How worn is the carpet outside your office door? Do you face a steady stream of people throughout the day asking for a decision?
These are signs of a “command-and-control” style of leadership that relies so heavily on one person that it can be detrimental, especially to establishing a customer-focused or Lean Culture and making full use of your company’s brain power. That was the message at the workshop, “The Executive’s Role in Culture Change,” part of the WMEP Manufacturing Matters! Conference 2007, held in April in Milwaukee. “
Think about the total brain power available in your organization – what percentage is being used?” asked Sam Miller, WMEP Development Manager who led the workshop. “People usually answer about 10%. It’s never over 50%. Executive leadership is the primary determinant of what percentage is being mobilized.”
Worn carpet is just one sign of a highly centralized (or command-and control) decision-making style. Another is that the executive is making too many tactical, rather than strategic, decisions. “
Tactical decisions relate to which jobs are done today -- how to handle a customer complaint, who works on what machine. Strategic decisions have to do with shaping the direction of the business, such as market intelligence, planning for the future and growing sales,” said Miller.
One useful exercise for executives is to make a list of everyone waiting for a decision. The higher the number, the more centralized the decision making. Also determine how many decisions are tactical and how many are strategic. “This will show if you’re too involved at the tactical level,” said Miller. “In Lean terms, that’s the waste of waiting, where people have to wait for a decision before they can do their jobs.” Ideally, decision-making should reside at or close to the place most affected by the decision.
Beyond the waste of waiting and the neglect of strategic thinking, a centralized decision-making style can rob initiatives of the support of everyone but the executive. “You’re the only person selling it. No one else has ownership for it,” said Miller. “You have to police it to make it work.” With more people committed to the course of action, there is a better chance of sustaining change.
Many companies operate with a centralized leadership style because that’s how they started. “It’s entrepreneurial behavior,” said Miller. But such leaders can be difficult to replace and risk leaving a group of loyal, dependent subordinates in their wake. Decentralized leadership focuses on building a self-sustaining system that will continue after the leader has left or retired.
One executive was so concerned about his leadership style and its impact that he made a conscious decision to change. The executive founded a steel centrifugal foundry in Watertown, and ran it for 25 years. “He had very bright, loyal people, but they were relying on him to an inordinate degree,” said Miller. Five years ago, as the foundry industry struggled, “he knew he couldn’t do his one-man show anymore,” said Miller. He announced his plans and was met with skepticism. But in the end, he sold the company to the employees. They’ve since expanded into a new building.
Moving to decentralized leadership involves empowering employees. “It’s giving people and teams the skills, knowledge and authority to act on behalf of their customer without prior approval,” said Miller. “In a successful organization, people know what they’re supposed to work on. There are visual systems in place that tell them what to do. Empowering leaders are more like coaches than supervisors.” A customer-focused or Lean Culture is designed to create the team infrastructure that allows for empowerment, so that cross-functional teams can solve problems that affect more than one department.
Managing the change to empowerment should be done so that it doesn’t feel like the change is being imposed, since this leads to resistance. Some pull forces that can cultivate a greater use of company brain power include gain/profit sharing, mutual goal-setting, employee development, a monthly reward or report card for teams and a suggestion system run by a cross-functional team that responds quickly.
Another pull force is communicating the company’s vision and goals. “Vision is great, but by itself, it doesn’t give you much,” said Miller. “You need to communicate it so that the least literate person in your workforce understands it.” The true test is to stand in the parking lot at shift change and ask employees what the company is trying to accomplish.
More generally, employees should be able to make decisions about their areas. “You need to make sure the decision making is at the right level,” said Miller. “You have to give people the tools to make good decisions. You can’t just throw it to them.”
Attention should be paid to the teams that are formed so that they stay energized. They should be given the information they need, as well as feedback and positive results. For very large tasks, set up milestones and realistic goals. Celebration thinking is another way to keep employees energized as they both adjust and contribute to change. This means focusing on what has been accomplished rather than problems that still haven’t been solved.
Measures are a good way to drive culture change “if they’re a true indicator and people are able to have an effect on them,” said Miller. Measures can include safety, quality, throughput and on-time delivery. Another effective force for change is peer pressure. Miller also warned against starting things without finishing them, which he called “deadly.”
The executive’s role in culture change is immense, and to truly change the leadership style of a company can require personal humility on the part of its leader. Ultimately, an empowering leader is concerned with using power to benefit all, collaboratively building self-sustaining systems and empowering others to make decisions. Company leaders who “resolve to do what must be done for the best long-term results and focus on building a great, enduring company will set up their successors for even greater success,” said Miller.