Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Leadership - Three OpEx Questions You Need To Know The Answers To
Leadership - Three OpEx Questions You Need To Know The Answers To
the Answers To
February 20, 2018/in Engagement, Leadership /by Amy Howard
Img 1 – The relative effectiveness of OpEx and Engagement Training at different levels of the organization. It’s
notable that training is deemed most effective at the lowest levels of the organization while executive level
training is deemed effective only about 50% of the time.
We can all see the connection between better engagement scores and improved
performance, however there is a lot of confusion about what good engagement looks
like. Often engagement is thought to be more frequent face time between bosses and
subordinates, 360 feedback, suggestion programs, and so on. Rather, good
engagement is about giving people the ability to directly influence their work. It
recognizes basic human needs that include the power to make decisions, the ability
to control outcomes and being part of something bigger. These attributes are not
naturally occurring in many work environments so equipping leaders to enable
OpEx is about training and coaching them on the essential actions and
behaviors they must take to engage and align the organization from top to bottom.
Our approach to ensuring effective leadership training starts with the Managers /
Executive Lean Overview workshops. These sessions quickly inform the team with a
common vocabulary, awareness and understanding of:
Tools and methods are covered, but gaining expert capability on them is not
specifically intended. Rather, this portion of the workshop is meant to provide
context for how front line practitioners apply problem-solving tools to achieve
desired business outcomes.
Our primary objective with leaders and managers is to provide insights that help
them define and develop their own leader standard work. This means doing the
hard work of changing some of their own behaviors and habits to be able to actively
coach and demonstrate support for Lean to the organization as implementation
begins.
Since a lot of the heavy lifting and day-to-day activities of implementation are in fact
delegated, it’s important to understand how to help leaders do this. We talked about
the training and coaching aspect for leaders in Q1 above. In addition to
understanding the value of better engagement, the organization must know how to
do it.
Since exactly how to do engagement can be described, the activities can be tracked.
This is important because it moves leaders beyond the idea of just “valuing
engagement” (because who doesn’t right?) to “knowing how to DO engagement.”
Only when this happens can implementation be effectively delegated.
A focus on leading indicators is a good place to start. Here’s a way to think about
indicators:
==========
Want more detail on these topics? You can download the full survey report – An
Examination of Operational Excellence – from the Resources section of our website.
(It’s great, really).
To learn more about enabling leadership to connect the dots between engagement
and value, check out our White Paper: Engage the Organization – And a Performance
Culture Will Follow.
Results Improve When Leaders Give Up
Some Control
December 22, 2016/in Change Management, Leadership /by Kaufman Global
Transformation requires a fundamental shift in how the organizations
collaborate to make real change happen.
Successful transformation efforts demand collaboration up, down and across the
enterprise. For process optimization to occur, the organization must establish ways
for people doing their work to be continuously involved. When significant design
changes (processes, procedures, work standards, etc.) are desired, they must be
developed collaboratively. If new methods and approaches for process,
communication, safety and efficiency are foisted onto the organization, resistance
mounts and the game is over before it’s even started.
True Facts
Autonomy and recognition are at the top of every single study ever
conducted about what motivates people in their work. Without these elements,
engagement dies and performance suffers. Self-regulating systems provide these
attributes naturally.
People know more about what is going on in their process or work area than
anyone else. It is impossible to optimize any process without direct input and
frequent feedback from those doing the work.
People will not naturally form themselves into a structure of engagement
that focuses on process efficiency. Instead, they will form personal networks that
minimize conflict. Correcting this tendency is where leadership focus is critical in
helping to drive process ownership and improvement through cross-functional
teams.
Culture Is No Excuse for Poor Leadership
The culture of the organization and individual leadership styles will impact how
transformation efforts go. It’s usually difficult to tease one out from the other since
they are the product of their collective and often mutual experiences. Even so, it is a
mistake to use culture as an excuse for poor progress. There are ways for leaders to
adjust their approach within the context of the existing culture. In top-down
environments, unless there are real changes in the fundamentals of collaboration, it
soon becomes evident that the “transformed” enterprise looks and operates as it
always has.
