“It takes a deep commitment to change and an even deeper commitment to grow.” Author, Ralph Ellison
Change: Individual. Collectivity/ies. Psycho dynamic. Economic/industrial…I think that change can be viewed simply as a move from one state to another, but is not simple, rather has complexities at its core. As far as the individual is concerned, take for example the change from a psychological state to a different one, who is to say this is a change for better or for ill? Does it matter? To who? What is the stimulus for that change, does it rise from within or from without (the latter an example set by others/by the environment)? One can change attitude and or emotional response to the same context and the question what is the precedent is pertinent because certain individuals transcend circumstances while others do not and remain in what is often a state of stagnation.
Collectivities of individuals are often seen to be moved from one state of being to a different one by virtue of certain powerful ques. These ques can be individuals who desire to effect a response or by the environment, be this changed by others, ie, by governmental authority because it views a transition as necessary and to pull those who it is intended for toward a different/more appropriate status. The latter is what can be referred to as innovation and can be a model based upon other models presented elsewhere. These models consist of physical attributes created via intellectual contribution and thus, their acceptability with respect to the individual and group subject to them is often a process in itself. Some regard the latter as imposition, others as opportunity, others anywhere in between and it is the task of facilitators to create acceptability whatever means are at their disposal.
Often change cannot be identified, it is a kind of excitement of the mind with no clear vision until a process of release is begun. One enters the universe naked, ie. without preconceptions and with freedom to be…Arguably this is not often the case but it is a tactic employed to set the scene for a mental landscape where either the individual places the meanings or someone subsequent.
Personally my view of change as it applies to me is a process of considerations based upon a desire within myself, often a frustration with the wider norms, but without clear outline of what will become. These considerations are based upon my own creative/artistic impulses that have no obvious psychological basis other than they manifest as something that did not exist before. Is this growth as the question refers? It depends on who answers the question and what they bring to it, some would answer in the affirmative, others not. Is it growth in the sense of an innovation, for example the widespread application of the internet and its continued development? I would say most would answer in the negative because what they bring is a kit bag of values and these are often based on what commercial success typifies, ie, economic growth. My own creation of a piece of literature is not likely to fall into this category for most viewers although it is fundamental to my own person and with each stage the work appears I experience growth. One could therefore argue that change is not always growth.