Communication is the means or set of deliberate activities to convey information to the organization. It involves the exchange of ideas, strategy and vision, plans, intentions, and expectations. Communication has the most direct influence on defining, nurturing, and reinforcing the right improvement Kata. This is another area that organizations have given little thought to in previous improvement programs. The potential for miscommunication was bad enough when its simple form was face to face with people around a conference room table. Evolving technology, the Internet, mobility, virtual meetings, and other means of communication are making this topic much more immediate, confusing, and challenging.
Executive communication is an area that I have become particularly interested in, especially as it relates to adaptive systematic improvement and evolving culture. Communication that strives to change behaviors and culture requires much more than banners and slogans, symbolic storyboards, an all-hands meeting, an e-mail blast, a monitor in the cafeteria, or a ceremonial videoconference. A fully functioning Lean Business System requires much more time, effort, and concentration on continuous, open, meaningful, two-way communication. It is the means of building awareness and a sense of urgency, renewing associate commitment, disseminating information about plans and progress, and reinforcing the need to stay on a particular track. It is the foundation for building honesty, trust, loyalty, respect, commitment, unity of purpose, and the right desired behaviors in order to achieve the right desired results. It is the means of proactively engaging and dealing with associate questions and/or barriers to success. Communication has also been accomplished matter of factly or by mimicking the actions of other organizations in previous improvement programs. Walk into most organizations and ask associates about communication, and they typically give it a needs improvement grade.
This chapter provides guidance about communication in an adaptive systematic improvement environment. Embedded within this subprocess is also an improvement role for evolving the invisible behaviors and cultural development needs of a Lean Business System. In its simplest terms, adaptive systematic improvement requires leadership, planning, organization, resource management, controls, and communication. The architecture of our Lean Business System Reference Model™ includes various formal subprocesses that are used to perform these essential roles. Leadership and communication are the largest inducers for setting behavioral patterns (Kata) and cultural norms. They are also the most difficult subprocesses because they include the highest human content and are the most difficult to systematize and evolve to a higher state. In our reference model, the integrate, adapt, systematize functions really involve observing and evolving behaviors and culture over time with the right, authentic situational leadership. Great organizations invest their thinking, time, and resources in communication because it provides the means for shaping the desired culture of the company. Adaptive systematic improvement requires well-designed and delivered communication; there is no such thing as too much communication when the messaging is adding value to the organization. Poor communication can poison the atmosphere for improvement and change as well as the morale of associates. When associates perceive communication as an insincere gesture, it can do more harm than good.
The purpose of communication is to create awareness, commitment, trust, inspiration, engagement, and other positive behavioral attributes of change. Communication also helps to evolve cultural values and beliefs, and brings the best-practice leadership behaviors (Adaptive Leadership) to life. This represents the human and emotional foundation for adaptive systematic improvement. Communication creates unity and constancy of purpose and strengthens organizational relationships with that end in mind. In terms of adaptive systematic improvement, communication conveys the what, where, when, why, who, and how of the aligned improvement strategy.
Why is the most important question to answer for the organization. Associates need to understand and embrace why the organization needs to move away from its current as-is state and the consequences and risks of staying the same. When leadership fails to answer this question, the members of the organization answer it for themselves—often based on fears and false perceptions. The common fears include fear of failure, ridicule, rejection, disappointment, exclusion, the unknown, and a perceived loss of freedom and the status quo. Why creates a shared understanding and demolishes fear, pure and simple. Purpose-driven communication helps associates to better understand the external market and competitive pressures that are driving the need for continuous adaptive systematic improvement and to internalize the emotional sense of urgency for improvement.
A good place to begin with purpose-driven communication is to understand current conditions. This does not require a lengthy study, it involves talking with and engaging associates, and it involves active listening. This is a competency in itself. Beyond listening to the words, it is important to understand the unspoken messages such as behaviors, facial expressions, attitudes, and body language. The five whys are another useful approach when evaluating the state of communications and the barriers. Some of the typical current communication barriers in organizations include:
Lack of respect between leadership and associates, between functions within the organization, or between individuals. Executives cannot avoid these situations; they must deal with them head on if they expect to create a positive, collaborative, team environment.
Failure to clearly define the purpose and objectives of communication. Communication is often delivered on the fly with the best of intentions, but the message is disorganized and confusing to the listener. Communication is missing the basic rules of what, where, when, why, who, and how.
A one-size-fits-all media strategy (e.g., letter with payroll check, e-mail blast, signage, cafeteria monitor, etc.). Associates in the organization receive messaging much better by customized media strategies, and it requires multiple hits to stick.
Leadership assumes that the organization fully understands and accepts the message. Presenters usually have much more background and understanding than the recipients of the message. It requires thought and planning to deliver a clear message. And presenters should be prepared to answer questions. Never assume that a message is received positively and is well understood. Also, put the message at the listener’s comfort level of understanding.
Unintended, one-way communication is common. This approach disengages and intimidates listeners because it leaves all their questions and concerns unanswered. People always seem to navigate more to the negative than the positive aspects of change because they fear the unknown. Recognize that the cause of fear is always much larger than reality.
The hollow monthly review. These reviews are scheduled with the same agendas, but they often leave associates wondering how the message and numbers are related to what they do every day. Communication must be meaningful, purposeful, and value-adding to all.
The wrong or mixed message. A good example of this is having a meeting about quality defects and then telling people that they must try harder, as if they are intentionally creating the defects. That’s not the root cause; it is insulting. Wavering and inconsistent direction and priorities are other examples, like doing Lean for the first three weeks of the month and then focusing 100 percent on shipments during the last week of the month.
