Hi!:bigwave:

The study takes only about 224 seconds to complete and will help my research immensely!

The working title of my thesis is "technological mediated interaction (communication) -thank you Jim for the clarification! and the organizational change agent". The goal is to explain how mobile devices can help maximize real time information exchanges on the manufacturing shop floor.

Here is a first paragraph of abstract: "Studies exist explaining how mobile phones have changed how we communicate as families. This study asks how does wireless Media Messenger Services change organizational communication and knowledge transference. The purpose of this thesis is to identify opportunities for organizational knowledge capture through technological mediated interaction. It will also examine how organizational change agents can leverage the organizational changes as result of emerging communication media."

Currently at our plant in Germany (and being adopted through a Kaizen event here in our Hillsboro NH plant) OSRAM uses pagers to notify when a process needs attention. I am trying to push that envelope in my thesis...

Honestly I am a wreck... between all the flooding here in NH, my ASQ CQE exam in less than 1 week (eeek):biglaugh:

Update: THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR EVERYONE'S SUPPORT... as I have been working on my thesis, I have had the opportunity to interact on several discussion boards ranging from quality to project management to information technology. This board's community has been phenomenal regarding input and feedback about this topic! This helps me stay more in tune to the REAL world and not too entrenched in theory. thank you!

:thanx:

Christina

http://www.questionpro.com/akira/TakeSurvey?id=460697

I will share my thesis final results if anyone is interested.

And answer any questions regarding it as well...

Just did your survey...good luck

Just did your survey...good luck
Same for me

Christina

If you get many responses from here, please share your results. Share your thesis would be more interesting.

You are correct. The thesis would be better. I haven't really searched this website- and what a great resource it is!

Is there a correct place to post it?

Again thank you for your input.

:thanks:

Absolutely

Reading room forum would be the ideal place.

http://elsmar.com/Forums/forumdisplay.php?f=109

I have just completed mine. There is also another web based survey software the ASQ uses : http://www.surveymonkey.com/
For some of your questions almost all check boxes are applicable. Anyway best wishes for your PhD.
Regards,
Govind.

Thank you for the heads up. I will look into that when designing that research plan.

Christina

Wow.

I am wondering... do people ever post thier MS PowerPoint presentations? If so I will post that as well.

Just want to 'pay it forward' for everyone being so nice and helpful:)

Wow.

I am wondering... do people ever post thier MS PowerPoint presentations? If so I will post that as well.

Just want to 'pay it forward' for everyone being so nice and helpful:)


Certainly, they can be posted in whatever thread is relevant. I have been encouraging large organiztions to go to mobile phone/radios to speed up communication ability with personnel on the floor or out of the office. I see vast improvement from those using it.

Wahoo:applause:

Now you are talking... I would love to interview you if possible for my project!

If you are OK with it, I can either send you a copy of the questions or schedule a teleconference sometime after next week (6/5/06). (my schedule is maxed studying for the ASQ CQE exam June 3rd)

Gotta get back to work... fighting the good 5S fight!:frust:

Wahoo:applause:

Now you are talking... I would love to interview you if possible for my project!

If you are OK with it, I can either send you a copy of the questions or schedule a teleconference sometime after next week (6/5/06). (my schedule is maxed studying for the ASQ CQE exam June 3rd)

Gotta get back to work... fighting the good 5S fight!:frust:


I would be happy to. You can send me an email to set up a time. As an auditor and consultant, evenings and weekends are best for availability.

Just completed survey, good luck. PPT and Thesis would be good when you finish.
Paul

Completed the survey
Best of luck from a wet wet Wales!!
:)

Completed the survey - good luck from Indiana. Would like to see the results when you are finished.

Completed the survey. Good luck!

completed survey- good luck!

Completed the survey also..good luck from SC

Done, good luck!

Survey complete....lots of luck!

Completed the survey - best of luck from Southeast Missouri (the Bootheel).

OK, well just completed your survey.

Hope everything works out well for you!

Rick
:)

I completed the survey but I had to guess at a few of the answers because I have no idea what "technogical mediated communication" means.

I also just completed your survey and wish you luck.

I LOVE your signature line! Have read some of your posts on this site, and appreciate the support from such an impressive and down to earth individual!

Thanks!

OK, well just completed your survey.

Hope everything works out well for you!

Rick
:)

Wow! You post like your avatar! Thank you for the well wishes. It is appreciated.

I also just completed your survey and wish you luck.

Two woofs, a tail wag and a squeaky bark Bill! :)

Now there is a book -canine continous improvement- Dog MAIC:topic:
Thank you!

I completed the survey but I had to guess at a few of the answers because I have no idea what "technogical mediated communication" means.

Thank you Jim for bravely completing the survey!

Technological mediated communication is how we exchange information using a scientific application delivery system. Examples range from recorded messages on your home answering machine to emails to discussion board postings:D to multimedia mobile devices like a Blackberry cell phone equipped with a web browser, camera, video capture, etc.

The application potential for the new generation mobile devices is phenomenal. My interest is in fostering communities of practice and creating databases of knowledge inclusive of text, sound and image.

I hope that helps:)

Technological mediated communication is how we exchange information using a scientific application delivery system.

Thanks for the explanation. If I may offer a bit of friendly unsolicited advice...

"Scientific application delivery system" is no clearer than "technological mediated communication." Why not just say "electronic communication"? The language of academia, which places a premium on using big words when small ones will do, doesn't translate very well in the workplace. Scott Adams, the creator of Dilbert, has made a career of making fun of that sort of thing. One of my favorite Dilbert cartoons shows an empty business suit saying to Dilbert, "I enhance core competencies by leveraging platforms."

