My third out of 5 posts following up on the publication of Reflections from ‘Autonomie zonder eigenaarschap’.
There is a certain comfort in gradual change.
It feels responsible, measured, and safe.
You adjust a little. Improve a little. Align a little more.
And many of the contributions move in that direction.
Step by step, nothing wrong with that until you realize something:
Gradual change only works when the foundation is stable.
When the structure itself is not the issue.
But what if it is?
Then gradual change becomes something else: Maintenance.
You refine the edges. You improve the surface. But the core remains untouched.
And so do the outcomes.
This is where things start to feel familiar.
Different initiatives. Same results.
Because the pace of change is aligned with the system, not with the need.
And systems, left undisturbed, tend to preserve themselves.
That’s the paradox.
The more careful we are, the more stable the problem becomes.
If the structure is the problem, gradualism keeps it intact.