Communication becomes extremely challenging in organizations with a Lean program on the rocks or a track record of failed fad improvement programs. The mention of systematic improvement is received as the next new flavor and leaves people with the feeling of, “Here we go again. It won’t last long.” Associates in many organizations have lost all faith in improvement programs. A common theme that we have observed is that leadership is not authentic, committed, and serious. Stop right here: Another hasty communication effort is not what is needed in these situations. Executives must come clean with their people, whether it was their previous improvement program or not. People generally embrace an honest explanation of what happened in the past. No excuses, no blame, but an honest explanation of the facts followed by an apology for bad performance and how it may have negatively impacted the organization. This is now a perfect place to begin communicating about the future and, in particular, why the organization must get improvement right this time, and what will be done differently to get improvement right. History is a huge contributor to culture and the status of an organization’s behavioral attributes of change. History may have created a negative grapevine and invisible resistance to change. Simply ignoring previous experience with improvement initiatives is a sure way to keep these undercurrents of resistance alive.
This section provides prescriptive guidance for the communication subprocess of our architecture. Much of this guidance is known but not rigorously practiced as an integral part of adaptive systematic improvement—or leadership in general. Also, it is important to factor in Western attributes and values when developing a communication plan. American culture can be assertive, individualistic, tending toward questioning authority, and standoffish, yet it can be very personable, friendly, and accommodating. When it comes to change, associates are not always willing to reveal what they are really feeling. Effective communication brings their emotions out so they can be dealt with.
Figure 5.1 provides a simple map of purpose-driven communication, with the Kata style of thinking embedded within its structure.
Figure 5.1 Purpose-Driven Communication Map
Copyright © 2015, The Center for Excellence in Operations, Inc.
The first step in communication is thinking through the purpose of the communication and what the organization desires to accomplish. Evolving culture to a higher state of excellence requires deliberate thinking, deliberate planning, deliberate execution, and deliberate evaluation. Following is a checklist of the multiple purposes of communication:
To convey and share relevant information about the business.
To engage and interact with associates about various challenges, issues, and general what’s on their mind topics.
To build awareness and persuade associates to align with a specific direction or initiative.
To motivate associates through a positive work environment possibly with recognition and rewards, and to create the inclusive emotional experience of being part of the team.
To achieve a unity and constancy of purpose and to reinforce the organization’s core values and expected code of conduct.
To continue to work toward a desired outcome through total stakeholder engagement and empowerment.
This is not an all-inclusive checklist, but these elements represent targets of communication—targets that people do not always think through when they prepare their presentations. Before communicating with the organization, it is often very useful to make planning notes as an executive team around this checklist of purpose points.
The figure provides a brief outline of activities in the communications Kata cycles. This is as much common sense as it is Kata. Nevertheless, if it takes a catchy phrase for an old practice to provide a more disciplined approach to communication, then so be it. The disciplined approach includes:
Plan: This includes clarifying the purpose of communication with a very crisp and clear message. Adaptive systematic improvement requires precision, not a rambling, confusing ad-lib story about improvement. Planning also includes determining how the organization will communicate to different associate groups with which type of media or approach. Another important aspect of plan is the what ifs—how might associates react to the message, and what questions might they ask? Be prepared!
Deliver: This is the actual delivery of the message. A very positive, upbeat, and passionate message is the first step in recruiting the organization’s support. In parallel, the message must be crystal clear and justify itself with facts. Do not assume that everyone understands and embraces the message. We have conducted a train-the-trainer exercise with communication where every executive, manager, and supervisor is capable of providing the same consistent message to associates and soliciting more detailed feedback. Associates are very comfortable about opening up to their peers and direct supervisors.
Check: This includes listening to and capturing associate feedback and concerns, evaluating their responses, and developing plans to resolve any barriers or detractors to improvement. An important part of check is reflection and lessons learned, and how to improve the next cycle of communication.
Adjust: This is the integration of feedback, lessons learned, additional clarity, examples and success stories, and other elements to build awareness and stimulate the desire to join in. Adaptive systematic improvement is systematic because it involves a continuous integrated process of reinforcement, eventually leading to autonomous improvement. It’s what the Kata principle is all about.
Executives must remain super-conscious and uniform when it comes to communication, especially in the less formal signals in their behaviors, choices, and actions. It is always much easier to undermine communication than it is to keep it on a track. Executives are always on stage, where associates are interpreting the meaning of their behaviors, choices, and actions. One unintended comment can send a signal that improvement is no longer a priority. Associates are the first to observe inconsistencies in the message. A few years ago I was involved with a major quality improvement initiative with a company. Its communications strategy was well-thought-out and perfect. Monitors were installed in high-traffic areas to reinforce the message. The IT department scrounged up whatever flat screens it could find, and apparently a few were severely scratched and installed with snowy resolution. The standing joke with a particular group of associates was, “They’re committed to Six Sigma, but they hang up Two Sigma monitors.” Associates are always testing commitment and sincerity behind the communication.
Resistance to change occurs when there is a perceived threat to an individual. The two key words here are perceived and threat. In most cases the basis for resistance is imaginary, and the risk of change is always much lower than the risk of staying the same with a solid adaptive systematic improvement process. It is very common for members of an organization to listen to a communications session and then return to business as usual. Some of the fault may lie in the message itself, but there is always some degree of resistance to change. While this resistance is evident, it is also a leadership growth opportunity.
Communication is very similar to strategic selling. It requires thought, planning, and multiple hits to a broad base of associates. At the end of the day, communication is about change management: removing fears; building confidence, acceptance, and internalization of change; and mentoring the right actions to achieve the right desired results. A favorite resistor comes from individuals who proclaim that they do not have time to improve and do their regular jobs. They are too busy doing all the wrong things and cannot see that a little investment in improvement could actually result in less firefighting and more value-added time. Yet they can always find the time to do things over. The problem is that so many forms of hidden and unknown wastes are buried in cost of poor quality (COPQ) and other financial variance accounts. Regardless of any claims about Lean, waste is institutionalized in these organizations. They can explain away the what, but they never address the why, so the same problems continue to recur. Many leadership behaviors, choices, and actions build and promote this cultural muddling. Perception is reality to these managers and associates, and it must be addressed by communication and other critical success factors of our Lean Business System Reference Model. The best decision in these situations is to replace the insanity with autonomation (line shut-down practice from TPS) and send associates off for a disciplined and uninterrupted team improvement exercise. This is the most effective means to break this damaging vicious cycle of incoherent thinking.