I know of a guy who a few years ago was having trouble getting his PhD dissertation through the committee because they felt that it wasn't written poorly enough. Of course they didn't say that. What they meant was that it was too easy to read because it wasn't written in the obscurantist academic language. So I understand the need to deal with your advisor in language he/she understands, but you should be aware that if you go out into the working world telling people "I'm going to interface with you via my scientific application delivery system," instead of just saying, "I'll give you a buzz," you might have a difficult time of it.

I wish you luck in pursuing your degree, and I hope you'll share your results with us and also continue to visit and contribute.

Jim I hear you loud and clear. I was following the academic rule that when you write a definition you do not include the word you are defining in the definition itself:)

OH you are on the money :biglaugh: regarding how to talk in business. It is a hard lesson to learn. For example trying to roll out 5S concept to my jaded long tenure line employees... visual factory, COPQ, etc. means JACK... they have that been there done that...

One night the mechanics complained the second shift supervisor moved a tool they had to another spot. They were outraged -'that tool had been there for 20 years! What the F***!' I took in a deep breath and then explain we had asked their input for labeling and taping tool placement in their workstation, the 2nd shift supervisor was just moving forward... well more drama ensued... (at OSRAM they are using yellow tape for almost everything- it has been a struggle) so I told them "look at this like marking your territory. be active. if that is where you want your tools and they work best then step up. kinda like a dog marking thier territory. the yellow tape is yellow snow."

Hey it worked. Our production line on 3rd proved the most enthusiastic with 5S after that.

So Jim very sage advice.

:thanks: I am still learning. Thank you!

....so I told them "look at this like marking your territory. be active. if that is where you want your tools and they work best then step up. kinda like a dog marking thier territory. the yellow tape is yellow snow."




...hey, I like that analogy...I can make money with that one! Thanks...:D

Thank you Jim for bravely completing the survey!

Technological mediated communication is how we exchange information using a scientific application delivery system. Examples range from recorded messages on your home answering machine to emails to discussion board postings:D to multimedia mobile devices like a Blackberry cell phone equipped with a web browser, camera, video capture, etc.

The application potential for the new generation mobile devices is phenomenal. My interest is in fostering communities of practice and creating databases of knowledge inclusive of text, sound and image.

I hope that helps:)

I completed the survey
Your response has been saved and recorded with ID [deleted]


Thank You for completing this survey (http://www.questionpro.com/akira/showEntry.do)

In regard to the "mediated" part in the quoted discussion with Jim above -
Does that reflect the time delay, ability to recall and/or repeat a message verbatim versus a mere "one time only" face to face or direct phone conversation? If yes, isn't pencil or pen or crayon or chalk plus paper or whiteboard or slate also "technological" - albeit low tech and non-electronic?

Does that reflect the time delay, ability to recall and/or repeat a message verbatim versus a mere "one time only" face to face or direct phone conversation? If yes, isn't pencil or pen or crayon or chalk plus paper or whiteboard or slate also "technological" - albeit low tech and non-electronic?[/LEFT]


Wes!

Thank you for participating in the survey and for that point. :applause:

Pencil, pen, crayon, etc. and even love letters written in the sand at low tide are mediated forms of communication. yes very low tech

With that in mind, in my definition I should state it is high tech, correct?

The concept of using new technology -not just for the technology itself- but as an effective tool that helps us identify root causes quicker, is exciting!

I like to think out of the box... like my green belt project was using an MSA as a learning tool to capture the true tacit knowledge of the online inspectors then based on the ongoing results 'calibrate' everyone including supervisors, tool and die dept, etc to see the same thing. We designed a computer based interface for the testing and it was very successful, meeting and exceeding the metrics set...

So if that can be done, why can't we continue to take other tools we have and think of using them in unique ways?

:biglaugh:

Pencil, pen, crayon, etc. and even love letters written in the sand at low tide are mediated forms of communication.

What's the difference between a "form of communication" and a "mediated form of communication? What form of communication isn't "mediated"? Keep in mind that even larynx-based multilateral vocalization (I'm sorry--speech) :D doesn't work without air to "mediate" it.

With that in mind, in my definition I should state it is high tech, correct? Then you get into the relativity of "high." I don't think many people, when asked what sort of technological communications devices they use, will answer "crayons." So if you want to leave the door open to all possible useful communications mediums, you should probably leave "electronic" and "technological" out of it.

Keep in mind that even larynx-based multilateral vocalization (I'm sorry--speech) :D doesn't work without air to "mediate" it.

The key here Jim is how do we use technology like mobile devices to help improve our quality systems?

Over and over I read and experience how communication is sorely lacking in organizations. And that poor reaction time to shop floor problems/incidents only allows for apathy among workers when management doesn't walk its talk... literally doesn't MBWA -manage by walking around- and is in tune to the real needs and wants of the customer.

Numbers... getting the production out is more important than making good product because we "do not have the time to deal with this now".:mad:

Takt time ...shmakt time... the customer pull for quality product is ignored and in its place just customer pull for product.:mg:

I know I am preaching to the choir... but why not have on demand engineering support or be able to show a customer product coming right off the line via a video stream during a meeting? Technology well designed can make us stronger.

When I was working as an International Sales Administrator, I had them outfit me with a wireless head set (and tolerated numerous jokes about orders missing fries) this allowed me to walk the plant while discussing an expedite problem. I could tell my customer that I was standing at the test technician station and what was wrong or right. They appreciated the real time data.

Why not use that in quality pursuits?

The key here Jim is how do we use technology like mobile devices to help improve our quality systems?

Over and over I read and experience how communication is sorely lacking in organizations. And that poor reaction time to shop floor problems/incidents only allows for apathy among workers when management doesn't walk its talk... literally doesn't MBWA -manage by walking around- and is in tune to the real needs and wants of the customer.

