Making It All Work : A Pocket Guide to Sustain Improvement and Anchor Change [1 ed.] 9780203847176, 9780415881029

Citation preview

Making It All Work

The area of Production and Operations Management has been dominated by several systems, or processes, introduced over the past couple of decades to huge success. First was Total Quality Management (TQM), which was then followed by the very popular and effective Six-Sigma Approach. Six-Sigma started in manufacturing industries but has now spread to other businesses that use a specific process to produce a product. This short book is meant to be a quick introduction to Six-Sigma and other established methods for improving product quality. It could be used as a standalone text in a short course as found in continuing education and M.B.A. programs, and as a supplement to operations management, Six-Sigma, TQM, or any other course in manufacturing and producing goods. John Roland Schultz has taught for over 20 years and was a program director administering an Advanced Technical Certificate program in Quality Management. In addition, he has 25 years’ experience as a consultant, technical services manager, and product development engineer. He is the author of magazine and journal articles on performance improvement and system change.

Making It All Work A Pocket Guide to Sustain Improvement and Anchor Change

JOHN ROLAND SCHULTZ

First published 2011 by Routledge 270 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016 Simultaneously published in the UK by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2010. To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’s collection of thousands of eBooks please go to www.eBookstore.tandf.co.uk. © 2011 John R. Schultz All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Schultz, John Roland, 1939Making it all work : a pocket guide to sustain improvement and anchor change / John Roland Schultz. —1st ed. p. cm. 1. Organizational change. 2. Business communication. 3. Management. I. Title. HD58.8.S37 2010 658.4'06—dc22 2010002724 ISBN 0-203-84717-2 Master e-book ISBN

ISBN13: 978–0–415–88102–9 (hbk) ISBN13: 978–0–415–88103–6 (pbk) ISBN13: 978–0–203–84717–6 (ebk)

This book is dedicated to: Donald S. Ermer 1932–2007. He was passionate in his pursuit of quality excellence. A colleague, mentor, and friend of many, he consistently recognized those teachable moments.

Contents

List of Illustrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xv

CHAPTER 1—An Elegant Solution Is Only the Beginning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 System Improvement Is Really About Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Why System Improvement Sometimes Fails to Achieve Expectations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 System Improvement Includes Problem Resolution and Solution Implementation . . . . . . . .6 Making It All Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 CHAPTER 2—A Practical Approach to Sustaining Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Lewin’s Three-Phase Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 Applying the Three Phases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 Using Teams to Implement and Sustain Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

PART 1—Unfreezing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 CHAPTER 3—Explain the Need for Making Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Recognizing the Need for Making Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 Why Complacency Is Such a Problem When Making Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18 Sources of Complacency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19 Raising the Level of Awareness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20

viii

Contents

Explain the Need for Making Improvement: How to Make It Happen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21 An Example of How It Was Done . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21 CHAPTER 4—Communicate a Unifying Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Why Purpose Is Important . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23 Characteristics of a Shared Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 Creating an Effective Statement of Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25 Communicating the Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27 Communicating Also Means Setting an Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28 Communicating Up Is Also Important . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29 Communicate a Unifying Purpose: How to Make It Happen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 An Example of Failing to Communicate a Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31 An Example of a Well Communicated Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31 CHAPTER 5—Identify Formal and Informal Networks and Ensure Their Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 What Are Formal and Informal Networks? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33 Understanding and Dealing with the System’s Culture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37 Creating New Alliances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39 Building Trust . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41 Identify Formal and Informal Networks and Ensure Their Participation: How to Make It Happen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42 An Example of Why Participation Is Important . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43 An Example of Working Within the Culture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44 CHAPTER 6—Create a Plan for Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Why Plans Are Important . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46 The Planning Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47 Determining Constraints That May Become Barriers to Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48 Plans Can Be Created in Several Different Ways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49 Establishing Timing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50 Making the Plan Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51 Create a Plan for Action: How to Make It Happen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53 An Example of How to Create a Plan for Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53

PART 2—Changing

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59

CHAPTER 7—Create the Opportunity for Small but Meaningful Gains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Why Small Gains Are Helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61

Contents

ix

The Character of Small Gains and Their Relationship to the Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62 Time Passes as Work Progresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .63 Create the Opportunity for Small but Meaningful Gains: How to Make It Happen . . . . . . . .64 An Example of Why Small Gains Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65 CHAPTER 8—Empower People to Take Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 What Is Empowerment? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67 Barriers to Empowerment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .69 Dealing with Power and Ensuring the Team’s Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .69 Training Makes It Possible to Operate in the New Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .72 Putting People to Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .75 Empower People to Take Action: How to Make It Happen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .76 Examples Illustrating Why Empowerment Is Important . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .77 CHAPTER 9—Manage Resistance to Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 Reasons for Resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .79 How People React to System Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .80 Techniques for Dealing with Resistance to Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .84 A Mechanism for Dealing with Entrenched Supervision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .85 Manage Resistance to Improvement: How to Make It Happen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .88 Examples Contrasting the Management of Resistance to Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . .90

PART 3—Refreezing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .93 CHAPTER 10—Complete the Restructuring of Daily Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 Keeping People on Track and Maintaining Faithfulness to Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .95 Coordinating and Integrating Unfinished Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .98 Creating New Networks and Relationships and Eliminating Old Ones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .100 Managing Conflict to Ensure the Completion of Unfinished Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .102 Making Corrections and Staying the Course . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .105 Complete the Restructuring of Daily Activities: How to Make It Happen . . . . . . . . . . . . . .106 An Example of Where More Coordination Was Needed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .109 CHAPTER 11—Sustain Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 Continue to Measure and Monitor Process Effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .111 Continue to Monitor Workgroup Dynamics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .119 Document Revised Process Activities to Maintain Gains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .124 Wrapping Up and Bringing Things to a Close . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .125 Sustain Improvement: How to Make It Happen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .126 An Example Illustrating the Importance of Sustaining Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .127

x

Contents

Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .129 Affinity Technique . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .129 Force Field Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .130 Activity Breakdown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .130 Top-Down Flow Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .132 Planning Tree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .134 Lesson Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .136

Key Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .138 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .142 Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .144

List of Illustrations

Figures A.1 Planning tree organization A.2 Example planning tree diagram

134 135

Tables 1.1 2.1 2.2 5.1 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 9.1 9.2 10.1 11.1 11.2 11.3 A.1

Problem-Solving Methods The Three-Phase Framework and Accompanying Action Steps How Methods Fit Together Organizational Environment and Approach to Communication Team Meeting Notes: Create a Plan for Action Team Meeting Notes: Force Field Analysis Action Plan: Nonconforming Parts Implementation Action Plan: ISO Standard Implementation Stages of Adaptability Experienced During Change Methods for Managing Resistance to Change Conflict Reduction Outcomes Measurement Types and Their Indicators The Workgroup as an Open System Group Development Behaviors During Change Example Force Field Analysis

3 11 12 36 54 55 56 57 83 89 105 116 119 120 131

xii

A.2 A.3 A.4 A.5

Illustrations

Example Activity Breakdown Example Top-Down Flow Chart Lesson Planning Objectives Example Lesson Plan

132 133 136 137

Preface

Quite simply, this book is about change and how to make good ideas a permanent part of daily work routines. If you are using Six-Sigma, process improvement, and lean manufacturing—or employing other management approaches using teams to resolve workplace issues—then this book has additional tools that will make the job of going from answer to action much easier. It addresses the needs of people—team members and system stakeholders—who are on the frontlines struggling with the realities of upgrading their work processes. Basic supervisory and organizational behavior practices are described. These practices are often overlooked, but can ease the difficult work of change. The focus is hands-on and the ideas are down-to-earth so that managers, frontline supervisors, sponsors, and project team members can deal with those inconvenient and sometimes worrisome human issues that transformation often brings. The text places responsibility for completing change activities with the problem-solving team and their sponsor. It encourages team members to maintain control over the concluding implementation activities so victory is not declared before improvements are truly locked in place. The ideas in the book are based on years of teaching, providing technical assistance, and management experience in a variety of organizational settings. I observed that projects applying lean manufacturing, problem-solving, and other improvement methods often failed to reach expectations. Failures were not because the solution was flawed, but because teams and their sponsors had difficulty during critical implementation steps. The causes of lost momentum can be multiple and exhaustive. Often, however, energy gets focused on problem-solving, leaving little reserves for the

xiv

Preface

equally important correction steps. Implementation then becomes a rushed course of action in which thoughtfulness about people and process impacts are hastily considered. Once a solution to a problem is found there is a temptation by the project team to push new ideas upon the system, and then find activities running aground as participants attempt to wrestle with their new and unfamiliar environment. This book explains how to organize and manage modifications during the solution realization phase of problem-solving so that improvements become the new way of life. The nine steps detailed in the book, although applied to solution implementation, can be used on their own to manage many types of system modification. These transition activities are framed in a three-phase model first proposed by Kurt Lewin, considered by some to be the father of change theory. Lewin’s model packages a strategy for sustaining improvement that is easy to understand and apply—unfreeze, change, and refreeze. Fundamental organizational performance techniques are introduced in each of the nine steps in order to assist project teams move improvements from idea to integrated solution. The practices are not new or revolutionary, but they are often overlooked while team members focus on statistical and analytical methods. The ideas described have a decidedly human focus and are meant to supplement the familiar diagnostic tools associated with Six-Sigma and process improvement projects. Like all tools, each approach has its particular use. Not all will be used on every project, and some may be useful during the early phase of problem-solving as well. Add them to your bag along with the other problem-solving and analytical gear. These tools are then available and can be applied when needed. This way fixes are more likely to become permanent and not someone else’s problem later.

Acknowledgments

I would like to recognize and thank the individuals listed here for their support and help. They gave me many hours of their time providing feedback and making recommendations for improvement. Ed Burnett Michael Hammer Mary Schultz George Watson Bonnie Granat for her coaching, editing, and probing questions that forced me to think beyond my normal assumptions.

one An Elegant Solution Is Only the Beginning

System improvement is more than the discovery of an elegant solution. It is a twofold process that includes problem resolution and solution implementation. Both activities require technical as well as emotional competencies. This chapter considers the dual nature of problem-solving by examining the following topics: ■ ■ ■

■

System Improvement Is Really About Change Why System Improvement Sometimes Fails to Achieve Expectations System Improvement Includes Problem Resolution and Solution Implementation Making It All Work

System Improvement Is Really About Change Those of you who pick up this book have, in most cases, been exposed to other works on lean manufacturing, Six-Sigma, or process improvement. All of these practices describe matter-of-fact and quantitative methods for getting from a troubled situation to a calm, productive one. Although such techniques are effective and reliable, they do not describe how people will be affected by improvement, or how the organization can deal with underlying emotions that arise when work processes are changed. Whenever a work situation is altered, people’s feelings are involved. The issues encountered will be both technical and emotional. Even though the

2

An Elegant Solution

current course of action may be flawed and difficult, stakeholders have figured out how to make it work. The helpful routines they have built to cope with existing system problems provide a sense of comfort and stability. So, when serviceable practices are threatened by change, people can become fearful and exhibit defensive behavior. The resulting dilemma, therefore, when making improvements is not the technical aspects of change, but dealing with the human behavioral issues that are inevitably encountered. Problem solvers are frequently baffled by the reluctance of co-workers and stakeholders to enthusiastically embrace upgrades to their routines. The reactions displayed are usually subtle, are somewhat bothersome, and appear as brooding, quarreling, continual questioning, reduced cooperation, declining output, and occasionally outright expressions of hostility. Project teams and their sponsors often shrug these actions off and chalk them up to the notion that “people naturally resist change”; they press on without regard for the lack of enthusiasm. However, this contrary behavior doesn’t usually bring about a more enlightened approach. Undeterred by events, the advocates for improvement end up shoving the results of problem-solving down the throats of co-workers and stakeholders who have been friends and colleagues, which inevitably provokes more dissension. Therefore, without being overly philosophic or deeply psychological, this book introduces some organizational behavior practices that can both supplement the programmed approaches to change implementation and make the process less tedious, more compassionate, and thus more successful.

Why System Improvement Sometimes Fails to Achieve Expectations Problem-solving has become a way of life in many work settings. Almost every public- and private-sector organization has introduced rational methods to improve quality and increase productivity. However, successful problemsolving and improvement require more than the discovery of a workable solution. At some point, the innovative answers need to become part of daily routines and then get locked in place so newfound solutions do not revert to old, less productive habits. Improvement projects, usually well intentioned and well designed, frequently become bogged down in later stages because team members and sponsors can lose focus once a resolution is found. Efforts that are centered on the problem and potential solutions often fail to consider how improvements will be permanently integrated into daily work.

An Elegant Solution

3

After finding a workable solution there is a temptation to push new ideas upon the system only to find that the proposed improvements are rejected. Even when the need is considered worthwhile and the solution is recognized as technically sound, work activities may stubbornly continue as if nothing new had been proposed. Getting people onboard and involved in the implementation effort can be terribly frustrating and can increase the cost of transition. Why does this happen? Why do solutions so well conceived frequently fall short of their potential when put into practice? The answer can be found in the inherent nature of the process. The problem-solving methods classically used are a two-step progression that includes both problem resolution and solution implementation. Often the challenges presented during implementation or realization are not handled with the same rigor as those encountered during problem resolution. Six-Sigma and process improvement methods are examples of this sequenced approach to problem-solving. Table 1.1 illustrates the dual nature of these models. Typically, when applying these rational problem-solving strategies, tasks are readily and enthusiastically tackled during the first stage. Team members excited by their triumphs during problem identification then rush to conclude the remaining implementation activities. By not taking sufficient time to consider stakeholder needs, well-intended solutions may not find traction as participants come to grips with unfamiliar concepts. People who manage and work in the system can become grousing skeptics, procrastinators, and even active resistors. Due to frustration, improvements then languish without having a lasting impact. Lackluster solution implementation frequently occurs when one or more of the following conditions exist:

TABLE 1.1: Problem-Solving Methods Process Improvement

Six-Sigma

Problem Resolution Define the problem Describe the current situation Analyze causes Develop solutions

1. Define 2. Measure 3. Analyze

Solution Implementation Implement improvements Evaluate results and make modifications Integrate into daily work

4. Improve 5. Control

4 ■ ■

■ ■

■

■

■

An Elegant Solution

Time is a factor and there is a rush to conclude project activities. Finding a solution becomes the objective while implementation steps get less attention. Team energy is exhausted on solution finding. Project sponsors are anxious to conclude activities once a solution is found. Resource requirements for training and process modification are inadequate and are glossed over or ignored. Solutions are pushed upon the system without thinking about impacts on people and processes. Activities that will make solutions a permanent part of daily work are not adequately thought through and are poorly integrated into new practices.

These issues can result in solutions that are rejected or poorly implemented. This in turn invites others to question the worth of problem-solving and improvement efforts, or the use of teams as a way to deal with workplace concerns.

Thanks Anyway But We Didn’t Need Your Help This case study illustrates how the implementation of a good solution can have unexpected consequences. The company, a manufacturer of hydraulic tools and components, had released a new high-pressure pump to production. The assemblers were experiencing difficulty in producing units capable of passing the output-flow test station without teardown and rework. A team was assembled to study the problem. Team members included the design engineer, a manufacturing engineer, the lead assembler, and a skilled assembler. The team met over a period of several days to study the problem and develop a solution. During that time, however, the workers in production began to tinker with the process to see if improvements could be made. Within a day, production workers had devised a workaround that yielded close to a 90 percent pass rate. The fix, although a bit jury-rigged, included custom fitting a valve part by removing sharp edges and changing the profile slightly using emery cloth, removing chips and debris from a valve body using a bent wire and compressed air, and reordering the assembly sequence.

An Elegant Solution

Meanwhile, the problem-solving team had devised its own solution and concluded by assigning the task of implementing improvements to the manufacturing engineer. The fix included changing the valve body cleaning procedure, which was handled by a different department; notifying the small-part supplier that changes were required in edge profile and diameter, and modifying the assembly sequence. These improvements were of course properly documented with new work instructions and change orders, which took several days to implement. When the manufacturing engineer called assemblers together and announced proposed training to introduce the new assembly techniques, he was greeted with blank looks, some chuckles, and then outright laughter. Some individuals just walked away. When he conducted the training session, assemblers were less than enthusiastic, openly ignored instructions, and purposely seemed to fumble the sequence of assembly. Feeling frustrated, the engineer eventually retreated to his office to consider the situation and ponder what had transpired. However, productivity picked up within a day and the pass rate was close to 100 percent. After a few days and feeling confident again, the manufacturing engineer approached production with several new ideas for further improvements. However, he was soundly rebuffed. Why, if both groups had discovered similar solutions, had production workers gone on the defensive? The answer was not the solution, but in how implementation activities were handled. The human relations aspect of change had not been considered a relevant factor. The assemblers through trial and error had come to the same conclusion as the problem-solving team. Yet their ingenuity and resourcefulness was not acknowledged. For them, the team’s solution was after the fact and redundant. Their pride of workmanship had not been honored. The engineer had not taken the time to observe, question, and understand what the assemblers thought, knew, or wanted in this situation. There are several lessons here. Workers seldom resist technical change, but social change—those alterations that can impact social structure and well-being—are often a point of contention. People don’t resist change; they resist the pain and threats that come from it. Good ideas, although meant to be implemented, often get put into practice simply as a matter of fact. Communication is often poorly handled and problem-solving methods rarely consider the resulting human relations consequences.

5

6

An Elegant Solution

System Improvement Includes Problem Resolution and Solution Implementation As stated at the start of this chapter, system improvement is more than problem-solving. It is dual-staged, having two contingent parts that must be managed to ensure success. The first segment is concerned with resolution, problem identification, and solution finding, while the second segment deals with implementing a corrective action. Both aspects usually operate under time constraints. Energy gets focused on the preliminary stage as team members grapple with a resolution. Implementation then becomes a rush where thoughtfulness about people and process impacts can get short-changed. Lasting improvement should be the result of systemic thinking that treats both problem resolution and solution implementation as parts of a continuing process. To be effective a team must complete all steps in the problem-solving model and consider how stages interact to bring about change. Making improvements permanent is as important as identifying root causes and developing solutions. All steps are vital. The team should not let pressure from outside or within the group undermine the progressive and necessary effort required to bring about improvement. A well-designed solution does not guarantee system improvement. Consideration and purposeful action are essential for a successful conclusion. The following factors are important to keep in mind: ■

■

■

■

■

System issues are not resolved until improvements are successfully implemented. Stakeholder values and self-image, not just process operating structures, will be impacted by installation activities. Stakeholder needs and feelings will require consideration and accommodation in order to make alterations permanent because system change is contingent upon individual change. Individual change is multi-stepped and dependent upon a person’s ability to make coping adjustments. Improvement activities that are planned and sequenced so they assist coping have greater acceptance and a better chance of producing a permanent solution.

Improvements, no matter how insignificant, can have consequences. Incorporating specific actions into the final stages of problem-solving— solution implementation—that accommodate stakeholder needs and explain “what’s in it for me” can ensure success with minimum upset.

An Elegant Solution

7

Making It All Work The goal of problem-solving is fixing the gap between current performance and desired performance. In order to create new efficiencies, the system will require modifications that alter both the flow of work and the deployment of labor. Likewise, the mindset of many individuals will have to undergo change so new routines are accommodated and ultimately become the accepted reality. Corrective action like problem resolution requires a set of well thought out and managed steps. The difficult job of shifting attitudes is much easier when using clearly defined actions to alter the organization’s traditions. Fixes are more likely to become permanent and not someone else’s problem later on. Improvement can bring uncertainty and frustration for people experiencing it. However, when planned and managed so anxiety is accommodated, the new way of working can create a sense of excitement and growth. Team members and individuals faced with the task of moving a process or system from difficult circumstances to improved operation will learn—by reading this book—how to apply the following steps to bring about lasting change: 1. Explain the need for improvements: Define why improvements are needed and then cut through complacency so system stakeholders understand why it’s necessary to move in a new direction. 2. Communicate a unifying purpose: Develop a central theme that people can rally around and create a sense of urgency so those impacted by change are ready to take a chance on something different. 3. Identify formal and informal networks and ensure their participation: Make sure the voices of diverse workgroups are heard and that affected individuals have an active role in completing the transition. 4. Create a plan for action: Create a map for getting from the current state to the desired state. Determine constraints, decide what should be done, assign responsibility, and estimate completion. 5. Create the opportunity for small but meaningful gains: Break the plan into meaningful chunks so people are willing to take risks and can readily measure progress. 6. Empower people to take action: Give problem solvers and affected workgroups the authority to make changes and accept responsibility for decisions related to their actions. 7. Manage resistance to system improvement : Understand how co-workers may react to change and develop strategies for helping those who are dragging their feet to make the transition.

8

An Elegant Solution

8. Complete the restructuring of daily activities: Eliminate the old networks and relationships and build new ones. Keep people on track, maintain faithfulness to purpose, coordinate and integrate unfinished activities. 9. Sustain improvement: Document revised activities. Measure and monitor both system and workgroup effectiveness to make sure improvements are performing as intended.

two A Practical Approach to Sustaining Improvement

This chapter describes a framework for facilitating the shift from problem identification and solution finding to realizing a sustainable improvement. The discussion will illustrate how typical problem-solving methods mesh with a three-phased model for change and its nine implementing action steps. The following topics are discussed: ■ ■ ■

Lewin’s Three-Phase Model Applying the Three Phases Using Teams to Implement and Sustain Improvement

Lewin’s Three-Phase Model Whenever there are improvements or changes to established operations, no matter how minor, those working in the system have invested time and energy in existing practices. These system stakeholders are accustomed to how things currently work and will find proposed revisions unsettling. Consequently, shifting system structures, routine activities, and cultural behaviors can become threatening when people are left to their own coping devices. Although the urge to push new ideas upon the system without preparation can be tempting, doing so often works to undercut the modification effort. System improvements that are planned for and managed have a much better chance of being accepted. People experiencing change are less likely to feel intimidated when they can understand and anticipate how alterations may

10

Sustaining Improvement

impact their work. A step-by-step approach is generally viewed as less daunting and more enlightening. Kurt Lewin, frequently regarded as the father of change theory, developed an effective model for altering systems in the mid 1940s. By combining elements of social science and psychology, he was able to initiate, manage, and stabilize changes so outcomes met expectations. His concept incorporates three phases that are easy to understand and apply. It provides a practical framework for organizing and securing system improvements. Kurt Lewin 1890–1947 Lewin was born in Mogilno, Poland (at that time in the Posen province of Prussia). He served in the German army during World War I and received his undergraduate education at the University of Munich and a Ph.D. from the University of Berlin. Lewin ultimately became involved with the Frankfurt School Institute for Social Research. When Hitler came to power in 1933, Lewin, along with other Institute members, emigrated to the United States where he became a citizen in 1940. Lewin worked at Cornell University, the University of Iowa, and he eventually became director of The Research Center for Group Dynamics at MIT. He is considered by many to be the originator of social psychology, and was the first person in the United States to study group dynamics and organizational development. Lewin’s research and studies, which produced information having a practical approach, were focused on organizational and social interactions. He is recognized for his work on force field analysis, action research, leadership styles, organizational change, and experimental learning. Lewin was truly a pioneer who created a field of psychology that gave insight into the behavior of groups. The following is an adaptation of Lewin’s idea for change based on his threephase model (Lewin, 1951): ■ ■ ■

Unfreeze old habits and behaviors to create a desire for change. Change to a new level or pattern of behavior. Refreeze by integrating the new method into a stable approach for getting things done.

Lewin’s model also included specific actions which supported each phase. However, the approach presented in this book replaces those activities with

Sustaining Improvement

11

TABLE 2.1: The Three-Phase Framework and Accompanying Action Steps Three-Phase Framework

Action Steps

Unfreeze: Make the need for change obvious so people are aware and ready to move in a new direction.

1. Explain the need for making improvement. 2. Communicate a unifying purpose. 3. Identify formal and informal networks and ensure their participation. 4. Create a plan for action. 5. Create the opportunity for small but meaningful gains. 6. Empower people to take action. 7. Manage resistance to improvement. 8. Complete the restructuring of daily activities. 9. Sustain improvement.

Change: Activate plans and actions that will move the system from old behaviors to new ones. Refreeze: Lock new patterns into place to reduce the tendency of sliding back into old familiar patterns of behavior and work.

contemporary action steps that nicely complement established improvement methods such as Six-Sigma, lean manufacturing, and process improvement. This common-sense approach framed by Lewin’s three-phase model is presented in Table 2.1. The paradigm based on Lewin’s thinking—unfreeze, change, refreeze— provides a practical framework for organizing the nine action steps and anchoring system improvement activities. The approach is easy to visualize, understand, and apply. The described actions can stand alone or be used in any situation where improvement is desired. However, framing these activities in three phases reminds the problem solver that there is more to making improvements than simply providing information and pressing for modified behavior.

Applying the Three Phases Lewin developed this approach because he felt agents for change, often eager to move in a new direction, jumped to the second step prematurely. Advocates for improvement were too quick to change things, and they created resistance in a situation that was not sufficiently unfrozen. In addition, the last step— refreezing—was often ignored, resulting in changes that were abandoned over time. This same condition is frequently encountered when solutions from SixSigma or process improvement projects are implemented. There is a rush to make changes without first securing support and ultimately stabilizing improvements. The resulting fixes are then rejected or discarded at some point, leaving system stakeholders disillusioned or having to go through a

12

Sustaining Improvement

comparable exercise again. Consequently failures occur because people have not adjusted to their altered circumstances. The three-phase model stresses fundamentals and is adapted here to help improvement teams and their sponsors understand that good ideas are only the beginning. Making them permanent requires a method that facilitates both intervention and stabilization. The three-phased nine-step approach to managing system conversion is usually applied during the last stage of problem-solving where a corrective action is put into practice. Table 2.2 shows how these elements fit together and meshes with Six-Sigma and process improvement to sustain system upgrades. Although Lewin’s approach is sequential, the nine action steps have some flexibility in their application. For example, when unfreezing the current system, steps 1, 2, and 3 can be handled concurrently, particularly if time is a critical factor. However, creating an action plan usually works best when it is applied after assessing the condition of formal and informal networks. Issues uncovered can then be accommodated by including palliative activities in the TABLE 2.2: How Methods Fit Together Six-Sigma

Process Improvement

1. Define 2. Measure 3. Analyze

1. Define the problem 2. Describe the current situation 3. Analyze causes 4. Develop solutions 5. Implement improvements 6. Evaluate results and make modifications

4. Improve

Three-Phase Framework

Action Steps

Unfreeze the current system

1. Explain the need for making improvement 2. Communicate a unifying purpose 3. Identify formal and informal networks and ensure their participation 4. Create a plan for action 5. Create the opportunity for small but meaningful gains 6. Empower people to take action 7. Manage resistance to improvement 8. Complete the restructuring of daily activities 9. Sustain improvement

Change the current system

5. Control

7. Integrate into daily work

Refreeze the new system

Sustaining Improvement

13

plan. The remaining steps framed by changing and refreezing must be undertaken in sequential order. By using an ordered approach to carry out modification, the chance of making decisions that affect only part of the system is reduced. There can often be a problem of acting too quickly and defining outcomes too narrowly. The resulting approach can produce payoff to one part of the system at the expense of the whole system. Individuals or groups then struggle against each other for resources. When this happens each unit will try to maximize its efforts for selfpreservation and not that of the whole system. Altering one part of the system without regard for the whole is a problem that can be corrected. By going through all three phases and all nine steps, the likelihood of failure is reduced. The goal of process improvement and Six-Sigma is system optimization to produce results that benefit customers. Employing the described steps ensures that interrelated system elements—people, processes, and structures—will function as a whole after system modifications are made. Each element is considered and addressed when using the three-phase framework along with the supporting nine action steps. The following are issues and concerns that are addressed by using this approach: ■

■

■

People: The judgment and energy for getting to a preferred result are provided by people. System improvement concerns are values, attitudes, relationships, and skills. Processes: Work practices that facilitate and direct the conversion of resources to achieve a desired result. System improvement concerns are decision-making, communication, supervision, and control methods. Structures: The arrangements that support the division of labor and the flow of work allow achievement of a desired result. System improvement concerns are system design, job design, facilities layout, and technology use.

System modifications should not be left to chance. Implementation actions should be well thought out; stakeholder anxiety must be dealt with, and controlled so that resulting improvements become the standard way of operating. The remaining chapters will detail how the nine steps can be applied when making system improvements.

