What We Are Doing Is Not Working

Written by Jason Haines

“The first step is transformation of the individual. The transformation is discontinuous. It comes from understanding the system of profound knowledge. The individual, transformed, will perceive new meaning to his life, to events, to numbers, to interactions between people. Once the individual understands the system of profound knowledge, he will apply its principles in every kind of relationship with other people. He will have a basis for a judgement of his own decisions and for transformation of the organizations that he belongs to.” -W. Edwards Deming

A few weeks back, Industrial Solutions made a post about leadership, values, goals, and growth that got many views, likes, and comments. But with the number of characters and in the context of a post most of the time your full post does not cover all the items you would like to cover. The post was out of a paper I had written that week but broken down into something less wordy than we can do in a paper (What Are Your Values: Goals or Growth?). One of the comments was from Edward Shelby, who posed a few questions that were very thought provoking. He asked, “so, is the result a picture of how well the cause was managed? Or could the result be a reflection of how well leadership performed? Is the cause merely an excuse to be managed in light of a lack in leadership skills?” These questions really got me thinking about this post much more deeply and the concerns we see and hear in many organizations, plus it brought up thoughts I have had in the past and things I have said about leadership. How we chose leaders, and where Lean can help with this process of selection.

There are many types of people who lead and ways to lead people, but what is the right way to lead? I am not sure there is a correct answer to that. An example of this is from the movie We Were Soldiers, starring Mel Gibson. In the movie two of the new sergeants are highlighted during one of the training exercises they are doing. One of them is a yeller, hard charger, gung-ho type who keeps on top of his followers and tries to get everything out of them. Now his yelling is not to degrade or put them down, but to get them to go further than they think they can so they will be able to fight through adversity in future battles. The other leader is a stop and see, understand, and access the situation to try and get the most out of his followers. He sees and understands that the men are having trouble with blisters and wet socks, so they stop, and he has them all help each other as well as change their socks. He is not doing this because he is a push over who feels sorry for others, but he wants to get the most out of them and have them healthy and ready for future battles. Both do anything for their men and serve them. So which leader is right? In the movie both leaders die, though in different ways, trying to save their men. Both men were chosen to be leaders, but why?

I posed this question in a training that I recently did and many of them said they would follow the caring and nurturing leader more so than the hard charger. I am in that group as well. But then I asked, because one said that the hard charger just wants people to follow, that during WWII Patton was loved by his men and was a hard charger, where Eisenhower, who was loved as well, just not by the men at the frontlines. Why is that? I received the answer it was because the men were in the military and had to follow. But I have also seen stories of Paul “Bear” Bryant, who had his players backs even when they hated him, but was not the nicest all the time, and then on the other side of the token you have John Wooden. Wooden said, I am paraphrasing here, “he may not like the things his players do, but he loved them all the same.” Both adored but had different styles.

Working in manufacturing for so many years I have seen many good and bad leaders but may have been suited to lead elsewhere. Leaders who worked in the field and those that did not before being chosen to lead. Leaders with years of experience and those with none. Leaders who moved up into more leadership and those who were stuck in the leadership roles they always had. I always wondered how they were chosen, and I have been in different roles and chosen in different ways of being a leader, but the most common form of leadership appointment that I have seen within places is through whom the best performer is. The other common form is through hiring from the outside through resume sifting and interviewing for what is felt to be the best fit. The sad thing is most of the time these are the worst leaders, and it is not because they are bad people. So then why do they struggle to lead?

One of my first manufacturers that I worked for promoted a guy, who could just run the brakes off any job and out do any one in the facility. He knew the production manager, which is not why he was promoted, but it helped, and she knew he was the best performer in the facility. Which like I said, great, and good for him, but he had one issue, he was not a good people person, and he did not try to be. But what is worse is, neither did the people who wanted to promote him try to help him with his people skills. They knew this person outside of work and the only thing that they cared about was his being a great worker, but the problem was his great work ethic did not translate to being a great leader. He could not get the most out of the people who worked for him because he only knew how to force his people and not how to get the most out of them. I found out a couple of months after I left there that he stepped down from the job due to stress and took an operator’s job again at the same place. It did not have to be that way; he was only working to achieve the values of the organization.

