Lean Leadership

The following information is from a presentation out of the lean leadership series by Factory Strategies Group LLC. (2009).  I have previously discussed the differences between management and leadership, as well as traditional and modern variations.  The following further highlights the importance of leadership, and the direct distinction from management.  Changing from wearing one hat to the other, and combing both takes practice, but will allow for a better organisational culture and increased efficiencies.  Although the following doesn't discuss energising and motivating employees, it is an area that will stem from good leadership.

Leadership Influences Change

ENGAGEMENT

“People don’t resist change.  They resist being changed.” - Peter Senge

REALISM

“Culture does not change because we desire to change it.  Culture changes when the organisation is transformed; the culture reflects the realities of people working together every day.” - Frances Hesselbein

DETERMINATION

“Faced with the choice between changing one’s mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone getsbusy on the proof.” - John Kenneth Galbraith

Leadership versus Management

Leadership is not management

3 Tenets of management

Planning and budgeting
Involves creating timetables to meet commitments and developing specific action steps.

Organising and staffing
Requires that managers put some structure to the plan which includes staffing requirements, communications and delegation of responsibility.

Controlling and problem-solving
Entails the monitoring of activities, spotting deviations from the plan and organising solutions.

These management processes create and maintain order and predictability within the organisation. - John P. Kotter

Lean Leadership Characteristics

A leader needs to be visible as a role model in order to demonstrate his/her breadth of knowledge and understanding of the business environment and the organisational challenges.

A leader should display an aptitude for logic and a desire to challenge the status quo or “alleged wisdom” in order to facilitate free flowing decision making.

A leader must posses the ability to be a linking agent (facilitator) with a wide array of knowledge and information coupled with an unquestionable trust, professionalism and an open invitation for dissent.

Traditional versus Lean



Lean Leadership:

Good leaders motivate people in a variety of ways, three of which are the basis to the “lean” approach.


1.  Leaders must define the organisation’s vision in a way
     that highlights the values of their group
2.  Leaders must support people’s efforts to achieve the
     shared vision through coaching, feedback, and role modelling
3.  A leader should recognise and reward success


There are five leadership moves, or actions, a leader can perform to provide leadership on the Lean journey.


1.  Leaders Must Be Teachers
2.  Build Tension, Not Stress
3.  Eliminate Fear and Comfort
4.  Lead Through Visible Participation, Not Proclamation
5.  Build Lean Into Personal Practice

Kaizen - A Therapy for Continuous Improvement

I came across this article on Kaizen which I found interesting.  One point I take from it and that has come up through several of my posts is the link of management and leadership support.  I have discussed leadership as both part of my studies with Robert Kennedy College as well as in context to lean culture.  At the end of the day, there are many programs that can be successfully implemented in companies, but everything starts with the leaders, and also has to finish with them to complete the circle.  Both their vision, strategic planning, persistence, openness and inclusiveness as well as change management play a big part in the successful implementation of any project.  For more information on my views please read my previous posts that relate to lean culture and leadership.  If you already have, just enjoy the article below.

Best regards
Roland

http://www.isixsigma.com/methodology/kaizen/kaizen-adhd-therapy-using-continuous-improvement-tools-to-keep-employees-continuously-occupied/?type=newsletter

Kaizen – ADHD Therapy Using Continuous Improvement: Tools to Keep Employees Continuously Occupied

Chris Seider, Robert Tripp and Mike Carnell September 3, 2012

Two common questions for people new to the Lean Six Sigma community are: “What is Kaizen?” and “Why would you run a Kaizen event as part of a Lean Six Sigma project?” This article describes what a Kaizen event is and addresses how to run successful Kaizen events.

Kaizen Basics

Kaizen is a Japanese term that translates to “change for the better” and is sometimes paraphrased as continuous improvement. As an event, a Kaizen represents a focused effort by a team to make quick but meaningful improvements to a defined area of a business process.

Kaizen is not designed exclusively for manufacturing processes but was first embraced on the shop floor. Kaizen can be used to impact one of three measures for a manufacturer – throughput (cycle time), inventory, and product or process cost. While non-manufacturing processes may look to other meaningful metrics to improve, any measurable process improvement should ultimately translate to one of these three primary areas of improvement.

