Our items for employee motivation - 6.2.2.4 Employee Motivation

[ISOPete]

AHhh heated debates ....you gotta love em! I would not consider holding someone accountable for their work to be adversarial. If you stopped at McDomalds and ordered a Big Mac and when you bit into it it was hard as leather because the burger is overcooked what would you expect to happen? After the 4th time what would you expect? Would you be satisfied if the manager told you he was still training the employee????? I think not. So if one of my customers continues to recieve non conforming product do you think as Corrective action they will accept "I'm still training this moron" as an excuse. I think not!

 

[Kevin H]

Deming info

Pete - W. Edwards Deming was one of the original quality gurus from the 1950's he's credited with helping start the quality revolution in Japan. One of the most (if not the most) prestigious quality awards in Japan is issued in his name. There is a web site for people interested in continuing his legacy. It is: www.deming.org. One of his books is "Out of the Crisis" there are many others. He attributed a lot of American quality problems to the fault of management.

There is a lot of good information in his writings, but I don't buy into it 100% - (I'm probably about 90% in agreement) too many years working in unionized environments where yes, you do have people sabotaging the system. Though it could be looked at in a more Demingesque way as the intersection/conflict of 2 different management systems - that of the union and that of the company.

I'm skeptical of suggestion systems - an example from Sikorsky comes to mind. We were hired to upgrade their heat treating operations to the use of an atmosphere based on nitrogen and methanol - it was initiated by an engineer. At an early stage before approval, one of the union employees got wind of it and put it in the suggestion box. When the job was completed, he was credited for the suggestion and got a bonus based on it. The engineer would not have been considered no matter what, because process control/improvement was part of the job.

 

[Tim Folkerts]

It is generally accepted by quality professionals that the vast majority of problems are due to bad management, not bad workers.

If the cook at McD is so overloaded that he can't always be at the stove to flip the burgers at the right time, is that his fault, or the manager's for being too cheap to have adaquate staff? If the raw materials being fed into a machine have occasional impurities that cause parts to be out of spec, is that he fault of the operator or the manager who decided to go with a less expensive supplier? If the worker just doesn't have the skill to do the job, is that his fault, of the fault of the manager who hired him for the job in the first place.

The point is that, yes, some employees don't care about the quality of their work, but often the fault is completely beyond their control. To punish a worker who intentionally breaks a machine is fine, but to punish him because he just happened to be doing his job there when it broke is inexcusable.

The challenge is to be sure of the root cause before assigning blame. Especially if we have already agreed that most problems are really managment's fault to begin with.



Tim F

 

[ralphsulser]

Yes, the vast majoirty of the time it is management's responsibiltiy. But over the last 35 years I have seen some real bad apples who willfully damaged, short cutted controlled systems, and get involved in illegal activities to defraud and damage the company. We just lost 3 last week who were stealing company info, and property to profit themselves. Past employment activities seen were union hardcores damaging equipment, or slowing down operations. Unfortunately there will be these type of people who just have to be fired and/or prosecuted.

 

[Jen Kirley]

Perfect Attendance Awards:employees recieve a certificate/gift card/days off based upon 3 levels of achievement with invite to awards banquet

This invites "presenteeism", which can help spread illness throughout a company and invites mishaps/accidents when people work while ill. I have seen people at their machines, looking like the living dead, when a machine shop had no sick leave policy. They were miserable, productivity was low and their risk of accidents soared during these times.

Service Awards:days off and certificates for every 5 years of service with invite to awards banquet

They are being rewarded for longetivity, which is nice but rewards only being there, not their contribution.

CIP program: Cost Improvement ideas are submitted. Any accepted ideas recieve 5% of total annual savings.

I agree this can be good when it is absolutely transparent, and when the meek are actively invited to contribute. Are there supervisors whose personnel are too demoralized to ply their imaginiations for their company? How do you know everyone is being provided ample opportunity to participate to their capabilitites? Is there a sense that only engineers or a certain caliber of person has the "right stuff" to make such a contribution? What about the little boy at the parade--is everyone made feel welcome to say "The emperor is naked"?

