Making a noise versus making a ruckus
We often confuse making noise for making a ruckus, so consider this for clarity:
You can make noise anywhere (even behind closed doors), it doesn’t make a difference because a difference isn’t the point. Noise is about berating a problem without solving it.
The fuming monologue you unleash into a room with no audience (other than perhaps yourself) over how a product is frustrating to use is noise.
The pronounced and intentional stomping on the ground a child makes when they are displeased is noise.
Noise provides catharsis and temporary relief, but offers no reassurances about actually making things better, alleviating points of contention, or nipping any other important problems in the bud.
A ruckus, unlike noise, is the art of exercising compassion for the people whose participation is required for change, and designing and making a calls until a change-making response is elicited.
Sometimes making a ruckus is as simple as sending in the feedback and others responding with changes that address it.
Sometimes, if the feedback falls on deaf ears and things don’t get better, making a ruckus is about reframing what you sent the first time and bringing other potential change-makers into the fold.
Sometimes, if nothing is working still, a true ruckus may require that you take it upon yourself and the minds of fellow creatives to build a better solution.
In any ruckus-making case, you rarely try the same thing again.
If you want temporary relief from a problem, by all means make the same noise (you may very well lose your voice in time). If you want to make a change and truly resolve a problem that you tend to make noise about, then it’s best to make sure you’re (actually) making a ruckus.
