|
Building better business processes since 1953. |
|
| About Us... |
| Process Improvement Home | Workshops | Coaching | Software | Library | Links | Newsletter | Testimonials |
Dealing with Attitudes Professionally
By
Dr. Ben S. Graham, Jr.
|
|
|
Self-focused |
Other-Focused (Social) |
Reality Focused |
|
Attitudes |
Defensive progresses into greedy |
Self righteous |
Objective |
|
Ideals |
Limited, for personal gain |
Justice, unrealistically high, double standard, critical of authority |
Realistic and serving as motivators for action |
|
Needs |
Security, comfort and possessions |
Acceptance, support from others, camaraderie |
Self satisfaction, respect from those who know |
|
Behaviors |
Acquiring rewards, scams, beating the system |
Judging, scapegoating, praise and blame, politics |
Accomplishing results |
|
Use Knowledge |
For personal gain |
To establish credit and blame |
To produce results |
|
Character |
Phony |
Sincere |
Capable |
|
Strength |
Simple |
Speak out against abuse |
Skills |
|
Weakness |
Undependable |
Divisive, superficial |
Private |
|
Views of Others |
I’m no worse than anyone else. They are all in it for themselves - everyone. |
People fit in two groups, those who care only for themselves and those who care for others. |
There are people who get things done and there are others who are primarily interested in who gets what. |
Read these columns vertically to get a mental picture of people dominated by each of the three patterns. Read the rows, from left to right to get a mental picture of the way people progress through these patterns. Then remember that people operate with a blend of all of these and it is the proportion that makes the difference.
It is standard in bureaucratic organizations and societies for people to conform. Prevailing opinions and existing work processes are comfortable. On the other hand, if the waves are being made for political reasons they shouldn’t be made. Like most clichés, this is simplistic. When reality is telling us something should be changed we should do it and vice-versa.
When things go wrong they need to be fixed. Bureaucratic rules, jurisdiction rights, job descriptions and the like simply should not be allowed to interfere with taking actions that are needed. Masters stick their necks out when reality demands.
This simplistic attitude implies that we should only improve when we have to. By this standard we would pass by multi-million dollar opportunities. In fact, we would still be using clay tablets if we had gotten that far. There is nothing wrong with fixing something that is working excellently as long as the fix has it working even better. As always, the key is in the reality of the change itself, not in the cliché.
The more people exert themselves to cover possibilities of failure, the less they are able to focus on doing things right. Immature people tend to feel great need for defenses. The more defenses they create the more goes wrong and the harder it is to spot the flaws. People can get so many defensive records established that it becomes almost impossible to see what is going on. Masters get on with work, confident that they can handle the problems as they arise. “Not to be suspicious of fraud nor to expect deceit, but to be the first to perceive their presence, that is to be man of the highest caliber.” Confucius
The idea that anything that can possibly go wrong will go wrong at the worst time is generally said tongue in cheek and is of little consequence. As long as there are masters at work the things that go wrong are attended to. But, when people are more bent on blaming than fixing, things go wrong and operations stop. Things do go wrong. Everything that can go wrong certainly does not go wrong. If this is used as an excuse rather than a harmless comment, it is symptomatic of bureaucratic excuse making. In organizations of masters almost everything goes right and what doesn’t is promptly fixed.
Masters tend to work quietly. People who are less mature tend to make more noise. The attitude of tending to the squeaky wheels catches organizations up in endless rounds of attending to distracting social issues and pursuing superficial ideas. Carried to an extreme, it assures that immature, politicians wind up in the key positions
This is the flip side of the squeaky wheel attitude. Many diligent capable masters stick quietly to their work only to be written off as a detail person. They may in fact be brilliant and highly creative. Organizations that push opportunities down to these people often get magnificent surprises.
Sometimes employees are convinced that management would never go along with the things that they are sure would improve the organization. Especially when management is feared, this becomes a comfortable excuse for not bothering to ask. And, of course, they will never buy it if they don’t even hear it. This is addressed again later under self-fulfilling prophecies.
