The Art of Successful Negotiation

Whether you are working on a joint business venture, a new job, the price of an auto or your child's new curfew, negotiation is a key success skill. So how can you improve your negotiation skills? Here are a dozen techniques I try to practice in every negotiation.

 

Be Prepared This is not just the motto of the Boy Scouts. Preparation is the single most important element in successful negotiations. In negotiations, information is power. The more relevant information you have, the better your position is. Preparation for your negotiations can not be overdone. Allow yourself adequate time to prepare prior entering any negotiation.

 

Understand The Needs Of Your "Adversary" Your "adversary" in this context is the other party in the negotiation. Your relationship with this party may not normally be described as adversarial, for the purposes of this discussion we will view the negotiation as an adversarial relationship.

Put yourself in your adversary's shoes. What would they like to gain from the negotiation? Write down as many possible goals as you can think of. Prioritize your list in the order that you believe your adversary would. Identify the items you are willing to negotiate and those items which are nonnegotiable.

 

Know What Your Needs Are What do you need out of the negotiations? More money? More flexibility? Better opportunities? Access to broader markets? Make a list of those things you would like to receive as a result of the negotiations. Refine and prioritize your list before starting the negotiation. Identify the items you are willing to negotiate and those items which are nonnegotiable. This list and the one created above will allow you to know what your true "bottom line" is.

 

Most Negotiations Involve On Going Relationships With the exception of large purchases, most negotiations involve parties involved in a long term relationship. Whether the relationship is family, friends or business associates, it will be necessary to continue to deal with your "adversary" outside the context of the negotiation. Always be sensitive to the potential impact of your negotiations on these relationships.

 

Every Negotiation Is Different Negotiating with a loved one is different than buying an automobile. Buying an automobile is different from negotiating with a new employer. They key difference is the relationship you wish to have with your adversary once the negotiations are complete. When negotiating with a loved one, you may be willing to make more concessions in the interest of harmony. When buying an automobile harmony may be less important than paying a fair price. Keep these intangibles in mind when creating and prioritizing your lists.

 

Understand The Situational Dynamics In order to negotiate successfully, you must understand the dynamics of the situation. Identify your role and the role of your adversary. Know what are the "power positions" of each role. The dynamics of negotiating in a parent/child relationship are significantly different than the dynamics of and employer/employee negotiation. Be certain your desires are appropriate and achievable in terms of the situation.

 

Never Lie Very few negotiations are a single contact event. With the possible exception of making large purchases, most parties involved in a negotiation have continued contact after the negotiations are completed. When you are caught in a lie, and it is inevitable that you will be, your future credibility will be lost.

It is possible to prepare to handle those areas where the need to lie may be felt. Examine the areas where your case is weak. Work to strengthen your case. In those areas that remain vulnerable, prepare how you wish to handle them should they arise.

 

Be Fair Negotiation is not an "I win, you lose" proposition. Webster's dictionary defines negotiate as "to bring about by mutual agreement". The best negotiators I know create "win - win" situations in every negotiation.

 

Don't Tip Your Hand Uncertainty is your key advantage in most negotiations. If your adversary knows what you desire most, your negotiating position is not as strong. Play it close to the vest.

 

Be Flexible Understand that negotiation frequently involves compromise. Look for creative solutions to the problems presented in the negotiation. Make tradeoffs in order to gain those elements you most desire.

 

Winning Isn't Everything It is easy to get caught up in the competitive spirit of a negotiation. Remember that the point of negotiation is to reach a common agreement on how to move forward. While it may be possible to bludgeon your adversary into agreeing to your terms, this does not create the "mutual agreement" that makes for a truly successful negotiation.

 

Quit While You Are Ahead Too many people have to see just how far they can push a negotiation. They have to try to get just one more concession. This attitude can be a deal breaker. The best negotiations are brief and to the point. Get agreement on your major points and stop. Additional items can be addressed in subsequent negotiations.

Copyright 2001, 2008 Tony L. Callahan All Rights Reserved
Tony L. Callahan, is a successful Internet Promotions Consultant with more than twenty years of industry experience and is president of his own Internet marketing company, Link-Promote. He also publishes Web-Links Monthly, a newsletter full of tips, tricks, tools and techniques for successful web site promotions.

---

Chocoholics' paradise! Enter here.

