Emotional Intelligence

Emotional Intelligence.

What is it?

Where does it come from?

Can it help elevate competence in leadership and analytical thinking on the shop floor?

Generally, emotional intelligence is self-awareness. It is the ability for an individual to be aware of how they function socially. But not just that, it is further carried to mean one’s ability to function not only socially, but effectively, of which social function is a component, in the business environment. People with emotional intelligence are typically willing to accept accountability, are open and honest and often exhibit self-deprecating humor, which endears them to others. Those with emotional intelligence also have the ability to get results. They are competent subject matter experts (SMEs) in their area of expertise, but they are also able to achieve results through others, regardless of whether their leadership is formal (supervision) or informal (thought or team leaders).

Research has shown that emotional intelligence can be both inherent and acquired. Acquisition however is often challenging and dependent on self-awareness, which is a component of emotional intelligence. Odd as this seems it is a cycle that is dependent on itself, and difficult to change. However, open and honest feedback thoughtfully rendered, can jumpstart the unaware, and help them to the desire to become self aware. Whether inherent or acquired, experts seem to agree that emotional intelligence requires constant development.

To enable one to elevate competence in leadership and analytical thinking on the shop floor, the first step is to recognize the issue of the lack of self-awareness. The second step is to identify what is required to overcome the problem. The third step is to take action to overcome the problem. Finally, one must evaluate the results of the action and in so doing, recognition of additional developmental gaps will become evident.

Emotional intelligence CAN elevate competence in leadership and analytical thinking on the shop floor. In order for this to take place the steps cited in the prior paragraph must be followed. It is not typically the habit of operators on the shop floor to think of themselves as leaders and analytical thinkers. However, they too can leverage the tools that are often used by the managers who supervise them. The cycle begins with operators evaluating what need they have to improve themselves through introspection, feedback or other means. They then identify the tools and the plan that will help close that gap. After identifying the tools, they then take action to develop themselves using the tools identified. Upon completion of the action, the process begins again with not only identification of additional gaps, but also evaluating how well the last action executed filled the previous identified gaps.

When I was an operator, I learned the importance of honest feedback from my peers and from my supervision. However, I was completely unaware and had to literally be “shocked” into realizing this was important for me to understand in order to develop myself in the way I wanted. In short, I was completely oblivious. I've since given myself to soliciting and evaluating feedback often. Fortunately at the time I worked for an organization that also provided me the tools and training for development. I was able to identify and act, developing my skills as I moved through the process. I eventually won the trust of many of my peers (this is often a very difficult task among operators), such that I could get open and honest feedback in evaluating whether I had learned what I needed, and what they thought I might do next to further improve myself. I also had a mentor, which was necessary to my long term development, which provided coaching and feedback as well.

I am no rocket scientist. However, I work now several extremely bright and talented scientists. I am currently engaged in informal leadership, leading a cross-functional team that has global impact in the organization for which I work. I’ve been very fortunate and it’s been a long road since being an operator on the shop floor. The key was in understanding what needed to be done to make it all happen. Now my passion is to help others like myself understand those same concepts as well. To understand the value and need for…

Emotional Intelligence.

Skilled = Sguild = Skilled

Skilled = Sguild = Skilled.

What does that mean?

You've seen the new name of this blog, "Sguild Labor". You've read my discussion with respect to my passion for development of shop floor resources in leadership (this includes communication), and analytical thinking as a means of driving competitiveness of American labor.

I am a professional that believes in the development of systems and processes that drive results. There are many processes for the development of shop floor resources. These ship floor resources are also often referred to as labor, hourly or non-exempt (from overtime) personnel.

In the early days of our country, colleges and universities did not provide education for the shop floor. There were no community colleges, nor were their trade schools. What did exist was the guild system. It was through the guild system that trades were learned and passed on. Printers, cart wrights, wheelwrights, blacksmiths, silversmiths; I could go on, but you get the idea. In the guild system, if you made horse shoes for your horses, but you were not a blacksmith, you were considered a novice. If you wanted to learn the trade, you started as an apprentice to someone who knew the trade and was an established artisan in the trade. Eventually, as your skill developed you would become a practicing journeyman. In the guild system, once you were established as an artisan, having patrons of note, you were identified as a master craftsman.

The guild system is, for the most part, now gone. However, as a model for developing leadership and analytical thinking on the shop floor, there is clear relevance. There are novices working to build their skills, there are apprentices focused on the development of their skills. There are journeymen that have developed their skills and are working to make a contribution. Finally, their are master craftsmen who are leading process improvements on the shop floor.

The guild system also had some informal aspects. First there was a mentoring process. This was typically the relationship between the apprentice and the craftsman to whom the apprentice was indentured. Although indentured servitude is a thing of the past, the mentoring relationship is not. Second, before an apprentice could become a journeyman, validation of the skills learned would have to take place. The apprentice would have to prove competence in their chosen craft.

It is my opinion the old artisan guild system has something of substance to offer in the development of shop floor resources to become skilled in leadership and analytical thinking. By leveraging the guild system a process can be established to facilitate that end. Thus...

Skilled = Sguild = Skilled.

Passion Rooted in Experience

In my last post I alluded to my passion for elevating the leadership and analytical skills of the labor force. My passion is rooted in experience.

I was late to the game. I spent my 20's chasing a fast buck. In my early thirties I came to realize that I was, for the most part, chasing a pot o' gold at the end of the rainbow. Once reality set in, I realized next that I needed to get grounded quickly. I needed to develop a solid income and solid marketable and transferable skills.

My quest began by getting the first job I could find. I lived by the adage to...

Call no work low that is honest. Honest toil never degrades.

The job I took was in the brine room of a plant that makes Swiss cheese. It was not enough to cover my expenses so I took assignments from a temporary agency, working in a process cheese plant when work was available and I could squeeze it in. Stability, although visible on the horizon, eluded me. Eventually, an opportunity on the production line of a fitness equipment manufacturer opened up and I was hired. The pay, supplemented by my temporary assignments, was enough to provide the beginnings of stability. I was now prepared for my next step and enrolled in the university located in the community.