Using Teams to Implement and Sustain Improvement Before the popular use of teams, most strategies for change originated at executive and managerial levels. Deployment actions were then pushed down

14

Sustaining Improvement

through the ranks to operations where it was management’s way or the highway. However, teams have become a way of life in many work environments. Problem-solving and system improvement are now, to a large extent, collaborative efforts in which people from various levels in the organization work together to bring about change. This book takes a team perspective. It assumes that those involved in an effort to fix process or system deficiencies and sustain improvement have basic team skills. The roles and responsibilities presumed are team member or green belt, team leader or black belt, coach or master black belt, and a sponsor or champion to oversee the effort. In addition, there is the assumption of good team practices. A project charter is used, a rational problem-solving method is employed, and ongoing review between the team and its sponsor takes place. Change in this context is a shared responsibility; there is a balance in roles between management and the workforce, which allows for team independence and decision-making within the project’s scope and the limitations defined in the charter. Finally, the team is not an end unto itself. It needs to operate in parallel with the rest of the organization. Its goals and objectives must align with the organization’s purpose. The team’s main priorities are the same as the system’s, and are ultimately concerned with providing goods or services that meet customers’ expectations. Don’t get swept up in the notion that your group has all the answers. Teams are just another method for getting work done.

Part one Unfreezing

Proverb: “Think of coming out before going in.” (Siu, 1980, p. 304)

Before improvements can be made, people need to have a reason to make them. They must be motivated, particularly if the current way of operating is comfortable and reasonably effective. No one wants to take a chance when status, competence, relationships, and compensation might be at risk. Certainty will usually outweigh uncertainty. So the first step is getting individuals or the group ready to accept another way of doing things. This requires creating awareness by exposing the flaws and difficulties associated with the current or accepted way. System modification involves not only learning something new but also unlearning something that is already well entrenched. Edgar Schein (1980) suggested three helpful mechanisms: 1. stop validating current behaviors, attitudes, or work arrangements;

16

Unfreezing

2. create sufficient guilt and discomfort with the current operation so people are ready to look at alternatives; and 3. set up a feeling of well-being by reducing barriers and promoting benefits that are only obtainable through moving in a new direction. The goal during unfreezing is to craft a motive for modified behavior. Start by increasing driving forces—the reasons for change—so restraining forces are outweighed. Break down the old way of doing things so people are ready to take a chance on something different.

three Explain the Need for Making Improvement

This chapter describes how to make the need for improvements obvious, and how to cut through complacency so system stakeholders understand why it’s necessary to move in a new direction. The following are the topics that will be explored: ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Recognizing the Need for Making Improvement Why Complacency Is Such a Problem When Making Improvement Sources of Complacency Raising the Level of Awareness Explain the Need for Making Improvement: How to Make It Happen An Example of How It Was Done

Recognizing the Need for Making Improvement The first move when trying to initiate improvement is getting others to recognize the need to make changes. Although there are many forces that can trigger awareness, the individuals impacted by change often remain complacent and unaware. Gaining their attention so behaviors and practices are interpreted in a new way should be part of an effective effort to manage system alterations. Sustaining improvements in most workplaces can be difficult because there is pressure to maintain harmony. Workgroups and their supervisors would rather not rock the boat because they have adapted to the current system. Its

18

Unfreezing

routines and relationships have become automatic and comfortable. The timehonored practices have allowed people to create a mental model that is reassuring and secure. This sense of steadiness creates complacency and a reluctance to do things differently. The goal during this step, because people may not recognize the need for making improvement, is to reduce contentment and indifference. This effort, however, should be more than an awareness campaign, yet not so forceful that people immediately tune out. Establishing a sense of urgency is one of the most effective ways to gain attention. Start by employing methods that encourage collective learning. This is a constructive way to expose the rocks that can lie under a system’s apparently placid surface. Collective learning creates awareness, develops capabilities, and gets people to challenge issues so real improvement can be made. It raises urgency without immediately increasing opposition. Consider using some of the following sources as a basis for making the need obvious: ■

■

■

■

■

Benchmark shortcomings against competitors or leaders in the organization’s market. Document and display information about complaints from customers, clients, and stakeholders. Document and display data related to rejects, scrap, rework, or the failure to maintain routine process control. Question waste that is the result of complexity, bureaucracy, overproduction, excess inventory, transportation, waiting time, or unnecessary motion. Expose excesses in spending and the inappropriate use of resources.

Why Complacency Is Such a Problem When Making Improvement There are many reasons why people tend to remain passive when improvements to a system are proposed. Fundamental to this attitude is the need for stability. Getting work done can be difficult in a situation where relationships and procedures are continually unsettled. As a result, system stakeholders learn how to make things work by building their own networks and methods for handling the job. Difficulties and problems are ignored in an effort to avoid conflict and keep things on an even keel. Many people will become uneasy when bothersome issues are made visible through problem-solving. Fear and anxiety can overtake individuals because

Explain the Need for Making Improvement

19

there are now uncertainties about roles, relationships, and practices. Workers worry about being able to perform in the new game. Stakeholders can have unanswered questions about feelings in the following areas: ■

■

■

Vulnerability: Will I be blamed for the problem? Will I be the scapegoat? Will I be moved to a different job? Will I still have a job? Trust: Can I believe what people are telling me? Will I be treated with respect? Will people accept what I’m saying as the truth? Will I still have the same access to information? Can I rely on others to do their part? Competency: Will my skills be adequate? Will I be able to keep up? Can I compete with others in the group? Can I handle the mathematics required? What do I need to know to work as part of a new team?

Sources of Complacency Complacency can arise for many reasons. It exists not only because those impacted by changes seem to be blind about the future, but also because there is contentment with the way things are now going. Even if there are recognized threats, system personnel often continue as if nothing new has happened. Dealing with complacency can be challenging because of the following factors: ■

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

People develop an aversion to risk-taking due to fear about how future events will unfold. People hold the belief that the problem is not a major crisis and will resolve itself over time. Personnel are already too busy and stressed so the notion of additional work is rejected. People recognize that past suggestions haven’t produced proposed results and hold the belief that the organization “keeps reinventing the wheel.” People think there is a clear mismatch between management’s pitch on how things are doing and its behavior—those in charge don’t walk the talk. Personnel feel that past support in terms of coaching, training, and resources has been absent. People think that management only reveals good news and has a history of “killing the courier of bad news.” People avoid questioning current practices because assessment and appraisal methods focus measurement and rewards on behavior that is acceptable to management.

20

Unfreezing

Raising the Level of Awareness When confronted by a difficult situation, such as a proposed improvement, individual workers often remark, “This is going to be a can of worms.” So there is a tendency to keep the lid on and keep doing what has always been done. As a result, however, those confronted by change will keep getting what they have been getting. If things are going to be different, then the worms have to be dealt with. This starts by purposely arguing against the sources of complacency—creating a sense that things are not right. It’s a time for bold action and not a time for excuses or reassuring words. This means making the truth known by telling those impacted by change what they may not want to hear. Communicating must be done in an open and honest manner so system stakeholders know what went wrong and why it must be fixed. The following are ways to get the word out about problems being addressed by the proposed change: ■

■

■

■

■

■

A memo to staff affected by pending improvements that precisely describes the problem and its causes. This message should be reinforced with data, illustrated by charts or graphs that support the findings. Postings on work area bulletin boards with copies of complaints by customers, clients, or other constituents. Include postings that describe with data the amount of scrap, rework, or the lack of system control. Emails to system operators and concerned personnel detailing cost overruns or costly waste. Be sure to describe consequences and impacts upon customers as well as system stakeholders. Newsletter articles describing the problem, its sources, and its consequences. Be blunt, but honest, and place emphasis on how customers are being impacted. A disgruntled customer usually means a loss of business. For emphasis, make the link between disaffection and loss of jobs. Meetings that make clear how sizable the problem’s impact will be. Here also the use of facts, data, and charts that can have persuasive influence. Face-to-face meetings with unhappy customers and clients in which these patrons can plead their case and make suggestions for repair.

The effort to raise awareness should not be a one-time thing. It should be multidimensional and repetitive over several weeks so people get the point. Everyone needs to understand that business as usual is not going to work—that accommodations will have to be made and proposed changes adopted.

Explain the Need for Making Improvement

21

To be successful at making improvements, both managers and unit supervisors will need to be onboard and convinced the problem is dire but fixable. So make them part of the campaign to raise understanding. Make a special effort to keep them informed and assured that the right solution is being adopted. The goal during this step, of course, is to make the need for change obvious so the people affected are ready to make a move in the new direction. The campaign should also rationalize the benefits of improvement by explaining the ease of future operations and the rewards derived through change. The next chapter describes how to create and communicate a unifying purpose, a step closely related to making the need for making improvement obvious. A shared purpose clarifies the direction that will be taken and creates a verbal picture of how contemplated changes can bring about a better way of operating.

Explain the Need for Making Improvement: How to Make It Happen The team’s goal during this step is basically one of persuasion. Framing the need and getting others to recognize the necessity of making improvements can be handled by taking a non-confrontational approach. The following five characteristics define a method for creating awareness: ■

■

■

■

■

Look for common ground. Indicate that the team and those impacted by changing conditions have similarities and share common interests. Avoid threats or use of force. Offer emotional appeals that may include information about the loss of customer confidence, erosion of market share, and consequential personal losses. Strive to be reasonable and rational. Use appeals that are logically consistent, truthful, and verifiable using data or actual examples. Offer an alternative course of action. Suggest a different direction and propose new methods that will bring about improved operations. Ensure equal access to information. Make the team’s sources of information and decision-making available and open to inquiry by anyone with a legitimate interest.

An Example of How It Was Done A small company manufacturing two-ply laminated plastic film for the safetyglass industry was under pressure from a major customer to upgrade its quality

22

Unfreezing

management system. The current corrective and preventative action process had continually failed to provide a product that consistently met requirements. A three-member team chaired by the operations manager was in the process of making changes and rewriting procedures when another customer demanded registration to the ISO 9001 quality standard. The following are actions the team took to raise awareness and signal a shift toward a more compliant and responsive quality management system: 1. The team continued to improve the corrective and preventative action process, but it now used the ISO quality standard as its guide. This slight shift in effort was consistent with ongoing work and showed the overall move toward the ISO standard to be a reasonable and rational extension of current activities. 2. The team drafted a letter to all employees, for signature by the operations manager and company president, discussing the move toward an ISOcompliant quality management system. The letter explained how this change would link functional business areas like engineering, purchasing, production, and human resources as partners in ensuring outgoing product quality. By achieving registration the company would now have more opportunities to sell its capabilities to other users of laminated film. 3. The team posted a copy of the customer letter requesting registration on company bulletin boards. This provided a logical and reasonable explanation for making a major commitment of this nature. 4. The team drafted and circulated a new quality policy along with a request for comments. The final version was then posted on company bulletin boards. This action provided an opportunity for input, and let people know there were going to be changes. 5. The team contacted the local community college and arranged for it to conduct a seminar that would help employees understand their responsibilities and relationships under the ISO standard. These sessions provided access to information, detailed how the new quality system would be organized, and showed employees how they would be allied in a common effort. 6. A pocket guide to the ISO standard was given to each employee attending the seminar. The handout not only provided information, but encouraged attendees to measure system improvements against the clause requirements and examples provided within its pages.

four Communicate a Unifying Purpose

This chapter explains how to develop a central theme that people can rally around, and how to create a sense of urgency so those impacted by change are ready to take a chance on something new. The following are the topics examined: ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Why Purpose Is Important Characteristics of a Shared Purpose Creating an Effective Statement of Purpose Communicating the Purpose Communicating Also Means Setting an Example Communicating Up Is Also Important Communicate a Unifying Purpose: How to Make It Happen An Example of Failing to Communicate a Purpose An Example of a Well Communicated Purpose

Why Purpose Is Important Just as the project for improvement had a statement of purpose, the implementation effort requires a clear statement of direction. Sometimes described as a vision statement, it presents a common picture of the future. A shared vision is the unifying element that pulls everyone together and keeps them moving forward.

24

Unfreezing

Without a clear sense of direction nothing else will seem to fall into place. Those working on improvements will act out of confusion and at cross-purposes because they have differing ideas about goals and how to achieve them. Although a resolution to system difficulties may be well grounded in fact, it doesn’t mean everyone understands what the updated situation will look like. In addition, those involved and affected have probably not given a lot of thought to how the improved condition will be realized. Many outside of the project team will be hesitant about the next steps and the scope of their involvement. To make matters worse, problem-solving teams often forge ahead expecting acceptance and adoption to be automatic. Team members and their sponsors imagine everybody knows what needs to be done because problem resolution had been such a fevered effort. However, for many improvement projects, failure to rally people around a unifying theme often sets the stage for confusion. Without a common understanding, some may question whether change is necessary. Others will charge ahead based on the suggestion that something new and different is in the works. Naturally these eager individuals want to be first at breaking new ground. However, the majority experiencing change will sit back and wait to see what happens. Because of uncertainty, gaining their support and cooperation will become a waiting game. Developing a shared purpose gives meaning to the work ahead and turns it into a joint commitment. However, the vision needs to be more than a clever idea or overwhelming manifesto. It must have resonance with those being changed so they are willing to be part of the new undertaking. Creating and communicating direction is much more than developing and posting a catchy slogan.

Characteristics of a Shared Purpose A statement of direction or purpose should be more than a set of well-crafted words or an announcement demanding commitment. It should convey a worthwhile reason for making changes that will allow others to have a stake in the future. The process starts by understanding and then describing what customers, clients, and stakeholders expect from the system and linking that to proposed changes or improvements. Also, analyze and portray the desired end in terms that have market appeal. Use words that will indicate how the recipients of the system’s outputs will benefit. In addition, the statement should be specific to those now operating in the system. Generic terms do not work. Neither do statements that are

Communicate a Unifying Purpose

25

well-crafted flights of the imagination. In such a case, everyone impacted will readily recognize the announcement for what it is—that the picture being portrayed is not pertinent to their future—and will tune out. A well-crafted statement of purpose should have the following characteristics: ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

It is brief so that it can be easily communicated, explained, and understood. It conveys a picture of the future and the desired end. It is clear and focused so decisions produce common results. It says something enabling and appealing to customers and stakeholders. It is realistic in its purpose so the end appears obtainable.

Creating an Effective Statement of Purpose A team meeting should be devoted to developing a statement for direction and purpose. In most cases, the focus for implementing improvements will be different than overall project objectives. Expect an assortment of ideas, but the first comprehensive statement will probably come from a single individual. There is usually someone who can craft a sentence that makes sense out of contrasting opinions. As compelling as the phrase may be, arriving at it doesn’t mean that the job is done. Let the dust settle for a while, and give the statement to supervisors and project sponsors for their review and input. The process of consideration and discussion is needed to bring clarity and focus. Several attempts typically work best because there will be differing beliefs about direction and how to get to the desired end. A certain amount of negotiation is usually required. There are practices that can aid discussion surrounding the creation of a purpose statement. Particularly useful is the Affinity Technique. It encourages team creativity as well as divergent thinking, then organizes ideas into groupings with similar themes. This technique is described in the Appendix. When crafting the final version, remember that words are important. The statement should be short, feasible, urgent, and motivating. This is an awful lot to ask from a sentence, but what is needed is a focus to rally around. Examples of such a sentence follow: ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Quick set-ups produce rapid turnaround and happy customers. Eliminating scrap and rework cuts costs and keeps customers. Process control produces top-notch quality. Customer satisfaction is achieved through quality and service. Reliability is what we will deliver.

26

Unfreezing

Thoughts on Negotiating Negotiating is very much like bargaining for a used automobile. There are rules of conduct (though usually unwritten), a common goal, a presentation of positions, and a focus toward agreement where both sides give up something to reach a deal. Negotiation roughly tracks the same process. There is (1) an agreement on ground rules, (2) a presentation of interests where each side explains its case, (3) a brainstorming session where both sides look together for ways to accommodate or work around the stated issues, (4) a process where proposed remedies are ranked, (5) a dialogue where shared interests are identified, and (6) discussion on which workarounds to pursue and agreement on how to implement them. Remember this is not a situation where there should be perceived winners and losers. In the end there should be no good guys or bad guys, just options for mutual gain where both sides can move ahead. People confronted by change react negatively because they feel threatened. Their sense of control, belonging, economic well-being, security, and recognition is being challenged. The goal is to devise ways to accommodate these basic needs.

■ ■

Expert preventive maintenance keeps our machinery humming. Our training keeps us one step ahead of the competition.

Rather than the following sentences that overstate the purpose: ■

■

■

■

We are going to reduce turnaround time by implementing a set-up reduction program so we can more readily meet customer demands. There is a need to reduce scrap and rework which will improve quality, reduce customer complaints and lower production costs. Process variability will be reduced through the introduction of statistical process control. We intend to initiate a training program that will improve the quality of information provided by the service representatives so customer satisfaction is increased.

The statement needs to be clear enough to center decision-making. Clarity provides a criterion against which people can assess their actions. There are many more good examples of purpose statements that can be found in advertisements and business publications. Remember to keep it short and simple.

Communicate a Unifying Purpose

27

Communicating the Purpose Once the team and its sponsorship agree on a theme that can guide the implementation effort, the purpose statement needs to be communicated. Of course, the goal is to let people know what is happening and shift their thinking so the nitty-gritty job of change doesn’t appear overwhelming. The task can be accomplished through both selling and telling. Selling creates a sense of urgency—“We need to do this or we’ll lose our customer base.” While telling is the dialogue that explains a reason to buy in. Telling is where additional details are revealed, but the statement of purpose should be the banner headline. The following are considerations for getting the word out: ■

■

■

■

■

■

Use many different methods. Devices typically include meetings, memos, emails, posters, newsletters, and personal contact. When the message is coming from several directions, it’s not likely to be ignored. Do it again and again. This tactic helps people realize the project is for real and the issue will not resolve itself over time. It also reminds those involved that this initiative is as important as the other daily tasks and pressures. It keeps the goal in the forefront ahead of the clutter from competing messages. Provide some details, but not too many. Be honest and upfront about the current situation and its causes, but be careful not to make the way ahead appear difficult. Gains can be made when people experiencing the change can identify and grasp opportunities that allow ideas to be tried out. At some point the team will need to enlist others in the detailed job of making things happen. Be clear about limits for responsibility and authority. Often there is the temptation to take on too much—to move beyond the project scope and proposed fixes. There will be enthusiasm for correcting other problems. In addition, some will see this as an opening to overthrow the whole system or make up for past injustices. Let them know what is negotiable and what is not. Be open to input and flexible enough to make modifications. Once people begin to grasp what is happening and the possible consequences, they will have opinions. Be ready to listen and address their anxiety. Flaws and soft spots in the team’s approach may become apparent. Be willing to make adjustments and accommodations. Avoid overselling and instead create buy-in. Individuals will get onboard because the need for improvement is ultimately seen as a real benefit and not as cover for the same old approach. Those impacted by modifications will be

28

■

Unfreezing

ready to take a leap of faith if rewards from change in fact outweigh consequences. However, creating an overly optimistic picture or one that is outside recognized realities will not work. People seldom change because of being pushed, told or warned. Exhortations can make them feel manipulated and the workgroup will tune out. Focus on the benefits. Instead of talking about cost savings, frame communication in terms of customers satisfied and jobs saved. Rather than saying, “We are going to clean up the mess in the warehouse,” explain ease of operation that will result from the change. Illustrate how proposed improvements will make life better for those operating in the current environment.

Communicating Also Means Setting an Example Projects can begin to unravel when those in charge display behaviors that contradict the proposed direction. Team members and their leader sometimes talk one way but act differently. Supervisors and sponsors will often champion a purpose, describe its benefits, listen intently, and yet conduct themselves in ways that seem to contradict the spirit of the planned change. Examples include the following: ■

■

■

A team sponsor encourages her people to investigate issues of waste in a production process as a means of reducing costs. Yet during the time the team was looking at issues and developing a tactical approach, she remodeled her office lavishly to display her sense of power. A production supervisor inaugurated a team that investigated sub-assembly failures. Their problem-solving discovered that a wiring harness was being nicked by small piece of sharp metal on a casting. The short-term fix was hand-filing to remove the jagged edge, while a permanent fix involved repairing the mold by the part supplier. However, before parts for the permanent fix could be obtained, there was pressure to increase production. In response, the supervisor promptly eliminated the temporary repair and simply hoped for the best. A team leader, under the gun to develop a program review and evaluation method so her college could fulfill accreditation requirements, eliminated team members who routinely express contrary views. The job of course got done, but it was seen as flawed by the accrediting agency’s team of examiners. The whole process of self-review, in the name of positive thinking, ignored divergent voices. The result was a less than stellar report that required further action.

Communicate a Unifying Purpose ■

29

A project sponsor congratulated the team on its problem-solving ability and its proposed solution. However, after giving praise, the sponsor offered a different solution and a different approach to implementing the corrective action. As the team left its meeting, he sealed the deal by saying, “I’m very pleased with how this turned out—don’t you agree?”

These examples show how people responsible for implementing improvements can frequently shoot themselves in the foot. By displaying privileged or guarded behavior, a mixed message gets sent that can’t be easily explained away. Actions that try to avoid exposure to possible discomfort, or obscure lack of know-how, can heighten resistance and discourage further risk-taking. People readily recognize their own vulnerability in these situations and look for defensive strategies which can prevent further learning. Don’t get caught saying one thing but doing another.

Communicating Up Is Also Important The project team needs to be aware of these defensive and destructive routines; then act to prevent them. Become proactive by keeping sponsors and supervisors informed. Continuous contact with those individuals over the life of the project is very important. Those with oversight responsibility don’t like to be surprised. Their decision-making capability, capacity to contribute, and ability to compete and survive depends on information. Make sure they have it. When questions or differences arise between the team and its sponsors, spend time to create understanding. Be flexible but willing to defend actions and prove your point of view with facts. Make sure those in authority are with you at each step through both phases of problem resolution and implementation. Make them your ally by employing the same techniques used to promote the project’s goals and purpose. Their exposure to ideas should be the first test for acceptability. The following are things to keep in mind when meeting with sponsors or supervisors: ■

■

■

Reporting is a fact of life. It should be considered a routine part of your job. Don’t be timid. Come prepared and control your side of the conversation by staying with the facts. View the opportunity as a two-way street. This is a chance to share ideas, get feedback, and press your issues. Be prepared and professional. Treat the occasion like a team meeting. Use an agenda, take notes, and return a summary of the conversation.

30 ■

■

■

■

Unfreezing

When reporting use the PDSA (plan, do, study, act) format. Describe your plan, the approach used, the results and lessons learned; then describe what the team intends to do next. Don’t hide the bad stuff. Be honest and upfront. This is an opportunity to ask for help, support, and additional resources. Be open to suggestions and critical comments. Expect them and consider the reason for such comments. Critical questioning is part of the dialogue. But if team members feel observations were inaccurate, dedicate time to organizing facts and planning your rebuttal for a subsequent meeting. Leave when the meeting is finished. Don’t be tempted to engage in small talk with sponsors or supervisors. Everyone has things to do. So keep it professional and get back to work.

Two-way conversation is the best way to answer questions. When others appear resistant or overly critical, it may be an indication that something was missed, that mistakes were possibly made, that workforce or stakeholder concerns were not satisfactorily handled, or that a proposal was not adequately presented and consequently was misunderstood. Negative observations are only a blow to the team’s psyche. Challenging comments shouldn’t be viewed as fatal. The implementation process has just begun. There is plenty of time to recover. Don’t give up. Instead, take the remarks for what they are, retrench and rework the proposal for improvement; and then press on. The objective in this step is getting most of those involved onboard and working with you rather than against you.

Communicate a Unifying Purpose: How to Make It Happen All well-managed political campaigns have a unifying statement of direction that serves as a focus for rallying diverse constituencies and undecided onlookers. “Change we can believe in” is a recent example. A project that involves restructuring time-tested routines has its own political components. The inherent apathy encountered when suggesting modifications can be altered by managing external communication as though the team were involved in a political campaign. Failure to center attention and unite varied interests can ultimately sink a project. Well-intentioned and worthy projects often lose steam for one of three major reasons. First, the vision appears muddled. The statement of purpose is buried in a paragraph of ambiguous and sometimes competing ideas. Second, the vision is under-communicated. There is the assumption that everyone

Communicate a Unifying Purpose

31

knows what is happening because problem-solving has been a high-profile effort so communication ends after one announcement in the company bulletin. Third, competing ideas eclipse the new vision. The demand imposed by normal daily activities pushes aside the urgency of improvement because work commitments must be met. Don’t underestimate the value of a crisp, well-phrased statement of purpose and the need to continually communicate with those who have not been personally involved in problem identification and solution finding. Change cannot happen unless people beyond the team are convinced their short-term sacrifice and contribution to transition activities will produce future benefits.

An Example of Failing to Communicate a Purpose A college facing reaccreditation decided to remodel its program review and evaluation process. It wanted to move from an administration-centered procedure, operating under the direction of the president’s office, to a departmentmanaged process that was annual and based on student and community needs verifiable by surveys and other available research data. A small team was formed, consisting of an associate dean, several administrative assistants, and a human resource supervisor. After three months of meticulous work, the group produced a procedure containing tools and techniques commonly used by continuous quality improvement and Six-Sigma teams. The documentation described a series of objectives, detailed steps to achieve those goals, operational clauses, data-collection techniques, and evaluation methods. The document was then pleasingly packaged in a binder that was deposited on the desks of department chairs and deans. Prior to this epic change in direction, there had been no compelling statement of purpose, ongoing and reciprocal communication with department heads, or plans to educate deans, faculty, and support staff on the use of unfamiliar and seemingly obscure techniques. Not surprisingly, this well-crafted and probably worthwhile project met vocal and rebellious resistance. A cumulative cry of alienation and disbelief could be heard campus-wide.

An Example of a Well Communicated Purpose A small specialty manufacture of stainless-steel food-processing equipment wanted to move from a traditional inspector-based quality system to one where machine operators and assemblers had responsibility for the quality of their own work.

32

Unfreezing

This shift in direction started with creation of a cross-functional team containing eight members. Equal representation came from the executive, administrative, supervisory, and operational levels in the organization. The group agreed that the planned change in responsibility should happen in several transitional steps, and that simple direct communication would be the key to success. The statement of purpose ultimately crafted was: “Customer satisfaction is our responsibility.” This statement was then introduced at a company-wide gathering and subsequently repeated in all communication related to the project—both printed and verbal—as well as on posters in work areas. It also appeared as a line on the company letterhead. Follow-up meetings were scheduled where supervisors explained in detail how the transition activities and training would be rolled out. Implementation was handled in four steps in which the communication was largely face-to-face, between an employee and supervisor, but supported by purpose-made printed materials such as training aids, and program documents. All documents contained the vision statement. The four steps were: 1. Orientation: The objective and reason for the change in direction were made clear. Employee skills were also bolstered through training so those in production areas could measure and evaluate their own work using statistical process control techniques. 2. Clarification: The limits for responsibility, authority, and decision-making were explained and tailored to specific job requirements. Job descriptions were also updated to reflect new responsibilities and limits of authority. 3. Agreement: Expectations for both parties were spelled out in a formal document and signed. Supportive actions such as coaching, mentoring, and ongoing training were described. 4. Follow-up: Specific arrangements for review and assessment were scheduled. People were not left on their own to muddle through, but were supported while attaining new proficiencies. Care was taken to avoid declarations and behavior that reflected a “this is the way it is” attitude. Open and two-way communication that was clear, simple, and honest was the goal. Feedback was encouraged and the pace of deployment was altered to accommodate several individuals’ ability to learn and use process control tools.

five Identify Formal and Informal Networks and Ensure Their Participation

This chapter describes how to make sure the voices of diverse workgroups are heard and that stakeholder groups have an active role in completing the transition. The following topics are discussed: ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

■ ■

What Are Formal and Informal Networks? Understanding and Dealing with the System’s Culture Creating New Alliances Building Trust Identify Formal and Informal Networks and Ensure Their Participation: How to Make It Happen An Example of Why Participation Is Important An Example of Working Within the Culture

What Are Formal and Informal Networks? Formal networks are typically defined by the organizational chart. Official relationships are considered the acceptable arrangement for getting work done. Formal networks identify legitimate decision-making structures. Such configurations are deliberately created by an organization’s management and have a prescribed hierarchy. Although these associations are viewed by management as the right way of supervising labor and distributing resources, this might not be the reality.