The Relationship Between Kaizen and Lean Six Sigma

Kaizen events are generally distinguished from Lean Six Sigma projects by virtue of the shorter time to implement changes and the more focused application of resources (i.e., team members) to solve problems. The cognitive problem-solving approaches and the philosophies are the same, though some may differentiate the names of the problem solving phases in Kaizen events versus Six Sigma projects. Using the same philosophy in a shorter timeframe can mean that Kaizen events tend to favor trial-and-error tweaking of solutions in the absence of the thorough data analysis that characterizes Six Sigma projects. Solution-tweaking is a consequence that is often readily accepted in order to drive change quickly.

Because of the philosophical similarities between Kaizen and Six Sigma, Kaizen events often become an important component of Six Sigma projects in order to remove operational noise and to help illustrate the systemic issues to be solved in a Six Sigma project. It is also common that Six Sigma projects are a byproduct of efforts to characterize waste in a Kaizen event. In a mature continuous improvement culture, Kaizen and Six Sigma can have a powerful, symbiotic interaction. A planned schedule of future Kaizen events can also become part of a control plan to ensure that an operating system adopts a continuous improvement approach to ongoing management of the process.

Successful Kaizen Events

The best Kaizen events, typically defined by achieving a goal in less than two weeks, feature the following elements.

Process understanding, defined metrics and license to change are prerequisites of a Kaizen event.

The role of team leader is crucial to having a successful Kaizen event. An effective leader will harness the power of multiple voices to explore solutions, refine and correct those solutions as needed, get actions completed quickly, and take responsibility for the success or failure of the event. The team leader should be mostly neutral during the event, but should be ready to contribute when doing so may add value – team leadership is an art form in this sense. The leader is empowered by the site or line leadership to make changes while keeping a focus on what metrics are most important. Change for the sake of change without improving business metrics (and ultimately financial performance) is never the desired outcome.

The team leader must be familiar with the process regardless of whether they formally work in the process. If the selected team leader is unfamiliar with the process, then the team leader must formally observe the process performed prior to launching the team – without trying to improve the process during the observations. In a transactional process the team leader needs to watch several process transactions flow from start to finish before facilitating an event.

Also before launching the Kaizen event, line or site leadership must determine the metrics that will be used to evaluate the work of the team. For example, if a Kaizen is being used to help 5S (sort, straighten, shine, standardize, sustain) an area, an operator’s movements (distance traveled by steps or arms) could be a selected metric – ensuring that the 5S actions were appropriate. As previously stated, continuous improvement-related Kaizen events should primarily focus on three types of measures – throughput, cost and inventory; the event and the selected metrics should be directly linked to at least one of these three process characteristics.

This often requires considerable planning; leaders must be sure that change management approaches are properly considered in anticipation of the desired improvements. For example, if it is clear that standard work combinations need to be reorganized in order to match demand to new manning levels and line layouts, then the site leadership needs to be prepared for document change control and training of operators – as well as supervisors and support personnel. (Note: This assumes that the organization is at an adequate level of maturity to perform a Kaizen and embraces  the importance of a formalized change management process.) Further, having to wait for approvals should be minimized so any changes prioritized by the team can be implemented within 24 hours ideally.

Speed is critical to these events in order to establish a clear cause-and-effect relationship between process changes and process performance. Consequently, the actions of the team must stay focused on improving the metrics desired by the leadership, and not be distracted by political maneuvering to gain support for the changes.

Teams that consist primarily of people who participate in the process.

The team must include three to seven full-time team members who regularly participate in the process that is the focus of the Kaizen event. While it is important to build a cross-functional team, consider using some team members (such as a finance representative) on an ad hoc basis. Powerful Kaizen events have line leadership or supervisors as part of the team composition; teams whose membership derives exclusively from either leadership or operator ranks can suffer from a myopic view of the system and limited buy-in from the process stakeholders. The challenge for any Kaizen leader is to ensure that subordinates are empowered and able to offer ideas without being inhibited by participating line leaders. The input of these team members is critical – they will be actively assisting in executing process changes, they will have to live with the changes as part of their daily routine, and they will be helping their colleagues understand and embrace the process changes moving forward. 

Often, work will need to be accomplished during the 12 to 16 hours the team is not on-site or otherwise unavailable, so the team leader should identify a prearranged point of contact who can coordinate necessary actions. Examples of off-hours work include rearranging furniture in an office, getting new IT connections to support a reconfiguration, getting new tools fabricated to accomplish a task, and acquiring a new piece of equipment that allows for easier operations.

