Deming
Too many years ago to count, I was fortunate to have spent some exclusive “small group” time with Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Thirty of us, while he was conducting a week-long session with our employer, were fortunate in being able to spend four evenings with him, asking questions and digging deeper into his philosophies. As a result of these sessions, I have a huge amount of notes taken, with his one-liners and off-hand remarks [if anything he said can be taken as "off-hand"].
I will share these comments and observations here, and update their applicability, in my mind’s eye, to the workplace of today. I would invite your review and commentary, and especially any supporting or contrary evidence of applicability in the new century.
Galen,
Thank you for the things that you’re interested in.
I suspect that few people know who W. Edwards Deming is anymore (biz-geeks excluded). Of those who know the importance of Deming’s work, far fewer ever had the opportunity to personally interact with him.
Thank you for having the common sense to take notes all those years ago in the presence of greatness.
I have always been a Deming fan.
“Zero Defects will not suffice”
For the younger crowd reading this, “Zero Defects” was a mantra, a slogan, and even a program that arose out of the Total Quality Movement, exhorting everyone to remove all defects from their processes. Apart from the statistical impossibility of this scenario, Deming also eschewed such focus as “only half the job”.
If you can perform your work without error, and you leave it at that, you are letting your company, your boss, and, most importantly, yourself down. The missing half of the job is to improve the process, continuous improvement.
Incrementalism reigned supreme with Dr. Deming. He would tell you that your job was to become 100% proficient at your work, then make the process better [which means you may not be as proficient at the "new" process], and then work back to 100% proficiency at the improved process, starting the cycle over again.
Continuous improvement is exactly that: never-ending. And it sometimes requires one to take what seems to be one step back [in proficiency] in order to gain three steps forward [in process].
As the title for today’s blog says, “Anything worth doing well is worth doing poorly at first.”
“The leader’s job is to find out what his people won’t tell him. They won’t tell the boss the things he needs to work on.”
Dr. Deming was a staunch advocate of the “involved” manager, of active participation in the daily routine of the workplace. He felt that only through this immersion and exposure could the manager begin to see what was really going on: the numbers would not tell him, the workers certainly would not tel him, and the only way to know was to be physically present and personally aware.
This begins to require a bit of a Zen-like approach to management, to see what is not there as clearly as what is. This requires a deep understanding of the work being accomplished, and the myriad ways that it might go wrong.
This becomes doubly difficult when the failing is in you, when you are not holding up your end of the bargain with your team. Even more when you are unaware that you are falling short, once you begin to provide inadequate support and leadership, the deterioration of communication with you will mean that you will not be told that you are failing in your role. You will continue, oblivious, while your team continues, disappointed.
Your role as the leader is vigilance, eternal vigilance, disiplined vigilance and objective vigilance. Team up with another supervisor to get an outside view, to get “fresh eyes” in the workplace. If you can’t see the problems, and the team won’t tell you, you have very few other options.
“Copying is a dangerous business – there can be no learning and no benefit without understanding of the theory”
Doing something simply because someone else is doing it is simply not rational thought. Never mind what your mother told you about jumping off a bridge [although she was right]. While it is true that the person you are imitating might be completely off-base and wrong [and unthinking imitation could be ruinous, if not terminal, to you], there is also the possibility, and I would expand that to likelihood, that what that person is doing is “right”.
But right for whom? For that person. At that time. Under those circumstances. With those particular resources. There could be any number of outside qualifiers behind the decided action. But it being right for your competitor does not make it right for you. Nor does it make it wrong.
Which is where the understanding part comes in. Understand why it is to work, what the requirements are for it to work, how to implement it to make it work. What are the sub-surface preparations and conditions needed for success? Have you done your homework? Will this work for you? Why can you say that it will?
Learn, then apply. Do not imitate for imitation’s sake. Imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery, but it among the surest paths to disaster if you are unprepared.
Before you undertake any new venture, ask yourself, very directly, whether you understand the theory behind the strategy well enough to bet the entire company on the venture. You can never know too much; you can never be too good.
But once you have decided, act.
“If you can’t argue with your boss, he’s not worth working for.”
Dr. Deming’s firm belief was that active contemplation and vigorous disagreement would only stimulate improvement of any system. He extended this need for such engagement to the relationship one has with one’s boss. Sincere disagreement, based on sound reasoning, can only strengthen a system.
Consider the alternatives:
If you object to the direction that your boss is recommending, but upon reflection, he is correct: your belief in the system [and in the boss] is strengthened.
If you object to the direction that the boss is recommending and you are correct: the system is strengthened.
A sincerely and well-placed question can only result in a positive gain.
I lived this experience with one of my bosses in a major aerospace manufacturing company. At the time, I was working in the International Business Development directorate, so quite a bit of our work was subject to a variety of interpretations. My boss, the Director, and I worked out a system of “yeah-buts”: on any given project, I was allowed a certain number of “yeah-but” objections to his direction. I was responsible for monitoring his facial color, his pace of response, his wording, all manner of clues, that would let me know when I had exhausted my supply of “yeah-buts”.
My inventory varied drastically, sometimes depending on his moods, and sometimes depending on the validity of my objection. But in all cases, I was allowed to disagree, respectfully, with any direction, until such time as my inventory was depleted.
Using “yeah-buts” was not an option – it was expected. In fact, the more one used one’s “yeah-buts”, the more “yeah-buts” one earned. Are you using all of your “yeah-buts”? Are you earning more each day by using them wisely? When is the last time you used one?
“One of the glaring gaps in American industry is competence.”
It is hard for me to remember that he said this to me almost thirty years ago, because it is so obvious and prevalent today. We have not made any strides that I can see in the overall competence of our American worker. In fact, we have continued to slide backward.
As a professional, one cannot know too much about one’s profession. There is far too much hoopla these days about being a jack-of-all-trades.
You will rise to the top more reliably by knowing as much as you can about your responsibiity. You will develop a reputation as a thorough and knowledgeable individual.
Notice that I did NOT say “by knowing as much as you can about what you do”. Many people spend a lot of time inquiring into “what” to do, and we have an entire generation of effective technicians- those who know “what to do”. What we lack is an entire generation of effective thinkers- those who know “why we do”. Knowing “what to do” only works when you meet with circumstances that you have met before- what happens when you are faced with unforeseen issues, like today’s economy?
Learn, seek, always strive to be better and to reach a deeper underdstanding. The Red Baron said: “Success flourishes only in perseverance; ceaseless, restless perseverance.”
You cannot know too much; you cannot be too good; the American terminology of “over-qualified” is only a defense mechanism for those too indolent to value education.
If you want to be a hit at a cocktail party, know a little about a lot; if you want to succeed at business, know everything about your job.
Dr. Deming loved to remind us that the four most significant diseases to American industry were: short-term thinking, annual appraisals, emphasis on quarterly returns and lack of marketing.
Having just come off an assignment in the area of strategic planning when I met Dr. Deming, I was especially gratfied that he addressed the short-term paralysis that affects virtually all of American businesses.
He told us: We are, all too often, driven by “the numbers” of the next reporting period [or by the haunting ghosts of the last period]. Companies that understand that they are planting seeds to be harvested in five to ten years can optimize the demands of today against the requirements of tomorrow. Short term savings at long term expense is no way to run a business for more than a few business cycles.
Keep the long view.
Great advice, but is it practical today with demands for quarterly performance and Wall Street hanging on every announcement and report? How does today’s business leader satisfy the screeching harpies of the financial world while taking strong strategic measures to build a solid future?