Organizations respond to change in several different ways once the message of change is delivered. Some of the common responses include:
Joining in: This is the best situation. The segment of associates have listened to the message and wish to get on board early (the “GOBEs”). They want to be part of the solution, not part of the problem. They are generally open to change because they trust leadership and thrive on challenges. Although they are missing the details, they envision the benefits of change and view their participation as a career-expanding opportunity. Many of these associates convince their peers to step up and commit to change. Occasionally an individual may join in to appear that they are on board. Joiners and hedgers are easily spotted by their behaviors and performance.
Hedging: This is a condition in which associates are not for or against change. They are merely holding out with the thoughts of change on their minds. These people become preoccupied with the perceptions of change, just when they should focus and commit to change. These people are indecisive and waffle about commitment. Most in this segment are the “I’ll believe it when I see it” crowd. Others will hedge until the risk of hedging is higher than the risk of boarding the improvement train.
Kibitzing: This segment of associates is not convinced of the benefits of change because there are many unanswered questions about the details of change and how it will affect them personally. They legitimately seek the truth through socialization, but stir up opinions, perceptions, fears, and imaginary concerns. These associates require continuous communication to achieve clarity, remove fears, and increase their acceptance of change.
Holding out: This is the tough segment of suspicious associates who are not committed, but wish to hide their true feelings for political reasons. Their reasons are influenced by personal beliefs, values, career goals, previous experiences, or simply bad attitudes. This is the make-believe and can’t crowd that keeps a low profile but often opposes initiatives under the radar. Some of these associates must go because they are undermining the good work of other associates. Others may be brilliant individual contributors where adaptive systematic improvement requires a much higher degree of innovative adaptation (e.g., research scientists, medical and clinical staff, etc.).
These and other responses to change are to be expected. Adaptive Leadership and communication get executives and their organizations through these ripples of change. These subprocesses grow and nurture full stakeholder engagement. Keep in mind that the above responses to change are at a symptomatic level; that is, executives cannot mandate 100 percent commitment and acceptance although it has been attempted many times in previous improvement programs. There are many stories of Toyota leadership’s ruthlessness in implementing the Toyota Production System. It worked in that culture (respect for authority, allegiance, harmony, working together, reserving opinions, etc.), and it was also a matter of human survival. Western organizations require more TLC (tender loving care, for lack of a better name) and want a voice in how things are done. Intimidation and coercion do not build trust and loyalty; a more collaborative and empowering approach is required. Communication must go deeper into the root causes of these initial responses to change and take into account the why why why why why below the surface. Some of this may be identified through the Operations Excellence Due Diligence cycles or by the multiple cycles of communication. It is important to understand the idea of systematic process and integrated system because our Lean Business System Reference Model and all of its subprocesses are interconnected and interrelated. This is the differentiator between just another improvement program and a robust systematic process of improvement.
Recognizing the root causes of resistance to change is important in developing an effective ongoing communications strategy. Many of the root causes are opinion- and perception-based because associates need more information to fill in their blanks. Be prepared that some resistance may be a reflection of poor leadership and substandard cultural norms that have been allowed in the past. Overcoming the human drama and root causes of resistance is the core of leadership. Dealing with these root causes head-on and continuously with an effective communications strategy will establish strong underpinnings for adaptive systematic improvement.
There may be hundreds of reasons why associates initially refuse to accept change. Typically these reasons fall into the following categories:
Associates are happy with their current situation. People who have served in the same capacity for a long time find comfort in familiarity and routine. Change introduces the perceived fear of failure.
Associates are heavily invested. Some people have spent time building their career in a stable social and organizational dimension. The social investment has created a sense of identity, individualism, and power and influence (i.e., healthcare physicians and clinicians). The combination of cross-process systematic improvement, process thinking, empowerment, and teaming is at cross-purposes therefore and rejected by these individuals.
Associates are metric-bound. Some people are committed to achieving a specific objective, and they think that involvement in change will disrupt or jeopardize success and individual performance. Individual metrics play a crucial role in adaptive systematic improvement. Many metrics are too immediate and localized, creating conflicts with the broader vision of adaptive systematic improvement.
Associates view systematic improvement as additional work. The first reaction of change with many people in organizations is that there will be more work—with no additional compensation and requiring efforts that far exceed the perceived benefits. They cannot fathom that improvement can actually simplify and eliminate many frustrations from their daily work.
Associates see change as hollow. People do not see the what’s in it for me attraction of change. Their reactions might be shaped by previous experiences with improvement programs and can be turned around only by regaining trust and credibility.
Associates are confused by the journey. The grand plan of systematic improvement is introduced, but it is missing the what, why, where, when, who, and how details. Unanswered questions invite fear, speculation, and resistance to change. Commitment requires a much better understanding of change and the individual roles of people in the process.
Associates do not trust leadership. Whether imaginary or real, justified or not, perception is reality when it comes to managing change. It is certainly worth taking the time to better understand the root causes of resistance and build the right countermeasures into the communication strategy.
Associates have been there, done that, got the T-shirt. This is a culture where people are just waiting for another improvement program to stumble so they can pull out their “See, I told you so” script. Skipping this fence-mending and renewal effort leaves the organization full of skeptics who will visibly pretend to go with the flow but will not be emotionally committed.
Associates are allowed to reject and/or obstruct change. Some organizations have perpetuated this condition by their leadership behaviors, choices, and actions. These people fall into two categories: Passive and obstructive. Passive people go about their business and pocket-veto change. Obstructive people reject and undermine change. There are no exemptions from systematic improvement.
Understanding the root causes of resistance to change involves patience for sure, and more awareness and common sense than science. Management consulting involves constant communication and dialogue with many people in different functional roles and levels of organizations. This communication involves understanding current business conditions, analyzing and reviewing current performance, working through business challenges and improvement needs, and understanding leadership and cultural barriers to change. The process involves a very detailed peeling back the onion of organizations—like a first time through Operations Excellence Due Diligence. Working with people and listening to their issues and concerns builds trust very quickly. Often it feels like the first time associates have been given an opportunity to discuss their issues and other things on their minds. Many associates express fear of sharing knowledge and concerns with their own management groups, but they open up when an outsider makes the effort to listen and show interest and empathy. Leadership, culture, and the associates’ need for continued employment suppress many issues that are necessary to integrate into a rock-solid communication strategy.
