My day job is all about helping people make major changes to their work habits. I see the same types of reactions there that I'm seeing on this forum in regards to 4e, so I thought you might like to hear some of the things that I've learned about change.
(There's some generalizations in the stuff coming up. Individual reactions vary, of course.)
First, it's human nature to resist change. It's not actually a dislike of new stuff that causes this resistance; it's that people get comfortable with the current way of doing things. The resistance comes from not wanting to lose stuff they already have and like. So the more mastery someone has over the existing way of doing things, the more likely they are to dislike a new way of doing things.
This is completely independent of how much better or worse the "new thing" is. People will come up with all kinds of rationalizations, and engage in long, bitter arguments, but at their core these arguments come down to "I like what I have now. Please don't take it away from me." Such an argument can never be won (or lost). The more you try, the more entrenched people get in their positions.
So, when people try to argue with me about a change, I don't argue about which way is better. Instead, I say: "It's worked for a bunch of people, and it might work for you, too. Give it a real try for two months and then decide. We'll set a concrete date for your group to make that decision, and it will be your decision to make, not mine."
This generally works, and people often find that they like the new way, even if they originally hated it. (Not always, though.)
It works because there's a predictable pattern to change. (Psychologist Virginia Satir explains it this way: Steven M Smith - The Satir Change Model) There's an initial period of resistance to making any change. When people try it, they experience chaos, low performance, and low morale as they discover that they no longer understand how they fit into to the system.
At some point, individuals discover a "transforming idea" that shows how the new way benefits them personally. They see how they can fit into the system and they start integrating it into their life. This happens at different times for different people. The nature of the "transforming idea" is highly personal, and some people never discover one.
(In my work, I've found that it takes about two months of full-time use to get through the chaos to the transforming idea. Hence the "try it for two months" argument. I doubt that timeframe applies to a 3e->4e change, though!)
After discovering the transforming idea, people can get very excited and evangelical. They can also overreact, expect too much, and become disappointed. Either way, they clash with people who are still resisting, and flame wars are born.
Over time, people perfect their understanding of the new system and reach a "new status quo." They see its strengths and weaknesses and the turbulence and arguments recede.
People get stuck at different stages in this process. Some never get out of the "resistance" stage, and never try the new system. Some experience the "chaos" stage that occurs when you first try the new system, and conclude that the new system is broken. And some get to the "transforming idea" stage, but then set their expectations impossibly high and are disappointed.
I'm not sure what this tells us, other than the obvious: "edition wars are inevitable," and "some people love 4e from the start (generally the ones who feel they have nothing to lose), others will grow to like it with time, some will try it and hate it, and some won't ever try it," and "edition wars have little to do with which system is actually better." The good news is that they'll pass with time.
Anyway, I hope this meander through the psychology of change was interesting.
(There's some generalizations in the stuff coming up. Individual reactions vary, of course.)
First, it's human nature to resist change. It's not actually a dislike of new stuff that causes this resistance; it's that people get comfortable with the current way of doing things. The resistance comes from not wanting to lose stuff they already have and like. So the more mastery someone has over the existing way of doing things, the more likely they are to dislike a new way of doing things.
This is completely independent of how much better or worse the "new thing" is. People will come up with all kinds of rationalizations, and engage in long, bitter arguments, but at their core these arguments come down to "I like what I have now. Please don't take it away from me." Such an argument can never be won (or lost). The more you try, the more entrenched people get in their positions.
So, when people try to argue with me about a change, I don't argue about which way is better. Instead, I say: "It's worked for a bunch of people, and it might work for you, too. Give it a real try for two months and then decide. We'll set a concrete date for your group to make that decision, and it will be your decision to make, not mine."
This generally works, and people often find that they like the new way, even if they originally hated it. (Not always, though.)
It works because there's a predictable pattern to change. (Psychologist Virginia Satir explains it this way: Steven M Smith - The Satir Change Model) There's an initial period of resistance to making any change. When people try it, they experience chaos, low performance, and low morale as they discover that they no longer understand how they fit into to the system.
At some point, individuals discover a "transforming idea" that shows how the new way benefits them personally. They see how they can fit into the system and they start integrating it into their life. This happens at different times for different people. The nature of the "transforming idea" is highly personal, and some people never discover one.
(In my work, I've found that it takes about two months of full-time use to get through the chaos to the transforming idea. Hence the "try it for two months" argument. I doubt that timeframe applies to a 3e->4e change, though!)
After discovering the transforming idea, people can get very excited and evangelical. They can also overreact, expect too much, and become disappointed. Either way, they clash with people who are still resisting, and flame wars are born.
Over time, people perfect their understanding of the new system and reach a "new status quo." They see its strengths and weaknesses and the turbulence and arguments recede.
People get stuck at different stages in this process. Some never get out of the "resistance" stage, and never try the new system. Some experience the "chaos" stage that occurs when you first try the new system, and conclude that the new system is broken. And some get to the "transforming idea" stage, but then set their expectations impossibly high and are disappointed.
I'm not sure what this tells us, other than the obvious: "edition wars are inevitable," and "some people love 4e from the start (generally the ones who feel they have nothing to lose), others will grow to like it with time, some will try it and hate it, and some won't ever try it," and "edition wars have little to do with which system is actually better." The good news is that they'll pass with time.
Anyway, I hope this meander through the psychology of change was interesting.