34

Unfreezing

A workforce will often create alternate arrangements when official work assignments are poorly defined or supervision is overbearing. The resulting informal structures operate in parallel with formal structures and are no less important. Informal groups are found in situations where people interact on a regular basis. These relationships can be complex because roles and expected behaviors are not documented. The job of getting work done is usually resolved through trial and error. Co-workers, out of need, ultimately figure out how to function together. Over time these improvised routines become quite effective and operate without a lot of conflict. The informal network functions within the formal organizational structure and typically uses some of the officially prescribed routines. To outsiders and supervisors, it may appear as though the formal structure is operational. However, if the flow of resources and information is tracked, a different picture emerges. Unofficial groups often operate in a way that befits the overall system. In other cases, particularly if the formal system is muddled, the informal network may act in opposition to desired practice. The informal group’s behavior may go undetected in this case because members have learned to skillfully maneuver within official structures. The system as a whole may be less effective and efficient, but nobody can point to a cause. Informal networks flourish for several reasons: ■

■

■ ■

The arrangement maintains and strengthens norms and values the group holds important. The arrangement provides for the group’s social satisfaction, security, and status. The arrangement facilitates communication among members. The arrangement mediates and resolves problems between members.

The informal network also creates informal leaders. These individuals arise through routine interaction. A leader is recognized as the person who speaks up at meetings, tends to offer the best suggestions, and recommends the most plausible direction for the group’s actions. In many cases alternate leaders may appear as competition to formal leadership because of their bearing and selfconfidence. As a result, the formal organization may not want to admit there is a successful alternate culture. The problem-solving team needs to recognize that two structures exist, and reach out to both when making its appeal for change. Each structure may require a slightly different approach. Communication methods should consider both groups’ degree of disarray or stability. Table 5.1 describes these two conditions and approaches for communicating in each situation.

Identify Networks and Ensure Participation

An Example of How the Informal Culture Works Many years ago I worked for a company that made dock ramps, sometimes called dock levelers. These are structural steel ramps counterbalanced by large springs that are built into loading docks. The ramp is adjustable to accommodate varying heights of truck trailers or vans arriving at the dock. It facilitates easy loading and unloading. Ramp size—width and length—has been standardized throughout the industry for some years. However, there are a significant number of older facilities that have ramps that do not meet the current standard. These customers were accommodated by building a modified version of a standard product. These were called “specials.” All of the controlling paperwork and managing relationships were anchored to a series of personal contacts. There was no formally documented procedure defining how things should be done. The process for dealing with these non-standard products developed over time and was controlled by handwritten documents that were carried to specific individuals in various departments. When given the assignment to manage these special products, I wanted to know how the process worked. After interviewing several department heads, I discovered that most did not know how non-standard products were being handled. These managers had to query department employees to find out who was familiar with the procedure. As it turned out the arrangement was quite efficient, worked effectively without management oversight, and was coordinated by average employees just doing their job. A copy of the sales order was given to Klaus, a designer in engineering. He would mark up a set of standard drawings, calculate deck weight, design a counterbalance spring, and create a duplicate materials list. The drawings and one materials list would be hand-carried to Ralph in manufacturing engineering. He would, in due course, match drawings with routings and then watched production schedules to make sure non-standard parts were made to specification and staged in the assembly area. The second materials list was taken to Duane in production control. He would enter items into the requirements planning system so materials would be deducted from inventory and individual parts would be scheduled through production areas. Klaus would also take a copy of the spring design and a purchasing requisition to Karen in purchasing. She of course would immediately order the spring. Ralph and Jerry, the lead

35

36

Unfreezing

persons in assembly, would then coordinate subassembly fabrication and final assembly of the special ramp. This case illustrates how non-managerial employees worked informally across department boundaries to ensure that customer expectations were met. The informal system was more efficient than the formal system, and was periodically exploited to accommodate particular customers when standard products were needed in a hurry. The formal system had its own set of protocols, was governed by written procedures, and depended on the inter-office mail to transmit information. Work was done in a routine fashion at a less than urgent pace which meant that things were completed in their own due time.

TABLE 5.1: Organizational Environment and Approach to Communication Situation Unsettled ■ Working relationships are strained and sometimes antagonistic. ■ People are reluctant or unable to take on responsibility. ■ Working conditions produce insecure and apprehensive feelings. ■ Goals and objectives are not always clear. ■ Work units tend to struggle against each other for resources and influence. Stable ■ Working relationships are friendly and collegial. ■ People are willing and capable of taking on responsibility. ■ There is a sense of security about working conditions. ■ Goals and objectives are clear and well communicated. ■ Work units are cooperative and contribute toward overall organizational effectiveness.

Approach ■ ■

■ ■ ■ ■

■

■ ■

■

■

■

■ ■

■

Be more directive than facilitative. Provide specific information about goals and objectives. Provide accurate information. Challenge rumor and speculation. Reinforce priorities. Explain decisions and provide clarification on direction. Follow up to make sure people are clear about what needs to be done. Be more participative and facilitative. Keep the focus on purpose and objectives. Share information and facilitate group decision-making. Provide for group development and increased involvement. Provide the opportunity for reciprocal communication. Build give-and-take relationships. Collaborate on progress and problems encountered. Engage in mutual problem-solving.

Identify Networks and Ensure Participation

37

Hersey and Blanchard (1982), in their book Management of organizational behavior, suggest that unsettled environments or groups in disarray respond best to appeals that provide a high level of direction and coordination. On the other hand, when the situation is more settled or stable, the approach should be less directive, and facilitate more collaboration and participation. The team’s goal, in any case, is getting people on its side so the need and opportunity for improvement is apparent. Don’t try to change formal and informal arrangements, but work with both groups. Consider the individuals in each structure as colleagues and friends with whom you interact on a daily basis and appeal to their common interest. Don’t let one faction try to exclude the other. There is often an attempt, particularly by formal leaders, to silence diverse and competing voices. Your job when implementing improvements will be inclusion. Try to keep an open mind and act in the best interest of all individuals. Don’t argue or choose sides; just do what ought to be done without prejudice. After all, if the team is going to be successful, everyone will have to operate in the new situation together.

Understanding and Dealing with the System’s Culture Culture is the display of collective behavior. It is influenced by a set of shared norms and values. Every organization exhibits a culture. The departments within the organization have a culture. Whenever people work together for an extended period of time, a culture is formed. It’s the force that guides and directs how people will interact with one another and deal with those beyond their group. The following are attributes that when operating together shape a system’s culture (Price Waterhouse, 1996): ■

■

■

Values: These are principles considered by the group to be the right way of doing things. Values are ideals displayed during individual transactions and interactions. Collegiality and teamwork are examples. Norms: These are formal and informal rules or standards that guide how people work together and relate to others outside of the group. An example might be, “People work long hours and late nights around here.” Beliefs: These are mental models or assumptions that people hold to be true. Beliefs are attitudes that influence an individual’s perception, and control decisions and actions. Examples: “Our company is the market leader,” or “the marketing department has the final say on which new products get developed.”

38 ■

■

■

Unfreezing

Symbols: These are rituals and traditions that communicate what is important to the business, department, or workgroup. Probably most noticeable is the arrangement of office space, or who eats at what tables in the lunchroom. Philosophy: These are policies that guide employee behaviors and viewpoints that quite often become embedded in employee handbooks and are made apparent by vision and mission statements. “Quality is job one” is a recognizable example. Environment: This is the system’s overall feel and atmosphere. It is revealed both in physical terms such as workplace amenities, and in the politicalsocial tone. Two examples are: (1) “Management operates from behind closed doors,” or (2) “Since the arrival of the new company president, women are now receiving promotions.”

The system that is currently being considered for improvement has a culture. The workgroups that operate within the system have a culture. Their demeanor, how they relate to one another, how they confront issues and resolve them is due to culture. Since culture has such a large impact on individual actions and how people accomplish work, there is an overwhelming temptation to fiddle with cultural attributes—values, norms, beliefs, symbols, philosophy, and environment. However, culture is created and shaped by a cascade of influences. The attributes displayed are a product of many interactions. These are things that can’t be easily manipulated. As a team considering how to make upgrades permanent, don’t try to reshape cultural attributes. Focus instead on those mechanisms that drive their formation and will influence changes in their expression. The following six methods capable of influencing culture are within the team’s span of control. Three of these have been discussed in previous chapters and are listed first. ■ ■ ■

Frame and communicate the circumstance for making improvements. Develop and communicate a strategy that people can buy into. Display actions and behaviors that set an example.

Next are other areas that the team will need to consider and work on when developing an action plan; these areas will be addressed and discussed in later chapters. ■

Create an infrastructure that will facilitate the new way of doing work. Infrastructure is the framework that coordinates the division of labor, the

Identify Networks and Ensure Participation

■

■

39

flow of resources and communication. It is typically defined by organizational charts, flow charts and work instructions. Develop people-practices that are helpful. The approach includes those things related to hiring, employee development, promotion, discipline and termination. Treatment must be considered fair and compassionate in these instances. Also, consider and make sure people have the right training so that operating within revised work structures is not intimidating. Clarify performance standards and how outcomes will be measured. Performance standards describe the boundaries for responsibility and authority. In addition, these standards define what an acceptable day’s work is. When modifying the culture, develop processes in such a way that expectations for results are reasonable and clearly stated.

All that being said, however, the key cultural driver is leadership. The project team will be required to act as the lead when implementing proposed improvements. Being the leader is not easy. There are going to be people at both the supervisory and operational level that don’t want to see their way of doing things upset. Current stakeholders have gained respect and a certain level of comfort under the existing arrangement. But if newly found solutions are going to become a reality, the team will have to complete its assigned task of realizing improvements. This will take leadership—articulating and carrying out the chartered purpose. This means maintaining control of the project and completing all remaining steps. Stay focused, believe in the team’s competence, do things right, and take on the remaining tough challenges. This starts by keeping sponsors informed and creating beneficial alliances.

Creating New Alliances Although up to this point, the team has capably managed problem-identification and solution-finding activities, it now needs to include others in the implementation effort. Workgroups not previously involved, but anticipating changes to their daily routine, will want a voice in the process. Getting them onboard and performing to expectations requires their participation. Once the project team moves into the implementation phase, it may find its capacity overwhelmed. Handling transitional details along with one’s own work can become quite burdensome. Getting things done in this case can be leveraged by sharing responsibility and authority. Unity is built and the potential for resistance is reduced by giving others in the workforce an opportunity to assist with the remaining realization activities. The newcomers can

40

Unfreezing

supplement existing team effort or become part of a new team with specific duties that will assist in completing changeover activities. The first step in expanding involvement is finding people with the right skills. A balanced group of personnel possessing the following characteristics is recommended: ■

■

■

Know-how: Individuals who display this attribute are able to learn quickly, and have capabilities that are relevant to the situation. Their knowledge of the current process is extensive and others see them as experts. Often practical, they are able to see tasks through to the end. Standing: Other group members find individuals who have standing to be highly creditable, and members are willing to take what they say seriously. As a member of the workgroup, people with standing have been team players, shown decision-making ability, and shown a willingness to take on new challenges. Leadership: In tough situations, others have looked to these individuals for guidance and direction. Instinctively, a person with this ability knows when to give direction and when to challenge others to use their own capabilities. Influential, they can rally those around them to a cause through example and persuasion. Formal and informal leaders are readily recognized because they display these characteristics.

When the team is developing new partnerships, incorporate a mix of people who are thinkers and doers. Include a sufficient number to assist with planning and managing the early stages of implementation. At first this may be only three people, but as the program develops others can be enlisted when demands increase. New recruits will bring a fresh perspective to the change process and ultimately serve as advocates for the unfolding transition effort. Begin by providing them with up-to-date information. Be complete, accurate, and explain the action steps that will be followed when introducing improvements. Include them in the planning and organizing of corrective action activities. Make sure these individuals are truly integrated as part of the project team. Give them responsibility and authority for decisions and actions that facilitate movement toward the defined purpose. Alliances can ease the burden of change by providing needed skills. The ideas offered by newcomers will bring a fresh viewpoint to the next step of planning implementation activities. As respected workforce members, their presence and participation will counter the notion that changes are being forced upon those not involved in earlier problem-solving. Although there is often overwhelming pressure at this point to charge ahead, doing so may leave out critical voices. Time should be spent preserving

Identify Networks and Ensure Participation

41

relationships and creating opportunities for involvement. Don’t assume acceptance will be automatic because others beyond the project team have been exposed to previous problem-solving activities. Remember, new enlistees—those who recently joined the project team— will experience entry problems similar to those feelings current team members felt when they were first forming as a team. The transition to a mature working group will probably span several meetings or weeks. Gaining experience and adapting to the existing team norms takes time. However, individual entry dilemmas can be eased by clarifying membership expectations. Actions that should be taken to facilitate new member integration: ■ ■

■ ■

■

■

■

Act as a positive role model. Be welcoming and inclusive through communication and meeting participation. Orient and train new members to current operating realities. Make assignments with a clear explanation for responsibility, authority, and anticipated outcomes. Meet regularly with new project team members to review progress and provide helpful feedback. Use group problem-solving and decision-making to reach agreement and settle issues where there are questions over behavior or progress. If need be, negotiate a written agreement specifying actions, obligations, and expected outcomes.

Building Trust Keeping those who are outside of the project team—but working in the system undergoing transformation—onboard and open to proposed improvements will require trust. Trust is the realization by individuals that they will be treated with respect and as equals. Trust builds slowly over time and is the result of repeated positive experiences. It can be shattered by a single negative incident and only rebuilt by recurring meaningful acts. People need to be recognized, listened to, and conferred with regularly. Fairness in all probability will be the key to building trust. Treat people unfairly and they will definitely tune out. Acting in an untrustworthy manner often produces grousing skeptics and antagonists to the project team’s cause. However, give all concerned a square hearing and the team will have a good chance of gaining the loyalty of workgroups outside of the project team. In general, those affected by changes will feel they are being treated fairly when the following happen:

42 ■

■

■

■

Unfreezing

Opinions are respected and listened to. Inputs or ideas are considered, and not discarded without a fair hearing or evaluation. People are treated honestly. There are no hidden agendas or self-serving plans that place a particular individual or workgroup at a disadvantage. Individual uniqueness is acknowledged and recognized. A co-worker’s situation or ability to adapt to proposed changes is considered and accommodated. Promises—implied or explicit—are kept. Saying one thing and doing another at the organization’s convenience will only produce resistance to the improvement effort.

Past experience can destroy trust. Rebuilding it can be difficult. Restoring trust is accomplished by getting process operators involved in the system improvement and transformation effort. Trust can be built by reassuring all involved that their best interests will be recognized, there will be methods available for addressing injustices, and rewards from improvements will be shared equitably. Support will be secured by using some of the following approaches: ■

■

■

■

■

Communicate often with groups impacted by changes and ensure their input is welcomed and desired. Display behavior that is open, honest, fair, accommodating to feedback, and true to promises. Invite workgroups and stakeholders—particularly those who have not been directly involved in problem-solving—to meetings where progress is reviewed, questions answered, and input accepted. Look for opportunities where stakeholders—particularly informal leaders—can be participants in the process of change and improvement. Let workgroups and stakeholders know how they are appreciated and how they can support the project.

Once the project team gains the trust and support of associated workgroups, it needs to make its promises actionable. The next chapter will describe how to create a plan, and explains why defined action steps are important to securing system improvements.

Identify Formal and Informal Networks and Ensure Their Participation: How to Make It Happen Projects often run aground because teams, enthused by their problem resolution capabilities, leap to implementation without considering others who also

Identify Networks and Ensure Participation

43

have a stake in the revised future. Because of group efficiencies and dynamics, project teams are regularly staffed by only a few representatives from the work unit. Part of sustaining improvements, then, will be getting others assimilated once an answer is found. The team’s objective at this point is involvement and inclusion, which starts with inviting others to participate and making them feel comfortable. However, don’t expect everyone to readily accept the proposed redesign as the single best answer. Some will excitedly jump onboard, many will go along but maintain a certain amount of skepticism, and a few will never see it your way. The following steps can be used by a team to get other system stakeholders and workgroups onboard and involved: 1. Look to those individuals who are capable, competent, and able to influence others. Don’t exclude those who official leaders consider contrary, outside the normal clique, too pro-union, or just not smart enough. 2. Invite their help and participation. Use both face-to-face contact and a letter from the team asking for their participation. 3. Provide useful information. Bring the new arrivals up to speed and let them know what the team intends to do next. Be specific about their roles and anticipated involvement. 4. Listen to their questions and respond. Give them a chance to talk about how they feel, what they like or dislike, and what else is needed. If there are strong concerns, then take the time to address issues. 5. Make them part of the decision-making. New arrivals should not be considered just passive doers, but full-fledged project team members capable of both decision and action.

An Example of Why Participation Is Important Forcing change upon unwilling participants may produce compliance, but it will not produce cooperation. Behind the scenes and out of view, those with influence will work to undermine the cause. Tactics may be stealthy, deceptive, and unrelenting until the initiative is undermined and ultimately collapses. The automobile industry, and many segments of manufacturing for that matter, has been under the influence of Frederic Taylor’s vision for industrial management. His idea held that there is only one scientific and right way to make an operation efficient. With time study as its base, jobs are broken down into component actions and then reassembled so that activity proceeds in a specific manner. The study is done by engineering experts, and subsequent solutions are enforced, often without discussion, by policy and stringent

44

Unfreezing

supervision. However, the result has been fragmented unsatisfying work, crippling work rules, and mediocre quality. Such management practices have led to the production of products that don’t stand up well to competition. The United States Postal Service suffers from this same management approach where mandated procedures make the organization less efficient than rivals like Federal Express or United Parcel. When there are labor disputes, employees follow rules to the letter, reducing productivity. As a consultant, I have been in numerous organizations where a well-meaning team, after finding a solution, forced their ideas upon the system. Those affected were basically told, “This is how things will be done in the future.” And not surprisingly, people found it difficult, if not impossible, to make the system function as anticipated. Even with coaching and added training, adaptation was painfully slow and often lackluster at best. Abandonment or the need for a consultant then became the options. People expect to have a voice in their future, and will fall back on familiar ways of doing things if presented with mandates.

An Example of Working Within the Culture A moderate-sized family-owned manufacturer with a paternalistic culture— decision-making was in the hands of family members—was under pressure to hold the line on costs. The customer making this request suggested shifting from an inspection-based quality system to a process-based system under operator control. This would, they felt, reduce the amount of rework and costly fix-up. Family members balked, however, because they believed only management possessed the knowledge to decide, while those in operations were merely capable of following directions. They felt decision-making would be diluted and in the hands of people with marginal competence. The quality manager was given the job of coming up with something that would appease the customer yet keep decision-making squarely in family hands. After pondering this dilemma he partnered with manufacturing engineering to create a small team. Upon analyzing those processes affecting the product in question, a number of rejects were linked to the stamping operation. It seemed die maintenance occurred only after nonconforming parts were detected. The errant parts then found their way into the production chain producing rework in many of the later operations. Although inspectors had tried to separate good parts from bad once a problem was noticed, ensuring 100 percent success was a statistical impossibility.

Identify Networks and Ensure Participation

45

The problem-solving team eventually selected in-process points where measurements could be taken and control charts maintained. This would provide information on die wear and give a signal for repair before errant parts got into the mix. It was felt pre-emptive action would shrink the amount of afterthe-fact fix-up and the potential for scrap, thus reducing costs. Rather than train operators to measure and monitor the work, several inspectors and manufacturing engineers were assigned the task of periodically gathering samples and determining process constancy. Measurements indicating potential problems were then reported to the manager of manufacturing for resolution. Decision-making was still in family hands and at an acceptable structural level, but control was now focused on prevention. Although this solution did not get at several deeper issues or place responsibility for quality where it belonged, it did remove special causes and improve common cause variability. Compromises were made to satisfy cultural pride. Over the long-term however, the company missed many opportunities for real improvement. It was ultimately sold while family members held fast to their convictions and brooded over their inability to remain competitive. Often teams are asked to solve problems in a situation where cultural, organizational, and power issues are beyond the scope of their charter or span of control. Don’t overreach, but remain true to your cause and look for compromises that will still produce meaningful gains. A proverb with a lesson for dealing with situational reality is, “Preach the sermon according to the congregation” (Siu, 1980, p. 306).

six Create a Plan for Action

This chapter explains how to create a plan—a roadmap that shows how to get from the current circumstances to a desired condition. It describes methods for determining constraints, deciding what should be done, assigning responsibility, and estimating completion. The following topics are covered: ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Why Plans Are Important The Planning Process Determining Constraints That May Become Barriers to Improvement Plans Can Be Created in Several Different Ways Establishing Timing Making the Plan Work Create a Plan for Action: How to Make It Happen An Example of How to Create a Plan for Action

Why Plans Are Important Very little happens until there is specific action to nail-down events that can be used to move the current situation toward a defined future. Planning facilitates and manages the details of getting from one place to another. It will coordinate and align the team’s effort, and is the first step toward determining how to achieve a desired end.

Create a Plan for Action

47

Fundamentally, planning sets a course for overall effort. It is a process that first establishes what needs to be done, then determines a sequence for activities, assigns responsibility, and targets when each action will be completed. However, planning does not stop when there is an agreed-upon set of tasks. Plans must also be put into action. In addition, planning helps standardize the improved system so that longterm stability can be maintained. It ensures revised operations will become the preferred way of doing things. Plans also establish points where organizational and production factors can be monitored in order to provide an ongoing method for collecting and analyzing data, thus assuring the new approach will readily adjust to future circumstances. Plans create discipline and help restrain the desire to charge ahead. Because teams have a fairly good idea about what needs to be done, members who are enthusiastic about the solution often act only to find that something was overlooked or steps have to be repeated. The resulting hesitations and restarts can create confusion and allow those affected by changes to question the solution’s validity. Planning encourages a systematic approach to change and thus a measure of self-control.

The Planning Process Planning is not difficult and is fairly straightforward. There are individual approaches or techniques that can be used. A substantial number of books and articles are devoted to the topic. So finding information and identifying what steps should be taken to complete a plan ought to be a fairly easy undertaking. In addition, planning is the point in time to consider methods for reducing and accommodating resistance to change. Developing a plan is normally a group activity. Begin by gathering team members together who have firsthand knowledge about expectations and issues. Make sure they have the authority and will to actively carry out tasks and see the plan through implementation to completion. Then work through the following steps: 1. Define the goal: Agree upon the purpose and desired results. This has probably been done already when the team developed its purpose statement. 2. Examine constraints: Consider and discuss issues or circumstances that may become barriers to realizing the purpose. Construct a force field analysis that looks at negative and positive forces affecting successful implementation. A discussion on how to employ a force field analysis is in the Appendix.

48

Unfreezing

3. Identify resource and training needs: Consider the requirements for equipment, materials, additions or reductions in labor, and training that will be needed so individuals can appropriately operate in the new system. 4. Develop the steps and supporting activities: Decide what needs to be done to make modifications permanent. Consider the impact this change will have on those in the system and those who interface with its processes. Determine the activities that will be needed to get from the current condition to the new state, and the sequence that will be used to introduce improvements. Decide on timing and responsibility for each activity. 5. Decide how to coordinate implementation activities: Consider how expectations for improved operations will be handled by others at both supervisory and staff levels. How will the job of change be managed so the work gets done? 6. Decide how to monitor and control improvements: Determine how system stability will be measured and assessed over time. How will people know if things are operating as designed and anticipated? Creating a simple yet workable plan for action should be the outcome of this activity. Remember, however, that the completed document is only the start. To be effective, plans must be executed. This will require work, decision-making, flexibility, and adapting the plan to conditions in the real world.

Determining Constraints That May Become Barriers to Improvement There are going to be situations and conditions over which the team may have varying degrees of control. The potential issues can be classified as fixed, changeable, or controllable. By defining control aspects, the team can anticipate circumstances where specific activities may be required to accommodate realities. ■

■

■

Fixed: These are process conditions that cannot be easily changed. Included are organizational values and policies, legal considerations, and environmental or resource limitations. Changeable: These are process conditions that the team may be able to influence or change through meetings, discussion, and negotiation with other groups or individuals outside of the team. Controllable: These are process conditions that the team has authority over and can influence. A give-and-take discussion with outside groups is not required to implement these actions.

Create a Plan for Action

49

Once the team has discussed and sorted possible constraints to implementing the corrective action, move to the second part of step 2 above and identify ways to work around these issues. A useful tool for analyzing limitations is the “force-field diagram,” developed by Kurt Lewin (1951). The force field analysis is a convenient way of not only identifying barriers and constraints but also a way for finding methods to work around or balance negative forces with compensating actions. The Appendix describes this approach. The analysis is done by brainstorming a list of negatives or barriers that can block a corrective action, and then brainstorming a list of positive or reinforcing actions that can counter existing obstacles. The force field analysis is a balance sheet where positive forces must match negative forces. When the analysis has been completed, set it aside. However, use the ideas for addressing restraints and barriers that might be encountered while creating the plan’s activities and tasks. This pre-emptive thinking allows the team to select among contingent approaches during plan development. There are going to be occasions where an alternate scheme is required to keep implementation activities on course and on time.

Plans Can Be Created in Several Different Ways There are several methods that can be used to identify the steps and activities that will move the current situation toward the ideal condition. Three ways of creating a plan are described in the Appendix. Of course there are others, including: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

activity network; planning grid; flow chart; process map; horizontal bar chart; and tree diagram.

Each has varying degrees of complexity, and one approach may be preferred over others because of team members’ experience. Use whatever will work best for your team under the prevailing circumstances. Plans contain sequential information about how to accomplish a proposed transition. They are essentially a list of decisions and tasks that must be completed when shifting operations toward a more desirable condition. In addition, plans provide details about the scheduling and sequencing of changeover activities so deadlines are met. Simply put, plans break down work into

50

Unfreezing

bite-sized chunks making the move from problem-solving to corrective action less intimidating. Plans are usually accompanied by graphics such as Gantt charts, bar charts, or network diagrams. Such illustrations show the relationship between sequential and parallel activities as well as timing. Often masterpieces reflecting considerable collaboration, visuals of this nature should be considered guidelines that are subject to modification. Although plans set deadlines and show time associations, they are living documents that on occasion require adjustment. The process of implementation, in many cases, will not readily conform to planned and documented steps. There will be challenges, changes will have to be made, and activities will need to be adapted to on-the-ground realities. The need for flexibility should be expected. Nevertheless, plans set direction, provide the details for action, and establish benchmarks for completion. Plans should be deployed and used rather than leaving modifications to intuition and hunch.

Establishing Timing There are several methods for estimating the time it will take to complete a given activity. The simplest and most expedient approach is to poll group members and then average their estimates. However, this technique assumes that individuals have a reasonable understanding of complexities and the tasks involved. Since an estimate is an opinion or judgment based on personal insights or experience, the variability in responses may be quite large. If this is the case, then the most pessimistic (longest time) and the most optimistic (shortest time) can be removed from the set of responses, and an average can be calculated using the remaining guesstimates. For those of you who want greater accuracy, the following model can be used. It is based on the normal distribution of data. The equation for figuring time is: Te =

To + 4Tm + Tp 6

When: Te = the calculated time estimate Tm = the most likely time To = the optimistic (shortest) time Tp = the pessimistic (longest) time

Create a Plan for Action

51

Making the Plan Work Once a workable plan has been developed, it needs to be put into practice. The team’s responsibility now becomes one of coordination and control. Team members will have to oversee plan activities to ensure tasks are completed and improvements installed. Coordination basically means getting people and resources organized; and then actively carrying out plan activities. It is a dynamic and continual process that employs a mixture of direct and indirect methods to manage modifications. A combination of these techniques is often used to synchronize activities toward task accomplishment. The following two coordination methods support resource organization and plan activation: 1. Direct methods: These are mechanisms that are usually more personal and specifically focused on small workgroups or individuals. ■

■

■

Face-to-face meetings: Team members or those assigned responsibilities for particular tasks meet regularly to discuss and assess progress. Unit or department meetings: Workgroups impacted by change activities are engaged regularly and kept abreast of progress. Their concerns are addressed and questions answered. Memos and emails: These facilitate and manage interactions between members, workgroups, and supervisors working at the details of plan completion.

2. Indirect methods: These are mechanisms that are usually impersonal and more generally focused on the larger organization or work units. ■

■

■

Written instructions and procedures: These forms of coordination would be plan schedules and budgets. Also included are procedures, work instructions, and quality manuals. Any criterion for operating that stipulates how work should be done is a candidate. Included are ISO standards, Mil-standards, OSHA standards, or SAE standards. Management information system: This type of coordination usually uses computer databases such as electronic record-keeping. Also included would be electronic bulletin boards and websites. Consider using these for newsletters, postings, or other communications that keep workgroups informed and up-to-date. Grapevine: Passing along information using informal channels to get the word out. Consider ways of using the rumor mill by purposely

52

Unfreezing

feeding information to individuals who are recognized as key points for spreading gossip. While coordination is concerned with linking together the actions of people working on change, control utilizes devices that keep activities on track and within anticipated limits. Control, in this case, ensures that actual activities conform to planned activities. Control has the following basic four steps: 1. 2. 3. 4.