Performance Reviews: based on productivity, quality, cooperativeness

Like Wes, I have never seen these done as well they should be. The process is way too subjective in almost all cases to do more than offer clues on what management wants.

Discipline: Disciplinary measures in place for quality issues

I share the distaste for discipline without clearly and thoughtfully executed behavior and change management programs that address why before disciplining an "offender"--discipline is a term too often misunderstood.

Annual Employee Meetings: Top Management discusses buisness outlook

If they discuss, it should be done in a very early, more personable level where people can offer their input to actually influence the processes that impact results. Advertising progress is great, but without active solicitation of employees' contribution the people might just think, "Okay, there's your bonus. Now let me get back to my desk/machine."

Profit Sharing: Company makes a profit employees get a share

Excellent, if, as Wes said, the formula is completely transparent. I have seen this done with secret formulas and it's devastating to morale. It actually was used more like a competition or form of discipline--"Make nice, or you might not get a bonus this quarter."

HR measures employee turnover

I hope so, and let us also measure accidents as linked to presenteeism, absenteeism due to preventable or recurring problems like child care or transportation problems, high-dollar employee factors that can be controlled through policy and good management practices.

Thanks for letting me put in my

 

[RoxaneB]

Perfect Attendance Awards:employees recieve a certificate/gift card/days off based upon 3 levels of achievement with invite to awards banquet

As some have already mentioned, there are problems that can come out of this one. I have worked for one organization that had this and the bitterness it caused for some women who went on maternity leave.

Service Awards:days off and certificates for every 5 years of service with invite to awards banquet

Seen them, but never known them to be motivational. If anything, the stories I've heard about such banquets...people who have had a little too much to drink and then wondering where their life has gone, etc. But it is still nice to give something at service milestones. We do a paperweight (5 years), clock (10 years), ring (15 years), ring with ruby (20 years), ring with diamond (25 years).

CIP program: Cost Improvement ideas are submitted. Any accepted ideas receive 5% of total annual savings.

Folks have already provided feedback on this one. It can be a dangerous path to go down...especially in a unionized environment.

Performance Reviews: based on productivity, quality, cooperativeness

Bias issues and these should focus more on issues that need to be resolved and professional development...not financial gains.

Discipline: Disciplinary measures in place for quality issues

As long as you are clearly able to demonstrate that it is the individual and not the process. Morale will drop across the board if people are constantly to blaim...especially if their CIP suggestions are regularly rejected.

Annual Employee Meetings: Top Management discusses buisness outlook

Only as long as it's two way communication...and maybe held twice a year. First...here's what we accomplished and here's what we plan. Second...here's what's happening so far.

Profit Sharing: Company makes a profit employees get a share

Depends a lot on what the criteria are. I've worked for a company where the Profit Sharing items were all production based. I was deemed administration. Nothing for me to do to help out except try not to kill myself out on the floor...not very motivational.

HR measures employee turnover
Is this enough??

Turnover is not necessarily a measure of how happy or motivated the employees are. Perhaps you could conduct an annual survey - at one of these meetings? - that focuses on what the employees think of their supervisors communications skills, would they recommend you to a friend as a great place to work, do folks believe that they are listened to, etc. From there, you get a good base line of where the major issues are with the employees and then what to focus on to help with motivation.

One thing that we did in 2004 - and it was a big hit! - was when hit one of our 2005 goals in 2004, we threw a big barbeque! With management cooking. All shifts were involved. Everyone mingled. Lots of laughter and music and discussions. It was a total success and motivated the group so much, that they achieved another 2005 goal the following month...another round of bbqs with chili, too!!

 

[ISOPete]

I see most people have a major problem with most everything I wrote! I am kinda confused on what the probelm is with CIP. Can someone enlighten me on what legal ramifications could possibly occur with this??????????

 

[db]

Actually you guys could create a separate thread on this subject. However, I have found that anytime there is a lack of personal performance, it can only be the result of one of two situations. 1) Deficiency in Knowledge (DK). I didn’t know, so I didn’t do. Here retraining will work. 2) Deficiency in Execution (DE). I knew, but didn’t do. Now, you have to find the real cause. Perhaps the employee wants to perform, but something is blocking performance. Of course, the employee might be just unwilling to perform. Before you can react, you need to have a good Root Cause Analysis done.