At the time, among the best paying jobs in the community were permanent assignments at the cheese processing plant to which I was being temporarily assigned from time to time. Eventually, after nearly a year, I was able to get on permanently. I quit working at the fitness equipment manufacturer and also no longer had the need to accept temporary work assignments to supplement my income. Stability had been achieved.

As it turned out, working for the company owning the cheese processing plant was one of the best things that could have happened to me. As an operator, I was trained on root cause analysis, the basics of business, process variation, team dynamics and other forms of leadership and analytical thinking. We certified by taking a proficiency test, executing an approved project. I participated on a process improvement project that increased productivity by a significant amount.

This company realized the value of enabling shop floor resources (labor) through training. This company also realized the value of empowering their employees through the opportunity to validate the training they received and allowing them to execute projects using their new found skills. This company realized that this not only provided their employees with the satisfaction of being engaged and part of the business, but it also helped the bottom line.

I had an extraordinary experience as I participated in this culture as an operator. I found further value by integrating what I was doing on the shop floor with my education as an undergraduate majoring in production management.

It has now been over 20 years since those days. Over the years I've developed a deep sensitivity for the talent on the shop floor. It is from the shop floor that I come. I recognize that this is where the rubber meets the road. I realize that there is vast talent that if tapped into appropriately, can yield huge dividends to the company for which these resources are employed. The key is to enable, through training and empowerment, shop floor resources around the country.

I did it, by the wisdom of a company for which I worked. If I did it, I believe most others can do it as well.

My passion is rooted in experience.

New Look, New Mission, New Post

Change.

It's inevitable. Sometimes it's joyful and refreshing. Other times it is intense and overwhelming. Particularly when it is imposed. The one thing that will never change, is that change will always exist.

The value of change is that it presents opportunity. In order to harness that opportunity, preparation is required.

American labor is facing change. Change due to offshore outsourcing. Change due to technological improvements in manufacturing. But change nonetheless.

Not long after his administration took office, Indiana Governor Mike Pence announced his intent to focus on elevating the capability of the Indiana labor force to attract manufacturing to that state. High tech manufacturing. Manufacturing that requires labor to communicate, lead and analyze.

In a November 2012 issue of Fortune Magazine, an Op-Ed by Nina Easton spoke of the need for a strategy similar to that adopted by Governor Pence. The article shares alarming data supporting that "There are millions of jobs coming online that American workers aren't equipped to fill." As of the date of the article, 3 million jobs have remained unfilled for 19 months, a vacancy equivalent to 6% unemployment. Further, a 2012 ManpowerGroup employer survey suggests roughly 50% of jobs applied for could not be filled due to lack of skill. Approximately 33% of employers "...complain that applicants lack technical competence and hard skills...". A proportion that appears to be increasing.

Think of the advent of smart phones and tablets. These are an outward manifestation of a deeper, larger and more subtle increase in technology, and the manufacture of technological goods and distribution of technological services. From smart phones and tablets we are moving to smart appliances, smart cars and smart homes. There are myriads of applications as technology grows exponentially and with lightning speed. Parts and components of all these technological necessities and conveniences use precision equipment and technique to manufacture, requiring a labor force able to analyze issues, identify improvements, communicate their need and lead process improvement for results.

In the aggregate, can our labor force do that? Who can? That is an easy answer. Look to where the jobs are outsourced. Countries that can court and retain American manufacturers of such devices have been able to meet manufacturing demand by positioning themselves with an educated, cost effective work force. Not in all cases, mind you. There are still brute force labor shops, but on the economic landscape, there is an increase in the education of the overseas competitive work force, while in America, there is a decline.

Change.

It's inevitable. Sometimes it's joyful and refreshing. Other times it is intense and overwhelming. Particularly when it is imposed. The one thing that will never change, is that change will always exist.

The question is, can and will American labor accept it, embrace it and leverage it for competitive advantage to bring jobs back to our country, our regions, our states, our cities and our homes.

I am passionate about helping to facilitate that end. In an effort to help drive this passion I too am embracing change. It has been some years since I have generated regular posts on this blog. I have given my path forward significant consideration. The result of which will bear fruit on this blog with a New Look, New Mission and New Post.

Change. The train is leaving the station. We can get on board or get left behind.

The Site Visit

When doing an investigation, you cannot underestimate the value of walking the process. In military parlance, "eyes on the ground" are the people who are where the rubber meets the road. Sometimes, you cannot truly understand a process, problem or loss event until you walk the process and speak with the SMEs, the eyes on the ground.

I am currently involved in an investigation that involves three different organizations, including my own, along the supply chain. The focus is to reduce foreign material that finds its way into the process. A multi-organizational team was chartered, which I was tasked to participate on, representing my organization.

Our first meeting involved discussing and mapping the process steps for the supply chain and rating the perceived likelihood each particular step was a probable point of ingress for foreign material. Once these assumptions were complete, the next step was to confirm those assumptions, or modify them based on additional data collected. This data was to be collected by a visit to each of the three sites involved along the supply chain, making personal observations, and querying SMEs for the process at each site.

We began at my site, in the mid-west. We then went to the next site up the supply chain in the Philadelphia area. Finally we went to the top of the supply chain (for our purposes) in Europe. Each site visit revealed new data that validated some assumptions and altered our perceptions around other assumptions. The point here is that until our team made the visits to the sites, we could not even remotely begin to appreciate what takes place in each process. Even then, our limited understanding of each site could only begin to focus into meaning with the help of the "eyes on the ground."

We completed our visits and our project is in its final phase, with recommendations for each organization along the supply chain. It was a good project.

Knowing that I was going to be in Europe, I got on Google maps and determined how far I would be from Omaha Beach. Visiting the American Military Cemetery there is something I had always hoped I could do and I wanted to see if it would be possible for me to take an extra day to make the trip. My query revealed that it would be four and a half hours from my hotel in Brussels. I determined to go and I had someone who wanted to join me for the trip.

