DRIVING CHANGE: Lessons from the golf course.

Acushnet, one of the leading manufacturers of golf equipment in the world, had global sales amounting to around $2.38 billion U.S. in FY 2023.?In 2022, UK manufacturers sold nearly ￡172 million worth of golf clubs and golf equipment. The golf equipment market is expanding from an estimated $18.34 billion in 2024 to a colossal $29.3 billion by 2034, fueled by an impressive CAGR of 4.8.?

Golf is?very?popular.

According to the Global Golf Participation report from 2023, over 61 million people engaged with golf across the world on 38,864 courses. Data shows that 5.6 million adult players in the UK played on nine or 18 hole courses in 2022, spending a cool ￡1Bn on equipment.

Everyone?involved in this high volume market?wants?to?'Continuously improve'.?

... now that's a sentence it's just as natural to hear in the boardroom as it is in the club house!

One of the great?innovations in golf is the?handicap?system. Properly applied, irrespective?of one's own capability,?an enjoyable game can be had with most levels of club?golfers, because the difference in?ability?is offset by applying the respective handicap to each players?score.

The?other major use of the handicap is?to provide?each player with a target to improve (TTI) or benchmark.

The following is from my friend, Prof. Douglas Young PhD Psych.

"If I consistently play better?than my?handicap, I feel good and my handicap goes?down. Conversely, if I? play?poorly, then my handicap goes up.? I have a clear?and?unambiguous?target -? my handicap.?

So, like millions of other golfers I pay money?to a professional for lessons and?practice to improve my technique. I read books, watch youtube videos of how to?swing a club correctly, practice?putting in my hallway, and take divots from my lawn.

The point is, I have access to a?host of tools to help improve my game. And yet, ...and yet…my handicap remains?at a stubborn 14. Despite all the tools and?practice with those tools?&?feedback, my performance fails to improve.

My?desire for change somehow?fails to translate into any appreciable improvement. I?continue to waste?valuable shots. As an aside, I almost always under-club?myself, landing?short of the green -?often through taking too high a club – perhaps, to?impress myself!!!? Conversely, analysing most professional golfers performance, they tend to be on or through the green – supporting?the adage “never up, never in.” And talking of the professionals, improvement in?performance is?their?job. And just look at?some of?the benefits of reducing?wasted?shots:?

In a study by Moy, R. L., & Liaw,?T.?(1998).?Determinants of professional golf tournament earnings (American?Economist, vol 42,?issue 1, pgs 65-70), they looked at how golfers earn money?on tour.?Reviewing all the?statistics, they concluded that a 1%?improvement??in:

???????Driving?distance - brings a 9%?increase?in?earnings

???????Driving?accuracy?- brings a 3% increase?in?earnings

???????Greens?in?regulation?- brings a 10% increase in?earnings

???????Putting?performance?- brings a 34% increase?in ?earnings

So,?it really does?look as though we

“Drive for show and putt for dough.”?

Another?saying?which equally applies,?is that old favourite,

“A bad workman blames his tools.”

This?fails to be adopted by most?golfers who invest huge sums of money in buying?better equipment in the vain?hope that it will somehow magically improve?their performance.??Off they go to the driving range, bright new?equipment in hand, and?practice their slice or hook till the sun sets.

Yes,?that’s right, just watch a?driving range and you will find the poorer?players hitting as many balls as they?can, as fast as they can, as far as?they can.? Then watch a pro practice ...

They work slowly?through the range of clubs from wedge to driver. Each ball is?hit slowly and time taken to review the outcome and use the feedback to?change the swing, grip,?stance. Above all, the pro is looking to eliminate?wasteful shots and improve?consistency of performance.

In Sigma terms, they?are trying to reduce the number of deviations (DPMO) or in Lean terms, reduce the waste of “re-work” / improve their FTT Yield (First Time Through).?

So, all these lessons, equipment sales and?practice are aimed at ... yup, 'improving performance'. But the pros, who make the biggest improvements?in their games, have something else .... something that goes beyond tools and technical prowess.

They have an attitude, a belief system, a different way of 'thinking' ... they genuinely challenge?their assumptions!

Sometimes, this means a huge drop in their?performance as an assumption is challenged and they rebuild their?whole swing like Nick Faldo did many moons ago.?

In the modern?game, pros don’t just have coaches…they also have nutritionists, fitness?trainers and PR support. But above all, they have psychologists. Once you?achieve?a certain level of performance, it is clear that to gain the?competitive edge, it all comes down to understanding your brain and yourself."

Know Thyself

To some extent this?is also recognised by?the amateurs who have bought huge volumes of books on the?Psychology of Golf, such?as Tim Gallweys’ The Inner Game, in which he says.

“The primary discovery of the Inner Game is that, especially in our culture of achievement-oriented activities, human beings significantly get in their own way. The point of the Inner Game is always the same - to reduce mental interferences that inhibit the full expression of human potential.”

The?performance equation.?

The?basic truth is?that our performance of any task depends as much on the extent to?which we?interfere with our abilities (the noise that comes from within) as it does on those abilities themselves.?

This?can be expressed as a formula:? P = p - i???

In?this?equation?P?refers?to Performance, which we define as the result?you achieve - what you, the individual 'brain' actually?winds up feeling, achieving and learning.?

Similarly,?p?stands?for potential, defined as your innate ability?- what you are naturally capable?of.

And i means interference -?your?capacity to get in your own way.?

Most?people try to improve their?performance (P)?by increasing their potential (p) through practicing and?learning?new skills, often with new equipment.?The?Inner Game approach, on the other hand,?is to reduce interference (i)?at the same time that potential (p) is being?trained - and the?result is that our actual performance comes closer to?our true?potential.

What’s this got?to do with Lean/OpEx, Six?Sigma, Leading Change or just, Leading?

It?may be?obvious from the prior golfing analogy, but in case it is not, let's?consider the approach of most organisations in terms of change.? ?

Most?change programmes involve a?series of sequential phases, considering in order:? ??

1.??????Tools &?Techniques - Training and implementation (= a 3-5 year period, where the approach triggers resistance, requiring investment in time, money and effort to try and get new ways of working, to stick).

2.??????Strategy - Development and deployment (= 3-5 year period where the approach triggers resistance, requiring more investment in time money and effort to stick with the new approach).

3.??????Culture change - in name only ... (Typically?a tools?/ process / analysis approach is adopted. e.g. surveys & apps to determine NPS and engagement (measured differently everywhere). This reflects the dominant 'tech / measure' belief, conditioned by the market of L&D / best practice.?This defacto approach fails to?focus on?the component parts?of culture, bypassing any consideration for, or knowledge of, the 'Human Factors' involved [Brain], while satisfying the brains involved, where they believe they have taken effective action - ironic right!).

However,?drawing a parallel to the?professional golfer, most organisations who embark?on change, already have?a reasonable level of performance (they have the tools, and have developed technique and strategy over years). Their quest for change, is to raise?their?existing performance. But, just as the professional golfer finds, improving?performance is predicated on challenging very entrenched (even practiced)?performance and ways of thinking (Habits and Beliefs).

Those who consciously recognise, that it can be the assumptions their brain makes, relative to their perceptions of their current ability, which interferes with their progress ... are the ones who make the most progress!?

Successfully recognising and challenging such?assumptions (interference) –requires a new way of thinking is deployed as?the precursor to other actions and activities! Challenging one's?assumptions and beliefs about 'What works' underpins?and?enables change!?A change to 'belief' & 'assumption'?(about self ... about 'brain function') is?not an emergent property of change developed through tools and strategy! However, a change to strategy, tools and performance is inevitable, where a change to belief and assumption can be facilitated...

It turns out, it's not chicken 'n' egg at all ... how our brain is programmed to react on autopilot is the thing we need to change first, if we're to see a sustainable change in reactions and action (conduct / approach), on the golf course, or in our places of work.

Back to Doug's example.

"I played a reasonable game of golf for?many years, but eventually went to a professional for a lesson. He asked me to play a few shots up the practice area. I tried to impress and was quite pleased with the results – straight up the middle – I was chuffed – nothing wrong with that! He smiled and disappeared into the clubhouse, returning with a video camera. On the playback he asked me “Where are you aiming?” It turned out I was aiming way to the right of the target in order to compensate for my significant hooking tendency. He proposed that to improve I would need to change my whole swing. Then we worked on the tools – my stance, grip and swing. After much practice I now actually aim at the hole, and get much more distance and consistency in my performance. So what did he do for me?

As a coach, before he looked at the practical aspects of my performance, he challenged my fundamental assumptions and beliefs by showing me a video playback and giving me a new perspective from which to assess 'what works' and 'what good looks like'.?

Once my mind was open to seeing something in a new way, I could accept that I wasn’t hitting the ball straight at all!"

So,?reflecting on the typical approach to leading change in an organisation, which is performing?'ok' and wants to perform at a higher level, we need coaches who can help us see?ourselves as we really are, to challenge our assumptions, our beliefs and ways of?thinking... our brain!

Only then can we properly adapt to new, advanced tools and techniques, and shift our strategy, to deliver better performance. We might therefore suggest, the appropriate order of intervention in change?programmes is;

STEP 1.??????Address our 'Way of Thinking' - to include those 'Human Factors' which lead to 'Culture' as an emergent property of human brain function.?

STEP 2.??????Develop and Deploy our Strategy - Ensuring it is congruent with the psychology and neuroscience of optimal brain function. (Knowledge established in?step 1.).?

STEP 3.??????Implement Tools & Techniques (i.e. Select the most suitable options from the 'best practice sweet shop', that will help us meet our outcome requirements and specific challenges - identified by clearly defining step 2).

In reality, we can apply a 'concurrent engineering' approach and address all three in quick succession / simultaneously, where we introduce coaches who understand brain function, to work in different areas around a business.

Doug's?coach helped him challenge his assumptions and adopt a new way of thinking, (i.e. accept he was hooking it, rather than kid himself with the feedback his biases subconsciously selected to confirm himself and his game as 'right').

Only then, did he?adopt a new strategy (hit the ball straight, rather than what his brain convinced him was straight) and only then did he deploy and practice with?new tools to see if they could offer any mechanical advantage ... Once he got out of his own way, and realised how his beliefs and thinking were the greatest barriers to progressing his game, his handicap dropped into single figures. Performance improved.

The same principles apply in business… The first step, is to identify and?challenge assumptions about what 'good' looks like. For example, most believe in the logical management of tasks, the provision of technical training to affect change and imposing control onto people [brains] to control quality, cost and delivery.

This approach creates the conditions brains are surviving on autopilot, which determines how people act at work (their Performance). Only after such beliefs are challenged and updated (to reflect the latest facts from neuroscience about human function (i / p) and Performance), can you generate a?meaningful strategy and select the appropriate tools and methods that will deliver sustainable performance?improvement in terms of process and profit.?

When all is said and done, It’s?about?understanding 'human Factors' (including thinking, our own and others)?as a first step to reduce resistance to?change, improve engagement and align brains over the 'Why' and 'How'.

Importantly,?you can address assumptions at any stage of?your performance improvement?lifecycle! If you're new to Lean and Six Sigma, part way through a change program or at the end of a long haul (incl. IT/ERP implementations), and you are looking?at little if any difference and wondering why the last 6-10 years?failed to realise the transformation the original consultants sold,?it's not too late!

The size of the hills you have to climb may change, but it's definitely?not too late. ?

ADJUNCT – of?interest: Psychological and Physiological Toughness? ??Cortical activity – EEG measured in 34 elite?golfers during the 3 seconds before a putt (Crews & Landers,?1993) ??Left hemisphere motor cortex activity tended to?decrease whereas right hemisphere activity in motor and temporal cortex?increased in the last second before the backswing correlated with an increase in?putting precision.        

"Golf is a game that is played on a five-inch?course - the distance between your ears." ?Bobby Jones?

Summary - resistance to change.

The 7 wastes as identified within the world of Lean ARE the 7 wastes, delay, over-processing, rework etc. (TIMWOOD / DOWNTIME). What isn't considered very often, is that they apply just as much to the internal workings of a human being as they apply to the internal workings of a commercial organisation.

Taking the 9 points listed in the table, it is obvious that we probably don't have much hope of getting the best from a person until they pass point 5. Their 'i' will be detracting from their p, so their P can't improve!

Sustainable change, (even around issues of 'sustainability') stands no-chance until we get brains to level 7 and beyond. Given Gallups recent reports, which highlight the world is currently suffering 75-95% disengagement, the stark reality is most brains at work function in the 1-4 range at work.

In-line with the Kubler-Ross bereavement curve, it can be said that a transition between phases can take seconds, minutes, hours, days or years. Any transition at all happens, or course, in the brain.

A 'Change' in this sense,?is a neurological and electro-chemical change that we loosely and inadequately describe with words like Attitudes, Beliefs, Values, Assumptions, Perceptions etc.

In any 'Change' environment, getting a brain to re-wire, via neurogenesis / neuroplasticity, such that it gets to level 5 and beyond is the 'Delay waste' to better operational performance, that change program leaders experience on a daily basis all around the world ... while unconsciously brushing over the subject with terms like 'Resistance', leading to no accountability or action to tackle the root cause .. of where employee Brains currently function, in the table above.

Any such delay has a negative impact on profit, often requiring re-work, motion, over-processing of change efforts ... all the 'Classic TPS Wastes'... as they occur in the?people we assume, will improve process and approach, just because our brain can work out why it's needed.

This is a re-write of an article Prof Young and I agreed to write together back in 2013. The original can be found on the Duxinaroe.com blog page.

For further information about the services Duxinaroe can offer, to help your leaders understand more about the brain function that inhibits progress and what to do about it, get in touch via the website, or message me here on LinkedIn.

?