diff --git a/blog/2026-09-03-getting_to_yes/index.qmd b/blog/2026-09-03-getting_to_yes/index.qmd new file mode 100644 index 0000000..8f61c96 --- /dev/null +++ b/blog/2026-09-03-getting_to_yes/index.qmd @@ -0,0 +1,218 @@ +--- +title: 'Making Change: What We Learned at the ESIP Session "Bridging Divides and Getting to Yes"' +author: + - name: Erin Robinson + orcid: 0000-0001-9998-0114 + - name: Eli Holmes + orcid: 0000-0001-9128-8393 + - name: Michele Thornton + orcid: 0000-0002-6533-6328 + - name: Michael Liddel + orcid: 0009-0007-9035-5647 + - name: Julie Lowndes + orcid: 0000-0003-1682-3872 +date: 2026-09-03 +citation: + url: https://openscapes.org/blog/2026-09-03-getting_to_yes/ +categories: [blog, ESIP, NASA, NOAA] +image: landscape_boxes.png +--- + +*This is a short post about the Hackday we held at NASA User Working Group +(UWG) Summit, on the heels of the Hackday we led at the 2026 July Meeting! We +were able to reuse our planning and coordinating process and infrastructure, +but adapt for a different audience (scientists and support staff from all of +the NASA Earthdata DAACs), goals, and time constraints. The goal here was to +gather anyone who’s attending the UWG Summit or from on-site at Goddard, and +hack on “contributing to open science to make things easier for scientists” +from policy, social and technical perspectives.* + +*Quicklinks:* + +- [ESIP Hackday blog post](https://openscapes.org/blog/2026-09-02-esip-hacking-on-ideas/) +- [Getting to yes slides on zenodo](https://zenodo.org/me/requests/596f3b2f-73ac-468e-9443-8a96f74a1554#record) +- [ESIP Highlight Slide](https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/13ZAFIAgly2yDH5I7md-STQv2PXSJepBzkRnZu8Gs16g/edit?pli=1&slide=id.g3f6a2cd3f22_2_5#slide=id.g3f6a2cd3f22_2_5) + +*Cross-posted at [openscapes.org/blog](https://openscapes.org/blog), [nasa-openscapes.github.io/news](https://nasa-openscapes.github.io/news), [nmfs-openscapes.github.io/blog](https://nmfs-openscapes.github.io/blog)* + +------------------------------------------------------------------------ + +# **Making Change: What We Learned at the ESIP Session "Bridging Divides and Getting to Yes"** + +A vast majority of the work that Openscapes supports is about making change. +NASA and NOAA mentors work on big changes like federal agencies moving all +their data to the cloud, and many individuals work on smaller changes like +making a process a bit more reproducible for future you and future us. However, +change can seem like a mysterious process. At the July ESIP meeting, in a +session entitled ‘Bridging Divides and Getting to Yes’, we broke change down +into bite-sized steps using the [Leading +Change](https://www.kotterinc.com/methodology/8-steps/) framework (Kotter, +1996). Kotter identified eight steps to make change: + +1. Creating or identifying the urgency +2. Building a guiding coalition (collaborators to work together, leaders in your network) +3. Forming a vision and +4. Communicating that vision +5. Removing barriers +6. Identifying small or short-term wins +7. Building momentum around the change +8. Finally, anchoring the change in the organization + + + +::: {style=""} +![Figure 1: Our Openscapes landscape with the change framework overlaid](./landscape_boxes.png){fig-alt="Figure 1: Our Openscapes landscape with the change framework overlaid" fig-align="center" width="70%"} +::: + +While these are presented linearly, as we heard in the session and have all +experienced, we move back and forth through them. + +## **Four Vignettes on the “Messy Middle” of Change** + +To explore the framework, we heard four vignettes about the path to change from +Eli Holmes (NOAA), Michele Thornton (NASA), Mike Liddel (NOAA), and Julie +Lowndes (Openscapes). The speakers were asked to share just a snippet of the +change and specifically to highlight the parts where it had been messy or +difficult. Between them, the stories touched four common areas of change: tools +and technology, people and relationships, resources and funding, and culture +and policy. + +Eli Holmes, NOAA Fisheries Open Science Lead, described getting GitHub +Enterprise adopted across NOAA Fisheries, a tools change that turned out to be +a culture and policy change. Her team formed a coalition and spent four months +writing a vision even though they half-believed it might never come to +fruition. GitHub Enterprise required permission. There was a bright spot: a +science center that already had GitHub Enterprise, but