Who is Bill Gaw?
And why should we listen to him?
Manufacturing Management Training
Strategic Planning
PART III.
|
The Urgency Addiction Like many individuals, groups and companies, our MIS department was
caught in what Stephen Covey calls the "urgency addiction. "3 Figure 1 illustrates this
concept. In Covey's model, our time can be divided into a two-by-two
matrix. Quadrants I and II consist of "important"
activities, those with high value. Conversely, quadrants III and IV
are not important. Quadrants I and III consist of "urgent"
activities, those which must be done now. Quadrants II and IV are
not urgent. Although they are often confused, urgency and importance
are very different. Covey believes that we spend most of our time in
Quadrant I, dealing with issues both urgent and important. Most of
our jobs, our companies, indeed our whole culture is focused on
resolving crises large and small. Conversely, most of us spend
little time in Quadrant II (not urgent, but important). It is only
in Quadrant II that we "think outside the box" of our
daily routines and address fundamental improvements to the whole
system. Long-range planning is by definition a Quadrant II activity.
Though it may be the most important activity a group could
undertake, most of us simply do not because it is not urgent, not
mandatory, and often not rewarded. Our MIS department concluded that
to change our "system," we had to first break our own
urgency addiction and force ourselves into Quadrant II. This was not an easy decision. Our internal
customers were basically happy. For the most part, management mostly
left us alone. Key projects were successful. Our group was working
as hard as it could on the priority projects, just as we had been
directed. The problem was not our people; rather, it was our whole
environment. Working smarter or harder would not improve our
results. We had to fundamentally change the system itself.
Further, since we could not reasonably expect direction from senior
management, we determined to develop it ourselves, and then seek
their support. We were convinced that a strategic MIS plan was our
best chance to change our department's contribution in a meaningful
way. But first, we had to successfully change our own behaviors.
Doing so would require a different kind of change project than we
had ever attempted. It was certainly new to us! The "New" Planning Our small group of leaders asked two questions.
First, was the organization (both our department and the Company)
really ready for serious change? Second, how could we do it
successfully, given that we had only one chance to get it right? We
scanned some literature on change management. We consulted our
internal Team Development group. We brainstormed approaches and
synthesized the best of our collective thinking. More by instinct
than anything, we decided to combine some new change management
technology with classic project management techniques. The remainder
of this paper describes the most effective of these. Change Management Activities We found the book "Productive Workplaces,"
by Marvin R. Weisbord,4 to be a valuable guide to change management
(and how it evolved). We applied Weisbord's "Four Practical
Guidelines" for evaluating an organization's readiness for
change: Weisbord's four practical guidelines 1. Assess the potential for action 2. Get the whole system in the room 3. Focus on the future 4. Structure tasks that people can do for themselves
Assess Potential for Action World Class Manufacturing Menu lean
six sigma success six
sigma presentations success We believed that an MIS-led planning process could be succeed. Conversely, we believed that inaction on our part would not improve our lot. But could we lead the necessary changes? Would senior management let us? Would the department follow? A model that helped us analyze this potential is Jansen's "Four-Room Apartment" (See Figure 2).-6 In Jansen's model, we all live in a four-room apartment. This applies to people, groups, departments, companies, etc. We move from room to room depending on how we feel in response to external events. Further, we move in a circular flow (usually in one direction). In the Contentment room, we are satisfied with the status quo. Then, some change—any change—can disturb our peace and push us into the Denial room. In Denial, we are perceived as unaware, afraid of change, or insensitive (though we do not feel that way). We stay in Denial until we admit to our fear and anxiety, which pushes us through the door into Confusion. In the Confusion room, we struggle with the problems until a solution emerges. When it does, we move into Renewal, and then eventually, back into Contentment (completing the cycle). The frustrating business and technical changes described above had split our MIS department between the Denial and the Confusion rooms. Those of us in Confusion knew that we needed fresh direction, and gambled that we could pull the balance of our people out of Denial if we could persuade top management to back us. We concluded that under the right conditions, the department did have the potential to change. To be Continued STAY CONNECTED To stay current on lean manufacturing process and best practices, you can subscribe to our free weekly bulletin, "Manufacturing Basics and Best Practices (MBBP)." Simply fill in the below form and click on the "Subscribe Now Button." We'll also send you our free Special White Paper Report, "8-Basics of Lean Manufacturing for Personal and Company Success." Your personal information will never be disclosed to any third party. privacy policy Here's what one of our subscribers said about MBBP Bulletins: "Great articles. Thanks for the insights. I often share portions of your articles with my staff and they too enjoy them and fine aspects where they can integrate points into their individual areas of responsibilities. Thanks again." Kerry B. Stephenson. President. KALCO Lighting, LLC Manufacturing
Knowledge you’ll not find at offsite
Lean
Manufacturing Training for anyone ... anywhere ... anytime Email: Click
here Privacy Policy |