Establish measures and methods for assessing performance. Evaluate performance against standard measures. Decide whether performance is outside of the standard. If performance is beyond the desired standard, take corrective action.

Part of the team’s job during this step is deciding what will be measured and what values will be used to establish the standard for performance. These are typically completion times for benchmarks, or resources consumed as measured by budgets. In any case, the following are a brief description of control methods to consider for use (Newman, 1975): ■

■

■

■

Pre-control: Ensures that the required human, material, and financial resources have been allocated and budgeted before action is taken. It includes any activity that confirms conditions and resources are sufficient before action takes place. Steering control: These are methods designed to measure deviation from a set standard. A run chart or control chart is a good example of this type of control; however, any large deviation from the normal routine can also be a signal for action. Yes-No control: This is sometimes called a Go No-Go control which implies that a particular condition has to be met before additional activity can take place. Post-control: This occurs when a completed activity is evaluated to find out if it met planned requirements. It answers the question, “Did the change produce the desired results?”

Planning ensures the corrective action has been thought about, scheduled, organized, set in motion, and controlled. It prevents mistakes and keeps activities on track. The plan is a map that gets people to their desired destination. It is truly the heart of making project improvements operational, and is probably the team’s most important job once a solution is found.

Create a Plan for Action

53

Create a Plan for Action: How to Make It Happen A plan provides the means for getting from a current situation to a new reality. The plan organizes transition activities in sequential order and schedules them so things get done and there is progress toward the anticipated fix. The following steps describe how it’s done. 1. Identify constraints: Discuss and consider limitations. Reaffirm the objective, determine boundaries, and consider barriers to achieving the objective. 2. Develop contingencies for working around barriers: Use the “force field analysis” technique to develop workarounds for barriers. Balance negative forces with countervailing positive forces. 3. Brainstorm a list of activities: Decide what actions should take place to advance from where the team is at now to where members would like to be when the project is completed. 4. Organize the list in sequential order : Combine similar tasks and breakdown those that seem too large. Then organize activities in chronological order. 5. Decide how long each activity should take and assign responsibility: Develop due dates for each activity and make someone on the team responsible for activity completion. Even if a task will be handled by a subgroup or contractor, have a team member do the necessary follow-up. 6. Review and refine the final activity breakdown: Give the final plan one last review to make sure nothing has been overlooked and steps have a doable logic.

An Example of How to Create a Plan for Action In this situation a small company was producing precision-machined parts. These, in turn, were used in valve assemblies being supplied to a large construction equipment manufacturer. Nonconforming parts were consistently being shipped to the second-tier vendor. After repeated warnings, the machined parts producer was put on probation and asked to upgrade its quality system to the ISO 9001-2000 standard. A five-member team chaired by the company president was formed to spearhead the total improvement effort. The two issues (part conformity and ISO compliance) were separated. The primary concern was improving the corrective action process and meeting the current requirements for correct parts. Making the existing quality system ISO compliant was viewed as a long-term

54

Unfreezing

project with its own set of deadlines. Assessing constraints was the first step in solving the part-conformance problem and was completed in about an hour using the force field analysis technique. Drafting the two plans—one to manage the nonconformance issue and a second to manage the quality system upgrade to ISO standards—required a second meeting that was two hours in length. TABLE 6.1: Team Meeting Notes: Create a Plan for Action Project: Eliminate issues of nonconformance on part A2017—performance to standard creates happy customers. Meeting objective: Create a plan for action. Discussion Points

Decisions/Action Items

1.

1.

Treat issue as two separate problems. One has short-term objectives and the other has long-term objectives.

Discussion centered on approach and how to deal with the two issues of eliminating nonconformance and upgrading the old quality system to current ISO requirements: ■

■

First: confirm actions and due dates for the nonconformance issue. Second: develop action steps and due dates for the quality system upgrade.

2.

The team decided to use a force field analysis to examine constraints and propose alternatives for dealing with issues.

2.

A two-phased approach was used. Constraints were considered first; then action steps and timing were addressed.

3.

Generally it was felt that many of the current non-conformance issues would be resolved by implementing the ISO quality standard. However, regaining customer confidence and resolving issues with the returned part are a top priority.

3.

A copy of the force field analysis is attached to these notes.

4.

A second meeting was scheduled for Friday to accommodate plan development. The two plans will be treated as two separate issues and addressed on their own merits.

4.

A copy of the plans will be sent by email when completed.

Create a Plan for Action

55

TABLE 6.2: Team Meeting Notes: Force Field Analysis Problem or goal statement: Eliminate issues of nonconformance on part A2017. Objectives: Increase customer satisfaction through quality and reliability. Barriers/Negatives

Workarounds/Positives

1.

1a.

On-time delivery outweighs other quality considerations.

1b.

2.

Requests for corrective action are not handled in a timely fashion.

2a. 2b.

3.

Department supervision doesn’t walk the talk.

3a.

3b.

3c.

4.

Process monitoring and measurement is sometimes compromised when there is pressure to meet delivery dates.

4a. 4b.

Continue to counter this perception with information about customer complaints. Introduce the concept of a balanced score card containing a limited number of key measures. Reinforce the commitment to customer satisfaction. Emphasize the requirement for continuous improvement under the ISO standard. Emphasize the requirement for management commitment under the ISO standard. Educate supervisors on the structure and clause requirements of the ISO standard. Since there has been a commitment by the company president to customer satisfaction and the ISO standard, place the issue on the agenda for the next meeting with the executive committee. Emphasize the commitment to customer satisfaction. Establish a procedure for compiling, analyzing and acting upon process information.

56

Unfreezing

TABLE 6.3: Action Plan: Nonconforming Parts Implementation Activity Breakdown Goal: Eliminate issues of nonconformance on part A2017. Objectives: Increase customer satisfaction; improve quality and reliability; standardize work processes. Activities

Responsibility Target Date of

1.

Maintain the current level of awareness by focusing on the customer’s request for parts that meet requirements.

Team

10/3/08

2.

Monitor rework of existing parts to ensure promises are being kept.

Katie

10/3/08 thru 10/8/08

3.

Ensure changes to the tooling are completed on schedule.

Sam

10/17/08

4.

Write work instructions describing how critical attributes for this part should be sampled and measured.

Dave

10/3/08 thru 10/6/08

5.

Discuss draft work instructions with department workforce and supervisor; solicit suggestions and obtain approval.

Dave

10/7/08

6.

Test work instructions, obtain feedback, and make improvements.

Dave

10/9/08 thru 10/10/08

7.

Meet with project sponsor and department supervisor to make sure everyone is in agreement.

Julie

10/13/08

8.

Introduce statistical techniques so monitoring, Zoey measurement and analysis are improved.

10/6/08

9.

Schedule training for process operators and their supervisor.

Zoey

10/13/08 thru 10/17/08

Bring revised procedure and new work instructions on line.

Team

10/20/08

10.

Create a Plan for Action

57

TABLE 6.4: Action Plan: ISO Standard Implementation Activity Breakdown Goal: Implement ISO 9001 standard. Objectives: Improve work processes; write work instructions and procedures; participate in an internal audit; participate in a registration audit. Activities

Responsibility Target Date of

1. Hold management orientation to ISO 9001 standard requirements.

Dave

10/6/08

2. Perform gap analysis of the current quality system.

Sam, Katie

10/13/08 thru 10/17/08

3. Educate workforce on standard requirements . Zoey

10/27/08

4. Organize improvement teams.

Team

11/3/08

5. Improve work processes.

Workgroups

10/4/08 thru 1/30/09

6. Write procedures and work instructions that describe revised work processes.

Workgroups, Supervisors

2/2/09 thru 3/27/09

7. Develop document control procedures.

Julie

2/6/09

8. Train workforce to operate using new procedures and work instructions.

Zoey, Dave

4/6/09 thru 4/17/09

9. Train audit team.

Zoey

4/6/09 thru 4/10/09

10. Perform an internal audit.

Audit team

4/27/09 thru 5/1/09

11. Prepare audit report.

Audit team

5/4/09 thru 5/8/09

12. Correct discrepancies.

Workgroups

5/11/09 thru 8/28/09

13. Choose registrar and schedule registration audit.

Team

5/18/09

14. Participate in a registration audit.

Organization

9/28/09 thru 9/30/09

Part two Changing

Proverb: “The one who plows and plows but does not sow will never reap.” (Siu, 1980, p. 303)

Change is both a physically and mentally adaptive process. While the environment and the structures that support it are being altered, individuals will have to adjust their attitudes and behaviors as well. This happens as a result of learning, a situation where new skills and responses are developed through training or trial and error. Changing starts by opening people up to new sources of information, new concepts, and new ways of doing things. Edgar Schein (1980) suggested two mechanisms that can assist this process. The first is through observation where there are models or examples that can be seen in action. The second is having information available that is specific and relevant to the situation and conditions being experienced.

60

Changing

Education and training are important factors during this phase of the change process. Also included should be managed opportunities where individuals can learn new behaviors and patterns by doing. This implies that sufficient attention should be paid to those things that support a group’s or individual’s adaptive capabilities.

seven Create the Opportunity for Small but Meaningful Gains

This chapter describes how to break the plan into meaningful chunks so people are willing to take risks and can readily measure progress. The following topics examine this process. ■ ■ ■ ■

■

Why Small Gains Are Helpful The Character of Small Gains and Their Relationship to the Plan Time Passes as Work Progresses Create the Opportunity for Small but Meaningful Gains: How to Make It Happen An Example of Why Small Gains Work

Why Small Gains Are Helpful The planning process produces many activities of seemingly moderate importance. However, once completed they will create a sense of accomplishment. By itself, a result may not appear too important. But as finished tasks accumulate, the effect begins to show progress that can win allies and soften opposition. Small gains—when viewed together—are managed opportunities that produce noticeable and meaningful results. Those affected by system changes will begin to measure progress and can visualize a successful conclusion as small gains accumulate. This sets in motion forces that are more favorable to completing another activity or larger step.

62

Changing

Success tends to perpetuate more success. This happens because new alliances are formed and old ones begin to dissolve. Entrenched habits are replaced by new solutions, which displace resources toward revised processes and methods. The following are reasons why small steps work: ■

■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Small gains are more attainable because risks and costs are lower, which therefore reduces the fear of failure. Small gains reinforce the notion that effort will produce results. Small gains provide a sense of achievement and satisfaction. Small gains produce a feeling of competence and ability. Small gains enhance the feeling of control during difficult circumstances. Small gains create interest and optimism in the next set of activities.

The Character of Small Gains and Their Relationship to the Plan Large tasks can appear overwhelming and prevent individuals from taking action. The fear of failure encourages defensive behaviors that conceal feelings of vulnerability, and allows people to avoid having to demonstrate untested skills. Big steps can often produce a belief in people that the desired major change is unattainable. In turn, dysfunctional levels of insecurity can emerge. The possibility of making small gains, on the other hand, gives people a visible horizon with an obtainable objective. The team’s job at this stage is to review the list of sequenced and scheduled tasks for logical combinations or individual items that are urgent. Think in terms of deliverables or coherent activities that have reasonable time frames, yet can produce a meaningful gain. A good way to visualize this is to think about creating an itinerary for an extended journey, an idea that was suggested by Don Fuller (1971). An itinerary shows the places that will be visited and the connections that have to be made. Connections are those points in time to where the project team must have progressed; but if a connection is missed, the team must then make sacrifices during the next part of the trip. Between connections are places where the team does its sightseeing—does its work on system improvements. Making sure a connection is made when an unexpected predicament arises does not necessarily require a complete change of itinerary. There are portions of the journey that can be modified so timely arrival at a scheduled connection point is possible. If, however, connections are too close together, then rearranging plans becomes difficult. Consequently the collection of tasks that produce an

Create the Opportunity for Small Gains

63

activity and thus determine a connection point, should be practical in number—not too many or too few—and create a realistic time frame. Planners refer to connection points as milestones and the interval between connections as segments. There is no easy rule of thumb that can be used here when compiling tasks. Planners typically use experience and practical judgment when developing segments. The following are suggestions that might be helpful when crafting workable segments for meaningful gains. Cluster activities together that have the following characteristics: ■ ■ ■ ■

■

■

■

Deliverables having timely or urgent due dates. Deliverables where people are ready and anxious to do something. Deliverables where there are resources available. Deliverables where people have the necessary skills and authority to get something done. Deliverables where several tasks can be carried out by the same group simultaneously. Deliverables that do not have interdependencies, for example, resource needs are not impacted by another activity or segment. Deliverables that have to occur in a specific sequence, for example, forms that have to be placed before concrete walls can be poured, or customer needs that must be understood before a solution can be proposed.

Time Passes as Work Progresses In most cases the transformation effort will take time. However, there is always the temptation to charge ahead and start doing things. But, in doing so, those involved in making improvements and those impacted by changes may not understand what is happening and when to expect results. In the interest of clarity and order, steady measurable progress should be the preferred approach. The workforce will look for signs that everything is working out. By converting the plan into bite-sized chunks with recognizable outcomes, those involved can feel more confident and more comfortable. All concerned will begin to recognize that something is getting done—progress becomes visible and measurable. As time passes, they know what to expect next and that an end is in sight. The visibility and completion of these small but meaningful gains accrue to the team’s benefit. Sponsors and supervisors are less likely to be critical because they can gauge progress and if necessary make suggestions.

64

Changing

Individuals in oversight positions can apply their coaching and mentoring skills and not feel they are losing control over the endeavor. The people, who have been sitting back or dragging their heels, will start jumping from the fence to become supporters and even eager participants. Their skepticism begins to disappear as they see results. Past doubt becomes certainty. Nothing succeeds for them like success. In addition, resistance is softened. The nit-picking skeptics have less and less to complain about. Their claims can be evaluated against what’s happening on the ground. Although assertion may continue, their contrary arguments will now require particulars. And that’s fine; because skepticism, accompanied by reasoned opinion, can be beneficial at keeping the effort from running amok. Contrarians are not as likely to go against the flow when they see success and recognize that others see it as well. Lastly, the question of time (how long) becomes less of an issue. Everyone can see the route, the connection points, the stopovers, and the comfort of reaching a settled place. Everyone can quickly measure the lapse of time by completed adventures and may even decide to enjoy the trip.

Create the Opportunity for Small but Meaningful Gains: How to Make It Happen Making improvements is a multi-stepped journey. Getting to the end can seem long and tedious. Having a few stopover points along the way breaks up the tediousness and renews people’s morale. The following are things to consider when setting up milestones. Review the plan and look for coherent sets of activities that have these characteristics: ■

■

■

Completion shows noteworthy progress: Enthusiasts, fence-sitters, and skeptics can see something is really happening and progress is more than a goodwill campaign. Completion gives system stakeholders something of value: Work life becomes less wearisome; a portion of the system begins to operate more smoothly and provides evidence that effort has its rewards. Completion makes the boss happy: Those higher in the management chain recognize the transition is on track; they stay onboard, and don’t have the urge to butt in or take control.

Small gains need to accomplish something. These short-term stopovers should be more than an advertising campaign with questionable outcomes. Those watching will quickly recognize reality and discount any hype, which in turn

Create the Opportunity for Small Gains

65

creates a whole new group of skeptics. In such a case, transition work becomes more difficult, if not impossible, while people quietly move to the sidelines as onlookers and not as doers.

An Example of Why Small Gains Work A medium-sized manufacturer of seating used in construction and agricultural equipment—under pressure from a major customer—decided to move from a traditional build-to-stock production system to a build-to-order system. The shift had multiple complexities. These included: 1. 2. 3. 4.

revamping material requirements planning; workplace organization; creating short production runs; and streamlining the set-up and tear-down of manufacturing processes to accommodate quick response requirements.

The plan separated product lines into discrete projects, with each having its own specific goals and deadlines. In turn, individual projects had a set of benchmarks and interim targets to mark success. The target points for each project were material requirements planning, ensuring quality, set-up reduction, material handling, production sequencing and logistics, training, and assimilation into the larger manufacturing operation. The overall and estimated time frame to convert all product lines was rather long with a horizon well past one year. However, the customer requiring a justin-time response was pushing for a start date of around 90 days. This added a sense of urgency for one product line, but left a long span where changeover work could be easily undercut, leaving a two-tiered manufacturing system. Making the first program phase operational within the time frame required was difficult. Although the product did not have a large mix of parts and the number of operations involved was minimal, the concepts were new and to some individuals seemed revolutionary. Several middle managers, although appearing to toe the line, stretched deadlines and continued to follow familiar routines. They claimed the current demand for orders made moving in a new direction an impossible task. In addition, the current manufacturing planning and control system was loaded with errors that added another level of uncertainty. These problems naturally gave the skeptics an opportunity to mock the project and its seemingly radical approach to manufacturing. However, with customer help and technical support, the set-up reduction project realized its

66

Changing

goal and provided gains for several other product lines. In addition, because of product simplicity, production logistics and flow were resolved with minimum difficulty. Changing the approach to ensuring quality and debugging the information management system proved to be somewhat more challenging. But the success of these two small gains knocked back opposing voices, brought two fence-sitting managers onboard, and provided the steering committee and customer with evidence that getting things to work was indeed a possibility. This confirmation bought customer confidence and a revised schedule because they could see things were indeed happening.

eight Empower People to Take Action

Change is difficult to sustain without the direct involvement of those being changed. Start by giving the workgroup authority to make improvements and accept responsibility for decisions related to their actions. This chapter examines the following topics: ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

What Is Empowerment? Barriers to Empowerment Dealing with Power and Ensuring the Team’s Control Training Makes It Possible to Operate in the New Environment Putting People to Work Empower People to Take Action: How to Make It Happen Examples Illustrating Why Empowerment Is Important

What Is Empowerment? Empowerment is the process of power-sharing. In the usual context, authority for getting something done is divided between a workgroup and its supervision. This is a relationship where members are granted authority to make changes and accept responsibility for decisions related to their actions. Empowerment implies that those in charge must be willing to share authority, and those empowered must be willing to step forward and accept the

68

Changing

challenge. In a situation where problem-solving or Six-Sigma teams become the lead for realizing improvements, they too must be ready to empower others for action. Under this arrangement, basic principles for managing power-sharing still apply. Three components sustain empowerment and must be addressed to make it work. They are a defined direction, freedom to make choices, and sufficient support to complete assignments. ■

■

■

Direction: Provides the boundaries for action by classifying the intent as well as results expected. Definitions include desired outcomes, measures for results, and any other information that makes clear what the deliverable will be. Freedom: Allows the workgroup to choose methods for achieving results and applying skills to complete the job. This is guided by a clear definition of authority and responsibility. However, within that latitude people are allowed to do what is necessary without being second-guessed. Support: Means providing the resources necessary to get the job done. Included would be essential equipment, materials, information, people, and training. In addition, this suggests those in a leadership position must become mentors, collaborators, and partners in the process of implementing improvements.

Empowerment is built on trust. Power-sharing implies that decisions made by a workgroup should not be reversed without the group’s advice and input. A relationship of this nature facilitates collective learning and supports the workgroup’s position by sending a message of respect. Restrained oversight allows workgroups to resolve issues and fix any negative consequences of their actions. Leadership that supports empowerment and thereby advances the process of change will do the following things: ■

■

■

■

Ensure skills are sufficient by providing training so people are capable of operating in the new environment. Place responsibility for the fundamental details of getting work done in the hands of process operators and their informal leaders who have the will and capability to complete transformation activities. Ensure that decisions by workgroups are not reversed without consultation and consent of its members. Provide a mechanism for addressing injustices, and use available political clout to deal with power structures that may undercut change activities.

Empower People to Take Action

69

Barriers to Empowerment Many improvement projects begin to unravel because those impacted by change are kept in the dark and thus workgroups are not empowered. Those in charge, fearing loss of control, maintain formal structures and information processes that discourage action. Even if inclined to do so, workgroups are not allowed to act. People left in the shadows recognize the powerlessness of their position and cop out. The following are barriers to empowerment and participation that a project team needs to watch out for: ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Lack of a clear focus or direction. Creating plans that are self-serving and undermine proposed goals. Requests without explanation. Questioning without listening. Saying one thing and then doing another. Making decisions that are detached from solid information or facts. Increasing responsibility without granting corresponding authority. Demanding changes without providing sufficient resources. Not providing a method of recourse for injustice. Not sharing the rewards with those who helped produce results.

Dealing with Power and Ensuring the Team’s Control Most employees recognize the advantage of having power and may have spent time chasing after it. Power is usually associated with authority or an individual’s position in the organization’s hierarchy. This definition, however, has its limitations because the ability to get something done presumes that the pecking order—the position in the chain of command—is an important factor. This assumption means that members on a project team may well be considered incapable of making meaningful system improvements. This group could therefore be disempowered by virtue of position. Responsibility for a successful change can then be placed with someone else higher on the organizational ladder, who may not have the will or knowledge to get the job done. However, positional power is, to a great extent, the result of circumstances and not necessarily superior skill. The criteria for getting things done when making improvements should not be based wholly on hierarchy. A more enabling definition of power would be the ability to get what is wanted from a particular situation by understanding existing conditions and

70

Changing

finding an advantage. Five sources of power have been identified by John French and Bertram Raven (1959). All of these can be used by the transition team to advance their cause. Each of the following sources of power is available to anyone in a position in which he or she is responsible for getting things done: ■

■

■

■

■

Expert power : This source of influence is based on the idea that information or special knowledge relevant to completing a task or resolving a problem is usually possessed by certain individuals. Accordingly, the team has gained considerable knowledge because of its problem-solving activity and is certainly well-versed in the issues. In this case it has expert power and is more than capable of making informed decisions. Referent power : This source of influence is based on the notion of popularity or the desire to associate with and emulate someone having status or influence. The project team can lay claim to this form of power by practicing leadership that is decisive and active at building relationships with workgroups and other stakeholders. Legitimate power : This source of influence assumes that a person in authority has the right to request certain actions. It is sometimes called institutional or formal authority. Because the team has been assigned to the improvement project, it possesses legitimate power. Members should recognize their authority and act to assert it. Reward power : This source of influence is the ability to reward others for completing a task or meeting requirements. The project team should remember to acknowledge and celebrate when a job or task is skillfully done. Coercive power : This source of influence is based on the ability to dish out punishment. The team can manage this type of power by setting minimum standards for its own behavior and for the completion of tasks. If people underperform, then use mentoring, coaching, and training. Avoid tactics that are viewed as intimidating.

There are reasons for a project team not getting what it wants. First, members do not empower themselves. The team is unclear about what it wants and does not take responsibility for pursuing objectives. Second, a particular goal cannot be reached. In that case, the team needs to recognize the fact and work for something that is obtainable. Power is a normal condition, but most teams because of learned experiences disempower themselves. The following list of ways this is done was adapted from Karp (1996):

Empower People to Take Action

71

Letting someone else put themselves in a position of authority. Asking for permission when there is a clear and valid reason for action. Looking for someone else’s approval rather than being self-confident. Deferring to another’s expertise while downplaying your own. Not being clear about what is needed and required. Asking questions when a forceful statement is required. Not saying “no” when there is a convincing reason for not doing something. Looking for guarantees—really, life is full of uncertainty.

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

■

An effective project team needs to recognize that it will take power to complete transition activities. Their ability to make things happen is based on

Thoughts on Being Assertive Being assertive is not the same as being aggressive. Assertive behavior communicates confidence, self-reliance, and self-respect. It is open, honest, and direct. Aggression, on the other hand, is in-your-face pushy behavior that disrespects the other person’s rights and intelligence. Assertiveness is a communication technique that ensures your thoughts, feelings, and opinions are heard and understood by the other party in a conversation. ■

■

■

■

It uses “I” statements rather than “you” statements or questions. “Please don’t interrupt while I explain my reasons for pursuing this approach.” Rather than, “Why do you always interrupt when someone else is trying to express their opinion?” It uses factual descriptions rather than judgment or exaggeration. “If you continue to behave in this manner, I will report your actions to the department manager.” Rather than, “If you don’t change your manner, you’re going to be in big trouble.” It expresses thoughts, feelings, and opinions in terms of ownership. “I believe that we can meet the previously defined deadline.” Rather than, “Maybe we should table this for now and bring it up first thing at the next meeting.” It uses direct requests rather than hinting or presuming. “The analysis appears to be incorrect. Please go back and review the data, and if necessary gather another sample.” Rather than, “Would you mind rechecking your numbers? This may not be right.”

72

Changing

a willingness to maintain control. Don’t let others commandeer the team’s power—it is the team’s chartered responsibility to finish all steps associated with solution finding and implementation. By being clear and assertive, others will get the message that this is the approved way of getting things done.

Training Makes It Possible to Operate in the New Environment Without the right workforce training, improvement projects can falter. Portions of this section on training are summarized and adapted from the article “Helping ease the transition” (Schultz, 2008). Training or retraining should not be left to chance when improvements of any scale are put into place. There is too much at stake, momentum can be lost and transition activities can founder as people try to redefine their responsibilities and relationships. Therefore, training ought to be part of any change for the better. It helps build confidence and reduce uncertainty about altered roles and expectations. Both workers and supervision will appreciate the opportunity to improve their usefulness and expand their skills so that they can readily function in the reconfigured environment. Even though the workgroup may have a high level of desire and try diligently, members cannot perform well at a job until they know what is expected and how tasks should be done. A well-developed training program can ease the changeover and address questions about “what” and “how” in the new work configuration. Although there are differences in how individuals learn, as a group adults have some common preferences when confronted with formal learning situations. The use of adult learning principles increases commitment, retention, and the ability to provide meaningful content. When developing training, subject design should include features that recognize learner maturity. The following are suggestions for adapting training to adult learners: ■

■ ■

■

■

Instructional materials should be situation-oriented rather than contentoriented. Place learning in the context of application. Accept and encourage active involvement by participants. Use instructional materials and activities that build on the learner’s experiences. Create a collaborative learning environment rather than one that is authority-centered. Solicit learner input when designing and structuring training activities.

Empower People to Take Action ■

■

■

73

Assessment should have criteria mutually agreed upon by the learner and instructor. Assessment ought to permit reappraisal and additional opportunities for improvement. Activities need to be experience-based rather than theoretical.

The training cycle consists of four basic steps: preparation, planning, presentation, and evaluation. The best place to start when developing a training program is with the identification of organizational expectations and trainee needs. There is more to developing new skills than presenting ideas or telling someone the way things should be done. The four steps are described as follows: 1. Prepare for training: Determine what is needed by gathering facts. Consider organizational expectations for results and learner needs to accomplish these outcomes. Observe how the process considered for change is currently doing. Ask questions, and then decide where there are gaps. Define desired outcomes and learning objectives so shortfalls are addressed. 2. Plan the training: Decide how the upgrading of skills will be handled. Create a lesson plan and decide how much time will be devoted to each learning activity. Determine what will be said and write a script if necessary. Test the preparation for training by doing a practice run to evaluate continuity, transitions, and timing. Doing this will help manage uncertainties and apprehensions about making the presentation. In addition, think about questions that may be asked and consider what might be appropriate responses. 3. Present the training: Engage the learner in the skill-building process. Establish the focus by letting participants know what to expect and what will be accomplished. Then present the concept or concepts by working through the lesson plan. Make the points more convincing by citing familiar examples where there were either positive or consequential outcomes. Make sure there are opportunities for audience participation and questions. 4. Evaluate the training: Evaluate learner skills after training against learning objectives. If the results do not match expectations, be sure to provide feedback, coaching, and follow-up. In addition, assess your success as a trainer by surveying learners and observing how skills are applied. Then plan and make improvements. Creating a lesson plan helps organize and sequence how subject matter will be presented. The plan indicates clearly what will be done and how much time will be devoted to each activity. It ensures that the right issues are addressed, the

74

Changing

right material is included, and the presentation is ordered and understandable. A sample lesson plan is presented in the Appendix. A lesson plan is like any other plan. It breaks down the process of learning into manageable chunks. The plan tells the trainer as well as the learner what will be accomplished during a particular session. Like an outline, the written narrative is brief and to the point. The trainer, on the other hand, provides instruction, encouragement, and feedback so new skills become part of the learner’s work routine. The lesson plan should be built around learning objectives. Objectives define what will be accomplished and then state expectations in clear and understandable terms. The following are suggestions for creating learning objectives: ■

■

■

Start with an action word that indicates the type of learning activity. For example: Explain, write, calculate, or examine. Describe the intent of the learning activity. For example: Calculate upper and lower control limits, or explain how to read a dial indicator. Explain outcome indicators if there are expectations for measurable results. For example: Identify and mark circuit design errors on the circuit diagram, or calculate upper and lower control limits and draw them on the control chart.