Our business complete, the appointed day arrived. We left the hotel at 6AM and arrived at Coleville Sur Mer, in France, 5 hours later. It was a cool day. We went in the visitors center first. There were interesting stories of some of the military men that lost their lives. There were also many facts and figures about the D-day landings, most of which I was familiar with. We then left the visitors center. I was overwhelmed by the fact that I was there, on the same ground that such a fearsome battle had occurred.

We walked from the visitors center to the memorial at the end of the cemetery. As we began up the walk to the memorial, my emotion overcame me and I had to remove myself for a moment to regain my composure. I was filled with a sense of awe, humility and gratitude. I had brought my phone to take pictures, but so powerful was the emotion I felt, that it seemed diminishing of the moment to me to trivialize it with photography.

After the memorial I turned and began to descend the steps toward the cemetery. As I looked out upon the six sections of neatly placed rows of graves, all 10,500 of them, I heard the chimes of the memorial strike 12. I listened and watched and tears began to stream down my cheeks as once again, I was overwhelmed by the solemnity of the place and the occasion of my presence. I thought about how good or bad, each one of these graves represented someone who gave the ultimate sacrifice at a pivotal moment in the anals of human history. The thought humbled me deeply and I felt a deep sense of gratitude for their sacrifice.

We then walked down to the beach. The person I was with had promised his daughter to get her some sand from Omaha Beach. We walked along the beach and it was wholly unremarkable as a beach, full of rocks, shells, mussels and cold. My colleague got his sand and I decided to collect a few rocks as mementos. I looked at the bluffs that the soldiers had to scale in a scathing fusilade of gun fire. I though it about 150 yards. A manageable distance, but not so much when one is under fire, I'm sure.

We then went to look at the gun emplacements of the Germans. It was interesting to me that there were pock marks of shells that had struck inside the bunkers through the gun ports. The bunkers had ceilings eight feet thick, made of concrete and reinforced with a lattice work of steel beams and re-bar. I could not imagine the thoughts and fears of the soldiers as they saw and waited for the thousands upon thousands of American troops being hurled at them from the endless number of ships crowding the shore of the English channel that lay before them.

After a couple of hours, I had seen enough. I would have been happy to see more, but I did not come on a sight seeing tour, but rather a personal pilgrimage. The intent of that pilgrimage had been met while I was in the cemetery. For me this was a bucket list day - one of the most powerful events of my life. There were no SMEs to answer questions. Just the memorial stones of over 10,000 witnesses.

It simply is true. You cannot underestimate the value of walking the process. Especially at Omaha Beach.

A Question of Priority

I just received an email from a colleague that has worked as a contractor for my organization over the course of several years. I worked directly with him for about two years. Although not hard charging (much like I am), he was consistent in producing consistent meaningful results. Of greatest value to me, was his ability to scrutinize a situation or process and ask, "Why?" In this way, he was able to challenge the status quo and get our group to see if we could not think about things a little differently.

I knew his contract was coming due, but did not expect him to leave because he had been able to get his contract renewed at least once that I know of. I was suprised to see a notice from him in my inbox entitled, "Farewell to friends and colleagues."

I read his comments and they gave me significant pause for thought. I include them here:

"To my friends and colleagues,

"I wish you all a fond farewell. It has been a great privilege to work for [Comany Name Redacted]. A company that I believe exemplifies integrity and innovation in the pharmaceutical industry. In the brief time that I shared here I had the great fortune to work with a number of extraordinary individuals. I wish you all continued good fortune as you continue to play your role in bringing life saving drugs to the patients that need it.

"As for me, I’m going skiing. Though few may be aware, in April of 2008 I experienced a bit of a health related wake-up call in the form of the autoimmune disease Rheumatoid Arthritis. My experiences over the past year and a half have compelled me to radically reorganize my priorities. Under the care of an open minded physician I focused on anti-inflammatory factors, nutrition, and stress reduction. Though not clinically “cured” I significantly reversed a condition that was, at times, very debilitating.

"So, as I make my journey East to Vermont, I leave you with something to consider. I believe health care reform starts at home. It starts with the simple choices that we make every day. Great companies like [Comany Name Redacted] will always be needed to produce drugs that save people’s lives. However, we have a choice each day to seek balance in our own lives and reap the reward of growing older, well.

"Best regards, [Name Redacted]"

This made me think of a time years ago. My son was only 7 years old, if that. I was working full time and going to school full time. In addition, I was helping run the family farm. Time was at a premium. I decided I would take the day off; from everything. At the time, I raced ATVs in the desert and my son rode as well. I put on my riding gear, loaded up the truck with our machines and went to his school. I went to the office and signed in and then went to his room and signed my son out. We went out on the west desert and camped and rode for two days. It is one of my, and I hope his as well, most cherished experiences. The image above is one I captured one night when we were goofing around.


I wished my colleague best of luck in a personal response to his communication. However, the provocation of thought from his email still lingers. How often do we stop to consider those things that are really and truly important? We have business needs that must be met. The organization does not stop and we must continue to produce for it. At the same time, we must also consider family, friends and loved ones. Are we building lasting relationships and meaningful experiences and memories? Or are we just going through the motions?

Each of us can only answer those questions for ourselves. What will your answer be?

It is simply put...

A Question of Priority.

Does An Attitude of Gratitude Help The Bottom Line?

Recently the question was posed in a discussion group I belong to, as to how to develop a culture of gratitude. It made me wonder: Does an attitude of gratitude help the bottom line?

Gratitude and feedback are nearly synonymous. If you receive gratitude from someone, they they are providing positive feedback. The lack of a display of gratitude is also feedback. However, lack of gratitude does not necessarily represent "bad" feedback. It can mean ambivalence to gratitude in general, it can also mean that what you have done is expected, and finally, it could mean that your performance did not meet expectation.

There are some simple rules to giving gratitude that will carry you a long way. First, Show gratitude frequently. My organization has an eCard system that you can use to send a Thank-you internally. Some you can attach dollars to, but most are just a Thank-you and nothing more. The system keeps track of all you send. In 2009, I sent over 150. Some people think that excessive. However, I rarely have difficulty when I need to ask someone for help on an urgent matter to take on an extra assignment.