The Reality of Office Politics

Tips for How to Survive an Office Minefield

The good, the bad and the ugly is present in virtually all companies. Office politics, however, can work in your favour. This article looks at how to play the game.

The Greek philosopher Plato said many, many years ago, "Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber." Unfortunately it's just as true today as it was in Greece two thousand years ago. If you are one of the millions of people who work in a cubicle within innumerable office complexes across the U.S. and the world, sooner or later you'll find yourself caught in a power play of some kind whether you want to participate in it or not. If there are people, there will be politics, period. Here are some helpful tips about how to handle these tricky situations, and what to do if things take a turn for the worse.

Be Prepared to Play Rather than Sit on the Sidelines

Let's face it, sometimes people fight dirty and are not easy to get along with. When it comes to promotions for example, the atmosphere in any office can become tense and decidedly uncomfortable. One of your closest friends might become your worst enemy when the prospect of advancement comes up. If you refuse to get involved in office politics you might unwittingly make yourself a target for the next bully to come through the door. Learn to stand up for yourself and be prepared for a showdown at any time.

Do an Exemplary Job

No matter how big or small the job might be, throw yourself into your work with dedication and enthusiasm. At some point in your career you're going to have to deal with somebody who will try to give you a hard time, and the reason is undoubtedly because they want to disguise their own inadequacies by lashing out at others. It's tremendously draining to face these individuals every day. The best defense is a good offense, so to that end make sure your colleagues are aware of your good work.. When trouble arises, they will probably be there to back you up. If in doubt about this, remember this quote from Fabricius, the Renaissance era Italian zoologist, "Death comes to all, but great achievements raise monuments which shall endure until the sun grows cold."

Be the Voice of Reason

It can be extremely hard to respond to an annoying co-worker calmly. Never scream or shout, if you do it will be interpreted by the office malcontent you are susceptible to intimidation and he/she will intensify their efforts. Similarly, you can try to get in the middle of an office feud and negotiate a truce and be a fire extinguisher of sorts. If you can learn to approach these situations diplomatically, it's far less likely somebody will make you a target in the future.

Things You Shouldn't Say at Work

1. "That's not my job."

This can be the kiss of death for you in any company. If you want to show you are a team player and a problem solver, promptly erase this remark from your office vocabulary.

2. "To be honest with you......"

What does this mean, really? Honesty is irrelevant in office politics because people will often just say what they want to communicate, and they would expect the same from you.

3. "I didn't have time to finish that."

In the mind of your boss what it boils down to is this, you are unreliable and you don't take your job seriously.

4. "Do it, or else."

Most people don't appreciate being threatened. Your list of office friends will be shorter and you'll also have a reputation for being difficult.

Additionally, if any or all of the above statements are directed at you, document them. Put a name to a face and inform your supervisor. It would be even better if others can hear them for added corroboration.

When Things Become Ugly

Form an alliance with a more experienced colleague who can advise how to handle the more intense effects of office politics. Remember, you should be prepared to defend yourself at any time. If you go to a supervisor to compain about a co-worker, be sure to suggest some possible solutions to the problem. After all, the boss will want to hear both sides of the story.

---

Planet Earth is in the hot seat. Know more.

Conflict Management--Style and Strategy

It's important to remember that there are many strategies we can use in conflict situations, but each of us tends to habitually use some strategies more often than others.. To most effectively resolve a conflict, we should use the strategy that is most appropriate for that particular conflict situation. However, that strategy might not be the strategy that we habitually use.

The Wrong Strategy for Shaun Williams How often do we make the mistake that Shaun Williams (celebrating in the photo above) made on Sunday; i.e., responding to a conflict situation the way we feel like responding rather than the way we should respond? The incident occurred at the end of a very close game--a time when his team could not afford any penalties. When tempers flared between one of Williams' teammates and an opponent, Williams ran across the field and began to fight. Predictably, his team was penalized and he was ejected. The penalty was very unfortunate as his team, the Giants, narrowly lost the game. The loss brought their season to an end. Williams' poor choice of a conflict management strategy was a giant blunder. To manage conflict well, we have to remember that there are several conflict management strategies. The key to managing conflict well is choosing and executing the strategy that best fits the situation.

Conflict Management Strategies There is a menu of strategies we can choose from when in conflict situations:

Forcing - using formal authority or other power that you possess to satisfy your concerns without regard to the concerns of the party that you are in conflict with.

