|
FACT GATHERING
(For Process Improvement Projects)
by Dr. Ben S. Graham, Jr., President
The Ben Graham Corporation
© Copyright 1996, The Ben Graham Corporation.
All rights reserved.
Permission is granted to post, print and distribute this document in its
original PDF format.
Two people can go into the same area to gather facts and experience entirely
different results. One spends weeks and gets incomplete and misleading data. The
other is finished in a few hours and has complete and solid facts. This session
outlines some of the things a person can do to achieve the latter. It covers:
How to initiate fact gathering. Common sense protocol. Recording technique.
How to keep the data organized.
Work processes are changing at an exciting rate. The appeal of electronics
has encouraged these changes for decades but the reason behind the recent
acceleration is human, not electronic. As long as electronics were main frame
and controlled by small groups of specialists the pace of change was severely
restricted. Now that has changed. Computers have been popularized.
The main thrust in hardware development has clearly shifted to personal
computers and networks. In the software area, thousands of packages are on the
market to assist us with a vast array of tasks. Young people are exposed to
computers early in their education. Retail outlets in shopping malls across the
country now supply equipment and software. Temporary help is available for
programming, configuring hardware, training and even operating. And, our
language has welcomed an infusion of new words and new meanings for existing
words.
More important than the widespread acceptance of personal computers has been
the social change which has accepted operating level employees into the
improvement process. Some companies do this very well. They have been at it for
years. But, many more are attempting it today. Unfortunately, some of the nice
words about employee involvement are nothing but lip service or if they are
sincere they are not very deep. This becomes evident when employees suddenly
change from being resources to being expenses as soon as the inflow of revenue
drops. But, we are learning.
Along with the increasing acceptance of employee involvement has come a
dramatic change in the role of the internal consultant who are learning new
skills for working with teams. But old habits persist.
This article is intended to help companies that are trying to capture the
enormous potential of the combination of computers and involved employees.
Specifically it addresses the role of the analyst in gathering facts about work
processes. Work processes generally pass through departmental boundaries and
improvement teams set up to study them need to include people from the different
departments. Analysts are people who have learned how to study work processes.
They can be a great help to interdepartmental teams by gathering and organizing
the facts of the work processes.
Why are We Gathering These Facts?
The first question that must be answered before we set out to gather facts
is, "Why are we doing this? What are we planning to do with these
facts?" Our answer might be to improve the way we do our work so that we
can use our resources to provide better products and services. Another answer
might be to change the way we do our work so that we can cut our staff (getting
rid of some of our resources). There is a world of difference between these
goals. This article addresses skills for doing the former.
Unfortunately, even in organizations that have never used innovation to cut
staff and have no intention of doing so, fact gathering presents a threat. Fact
gathering is usually required in the early stages of major work improvement
projects. Strangers (analysts) appear in the work areas asking questions about
procedures. Too often this is how employees first get wind that an improvement
project exists. New employees don't know the organization's history. Employees
may suspect that new executives will do things differently. It appears that many
other companies are cutting. The newspapers are full of it. There is always a
first time.
Fact gathering implies changing work methods. Changing the work, in turn,
threatens employee livelihood. Employees whose jobs are under study are likely
to become anxious. Their anxieties will be increased if there have been
announcements or rumors of staff reduction. These anxieties may prompt employees
to interfere with the project by distorting or withholding data and attempting
to discredit the project.
There is a simple way to avoid these problems. Don't enter into work
improvement with the objective of cutting staff. Instead, direct improvement at
providing the best products and services by using the best work methods. The
focus is on the work, not the people. People are a resource to be utilized, not
an expense to be cut. Work methods that waste their time will be changed. Work
methods that better utilize their time will be incorporated. Make sure the
employees understand this!
How to Initiate Fact Gathering
Public Announcement A public announcement can go a long way towards
inspiring cooperation. It can also provide an opportunity to forestall the
anxieties just discussed. The people working in the areas affected by the
project are informed that a five or ten minute meeting will be held at the end
of a work shift and that a senior executive has an important announcement. (This
senior executive should be a person whose authority spans the entire project.)
