|
|
|
12/29/2010 12:13 PM
|
|
|
I had an interesting conversation with a leadership consultant. He was reviewing my Lean Curriculum and had some surprising things to say and being someone who is always in pursuit of new knowledge I wanted to run some of the comments by you. Perhaps his comments were valid. Then again, maybe not. I'll get your thoughts.
On one slide I mentioned how important it is that leadership establishes a clear vision, that it must be the upper management that establishes that vision and shares it clearly. Staff should then be empowered to help us decide how to get there. The vision starts at the top and decisions are then made at the lowest possible level. His claim, "It is not upper management that establishes that vision. That is too forceful. Hourly employees must establish that vision." Your thoughts?
Also, having a MS in organizational leadership, I'm aware of many leadership models and motivational theory, and try to incorporate them in the program. But, also being a realist, I make it clear this journey is not an easy one. It is challenging and only through true teamwork, hard work, will we get there. I state we will support you but that team members must hold themselves and others accountable once the work begins. His response, "Too negative. Find a way to put a positive touch on it."
These are just a couple of many comments. And while we do incorporate many great team activities and empower teams (supported by leadership of course), I wanted to pose the question to you:
Is it not possible to be too 'touchy feely' when leading people? Absolutely we must support them and use our leadership skills to motivate them. Sure we want them to be excited about the changes and empowered and supported by us, but as leaders if we do not let people know up front that this will be a challenge, are we not setting people up to fail?
If it is not upper management that establishes that clear vision, are we not simply setting people up to fail? I've seen too many organizations fail because they didnt approach this in a realistic manner and did not let people know they had very real expectations of them. Then again I've seen others fail because everything was dictated. So, I believe there must be balance. This is why true leadership is rare.
Any input is appreciated. People are the most important resources we have, but I believe if we dont also set a direction and hold people accountable the Lean transformation will never come. I believe clear direction, empowerment, leadership support, and accountability go a long way...but perhaps I should consider the comments and modify my approach.
|
|
|
|
|
12/30/2010 03:08 PM
|
|
|
Dear Brian Leonard - Your situation is not unique. Sounds like your leadership consultant was reacting to the tone being set by the language used.
Note: People cannot be motivated, they can only be demotivated. Most of what passes for motivating people is enticements or bribes for good behavior. Much can be gained by leaders finding and removing obstacles, allowing the innate human motivation loose in the workplace.
To answer your last question first, consider the 'leadership consultant's' comments and create multiple approaches for your Lean Curriculum. Focus on what is important. Which is that the people learn something beneficial. Acceptance of the concepts into the organization's culture is more important than the terminology or approach.
Lean implementation requires a structured approach. And that structure must be appropriate for the culture of the organization. Implementation also requires a certain amount of self-discipline or internal discipline. Self-imposed organizational structure encourages self-discipline. Mandated structure only produces compliance, or worse.
Since you are open to further investigation, lets explore.
Part of the confusion concerning the 'Vision' discussion might be semantics. While yes, the top management must: 1) create the aim for the organization, including predictions for the future, 2) create a system of interconnected components, and 3) direct efforts of all components towards the aim of the organization. Only management has access to the resources necessary to create a method to achieve the aim. And Lean IS a method towards an aim. The workers can only perform the tasks set before them. Either by physical resources or by the policies/procedures management has established. So yes, management has the responsibility to get involved. However, the workers do have an influence in how the 'culture' of the organization is shaped and the 'attitude' of the work environment.
The 'leadership consultant' may be concerned about how the organizational vision is created and deployed. He may have interpreted your description as advocating an authoritarian, top-down, edict/dictatorial, patriarchal/matriarchal type creation and deployment strategy. While you were describing one possible leadership engagement structure, complete with actionable tasks.
All process improvement structures (lean, six sigma, etc.) are methods to achieve an organizational aim. Most are set up as a 'problem solving' methodology, find the problem and solve it (yes, lean is sold as a problem solving methodology - that is it's Achilles heel). Unfortunately, first you have to describe the problem. And problems are usually described using negative terminologies, which can be very depressing. BTW - changing the word 'problem' to 'opportunity' doesn't cut it.
Your 'leadership consultant' seems to be from the camp that advocates leadership being 'inspirational.' That a leadership's role is to inspire others. It is hard to inspire people or be inspirational while using the negative language of problem solving. Enthusiasm maybe. Inspiration? I don't know. However, the ability to inspire is only part of the leader's role. Providing structure is another key element (see previously mentioned 'structured approach')
Concerning your 'journey' description, the feedback might be valid in some organizational cultures. While in others, your terminologies might fit right in. For example 'holding other accountable' is aggressive. Especially if someone else is telling people what they are being held accountable for. Remember people don't mind change, they just don't like BEING changed. A more assertive approach is to ask what are they willing to commit to accomplishing.
I hope this provides something to think about.
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
01/03/2011 10:01 AM
|
|
|
Hello Dave,
"People can not be motivated, they can only be demotivated."?!?!?
Sorry, that one sprung my gears. Yes, I agree that most of what passes for motivation is crap. However, I motivate teams by giving them ownership of the problem. By making it theirs, they become involved, have a stake, and have a care. Then I find they become very motivated.
Hello Brian,
Your "leadership consultant" is also making such blanket statements. My question: Were perhaps some of his statements made to jar you loose of a present mode of thinking without trying to throw you to the far extreme?
Yet as I reread your post, I agree that big picture vision comes from management, but are you allowing the team and worker-level employees to create the methodology and solution vision as they are the ones who perform the tasks and can perhaps best see how to implement the big picture vision. And smaller tasks are frequently driven from below, because the managerial vision is far to broad to see it never mind implement it.