Actions prompted by the team must align with the measures that the leadership wants a Kaizen event to affect. The team members must know that their time is dedicated to the Kaizen until the team disbands. Furthermore, site or line leadership must recognize that team members will not be available as resources to accomplish other tasks – like keeping the line running! 

Using process participants as part of the team helps with the critical change management that is often neglected. If the improvements are understood by all the team members, then acceptance is easier to sell outside of the team. If line leadership can also be part of the team, then the team’s empowerment grows because tacit approval exists for the changes even before confirming with a change management program. The team leader should recognize that unanimous, unwavering endorsement of all changes is not critical; many changes can proceed with general agreement only and an understanding of potential risks. Kaizen leaders need to recognize that there is risk in every decision, but when discipline is applied in understanding the metrics, the people and the process the risks can be better understood. Understanding the risks of making a bad decision – not eliminating such decisions entirely – is the practical path to undertake. To presume that any risk will be completely eliminated undermines the credibility of the Kaizen leader and/or wastes time trying to achieve the impossible.

Kaizen scopes defined not just by the metrics, but also by the physical boundaries of work.

Do not attempt to solve world hunger. No matter how tempting it might be to improve a high-level metric of an operation, the Kaizen leader needs to keep the focus sharp and directly tied to the team’s domain of control. This is especially important if the leader lacks experience running these intense, focused events. The focus should be on reducing a defect or error in one portion of the process, removing a specific element of waste or improving a subprocess of one production/processing area – not on reengineering a complex system. Planning multiple Kaizen events in sequence, each with a narrow focus, is preferable to a single, broadly scoped event on a complex operation. Elimination of one bottleneck will often reveal other bottlenecks that previously had been obscured.

Depending on the scope of the Kaizen, the availability of the line (process) must be coordinated and aligned with thebusiness needs. If significant physical changes are required (or expected) for the process as a result of the Kaizen, then time must be allotted each day to allow these changes to occur. The team leader must remember to use the change management process to ensure changes are aligned with the business needs.

Successful Kaizens can be scheduled for as short as one day or as long as five days. Short Kaizen events need to be narrowly focused with a small physical area to be impacted. While a Kaizen event should target two weeks or less to attain its goals, there are often cases where more difficult physical changes cannot be fully accommodated in that timeframe, so a project plan with milestones and responsible individuals will need to be established and managed.

There is no absolute rule that prescribes how long a Kaizen should keep the team members fully engaged, but it is rare to go beyond a week on a single purpose. Kaizen events are both physically and emotionally intense so more than one week can become difficult to endure. Often, team members will need to address action items outside of the formally convened team for at least one week following the original event. If the team feels the physical or transactional boundary must change during the event, the team leader must immediately coordinate with site or line leadership to formalize the scope change.

Preparing for Success

As with most endeavors, adequate preparation paves the way for success. The guidelines provided here  prepare a company for how to arrange and scope a Kaizen event. Besides solving a focused issue within a process, Kaizen events can be effective in any phase of a Six Sigma project as a means to scope an opportunity, understand waste or quickly identify solutions. Whether used on its own or within a Lean Six Sigma project, a Kaizen event has the potential to bring about lasting, impactful change.

Organisational Behaviour

I have recently completed my first module for my MBA in Leadership and Sustainability through Robert Kennedy College and the University of Cumbria.  It was an interesting start to this journey, enhanced by the multi-cultural and multi-business background of the participants in the course.  The individual views of individuals in the course widely varied depending on their cultural background and geographical location.

The discussions often included individual’s examples and their personal experiences, bringing a different perspective to the subject matter.  The course material was interesting and there was plenty of it.  More material was introduced as the course progressed.  The structure that lead from leadership and general organisational behaviour, through communication and teams, while looking at human capital and the motivation and management styles encountered in organisations did not only make sense, it was practical and allowed an in depth analysis on the way about one’s own present and past businesses.

The consideration of culture and conflict management as part of the organisational structure, as well as the tools discussed like balanced scoreboard, SWOT analysis and McKinsey’s 7s analysis allowed for a detailed analysis of an organisation, leading to clearly defined solutions relevant to our daily business lives.

The Professor was knowledgeable and easily approachable both through the public forums and through private communication.

I would recommend this course to anyone who wants to become a leader, or a more effective leader.  The investment of both time and money is minimal compared to the outcomes gained from the experience.  Below is a summary of this particular course (as taken from the Robert Kennedy College online campus).  Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Best regards

Roland

COURSE OBJECTIVES 

-- To focus on increasing the effectiveness of organisations and thus, of their members. 

