How to SHOW the importance of checklists, through some team gaming or play?
- Thread starter rogerpenna
- Start date
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
rogerpenna
Quite Involved in Discussions
Most probably it is, which is why it's not a simple "sit there and watch video" training, but a gamified event.
And why it is generic about importance of checklists, not about a specific checklist.
imho, if I am trying to show the importance and use of checklists, rather than trying to show how to use a specific checklist, it already demonstrates it's more related to personnel issues than about the checklist itself.
John's answer (which you liked) seemed to go along the lines that the problem was the checklist itself not being good for use, so I am not sure why you agreed with that post and yet you think the issue IS different than proper checklist use.
I liked it because I felt like his post was trying to get the conversation back to whatever your actual question was as it's easy for threads like these to wander a bit. I know that well because chase rabbits a lot 
. I tried to help that along because it felt like you were trying to find a way to fix people's use of checklists when originally you asked about ways to make a checklist training sessions more fun/engaging. I'm not sure, just trying to help see what's being asked.
. I tried to help that along because it felt like you were trying to find a way to fix people's use of checklists when originally you asked about ways to make a checklist training sessions more fun/engaging. I'm not sure, just trying to help see what's being asked.rogerpenna
Quite Involved in Discussions
I am sorry if my posts were a little confusing, but I tried in the OP to show I was trying to fix people's use of checklists. I think I (at least tried) to write an entire paragraph about it in the OP, about how several employees were not filling correctly their checklists, mostly for thinking it was a waste of time, some even trying (as far as we can tell) to fool managers, filling checklists after doing (or not doing at all) their own incomplete checks.
Roger,
After facilitating a workshop for the operators to develop their own checklist I’ll wager that it’ll cover most if not all of the items listed by the Chief of Maintenance plus a few more. But it will be owned by the operators after they feel they’ve been consulted.
Their discussions should deepen their understanding of the need for each checklist item too.
Sorry for suggesting it was your checklist earlier.
John
After facilitating a workshop for the operators to develop their own checklist I’ll wager that it’ll cover most if not all of the items listed by the Chief of Maintenance plus a few more. But it will be owned by the operators after they feel they’ve been consulted.
Their discussions should deepen their understanding of the need for each checklist item too.
Sorry for suggesting it was your checklist earlier.
John
Rogerpenna, just for clarity, I was replying to John Broomfield.
In my example the desired impact was threefold, 1. To get the checklist up to date and relevant, 2. To get the people doing the checklists to own them and 3. To give everyone involved a better understanding of why these checks are important from numerous viewpoints i.e. production, quality, technology, maintenance etc. So during these “working lunches” when an someone asked “is this check really necessary” an engineer, quality, production or technology representative would either say “yes, and here are the reasons why”, “no, you are right, this should be removed” or “this is not critical, however we would like to monitor it so lower the check frequency”.
Also remember, at operator level I used “Key operators”. These were experienced people that worked on the production line that the others looked up to. I knew that once I had their “Buy In” everyone else would follow their lead, and they did.
Not wanting to offend you Rogerpenna, however I must ask the question "Are you training, or are you teaching?"
Training Not Teaching
• When considering the principles of learning we are only concerned with training and not teaching.
• Teaching is purely the imparting of knowledge.
• Training is also the understanding of the practical application of this knowledge.
• A teacher is not necessarily concerned with the after effects of his or her teaching, other than passing exams.
• A trainer teaches with the sole purpose that the theory is correctly put into practice.
Quite simply, that is the reason why training takes place in the field, as training cannot only be done by books and courses alone.
In my example the desired impact was threefold, 1. To get the checklist up to date and relevant, 2. To get the people doing the checklists to own them and 3. To give everyone involved a better understanding of why these checks are important from numerous viewpoints i.e. production, quality, technology, maintenance etc. So during these “working lunches” when an someone asked “is this check really necessary” an engineer, quality, production or technology representative would either say “yes, and here are the reasons why”, “no, you are right, this should be removed” or “this is not critical, however we would like to monitor it so lower the check frequency”.
Also remember, at operator level I used “Key operators”. These were experienced people that worked on the production line that the others looked up to. I knew that once I had their “Buy In” everyone else would follow their lead, and they did.
Not wanting to offend you Rogerpenna, however I must ask the question "Are you training, or are you teaching?"
Training Not Teaching
• When considering the principles of learning we are only concerned with training and not teaching.
• Teaching is purely the imparting of knowledge.
• Training is also the understanding of the practical application of this knowledge.
• A teacher is not necessarily concerned with the after effects of his or her teaching, other than passing exams.
• A trainer teaches with the sole purpose that the theory is correctly put into practice.
Quite simply, that is the reason why training takes place in the field, as training cannot only be done by books and courses alone.
John Predmore
Trusted Information Resource
I attended a corporate training recently. We divided into teams and it was a race to assemble children's bicycles. There were instructions, but most teams tried to assemble the front and rear of the bicycle simultaneously, without reading the instructions. At least some of the teams had to disassemble work already completed after they discovered leftover pieces or sub-assemblies that would not assemble together because the proper sequence was not followed. At the end of the race, the bicycles were donated to a youth camp type charity, so participants left with a warm generous feeling in their heart and the corporate sponsor got a tax deduction for the price of the bicycles. I think the lesson here was teamwork, but maybe this story will prompt training ideas for the value of checklists.
CreativeQC
I truly have no idea what I'm doing half the time.
You could have three cabs/forklifts/trucks and have employee's race to see who could complete an inspection the quickest. The catch being that each cab is missing something or has some defect (Red Rabbit). More likely than not they will miss the Red Rabbit and hand in a rubber stamped inspection list. If someone identifies the missing item, starbucks gift card. Either way you could then take the opportunity to explain that missing items can mean quality and safety issues. My goto one is a defective fire extinguisher. They glance to see if the tank is there, but don't check to see if its changed and in date. This game works best if its a station and you can work with smaller groups at a time.
Let's assume that checklists are completed as expected. How does that assure that the items on the checklist were actually done? The only thing you can know for sure is that the checklists are completed. Checklists aren't much good unless you can actually verify that something called for wasn't done. Creating some kind of game isn't likely to help anything. In my experience that sort of thing tends to trivialize things and can be perceived as condescension. If you have to go to that length to get people to do their jobs, there's a problem that goes deeper than checklists.
Similar threads