The meeting includes an announcement of the project, its objective, who is
involved in it, a request for the support of all employees and an invitation for
questions. It is conducted by the executive mentioned above because it is
important that statements about the intent of the project be made by someone who
has the authority to stand behind his or her words. It is also helpful for the
executive to introduce the analyst and the team members who have been assigned
to the project.
The issue of staff cuts may be introduced by the executive or may surface as
a question. (Or, it may not arise at all in organizations where loss of
employment is a non-issue.) If it is addressed, it should be answered directly
and forcefully. "I guarantee there will be no loss of employment because of
work improvement." This is not a difficult guarantee for executives who
genuinely believe that their people are their most valuable resource. (Note,
this is not a guarantee that there will be no loss of employment. If we fail to
improve our work there is a pretty certain guarantee that there will be loss of
employment.) This meeting can also have constructive side effects. One is that
the analyst gets a public introduction to the people from whom he or she will be
gathering data. Simultaneously, everyone is informed of the reason for the
project, making it unnecessary for the analyst to explain this at each
interview. And, the explanation carries the assurances of the boss rather than
an analyst.
Common Sense Protocol
Where to Get the Facts It is critical that the analyst go where the facts
are to learn about them. This means going where the work is done and learning
from the people who are doing it. If there are a number of people doing the same
work, one who is particularly knowledgeable should be selected or several may be
interviewed.
Unfortunately, analysts often try to collect data in indirect ways.
Occasionally this may be for no better reason than that the analyst is too lazy
to go where the work is done. Or, the analyst may have been instructed to keep
the project a secret. This may be because management wants to avoid stirring up
concern about job loss. Unfortunately, when employees learn (and they will) that
secret projects are underway in their areas, their anxiety levels will rise all
the higher, encouraging more non-cooperation.
Introverts tend to be attracted to research type work and they also tend to
find excuses to avoid meeting people. They are often tempted to use written
procedures as their source of data rather than going directly to the operating
people. Or, they may simply assume data to avoid having to go after it.
Sometimes an analyst arrives in the supervisor's office (a proper practice
when visiting a department for the first time) and the supervisor wants to
provide the information rather than having the analyst bother the employee who
does the work. This could be motivated by a sincere desire to help. The
supervisor may also want to slant the data. Regardless of the motive, it keeps
the analyst away from the work place and the person doing the work.
Whatever the reasons, each time an analyst settles for collecting data at a
distance from reality the quality of the analysis suffers. Guesses replace
facts. Fantasy replaces reality. Where the differences are small the analyst may
slide by, but professionals should not look to slide by. Where the differences
are large the analyst may be seriously embarrassed when the facts surface.
Meanwhile, the quality of the work suffers and in the worst cases major
commitments to work methods are made, based on faulty premises.
Introduction to the Employee at the Work Place When we are gathering data,
everywhere we go people are accommodating us, interrupting their work to help us
do our work. The least we can do is show that we are willing to return the
favor. When the time is not convenient agree to come back later. Occasionally an
employee will suggest that it is an inconvenient time and ask that we come back
later. Sometimes, however, the employee is seriously inconvenienced but for some
reason does not speak up about it. A sensitive analyst may notice this. However,
to be on the safe side it helps to ask, "Is this a convenient time?"
Coming back later is usually a minor problem. Typically you have a number of
places to visit. Pick a more convenient time and return. Don't be surprised if
the employee appreciates it and is waiting for you with materials set out when
you return.
Whatever you do, don't start suspecting that every time a person puts you off
that person is trying to scuttle your work or is a bad actor. Assume the person
is honestly inconvenienced and simply come back later. If someone puts you off
repeatedly, it is still a minor inconvenience as long as you have data to
collect elsewhere. Give the employees the benefit of the doubt, knowing that
every time you accommodate them their debt to you grows. If you do in fact run
into a bad actor and eventually have to impose a time, it is nice to be able to
remind that person of how many times you have rescheduled for his or her
benefit. At such times you will also appreciate the project-announcement meeting
when the senior executive brought everyone together, described the importance of
the project and asked for their support.
