posted 15 February 2001 04:32 PM              

I need your help! I am going to give Quality Awareness training sessions in my company. The target of this training are line supervisors and production operators. Their motivation is very low, so I'm trying to get some extra "weapons" to get the message through.

I'm trying to get practical examples of everyday's life that help them understand the importance of:
- traceability and defect segregation;
- adequate and clear identification;
- following written instructions;
- document control;

Can anybody give me some ideas? Remember: it will have to be examples of everybody's daily life.
Thanks a lot

posted 15 February 2001 08:48 PM               

Adequate and clear identification:

An example I've used with hourly employees·

Let's say you take your new car in for service. You drop it off in the morning and the dealer says "No problem·we'll keep track of it for you!" You go back in the evening to pick it up and when the dealer brings "your car" around, it turns out to be a ten-year-old beater. "Oh, I'm sorry sir·I guess we mixed up some cars! I think we may have given yours to someone else. Why don't you come back tomorrow and maybe we'll figure out who we gave it to!"

Dealers and service shops use the number systems on their service tickets for a good reason·clear identification. They know that the customer will be extremely upset if they "lose" their car.

posted 16 February 2001 08:24 AM               

Two things come to mind. The employee motivation being low is a systemic problem that needs addressing. I recommend the thread ãDoes money motivate?ä also in the Misc. Quality Topics forum. It goes beyond just the money aspect especially with the suggested reading and links. The sources of demotivation are probably beyond your control, but you should understand why they feel as they do. It would help when presenting. If they are bitter, they will see your efforts as more of the same. You must demonstrate that this is good for them (help them to learn why it is important so that they do it for themselves if not for the company). I feel your success will ride on this point.

To your request (the second thing):

Depending on the time you have, you may want to ãBake a Cakeä with your group. Baking a cake is a relatively straight-forward and simple process. It can cover many (all) the elements of ISO if you think about it long enough. The selection of ingredients (jars marked flour, sugar, salt, tea, etc.), following the recipe (procedures, instructions, etc.), and how the recipe is filed. What is done with the ãnonconforming cookiesä (probably eaten by the baker) might demonstrate inspection and segregation. Mixing the ingredients in the proper sequence and baking them in a calibrated oven might help the process. Think of the boundaries of a cookie company (purchasing, customer service, etc.) when you develop your organization.

Anyone having any experience preparing a meal would have enough knowledge to follow the process and understand the message. I would recommend a little comic relief in the script when presenting your topics. Get people involved and participating in your presentation. They just might forget about their job problems long enough to hear your message. The trick next is to find ways to compare the demonstration to real examples in your organization and outside of it to reinforce what they have learned. Danâs example is a good one.

Perhaps others out there might be able to suggest how another element (point in an element) can be brought into the ãCookie Companyä procedures training manual?

Regards,

posted 16 February 2001 02:50 PM               

Bring's to mind another example I heard (with respect to "clear instructions")...

A Plant Manager I know tells how he stresses the importance of clear instructions by asking his audience "how to work one of these things" when he holds up a cigarette (OK, OK...maybe this isn't the BEST example!). He says that most often, the first response is "put it in your mouth". He claims to have eaten many cigarettes by using this example!

posted 19 February 2001 10:57 AM               

Hospitals ID patients so they do not remove the right thing from the wrong patient.

Dry Cleaners and laundries ID your clothing so you get YOUR clothing back.

posted 20 February 2001 01:13 PM               

Excellent point! Why is it that folks are enthusiastic when they leave, but later lose enthusiasm? The answer is simple: they are not MOTIVATED to do anything different. Additionally, Management lacks a Method to accomplish the Transformation.

ãQuality awareness can only be appreciated by the individual within the process of adequate training, mentoring, measuring and then, Responsibility and Accountability.ä

I think you might be right on this. People must learn why Quality Awareness is important. Being told that it is important is much different than learning that it is important. Telling someone creates movement, in other words, short term effect (brief enthusiasm). Learning causes intrinsic belief and understanding which is long term and creates motivation (extended enthusiasm). ÎMentoringâ creates opportunity to learn (know), Îmeasureâ creates feedback on how well you applied what you know (know-how), and ÎResponsibility and Accountabilityâ creates Wisdom and Character. I borrow these references form the work of Myron Tribus. (knowledge>know-how>wisdom>character).

How many Quality Awareness meetings does it take before the organization understands the importance of Quality? Why donât people just simply understand that it is Îgood for themâ and just do it?! How many times have you asked these questions or heard others ask them? Iâll bet fairly often.

Back to the group·.

posted 20 February 2001 06:13 PM               

Personally, I think these sessions help a great deal if the situation in the work place can be related to an everyday situation that the employee understands. Take the identification issue...most employees consider putting a tag on work as a "nuisance" part of the job until they have an everyday experience provided that demonstrates it's important .

If they still don't respond, it's time to take the three step training approach...

posted 24 February 2001 04:14 PM               

An auditor (from one of our customers) once told me that discipline is not true corrective action. But I am a realist. That's where my "train/retrain/are you trainable" approach comes from. I guess it moves discipline to the management level in my mind.

If the employee is "not trainable", then as management, something has to be done. Most often this involves a number of steps·first warning, suspension, dismissal, etc. All are disciplinary actions, but "corrective action" in my mind from the point of managing the situation. As a Quality Manager, I often fought Foremen who complained their employees just couldn't be trained. My comeback was "How come they're still here?"

