NLP refers to Neural-Linguistic Programing. This is basically a thought management technique that deals with using internal mental images and language to alter behavior. Some of these techniques are applied in the area of communications.
The communication example I heard compared a conversation to two people walking. For this couple to stay together they have to start from a common point, head in the same direction at the same pace.
I took this to heart. I can't count on the number of times I made an assumption that the person I was talking to and I were starting from the same point. If I am lucky, the person I am talking "at" will pull me up short. If I am not so lucky, they will let me walk off with the delusion that 1) they knew what I was talking about; 2) they agreed with me and 3) they would somehow support my efforts in this area.
Prior to hearing the NLP communication analogy, I would just attribute their subsequent lack of support as deliberate sabotage or passive aggressive behavior. After hearing about the NLP analogy I made a deliberate effort to change my behavior and tried to improve my listening skills. I approached a conversation as a dance. As Franklin Covey recommends: I first tried to understand the topic from the point of view of the other participant, then adjusted my approach correspondingly and it quickly paid off.
So what does this have to do with an IT project you ask? Let me explain, I inherited a database system that was based on a software platform that was neither scalable or expandable. In short, we hit the end of the road. We needed to change the software platform and add features to the database system.
Prior my "enlightenment" I would have approached the project in probably a less effective manner. I would have done the work based on my interpretation of the end users needs with minimal effective listening. Any problems that came up I would blame on the end users lack of cooperation. After all, that was common operating procedure for me and a lot of my colleagues.
Now I approached the project from the point of view of the end user. The first decision I made was to start the new system so that it looked and felt almost exactly like the old system. What I tried to do is decrease or eliminate any learning curve associated with moving to the new system. So that was done. A consulting firm wrote the software to almost exactly match the old system's user interface. We had also set up two computers that periodically synchronized the databases to keep them both current. This allowed us to work on the system without disrupting the work of the end user. We would ping pong between the machines to introduce upgrades. When the new improvements were approved by the end users both computers were upgraded.
The end users loved it because it did not create more work for them or interrupt the work they needed to do now. After all, a new system that increases work load or makes it harder to do the existing work in not expected to be warmly accepted.
Next to upgrade system features, we asked the end users what they wanted next. With the list they provided, we prioritized the development work based on the criteria of: relative urgency, ease of implementation, and benefits. The features would be developed and installed on one of the computers and submitted to the end users for sign off.
I must add one clarification on the end users group: it did not contain all end users. It was composed of the group creating the information in the database. However, this database was being used by several other company divisions and the end user group was getting feedback from these divisional users.
The project was a success as defined by the end customer's satisfaction level which was relatively high. In addition, the project was relatively low budget and was very near its final form in less than 6 months. The work continued for quite a while after that because the users kept requesting new features.
Also I think all of us involved in the actual development work were pretty proud of the results we had collectively achieved. And once we settled in, the process was virtually friction free.
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Friday, March 27, 2009
The Unexamined Life Results In Low Quality
Another seminar on managing non-conforming materials in the medical device industry got me thinking about the root of the real problem concerning quality.
I have worked in engineering for nearly 3 decades and I have seen the same behavior many times as a result of new paradigms and procedures. Initially after the introduction of the new process culture, things improve. However, as time passes the improvement degrades and eventually the same level or lower quality results. And when I refer to quality I mean that the resulting product meets the intended goals.
I have a hypothesis concerning this phenomena. When people learn they go through the phases: conscious incompetence, conscious competence and unconscious competence. Upon introducing the new material people are put into the conscious incompetence phase. They have to think about what they're doing and learn the new material. As time passes, they become more familiar with the new stuff but still have to think about it to do it. This is the conscious competence phase. However, in the final stage people can perform the new dance in their sleep and often do. Basically thinking virtually ceases and the reasons for the procedures are forgotten and quality begins to decline and the rates of defects increases.
The problem is that the workers have fallen asleep on the job. I have observed this many times in new business paradigms, quality improvement processes, new products, etc... any time that there is a change that "wakes-up" the employees.