Change is inevitable in this world, and so is the need for continuous adaptive systematic improvement. This statement is a no-brainer in my profession, but I always remind myself that my passion for improvement does not always translate to those around me. And I would be lying if I said that I never resist change. Everyone resists change at some point for many reasons. Executives contract with our firm to help them change their business, and often they are initially the greatest resisters to change—especially when they understand that they and their organizations need to change too. This is not a criticism, but a fact of major change and breakthrough improvement. It requires a momentous and continuous amount of patience and compassion to master the gift of change leadership. Actually it is never mastered; it is continuously developed through interaction with the diverse group of individuals in organizations. It also requires lots of head bumping and knee scuffing along the way because change management is an abstract topic in textbooks. My personal change leadership skills come from interacting with tens of thousands of people in hundreds of different organizations around the globe. I certainly do not have all the answers and am always eager for the next learning and leadership development experience.
Purpose-driven communication is the leadership art and science that transforms fear and confusion into trust, understanding, and acceptance. This is a simple statement but represents an ever-challenging endeavor. Before an organization hurries up and launches systematic improvement, have the patience and compassion to address current communications conditions in the organizations. Take the time to conduct a thorough organizational scan: the business scan and cultural scan via the Operations Excellence Due Diligence. Beyond this, listen to the voice of the organization and understand the multiple audiences. Be accessible and take advantage of face-to-face communication. Explore and use whatever means of communication possible to flush out the root causes of resistance to change—e-mails, monitor messaging, videoconferences, town hall meetings, the hallway power hits (“Great job on X”). Communicate often and with a great plan, not as a scheduled trivial exercise. Answer all the whys—and never assume that associates understand, internalize, or are committed to an idea. Have the patience to shape expectations over time by frequent and well-constructed communication. Demonstrate to associates that leadership is listening by integrating their feedback and addressing their concerns into future communications plans. Help associates to proactively engage in and internalize the end in mind. Remove the fears and open up the door to no-limits thinking. And do not forget widely publicized successes and recognition and rewards. These are the critical factors of purpose-driven communication that help to deliberately build a high-performance culture.
Every organization has its own unique culture—its values, vision, mission, and expected codes and standards of conduct. Culture is the personality of the organization, its shared belief system. The only certainty about culture is that “culture happens,” for the better or for the worse. The characteristics of culture are shaped by collective behaviors, choices, actions, experiences, and other accepted norms and events over time. Culture is also influenced by leadership and constancy of purpose and is disrupted by several transient leaders with their different styles, agendas, personal goals, and organizational expectations. Culture plays out in a variety of ways. Culture is reflected in the way the organization is structured, whether work is conducted cross-functionally or within individual silos, how the hierarchical levels are set up, and how the chain of command and span of control work. Culture is often defined by the type of industry, the backgrounds of the executives, the discipline of systems and processes, and the less formal symbols, conduct, values, and behaviors in the organization. Culture is even reflected in how and why meetings are held in an organization. Often, there is a big difference in culture between the mission statement on the lobby wall and the actual behaviors and practices behind the lobby doors. “Culture happens,” either through structured means and deliberate actions or through inattention.
From a practical perspective, culture is what it is; executives cannot wish and hope for a change in culture or flip a switch and change it overnight. Culture is, however, the largest enabler of or obstacle to change. Culture is simply about individuals in a group sharing expected patterns of behavior. There is no cultural absolute because culture is both relative and dynamic to the organization’s strategy and mission. Left on its own, culture is not sustainable. Culture is not some natural evolution in business; it is formed by the right intentional cascading best-practice leadership behaviors, choices, and actions. Executives have the power and responsibility to deliberately design, create, and nurture a culture that is the best fit for an organization’s future direction.
Let’s look at Ahrens, Flextronics, Lincoln Electric, Avery Dennison, General Cable, Audi, GE, Harley Davidson, Bosch, Motorola, IBM, BMW, Deere, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Dana, Boeing, Porsche, Johnson Controls, Visteon, Honda, Daimler Benz, Emerson Electric, Caterpillar, Honeywell, and dozens of other great global organizations (Toyota is a given). All these organizations continue to face the same or greater operating obstacles as everyone else, yet they continue to evolve winning cultures and be the benchmarks of improvement. What is it about these organizations that sets them apart? Although they might not call it by the name, they have a very precise and well-integrated Lean Business System and all the subprocesses in place, and they position the overarching philosophy of improvement front and center as the cultural standard of excellence throughout the enterprise. They have thought through and implemented all the critical success factors of adaptive systematic improvement. They have the elements of the architecture and subprocesses of our Lean Business System Reference Model implanted in the governance, implementation, and cultural foundation of improvement. They continue to win and define best-in-class performance because they deliberately design, create, and nurture improvement-enabling cultures.
How do your executives and organization weigh in on deliberately designing, creating, and nurturing an improvement-enabling culture? In terms of adaptive systematic improvement, what is the difference between an improvement-enabling culture and an improvement-dysfunctional culture? Part of the answer lies in reflecting on the traditional Western process of improvement with its tools focus and flavor-of-the-month programs. A stream of fad improvement programs and Lean manufacturing tools do not change culture; in fact, it’s just the opposite. Adaptive Leadership creates an environment and shared belief system for success (i.e., for the program and tool content to work effectively). Culture is a deliberate and defined goal that positively influences the organization’s shared values, belief system, and code of conduct. The role of Adaptive Leadership is to continue to evolve culture to higher standards of excellence by understanding and realigning behaviors and values. This has within it a continuous Kata-like process that includes the following cycle of learning:
Creating a learning and development environment for associates (e.g., center of excellence and other professional development opportunities).
