By Jon Miller | Post Date: March 16, 2009 11:42 PM | Comments: 3
I have trouble with staff who appear generally supportive of improvement projects and agree with Senior Management on proposed actions but then fail to implement agreed changes and constantly come up with lame excuses. I don't know whether they secretly don't believe we can improve, although they have ample opportunity to speak candidly. Do I need more support from Senior Management or to be a little tougher with the 'passive saboteurs'? It's not just Lean that doesn't get done, they don't do work for Quality Management of Health and Safety either. If I need more support from my Senior Manager, how do I requests this without sounding like I'm blaming them for the failure of the project? Any suggestions greatly appreciated.
It's hard to make suggestions without understanding a bit more about the organizational environment within which you are trying to do continuous improvement. Here are a few questions worth reflecting on:
The correct answers to these questions are 1) the higher the better, 2) the more often the better, and 3) at every opportunity. Anything less indicates that continuous improvement is not a top priority for senior management. Even if these are the answers you gave, it may be a question of either culture or policy of the organization - the middle layer creating an inertia on continuous improvement.
If you feel like you have strong support, management are vocal and visible in their support, and truly want the facts, they will probably want to hear that people are not giving adequate support to continuous improvement. However it may not be an issue with senior management, so here are a few further questions to ask before raising this issue:
The "correct" answers to questions 4 and 5 are a bit tougher, more nuanced. In general we can say that from a cultural point of view, if safety and quality do not come first, you are fighting an uphill battle for continuous improvement. The management does not put people and the customer first, or incentives are skewed. Since much of successful lean management is simply about making and keeping agreements (we might call them standard), it is essential to make responsibilities clear and visible. Posting a kaizen newspaper is a great way to show who has agreed to do what by when, in terms of continuous improvement tasks.
The aim of question 6 is not to fire people who don't do as you say. On the one hand it is a question of having clear agreements, policies and responsibilities, and being willing to what is fair to everyone by being true to these agreements - even when it means asking someone to leave the team. More importantly, the answer to the question of what it takes to get fired should be based on a shift from asking "why?" instead of "who?" There are reasons for resistance and uncooperative behaviors which need to be understood since some may be bad apples and unwilling to change while others may simply be doing what seems to be accepted, and willing to change once leadership sets a new standard of behavior.
If none of these are critical gaps for you then it may be wise to call out the few who are not supporting continuous improvement. There will always be some who are late adopters, anchor draggers or procrastinators. Tread carefully when following this advice CILean, as it sounds like your management is not strong on holding people accountable when it comes to continuous improvement. I know of many good people in continuous improvement positions who changed careers or companies because their effectiveness was limited by the leadership and management culture. "Change management is preferable to management change," but if you can't get either you might be better off to change careers.
7. How much longer do you think a company with this style of management can continue to exist in this day and age?Comments are moderated to filter spam and inappropriate content. There may be a delay before your comment is published.