Numbers... getting the production out is more important than making good product because we "do not have the time to deal with this now".:mad:

Takt time ...shmakt time... the customer pull for quality product is ignored and in its place just customer pull for product.:mg:

I know I am preaching to the choir... but why not have on demand engineering support or be able to show a customer product coming right off the line via a video stream during a meeting? Technology well designed can make us stronger.

When I was working as an International Sales Administrator, I had them outfit me with a wireless head set (and tolerated numerous jokes about orders missing fries) this allowed me to walk the plant while discussing an expedite problem. I could tell my customer that I was standing at the test technician station and what was wrong or right. They appreciated the real time data.

Why not use that in quality pursuits?


We have already discussed that the workplace prefers simpler terms and phrases in communicating, unlike academia. And, since your thesis is based on clearer communications...hmmm.

More importantly, to your main topic, I think you are absolutely right. We need mobile communiactions on the floor and outside the building. I am encouraging clients to embrace this, and would like to hear about your headset. Some of my clients use Nextel radio phones, or something similar, and I see the benefits.

I am consulting one client who desparately needs this type of solution, but is wrestling with the cost to implement. They don't yet realize how many thousands of $$ they chew up not having them

The key here Jim is how do we use technology like mobile devices to help improve our quality systems?

Over and over I read and experience how communication is sorely lacking in organizations. And that poor reaction time to shop floor problems/incidents only allows for apathy among workers when management doesn't walk its talk... literally doesn't MBWA -manage by walking around- and is in tune to the real needs and wants of the customer.

Numbers... getting the production out is more important than making good product because we "do not have the time to deal with this now".:mad:

Takt time ...shmakt time... the customer pull for quality product is ignored and in its place just customer pull for product.:mg:

I know I am preaching to the choir... but why not have on demand engineering support or be able to show a customer product coming right off the line via a video stream during a meeting? Technology well designed can make us stronger.

When I was working as an International Sales Administrator, I had them outfit me with a wireless head set (and tolerated numerous jokes about orders missing fries) this allowed me to walk the plant while discussing an expedite problem. I could tell my customer that I was standing at the test technician station and what was wrong or right. They appreciated the real time data.

Why not use that in quality pursuits?

I'm no Luddite, believe me. Part of the problem is that people don't understand the technology that they already have, or the possibilities for its use in making things better. Another part of the problem is using technology just because you can. I learned when I had a work-assigned pager for the first time that 90%--perhaps more--of the pages I received were for something that easily could have waited until I responded to a voicemail message, or was face-to-face with the person paging me.

I'm 100% in favor of making the best use possible out of all of the resources available, and having smart people around who know how to do it, so I salute you in your efforts. One of the simple tools that we don't use nearly as well as we should is language, though. It doesn't make any difference if you have $10 million dollar communications system if no one knows how to speak plain English. We also don't do specifications very well, especially drawings. More heartburn is caused by bad specifications than anything else. If you don't know how to tell someone else what you want, you aren't likely to get it.

I recall Leo Durocher's observations about the Houston Astrodome--a true technological marvel at the time (mid-sixties), with a glorious electronic scoreboard and all kinds of unheard-of amenities. Problem was, its designers hadn't verified that they would be able to grow grass, and the field was terrible. Durocher remarked, "It's a fabulous place. They have million dollar scoreboard and a ten cent infield."

Please forgive my naivete... I am wondering if a COPQ was done for your customer.

Are you trying to use 'push to talk' nextal on the shop floor? What is the driver? Trigger points for material efficiency? Mechanical breakdowns? SPC software wireless broadcasted alarms to group leaders, engineers and/or production supervisors?

The headset worked great. I got frustrated having to take a message from the customer and then do the research and return the call especially with a time difference between New England USA and my territory companies in Italy, Germany, Isreal, England and France.

By being mobile I could talk with the customer and relay (I resisted the urge to use the word 'interface') shop floor information real time. The genuine nature of the information really built a trust with the customer. Actually they were more forgiving even if the information was not the best -it was the truth and they needed it for planning. It is all about relationships.

Do not get me wrong I was diplomatic -once Watkins Johnson in California (my territory did expand) told me during a teleconference that I could sell 'cadillacs by phone'!:biglaugh:

One of the simple tools that we don't use nearly as well as we should is language, though. It doesn't make any difference if you have $10 million dollar communications system if no one knows how to speak plain English. We also don't do specifications very well, especially drawings. More heartburn is caused by bad specifications than anything else. If you don't know how to tell someone else what you want, you aren't likely to get it.

Well said:applause:

Firmly believe in back to basics in management. And though many tout communication as a solution so few actually pursue it.

OK... I used this example in a paper (and my goal this summer is to submit several for publication -wish me luck), here it is paraphrased: Who is the better manager? The Lone Ranger or Tonto?

To me Tonto... his feet are firmly planted on the ground, his tracking methods (checking horse poop for time delay of bad guys) demonstrates he is not afriad of dealing with day to day crap and his language is plain, simple and straight to the point.

Really, how many managers hide behind the mask of thier title? Sit hit and mighty on thier white steed and think they have saved the day, when all the employees are wondering "who was that?"

BTW Jim... this winter I used the word 'egress' on power point slide regarding winter safety tips... boy did I get it from the staff! Often it is them training me!

BTW Jim... this winter I used the word 'egress' on power point slide regarding winter safety tips... boy did I get it from the staff! Often it is them training me!

A long time ago I used the word "extant" in a memo, and one of the recipients sent it back to me with the word circled, and "I think you meant existant" scribbled in the margin.:bonk:

Another time I innocently used the word "bellwether" in a memo and a language-challenged coworker, who at least had the good sense to look it up, asked me if I thought it was a good idea to compare our department to a castrated sheep. He had apparently only read the first definition.

Please forgive my naivete... I am wondering if a COPQ was done for your customer.