Accommodating - allowing the other party to satisfy their concerns while neglecting your own.

Avoiding - not paying attention to the conflict and not taking any action to resolve it.

Compromising - attempting to resolve a conflict by identifying a solution that is partially satisfactory to both parties, but completely satisfactory to neither.

Collaborating - cooperating with the other party to understand their concerns and expressing your own concerns in an effort to find a mutually and completely satisfactory solution (win-win).

Research on conflict management styles has found that each of us tends to use one or two of the above five strategies more than the others. For instance, some people predominantly use collaborating when in interpersonal conflict situations. In other words, although there are five different ways to handle conflicts, such a person is more likely to collaborate than they are to force, accommodate, avoid, or compromise. There are many advantages to using a collaborating strategy to handle interpersonal conflict situations. Collaborating with the other party promotes creative problem solving, and it's a way of fostering mutual respect and rapport. However, collaborating takes time, and many conflict situations are either very urgent or too trivial to justify the time it takes to collaborate. There are many conflict situations that should be handled with one of the other four conflict management strategies rather than collaboration. Managers who are very skilled at conflict management are able to (a) understand interpersonal conflict situations and (b) use the appropriate conflict management strategy for each situation.

Matching Strategies to Situations

There are a few key variables that define conflict management situations and determine which conflict management strategies are likely to be effective. Time pressure is an important variable--if there were never any time pressures, collaboration might always be the best approach to use.. In addition to time pressures, some of the most important factors to consider are issue importance, relationship importance, and relative power:

Issue importance - the extent to which important priorities, principles or values are involved in the conflict.

Relationship importance - how important it is that you maintain a close, mutually supportive relationship with the other party.

Relative power - how much power you have compared to how much power other party has.

When you find yourself in conflict over very important issues, you should normally try to collaborate with the other party. But, if time is precious and if you have enough power to impose your will, forcing is more appropriate. Realize that you might need to repair the relationship after using a forcing strategy if the other party feels that you did not show adequate consideration for their concerns. Again, collaborating is normally the best strategy for handling conflicts over important issues.When dealing with moderately important issues, compromising can often lead to quick solutions. However, compromise does not completely satisfy either party, and compromise does not foster innovation the way that taking the time to collaborate can. So, collaborating is a better approach to dealing with very important issues. When you find yourself in conflict over a fairly unimportant issue, using an accommodating strategy is a quick way to resolve the conflict without straining your relationship with the other party. Collaborating is also an option, but it might not be worth the time. Avoiding should normally be reserved for situations where there is a clear advantage to waiting to resolve the conflict. Too often, interpersonal conflicts persist and even worsen if there is no attempt to resolve them. Avoiding is appropriate if you are too busy with more important concerns and if your relationship with the other party is unimportant. However, if either the issue or the relationship between the parties is important, then avoidance is a poor strategy.

 

 

---

Bollywood, fun, friendship, sports and more. You name it, we have it.

Seven Dynamics of Change

Whatever the kinds of change that people encounter, there are certain patterns of response that occur and re-occur. It is important that change leaders understand some of these patterns, since they are normal outcomes of the change process. Understanding them allows leaders to avoid over-reacting to the behaviors of people who, at times, seem to be reacting in mysterious, non-adaptive ways.

Ken Blanchard, well known management consultant, has described seven dynamics of change designed to help managers better address employee reactions to change. They are worth summarizing here.

People will feel awkward, ill-at-ease and self-conscious

Whenever you ask people to do things differently, you disrupt their habitual ways of doing things. This tends to make people feel awkward or uncomfortable as they struggle to eliminate the old responses and learn the new. Think back to your own experience and you will discover this theme. Whether it be learning to use a computer, the first time picking up your infant, or dealing with a new reporting relationship, recall the self-consciousness that you probably felt. People want to get it right, and fear that they will appear inadequate.

People initially focus on what they have to give up

Even for positive changes such as promotions, or those that result in more autonomy or authority, people will concentrate on what they will be losing. As a change leader you need to acknowledge the loss of the old ways, and not get frustrated at what may seem to be an irrational or tentative response to change.

