Hi !!
I joined this forum long back but this is my first post:).I work in a Telecom Network Engineering Company as Corporate Quality Manager. We get requests from employees for participation in training program .The participants undergo training and when it comes to delivery , they back off.The training on Six Sigma or PMP which involves huge training and counselling cost as well as efforts in such cases becomes a Flop show:mad:.Therefore we have decided to design a Commitment letter and seek commitment from the participant who wanna undergo training, that he/she will be delivering as per the requirement of the training program and if at all he/she is not able to, is ready to bear the training cost .:notme:

I am not able to design a generic Commitment letter.Plz help me out .:confused:

Thanx in advance :thanx:

I'm going to suggest that getting their commitment is nothing to do with fixing a poor deployment of tools like 6 Sigma. It's because their management don't support it or something very similar.

I'd also look at your training process and how training needs are identified and supported. Having people request training is all fine and dandy (and as you correctly point out - costly), but there has to be some linkage to a strategy to use the skills from this training, which appears (to me, at least) to be missing.........

Welcome to The Cove! :bigwave:

I second Andy's take on this subject. I have some questions:

1. What is the training intended to accomplish? That is, what is the company's expected strategic benefit to having this training? Let's suppose all of these people followed through and you had a bunch of 6 Sigma-trained people in your organization. What is the compny's plan for using these people's expanded abilities?

2. What's the manner in which this training is being offered? Is it being advertised in the open within your company for all takers, or is the training being offered as individualized and structured personnel development?

3. If there is structured personnel development that includes this training, how are people chosen for their roles, and what happens when they fail to come through--is there any investigation as to why they don't show up?

I hope you see whare I'm going with this. I don't want to discourage training in quality subjects, but I want to see it performed in a locical manner, and for its planning to include the what-next and what-went-wrong. I would like to see these things done before deciding the problem is one of personal commitment and approaching it with a sort of contract.

I hope this helps!

I note you are located in India. This may have an impact in that concepts like Six Sigma and other Quality initiatives face a double barrier:
Relatively poor quality of training programs and trainers compared to western nations like those in Europe and North America
Lack of a corporate culture that is required for such Quality initiatives to succeed.As you are a member of the Cove of about one year standing, you should be aware of the Deming precept that management is primarily responsible for the success or failure of improvement programs, depending on whether they offer fertile ground or barren waste for them to grow.

In a practical sense, management should be taking the classes FIRST (if they are good and worthwhile - topic for a new thread) so they can prepare the ground for the subsequently trained employees to flourish.

I agree with Wes. If the management does not understand why the training is being provided and what is expected out of it then the employees will not also understand what it is all about before commiting themselves to it. It is important for them to understand what the training entails and what is expected of the trainees at the end of the training before they even start. The same problem still happens in Africa as people like to follow the waves.

Wes,

You have right pointed it that Management is the one who needs be trained first hence they would appreciate the value of Quality Initiatives. Not only that they should be aware of what it is but should be committed to drive it across the organization in all the aspects. However it's quite generic and no that it applies to only Indian. I know couple of North American companies too who does not understand the cores on a quality initiative and push it in hush-hush manner which in turn leads major disappointment.

Shailendra,

I would suggest not to take commitment letter from employees as even if you would get that signed off, It wouldn't lead to any major improvement.The urge to learn has to come from within.It can not be forced.It seems to be quick fix strategy to justify the cost of training to management which would not fix anything.It's like prescribing paracetamol to a fever patient withou knowing what type of fever it is.

Moreover employees not responding well in terms of implementing the things they have learnt is just a symptom and not the cause.You would need to introspect to find out what are the real cause behind it.Some of the root cause have been rightly pointed out by others.Root cause analysis and finding the solutions for avoiding the cause would help you significantly.Focus on the causes and not the symptom.

All the best .

Hardik Someshvar

Dear friendz,
Thanx for your encouraging wordz. I agree that lack of management commitment would not make any training program a success. But the problem am facing is something different....