These systems integrate those doing the work in the design of the process and ask
what needs to be done to optimize performance. These systems are less
bureaucratic and faster to react.
Command and Control Systems – Here, process design and work standards are
developed far away from the work processes. Command and control systems:
1. Externally monitor, audit and report current performance back to those
doing the work
2. Mandate what to improve – often focused on systems, not processes
3. Authorize actions that are compliant with their control function
Those who embrace and perpetuate authoritative command and control systems
believe that top down management knows more about how work should be done
than those closest to the work. These “managers” hold power dearly and resist
engagement for fear of losing power and control.
Authoritarian organizations are less efficient and less effective than those where a
certain and significant control is pushed down into the organization. When this
happens, reaction times in the dynamic environment speed up and safety and
efficiency improves because decisions can be made faster. Standardizing and
enforcing how the organization engages as a self-regulating system yields the
greatest long-term benefit. Unfortunately those managers who survive in top-down
systems are the usually the last ones willing to give up “their” control.
For those control freaks out there who must control something, fear not ― moving
into a more autonomous environment requires plenty of leadership and direction.
No organization comes together one day and says, “Hey, let’s all take some control
and regulate ourselves and own our performance!” Getting to this place requires a
transition of power that requires a lot of work for both traditional leaders and their
organizations who are used to being told exactly what to do. People are smart
though, and they will find the best ways to optimize processes, enable standards and
share learnings if they are given the chance and a mandate. Start by describing a
structure that accelerates engagement, collaboration and autonomy and then make
sure people are fully subscribed.
To get a handle on what is happening and why, we explore some of the traditional
norms, individual behaviors and corporate incentives that must be rethought to
enable transformation success. As a first step, let’s define a few simple rules that are
the foundation of any successful initiative:
When everyone works on solutions with cadence, structure and discipline, peers are
required to spend time together improving their deliverables along the value
stream. Team dynamics increase accountability and generate performance
momentum. This is the catalyst for sustainment.
Internalizing and applying these rules to any improvement system increases the
odds of success. Fail to apply them and results will be sub-optimized at best. Going
to the next level requires understanding the underlying organizational behaviors
that come into play in the struggle to transform and sustain. Here they are:
The organization is engaged when you, your peers, your superiors and subordinates
spend at least one hour each week actively improving the business.
This is what good looks like. When you overtly define engagement at an individual
level, the behaviors and actions of it can be observed, measured and mirrored. Too
often, leaders want everyone to really “get it” before they do it. Transformation
happens in the reverse.
When the requirements for sustainment are poorly defined, not well understood
and appear difficult to measure, they are avoided. Success requires broad
participation, openness to new ideas and a convergence of standard, simple
mechanisms aimed at improving the business. Overtly make the connection
between transformation and sustainment, then weave it into the compensation,
reward and recognition system. Make it safe and make it pay.
The truth is this shift frees energy that is traditionally spent on re-work, redundancy
and errors. Not everyone will see it this way but when the new system of
engagement is well defined and well structured, resistance is easily surfaced. Shifts
in organizational and personal behavior are required. Recognize the fact that
something that threatens entrenched relationships and systems succeeds only with
a crystal-clear mandate, a well-defined plan and adequate coaching.
With all these obstacles, it’s no wonder the majority of organizations and leaders
lament an inability to sustain their transformation and continuously improve. Start
by viewing the system holistically with a keen eye on organizational dynamics,
individual behaviors, simple definitions and an approach that is firmly linked to
activity-based performance measures. This will help avoid rework that is
exponentially more difficult the second, third, and fourth time through.
**********
For information about how to engage workgroups and push decision making down,
read about Kaufman Global’s Lean Daily Management System.
These are good questions, yet, their focus is entirely on the problem and the
organization. It omits the critical success factor – namely, their own role in driving
change.
The question that should be asked is: “How are you going to engage me and my
leadership team in this process?”
Seeking the answer to that question means there is recognition that standard work
isn’t just for “the doers”. Having a disciplined approach to leading and managing
change at the top of the organization is the difference between success and failure.
