The error however results into defective output and hence it produces waste.
Can-changing-th
Do you exercise your choice meaningfully
Mr Foolhardy slips over a banana peel. After a few steps he falls again over another banana peel. He gets up and starts walking. On seeing third banana peel he says: "Oh-My-God, now I have to fall again!!!" .... Like Foolhardy, some do love 'falling' followed by getting 'cured' reactively 'again-n-again' than taking preventive 'care'. What should the case really be?
Business of the company that I went to assess was driven by research and development (R&D), high obsolescence of products and uniquely varying needs of customers.
High customisation was the order of the day. That in turn called for high level of customer contact and listening skills in order to capture voice of customer (VOC) precisely. This obviously calls for leadership skills to get it made in-house and get delivered before competition could do.
The need may appear unique to the company. But this in fact is the order of the day for most suppliers given the ever dynamic market place characterised by VUCA¹ and high level of competition.
While CEO of the company was keen to improve business processes to help retain their position externally, simultaneous concern was about 'attrition' he had been facing. Recently 'bought' talent also left, he complained.
Won't the training go waste under such circumstances, he feared.
Between the trained people leaving and untrained ones living (with you) for ever with their errors to annoy you, what is better?
Education, training and coaching builds people. Between 'Building' relevant skills captively versus installing 'Bought' skills as a foreign particle, what is preferable?
Companies need to understand that building pipelines of people is no less important alongside building the pipelines of products. In fact the former should be their prime agenda.
Why do people quit?
Especially those with high aspirations definitely do.
In fact, those without aspirations too move in absence of a conducive environment to hold them back. One of the major reasons of the other party leaving is indifferent treatment be it to people in general or to a customer in particular.
So one of the most important portfolios of the CEO is not to leave HRD² to HR-D (HR-Department). Instead, creating culture that 'compels' people to stay back should be her hands-on agenda driven personally.
One can't ignore the fact that even seemingly dumb people have intelligence, so-called average though. It usually stays latent or dormant until challenged.
Leaving aside their own ego, superiors just need to facilitate unleashing it by making them feel confident and help them to realise their self-worth. They just need to be given an opportunity and a platform to shine. This can be done by encouraging them to express their thoughts, experiment corresponding changes in their work area without fear-of-failure.
It's a process of enabling³ people.
Once done, latent talent can be seen flowering and flowing-in smoothly. The pipeline of HRD can be seen getting 'built' that not only ensures employee retention but also creates a pull.
How to enable³ people?
First of all collect (Not Buy!) people who have fire-in-their-belly although with not-very-high aspirations and high-qualifications. Then enable³ them step-by-step.
Step-1. Establish your credibility by demonstrating your actions on what you speak.
Step-2. Explain your expectations from them. Communicate your urgency and seriousness through complimentary evidences.
Step-3. Educate, train and coach them.
Education is to help them acquire goal specific knowledge.
Training is to help them acquire goal specific and industry-relevant, organisation-specific skills.
Coaching is to help them on 'Do-Why' and 'Do-How' in order to apply the knowledge and skills to enthusiastically achieve the goals of common good.
Step-4. Encourage, inspire & motivate to keep them engaged in the process. Give them a platform to showcase their talent and to shine.
Step-5. Empower them: Give them freedom-within-a-framework to experiment without fear of failures.
Step-6. Ennoble, means dignify them with high respect. Recognize & reward their achievements by actively listening to their efforts.
Step-7. Repeat the enablement cycle to take up higher challenges.
'Building' people rather than 'Buying' them is in a true sense creating a learning organisation as companies like Toyota do. It's their company level strategy driven by the top rather than merely a HRD² strategy left to the HR-D.
Footnotes:
1. VUCA: Volatile, Uncertain, Complex, Ambiguous. A term of military origin that represents warfare environment.
2. HRD: Human Resource Development.
3. Model 7-E© from Book "How To Enable A Change Process? Start-From-Self". Author: Shyam Talawadekar.
Also read a few relevant blogposts hereunder: Please do consider leaving a comment or sharing this post.
Taken-For-Granted ? You Deserve It !!
Strategise To Achieve Targets Daily
Does recognition really matter
IQ-EQ-or-SQ: What-is-more-important?
Do you know a Best-Career-Plan
Take your career in fast lane!
Succession-Plans In Fast Lane!
Treat Root-causes, Not Symptoms !