Management is often tempted to keep their plans for improving the company secret. This makes it almost impossible to tap into the details of the current methods, which are known to the operating people but not to management. It also results in superficial solutions although they don’t appear to be superficial to management and consultants who are operating from a distance. These superficial solutions tend to be fine with immature employees whose views tend to be superficial as well. And, the immature people often see process change, particularly if it is dramatic, as an opportunity to ride ahead on the coattails of change. Meanwhile, when masters are confronted with mandated changes that have been designed by people who know less about the work than they do, they don’t like it. The focus of the changes is invariably more on equipment and technology than on the mission of the organization. This approach is one that promotes superficiality and encourages masters to leave. Goodbye corporate memory.
There are many variations on this theme. All of them involve jumping to conclusions based on superficial thinking. The less people know, the simpler it seems. What appears obvious and wonderful to people who don’t really know the work may be clearly unworkable to those who know it well. Sooner or later reality will be the judge of every installed solution. It is better when we listen to reality before we invest and commit. Masters, who have a firm grip on reality, can do that.
This is another variation of a preconceived solution with an insidious twist. When a commitment to some new system has been made, it is time to get on with it and make it work as best you can. But if there are doubts and someone who has a handle on the facts is asked to check it out, management must be willing to accept a negative finding. If the justification study is nothing more than assembling supporting data to endorse a preconceived solution, it’s a game not to be condoned by masters, a ploy to line up someone to take the blame if it fails – who certainly won’t get the credit if it succeeds. The word “study” deserves respect. It implies we begin as students ready to learn and prepared to allow reality to tell us how it wants to be.
This is a cliché that has cost industry billions in wasted effort on canned solutions. Of course the wheel is a fundamental discovery. So is the alphabet. There are many things that are basic enough that we simply make use of them. But to equate the detailed structure of a procedure with the basic simplicity of the concept of a wheel is inappropriate. When this cliché is used to sell canned processes designed at a considerable distance from the reality of the organization in which they will be used, it is little more than hype. Over and over again this has happened. Managers buy solutions, undercut their masters, and promote younger people. These younger people are excited about equipment, which they know but they know the reality of their business only superficially. Another affront to the corporate memory.
Whether it is an illiterate frontiersman spending a dollar for snake oil or an executive with a post-graduate degree spending millions for an enterprise system doesn’t matter. When people buy things that they don’t understand they are vulnerable. The more that is promised, the more wary they should be. Invariably the panaceas that claim to hold answers to all of the problems of the organization are superficial. They are also an affront to the masters of the organization. If there is ever any panacea to be had, it is the enthusiastic pride of a cadre of masters in command of the reality of an organization.
Clean slate - Tabula Rasa – a mind not yet affected by experience. To ignore the accumulated wisdom of an organization is to imply it is worthless. To knowingly replace this tested wisdom with new processes that are untried is foolhardy and analogous to the message of, “The Lord of the Flies”. (A story of civilization lost and a return to savagery.) But it is attractive to those who lack access to the detailed knowledge of the organization. The better alternative is continuous improvement conducted by the masters of the organization.
Also, the Clean Slate approach chucks out the old process without looking at it. This means that a new process replaces the old in its entirety. It is not a question of modifying those portions that are not working well. We abandon that which is excellent as well. Then, if the new process is superficially designed there will very likely be portions that aren’t nearly as good as those they replaced.
The concept of integration of systems has caused some people to adopt an attitude of “take it or leave it”. It is as if once a process is designed it will be so completely integrated, with everything depending on everything else, that it must be bought in its entirety. Most people who have had experience in process improvement are well aware that the possibilities for customizing are endless. Excellence requires continuously improving those things that can be improved. Organizations should not commit to processes that continuously restrict the performance of the people – where their masters know things could be done better but where they can do nothing about it.
