Lunes, Agosto 30, 2010

Ii is a Perfectly Good Way to say, "No, Thank You" written for your information by Jolito Ortizo Padilla.


I don't know why people are sometimes judgmental when they did not even know a person during the early years of his career. Pride, insecurity and jealousy thrives with these kind of people. They are bugs, that even a handy fly swatter could not stop them.Forget them. Smile and say ii to these people.

To the bugs, let's learn: Ii is a Perfectly Good Way to say, "No Thank You."

When I was in elementary school, a certain comma was the bane of my existence. No, not the serial comma. I learned (and later unlearned) that one relatively easily. It wasn't the comma before "too", either, nor was it the one between multiple adjectives modifying a single noun. No, it was the comma in "no, thank you."The role the comma plays , the way set phrases are spoken and undestood , and the disconnect caused by a phrase of refusal that incorporates a words of affirmation and acceptance is mirrored in the Japanese word iiand its polite alternative yoroshii and kekko.

Perhaps I was uncomfortable with "no, thank you" because the phrase sounds more like "nothankyou." We utter set phrases so often and so quickly they seem to merge into a single word, such as "thanksalot" and "howzitgoin." This is especially true for "nothankyou", since we attach it to the end of conversation in order to exit a situation. For example, to leave a convenience store or a supermarket unburdened by receipt. We shouldn't feel bad, though. This is, after all, the goal of set phrases. we use them to expedite the process of relaying certain information.

In no, thank you" we relay politely the fact that we are refusing goods or services offered by another party. While the comma confused me, it also provided the solution-it sets off the answer ("Nay! I need not the extra calories in those supersize fries")from the polite softening of the phrase (" but thank you for the offer"). If you pause for a moment on the comma, the meaning become obvious. And the longer you pause, the more polite it becomes. Standard level of politeness, "notankyou." More polite, "No, Thank you." Polite and very considerate, "No ( a beat), Thank you." You have to be careful not to take this to the next level of "sarcastic politeness": "No (adjusts monocle and puts on top hat), Thank you.

Japanese, too contains polite refusal that sometimes confuse students. When teachers introduce the word ii, they often give the quick , three -word definition:good, fine, nice like "Thank you," these are positive words. Teachers fail to mention , at least initially , that "fine" really means "fine without." The real definition of "fine" in the phrase "ii desu" is " I'm fine (in the state in {I often with the absence of ceratin services or goods offered}) "Or " I'm fine, I don't need the receipt. Keep it please. No , Thank you."

This fact becomes more readily apparent if you've heard someone say or shout "mo ii" ( Enough already!)Using "mo ii" less assertively is an acceptable way to refuse something offered, especially if you add "desu", "keki wo mo sukoshi tabemasu ka?" " Would you like more cake?" "Mo ii desu." ("No, thank you")"Keko desu" is the polite alternative to "ii desu,", but the long vowel at the end along with the long constant "k", makes pronounciation trickier.If you use this phrase and find that people double-check what you've said with "ii desu ka", you might try to stick to a straightforward "ii desu"and hold your palm out in front of you-the universal symbol for stop.

When you are asking questions , do not use "kekko" - use " yoroshii," instead. In this case , the order of politeness of these questions running from the shortest (least ) to the longest (most) is li desu ka"? "Yoroshii desho ka?" These questions are flexible and incredibly useful. First you can use them to confirm that someone is "fine (with the current situation/without something)."A useful English is, "Are you sure? These questions are also a sincere way to express appreciation for someone's kindness. Say, for example, a ramen shop owner offers you free gyoza with your ramen. An acceptable way to express thanks without using "arigato gozaimasu" would be to confirm this in miraculous event with "ii">(Ee? Honto ni ii desuka?"" "What?" Really? Are you sure?") and then give thanks with a sing-song "itadakimasu!"

While iiis an adjective meaning good or nice, it's important to remember that it is incorporated in many set phrases such as "no, thank you" that can quickly express that something is decidedly not good. I've known one Filipino English teacher in Tokyo that had an array of stickers that she give to students. Boys loved insect stickers. when she offered one to a girl in the class with "Mushi wa ikaga desu ka?" ("Would you like bug?"), she match her level of politeness and reply, "Mushi wa ii deshu." No, she wasn't saying bugs were good, she was implying she was fine, thank you, without any bugs. Learning the subtle uses of "ii" can, it appears, even make a handy fly swatter.

Linggo, Agosto 29, 2010

Strategic Management, Emotional Intelligence,Human Resource Management in Action, Managing People are NOW BEING SOLD WORLDWIDE.








An Invitation for the Six Sigma Training Seminar in Hongkong.. Jolito Ortizo Padilla is the Resource Trainor...

Jolito Ortizo Padilla Books: Emotional Intelligence- Putting Things in Proper Perspectives,Strategic Management -Building Competitive Advantage, Human Resource in Action, Mojo or Nojo- Where Are You Living, and Managing People are available in all bookstores of Singapore, Malaysia, Vietnam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Philippines, Hongkong, Macau, Shanghai, all GCC Countries, London, Australia, India (Hyderabad, New Delhi, Chennai. Mumbai, Madras) ,New Zealand,Dublin,France, Chicago, Los Angeles, California and San Francisco, Minnesota,  USA and Canada.


Strategic Management-Building Competitive Advantage is the official textbook of 48 Universities and Colleges Worldwide.

Human Resources in Action is the official textbook of  36 Universities and Colleges Worldwide.

