| Problem
Solving vs. Process Improvement
By
Evan Wise, Managing Director of Management One
Many organizations focus on problem solving rather than
improving the processes that make up the business. This
is a key difference between Winning@Business™
and fads like six-sigma, TQM, ISO and other similar
efforts. Quality is a necessity to stay in business
today while process improvement is a competitive necessity
to succeed in business.
In a traditional management position, an individual
high in the hierarchy does the problem solving. Employees
are then told how the solution is to unfold and what
they are required to do to make it happen. There are
many reasons that this approach is less and less effective
every day. Among these are the emasculating and debilitating
effect that being "told" what to do will have
on employees that are creative, intelligent and able.
In other words, any motivation is being taken away from
the best employees. The solution lacks the robust character
that can be achieved when a team or organization has
input to solutions. The approach eliminates any flexibility
that the employee may have to adjust and adapt to changing
situations to keep a solution viable.
Problem solving in a traditional organization becomes
very tactical. It results in a series of instructions
to the employees instead of communicating an understanding
of the problem and issues surrounding it. Often success
reflects well on the manager that came up with the solution
while failures are blamed on poor help, an individual
that failed or other external reasons. In most organizations
this problem solving process is reactionary rather than
proactive. It focuses on urgent issues rather than taking
a longer-term strategic view on what is important. These
are among the reasons that this process is very costly
and keeps a company from being as competitive as it
could be.
Another characteristic of these traditional organizations
is the fear of challenge and change. No one volunteers
bad news or deteriorating situations so they go undetected
at the top until it is too late. Meetings are generally
a forum for the manager to download information. Sometimes
the meeting gives employees an opportunity to confirm
the decisions that the manager has already made.
Measurements
and policy statements are normally critical in these
organizations. Measurements are used to hold people
accountable for getting the results that the manager’s
decision was designed to achieve. Performance reviews
are typically used to blame and deride instead of support
and plan for the future. The policy statements are written
to be certain that the 5% of people in the company that
might cheat the system don’t cheat the system.
In reality they prevent the 95% of the people that are,
or could be, committed to the success of the company
from having the flexibility that they need to make needed
decisions. There is a fundamental lack of trust in these
organizations. This lack of trust led to unions in the
past but still exists in many organizations today.
Because
of the situation described above, these managers focus
on daily problems and react to them. They deal with
what is urgent rather than what is important. Although
this situation doesn’t make sense when you read
it, there are countless companies big and small where
this is the daily reality.
Winning@Business™
is a different model. It starts with a strategic plan
that is one page long so that everyone in the company
can understand it and use it in the course of making
daily decisions. The strategy identifies the objectives
the company will achieve but also the guidelines for
making the decisions that will get the company there.
These are the core values of the company.
The
Winning@Business™ process leads a traditional
company described above to one where executives don’t
make the day-to-day decisions. Executives set the direction
and the employees make the decisions. Measurements are
used constructively to establish the priority of the
problems and opportunities that will be addressed. The
measurements are used to set the goals to be achieved
in solving the problems. Measurements are used to confirm
that the goals are achieved. Measurements are not used
to place blame.
This
brings us back to the issue of problem solving vs. process
improvement. Problem solving can be reactive. A manager
sees the obvious problem, develops a tactic and starts
directing its implementation. Without a systematic approach,
often the problem addressed is only a symptom of an
underlying process defect. The Winning@Business™
process provides a process whereby others are brought
into the process of determining the actions. Challenges
to opinions are expected and creativity and innovation
replace the single-minded approach of a traditional
management philosophy. The team identifies the underlying
process defects and goes to work on them.
Winning@Business™
is a simple process which is what makes it so effective.
That doesn’t mean it is easy. When a company is
mired in a traditional management system, moving it
forward takes a tremendous outside influence.
The
key to success is implementation. The key is using a
process that people can understand and use every day.
The
United States grew from an industrial base. It then
moved to technology to lead the world. The service economy
followed that. If we are to maintain our top place in
the world’s economy, we must tap into the innovative
spirit and creativity that has been locked within organizations.
Sandra Black of UCLA studied the impact of team based
organizations and concluded that “these firms
experience higher labor productivity.” New levels
of productivity, motivation, and achievement are possible
but not when businesses continue to operate the way
they have in the past.
At
the end of the day, every fad depends on effective implementation
to have a positive effect on the workplace. Winning@Business™
provides the direction and the methodology to successfully
implement ideas, innovations and creativity, even if
these come in the form of fads.
|