when Eli pointed to it, +the response was no because it was not on the approved list. How do you get it +on the list? IT did not know. Eli continued to investigate how to get on the +list and found out that the person who could actually decide was not someone +she could email directly. However, during a chance meeting, Eli found herself +on a call with that person. While she couldn't email this person, she could +speak up. At the end of the call, she said: "Hey, I have an unrelated +question." That question unlocked everything. It took vision, persistence, +being in the right room, and the courage to ask to add GitHub Enterprise to the +approved list. (Eli's slides from the January 2025 ESIP meeting: [The GitHub +Story at NOAA +Fisheries](https://openscapes.org/blog/2025-01-30-esip-winter-2025/)) + +Michele Thornton, ORNL DAAC Manager, opened with a familiar slog: enormous +amounts of downloaded data instead moving into cloud-native solutions, and the +thought “there has to be a better way”. A conversation with the right person +surfaced an approach for cloud-native publication, and then her excitement met +resistance. The solution didn't come from winning the argument; it came from +relationships: getting the right people in the room with each other and by +imparting the right technical vision, the needed collaborations were built to +execute the solution together. Because that workflow existed, her team could +publish and analyze data in near real-time during the 2024 LA fires. That's the +payoff of a change made before the urgency arrives. Michele is the one who +named the session's shadow title: sometimes getting to yes is not accepting no. + +Mike Liddel, Acting Assistant Chief Data Officer for NOAA Fisheries, told a +story of one change laying the foundation for the next. Starting an Open +Science Community of Practice at NOAA several years ago took vision and real +effort, building a coalition of the eager (an important distinction from the +willing) around open, collaborative work. He anchored this community in the +organization. So when a new directive to move to the cloud came with no +additional time or money, supplying the urgency required for change, the +community was ready. The coalition of the eager could support many more in the +migration to the cloud. + +Julie Lowndes, Openscapes Founder and Director, brought the +resources-and-funding story about making the change to become a small business. +In the early days of Openscapes, she was working full-time but paid half-time +to stretch the support at the university. However, the university couldn't +accept payments in the configurations federal teams needed, which meant teams +of feds and contractors who wanted to participate together could not do so. +Universities can also be slow to vendor outside organizations. This did not +align with Openscapes' values of wanting to pay people quickly and easily for +their work. Julie decided to become a small-business owner to overcome those +procurement challenges. It let her accept two payments so whole teams could +join, and it made payments faster. The path to business owner has not been +easy, and sometimes it is very lonely. From this, she offered the approach she +reaches for when change gets hard: Pause (take a beat), Fork (what have you +seen before? who has attempted this?), and Do — ask for help. You don't have to +do it alone. + +## **The Interactive Change Lab** + +Listening to these stories, it's easy to see the framework shine through. We +know that we learn by doing, and we wanted to activate this learning in real +time. We took an experimental approach that Erin Robinson designed and called +the Interactive Change Lab. The confines of the 30-minute lab provided the +urgency that normally kicks off a change cycle. As participants arrived at the +start of the session, we used the attendance list in the ESIP agenda doc as a +first step to prompt them to consider a change they wanted to make. The changes +the participants named fell into the same buckets as the vignettes (tools, +people, resources, culture) and ranged from federal data infrastructure to +giving yourself permission to pivot careers. + +The lab started with each person receiving a blank 5x8 notecard and writing +down a change they wanted to make. It turned out it was shockingly hard to +write down a change you want to make on the spot, even for the facilitators. +That act of writing on the notecard alone was clarifying. We then