The alternative is to manage processes continuously. Maintain a library of charts drawn at the elemental level. Working at the elemental level permits changing as much or as little of a process as is appropriate.
Pursuit of perfection sure sounds good. Unfortunately, it focuses on flaw. The return on investment of perfection is terrible. It takes forever, as the benefits get smaller and smaller. Trivial details hold up marvelous opportunities from being realized.
No matter how well people know their own work, their knowledge of the work in other departments will be less. Superficial assumptions lead to misunderstandings and antagonisms. Sometimes departments find themselves working at cross-purposes. This is not an area where the masters in the departments can help unless they have access to one another. And, that is the way to get past departmental rivalries. Get the best people from the different departments working together on improving processes that involve them all. This work generally leads to knowledge and respect replacing superficial negative assumptions.
This cliché is generally used to criticize organizations for being proud of what they have developed for themselves. Think about that for a moment. Who is doing this criticizing? Why are they doing it? As with most clichés, it is simplistic. Of course, it doesn’t matter where an idea comes from. The important thing is how well it works. Ignoring options for improvement simply because they were first thought of by someone else is silly. However, when ideas come from outside they must pass muster with the masters inside to assure that they will work. Since masters focus on reality and are objective NIH is a non-issue. It becomes an issue only if the people are not performing as masters.
Immature people operating politically play many games over credit and blame. These games offend the people who know. In an organization that really wants mastery, they will avoid these games. It should be unthinkable to steal credit or duck blame. That is at the heart of responsibility. The best leaders shoulder blame publicly. If they must reprimand they do so privately. And, they distribute credit to those who have earned it publicly.
Jealousy over credit leads some people to be critical of those who join in when it appears that something is going to be successful. Forget it. When a project gains momentum, cherish it. Momentum is a most crucial factor in success.
The people who are most bothered by resistance to change are usually those who are trying to accomplish change. The more enthusiastic they are about the changes they are promoting, the more resistance they seem to run into. A lot of that is merely perceptual. They are simply moving faster than the others are prepared to move. If they slowed down to the pace of the others, a lot of the resistance would disappear. Unfortunately, in many cases so would all progress. But, what if they slowed down to the pace of the others and then invited them to become a part of it and share the enthusiasm? That is what teamwork does for effective process improvement projects.
Here again we find an attitude of criticism directed at someone who has taken responsibility. People don’t use bootleg forms because there is some perverse pleasure derived from designing and using them. They do it to get the job done. If there is a service that can help them to do it better and easier, it should be welcome. If they have no idea how to avail themselves of that service, that should be addressed. If availing themselves of that service is more difficult than doing it themselves, that should be addressed.
Some organizations plan and plan but never seem to be able to execute. It may be lack of resources. It may be lack of mastery. It may be lack of support for the masters who are there. Or it may simply be that they don’t know how to execute change. Mastery at doing work does not prepare a person to be a master at changing it. Changing it requires support from many people with a lot of coordination. As a result well thought through improvements deteriorate into ‘muddling through’ when it comes to implementation. This in turn fosters an attitude of, “Leave it alone. It’s working well enough.” A far better alternative is to supply the necessary leadership support and in addition provide project management instruction and assistance so that the organization can identify the activities required for implementation and see that they are done.
A common attitude toward improvement savings is that they aren’t real unless they produce dollars. If unnecessary work is eliminated but not enough to discharge an employee, the employee is still being paid; therefore there are no savings. If we are operating with a value system that says people are expenses, there are no savings. But, if we are operating with a value system that says people are resources, there is a definite savings. We now have a resource available for that amount of time that was previously being wasted. The dollar value of that time is a very real savings.