Emotional Intelligence- Putting Things in Proper Perspectives sold 7,400 copies Worldwide.

We don't sell online.For convenience and safety - Please deal with our Official Distributors in each Region.

Books are now available in IPad e-book, Samsung Galaxy e-reader, Nokia MeeGo e-book, Sony e-book,Sharp Galapagos tablet reader, Playbook , Amazon's Kindle 3G e-book and Toshiba Libretto tablet reader.. 

Thank you for buying my books... My Appreciation to Virgin Megastore for the support they give me from conceptualization to marketing these books.

Miyerkules, Agosto 25, 2010

Communities of Practice- Getting The Most Out of Sharing Knowledge by Jolito Ortizo Padilla


Knowledge management is a fundamental quality tool- the better people know how to do their jobs, the better their output and the fewer mistakes they will make. Finding ways to sustain knowledge is therefore a critical job for the quality manager.

There are two types of knowledge that require two very different methods of management. First, explicit knowledge is that which can be written down so it may be communicated to others as needed. This is the knowledge that quality professionals often work with when they are mapping processes and structuring documentation system. The second type of knowledge, tacit knowledge , is less tractable in that it difficult to write down and capture. Tacit knowledge is the knowledge of the expert, the person who has spent years learning on the job.

So how do you manage tacit knowledge? If you cannot write it down , how do you preserve it, spread best practice and teach it to new people? There is no easy answer, but one tool you can use is communities of practice. In keeping with the different nature of tacit knowledge, it is not like a traditional quality tool ; which is structured and explicit.

A community of practice is, in its simplest form, a loose collection of professionals who occassionlly meet up to share ideas and discuss what works. It is not a normal part of the day job and may fall under the radar, unnoticed by managers. Such communities may not be recognized as a critical knowledge tool even by their members. Yet these groups are often crucial for sharing knowledge and sustaining professional development of their members.

So how do communities develop and how can you help them? Internal communities of practice happen within the companies where birds of a feather find one another and flock together, perhaps initially for chats over lunch and later in meetings to help one enother out. An important point; you cannot force such groups and if you try to manage them, their members will drift away. They have to be self managed. All you can do is create the conditions and prompt people to collaborate. Importantly, such meetings must allow very free, trusting and open conversation, including criticising organization.

As an example, a quality manager might go around the security managers in the organization, each of whom may be working independently, then introduce them to one another. Suggestions of "getting together" might be a good idea and you can even find an excuse to fund them travelling all to one place, such as for a joint security review of one facility, putting them all up in a single hotel and organizing dinner just for them (making your own excuses).

External communities of practice mean connecting with people with similar interests in other organizations. One way is to send people on open training sessions, where they will meet and can network with others (such as business continuity manager).Another route is sending people to conferences. A third and important route is to encourage people to join their professional institute where ideas can be exchanged and good practice learned. Much can also be done online and there are groups on websites such as Linkedln , that discuss and share the esoterica of professinal subjects.

Linggo, Agosto 22, 2010

Does Mystery Shoppers Work? - A Study Focused On The Mind of The Mystery Shoppers by Jolito Ortizo Padilla published in Singapore Times.


Service performance and its impact on the customer experience are seen as the key to customer satisfaction worlwide.Gronroos, a professor of service and relationship marketing, divided this service performance quality into two parts- technical and functional. Technical quality is concerend with "what" is done whereas functional quality focuses on "how". The "how", although harder to measure, is vital. Service managers need to reduce variation in both process and product quality so that all customers have the same experience with what they received and in how it is delivered and so leave highly satisfied.

The main difficulties with monitoring performance are associated with the diverse nature of services, their relatively short shelf -lives, their blend of tangible elements (collecting products at a supermarket) and intangible ones (being served at the check-out) and the fact that consumption takes place simultaneously with production. One method that has increased in popularity in recent years is the use of mystery shoppers, a growth industry worth US1.5bn worldwide. There are number a number of key stakeholders in the monitoring of services by mystery shoppers, namely the organization that is under surveillance, its management and staff, the organization employing mystery shoppers and finally the mystery shoppers themselves. So is it effective? The study described in this article focuses on what the experience of mystery shopping is like for mystery shoppers.

What is Mystery Shopping?

In his book Managing Service Quality, AM Wilson defined mystery shoppers as researchers who "act as customers or potential customers to monitor the quality of processess and procedures used in the delivery of a service." The aim in using mystery shoppers is to obtain facts rather than perceptions. This approach captures behaviours that are best observed in natural settings as opposed to interviews after the event or surveys. It uses a structured approach of checklists and codes to gather and measure information about service performance in every encounters.

There are many ways to measure customer satisfaction, but it is the quality of the collected data that differentiates this technique. Mystery shopping results can be used as a diagnostic tool to identify failing or weaknesses in procedures and processes, to encourage, develop and motivates staff and to assess an organization's competitiveness through benchmarking. The service-quality loop of service standards, employee performance, training and rewards can all be linked by using mystery shopper evaluations in a positive way.

However, there are disadvantages to using mystery shoppers. For example:
- Employee may view the evaluation process as threatening-management are "spying" on them.
- It reviews processess not their outcomes- the service was excellent but the meal could be inedible.
- If used as an ongoing method of evaluation it will result in constant need for mystery shoppers. This will inevitably use of staff time and impact on training and finances.
- Staff can become complacent about the level of service they provide after the novelty of being mystery shoppers wears off.
- Memory demands placed on assessors could affect the accuracy of the information obtained.
- It offers a snapshot of the service process, that may not be representative.
- It has been suggested that mystery shopping violates the principle of informed consent, as staff are not always aware that they are being observed.
- Staff may attempt to pale " spot the mystery shopper."
- Busy staff may spend time on something that is not a genuine enquiry.

