Discussion: View Thread

Dear List,

Craig Bart recently inquired about what kind of trust we are
referring to with regard to Senior Management. Since I proposed
the original question to the List, I was thinking that I should
answer Craig's concern.

Our questionnaire showed several gaps:

In an area where we asked associates to list what they thought Sr.
Management VALUED and what they VALUED, we found a major gap in
two area's. Associates felt that Sr. Management valued Profits
where they showed little value; and they valued wages, where Sr.
Management showed little concern.

In another area that asked for specific behaviors, associates
listed 'unequal treatment', 'not enforcing enough policy' and 'not
listening' as the major gaps.

Regarding leadership:
Associates think that Sr. Management has a good understanding of
where our facility is headed (direction), but not a good
understanding of the issues and concerns of today. According to
our own definition of leadership = Clear direction and goals as
well as good understanding of where we are = we would not say that
is an indication of confidence in leadership, though they rated us
high as leaders.

Two other notes:

1. When rating a Sr. Manager (who is also your immediate
supervisor) the confidence levels rose sharply. It appears that
there is a lack of confidence in the Sr Management group as a
whole and not as individuals. We believe it is that collective
'THEY', that there never seems to be a face for. Competitions
between departments was identified and a thread throughout the
questionnaire results.

2. The purpose for collecting this information is to create a
major transition in management style. The Sr Management is 100%
behind this. You could not ask for a more cooperative group.
They were shocked, disappointed and saddened by the news (results)
and now that we have identified a gap, we are looking for ways to
bridge that gap. We want the SOUTHWEST airlines energy and
excitement for work...and we are not foolish enough to think that
PR and fancy talk is the answer. We want to identify systems,
processes, procedures and policies that support or inhibit high
quality work and results, including relationships. The
questionaire regarding relationships is only one aspect of the
gaps we are identifying and trying to bridge.

Incidently, the team that is identifying these gaps and looking
for answers is a Cross-Funtional team made up of all Senior
Managers (horizontal) and representation through the facility
(vertical). We are working to become a microcosm of the facility.
We believe that decisions made by this team, made up of all area's
of the facility, will be better decisions. We collected this
prelaunch data to have base data for comparison in a year.

We have been spending the last 4 months developing a Vision,
Mission and Value System. We are currently collecting information
to find out where we are compared to where we see ourselves in the
vision. As managers, we want to become leaders of the vision...as
a Steering Committee we want direct communication and feedback on
the enablers and inhibitors. We plan to provide support and tools
to the rest of the associates to design processes that take us to
the vision.

Thanks,
Rick Corcoran

Thanks for the clarification! Although the issues you've uncovered
(perceived value differences) don't fall directly into the domain with
which I'm most familiar (ethics/moral integrity), two ideas do occur to
me:

1. A common practice among lower-level managers is to blame anything
remotely resembling bad news on the higher ups. That is, IF immediate
supervisors are, as part of their usual strategy of communicating to
their direct reports, habitually presenting unpopular directives, news,
etc. as being the fault of senior management (e.g., "Look team, I don't
like it either; it's those darned executives who are making us do X."),
they may be actively perpetuating the perception of value differences.
If this is going on, one solution may be to coach supervisors on other
ways of presenting "bad" news to their direct reports.

2. Associates may tend to attribute these different values to senior
management because they are unfamiliar with senior management. That is,
if associates haven't had the opportunity to get to know senior managers
as real people, they may be attempting to "fill in" the cognitive gaps
in their knowledge, and assuming the worst. If this is going on, one
solution might be to increase the visibility of senior managers and the
frequency of communication between them and associates. Associates may
be less likely to "demonize" senior managers if they can come to see
them as real people, like themselves.

Undoubtedly, there's much more going on than just those two effects (and
those two guesses may be way off base), but perhaps the above will give
you some directions in which to look. Ultimately, though, the general
question facing you is, "What makes associates think X?" You might
consider asking them that outright, such as in informal discussion or
focus groups.

Good luck!
Bart
>
>------------------------------
>Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 08:28:33 +0000
>From: RICHARD CORCORAN <CORCORANRE@EXCELINC.COM>
>Subject: Reply to TRUST Question
>
>...In an area where we asked associates to list what they thought Sr.
>Management VALUED and what they VALUED, we found a major gap in
two area's...
[snip]
>