Every transformation begins with two states.
What exists.
And what could exist.
A product and a platform.
A service and a subscription.
A company and a different company.
Most discussions about transformation focus on these two points.
The current state.
And the desired state.
The conversation usually becomes:
“How do we get from here to there?”
But while studying products that appeared capable of transforming from one state into another, I became interested in something else.
The space between them.
The gap.
The Part We Tend To Skip
When we look at a successful transformation, we often see only the outcome.
We see the platform.
We no longer see the product that existed before it.
We see the subscription model.
We no longer see the service that came before it.
The transformation appears obvious in hindsight.
Yet at some point there was a distance between those states.
A separation.
A gap.
And that gap had to be crossed somehow.
The Gap Is Not Empty
One of the assumptions we often make is that transformation occurs somehow and automatically.
That once a future state has been imagined, movement toward it naturally follows.
But observation suggests otherwise.
Most desired states never arrive.
Most ideas never become products.
Most concepts never become realities.
Most plans never become outcomes.
Something more is required.
The gap itself contains a problem that must be solved.
Why The Gap Matters
The greater the difference between two states, the greater the gap between them.
Small changes may require only minor movement.
Large transformations may require entirely different mechanisms.
The challenge is not defining a future state.
The challenge is understanding what enables movement toward it.
Without that understanding, transformation remains an intention rather than a process.
Looking At Transformation Differently
What if transformation is not primarily about the destination?
What if it is about understanding the relationship between states?
What if the most important thing is not State A or State B, but the conditions that allow movement between them?
This perspective formed part of the foundation of my Transformative Design research.
The work explored states, gaps, and transformation points as a way of examining how transformation actually occurs.
Not simply what changes.
But how change becomes possible.
A Different Question
Perhaps the most useful question is not:
“How do we achieve the future state?”
Perhaps the more useful question is:
“What exists in the gap between these states?”
Because whatever enables transformation is likely to be found there.
Why This Question Still Interests Me
Many years have passed since the original research was completed.
Yet this question continues to appear in different forms.
In products.
In organisations.
In systems.
In ideas.
And, whether we notice it or not, in life itself.
We often become fascinated by what something becomes.
I remain interested in the space that made becoming possible.
A Personal Observation
When I began studying transformation, my interest was not limited to products.
Products simply offered something observable.
They could be examined.
Compared.
Disassembled.
Studied without opinion.
What interested me was transformation itself.
How something moved from one state to another.
How change became possible.
And whether understanding that process in one domain might reveal something useful about transformation in others.
That question still interests me today.
And in many ways, my understanding and application of it has quietly infiltrated much of my life’s work in understanding and creating change.
Explore the Original Research
Transformative Design (2008)
An exploration of states, gaps, transformation points, and the mechanisms that enable transformation between one state and another.
Schreibe einen Kommentar