Perhaps a solution would be to have an automated system that measures some facet of the product and varies the procedures periodically to keep the workers awake. The automated system would do a statistical analysis of product variations and ideally select the process modifications to optimize the process.
I have an image of a robot controlled by this system running around on tank like tracks with a swinging appendage on the front that terminates in a big combat boot. The robot would run around and stimulate the workers at the "seat-of-the-problem"...
Just a thought.
I have worked in engineering for nearly 3 decades and I have seen the same behavior many times as a result of new paradigms and procedures. Initially after the introduction of the new process culture, things improve. However, as time passes the improvement degrades and eventually the same level or lower quality results. And when I refer to quality I mean that the resulting product meets the intended goals.
I have a hypothesis concerning this phenomena. When people learn they go through the phases: conscious incompetence, conscious competence and unconscious competence. Upon introducing the new material people are put into the conscious incompetence phase. They have to think about what they're doing and learn the new material. As time passes, they become more familiar with the new stuff but still have to think about it to do it. This is the conscious competence phase. However, in the final stage people can perform the new dance in their sleep and often do. Basically thinking virtually ceases and the reasons for the procedures are forgotten and quality begins to decline and the rates of defects increases.
The problem is that the workers have fallen asleep on the job. I have observed this many times in new business paradigms, quality improvement processes, new products, etc... any time that there is a change that "wakes-up" the employees.
Perhaps a solution would be to have an automated system that measures some facet of the product and varies the procedures periodically to keep the workers awake. The automated system would do a statistical analysis of product variations and ideally select the process modifications to optimize the process.
I have an image of a robot controlled by this system running around on tank like tracks with a swinging appendage on the front that terminates in a big combat boot. The robot would run around and stimulate the workers at the "seat-of-the-problem"...
Just a thought.
Hole in the Bail-Out Bucket
I attended a presentation a few weeks ago given by a venture capitalist. It seems that the money is trapped behind a wall of undefined requirements and procedures. In short, although the bail-out money is there, few people understand what the requirements are and how to apply for it.
In addition, VC's are moving to the less risky funding ( C-D levels) and away from the initial funding ( A-B ). So the higher risk start ups are suffering. And the VC's are demanding a bigger piece of the equity pie (80-90%) so the start up crew and the CEO are basically working for wages -- high risk and low pay with little or no equity at the end. This is going to kill the golden goose for sure!
Currently, I am trying to either increase my line of credit or apply for an SBA loan. I am figuring out the ropes with the help of my wife. She has a knack for figuring out bureaucratic document mazes. She is a freelance medical writers that deals with FDA requirements which I guess gives her the experience she needs.
Anyhow, we will try to figure it out. If we do, we will post our findings somewhere.
On another note, although credit is suppose to be loosening up, in the last few weeks my credit card interest tripled. And I have read of credit card companies cutting off or reducing the credit limits for business customers.
On the plus side, at least we're not getting 5 preapproved credit card applications a day any more.
In addition, VC's are moving to the less risky funding ( C-D levels) and away from the initial funding ( A-B ). So the higher risk start ups are suffering. And the VC's are demanding a bigger piece of the equity pie (80-90%) so the start up crew and the CEO are basically working for wages -- high risk and low pay with little or no equity at the end. This is going to kill the golden goose for sure!
Currently, I am trying to either increase my line of credit or apply for an SBA loan. I am figuring out the ropes with the help of my wife. She has a knack for figuring out bureaucratic document mazes. She is a freelance medical writers that deals with FDA requirements which I guess gives her the experience she needs.
Anyhow, we will try to figure it out. If we do, we will post our findings somewhere.
On another note, although credit is suppose to be loosening up, in the last few weeks my credit card interest tripled. And I have read of credit card companies cutting off or reducing the credit limits for business customers.
On the plus side, at least we're not getting 5 preapproved credit card applications a day any more.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
