Difficult to change?

From JebatMustDie, I linked to (in lawyer-kampung.blogspot.com) a very interesting analogy of how a political party can improve using a Hybrid vs Petrol car as an analogy.

Interesting because in many ways, many organisations (political as well as commercial and non-profit) may be in the same state, and will benefit if they consider (using lawyer-kumpung's analogy) switching from a large engine capacity car to a hybrid (electrical and petrol) car which saves fuel, improves emissions and therefore is greener than the current gas guzzlers.

I made a very long comment and posted it only to realised that the original article was posted in September, which makes the comment almost irrelevant (2 months ago is history in blog time, no?)

And because it was a comment, it didnt exactly follow the normal style (if I may call it so) of this ramblings blog. Anyway, I am posting the comment here, if nothing else, for me to remember what I said there.

--- my comment posted in lawyer-kumpung
In many ways, I think many of us know what has to be changed, while the challenge is how to implement the change.

Taking the example of a hybrid car, perhaps some of the challenges are:

1. Those in power who already own many "big engine" cars, and would prefer to mix with and invite only others with similar engine capacities to join their exclusive "club".

2. Because it costs more to maintain these big cars, it also serves as a barrier to prevent the men-on-street, such as Ali, Ah Chong and Ramasamy, to join with a "cheaper" hybrid or even a smaller engine car. This again keeps the club exclusive. And being exclusive (with benefits) is often enough a reason why others aspire to join.

3. There already are a bunch of wannabes that crave for the perceived prestige (and benefits) of the "big engines". And they are not about to let a bunch of hybrids owners (or promoters) ruin their past efforts in clearing their path to glory (and money) of the big-engines.

4. If the big engine users considers drop their gas-guzzlers, they will be letting down their army of members in the supply-chain that provides the special maintenance, petrol, tyres, etc for their cars. And these members of the supply chain are the people that enabled the owner to own and keep the big engine in the first place.

5. And when (or if?) the early adopters move from big-engine to hybrid, the supply-chain (who are being cut off) will quickly move one of the wannabes to replace the "betrayer". And of course the "betrayer" will be left out of the club and left join Ali, Ah Chong and Ramasamy.

Their choices:
a. Drive a 700cc with batteries that everyone else can own?
b. Own a 4,500cc that is seldom driven and few (very few) can own?

Why go through the hassle in order to get to the top if you are going to get the common car?

I guess one benefit of wielding power is that one can choose to be exclusive. And because the powerful will want to be exclusive, they will choose vehicles (and everything else) that are exclusive. Hybrids will not be their choice, unless there are exclusive hybrids. Which again will create a supply-chain to service such exclusive hybrids, and so on.

Cyclical? Yes. Perhaps that is why it is so difficult to change?
---end of comment posted in lawyer-kumpung

Maybe before we even asked whether it is difficult to change, we should ask, if they want to change. I doubt if they want to, and because they are the powerful, I doubt if others can change them.