But back on topic….

6.2.2.4 has two separate requirements. The first, is that you have to have a process to motivate employees. Rewards and punishment will work, but the focus needs to be on achieving objectives, making continual improvement and promotion of innovation.

The second requirement is to measure the extent of personal awareness to 6.2.2 d). This is probably the biggest and hardest issue. How do you measure the extent of awareness? I have yet to find a good method.

 

[Al Rosen]

Okay Wes. So how long is an employee allowed to waste company money??????? How much constant reinstruction would you find sufficient. Not only is time being wasted in his production, but you have lost product and additional time training them for the umteenthmillionth time.

Here's a rhetorical question. How much would you invest to fix a broken machine?

 

[Wes Bucey]

Here's a rhetorical question. How much would you invest to fix a broken machine?

I guess the point of that is "the right machine for the job."

Do you keep on discarding tools that break in use or do you examine why they break? I think most of us here with a few miles under our feet got out of the habit of looking at the worker first as the root cause of any problem.

A model shop might be able to get away with using a 3/8 inch electric drill with 1/2 inch bits with the shank turned down to 3/8 inch for an occasional hole or two. A production shop drilling 120 holes an hour would soon burn out a 3/8 inch drill using it for 1/2 inch holes. So when the drill wears out and the bit begins to wobble and make eccentric holes, do you fire worker after worker for making nonconforming holes? Or do you change the work instruction and tooling?

As long as we are returning to Quality 101, let's take up the topic of FMEA (Failure Mode and Effects Analysis) Google the term!

When an organization devises a process for making a product, it makes sense to spend some time thinking, "What could go wrong? What does that do to the end product? How does that affect the customer? the user? the next stage in the process? Is there any effect on Life, Health, Safety of anybody anywhere? How can I prevent that from happening? How often could that wrong thing happen? Is the cost of prevention less than the cost of something going wrong?"

The FMEA process leads naturally into the concept of "mistake proofing" which is sometimes called by the Japanese term "Poka Yoke" in which the producer of a product tries to design the product and the processes for making it so the part can only be made correctly or not at all. There are some really slick sites about mistake proofing all over the internet.

Let's apply the concepts of FMEA and mistake proofing to Cost Improvement Programs (just legal implications for the example):

1. Management says, "Hey! Wouldn't it be neat if we have employees think of ways to make us more money or to save us money? If we give them 1% of only one year saving, we get to keep 99% of the saving first year and 100% every year after that!"
   "Yeah! Great! Let's put up a suggestion box."
2. Clear thinker #1 (FMEA) says, "How do we calculate that money? Sometimes you have to spend money to make money. Even though we charge off capital improvements on a 15 year basis, let's charge ALL the front end costs of the improvement the first year and only pay the employee 1% of the net. Isn't that cool?"
3. Clear thinker #2 says, "What happens if the long term saving is really huge and the front end costs eat up ALL the first year savings? Will the employee squawk that we're cheating him?"
4. Clear thinker #1 says, "So what! He'll take what we give him and like it."
5. #2 retorts, "What if he sues?"
6. "Based on what?" says #1. "We won't show him the books."
7. "If he sues, an attorney could get a subpoena to look at our books. If he does, he could discover we're front-end loading the expenses. If we have a lot of employees who made suggestions, there could be a class action. It could affect our stock. Some of our customers are very touchy about stuff like that. We could lose business. Oh my goodness! We could lose our jobs!"

Of course, this is exaggerated for comic effect, but it should lead you to see there are potential pitfalls to something that seems so user-friendly as CIP. The pitfalls can be as minor as worker dissatisfaction and refusal to participate in program escalating up to work actions, union agitation, distraction of executives from strategic planning for the organization, etc. UNLESS the planning team goes through a FMEA and mistake proofing process BEFORE implementing the CIP.

I don't mind answering questions about Quality processes and systems, but this thread has turned into something tiresome for me, because it's more like teaching basic school and may belong in the school Forum rather than the TS16949 Forum.