For e.g .. Management says that they want to prepare a pool of trained and certified Internal Quality Auditors.We discuss the objective with the management and then invite nominations for the said program.Huge number of employees come for the training program ( just becoz they will get a certificate which may add value to their CV ).We said that we wont award the certificate unless you conduct atleast 4 Internal audits, which will be supervised by Company's Lead Auditors.Inspite of all this, employees participate, they spend 2 days (rather say holiday sort of thing during training) and then they forget.Afterall they hve not lost nething.Its the loss of the management. When we discussed this with management, management itself suggested that y dont we get a commitment letter from interested employees wherein minimum requirements and training objective will be written down as terms & conditions and this commitment letter will be authorised by the participating employee's management boss

I am not sure but i guess this commitment funda mite work.What say ?

As I mentioned earlier, you should look at your training process. Did your organization even follow it?

Just having a process that (basically) says 'We need auditors, anyone interested?', will give you that kind of result. Hey, even I'd go just to get a couple of days off work, if my management did that kind of thing.

The clue to preventing this kind of thing is in the way the ISO 9001 requirements were written....."Competency, awareness and training".

You jumped straight to the last thing and didn't go through the process!:bonk:

No wonder it's broken! Your process should be to define what competencies are required, then identify the potential candidates, evaluating what they have already. Then, elevate their awareness (educate them) and further evaluate their abilities after taking some actions on the 'missing pieces' in their competencies.

There is no way that the organization has all its people even close to being candidates as internal auditors.

Shailendra,

It might work to an extent!! I am skeptical :(

As per my understanding if you could develop a sound selection criteria based on work experience,knowledge interest of a person in quality initiatives for selection of a eligible trainee, It would help you resolve the issue.

Apply your commitment fundae along with it.

You are not the one who is facing this challenge, in fact GE had the same issue.They meant it mandatory to complete at least two successful projects after the training ti get GB certified. They had one year deadline to complete GB from the date of joining. On fail, It might lead to termination of an employee.

That's the better way then a commitment letter, isn't it?

Warm Regards,
Hardik Someshvar

...We said that we wont award the certificate unless you conduct atleast 4 Internal audits, which will be supervised by Company's Lead Auditors.Inspite of all this, employees participate, they spend 2 days (rather say holiday sort of thing during training) and then they forget.Afterall they hve not lost nething.Its the loss of the management....

Hi Sheilendra,
if you have an approved (management signed of on it) audit schedule, which defines who has to audit what together with your lead auditor, then the employee who received training, was assigned to an audit team and does not perform the audit is not doing his or her job. That would make it a problem of either discipline of the employee or commitment of the employees' supervisor who might not allow for the employee to perform the audit due to capacity constraints elsewhere in the company. Just the discipline issue would be kind of covered in the letter of commitment, but if the employees supervisor does not cooperate than the letter of committment might be unfair to the employee.

I do not think the letter is a good idea for the trained employee, maybe rather for the employees direct management/supervision (if not involved in the decision to train the employee) to allow for the time needed to perform the extra tasks.


Just my
:2cents:

Joachim

Inspite of all this, employees participate, they spend 2 days and then they forget.

Stop the press!!:mg:

Employees not caring and employees not demonstrating learning are two different things. It's very important to heed Andy's (and others) insistance on the learning effectiveness aspect.

Tim Folkerts (one of our regular Covers) can take a room of people like me and teach us some advanced Physics. Guess what?? I'll fail miserably. :yes: It would have nothing to do with Tim as an instructor, or with me caring or not caring. It's just not that simple.

It has a little to do with the individual, but a lot with the effectiveness of the program. Actually, the above example would have to do with other training issues such as relevance, adaptability to audience, etc.

All I'm saying if maybe give your people the benefit of the doubt. There are probably a huge number of variables in this learning scenario.