These issues can affect the reliability of mystery shoppping as a technique to measure customer service. It has been questioned whether mystery shopping techniques can even be considered as methodologically sound ways of collecting data on performance. Specifically, the method and sample sizes have been criticised by some. In order for the data to be valid and reliable, the mystery shopping study has to be well desinged with particular attention on the data gathering process, the person doing the study (the mystery shoppers) and the reporting process.

The reliability is defined as the extent to which a given procedure produces similar results on other occassions given similar conditions-it is crucial if staff are to be rewarded on the basis of the results. Objective measurement is obviously possible in determining whether an activity did or did not take place, such as whether or not a customer was addressed by name, but to minimize subjectivity shoppers justify their rating selection by providing appropriate verbatim comments on their reports.It is also advisable to build up data overtime. For example, there may not be enough staff on the shop floor during lunch times or peak holiday periods.

A mystery shoppers feedback evaluation reports the perceptions of an individual rather the representative interaction and is influenced by the behaviour and appearance of both participants. The effects of individual differences between assessors can be reflected in assessments. For example, in department stores men tend to get priority over women according to Morrison et al. Also, the style of dress chosen and gender interaction can further influence service priority. Women are also more likely to provide more accurate mystery shopper reports than men and the age of the assessor can affect mystery shopper reports, with young adults being the most reliable.

The Study


To obtain the views of mystery shoppers themselves, a questionnaire was developed based on the issues arising from previous study. Participants were recruited via advertising the questionnaire as a web link on mystery shopping boards to attract as large sample as possible. In total 85 mystery shoppers participated in the study consisting of 22 men and 63 women. Participants came of Asia and from a range of social backgrounds, ranging from 21 to 60. The length of mystery shopping experience varied, the average being two to three years. The most experienced respondents had at least ten years' experience. Here we present some of the key findings of the study.

Deception and Guilt


Analysis indicated that mystery shoppers did not view adopting the role of a customer as deception, since staff have been aware that mystery shoppers would assess them. They felt it was vital to capture a true account of the customer experience and staff performance and this could only done covertly. They felt they were acting on behalf of the consumers generally. Another uncomfortable issue identified with feelings of guilt about being dishonest about circumstances including meployment and financial details. They also felt uncomfortable in giving negative feedback , especially a staff member was being helpful but not following company policy.

With regards to giving negative feedback on a mystery shop, 27 percent of respondents reported that they felt guilty, while 73 percent said they did not. Regarding uncertainty of what to include in reports , over half of respondents admitted feeling unsure. Almost 60 percent of respondents relied on checklists to recall the information required for completing the report. The vast majority of mystery shoppers in this sample (83 percent) believed that their report was a true reflection of the customer experience.

The results of an independent analysis found that women felt guiltier in giving negative feedback in comparison to men. Women relied on using checklists to recall information and felt that their report was a true reflection of customer experiences while men found it more difficult to meet deadlines and were unsure at times what to include.

Whatever the findings of mystery shoppers exercises , the results need to be fed back to employees in a positive manner. Management must be informed of what value has been obtained from mystery shopping programmes and any changes necessary to improve customer service. Results in some organizations can be linked to bonuses, awards and prizes. However, the mystery shoppers should also receive feedback on their performance and the quality of their reports from their employing organization.

Training The Mystery Shoppers

In the study, respondents were asked to rank qualities needed to be a good mystery shopper.
Quality Ranking
Ability to follow briefs 1
Objective 2
Work to Deadline 3
Ability to think on one's feet 4
Anonymous 5
Independent 6
Critical 7
Smart 8

A statistical test test, the non-parametric Mann-Whitney analysis, indicated that there was a significant difference regarding the qualities required to be a good mystery shopper depending on the experience of the respondent. Those with over three years' experience identified " able to think on your feet" as a key quality.

The information gained from mystery shoppers, if acted on , can reduce mistakes that lead to a loss of customers and loss of competitiveness. Therefore, recruitment of the right assessor is vital. They need to be typical of the organizations' customer base or they will be easily identified. AM Wilson argues that for most scenarios the adopted persona of a mystery shopper should be "neutral rather than aggressive" and recruits should be selected on the basis of having such personality.

Intensive training should be given so that they have a thorough understanding of their assignments. Training is important regarding briefing of the scenarios that are to be used, what observations are required and the type of questions the mystery shoppers has to ask. The type of training received can also impact the reliability of the results. Scenarios of training received can also impact the reliability of the results. Scenarios should then be rehearsed to ensure the service encounter is realistic. to reduce the chances of detection by staff. Training in data collection skills is important and shoppers should receive memory testing. As a result of the study, respondents indicated that online training is the most popular method. Those who have experienced mock msytery shops allowed variations in their experience. Those who had experienced in house specialist tarining rated it highly and those who were accompanied by an experienced assessor rated it as highly effective.

Respondents were asked to rank eight aspcts of the training they received from " most useful" to "least useful." These aspects included the completion of assessment reports, submission of assessment reports, background information on clients , preparation for visits, how to handle objections, common errors, using specialist equipment and how to avoid being spotted. The most useful aspects of training received included preparations for visits, completion of reports and common errors.