Are you trying to use 'push to talk' nextal on the shop floor? What is the driver? Trigger points for material efficiency? Mechanical breakdowns? SPC software wireless broadcasted alarms to group leaders, engineers and/or production supervisors?

By being mobile I could talk with the customer and relay (I resisted the urge to use the word 'interface') shop floor information real time.




The CoPQ is obvious, but no formal study. It would be difficult to do a hard quantification, though it is possible.

Instead, I am simply comparing two clients. One has many people on mobile phones in place of desk phones. They get their calls wherever they are, and can see who's calling.

The other has 250,000 sf of real estate and no mobiles. It is not just customers who can't reach them. Just the drag and slowdown of communications among their own team members is very slow. I am sure it costs them 10's of thousands a year in reduced productivity and errors. The only thing complicating it, is service insode the plant is poor and spotty. They would have to actually contract with a service like Nextel and lock in some things. Probably a 50-100,000 project. But, still well worth it, in my judgement. Besides, I have probably saved them several million dollars by now, so they should just trust me and do it. (We will eventually prevail, cuz that's how I work).

Another time I innocently used the word "bellwether" in a memo and a language-challenged coworker, who at least had the good sense to look it up, asked me if I thought it was a good idea to compare our department to a castrated sheep. He had apparently only read the first definition.

GREAT EXAMPLES!! Thank you for making me laugh!:lmao: I am in the middle of editing research and that was welcomed!

Alas Jim I feel your pain!

And this all goes back to communication and one's intended party.

There is a delicate balance between phrasing a message in terms people understand and insulting them by 'dumbing down' the communication -not insulting others by patronizing them.

It doesn't matter what the vehicle-which goes to your point- it is the content that counts.

I was raised in a very strict household where you use sir, mam', thank you, please, etc. Actually I got told that I am too polite by my boss and that we do not make a practice of thanking others. It is not common practice. :magic: Yep felt like I was in an alternate universe.

The only thing complicating it, is service inside the plant is poor and spotty. They would have to actually contract with a service like Nextel and lock in some things. Probably a 50-100,000 project. But, still well worth it, in my judgement.

Poor and spotty. One company campus I worked at tried VOIP which was disastrous for off shift communications. It wasn't well thought out. There were four plants on this campus without the capability to call out or between plants after the main switchboard shutdown (@5pm) -horrendous for international customers! Or merely to order stuff!

Currently with the roll out of wireless scanning guns for SAP, we are encountering alot of noise and at some parts of the plant have resigned to hard wiring the guns to kiosks.

(We will eventually prevail, cuz that's how I work).

:whip: Wahoo a man with a mission!:agree1:

GREAT EXAMPLES!! Thank you for making me laugh!:lmao: I am in the middle of editing research and that was welcomed!

... And this all goes back to communication and one's intended party.

There is a delicate balance... ....

Actually I got told that I am too polite by my boss and that we do not make a practice of thanking others. It is not common practice. Yep felt like I was in an alternate universe.


You'll like this one...

I worked with an ISO Manager to get him to be more professional adn "managerial" in his communication with his co-managers. I got him to be less demanding and more consensus focused, less cussing, more friendly, please, thank you, etc.

His coworkers went to the CEO after about a month and said they didn't like the new, "kinder and gentler" version. They felt he was being condescending and affected. The CEO told him to go back to being like he was... :confused: Then, everyone was happy again!

Poor and spotty. One company campus I worked at tried VOIP which was disastrous for off shift communications. It wasn't well thought out. There were four plants on this campus without the capability to call out or between plants after the main switchboard shutdown (@5pm) -horrendous for international customers! Or merely to order stuff!

Currently with the roll out of wireless scanning guns for SAP, we are encountering alot of noise and at some parts of the plant have resigned to hard wiring the guns to kiosks.



:whip: Wahoo a man with a mission!:agree1:
I am definitely NOT a guru in this field, but I seem to recall reading of companies which set up internal "antenna boosters" throughout the facility and across large campuses to eliminate dead spots and overcome ambient EMI. It seems a natural extension of the technology to extend it to other wireless devices besides "walkie talkie" - type devices.

The question of shielding such data from prying eyes perched just outside the corporate campus boundaries is yet another consideration. I am also aware of some organizations in high-rise office buildings where executives used phone systems with wireless headsets which were compromised by snoops in adjacent floors or offices with relatively simple scanners.

Obviously (to me), this is an issue which requires a comprehensive FMEA before implementing ANY system.

I am definitely NOT a guru in this field, but I seem to recall reading of companies which set up internal "antenna boosters" throughout the facility and across large campuses to eliminate dead spots and overcome ambient EMI...Obviously (to me), this is an issue which requires a comprehensive FMEA before implementing ANY system.

Thank you! Praise be! Someone who is thinking of organizing a plan? OK...now I do not feel alone!!

By the way here is a reference regarding some wireless numbers:

The cost of wireless gear, installation, and support comes to about $500 per year, or $1 or $2 a day, for each user, according to Cisco the world’s largest maker of wireless equipment for enterprises. Assuming the average corporate employee costs $100,000 to $300,000 a year in salary and benefits a company can recoup it $500 investment by squeezing just a few extra minutes of work a day out of each one, Cisco says. (Crockett, 2002)

Crockett, R. (2002) All net, all the time: High speed connections, just about anywhere: WI-FI looks like a communications breakthrough. Special Report –Wireless Internet. Business Week Online. April 20, 2002. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on April 1, 2006:

http://www.businessweek.com/print/magazine/content/02_17/b3780009.htm?chan=mz

His coworkers went to the CEO after about a month and said they didn't like the new, "kinder and gentler" version. They felt he was being condescending and affected. The CEO told him to go back to being like he was... :confused: Then, everyone was happy again!

Yes you are right I do like that story because I think people do like to stay with what they are familiar with, even if it is EVIL. Kudos to you, because it sounds like you were successful in enacting change.

