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.

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?

Big D, little d, what begins with d?

When I was very young, (according to my son, when dinosaurs roamed the earth), I had a book entitled, "Dr. Seuss's ABC: An Amazing Alphabet Book!" It was one of my most favorite books and I remember the silly animals and items Dr. Seuss created to make an impression as to each letter of the alphabet.

Each alphabet character started with a new page and a new phrase. Something like this: "Big A, little a, what begins with A? Aunt Annie's alligator, A...a...A!" And so it went through the entire alphabet. It was silly, as only Dr. Seuss can be. It was hugely entertaining and somehow, learning surreptitiously insinuated itself amongst all the mirth and fun. Little did I realize, at such a tender age, my career in business would find another meaning for the phrase "Big D, little d, what begins with d?"

Some years later, (read 'a lot of years'), I was employed by a Fortune 500 company (not the one I am engaged with now), and they discussed the value of diversity as a means for competitive advantage. This organization divided diversity into two distinct groups: Big D and little d. The Big D represented protected classes. Those things, which to most of us, are obvious: Race, Creed, Color, Gender, Religion, etc. The little d represented those things which were not so obvious: Where you were raised (Midwest or Rocky Mountain West, urban or rural), where you went to school (Utah State University or Harvard, Trade School or higher education, high school or college degree), what you do with your spare time (watch TV or read a book, race a car or race to the store).

This organization taught and I personally agree with, the idea that the true value of diversity is getting past the Big D. That is not to say that the Big D is not important; it is. But that is like saying a wedding cake is important. Everyone at the wedding can see it and knows it's there. You can't really have a wedding without one. Comments abound on how it looks, the delicate floral frosting, the subtle colors and so forth. When people really get interested in the wedding cake is when it is cut. Does it have filling or not? If so, what kind of filling is it? Is it a white cake, yellow cake, chocolate cake, spice cake or some combination in layers? That's when the wedding crowd starts making the decision to take action on how big and how often they will have a piece of cake.

Diversity is the same. We need to get beyond the obvious. Doing so allows us to see what the real competitive advantages are. Reference my blog post about the IDEO company, (as well as any blog posts with the label "Diversity".) Any way, the IDEO company: they leveraged the little d and got fantastic results in what is now known as the shopping cart project. Investigative teams are the same way. It is the little d that truly delivers results.

The problem is that it is difficult and challenging to try and find the little d and what value it will have on the Investigation and the Investigative Team. Doing so requires discipline and forethought. Lead Investigators that exercise this type of deliberation, will have much more robust investigations. The risk of not understanding and leveraging the little d is Cognitive Myopathy.

So...Big D, little d, what begins with d?

A good, robust Investigation!

When The Lead Investigator Is Happy...

Yesterday, I was speaking with yet again, another colleague (I have a lot of colleagues!), and shared with her (we'll call her Christine, her real name is Christine), this concept of SMIs. Although I found the term intriguing myself, Christine really enjoyed it and was quite animated. Here, I believe, is why:

1. If you acknowledge someone as an SMI, and you bring them into the investigative team as an SMI and if they embrace the idea of being an SMI, this has great potential to bring an air of fun and light-heartedness to the investigation. In my view, a sense of fun, makes what would otherwise be a tedious investigation, go much faster and more interesting.
2. If the SMI understands clearly their role as such, then they will have the added value of being consciously critical, asking the difficult why's without fear or reservation.
3. If the SMI is comfortable and has fun with their role on the investigative team, then you have clearly established a safe environment for the investigation to take place in.

Actually, all these points are indicative of a safe environment. Christine's animation about the SMI concept, is because she holds these three things in high esteem. She knows the value of a safe environment for an investigation, especially a difficult one.

One of the single most important aspects of an investigation, is that the environment IS safe for all the investigative team members. This allows for a forum where anyone can speak wit hout fear of judgment or repercussions outside the investigation. Especially SMIs. When team members can operate without fear, then ideas and interaction flow freely, accelerating the investigation.

This makes the Lead Investigator very happy. And you know what they say:

When the Lead Investigator is happy, everyone is happy!

(By the way. Today is my son's 20th birthday. He is in Spain and I haven't seen him since February 18th. So here is my message to him: ¡Cumpleaños felices Lorin Douglas! )

Subject Matter Idiots

I was in yet another conversation, with yet another colleague, as we discussed the value of having someone who is not close to the process, to be on the investigative team. He is a Six Sigma Black Belt and told me that his group called these people SMIs. Like a goof, I asked what an SMI was and he responded, "Subject Matter Idiots."

We had a good laugh, but his point is well made. You want someone who knows nothing about the process being investigated. They are not afraid to ask questions that won't be asked by people who, because of their expertise, may not consider the question at all. Not because they are above the question, but because they are too close to the process, for the question to even be on their radar screen.

I like to think of this concept as a painting by Claude Monet, credited with starting the "Impressionist" era in art during the late 19th century. Monet used textured "dobs" of paint to create an impression of what was seen by the observer of the painting. Consider his work, "Sunflowers", a famous still of sunflowers in a vase on a table. If you were to get as close at this work as you physically could and look at it, all you would see were "dobs" of oil paint in rich yellows and oranges, with some greens, which made no apparent sense at all. But as you stand back, you can see the collection of color swaths come together to make sense of something meaningful to the eye of the observer.

Investigations are similar. Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) are too close to the process. Whereas an SME cannot see the broader view because of their Cognitive Myopathy, an SMI has no Cognitive Myopathy. Without such a filter, there are no rules and anything, or any question, is fair game.

I have been involved with investigations where SMIs took the investigation down the path to true Root Cause by asking the "why" questions no one else could see.

When you need a fresh perspective, don't be afraid to leverage a Subject Matter Idiot.