Discussion: View Thread

  • 1.  incentives - sigh

    Posted 05-26-2005 14:08
    Hi folks -

    I hope all of you are well.

    Yesterday I received the following message from one of my students (in my core MBA ob/mgmt course.):

    xxxxxxxxxxxxx

    "When I was reading about how the companies motivate
    change internally, I started thinking about specific
    incentives. Is there a good source that would give me
    a good idea of various incentives that have and have
    not worked in the past?

    "I had to manage people in the past and I had no
    control over their salaries, bonuses, promotions, etc.
    It wasn't always a nightmare, but I'm bothered by the
    fact that if I ever get to manage again and was given
    a free hand to develop proper incentives, I wouldn't
    really know where to begin."
    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
    (For context: The student has started reading - as part of the course - Good to Great and Built to Last.)
    Following his being "bothered by" comment, I am bothered by (1) the fact that I do not know what to recommend, and (2) by my own W. Edwards Deming-influenced (and Alfie Kohn-influenced) despair about all incentive systems.
    (I think I stopped thinking about incentives years ago -- can anyone jump start me?)
    Warm regards,
    Jim Stoner
    stoner@fordham.edu
    PS: Looking forward to seeing lots of you all in Scranton and Hawaii.
    J -
    PPS: I'll post to both MG-ED-DV and OBTS-L. (I need all the help I can get.) My apologies for cross-posting.
    j


  • 2.  incentives - sigh

    Posted 05-26-2005 16:17
    Jim Stoner relays a query from one of his students...

    > "When I was reading about how the companies motivate
    > change internally, I started thinking about specific
    > incentives. Is there a good source that would give me
    > a good idea of various incentives that have and have
    > not worked in the past?
    >
    > "I had to manage people in the past and I had no
    > control over their salaries, bonuses, promotions, etc.
    > It wasn't always a nightmare, but I'm bothered by the
    > fact that if I ever get to manage again and was given
    > a free hand to develop proper incentives, I wouldn't
    > really know where to begin."

    Jim then comments...

    > (For context: The student has started reading - as part of the course -
    > Good to Great and Built to Last.)
    > Following his being "bothered by" comment, I am bothered by (1) the fact
    > that I do not know what to recommend, and (2) by my own W. Edwards Deming-
    > influenced (and Alfie Kohn-influenced) despair about all incentive
    > systems.
    > (I think I stopped thinking about incentives years ago -- can anyone jump
    > start me?)

    I think incentives is one of those half-empty, half-full issues. On the one
    hand, as Jim's student observes, managers have little control over
    incentives writ large. The incentives glass is largely empty. On the other
    hand, managers do control or at least seriously influence the words that go
    into an employee's performance appraisal, who gets to attend what seminars
    and conferences, who gets vacation when, who gets recommended for promotion,
    who gets what assignments and so on. The incentives glass might be half
    full.

    Where I think the management of incentives rests at this point in the
    evolution of organizations and management is that, writ large, incentive
    management is mainly in the hands of HR and senior execs. Moreover, using
    incentives to achieve and maintain a specific performance is largely passé.
    The typical manager can, however, manage those incentives over which
    influence is exercised in such a way as to ensure most employees will strive
    to perform in ways that favorably impress their manager lest they miss out
    on those localized goodies.

    As for "sources," most of those addressing incentives and with which I'm
    familiar challenge, question, impugn and denigrate incentives and their use.
    Piece rates is a classic example of an incentive that works quite well under
    the appropriate circumstances but most of the work to which piece rates
    apply has been mechanized or moved off shore and it was never under local
    management control anyway.

    I'll be as interested as Jim in what list members have to say about
    incentives and their management by managers.

    Regards,

    Fred Nickols
    nickols@att.net
    www.nickols.us


  • 3.  incentives - sigh

    Posted 05-26-2005 16:27
    I agree and share your view, Fred. That controversy is as resolvable as the nature-nuture one. In fact, the latter is probably better understood. If you subscribe to the local vs. HR/Exec control, you might check out the work of Bob Nelson at www.nelson-motivation.com. Bob has written such books as " 1001 Ways to Reward Employees" and "1001 ways to Energize Employees", and offers many (well 1001) ways that a manager can influence employees to want to perform better.

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Management Education and Development Discussion [mailto:MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU] On Behalf Of Fred Nickols
    Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 4:17 PM
    To: MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU
    Subject: Re: incentives - sigh

    Jim Stoner relays a query from one of his students...