Just as the improvement project and implementation program had objectives, it is equally important to define what the learner should know and be able to do after the training is complete. Stated learning objectives become the measure against which accomplishments are judged. Additional discussion about lesson plans appears in the Appendix. A lesson plan contains the following items: ■

■

■

A title that describes what the training is all about. For example: Reading and using shop work orders. A brief description of purpose. For example: A new shop work order process is now being used. It contains production and material information that defines how a part or assembly should be processed in production work areas. Several learning objectives that define what skills the learner should have after the training is complete. For example: (1) Explain the shop work order’s organization and where information is located. (2) Describe the shop work order’s movement through the plant and where information comes from.

Empower People to Take Action ■

■

75

A content plan that describes the sequence for learning activities and approximate time for each activity. For example: Place participants in groups of two or three. Provide groups with a sample shop work order and drawing. Have them identify discrepancies between material list and related drawing. A description of performance criteria that define how the learner’s comprehension will be measured. For example: Performance will be satisfied when the learner can correctly identify discrepancies between a drawing and shop work order.

Once a lesson plan has been completed, the content is then delivered to the prospective learner. This can be done in a one-to-one session or collectively in a large group setting. The act of teaching typically has four steps. All must be present for learning to occur. The following is a model (Meier, 1995) describing the process: 1. Arouse interest: Start by citing personal benefits for the learner and establishing a positive relationship. Do things that raise curiosity, create a desire, awaken possibilities, raise questions, calm fears, and remove barriers. 2. Engage the learner: This is where the learner encounters new information or skills. Use a variety of visual, acoustic, and hands-on methods to create a learning experience. Because people learn in different ways, there is better chance of appealing to a range of learning styles by presenting material using a combination of methods. 3. Facilitate integration: Provide an opportunity for the learner to play with the new information or skill. Get them to try things out, gain experience through trial and error, exercise judgment, establish meaning, draw conclusions, and connect the new method with what is already known. 4. Enable application: The new knowledge or skill is transferred to a real-world situation. Have the learner problem-solve using the new information or skill, accomplish something meaningful, or demonstrate competency in the work setting.

Putting People to Work The ultimate goal of empowerment is the efficient and effective completion of system transformation activities. This means sharing the load by putting others outside of the team to work. Formal authority and responsibility are handed to someone else along with the expectation that tasks will be carried out as

76

Changing

planned. However, simply making the assignment and waiting for something to happen, is not a sure-fire way to get results. The delegation process has the following steps: 1. Preparation: This is where the team decides limits for responsibility and authority on activities that will be reassigned. A clear understanding of the objectives and tasks must be included in the discussion. Settle on who should get the job and decide exactly what must be accomplished. 2. Assignment: Here the team signals its intention to those individuals or groups who are expected to carry out specific portions of the plan. Ground rules and limitations are discussed. Points of difference are clarified, and a mutual understanding about expectations is negotiated. 3. Agreement: This is where a concrete understanding is confirmed. Everyone recognizes expectations, limitations, how progress will be reported, and how outcomes will be evaluated. 4. Follow-up: This step is critical for control and can be difficult because supportive actions are sometimes necessary. Coaching and mentoring may be required if progress falters. From time to time, adaptability is needed and contingent plans must be developed to meet changing conditions. Don’t over-manage the situation; be willing to let go. And be sure to reinforce progress and acknowledge good performance. Empowerment is a very powerful tool. When coupled with a unifying purpose, a well-defined plan, targeted training, committed people, and clear direction many things will get done. Obtaining other people’s involvement, bringing them up to speed, and putting them to work starts by recognizing that the transformation team has legitimate power and the right as well as an obligation to use it. By not stepping up to the challenge and asserting its authority, the team can find the hard work of problem resolution and solution finding is a zero-sum game. Don’t let that happen, instead remain steadfast to the process of realizing improvements. The job isn’t done until both problem resolution and implementation are accomplished.

Empower People to Take Action: How to Make It Happen The completion of transition activities—implementing a solution—will require the purposeful use of empowerment. As a group, the project team will need to empower its individual members as well as others when enlisting help to complete the nitty-gritty details of change. Making improvement permanent

Empower People to Take Action

77

is almost impossible if those involved lack sufficient power to finish essential activities. Empowerment is one of the basic ingredients that allow people to get things done through their own initiative. Remember that empowerment has the following three characteristics: ■

■

■

Direction: A clear understanding of what needs to be done and how outcomes will be assessed. Freedom: The ability to make decisions and choose how things get done— within the limits of assigned authority—while completing assignments. Support: Those working at transition activities will need sufficient training, and access to resources so that scrounging or waiting for materials doesn’t slow progress.

Examples Illustrating Why Empowerment Is Important A community college looking ahead several years to the reaccreditation process, decided to use the recently approved AQIP option—Academic Quality Improvement Program. The goal of this process was to instill the principles and benefits of continuous quality improvement into the culture of participating colleges and universities. The college president, anxious to outpace other schools in the system, led the initiative. She chaired the steering committee, and her office managed all of the communication between the Higher Learning Commission (the accrediting body) and the college. Normally this would have been fine if the president had a reasonable sense of ego and understood the concepts embedded in the program. Neither was true in this case. After several months of fruitless discussion on how to proceed and organize the initiative, steering committee participation began to wane. Members could see they were merely a figurative assembly being asked to rubber-stamp an effort driven—not very nimbly—by the president. Eventually, those that remained did make an attempt to exercise their responsibility, and tried to advance the program by making some decisions and suggesting a plan. However, fearing loss of control, the president dissolved the steering committee by publicly thanking members for their valuable service. Still not truly understanding the program’s purpose and not wanting to admit defeat, she appointed a new “Implementation Committee.” These were loyalists accustomed to nodding approval, laughing appropriately, and being disempowered—continually deferring to the college president’s wishes. As individuals who had been rewarded in the past for staying out of the way, they were incapable of inspiring others. As a result, the implementation

78

Changing

committee dithered for many months. One project after another met with uninspiring results because project teams struggled under the lack of meaningful direction. The program destined for failure was ultimately salvaged, but only after the president’s departure. Accreditation was achieved but with several outstanding issues that needed further attention. Now compare the previous example to this national not-for-profit hospital chain pursuing quality in healthcare by using the Baldrige criteria. The president and CEO of the system had a vision for excellence based on the Franciscan Sisters’ philosophy of service to others. However, reaching that goal, when there were 17 instructions located in several states, had major challenges. By employing shared accountability—a model that empowered member entities and encouraged leadership by moving governance from managers to staff—extraordinary results were achieved. Shared governance was an organizational structure where people at operational levels were given a voice in determining practices, standards, and quality of care. It was administered through committees that had responsibility and accountability for getting day-to-day work done. Each of the hospitals in the system was encouraged to pursue its own course for excellence by putting the Baldrige criteria into practice. Outcomes were then verified by applying for recognition under various state quality award programs. After ten years of empowering system hospitals so healing through value-centered customer service and positive patient care were advanced, the parent organization applied for and received the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award. The advantages of shared governance in this case were twofold: ■

■

It empowered healthcare professionals who used their clinical knowledge and expertise to develop, implement, and sustain practices that provided exceptional care. It allowed healthcare professionals to network with colleagues and to collaborate among units to produce outstanding service results.

nine Manage Resistance to Improvement

This chapter examines resistance to change and how co-workers may react to change. It presents strategies that can assist those who are dragging their feet in making the transition. The following topics are discussed: ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Reasons for Resistance How People React to System Improvement Techniques for Dealing with Resistance to Improvement A Mechanism for Dealing with Entrenched Supervision Manage Resistance to Improvement: How to Make It Happen Examples Contrasting the Management of Resistance to Improvement

Reasons for Resistance Systems and processes exist in their current state because someone got them to that level of refinement. Flawed and inconsistent as these practices may now appear, at some point in the past, an effort—possibly heroic—was made to coordinate activities and relationships to create a sense of order. Then, over time, those involved learned to compensate for gaps and made the system operational. In turn, these employees built a mental model about who they were and what they could do based on this arrangement for getting work done. Proposed improvements can threaten these mental pictures and create self-doubt because the new way of operating often requires skills and social structures that are not familiar. The thought of uncertainty then

80

Changing

produces anxious feelings about loss of identity, loss of position, and loss of face that give rise to guarded behavior. These fears may take many forms, from negative attitudes to active sabotage, and may become evident through reduced productivity, decreased quality, increased absenteeism, and produce increased grievances. The following are an adaptation of anxiety sources first described by Paul Lawrence (1969): ■

■

■

Doubt about the causes and consequences of the proposed improvement. There is uncertainty about the intention behind the change and how it will impact existing work structures and relationships. Concern over the loss of existing benefits. There is fear over how potential changes will impact power, prestige, salary, quality of work, or other perceived benefits attributed to the current system. Realization that the proposed improvement is flawed. There is awareness that the new way of operating has problems that will create difficulties in the current system or adjacent process.

How People React to System Improvement It has been said that making alterations to existing practices would be easy if it weren’t for the people involved. However, these individuals are the ones who will get things done and make things work in the new system. Groups affected by change need to be part of the decision-making and allowed to work their way through developments. The inclusion of outsiders can consume valuable time and create frustration for the project team; nevertheless, workgroups will almost certainly not modify attitudes and behaviors because they were told, pushed or warned. Ultimately, change needs to be more than a spectator pursuit. People confronted by altered circumstances often experience grief and will go through a distinct conversion process before taking on their new roles. The length of time at each stage varies depending on the situation, the type of support, and individual flexibility. Each segment has its own set of recognizable characteristics. Accepting and understanding these stages will provide an opportunity for the project team—as agents of improvement—to reduce resistance and move system improvements forward. The following is an adaptation of Lynn Fossum’s (1989) thinking on behavior patterns people will go through upon encountering situation-altering events: ■

Indifference: A belief that a proposed change makes no difference at all, that nothing new is really going to take place. Or when it does, individual interests will be taken care of. As a result work continues as usual.

Manage Resistance to Improvement

81

Opposition: There is a realization that the old way of doing things will not work and new rules apply. There is an active push-back to maintain old and familiar routines. Consideration: A recognition that changes are starting to affect people’s work. Adaptations are required to reduce confusion. By modifying and tailoring work processes some things begin to function better. Cooperation: The new process begins to exhibit some successes. Workgroups can see results. The skeptics and cynics are proven wrong and leave or buy-in.

■

■

■

As the improvement program gets under way, people will behave differently. Not everyone will have the same perceptions. As a result the team will probably find individuals at various points in their development. This typically calls for situational management techniques to help shift workgroups toward completing implementation activities.

Thoughts on Situational Leadership Situational or contingency leadership suggests that management techniques should vary according to follower relationships and system circumstances. Leaders often adopt a particular style for managing and use it regardless of the situation they may be in. It’s similar to having only a hammer as a tool; every problem gets rapped as if it were a nail. Inflexible leaders typically function well in a particular situation, but as circumstances mature or change their ability to maintain authority and control diminishes. Over time such individuals lose their influence and are asked to move on, or they recognize their lack of standing and leave on their own. This lesson seems to indicate that practices must continually accommodate individual needs and environmental conditions. Fred Fiedler (Fiedler, Chemers, & Mahar, 1976) suggests there are three situational factors that determine which leadership approach will be effective. The factors are: ■

■

Leader–member relationship: The extent to which members and the leader get along. A strong working relationship is one of mutual respect. Formal rank or authority is not the reason group members accept the leader’s influence. On the other hand, a weak relationship is one built on control and low regard for member concerns. Task structure: The extent of clarity in work structures as opposed to

82

Changing

■

disarray and uncertainty. Structured situations have clear goals and well-defined methods, while unstructured situations have ambiguous goals and muddled routines. Power position: The position a leader holds in the chain of command. The president of an organization has more power than the manager of engineering. A team leader has less power than the department supervisor but more power than members.

Fiedler also suggests there are two leadership approaches that can be applied, but each is situationally effective. The methods are: ■

■

Task-motivated: The leader focuses on getting the job done. The reaction of members is less important than maintaining goals and reaching objectives. Relationship-motivated: The leader is able to build warm personal relationships with co-workers and regards close ties with members as important to overall success.

Confronted by changeable contingencies, effective leadership should then vary tactics according to the situation. The following chart illustrates which approach to use based on situational factors. Situational Factors and Leadership Approach Relationship

Good

Mixed: some good, others poor Task structure Structured Muddled: some structured, others unstructured Power position Strong Mixed: some strong, others weak Leadership Task oriented Relationship approach and low control oriented

Poor Unstructured

Weak

Task oriented and high control

Implications for helping people adapt to change would be as follows: 1. Individuals who are still in denial or opposing improvements will require considerable support and direction.

Manage Resistance to Improvement

83

2. Individuals who have moved toward consideration and are showing some adaptability will respond to approaches that strengthen or build relationships. 3. Individuals who have matured and bought in will respond to practices that shore up active participation.

Each phase in the adjustment process has its indicators, and will require different strategies. Table 9.1 describes behaviors at each stage, can help diagnose what stage people are in, and suggests approaches to assist individual progress toward cooperation. TABLE 9.1: Stages of Adaptability Experienced During Change Stage Indifference: People are indifferent and don’t have a sense of urgency. Don’t be fooled into thinking things are fine. Opposition: People grow unsettled and push back during this stage. Those in charge can become targets of negative talk. Don’t neglect or ignore signs, but act swiftly. Consideration: People start searching for alternate ways of relating to one another so their work can get done.

Indicators ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Denial Working as usual Living in the past Things will blow over Wishful thinking Anger Conflict Reduced productivity Decreased quality Increased absenteeism More grievances

Strategies ■

■ ■

■

■

■

■

■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Frustration Confusion Increased energy Willing to try things out Increased involvement

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Cooperation: People begin to identify with the revised effort. They start working together and look for results.

■ ■ ■ ■ ■

More cooperation More enthusiasm Increased involvement More teamwork Renewed focus on goals

■

■

■ ■ ■ ■

Keep raising the level of awareness Promote benefits Solicit and share information Allow resistance to surface Challenge rumor and speculation Provide accurate information Build relationships Refocus on priorities Increase follow-up Provide training Reinforce the plan Increase involvement Make adjustments Refocus on purpose and completion objectives Provide for team development Increase training Increase involvement Share responsibility Acknowledge and reward accomplishment

84

Changing

Techniques for Dealing with Resistance to Improvement Fear and anxiety are a natural response to change, but they can be dealt with. However, this requires an atmosphere of openness where people can speak their mind and be listened to. The key to coping with resistance is to understand those affected by alterations and then actively take steps to address their issues. When there is sizeable resistance to a proposed improvement, it should be a signal that something may have been missed. Mistakes may have been made, concerns may not have been satisfactorily handled, or the proposal may not have been adequately presented and thus may have been misunderstood. The choice of responses and techniques that might be applied are multiple and somewhat dependent on the personal perspective of the individuals involved and the challenges encountered. The following strategies adapted from John Kotter and Leonard Schlesinger (1979) are methods for dealing with resistance to change. Any or all may be used, depending on the situation. Each technique has situational uses and produces consequences that can have both favorable and unfavorable outcomes: ■

■

■

■

■

Two-way communication: Used when there is the assumption that information is lacking, is inaccurate, or is being poorly analyzed. Involves listening to employee concerns and providing precise information. Group participation and decision-making: Ensures that those affected by the change have input into the design and realization activities. Employee groups take an active role in the implementation process. Education and training: Special attention is paid to people’s needs and concerns through team building, confidence building, and training to ensure skills are sufficient for alterations in responsibility. Negotiation and bargaining: Through a process of open discussion, modifications are made to proposed changes. The rate of implementation and issues dealing with employee welfare are usually negotiated. Economic incentives: Some form of compensation is provided to reduce losses that result from the change. Guarantees against the loss of wages and commissions may also be used in this case.

Two additional approaches can be used to overcome and reduce resistance. However, they deserve separate consideration since they are coercive, are very top-down in nature, and are often used as first alternative rather than a last choice. Applying the following approaches does not produce buy-in but

Manage Resistance to Improvement

85

promotes compliance in a situation where continuing relations between levels of authority can become adversarial: ■

■

Manipulation and concealment: Involves covertly managing and distorting information as well as systematically controlling resources, rewards, and key personnel through subterfuge and deception. Power and coercion: Blatantly using power with the threat of adverse consequences and punishment to force acquiescence or compliance with the proposed objectives.

A Mechanism for Dealing with Entrenched Supervision Teams may also face supervisors in the system being altered who can’t give up their command-and-control management style. Sometimes individuals in authority don’t really get it, and are continually working at odds with the transition team. For years these supervisors have been successful at maintaining their position through the use of power. The organization has rewarded them because they were able to drag workers to the finish line against all odds using force and bluster. Now, however, their actions can threaten the project team’s authority and responsibility for completing transformation activities. The team needs to act even when there is fear that political clout could rally other managers against them. Before acting, make sure you have the backing of your sponsor or oversight team. Don’t move ahead without their advice and consent. Begin by meeting with sponsors and sharing the team’s concern about potential consequences. Engage support by proposing a positive approach to dealing with the opposition. Make a recommendation to the sponsor that resistance be surfaced rather than buried and allowed to undermine the improvement effort. By not confronting blocking behavior of this nature the commitment from others can be dampened. The following method can be used to gain support from an entrenched supervisor in a situation where indifference or opposition is slowing the team’s progress: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Separate issues from personalities. Acknowledge the other person’s opposition. Explore their concerns. Look for areas of common interest. Where differences exist, use problem-solving. Agree on actions.

86

Changing

Thoughts on Surfacing Concerns That Produce Resistance Resistance when buried can’t be addressed, and it tends to erode the confidence of fence-sitters and to rally the opposition. Getting concerns out in the open so underlying problems can be dealt with is the best way to shift people to your side. The following is a method that is modeled after the approach taken by GE when dealing with suppressed issues: .

1. Get people away from the situation and into a more casual setting. 2. Keep bosses and the workforce separated. Supervisors and managers by virtue of their position will stifle input from those at the operational levels. 3. Use someone to facilitate the discussion who does not have a vested interest in the outcome. If the gathering is large, break it up into smaller groups. 4. Begin the discussion by having participants write their concerns on 3  5 index cards or sticky notes. One idea per card using six to ten words. Silently recording concerns on cards or sticky notes provides a sense of unanimity and encourages openness. 5. Post the notes on a white board, a wall, or spread the cards on a table. 6. Have the groups reorganize the cards or sticky notes into clusters having a common theme. Keep the conversation to a minimum during the sorting process. Allow individual members to make their own decisions about where cards should go. If someone feels a particular concern belongs with another cluster, create a second card. 7. Develop a label or title that summarizes each cluster of cards or sticky notes. Allow time to discuss and decide the common element or theme for each cluster of cards or sticky notes. Write the summary idea on a blank card or sticky note, three to five words, and place it above the cluster. 8. Rank the various themes by importance using a show of hands or ballot. 9. Bring the ranked concerns to an open meeting where members, their supervisors and sponsors can discuss issues, answer questions, and suggest strategies for dealing with the causes of resistance.

Manage Resistance to Improvement

87

First, remember that confrontation will only galvanize an opposing position. So don’t attempt it. The team’s claim to power is situational, and team members will probably have to work with these individuals once the project has been completed. Start by separating issues from personalities. Dogmatic individuals are not really bad actors; they just don’t know any other way. Recognize that maintaining an amiable working relationship is in the team’s best interest. Putting the other person on the defensive will only heighten resistance. Failing to recognize their sensitivities will cut the team’s ability to deal on a face-to-face basis. The capacity to communicate can be lost. Next, acknowledge the other person’s opposition. Let the resistor know you understand the change may have problems, and if given a chance the team will address concerns. Look for ways to build an agreeable and cordial connection without compromising the commitment to improvement. Act in accordance with the other person’s value system—their beliefs about organizational relationships. Build trust by being open, truthful, and, above all, keep your promises. Once the individual standing in opposition to the team’s position feels secure and is willing to open discussion, begin to explore his or her concerns. Try to understand the other person’s perceptions by asking questions; then listen actively and acknowledge what was said. Allow the other side opportunity to let off steam. Don’t be concerned if the responding language is extremely negative, overly pessimistic, and in your face. Get issues out on the table. Now look for common ground. Identify values, objectives, and interests where there is agreement and separate these from concerns where there are still differing points of view. Discuss and confirm areas of agreement by recording them. Then define and list matters where conflicts remain. Be precise so both sides have the same understanding. Use the force field analysis technique to explore differences and look for options. List issues on the left side of a flip chart. Then brainstorm workarounds or potential solutions on the right side. Review the results and look for areas where there can be mutual gain. Be flexible but true to project and implementation goals. Where differences exist, replace opinions with frank discussion about transition realities supplemented by fact, and then test to see where there is agreement. When disagreement still exists, look for tradeoffs and places where compromises can be made. Consider what positions are critical to transition success and what can be modified or abandoned. Be willing to ask for accommodations in exchange for some concessions in the project team’s position. However, keep the overall purpose in mind and intact.

88

Changing

As a final step, draw up an agreement that confirms how both sides will continue and what will be measured to show progress. If need be, agree to disagree on some issues, but move forward on areas where there is common ground. Reconfirm project goals and the need for implementing improvements. Maintain the team’s authority and responsibility to complete transformation activities. Most resistance is not due to the practical or physical aspects of an actual change, but to the fact that relationships and the prevailing social order are uprooted. Anxiety and resulting obstructive behavior can be reduced if preemptive action is taken to deal with underlying questions and concerns that give rise to guarded behavior. Before a workforce will accept system modifications, its members need to deal with fears about perceived losses. The project team has tools, available that can help these individuals move on. Applying the right tool, however, compels members to focus on objectives yet be sensitive to other people’s needs, supportive in dealings, and adaptable to alternative practices. When these conditions are skillfully handled, workgroups will then respond more favorably. But the job of shifting system or process activities will still have its difficulties and detractors. Resistance is a recurring and persistent challenge. Stay alert and be ready to challenge its obstructive potential by using the tools the team now has at hand.

Manage Resistance to Improvement: How to Make It Happen Even the best resolution to system problems will have its detractors. The acceptance of new ideas tends to be normally distributed. In other words, a small group will immediately buy in and embrace the transition. A much larger group, probably around 70 percent, will proceed with caution—it will test the water and make adaptive adjustments. A remaining group, often few in number, fearing losses associated with the change, will refuse to accept proposed upgrades. A certain amount of push-back is a fact of life when introducing system or process improvements. Expect it and accommodate it. Table 9.2 describes strategies for managing resistance. The list is organized in graded order with aggressive techniques at the end. The helpful and less assertive methods can be used to assist those people in the middle make the changeover. The more forceful approaches should be reserved for entrenched resisters. If resistance doesn’t appear to be distributed normally— for example, there is lots of immediate and hostile feedback—that is probably an indicator that something was overlooked at the beginning of transition activities or in the

Manage Resistance to Improvement

89

TABLE 9.2: Methods for Managing Resistance to Change Technique Two-way Communication

Application ■ ■

■

■

■ ■ ■

■

Builds trust Reduces anxiety Provides a common vision Encourages an exchange of ideas Increases commitment Promotes teamwork Lessens insecurity Builds a team atmosphere Provides direction Increases confidence

Disadvantage ■ ■

■ ■

Takes time Uses top-down selling that can be overbearing or misunderstood Takes time Requires training and skill building Requires expertise in group dynamics Takes time Requires training and skill building capability Requires coaching and mentoring skill Requires negotiating skills May be timeconsuming

N ot fo rD is tri bu tio n

Group Participation and Decision-Making

Promote benefits Provide accurate information Challenge rumor and speculation Solicit and share information Provide for shared responsibility Build relationships

Advantage

■

■

Education and Training

■ ■

■

Reduce barriers Ease adjustment to a new situation Provide new skills

■

■

■ ■

■ ■

Negotiation and Bargaining

■

■

Economic Incentives

Manipulation and Concealment

■

■

■

Power and Coercion

■

■

Desire to create balance and equity Create a caring environment Compensate for economic and social losses

Other tactics do not work Environment is politically charged

Eliminate entrenched resistance Maintain a position of power or control

■ ■ ■

■

■

■

■ ■

■

■

Reduces guilt Reduces anxiety Balances individual needs with system needs Lessens the felling of loss Increases acceptance Fairly quick to implement Reinforces control Relatively inexpensive Ensures a fast implementation Least expensive

■

■ ■

■

■

■

■

■

■ ■

■

■ ■

■

Can be expensive May create the wrong motivation Destroys trust Can lead to future problems May be challenged as unethical Destroys trust Creates a strong feeling of loss Can encourage sabotage and whistle-blowing

Source: Adapted from Kotter and Schlesinger (1979).

problem resolution process. People may have been caught unaware or recognize there are catastrophic risks. The team might not have done an adequate job of unfreezing, or the proposed improvement could have fatal flaws. In any case, don’t move ahead insistently without understanding why the opposition is abnormal. As a project team or improvement team, your power has

90

Changing

limitations and your cause can be overwhelmed and swamped by a determined opposition.

Examples Contrasting the Management of Resistance to Improvement A manufacturer of electronic test equipment wanted to move from a very traditional assembly line set-up with the usual profusion of work-in-process to a build-to-order system. The proposed project would reinvent the factory by incorporating many of the goals and concepts found in lean manufacturing. However getting there would require an adaptive and more flexible workforce. Not wanting to face the same problems experienced by other manufacturers such as the automotive industry—dealing with work rules, multiple job classifications, and incentives—the transition team purposely decided to manage resistance. This meant that members of the workforce would become active participants in creating their own future. Teams were formed based on product groups. These were units—final assemblies—that used common circuit boards, subassemblies, and cabinetry. Team members included at least one manufacturing engineer, a lead person, and a combination of assemblers and technicians. Each team was given some basic instruction in lean manufacturing techniques and asked to value-map the work process under their responsibility. The information was reviewed by manufacturing engineering, and several reorganization and standardization projects were selected that would apply one-piece flow concepts and kanban techniques. The proposed restructuring was discussed with the affected workgroups and revisions were made based on the feedback. The newly organized process was ultimately put to the test and customized using trial-and-error methods and workgroup input. Since the remodeled process required new skills and a more diverse range of skills, workers were retrained. Jobs were restructured and reclassified in order to eliminate piecework and the corrosive effects of incentive pay. Those that could not adapt or make the grade were moved to production areas not yet affected. However, the overall goal was obvious and individuals who understood the long-term implications frequently found other employment more suited to their aptitude and ability. The methods used in this case were two-way communication, group participation and decision-making, education and training, as well as economic incentives. The individuals who could not make the transition were not asked to leave but sidetracked so their earning power was compromised. They were not manipulated or coerced, the opportunity to improve skills was available,

Manage Resistance to Improvement

91

and in the end they made the choice to get onboard or find a more suitable situation. A manufacturer of water pumps and supplier to the automotive industry had a different experience. The company was being pressured to adopt a just-intime production system. The project was being spearheaded by the vice-president of operations. His changeover team included two production supervisors and three manufacturing engineers. Planning was for the most part handled by manufacturing engineering. In the six months since the project was launched, there were many problems that were difficult to pin down. The vice-president of operations was convinced that the workforce was trying to sabotage implementation efforts. He stepped up pressure on the transition team and supervision by becoming directly involved in shop-floor decisions. He also spent considerable time talking with hourly workers personally trying to diagnose issues. However, he had difficulty discovering root causes and answering the apparent rise in resistance. In frustration, the vice-president of operations demanded tighter schedules for changeover activities and exhorted production supervisors to do a better job of managing their responsibilities. He felt a shakeup was needed and threatened his staff by suggesting new people might be better at forcing issues and resolving problems. In the end, however, the company owner replaced the vice-president of operations. In this situation, anticipating and managing resistance rather than applying brute force would have been a better transformation strategy.