Bahaviour

Nearly two thirds of respondents reported changes in staff behaviour during their visit, indicating that staff had been alerted to their mystery shops. Respondents noticed briefing notes/posters on staff notice boards, computers and shop windows announcing that a mystery shopper visit was due and for staff to be alert. Scores from previous visits were also prominently displayed and staff had been overheard discussing upcoming mystery shopping visits.

Some shoppers perceived that staff were waiting for "trigger question." The subsequent following of the checklist would mean that the mystery shopper was easily distingushible from "normal" customer. Some staff became nervous and gave too much information, while others used gestures to warn colleagues that they were dealing with a potential mystery shopper. Other behaviours included a " floor show" when asking for a receipt -a sure way of identifying oneself for claiming expenses for the visit-in eating establishment where staff would suddenly start cleaning surfaces and managers enquire how your meal is.

Nearly 65 percent of those surveyed reported that they were not treated differently due to their gender. However, a qualitative analysis indicated that female respondent reported being treated differently in ceratin establishments such as car parks where they ere told to return with their partner or husband.Female respondents also reported being treated differently by male staff in electrical and mobile phone outlets., where they were steered toward purchasing a simpler model they wanted. Credit card sales representatives were reported as tending to approach men rather than women.

How To Improve

Corporate managers rely on mystery shopper reports for monitoring the performance of their frontline people and processes and their obvious need for the data collected to be valid and reliable. The study identified both good and bad practices in the recruitment, training and use of mystery shoppers. Clearly bad practice needs to be eliminated. Responsibility for this is with mystery shopper employment agencies. These agencies need to follow some straightforward guidelines regarding recruitment and use of mystery shoppers, including:
- Recruit the right people and match people profile with the client brief.
- Train recruits in all areas of the job including different monitoring techniques, memory and observational skills, interviewing skils, avoiding detection, understanding assignments briefs, the use of checklists and completing reports.
- Have a three month probationary period for all new recruits, monitor their performance and give feedback.
- Give all mystery shoppers periodic performance appraisal.
- Ensure that client assignment briefs are rubost and will not lead to the easy identification of the mystery shopper. Be prepared to refuse to take on a clinet if the briefs are poor quality.

Overall, the findings from this study concur that the use of mystery customers, as a covert method of measuring performances, appears useful and effective. However, many companies that offer mystery shopping services are not selective when it comes to recruitment and offer no training to new recruits. This research suggests that the validity and reliability of data so gathered may therefore be questionable.

Further research that explores attitudes towars mystery shopping from other stakeholders' perspectives would add to the understanding of the effectiveness of mystery shopping as a measurement , diagnostic and improvement tool> employees' views would give another perspective, as would comparing the recruitment and operating methods of various mystery customer agency. A survey of the views of the management of organizations who would employ mystery shoppers would make the circle complete.

Biyernes, Agosto 20, 2010

Opinions and Expectations About Continuous Improvement Programs by Jolito Ortizo Padilla



How does continuous improvement fit with 21st century leadership? This survey shows the importance of a clear link between improvement efforts and achievement of organizational goal.

Over the last few decades, continuous improvement (CI) initiatives such as Six Sigma, lean, total quality management (TQM), just in time (JIT) and other quality programs have recieved significant attention in Asia, U.S. and Europe businesses. The desire to remain current and competitive by adopting CI intitiatives enthusiastically and today, these programs are part of the management vernacular across the country.

Although these initiatives have generated significant buzz in business for some time now, the focus on quality is hardly new. Manufacturing has embraced varying levels of continuous improvement since the industrial revolution hit its stride in the mid-19th century. The evolution in automation resulted in great productivity gains, and 20th century innovators such as Ford, Taylor, Shewhart, and Deming demonstrated how manufacturing companies could increase productivity through a variety of quality techniques and approaches. By the early 1980s, these approaches were at the forefront of many US and European manufacturing companies.

Likewise in the early '80s , companies started to take notice of Japanese automotive manufacturing, notably Toyota. As American companies sent envoys to Japan, new terms such as JIT and kanban gained popularity. Books were written about the new Japanese manufacturing principles and companies began experimenting with some of those techniques. Then Motorola developed the Six Sigma methodology, which other organizations eagerly adopted.

In 1990, the term "lean" was coined by MIT researchers studying the global automotive industry, and their follow-up book in 1996, Lean Thinking, Womack and Jones captured the attention of many companies. Corporate leaders extolled the virtues of lean, Six Sigma, and other CI initiatives during the decade and into the 21st century.

Not all organizations, however, are as enamored with CI programs. One study found that many companies that adopted Six Sigma actually underperformed in the stock market and achieved only incremental gains. Moreover, some companies experienced losses after the early initial gains that occurred within a relatively short time after these programs were implemented.

For example, Motorola, a Six Sigma pioneer, announced in 1998 that its second quarter profits were almost non-existent ;as a result, the company cut 15,000 of its 150,000 jobs. In a particular irony, when Robert Nardelli, former CEO of Home Depot and a Six Sigma evangelist, cut the work force and increased training programs to reduce defects, Home Depot dropped from its worst among major retailers on the American Index in 2005.