    > "When I was reading about how the companies motivate change
    > internally, I started thinking about specific incentives. Is there a
    > good source that would give me a good idea of various incentives that
    > have and have not worked in the past?
    >
    > "I had to manage people in the past and I had no control over their
    > salaries, bonuses, promotions, etc.
    > It wasn't always a nightmare, but I'm bothered by the fact that if I
    > ever get to manage again and was given a free hand to develop proper
    > incentives, I wouldn't really know where to begin."

    Jim then comments...

    > (For context: The student has started reading - as part of the course
    > - Good to Great and Built to Last.) Following his being "bothered by"
    > comment, I am bothered by (1) the fact that I do not know what to
    > recommend, and (2) by my own W. Edwards Deming- influenced (and Alfie
    > Kohn-influenced) despair about all incentive systems.
    > (I think I stopped thinking about incentives years ago -- can anyone
    > jump start me?)

    I think incentives is one of those half-empty, half-full issues. On the one hand, as Jim's student observes, managers have little control over incentives writ large. The incentives glass is largely empty. On the other hand, managers do control or at least seriously influence the words that go into an employee's performance appraisal, who gets to attend what seminars and conferences, who gets vacation when, who gets recommended for promotion, who gets what assignments and so on. The incentives glass might be half full.

    Where I think the management of incentives rests at this point in the evolution of organizations and management is that, writ large, incentive management is mainly in the hands of HR and senior execs. Moreover, using incentives to achieve and maintain a specific performance is largely passé.
    The typical manager can, however, manage those incentives over which influence is exercised in such a way as to ensure most employees will strive to perform in ways that favorably impress their manager lest they miss out on those localized goodies.

    As for "sources," most of those addressing incentives and with which I'm familiar challenge, question, impugn and denigrate incentives and their use.
    Piece rates is a classic example of an incentive that works quite well under the appropriate circumstances but most of the work to which piece rates apply has been mechanized or moved off shore and it was never under local management control anyway.

    I'll be as interested as Jim in what list members have to say about incentives and their management by managers.

    Regards,

    Fred Nickols
    nickols@att.net
    www.nickols.us


  • 4.  incentives - sigh

    Posted 05-26-2005 16:48
    Robinson & Schroeder, _Ideas are Free_ has a number of thoughts on how
    to do it, _well_.

    Yes, rewarding bright thoughts to individuals gets bogged down, and
    counter productive. Case examples show that rewards for the same thing,
    to all participants, based on something like hours worked per quarter,
    and tagged to aggregate results, can have a very positive effect. Also,
    I suspect that simply putting together the rewards/incentives isn't
    going to do it. If you have to 'incentivize' someone to think, what
    does that say about your opinion of their ability/willingness to think?

    More anon,

    Jay

    Oh, and Deming (Out of the crisis) does not disparage _all_ incentive
    programs. again, what good is a program that rewards the troops, and
    not the managers/leaders? We are in this together, gang. Get used to it.



    stoner@fordham.edu wrote:

    >Hi folks -
    >
    >I hope all of you are well.
    >
    >Yesterday I received the following message from one of my students (in my core MBA ob/mgmt course.):
    >
    >xxxxxxxxxxxxx
    >
    >"When I was reading about how the companies motivate
    >change internally, I started thinking about specific
    >incentives. Is there a good source that would give me
    >a good idea of various incentives that have and have
    >not worked in the past?
    >
    >"I had to manage people in the past and I had no
    >control over their salaries, bonuses, promotions, etc.
    >It wasn't always a nightmare, but I'm bothered by the
    >fact that if I ever get to manage again and was given
    >a free hand to develop proper incentives, I wouldn't
    >really know where to begin."
    >xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
    >(For context: The student has started reading - as part of the course - Good to Great and Built to Last.)
    >Following his being "bothered by" comment, I am bothered by (1) the fact that I do not know what to recommend, and (2) by my own W. Edwards Deming-influenced (and Alfie Kohn-influenced) despair about all incentive systems.
    >(I think I stopped thinking about incentives years ago -- can anyone jump start me?)
    >Warm regards,
    >Jim Stoner
    > stoner@fordham.edu
    >PS: Looking forward to seeing lots of you all in Scranton and Hawaii.
    >J -
    >PPS: I'll post to both MG-ED-DV and OBTS-L. (I need all the help I can get.) My apologies for cross-posting.
    >j
    >
    >
    >
    >

    --
    Jay Warner
    Principal Scientist
    Warner Consulting, Inc.
    4444 North Green Bay Road
    Racine, WI 53404-1216
    USA

    Ph: (262) 634-9100
    FAX: (262) 681-1133
    email: quality@a2q.com
    web: http://www.a2q.com

    The A2Q Method (tm) -- What do you want to improve today?