Nauseous Communication Gaps
Do You Cleanup-After-Crisis
Raam or Krishna-Shyam: Tell me Hey Raam!
Will It Work Here?
Some Moron ! Some Great !!!
That's How Morons Work
You seem Reasonable if you appear Un-reasonable
Smart-Moron Who Breaks Your Glass
WOW Work-Culture: By Telling or Selling
Suggestions On-Sale, None-To-Buy
Can-changing-thoughts-change-a-nation
Ridiculous Poison-culture versus Maverick Kaizen-culture
Tolerate Once, Twice, Thrice?
Make checklists your friends
Make It Simpler, Rest Will Follow
How To Make A Difference
Big-Be Or Bug-Be !
A customer gets what s/he deserves: Shoddy Quality!
Listen to iceberg of VOC to acquire customers
"Green tax of Rs 20 crore in kitty, but pollution in Thane remains high!"
This news that I read while sipping tea after a long drive of over 100 kilometers across Mumbai and Thane, reinforced writing this blogpost and its title.
Actually I had already begun to write this blogpost on studying various signals over a few days. Only some of them had 5...4...3...2...1... 'Second-tickers' that indicate time in 'seconds' the next signal would show up.
More than half of almost a hundred signals that I studied didn't have 'ticking countdown timers' nor were they visible except to the first row of vehicles.
Purpose of the 'ticking' is to provide transparency so that speeding vehicles could predict when to halt and stationary vehicles could 'start' their engines just-in-time. Former would prevent accidents. And both, the former and the latter, would save fuel as well as pollution by preventing idle running of engines.
So it's not necessarily the old vehicles that cause pollution. Attitude of drivers in spite of the infrastructure such as above (or the lack of it) also contribute their might. Even new vehicles holding 'pollution-in-control' certificate 'vomit pollution'.
Causes may be many that need to be treated at root cause level. It's actually easy and less expensive to do so.
Lack of proper maintenance, for instance.
Attitude of 'managing' to seek pollution certificate.
Fitting 'timers' at all signals or fitting them at visible level.
Marking an area at busy signals (as yellow box-1, 2, 3, say) that indicates those many vehicles within a maked box could pass through a given 'timer-setting' of the signal. So only one batch of vehicles within the yellow box-1 would pass within the fall of one signal.
Vehicles within yellow box-2 need not race-to-chase since the timer-setting of signal-1 won't be adequate to get them cleared. See the idea in sketch.
The denomination of the boxes can be standardized in steps equivalent to the units of signal-time so that signal time can be adjusted as per demand. This is equivalent to a 'pitch' in 'just-in-time' or 'lean' operations that bring in visibility. Thereby it will reduce costs such as fuel consumption and pollution in case of traffic.
Installing proper signboards and indicators. In absence of that, many a time a driver ends up getting stuck on signals while he could have easily taken a couple of flyovers to reach his destination without any waiting time.
This is analogous to a 50-story building employing say four high-technology lifts: one each reserved for going upto 10th floor, upto 20th floor, upto 30th floor, and upto 40th floor respectively; but not having a few pennies worth signboards. A first time visitor might end up landing into a wrong lift and shuttling among lifts and floors. Murphy's law usually takes over in such cases!
Tackling habits of people pressing switches of all the lifts at a time without reading signboards if at all they are readable, is another story of course!
Shear waste of energy! Many a time road-signs are hidden behind political hoardings full of birthday wishes.
In short, root cause of pollution is the wasteful human-activity that adds costs rather than value.
Unless there is a reward mechanism to recognise all those stakeholders who involve themselves in finding out non-value-activities, merely punishing at symptomatic level is not going to be of much help.
Authorities must listen to their voice on their real time difficulties. Leaders need to go to corresponding workplace (Gemba) in real time (Genjitsu) in order to do so so that they can see the difficulties themselves. They must treat those difficulties at root cause levels rather than merely giving first-aids to symptoms.
Wish To Be Planet-Friendly?: Save!
Taken-For-Granted ? You Deserve It !!
Technology in-place, security dis-placed
Do you know a Best-Career-Plan
Less With More And More Gets Sore
Make It Simpler, Rest Will Follow
Some Moron ! Some Great !!!
Smart-Moron Who Breaks Your Glass
WOW Work-Culture: By Telling or Selling
Suggestions On-Sale, None-To-Buy
Can-changing-thoughts-change-a-nation
Ridiculous Poison-culture versus Maverick Kaizen-culture
Taken-For-Granted ? You Deserve It !!
