What You Can Learn From Jamie Oliver About Creating Change
Jamie Oliver, with Rhonda the administrator (middle) and Alice the cook (right). From abc.com
I finally watched Jamie Oliver’s Food Revolution this weekend. I’ve been a fan of his cookbooks and cooking shows for a while and I love what he is trying to accomplish with his food revolution. (After all, I love a good revolution for positive change!) However I couldn’t help but feel a bit of déjà vu as I was watching the show — with over ten years of experience as a standards evangelist and change agent, I’ve been through the wringer a few times. Making change is difficult, no matter how much experience you have.
So, with that said, here is my perspective on how Jamie’s done so far in the show. There’s a lot you can learn by watching him!
- In the first two episodes, a lot of Jamie’s messaging about the need for change is negative. Pointing out that Huntington was the most unhealthy city in the country put people on the defensive. Telling them they were dying because of what they were eating was going to create a feeling of hopelessness. Jamie should have started with a positive message to sell his idea. For example, telling people they can live longer, healthier, and happier by eating better, and then telling them that he’s there to help them do exactly that probably would have won him more allies early on.
- Since Jamie’s early statements caused some prickles to go up, he was walking into a negative environment in the elementary school. Perhaps his biggest mistake there was to say, “I’ve done this before.” What Jamie probably thought he was projecting was an assurance of success and a reason to trust him. Instead, he came off as an intruding know-it-all: as though he was dismissing their concerns and not leveraging their knowledge and experience. By saying, “I’ve done this before,” he was actually giving cause to his audience to resist change even more strongly.
- Once the cooks, especially Alice, started digging in their heels, it was clear Jamie was getting frustrated. I don’t have an issue with that, really — it’s hard to contain your emotions. But I didn’t like Jamie’s snippy and sarcastic responses to Alice. From the get-go, she was going to be the toughest convert — but potentially also his biggest ally. Jamie should have swallowed his pride and focused on the result he desired — cooperation! He didn’t need Alice to buy-in to the change yet, but he did need her help. Jamie should have disengaged from her negative behavior and instead sought to re-establish a positive context — for example, asking her help with the spec sheets. (Speaking of which, he broke a few too many rules for my comfort. Making sure you’re getting done what needs to be done, like the spec sheets, keeps people off your back and allows you to maintain focus on change.)
- Some of the best moments of the show are the ones where Jamie engaged directly with the elementary school kids, one of his key audiences. Even when his tried-and-true demonstrations didn’t go as expected with them, the kids were always going to be the easiest converts — and, as we know from the advertising industry, some of the most effective in terms of putting pressure on adults! Seeing Jamie dress up as Mister Pea was priceless: an image that won’t be forgotten by those kids anytime soon.
- At the high school, Jamie went one step further — he recruited like-minded teenagers, empowered them with tools to create change, and gave them a voice. As he connected with teens whose lives are being directly impacted by the current situation, he created a strong network of change agents who could help infiltrate the high school and advocate the change agenda to a variety of audiences. Then, he gave them a taste of success by having them first cook for a large audience and then speak directly to that crowd about their experiences.
- There are two questions which are crucial to answer (and regularly reassess) when creating change: What’s holding you back and What you need to move forward? Jamie answered both. He realized that the french fries were the crutch that everyone fell back on, so he removed them from the lunch line. Then he realized that to go forward with his plan, he needed funding to train more workers. Once you know these two things, you can create a plan for advancing change, which is precisely what Jamie did!
As I got to the end of the third episode, I realized I was excitedly jumping up and down on my couch, with tears in my eyes. It’s always an awesome feeling to witness someone’s success as they build momentum to create positive change! Watching the previews for the next episode, I can’t wait until Jamie re-encounters the radio DJ — it looks like he’s finally going to have a breakthrough with him.
If you’ve watched the show, what behaviors or actions have caught your attention? And do you think Jamie can truly help the United States launch a Food Revolution?
Comments
Scott Berkun left this comment on :
Thx for the comment over on my site – came over here and saw this post and had to reply.
Very good observations on change, and finding positive or negative ways to frame it. I do wonder with any reality TV show how much of how things are framed is the choice of the producers who are interesting in creating drama – and negative framing is easier to create and easier to sell (in teasters for the show). Plus it’s impossible to know how much of what’s shown is representative of everything that actually happened.
The thing I kept thinking about was incentives. Alive has no clear incentive for wanting change. Change is more work and frustration for her, even if it’s good for the kids. However if she gets $1 for every kid that eats better that day, or a $5k bonus if the obesity rate in her school, then Jamie’s goals and hers become aligned. Same goes for that bureaucrat who insists there are 1.5 units of bread in every meal. Her job is to enforce the rules, not to improve them. Unless she’s rewarded for making the rules better, or god forbid, making kids healthy, she’s unlikely to be an ally either.
All in all, I thought the show, and Jamie, was very positive and real compared to many reality TV shows. It’s still TV, but compared to say Kitchen Nightmare where Gordon Ramsey runs around yelling at people for an hour, it was, as you mention, something quite positive.
Thanks for the post.
kelly left this comment on :
Excellent, Kimmie. Thank you for writing!
Obi-Wan Kimberly replied on :
Thanks, Kelly! Thanks, Scott!
Yes, Scott, you’re right — who knows how the show producers have framed or manipulated the situation or tape. But given what I’ve seen on the show, it all seems awfully familiar to what I’ve experienced, so I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt and take what I see at face value (at least for the purposes of this post).
It’s interesting that you bring up incentives and rewards. I’m most accustomed to the incentive of a job well done; I have never been able to offer any tangible reward to promote any of the changes I’ve advocated. I dislike monetary incentives because they’re most often used in the early promotion of a change — so later adopters miss out, which can create unneeded barriers between adopters. Also, in Jamie’s case, he’s already seeking funding for more training, so finding money for incentives might be even more difficult. But, just in bringing it up, you help raise awareness of how rewards are so often used to manipulate behavior, which is something we should all be aware of (especially when we’re the ones being manipulated).
Ricardo Patrocínio left this comment on :
I have not seen the show, but for what you wrote I assume that it is related to Jamie’s talk on TED: http://www.ted.com/speakers/jamie_oliver.html
Great post by the way, is a very incisive criticism. Thank you for sharing.
Bala left this comment on :
In regards to your first point about his messaging for change being negative.
I think people respond to criticism differently across cultures. His initial approach might not have been completely American (which makes for good drama).
My personal experience (in Africa, Europe and now America) is that people here in the States respond more to positive reinforcement – not so everywhere.
I think he gets a pass because he actually offers solutions.
Hopefully the culture (or personality) does not get in the way of his very important message.