Based on the original posters responses, It seems management missed an important understanding of "Contract Review" before engaging the training person or group. In my post above, I wroten a practical sense, management should be taking the classes FIRST (if they are good and worthwhile - topic for a new thread) so they can prepare the ground for the subsequently trained employees to flourish.
Perhaps we really do need to run a parallel thread on

selecting a trainer
understanding and approving the curriculum
Pre-test and post test of trainees to determine readiness and to evaluate progress in learning and being able to apply the lessons learned in the real world of the trainee's organization
continuing evaluation of trainees to determine if they have ample opportunity to apply their lessons and how well they DO apply them.There may be charlatan trainers around, but my own experience is the organization of the trainees puts more roadblocks in the way of effective application than poor skill of a trainer or of the trainees. The reasons for the roadblocks by management range from ignorance to fear of being exposed as incompetent (emperor's new clothes, anyone?)

Wes, you've hit the nail on the old head, again............and I'm reminded of an organization I did some auditor training for recently. Quite a few were sharp people, but one or two just didn't get it.

Specifically, there was one individual who could not put their thoughts together and make a clear, concise statement relating to the subject at hand. When I (carefully) pointed out that an internal auditor has to do just that, I was told it was my problem for not being able to help them do that..................:notme:

But, then again, this is an organization who looks around itself and says, "We need more auditors........."

Dear friends !
What you are saying is true but there is one more angle to the requirements. The trainee (auditor) is competent enough but when it comes to actual deliverables (conducting audits), they would always be busy in some other work. If after developing pool of auditors, if auditors are not ready to perform the audits then how would the audit process will rermain effective.
Secondly, some employees have successfully completed Six Sigma training & examinations but they do not have time to complete the project. As a result, neither the are certified nor the organization who is spending enormous amount in training is getting ROI (Return On Investment)
Hence committment letter is required in some cases & some training programmes

Dear Rathin,
Seems you are facing the same problem in your organization.To end the Argument:argue:, i would like to reiterate that all i asked for is sample commitment letter.

I do not deny to watever my frendz said ova here, but believe me guys, we tried every bit of wateva u said and still failed.:mg:

Finally we (Management) came out with this suggestion.:read:

Plz guys. help me designing a generic commitment letter, thts it :nopity:

Shailendra :notme:

Dear friends !
What you are saying is true but there is one more angle to the requirements. The trainee (auditor) is competent enough but when it comes to actual deliverables (conducting audits), they would always be busy in some other work. If after developing pool of auditors, if auditors are not ready to perform the audits then how would the audit process will rermain effective.
Secondly, some employees have successfully completed Six Sigma training & examinations but they do not have time to complete the project. As a result, neither the are certified nor the organization who is spending enormous amount in training is getting ROI (Return On Investment)
Hence committment letter is required in some cases & some training programmes

Welcome Rathin,

What you mentioned is rampant in my part of Asia also. Superficially you are right but if you delved further you will realized that the answer lies in two words - "Management Commitment".

Welcome Shailendra,

Seems you are facing the same problem in your organization
I can see your problem. Our government is being owed about 1.6 billion dollars local currency from students who took study loans and then refused to repay them upon graduation. The US or British yardstick may not be applicable in most part of Asia. But this is not the issue.
but believe me guys, we tried every bit of wateva u said and still failed.
Actually what many fellow Covers had been politely hinting is whether you had gone to the root of the problem. It appears not.
Finally we (Management) came out with this suggestion.
That is your choice though we felt sad that you are not reconsidering or relook at the root cause.
help me designing a generic commitment letter, thts it
If you choose to go that way, might as well get your lawyer to design a simple 'contract'. It gives you more bite and convey a strong message that you meant business. (by the way, all study loans given out to our students are backed up by contracts)

I am sorry if you felt that we had not been helpful.