Can management become too touchy-feely? I would have to concur. Back to your post's title, I've found it to be a true balance. There is a threshold below which workers (at least in my western experience) decide that management doesn't know what they want and therefore, rather than taking ownership, essentially kick back and under-perform.
MATT
|
|
|
|
|
01/03/2011 10:01 AM
|
|
|
Thanks for your input. And yes I would agree. It does seem most is semantics and our inability to see eye to eye on leadership methods were the biggest obstacles. His firm belief that leaders must be focused most of all on relationships and my position that one must be focused equally on task and relationship certainly clashed.
Our program is rather unique in that we not only focus on the Lean methodology but also teambuilding concepts such as the 5 dysfunctions and motivational theory such as Herzbergs model and even Maslows hierarchy. Initially, when we first developed this program we were too 'task-oriented'. A hard lesson many of us realize early on. We then went too far the other direction. We were too focused on keeping staff 'happy and motivated'. Again, an equally ineffective approach.
I think we are just now beginning to see where that delicate balance is and continue to improve the program. I hate calling it a program because its really a transformation, not just a kaizen event or training program. But i very much appreciate your input. It is very helpful. I'm always willing to seek new info. So thanks again.
I also believe what we may see as great leadership may not necessarily fit in immendiately in new organizations simply because of the different cultures. Transforming processes is the smallest of tasks when compared to a complete reinvention of culture.
|
|
|
|
|
01/03/2011 12:32 PM
|
|
|
Brain,
I've made the same journey, too task-driven then too soft. The balance is somewhere down the middle.
As to your last paragraph, I think that is an essential point that I must try to remember. Methodology in a lean-mature organization is very very different from methodology in a lean-newbie organization.
MATT
|
|
|
|
|
01/04/2011 09:14 AM
|
|
|
Every level of organization has to change in an organizational transformation, workers, supervisors, functional support and the site leadership team. If you are part of a larger corporate structure they have to change to change as well.
As much change as you want on the production level of the business, is as much change as all these other levels have to undergo.
The leadership team is most critical because they define the success rules for the business. They define every day was is a good result and a good process to get that result. If they don't get it they can kill the effort before it even gets out of the gate. I have seen a new production director unknowingly wipe out a years worth of work on kanban with just one sentence. "How come all these machines aren't running 24/7?
Visions are not airy fairy things. They are detailed pictures of how the business will be running differently in the future. How machines will run, How schedules are managed. How people work. How inventory is managed. How problems are solved. Are the leadership has to have the guts to create and to pursue that vision.
Don't worry about the workers. They are the first to get it. Worry about your middle management they will be the ones who will do you in not for lack of motivation but rather the fear their daily command and control work will not be needed anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
01/04/2011 09:14 AM
|
|
|
Thanks Matt
And I completely agree regarding the empowerment of teams. Because it really is the teams who help the organization get to where that new vision is. That empowerment has certainly paid off.
Thanks again for the comments
|
|
|
|
|
08/19/2011 06:26 PM
|
|
|
Originally posted by: ldenglish
Don't worry about the workers. They are the first to get it. Worry about your middle management they will be the ones who will do you in not for lack of motivation but rather the fear their daily command and control work will not be needed anymore.
I wish someone had told me this 18 months ago. This is really good advice. If you walk the walk, and not just talk the talk, the 'workers' or are as I prefer to call them 'the specialists' will follow you (this by definition makes you a leader). If you get those same specialists to discuss the problems and help you work to find solutions those that feel threatened are the middle management who fear that their command and control structure is being threatened. Those are the people you need to focus on. How you do this is something I have yet to figure out. What I have done is ask why (five times?). I think it is because this is the way they saw there managers work when they were younger so did the same to get promoted; and who can blame them? In Lean circle we mention Demming, Ohno and others often, but I still think Dale Carnegie had a great point to make about leadership. 'never critise.condemn or complain.
|
|
|
|
|
08/22/2011 03:36 PM
|
|
|
I am project manager for a medium size construction project in Jamaica, and we recently introduced a few Lean tools, most notable the Last Planner System (adopted from the Lean Construction Institute). Reading this post earlier I think Steven is so right in saying, "Don't worry about the worker".
Since the implementation of some aspects of the LPS, I read a note just recently which has proved to be a great help. It goes like this-"The best teacher teaches by example and, the best student learns by doing". Since i shared this with the team of Last Planners (foremen, site engineers, job supervisors, safety officer, etc.) they have become more proactive and their actions have resulted in a more motivated workforce and production in the field increased by at least 30% over the last two (2) weeks.
In essence sometimes as managers we fail to empower our middle managers (in our case the Last Planners) and when we don't get the results we wonder why. On our project we conduct daily 10-minute huddle meetings, twice daily (6:50 AM & 3:50PM) with our Last Planners. These meetings are guided by five (5) mantras and Three (3) focuses of the project.
The Five Mantras are;
1) Involve our people (find a sense of need for each other -mutual respect)
2) Focus on our purpose (what is it we are building)
3) Measure our performance (Record/review what we produce daily)
4) No BEC (No blame, no excuse, no complain)
5) We PAR (We participate, we applaud and we redirect)
Our Three focuses are;
1) Safety
2) Quality
3) Production
You may notice that no mention is made about time and cost, but my experience is with the practice of our five mantras not only our Last Planners are empowered but the workers also motivated to do their best and leader is evolved at all levels, with students becoming teachers and vice versa, and the result is that time and cost is reduced as we participate and applaud each other.
|
|
|
|
>
Community >
Forums
Send to a Friend