In the end the supervisor could have gone and received the proper training, but he did not, and the organization could have provided the proper training, but they did not. So, in the end both sides lost. I used to believe that it was the organizations job to provide for the student, athlete, or worker but later in life I realized I needed to also take responsibility as well. Because if we are not doing anything for ourselves to help others will not try to help us either and many of us lose sight of this. Is it because it is easy? Is it because we do not know where to turn? The way we were raised. What exactly stopped me in early years?

What changed my mind was getting to see things from outside of Southeast Ohio, though I know I still have some of the cynicism from there. This is not because of living there, or the people I was around, it is because I did not go find out for myself. I began to have to find out for myself when I was put into my first leadership role, which I had no experience for and was put there because of my performance. When I first started this role, I tried to run my team with an iron fist and drive them with fear because that is what I was told would work by everyone I listened to. I found out quick this was not the way to go, and I needed to find a new way. That new way was hustling, and I do not mean the hustling of dealing, but the hustling of working extra hard, which was not going to work long term. I worked hard to help everyone, and I sacrificed a ton. I was everywhere and did all I could to help everyone in my area by providing better care than any other shift. This helped me with stability and bringing others to my shift. I had people who did not want to work nights come to my shift because of my leadership and servant style, but I realized the pace I was working was not sustainable and I needed to find something to help.

I believe what stopped me early in life was that I would listen to what other people would tell me and leave it at that. I would not dig into things and see how they really worked and how I could get ahead by helping myself improve. It took awhile because I listened to what others told me and thought that was how things worked in the world. Things such as it was the coaches’ job to call and find scouts for the athletes, it was managements job to provide for the workers and help them move forward, etc., etc., etc. When really in all reality it was my responsibility to do these things and help ourselves before we could give or receive help. When I found my pace was not sustainable that is when I started to look for answers on my own and then find out who could help, not speculate on who should help. Waiting on the organization to help only keeps us frustrated and in the blame cycle of life. Because when we wait around for others usually nothing happens, and everyone gets frustrated. But that all being said what exactly is the responsibility of leaders and an organization? Well, the same really, but much more.

Leadership has a responsibility for its people to show the people they care and are willing to go out and find out who can do what. This does not take away the responsibility of the frontline employ to work on themselves, it just makes the frontlines and the leadership work together. Leadership must find people to help them, and they start doing this by what we call in Lean, going to the Gemba. Or the place where the work is done. This is where leaders find out what makes the people at the frontlines go and what their interests are. It helps them understand what needs worked on, improved, and problems alleviated. When leaders do this then they can build trust and relationships that help them get things done. It is also made clear to them what types of training to provide to their employees and what may help build a better, more stable team that works together and builds leaders and ambassadors. So, the responsibility falls on everyone. Just in different ways.

Lean is built to help leaders by providing a toolset that helps them do a better job. The toolset allows the process to be managed while they can grow and help employees become better versions of themselves. The toolset allows everyone to see problems before they arise in the facility and everyone can fix them together, making sure the problem is completely fixed, not just a band aid. The toolset eliminates fear from repercussions and ridicule for stopping the line to solve and fix problems. People will not kill the messenger and people can make improvements. Leaders will see what is important on their leader standard work by using the toolset allowing them to mentor, train, and grow the future of the organization. Just know when and how to use them so yours and your people’s jobs are easier.

The most important thing to do though is pick the right people for the right seats and we can do that by getting out to the Gemba and building relationships. The most important thing is to serve the people who are doing the work at the frontlines and help them achieve things. Show them you care, and they will care about you. Like Teddy Roosevelt said, “nobody cares how much you know, until they know how much you care.”

Not sure if I answered your questions Edward, but it is what I have experienced. Leadership is influence.

Helping build future leaders and ambassadors while also getting people home to their families. Allowing employees to enjoy their life and their jobs. This is what Lean is about. Respect for people (Stakeholders) in all areas and in all ways. If you do not know where to start give Industrial Solutions a call to start the conversation.

Helping grow your business through process improvement!

?