Applying new knowledge and skills, often in situations that may be viewed initially as unlikely or impossible to improve.
Mentoring and helping associates to experience success and personal discovery (from being intellectually to emotionally committed—the believers).
Reflecting and solidifying personal beliefs through continuous efforts (e.g., communication, involvement in other improvement activities, pride of accomplishment, formal recognition, etc.).
Growing incremental talent and evolving cultural values, standards of conduct, and expectations to higher levels of autonomous excellence.
Shaping culture is not rocket science, but it does require rigorous leadership attention, planning, and involvement. When leadership chooses not to assume this deliberate and proactive role, culture is accidental and improvement is limited. Let’s discuss the signs of improvement-dysfunctional cultures. Improvement is not systematic at all. Wavering leadership, token agreements (rather than true commitment), constant disruptions, and changes in priorities are the norm where improvement is the first casualty. High-anxiety executives are always under pressure to make their numbers. In such organizations, improvement is an activity composed of wishes and hopes. Executives are seeking out programs like grabbing at straws, wishing for the big home run from a tool or single point program and hoping that everyone in the organization embraces change without asking questions about all the unknowns. Brute force and firefighting receives more recognition than improvement, and improvement is viewed as in addition to rather than an integral part of daily work (the separation disorder of improvement). This vicious cycle of overhyped and shoehorned improvement programs ultimately fail because they lack strategy, deployment planning, execution, accountability, widespread organizational credibility, authenticity, and substance. They continue to be undermined by ongoing executive behaviors, choices, and actions. Hence, these organizations create improvement-dysfunctional cultures. The problem with this concept is that it is extremely difficult for organizations to look in the mirror and recognize that this situation is a major barrier to future success. “We’ll deal with it as we go forward” is not an acceptable approach unless an organization wishes to remain in this malfunctioning and maladaptive state. “We will” and “we already know how to” usually do not change much in these organizations.
Great improvement-enabling cultures do not view improvement as a magic box of improvement tools or a quick, emergency response to changing business conditions. They do not copy and paste tools applications, and they do not follow along with the next “in-vogue” program that everyone else is implementing. These organizations do not dwell on individual tools or the merits of Kaizen compared to Lean compared to Six Sigma. Adaptive systematic improvement is a living best practice and critical enabler of strategic and operating performance. Executives and their organizations focus on improvement every minute of every day intuitively, without even thinking about a buzzword or a tool. In these organizations it is difficult to tell the difference between executives, managers, and the workforce because great ideas for improvement are coming from everywhere. Everyone is engaged and empowered to make decisions about improvement and corrective actions, and they understand the dynamics of collaboration and always get the right people involved. The organizational hierarchy and silos are replaced by interactive networks of people working together. Adaptive systematic improvement is built into individual performance via recognition and rewards and direct compensation. Adaptive systematic improvement is fully internalized, which we discuss in more detail later.
Cultural evolution is the systematic improvement of culture. Moving the culture needle is the most difficult aspect of change. This is a deliberate and planned leadership effort that evolves by leaders continuously checking the organization’s cultural vitals, and making the right leadership adjustments with the right momentum. Culture is never steady state and is always being transformed through both deliberate and unintentional means. There is positive momentum from the right executive behaviors, choices, and actions; and there is negative momentum from the wrong executive behaviors, choices, and actions. Negative momentum also comes from inaction, or action without communication, or disengagement. The objective is to deliberately define, design, and shape culture and not allow it to accidentally shape itself. A major cultural norm needed in organizations is the expansion of associate engagement and collaboration. Today the majority of organizations is losing ground because it is not developing and tapping into its vast talent pool. Associates are also unhappy because their work environment is not allowing them to engage and realize their full potential. Engagement and collaboration of all talent is a must in this fierce global economy. A major objective of adaptive systematic improvement is to find new ways of unleashing the tremendous human imagination, knowledge, experience, skills, and other capabilities that exist in every organization. Previous improvement programs have talked a good game about engagement and empowerment, but many organizations are in the infancy stages of associate participation.
Our integrated Lean Business System Reference Model architecture creates both the substance and momentum needed to evolve culture to higher levels of excellence. The goal is internalization where executives and their organizations reach constancy of purpose in terms of their shared beliefs, values, goals, and assumptions about systematic improvement. These values are evident in the behaviors of groups or individuals and are visible in how people think and work every day. Systematic improvement becomes embedded in culture, and executive behaviors, choices, and actions further amplify and reinforce the importance of systematic improvement. The process of internalization not only represents superiority, but it also ensures the longevity of systematic improvement through continuous cycles of positive cultural evolutions.
Internalization is a process of transforming culture through critical mass acceptance. Internalization is the deliberate, human-focused process of installing shared beliefs, values, assumptions, attitudes, and organizational best practices about improvement into the consciousness of individuals, groups, and the organization as a whole. Over time, internalization becomes the acceptance of a set of norms, strategies, and expectations established by and maintained by leadership. The process begins with defining, communicating, and learning the desired cultural values and attributes. Then people go through a process of understanding why these values are critical to success and why they make sense. Finally they accept the norm as their own created viewpoint. In effect, internalization is the interpretation process of formal and informal communication that creates cultural conditions and shapes Kata.
With adaptive systematic improvement, internalization begins with individual egos in a manner that is integral to one’s sense of self, usually through their personal discovery moments. It is one thing to believe in improvement conceptually or intellectually. Individual beliefs become much more powerful through engagement, empowerment, and the success of their eureka moments. When this happens over and over, the external world of improvement as a corporate operating philosophy is brought into the internal belief systems of individuals, thus creating individual ownership for improvement and at the same time filling in the separation anxiety of improvement (from “in addition to” daily work to a “normal integral part of” daily work). Internalization always begins with individuals or individual improvement teams. One important lesson about improvement in organizations is that nothing changes until associates are willing and ready to accept and physically support change by their actions. Culture change is the aggregate of associate change.
