The problem I’ve had since I turned 90 was trying to understand how to explain any kind of success I’ve experienced to younger adults who live in a much different world than the one I grew up in. So much has changed. Slowly, I realized that change itself was a subject I didn’t try to understand, or think about enough. Realizing that basic fact suddenly opened many doors for me. Today, more than ever before, one has to accept the fact that everything will change, and probably faster than we expect it to. The new challenge is to study how change is most likely to happen, and how will it happen. You can call this a new field of study, the new science of change analysis.
This is not a new idea. It’s just one that deserves and, in fact, demands much more attention as the rate of change continues to increase. I remember arguing with friends and clients of mine in the 90’s about why didn’t Kodak see the digital camera revolution, after they had invented the digital camera, but I soon realized that your perspective is much different when you work outside of the Kodak monopoly. You need an objective, and I would now say, “scientific” perspective on whatever kind of change you’re trying to figure out. That’s when I realized the best model for correctly and scientifically analyzing natural change, was the scientific path discovered by Charles Darwin.
How Much We Owe Charles Darwin
In 1859, just before the American Civil War started, Charles Darwin, a British naturalist, published a book, The Origin of the Species, that started a civil war within the Christian Church; a war that is still going on, I’m sorry to say, because traditionalists will simply not accept natural change. They are not comfortable with it because, if you accept Darwin’s Theory of Evolution based on natural selection, you realize that the Book of Genesis in the Holy Bible, is wrong. For this reason, Traditional Evangelical Christians waged war against Darwinism, and in 1925, Tennessee state legislators made it illegal to teach the Theory of Evolution anywhere in Tennessee. I now think of this as the first failed attempt to make Christian Nationalism happen in America. The ACLU hired the most famous attorney in America, Clarence Darrow, and found a rural high school teacher, named John Scopes, willing to test the law by openly teaching Darwinism in a rural public school. A widely publicized court case resulted and is still remembered as the Scopes Monkey Trial.
The trial was one of the first true media trials of the modern era, covered in hundreds of newspapers and broadcast live on the radio. Defending Scopes was Darrow. The court case lasted eight days and, in the end, John Scopes, a high school teacher in Dayton, Tennessee, was found guilty of violating the state's Butler Act, and was promptly fired. He had broken the law which prohibited teaching evolution in any Tennessee public schools.
The angry traditional Christian leaders in Tennessee and other southern states attempted to portray Darwin as anti-Christian and his Theory as “just” a theory, implying it was not scientifically substantiated. Both claims were immediately shown to be false. Ironically, Darwin and his wife were both devoted Christians. Charles Darwin realized the impact his long and careful field work would have on Bible credibility, so for that very reason he waited 20 years to finally publish his Theory of Evolution by natural selection.
From that day on, most biologists and other scientists contend that evolutionary theory convincingly explains the origins and development of life on Earth. Moreover, they point out that a “scientific theory” is not a hunch or a guess, but is instead an established explanation for a natural phenomenon, like gravity, that has repeatedly been tested and refined through observation and experimentation. Today, you could also cite Einstein’s Theory of Relativity as another fully established “theory” of science. Despite the consensus of scientists, Evangelicals and Bible Schools attempt to reduce Darwin’s immense contribution to a matter of “faith”. While some Christian universities in the US do teach evolution, there are colleges that don't. The exact number of Bible colleges that still don't teach the Theory of Evolution is difficult to determine.
One of the most interesting, little known facts about Darwin I found was that his thinking was inspired by Thomas Malthus, a late-eighteenth-century economist. Malthus wrote, "Essay on the Principle of Population" (1798), which inspired Darwin to refine natural selection by stating a reason for meaningful competition between members of the same species. Another inspiring fact about Darwin was that his research to prove evolution was also motivated by his desire to end slavery. Charles Darwin, the scientist whose theories have become a corner stone of modern biology, was motivated to carry out his famous research by a desire to rid the world of slavery. He was a most remarkable man of science.
What Can Darwin Teach Us About Studying Change?
I suggest that the first thing we can learn from Darwin is to treat the subject of change with respect. In fact, let’s treat the subject of natural change in markets and everything else as a scientific subject. We’re not interested in wild pronouncements by so-called experts as seen so often in the past; for example, in the late twentieth century, both Lee De Forest and Darryl F. Zanuck said television had no future, at the same time that a major accounting firm said television would eliminate movie theaters. I call this shooting from the hip, and I think we can do much better than that today.
What would Darwin say about analyzing change in business and technology if he were still alive? My guess is what he said about natural change in life forms over almost 200 years ago. He would first be asking what causes change, and then look for hard evidence of actual historical change. To structure his Theory of Evolution by natural selection of life forms, he proposed (1) that species can change over time, (2) that new species come from pre-existing species, and (3) that all species share a common ancestor. In this model, each species has its own unique set of heritable (genetic) differences from the common ancestor, which have accumulated gradually over very long time periods. Suppose we tried to define a starting structure to analyze change for any existing technology today. How would you describe what the market tells us is wanted and appreciated for the price, and what isn’t? The other thing I would conclude from what I know of Darwin’s structure was that he wasn’t looking for the next big winner; he was trying to understand what influenced change from all possible sources. If yo.u’re working or studying at a university today, maybe you could encourage a visiting lecturer who knows Darwin’s work and try to use him/her to help you create a Kuhnian model of natural change for the specific fields you teach or study.
Dan’s Net Take-Away
I believe we have a lot to learn from Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution. I would love to see every university defining a science of change for what they teach. There should be one for each popular field, beginning with the professions of medicine, law, and accounting, but expanding to all fields of learning. The secret of future success in all fields will be how to harmonize with the inevitable change coming. To me, the people to be wary of are the people denying and fighting change. They want to deny reality. Any business or organization needs to make change a subject of investigation and analysis for their own survival. We don’t have to be afraid of change unless we try to ignore it. It’s always worth thinking about.
Hi Dan
Interesting perspective on a topic that my brother & I discuss often: Change. It’s inevitable & constant. The world is constantly evolving & therefore changing around us. Those that deny this with fact do it with such vigor that I feel they do it both out of fear & confusion. It may sound harsh & even odd but it reminds me of why a baby crys- it doesn’t yet have the skills to process the rate of information it is getting.
I have my own theory & observation that relates to that baby: if things are happening too fast to comprehend them then slow them down for yourself until u can accept them. That doesn’t mean we can control them entirely just that we more aptly look at change as an opportunity to grow instead a fear of not knowing. Like we do with a baby.
I learned this from Aunt Aileen as she approached her 96th in 2014. I was fortunate to care for her the last several years of her life & she always used to tell me to “slow down” until you understand. She was right too - every time I did the Bigger, Faster, Stronger Model I would often slide out of control . Then, often after a visit with her, I tried to stop or slow down & for me aspects of that topic became clearer. Collateral effects were more recognizable but no less inevitable just again easier to understand & take.
Of course not everyone will let or want you to slow the process. In fact, it often seems that our society especially in America loves to praise those that get everything at a young age or seem to “have it all”. But again when I dissect that it’s not that it’s wrong just undefined. Surely everyone’s definition of having it all, is just as varied as what
each individual may define as successful. Everything should not be done slow or fast but at a rate of understanding that’s as individual & distinct as every baby.
Let's evolve together & accept the change