Pointing to the destination shows why we're going
Shifting out of the status quo bias requires painting a picture of the desired destination—a “destination postcard.”
We want what we might call a destination postcard—a vivid picture from the near-term future that shows what could be possible.[1]
By painting a compelling destination (and avoiding, to the extent possible, an absolute recantation of the prior values and beliefs that is shaping identities), it may be possible to overcome analysis paralysis.
When you describe a compelling destination, you’re helping to correct one of the Rider’s great weaknesses—the tendency to get lost in analysis. Our first instinct, in most change situations, is to offer up data to people’s Riders: Here’s why we need to change. Here are the tables and graphs and charts that prove it . The Rider loves this. He’ll start poring over the data, analyzing it and poking holes in it, and he’ll be inclined to debate with you about the conclusions you’ve drawn. To the Rider, the “analyzing” phase is often more satisfying than the “doing” phase, and that’s dangerous for your switch.[2]
The key is to have the destination as well as the vital behaviors that progress toward it. These are analogous to the “set of coherent actions” in the kernel of a good strategy.
You have to back up your destination postcard with a good behavioral script. That’s a recipe for success. What you don’t need to do is anticipate every turn in the road between today and the destination. It’s not that plotting the whole journey is undesirable; it’s that it’s impossible. … When you’re at the beginning, don’t obsess about the middle, because the middle is going to look different once you get there. Just look for a strong beginning and a strong ending and get moving.[3]
Directing the Rider:
- Find the Bright Spots
- Script the Critical Moves
- Point to the Destination
Switch – Heath and Heath (2010), ch. 4, 79. In Built to Last, Jim Collins and Jerry Porras refer to this as a BHAG: a Big, Hairy, Audacious Goal. ↩︎
Ibid., 83. ↩︎
Ibid., 96. ↩︎