Second, be specific. You should always specifically state the behavior or task for which you are grateful. The system I use requires no more than 200 characters. This forces me to be brief and specific so it is clear as to what I am grateful for. "Thanks for your help," does not cut it in my book. It is too general. If you state specifically what you are grateful for, you are more likely to have a positive impact. You are also more likely to get the same behavior you recognized when you ask for help again from that individual.

Third, following the first two rules help when you have to deliver an uncomfortable message. Face it; we live in the real world. From time to time we need to coach others on what could have been done differently. These discussions are much easier to digest by those to whom we deliver the message, when you have established a pattern of gratitude. Explaining to someone how to change a behavior or activity to produce better results is much easier to accept if the bearer of the message is frequent and consistent in delivering messages of gratitude.

Fourth, Coach and Challenge others in your organization to do the same. Life is usually not made of step changes. As a matter of fact, step changes typically represent something bad that has happened in our lives. The positive things we see in our lives come from positive incremental change, (http://findingfault.blogspot.com/2010/01/door-to-change-swings-on-small-hinges.html). If you work on developing an attitude and behaviors that reflect gratitude, others will notice. Of those others, someone will adopt the same behaviors. Others will notice, and of those others someone, perhaps some others, will adopt the same behaviors. Eventually you will have critical mass in your organization and voila! You have cultivated gratitude in the workplace.

A culture of gratitude is one that values the individual and values results. A culture of gratitude is more collaborative and more productive. A culture of gratitude has a higher probability that it will resolve conflict and position itself on a more competitive footing.

Does and attitude of gratitude help the bottom line? Please...

...Help me understand where the down side is!

The Door To Change Swings On Small Hinges

The door to change swings on small hinges. That's what my grandmother used to tell me when I was too anxious for something to happen. Her parents crossed the plains to the Rocky Mountains in a covered wagon; one step at a time. It took months. One small change at a time. Some days the horizon looked the same as it did the day before. Eventually they made it and saw big change when they finally made their way to the Great Basin of the Rocky Mountains. The door to change swings on small hinges.

I think about that statement now, more than ever. I think about economic bubbles. Why do they exist? People want things to happen faster than the economic environment is prepared for them. Take the real estate collapse for example. Many people wanted homes. In many cases more house than they could really afford, or than they needed. This created paper wealth for other people in the form of mortgages. But not enough wealth. Real Estate hedge fund managers saw the opportunity to leverage, already leveraged mortgage paper to generate "wealth". Lots of it. More than they really needed. Then there was a failure, and another and now we have an economic recession we think we might be getting out of. Or maybe not. Time will tell.

Our society seems to have become an "I want it all now" society; at the expense of what? Banks? Bond Holders? Stockholders? Neighbors? Taxpayers? What happened to the idea of frugality? What happened to the idea of an honest day's work for an honest day's pay?

I have come to the conclusion that if you try to make it happen faster than the natural process will allow, someone will nearly always suffer. There are no shortcuts. A thoughtful disciplined approach will get you where you want to be. Patience must be applied and developed. This enables one to see the pitfalls and circumvent them. On the other hand that does not excuse a lack of progress, growth and development either.

The same is true of investigations. When conducting an investigation, there is nearly always a time line. A target due date. The nature of business dictates such. On the other hand, the quality and depth of the investigation is an exercise of executing proven methods with discipline. This may be painful at first. Over time, investigators get better and better at finding Root Cause and applying the appropriate counter measures. It all of a sudden seems to get easier.

I remember a couple of years ago when I was hammering through investigation after investigation. I usually had 3 or 4 going at the same time. At one time I had 8 investigations I was conducting. It was a grueling time for me, but I kept at it and I stayed true to the process. Then something happened. I realized one day that investigations in general got easier. Upon deeper thought and consideration I realized that I reached a step change in my skill and ability. However, it didn't just happen. It took a lot of little activities repeated consistently time and time again.

In church not long ago, a woman trained in classical performance of the violin, performed a solo. It was powerful and had great feeling. Everyone in the congregation was visibly moved, including myself. I was astounded at the technique demonstrated. When she was through, she sat down and the speaker got up. He thanked the violinist and then made a statement that has since stuck with me. He said, "I'm sure most people don't appreciate the THOUSANDS OF HOURS that went into being able to play such a moving piece for those few moments.

Money and finance, business, having a nicer home or nicer car, conducting investigations and yes, even playing the violin, and doing any of them well, require practice, patience and diligence as the skills and behaviors for success are developed.


In the late seventies, famed actress Shirley MacLaine was asked in an interview at the height of her career, "To what do you attribute your overnight success?" She responded that the overnight success she was enjoying took her 25 years to develop.

The Door To Change Swings on Small Hinges.

The Incentive Continuum

There is a balance between individual and team incentives. It is important to realize that this balance is dynamic. To assume it is static risks the potential of "stale" performance.

Think of incentives as being on a continuum. This continuum starts with individual performance and ends with team performance. If incentives are at the "individual" end of the continuum, then personal agendas will supersede team performance. Behaviors exhibited at this point in the continuum usually produce short term results and are sycophantic in nature. This is not something that all people are given to, but it is something that all people will exhibit to one degree or another, when the incentive is for individual performance alone.

On the other hand, at the opposite end of the continuum, if incentives are strictly for "team" performance only, confusion may occur. Who will lead when there is no incentive to lead? Who will make decisions? Ambiguity ensues and individuals, especially highly motivated individuals, become disenfranchised. They will disengage and results will be slow in coming and as ambiguous as expectations for the team.

Given this data, the correct balance must be identified. Such a balance depends on organizational values, objectives and business needs. Determining the correct balance cannot be arbitrary, but rather should be a disciplined, proactive process that is aligned with organizational strategy. This also anchors the incentive program to the organizational culture.

To ensure that the incentive plan does not become stale, it should be evaluated for change on a periodic basis. This will ensure that the incentive plan has the correct balance, at that period of time for the organization, between individual and team performance.

It is also important to keep in mind that not all incentives are monetary in nature, and not all incentives are formal. Leaders within the organization can exercise creativity for short term projects or plans, which will help drive results. The same criteria for developing these incentives are the same for broader organizational incentives.