Although , it is clear there is still groundspell support for CI programs, failure to realize promised results suggests that these implementations were challenging for some organizations, which generated our interest in investigating these seeming inconsistencies. Specifically, this research involved conducting a survey of supervisors, managers, directors, and officers from a variety of companies in the manufacturing sector in Japan. The survey contained two main points of inquiry, as follows:
. Do respondents still eagerly embrace current CI initiatives?
. What do respondents believe about these efforts' impact on performance expectations, such as increase in revenue, inventory reductions, and perceived quality improvements?

The actual survey and detailed discussion of its methodology are included in the supplement to this article, http://gaconsultants.com.

The Findings

The most widely used CI approaches among those surveyed were lean, Six Sigma, some combination of lean and Six Sigma, JIT, or TQM.Most respondents (75 percent) reported that the CI initiative was deployed company-wide;division-wide was 14 percent, and others were restricted to a department or product line (8 percent). More than one third (36 percent) reported their particular CI initiatives had been in place between one and three years. Fifty-six percent indicated that their organization had launched many CI initiatives over the years, and 19 percent said that this was at least the second attempt.Only 8 percent reported that this was a first attempt, and 16 percent said they didn't know how many intitiatives their company had attempted.

Opinion Questions

Respondents' opinions about CI programs were generally very favorable. For example, the vast majority (91) percent agreed that the implementation appeared fully aligned with their company's long term strategies and that their particular initiative was aimed at the root problems in the organization (81 percent). Most respondents (89 percent) agreed that their companies emphasized the need for awareness of the goals of their initiatives.

Furthermore, 83 percent reported that their personal enthusiasm and support were very strong for their particular initiatives, nearly 60 percent claimed that many in their organization had lost enthusiasm for the project, exhibiting a "been there, done that " atttitude. Moreover 38 percent indicated that they did not have all the needed resources (e.g. people, education, time, budget) to make their improvement initiatives successful, and 41 percent had concerns about comprehensive training for the initiative. Furthermore, close to two thirds (63 percent) anticipated organizational resistance organizational resistance to making all the changes required for successful implementation.

When respondents were asked what percent of people in their organizations believed in and supported the initiative, 33 percent of the respondents felt that over half were supportive, and 31 percent reported between 26 percent to 50 percent; only 25 percent reported that there were less than 25 percent of people in the organization who truly supported the initiative.

Performance Expectation Question

Performance expectations were less definitive. For example, when asked about expected increases in revenue, as a result of CI, 16 percent expected no increase at all, 44 percent expected to see only small or modest increases, and 33 percent didn't know what to expect. For reduction of inventory levels, 50 percent of the respondents expected few significant reductions, and 31 percent said they don't know.

This pattern of responses repeated itself for other quantifiable performance measures. For example, 33 percent anticipated less than 10 percent dollar savings, another 30 percent expected between 10 percent and 25 percent savings, and 27 percent didn't know. Almost two-thirds (63 percent) expected less than 5 percent reduction in headcounts; 48 percent expected 10 percent or less improvement of on-time deliveries, and 53 percent expected minimal reduction of lead times. When asked about the level of quality improvements that were expected to impact the final customer, however, respondents were generally more optimistics with 39 percent indicating they expected significant improvements and 47 percent expecting small to modest improvements. Only 6 percent said they didn't know if their initiative would have an impact on quality.

Analysis by Involvement With Implementation

We expected some variability in responses on both opinions and performance expectations based on how involved the individual respondents were with the day-to-day CI programs. To analyze this, we categorized the respondents into two groups: those with a high level of program involvement (self described as project sponsor, project leader, or part of the project) and those with a low level of program involvement (self described as only moderately involved or not involved at all). Interestingly, results indicated there were no significant differences on opinions or specific outcomes of the seven key metrics between two groups with one exception. On average, those more involved expresses somewhat greater agreement that the organization emphasized the need for them to be aware and understand the program (more involved=3.4, less involved=3.0)

When we looked at the frequency distributions of the "don't know" responses between the two groups, however, those less involved were considerably less aware of the aniticipated outcomes of the CI program than those more involved. For example,57 percent of those less involved said they didn't know what to expect in terms of revenue increases compared to 21 percent of those in the highly involved group. When looking at expected dollar savings where 52 percent of those less involved don't know what to expect., only 14 percent of those closest to the implementations reported that they don't know. with the exception of quality improvements, similar results emerged for all performance metrics.

Some Thoughts

The main stated goal of most CI initiatives is enhancing quality through greater operational efficiencies, an inarguable premise for business today, and we found that CI implementations are viewed as necessary and positive actions for organizations. Even with a few dark clouds such as a sense that resources and efforts are spread too thin and a certain "been there, done that" apathy by some, enthusiastic acceptance of CI programs continues. Although there is some apprehension that the CI program could face some internal resistance , most respondents reported that the programs are largely supported and aligned with the company's goal.

We did find, however, that while most respondents expressed great enthusiasm about their CI initiative and its importance in meeting their organizations' strategic goals, there was some hesitancy about their CI program's ability to impact success on key performance drivers. Furthermore,although the majority appeared confident that their initiative was aimed at addressing core organizational problems, respondents were somewhat guarded when asked about real and achievable outcomes generating from the program. In essence, regardless of how involved respondents are with day to day CI implementations, many were tentative about the program's ability to bring about substantial bottom line results.

We also found that while CI projects are perceived as aligned with company goals and management has emphasized the need for awareness of these goals., there is a lack of clarity about what proram is supposed to accomplish specifically. Several respondents, particularly those less involved with the day to day implementation of the programs and some of whom would logically be considered key decision makers in the organization, don't know what to expect about their program's ability to achieve measurable results. This is in spite of reporting that they fully understand the goals of the CI programs.

