Ensuring Improvement and Handling Change

[v9991]

target at hand is improving effectiveness of a system (for eg., FMEA)
task is to
1) comprehensive representation of all risks and action plans;
viz., establishing the role of facilitator, providing guidance documents for identificaiton of risks Simple Representation for Scope of DFMEA and PFMEA
& specific to our case is an action on revising the scoring criteria
etc.,

2) summarizing/conclusion reporting of FMEA.(implementation of heat maps)(categorize the risks into design-controls & process-controls + open-closed-differred risks)

I got team members: who want to work based on ease of implementation; (giving the name of simplicity, doing what is possible; NOT, what is required!!! and naming it as complexity) what i mean here is that, for eg., team says that they would like to present the pareto (which is also an usefull tool) but not as effective as heat map (Severity vs occurrence & then against detectability)

and report is simply taken as additional responsibility, without realizing the importance and significance of it in concluding/reporting the risks.

bringing the whole team to discussion itself is becoming a burden; escalation would further alienate them from concept & especially from me(my initiatives).

hope to hear from gurus of resolving such situations.

 

[Chennaiite]

target at hand is improving effectiveness of a system (for eg., FMEA)

Did you care to assign a measurable indicator for this? Was the initiative linked to Business Objectives of your Organization? Does meeting the target influence the Performance appraisals of the key stakeholders?
More than anything, was the initiative given due recognition by the Top Management (cliche intended)?

 

[v9991]

Did you care to assign a measurable indicator for this?
Was the initiative linked to Business Objectives of your Organization?
Does meeting the target influence the Performance appraisals of the key stakeholders?
More than anything, was the initiative given due recognition by the Top Management (cliche intended)?

Answer to first 3 questions is YES;
measurable-indicator is interms of providing a change-proposal with justifications-references (1st post indicates those two changes proposed to improvise the system)
business objectives :- it is linked with one of organizational initiative (in fact, that is one of feedback we got it from outside as well)
performance appraisal :- is again yes, as above two points indicate, its obvious.
and actually that is what is probably leading to false/low targets; just do what is simply possible, and tick the task as done!!!(but thats my guess.)

last answer is, NO, exactly what I really miss; I wouldnt call it recognition but I would like to use the term "involvement";
i would like to hear some ideas about getting involvement of management; because all the current approaches are not working (or are opposed; viz., the proposal for presenting risk summary in review meeting is not yet accepted)

 

[Jen Kirley]

It all comes down to money, doesn't it?

Your people believe - and probably correctly - that they are being judged on the value of the goods they produce. FMEAs very often feel like a paperwork exercise for both the people doing them and the management. No sellable widget pops out at the end, after all.

Deciding otherwise usually takes time, or new leadership, or a crisis/epiphany. Kotter (he of the 8-Step Kotter Model of change management) has a book out titled The Heart of Change, with stories of companies and their changes. I like the Kotter method for managing change, but in my lowly position I have usually had to wait until the people made up their own minds, then said "What a great idea!" because I care most that it gets done; it can't always happen on my wishing.

Not everything with an FMEA's high RPN must be addressed. The organization gets to decide - unless the issue impacts the customer, of course. In fact I often advise to start with the clearly obtainable - that also has measurable outcomes we can point to and say "See here, see how much benefit the effort brought." After gaining confidence in the change process (nothing imploded, we learn how to change one thing without causing negative effects to something else) we can become more bold and demand more of ourselves.

I hope this helps!

 

[v9991]

Deciding otherwise usually takes time, or new leadership, or a crisis/epiphany.

Yes, almost always thats true; in fact its sad/more with initial phase of newer systems. and still we manage to call them improvements while all those systems are in response to an audit observation or product failure!!! (not to mention the resistance or reluctance to the change)

... but in my lowly position I have usually had to wait until the people made up their own minds, then said "What a great idea!" because I care most that it gets done; it can't always happen on my wishing.

'
how do you manage to stay that disconnected; (especially, you knew it, indicated it, tried&failed to implement; and it was resisted...) and suddenly one fine day, the same things back to you as recommendation (worst case from an outsider, consultant, and even better from the same boss!!!)
is it different to face above situation as an consultants than facing it from employee-end?