Finally, incentives are a form of recognition and nearly everyone wants to be recognized for their efforts. Not all want to be recognized in the same way. George Washington was keenly aware of this during the American Revolution. A highly puritanical congress thought that the Continental Army should aspire to the greater good of the country and quit complaining that the worthless Continental Scrip they were issued had no value. During Valley Forge, there were large numbers of troops deserting daily, most of which deserted for lack of "real" pay. Washington was keen on recognizing the folly's of this congressional thinking and met with many of his men who had deserted upon their capture and return. He asked them of their concerns and promised with full intent, and the integrity known to be characteristic of him, that he would do his best to redress their grievances. His troops returned and others on the cusp of desertion remained.


These men of the Continental Army were only seeking recognition for their efforts, trials and contributions. They wanted to be validated as individuals, as soldiers, as human beings. They also had to work as a team. Through the instrumental skills of Baron Von Steuben, Washington was able to give his troops pride (read as recognition) as an army that would be a force to be reckoned with; a team.

Balance had to be found on the continuum. So it is with every project for every organization. Incentives must exist, but they must be balanced between the individual and the team. They must be appropriate to the time and the task. And they must not be allowed to go stale.

When performing an investigation, it is important to consider incentive, both for the team and the individuals on the team, to ensure the investigation is sound and completed on time. It is critical that your plans for your team are found at the right point on...

The Incentive Continuum

Leadership & The Drill Master

I prefer learning leadership from historical lessons, rather than theorized concepts found in the current contemporary literature. That is not to say that the contemporary literature does not have value and merit. I read much of the contemporary literature as well. However, learning from others in the past, which have had to lead during trying and difficult times (when leadership is truly put to the test and demonstrated), brings me great pleasure and something I can wrap my mind around.

Given the above, here are my favorite books on leadership:

1. Washington's Secret War: The Hidden History of Valley Forge
2. Henry Knox
3. The Drill Master of Valley Forge
4. We Were Soldiers...Once, And Young: The Battle of Ia Drang Valley

I love that all these people, although they demonstrated excellent leadership when called upon, saw leadership as a character trait rather than a technique, and that although they were great leaders, suffered from some flaws in human frailty as well. Great leaders are human. All too often we think them infallible. It is the human side of their nature, aspiring to something great, which in times of difficulty allows leadership to rise within them.

This is even more important when one considers that each of us are of the same mettle. To what level though, do we build leadership as a character trait, such that when called upon, we too may lead? This is the question we must all face, whether leaders by design or by circumstance. It cannot be ignored.

Below is an image of Baron Von Steuben "The Drill Master of Valley Forge" working with Washington's troops on learning drill. Von Steuben demonstrated exemplary leadership at a time when our nation's greatest need were for his skills in leadership.


Here is what Von Steuben expected of his troops:

1. Excellence in execution through daily practice
2. Officers (read as supervisors) participating in daily practice
   
3. Officers taking care to ensure their troops needs were met as much as could be expected
4. Officers developing their careers through results, rather than pandering for promotion

Here is what Von Steuben expected of himself as leader:

1. Lead by example
2. Orders (read as assignments) are best completed when understood why they are important
3. Humor is important in engaging others
4. Be firm and decisive when appropriate
   

Understanding leadership and building it as a character trait will ensure that all the objectives of any investigation are met, that it is robust and definitive in the root cause, or exhausted entirely in the pursuit of root cause. Von Steuben gave a great example of how this is the case. You can read about it in "The Drill Master of Valley Forge." Just think about the next investigative team you either lead or participate in, and consider...

Leadership & The Drill Master

Happy Holidays

I will be on hiatus the last two weeks this year.

Unfortunately, there will be no posts on my blog site until 04 January.



Until then, I wish you a warm and happy holiday season, filled with joy for you and those you love.

All the best.

Douglas E Dawson

Draining The Pond

My father-in-law owns a farm in Preston, Idaho (famous for the film, “Napoleon Dynamite”). There is a small creek (pronounced “crick” in Preston) that intersects the property and feeds a small pond in the center of the property. The story is sometimes told of when the pond had to be drained.

It seems there was some obstruction to the pond effluent. The pond had a small concrete dam with a steel plate flood gate. The flood gate was opened and the pond drained so the obstruction could be removed. As the pond drained, an old rusty Model A Ford began to appear. Once the water level passed the Ford, and as the pond continued to drain, an old refrigerator was seen. After the pond was completely drained, the Ford, refrigerator and other junk in the bottom of the pond were chained to the tractor and pulled out. The pond was then refilled.

Not long ago, I got the opportunity to drain the pond at work. I was assigned an investigation, the purpose of which was to find why we were not able to correctly account for some units of very expensive product. As I pursued the investigation, it was discovered that the operators had just a few seconds to count over one hundred units of product and that this was done about every 2-3 minutes. The counter measure was to create a template, that would be placed over a tray (or case) of units, to see if they looked correct. Voila! Problem solved.

What?! But, wait a minute! You say that there is still a problem with the accountability? Yep, you guessed it. I was assigned another investigation for the same thing not long after the first investigation. So I dug a little deeper this time. The data I analyzed showed that the templates for counting the units of product worked well on the large units, but because the small units were in presentations of nearly 600 units, it was difficult for operators to tell if the count was correct or not. Hence, the potential for an erroneous count was still there. The counter measure implemented at that point was the introduction of an automated visions system that would use a computer and camera to do the counting, taking out the potential for Human Error. Finally! Glad that’s over.

Hold on now! I just got done fixing this problem. It can’t still be happening, can it? Another investigation assigned for the same thing, yet a few weeks later. When will the bleeding stop? In this investigation, I learned there was a new step in the process for additional testing to ensure oxygen content of the product was less than 1%. Final unit accountability of the product was completed before this step was executed. The problem was that a failed unit would be rejected, thus changing the count. This was not accounted for in the planning phase for implementation of this new step in the process; fixed yet again.

Process improvement is often referred to as Draining The Pond. It is the process of looking for incremental improvement rather than betting on big step changes. As you improve productivity through process improvement, you find other opportunities for improvement. The beauty of Fault Tree Analysis, is that you can capture several gaps in the process – junk in the pond – simultaneously by creating a visual of all the hypothetical gaps.