People will feel alone even if everyone else is going through the same change

Everyone feels (or wants to feel) that their situation is unique and special. Unfortunately, this tends to increase the sense of isolation for people undergoing change. It is important for the change leader to be proactive and gentle in showing that the employee's situation is understood. If employees see YOU as emotionally and practically supportive during the tough times your position will be enhanced and the change will be easier.

People can handle only so much change

On a personal level, people who undergo too much change within too short a time will become dysfunctional, and in some cases may become physically sick. While some changes are beyond our control, it is important not to pile change upon change upon change. While changes such as downsizing bring opportunity to do other positive things, the timing of additional changes is important. If you are contemplating introducing changes (that are under your control), it may be a good idea to bounce your ideas off employees. A good question to ask is "How would you feel if....."

People are at different levels of readiness for change

Some people thrive and change. It's exciting to them. Others don't. It's threatening to them. Understand that any change will have supporters and people who have difficulty adapting. In time many people who resist initially will come onside. Consider that those people who are more ready for the change can influence others who are less ready. Open discussion allows this influence process to occur.

People will be concerned that they don't have enough resources

People perceive that change takes time and effort, even if it has the long term effect of reducing workload. They are correct that there is a learning time for most change, and that this may affect their work. It is important for change leaders to acknowledge that this may occur, and to offer practical support if possible. In the downsizing scenario this will be even more crucial, since resources themselves are cut. Consider following the downsizing with a worksmart process, whereby job tasks are reviewed to examine whether they are still necessary.

If you take the pressure off, people will revert to their old behaviour

If people perceive that you are not serious about doing things the new way, they will go back to the old way. Sometimes this ill be in the open, and sometimes this will be covert. While Blanchard uses the word pressure, I prefer to think of it in terms of leadership role. The leader must remind people that there is a new course, and that the new course will remain. Coaching towards the new ways is also important.

Conclusion

It is important for leaders to anticipate and respond to employee concerns and feelings, whether they are expressed in terms of practical issues, or emotional responses. When planning for, and anticipating change, include a detailed reaction analysis. Try to identify the kinds of reactions and questions that employees will have, and prepare your responses. Remember that the success of any change rests with the ability of the leaders to address both the emotional and practical issues, in that order.

1 The seven dynamics of change in bold were taken from an article by Ken Blanchard, and published in The Inside Guide, Oct., 1992. Commentary on each of the principles was written by the Editor of The Public Sector Manager.

---

Explore your hobbies and interests. Click here to begin.