When a new or improved process is installed there is often frustration that people don’t do it the way it was planned. If this is because they have not been informed, the answer is better training. “To expect performance without proper advisement is ridiculous.” Confucius. However, once the advisement has been properly made, what will assure that it is followed? There are two alternative routes. One is to keep checking up on people and ‘police’ the process. The other is to encourage the people to be proud of themselves. In an organization of immature people, it is generally felt that the former is necessary and doing so tends to keep the organization immature. Pride as a motivator for performance knocks the socks off of policing.
|
DO |
DON’T |
|
Treat employees as resources and earn loyalty by maintaining unfaltering commitment to employees. |
Treat employees like expenses to get rid of at the first opportunity. Downsize. |
|
Keep the organization healthy and financially sound. |
Allow the organization to deteriorate – raiding and pocketing assets. |
|
Give employees the opportunity to make important, needed contributions so that they are valuable to the organization. |
Keep employees tied up in mindless routine – fixed in job descriptions with little opportunity for growth. |
|
Let the normal pace of work be relaxed but accomplish much because of skill – Work smarter not harder. |
Keep people working under constant pressure or having to fake it – looking busy. |
|
Pay well and expect much. |
Routinize the work and pay little. |
|
Make sure operating people own their processes and are responsible for their work. |
Treat operating people as users who follow instructions. |
|
Keep attention focused on accomplishments. |
Keep attention focused on pay and benefits. |
|
Reward merit and specific accomplishments. |
Reward all alike. Promote politically. |
|
Involve operating people in process-study so that they learn how their work fits into the bigger picture. |
Leave process-study to staff people who are responsible for the big picture. |
|
Use charts that show how work is actually done documented in plain language. |
Keep things ambiguous so that there is always room to maneuver. |
|
Mix new people with veterans on the job and on improvement teams. |
Locate newcomers together in one group and veterans in another. |
|
Focus on the main mission of the organization. |
Focus on the appearances. |
|
Be willing to depend on employees to meet new challenges. |
Go outside to find impressive people to meet new challenges. |
|
Entertain improvement possibilities from any source but accept only those tested with charts by experienced employees. |
Commit the organization to improvements that have prestigious backing and mandate that they be adopted ASAP. |
|
Where two alternatives are otherwise equal always use the simpler. |
Where two alternatives are otherwise equal use the more complex. |
|
Put a premium on common sense. |
Put a premium on sophisticated and elegant. |
The simplest strategy is to treat everyone as though they are always ready to cooperate to the best of their abilities. Many will try to measure up. Unfortunately, managers often treat people as though they can’t be depended upon to cooperate and they don’t. Bureaucracies tend to foster a lot of this negative self-fulfilling prophecy. Managers underestimate their people and their people get used to it. Employees distrust their bosses so they don’t try to help them. They don’t believe their bosses will go along with changes they would like to see made so they don’t bother to suggest them and sure enough their bosses don’t go along. How could they? Interdepartmental hostilities flourish as groups retaliate for imagined slights. And on and on it goes – negative self-fulfilling prophecies steadily reinforcing themselves.
But, even in the worst bureaucracies people can change. The key is to invite cooperation. Set up situations for cooperation and follow through. Assume that people would prefer to be proud of their efforts and help them to earn that pride. The idea is to replace negative self-fulfilling prophecies with positive.

One of the finest ways of establishing situations to bring out the best in people is to involve them on process improvement teams. Being a part of a team downplays self-focused attitudes. For people locked into social-focused attitudes, studying the work replaces superficial opinions with facts. Working with people from other work areas lifts the reality-focused masters out of their privacy into a forum where they can effectively share their skills. And, past masters who have regressed into self-focused attitudes generally react to the new challenges with a return to mastery.
Care should be taken when forming a team to have each work area represented by at least one first-string veteran. There can be other team members who are less experienced or old timers whose experience is obsolete. But, the first string veterans set the tone for the group. When this is done effectively, the team members perform as a group of masters during the project regardless of the attitudes they brought to the project. After the project they can return to less mature attitudes if they like, but at least they do it with better processes. However, once they have had a taste of mastery with its accomplishments and pride, some of them would prefer more of the same.