When I was doing these investigations, I was not disciplined in using Fault Tree Analysis in this way, but it would have helped prevent the non-value added activity of doing multiple investigations for the same issue. That is not to say that Fault Tree Analysis will be the end all, be all for any issue. I have been involved in investigations that used Fault Tree Analysis, which did not capture all the potential gaps for the Loss Event. However, capturing more gaps in an investigation, rather than fewer, is a more efficient way of…

Draining The Pond.

Perfect Execution or The Perfect Plan

I read a white paper some years ago, published by a well known global consulting firm, which stated something similar. The hypothesis, which was successfully argued, was that, "Perfect Execution delivers better results than a Perfect Plan."

The fundamental process for Lean Six Sigma (LSS) is DMAIC - Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve and Control. The essence of the American Express article is that, in corporate America, we sometimes get bogged down in the Analyze phase of any launch or implementation. We sometimes feel we need to know the minutiae of detail before we feel comfortable taking the risk of launch/implementation.

The fact is, that without risk, there is no reward. Referring again to LSS methodology, being risk averse completely bypasses the Improve phase of the DMAIC process. Beta testing, used by the IT industry, is in essence, a Pilot Project - something that is often used in the Improve phase of DMAIC. The purpose of pilot testing is to gather information not available by any other means. In other words, you are launching/implementing without all the data you need.

Collection of the data gathered by the pilot/beta test, allows you to tweak your process/product so that you can Control (read as "sustain") results and at some future date, Validate (another key component of the LSS methodology) the process/product.

Given this argument, it is far more important that the pilot/beta testing, be executed flawlessly. Execution is the most critical factor. Disciplined execution will provide all the data that is needed and much that was unexpected and which can also be used. It also places trust in the end user of the product or process, which gives them "skin in the game." This kind of leverage drives both the success and sustainability of the implementation/launch.

When doing investigations, which often use LSS tools (Fault Tree Analysis), it is far better to execute robust Root Cause Analysis, and appropriate Counter Measures, than it is to try and find every little reason why the Loss Event occurred. This approach (the perfect plan) can soon become counter productive. I'll share more on this in a later post about Draining The Pond. In the meantime, think about what will get you the results you desire...

Perfect Execution or The Perfect Plan.

A Writer Writes!

I have a favorite movie. It is a dark comedy starring Billy Crystal, who plays Larry, a bitter and frustrated would be author, teaching creative writing at the local community college. The movie is a hilarious dark comedy, but that's not the point of this post! At the end of each class session portrayed in the film, Larry finishes his class session by stating to his students, "A writer writes!"

I am currently in the process of studying a book. I say studying because at first I just read it. The book is entitled, "How To Run Seminars & Workshops," (Robert L. Jolles, Wiley, ISBN 0471715875). There is a section on writing, which states, "Planning to write is not writing. Thinking about writing is not writing. Talking about writing is not writing. Researching to write, outlining to write - none of this is writing. Writing is writing."

So now I have two paragraphs in this post about writing. Why, one might suppose, is that? Well here it is: You can execute an Investigation. You can do it using Fault Tree Analysis or some other methodology. You can identify Root Cause and the appropriate Actions to mitigate the Loss Event and prevent it's recurrence. You can involve SMEs and your Investigative Team members. At the end of the day, you will have to document your findings. For many people, this is sometimes the worst possible aspect of an investigation, made more so when the summary requires approval from various parties, each of whom has their own opinion as to style and grammer, and which can reject your summary for tawdry edits that often don't make sense.

There are a million reasons why we don't like to write. However, at the end of the day, if we do not write at one point or another, the investigation is incomplete. In order to truly complete the investigation, it needs to be "wrapped up in a bow," through documenting (read as "writing") the investigation.

Lead Investigators, or at least a member of the Investigative Team, is typically a writer. And the Root Cause Analysis, must be documented and summarized so a record exists for review in the future. If for nothing else, to enable prevention of the same issues in the future. You may not feel like your documentation is up to par, and perhaps it is not. At least not now. But the more you write, the better you get at writing.

Over the course of a 26 month period, I documented 115 Investigations, all requiring full Root Cause Analysis. Many suggest that I am an expert. However, I contend, if that is the case, it is only through the continued practice that took place from writing so many investigative summaries in so short a period of time. Anyone can develop this skill set if they have a mind to. It's not difficult, although you have to toughen up your hide and accept feedback from time to time. But this is no problem if you truly wish to excel. The key thing to remember is...

A writer writes!

Could You Please Show Me Your ID?

The organization I work for requires an ID card to enter the network of buildings that make up our campus. I am a person of routine. My wife often refers to it as OCD, but I prefer to think of it as routine. To some degree, we are creatures of habit.

At any rate, on this particular morning, my commuter vehicle was in the garage for maintenance, so I had to drive another vehicle. I forgot to transfer my parking pass from the commuter vehicle to the one I was temporarily using. I had to stop at the front gate and ask for a temporary parking pass.

"Could you please show me your ID?" the security guard politely asked.

"Sure, hang on a minute," was my reply as I started digging my wallet out of my back pocket. No sooner had begun search for my wallet, that I became painfully aware that my morning routine had somehow been disrupted and I had left my wallet on my dresser. I commute an hour each way and I plead with the guard, now somewhat suspicious, that I for me to run back home for my wallet, would constitute and additional two hours of drive time for me, and two hours of lost productivity for the organization.

Suspicion had evolved to impatient indifference and I was waved on to the security desk at the main entrance. Once I got there, it took nearly an hour to get through all the red tape that would allow me to get to my desk and grind out value for the organization. But I made it. Finally.

What does this have to do with investigations? As you build your Fault Tree Analysis, you need to give each hypothetical cause in your growing tree a value. This value is called a Fault ID. The Fault ID helps investigative team members, approvers and stakeholders understand the relationships of the various faults hypothesized to be potential root cause, as well as potential relationships they may have one with another.