Part three Refreezing

Proverb: “The end of fishing is not the angling but catching.” (Siu, 1980, p. 306)

At some point the process being changed will have to be stabilized. However, programs that have been designed to alter attitudes and behaviors often fail once the effects of training have been sedated by time. This can happen because the new routines—the new things learned—don’t fit the individual’s or the group’s concept of how things ought to be done. This often happens when there are conflicts between desired behaviors and those displayed by supervisors and upper managers. In addition, other colleagues may not value or understand new performance requirements. Edgar Schein (1980) suggests two mechanisms that can help refreeze attitudes and behaviors:

94

Refreezing

1. Individuals should have the opportunity to test and select behaviors that have an appropriate fit with prevailing conditions. 2. Organizational attitudes and behaviors should support and reinforce individual and group purposes. There are organizational implications for this final phase in the change process—for example, training for managers and supervisors is as important as individual worker training. Those advocating change must act in accordance with desired results. Their attitudes, behaviors, and actions should model and strengthen expectations. The project team, their sponsors and supervision can’t be caught saying one thing while doing another. In addition, workgroups must be able to find comfort and accommodation with their reorganized environment. There should be workgroup involvement along with the opportunity to test and modify new workplace structures.

ten Complete the Restructuring of Daily Activities

Bringing the change process to a successful close involves eliminating old networks and relationships and then building new ones. This chapter explains how to keep people on track, maintain faithfulness to purpose, and how to coordinate and integrate unfinished activities. The following topics are discussed: ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Keeping People on Track and Maintaining Faithfulness to Purpose Coordinating and Integrating Unfinished Activities Creating New Networks and Relationships and Eliminating Old Ones Managing Conflict to Ensure the Completion of Unfinished Activities Making Corrections and Staying the Course Complete the Restructuring of Daily Activities: How to Make It Happen An Example of Where More Coordination Was Needed

Keeping People on Track and Maintaining Faithfulness to Purpose This is the point where new structures, work operations, communication links, and relationships are being formed. It is the stage where old interdependencies are being disrupted and new ones are established. However, as these separations and connections are being made, resistance can reassert pressure to maintain old, familiar alliances.

96

Refreezing

Maintaining momentum, re-establishing focus, and ensuring support are critical to preventing the project from bogging down or derailing entirely. This can also be the time when some people want to prematurely declare success, but the job is not done yet and is subject to backsliding. The team’s task in this step is ensuring that gains continue and that unfinished activities are wrapped up. The following actions can help team members, individuals viewed by the workforce as influential, and sponsors keep the transformation process on track and secure its completion: ■ ■

■

■

■

Lead by example and illustrate through action that the new way will work. Continue to stay the course, but be flexible and ready to make adjustments where new patterns prove unworkable. Redesign and shift formal and informal structures including communication links so these are compatible with new objectives. Redesign and shift individual work activities so these support structural changes and new objectives. Maintain control through guidance, by acting as a mentor or coach, but allow people to experience the change through their identifying and seizing opportunities where new skills, behaviors, and relationships can be tried out.

Don’t underestimate the pressure from opposing factions to redirect the improvement effort. Individuals finding the transition problematic will skillfully and stealthily try to subvert the original goals and underlying objectives to favor their own purposes. Resisters may quietly try to stem the flow of resources to the new endeavor, doggedly uphold old and valued ways, or openly claim credit for improvements.

Thoughts on Helping Fence-Sitters Make the Transition A system in transition will contain a rather large group of seemingly noncommitted individuals. These are people who don’t want to rock the boat. The strategy is to wait and see what happens. By staying unnoticed and out of the way, they hope to avoid the disquiet that can accompany change. In the end, however, their loyalty will be on the side holding the winning cards. Understanding their concerns and shifting their loyalty earlier can be handled by asking questions, listening, and responding to anxieties.

Complete the Restructuring

97

The following method is helpful and may also have value in shifting resisters: ■

■

■

■

Question: Ask probing questions that can’t be answered with yes or no. For example: (1) How has the current system changeover impacted your work? (2) What do you think it will take to accomplish the changeover? (3) What are your concerns or ideas in regard to the changeover work? (4) Can you tell me where that information came from? (5) What would you like to happen next? Listen: Listen actively by concentrating on what the respondent is saying. Tune out the surrounding noise and background distractions. Listen for things that aren’t being said—listen between the lines. Don’t interrupt, and let the other person vent his or her frustration if that is what’s happening. However, maintain civility by calmly reminding shouters that bluster and bad language is not acceptable. “I’m sorry, but I can’t answer the question when you are shouting like that. I’m here to try and understand your situation.” Confirm: Take a moment to summarize the key points and state what you heard. “Let me make sure I have all the details. You don’t think this is going to work because most of the people in your position have never been good at math and feel this type of responsibility belongs to someone else. You’re here to work and those extra steps make you less productive. Did I get that right?” Respond: Don’t be rushed. Take time to shape your response. Be empathetic but honest. Don’t oversell or promise what can’t be delivered. If the answer has more than one possibility, propose several options and ask the other person what they might prefer. If you don’t know, say so and tell that individual when you will have an answer. “I understand how you feel. The assemblers in the Atlanta plant were similarly concerned. But with training and on-the-job coaching, they were able to do very well. As a group they reduced rework to zero and increased overall productivity by 20 percent.”

In any case, it will be the project team’s job to keep the project on track and true to its purpose. The management tools that can be used are control and coordination. If the team doesn’t maintain control over project outcomes, someone else will try to do so.

98

Refreezing

Control is, of course, the process of ensuring that actual outcomes conform to planned objectives. Control was discussed in Chapter 8. Coordination as described in this chapter, on the other hand, involves making sure people are functioning in their day-to-day jobs so that the project meets expectations.

Coordinating and Integrating Unfinished Activities Coordination is the process of integrating ideas and activities from separate functions so that the system can operate effectively and efficiently. Without coordination those involved can lose sight of their roles and obligations to the larger objective. Coordination is dependent upon the acquisition, processing, and distribution of information. When there is uncertainty about tasks or relationships, there is a greater need for high-quality information. For this reason it’s best to handle coordination as a communication-processing assignment. During these remaining steps, communication will be the key to keeping the program on its intended path. Start by being an active listener. Pay attention to what individuals are saying as well as their feelings and emotions. These will indicate where people are situated in their transition from the old way to the new way. Be ready to intervene when expectations are not being met. This will require giving directions and providing accurate information. In addition, keep reminding workgroups of the need for improvement including the purpose for this particular project. Be assertive, objective, and straightforward about what is required to complete remaining activities. Be sure to keep sponsors and senior managers informed and onboard. Use both direct and indirect methods for communication such as meetings, faceto-face conversations, copies of meeting notes, and written reports. But be aware that upward communication often gets filtered, altered, and condensed by protective administrative assistances and front-line supervisors. Make certain that your message is not being distorted. Use feedback to the team’s advantage. Confirm the substance of conversations and discussions by means of agendas and meeting note copies that are sent directly to sponsors and managers. Maintain milestones in the plan as contact points where information gets routinely exchanged. When possible make these face-to-face meetings. The power of managers allied with the team’s cause can be helpful when resistant behavior outside of the team’s authority attempts to assert its control. The political clout of upper managers may be needed to run interference or arbitrate a resolution. Three basic approaches to effective coordination are organizational practices, communication practices, and managerial practices. These were

Complete the Restructuring

99

described by Jay Galbraith (1977) in his book Organizational design. The following is a summary of his thinking on coordination methods: 1. Organizational practices: The three methods described below have been discussed in greater detail in other places in this book. Nevertheless, all of the approaches can be reasserted at any point in the transformation process to ensure results. Organizational practices include the following: ■

■

■

Goals and plans: These set direction and describe the steps that will be taken to fulfill the purpose. Keep objectives at the forefront in people’s minds as a reminder of direction and progress. Procedures, rules, and work instructions: These are activities described in written documents that prescribe standardized ways of getting work done. The design and intent of documentation is to set forth routine decisions and process outputs that are predictable. By documenting recurring process operations, anyone can learn how things should be done. Administrative structure: This facilitates reporting relationships and determines the official flow of information and resources. Formal arrangements of this nature are often defined by a hierarchy and illustrated using an organizational chart. However, remember that informal structures can supplement the formal structure. Both are important in the coordination of process activities.

2. Communication practices: Included are techniques that facilitate the flow of information and can be manipulated when greater coordination is required. Stay connected by keeping people informed about progress, modifications, or lack of project advancement. Don’t limit your approach to only one method for getting the word out. Use both of the following systems as channel of communication: ■

Lateral information systems: This type of communication is based on relationships and functions horizontally in the hierarchy. It commonly facilitates the exchange of ideas used to coordinate daily work activity. There is direct contact, which is face-to-face discussion, used when handling issues concerning one or a few individuals. In addition, there is boundary-spanning contact. This facilitates the communication between departments or groups. Committees, subgroups, and interdisciplinary teams often perform this function. However, in some organizations specific individuals or coordinators are assigned to the role.

100

Refreezing ■

Vertical information system: This method manages the flow of information up and down the hierarchy to all organizational levels. It typically facilitates the flow of financial, production, or marketing information so that it’s available throughout the organization to assist with planning, coordination, and control. It is often called the “management information system” and is usually electronic in nature. Any method that distributes information to the whole organization, such as newsletters or bulletin boards, can also be used.

3. Managerial practices: These approaches are used when other techniques have not been successful. Sometimes independence—reducing supervision and turning over control to an individual work unit—will increase effectiveness. Coordination that is self-actuated and locally controlled can be facilitated using the following practices: ■

■

Providing self-determination: This is where decision-making and control are turned over to an individual, a team, or a work unit. It is usually done when there is sufficient capability or experience for self-management and coordination. An example is a research group or a product development group that operates autonomously and reports outside of the normal command structure. Project teams are usually afforded this type of freedom. Providing focused resources: A workgroup or work unit is given discrete resources to complete a task, and allowed leeway and judgment in their distribution. An example is allocating a set dollar amount without external controls for distribution based on process demands. Another example is a system that automatically distributes focused resources based on the completion of specific project activities or upon reaching particular milestones.

Creating New Networks and Relationships and Eliminating Old Ones As the transformation begins to take shape, existing responsibilities, communication links, and relationships will be altered to accommodate the desired reality. These separations and reconnections will happen in one of two ways— organically or intentionally. In other words, people will figure out how to work together because there is a desire to maintain stability. Functional relationships will develop over time and out of necessity. Conversely, and more typically however, task structure and reporting relationships will be purposely

Complete the Restructuring

101

constructed. Relationships and methods for operating will be defined by formal and written procedures. The following are areas of influence that impact job design, and that should be managed so that individuals can grasp the complexities of a new job: ■

■

■

■

■

Skills, techniques, and practices required to do the work: These are often depicted by a job description and must be sufficient to create the required product, compound, article, or administrative result. Experience and training contribute to this capability. Make sure people are competent and ready to do their part in the new situation. Methods, routines, and tools that are usually followed and used to complete work tasks: These are described in written procedures and work instructions. However, where documented instructions are absent, custom and normal practice may dictate how things get done. People need to understand the new routine, how tools should be used, and the preferred methods before they can perform as expected. Schedule and quantity of work: This sets minimum limits for what will be accomplished during a specific period. These boundaries can be governed by agreements, tradition, or organizational expectation. Make expectations for the quality and quantity of work clear. Scope of authority and responsibility: This defines how much control individuals have over their work situation—how much decision-making freedom is permitted. These are typically outlined by a job description but can be framed by custom or supervisory discretion. Clarify individual responsibilities and rewrite job descriptions where necessary. Reporting and interpersonal relationships: This defines who supervises and the accepted way of communicating information. These relationships may be illustrated by an organizational chart or job description. In the absence of documentation, they are shaped by tradition and necessity—what has worked in the past ought to work now. However, this may not be true in the revised work environment. Make sure people understand new reporting relationships and communication links.

The areas that influence job design and work structure will need study and will require specific attention when planning and managing transformation activities. These practices may be of particular concern when changing or upgrading an ISO-compliant quality system, or when implementing practices subject to review by an outside accrediting agency. Both require written procedures and work instructions to guide the uniformity of operations. In any case, be careful not to define process aspects subject to review too tightly. Inventiveness and adaptability are often needed to work out fine

102

Refreezing

details. Over-control can lead to frustration and can stifle resourcefulness. Where recertification audits are required, over-documentation can reduce flexibility and lock a process into a specific routine or method. This may not permit the necessary give when extenuating circumstances arise. By allowing needs and circumstances to shape reality, a more adaptable and flexible system is often created. People, out of necessity, will learn how to work together in due time. Use a combination of both prescribed and evolved actions when creating new work processes. Remember, however, when documenting these arrangements, keep them simple, yet understandable, and define only what is necessary to ensure consistency.

Managing Conflict to Ensure the Completion of Unfinished Activities Conflict is a fact of organizational life. It can lead to dysfunctional as well as functional outcomes. Conflict can produce changes that improve operations to the benefit of customers, shareholders, and employees. And if managed, it can produce a healthy tension between individuals so that the group or department does not fall into complacent and self-righteous routines that can lead to ineffective thinking. Conflict arises when there is disagreement over how decisions will be made, how resources will be consumed, or how work will be accomplished. The interdependence of job activities and diversity in values or perceptions can pit individuals against each other. Out of frustration, one group may try to prevail over another by attempting to force adoption of their point of view. Typical sources of organizational conflict include the following: ■

■

■

■

Shared resources: The recognition that money, materials, equipment, and space are not unlimited, but must be budgeted and allocated. Departments will try to defend their needs over those of other work units. Differences in goals: The specialization of organizational work units produces differing expectations and outcomes for each department. Units often try to maximize their output without consideration for others and at the expense of others. Interdependence of work: The completion of work by individuals and departments is usually dependent on the output or information from many others in the organization. Depending on the degree of competition or cooperation, productivity can be reduced or enhanced by the flow of information and resources. Organizational ambiguities: Poorly defined job responsibilities and unclear

Complete the Restructuring

■

■

103

roles that result in overlap or a gap in performance are triggers for conflict. Poor communication or the lack of accurate information, which produces mistakes or missed opportunities, will result in conflict. Differences in perceptions or values: The distinction in goals and expectations for various organizational units also produces differences in perception, attitudes, and values that can lead to conflict. For example, delivery promises made by sales may not be realistic to production. Labor and management may differ over issues of control and what constitutes an honest day’s work. Individual style: Individual differences in personality and behavior can lead to harassment, arguments, and retaliation. Authoritarian personalities or people with low self-esteem can anger colleagues, which may result in reprisal.

Sources of aggravation usually arise because organizational structures are not sufficiently defined and clearly understood, or because management within company structures is not functioning as a coherent team. Such circumstances are called antecedent conditions. In other words, these situations are the breeding ground for dispute and struggle that can bring on conflicts. Since the state of organizational certainty or uncertainty is the starting point for conflict, the work of restructuring should include purposely designed processes that reduce ambiguity. This means developing a system where there is clarity about methods, goals, and values. People are more likely to operate in a cooperative manner where overlaps in responsibility and authority are reduced and limits are understood. By being pre-emptive when designing work structures, conflict can be buffered and sometimes avoided. As the team responsible for managing and coordinating system improvements, be aware that interpersonal relationships can present problems. Workplace associations are not always neat, polite, or logical. In response, there may be an attempt to compensate by tightly defining working arrangements—standardizing routines and describing what should be done in usual situations. However, being too prescriptive can create rigidity and the freedom to act when necessary can get lost. Define only those structures that are critical to coherent operations. Conflict is also noticeable in the following situations: ■

Within an individual: This occurs when there is uncertainty about task requirements. The anxious behavior is created when differing requests from several sources infringe on the current workload, when time conflicts create and overload, or when demands are beyond a person’s capacity. These contradictory pressures can be unsettling and reduce individual effectiveness.

104 ■

■

■

Refreezing

Between individuals: Usually erupts because of differences in opinion or over the differential in roles—status in the hierarchy—but is more likely due to disparity in values or perception about how to manage and coordinate individual work activities. Work requirements and individual values are in conflict with another’s expectations. Between individuals and the workgroup: Often related to workgroup pressure requiring conformity with specific norms or accepted practices. For example, being criticized for falling behind or exceeding production goals. Between workgroups: Can be caused by labor–management disagreements but is typically due to squabbles over scarce resources. Also, tensions can be raised when one group perceives that another is receiving more favorable attention.

Supervisors were traditionally expected to deal with conflict by trying to change behavior. However, this is difficult because core feelings are closely held and changing them requires specific skills beyond the capability of most project teams and first-line supervisors. It is far better to view conflict as normal and inevitable. This viewpoint does not require elimination or resolution of conflict, but instead acknowledges that conflict can be managed. From a project team’s perspective, there are methods that can be used to reduce and in some cases eliminate conflict. Most, however, tend to suppress the underlying issues which allow people the time to complete the task at hand, but underlying issues may require later intervention. The following conflict reduction and resolution methods are based on ideas articulated by Stoner and Freeman (1989): ■

■

■

■

Avoidance or withdrawal: Pretending that the conflict does not exist. Parties withdraw from the situation in the hope that it will go away. The management technique is to tell involved individuals that circumstances don’t merit a dispute, and instead refocus attention on work matters such as meeting production and quality objectives. Dominating or forcing: When a formal authority simply dictates the solution and decides what will be gained or lost by each party. The person in authority simply says, “Cut it out,” and then dictates how things are going to be handled. Competition: One side is allowed to win over the other through superior skill or other advantage. Supervision allows the drama to play out, or assists one side and suppresses the other by controlling resources and access to information. This is typically done without the knowledge of the involved parties. Majority rule: Simply placing an issue on the table for a vote with the understanding that the side with the most votes has the winning position and the others must go along.

Complete the Restructuring ■

■

■

105

Accommodating or smoothing: The difference between disputing parties is played down and connections or common interests are highlighted. This is where the person in charge uses diplomacy to minimize the extent and importance of disagreement and tries to talk one side or the other to give in. Negotiation or compromise: When each party gives up something of value to the other. Both groups agree to discuss the issue, usually with the help of a facilitator or arbitrator, to decide what will be sacrificed and how future responsibilities and conditions will be carried out. Problem-solving: Both parties agree to search for a solution that everyone will accept. All involved work toward a common goal where there is a free exchange of ideas and a solution is found by weighing facts and deciding on methods for future action.

Each of these methods has advantages and disadvantages. Their use and application is dependent on the particular situation and the time available to deal with issues. Although time is often a consideration, conflict reduction methods that set up a win–lose result may need attention later on. Table 10.1 organizes conflict reduction methods according to their potential outcomes. TABLE 10.1: Conflict Reduction Outcomes Outcome Win–Win: Conflict is managed by getting to the bottom of issues to reconcile differences. Win–Lose: One party achieves its needs at the expense or exclusion of the other party.

Conflict Reduction Methods ■

■ ■ ■

Lose–Lose: No single party achieves its needs and underlying causes remain unsettled.

■ ■ ■

Problem-solving Dominating or forcing Competition Majority rule Avoidance or withdrawal Accommodation or smoothing Negotiation or compromise

Making Corrections and Staying the Course Everyone involved will be expecting the team to finish within budget and on time. As the project progresses there will be occasions when plans don’t work out. Contingencies will have to be discussed and corrections made. Being flexible and adaptable is part of ensuring gains are made and unfinished actions are completed. There are strategies that can be applied when the project begins to bog down and fall behind. Remember, however, there is going to be variability in daily

106

Refreezing

activities. Sometimes the team will be ahead of plan and at other times it will be behind. Don’t be too quick to act. Two points don’t signal a trend. Some things will take care of themselves over time, although steady day-to-day progress should be the ultimate goal. Strategies that can be used to keep the project on course include: ■

■

■

■

■

■

Request compliance: Remind people of their obligations and their agreement to the plan and scheduled due dates. Sometimes a forceful prompt can get others moving. The team may also have to use sponsor or senior management assistance to back up its appeal. Look for slack in later steps: Re-evaluate the plan to see if there are later steps where time can be gained. Perhaps by doing some activities in parallel or eliminating less essential tasks. Opportunities to adjust the schedule can be created. Use more resources: Try to decrease the number of days required by increasing the number of hours—go to overtime. Another possibility is loading, or putting more people and equipment to work. Balance the increase in cost against the need to meet a deadline. Look for options or substitutions: When equipment or materials are too expensive or not available, search for alternatives. If people with particular skills are not available, find someone who is. Redefine the project’s scope: Consider scaling down the project by focusing on essential attributes only. Look for non-essential features or steps and eliminate them. Think again about the project’s purpose and its goals and objectives. Negotiate for more time or resources: Meet with the project’s sponsor and upper managers; then justify the need for more time or resources. Jointly do some problem-solving and agree on revised actions and deadlines.

Making changes and improvements is usually a challenging proposition because of the interdependencies and relationships. Getting to the end, however, can be done if the team maintains its authority and manages the details of day-in and day-out activities. This takes a certain amount of courage and commitment to purpose. Hang in there, the job is almost complete.

Complete the Restructuring of Daily Activities: How to Make It Happen This is the point where old routines are being abandoned and new relationships are created. It’s somewhat like redecorating an old and familiar room. Some of

Complete the Restructuring

107

Thoughts on Dealing with Power Improving a troubled system can have its difficulties. There are going to be those who are perfectly happy with the old way and benefit from its inconsistencies. Getting them on your side will be a challenge. So as a team, you need to remain in charge and not declare victory once a solution is found. This will require leadership and the courage to stay the course. Just like a well-trained and experienced athletic team you will need to practice good fundamentals. That means starting the project with a charter that describes purpose and defines the scope. Make sure it gives the team authority to pursue all steps—from problem identification to solution implementation. This lets others know what to expect and reinforces the commitment to completing all activities. Stay focused on results. Don’t get hung up on the day-to-day difficulties or bureaucratic complexities that come with solution realization. Keep the team’s ultimate goal in mind and move toward that end. Gather solid information, do the critical analytical work, build relationships, and develop enabling structures that will allow the workgroup to push ahead. In addition, work closely with your sponsor and supervisors. Keep these individuals informed and up-to-speed. Meet with them regularly and use their power and influence to obtain resources and run interference when the going gets tough. Be aware, however, that sometimes people in these positions may not walk the talk. That their interests and loyalty rest with the old way. In that case, the team will have to think about its options. These include the following approaches to sponsors and supervisors: ■

■

Tie the project’s purpose and objectives to the organization’s purpose and objectives: Using information the team has gathered during problem-solving to justify your ideas and show that the team is moving in a direction that will benefit the organization and its customers. Try to understand the sources of uneasiness: Meet with sponsors and supervisors and ask what has been overlooked or could be done differently to make the transition more attractive. Use the opportunity to answer questions and minimize anxious feelings. This may mean revising some of the team’s approach.

108

■

■

■

■

Refreezing

Use the informal network to advance the team’s cause: Identify individuals at all levels that have been sympathetic to your work and recommendations. These might be people with years of service, secretaries, technical staff, or other managers. Explain the team’s plight, show these groups what has been done, restate your purpose, and characterize the benefits. Ask for their help to bring about grassroots pressure. Cope with current realities: Sometimes power structures or political forces associated with making changes are beyond the team’s authority or influence. Do what politicians do; salvage what you can. Look for ways that, when put together, will produce something of value for the organization. Then complete the implementation steps. Appeal to a higher level of authority: Gather the facts, show what the team has accomplished and where it intends to go, describe the problem it has encountered, and ask for assistance in completing its chartered purpose. Recognize that the team has done all it can do: There will be times when opposing forces are just too powerful. Moving ahead might be career damaging, might violate team values, or might undermine the original purpose. In such cases, suck it up; declare a team victory over tyranny and celebrate the team’s effort. Write a final report extolling the team’s work and the potential benefits of implementing a solution if it is ever accomplished. Distribute the report so others know what was lost and that the team put forth a first-class effort.

Admittedly some of these tactics might seem a bit plucky. But implementing changes can be a tough job. The team’s success is dependent on its ability to maintain control and complete all implementation steps. The job of change will have a greater chance of success when the team stays true to its purpose, but there may be times when staying true to purpose means defending the team’s cause with a well-written report.

the furniture will remain as it was, but other pieces will be moved, and some new pieces will be added. New traffic patterns will emerge and the utilization of space will be different. Improvement is similar. Old patterns and interdependencies will be altered to accommodate new efficiencies. Completing these transitions will require a

Complete the Restructuring

109

certain amount of coordination and the balancing of individual needs with organizational realities. Plans may have to be altered and time frames adjusted to keep activities on track. The major job for the improvement team, at this point, is ensuring that human and material resources are integrated into a coherent package that will fulfill objectives, function as anticipated, and satisfy time and budget predictions. Staying on track and maintaining closeness to purpose is the objective now. The tools that are most helpful are the following: ■

■

■

Communication practices: These can be face-to-face verbal, electronic, or the management information system. Communication of this nature provides direction and assists decision-making. Organizational practices: These include the administrative hierarchy, rules and procedures, as well as goals and plans. Organizational practices arrange the flow of information and resources, and determine how work will be accomplished. Managerial practices: These can vary from being highly directive to more participative. Basic management techniques can be used to increase or decrease the amount of coordination that is needed to keep transition activities on schedule.

The key to selecting which combination of practices should be used is based on the need for coordination—system requirements and circumstances. In general, if progress is hampered by confusion or delays, then more coordination is usually necessary. On the other hand, if the effort appears to be on course and moving along smoothly, then less coordination is required. Over-direction in a situation that is doing well can be counterproductive. Don’t be a taskmaster if people are experienced, highly trained, and making progress; however, act quickly if the situation is declining and people appear frustrated in their efforts.

An Example of Where More Coordination Was Needed An electronics manufacturer, a supplier of circuit boards to several industries, was installing new robotic equipment, simplifying the work process, and reducing the size of its workforce. The changeover work had taken space occupied by several existing product lines. The current operation was then compressed into a smaller space while maintaining normal production schedules. Subsequently, deadlines began to slip, and current production, including quality, had also declined.

110

Refreezing

The renovation project had shifted focus and resources from current production to the new effort. It utilized engineering and supervisory talent to oversee the installation of equipment, and the reorganization of work areas for greater efficiency. But now problems in existing production were pulling people away from the project to do day-to-day problem-solving. The transition team, headed by the director of operations, recognized that existing management was being tugged in several directions. In addition the workforce, anxious about pending reductions and their integration into the new system, appeared to be keeping the automated and modularized set-up from coming on line. Communication with this group had been limited. Production employees had been left out of the decision-making process and were largely dependent on their own insights and adaptive devices. This particular situation did respond favorably to more coordination and the use of tools from all three approaches to integrating new practices. The job became one of maintaining current quality and production standards, as well as getting the updated system up and running. Human resources was enlisted and charged with assisting in transitioning the labor force. The job required establishing familiarity with the new work standards and providing appropriate training. Also, an equitable method for deciding reductions was developed that included attrition, reducing temporary labor, and skill testing. Supervisory responsibility was reorganized so that all product lines had active day-to-day oversight. Lead persons were given more responsibility to manage productivity and improve quality. Emphasis on individual responsibility for quality was again reinforced. The quality assurance department increased sampling and continuity checks on product lines where there were amplified error rates. The project was given priority. Emphasis was placed on making timely decisions, keeping team members informed about problems or delays, and ensuring critical resources were available when needed. Project meetings required weekly attendance with members being assigned to follow-up on uncertain details or difficulties. Decision-making had shifted from being less directive to being more directive. Coordination in this case had increased communication, placed an emphasis on training, developed a policy for handling cutbacks, reshaped the administrative and supervisory arrangement, and reduced the amount of self-determination.

eleven Sustain Improvement

Firmly anchoring change so that improvements are sustained is the last but most vital step in implementing a well-designed solution. The project team will need to document revised work processes. Measure and monitor both system and workgroup effectiveness to make sure improvements are performing as intended. The following concluding actions are addressed in this chapter: ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Continue to Measure and Monitor Process Effectiveness Continue to Monitor Workgroup Dynamics Document Revised Process Activities to Maintain Gains Wrapping Up and Bringing Things to a Close Sustain Improvement: How to Make It Happen An Example Illustrating the Importance of Sustaining Improvement

Continue to Measure and Monitor Process Effectiveness Although the ordeal of improving a system and related processes may appear to be successful, there are still some things that need to be done. The team will want to ensure that performance is meeting expectations, and that people are not reverting to old familiar patterns of behavior and work.