Getting facts into the open replaces superficial misinformation with reality. Detailed process charts help to achieve this by showing what is happening step by step. When teams of people from different departments who have different interests review these charts, it sets the stage for win-win solutions. Opportunities for improvement are chosen based on how well they serve the organization not one group or another. These opportunities become so apparent that realistic changes can actually be made.
Unfortunately, depending on their maturity, people bring many dysfunctional motives to their organizations. By obscuring what is happening, bureaucracy allows ulterior motives to thrive. Ambiguity allows people to twist facts and play self-serving games. As the amount of this behavior increases people know it is happening and know it is condoned. It becomes accepted. However, transparency makes these behaviors more obvious and tends to quash the ulterior motives – to reduce the irresponsible game playing. Self-seeking things that people might readily try to pull off in private are less likely to be proposed in public. Transparency gets more people working together to come up with solutions that meet all of their needs – solutions that they don’t mind supporting publicly.
While there are many variations on the basic patterns discussed earlier in this article, there is one more specific variation worth noting here. Some people manage their self-needs very well so that they are comfortably secure. They manage their social needs so that they have a strong sense of belonging. They manage their reality needs so that they have a strong sense of fulfillment.
As these people grow bored with repeating their accomplishments, they are able to shift to new challenges directed at higher purposes. They arrive at a pattern of attitudes that combines the high ideals of their socially-focused attitudes with the confidence that grew out of their reality-focused accomplishments.
The exploding technology of today calls for many of these people. These are people who will see to it that education prepares people for the thrill of living and not just a bigger paycheck. They will make sure that social wrongs do not tie up vast quantities of energy in senseless bickering. They will release the energies of a professional society to the benefit of mankind.
Today we live in a society that has more professionals than any other category of employment. Unfortunately, many forces interfere with the development of the responsible attitudes that professionalism requires. Bureaucracy replaces common sense with arbitrary nonsense. Explosions of available information create not wisdom but superficial information fads. And, this frustrates entry into adulthood. People are locked into canned views of the world that model on “The Emperor’s New Clothes”. Hype abounds. Divisiveness over non-issues turns wonderful people into enemies.
We may have a lot but it is getting a whole lot harder to grow up. The following ten thoughts offer guidelines for professionals in shaping their attitudes, values and behaviors to measure up to the challenge of true professionalism.
Reward |
It is not wrong to desire wealth and honor but the desire to merit them will always be greater in the true professional |
Honesty |
You market your knowledge but if you can’t be trusted, of what value are your skills. |
Politics |
A professional who takes sides in organizational politics makes lasting enemies and wary friends. |
Rank |
Do not confuse high position or title with knowledge. If the chief executive knows more about the filing system than the file clerk, the organization has deep trouble. |
Sources |
When seeking people as sources of knowledge and ideas, go where the knowledge is. Do not be put off if they are unfriendly. Do not be shy if they are prestigious. Do not pass them by if they are of low rank. |
Appearance |
Do not place great emphasis on your appearance using it to impress or allowing it to detract. Let your appearance be no more than appropriate while your performance shines. |
Skill |
Know the tools of your profession so well that they need not occupy your attention. Then you can give proper attention to what you are accomplishing. |
Facts |
Gather facts at the source. Capture them the same day. Do not lose them by being disorganized or forgetful. |
Mood |
Do not let your performance depend upon your mood. Learn to control your mood so that you can put yourself into the frame of mind to provide your professional best at any time. |
Yourself |
You will never affect anything in your life more important or more completely than yourself. If you do not manage yourself well what will you do with your professional responsibilities? |
Summary
Understanding the three basic attitude patterns can help individuals to become masters of their chosen fields. These understandings can also help executives to build masterful organizations by providing a climate that invites responsible behavior. They can also guide governments past partisan bickering and into the realm of statesmanship. In all cases the gains come by getting closer to and performing in greater harmony with reality.
|
||||