Musical Chairs
The company had a sprawling campus with many partially-populated buildings. During an economic downturn, senior management wanted to save on real estate taxes by consolidating the people into fewer buildings, allowing for demolishing of remaining empty buildings. Directives came from the senior executives to each functional director, “move your teams into smaller spaces”. Unfortunately, this message failed to fully articulate the end goal, and there was no overarching champion in charge of coordinating these relocations to deliver the required vacant buildings by a specified deadline.
Predictably, as one team would shrink their footprint, another team would identify the newly emptied space as nicer than their own and move in. This game of "musical chairs” continued as dozens of teams were moved all over the site. Over a year later, not a single building had been vacated. Many teams were disrupted, significant moving costs were incurred, but buildings were all still partially filled, none could be demolished, and not a single penny of real estate taxes was saved.
I took two lessons forward in my career: People will do what they’re being measured on (“reduce my team’s footprint”) without regard for the big picture (“empty these 3 buildings by end of Q3”). And, to avoid non-productive “local optimizations”, it is essential to have a designated champion with the authority to hold people accountable to the overarching goal.
Over the years we’ve been exposed to Six Sigma, Juran, Deming PDCA, 8D, Dale Carnegie, A3, Shainin, and more. Each technique works pretty well, and has been demonstrated many times in a wide variety of industries and circumstances. At the core they are all essentially the same!
Each approach relies on an underlying logical flow that goes like this: [a] make sure the problem is clearly defined; [b] be open to all sources of information; [c] vet the information for relevance and accuracy; [d] use the process of elimination to narrow down all possible causes to the most likely few; [e] prove which of the suspects is really the cause of the issue; [f] generate a number of potential solutions; [g] evaluate the effectiveness, feasibility and risk of the potential solutions; [h] implement the winning solution(s); and [i] take steps to make sure your solution(s) don’t unravel in the future.
The differences between the paradigms resides in supplementary steps and toolkits. For example, 8D contains the important “In
Your primary role as a manager is to ensure your team’s success. Internalize this. Make sure your team members know this. Build an environment of trust and collaboration. A direct report of mine would frequently leave me out of the loop as problems escalated, preferring instead to “work harder”. It was clear that he felt uncomfortable delivering bad news to me (his boss) when things were not going according to plan. Let me tell you the rest of the story.