112

Refreezing

A critical factor in achieving desired results is the ability to monitor and measure performance. There is a tendency to rely on intuition, experience, or judgment when drawing conclusions about progress or project success. The assumption tends to be that everything is fine if sponsors and senior managers aren’t asking meddling questions and if the workgroup seems to be doing what needs to be done. However, since considerable resources and effort have gone into this project, then a performance measurement system should be developed—a scheme that contains essential metrics capable of evaluating ongoing system health. If done correctly, the assessment method can serve long-term needs by allowing individuals to evaluate and manage their own work. An effective approach for measuring, analyzing, and utilizing system information is based on the following steps: 1. Identify desired results: Decide on key goals and expectations for the system or process recently changed. The project purpose may point to the preferred result. What are customers and stakeholders looking for? Do they expect improved quality, lower scrap, reduced costs, improved morale, or specific deadlines met? Understanding the desired result will ultimately point to a specific indicator. For example, if the supervisor of a college cafeteria has concerns about how long students wait in line to get served then time in minutes would be the measure for results. 2. Establish indicators for results: Decide what will be measured and where measurement will take place. Will the indicators be input measures, process measures, or output measures? Keep it simple, too many measurements can be overwhelming. For example, again consider the cafeteria. The time it takes to get served is a process measure. In this case, the interval from tray and flatware pickup to checkout at the cashier is probably the best indicator for service. 3. Define decision limits for indicators: Establish a standard or limit—a decision rule—so that people don’t overreact to minor variations, or fail to react when differences beyond specifications are significant. These limits should not be arbitrary but based on information that defines the system’s typical capability. Using the cafeteria example, a maximum time in the serving line under busy conditions should be about ten minutes. Being caught in line longer may mean having to wolf down lunch before getting back to class. 4. Set up a data collection and feedback process: Develop a data collection plan by answering the questions what, where, when, who, and how. Design a

Sustain Improvement

113

spreadsheet or checksheet so observations can be tallied or counted. Establish a means for analysis and decision-making. Again using the cafeteria example, time data could be collected by selecting 30 patrons at random and timing each individual from arrival at tray pickup through departure at the cashier during a peak period. The results would then be recorded on a spreadsheet. 5. Analyze information and take corrective action: Interpret the information by charting or plotting data. Compare results to the decision rule, and decide what action should be taken, if any. Sometimes the course of action will be obvious, but on other occasions additional information and analysis may be necessary. In the cafeteria example, the collected time data was placed in a histogram—the data organized according to time intervals—and a judgment was made about throughput time. Some students made it in less than six minutes, others took longer than 20 minutes, but 70 percent were caught in serving lines for between 10 and 20 minutes. Yes, according to the decision rule, there appears to be a problem. Before beginning data collection, make sure the reasons for gathering it are clear. Take the time to plan for data collection and analysis. Collect only what is important for understanding process issues or problem-solving. There is a tendency to measure too many variables or subjective attributes that don’t add clarity. When developing performance measures, look for indicators that assess proximity to standards, uniformity and stability of processes, customer satisfaction, and employee effectiveness. There should be a mixture of indicators. Include only key process characteristics and outcomes that have a clear link to project objectives and customer satisfaction. Don’t focus exclusively on financial dimensions, but instead focus on those factors that will create long-term value. Indicators might include measures such as perfect orders shipped, on-time delivery, inventory levels, capacity utilization, lost work due to safety issues, customer delight, employee satisfaction, and employee training completed. An organization’s performance measures should focus on inputs, key process elements, and results. The combination should create a balanced scorecard for aligning activities and assuring value for customers and stakeholders. When using a balanced scorecard, both financial and non-financial measures assume equal importance and are part of the assessment system for all organizational levels.

114

Refreezing

Thoughts on Balanced Scorecards The concept of a balanced scorecard was introduced by Kaplan and Norton (1996). Their thought was to measure organizational performance from more than a financial viewpoint. The criteria chosen were customer perspective, internal business processes perspective, and learning and growth perspective. The idea was to link long-term strategies with short-term goals. Subsequently, the idea has been applied in many settings to give a better picture of overall business operations. For example, a restaurant chain trying to understand a downturn in the number of customers coming through its doors chose the following criteria: (1) food quality, (2) food selection, (3) ambience—environmental feel, and (4) efficiency of service. These can be measured through customer surveys and by studying the length of time it takes to receive service after the customer steps through the door. Another example is a clinical setting where patient satisfaction was evaluated. The areas chosen for analysis were billing, waiting time, physician care, lab reports, and phone response. The characteristics considered are listed in the table below. Process Area

Quality Measure

Billing

Accuracy Understandability Length of time to see physician after check-in Caring manner Understandability Length of time for patient to receive report Understandability Length of time to answer phone Polite treatment Accurate answers

Waiting Time Physician Care Lab Reports Phone Response

As with the restaurant chain’s indicators, these criteria can be measured through patient surveys and actual time studies. In any case, the objective is to choose an array of measurement criteria that can assess outcomes as well as process characteristics in order to make sure customers are satisfied and the business is achieving its purpose.

Sustain Improvement

115

Developing performance measures takes a bit of consideration. The next few pages provide some background information so you can get a feel for how it is done. The subject matter includes discussion on measurement fundamentals, measurement types, measurement frequency, and measurement standards. It also describes how to share the results of data analysis with process stakeholders. Measurement fundamentals: The following are some basics to think about when establishing performance measures: ■ ■ ■

■ ■ ■ ■

Processes produce data that are measurable and recordable. Data are variable; they differ from hour to hour and day to day. Data variability produces patterns that can be used to assess process predictability and stability. Data doesn’t become information until it is collected and analyzed. Data gathering and analysis permit conversation in terms of fact. A smart thing to do when assessing process effectiveness is to collect data. The worst thing to do is collect unnecessary, unimportant, and meaningless data.

Don’t collect data for the sake of having data. Collect meaningful data. Collecting, organizing, and then analyzing data is time consuming. Don’t burn out process owners and customers by collecting data that does not describe essential process characteristics. Measurement types: Six basic types of measurement can be used to assess how things are going. These are described in Table 11.1. Measurement frequency: The number of measurements or control points should be limited. Too many can become too much for individual system operators. At some point they may view the number of measures as tedious or constraining. This can result in neglect or defensive actions. The goal should be data that provides guidance for action. Collecting the wrong data or too much data will produce questionable results. Being data-driven is not the objective. Data collection must have purpose, must examine critical attributes, and must provide for analysis that will be used. Try to balance the time and cost of data collection against the value of information returned. The frequency of samples should be based on the ability to see a pattern in a set of observations. Somewhere between two and five critical measurement points should be sufficient for most systems. The number of observations at any point should be at least 20 measurements. A magnitude of this size should be sufficient to distinguish a pattern. Observations are typically done at specific intervals—hourly, daily, or monthly. Measurements are usually made at the start of a new cycle, the arrival of a new shipment, or a change in customer order.

116

Refreezing

TABLE 11.1: Measurement Types and Their Indicators Type Of Measure Timeliness: Used to evaluate how closely promised deadlines matched actual completion. Often expressed as a percentage.

Indicators ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Cycle time: Used to evaluate the length of time to complete a specific activity or group of tasks. Usually expressed as an average. Productivity: Used to assess output, yield, or efficiency. Can be expressed as a ratio of outputs to inputs and as a count that answers how much or how many.

■ ■ ■ ■

■ ■ ■ ■ ■

■

Quality: Used to evaluate the closeness to standard or specification. Included are assessments of customer satisfaction. Can be expressed as a count or percentage.

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Costs: Used to evaluate the value of services performed for specific transactions. Typically expressed in dollars. Can be ratios, percentages, or sums.

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Utilization: Used to evaluate resources used based on availability or capacity. Usually applied to equipment, people, or facilities. Primarily expressed as a percentage or ratio.

■ ■ ■ ■

■

On-time deliveries Time to respond to calls Delay time Wait time Down time Elapsed time to complete a project Time to complete a production cycle Time from order entry to shipping Elapsed time to complete a specific number of orders Items shipped Returns compared to shipments Requests met Audits performed Value of resources consumed compared to the value of items completed Number of items reworked Items processed Amount of scrap and rework Error rate Number of items outside of critical limits Number of customer complaints Number of blemishes Defects per number of items shipped Project costs Project costs compared to budgeted costs Revision or redesign costs Rework costs Maintenance costs Repair or replacement costs Labor rate Machine utilization rate Capacity rate Number of machines down for repair compared to the number operating Length of time equipment was operational compared to time it was idle

Setting measurement standards: Performance standards that have relevance and meaning should involve workgroup input. When standards are set by one person, there is a good chance the criterion will be considered impractical or unreasonable. Use meetings and group process to establish measures, their location in the process, and their frequency. Questions that should be answered to ensure the data collected are usable, relevant, and acceptable include the following:

Sustain Improvement

117

Why is this data being collected? What data will be collected? What data collection tool should be used? Where should data collection take place? When will data be collected and for how long? Who will be responsible for collecting the data? Who will compile and analyze the data collection results? How will the data be collected? How will we know the right data has been collected?

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

W. Edwards Deming (1982) stated that measurement standards or operational definitions should contain the following elements: A criterion or standard. A test for compliance to the criterion. A decision rule for interpreting test results.

■ ■ ■

For example, a team decides to gather information on the length of time it takes to get served in the college cafeteria during peak hours. The standard for waiting is set at no longer than ten minutes from tray pickup to checkout at the cashier. The test for compliance is to time-study 30 patrons from tray pickup to checkout. The decision rule is to investigate causes for waiting if more than 5 percent of patrons take longer than ten minutes. A measurement standard may be almost anything, but to have meaning and relevance, it must be supported by methods that make the information understandable. This in turn provides for communication that others can trust. It also produces information for decision-making that others can feel is likely to produce a dependable result.

Thoughts on Measurement and Analysis Measurement and analysis are important aspects of problem-solving and completing implementation activities. However, the focus of this book is managing the transformation process and not data literacy. If your project team needs more information on specific data analysis tools, the following books will be helpful: ■

■

Amsden, R. T., Butler, H. E., & Amsden, D. M. (1998). SPC simplified: Practical steps to quality (2nd ed.). Portland, OR: Productivity Inc. Wheeler, D. J. (2003). Making sense of data. Knoxville, TN: SPC Press.

118

Refreezing

Feedback and use of information: Performance measures are used to assess current conditions against desired conditions. The resulting data has value that ought to be shared. Feedback, however, must do more than merely provide information that checks up on the workforce. Data effectiveness can be lost when measurement results become a disciplinary device. People will then have difficulty linking actions with results and view future information from measurement with skepticism. System failures are seldom the direct result of individual failure. Other difficulties associated with process operations such as machinery, equipment, methods, or materials often contribute to breakdowns. Using data to make people the sole source of a problem will not get at root causes. Real solutions are found when examination of the system considers all contributing factors. Data gathering and analysis achieve legitimacy when multiple aspects are measured and evaluated. Feedback will then provide for learning—it will not create fear but will help individuals to become more effective and efficient at their jobs. When monitoring, measurement, and analysis are turned over to the workgroup for consideration, fear of reprimand is reduced. The information gathered then becomes a valuable tool and a catalyst for continued improvement. It provides information that will keep the system capable and on course. Allowing people to use the results of data analysis for their own benefit reduces the potential for resistance and helps lock in improvements. As an example, the problem of waiting time in the college cafeteria can serve as a case in point. The data indicated a large number of patrons took longer than ten minutes to get served. The cafeteria supervisor could use this information to exhort staff to work harder, faster, and smarter. But maybe they are doing their best already. Prodding and warnings will only create animosity and resentment if this is true. Such direction would have failed to recognize that the workforce is part of a larger system. There may be other issues at play here. The cafeteria may be understaffed and not capable of handling the crush during peak serving times. There may be only one cashier when two are needed. An even bigger culprit might be the design and layout of the serving area itself. The arrangement may be cramped, awkward, and produce flow patterns that contribute to congestion and waiting-lines. These are not people problems but system problems. Data in this case is a harbinger of trouble but does not indicate where the problem lies. Information used as a stick to prod people doing their best gains nothing. However, using data collection results as a means to problem-solving, where workers are allowed to diagnose issues and resolve them, produces both learning and bona fide improvement.

Sustain Improvement

119

Continue to Monitor Workgroup Dynamics Successful transition can also be appraised in terms of group dynamics. Critical to sustaining improvement is the group relations process. It is demonstrated through the effectiveness of decision-making and the behavior of individual members toward each other. The results of these interactions can be observed in two ways—task performance and group relations performance. Groups function much like any other open process (Hackman, 1987). There are organizational and human inputs that are transformed through group interaction into performance outputs. These interactions and the dynamic flow from inputs to outputs are shown in Table 11.2. In simple terms, the project team can evaluate transformation success by deciding whether work is getting done as planned and whether the workgroup is behaving as expected. If not, then there are fundamental group dynamics that can be evaluated and ultimately influenced. The group process activities that indicate effectiveness are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

group development, interaction patterns, decision-making, task activities, and group support activities.

Let’s examine them in more detail. Group development: As indicated in Chapter 9, groups confronted by change go through four stages of adaptability as they gain skill and confidence in a new and unfamiliar situation. Knowing the development stage of a workgroup can provide clues about its ability to perform. Ideally the workgroup should be approaching the last development stage. However, if some individuals are still stuck at one of the earlier stages, then TABLE 11.2: The Workgroup as an Open System Inputs ■

■

■

■

Organizational setting and structure Task complexity and character Individual skills and attributes Group norms and cohesiveness

Group Process ■ ■ ■ ■

Group development Decision-making Task activities Group support activities

Outputs ■ ■

Task performance Group relations performance

120

Refreezing

additional training and team building will be required to help them find their footing in the new system. Table 11.3 describes behaviors that can be used to assess how people are acclimating to circumstances during the transition. The figure is an adaptation of the group development model (Tuckman, 1965; Heinen & Jacobson, 1976). TABLE 11.3: Group Development Behaviors During Change Group Development Behaviors Indifference: This is when the workgroup is still trying to play by the old rules. Behaviors: ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Struggles to define task requirements and work methods Unable to accept or establish new group norms and values Has difficulty setting up interaction patterns and maintaining relationships Grapples with types of decision-making Individuals are trying to figure out how they fit in.

Opposition: This is when old habits and new structures clash as members try to establish new positions in the old pecking order. Behaviors: ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Arguments over work goals and methods Disagreements with what is and what is not acceptable behavior Competition between members and defensiveness over roles Disagreements about how decisions should be made—individual or group actions Many questions about the wisdom of the corrective action chosen.

Consideration: Here the workgroup begins to figure out how they are going to work together in the new environment. Behaviors: ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

More likely to agree on work goals and methods than disagree A sense of trust and cohesiveness begins to build Some confidence in each other’s ability to perform as required More friendly interactions and some sharing of personal problems Reaches decisions using several methods without a lot of quibbling Belief that the solution selected might work.

Cooperation: The workgroup displays maturity and is able to function as a skillful and fully accomplished team. Behaviors: ■ ■

■

■ ■ ■

Completes work tasks on time and at required level of quality Members work well together, are friendly, and have a common ethic about how to treat one another Members understand each other’s strengths and weakness and use them to the group’s advantage Forms close attachment to other workgroup members Uses a variety of decision-making methods Works through group and task problems without outside help.

Sustain Improvement

121

As a project team, try to judge workgroup maturity by the behaviors it displays. If the workgroup is still not fully committed, then use coaching, mentoring, and training in group behavior methods to advance their capability. Workgroups should be able to manage their own decision-making, problemsolving, and goal setting before they are considered mature enough to operate in the revised environment. Group interaction patterns: This is the degree to which members are able to function together and remain committed to group goals and activities. Some groups have a particular closeness and a common attitude about how things will be done. Others don’t seem to be able to get their act together. Factors that define group interaction and cohesiveness include the following: ■

■

■

■

■

Group goals: There is agreement on the purpose and direction of group actions. Members are able to focus activities and effort on meeting required objectives without a lot of struggle or disagreement. Interaction frequency: Group members communicate and cooperate frequently to accomplish work tasks. Individuals meet formally and informally to resolve work and personal problems so group outputs stay at desired levels. Personal connection: The ability of members to form sincere, trusting, and supportive relationships. Close personal associations help group members make decisions and solve problems; such relations help people overcome obstacles to personal development and goal realization. Competition: The extent of disagreement within the group over roles, position, or resources. Groups function better when rivalry is minimal. Members should be able to pool their talents to take advantage of each other’s strengths. However, some members may view those outside of their group as opponents for resources and recognition. Recognition: Members are able to acknowledge and celebrate outstanding individual and group performance. The group will strive together to receive favorable evaluation from supervisors and upper managers.

Because group cohesiveness is crucial to performance ability, care should be taken to foster and reinforce activities or behaviors that encourage team building. If a group is showing low cohesiveness, keep them focused on overall goals. In addition, get them training in group methods that will improve team problem-solving and decision-making. Also, upgrading meeting management skills and group communication skills can be useful.

122

Refreezing

Group interaction and communication: A workgroup that is capable of high performance is one that displays interdependency. Members interact and communicate regularly in their day-to-day activities. Interactions and communications are extensive and evenly distributed. No single member dominates decision-making or acts as a gatekeeper for the allocation of information. Decentralized communication—interactions where many group members share information—works best in most situations but is particularly valuable where activities around task performance become complex. Open communication should be valued and not discouraged. However, there are always forces at work that can split a group over issues and then create antagonism and differences about group direction. Silence and bickering are indicators that a workgroup is having difficulty adapting to the new situation. The goal is to maintain a high level of participation and transference of information. If workgroup performance is below expectations, look at interaction and communication patterns for signs of dominance by a single member or subgroup. A struggle for leadership may be an indication of larger group problems such as immaturity in development or low cohesiveness. In any case, be willing to diagnose the situation and intervene through problem-solving. Apply training, coaching, and team-building methods that will refocus the group and advance their skills. Assistance of this nature often requires supportive intervention by sponsors, supervisors, and human resources. Keep these individuals and groups informed and involved. Group decision-making: A primary group activity is decision-making. It is the process of choosing among alternative courses of action. The workgroup’s ability to discuss and agree upon a particular method for making decisions is an important indicator of growth and movement toward the mature stage of cooperation. There are several ways that decisions can be handled. A workgroup that has adjusted to its new environment should be able to use several different methods depending on the situation encountered. The following summarizes decision methods that can be used when trying to reach an agreement (Schermerhorn, Hunt, & Osborn, 1988): ■

■

Decision by authority: A single individual in a position of power decides what will be done. This happens without discussion by the group and direction may be based on little more than intuition and hunch. However, the group is expected to accept the decision and follow. Dominators will often try to force decisions to enhance their power position over the group. Decision by authority after discussion: A team leader, chairperson, or supervisor makes the final choice after receiving input and listening to discussion

Sustain Improvement

■

■

■

■

■

123

from the group. The quality of the decision is usually based on the evidence and the merit of arguments presented. Decision by an expert: The group defers its decision to a specialist who may be more knowledgeable about a particular problem and alternate methods for resolution. The method is often accompanied by a group discussion and agreement with the expert’s opinion. Decision by a subgroup: A subgroup is given authority to study alternatives and make an appropriate choice for the larger group. Decision by a minority: A small group is able to dominate the discussion and force its decision. This method often arises when other group members lack interest or knowledge about the issues in question, or when a majority of group members are absent. Decision by majority rule: The group agrees to poll members and abide by a majority vote. There is usually discussion and a presentation of arguments. However, the decision can leave a disgruntled minority that may prove to be trouble later on. Decision by consensus: The group continues to discuss issues and redefine solutions so that terms are agreeable to everyone. This requires time and a commitment by group members to listen and engage in dialogue. Often the outcome can be viewed as less than optimal, but all agree to support the effort and are able to jointly proceed.

A mature and performing group is able to recognize the limits and value of each of these methods and uses them where appropriate. Members are not locked into a particular method or dominated by a single individual or small clique. Group performance is considered satisfactory when members are able to focus on and contribute directly to task activities. The group is able to define and solve problems that relate to work completion. In addition, they are able to strengthen and support group relationships that help enhance satisfaction. This in turn makes the group more effective and productive. Task accomplishment activities: A well-functioning group is able to get the job done in a timely and acceptable manner without too much discord. The way to gauge acceptable shift in this dimension is the group’s capacity to handle tasks of varying and increasing complexity. A group that is confronted with increasing task complexity should be able to achieve both quality and quantity requirements. Group members demonstrate this capacity to manage their common effort and reach expected results when output is driven by self-determination. Usually, individual satisfaction is boosted as the group’s ability to complete complex tasks increases. Task

124

Refreezing

accomplishment is possible because members possess suitable skills and have overcome doubt about the value of system improvements. If task accomplishment is a problem, it probably means that some people are still unsure or uneasy about the need for making changes. First make sure training was sufficient so that skill competency matches new system demands. Next, look at group social issues—are members willing to make a personal investment in the required task and its outcomes? Can members agree on the means for bringing a task to conclusion?

Document Revised Process Activities to Maintain Gains At some point gains need to be standardized—made permanent. Documenting new work methods and processes is part of reinforcing the new approach. There are basically three types of documentation: 1. procedures, 2. work and job instructions, and 3. other records and support documents. ■

■

■

Procedures: Usually prescribed activities that take place at the department level and explain how specific operations should be handled when dealing with the larger organization. Procedures are often written by supervisors and department managers. The methods are designed to handle routine events and activities so outcomes are uniform and predictable. Work and job instructions: These characteristically describe in relative detail how work should be accomplished. The documentation typically organizes tasks in a step-by-step sequence and is usually written by operators and trainers. Work instructions help reduce process variability and increase stability by standardizing the way people work. Records and support documents: This type of paperwork typically includes forms, receipts, or spreadsheets that provide evidence on how activities were conducted. Support documents can be designed and used at all levels of operation. Examples are purchase requisitions, receiving records, repair orders, corrective action forms, checksheets, and control charts.

Documents form a hierarchy and usually relate to one another. A procedure can often create the need for a specific work or job instruction. In turn, the described activities are controlled and verified through records or other

Sustain Improvement

125

support documentation. When creating or revising documents, make sure all levels of paperwork are considered and included. Suggestions for developing and writing documentation are as follows: ■ ■ ■

■ ■ ■

■

Use a uniform or standardized format throughout the organization. Develop a method for controlling and reviewing documentation. Keep the reader in mind in order to reduce misunderstanding. Make the meaning clear by using good grammar and sentence structure. Avoid the use of jargon and define complex concepts. Keep things as short and simple as possible. Get input from those who will be using the documentation. Start by flow-charting the process being documented in order to verify operations and their organization. Test the documentation for ease of use and correctness of operation with those who will be using it. Solicit feedback and revise as required.

Wrapping Up and Bringing Things to a Close At some point the project has to come to a close and the revised system turned over to workgroups and system operators. If the project team has maintained focus and followed the nine implementation steps, people will be able to function on their own without relapsing into old habits. They will have the tools, training, and confidence to manage and control their work activities effectively and proficiently. However, before turning in a final report, the project team should do a final review of project activities. This helps preserve knowledge and reinforce lessons that have been learned. It also helps others in the organization understand what worked and what did not. Future projects will benefit from the experience and information gained during the current effort. As the team thinks over its implementation journey, it should do the following things: ■

■

■ ■ ■

Assess the team’s effectiveness in planning and carrying out transformation activities. How well did the team carry out its plan? Discuss difficulties and how the team recovered. What were the strategies used? Brainstorm and examine the team’s strengths and weaknesses. Assess the effectiveness of training provided by the team and other sources. Create a list of lessons learned. Brainstorming and the Affinity Technique (see Appendix for a description) can help facilitate this activity.

126 ■

Refreezing

Acknowledge and celebrate the effort. Recognize all who were involved and not just the team. There are many things that can be done including handing out certificates of appreciation, holding a lunch, or providing small gifts such as baseball hats or T-shirts with reminiscent logos and phrases. Even a handshake and word of thanks will let people know their hard work was recognized.

Through its work on the project, the team has gained considerable experience and matured in its ability to build relationships and complete a task. To remain sharp, these skills should be put to work again. The ongoing goal of course should be continuous improvement. Look for snags and bottlenecks in other work processes that create difficulty or reduce customer satisfaction. Don’t wait for others to recognize the need for improvement. Instead be proactive—as a team you have the skills and know-how to continually improve your current environment. Take control of your work situation. It will, on the whole, increase your job satisfaction. Initiate a new project by formally completing a proposal and presenting it to the appropriate supervision. In addition, begin to recruit sponsors for another oversight or steering team. It’s time to get the ball rolling so processes are continually improved and renewed. Don’t be driven by change; control it instead. Become a force for constant improvement.

Sustain Improvement: How to Make It Happen Teams enthused by their success and weary from the hard work often celebrate too soon. Members don’t spend sufficient time tying up the loose ends and ensuring that the new approach is secured. Improvement can be fragile at this point and subject to backsliding. Old and familiar ways can easily replace the new and unfamiliar. Changes stick when they are reinforced and have sufficient time to become the customary way of doing things. Take the time to measure and assess the results of completed activities. Then make appropriate modifications that will ensure system changes remain permanent. The following are methods that can help secure and sustain improvement: ■

Document revised work processes: Record process activities in a series of documents that are linked to organizational policy. Typical records would include procedures, job and work instructions, and supporting forms. Permanently recording process operations gives them an official status that is difficult to overthrow without formal review and discussion concerning proposed amendments.

Sustain Improvement ■

■

127

Develop metrics that measure key process attributes: Develop a few process metrics that will indicate how revised operations are doing. Measures should include such things as timeliness, cycle time, productivity, quality, cost, and utilization. Record the data in time-ordered sequence and look for abnormal variation. Make these metrics a permanent part of a routine that is someone’s responsibility in the new system. Assess group dynamics: Make observations that will provide feedback on how well the workgroup is performing. These could include the ability to get work done on time, the amount of supervision and coaching required, the amount of control people exercise over their own work, and the amount of satisfaction or dissatisfaction with current work conditions.

The goal at this last step in the change process is to make sure the revised system is meeting expectations—that to a large extent customers and stakeholders are satisfied with results. Concluding activities are part of closing the loop on the “plan, do, study, and act” cycle. If everything is fine, the team can fold up camp and move on. If expectations are not being met, the team will need to fine-tune its campaign and continue to work at locking in changes. After all, plenty of effort, time, and money went into the project. It would be a colossal waste of resources if a new team at sometime in the future had to deal with this problem again.

An Example Illustrating the Importance of Sustaining Improvement A manufacturer of modular office equipment had over the course of several years experienced an increase in rework at the end of assembly. A team consisting of two quality engineers and three assemblers investigated the problem, and felt that check points early in the process and at several other key locations would eliminate the redundant rework. The team introduced process measurement and control techniques that became the responsibility of line workers. But the line supervisor, accustomed to building and then inspecting, was of the opinion that these in-process checks were a waste of time. He was being measured on output and not on the amount of rework, which was someone else’s problem. However, he went along because the operations manager had approved of the project and embraced the solution. The team celebrated its success and went about its usual work. The only documentation that confirmed the effort was team-meeting notes. All communication and interaction with line workers had been oral. Tutoring to improved

128

Refreezing

measurement and control methods was handled informally on the job. Followup and coaching was done by one of the quality engineers—it was learning while doing. Everything was fine until there was pressure to increase production. Then of course the supervisor seized his opportunity and eliminated some of the process checks. Noticing an increase in rework, the quality manager, evoking the operations manager’s enthusiasm for the project, restored the missing checkpoints. But it was not done easily and without a few heated words. This push-and-pull battle of wits lasted for several months with the line supervisor giving in each time, but continually testing the water. However, eventually the operations manager left for a better position and was replaced by an in-house promotion. This was an individual with a long company history and a very traditional management philosophy. The line supervisor, recognizing a comrade in arms, got what he wanted and eliminated all of the process checkpoints. It was then back to build, inspect, and fix-up after the fact. Shortly thereafter the quality manager left for a new position.

Appendix

The following are methods that will assist project teams during the implementation process: ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Affinity Technique Force Field Analysis Activity Breakdown Top-Down Flow Chart Planning Tree Lesson Plan

Affinity Technique This approach is used to generate a large number of ideas and organize the results into groupings containing similar themes. It helps focus thinking and allows a few key thoughts to emerge naturally. To use the Affinity Technique do the following: 1. Distribute index cards or sticky notes and ask members to brainstorm ideas that convey a future focus for the improvement effort. 2. There should be one idea per card or sticky note. Use more than one word—five to eight seems to work best. It is best to start each idea with a verb to show action.

130

Appendix

3. Post or otherwise display the resulting ideas so that they are visible to the entire group and ask members to physically sort the cards or sticky notes into related groupings. 4. Keep the conversations to a minimum—no talking please, if that is possible. Allow people to make associations that best fit their feelings. If an idea moves from one group to another and back several times, create a second card so the two groupings contain the same idea. 5. Once each member feels comfortable with the arrangements, ask the workgroup to create a header card for each grouping. The header card should contain a sentence that summarizes the thought or theme contained in each particular group of cards. 6. The summary sentence should be a consensus agreement that is specific and concise. 7. Then by vote or nominal group technique, have the team rank the header cards. The card with the top vote is a likely candidate for a purpose statement.

Force Field Analysis The force field analysis is a technique used to identify factors that work against a solution through finding counterbalancing reasons that can eliminate or reduce the negative factors. On the left side of the worksheet, as illustrated in Table A.1, list constraints and other issues that may become barriers to achieving end results. Then on the right side, brainstorm and list things that can be done to accommodate the barriers or work around them. Each negative should have at least one or possibly more counterbalancing positive forces.

