Perf Improvement LO14662

JAMES_H_CARRINGTON@HP-Chelmsford-om1.om.hp.com
Tue, 12 Aug 97 12:17:39 -0400

Replying to LO14640 --

response to Mr. Harrells posting:

you ask: 'Are you saying that we are not as concerned with quality due
to our not being concerned with financial shareholder profit?'

No, exactly the opposite. Organizations that are concerned with bottom
line are not nearly as concerned with quality as those with little
concern for profit margin (or those that are not responsible to
shareholders assets). As my favorite curmudgeonous subordinate says
"Management 102 - Quality is desirable, but not at the expense of
missing a shipment"

Therefore, you and I are on the same page when you say:

>I think the profit motive is overrated as a stimulus for quality.
>Quality comes from competence, worker pride and personal fulfillment
>on the job. Workers that I deal with often consider management "in
>the way" on that one.

In fact, being in the electronics industry for 15 years, I could even
go so far as to say that, in the minds of some business managers,
quality and profit margin are two completely divergent concepts.

you also write: (re: manager-employee relationship)
>I have no feeling on this. It is not appropriate to our performance
>structures, unless you mean you pat a success on the back and warn a
>failure. .... Expertise knows when its not accomplishing the task.
>We must be careful not to injure the person's pride in the product
>outcome.

Yes, that's what I meant, and yes a responsible employee will know if
they are not meeting their goal. A responsible manager will know when
to approach the employee about the situation or when to let the
employee fix themselves.

It is after this point where we diverge. You ask:

>When you need real authority to complete the job, is it not
>self-defeating to get involved in an evaluative power struggle?

Only in a situation where there is a personal(ity) conflict between
the two individuals. I'm sure that you have had "creative differences"
with some of your artists that have resulted in an open chair(be it
voluntary or not). In EVERY situation where there is good report
between the individuals, the problem can be worked out to the
satisfaction of everyone. It comes down to this; the boss has the last
word, and the employee must accept that. This is an issue of respect.
If the employee cannot accept this relationship then it is up to the
employee to change the situation by either leaving the organization or
taking the problem to a higher authority.

It is then that the employee will make the decision to modify their
behavior to meet the needs of the organization. The 'molding' if you
will. But I maintain that ANY member of ANY organization must be
trained, coached, molded, whatever to fully realize their potential
with that organization. you write:

>The company's coaches prepare the individual for the particular
>demands of that ensemble(very high level fine tuning).... But the
>personal basic work is individual and the individual hires their
>trainer.

This is not coaching-training-molding ?

Speaking as a classically trained musician, I can say with experience
that it NEVER comes out right the first time. That's why we have
*rehearsals*. The conductor does not mold the ensemble as a whole.

"OBOES - not quite so legato on that arpeggio in the fourth measure, I
want the bassoon's obligation on the off beat to be more prominent"

This is not coaching-training-molding ?

Do you want to be operated on by a surgeon who has not been to a
seminar on new techniques in ten years?

I can also say with experience that an electronics engineer that does
not keep up with new technologies and practices should think about
retiring.

Even in your organization, where you get to select the conductor, do
you chose an individual that simply waves the wand in time to the
music? Or do you select someone who will work with the group and the
individuals to bring out the best performance in each?

This is not coaching-training-molding ?

In your organization, the feedback loop is immediate and continuous.
So how can you say that it is nonproductive, merely for the benefit of
a warm and fuzzy? Is it not productive when the conductor tells the
percussionist to back off on the tympani roll to help bring out the
lower register glissando of the third flute? What happens then when
the percussionist disagrees? You may not have a regular performance
review and feed back schedule, but you do have performance reviews,
(as informal as they may be) your audience approval not withstanding.

Your ultimate review will come in the form of box office receipts and
donations. If people don't like your product, be it the content or
performance, your organization will dive deeper and deeper into the
red, until the board of directors (or trustees) demand a change. That
will be a review of the management of your organization as a whole.

In the arts, quality and quantity are highly subjective, less tangible
aspects of the organization than in the manufacturing industries where
quality and quantity are directly measured as major aspects of an
employees performance.

JHC

james_carrington@hp.com

-- 

JAMES_H_CARRINGTON@HP-Chelmsford-om1.om.hp.com

Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>