  • 5.  incentives - sigh

    Posted 05-26-2005 21:06
    Hi, Jim

    Can't help but add some thoughts to this discussion.

    First, I agree with everything that has been said on the topic so far, by
    you, Fred, Bob and Jay.

    But we could look at things from a broader perspective than even Bob Nelson's
    books offer, that concentrate primarily on various approaches for providing
    tangible and semi-tangible rewards.

    It might be worthwhile to see that the idea of 'incentives' evokes the carrot
    (and possibly the stick) issues.

    If the purpose of incentives is to motivate, we should keep in mind that no
    one would not want somebody to say, in effect, "I am going to motivate you."

    As part of a comprehensive program to create and maintain a motivational
    climate, semi-tangible and tangible rewards for contributions, have appropriate
    roles. However, they need to be combined with a comprehensive
    managerial/leadership approach that considers, first, the way a manager can show appreciation
    for many of the minor contributions of staff members. There is an almost
    infinite number of ways that a manager can use non-tangible (primarily
    psychological) ways to show appreciation, which can balance the many negative events that
    every staff member encounters every day. That can help greatly to make jobs
    more satisfying. Few managers have learned how to be competent in doing this.

    If anyone would like to know more about this, you might look at John
    Washbush's and my book High Quality Leadership: Practical Guidelines to Becoming a
    More Effective Manager. It may be out of print by now but I can provide sections
    from the next iteration of the concept in the currently self-published book
    High Quality Managerial Leadership Decisions - The Keys to Superior
    Performance, that address these issues. I am polishing it in my graduate classes at
    Kean. Both books focus one chapter on issues within the question: What else, if
    anything, can we (I) do to help stakeholders gain the highest practically
    possible level of satisfaction.

    Please make the request off-line, specifically promise to cite formally, and
    to inform me of any portion that is quoted, at least until the book is in
    print by a commercial publisher.

    Best,

    Erwin (Rausch)
    Didactic Systems and Kean University


  • 6.  incentives - sigh

    Posted 05-27-2005 00:59
    I guess incentives is a little like juggling with dynamite -- it might seem like a good thing but it seldom pays the dividends that one might think. For me at the crux of the issue is that if you are incentivizing someone to perform a specific task -- because sales are down; because productivity is down; because one's grades are down, that is really a short term fix to the issue; and it means everytime that you want a change you have to incentivize to get a change rather than having folks who are intrinsically motivated to do their jobs, or to learn. If it sounds as if I am in the Afie Kohn camp -- you are right, I am.
    -rr

