Articles
A
Sunny Forecast
Grassroots Teams Help Sun Micorsystems
Raise Customer Satisfaction
Coming Full Circle
Measuring and Improving Organizational
Effectiveness
Oil Change
Externalization, Change Management Key
to Realignment
Project Management:
Just Do It!
A Step by Step Overview ofa 1950's
Organizational Tool Experiencing a 1990's
Rebirth
Columns
Hope Is Where You Find It
by Peter Block
Sorry We're Closed: Diary of a
Shutdown
Features
Brief Cases
Business News Briefs
Views for a Change
Sites Unseen Reader's
Favorite Websites
The Quality Tool I Never Use
Pageturners
Book Review
Letters to the Editor
Calendar of Events
|
|
Views For A
Change Consultant
Q&A
Jim Harrington
Responds:
Your question is more of an assignment
than it is a question, but I am glad you are using Purdue
University’s well-established term GEMBA, which
stands for Global Executive MBA program. This is a
proven, very effective management training process that
has, for a number of years, produced excellent results. I
am assuming you are referring to “gemba” as
defined in Masaaki Imai’s book entitled,
“GEMBA Kaizen,” published by McGraw-Hill in
1998. Based upon this assumption, I believe that you are
interested in knowing if a self-managed communication
system can be established at the worker level for small
groups of about 100 people. The answer is yes. However,
it may be very difficult to define a value proposition
for this project. Is there a better, less expensive way
of doing it? The answer is most cases, again is
yes.
If I was given the assignment to implement a system of
this nature by a client, the two major things I would
consider are: areas where everyone has computers that are
on LANs and areas where individuals are not connected
through a computer LAN network.
In the first case, communication systems can easily be
set up using the organization’s intranet by
establishing a number of communication subjects and
allowing everyone in the group to read and input into the
intranet structure. The advantage of this communication
system is a free exchange of ideas and information. The
disadvantages:
1. A major loss in productivity because both needed and
unneeded information must be sorted through to find the
few gems.
2. The system can become more of a rumor mill than a
fact-based communication system.
3. There can be major legal expenses.
In the second case, newsletters, bulletin boards and
group meetings organized by the group can provide the
communication system. Again, I believe that this has a
poorer return on investment because much of the
information that is communicated is rumors, not fact.
Also, most of this type of communication is better
handled at the coffee machine and during break periods
than through a formal system.
The best approach I know of to focus the Natural Work
Teams (NWT) on their processes and how their processes
relate to the organization is through a methodology
called “Area Activity Analysis (AAA).” In
this case, each Natural Work Team develops a mission
statement that supports the next level manager’s
mission statement. Then the NWT defines the activities it
conducts and compares them to its mission statement. Only
activities that directly support the mission statement
are included in the NWT work assignments. Activities that
were completed by the NWT that do not relate to its
mission should be directed to upper management so that
they can be redirected to another area, or the
NWT’s mission statement should be changed to
include the activity. Then for each activity, the NWT
defines the customers that receive the output from that
activity. They meet with these customers to document
their requirements, acceptable performance standards and
define a performance feedback system. These agreements
are documented in the customer’s specification and
signed off by the customer and the NWT. The Natural Work
Team then flowcharts the tasks that make up each activity
and defines the efficiency measurements for each activity
(dollars per unit processed, cycle time, cost per unit,
inventory turns per month, etc.). The team then collects
data to define how efficiently the activity is presently
operating. These data, along with recommended performance
standards for each efficiency measurement, are submitted
to the next-level manager. Based upon business needs and
these inputs, the next-level manager establishes the
official efficiency standards that will serve as the
basis of future budget plans.
The AAA process is completed by defining the suppliers
for each input to each activity. Working with the
supplier, the NWT will define the input requirements,
acceptable performance standards, NWT’s feedback
system to the supplier and have the supplier sign off on
the specifications indicating that it can meet these
standards. What the Natural Work Team has just
accomplished is establishing many process-related gembas
with backward, upward and outward communication systems
built into them. Add to the AAA approach a suggestion
program, a speak-up program plus town meeting programs
and you have developed a really effective, gossip-free
communication system that meets everyone’s
needs.
One of the major problems we face today is consultants
who have good products to sell, but the products are
applied to situations that add little value. Be careful
of improved communication systems that do not have a
positive effect on one or more of the following without
having a detrimental impact on any of the others:
- Improve productivity
- Decrease cost
- Improve quality
- Improve return-on-assets
- Reduce employee turnover rates
It is easy to justify expansion of communication systems
based upon “touchy/feely” things like
improvement of morale or increased access to knowledge
that in turn do not improve the organization’s
performance. If this is the case, there are better ways
for your organization to spend its hard-earned
money.
Knowledge management systems are
playing a very important role in today’s
organizations. They can add significantly to the
organization’s performance if they are designed and
managed correctly, or they can be very expensive toys if
poorly designed and left on their own.
John Runyan's Response
|