Vicious Circle or Virtuous Cycle - two sides of operational leadership behaviors...

Are your operations spiraling downward in a vicious circle of relentless cost pressure and diminishing sales or declining supply chain performance? Or are your operations accelerating into a bright future riding a virtuous cycle led by strong employee engagement and positive momentum from your continuous improvement activities?

I think there is strong evidence to suggest these are two sides of the same coin and that missteps in execution and leadership behaviors, particularly, as it relates to messaging for employees and employee engagement, can be the difference.

Oh, and apologies for the "rustic" illustration above - tried to find a good PowerPoint template to build from but I couldn't find one that suited my needs that was both free and easy to use. The symbolism of the behavior pairs on the screw threads is meant to illustrate the thin, sharp separation between the vicious and virtuous behaviors and the dependence of success or failure coming from which way the screw is turned.

Speed vs. Quality and Safety - In two of my previous articles, I have highlighted how a focus on speed or throughput vs. a concerted effort to improve quality, eliminate waste while ensuring food and employee safety - can drive different and even opposite results. A single message about improving OEE (Overall Equipment Effectiveness) might be seen as a "push" for speed to cut costs without regard for quality, vs. a data-based approach to improving quality as a means to improved throughput. I have seen in my own experience that the same message delivered to a group of employees can be heard in different ways by different individuals.

My recommendation, is to ensure your messaging and motivation always remain employee customer and consumer centric - that those messages have a firm foundation that "Starts with Why" (plenty of articles and LinkedIn material to help you with that) AND highlight "What's in it for me", (as well as ... for employees, for customers, for consumers, for stakeholders, for managers, for owners). Never ever forget the the "soft stuff is the hard stuff". Other methods to consider to assure your messaging is appropriate for all stakeholders is the Power, Legitimacy and Urgency Model or the Power/Interest Matrix. (Links to RequirementTechniques blog)

Allocating Blame vs. Giving Credit - I think we can all remember a time when a production meeting or Kaizen event devolved (even momentarily) into a "blame game" instead of a collaborative search for improvement. Again, the same messages - delivered without context - can be heard as critical toward the way things have been done in the past - instead of as encouragement to try something new or to adopt a different perspective.

In this era of instant information - the potential for micro-management is high - as operational coaches and leaders on the floor - we need to ensure that company leadership and stakeholders focus on giving credit and recognizing progress and new solutions instead of coming on a visit and immediately charging into the latest issue. Of course, we need to be engaged in challenge and improvement at all levels of the organization as we progress and mature in our respective Lean Journeys - but in the beginning it is critically important that senior leadership, owners and influencers be focused on praising gains made with new and improved methods - building a culture of sharing credit and encouraging collaboration and experimentation. Micromanagement can be discouraging and seen as allocating blame - using information tools to recognize gains and giving credit for recent successes is a way to ensure folks know that leadership knows about the "wins" (small and large) and not just the "issues'.

Cost vs. Value Added - The dilemma of sharing the details of expenses in a context of cost vs. value added can be very consequential. In our efforts to ensure understanding and to make things simple to ease analysis and repetition we can get caught in subtle traps of language - where things like "labor" get viewed or discussed as "cost" vs. "value added" activity. It is easy to see how this use of basic language can be "heard" much differently then how it was "spoken" or intended.

Starting with good Value Stream Maps that highlight areas of waste as opportunities can dramatically improve communication and heighten success rates. My experiences have reminded me again and again that folks everywhere in organizations are anxious to address and eliminate waste, or improve value added - and less motivated by cost reduction. Too often cost reduction is "heard" as a reduction in preventative maintenance, a reduction in support labor, or a reduction in the quality or utility of parts, tools and ingredients. When the focus is on "value" and "elimination of waste" it can make a difference.

Command & Control vs. Servant Leadership - I have many more pairings of these behaviors I could discuss - and I sincerely hope you will share some of your ideas in comments or messages, but I want to get to one pair which I think is extremely important. That is evolving the culture in manufacturing and operations from command and control styles of management and direction toward servant leadership based on influence and coaching.

Command and control is about telling folks what to do - servant leadership is more about asking what is needed to get things done. The methods and behaviors that distinguish one from the other can be discussed at length - but one primary difference is centered in what we believe about our teams - some folks think teams need to be told how to do everything and when to do it - others believe that teams need to know what is expected and be given the opportunity to provide input and ideas and ultimately provided the tools and coaching they need.

"Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what you expect and they will surprise you with their ingenuity." - General George Patton

The compound effect - It is not difficult to imagine how missteps within these pairs of behaviors could either lead to a vicious circle of diminishing performance or a virtuous cycle of continuous improvement. One or two slips along the way are recoverable - but recognizing when messages are missing the mark - having that "ear on the ground" - to assure efforts drive engagement instead of compounding pressure and mistrust. I think it today's environment of nearly full employment - eliminating waste and improving effectiveness as ways to redeploy resources is critical.

Finally, it is important to recognize that within the context of growth and decline in business - there will be times of urgency - when results are needed more quickly - I still believe that if you start with why - you can effect change, turn-around results AND maintain employee engagement while getting quick, impactful results.

As always, I'd love to hear your thoughts and comments. Please review my other articles as well - your comments, suggestions, feedback and additions are always appreciated.