    -------------- Original message --------------

    > Robinson & Schroeder, _Ideas are Free_ has a number of thoughts on how
    > to do it, _well_.
    >
    > Yes, rewarding bright thoughts to individuals gets bogged down, and
    > counter productive. Case examples show that rewards for the same thing,
    > to all participants, based on something like hours worked per quarter,
    > and tagged to aggregate results, can have a very positive effect. Also,
    > I suspect that simply putting together the rewards/incentives isn't
    > going to do it. If you have to 'incentivize' someone to think, what
    > does that say about your opinion of their ability/willingness to think?
    >
    > More anon,
    >
    > Jay
    >
    > Oh, and Deming (Out of the crisis) does not disparage _all_ incentive
    > programs. again, what good is a program that rewards the troops, and
    > not the managers/leaders? We are in this together, gang. Get used to it.
    >
    >
    >
    > stoner@fordham.edu wrote:
    >
    > >Hi folks -
    > >
    > >I hope all of you are well.
    > >
    > >Yesterday I received the following message from one of my students (in my core
    > MBA ob/mgmt course.):
    > >
    > >xxxxxxxxxxxxx
    > >
    > >"When I was reading about how the companies motivate
    > >change internally, I started thinking about specific
    > >incentives. Is there a good source that would give me
    > >a good idea of various incentives that have and have
    > >not worked in the past?
    > >
    > >"I had to manage people in the past and I had no
    > >control over their salaries, bonuses, promotions, etc.
    > >It wasn't always a nightmare, but I'm bothered by the
    > >fact that if I ever get to manage again and was given
    > >a free hand to develop proper incentives, I wouldn't
    > >really know where to begin."
    > >xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
    > >(For context: The student has started reading - as part of the course - Good to
    > Great and Built to Last.)
    > >Following his being "bothered by" comment, I am bothered by (1) the fact that I
    > do not know what to recommend, and (2) by my own W. Edwards Deming-influenced
    > (and Alfie Kohn-influenced) despair about all incentive systems.
    > >(I think I stopped thinking about incentives years ago -- can anyone jump start
    > me?)
    > >Warm regards,
    > >Jim Stoner
    > > stoner@fordham.edu
    > >PS: Looking forward to seeing lots of you all in Scranton and Hawaii.
    > >J -
    > >PPS: I'll post to both MG-ED-DV and OBTS-L. (I need all the help I can get.)
    > My apologies for cross-posting.
    > >j
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    >
    > --
    > Jay Warner
    > Principal Scientist
    > Warner Consulting, Inc.
    > 4444 North Green Bay Road
    > Racine, WI 53404-1216
    > USA
    >
    > Ph: (262) 634-9100
    > FAX: (262) 681-1133
    > email: quality@a2q.com
    > web: http://www.a2q.com
    >
    > The A2Q Method (tm) -- What do you want to improve today?


  • 7.  incentives - sigh

    Posted 05-27-2005 09:45
    Rusty Rae rustyrae@comcast.net

    I guess incentives is a little like juggling with dynamite -- it might seem
    like a good thing but it seldom pays the dividends that one might think. For
    me at the crux of the issue is that if you are incentivizing someone to
    perform a specific task -- because sales are down; because productivity is
    down; because one's grades are down, that is really a short term fix to the
    issue; and it means everytime that you want a change you have to incentivize
    to get a change rather than having folks who are intrinsically motivated to
    do their jobs, or to learn. If it sounds as if I am in the Afie Kohn camp --
    you are right, I am.
    -rr

    -------------- Original message --------------

    > Robinson & Schroeder, _Ideas are Free_ has a number of thoughts on how
    > to do it, _well_.
    >
    > Yes, rewarding bright thoughts to individuals gets bogged down, and
    > counter productive. Case examples show that rewards for the same thing,
    > to all participants, based on something like hours worked per quarter,
    > and tagged to aggregate results, can have a very positive effect. Also,
    > I suspect that simply putting together the rewards/incentives isn't
    > going to do it. If you have to 'incentivize' someone to think, what
    > does that say about your opinion of their ability/willingness to think?
    >
    > More anon,
    >
    > Jay
    >
    > Oh, and Deming (Out of the crisis) does not disparage _all_ incentive
    > programs. again, what good is a program that rewards the troops, and
    > not the managers/leaders? We are in this together, gang. Get used to it.
    >
    >
    >
    > stoner@fordham.edu wrote:
    >
    > >Hi folks -
    > >
    > >I hope all of you are well.
    > >
    > >Yesterday I received the following message from one of my students (in my
    core
    > MBA ob/mgmt course.):
    > >
    > >xxxxxxxxxxxxx
    > >
    > >"When I was reading about how the companies motivate
    > >change internally, I started thinking about specific
    > >incentives. Is there a good source that would give me
    > >a good idea of various incentives that have and have
    > >not worked in the past?
    > >
    > >"I had to manage people in the past and I had no
    > >control over their salaries, bonuses, promotions, etc.
    > >It wasn't always a nightmare, but I'm bothered by the
    > >fact that if I ever get to manage again and was given
    > >a free hand to develop proper incentives, I wouldn't
    > >really know where to begin."
    > >xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
    > >(For context: The student has started reading - as part of the course -
    Good to
    > Great and Built to Last.)
    > >Following his being "bothered by" comment, I am bothered by (1) the fact
    that I
    > do not know what to recommend, and (2) by my own W. Edwards
    Deming-influenced
    > (and Alfie Kohn-influenced) despair about all incentive systems.
    > >(I think I stopped thinking about incentives years ago -- can anyone jump
    start
    > me?)
    > >Warm regards,
    > >Jim Stoner
    > > stoner@fordham.edu
    > >PS: Looking forward to seeing lots of you all in Scranton and Hawaii.
    > >J -
    > >PPS: I'll post to both MG-ED-DV and OBTS-L. (I need all the help I can
    get.)
    > My apologies for cross-posting.
    > >j
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    >
    > --
    > Jay Warner
    > Principal Scientist
    > Warner Consulting, Inc.
    > 4444 North Green Bay Road
    > Racine, WI 53404-1216
    > USA
    >
    > Ph: (262) 634-9100
    > FAX: (262) 681-1133
    > email: quality@a2q.com
    > web: http://www.a2q.com
    >
    > The A2Q Method (tm) -- What do you want to improve today?