We wondered why people who are avid supporters of a given CI are somewhat reticent to forecast outcomes. One explanation might be that although there is a belief that there CI program is inherently "good," organizations are complex, and cause -effect relationships are difficult to isolate. Another possible explanation may be that excitement and motivation are driven more by the pride of having the program itself than waht the program actually will deliver to the organization's bottom line. This explanation seems consistent with some criticism that the emphasis on CI integrations tend to focus more on the conceptual appeal of the program and less on the realities of its effectiveness.

This study was limited by its small sample size, but its implications should interest strategic decision makers who are seeking to maximize the reults of their CI programs. It provides insights for those who either lead or actively participate in a currrent or proposed CI program, suggesting a reticence about a program's ability to achieve organizational goals. On the other hand, these reults actually may reflect a lack of internal communication regarding the stated end goals of continuous improvement program. In any case, most CI programs are extraordinary expensive, and with the requisite level of investment of money, time , and effort needed, quantifiable expectations for these efforts should remain transparent throughout an organization.

Summary

Clearly, CI is management prerogative, and most companies feel compelled to have some type of initiative in place. It is no longer a point of parity; however, as Abrahamson pointed out more than a decade ago, the issue of efficacy is of critical importance to leadership. Adopting and executing a particular CI program or combination of programs will result in some type of change, with both positive and negative effects. Although there is a preponderance of support for CI program efficacy, there are also contrarian reports that are worthy of consideration and which pose a strategic dilemm: When enthusiasm is high, measurable accountability can be neither less imporatnt not immaterial. Otherwise , we are left with what Alan Greenspan called "irrational exuberance."

This research work is long overdue. This was conceptualized during my stay in KSA, where CI was not given due importance in most manufacturing companies. I have finished this research only recently when I was in Japan.

I am honored to share this research with those who believe in CI.

Thanks..



















Huwebes, Agosto 19, 2010

The DOREMEFASOLATIDO PRINCIPLE OF Jolito Ortizo Padilla-


From the Book "Emotional Intelligence- Putting Things in Proper Perspectives."


DO- Do not worry over things that may never happen, and even if they happen, worry will not help. Do count your blessing before you count cases.

RE- Radiate goodwill and spirit of benevolence. Like laughter, it is infectious and make yourself, as well as others, feel better.

MI- Mete kindness, understanding, tolerance, and forgiveness generously. You reap as you mete.

FA- Far reaching are therapuetic benefits of spiritual thinking. You become as you habitually think. Resentment, hatred, spite, envy and vengeance pack radio-active fall out that gnaws at your vitals. They are self consuming.

SO- Sow the seeds of love, friendship , empathy and helpfulness. These hardy seeds take root in the crustiest ground.

LA- Laugh at yourself now and then. He who can laugh at himself is less apt to be at war with himself. Laugh at yourself, even if you don't feel like laughing.

TI- Teach yourself awareness and appreciate all of the wonders of nature. Thank God daily for the precious gift of life. Genuine gratitude and discontent are never found together.

DO- Do not expect someone else to open the door to happiness for you. You must do it yourself. You alone have the key. Turn it.

Martes, Agosto 17, 2010

How to Lead When the Generation Gap Becomes Your Everyday Reality- An Analysis- originally written by Jolito Ortizo Padilla



Do you ever feel as if you're speaking Sanskrit to a workforce that only understands text messaging. (I have experience this during my years in the Middle East.)
" What we have in Asia and Middle East organizations today is a diverse group of workers with differences in attitude affecting everything from recruiting, building teams, dealing with change, motivating, managing and increasing productivity. The differences in attitudes are primarily caused by the difference in their respective generations," writes Sativa Ross.

We all are aware that the different generations in the workplace have different values and mind-sets. We also know that the generational mix is making leadership more complex. What seems less understood is how to lead these different generations in a way that promotes harmony, productivity, and mutual respect.

According to Renee Taylor, chief of staff at AT&T, Millennials currently make up 11 percent of the company workforce. The remainder is 39 percent Gen X and 50 percent Baby Boomers. She believes that "understanding the different values between the generations helps (leaders) to adapt the way they work with others and create a more cohesive team environment.

Arguably , the most challenging age group for current leaders is the Millennials, who also are referred to as "Gen Y" because of how often they want to know, "Why?"They differ from other three generations in such profound ways that using tried and true approaches to leading them are not successful.

Successfully Leading Different Generations

Current leaders would be wise to assess their leadership style, knowledge of the different generations, and personal attitudes toward the different members of their workforce. The following questions can serve as a basis for evaluating personal perspectives and approaches:
. What differentaition each generation?
. Which generations are you responsible for leading?
. How do generational differences impact your perceptions and leadership styles?
. How can you lead intra-generational and intergenerational groups?
. What can you do as a leader to foster mixed generational dialogue and problem solving?
. Which generation has the strongest impact on your organization? Is your organization more like Toyota or Google?
. How do the major aspects of your organization's culture ("generation bias"), align more with one generation than on the others? How does that generation-bias impact inclusion , recruitment, retention, and development of employees.

The Four Generation in the Workplace

Lathough describing an entire generation's characteristics involves some stereotyping, it also is true that each generation demonstrates similar characteristics. Sociologist Morris Massey points out that "the influence of the events (people) lived through creates a collective personality of sorts."