Woe to the CEO who did not support you!:rolleyes:

Coming in a bit late here (I was fiddling a bit with my computer, and stayed off line for a couple of days).

Welcome to the Cove 2.5bostons :bigwave: I just completed the survey, and I'm looking forward to seeing the results.

/Claes

Yes you are right I do like that story because I think people do like to stay with what they are familiar with, even if it is EVIL. Kudos to you, because it sounds like you were successful in enacting change.

Woe to the CEO who did not support you!:rolleyes:


It was the right idea but at the wrong time. Today, he has achieved the same change, but smoother and slower, and it went fine. Also got several important promotions during the period of time. So, we ultimately won for the good of everyone.

On what seems endless task of rewriting... it occurs to me while surfing the elmar's cove wave that the professional significance of this paper would be to inform quality professionals as opposed to show how quality professionals use electronic communication effectively.:thanx:

It appears that the latter is the minority.:(

I have a couple great examples:

Manning did a study of pollice officers using mobile phones to demonstrate the decentralization of communication (not using dispatch) and the community of practice that it strenghtened. I think that would be pertinent to demonstrate how quickly information can be passed directly between employees. (it also shows what to try to avoid)

Ling did a study using real estate agents, contruction workers and soda machine delivery guys (sounds like a bad joke... ). This one demonstrates the different uses of mobile phone extras: like text messaging, video, picture, even greeting cards, etc. It showed that given the tools (at least my take) the individuals rise to the use of the tools.

Someone brought up a great point in this discussion regarding the over use of thier pager :thanks: -I am looking into a filter for information- like text mining or spam provention- so only the most critical of messages make it to the mobile device unless enabled by the user.:bigwave:

THANK YOU!!!Off to anothe rewrite...

It showed that given the tools (at least my take) the individuals rise to the use of the tools.I think you hit the nail right on the head there...

If the tool is a good one, the change can take place almost overnight. If not, people will find ways around the quirks.

/Claes

.... Someone brought up a great point in this discussion regarding the over use of thier pager :thanks: -I am looking into a filter for information- like text mining or spam provention- so only the most critical of messages make it to the mobile device unless enabled by the user....


You can develop sophisticated filters, or just recalibrate the offenders on what needs to be sent, vs what should just be an email.

Though, I would not rate pagers as a particularly effective tool today. Either 2 way phone or radio, or text messaging would be much better.

If the tool is a good one, the change can take place almost overnight. If not, people will find ways around the quirks.

/Claes

Claes

Thank you! (tack!)

That is why understanding the true capability of the tool and how it fits within the organization is so important. The design of the tool must consider possible subversive tendencies within the group. I.E. your 'people will find ways around the quirks"

That is classic community of practice- I see this especially in quality. I think noone wants to go home at the end of thier shift and say "daddy made scrap all day!" Inherently people want to make good stuff, feel productive.

I studied the relationship between foundry workers and lab technicians. There was a subversion to the established QS9000 work instructions. Their under the radar modifications to the process saved the company $100,000's annually but was not recognised. My project put a value to that activity and helped those line employees finally change the instructions. I studied 3 years historical data and 6 month real time to achieve the results.

You are right where there is a will there is a way!

Though, I would not rate pagers as a particularly effective tool today. Either 2 way phone or radio, or text messaging would be much better.

I agree with you the pagers seem a bit old school for the competitive advantage one would be looking for when investing time and effort into such a program.

Behavior modification (ongoing training) is definitely a solution.

I am thinking of a PDA or similar, for text messaging, image sending, like an SPC chart, broken part on an assembly line, specific test results, or in our case sometimes a picture of a crummy injection molding headlight base straight to the engineer who then can send it to either purchasing or supplier.

:applause: Serendipity... this board is a form of technological mediated interaction!:magic:

In four days, this posted request delivered the following:

512+ views
54+ postings
19 new to thread

My survey response jumped 40% once posted onto this site and engaged in dialogue.

The same request had been posted to six different DB's: 2 quality, 2 project management, 2 information technology... The Cove was outstanding!

And in the spirit of the virtual community I feel I have made some pretty significant contacts and received praiseworthy feedback on my project.

Thank you... I wonder if anyone ever studied this virtual community for academic purposes as a successful internet community of practice? Marc?

Rolling Stones, circa 1969

You can't always get what you want
And if you try sometimes you find
You get what you need

And boy I got so much more through this DB!!;)

:thanx: Christina

...... Assuming the average corporate employee costs $100,000 to $300,000 a year in salary and benefits a company can recoup it $500 investment by squeezing just a few extra minutes of work a day out of each one, Cisco says. (Crockett, 2002)

Boy, am I getting old. Beware a rant starts.

Yeah I am getting squeezed for a few extra minutes everyday at work!

I started work just at the tail end of letters (anyone else remember them?)

We would get a complaint from a customer by mail. In an envelope with a stamp (imagine that). It had some siginificant advantages over todays faster communications.

Because the delivery time was so long, the sender had to try to get it right the first time or face getting a letter back that just asked for more information, and the loss of a few weeks. A lot of thought was put into it. It was well written. The problem was described completely.

We were expected to reflect upon the problem and reply in a few weeks.

Then FAX showed up. The thermal kind that faded out. Less effort was put into communicating the problem. A reply was demanded by FAX tommorrow!

Then PRRs showed up (GMs e-mail precursor). We had to get a modem that you pushed the telephone headset into rubber cups. Even less effort was put into describing the problem. It was typed ALL IN CAPS - SOLVE IN 24 HOURS OR YOU ARE ON NEW BUSINESS HOLD! INCLUDING SATURDAY AND SUNDAY!

Then cell phones jacked it up to "I want an answer right this minute - solve it as we speak".