C'mon Shailendra,

You are talking about a commitment letter for a training which would help you resolve the issue :bonk:

Being from India, I assume that you are aware of IT companies getting the Contracts( or bond of so and so amount what we call it in India) signed with college graduates. Just try to walk down to any o the HR Manager at these IT companies, ask them till what extent it has helped them to retain employees? You would find one synonymous answer and that's shear No. There are chances of legal action too apart from monetary loss and securities but does employees stick to the same company just because of fear of it even if they are getting a better opportunity? No, not at all. You know how our legal system works...in case the legal trial would happen though it has very rare chances , the guy would be 60 yrs old by then.In may cases, companies buy out the bond amount.

Why none of the companies like Sun or Microsoft went for contracts and though they have never faced such a huge attrition issues ? Just because they go deep into the issue and work on root cause which are work satisfaction.work culture,monitory benefit and personal development.That's something now all Indian IT honchos have started to understand and started working on the same lines and I bet that they have much lesser attrition rate now.

I hope you're intelligent enough to pick up what I am trying to point out.

After all it's your decision, only you can have say in it.

Just my 2 cents !!

Hardik Someshvar

Hi !!
I joined this forum long back but this is my first post:).I work in a Telecom Network Engineering Company as Corporate Quality Manager. We get requests from employees for participation in training program .The participants undergo training and when it comes to delivery , they back off.The training on Six Sigma or PMP which involves huge training and counselling cost as well as efforts in such cases becomes a Flop show:mad:.Therefore we have decided to design a Commitment letter and seek commitment from the participant who wanna undergo training, that he/she will be delivering as per the requirement of the training program and if at all he/she is not able to, is ready to bear the training cost .:notme:

I am not able to design a generic Commitment letter.Plz help me out .:confused:

Thanx in advance :thanx:

There have already been numerous responses that indicate that you have a problem with your training system, which seems fairly obvious. But if you give 20 people training for internal auditing and three of them actually become auditors, then you have three auditors and 17 people who are familiar with auditing and will understand what's going on when audits take place. How is that a bad thing?

We are all missing the point here (to some extent). As we learn a bit more about the OP's situation, it seems to me that it's not the lack of support coming from the GB and auditor candidates, it's the lack of leadership by management!:mg:

Do they realize they are not running a democracy? Sure they allowed their people to 'vote' on attending the training which was (very democratically) provided. But the question remains the same;

Why the h*ck wouldn't someone turn up to perform the work assigned? In my 35 years of industrial experience I've never encountered a situation where my supervisor wouldn't have been all over me if I didn't get an assignment done.:yes:

There appears to me to have some fundamental management issues that need to be resolved first. They are not supporting the 6 Sigma efforts in that either the teams are not choosing issues that are CTB etc. or they don't see any value in the audits. So, they don't make it a requirement of their people to participate - yet they authorized them to go to the training and waste, therefore, the budget.:frust:

My Dad would say they all need a kick up the rear end. But in this enlightened day and age, the management team should look at themsleves and write down their commitment to these essential tools........not have the trainees do it!:nope:

Then the managers need to get up off those rear ends, stop protecting them from being kicked and get out to show those trainees that they're involved and give two hoots for the implementation........:yes:

Finally, I saw the part about management commitment! :applause:

I read a remark about getting letters of commitment when the person doesn't have time for doing a six sigma project or auditing. Seems to me, the letter of commitment should come from the manager, not the trainee!

I agree with Jim that it makes sense to have a number of people around who are wise in auditing. And, arguably creating a pool of auditors is a good idea. But, having a well stocked fishing pond is no guarantee of catching fish for dinner.

I also missed the part about the trainees' aspirations. I read about their wanting the certificate, and I found the part about nominations of candidates, but performing well at auditing takes a wish to do so, the right personality, enough technical skill, and oh by the way the willingness of auditees to suddenly find themselves under this person's critical eye--and vice versa. Not everyone is up for that.

And so goes the tough task of training auditors. I suggest this thing will need more planning than has been described. People need to be matched to a job like this one. They need to be given the first bit of training, then taken out to observe, and find out if they have the stomach for more before a lot of investment gets made.