-- To understand why people and groups in organisations feel and behave as they do. 

-- To identify principles that can improve the behaviour and attitudes of organisational members. 

-- To develop and enhance your skills as an organisational member and a manager. 

COURSE OVERVIEW 

The course involves learning from a variety of sources - audio clips, slide presentations, textbook, lecture notes, case studies, and interaction with peers and faculty in the forums. 

The course aims to be an examination of research and theory on the forces underlying the way that the members of an organisation behave. Topics covered include the behaviour of work groups and supervisors, inter-group relations, employees’ goals and attitudes, problems in communication, the circumstances of change in an organisation, and the goals and design of an organisation. 

READINGS 

Please read the articles provided under the resource tab of this course to get a brief idea about the focus. Students can also avail of our e-library facilities to surf, and research for material. The faculty will also provide some online links for selected reading as and when required. 

ON-LINE PARTICIPATION 

All students are expected to participate regularly in the discussions taking place in the forums. A wide range of discussion is usually desired in these discussion forums. These areas are an interesting and informative way of interacting with peers and faculty. They also allow you to apply concepts learned in isolation to real life or personal experiences. 

The benefits of self-evaluation as it relates to leaders today

When talking about LEAN, leadership is a key component of change and driving implementation.  The article below, written as part of my MBA in Leadership and Sustainability with Robert Kennedy College & The University of Cumbria, examines the benefits of self evaluation for leaders.

Self-evaluation or “self-leadership” (Runn, 2011) forms a critical part of a leaders repertoire and some key blocks of the foundation for this persons leadership.  If someone can ultimately say that they fully understand themselves, they will find it much easier to understand others around them.

This however requires some strong discipline from the leader, to continuously self-evaluate and aim for continuous improvement.  There are some key questions that the leader needs to ask themselves and truthfully answer to gage where they are at.

1.      Do as you preach

If a leader makes a statement about what he or she will be doing, they need to take ownership and answer on the basis whether they actually did as they said.  When a leader expects others to follow suit, they need to set the standards.

2.      Change is ok

If a change of direction was required from the initial target, that is ok, as long as the leader can clearly identify why it was different to the planned path, and explain that in simple terms.

The two points above can be broken into many individual questions that form the basis of a self-evaluation tool for a leader.  Let us discuss some critical ones, and how they can benefit the individual and organisation.

A leader’s professional image can have a positive or negative influence on the way others perceive that person. 

The table below (Table 1.1) outlines some key areas of self-assessment, and the benefits derived from the outcomes.

Aim	How to	Benefits
Good Professional Image	know what image you want to portray, ensure professional personal appearance, show interest in others, walk the talk	Positive communication, Credibility, integrity
Positive Attitude & Self-motivation	Mix with other positive people, be in full control of your attitude	Will to win, success
Personal Health	Diet, exercise, sleep and a balanced lifestyle	Clear Mind, energy & drive
Self-assessment questionnaires	Establish and know ones weaknesses and strengths	By being aware of our strength and weaknesses, we can lead accordingly and work on continuous improvement

Table 1.1

The table above (Table 1.1) includes items directly discussed by Flanagan & Finger (2011).  Essentially by being aware of one’s strengths and weaknesses, a leader can use this to their full advantage.  By asking for independent help the leader can both work on their weaknesses as well as utilising the coaches skills to further improve his leadership and own mentoring skills.

As argued by Robbins & Judge (2010) the question remains whether it is actually possible for individuals to be their own leader.  The argument works on the basis of leaders helping their staff in the same principle.  The same argument can also be found in principle in an article in the November/December (1974) issue of HBR about monkey management[1].  This all revolves about ownership and taking ownership of problems.  By doing so we are teaching our staff in just another way to self-manage or about self-leadership.

The question we are discussing here is about today’s leaders, but I would like to argue that in reality this has been widely known for decades, and that it has merely evolved into a tool that is widely used by successful leaders around the world today.

While I could argue that self-assessment will work the same for everyone, I truly believe it does not.  Some individuals have a strong sense of self and would find it relatively simple to look at their weaknesses and strengths in a self-assessment report, and work on these to improve their leadership skills.