Top line, or First Order hypotheses have a value represented as a whole number beginning with zero or one and progressing from there. Secondary or Second Order hypotheses have a decimal value of one place, such that any hypothesis subordinate to a First Order hypothesis would be as 1.1 for the first hypothesis, 1.2 for the second and so on. Tertiary, or Third Order hypotheses are separated by decimal as a delimeter and follow the same convention as the Second Order hypotheses. In other words, Fault ID subordinate hypotheses to Fault ID 1.1 above, would be 1.1.1, for the first tertiary hypothesis, 1.1.2 for the second tertiary hypothesis, and so forth. This convention is true also for Quaternary and Quinary subordinate hypotheses.

For an example of a partial Fault Tree showing Fault IDs, look at the image below.

When you think of order of magnitude, as you build your Fault Tree, it can become very large and quite cumbersome. This is where the Fault IDs of the various hypotheses becomes most important. Keeping track of these hypotheses, and seeing the potential Interactions that exist are key a successful investigation. Particularly if it is a large scale investigation.

The Fault ID has additional value I'll save for a later post. The point of this post is to explain what, exactly, a Fault ID is and how it is used. Below, you can see an image of what a Fault ID looks like. Just remember that when you are building your Fault Tree Analysis, someone interested in your investigation, perhaps an Investigative Team member, a Stakeholder or an Approver, may ask you...

Could you please show me your ID?

Were You Entitled, or Was The Title Won?

NOTE: The title of this post is also a link to the article referenced within the post.

I recently received a post (see link above) regarding "Learned Helplessness", which is defined as "where people 'learned to behave helplessly, even when the opportunity is restored for them to help them self by avoiding an unpleasant or harmful circumstance.'" Unfortunately, I see "Learned Helplessness" too much in business and community. I believe our culture has evolved from the independent self-sufficiency exemplified by the puritanical contingent of our country's forefathers, to a culture of entitlement (read as "helpless").

I work with and teach others to take ownership for who they are and the results of their actions. This is often times difficult when people have been entitled too long, but told they are performing well (read as "vanilla" not "balanced" feedback) in spite of the evidence of their labors. I have a 2X2 Capability Awareness matrix I use to help illustrate the entitlement mindset. It is sometimes difficult for people to accept, but once they do, they are on the road to recovery.

Ultimately, the fundamental flaws of our economy right now are evidence of this mentality. Unfortunately, it does not just evidence itself with the "less fortunate." Learned Helplessness is often enabled in the executive suites, by group think, or what I like to refer to as Cognitive Myopathy. At other times it is enabled by lack of integrity and professional courage.

In short, Learned Helplessness has pervaded every facet of our society in pandemic proportions. Sounds pessimistic doesn't it? I, however, am an optimist. I believe that armed with the correct knowledge, delivered by those with the professional courage to render the appropriate balanced feedback, that most people will want to do the right thing and to feel good about, rather than justify themselves. Given this assumption, I believe also that ours is not a hopeless state. As stated in my prior post, good investigators are generally also good leaders. They have to leverage leadership to gather, assimilate, collate and make sense of all the data that exists around the Loss Event and then identify and develop Actions for the Root Cause. If you are doing investigations, and not exemplifying the characteristics of a good leader, you are in danger of a less than complete investigation. In order to accomplish a good investigation, you have to work at leadership, and as such, solicit the help and support of other. An attitude of Entitlement or Helplessness, will only scare of the support you need to be successful.
So when you are done with the investigation, ask yourself...Were you entitled, or was the title won?

Does That Include Me?

NOTE: The title of this post is also a link to the article referenced within the post.

Good investigators are great leaders. They have to be. I've just only begun to realize how true that is. Attached to this post is a link to an article I recently read in a magazine I subscribe to. The article, entitled, "How To Build Great Leaders," discussed the value of developmental assignments as one of the tools that are used by organizations to build great leaders. My organization is on the list of the top 25 cited in the article. I have a colleague who has gone to Harvard Business School as a developmental assignment. I have several other colleagues who have been assigned overseas for three years for leadership development.

As I read through the article, I began to wonder why I was not getting some of these opportunities. And then I began to think about what I am doing for the organization now, and how I got there. But first, allow me to back up.

According to the article, developmental assignments are costly in that you leave a role in which you are being productive (read as adding value to the organization) and are assigned a role in which you are not necessarily being productive (read as learning or developing). In the latter case, a return on investment for the developmental assignment may not be realized for years after the assignment. Many times, these developmental assignments are grueling in terms of demand on time and other personal resources, because you have to really push the learning curve to keep up.

As stated above, I began to wonder why I was not getting some of these opportunities, but stopped short when I thought about what it was I was I am doing for my organization now and how I got here. Prior to my former role, I had been given a challenging leadership position (formal) at which I had been successful. I had asked specifically about further developing my leadership skills and was placed in an individual contributor role, the purpose of which was to focus on improvement of the process I would be supporting. I was in this role only six months before it became apparent that there were going to be numerous manufacturing deviations for some time to come. Although I had a team of peers I worked with, the responsibility of investigating and resolving these deviations fell to me.

In January of 2007, the organization implemented a new database for investigating deviations and storing all the details of each investigation. This system has queries that will enable anyone to identify how many investigations they have actually done. From 01 JAN 2007 to 01 MAR 2009, slightly over two years, I had performed 115 investigations requiring full Root Cause Analysis and supported several others. It was challenging and difficult. I often viewed myself as not much more than a technical writer. My focus got more narrow as time went on, such that all I was doing was these investigations. Long hours were put in to manage a nearly unbearable workload.

I was informed in NOV 2008, that I would soon have a new role and in MAR 2009, took the role I now have as a member of a team of individuals specifically tasked to investigate certain types of deviations called trends. We use Six Sigma tools (I'm a Green Belt) and other investigative techniques and impact is sometimes beyond the site I support. We are an eclectic bunch and have learned to work well together. We are just now preparing a year end presentation of our results for senior stakeholders.

How, you ask, does this relate to the article cited above? First of all, allow me to explain that there are formal leaders and there are informal leaders. Formal leaders have titles stating them as such. Informal leaders do not. Not everyone can be a Formal Leader. There is just not enough opportunities to go around. In any organization. Some people are Formal Leaders due to skill, talent, nepotism, favoritism, timing or any combination of these. Some are controllable, some are not.