Figure 5.2 provides an overview of the internalization of adaptive systematic improvement. Note that the diagram represents a single cycle of cultural evolution, which is a continuous, never-ending role for executives. Discussing culture and how to cause it to evolve to higher standards of excellence may sound a bit Zen-like and Freudian, but it is more common sense than anything else.
Figure 5.2 The Internalization of Systematic Improvement
Copyright © 2015, The Center for Excellence in Operations, Inc.
This deliberate and longer-term process of internalization is achieved through proactive management of four specific cultural conditions:
Projection
Introjection
Identification
Incorporation
These cultural conditions are dynamic and easily influenced by real and perceived events. They require continuous attention and management so that they can continue to transform culture in a positive direction. When the gurus of the past 30 years talked about continuous improvement as a relentless, never-ending process, they meant what they said. Continuous improvement is not easy; it has taken Toyota 70 years and counting to get to where it is today. Like everything else it becomes automatic and routine (Kata) at the mastery stage. The remainder of this section provides additional information about each cultural condition of internalization.
Projection is the initial defense mechanisms that occur in response to improvement and change. Fear is the major driver of projection because individuals are afraid of all the perceived loss, effort, commitment, discipline, sacrifice, risk of failure, and disruption to their established norms. When individuals do not understand the what, when, where, why, who, and how of improvement, they fabricate negative thoughts. The more people think about change, the perceived losses, and their unanswered questions, the larger their initial barriers grow. The signs of resistance are obvious: silence, deflection, criticism, confusion, denial, easy agreement, pocket vetoes, excuses, or “whatabout-itis.” Projection is the attempt people make to put space between the inner self (norms) and the external environment (change).
Projection is also positive. Every organization has the initiators and early enlistees of improvement. These associates generally have positive attitudes and see the glass as half full instead of half empty. They may have similar concerns as others, but they see more good than bad in improvement. Leadership, communication, and education are the means of dealing with projection. This phase is the early stage of the next cultural condition called introjection.
Introjection is a group version of projection. As associates begin talking with each other about their individual perceptions of change, the exchange (positive or negative) becomes a collection of data points that shapes the perceptions and visions of improvement and change. Associates are drawn into beliefs or are influenced by others internally by the communication that they are receiving from the external space. Through this cultural condition, individuals replicate in themselves the behaviors, decisions, actions, attributes, or other fragments of associates around them, especially leadership or lack thereof. Introjection occurs through rumors, political motives, the stronger personalities of others, or the real data and facts. Associates cannot decide whether to jump on the train or hang around and get run over by the train. If the perception of the messages is negative, it creates pockets of naysayers and dogmatic cults, but an effective adaptive systematic improvement initiative exposes these folks rather quickly. Introjection is a dynamic process that continues to be influenced and shaped by communication and direct engagement in the improvement process. The shared beliefs, values, and assumptions about improvement are influenced by inconsistent versions of improvement, wavering leadership, a perceived or actual change in commitment, and other leadership behaviors, decisions, and actions. This in turn can change the behaviors of groups or individuals positively or negatively and the organization’s ultimate commitment to improvement. Constancy of purpose, effective communication strategies, and “walk the talk” best practices leadership behaviors are the best methods for dealing with introjection.
Identification is the cultural condition in which individuals seek to become an integral part of the larger group in terms of shared beliefs, values, and assumptions about improvement. Many of these associates are the “Show-me, I’m from Missouri” people in the organization. This is actually a favorable condition because it increases the attention to and desire to demonstrate success. Once they either experience or understand improvement, they jump on the train. Through this cultural condition, internalization occurs through the transformation of individuals, groups, and the organization, wholly or partially, after the role models of leadership and other champions of change. It is in this phase that the new personalities of individuals, groups, and the organization are formed. This is the phase where, with enough participation, cultural transformation is visible in the way associates think and work every day.
The final cultural condition of internalization is incorporation. This is the psychological and social ingestion of the philosophy of improvement as well as the systemized process of improvement. Incorporation is undeniably a cultural standard of excellence—in improvement strategy, deployment plans, values and code of conduct, individual behaviors, education, performance expectations, decisions and actions in associates’ own daily work, and their interactions with the entire organization. Cultural transformation is extremely visible in the way associates think and work and how they are intolerant of the mediocrity of those around them. Incorporation implies permanence in shared beliefs, values, and assumptions about improvement that are glued into culture—and that lead to the rhapsody level of continuous improvement. Remember that this is all a state in time; culture and adaptive systematic improvement as a whole require continuous renewal and nurturing to continue the positive evolution cycles.
Socialization is not a cultural condition in itself, but it is an important part of every cultural condition of internalization. Socialization is the ongoing transfer of information and nurturing of the organization’s mission, vision, shared beliefs, values, expectations, and standard code of conduct. The goal of socialization is to manage and minimize the disruptions of the various cultural states, to grease entry of internalization by whatever means necessary. Cultural evolution is simplified when executives have the full trust, loyalty, and commitment of their entire organization. Socialization helps to establish this unity of purpose between the organization and its associates, but it goes beyond communication. Socialization develops knowledge, skills, and personality characteristics within individuals so that they can function successfully within the broader context of the organization. This occurs through many directions: from leadership and/or organizational development to employees, from older employees to newer employees, exchanges between individuals in a department, exchanges between functional areas, from an experienced improvement resource to a new team, from a formal buddy or mentoring process, from interactions with champion employees, through a center of excellence in the company, and from many other directions. These are common practices at Toyota and within our small sample of great organizations mentioned earlier in this chapter.
There is an old story about dropping a frog in boiling water. If you drop a frog in boiling water, it will leap out immediately. However, if you put a frog in a pot of water that’s at room temperature and slowly bring the water to a boil, the frog will die. I have never validated this claim in my own kitchen, and do not intend to in the future. The story provides a relevant metaphor about how many organizations deal with culture change. Many organizations are operating like a frog in boiling water mode. They procrastinate or postpone improvement in favor of more (perceived-to-be) immediate problems. Slow cooking and the frog dies. Another viewpoint is that when faced with a crisis or need for instant gratification, they themselves leap out of hot water like the frog. First, they are not dealing with the root causes of problems; they are dealing with symptoms of problems. Second, waste is like a living organism; if you are not uncovering and eliminating waste continuously, it is growing and keeping itself well hidden. These behaviors create an anti-Kata culture, the opposite values and code of conduct necessary for adaptive systematic improvement. Executives are smarter than frogs, and it is healthy to unplug and observe occasionally and check the vital signs of culture.