On the other hand however, we have individuals that would struggle with the idea, due to several factors like low esteem, being an introvert or even just being scared of finding something they cannot readily accept.  This is where the real challenge begins in my view.  These particular leaders will often spend a surreal amount on further education, seminars and courses, while failing to notice that the core of understanding their own centre is where the issue lies.  In these cases I do not feel that self-assessment can be beneficial until this individual has been educated and fully understands the principles behind it.  If they will resist this process, the problem will most likely persist.

Therefore, while the benefits for leaders who understand that the outcomes of self-evaluation are enormous; it forms only part of that leaders strengths and understanding.  Some very successful international companies have adopted self-assessment programs.  The UK Petroleum Industry Association for example has set up several self-assessment modules for leaders in regards to process safety leadership commitment.

The Leadership Steps Assessment (LSA) (Clawson, McNay, Bevan 2000) discusses the clarification of one’s centre, clarifying what is possible, what others can and how they can contribute, supporting others so they can contribute, about being relentless and measuring and celebrating success.  It sounds rather simple, or does it not.  Well, by actually dissecting these individual parts, we come to a conclusion that is similar to the one earlier discussed, that returns to the roots of ownership. 

In conclusion I would like to summarise that although the potential and benefits for self-assessment are great, the understanding and implementation, as well as continuous improvement are critical.  Todays leaders have to be fully aware of so many issues, whether political, cultural, and financial or even personal influences on the workplace.  By understanding themselves, they are creating a stable base to work from, and also helping others understand themselves.  This is where the significant benefit will arise from.  It is not from one leader, but from the vision and leadership they share, and openly distribute among their peers and subordinates.  By allowing individuals all around them to gain the same understanding we are forming a cluster of stability, strength, drive, passion and most importantly a culture which feeds on the outcomes. 

The cultural drive of an organisation can therefore be directly influenced by a self-aware leader.  This has been the Japanese way for many decades, and has proven to be extremely successful.  By leaders all around the world adopting these cultural principles with their detailed understanding of themselves and their whole environment, leading teams becomes easier, more efficient and more rewarding.

These rewards will then spread like a cancer enveloping our core industries and thus allowing for sustainability beyond the foreseeable future.  In essence we are saying that one person can make a change, or at least start the change process.  With clusters of self-aware leaders growing, and todays way of networking through social media as well as traditional networking events, knowledge is readily shared, enhancing each person’s strengths, reducing or even eliminating individuals weaknesses, allowing them to learn and focus on what lies ahead.  They will not be diverted from the greater goal, as their core understanding of themselves has reached a level that is beneficial to them, their team, their company, their industry and even their family.

Self-assessment should be a key focus for any executives, and should be driven by corporations around the world to capture the greater good and benefits, continuous improvement and sustainability gained from the experiences.

---

[1] Oncken, W., Wass, D., (1999), Management Time – Who’s Got The Monkey http://hbr.org/1999/11/management-time-whos-got-the-monkey/ar/1

Bennis, W., Thomas, R., (2002), Crucibles of Leadership

Blanchard, K., (1999), The Heart of a Leader, Surrey UK: Eagle

Carnegie, D., (1999), How to Win Friends & Influence People, Sydney Australia: Harper Collins Publishers

Clawson, J., McNay, E., Beavan, G., (2001 Rev 11/01, UVA-OB-0733), Leadership Steps Assessment (LSA), University of Virginia: Darden Business Publishing

Flanagan, N., Finger, J. (2010), The Management Bible, Queensland Australia: Plum Press

George, B., Sims, P., McLean, A., Mayer, D., (2007), Discovering Your Authentic Leadership

Leadership Training and Development Online (2010), Leadership Self Assessment Activity http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/leader/survlead.html

Littauer, F., (1995), Personality Plus, East Sussex UK: Monarch Publications

McGraw, P., (1999), Life Strategies, Sydney Australia: Random House

Oncken, W., Wass, D., (1999), Management Time – Who’s Got The Monkey http://hbr.org/1999/11/management-time-whos-got-the-monkey/ar/1

Robbins, S., Judge, T., 13th Edition, (2009), Organizational Behavior, New Jersey USA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Runn, G. (2011), Self Evaluation In Leadership http://garyrunn.com/2011/08/17/self-evaluation-in-leadership/

UKPIA (2010), Self Assessment Module – Successful Leadership http://www.ukpia.com/files/pdf/ukpia-self-assessment-module-leadership-v1.pdf

Organisational Culture

Organisational Culture in my eyes is probably one of the most important but least understood parts of an organisation.  As change is required I refer back to some of my previous posts, in that change is a journey, and not a fast one at that.