  • 8.  incentives - sigh

    Posted 05-27-2005 10:56
    Another element I see at play here is what naturally motivates different
    people. Some need the security of a constant paycheck. Achieving such
    regularity, they are free to do their best work. I have heard others say
    they find such regularity confining - they want to operate solely on
    commissions. That way they are in charge of how much they make and the
    direct correlation between their work and its rewards motivates them. These
    ways of being motivated may be temperamental traits - ones we are born with
    and don't change much over time (Thomas & Chess).

    These two different types may exist in the same department. An incentive
    program would be motivational to some but not others. This may explain the
    half empty/full glass. One might also posit that those critical of
    incentive programs might have the trait that values regularity, and those
    praising these programs have the opposite trait.

    It is probably accurate to say that humans in general don't mind being shown
    appreciation for what they do, but true motivation may be bifurcated.

    Mike Kiska
    Training & O.D. Manager - Administrative Services
    Jefferson County Public Library
    mkiska@jefferson.lib.co.us

    Find us on the Web: http://jefferson.lib.co.us


  • 9.  incentives - sigh

    Posted 05-27-2005 11:10
    From: Tom Bryant [mailto:Tom.Bryant@nicholls.edu]

    Jim's initial question and most of the replies so far assume that we are
    talking about managers in megacorporations. In smaller, more
    entrepreneurial firms, the owner-manager CAN make all those decisions,
    strategic and tactical. Indeed, the O-M DOES make all of those
    decisions, for better or worse. For some people, control over the full
    range of organizational design / corporate culture issues -- within the
    constraints of law and regualtion -- is one of the best reasons for
    running one's own company.

    The intersection between between HRM and ENTR is a pretty big space, and
    still pretty wide-open, as noted by Jerry Katz, Howard Aldrich, and
    others recently (citation below). I've been doodling around in it for a
    couple (!) of years and would welcome colllaborators. What about a
    joint ENT-HRM-OB symposium at Academy 2006? (Let's talk offline, or in
    Hawaii in august if you are interested.)

    Doing a quick scan across my databases, I found the following items,
    given in annotated form to explain their content.

    Jones, Janice (2001). "Training and development, and business growth: a
    study of Australian manufacturing small-medium sized enterprises." Asia
    Pacific Journal of Human Resources 42(1): 96-122.
    The principal objectives in this paper are to compare
    and contrast training and development initiatives for a longitudinal
    sample of 871 small and medium-sized enterprises in the Australian
    manufacturing sector that have embarked upon different growth
    development pathways; and to examine possible connections between small
    and medium-sized enterprise growth, and training and development.
    Statistical analysis reveals highly significant differences in
    management training and qualifications, training changes, as well as
    training methods, providers and fields, across the low-, moderate and
    high-growth small and medium-sized enterprise development pathways.
    Furthermore, training is a relatively consistent concomitant with small
    and medium-sized enterprise growth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

    Katz, Jerome A., Howard E. Aldrich, et al. (2000). "Special issue on
    Human Resource Management and the SME: toward a new synthesis?"
    Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 25(1 (Fall)): 7-10.
    Basically argues that noone has studied the synthesis of these
    two fields, but that such studies are ripe with interesting questions.

    Litz, Reginald A. and Alice C. Stewart (2000). "Trade name franchise
    membership as a human resource management strategy: does buying group
    training deliver 'True Value' for small retailers? (Research Note)."
    Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 25(1 (Fall)): 125-135.
    Based on a study with over 300 SME hardware retailers
    responding. Trade name franchisees achieve better performance, but it
    does not appear to be based on the training programs.