Transform Your Company for Growth

Scott D. Anthony and Kevin Bolen 04.04.08, 7:00 PM ET
Transformation. The word oozes with potential. Shed the skin of the old and embrace the new. Emerge better, stronger, more powerful. Companies are increasingly recognizing that mastering transformation is becoming a competitive imperative. As formerly isolated markets collide and competitors from emerging markets hone disruptive approaches, product lifecycles are shrinking and competitive advantage is dissipating more rapidly than ever before.
Case studies of sweeping organizational transformation--Nokia moving from rubber boots to mobile phones, Kimberly Clark shifting from a paper provider to a leader in consumer packaged goods, Apple sextupling its stock in five years after a decade of stagnation, Google going from a technology company to an advertising powerhouse, Procter & Gamble hopping from soaps to laundry to skin care to health care--show that successful transformation is possible.
But the breathless hype behind these stories obscures a brutal reality: Most efforts at transformation fail miserably. This unnerving and frustrating reality should not be a surprise--after years of pervasive "continuous improvement" programs, executives are reaping what they have sown. Their organizations, from executives down through the rank and file, have been motivated and compensated to focus on incremental improvement, measured quarterly and annually, along competitive performance parameters established years earlier.
Five Lessons To Transform Your Company For Growth
To expect this system to create the breakthrough innovations that power transformation is simply unrealistic. Years of continuous improvement training have caused corporate innovation muscles to atrophy.
To ascertain the scope of the transformation challenge, our company, Innosight, surveyed more than 300 managers, directors, vice presidents, and senior leaders from a wide range of companies. We asked these practitioners whether their companies were walking the walk or just talking the talk around their transformation efforts. Did they have the necessary focus, tools and talent to drive meaningful growth from within?
Their answers are sobering for any executive telling investors about their deep commitment to "growth through innovation." Most survey respondents said their companies are struggling with transformation and they don't know quite what to do about it.
However, there are signs of hope. In this article, we blend insights based on this research as well as our field work, to provide guidance for companies seeking to master transformation.
A Multi-Faceted Problem
"How do you transfer intent into sustainable and reasonable organizational action?" One respondent suggested this is the most important question to answer to make progress on transformational efforts. This question lies at the heart of most organizational struggles around innovation.
It is clear that practitioners bent on transformation face a steep challenge. They have to address a multi-faceted problem with unclear answers and inadequate tools. Our research and field work over the past 10 years suggests transformation requires four interlocking elements: dedicated resources, lead opportunities, tools and processes and appropriate mindsets.
Transformation is about change, and so the resulting acronym--"DeLTA," for dedicated resources, lead opportunities, tools and enablers and appropriate mindsets--is appropriate. We asked survey respondents detailed questions about 11 specific factors related to transformation that fit into four categories:
Dedicated Resources:
Human resources dedicated to transformational efforts: In many organizations, the scarcest resource isn't money, it's time.
Financial resources dedicated to transformational efforts: Organizations can struggle with transformation because natural forces within the company allocate financial resources toward core initiatives.. Dedicated financial resources can avoid this trap.
Senior management engagement and leadership: It is hard to overcome the hurdles inhibiting transformation unless senior management actively engages. Transformation is rarely accidental.
Lead Opportunities:
Selection of opportunity areas for new growth efforts: Companies hell-bent on transformation sometimes think they ought to let chaos reign. Our experience is that strategic selection of opportunity areas is a critical component of success.
Development of new business models and approaches in specific opportunity areas. "Doing what we've always done" is rarely sufficient to power transformation.
Companies need to develop new approaches and at times even challenge their core business model. Capability to scale new growth businesses that power transformation: Generally speaking, the development of ideas involves an "exploration" period and an "exploitation" period. Managing the second part of this development process is critically important to realize the full impact of transformation.
Tools And Enablers:
Utilization of new tools to assess and shape transformational ideas: Any well-run company has tools to manage ideas in its core business--tools that can be ill-suited for nascent opportunities, where judgment and intuition are critical.
Unique and different process for transformational initiatives: Standard processes and procedures can subtly reshape transformational ideas so they resemble what has been done before. However, separate processes can foster transformational potential.
Appropriate metrics and incentives for transformational efforts: What gets measured gets done. Even the best-intentioned companies can struggle if they do not have appropriate metrics and incentives to support their transformational efforts.
Appropriate Mindsets:
Formal approaches to overcome internal resistance to transformational efforts: Left to their own devices, "corporate antibodies" can severely impact well-intentioned transformational efforts. Specific approaches can help defend against these antibodies.
Mechanisms to teach the new mindsets required for transformation: Getting transformation right can require taking actions that can appear counterintuitive or even antithetical to most managers. Developing a "common language" can address this issue.
None of these factors are by themselves silver bullets. When given the chance to evaluate each criterion independently, 90% of respondents said all five factors are somewhat or very important, and 80% said all 11 criteria are somewhat or very important.
This is consistent with our field experience, which suggests that transformation is multifaceted. Throwing money at the problem isn't sufficient if you don't have the right ideas, tools, and leadership. Tools and leadership are worthless without resources.
The wrong mindsets can sink the most well-thought-out transformational efforts. Simply trying to create a compelling mission statement or adopt a new philosophy is insufficient to drive transformation. A few leadership memos and the addition of "innovation progress" to the monthly metrics package are insufficient: cultural change does not occur through PowerPoint.

From Chandigarh to Chennai - find friends all over India. Go to http://in.promos.yahoo.com/groups/citygroups/

Bringing lean systems thinking to six sigma

For years companies have struggled with the dilemma of which quality improvement program to use: lean or six sigma? While some are still debating the either/or issue, others have come to realize that lean tools and six sigma work well together to achieve quick process improvements and greater product consistencies. This is true particularly if you subscribe to a top level and often misunderstood and misaligned definition of each. Lean equals zero waste. Six sigma equals zero variation. Certainly there's some overlap here because lean includes variation elimination as well. But the point is you really can't separate the two when it comes to developing an overall improvement effort.

Lean encourages action along a broad front by empowering people at all levels to contribute. This allows organizations to welcome challenges and implement improvement initiatives. Of course, improvement starts by using the appropriate tools such as process mapping, kanban, kaizen and 5S. Kaizen can help to standardize a process or eliminate waste, and often results are seen within days. 5S can help to structure an environment so that problems can be identified more quickly.