When you find people who are actually up for the job, you will need to be sure you can find them available to do a scheduled audit. That means planning their audit into scheduled existing projects, and choosing the type of audit they'd perform well in. Covers here show a very big variation in expertise; mine is training and metrics. You will similarly be better off finding the right person for the right job and planning well enough to make sure they fit together when you need them to.

But if other department managers do not cooperate, you have a different problem than training.

I hope this helps!

Hi !!
I joined this forum long back but this is my first post:).I work in a Telecom Network Engineering Company as Corporate Quality Manager. We get requests from employees for participation in training program .The participants undergo training and when it comes to delivery , they back off.

The way I get participation on auditor training is first to get interest in participation by the folks. Then I use our Outlook program to determine when the folks are available (everyones' schedule is on there). Then I send out an invitation to said folks so that they can confirm their participation in the training. I can then schedule conference room and lunch.

Covers,

When I read shailendrasingh’s original post, I read the problem to be that employees who requested training and received it, would then refuse to (or find excuses not to) participate in projects to make use of that training. Shailendrasingh made the suggestion that gaining a commitment from the employees who requested the training would be, in some measure, at least a partial fix to the problem. It seemed like a reasonably thoughtful action to me.

Then I was amazed as I watched the Cove jump right off the bridge into Conclusion Creek.

The very first comment was “I'm going to suggest that getting their commitment is nothing to do with fixing a poor deployment of tools like 6 Sigma. It's because their management don't support it or something very similar.”

Then it was downhill from there.

We are the people who are supposed to make decisions and conclusions based on data, not conjecture.

How could we come to as many conclusions about what is wrong with Shailendrasingh’s program and make so many heavy handed statements about what Shailendrasingh should do about the system without the facts (DATA) to back up our conclusions.

Is it possible that we have become so cynical that we no longer have the capacity to realize that “Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar”?

Respects,

Jim Shelor

Thanx a lot Jim,
I think i have confused a hell lotta people ove here.

Guys, believe me there is no lack of management commitment, but management has many other tasks at hand.Many a times top management guys keep travelling, hence they are not approachable.Management has always given full support by attending the meetings, declared a hefty amount as prize money for those who complete the project on time etc etc .But still we found participants not doing Six Sigma project or conducting Audits and they always have am excuse i.e "They Are Busy With their Day To Day Activities".

To take care of this we said tht we will be signing an agreement with the participants wherein the participant will agree / declare that he/she will be meeting all the requirements of the training program failing which he/she will be reimbursing the 50% amount of the training cost.If he/she leaves the company before the completion of the training program he/she will reimburse the entire training cost.

When it comes to paying the training cost or meet all the training requirements, participants will definitely opt for latter.

What say Guys ? ( I think I hve highlighted one more issue here for an Argument..... Lets start )

Shailendra:read:

Thanx a lot Jim,
I think i have confused a hell lotta people ove here.

Guys, believe me there is no lack of management commitment, but management has many other tasks at hand.Many a times top management guys keep travelling, hence they are not approachable.Management has always given full support by attending the meetings, declared a hefty amount as prize money for those who complete the project on time etc etc .But still we found participants not doing Six Sigma project or conducting Audits and they always have am excuse i.e "They Are Busy With their Day To Day Activities".

To take care of this we said tht we will be signing an agreement with the participants wherein the participant will agree / declare that he/she will be meeting all the requirements of the training program failing which he/she will be reimbursing the 50% amount of the training cost.If he/she leaves the company before the completion of the training program he/she will reimburse the entire training cost.

When it comes to paying the training cost or meet all the training requirements, participants will definitely opt for latter.

