Conference 7.286::digital

1350.0. "Managing Transformation and Digital" by SAHQ::CARNELLD (DTN 385-2901 David Carnell @ALF) Tue Jan 22 1991 10:54

    
    Continuous improvement is not a matter of fixing the old system.  It is
    constructing what should be the next system for the twenty-first
    century.  Change is the name of the game.  Not modification, not
    adaption, not adjustment, not downsizing, but transformational change.
    
    Right or wrong for Digital to ensure future prosperity?  And how will
    managing transformation in Digital be best accomplished?  Will it?
    
    Enclosed below is a very long, but worth reading, article floating
    around the Digital electronic network from this month's issue of The
    Journal of Quality Management.  It is posted for discussion purposes
    without permission.  It addresses change and transformation into new
    systems versus maintaining old systems.
    
< e-mail circulation headers deleted >

   
        This months issue of The Journal of Quality Management has a very good
      article on "managing transformation" that is worth making available in
      electronic format.
        The JQM is published quarterly and is available through:

                           MARIAN COLLEGE
                     45 South National Avenue
                       Fond Du Lac, WI 54935
                          (414)923-8140

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

                      MANAGING TRANSFORMATION

                      by Dr. Sheila Sheinberg

"I am going to explore in this article one of the critically important elements
for quality management-managing change. We shape the future of our country. I
have a bit of experience with change. I happen to have two children. I have a
twenty-year-old son and a four-year-old son and nothing in between. So, I don't
just talk about change, folks, I do it.

I found out I was pregnant and needed bifocals on the same day. Let me tell you
something that will make you wake up and smell the coffee. I thought they were
putting smudges in telephone books and I thought I was going through the change
of life. I waited a couple of months, I went to the optometrist and I said,
"They're putting smudges in telephone books." He said, "No they're not; you
need bifocals." That afternoon I went to the gynecologist. I told him that I
thought I was going through the change of life. A couple of hours later he
called me and said, "Well, lady, it's a change of life but not the one you
thought."

My children are very important to me. I believe that the world you and I live
in today was not given to us by our ancestors or by our parents. The world that
you and I live in today, the America that we are so proud of, is loaned to us by
our children. I want our children to inherit a nation and a world that they too
can be proud of. That's our job for the next decade in America.

The only way we can build the future is to accelerate and manage the change
process. I've gone into many companies where the basic assumption is that we can
do quality by simply learning the tools of quality. We'll learn SPC, histograms,
and pareto charts. We'll even discuss problem solving and organize a couple of
teams here and there, if that's what it takes to do quality. Well I can tell 
you, that is not quality. Those are the tools of quality. that's like handing
someone a hammer and a set of nails and saying, "Now build me a cathedral."
Well, that doesn't make any sense. All they have is a hammer and a set of nails.

                       
                          THE ONLY WAY WE CAN

                         BUILD THE FUTURE IS TO

                        ACCELERATE AND MANAGE THE

                              CHANGE PROCESS.


My question is, "What is the cathedral that we are trying to build? What stra-
tegy, what blueprint, do we have for that cathedral? What management do we have
to facilitate the organization and the use of people that are going to build 
that cathedral? What is each person's responsibility and what part of that cat-
hedral do they own?" Then put a hammer and a couple of nails in their hands and
say,"Let's build a cathedral."

Quality improvement or continuous improvement is not a matter of fixing the old
system. It's not a matter of simply improving what is; it is constructing what
should be for the twenty-first century.

Managing quality requires us to transform our thinking about who we are, what we
do, and how we do it. We have to transform our understanding of what our prod-
ucts and services look like and how we interact with and respond to our cust-
omer. We're talking profound change.
 
                           QUALITY IMPROVEMENT OR 
                           
                           CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT

                          IS NOT A MATTER OF FIXING 

                               THE OLD SYSTEM.

Without profound change, quality will never happen in this country. Quality is
an American invention. It has been on the scene for ninety years. It started in
1900. However, in ninety years, America has not succeeded in the quality pro-
cess. Why? Because we did not start from profound knowledge. Even when we're
exposed to profound knowledge, we often reject it or think we don't need it. 
Quality will not happen without profound knowledge and not without transforma-
tional change. The quality/continuous improvement process begins with the pro-
found understanding that we have to transform ourselves. We have to transform
our companies. We have to transform America.

