One of my favorite things to do on my commute to/from work is to listen to podcasts. I have a mix of topics I listen to, but generally focus on leadership or sports. For long-time readers, you know I like to mix the two together when I can to help drive home a point. Today is no different.
Several years ago, NIL and the transfer portal were frequent podcast topics. The discussion was focused on pros and cons and how it would change college athletics forever. Some couldn’t wait for it to start, while others were adamantly opposed. The "Atlanta Journal-Constitution" did a nice piece on the timeline of NIL's inception, and the challenges faced. Those conversations seem like eons ago, don’t they? Look at college athletics now – we’re only two years into the evolution, but now it is commonplace to see your favorite pro, or college, athlete with a cameo in a commercial, and changing teams is no longer unique to the pros. NIL and transfer portal discussions continue, but now the focus is on managing the changed landscape.
In a similar way, I believe the weather community is in
the middle of some larger changes. The writing is on the wall for NIL and transfer
portal equivalents (Artificial Intelligence, probabilistic
forecasting/messaging, flexible operational and staffing models, remote work). Some
changes have already happened, while others are in the planning and discussion
phase. I’ve talked before about the challenges of change, but I wanted to add to this in light of what I’ve seen in college
athletics recently.
Early on, not all coaches or ADs were sold on the changes. Now some are starting to see the benefits, and are changing their tune, even if reluctantly. Other coaches, like former Alabama coach Nick Saban, are somewhere in the middle. Saban has pointed out that he isn't opposed to NIL, but that the change needs to be navigated carefully. This got me thinking about the importance of knowing when to keep standing against something, when to let it go, and when to find a middle ground. Navigating change is a balancing act, and if not handled well, can lead to unfortunate outcomes.
Early in my career, I spoke out about a lot of things…too many things. I saw what I thought was a problem, and I would pick a battle to fix it. Pausing to think through the balancing act of it all wasn’t a strength of mine. Looking back, I see some battles that were worth fighting, but I wish I would have spent more time thinking inwardly and outwardly first. What I’m learning now is not only how to better choose if a problem is worth fighting for or not, but also how to move forward after each decision.
In his book, “Just Listen”, Mark Goulston points out the need to “think about what you’re thinking” [page 40]. A mentor of mine had some thoughts on how to do this. He challenged me to think about whether the issue will matter in a week… in a month… in a year. He also challenged me to think about whether the outcome matters in the long run, and to consider if speaking out is making a problem worse, or even creating a problem that didn’t previously exist. While I don’t do it perfectly, this is the filter I’m trying to use more for help with identifying if a problem is worth fighting for. I’m also finding out that I can’t always use this filter on my own.
Over the years, I’ve been humbled by the importance of having at least 2 or 3 trusted people to bounce ideas off of, and to vent to. We all need people like this in our lives who can provide a safe space to work through challenges. It’s also important that we are that person to others as appropriate. My current mentors/close friends have a range of experiences and backgrounds, but they know the weather community, they know me, and they know the problems of the day we face as Meteorologists. Selfish plug…if you haven’t developed mentor/mentee relationships with others, I strongly recommend you consider this. A mentor or close friend who understands you and the issues you face can be gold in helping determine if a battle is worth picking or not. And if it is, they can help you work through how to best address it.
In the spirit of outward thinking, I’ve found it can help to think about how a change could positively, or negatively, impact those I work with and those I serve. We have our problems of the day, but so do the people we serve. If their problems are evolving, it stands to reason that we may also need to evolve to better serve them, right? While it doesn’t make a change easier to swallow, it can help to know that going along with a change, and choosing not to fight it, may actually be what is best for someone else, even if it isn’t what’s best for you. I know this can be a tough one. There’s also the aspect of change that, for example, may be what’s best for your office at large, but may not necessarily be best for you. It’s a give and take, not give only of course, but factoring in what’s best for us and what’s best for others, is a part of the equation.
As we work through change in this way, it also opens up the door for us to help others navigate change. You never know when an idea you share in a group discussion could help someone else see things from a different perspective. Your input could be the very thing they need to get over their own mental hurdle. There’s also something to say about being gracious with those around you who aren’t as excited about a change as you are. When I hear of a change coming that I am excited about, I sometimes forget that not everyone around me will share the same excitement. Liking a change doesn’t excuse us from listening to others vent about why they don’t like a change. It may feel like they are raining on your parade, and sometimes this will be the case, but just pausing and listening to them can be huge in helping others navigate change, and supporting a good culture around you. It also gives you an opportunity to consider if a change you’re excited about is as good as you thought it was. Being excited about a change doesn’t mean the thought process can be skipped.
