| I'm not sure why the article refers to Chesterton's fence as a fallacy when it basically agrees with the principle that you shouldn't blindly push reforms without understanding the reasoning behind the existing state of things. That's not to say I disagree with the content of the article. I think it presents a good approach to promoting improvements to processes, the key takeaways being: 1) Observe the process and try to understand all aspects of it (not just that which affects you). 2) If you still feel that it can be improved, come up with a plan to improve and implement the process in a limited scope over which you have control. 3) If successful, break down why it was successful, and evaluate whether it is suitable to be expanded to the general case. 4) Find the owner of the existing process to discuss it with them, and present your proposed improvements. I think there's an argument to be made that you should talk to the owner of the process before you start coming up with improvements, which could save some time on understanding it. But I suppose that depends on the situation. |