Yes, the Japanese were one of the first people to recognise the importance of organisational culture which forms the “founding philosophy” of the Toyota Production System:

“There is no royal road to success in life.  It takes the right process to achieve a great result”.

What they mean by that is that it requires total participation (“one team, working together” approach).  The engagement in any organisational change requires staff to truly understand the value of continuous improvement willingness to participate.  Rules and regulations will never motivate them.

Proper training, discipline and respect for their knowledge and skill is required.  Furthermore, innovation and change comes from small continuous improvements that have been suggested from staff members.  Improvement after improvement is what creates results and culture.  In order for staff to offer their suggestions in a productive way, they need to feel respected and second, have a proper process in place in order to provide their suggestions in a fruitful manner. 

Edgar Schein’s summary:

“The pattern of basic assumptions that a given group has invented, discovered, ordeveloped in learning to cope with its problems of external adaptation and internalintegration, and that have worked well enough to be considered valid, andtherefore, to be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think andfeel in relation to these problems”

for me highlights the above in a more complex and philosophical way.  

 

The “iceberg” scenario certainly agrees with that.  (Cultural artefacts are like the tip of the iceberg . . . we can observe them. However, there is much below the surface. True cultural awareness involves understanding what’s below the waterline.)

When we talk about sub cultures, we start to get into more complicated situations that need to be monitored and controlled.

An “Enhancing Subculture” can be great, but even then I feel that it is easy for it to get out of hand, therefore close monitoring is required.  Over enthusiasm can become failure just too quickly.

The “Complementary Subculture” for me is a necessity.  It can look at the situation objectively and give great input.  Again we need to monitor that we do not go off on tangents.

For me “Counterculture” goes hand in hand with the complementary subculture, rather than being objective though, it can challenge the culture, and often create improvements.  As with any of the above, it needs to be monitored.

I also agree that many managers see culture as a “surface level concept” and then are unpleasantly surprised when cultural change efforts fail.  The founder, CEO or owner of a business must be seen as leading cultural change.  If he/she doesn’t lead from the front, his managers, supervisors and staff are unlikely to pursue the outcomes required.

Culture can be a most powerful influence, which is why leaders must enhance their organisation’s culture through maintenance, sustenance and change.

My personal recommendations:

            The role of culture cannot be underestimated

            We must understand that culture is not easy to change

            We must have a vision and follow it

We must be patient

We must focus on each of the elements like: values, tradition, procedures, symbols, rituals and ceremonies

Essentially we want to create a workplace where employees want to be.  We need to create the right environment, understand what makes people happy or unhappy, empower our staff and much more.

Resources:

Corriero, A. (2012), “Workshop 1 - Inspiring and Structuring a Lean Culture within Your Organisation”, Chase Performance: Melbourne, Australia

Flanagan, N., Finger, J. (2003), “The Management Bible”, Plum Press: Queensland, Australia

“Primer on organisation culture” (2003), UVA-OB-0675, Darden Business Publishing, University of Virginia

The Change Leadership Sustainability Demands

I believe we all agree that sustainability goes beyond and encompasses a much broader area than just environmental aspects, and change in all of these areas are necessary to sustain business growth and the economy. As I understand it we are putting environmental sustainability on the forefront for the purpose of this module and course, as a major part of it is driven by other areas of business.

 “The Change Leadership Sustainability Demands” refers to three distinct stages”. (MITSloan Management Review, Summer 2010, Vol. 51 No. 4, by Chrisoph Luenburger and Daniel Goleman)

Phase 1 – Making the Case for Change

I would refer to this as how to prepare to bring about change. One of the most important parts to get buy in is to get wins on the board quickly. This cannot always be done easily. Most people associate sustainability with huge costs without any direct payback. The introduction of the carbon tax in Australia since July 1st will certainly change this mindset somewhat.

If we break down Phase 1 into several steps we may look at something like this:

•             Be convinced that change and sustainability is necessary

•             Consider the present and future and analyse change accordingly

•             May the change be resisted and why

•             If so, how can fears be addressed and dealt with

•             Work on a detailed plan

•             Benchmark against competitors

•             Ensure others are involved

Now, I agree with Ralph (fellow student), that all this has to be driven by senior management, and fully supported to succeed. However, often, senior management are scared to make these decisions, and if they are seen to be hesitant, the change mechanism is most likely doomed.