Let's look at the first issue in profound knowledge - understanding systemic
implications. Do you realize what a radical transformation that is in thinking?
Do you realize that the whole basis for how we organize, how we manage, how we
deliver our product and our service to our customer is predicated upon a very
mechanistic world view? The world is a place made up of bits and pieces. You
can break a machine done into its parts. You can analyze it in terms of indi-
vidual segments. You can put it back together and run the machine. The machine
has interchangeable parts so you can replace parts when they wear out. We have
a very mechanistic view of the world and even of human beings.

To take the systemic view of our universe we have to stop thinking mechanisti-
cally. We have to stop thinking in terms of bits and pieces. Effective quality
management requires us to think organically. We have to think in wholes. We
have to think of interactive effects. We have to think of collaborative and
relationships. These are not the basic assumptions upon which we have built our
lives, our companies, our industries and our economy.

To take the systemic point of view, to gain the first step in profound know-
ledge, we have to make a major change in our mind set. We must see our universe
organically, in terms of a whole, as an organism rather than as a machine. This
is a radical transformation in thinking in America.


                          EFFECTIVE QUALITY MANAGEMENT

                               REQUIRES US TO THINK

                              ORGANICALLY. WE HAVE TO

                              THINK IN WHOLES. WE HAVE

                          TO THINK OF INTERACTION EFFECTS.

                                WE HAVE TO THINK OF

                          COLLABORATION AND RELATIONSHIPS.

Organic thinking is only the beginning of the kind of changes that we must make
to be successful in the process of continuous improvement. Change is the name of
the game. Not modification, not adaption, not adjustment, not downsizing, but
transformational change. Change is not strange or weird or bizarre or unusual.

The most important area that needs changing is our assumptions. Assumptions 
about who we are, what we do, what an employee is, what the relationship is of
management to frontline workers are critically important to quality. I think
that when Dr. Deming talks about profound knowledge, he is talking about knowing
our own assumptions, challenging our assumptions and creating new assumptions. I
want to give you an illustration of why and how assumptions work. Unless an org-
anization's management and its frontline people are willing to make some major
changes in their assumptions, quality will probably fail. A company may get
quality with a small "q" but it definitely will not get quality with a big "Q" 
unless there is change in basic assumptions. We've done a lot of things over the
last few years.

                            UNLESS AN ORGANIZATION'S

                               MANAGEMENT AND IT'S

                               FRONTLINE PEOPLE ARE

                               WILLING TO MAKE SOME

                              MAJOR CHANGES IN THEIR

                             ASSUMPTIONS, QUALITY WILL

                                    PROBABLY FAIL.


Think of all the programs our people have experienced. We may have done quality
circles - why did it fail? We may have done zero defects and it failed. We did
management by wandering around, and it failed. Our people could probably give us
a long list of short-term programs. Why have they failed? Are quality circles
bad? Is Kaizen wrong? Is zero defects inappropriate? The usual reason for these
foiled initiatives is that there was no change in basic assumptions. It's like
taking a skin graft from Sue and giving it to me - I'm going to reject it! What
we've done in the past is given our employees inoculations. We give people a
deadened form of something and they get immunity to it.

When most of our employees see a new program they say, "and this to shall pass."
This is the drill of the week, the drill of the month, the drill of the year,
the drill of the decade, the drill of the CEO; and this to shall pass. Look at
all of these failed initiatives. They failed because assumptions didn't change.
Let's talk about one major assumption that will have to change if we are going
to meet the quality challenge. What has been America's assumption about work
and workers the last couple of decades? Simply put, workers are disposable. This
is the mechanistic view. The problem is that these workers are not going to be
replaceable. We're not going to have that many parts from which to choose. We've
got to create a system that fits the future. One of the realities of that future
is the demographics of the birth-dearthers or the baby bust. We will not have
enough workers who are well-enough prepared to do quality work in a technologi-
cal era.

Another assumption that must change is our attitude that workers must be super-
vised. This is the attitude that workers only work when they're watched. Basic-
ally workers are stupid, lazy, unmotivated, and unresponsive. These are the
assumptions of Fredrick Taylor. He taught American companies scientific manage-
ment. Taylor's strategy was to break the task down to its simplest components-
a fully mechanistic view. Make sure the workers understands the task.

                            ANOTHER ASSUMPTION THAT

                               MUST CHANGE IS OUR

                              ATTITUDE THAT WORKERS

                               MUST BE SUPERVISED.


Don't give workers more than one task because they will be confused. If we want
the worker to work better; we need someone to watch the worker; because workers
only work when they're watched. If we want quality, we have to inspect each 
operation. Let's look at the reality of work-a-watchers.