As you are about to start the interview, don't be surprised if the employee
brings up a subject for idle conversation such as the weather, a sports event, a
new building renovation, etc. People often do this when they first meet in order
to size up one another (on a subject that doesn't matter) before opening up on
subjects that are important. Since the purpose, on the part of the employee, is
to find out what we are like we will do well to join in the conversation
politely and respectfully. Then when it has continued for an appropriate amount
of time, shift to the subject of the interview, perhaps with a comment about not
wanting to take up too much of the employee's time.
Respect Most of the time analysts gather data from people at the operating
levels who happen to be junior in status, file clerks, messengers, data entry
clerks, etc. Be careful not to act superior. One thing we can do to help with
this is to set in our minds that wherever we gather data we are talking to the
top authority in the organization. After all, if the top authority on filing in
the organization is the CEO, the organization has serious trouble. Don't treat
this subject lightly. We receive a good deal of conditioning to treat people in
superior positions with special respect. Unfortunately, the flip side of this
conditioning leads to treating people in lesser positions with less respect.
Unintentionally, analysts frequently show disrespect for operating employees
by implying that the way they do their work is foolish. The analyst is usually
eager to discover opportunities for improvement. When something appears awkward
or unnecessarily time-consuming the analyst is likely to frown or smile, etc. In
various ways the analyst suggests criticism or even ridicule of the way the work
is being done. The bottom line is that the analyst, with only a few minutes
observing the work is implying that he or she knows how to do it better than a
person who has been doing it for years. This is unacceptable behavior. Don't do
it! Go to people to find out what is happening, not to judge what is happening.
First get the facts. Later we can search out better ways and invite
knowledgeable operating people to join us in that effort.
Recording Technique
Recording Data The keys to effective data recording are a reverence for
facts and knowing how to look for them. You do not go into data collection with
a preconceived notion of the design of the final procedure. You let the facts
tell you what shape the procedure should take. But, you must be able to find
facts and know how to record them. This is done by breaking down the procedure
into steps and listing them in proper sequence, without leaving things out. The
analyst keeps his or her attention on the subject being charted, follows its
flow, step by step, and is not distracted by other subjects that could easily
lead off onto tangents. The analyst becomes immersed in the data collection, one
flow at a time.
Record what is actually happening, not what should happen or could happen.
Record without a preference. Wash the wishes from your eyes and let the facts
speak for themselves. When later you have them neatly organized and present them
for study they will assert their authority as they tell their story.
The Authority of the Facts
There are two authority systems in every
organization. One is a social authority set up for the convenience of arranging
people and desks and telephones, dividing up the work and making decisions when
there are differences of opinion. The other authority system is reality itself.
Too often the former is revered and feared and attended to constantly, while the
latter is attended to when time permits.
Yet, whether we come to grips with the facts or not, they enforce themselves
with an unyielding will of steel. 'Reality is' - whether we are in touch with it
or not. And, it is indifferent to us. It is not hurt when we ignore it. It is
not pleased or flattered or thankful when we discover it. Reality simply does
not care, but it enforces its will continuously.
We are the ones who care. We care when reality rewards us. We care when
reality crushes us. The better we are able to organize our methods of work in
harmony with reality, the more we prosper. When we are unable to discover
reality, or deny reality we are hurt. Period!
So we enter into data collection with respect for reality. We demonstrate
respect for the people who are closest to reality, who can offer us a glimpse of
it. And, then we do our best to carefully record the unvarnished truth.
Observation
A person who has been doing a job for years will have an
understanding of the work that goes well beyond his or her ability to describe
it. Don't expect operating people to describe perfectly and don't credit
yourself with hearing perfectly. Sometimes it is a lot easier for a person to
show you what he or she does than to describe it. And, a demonstration may save
a good deal of time. A person might be able to show you how the task is done in
minutes but could talk about it for hours.
Most people are able to speak more comfortably to a human being than to a
machine. Furthermore, a tape recorder doesn't capture what is seen. If you are
going to use a tape recorder, use it after you have left the interview site. It
can help you to capture a lot of detail while it is fresh in your mind without
causing the employee to be ill at ease.
Level of Detail
If you try to gather enough information so that you can
redesign the procedure without having to get help from experienced employees you
will need to collect enormous amounts of data and your project will be
interminably delayed. For instance, if you are studying a procedure that crosses
five desks and the five people who do the work each have five years of
experience, together they have a quarter of a century of first-hand experience.
