Articles
Emergency
Quality Management
Mission Impossible: The Ultimate Facilitation
Challenge
Do You Believe In Magic?
Remembering Root Cause
Analysis
Columns Conversations
For A Change
by Peter Block
Fox Shows Employees It Has
Heart
by Lynn L. Franzoi
Features
Brief
Cases Business
News Briefs
Views for a Change
Sites Unseen
The Quality Tool I Never Use
Pageturners
Book Review
|
|
Views For A Change
Myron Kellner-Rogers answers:
Benchmarking: bane of learning
People who regularly read this column have come to expect
my contrary responses, so I won’t disappoint. Ken,
to your desire to benchmark, I say-don’t do it! Or,
if you must, I hope you’ll consider the different
understanding of learning and adaptation offered here. In
our In Search of Excellence culture, benchmarking has
become the Rosetta Stone of high performance. As brave
explorers, we wander into foreign cultures, intently
listening to the tales of the natives, who describe how
they conquered the forces of sloth and surmounted the
pinnacle of success. We return to our own shores,
borrowed tools, measures and methods in hand,
transplanting them to our own soil. But in our unique
climate, they don’t take, wither and die or grow in
mutated forms, bearing inconsistent results. Then the
blame begins, as we set about determining who did what
wrong. “It worked at GE, it must work
here!”
Nothing Transfers
Unchanged
This is a fundamental rule of living systems. The new
tools and techniques any organization invents to change
its results arise out of unique conditions. These
conditions have much to do with the quality of
relationships and information: who has access to whom,
and what information is available to people. The
conditions also have much to do with the unique identity
of the organization: what it values, what’s
important, how it determines what is significant. Given
any particular problem, the dynamic process of working
out the solution has more to do with the results achieved
than the tools and techniques used. In fact, the invented
methodologies are simply the artifacts of the dynamic
process of learning together. When we reduce our story to
the artifacts, the messy truth of our learning process
becomes hidden behind an exciting but useless
myth.
What is the Real
Story?
An example might help. Royal Dutch Shell became famous
for its scenario planning process. Begun as an internal
dialogue in the 70’s, the process of conversation
that evolved into shared scenarios of the future is
widely credited with enabling Shell to respond faster,
better, smarter than its competitors to radically changed
industry conditions. Shell excelled in the face of
crisis, when everybody else stumbled.
As experts sought to explain the
difference, they noted the use of scenarios, and the
common wisdom became the myth that said Shell got the
scenario right. We only needed to reverse-engineer
Shell’s scenario process for all of us to profit
from their experience.
Retrospectively debriefing
participants led to a step-wise process for scenario
building, now widely taught and applied. Now, where are
the stories of wildly different results on the basis of
this new technique? I think they are few, because the
recreated story is not the real story.
I believe the real story is not that Shell excelled
because they got the right scenario, but that they
created the capacity to respond quickly and intelligently
to any reality that appeared. They did this through a
messy and experimental conversation about meaning, and
all real change is a change in meaning. What did any
information mean to Shell? What was important, what was
different, what did it imply about how anyone should act?
They changed the quality of relationships in the
organization, the access to information, the
meaning-making possibilities. A value for challenging
dogmatic thinking was fostered, and the possibility of
radically different response emerged.
We can replicate the tools Shell used,
but they are only the artifacts of a profoundly changed
culture. If we are unwilling to see the complex truth
behind the simplistic myth, we will never be able to
learn from one another.
The Real Meaning of
Safety
When I look at the success or failure of any
organization, I try to understand what were the
underlying conditions that led to the results. You
mention safety. Why is it that different manufacturing
plants in the same corporation with identical safety
procedures achieve different results? I’ve worked
in a few environments in which safety was an issue-either
improving it or sustaining high levels of
performance.
In all my experience, performance is
transformed when people recognize that safety is about
relationships, about our caring for one another. Do I
accept responsibility for the safety of myself, as a
commitment to my family? Do I accept responsibility for
the safety of my colleagues, as a commitment to our
friendship?
The more safety becomes a hallmark of
our relationships with one another, the more likely we
are to seek after new learning, to apply breakthrough
procedures, to surpass previous standards. We create an
environment in which no accident is acceptable. Because
the quality of our relationship improves with each other,
the quality of our performance in all areas improves-not
just in safety. A new quality of relationship cannot be
transferred from another environment. It demands that we
commit to one another where we work, right here, right
now.
Starting Here, Starting
Now
If I were to benchmark, I’d begin “right
here, right now.” Start with this belief: The
change we are seeking is already occurring somewhere in
our organization. We just can’t see it, because it
represents something that contradicts our shared myth. To
see the change requires a change in meaning. We have to
be willing to look at those communities of practice in
our midst where people are getting different results and
understand they got those results differently. Look
inward, and begin the conversation that challenges
conventional wisdom, that engages everyone in recognizing
and respecting what they are learning. Begin to change
the relationship you are in together, and the results you
get, by having the courage to know what you really
know.
Dave Farrell
Responds
|