What's the first level of work-a-watcher in our companies? Front line super-
visor. But not too long ago this person was just a worker. Consequently, we
really cannot trust him. So, we have a work-a-watchers in American companies
who watch work-a-watchers, who watch workers. What's the second level of work-
a-watcher? Foreman. That's the work-a-watcher who watches the work-a-watcher.
And we have a work-a-watchers who watch work-a-watchers who watch work-a-watch-
ers who watch workers. What's the next level of work-a-watchers? Mid-level
managers. So the story continues.The next level of work-a-watchers are execu-
tives. If we are concerned about productivity and America's competitive posi-
tion may I suggest that we look at our bureaucracies. Many people in America
who say they are working are only watching. Watchers don't make things happen.
Only workers do. In America, in any one day, many people are just watching.
That's why in the last decade we have begun to flatten the structure. We have
eliminated a significant number of work-a-watchers by instituting successful
self-management team approaches, super-team approaches, and quality improvement
processes.

                            IF WE ARE NOT WILLING TO 

                            MAKE A PARADIGM SHIFT, IF

                              WE ARE NOT WILLING TO

                              TRANSFORM OUR ATTITUDE

                             TOWARDS WORKERS, WE WILL

                             NOT MAKE QUALITY WORK IN

                                 OUR ORGANIZATIONS.


These team approaches and quality-improvement processes are predicated on the
ability to trust. The whole bureaucracy is based on mistrust and designed to
control. That's why we have level upon level of work-a-watcher. Our assumptions
are critically important. If we are not willing to make a paradigm shift, if we
are not willing to transform our attitude toward workers, we will not make qual-
ity work in our organizations.

There is a paradigm at the heart of every company, every industry, and every
management process. The paradigm ultimately determines our theories, our methods
and even our reality. Yes, our paradigm determines our reality because the para-
digm tells us what to look at. This is why profound knowledge is sometimes diff-
icult to attain because our paradigm binds us to that which is possible or even
probable or that which is different and doesn't fit the paradigm. Once that par-
adigm is in place in our companies it is very difficult to change. Why is that?
Because it is our reality. The paradigm defines who we are and what we do and
how we do it. It is our safety, our security, and our predictability.

When a new person enters our companies, what do we do? For the first couple of
years we teach orientation, socialization, indoctrination. We teach the neo-
phyte the way it is. If the newcomer asks us why we do it this way, we say,
"Don't ask stupid questions; just learn how to do it." The good news for us is
that they don't ask stupid questions once they learn it our way. So we socialize
them into the paradigm and they go out and make a discovery and bring it back
and it fits the paradigm.

Within a paradigm, only minimal growth can happen. Within a paradigm, growth is 
a liear and additive process. It's more or less of what you already have. It's
an adjustment, an adaptation, a modification. This is the kind of change most
of us experience most of the time. It's also the easiest kind of change for
most of us to do. It does not require profound knowledge. It does not challenge
our basic paradigm. We get to keep our basic security, our basic understanding,
our basic world view in tact. Thomas Kuhn, in his book THE STRUCTURE of SCIENTI-
FIC REVOLUTIONS, asked what happens when a piece of information reaches the
paradigm which does not fit the basic paradigm. He calls this an anomaly. What's
the first response to an anomaly? To reject it. The gatekeeper sees it as his
divine responsibility to protect and defend the paradigm. Most managers have
reached their position because they have succeeded in their organizational
structure. We have become gatekeepers.

Our first response to an anomaly is often to kill the messenger. They poisoned
Socrates, remember. They put Gallileo in jail. My suggestion for the next decade
is kill the messenger only if he/she arrives late! There are multiple anomalies
on America's horizon. They're all out there. Demographic, fiscal, technological,
and systemic anomalies. Now we have one or two choices...as professionals, as
companies, as industries, as Americans. We can recognize the handwriting on the
wall and ask, "What is it going to take to create a new paradigm so that we can
acquire and utilize profound knowledge?" Or, we can just sit back and wait for
the big bang.


When we let go of our old paradigm, what do we have? Nothing. Chaos, that's it.
That's the chaos that Tom Peters talks about in THRIVING ON CHAOS. Chaos intimi-
dates most of us. It makes us angry and frightened. Many people feel betrayed
when an organization or a company or an industry goes into that chaos. If we
can live in the chaos and shape a vision, we can come to a new paradigm. What
might this paradigm look like? The aradigm for quality may require us to move
from a paradigm of competitive to a paradigm of cooperation. We're going to have
to move from MBO to collaboration, learning and contribution. We're going to
have to move from quanity to quality, from bottom line to continuous improve-
ment. The paradigm shift will require us to move away from mechanistic attitudes
and toward organic attitudes. We will need to move from rugged individualism to
collaboration and teamwork, from "good enough" to error free, from bureaucracy
to ad hocracy. We are talking about creating a whole new paradigm for us as pro-
fessionals and for the front line people in our organizations.