passed the +cards around, shuffled, and responded to four prompts, one per round: + +1. Build the coalition: Who could help, champion, or unblock this? +2. Communicate the vision: What would make someone say yes to this? +3. Remove barriers: What are the objections? Suggest a counter. +4. Generate a short-term win: What's a near-term action? What could make it + smaller or faster? What's the 15% version? + +After each prompt, we shuffled again, so every card collected input from four +different people who had no idea whose problem they were holding. + +At the end, cards returned to their owners, and we ran a quick 1-4-All +(modified [Liberating Structure](https://www.liberatingstructures.com/1-2-4-all)) +to digest the input. By and large, there was something useful on every card, +and people were genuinely surprised how valuable anonymous feedback from someone +outside their context turned out to be. + +::: {style=""} +![Figure 2. Folks discussing the input on their cards](./workshop.png){fig-alt="Figure 2. Folks discussing the input on their cards" fig-align="center" width="70%"} +::: + +## **Strategies We Synthesized** + +At the close, we harvested strategies from the cards and the room onto the +whiteboard: + +- Write it down. Naming the change is harder and more clarifying than it sounds. +- Reframe the problem. Many people said the most valuable thing they received was a reframe. Refine and test how you define the problem. Ask: what is this problem like, and how has that been solved before? +- Surround yourself with a smart, diverse team, and do the work of translating the technical problem so they can help. +- Get to the small yes. Find one person to say yes, then let momentum (and a little FOMO) work on the rest. +- Make the case in their terms. Show how the change benefits the person saying yes and their organization: metrics, demos, the 15% version they can see working. +- Look at lots of solutions before narrowing down. +- Take a step. Any step. And sometimes, take a step back and evaluate where you are. + +## **Make Your Own Change** + +This **Interactive Change Lab** format is completely reusable for a team +meeting, a working group, or even just yourself: + +1. Write down a change you want to make. (Expect this to be hard.) +2. Answer the four prompts (coalition, vision, barriers, short-term win) yourself, or better, hand your card to people who don't know your context. +3. Ask "why now?" If you can't answer it, that might be the first thing to work on. +4. And as Julie said: Pause, fork, do: take a beat, look for who has done something like this before, and then act: this is often asking for help. + +Beyond this short activity, the [Openscapes’ Approach +Guide](https://openscapes.github.io/approach-guide/) has many resources that +your group might find helpful to make change. The Openscapes Champions +[pathways template](https://openscapes.github.io/series/pathways.html) (drawn +from Lowndes et al., 2017\) is an excellent resource for mapping out the vision +and steps for your change and collaborating on them with your team. The +[Reflections program](https://openscapes.github.io/approach-guide/reflections/) +also provides a quick three-week scaffold to kick-start change. + +Good ideas don't become reality on their own. But as our four speakers and +dozens of notecards showed us, coalitions can be built before you need them, +and a no is often the easiest first position. And sometimes getting to yes +means persistently not taking no. + +Finally, thank you to our speakers — Eli Holmes, Michele Thornton, Mike Liddel, +and Julie Lowndes — for sharing the messy middle of making change, and to +everyone in the room (and online) who brought real changes to the table and +generous feedback to each other's cards. Thank you Erin Robinson for designing +and leading the session, the Interactive Change Lab was so valuable and we’re +excited to see where people reuse it. This session only worked because of +everyone’s contributions. Thank you! + diff --git a/blog/2026-09-03-getting_to_yes/landscape_boxes.png b/blog/2026-09-03-getting_to_yes/landscape_boxes.png new file mode 100644 index 0000000..5814ad1 Binary files /dev/null and b/blog/2026-09-03-getting_to_yes/landscape_boxes.png differ diff --git a/blog/2026-09-03-getting_to_yes/workshop.png b/blog/2026-09-03-getting_to_yes/workshop.png new file mode 100644 index 0000000..f6db648 Binary files /dev/null and b/blog/2026-09-03-getting_to_yes/workshop.png differ