Recently I came across a spiritual article on Tolerance that referred to UNESCO's definition: "Tolerance is respect, acceptance and appreciation of the rich diversity of our world's cultures, our forms of expression and ways of being human. It is fostered by knowledge, openness, communication, and freedom of thought, conscience and belief. Tolerance is harmony in difference."
Sometimes it appears difficult to practice some spiritual prescriptions such as above. Such sane characteristics typical of epic-character 'Rama' become impractical especially while dealing with insane 'Kaansaa's kind black behaviors. So I dug into UNESCO's definition further knowing very well that I am too small a fly in front of spiritual Gurus and UNESCO's definition as well that went on to say that, "Tolerance is the responsibility that upholds human rights, pluralism (including cultural pluralism), democracy and the rule of law."
On seeing reference to "the rule of law" in the definition, I was a bit relieved.
How long does one tolerate a given abnormal situation or an abnormal behavior, be it that of self or that of others?
Once, Twice, Thrice? How many times? Everyone faces this dilemma some time or the other.
Epic character Rama in you may tolerate abnormal behaviors limitlessly. However another epic character Krishna 'directed me' to devise my own method to make a judgement.
In any given situation there may be an involvement of man, machine (equipment), material, method (a standard, a process or a procedure to perform act/s) in a typical work environment.
Anything going wrong in any one of these ingredients individually or collectively may create an undesired or a mistakeful outcome that one refers to as an abnormal situation. It's like an undesired, out-of-tune, out-of-beat, noise instead music getting produced in an orchestra.
The undesired outcome may be due to a collection of mistakes. Role of 'music director' of the situation is to track and trace such mistakes in order to 'orchestrate' prevention of those for producing desired effect in future.
So as a student of Kaizen-school-of-thoughts, in order to prevent making wrong judgement while studying an undesired situation, I identified three categories of mistakes.
1/ Inadvertent mistakes
2/ Careless mistakes
3/ Criminal mistakes
An inadvertent mistake is unintentional. It's not done on purpose. It might just happen as a result of missing consciousness of one's own mistake or that of others. It is like falling in a given pit or a pot-hole on road for the first time. The cause may be inattention while talking on cell phone. Or it may be that someone else being on wrong side forced the victim on right (correct) side to suffer.
A careless mistake happens due to missing concern or worry about consequences of a mistake. It might occur as a result of not giving sufficient attention or thought, especially concerning it's avoidance or harm therefrom. It is like falling in a pit second time while talking on cell phone. Mostly fools fall in this category.
A criminal mistake is the one that recurs due to recurring carelessness. It's criminal since there is a resistance to learn from past mistakes. It's criminal if it's done intentionally. In most cases, the criminal himself may not fall but surely makes fellow-beings fall and, if not arrested, repeatedly so. In fact, he ends up pushing them and at times pushing community itself into crises.
Inadvertent and careless mistakes are relatively easy to tackle. But criminal mistakes are the most difficult ones to tackle because they are more to do with wrong intentions and criminal mindsets deployed by-design.
So coming back to the question, "How long does one tolerate a given abnormal behavior?" is like asking "How long does one tolerate mistakes of self or of others? How many times: Once, Twice, Thrice?"
My method is:
1/ Tolerate a mistake one-time while it's Inadvertent. Invest in training and putting Kaizen efforts on errors thus revealed in order to make the process mistake-proof. Establish complimentary SOPs (standard-operating-procedures), rules and regulations to prevent deterioration of the mistake-proof level attained.
2/ May tolerate a mistake second time while it's at Careless-stage. Put in training, Kaizen efforts and complimentary rules & regulations by revisiting the mistakes in order to make the process mistake-proof.
This way the chances are that inadvertent and careless mistakes may get prevented from getting matured into criminal ones especially that concerned with safety, dignity and rightful rights at personal level as also concerned with rightful common goals.
3/ So having given opportunity for structured learning and that of tolerating mistakes once or twice, tolerating it the third-time is being criminal on the part of the tolerates or the orchestrator himself apart from tolerating the so-called criminal making mistake. Because in that case it's the orchestrator who allows a small-mistake to grow into a crime or a crisis or a disaster.
Having established that a mistake falls in criminal-category, it should be dealt with with a sense-of-urgency.