Phase 2 – Translating Vision into Action

Basically we are now discussing implementing the change, if we have been successful in establishing our case. One comment of the article is that “executives who are effective in Phase 2 tend to be comfortable with the distinction between the ideology of sustainability and the sustainability goals that the organisation seeks to achieve”. What do we need to be successful in Phase 2.

Again, I’d like to break down Phase 2 into several steps:

•         Always remember the basics of good change management (people will go with the       flow or if change is really required, people are more likely to change if they are actively involved, people generally resist orders or surprises, people like to feel secure, people cannot be treated as objects, change can sometimes take time)

•         Therefore as in Phase 1 ensure people are involved in the whole
           change process

•         Ensure that people understand as much as possible about
           sustainability

•         Making sure that staff are fully aware und understand as to why we are implementing these particular changes

•            Highlight, Promote & Sell the Benefits

•         As a leader you want to be seen as fully enthusiastic and driving the change, failing to do so will most likely result in the staff not believing in it either

•         Ensure that the staff are armed with resources and tools, and offer plenty of support throughout the change period and beyond

•         Deal with one project at a time, and celebrate wins, therefore building a positive track record

•         Empower everyone to have continuous input by regularly discussing new ideas and initiatives

Wow, it all sounds so easy, but is it? If you are entrenched in a company which has employees that have been there for many years, these individuals can be your greatest supporters or your greatest opponents. It is important in my eyes, to involve them, as the “newer” employees are more likely to join the bandwagon. These individuals will come up with excuses like, “I’m about to retire, what do I get out of it”, or “why change now” and many more. The true challenge for the leaders is to harness these employees to make them supporters. And I strongly believe that herein lays one of the greatest challenges.

Phase 3- Expanding Boundaries

We are now talking about a strong strategic orientation and competitive advantage, however we often find that the competitive advantage may not crystallise for many years, as the rest of the market or world play catch up. Regulatory changes will help drive the changes, but we also know that politicians are supported by large corporations, so change will still be slow. Even with the carbon tax introduction in Australia, the opposition still promises to abolish it as soon as it is in power. The opposition is also backed by some major corporates. Therefore if the support from our “main leaders” isn’t there, how can we expect our staff to fall in line? At the end they are generally confused and unsure. So a leader changing direction and working against the direction the company had previously taken will be even more so difficult.

I have also thought about Phase 3 in regards to some more elementary points:

•         We need to look to the future and stop holding on to the past

•         We don’t see issues as problems, rather as opportunities

•         Our strategy needs to encompass us being able to cope with the change (be aware of the four phases of the change cycle – denial – resistance – exploration – commitment)

•         Understand the change is continuous and nothing is permanent

Understanding the principles of change will help implement any new strategy including sustainability. But let’s not kid ourselves, it is a difficult and long journey, and not for the faint hearted.

The focus needs to be on environmental sustainability to ensure there will be a world as we know it for generations to come. Technological advances will play a key role in these as well as the smarts of our leaders.

The key question for this module is the change leadership that sustainability demands. We have discussed leadership in detail, and I think it's great to combine it now with the sustainability part, as they work hand in hand. Without strong leadership basics and understanding, a leader is ultimately going to fail, especially when embarking on the sustainability journey.

It is a fine balance between a business being profitable and sustainable in all areas, or it failing.

The following link is for an article titled "Mining and the environment: the future of Australia’s brand". It discusses the questions raised over environmental impact versus the environment and business areas that are directly and indirectly affected. It is a great independent view and read, and once again shows the dilemma politicians, corporations and individuals face when trying to create a sustainable future.

http://www.miningaustralia.com.au/news/mining-and-the-environment-the-future-of-australia

I would agree that sustainability is not a destination, but would call it a journey rather than direction, although direction works as well.

I love “the learning to work in systems diagram” (Zeri system), looks simple enough once you understand it, but there are many players involved, and they all need to be individually driven towards the better outcome and goal. They all have to embark on the journey.

This is also where “lean” crosses with “sustainability” Lean is all about reducing waste, sustainability takes it to the next level. The first principals of lean are the 5 S’s (you can read more about this on my posting: http://leanimprovement.blogspot.com.au/2012/04/what-is-5s.html)

The article for me proves that it is great long journey with continuous improvement required.

Our Professor asked: “Can we hold our leaders accountable for sustainability?”

Absolutely, they are the ones that need to drive it, without being driven from the top down, change will never happen. CEO’s are financially accountable, and in this new age environmental accountability falls in the same category for me.