It’s what brings focus and alignment, and therefore prioritization and attention, to
the urgent things that must be done.
So what does the standard work of engagement look like for leaders? It’s a question
we answer so often it prompted us to create pocket cards that would serve as an
easy checklist and guideline. In this case, providing the basic formula for the
Executive Steering Committee – the change governance structure. The card does
two basic things:
Change is inevitable. Whether you’re leading it, supporting it, or it feels like it’s
being forced upon you, uncertainty can make change a painful process. A new
reporting structure, the arrival or departure of an employee, or a company
acquisition can make you feel like your world is turned upside down ― but only if
you let it. The challenge lies in being able to more easily (and gracefully) consider,
accept and adapt with the changes that occur. A part of you must become immune to
the fear that stems from the unknown or unfamiliar. Ultimately, you have to learn to
take an active role in the parts you can influence or control. When this happens, you
might even become an advocate.
As seen in the reality show competition Survivor®, where the rules (i.e., Outwit,
Outplay, Outlast) are straight forward, there are countless opportunities to be blind-
2. Be Flexible
Change requires flexibility. The better you are at adapting to change, the greater
your chances are of being successful. It can be easy to get wrapped up in the gritty
details, without ever thinking much about why the change is happening in the first
place. Take a good look at the new situation and instead of focusing only on what
will be different, look ahead and consider the destination that you can be part of.
3. Do a Self-Assessment
In planning for the future, organizations often conduct an analysis for strengths,
weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT). That type of SWOT analysis can be
just as helpful to you individually. What skills and strengths do you have? Where do
you need to improve? By understanding your own strengths and weaknesses, and
educating yourself on the new situation, you can proactively look for opportunities
to take on new responsibilities and challenges.
In the end, change can be disruptive. But, with the right attitude and actions, you can
become a change advocate finding creative ways to participate and affect a more
positive outcome. After all, you’re a survivor right?
To dig a little deeper into the reasons leaders fail to pursue engagement, Kaufman
Global recently surveyed a large group of top leaders and known change agents.
These individuals come from diverse industry backgrounds, such as consumer
products, energy, government and technology. Averaging over 20 years of
experience, each has a proven track record of successfully engaging and improving
their organizations.
The question was asked, “If we accept that the leader’s function is to create
value and that one vital and comprehensive way to do this is by fully engaging
the organization — at all levels and at all times — why do so few leaders truly,
actively pursue this essential aspect of sustainability and performance?” Six
possible answers were given with a rating that ranged from 1 (seldom) to 5
(often). A summary of the results follow. Additional detail is provided within the
white paper.
Distraction | The top reason at 80% is that leaders are too distracted with day-to-
day operations and other external inputs to focus themselves or their teams on
anything other than existing systems applied to here-and-now deliverables. This
defines a mostly reactive environment and one that has multiple competing inputs
— often from above. It’s true enough that “Change starts at the top.” With enough
distraction the opposite is just as true (and way more common). In this instance,
engaging the organization is not valued enough to make it a formal priority.
Immediacy | Next comes immediacy at 72%. Immediacy has to do with the extreme
focus on short-term goals and results. There’s no time for something that might not
deliver a here-and-now win, requires some level of faith and is even slightly
different than anything already being done. Moving upward in the organization, if
results are not achieved, personal compensation and job security are at risk.
Immediacy and distraction are intimately linked. Distractions mount as the need for
immediate results rises. Two back-to-back quarters of poor performance and the
level of distraction goes off the scale. If this cycle goes on long enough, pressure and
confusion over priorities lead to loss of morale and disengagement. People tend to
exit these types of environments, and it’s unfortunate that engagement — a major
mitigation factor and the single greatest contributor to employee morale and
retention — is among the first to go and is seldom pursued in a systematic fashion.
All of these factors are closely related and combine to form a powerful barrier to
real change. That “fail to understand” and “don’t believe” were scored as significant
factors says a lot ― and not in a good way ― about basic leadership and
management skills. Training is one element that can help, but people learn through
their own experiences that are illuminated by existing values and norms. To change
these patterns requires a significant reset on how organizations reward certain
behaviors.