The oldest generational group, born between 1925 and 1945, is the Silent Generation. Also called Traditionalists, Senior, Veterans, this group values hard work , conformity, dedication, sacrifice, and patience. Members of this generation are comfortable with delayed recognition and reward.

The largest group in the workforce is the Baby Boomers. Born between 1946 and 1964, Boomers are characteristically optimistic and team oriented. They place a high value on their work ethics while also seeking personal gratification and growth.

The smallest group in size is Generation X, which laso known as the Sandwich Generation because of its position between the two largest groups. These folks were born between 1965 and 1980 and were the first "latchkey" kids. They are self reliant, global thinkers who value balance, fun and informality.

Millennials were born between 1981 and 2000, and ultimately will become the largest group. Even though less than half of them are presently in the workforce, they already are having a significant impact on organizational leadership. Members of this organization exhibit confidence, optimism , civic duty, sociability, street marts, inclusivity, collaboration, and openmindedness. They tend to be goal oriented.

Specific Things to Know About Millennials

Of course, most of today's organizationa leaders represent the Silent Generation or Baby Boomers. Over the past 40 years, these two generations have learned to work together. Many members of both these generations struggle to some degree when interacting with Genrations X'ers and Millennilas. Of course, with each progressive generation the gap becomes greater; therefore, to optimize interactions current leaders have much to learn about the youngest group now entering the workforce.

Here are 10 things about the Millennial generation that leaders should know:
1. In the United States , 95 million people were born into this genration compared to 78 million for the Baby Boomer generation.
2. Technology is hard-wired into this generation, and they live with constant technological stimulation. It is peripheral to their experience. One consequence of living in such a world is a resetting of the internal clock.What was considered fast is now experienced as slow.With technological speed increasing exponentially every year, Millennials seem to have little patience for meetings, discussions, or other structured gatherings;this is especially true if they cannot see the relevance of the meeting or the need to participate.
3. They need ongoing feedback. My son Job is a Millenial graduate student who cautions leaders " to be sure you are providing enough feedback. Millennials are used to immediate feedback , but you should try to be more immediate." Jason Lee of Toshiba , also advocates giving constant feedback. " You might not always use it, but the regular asking for it is important. Not just in annual or quarterly increments either. I mean daily."
4. Millennials are multitaskers. Not only do they have difficulty focusing on a single task for an extended time, they also see no reason to limit their focus to one thing at a time.
5. Mira Furt, former outplacement specialist and founder of We Lead Now! believes there are serious generational issues around a performance feedback. "For most of my generation of Boomers, no news usually means 'so far so good. I still have a job.' To Gen Y, the absence of feedback 'is interpreted as no one cares!' It is unusual for people to find out that their contributiion is seen as valuable when they announce that they are leaving for another job.
6. Millennials social norms are different form other generations. Where Boomers , Xers, and Seniors might agree that asking sbout other peoples' salary at a job interview is a breach of etiqutte, Gen Ys have no qualms about inquiring after intimate details. As a result of their experience with social media sites such as Facebook, My Space and Tweeter (though my second son Jol, don't like me to have any of these) they are accustomed to much greater level of personal transparency than other generations.
Organizational advisor Tereo Yokohama sees downside to the way members of Gen Y interact with others, "Older groups were forced to interact with humans directly rather than texting, tweeting, etc. In person, Millennials seem far less able to read nonverbal cues, understand social context cues for determining appropriate communications, and follow social graces of gratitude and civility.
7. The concept of " workplace" is different for Millennilas than for other groups. with wireless technology , a seat in a coffee shop or airport can be as a cubicle. To them, it is more important to get the job done than where it gets done.
8. Self confidence is very evident in Millennials. They alaways recieved encouragement to take on the world and to believe in themselves. In her article," Managing Millennials," Claire Raines points out that this group has "always felt sought-after, needed and indespensible." The same characteristics also can lead to describing their behavior as entitled or disrespectful.
9. Millennials function well in teams. Their experience has shown them that a team can accomplish more than an individual. This offers an opportunity to mentor and train Millennials as a team rather than as individuals.
This generation brings skills to the workplace that older workers don't have. The traditional model of top-down education from the more experienced to the novices is not effective when the latter group knows more than the old hands. This situation offers an opportunity for bi-directional mentoring.
Management consultant Barb Artemis suggests that Millennials can mentor Seniors and Boomers on technology while the older generation mentors the younger on institutional knowledge.
As Kristin Hooper Woolsey, founder of Apple Multimedia Lab, succinctly states, "Millennials are skilled in areas of technology and media wheras Boomers and Gen Xers in areas of process, judgement , and intentionality.
10. Work life Balance is more than a platitude to Millennials . They are involved in many activities and have many interests, but working long hours just because it is expected of them is not one of them. Flexible work hours are as important, if not more so, than retirement benefits.

Starting the Dialogue

You can begin to raise awareness about the differences among the generations and their implications to your organization by facilitating a dialogue between and among the generations. during the session, participants can discuss the impact that generational differences have on effectiveness and productivity and identify the personal perceptions in your organization that interfere with cross- generational understanding.

Leveraging the Power of the Four Generations

After conducting the cross -generational dialogue, you can form cross-generational teams to address real issues that are occuring in your organization. Begin this process by having each team clarify the specific problems its members have encountered. Then ask each team to select one of the problems and work together to develop a practical solution.