What will it take to go from where we are today to the new paradigm of tomorrow?
What will it take to move me personally? If the management doesn't change, the
industry will not change, and America will not change. What will it take to move
organizations to create a new paradigm for quality work? Systemically, what kind
of reward structures will be required? What kind of relationships will be 
needed?

                            WE WILL NEED TO

                            MOVE FROM RUGGED 

                           INDIDIVIDUALISM TO

                            COLLABORATION AND

                     TEAMWORK, FROM "GOOD ENOUGH"
 
                             TO ERROR FREE,

                   FROM BUREAUCRACY TO AD HOCRACY.


First, we must believe that change is needed. How often do you hear, "If it 
ain't broke, don't fix it"? What's wrong with what we're doing now? If we're
going to make continuous improvement a reality in this country, if we're going
to make it work after 90 years of rejection, we're going to have to talk about
transformational change. Second, to shift a paradigm requires competent leader-
ship that sees itself as a change agent. That's very different from management
for continuity. Change agents need some unique skills, such as anticipatory
skills. Anticipatory skills include forecasting, projecting opportunity, obs-
tacles and consequences, and scanning the environment. This wisdom of prediction
is part of profound knowledge. We might also call this intuitive leadership be-
cause it requires a sense for the unknown and unforeseeable. We need to antici-
pate change in servicing customers, finding new advantages over competitors,
and exploiting new company strengths. We have to do strategic thinking and
strategic planning.

Let's take an example from the past - Moses. Strategic thinking and strategic
planning for Moses made him realize that the Jews would have to leave Egypt. Now
here's where it becomes a significant problem. How did Moses get the Jews to
leave? Here's where leadership becomes critical. The leaders must understand 
that change is difficult and people do not generally want to change. Just be-
cause you're a slave is no reason to let go. Why change old structure? It's not
that bad, it's worked in the past. I mean, being a slave is better than no 
status at all. Yes, you have a master. The bad news is the master tells you what
to do. The good news is the master tells you what to do. The master gives you a
free house and a shop and takes care of you.

So why leave? How did Moses get the Jews to leave? Moses created a picture of
the future, better than the present and the past. There is tremendous power in
a vision. A vision is paramount because it moves people out into the future. It
gives them something to reach for, something to strive for, something to work
towards.

                            A VISION IS A WAY TO

                        UNIFY POLICIES, TO OVERCOME

                      INERTIA AND TO UNIFY EMPLOYEES

              IN A COMMON PURSUIT OF A COLLECTIVE PASSION



That vision is extraordinarily important. The vision is a standard by which
choices will be made. America's going to have to make some difficult choices 
over the next decade. In our companies and divisions, the final criterion for
decision making must be,"Will this action take us toward our vision or away
from it?" The vision is an opportunity for the leader to assert moral princi-
pals. It should be stated very simply. A vision is a way to unify policies, to
overcome inertia and to unify employees in a common pursuit of a collective
passion. A vision works from the heart as well as from the mind. A vision gives
purpose and meaning. If I were to describe vision in its most simple sense, I
would use the analogy of an architect. We tell the architect what we want and
the architect gives us a picture. The picture doesn't have alot of detail but
it's what we're trying to create. Next the architect will give us a blueprint.
That's our strategy to get there. Finally, we talk about tasks and responsi-
bilities and activities to build that structure. Anybody ever go to a constru-
ction site halfway between ground breaking and completion? You want to see 
chaos? That is chaos. However, progress is slowly measured against the picture
of the future.

Ian Carlson has written a book called MOMENTS of TRUTH in which he talks about
how he turned around Scandinavian Air Service. He says that any organization
that wants to transform itself first and foremost has to figure out what busi-
ness they're in and who the customer is. Second, they need to empower their
people to live with their product or service in every interaction with the
custome - the moment of truth. Finally, one needs to sustain a passionate
vision. He gives a beautiful illustration of vision. He says every day, day in
and day out, every person is cracking rock. Ian Carlson says he walks through
the rock quarry. He sees old Bob. He says, "Bob, what are you doing?" Bob says,
"What do you think I'm doing; I'm cracking rock." He sees ol' Jim. He says,
"Jim, what are you doing?" Jim says, "I'm earning $13.50 an hour so I can pay
my house note, what do you think I'm doing." He goes over to Jeff and says,
"What are you doing?" Jeff says, "I'm building a cathedral." Who do you think
is going to work the hardest?