Not just the technology but the people have changed.

Now I find I work with toy junkies. People answer cell phones during meetings. They can't focus for more than 4 minutes. They need the next quick hit.

So, I think we are less effective today. The apparent speed up has reduced the effort put into problem solving. We now just skip off the top of problems as they surface.

I don't need faster access to problems. I need people with the time (and the ability) to focus on a problem, do good root cause, implement a plan, and follow up to see that it worked. What I have is cell phone gabbers with a 4 minute attention span.

We see it here in the Cove. People who ask for help when a simple search would provide the answer. Its not that they won't search - they can't. Video games and MTV jump cuts have made it impossible for them to focus for more than several minutes on any given task.

Every time I get a copy of Quality Progress someone asks me "do you actually READ that?". I've stopped saying yes, because I can't stand the look of shock in their eyes.

Same reason people don't follow Work Instructions, they say "just tell me what to do, and I'll do it". But don't you dare spend more than 4 minutes telling them. They will jump out of their skins.

So, I submit that technology has destroyed our ability to focus and reflect to the detriment of effective problem solving.

Rant ends - please excuse the typos and the use of the word detriment in a sentence.




.

I feel your pain, Caster.

The ideal, of course, is to work smarter, not faster. The well-ordered organization tries not to generate any complaints, rather than obsess over answering them.

The beauty of most cell phones is they often hit "dead spots" with no reception. I have one sure fire dead spot - my pocket, with the battery removed - no GPS tracking either!

My favorite ploy for rush-rush folks is "when in doubt, tell the truth" even if it means saying, or emailing, a response which consists of "I need more information before I can help you."

Now I find I work with toy junkies. People answer cell phones during meetings. They can't focus for more than 4 minutes. They need the next quick hit.

At my last job there was a cell phone policy: all were left outside the meeting room. A fine imposed for ringing and the phone confiscated during the meeting and returned after. Those were the rules of engagement.

So, I think we are less effective today. The apparent speed up has reduced the effort put into problem solving. We now just skip off the top of problems as they surface.

That I agree with you. What is suppose to make us more efficient oftens makes us less effective. A tool is only as good as it is applied.

I don't need faster access to problems. I need people with the time (and the ability) to focus on a problem, do good root cause, implement a plan, and follow up to see that it worked. What I have is cell phone gabbers with a 4 minute attention span.

And here you are right again Caster: there are significant writings regarding how cell phones and other mobile devices are addictive, that it is predicted 'cell phones users' may be the 'smokers' of tomorrow -cell free areas, etc. They actually sell cell free area industrial signs now.

Technology has reduced the average attention span. So as managers, and especially quality professionals are we going to deal with that?

Technology has reduced the average attention span. So as managers, and especially quality professionals are we going to deal with that?

I think Caster's point regarding time is very good. It's only a relatively short time ago when there was no time standardization beyond the bounds of very small areas; there was simply no reason for people in Chicago to want (or need) to be in sync with people in New York, or even Peoria. Communications and transportation technology changed all of that, but it's now gotten to the point where clocks are being sold that automatically update themselves by receiving a radio signal from a NIST time server.

As managers we need more than anything else to inculcate the need for rational thinking and common sense, and hold people accountable when they come up short in those areas. In many (if not most) jobs, it makes no difference whatsoever whether someone arrives for work at 8:00 or 8:10, yet we hold those people to the same rules set for people whose arrival time is important. We do this because we don't want to have to think, or to deal with people rationally. It's much easier to make a rule. If Jerry the production worker, whose presence is necessary for work to commence has trouble getting to work on time, it can be shown that his failure to meet expectations is costly. On the other hand, if Sally in Accounts Receivable gets to work at 8:15 and nothing is lost by it, we hold her accountable anyway, even though it makes no sense to do so.

So it is with cell phones and other technologies. Rather than making do-this-don't-do-that rules, we should expect people to act rationally and considerately, and deal with individuals who are irrational and rude. Set a standard of behavior that reflects the actual requirements, then expect adults to act like adults.

....As managers we need more than anything else to inculcate the need for rational thinking and common sense, and hold people accountable when they come up short in those areas. In many (if not most) jobs, it makes no difference whatsoever whether someone arrives for work at 8:00 or 8:10, yet we hold those people to the same rules set for people whose arrival time is important. We do this because we don't want to have to think, or to deal with people rationally. It's much easier to make a rule. ....


very insightful

Boy, am I getting old. Beware a rant starts....

So, I think we are less effective today. The apparent speed up has reduced the effort put into problem solving. We now just skip off the top of problems as they surface....

I don't need faster access to problems. I need people with the time (and the ability) to focus on a problem, do good root cause, implement a plan, and follow up to see that it worked. What I have is cell phone gabbers with a 4 minute attention span....

So, I submit that technology has destroyed our ability to focus and reflect to the detriment of effective problem solving....

Rant ends.


Your points are well taken, however, technology did not cause the problem, it just continues a long history of ineffectiveness. Ineffective people have always been ineffective. The technology is just a current invention.

My evidence is these old axioms, which have been in use far longer than cell phones and text messaging:

"Failure to plan, is planning to fail."

"Measure once, cut twice. Measure twice, cut once."

There are others, anyone remember some good ones?

Appears that our forefathers had the same complaints, just a different flavor.

And I can share 2 sides of the value of current communication tools..

Nextel radios – My company bought into this about 10 years ago when it was new and novel. All of the managers and department leads got one. And we loved it! No more paging system, no more running around to find the shop manager. At the time our shop was 20,000 SF. We have since moved to a 60,000 SF facility, tripled our work force, and we still love the Nextels!