These barriers — and they apply at all levels — are daunting for anyone attempting
change within the area they control. Some traps are more common depending on
where you are in the organization. The lower you go, the more the system will
attempt to kill your initiative (i.e., “Not invented here.”, “Who else knows about
this?” or “This is not part of your job description.”). As you go higher in the
organization, the problems associated with trying anything different prevent
ignition ― pick any combination of reasons.
Those in the middle of the organization have simultaneously the most to gain and
the most to lose. Here there is a lot of local control over value creation ― therefore
the gains can be fast and big. In addition, the personal risk of failure for trying
something different is less; yet there is strong attachment to the status quo and
disruption isn’t much welcomed. Besides, in many situations, operating marginally
better than one’s peers doesn’t require anything as foreign as attempting your own
fully engaged organization. Without the support of peers and bosses, mid-level
managers quickly start to feel they are rowing upstream alone.
Given all the barriers, it’s amazing that anyone pursues the engagement prerogative,
but some do. And when someone, somewhere intends to make a meaningful
difference by getting everyone involved to the fullest extent possible, the journey
can be made a little easier with well-conceived boundaries that are defined by
accountabilities, expectations and metrics. Journeys begin by starting to think about
engagement as a process (as opposed to an outcome)…
Ready to dig deeper? This article is continued in our White Paper: Engage the
Organization and a Performance Culture Will Follow Click here to download the full
text.
Drop us a line if you want to learn more about Kaufman Global’s view on
engagement.
In life, there are those who watch things happen, and those who step up, take action,
and make them happen. This concept is woven into the fabric of today’s aggressive
and diverse economic landscape where organizations seldom stumble upon success
by simply having a strong product or service offering. On the contrary, attaining
business differentiation — and sustaining a level of success — requires assertive
action – that is; a strong and enduring bias for action. Leading organizations do not
sit back and hope for better results. They are far too busy creating them.
Employee Retention
A hospital had been experiencing a high degree of front line employee turnover for
several years. Recent metrics revealed that 47% of its new hires left in the first 12
months and 74% in the first 18 months. To address this significant challenge, a
disciplined, comprehensive project was organized to drive improvements that
would increase employee involvement and reduce ongoing organization stressors
fueling high turnover. Partnering with Kaufman Global, problems were measurably
targeted and new methods and systems were introduced to address issues
through Lean Leadership®learning, Rapid Performance Evaluation (RPE), and The
Lean Daily Management System ® (LDMS)implementation. Employee ideas are now
constructively integrated into the daily work. After only one and a half months on
the project, employee flight stopped its free-fall and signs are good for a sustainable
reverse of fortune. Employees can now be heard saying, “this is our chance to make
a difference. ” Related article: Employee Retention: Strategy and Tactics.
Rework and Machinery Stability
A global tire manufacturer needed to reduce rework and improve machine stability
as a foundation for the implementation of a pull scheduling system. Kaufman Global
provided oversight of the strategy, design and sequencing of the project through the
development and launch of a multi-phased approach. Phase 1 consisted of
establishing cross-functional teams to enhance processes for improving changeover
times and overall equipment effectiveness (OEE). Phase 2 involved the pull system
development and associated pre-implementation work. To drive sustainable change,
workgroups and task forces were mentored, trained, and engaged by working side-
by-side with Kaufman Global to actively apply Lean principles to their operations.
Productivity
One of the largest mini-mill steel makers in North America needed to improve
productivity on direct labor by redeploying manpower, reducing overtime, and
increasing utilization. With a focus on enhancing operational and functional
performance, the client needed to develop internal Lean experts to drive
improvements and compel a company-wide customer-focused culture. Over a two-
year period, Kaufman Global led analysis, program design, implementation and
internal capability development efforts. Plant throughput was optimized by
expanding OEE, equipment reliability, product yield, and changeover time work
streams. A production planning system was also developed to increase
responsiveness to customer demand.
Success stories like these are abundant for those organizations who fully commit to
establishing a Lean culture. Want to find out more about how Kaufman Global works
with clients around the world to improve and sustain their results, contact us here.
