In the old conversations, we positioned big as the most valid approach to change. This was a bias for large scale change, supposedly well-planned. For several reasons, there is more efficiency and sustainability in change when we go about it through multiple iterations of small experiments. These lower risk and accelerate learning and paybacks.
With the mantra that small is smart, experiments on small scales become richer platforms for creativity than large change ever provides. They use fewer resources and the costs of permissions and oversight. Every organization and community is wise to keep multiple small experiments going at any point in time. Those that have used the approach has found that it is sheer illusion that rigorously planned and capitalized large changes have fewer failures than multiple improvisations.