In order to be building a cathedral, a person needs a vision. Leadership pro-
vides that vision that enables workers to build cathedrals. Each of us needs to
ask ourselves what's the cathedral in our company? What's the cathedral in our
industry? What is the vision for America and her future? Is it critical we have
a picture of that future. I was in Sussex, England visiting a church recently.
As I walked out of the church, I noticed that there was a inscription on the
wall. Here's what the inscription said:"1730. A vision without a task is but a
dream. A task without a vision is but a drudgery. A vision and a task are the
hope of the world." There are many people who have grandiose visions who are
not able to implement them. On the other hand, so many people have worked in
drudgery - without any sense of a vision to motivate them. However, a vision
and a task are the hope of the world.

In Proverbs it says,"Where there is no vision the people perish." I believe the
vision is where we must start. A vision creates mental and verbal pictures of a
future state. It allows us to share and create a new reality with others. It 
also motivates us to persist and to perserve into the desired state.


A vision must be based on a set of values. These values quide, motivate and give
meaning to people who spend much of their lives at work. Values are very, very
important in the process. They allow us to recognize ourselves as we work our
way through the chaos. I can go into any McDonald's anywhere in the world. I
haven't been to the one in Moscow, but I've been in the Grand Via, in the Champs
Elysee, Via Veneto, I mean I'm an expert on McDonald's. I've got kids. I don't
care what McDonald's you walk into, if you speak to a kid who's been there for
two weeks or the manager, the same value comes across. If you ask people at
McDonald's what's important around here, with very little variation, you will
get the same answer - cleanliness. How many dirty McDonald's have you walked
into? You know how many folks they feed? I can't feed three people without 
having a lot of dirt in my house. Cleanliness, comsistency, and politeness are
important values for every McDonald's.

                            IT IS IMPORTANT TO

                    REMEMBER THAT QUALITY IS A JOURNEY.

                    IT'S DIFFICULT, IT'S TIME CONSUMING,

                    IT'S FRIGHTENING, BUT THE REALITY IS 

                             IT'S THE ONLY WAY.

In the quest for quality it's important that we articulate and understand our
organization's guiding beliefs. There must also be a willingness to act consis-
tently as a person of principle. We must teach others the organization's values.
We must challenge people who do not live by those values. Those values must 
shape the structures of the organization. The structure empowers people to make
the journey. That empowerment is important. The structure creates the envir-
onment in which people can own the journey toward quality, toward the vision.
You can't simply tell your people we're going to destroy the old structure with-
out providing some kind of path from the present reality to the vision. I have
seen too many organizations where they burn the rule books and take the time
clocks off the walls.

                            AS YOU CHANGE SO YOU WILL 

                             CHANGE YOUR ORGANIZATION,

                          YOU WILL CHANGE YOUR INDUSTRY,

                             YOU WILL CHANGE AMERICA.


The workers come in and go, "Do we still work here? What the heck's going on?"
You have to establish some path, some pattern to take you toward the vision.

It is important to remember that quality is a journey. It's difficult, it's time
consuming, it's frightening, but the reality is it's the only way. It's the only
way to get to the promised land. Who got there? Moses didn't get there. The 
silver foxes of today won't get there. What's the moral of the story? Does this
mean that people who are senior citizens like myself don't have to worry about
vision? No. Someone has to have the courage to start the journey. And someone
has to have the courage to leave behind people who are better than they were.
Who got to the promised land? The children who were born in the chaos.

Finally, it is important to recognize that change begins with people. I believe
people change. Part of the moral of the story is the people who got to the pro-
mised land were transformed by the journey. As you change so you will change
your organization, you will change your industry, you will change America."

Tom Glass
17 January 1991
    

    "Quality is an american invention"....
    
    Luvvit. Just luvvit.
    
    Seriously, an ok article, although it treads several well-worn paths.
    
    	- andy

    I suspect we are waiting for a "big bang."

    
    That's right, Andy, afraid so:
    "Quality is an american invention"....
    
    vis-a-vis -
    	Monet was an American
    	Chippendale was an American
    	Picasso " " "
    	Greenway " " "
    	Etruscan urn makers were all Americans
    	The Volga is the longest river in the world
    	The moon is made of green cheese
    	Americans never produced junk like the Edsel, Mcdonalds, MVS.	
    
    soon there will be demands for "quantifiable quality" (now that
    probably is an american invention). 
    
    
    John

koala tea is an Australian invention.

    Yeah,
    its actually made with wombat poo. 
    
    I know quality when I see it on the bottom of my foot.
    
    John