How Engagement and Value are
Intimately Linked
May 8, 2013/in Change Management, Leadership /by Kaufman Global
The following is an excerpt from Kaufman Global’s latest White Paper: Engage the
Organization and a Performance Culture Will Follow. This paper examines the reasons
why leaders fail to pursue engagement, even while it’s proven to be fundamental to
value creation. Content stems from research completed with top leaders and known
change agents with diverse industry backgrounds.
Efficient Process
Engagement is about working together, being involved, two-way communication
and, most of all, the ability to have input, make decisions, and take action on those
things within one’s immediate control. This level of involvement surely generates
value. However, value can be a complex topic. If you
doubt this, read a little about prospect theory, loss aversion and anchoring. Here, we
are talking about the benefits that are derived from efficient and effective processes.
Defining Value
The most basic definition; the worth of something, implies subjectivity. Value for a
product or service is best understood where it is created, and where it is consumed.
Since the term means different things to different people we need to find some
common ground. A simple way to think about it goes like this: Value remains when
waste is removed. Waste is anything an all-knowing, all-seeing customer would not
be willing to pay for — because it has no worth to them. Just as the customer has an
opinion about value, those closest to creation of the product or service know the
most about how to mitigate waste and increase value. This definition allows anyone
to ask and answer value questions related to their personal situation, such
as: “Would the customer be willing to pay for:
me looking for my missing wrench?” No.
us counting excessive inventory?” No.
our inability to find or retain the best talent for this job?” No.
accidents that result from an unsafe work environment?” No.
The individual or team touching the product, service or process creates value, and
the customer judges it. However boundaries can’t go completely undefined and left
to personal whims. In day-to-day work, value is bounded in absolute terms like
quality, quantity, time, etc. These definitions are turned into metrics and spread
across the enterprise, but usually at levels too high to effectively measure individual
or workgroup performance. Only through engaging the organization at this level ―
those doing the job — can we react to the dynamic environment, make real-time
adjustments and capture the value that is otherwise lost.
Value Workers
Peter Drucker, the highly regarded organizational design and management thinker,
described “knowledge workers.” This was a natural evolution from manual labor
and factories to offices, information, data and design work. We need to expand the
concept of knowledge worker and describe a new one: Value Workers. These are
individuals and small teams (aka natural workgroups) with common deliverables.
They subjectively know the most about and best way to achieve optimal results
within their sphere of influence. Value workers apply their deep local knowledge at
their position along the value chain. A few examples:
Manufacturing | The assembly line worker knows the most about how to reduce the
amount of movement required for the job. The maintenance technician and
equipment operator are best able to increase Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE)
and reduce Mean Time To Repair (MTTR). The Plant Manager optimizes factory
output by engaging the functions and taking decisive action.
Psychiatric Hospitals | The direct care worker may recognize patient behavioral
triggers sooner than their physicians due to daily interaction and familiarity.
The unit treatment team is best equipped to improve a patient’s mental health by
making necessary changes to the treatment plan. The Hospital
Administrator balances the needs of the patients, nursing staff and doctors and sets
priorities.
Oilfields | The maintenance technician controls cost by managing the proper
inventory of materials to complete a job. The operations manager knows the most
about balancing customer priorities for field technical equipment. The oilfield
operator knows which component suppliers contribute to the best rig operating
conditions or uptime.
If leaders want better results they must embrace pushing decisions and the ability
to make change happen down into the organization where value workers engage.
**********
Download and read the entire White Paper here: Engage the Organization and a
Performance Culture Will Follow.
Bacon Revolution: Are You In?
January 31, 2013/in Change Management, Leadership /by Kaufman Global
I’m not sure if you’ve noticed, but there’s a bacon revolution going on. Everyone
seems to be talking about bacon and eating more of it lately. Recipes are sweeping
the Internet. Fast-food chains are peddling double bacon burgers, and upscale
restaurants are wrapping steaks in it. Some connoisseurs are even adding it to
desserts. To top it off, retailers are carrying all types of themed products, ranging
from bacon soap, salt water taffy, to soda. It’s everywhere you turn.