Laptops – I was visiting a customer (major player Fortune500 company). We were in a meeting with 3 of our folks and about 10 reps from the customer. We were reviewing some new products, with multiple components and a lot of engineering work left to be done on the customers end. Every rep from this customer had their laptop open and most were engaged in some other work on their computer. Talk about multitasking. But what really hit me was – HOW RUDE! Now, don’t get me wrong, I have been in plenty of meetings that were WAY boring and I felt my presence was not relevant, but, for what ever reason, I was asked to attend. Did I walk away with something…..always! My thoughts were, if you felt I could contribute in someway to the subject – I will give you my fullest attention.

As managers we need more than anything else to inculcate the need for rational thinking and common sense, and hold people accountable when they come up short in those areas....If Jerry the production worker, whose presence is necessary for work to commence has trouble getting to work on time, it can be shown that his failure to meet expectations is costly. On the other hand, if Sally in Accounts Receivable gets to work at 8:15 and nothing is lost by it, we hold her accountable anyway, even though it makes no sense to do so.

Well put! We are now in the middle of another revolution and feeling the uneasiness as how we did business even 10 years ago has changed drastically.

One plant manager told me was irritated with the number of useless emails he receives- how many times he is cc'd needlessly - and conceeded that one time he actually measured the amount of distance it was between two engineers offices who were having a critical debate via email, replied to thier cc'd emails telling them to get out of their cubicles, talk face to face and committ to a solution!

Set a standard of behavior that reflects the actual requirements, then expect adults to act like adults.

:applause: This goes to Caster's post about 'toys' and general rude behavior. Good ettiquette means making those around you feel comfortable -being considerate of others. Therefore I would think it is the manager/meeting facilitator's responsibility to set the standard of behavior, akin to a cuss jar.

Otherwise who else would you consider responsible to enact those standards?

Your points are well taken, however, technology did not cause the problem, it just continues a long history of ineffectiveness. Ineffective people have always been ineffective. The technology is just a current invention.

RIGHT ON!:agree1: This goes to the great 'dumbing down' of society debate: it is not the ineffectiveness of the system or the tool but by those who use it.

Here is an old axiom my Greek grandfather told me as a rule to live by:

(loosely translated) You do not poop where you eat.

Laptops –Every rep from this customer had their laptop open and most were engaged in some other work on their computer. Talk about multitasking. But what really hit me was – HOW RUDE!... My thoughts were, if you felt I could contribute in someway to the subject – I will give you my fullest attention.

:( Carol!! It is a matter of mutual respect. Disengaging oneself from the present was a condition only acceptable from mental patients! Being physically here but somewhere else -now this has become a parrellel management front... a standard way of operating for people.

Richard Ling, PhD did significant research on the emancipation of teenagers in Norway through the use of cell phones, as a rite of passage.

As managers- those teenagers will be our charges soon or even our superiors- this is bigger than buggy whips- this is more than slang terms and latest dance crazes-

BTW I experienced the laptop thing in class... students will have thier laptops open engaging in the ball game, instant messaging, music etc.:bonk: And these people are paying to be there!

Well put! We are now in the middle of another revolution and feeling the uneasiness as how we did business even 10 years ago has changed drastically.

One plant manager told me was irritated with the number of useless emails he receives- how many times he is cc'd needlessly - and conceeded that one time he actually measured the amount of distance it was between two engineers offices who were having a critical debate via email, replied to thier cc'd emails telling them to get out of their cubicles, talk face to face and committ to a solution!



This goes to Caster's post about 'toys' and general rude behavior. Good ettiquette means making those around you feel comfortable -being considerate of others. Therefore I would think it is the manager/meeting facilitator's responsibility to set the standard of behavior, akin to a cuss jar.

Otherwise who else would you consider responsible to enact those standards?


As with any revolution or evolution, we have to set changes to the practices and conventions. Companies should establish some guidelines for emails and cell phones. Who has to get a cc? Let's not reply needlessly back and forth with "Thank you for the info,"... "Thanks, No problem," ..."well, I really appreciated it,"...and so on. Those conventions worked for verbal calls, but not with emails where each additonal email is a new item that has to be dealt with.


This would be a good place for management teams to define some protocols and maybe a good place to write a meaningful procedure.

now that has me interested... procedure as in a work instruction? a policy? what would it include emails, cell phones?

at OSRAM we have a electronic use policy which encompasses the use of the company electronics (i.e. computers), software, intranet, internet. That any employee's use can be monitored, include email for content.

that is something different than cell phone use in meetings, needless cc'd emails, expected responses...

can a meaningful procedure dictate an organize's cultural change?

now that has me interested... procedure as in a work instruction? a policy? what would it include emails, cell phones?

at OSRAM we have a electronic use policy which encompasses the use of the company electronics (i.e. computers), software, intranet, internet. That any employee's use can be monitored, include email for content.

that is something different than cell phone use in meetings, needless cc'd emails, expected responses...



Include whatever the company feels it needs to control better. Remember, this stuff is to help us run our companies more effectively. You can create any document to that aim.


can a meaningful procedure dictate an organize's cultural change?

Sure, why not?

Sure, why not?

:confused:I am probably making something more difficult that it should be, but how do you define a procedure as meaningful?

Hjilling would you please provide an example of a procedure changing corp culture.

Would an example be like when you start to roll out a lean manufacture program and write work instructions for 5S, Kaizen events, etc.? Each procedure slowly changes the corp. operating landscape and eventually the culture?

But I am still stuck on a meaningful procedure for changing email and cell phone behavior in an organization... :frust:

Sorry... please bear with me for being so daft!:o

Hello everyone

I skimmed the entire discussion but haven't perused.

2.5bostons, I think a meaningful communication policy or "procedure" would just be based on discipline, such as the discipline evinced at Elsmar Cove. Disciplined communication content and a culture of quality communication is also readily observable in the military, air traffic control, and NASA.