Apart from enforcing rules & regulations used to deal with criminals while 'dealing with criminal mistakes', great leaders deal with 'causes of such intentional behaviors'. Like wrong intentioned poor leaders they don't corner the people making mistakes. That's a separate topic to be dealt with some other time on investing time and efforts in 'behavior-modulation' of the people concerned.
A Customer Complaint made to a reputed taxi service in Mumbai was:
1/ The taxi booked was not found until few minutes after the appointed time. So the driver was called (by customer) to find out his 'whereabouts'.
Taxi was found to be parked away on road. The driver refused to go to customer's colony when requested. He threatened to go away if the customer did not go where the taxi was parked.
2/ Nor had he informed his arrival although he said that he had. In fact, customer called him up a few minutes after 'no-show'. Attached screen-shot of the customer's cell shows 'outgoing' to driver's number but not incoming from his number.
3/ On telephone as well as in person, when the driver was asked 'why he did not come inside the colony' he arrogantly replied: "Our Taxi-Service-Provider gives too much importance to Customer. (In his vernacular language: "Ye Taxi-Service-waleney Customer ko aisa, implying 'chadhake', banaya hai''...and so on).
Supplier's response after over a week of registering the complaint was:
"Please accept my sincere apologies for the inconvenience caused to you."
Where does the above real-life practice fit into business principles?
How should, a service provider wanting to stay and flourish in business, look at a typical customer complaint?
The above transaction is a typical case-study of INDIFFERENCE that should be avoided at all the touch-points with all stakeholders especially with customers by both the front-liners as well as the rear-end officers. (Reference 'world of Kaizen' book).
What is a customer's rightful 'expect'ation after a typical complaint (that hardly 4% of the dissatisfied customers choose to make):
1/ First of all the first-aid so that s/he gets quick relief. (In addition, apology is anyway expected but it's of no use without the First-aid.)
2/ Right to know specific details of what exact action was taken to prevent the situation from occurring in future.
How does a typical supplier respond. What INDIFFERENCE do most suppliers engage into:
1/ First of all they deny the complaint then they defend.
2/ They express dry apology without taking preventive action. Such an apology is like rubbing the wound. (The taxi service in above case fell in this category.)
3/ They don't keep customer informed about specific details of what exact action (if at all) was taken to prevent the situation.
4/ They expect customers to forget service-errors s/he had faced during the year in lieu of a yearly-gift-packet and/or sweets. While the gift 'dry-of-emotions' reinforces their vow to quit, most customers shamelessly accept it in exchange of an unexpressed abuse (to the supplier).
Funnily, a typical supplier doesn't mind recruiting a well-paid customer-care officer who is well-trained in handling an errate customer, and further training him in writing flowery letters so that 'issues' are taken 'care' of.
Result: Customer continues the service provider only until s/he finds another option so that s/he can QUIT. Meanwhile, s/he plays the role of a devil-publicity-officer 'bad-mouth'ing the supplier's services among not less than a dozen prospective customers.
As someone says, it takes 10 times more money and efforts to acquire a new customer.
Isn't it wiser instead to invest this money in training associates on what the customer 'expects' rather than spending wastefully on reactively 'managing' the effects of indifference.
Should a customer bother about such 'small' issues?:
If s/he wants a change in such careless attitude, then yes!
S/he must play her small-bit-a-role though. Else, s/he should not blame suppliers for shoddy quality of service. S/he must help to get service-error out of the system which otherwise anyway will keep popping up above the carpet exactly when unwanted.
If and when it eventually does pop-up then the corresponding customer got what s/he deserved. Also s/he makes herself deserving to what s/he will get in future.
Murphy's Law: The tile on foot-over-bridge is looking for an opportunity to fall on vehicle speeding underneath.
I photographed them both ignoring embarrassing look by my co-passenger. That's how I behave: an idiosyncratic fellow taking odd pictures such as around even a wash-basin, catching 'innovative styles' of someone blowing nose.
Washington Post (dataflurry.com Jul 22nd 2009) published an estimate that over 22,000 of the 42,000 people that die each year in USA from automobile accidents (i.e. over 50% deaths) occur because of dangerous road conditions such as potholes, fading lane-line-markings, missing road-signs, and debris that gathers on roadways, hazardous highways, narrow roads, etc. Rest deaths are caused by driving under the influence of alcohol, speeding excessively, and even neglecting wearing a seat-belt.