Culture is a frequent topic of discussion, but it is often within theoretical and abstract space. We provide a systematic means of changing culture, and we have also been advising our clients to improve the intangible qualities of their culture. The soft stuff is the tough stuff that you cannot observe with your natural senses. Nevertheless, creating the right cultural competencies is much more important (and difficult) than developing competencies around the tools of improvement. Let’s add a little boots on the ground detail to our discussion. How does an organization create a Lean Business System culture? Here are a few summary points:
1. Communicate! Communicate! Communicate! There is no such thing as too much communication when the message is purpose-driven and well targeted. Executives can use their interpersonal skills to attract associates to the mission and create the call to action.
2. Plan-deliver-check-adjust. Communication can be a positive reinforcer, a negative reinforcer, or a neutral reinforcer of change. Executives and managers must make sure that there is constancy and unity of purpose in the message. If associates were to talk with any executive or manager, they should hear a consistent story and messagie about their XYZ business system. Trickle-down communication is important; organizations must make a special effort to clarify questions before issues become misinterpreted, distorted, or blown way out of proportion.
3. Walk the talk. When executives and managers communicate to their organizations, they must keep in mind that this is not the end. They are on a perpetual stage where people in the organization are observing their behaviors, choices, and actions. If leaders desire a certain change in behaviors, they must be prepared to change their own behaviors and demonstrate constancy in direction. Never allow associates to feel that they are being asked to do something that executives and managers are not willing to do themselves.
4. Implement all the operating philosophies, subprocesses, and content of our Lean Business System Reference Model. As a whole, a well-architected and well-maintained Lean Business System creates a very positive environment for associate success.
5. Practice proactive engagement. This includes the engagement and participation of associates through a deliberate outreach best practice. Don’t wait for volunteers; proactively recruit associates and use communication, mentoring, education, professional development experiences, and many other elements of the Lean Business System to build confidence and drive out fear.
6. Develop talent continuously. Great organizations are always in learning mode. This is encouraged by coaching and mentoring, and often it is through the personal initiative of an associate. This point is not suggesting that the organization spend 50 percent of its time in classroom education. There are all kinds of different ways to develop talent in people which we discuss in further detail in Chapter 6. People can develop significantly through continued mentoring and reflecting on events, root causes, and corrective actions.
7. Help associates at all times. One of the reasons change does not stick is that people fail and there is not a “help desk” function to get them out of trouble. In Toyota Kata this is the strong coaching and mentoring practices. These fundamentals apply to all organizations. Don’t allow associates to remain in a wheel-spinning or failure mode. Provide support, and help associates succeed and experience their eureka moments. They become believers very quickly from these positive experiences. They develop the courage to change and to not fear change.
8. Do it! Live it! Breathe it! I am certain that these points are not new to most readers. What is new is developing the capability to evolve culture through a holistic, for-real Lean Business System. Most organizations have not been able to develop a culture of continuous improvement. For decades organizations have spent too much time on the technical (fad programs and tools) side of sociotechnical elements and not enough effort on the socio (behaviors, values, cultural development) side of sociotechnical elements. When one visits Toyota, GE, Honeywell, Harley Davidson, and other great organizations, one finds that they are literally oozing with constancy of purpose and enthusiasm to improve. One can sense this commitment and enthusiasm before talking to anyone.
Most Lean practitioners are familiar with the standard waste categories of Lean. Some call them the seven wastes, the eight wastes, or the nine wastes. We use ten wastes in our practice. They include:
1. Waiting
2. Overproduction
3. Transportation
4. Overprocessing
5. Storage
6. Motion
7. Defects and rework
8. Underutilized human capacity
9. Safety
10. Inadequacy of human initiative
The eighth waste, underutilized human capacity, is often discussed in terms of management’s failure to engage, involve, and leverage employees and their tremendous wealth of knowledge. Since the 1980s organizations have talked a good game about employee engagement, involvement, and empowerment. But it quickly vanishes when there is a frog in the pot of boiling water. The eighth waste is definitely an immense loss for many organizations, and as a result, there are many dormant improvement opportunities—and defective improvement opportunities as well.
The tenth waste we discuss with clients relative to the Lean Business System Reference Model is the other side of the eighth waste, and it’s called—inadequacy of human initiative. Too often, organizations wait for their executives to step up, give their commitment and proactively lead an effective improvement initiative. Executives are the most overloaded resources in organizations; they are always in situations where they need to make decisions or nothing gets done. They are distracted by many issues that run counter to systematic improvement or that they wish they did not have to deal with in the first place. They are not always in a position to have all the knowledge, skills, and facts to organize and launch a well-designed and planned Lean Business System. What happens to systematic improvement in these situations? It becomes easy for executives to underestimate and oversimplify all the elements of a Lean Business System and what is required for lasting success. What might have started out as a commitment becomes a temporary token agreement. The above comments are not a criticism or a defense for their behaviors, choices, and actions. I am certain from my experiences that at least 95 percent of executives (and their associates) are for the most part acting with the best of intentions. When organizations hang around waiting for or complaining about executive direction, commitment, engagement, and endorsement, it does not change the status of things much. Think about the five why answers to this dilemma.
Many successful Lean initiatives have begun by grassroots activities of energetic practitioners and associates. This is what inadequacy of human initiative is all about. If something is not working well, take the initiative to jump in. Always ask for forgiveness, not permission. Create a community of managers and associates interested enough to demonstrate success. Organize a few pilot activities. Engage both managers and associates; it will make the story more compelling down the road. Get associates talking and engage them. Put the extra effort into pilots and create a few impressive local successes. Publicize the financial benefits and positive experiences of participants. Lay out the pilot experiences and lay out the details of how to scale the pilot successes across the enterprise. Results matter; numbers get executives’ attention. Plan-do-check-act! “Pull” executives into systematic improvement through the success stories. Earn the commitment and engagement.