There was a brief but interesting discussion some time ago regarding the use of this forum's exact format for communication within organizations. If something like this forum were utilized in a giant multi-national corporation, there could well be a great amalgamation of company culture, consistency, knowledge, purpose, and organizational excellence.

http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=15601

It is also inspiring to watch, on NASA Television, the communications from control stations on Earth to the International Space Station, which is probably the most effective spoken communication in the history of language.

An effective policy for use of technologically mediated communication would probably involve many of the disciplines developed by disciplined professionals.

Not everyone needs to be a Truman Capote to advance the way technologies are used for communication. It's also possible to get effective communication coming across a sound powered phone, chopped and in poor english, but employing the proper procedure, terminology, short-hand, and demeanor. It can be highly amusing but it works.

Disciplined communication content and a culture of quality communication is also readily observable in the military, air traffic control, and NASA.
It is also inspiring to watch, on NASA Television, the communications from control stations on Earth to the International Space Station, which is probably the most effective spoken communication in the history of language.

Thank you for that example of effective communication driven by situational need.

There was a brief but interesting discussion some time ago regarding the use of this forum's exact format for communication within organizations. If something like this forum were utilized in a giant multi-national corporation, there could well be a great amalgamation of company culture, consistency, knowledge, purpose, and organizational excellence.

I agree that this forum is exceptional example of a community of practice.:) The link you provided helped me understand how others have tried to adopt similar practices and met with frustration.

I wonder if anyone has had success with a open submission database like Carol had with her nextel phones application?

:thanx:

:confused:I am probably making something more difficult that it should be, but how do you define a procedure as meaningful?

Hjilling would you please provide an example of a procedure changing corp culture.

Would an example be like when you start to roll out a lean manufacture program and write work instructions for 5S, Kaizen events, etc.? Each procedure slowly changes the corp. operating landscape and eventually the culture?

But I am still stuck on a meaningful procedure for changing email and cell phone behavior in an organization... :frust:

Sorry... please bear with me for being so daft!:o


I don't have a particular sample to post, but the concept is kind of simple. I shared some samples in previous posts, such as #67. The idea is that if a company has certain protocols they want people to follow, they can just list them in the procedure. When to send a cc, who has to get multiple copies. when not to reply with thanks, how to avoid things which increase spam. No biggie.

But, if the absence of protocols means people are being bothered by junk emails, then maybe we should develop protocols.

hjilling

Thank you for your patience! :) I agree it is simple.

For example when I review through this forum it is easy to see what makes it successful:

1. the rules of engagement
a. understanding them
b. respecting them
c. enforcing them fairly
2. mutual benefit in the negotiation of data exchange
3. wise decisions in rating and sharing of information

I am sure that you have witnessed discussion boards which have been horrifically off point and discussions degrading in content into malaciousness or worse apathy. The same would apply to email.

Which brings us back to your previous post: the protocol exists here and the forum is a thriving community of practice, a living document.

Sometimes the most eloquent of solutions are the simplest.:D

Hi!:bigwave:

As promised here are my initial results of my survey as an attachment.

I am working concurrently on the text of my thesis as well as my presentation for defense. ;) So this is a very rough draft.

53% of the respondents had quality improvement or continuous improvement as part of thier job functions.

And 46.51% worked in Manufacturing (non computer) Industry.

Again thank you so much for all of your support. :thanx:

Would be interested in your thoughts regarding the survey findings.

Christina

Thank you Christina,

Just one thing: In the 2:nd frame (Cell phone options) you have 13 bars, but just 7 categories explained?

Looking forward to reading your thesis.

/Claes

Claes... thank you...I need those second set of eyes!:applause:

I will attend to that immediately.

Big hug THANK YOU!!!:bigwave:

Hi,
one of the things I see in your slides confirms what I see everyday: too many emails. It goes so far that desk neighbors send each other emails instead of talking "face to face":bonk:.
Also the strategies to deal with the amount of emails received are interesting (and not necessarily good) :
it was longer than 2 days in the inbox and nobody called--> delete without reading
I am in the cc and not the to line ---> delete without reading

....and then there are still 50 emails left to read!

The only thing I saw is that there are no units on the axis of your graphs. That would help.

Good luck! (also with the CQE in December)

Thank you to every one who participated in my survey and this thread.

Christina:)

one of the things I see in your slides confirms what I see everyday: too many emails. You said it. It is a scourge, but I have another pet peeve: Faxed customer surveys :mad: Why do people insist on sending those infernal things via the fax? I certainly don't think it improves the response rate. I got one a couple of minutes ago, and the fax machine (Let's face it people, a fax is not exactly state of the art technology nowadays) had made quite a job on it... it was virtually unreadable.

Besides, if I have to fill in a survey, I prefer the digital variety, thank you very much... And so would anyone having to read my handwriting.

/Claes

You said it. It is a scourge, but I have another pet peeve: Faxed customer surveys :mad: Why do people insist on sending those infernal things via the fax? I certainly don't think it improves the response rate. I got one a couple of minutes ago, and the fax machine (Let's face it people, a fax is not exactly state of the art technology nowadays) had made quite a job on it... it was virtually unreadable.

Besides, if I have to fill in a survey, I prefer the digital variety, thank you very much... And so would anyone having to read my handwriting.

/Claes

Then you are of the opinion that persons with a desire or mandate to interact via technological mediation devices should select such devices only after giving negative weight to factors deriving from the possibility of comprehension-obfuscating distortions arising from the inherent properties of certain mediation devices such as facsimile transmitters?

Then you are of the opinion that persons with a desire or mandate to interact via technological mediation devices should select such devices only after giving negative weight to factors deriving from the possibility of comprehension-obfuscating distortions arising from the inherent properties of certain mediation devices such as facsimile transmitters?

Well "Ollie", that mouthfull certainly gives me a headache :bonk: