By Kevin Meyer
Those of us in the lean world often struggle with enabling a nascent lean transformation to take root in an organization. Now we may have one more concept to help us:
Scientists at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute [coincidentally my alma mater] have found that when just 10 percent of the population holds an unshakable belief, their belief will always be adopted by the majority of the society.
The scientists, who are members of the Social Cognitive Networks Academic Research Center (SCNARC) at Rensselaer, used computational and analytical methods to discover the tipping point where a minority belief becomes the majority opinion. The finding has implications for the study and influence of societal interactions ranging from the spread of innovations to the movement of political ideals.
"When the number of committed opinion holders is below 10 percent, there is no visible progress in the spread of ideas. It would literally take the amount of time comparable to the age of the universe for this size group to reach the majority," said SCNARC Director Boleslaw Szymanski, the Claire and Roland Schmitt Distinguished Professor at Rensselaer. "Once that number grows above 10 percent, the idea spreads like flame."
Just 10 percent. Interestingly that number stays roughly the same regardless of the circumstance or propagation method.
An important aspect of the finding is that the percent of committed opinion holders required to shift majority opinion does not change significantly regardless of the type of network in which the opinion holders are working. In other words, the percentage of committed opinion holders required to influence a society remains at approximately 10 percent, regardless of how or where that opinion starts and spreads in the society.
A couple of recent events support the theory.
As an example, the ongoing events in Tunisia and Egypt appear to exhibit a similar process, according to Szymanski. "In those countries, dictators who were in power for decades were suddenly overthrown in just a few weeks."
Once you hit that tipping point opinion shifts fast. Consider how all of a sudden the Tea Party accelerated and became a major force in U.S. politics, while the rough equivalents on the left, MoveOn.org and Code Pink, simply remained on the wacko fringe. It doesn't take much, but one movement hit that threshold.
Now back to a lean transformation. Coming into a new traditional organization, the lean leader struggles to convince his or her folks that counterintuitive concepts like one piece flow, org charts center around processes instead of functional silos, and the value of brainpower vs the cost of hands, really work. Often the organization believes it is much better than it really is and has no idea of the potential – or how it compares to lean organizations.
In my most recent couple of transformations the 10 percent number really appeared to be the tipping point. By bringing in a few folks already experienced in lean and sending a few folks to conferences and events such as the AME Annual Conference and AME California Lean Tour, hit that level. From that point the passion and evangelism of those 10 percent took root and eventually convinced the others.
Lean is still not easy to sustain and it takes time. And as the Wiremold story tells us, it can easily slip backwards. In that particular case there are now indications that it is now moving forward again.
But look around. Do you have your 10 percent?
Pete says
Back in the early 90’s I was told approximately 20% was the magic number. Point is, the number is lower than most expect. Key, however, is how many of top management are in that 10% – 20%. And as the Wiremold case demonstrates, if that number falls at the top it becomes difficult to impossible to sustain. If managers are hired predominately from external sources rather than growth from within and aren’t held to the proper standards, we have another “flavor of the month”.
david foster says
I see a bit of a contradiction. What if one group of 10% holds view X very strongly, and another group of 10% believes with equal fervor in Y, which is directly contradictory to X?
Jim Fernandez says
This is interesting. The report talks a lot about interaction between people.
At my company I have noticed that we have several different “societies”. The machine shop workers do not interact with the assembly workers. They even have different coffee and lunch breaks. And for instance the engineering workers rarely interact with the shipping/receiving and stockroom workers. And so on.
So even if 50% of my machine shop workers held a belief, that belief would never spread to the assembly workers. In other words I don’t think I can consider my company as one cohesive society where everyone interacts with each other.
But still this is a very interesting discovery. And maybe I need to give some serious thought to my company’s social structure.
S Hodg says
Good point Jim. Things are aften so siloed that nothing can go anywhere. But I suppose if you got 10% of each department together for training (depends on the size of the company) they could go back an spread that to the rest.
I think I’m the 0.01% at my place. Maybe I’ll get some pizzas to lure people in and give them an intro to lean? I think management would lay the hammer down on me then! Ha ha.
david foster says
Jim,
Do the relationship patterns map into the physical structure of the plant??…ie, do the machinists all work in the same area?
If so, I’d guess the social structure might change if, for example, the machining and assembly for product “A” were co-located, and ditto for product “B,” etc. …don’t know, of course, if this is technically/economically feasible for your particular products. But definitely, in my experience, both physical layout and organization design have a big influence on socialization patterns.
My post on functional chauvinism is somewhere relevant to this.
Jim Fernandez says
S. Hodg and D. Foster The more time I spend thinking about my company’s social structure the more concerned I get.
In reality we have three separate companies in one building. Machine Shop, Assembly, Administration/Engineering. They reside in three separate sections of the building, with three separate break and lunch schedules and three separate hours of operation (starting and quitting times). We even have a night shift which is a fourth separate social group all by itself. We manufacture about 200 different types of solenoid valves.
Jamie Flinchbaugh says
As some of the comments indicate, it’s not any 10%, it’s the right 10%. the Tipping Point helps elaborate on what types of role players are needed.
Most people trying to change organization worry to much about the middle 80%, or even the 10% at the other end of the curve who could be called the anchors. If you’re trying to lead change in an organization, don’t worry about the anchors, and don’t worry about the 80% in the middle. Focus on building the critical mass, and let that group get the rest of the people moving.
Jamie Flinchbaugh
Lean Learning Center
Wayne says
I read somewhere, sometime ago, that our founding fathers only had solid support from only about 10% of the general population.
When Pain’s Common Sense hit the pamphlet circuit acceptance of the concept of independence bounced that necessary few points to become popular.
For business, this is the reason so many new products target the ‘sneezers’, those game to try new stuff and show it off in one way or other.
Daran says
@Jamie: ‘As some of the comments indicate, it’s not any 10%, it’s the right 10%. the Tipping Point helps elaborate on what types of role players are needed.’
That makes much more sense. I have been in old communist countries and the majority knew that the system was evil and corrupt, yet change did not happen.
I don’t agree on ignoring the anchors. You need a strategy to handle their negative influence.