Change, change, change - Part 1

During the hey-days of the dotcom, Jack Welch of GE introduced the concept of DYB or destroy your business, as a challenge to existing business units of GE (and there were many), to find ways to reinvent themselves, in other words to destroy the old so that the new can emerge.
We all understand that change posseses a destructive element and the result may be good or bad. That choice is left to man to make, not nature, not god, but man.
The current BN Government, in my view, is unable to grasp the concept of change nor able to implement change. As anyone who has undertaken change management it is painful, there are many vested interests (and I don't only mean pecuniary) and entrenched positions, so much so, that a key element of change management is to have leadership and buy-in. Any corporation that wants to implement change does this.
Yet in a Government that has become accustomed to having its way, controlling 2/3rd of the Dewan Rakyat, seeing itself as a ruler not as a group to govern (a subtle but important distinction), cannot change by simply mandating it with slogans - blue ocean strategy.
If the BN Government really wanted to change, then:
(a) its top leaders must become change agents or if not to empower proper change agents;
(b) it must trust the stakeholders and in this regard must know who the stakeholders are.
(c) a proper plan for change management must be introduced.
In all three points the BN Government has failed spectacularly.
How come?
well what is said is not what is believed, so change is not going to happened because they don't really want change. They want the status quo particularly the brand of economics called mahathirism in all its glory.
Secondly they dont care whether they have stakeholder trust because they dont even know who their stakeholders are. The usual concept of stakeholders are all people who are interested in the result and this can usually be displayed as a pyramid. These guys have inverted the pyramid, so everyone looks to the PM and the PM looks to the Ketua Bahagians' for power/authority. It's almost fuedal like, in fact it probably is.
So if the going has been good, and everyone has grown up in the belief that "I will have to wait my turn to ..." then why should I want the situation to change when it is my turn.
Its like kids at a playground waiting to use the swing, after the first guy goes the second guy gets on, and if you then ask the second guy that the queuing to enjoy the swing approach is to be changed you would hear him howl.

So there aint going to be any change from within, because for all their talk (and that's what it is) they are not prepared to make the sacrifices for changing the way things are for the future generations and this country's survival.

Hence we should not believe a word they say.

So if change aint then what is?
Change from outside is the only answer. Change needs change agents to happen, and this means that all stakeholders have to act as change agents. if we want the change (and why should we not, since a change does not put us in (economically speaking) a worst off position than if no change) we should move for a change.

Next how should we move for a change ...