Your point is well taken, and on track. One place I was at we ended up suspending a very senior employee for not signing his paperwork. It was a tough decision, but it had an impact. The junior employees realized we meant what we said, and conformance went up.

The key is management support. Once management moves to take action (perhaps somewhat harsh), the message is clear...both to the employees and those that supervise them.

posted 26 February 2001 08:37 AM               

If you are proponents to the 94/6 theory (85/15 for Juranâs folks), then the reasons why the documents are not being signed in Energyâs organization belong to the System, not the individual. This is not to say that their arenât a few bad apples, but probably somewhere around 6%. But I suspect that there should be less cutting to do than I am lead to believe.

Senior management must provide an organizational AIM and a method for achieving that AIM. Asking for something without providing a method can be classified as Wishful Thinking. It appears to me that Energy has a tough, but common, hill to climb. A decree from management to be ISO registered, but lacking a method (and probably resources) for accomplishing this wishful thought. Management must lead. They must provide the resources and guidance necessary to make their desires a reality. This is goes for whatever desire that they may hold.

Firing someone is KITA, clear and simple. The message you send to others is simple: do it; or you will be gone! Movement like a kick-in-the-ass will work in the short term. Other movement practices, like incentives, will have the same negative effect (though less painful and visible). What we are really after here is long term gain, intrinsic motivation. Motivation can only come from within. We need to find ways as managers (ISO reps) to draw out this motivation. People must understand why something needs to be done. We must facilitate their learning. Training is not enough.

Best regards,

posted 26 February 2001 11:08 AM               

Life is a series of penalties and rewards. And I think discipline has it's place in a work environment. Don't get me wrong...I do in fact subscibe to the 94/6 theory. In fact, the use of discipline is, in my mind, management using a tool to take hold of a situation. I've seen work environments where management can't come to a unified descision to use this tool, and it's often interpreted as a lack of commitment to the system ("If he doesn't have to do it, why should I").

It's also important to use reward when implementing a system. When things are done right, praise should be handed out. Praise is a management tool that's probably not used enough. If Energy's workforce is skilled and committed to the company, maybe an alternative approach would be to very obviously praise the one or two who do sign their paperwork. And not in private...do it in front of those who don't (without reprimanding the one's who don't). I've also used this technique with success.

posted 26 February 2001 12:57 PM               

Under the prevailing paradigm of Skinnerian thought, your comment on life being a series of penalties and rewards is unfortunately true. Pop behaviorism has led us to this point. What is worse, when given the alternative to Skinnerian thinking, one finds the road much more difficult. It isnât any wonder why we resort to the easiest path, the path of least resistance. Who has time to take the hard road?

The prevailing paradigm is widespread, touching all phases of our lives. We reinforce good behavior of children by offering them bribes of desert or prizes, punishment to change negative behavior. This continues on into our Education, Gold Stars for good work, frowns and Fs when we do poorly. On to work we go. Employee of the month and probation fit the bill here. As you can see, all of the punishments and rewards cause movement and take away the focus on what we are truly after, motivation. Skinner believed that our actions were all caused by outside influences (we did not have a mind of our own). He based this on his interactions with rats and how they responded to outside stimuli. When asked if there was a difference between rats and man, he replied, ãNo.ä

I recommend the book, ãPunished by Rewards: the problems with incentives, gold stars, Aâs, praise and other bribesä by Alfie Kohn to anyone following this thread. It is a truly enlightening book. Kohn demonstrates the differences between Movement and Motivation and makes a solid case for the abolishment of Skinnerian Pop Behaviorism. He speaks of the many forms of KITA present in society, expanding on the work of Herzberg (see our thread on ãDoes money motivate?ä).

Still gentlemen, there are those who require a nudge to get them going. A measure of Îmovementâ might be necessary, no doubt about that (some folks only respond to fear and intimidation). But the focus should be on the education of people. Facilitate learning and look towards the long-term objective. If you have committed people, then I question if they understand the value or importance of signing the document. If they realize that this may be a protocol or a quality record, then I would think that they would follow your instruction. Otherwise, your explanation may have not been clear enough.

Regards,

posted 26 February 2001 03:21 PM               

I must admit that I am quite familiar with where you are. It is still a battle in this organization to getting things done as we have outlined for ourselves from time to time. A few years ago, I was so frustrated with folks not complying to procedures that they created for themselves. Internal audits would uncover these problems, CARs were issued. Then the CARs went unresolved for extended periods. The frustration grew!

In retrospect, my frustrations werenât with people. Simply, my own expectations of what the System should yield led to my frustration. The System will yield only what is it capable of. No more, no less. With ever increasing knowledge of systems (largely due to interactions with many of the folks here through shared experiences), I have learned to control my level of frustration. Yes, I still do get frustrated with people, but I always challenge myself to find a reason within the 94% before I get down on the individual for not complying. Sometimes it is easy, sometimes I resolve that the cause resides in the other 6% (and Iâd like to do the kicking!).

Using an outside source does remove individual doubt (we used a consultant many years ago that I thought was near worthless) makes sense. I am often certain that I can give a better presentation, but I understand that if there is doubt in the minds of the people because it is me giving a perspective, then it is better that someone else deliver the message.

Best regards,