On the other hand, everyone can be an informal leader. Allow me to repeat that one more time: EVERYONE CAN BE AN INFORMAL LEADER. Given this fact, then the equation for leadership changes a bit. I left a role as a Formal Leader to work for a time as an individual contributor. I was not able to utilize my skill set in the manner described in my job description, nor to my own personal expectation. I felt that I had left a role where I was productive. In my new role, I was productive, but not in a way I felt good about at the time.

After three years, and a lot of frustration, I was assigned my current role, also as an individual contributor. Admittedly, I was somewhat frustrated coming into this role, but then the clouds parted and angels began to sing. The work I had done over the previous three years, although unexpectedly, had helped me develop a skill set highly valued by the organization. My networking, investigative, communication and yes, leadership skills, had all improved significantly. This was not overt. I did not realize this until things started developing as I settled into this new role.

This was a significant learning for me. So when you hear about the fancy assignments overseas or at Harvard or MIT or whatever, perhaps you can step back and take a look at what you are doing right now and ask: Is what I am doing a developmental assignment in disguise? What can I learn from this role, frustrating as it may be, that will position me to be a better leader, formal or informal, in the future.

I believe that when things are painful, we are either growing, or missing a significant opportunity to grow. When things are easy, we are not challenged and when we are not challenged, we do not learn. If we don't learn, we may be cutting ourselves short on future opportunities. If you accept this as fact, then after you read the article above on organizations that build great leaders, and then ask yourself, "Does that include me?" The only answer is...

...YES!!!

Descend To The Lowest Level You Can!

How often have you overheard a conversation and heard the phrase, "I don't think they can get much lower than that." Usually, this is about someone in particular and their perceived behaviors. The statement generally has a negative connotation.

How about the sometimes wildly entertaining Caribbean dance, the Limbo? The object is for participants to dance under a bar or pole, that is lowered through successive turns of the participants. When a participant falls, they are eliminated from the dance, until the dancer who can go the lowest remains. The thought is, how low can you go?

When doing an investigation, you want to get to the lowest level you can. You want to peel away the layers of circumstances that will get you to the root cause. This is often done using "Cause of the Cause" or "5 Why Analysis". Fault Tree Analysis is a disciplined approach to these processes. Essentially, you want to go as low as you can go. You want to descend the lowest level possible.

Each hypothetical cause has one or more hypothetical causes subordinate to it. Eventually, you will get to a point where you have exhausted all reasonable possibilities. Typically, you will find that there are usually no more than five levels of "Why" or hypothetical causes. Evaluation of these hypothetical causes then lends you some measure of confidence as to whether they were truly contributory to the Loss Event. The key, however, is to go to the bottom, get to the root of the Fault Tree, or the Root Cause.

When pursuing your investigation, it is important to remember...

Descend to the lowest level you can!

To Be or Not To Be...

Hypotheses are interesting things. They are, or they are not. There is no middle ground. Now on the other hand, you may have some measure of confidence (which we will discuss in a later post) as to whether the hypothesis is, or is not. When pursuing an investigation, you are inundated with hypotheses.

What are hypotheses, relative to an investigation? Well, once you know what the Loss Event is, you have to hypothesize different scenarios that might have caused the loss event. Some of those hypotheses will be the result of data that you collect immediately after the event and when you build your time line. Others will be what if's based on SME knowledge of the process surrounding the Loss Event. Others still, will be subordinate to the first level hypotheses. In other words, cause of the cause.

Ultimately, what you wind up with is a Fault Tree of hypotheses. You will begin collecting data that will enable you to prove your hypotheses with some measure of confidence. As you work through all the hypotheses in your fault tree, you will eventually begin to discern either Root Cause, or one or more interactions leading to the Loss Event. In the end, a Fault Tree is a grouping of hypotheses either related and/or subordinate to one another, and which lead to the Loss Event.

With respect to the truth of any hypothesis found on a Fault Tree:

To be or not to be...

That is the question!

Do It, Do It Right, Do It Right Now!

Last week I had a posting called, "Just Do It!" after the Nike slogan, used so often in their advertising. Before, "Just Do It!" was even considered by Nike, I was serving a mission for my church in the late 70's. One of our church leaders had a placard on his desk which said, "Do it, Do it right, Do it right now!" Everyone knew that this was his credo and we made it ours. It has since stuck with me.

So what does the mantra, "Do it, Do it right, Do it right now!" have to do with investigations? The following are my thoughts on the matter:

1. Do It: This simply means "Take Action." If no action is taken, nothing gets done. A Loss Event has occurred. You are aware of it, or previously unaware of the Loss Event, it has been assigned to you for investigation. Take Action. Begin the investigation. Understand the events surrounding the Loss Event and use that understanding to determine Root Cause. The point is, that unless you "Do It," nothing will ever be resolved. No Root Cause will be found.
   
2. Do It Right: When taking action, during the course of your investigation, be sure you are taking the right action. Question everything. Require the appropriate data to support or disclaim all your hypotheses. Talk to the SME's and SMI's, both. Don't be afraid to challenge. Don't be afraid to be challenged. Gather all the data and information you can. Organize it, codify it and prepare it for review and/or approval. Most of all, be sure your Corrective Actions are appropriate and sound and prevent future Loss Events of like kind.
3. Do It Right Now: There is a sense of urgency in business. Any business. The business of work, the business of community, the business of family, all require some sense of urgency to resolve issues and resolve them quickly. Understanding this as investigators, we should take action and we should take the right action. However, waiting does not help at all, we need to take action now! The sooner we take action, the sooner resolution will take place, the sooner we improve whatever process we are investigating, and the sooner we reap the benefits of such.

Life is full of challenges and choices. These are compressed even further in the traditional business environment. Investigators are leveraged to understand why some of those challenges occur and how to prevent their recurrence in the future.

When you are faced with the challenges and choices of life, in your work or otherwise, as an investigator, just remember...

Do it, Do it Right, Do it right now!