Six sigma brings the discipline of define, measure, analyze, improve and control (DMAIC), as well as the rigor of statistical analysis to identify a root cause, sustain improvement and provide the solid measurements that create a balanced scorecard. Most of us know by experience that six sigma is a solid, scientific methodology for reducing process variability. Process variability affects quality because the more variation is reduced, the more likely it is that the process will produce a good product. It's not just quality, though. Variation reduction also affects the entire value stream (a uniquely lean view) because reducing variation will provide more consistent yields, which means that you can predict what you will get out based on what you put in. Therefore, a process can be designed to flow more continuously, with less just-in-case inventory and improved lead times. Often this is an underappreciated benefit of reducing variation.

Looking at improvement through both lean and six sigma lenses, the necessary tools, methods and strategies exist to not only uncover root causes, but also to concentrate on the obvious. In the old days, this was known as "common sense," and as Mark Twain once observed, "There's nothing common about common sense anymore."

A winning combination
For many of us, it's no longer a matter of lean vs. six sigma, but one question still remains: How do you integrate the various improvement efforts to deliver sustainable results?

To answer this question, you have to know how companies fail at integrating lean and six sigma. One major way of failing is to do this improvement work strictly for the sake of lean or the sake of six sigma. These are the wrong reasons. Companies should execute lean and six sigma for the sake of business results. If leaders don't clearly provide a "why" and "how" for lean and six sigma, the focus will not be on leveraging the methods for business results.

The second most common way companies fail is in choosing a few tools – whether lean, six sigma or something else – and drastically overusing them. An example of this is the overuse of kaizen. There are no magical tools that can do all things. It takes the right tool at the right time. If you can't find a tool to do what you need, you shouldn't force-fit one. Develop your own tool to accomplish what you need.

A major utility company that leveraged its improvement project selection criteria for business results used the right combination of lean tools and six sigma to solve a problem with respect to third-party billing. Challenged with improving the billing process, eliminating the defect and retrieving lost revenue, the company assembled a team consisting of a lean six sigma black belt from finance, a green belt from the pole yard, a pole yard foreman and various yard personnel. One of the first steps was a kaizen workshop where the current state was documented through a series of process maps. Next, waste and non-value-added activities in the current state were identified. From that information, the team worked to redesign a more ideal state. At that stage, specific lean tools such as one-piece flow, 5S, visual control, control point standardization and error proofing were used. Proving that six sigma can be equally effective outside the manufacturing arena, the company also used tools such as failure mode effects analysis (FMEA) and hypothesis testing to understand, measure and systematically reduce the variations in the billing process. The result? A $1.4 million revenue enhancement.

Another example is that of a food company that wanted to improve its processing. Like the utility company, this organization was focused on business results and used both lean tools and six sigma to realize them. For the six sigma initiative, one of its suppliers "loaned" the food company a black belt to help establish baseline data.

The company was faced with a regulation that required it to completely purge, clean and check its system every 72 hours to test for bacterial growth before running production again. This cleaning process was taking too long, chewing up capacity and resulting in back orders and quality issues. The challenge was to reduce the 10-hour cleaning cycle time without sacrificing the quality of the product or equipment.

The company mobilized the key people involved with the process and attacked the problem like a NASCAR racing team pit crew. The crew was coached by a lean six sigma black belt using process mapping, lean layout, visual management with digital cameras and process capability analysis in the product packing area. Cycle time was reduced by more than 2 hours and improvement in the overall capability of the packaging line equaled an additional increase in annual production of more than 30 percent. Backlog was eliminated.

Lean systems thinking
Chances are you've never sat on a two-legged stool, and with good reason: It's tough to do when you can't find the right balance.

Balancing lean and six sigma in your operation might give you the best of both worlds, but not the best of all worlds. Without a third essential component, real success doesn't have a leg to stand on (pardon the pun). The cultural transformation brought on by lean leadership and lean systems thinking within an organization provides the long-term stability – or balance – necessary to sustain quality improvement efforts.

Whatever combination of lean tools and six sigma is used, when it comes to quality improvement, they work. This is good news, but it's not the whole story.