What say Guys ? ( I think I hve highlighted one more issue here for an Argument..... Lets start )

Shailendra:read:Sorry, I don't buy this excuse at all! "They Are Busy With their Day To Day Activities".
This definitely points to management as the culprit. It is management's responsibility and commitment to make time available for personnel to perform tasks. If personnel are unable to complete tasks in the alloted time, it means either the method for the task is inefficient or the worker is overloaded. If inefficient, all the more reason to turn trained personnel loose to find new, efficient ways to do tasks. If overloaded, hire more people. If not enough money to hire more people, it means the tasks are inefficient and money wasting - more need to bite the bullet and concentrate on making tasks more efficient and therefore more profitable.

Well here's the end......
We designed the commitment letter and rolled it yesterday.Outta 15 nominations that we had received earlier for Six Sigma Black belt program, 6 employees opted out. They refused to sign the commitment letter.

When we asked them why, the replies were .....
1) I am not sure whether i will be able to complete the project within the defined timeframe ( Com on buddy , thts the timeframe decided by the Certification University and not us ):bonk:
2) Who Knows whether am gonna stay in this company till the completion of the training program and if i leave i will haffto pay the training amount which is not acceptable to me.:cool:

We are happy that we are able to identify the genuinely interested participants with the help of commitment letter.:D

Shailendra::notme:

Well here's the end......
We designed the commitment letter and rolled it yesterday.Outta 15 nominations that we had received earlier for Six Sigma Black belt program, 6 employees opted out. They refused to sign the commitment letter.

When we asked them why, the replies were .....
1) I am not sure whether i will be able to complete the project within the defined timeframe ( Com on buddy , thts the timeframe decided by the Certification University and not us ):bonk:
2) Who Knows whether am gonna stay in this company till the completion of the training program and if i leave i will haffto pay the training amount which is not acceptable to me.:cool:

We are happy that we are able to identify the genuinely interested participants with the help of commitment letter.:D

Shailendra::notme:

Oh, there are just so many ways to approach this.:(

Yes, many times an employee will volunteer to impress the higher ups and then realize that they didn't realize what they were in for, or that they really are not interested. Management fault! Management should be able to see those people coming.

Signing a piece of paper is not going to help! Now you will have people going through the motions because they are afraid to lose their money. They will not do a good job. Management Fault! Management will still not be committed to the process or properly encouraging.

I predict that your committment letter will be worth exactly what the value of a piece of recycleable paper is worth to your process. You will just have people that stay with the program for 4 audits, or whatever your minimum requirement is. :2cents:

I'm reminded of Neville Chamberlain, British Prime Minister from 1937 - 40, waving his piece of paper of commitment..........:(

Hello,

Commitment comes from the heart and cannot be dictated nor demanded.
Commitment comes from understanding and appreciation.
Understanding and appreciation comes from awareness.
Awareness comes from guidance, coaching, and positive examples set by Management.

Stijloor.

Covers,

When I read shailendrasingh’s original post, I read the problem to be that employees who requested training and received it, would then refuse to (or find excuses not to) participate in projects to make use of that training. Shailendrasingh made the suggestion that gaining a commitment from the employees who requested the training would be, in some measure, at least a partial fix to the problem. It seemed like a reasonably thoughtful action to me.

Then I was amazed as I watched the Cove jump right off the bridge into Conclusion Creek.

The very first comment was “I'm going to suggest that getting their commitment is nothing to do with fixing a poor deployment of tools like 6 Sigma. It's because their management don't support it or something very similar.”

Then it was downhill from there.

We are the people who are supposed to make decisions and conclusions based on data, not conjecture.

How could we come to as many conclusions about what is wrong with Shailendrasingh’s program and make so many heavy handed statements about what Shailendrasingh should do about the system without the facts (DATA) to back up our conclusions.

Is it possible that we have become so cynical that we no longer have the capacity to realize that “Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar”?