Until recently, the frenzy had me puzzled. In today’s health conscious age, this new
obsession didn’t add up. After all, 68% of bacon’s calories come from fat, almost half
of which is saturated. According to the American Heart Association (AHA), foods
rich in saturated fats can raise cholesterol levels, increasing risk of heart disease and
stroke. So, having witnessed bacon’s rise in popularity over several consecutive
months, I couldn’t help but ask myself: Why such a pig…I mean “big”… push for a
food that we’ve all come to recognize as being so unhealthy? Is there a new, fat free
form on the market? Have experts made a discovery that bacon is actually good for
the body?
Upon
doing some research, there were no ground-breaking “bacon discoveries” to be
found. However, I did learn about some healthier ways to prepare and eat it.
Reading the countless available articles, I had a sudden epiphany. It hit me that the
meticulous handling of bacon provides a valuable lesson. There’s a right and wrong
way to do things, and, in many cases, the right way is neither the easier nor the faster
path (but it’s still “the right path”).
Suddenly, I felt inspired by bacon. To me, bacon provided an ideal metaphor for how
a business should manage its operations. Much like there’s a right way to consume
bacon in order to maintain a long, healthy life, there’s a right way for businesses to
manage and improve operations to drive lasting value. Going about it the wrong
way… well, there are consequences.
So, with these ideas in mind, I’ve officially joined the bacon revolution. Now, I’m
more focused than ever on driving sustainable change. How about you? Are you in?
The term “leadership” can be defined in a lot of different ways, but essentially
leadership occurs from one’s ability to guide, direct, or influence people. Within any
culture change, Leadership’s role is to create a vision that their employees can
believe in, and ultimately foster their desire to achieve it. In other words, human
beings want someone who inspires them to be the best they can be.
The most successful leaders I’ve worked with are committed to bringing out the best
in all employees. They understand the very essence of their organizations and
regularly stimulate hope amongst their teams for brighter futures. They do so by
exhibiting the following qualities:
A Good Attitude
Leadership is about attitude. Leadership is about walking the walk. It is much easier
to demonstrate the vision than to explain it in words. People watch a leader’s feet
more than they listen to their words. A strong leader inspires hope, develops trust,
earns respect, and provides encouragement ― all by treating others with respect
and conveying a positive attitude.
Recently, I had the pleasure of working with a top leader that exhibited all of these
qualities, resulting in one of the best client engagements that I have ever been a part
of. After being newly hired, this leader came in and observed the existing work
environment and the interaction of his senior leadership. Instantly, he recognized
that the team was too large to be effective. There was little accountability, and
decisions were rarely ― if ever ― made during meetings. As a result, he quickly
reconfigured the team and set very clear expectations of how the team would
perform moving forward. Just weeks later, he came to the realization that the right
people were not sitting at the leadership table, as one of this leader’s key strengths
was ― and still is ― recognizing others who possess leadership qualities and
promoting them accordingly. He understood that getting the right people, in the
right place, at the right time was critical.
To cut to the chase, the way this leader bridged the gap that existed between
management and staff looked rather effortless. He drove changes by making himself
available, listening to employees, showing respect to customers and staff, creating a
bias for action, not being satisfied with the status quo, and inspiring the masses. In
the end, others were willing to learn because he demonstrated how important it was
to change. He walked the walk, maintained a positive attitude and demonstrated the
organization’s vision repeatedly. Through his valiant efforts, I watched as the
organization soared to new heights.
At the end of the day, a committed leader bets on his people being able to achieve
their goals. He or she ensures that the right people are in place and removes any
barriers in their way. In fact, at the start of the journey, getting the right people in
the right jobs is a lot more important than developing a strategy. The best leaders
are not those that develop more followers, but those that develop more leaders.
**********
Learn more about how best to nurture Lean leadership, read our Developing
Operational Excellence Leaders White Paper.
“The task of leadership is not to put greatness into people, but to elicit it, for the
greatness is there already.” — John Buchan, Scottish politician, author (1875-1940)