    McMullan, W. Ed. (1982). In the interest of equity: distributing equity
    among new venture employees. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research
    1982. K. H. Vesper. Wellesley, MA, Babson College, Center for
    Entrepreneurial Studies: 396-413.
    "Instances were encountered of technological entrepreneurs faced
    faced with the issue of whether or not to distribute ownership equity to
    key employees. The decision to invite employees to participate in the
    ownership of a new venture is a complex one involving behavioral as well
    as financial considerations. The article reviews the logic both
    favoring and opposing employee ownership of equity. Subsequently a
    number of questions are [sic] discussed relating to the who, how, what,
    when and where of equity distribution. The paper concludes with the
    results from a pilot study and a strategy for further research."

    Morris, Michael H. and Foard F. Jones (1994). "Relationships among
    environmental turbulence, human resource management, and corporate
    entrepreneurship." Journal of International Business & Entrepreneurship
    3(1&2): 15-44.
    "Entrepreneurship theory suggests that entrepreneurship is
    especially critical in companies faced with high levels of environmental
    turbulence. This study empirically assessed the extent to which
    turbulence leads to an increase in entrepreneurial behavior. The degree
    of entrepreneurial behavior in established firms was found to be related
    to the perceived level of change in competitive, labor, and supplier
    environments. The study also tested propositions that human resource
    management practices are a principal means for facilitating corporate
    entrepreneurship for organizations operating in turbulent environments.
    Specifically, linkages between eight HRM practice dimensions and
    corporate entrepreneurship were found. In addition, a relationship is
    established between environmental turbulence and HRM practices."

    Posner, Bruce G. (1991). "Looking out for Number 2." Inc. 13(7 (July)):
    42-44, 46.
    "Sharing responsibility and trust with another manager is never
    easy, especially when it's your company. But failure to create an
    effective working relationship with your second-in-command could spell
    disaster."

    Thakur, Sanjay Prasad (1999). "Size of investment, opportunity choice
    and human resources in new venture growth: some typologies." Journal of
    Business Venturing 14(May): 283-309.
    Argues for the critical differences that HRM makes in the
    development of new ventures.

    ----------
    Hope that helps, Jim, others!

    Tom.




    Prof. Thomas A. Bryant, Ph.D.
    The Bollinger Family Endowed Chair in Entrepreneurship
    Nicholls State University, Thibodaux, LA 70310, USA
    Tel: (985) 448-4179; e-mail: tom.bryant@nicholls.edu


  • 10.  incentives - sigh

    Posted 05-27-2005 12:12
    DidacticRa@aol.com wrote:

    >[snip]
    >
    >If the purpose of incentives is to motivate, we should keep in mind that no
    >one would not want somebody to say, in effect, "I am going to motivate you."
    >
    Seen on a T-shirt during a tour of the Daimler-Chrysler engine plant in
    Kenosha, WI:

    The floggings will continue until morale improves.

    Erwin has a good/great point.

    the Skinner box approach, that every creature (lab rat or human) is a
    system, that what the 'controlling' person has to do is find the right
    factor to change and the desired response will come forth, does not seem
    to have much credence these days. Probably for good reason.

    I'm not going to offer alternatives in the confines of a hastily written
    email post.

    I am going to say that said Daimler plant (in German, the 'Chrysler'
    part is silent :) has learned a good deal about motivation of the troops
    (Union). Each work area has a problem board, with problems raised,
    status, etc. Andon boards with far more info in a flashing light than I
    thought possible. Floors you could almost eat off of, at least in the
    newer production line with the 'new' procedures. A "PQC" - process
    quality improvement - group that lives in the plant and takes on the
    statistically serious improvement projects. The chief LEAN coordinators
    always appear in pairs - one mgt., one Union, to keep each other honest
    & effective.

    this in a plant that 30 years ago had the engineers walking in pairs, to
    prevent physical attacks.

    Maybe I should read that book....

    Jay

    >If anyone would like to know more about this, you might look at John
    >Washbush's and my book High Quality Leadership: Practical Guidelines to Becoming a
    >More Effective Manager.
    >
    >

    --
    Jay Warner
    Principal Scientist
    Warner Consulting, Inc.
    4444 North Green Bay Road
    Racine, WI 53404-1216
    USA

    Ph: (262) 634-9100
    FAX: (262) 681-1133
    email: quality@a2q.com
    web: http://www.a2q.com

    The A2Q Method (tm) -- What do you want to improve today?