The real "Aha!" moment for companies comes when lean systems thinking is factored into the quality improvement equation. Lean systems thinking is about empowering people to drive change. This is accomplished by following these five key principles:

1. Directly observe work as activities, connections and flows.
2. Systematically eliminate waste.
3. Establish high agreement of both what and how.
4. Systematically solve problems.
5. Create a learning organization.

The fundamental message here is simple, yet not universally understood. No technique, tool or methodology alone can improve a process or system and sustain that improvement long-term. It takes lean systems thinkers to successfully implement lean tools and to drive six sigma change.

To see lean systems thinking as a distinct leg in the stool analogy – separate from lean tools and as a companion to six sigma – is to understand that it's not just a series of events or methodologies that contribute to problem fixes. These efforts often lead to the three Fs of improvement: frustration, flavor of the month and, ultimately, failure to deliver sustainable results.

Lean rules provide the guidance needed to implement improvement, explaining the "why" behind lean tools and the six sigma methodology. Lean rules also help develop new solutions to problems. For everyone in an organization, these rules help structure activities, connect customers and suppliers, specify and simplify flow paths, and bring improvement through experimentation at the right level.

Imagine driving in your car. You have all the tools at your disposal: an easy-to-read speedometer, a clear windshield with an accurate view of the speed-limit sign, a smooth accelerator pedal and even cruise control. However, if the principles or beliefs of the driver are inconsistent with the correct use of these tools, there's little chance that individual will stay within the speed limit. No amount of tools or rules will change people's behavior. They can guide, coax, constrain and aid, but they cannot change how someone acts. Only by changing their beliefs can you change their actions for good.

Lean tools and six sigma initiatives can help to change the way you do things, but without a mechanism such as lean systems thinking to align the organization' s goals and objectives for the most effective application of these tools, an improvement strategy won't be complete.

The best of all worlds
Consider one plant manager who recently bought a new piece of equipment designed to increase production by 30 percent and free up 3,000 square feet (279 square meters) of floor space. While he couldn't wait to get it into his shop, he wondered how he would get the equipment up and running without causing order delays or increasing his number of defects, which averaged about 2.5 percent.

With the assistance of a lean six sigma specialist, the plant manager trained, engaged and empowered a cross-functional team to accomplish this mission. On the lean side, the team's efforts included a kaizen workshop, waste walks and process mapping. As for six sigma, the team performed process capability studies, looked at quality data for defect identification and gathered baseline metrics for all product lines.

The team was also introduced to lean systems thinking. With an understanding of the current state, the team established an ideal vision and developed an action plan. This process improvement plan encompassed input measurements around safety, delivery and cost – all of which directly affected output. The team is now implementing a complete re-layout of the shop floor and undertaking a substantial 5S effort to uncover other improvement opportunities. All of this has been done, by the way, during the company's SAP implementation, which included the introduction of bar coding on the shop floor.

It seems like an impossible task, but the balanced effort provided by lean tools, six sigma and lean systems thinking helped the team to achieve the goal of installing and implementing the new equipment in a smooth, undisruptive manner. Thanks to the third leg of the proverbial stool, the team approached the challenge systematically, with a shared vision.

Successful quality improvement involves using all the available tools and methodologies. Traditional lean efforts will help to reduce flow time and waste, leading to improvements that will boost overall quality. Six sigma, with its focus on statistics, will help to deliver a more consistent product. But to fully support long-term goals calls for an all-important third component: the cultural change that comes with adopting lean rules, principles and vision.

About the author Jamie Flinchbaugh is a founder and managing partner of The Lean Learning Center, Novi, Mich. Through years of research and application, including previous stints at DaimlerChrysler Corp., DTE Energy and research at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Flinchbaugh has created, presented and successfully implemented new and powerful approaches to lean.

 

---

Explore your hobbies and interests. Click here to begin.

Management by Nagging (a Lot) by Kevin McManus

Management by Nagging (a Lot) by Kevin McManus

First published in Industrial Engineer magazine April 2002

Over fifteen years ago, the phrase 'management by walking around' (MBWA) became a popular buzzword in the organizational improvement realm. The intent of this strategy was to increase employee involvement and management communication levels by providing managers with a 'approved reason' to get out and spend time with their people. While we can question if such a concept really is worthy of several books, multi-day seminars, or the attention in general it received, MBWA is a worthwhile idea to employ if you are not doing so already.