There is no disagreement that a Lean Business System requires unwavering commitment, engagement, and ongoing endorsements from the CEO and executive leadership team. Period. End of story! But when an organization is missing these ingredients up front, it needs to begin somewhere. Senior and middle management, supervisors, and associates have a professional obligation to engage themselves in systematic improvement—with or without executive commitment. In other words, all people in organizations need to step up and accelerate their own human initiative. Executives are intelligent people. In these middle-out situations, I have never seen an executive deny Lean or any other initiative with well-documented, impressive results. Again, this is not the end all, but it is a start when all the stars of systematic improvement are misaligned.
Inadequacy of human initiative applies to executives and managers as well. Not that they do not have enough to do already. We encourage executives to become directly involved in a major improvement activity, gain additional familiarization with the overall process, principles, and methodologies, and most important of all experience the success on their own. This creates enormous benefits (Kata contributions). First of all, it demonstrates that executives have not asked their organization to do something that they would not do on their own. Second, it develops the Adaptive Leadership competency because executives are leading from direct engagement and experiences, not at some intellectual level. Leading at an intellectual level can also create disconnects during communications activities. Last, it helps develop leadership into better (informed) executive mentors and coaches.
Kata is a behavior that comes from within. It starts with a single person or a few individuals, and it evolves to the religion of conducting business. It is developed over time through the right patterns, routines, and work ethics. It takes time, patience, effort, and people—all people to build these invisible competencies in organizations. Four major elements missing in the Western translation of Kata are learning to learn, learning to observe, learning to coach, and learning to develop culture. Many people who are serving as coaches today have been thrown into those roles and are missing the complete skill set to coach effectively. Coaches must be motivated to expand their learning; they also need continuous learning and development and coaching from vertical, horizontal, and lateral sources in the organization.
Culture is the invisible energy field in organizations. We have provided guidance concerning the subprocess involving communication and cultural evolution. Evolving culture is, in itself, a race without a finish line—it’s not an event. It is the most challenging role of being a CEO and a member of his or her executive team. Culture is difficult because it is an abstract topic requiring strong interpersonal and communications skills. It involves the right messaging with the right interpretations, and persuading people to change their ingrained habits and embrace new thinking, behaviors, choices, and actions. We have chosen the word evolution because it requires many small, consistent steps over time. It also requires that executives set the example by modeling and mirroring the desired cultural state. In particular, this means finding a balance between numbers and short-term performance (which is a must-do), and strengthening the organization’s capacity to eliminate detractors to performance (wastes) and continuously exceed the numbers. Following are a few key summary points:
The CEO and his or her executive team are responsible for defining, designing, and creating cultural evolution. Culture cannot change through an empty message or delegation to human resources or an outside consultant or by continuing to mimic the cultures of other organizations with a tools-based approach to improvement.
The subprocesses of our Lean Business System Reference Model are inseparable. All play an integral role in evolving culture. It is not just about changing performance metrics or communicating a vision. It is about the complete and repetitive follow-through of fully integrated adaptive systematic improvement as a whole.
Constancy of purpose is critical. The CEO and executive team must become capable of delivering a consistent message to their respective organizations and provide consistent leadership and mentoring to move the culture needle. Additionally, constancy of purpose must become an adaptive and well-communicated step-down practice. Managers, supervisors, and peer associates must also reach the point of consistent thinking, behaviors, choices, and actions. The organization needs to remain on a consistent course of adaptive systematic improvement and not be distracted by some new flashy program.
Controversy and confrontation must be dealt with head on. Executives should expect resistance, get down to the root causes, and plan the right response strategies. Most associates will come around, and a few iterations will lead to more associate acceptance. Executives cannot change culture overnight. Evolving culture is never ending, and a single evolution might take years. It also requires patience and persistence and investing enough time and effort to make a difference. Adaptive systematic improvement brings out the best in most people. I have personally turned individuals who their executives were ready to write off into the greatest improvement champions in the company. Culture change includes many unknown challenges. Finally, look for the players who undermine progress and cannot be turned around; send them on their way.
Reason and logic do not always work when it comes to modifying behaviors and reducing the fears of change because the emotional elements are not addressed properly. These include fear, perceived loss, mistrust, conflicts, and confusion to name a few. Additionally, most cultures are not wired to embrace change without question. People are individualistic, enjoy freedoms and space, become comfortable with the status quo even if it is not so good, and reject being forced to change. However, there is a powerful resolve to perform beyond expectations and win when the invisible energy behind engagement is drawn out and nurtured. Organizations must begin their systematic journey with their present culture and deliberately evolve this culture to a more desired state. The experiences of Western organizations provide a good example. Imposing the values of other organizations through a mass implementation of tools and programs has not worked, and the Western culture excuse is garbage. Maybe these approaches worked for a while, but they did not stick because organizations failed to evolve their own culture as an integral foundation of continuous improvement. Culture is what it is and can be changed to a higher order of improvement Kata. It’s time for all global organizations to dig deep into their souls of improvement and leverage their cultural resolve to create a superior adaptive systematic improvement process in the near future and beyond.
Hillman, O. S. 2011. Change Agent: Engaging Your Passion to Be the One Who Makes a Difference. Charisma House Book Group, Lake Mary, Florida.
Horwath, R. 2013. Elevate: The Three Disciplines of Strategic Thinking. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey.
Kotter, J. P. 2008. A Sense of Urgency. Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston.
Lawler, E. E. 2008. Talent: Making People Your Competitive Advantage. Josey Bass Publishing, San Francisco.
Liker, J., and Hoseus, M. 2008. Toyota Culture: The Heart and Soul of the Toyota Way. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Thean, P. 2014. Rhythm: How to Achieve Breakthrough Execution and Accelerate Growth. Greenleaf Publishing Group, Austin, Texas.