There is no way that an analyst, no matter how skilled, can match that
experience by interviewing. No matter how many times you go back there will
still be new things coming up. Then if you redesign the procedure based solely
on your scanty information your results will be deficient in the eyes of these
more experienced people. It doesn't do any good to complain that they didn't
tell us about that after we have completed designing a defective procedure.
While the analyst cannot match the employees' detailed knowledge of what
happens at their workplaces, it is not at all difficult to discover some things
that those people are unaware of, things that involve multiple workplaces. Save
yourself a lot of time by not bothering to record the details of the individual
steps and concentrate on the flow of the work. It goes here. They do this. It
sits. It is copied. This part goes there. That one goes to them. Etc. Never mind
how they do the different steps. Just note the steps in their proper sequence.
Then, when it comes time to analyze, you invite in those five people who
bring with them their twenty-five years of detailed experience. Voila! You have
the big picture and you have the detail. You have all that you need to discover
the opportunities that are there.
Defused Resentment
When people who have been doing work for years are ignored
while their work is being improved, there is a clear statement that their
experience is not considered of value. These people tend to feel slighted. When
the organization then pays consultants who have never done the work to come up
with improvements, this slight becomes an insult. When the consultants arrive at
the workplace trying to glean information from the employees so that they can
use it to develop their own answers, how do you expect the employees to react?
Do you think they will be enthusiastic about providing the best of their inside
knowledge to these consultants? "Here, let me help you show my boss how
much better you can figure out my work than I can?" Really!
We don't have to get into this kind of disagreeable competition. Instead we
honestly accept the cardinal principle of employee empowerment which is,
"The person doing the job knows far more than anyone else about the best
way of doing that job and therefore is the one person best fitted to improve
it." Allan H. Mogensen, 1901-1989, the father of Work Simplification.
By involving operating people in the improvement process you also reduce the
risk of getting distorted or misleading data from them. Their experience is
brought into improvement meetings, unaltered. If they get excited about helping
to develop the best possible process they will have little reason to distort or
withhold the data.
Don't be deluded by discovering instant improvements During data collection,
opportunities for improvement of a certain type surface immediately. Some of
them are outstanding. The analyst discovers, for instance, that records and
reports are being maintained that are destroyed without ever being used.
Time-consuming duplication of unneeded records is found. Information is
delivered through roundabout channels creating costly delays. The only reason
these opportunities were not discovered earlier by the employees is that the
records had never been followed through the several work areas. These instant
improvements simply weren't visible from the limited perspective of one office.
The people preparing the reports had no idea that the people receiving them had
no use for them and were destroying them. The people processing redundant
records had no idea that other people were doing the same thing.
These discoveries can be clearly beneficial to the organization. However,
they can be devastating for the relationship between the analyst and the
operating employees. The problem lies in the fact that the analyst discovers
them. This may delude the analyst into believing that he or she is really
capable of redesigning the procedure without the help of the employees.
"After all, they have been doing this work all these years and never made
these discoveries. I found them so quickly. I must be very bright."
Most people spend a great deal of their lives seeking confirmation of there
worth. When something like this presents itself an analyst is likely to treasure
it. It becomes a personal accomplishment. It is perceived as support for two
judgments, "I am a lot better at this than those employees." and
"Employees in general are not capable of seeing these kinds of
things." Both of these judgments are wrong. The credit goes to the fact
that the analyst was the first person with the opportunity to follow the records
through their flow. If any one of those employees could have done the same thing
the odds are that the results would have been the same.
The analyst is apt to alienate the employees if he or she grabs the credit
for these discoveries. If this prompts the analyst to proceed with the entire
design of the new procedure without the help of the employees he or she will be
cut off from hundreds of finer details, any one of which could seriously
compromise the effort.
Taking credit for these early discoveries can also alienate employees even if
they are invited into the improvement activity. For instance, it is not uncommon
for an analyst who is about to go over a new process chart with a group of users
to start by telling them about the discoveries made while preparing the chart.
This can appear very innocent, but the fact is, the analyst does this in order
to get the credit for the discoveries before the team members spot them. The
analyst knows very well that as soon as the employees see the chart those
discoveries will be obvious to them as well.
