Process Improvement, Organizational Change: Recent Research Results

1
Process Improvement, Organizational Change
Recent Research Results

• By
• Andrew P. Schissler, PhD, MBA, PE

2
Organization

• Advances in Teaming
• Research on Sustaining Improvement
• Capacity for Getting Results
• Two Classic Six Sigma Routes to Success

3
Teaming

• National Science Foundation supported study of
  300 teams5
• Teams failed due to change in macro-support
• Corporate immunity will kill anything in
  isolation, or the opposite is truesupport
  betters the chances but not guarantees success
• Worse before better6
• Team training may 150 hours.
• Team maturity is proportional to rewards as a
  motivational factor
• Work teams require new behaviors - - from
  espoused theories to theories in use

4
Team Psychodynamics Tavistock Model1

• Anxiety basis of all organizational and team
  behavior9. Contain or ventilate. When anxiety
  rises, the need to make a rule immediately
  surfaces.
• Resistance to change. Manage.
• Organizational boundary management. Needed for
  space, time, task.
• Taking up a role. Internal anxiety chain.
• The discharge of representation across
  organizational boundaries problematic.

5
Team Psychodynamics Tavistock Model1

• Authorization as team members may rebel against
  yielding.
• Leadership. How are team members allowed to be
  lead, be empowered.
• Relationship and relatednessthe team is always
  in the mind. Identity fuels response.
• Group-as-a-whole. Nothing happen in isolation.
  Collectivism. A strength when positives
  transfer.
• Projective identification. Internal values
  influenced by parallel or direct negative
  information.

6
Cornerstones of Teaming Organizational Dynamics1

• Dependency. Move to more mature behavior.
• Fight or flight. Coach identifies, manages.
• Pairing. People seek safety in pairing to lessen
  anxiety, coach works w/team.
• One-ness of teamsmanship at the expense of
  differences, i.e. Abilene Paradox.
• Me-ness as a means to retreat inwardly from a
  disturbing environment.

7
Team Support Systems7,8

• Ground design support system (rules) - hi
  correlation with success
• Clarifying roles, tasks, boundaries, personnel
  selection
• Defining performance support system - hi
  correlation with success
• Setting of performance-related goals
• Training support system - hi correlation with
  success
• Mitigates the lack of self-efficacy
• Information system support system
• How to get it and how to use it
• Performance appraisal support system
• Integration support system
• How to link horizontally, vertically
• Direct team supervisor support support system
• Executive support support systemfacilitates the
  environment
• Reward reinforcing
• Hi correlation approximately 25 to 30 more

8
Internalizing and Sustaining Continuous
Improvement

• Growing body of research suggests to constantly
  improve and produce competitive advantage depends
  on the organizations ability to learn from its
  own experience and from others2
• Internal sources of learning innovation,
  experimentation
• External sources of learning systematic scanning
  search for best practices

9
Evaluating Learning Culture3

• Personal mastery maintaining creative tension
  between vision and ground truth
• Mental modes undiscussables, challenging sacred
  cows
• Shared vision
• Team learning team dialogue, cross-team
• Systems thinking seeing interdependence
• External and future scanning awareness
• Experimentation is it continuous?
• Systematic operations measurement

10
Measurement Rubric for Learning Culture
11
How to Ascribe Value to Descriptive Findings
(Observations by Experience)

• Historical response measure performance relative
  to a goal problemsets up organization for
  incremental improvement missing gap ups
• Merit-based methodology

12
Integrating Individual Assessment, Position
requirements, Team-based Competencies, and
Organization Vision for the BPI Champion4

• Position needs competencies
• Being able to tie tools to the trade, logistics
• Team needs competencies
• Common vision / accountability / interdependence
• Organization needs competencies
• Articulate, promote the visionthe intent

13
BPI Practitioner Implementing Change

• Understanding historical evolution, evaluation of
  current events, to plan the future.
• Genetic data, why it happened?
• Structural data, what happened?
• Process data, communication and information?
• Interpretative data, evaluation the capacity to
  act?
• Human performance f(abilitymotivation)situatio
  nal factorsself efficacythe power to produce an
  affect10

14
Two Approaches11

• Continuous Improvement -DMAIC
• Define
• Measure
• Analyze
• Improve
• Control

• Design/Redesign DMADV / DFSS
• Define
• Measure
• Analyze
• Design
• Verify

Decision to enact DFSS driven by risk,
competition forcing reaction, the customer,
internal structure. Internal interrelationships
of variables, needs research.
15
References 1 Lawrence, W.G. Exploring individual
and organizational boundaries A Tavistock open
systems approach. London Karnac, 1999. 1Lowman,
Rodney L. Handbook of Organizational Consulting
Psychology. San Francisco Wiley Imprint, p.
246. 2 Lowman, p344 3 Lowman, p349 4 Lowman,
p452 5 Lowman, p240 6 Keating, E. K., and Oliva
E. (2000). A theory for sustaining process
improvement teams in product development. In
Advances in interdisciplinary studies of work
teams Vol. 5, Stamford, CT, JAI Press, p.
245-281.
16

• 7 Hall, C. A., and Beyerlein, M. M. (2000).
  Support systems for teams A taxonomy. In
  Advances in interdisciplinary studies of work
  teams Vol. 5, Stamford, CT, JAI Press, p.
  89-132.
• 8 Lowman, Rodney L. Handbook of Organizational
  Consulting Psychology. San Francisco Wiley
  Imprint, p. 245.
• 9 Menzies, I.E.P. (1993). The functioning of
  social systems as a defense against anxiety.
  London Tavistock Institute of Human Relations.
• 10 Performance Improvement Quarterly, Vol. 18,
  2, International Society for Performance
  Improvement.
• 11 Ricardo Banuelas, Fiju Antony. "Going from six
  sigma to design for six sigma An exploratory
  study using analytic hierarchy process. " The TQM
  Magazine  15.5 (2003)  334-344.