This article is not about MBWA however. Instead, I would like to use this space to help stem the tide relative to a new management philosophy that I continue to see being practiced on a regular basis, even though it is quite flawed from my perspective. This concept can be simply phrased as 'management by nagging.' Management by nagging is characterized by the prolific use of e-mails, bulletin board postings, mailbox contributions, and meeting agenda items that are intended to make people change. In other words, if people are not doing what we want them to do, we need to deluge them with policies, procedures, and 'requests' for compliance. Unfortunately, as many of you know, these approaches have a very low probability for success.

For example, let's look at a traditional workplace challenge – getting people to limit their personal breaks to only ten minutes. If we were to employ the technique of 'management by nagging,' we would repeatedly let people know that breaks are being extended and that this practice needs to stop. We might send out one e-mail asking each manager to cover this problem with their people during the next team meeting, or we might even use time at the monthly 'all hands meeting' in an attempt to accomplish this goal. Unfortunately, behavior change rarely happens simply because we request that it does. Also, if you are flashing back to scenes from the past that occurred in your child's bedroom, don't worry – the similarities are striking for a reason.

This approach fails to give us the desired result for several reasons. First and foremost, management often fails to define salient consequences for failing to adhere to such a policy. Secondly, if consequences are defined, they are often unenforceable, because no one has the time to consistently monitor each employee's break schedule. Thirdly, people learn to recognize management's nagging behavior pattern quite quickly, and in turn they know that all they have to do is adjust their behavior for a week or so, after which time management will move on to nagging others, or at least nagging about other issues. Finally, most people know how to beat the system – they just need a little time to figure out how.

As with other fundamental changes that you might desire, you do need to change the existing system, but not necessarily in a mechanical or technological manner, to help facilitate this type of behavior change. Instead, we might only need to look at how and what we communicate with our people. I believe that there are three key things that need to be defined in a case like this – expectations, consequences, and desired results. In each case, we need to be specific in what we define.

I have dealt with the potential for lunch and break extensions in this manner. First of all, I let my people know that supporting their teammates and achieving our daily performance goals are our primary focus. If we maintain and improve in those two areas, I do not have to micromanage their personal behaviors. I also stress the fact that we are all adults, and in turn I should not have to fall into a parental role. We know what we need to accomplish, we know that supporting our team members is a top priority, and we know that if we fail in these two areas, the consequences for doing so will be much more significant that a verbal or written reprimand. At our monthly work team meetings, I ask questions to ensure that the 'teamwork' goal is being supported. I also emphasize what our desired results are and again ask questions to identify what I need to do to support them in consistently attaining these results. To-date, this approach has worked quite well.

I also suggest that you take time to identify possible causes for why this policy, or others that we similarly like to nag about, are not being adhered to. In some cases, there is a deeper cultural problem that exists – why are most of the requests being made by management largely ignored? In other cases, people may not be able to make the change, even though they want to (not enough time, knowledge, or other resources). People behave in a certain way for an identifiable reason, and that reason is rarely as simple as "I don't want to."

It is our belief that (1) nagging works and (2) it is the most effective approach however that is the most debilitating. I challenge you to attend one or two meetings and listen to how many times the nagging strategy is employed in just those one or two events. In our efforts to save time, we have opted for an approach that rarely works, and yet we keep on trying to use it. That sounds like a familiar definition of insanity to me.

If you want your customer service people to fill in all of the fields on an order entry screen accurately, you need to design the system to only accept complete, correct entries. If you want your salespeople to use their sales tracking software religiously, you have to give them a compelling reason to do so – how will using this tool help them better achieve the desired result? If you want people to clean up after themselves in the cafeteria, you need to restore the company and personal pride that has been lost. Simply sending out a request for these changes to happen will rarely work – spend time with people to find out why they are behaving as they are – ask questions to learn.

Ironically, management by walking around can be one effective, alternative solution to management by nagging. If you spend time talking with, asking questions of, and most importantly, listening to your people, they will get a stronger indication that you care about them. If you are present in the workplace, you can better observe the workplace practices that occur and why they occur. I stress to my supervisors that each interaction with an employee is a chance to both teach and learn. If you want people to know what is important, you need to make sure that they believe what you are saying, and not simply nagging them like their mom used to do.

---

Unlimited freedom, unlimited storage. Get it now