An analyst who realizes that the enthusiastic involvement of the team members
is much more important than the credit for one idea or another will want to keep
quiet about early discoveries until after the employees get a chance to study
the chart. In doing this the analyst positions himself or herself to provide
professional support to knowledgeable employees. Soon they make these obvious
discoveries for themselves and this encourages them to become involved and
excited about the project. It makes it theirs. In the end the analyst shares the
credit for a successful project rather than grabbing the credit for the first
few ideas in a project that fails for lack of support.
How to Keep the Data Organized
One important characteristic of professional performance is the ability to
work effectively on many assignments simultaneously. Professionals have to be
able to leave a project frequently and pick it up again without losing ground.
The keys to doing this well are:
1. Knowing the tools of the profession and using them in a disciplined
manner. 2. Working quickly. 3. Capturing data the same day that it is gathered
Using the Tools of the Profession with Discipline In this respect, there is
more professionalism in a well conceived set of file names and directories than
there is in a wall full of certificates belonging to a disorganized person. For
that matter, a three-ring binder may do more good than another certificate.
A professional simply keeps track of the information that he or she gathers.
Perhaps the worst enemy of data organization is the tendency on the part of
intelligent people, who are for the moment intensely involved in some activity,
to assume that the clear picture of it that they have today will be available to
them tomorrow and a week later and months later. One way of avoiding this is to
label and assemble data as if it will be worked on by someone who has never seen
it before. Believe it or not, that person may turn out to be your.
A word about absentmindedness may be appropriate. When people are
goal-oriented and extremely busy they frequently find themselves looking for
something they had just moments before. The reason is that when they put it down
their mind was on something else and they did not make a record of where they
put it. To find it again they must think back to the last time they used it and
then look around where they were at that time. Two things we can do to avoid
this are:
1. Develop the discipline of closure so that activities are wrapped up. 2.
Select certain places to put tools and materials and do so consistently.
Working Quickly
An analyst should take notes quickly. Speed in recording is
important in order to keep up with the flow of information as the employee
describes the work. It also shortens the interview, making the interruption less
burdensome to the employee, and it reduces the probability that something will
come up that forces the interview to be cut off. At the close of the interview
it is a good idea to review the notes with the employee, holding them in clear
view for the employee to see and then, of course, thank the employee for his or
her help.
Skill in rapid note-taking can be developed over time. This does not mean
that we rush the interview. Quite the contrary. We address the person from whom
we are gathering information calmly and patiently. But, when we are actually
recording data we do it quickly and keep our attention on the person. For
process analysis data gathering, we don't have to write tedious sentences. The
charting technique provides us with a specialized shorthand (using the symbols
and conventions of process charting in rough form).
Same Day Capture of Data
The analyst then returns to his or her office with
sketchy notes, hastily written. These notes serve as reminders of what has been
seen and heard. Their value as reminders deteriorates rapidly. While the
interview is fresh in mind these notes can bring forth vivid recall. As time
passes they lose this power. The greatest memory loss usually occurs in the
first 24 hours.
A simple rule for maximizing the value of these notes is to see that they are
carefully recorded in a form that is clear and legible, the same day as the
interview. The sooner after the interview this is done, the better. If this is
postponed, the quality of the results suffers. What was clear at the time of the
interview becomes vague or completely forgotten. Details are overlooked or mixed
up. Where the notes are not clear the analyst resorts to guessing about things
that were obvious a few days earlier. Or, to avoid the risk of guessing, the
analyst goes back to the employee for clarification. This causes further
inconvenience to the employee and creates an unprofessional impression. We can
help ourselves, in this regard, by scheduling to keep the latter part of the
work day free for polishing up notes on days when we are collecting data.
SUMMARY
Fact gathering is a very volatile activity. In bureaucracies where ponderous
processes are attended to by alienated employees who distrust their managers it
can even be explosive. However. the skills and the integrity of the professional
can go a long way towards reducing anxieties and gaining cooperation. Skills
enable the professional to collect critical, relevant data easily and assure
that once collected it will not be lost. But, integrity is more important. Make
sure that you always gather data from the top authority in the organization, the
person doing the work, and treat that person with the respect due a top
authority.
|