Respects,

Jim Shelor

Not at all Jim. I'm not cynical about this specific issue at all. Indeed, I have a letter of commitment, signed when I joined my organization over 15 years ago. Never missed a day of work since..........but then that's because my management have always made it a great place to work and encouraged me to do well, provided training etc to expand my skills, abilities and knowledge. Pretty unusual in my experience..........Many people 'fight' going to work each day because they are walking into a poor culture where their management/supervisor demonstrates little/no leadership skills, claims credit for doing nothing, makes promises to 'take care of stuff' that never gets done,only acts when in crisis and a host of other nasty things.

It isn't the commitment letter those demotivated employees signed upon employment that keeps them going, it's the threat of termination etc..........
Oh, and no jumping into any creek or other body of water on my part. Simply, a boat load of experiences of literally hundreds of similar situations that have helped me and others diagnose what causes problems like this.
:magic:

Well I have nothing more to say. We rolled out the commitment letter thingy and we are getting gud response from management. Also we have been able to filter & Identify the genuinely committed participants.

Am Happy , The management is Happy.!!

No More comments from me on this topic !!

Well I have nothing more to say. We rolled out the commitment letter thingy and we are getting gud response from management. Also we have been able to filter & Identify the genuinely committed participants.

Am Happy , The management is Happy.!!

No More comments from me on this topic !!

We hope you will come back and let us know how things are working out. Once the 'Hawthorn effect' as worn off..........

This has become a very interesting discussion. Lots of good insight here! :applause:

Perhaps there has been some swimming in Conclusion Creek (what a great term!) but I am not sure it's total.

I stand by my message, though maybe I didn't say it right. Programs like auditing and Six Sigma need to be planned, and personnel time resource is surely part of the planning. I would definitely not want people to line up and go through a bunch of training--even the most devoted of people, if I could not be sure they'd be available.

So I wonder two things--and I may always wonder since I've been told our original poster has finished with the subject.

1. If the Certification University is counting time frame to certify in hours to the task, or a time frame like months. In other words, is the time frame built upon sustained, large scale availability? Or is it built like a correspondence course, with an eventual drop-dead date but learn at your own pace?

2. If the people signing these commitment letters are doing so with their fingers crossed that they will be available to fulfill the promise. Are they guessing, or do these people have more efficient departments or devoted bosses? I wonder how many good candidates are getting away.

A commitment letter isn't a plan. :2cents:

Perhaps there has been some swimming in Conclusion Creek (what a great term!) but I am not sure it's total.

Jennifer, I like that phrase. Can I have the copy-right to use it elsewhere?

I am so frustrated:frust::frust::frust:
It seems like the decision was made, a search was initiated to find validation for the decision, and, when no validation was forthcoming, validation was invented out of whole cloth.

Jennifer, I like that phrase. Can I have the copy-right to use it elsewhere?Alas, I did not invent the phrase, however much I may have altered it by the percent needed to protect against copyright claims...;) The Conclusion Creek term was supplied by Jim Shelor. :applause:

I am so frustrated:frust::frust::frust:
It seems like the decision was made, a search was initiated to find validation for the decision, and, when no validation was forthcoming, validation was invented out of whole cloth.Yes, I feel it too.

However, I am aware after many years at this sort of thing, that at the root of it I am providing information needed to make good decisions. People are always free to make their own decisions, and I often disapprove. Sometimes I am proven wrong.

That said, I am not in our dear poster's organization and I only know what he has told us. Maybe later he will change direction, and in any case these discussions are only about the original poster in a very small part. The largest part is everyone else who reads the discussion and learns from it what they will. :cfingers:

I am so frustratedIt seems like the decision was made, a search was initiated to find validation for the decision, and, when no validation was forthcoming, validation was invented out of whole cloth.My point exactly. You just have a much better way with words.

Yes, that's OK. Good luck to the OP.

in 1985, Coca Cola was pretty certain about their new revelation. After all, time after time in taste tests, people preferred the new Coke significantly over the old Classic Coke. So they ran with it. The rest....is history:

http://www.thecoca-colacompany.com/heritage/img/chronicle_global_business_new_coke.jpg