Activity Breakdown This is a quick and easy way to split up the work of change implementation into actionable steps. It works well when organizing and sorting out clear-cut projects but can be used in more complex situations as a starting point. An example activity breakdown appears in Table A.2. The information is then normally transferred to an activity network diagram or Gantt chart that shows the relationship between sequential and parallel activities. To create an activity breakdown do the following:

Appendix

131

TABLE A.1: Example Force Field Analysis Force Field Analysis Problem or goal statement: Reduce waiting time and congestion in the college cafeteria serving area. Objectives: (1) Move and reconfigure beverage serving station. (2) Reduce the number of outages at the salad bar. (3) Assure that clean flatware and dishes are restocked during rush times. (4) Switch to pre-made sandwiches. Barriers/Negatives

Workarounds/Positives

1.

Down time while improvements are being made.

1a. Schedule improvements during winter break. 1b. Schedule improvements during summer break.

2.

Cost of using college maintenance crew.

2a. Compare costs of using outside contractor. 2b. Examine the cost of using both maintenance staff and outside contractor for specific work.

3.

Conflicts in scheduling maintenance crew.

3a. Compare availability of outside contractor and maintenance crew. 3b. Obtain open slot on maintenance schedule.

4.

Scheduling training for cafeteria staff. 4a. Bring in staff one hour earlier. 4b. Do training during changeover period.

5.

Obtaining buy-in from cafeteria staff.

5a. Hold special meeting to explain improvements and obtain feedback. 5b. Include more staff in implementation meetings.

1. Identify the target or goal. The overall project goal. 2. On separate sticky notes, one idea per note, brainstorm and list activities that might be needed to reach the target or goal. Use three to seven-word phrases that start with an action word like create, develop, establish, or review. 3. Spread the notes out on a table or wall where everyone can see them. 4. Remove duplicates and consolidate ideas by writing new sticky notes when needed. 5. Organize the notes in sequential order through discussion and consensus. 6. Discuss the breakdown thoroughly to reduce the chance of overlooking something. 7. Assign responsibility for each activity or groups of activity. 8. Estimate and assign due or target dates.

132

Appendix

TABLE A.2: Example Activity Breakdown Activity Breakdown Goal: Reduce waiting time and congestion in college cafeteria serving area. Objectives: (1) Reconfigure serving area to improve traffic flow. (2) Reduce the number of outages at the salad bar. (3) Ensure that clean flatware and dishes are restocked during rush times. (4) Switch to pre-made sandwiches. Activities 1. Work with Buildings and Grounds Dept. to finalize plans for reconfiguring serving area as follows:

Responsibility Target Date of Dennis

April 1

2. Send a request for proposal to college maintenance department and two outside contractors.

Buzz

May 1

3. Schedule meeting with cafeteria serving staff to share plans and obtain feedback.

Katie and Helen

April 1

4. Define the need for change by posting customer complaints, customer survey data, and time-study data on average time spent in serving area.

Becky and Mary

April 15

5. Create a purpose statement for the changeover project.

Team

May 1

6. Identify opportunities for staff participation.

Team and staff

May 15

7. Set specific dates for changeover activities.

Team

June 1

8. Conduct staff training.

Team and staff

June 15

9. Identify measures and methods to monitor efficiency in the reconfigured setting.

Team

July 1

10. Manage changeover activities.

Steve and Jon

July 1–Aug 31

11. Acknowledge and celebrate accomplishments.

Team

September 15

■ ■ ■

Move beverage serving area Move salad bar Remove obstructing railing.

Top-Down Flow Chart Flow charts have many uses, one of which is to describe the sequence of activities for implementing simple process changes. They may also be employed when trying to organize events that define a more complex project. However, grid size requirements are the fundamental limiting factor. A top-down flow chart ordering the process for writing quality system procedures appears in Table A.3.

Appendix

133

To create a top-down flow chart, do the following: 1. Identify the target or goal. 2. Decide what major steps will be required to implement the change. Three to eight should be sufficient. Write these on separate sticky notes, one idea to a note using phrases that start with an action word. 3. Organize the notes in sequential order from left to right across the top of a flip chart. 4. Develop a set of activities for each major step. Write these on separate sticky notes, one idea to a note using phrases that start with action words. Use brainstorming or discussion to decide on activities. 5. Organize the activities in sequential order from the top down for each step. 6. Discuss the chart thoroughly to ensure the sequence is appropriate and nothing has been overlooked. 7. Assign responsibility for each step or activity. 8. Estimate and assign due dates or target dates for each step. TABLE A.3: Example Top-Down Flow Chart Goal: Document quality system procedures. Objectives: Develop a process for writing new procedures. Step 1 Identify procedure

Step 2 Identify gaps in current procedure

Step 3 Test new procedure

Step 4 Develop forms and support documents

Step 5 Implement procedure

Who

Who

Who

Who

Who

When

When

When

When

When

Activity 1.1 Form team

Activity 2.1 Develop schedule for writing procedure

Activity 3.1 Identify any discrepancies

Activity 4.1 Review and edit forms and support documents

Activity 5.1 Provide training in new procedure operation

Who

Who

Who

Who

Who

When

When

When

When

When

Activity 1.2 Read related ISO clauses

Activity 2.2 Write procedure

Activity 3.2 Rewrite procedure

Activity 4.2 Provide for document control

Activity 5.2 Monitor operation and follow up if necessary

Who

Who

Who

Who

When

Who

When

Who

When

Who

When

When

When

When

Activity 1.3 Flow chart current process

Activity 2.3 Review and edit procedure

Activity 3.3 Develop procedure flow chart

Who

Who

Who

When

When

When

134

Appendix

Planning Tree The planning tree is a pictorial method—a visual outline—for breaking a goal into component objectives, activities and tasks. Figure A.1 demonstrates this method. It organizes thinking about the complex details of moving from problem resolution to solution implementation. The technique is helpful for encouraging a more detailed and through examination of activities that will be pursued to implement changes. The process is a team pursuit that encourages creativity and divergent thinking. It is facilitated by using sticky notes to define the various levels of detail. Remember to use one idea per note. This method will allow flexibility and permit the rearrangement of activities and tasks as plan particulars develop. Figure A.2 provides an example of a planning tree. To create a planning tree, do the following: 1. Define the end result or goal. Keep the statement short and to the point. For example, “Document quality system procedures.” 2. Ask the question, “What are the major things (objectives) that need to be done to achieve this goal?” 3. Write two to five objectives—start each response with an action word. 4. For each objective, ask the question, “What are the things that need to be

Goal Objective Activity Task Task Objective Activity Activity Objective Activity

FIGURE A.1: Planning tree organization.

Appendix

135

Document quality system procedures Identify procedure Form a team Read related ISO clauses Flow chart current process Identify gaps in current procedure Develop schedule for writing procedure Write procedure Review and edit procedure Test new procedure Identify any discrepancies Rewrite procedure Develop forms and support documents Develop procedure flow chart Provide for document control Implement procedure Provide training in new procedure operation Monitor operation and follow-up if necessary

FIGURE A.2: Example planning tree diagram.

done to implement this objective?” Again, start each reply with an action word. 5. Break each objective into greater detail (activities and tasks) by asking the question again, “What needs to be done to address or achieve this result?” 6. Review the finished diagram for completeness and the logic of linkages and relationships. 7. When the tree is complete, assign responsibility for actions and estimate completion dates using an activity breakdown.

136

Appendix

Lesson Plan Lesson plans organize the teaching and learning process. Like other plans, the lesson plan breaks down the transfer of ideas and skills into manageable chunks. A lesson plan does several things: 1. 2. 3. 4.

organizes the content of a training session, describes instructional activities that facilitate the transfer of information, assigns a time interval to learning activities, and describes how learning outcomes will be measured.

An example lesson plan appears in Table A.5. Lesson plans are constructed around learning objectives. These objectives describe what skills the learner should have developed after leaving the training session. Objectives start with an action word that describes what activity the learner should perform to gain proficiency. Examples of words to use at the beginning of a learning objective are shown in Table A.4. TABLE A.4: Lesson Planning Objectives Information Processing

Critical Thinking

Problem-Solving

Prioritize Distinguish Categorize Record Calculate Tally Sort Arrange Outline

Evaluate Explain Summarize Illustrate Predict Build Evaluate Draw Estimate

Describe Identify Find Brainstorm Develop Define Generalize Select Question

The following are examples of learning objectives: ■

■

Identify and define the five factors customers use to evaluate service quality. Evaluate waiting time in the cafeteria serving area by timing 30 customers from tray and utensil pickup to checkout at the cashier, and organize the results in a histogram.

Appendix

137

TABLE A.5: Example Lesson Plan Outline of Instruction Topic Reading and using shop work orders. Purpose A new shop work order process is now being used. The work order contains production and material information that defines how a part or assembly should be processed in factory work areas. Learning Objectives 1. Define the purpose of a shop work order and explain its function. 2. Explain what information is contained in the shop work order. 3. Describe how to reconcile differences between the shop work order and drawing material list. Performance Criteria Performance will be satisfactory when learner: 1. 2. 3. 4.

Describes where information comes from that is placed on the work order. Identifies where information is located on the work order. Identifies discrepancies between the work order and production drawings. Explains how to handle part shortages.

Content Outline 1. The shop work order and its function. 2. Shop work order organization and components. 3. Flow path of shop work order through the factory. 4. How to compare shop work order and drawing revisions. 5. How to deal with discrepancies between shop work order and drawing material list. 6. Handling parts shortages. Learning Activities

Time

1. Present a brief lecture explaining the purpose and function of a shop work order. 2. Using the overhead projector, explain shop work order organization and where information is located. 3. Using the overhead projector, describe the shop work order’s movement through the factory and where information comes from. 4. Place participants in groups of two or three. Have each group propose three questions about information location and origin. Then have groups exchange questions, develop answers to the three questions, and return their answers to the originating group. 5. Using the overhead projector, explain how to compare shop work orders and drawings for correct revisions and material lists. 6. Place participants in groups of two or three. Provide groups with sample shop work orders and drawings. Have them identify discrepancies between material list and related drawing. 7. Explain how to handle part shortages. 8. Test for comprehension using verbal questioning in a “Jeopardy” format. 9. Assess value of training for participants using a written survey.

5 min. 10 min. 5 min. 30 min.

5 min. 30 min.

10 min. 20 min. 5–10 min.

Key Terms

Abilities Having the potential to carry out specific duties or display particular behaviors. A combination of effort and aptitude contribute to the ability to act. Accountability An individual’s obligation to manage and carry out responsibilities and be accountable for decisions. Activities Specific physical and verbal actions that individuals and groups engage in while performing work-related tasks. Authority The entitlement, based on position in a hierarchy or through assignment of responsibility, to expect compliance from subordinates. Avoidance A strategy for conflict reduction that disregards the causes of conflict and encourages activities to continue under controlled conditions. Behavior The purposeful acts and decisions of individuals, groups, or organizations. Boundary-spanning role Facilitating interaction and communication between groups within an organization, or between an organization and the outside environment. Coercive power Having influence over others through the use of fear. Cohesiveness When group members share closeness, have common attitudes, behaviors, and are able to perform effectively with a minimum of disagreement.

Key Terms

139

Communication The transmittal and exchange of information between individuals, groups, and organizations. Consideration Behavior that displays openness, friendliness, and concern for the well-being of others. Decision-making Choosing among alternative actions or solutions. The choice is usually made after evaluating possible outcomes based on analyzing data or past experiences. Effective workgroup A group that is able to achieve a high level of performance and member satisfaction. Expert power The ability to influence others based on knowledge, skill, or expertise. Formal group A group that is created by an organization and operates in parallel with organizational objectives. Founder A sailing term that means to run aground or, in other words, failing to achieve and objective or falling short of an objective. Functional group A group that is able to operate effectively—to meet defined goals—within the normal organizational structure. Goal A primary distinct purpose, result, end point, or outcome that is upheld as a focus for action. A goal may contain several secondary objectives. Goal setting The act of negotiating and defining a desired target, purpose, or performance standard that an individual, group, or organization can aspire to attain over a set period of time. Grapevine An informal communication network that functions in parallel with, and at times in opposition to, the formal communication network within an organization. Group Several interdependent individuals who act in common to perform a task or achieve a goal. Group decision A common understanding reached by members of a group after considering competing alternatives. Group development A series of developmental stages a group goes through where members learn how to work with one another and function as a unit. Group norm A standard of behavior that is usually established by group members to guide actions and performance when dealing with others within the group.

140

Key Terms

Group process The method by which a group transforms resources and inputs into products or services. Informal group A group that exists without being officially recognized by the officially organizational structure. Intergroup conflict Disagreements that arise between two or more groups. Intragroup conflict Disagreements that arise among group members. Job A cluster of tasks that are designed to serve a particular organizational purpose. Job analysis The study of tasks and behaviors comprising a particular job to discover and define qualifications for employment. Job content The factors that define specific work tasks and behaviors. Job design The planning and specifying of job tasks. Learning A change of behavior that occurs as a result of experience or purposefully designed instruction. Legitimate power The ability to influence others based on having a managerial position in the organization. Needs Deficiencies that an individual or group may perceive as necessary at a particular point in time. Objective A secondary characterized purpose, result, or outcome that is upheld as a focus for action. Objectives are specific actions that must be completed before a primary goal can be reached. Organization A structure that provides a climate in which individuals and groups are able to operate to convert resources and inputs to usable outputs. Output The result of process activities that transform resources and inputs into products and services. Perception An individual’s attitude that is shaped by incoming stimuli. The result is an opinion and communicated message that reflects the new awareness. Performance The ability to achieve defined objectives, which are usually defined by key measures that are used to judge effectiveness. Performance gap A discrepancy between actual and desired results. Planned change Improvement that happens as a result of specifically designed actions.

Key Terms

141

Referent power The ability to influence others through association and identification with another powerful individual. Relationships The interpersonal connections and associations that exist within an organization. Role The behavior pattern that is attributed to a particular job or position. Role ambiguity Uncertainty about job duties, responsibility, and accompanying authority. Span of control The number of subordinates supervised or the limits of responsibility and authority extended to a particular individual or group. Sponsor A manager or executive who provides support, oversight, review, and political clout for a team or group working on an improvement project. Task A specific activity that is completed to achieve a particular outcome. Task uncertainty Uncertainty about what constitutes a specific activity. Team building A series of designed and planned actions that gather information and facilitate team learning so that functioning and effectiveness are improved. Unplanned change Improvement that occurs without the assistance of formal authority. Usually occurs over time as a group tries to respond and cope with external or internal organizational pressures. Workgroup A group created by formal authority to transform resources and inputs into products or service outputs.

References

Deming, W. E. (1982). Out of the crisis. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Fiedler, F. E., Chemers, M. M., & Mahar, L. (1976). Improving leadership effectiveness. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. Fossum, L. B. (1989). Understanding organizational change. Los Altos, CA: Crisp Publishing Inc. French, J. R. P., & Raven, B. (1959). The basis of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. Fuller, D. (1971). The estimating, planning, and scheduling of engineering input (Paper on Management #13). Boston, MA: Don Fuller Associates. Galbraith, J. R. (1977). Organizational design. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Hackman, J. R. (1987). The design of work teams. In J. W. Lorsch (Ed.), Handbook of organizational behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Heinen, J. S., & Jacobson, E. (October 1976). A model of task group development in complex organizations. Academy of Management Review, pp. 98–111. Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1982). Management of organizational behavior (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). The balanced scorecard. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Karp, H. B. (1996). The change leader: Using a gestalt approach with work groups. San Diego, CA: Pfeiffer & Co. Kotter, J. P., & Schlesinger, L. A. ( January–February 1979). Choosing strategies for change. Harvard Business Review, p. 57. Lawrence, P. R. ( January–February 1969). How to deal with resistance to change. Harvard Business Review, p. 47. Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social sciences: Selected theoretical papers. New York, NY: Harper & Row. Meier, D. (December 1995). Accelerated learning: A key to individual and organizational success. Symposium conducted at Madison Area Quality Improvement Network, Madison, WI.

References

143

Newman, W. H. (1975). Constructive control. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Price Waterhouse (1996). The paradox principles. Chicago, IL: Irwin. Schein, E. H. (1980). Organizational psychology (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Schermerhorn, J. R., Hunt, J. G., & Osborn, R. N. (1988). Managing organizational behavior. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. Schultz, J. R. (May 2008). Helping ease the transition. Quality Progress, p. 53. Siu, R. G. H. (1980). The master manager. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. Stoner, J. A. F., & Freeman, R. E. (1989). Management (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Tuckman, B. (1965). Developmental model in small groups. Psychology Bulletin, 63(6), 389–399.

Index

Page numbers in italics denote a figure/table accommodating 105, 105 accountability 78, 138 action plan see plan/planning activities 138; coordinating and integrating unfinished 98–100; restructuring of daily 8, 95–110 activity breakdown 48, 53, 130–131, 132 adaptability 60, 76, 101–102, 105; stages of experienced during change 83 administrative structure 99 Affinity Technique 25, 125, 129–130 aggression 71 alliances: creating new 39–41 ambiguities, organizational 102–103 analysis 117; see also measurement antecedent conditions 103 assertiveness 71 assessment: and training 73 authority 138; decision by 122–123; formal 70, 75–76, 81; limits for 27, 32, 76, 103; and power 69; scope of 101; see also empowerment avoidance 104, 105, 138

awareness 15; raising level of 18, 20–21, 22 balanced scorecard 113, 114 barriers 53; and force field analysis 47, 49, 53, 55, 87, 130, 131; to empowerment 69; to improvement 48–49 beliefs 37 boundary-spanning role 99, 138 brainstorming 26, 49, 53, 87, 125 champion 14, 28 change: improvement as 1–2; motivation for 15; recognizing need for 17–18; resistance to see resistance to change/improvement change/changing phase 59–91; and Lewin’s three-phase model 10–13, 11, 12 charter 107 closure 125–126 coach/coaching 32, 44, 70, 73, 76, 96, 121, 122, 127–128 coercion 85, 89

Index

coercive power 70, 138 cohesiveness 121–122, 138 collaboration 14, 37, 72 collective learning 18 common ground 21 communication 7, 23–32, 38, 139; conflict and poor 103; and coordination 98, 99–100, 109; examples 31–32; and group interaction 122; organizational environment and approach to 34, 36; of purpose 27–28, 30–31; and setting an example 28–29; two-way 30, 32, 84, 89; upward 29–30, 98 competency 19 competition 104, 105, 121; and groups 121 complacency 7, 18–19; sources of 19 completion 64 compliance 106 compromise 105, 105 conflict 102–105; benefits 102; reduction and resolution methods 104–105, 105; situations where noticeable 103–104; sources of organizational 102–103 consensus: decision by 123 consideration 81, 83, 120, 139 constraints 47, 48–49, 53; see also barriers contingencies 105 control 97–98; methods 52; span of 38, 45, 141 control chart 52 cooperation 81, 83, 120 coordination 51–52, 97, 98–100, 109; approaches to effective 98–100; communication practices 98, 99–100, 109; direct methods 51; examples 109–110; indirect methods 51–52; managerial practices 100, 109; organizational practices 99, 109 corrections, making 105–106 costs 116 critical thinking 136 culture, organizational 37–39; attributes shaping 37–38; examples 44–45; methods capable of influencing 38–39

145

cycle time 116 daily activities: restructuring 8, 95–110 data collection 112–113, 115 decentralized communication 122 decision-making 21, 26, 33, 100, 139; and groups 41, 80, 84, 119, 121, 122–123, 139 defensive behaviors 2, 29, 62 delegation process 75–76 Deming, W. Edwards 117 direct methods 51 direction: and empowerment 68, 77 documentation 99, 101, 124–125; procedures 124; records and support documents 124; and revised work processes 126; suggestions for developing and writing 125; work/job instructions 39, 51, 56–57, 99, 101, 124 dominating/forcing 104, 105 economic incentives: and dealing with resistance 84, 89 education 60, 84, 89 see also training effectiveness: measuring and monitoring 111–118 efficiency 7, 43, 75, 110 emails 51 empowerment 7, 67–78; barriers to 69; characteristics of 68, 77; delegation process 75–76; examples 77–78; leadership supporting 68; meaning of 67–68; sources of power 70; and teams 70–71; and trust 68; ultimate goal of 75 entrenched supervision 85 environment 36, 38; stable 36, 37; unsettled 36, 37 evaluation: and training 73 example, setting an 28–29 expert: decision by 123 expert power 70, 139 face-to-face meetings 51, 98, 99 failure, fear of 62 feedback 32, 42, 98, 112–113, 118 fence-sitters 96–97

146

Index

Fiedler, Fred 81–82 flexibility 50, 105 flow charts 39, 125; top-down 132–133, 133 follow-up 76 force, avoiding use of 21 force field analysis 47, 49, 53, 55, 87, 130, 131 formal authority 70, 75–76, 81 formal groups/networks 33–34, 37, 42–43, 139 Fossum, Lynn 80 founder 72, 139 freedom: and empowerment 68, 77 Freeman, R. E. 104 French, John 70 Fuller, Don 62 Gailbraith, Jay: Organizational design 99 gains: activities to maintain 124–125; creating opportunity for small 61–66 GE 86 goal setting 121, 139 goals 99, 139; defining of 47; differences in and conflict 102; group 121 grapevine 51–52, 139 green belt 14 group(s) 119–123, 127; competition among 121; and decision-making 4, 80, 84, 119, 121, 122–123, 139; development 119–121, 120, 139; formal 33–34, 37, 42–43, 139; goals 121; informal 34–36, 37, 50, 99, 108, 140; interaction 121, 122; norms 34, 37, 41, 104, 119, 120, 139; participation 84, 89, 139; process 116, 119–124, 119, 140; task accomplishment activities 123–124; values 35, 37; see also teams Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K. H.: Management of organization behaviour 37 horizontal flow of information 99 implementation 6, 13, 50 improvement: as change 1–2; explaining

the need for making 21–22; people’s reaction to 80–83, 83; reasons for failure in achieving expectations of 2–5; recognizing the need for making 17–18; sustaining see sustaining improvement; using teams to implement and sustain 13–14 indicators 112, 113 indifference 80, 83, 120 indirect methods 51–52 individual style 103 informal leaders 34 informal networks/groups 34–36, 37, 99, 108, 140; reasons for flourishing 34 information 59, 98; equal access to 21 information processing 69, 136 information systems: lateral 99; vertical 100 infrastructure 38–39 inputs 13, 27, 42, 116, 119, 119 interaction frequency 121 interdependence 102, 122 intergroup conflict 104, 140 intragroup conflict 104, 140 ISO standard 22 itinerary 62 job description 32, 101 job design 140; areas that impact on 101 just-in-time 91 Kaplan, R. S. 114 Karp, H. B. 70 know-how 40 Kotter, John 84 lateral information systems 99 Lawrence, Paul 80 leaders/leadership 39, 40; and group interaction 122; informal 34; situational 81–83; supporting of empowerment 68 lean manufacturing 11 learning 72, 140; collective 18; objectives 73, 74; see also training

Index

legitimate power 70, 140 lesson plan 73–75, 136, 136 Lewin, Kurt 10, 49; three-phase model 9–13, 11 listening 97, 98 majority rule 104, 105, 123 management information systems 51, 100 managerial practices: and coordination 100, 109 manipulation 85, 89 measurement 111–118, 127; data collection 112–113, 115; and feedback 118; frequency of 115; fundamentals 115; setting standards 116–117; types of and indicators 115, 116 meetings: face-to-face 51, 98, 99; unit/department 51 memos 51 milestones 63, 64, 98 minority: decision by a 123 monitor/monitoring 48; of process effectiveness 111–118; of workgroup dynamics 119–124 needs 102, 140; individual 109; stakeholder 3, 6; training 48, 73 negotiation 26, 84, 89, 105, 105 networks 7; creating new 100–101; ensuring participation of informal and formal 42–43; formal and informal 33–34 norms 37; group 34, 37, 41, 104, 119, 120, 139 Norton, D. P. 114 objectives 76, 88, 94, 140; and action plan 43, 54–57; learning 73, 74; project 25, 107, 113; team 14, 43 observation 59 open communication 122 openness 84 operational definition 117 opposition 82, 83, 120 organizational culture see culture, organizational

147

organizational practices: and coordination 99 outputs 99, 102, 116, 119, 123, 140 overtime 106 participation 43–44; group 84, 89, 139 paternalistic management 44 PDSA (plan, do, study, act) format 30 people: keeping on track 95–98 people-practices 39 perception 37, 81, 87, 102, 140; differences in 103, 104 performance measurement see measurement performance standards: clarifying of 39 philosophy 38 plan/planning 7, 46–57, 61, 99; creating an action 12–13, 53; determining constraints 48–49; establishing timing 50; example 53–54, 54–57; and graphics 50; making it work 51–52; methods of creating 49–50; process of 47–48; reasons for importance 46–47; and small gains 62–63; and training 73 planned change 28–29, 32, 140 planning tree 134–135, 134, 135 political campaigns 30 post-control 52 power 69–72, 85, 89; coercive 70, 138; dealing with 107–108; definition 69–70; expert 70, 138; legitimate 70, 140; referent 70, 141; reward 70; sources of 70; see also empowerment pre-control 52 problem-solving 2, 4–5, 6, 7, 105, 105, 122, 136; goal of 7; methods 3, 3; and teams 14 procedures 124 process control 18, 25, 32 process improvement 11; and threephase model 12, 13 processes 13 productivity 116 project: final review of 125; keeping on course 105–106

148

Index

purpose: characteristics of a shared 24–25; communication of 27–28, 30–31; examples 31–32; importance of 23–24; maintaining faithfulness to 95–98; statement of 24–26, 30, 32 quality 116; of work 101 Raven, Bertram 70 recertification audits 102 recognition 121, 126 records 124, 126 referent power 70, 141 refreezing 93–128; mechanisms for 93–94; and three-phase mode 10–13, 11, 12 relationships 87, 88, 121, 126, 141; creating new 100–101; and group members 121; informal 34; interpersonal 103; and lateral information systems 99; leader– member 81; and situational leadership 82, 82 reporting 29–30 resistance to change/improvement 2, 5, 9, 11, 26, 64, 79–81; dealing with entrenched supervision 85–88; examples of management of 90–91; getting concerns out into open 86; methods of managing 7, 84–85, 88–89, 89; overcoming of and situational leadership 82–83; reasons for 79–80 resources 48, 100, 106 responsibility 101 results: establish indicators for 112; identify desired 112 review, final 125 reward power 70 role ambiguity 19, 102–103, 141 role model 41 roles 34, 72, 98, 141; disagreement over 121 routines 101 Schein, Edgar 15–16, 59, 93–94 Schlesinger, Leonard 84 Schultz, J. R. 72

segments 63 self-determination 100, 123 shared governance 78 shared purpose 24–25 shared resources 102 situational leadership 81–83 Six-Sigma 1, 3, 3, 11; and three-phase model 12, 13 skills and techniques 101 smoothing 105, 105 span of control 38, 45, 141 sponsors 106, 141; approaches to 107–108; communicating with 29–30; engaging support from 85; keeping informed 98, 107 stable environment 36, 37 stakeholders 2, 3, 6, 13, 19, 24, 39, 42, 64, 127 standards: clarifying performance 39; setting measurement 116–117 standing 40 statement of purpose 24–26, 30, 32 steering control 52 Stoner, J. A. F. 104 structures 13 subgroups: decisions by 123 supervisors: approaches to 107–108; dealing with entrenched 85–88 support: and empowerment 68, 77 support documents 124 sustaining improvement 111–128; and documentation 124–125, 126; examples 127–128; methods for 126–127; monitoring of workgroup dynamics 119–124, 127; and performance measurement 111–118; wrapping up and bringing things to a close 125–126 symbols 38 system modification 13, 15 task accomplishment activities: and groups 123–124 task uncertainty 98, 103, 141 Taylor, Frederic 43–44 team-building methods 84, 120, 122, 141 teams: action to be taken to facilitate new

Index

member integration 41; creating new alliances 39–41; and empowerment/ disempowerment 69–72; using of to implement and sustain improvement 13–14; see also group(s) Three-Phase Model (Lewin) 9–13, 11 time 64 timeliness 116 timing 50 top-down flow chart 132–133, 133 training 39, 48, 60, 72–75, 84, 94, 101, 124; and assessment 73; benefits 72; creating of lesson plan 73–75; and managing resistance to change 89; steps 73; suggestions for adapting of to adult learners 72–73; teaching model 75 trust 19, 41–42, 68 two-way communication 30, 32, 84, 89

149

unfreezing 15–57; and three-phase model 10–12, 11, 12 United States Postal Service 44 unsettled environments 36, 37 utilization 116 values 37; conflict and differences in 103 vertical information system 100 vision statement 23 vulnerability 19 withdrawal 104, 105 work/job instructions 39, 51, 56–57, 99, 101, 124 workgroups see group(s) wrapping up 125–126 Yes-No control 52