Thanks, guys, for the replies; good info.

I guess my real point, poorly expressed above, is that you cannot get real change in an organization if you implement change that reinforces current poor practice. 

Let's take the simple example of taking a group of MS Word users and trying to get them to work collaboratively in a wiki to create a document (this is exactly what I am doing now). I could have implemented a wiki that was totally WYSIWYG and menu based. I did not.  Why? Because I am looking past this project towards the next one with the same group. By the time we work on the next task I want to be comfortable that those who cannot learn (that is, who refuse to use the wiki) are weeded out and that those who can learn have identified themselves by trying to use the wiki.

Current (and poor) practice for a group is to independently create sections of a document as separate Word documents and exchange them via email.  You all know what kind of a nightmare and waste of time and money that results.  Even worse is that the users are also wasting time formatting (often incorrectly) the documents.  

Replacing the cherished poor-quality word processing interface with a limited but similar interface is sending the wrong message to the users. We are, in effect, saying "This it not really something different, it's just kinda different." The message we are sending is that the users they do not have to take  the change seriously; they do not have to apply themselves and learn.

"However, enterprise software has a different common denominator and most non-technical users do not want to take the time to learn something new, they just want a tool that makes their job easier and with less overall effort."

If we cater to the perception that the users cannot learn, they never will. that's human nature.  If, instead, we promote learning by booting the users out of their comfort zones early on, then we can gain tremendous long-term advantage at the expense of short-term peace of mind.

It is for these reasons that I am averse to making things easy up front.

Perhaps to a large extent, my point of view is based on my focus on small organizations and small groups. This I know, and I understand that change in large organizations is a different animal. However, large organizations are composed of smaller ones, official or not. Change the small and you can change the large.

In any case, thanks for the article and for making me think. I appreciate having access to this area and to you folks.