If you want evidence that people don't like change, look no further than the Metric system. I first learned about meters, grams, and liters when I was in elementary school. My teachers told me that soon, everyone around the world would be using the Metric system, which is a system of units of measurement that are based on the number ten. It is relatively simple in concept and easy to understand. Surprisingly (at least to me), the Metric system has been around since the 1790's, when it was first developed by the French.
As of today, there are just three countries around the world that have still not officially adopted the Metric system - Myanmar, Liberia, and the United States. Please note that the United States still officially uses a system of measurement adapted from the British Imperial system of measurement, which even the British moved beyond in 1965. American scientists, hospitals, and Olympic athletes do, in fact, use the Metric system, though most Americans do not. The late U.S. Senator Jesse Helms once said, "If God had wanted us to use the Metric system, Jesus would have had 10 apostles" (just for the record, Christian teachings state that Jesus had 12 disciples).
Why are Americans so resistant to this change, especially when nearly every other country around the world have officially adopted the Metric system? The U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to "fix the standard of weights and measures" in Section 8 of Article I. The Metric Act of 1866 legally recognized the Metric system, opening the door for the United States to adopt it as its official system of measurement. However, adoption of the Metric system was never mandated, and most industries at the time continued to use the old system of measurement. Congress tried again in 1975 with the passage of the Metric Conversion Act which declared that the Metric system was the "preferred system of weights and measures for United States trade and commerce." However, adoption again was not mandated. I suspect that until adoption is no longer mandatory, most Americans will continue to use the system of measurement that they are most comfortable with - the one adapted from the British Imperial system.
One of the major reasons Americans haven't embraced the Metric system is that people are just resistant to change. We've talked about change resistance before. Change can be uncomfortable. I can remember a time when I was growing up that units of measurement (distance markers on the highway, volume measures at the gas pump, etc) were listed in both the British Imperial system and Metric system with the goal of increasing the level of comfort with the Metric system (shortly after the 1975 Metric Conversion Act). As with any change initiative, old habits are hard to erase. Whenever people get out of their comfort zone, even just a little bit, they will revert back to the "tried and true" way of doing things.
I suspect that part of the reason is financial. There is no question that there will be a cost associated with making the change to the Metric system. NASA estimated that it would cost the U.S. government over $370 million to change fully to the Metric system. The total cost of a conversion is hard to determine, but there is no question that it would be expensive.
There are certainly cultural, financial, and likely political (unfortunately, politics is always a factor in these kinds of issues) reasons why the U.S. is one of only three countries that haven't changed to the Metric system. I don't necessarily always subscribe to the rationale that "just because everyone else is doing something", you should follow suit. But in this case, there are a couple of real-world accidents where conversion between the Metric system and the British Imperial system played a causal role.
Air Canada Flight 143, now known as the "Gimli Glider", a scheduled commercial flight from Montreal to Edmondton was forced to make an emergency landing on July 23, 1983 after running out of fuel at the half-way mark at an altitude of 12,500 meters (that's about 41,000 feet for us stubborn, bull-headed Americans). The plane ended up gliding down to an abandoned Royal Candadian Air Force base in Gimli, Manitoba (hence the "Gimli Glider"). While there were multiple holes in the proverbial "Swiss Cheese", one of the reasons that the plane ran out of fuel is because the ground crew mistakenly switched between pounds and kilograms of fuel. The Boeing 767 departed with only 45% of its normal fuel load.
More recently, NASA lost the $125 million Mars Orbiter in 1999 when the engineering team failed to convert from English to Metric units when exchanging vital data before launching the spacecraft. Apparently, during the landing itself, Lockheed Martin was sending thrust calculations based in the British Imperial system of units (pounds), while NASA was expecting Metric units (Newtons). The spacecraft crashed onto the Martian surface and was lost. There are numerous other examples.
Okay, I know what you are thinking. What does THIS have to do with leadership? In my mind, failure to change to the Metric system has everything to do with leadership. The success or failure of any major change initiative depends upon how that change is managed by the organization's leaders. The change guru John Kotter said, "We know that leadership is very much related to change. As the pace of change accelerates, there is naturally a greater need for effective leadership." Leadership is all about change.
Making the transition to full adoption of the Metric system in the United States will require a leader who is fully committed to making the change and willing to push it. We've had plenty of time to embrace the Metric system. And as the examples above suggest, there is no better time to do so.
No comments:
Post a Comment