At the core, generational conflicts are similar to other diversity challenges. Each group is influenced by the adveristy, technology, complexity, and economy experience in its youth. Understanding the perceptions behind the differences goes a long way toward the acceptance of, if not the aggreement with, those differences As a leader who both understands thje advantages and disadvantages of having these diverse generations in the organization- a leader can harness the power of those differences effectively, efficiently , and productivity.


4.

Linggo, Agosto 15, 2010

Leadership Development Approaches -Effects of Perceptions of Famous Individuals and Training Venues on Success- by Jolito Ortizo Padilla


If you're trying to teach people to be leaders, their role models and the training venue you emulate may influence learning significantly.

Leadership remains a coveted characteristic in business and society. This is not surprising given the widely held view that effective leadership is an important catalyst to desired levels of organizational performance. Consequently, organizations are encourage to develop leadership abilities of employees. Hughes, Ginnett, and Curphy observe that leadership is comprised of personal experience as well as planning.

This research explores facets of experience and training related to leadership through a survey that ascertained individuals' perceptions regarding different training venues and famous individuals, celebrities, and public figures as effective or model leaders.

Perceptions and Role Models
There is widespread acceptance of the notion that an organization's leaders serve as role models for individuals within an organization. Recognizing role models within the organizations is important given evidence suggesting that role models influence the choices that individuals make. It is also important, however, to acknowledge that role models or influencial others also can reside outside the organization. For example, celebrities can serve as role models for individuals. These celebrities could include , but are not necessarily limited to, movie stars, professional athletes, publci officials , individuals of historical significance , or anyone widely recognized throughout society.

The proliferation of media outlets intesifies the potential impact that these external role models can have on individuals' choices or behavior. Miciak and Shanklin noted that individuals might attempt to be similar to celebrities in attributes such as appearance. These mimetic tendencies feasibly could extend to individual behavior. This contention is bolstered by Fiesbein and Ajzen's widely accepted Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) model. An important facet of this model suggests that individual attitudes and beliefs are potent determinants of concomitant behavior. Applying this tenet of the TRA within the context of celebrities as role models, it is probable that individual individual beliefs about desirable or undesirable characterisitcs of celebrities could ultimately influence their behavior. Of specific interest in this research is the extent to which selected celebrities and other noteworthy individuals are perceived as effective leaders, with these perceptions or beliefs having a potential impact on the leadership behaviors of those holding such perceptions.

Perceptions and Training Venues
Understanding individuals' perception about the effectiveness of training venues in the development of leaders is important. In their widely distributed text on leadership, Hughes, Ginnett, and Curphy noted that perception"... plays a very important role in what anyone will extract from a leadership course or from any leadership situation." Insights gained through perceptions about the effectiveness of common training venues can provide fodder for improving leadership education through strategies such as benchmarking and best practices. Furthermore, knowledge about perceptions of training venues may be useful in explaining individual choices or selections of certain organizations for educational or career purposes.

Survey on Leadership Perceptions
The survey assesesed self reported perceptions related to the effectiveness of 30 well known individuals (such as celebrities, politicians, and religious figures) as leaders and training venues.

The demographic composition of the respondents was not representative of the overall work force population. Although gender was dispersed relatively evenly, ethnicity and age were not, so these results cannot be generalized. They are worth noting, however, and certainly bear further investigation.

The US first President George Washington was rated as the effective leader. Politicians and religious leaders rounded out the top most effective leaders. Given that most survey participants were relatively young (less than 60 years old) it is interesting to note that none of the celebrities listed in the survey were rated in the top 10. In fact, the highest rated celebrity (not a politician or religious leader) was Oprah Wifrey who ranked 15th. Individuals receiving the lowest leadership effectivenes ratings included pop icons Jessica Simpson. Madonna. Britney Spears and Justine Timberlake.

Perceptions on the effectiveness of selected training venues identified the military as the most effective of the 17 options, followed by small businesses (entreprenuerial firms), medicine (doctors and hospitals, education(public and private schools) and sports. The training venue considered the least effective was entertainment. This is consistent with perceptions of model leaders where the individuals receiving comparatively low rankings came from the entertainment industry. Religious organizations were rated as only the eight most effective training venue, which appears inconsistent with religious leaders' high rankings as effective leaders. It is interesting to consider the relatively high ranking of education given the ongoing , negative media and political portrayals of public education in the world.

Conclusions
Acknowledging individual perceptions related to effective leaders and training venues is considered important given the likelihood that these perceptions ultimately will impact the choices or behavior of individuals. Participants identified selected religious figures and politicians as the most effective leaders. A deeper assessment of the personal attributes of the model leaders may be useful in identifying silent characteristics to incorporate into an organization's leadership development efforts, and ultimately the habits of organizational leaders.

The top rated leadership training venues (military, entreprenuerial, and medical facilities) are generally regarded as fast faced and relatively high risk with the consequences of failure considered significant, which may result in the emergence of effective leaders. Also, out of necessity, these organizations face pressures to develop skills, and abilities of internal stakeholders, including leaders, quickly. It is likely that leadership development within these organizatios emphasizes practice rather than theory, which aligns with Hurt and Homan's highlighting the importance of training that is realistic in nature, focusing more in practical rather than theoritical aspects of leadership.

Summary
Although the results from this perceptual survey cannot be generalized, they do provide interesting and potentially valuable insights into individual perceptions of model leaders and effective leadership training venues. Organizations may benefit from incorporating those characteristics associated with the highly regarded tarining venues.

Biyernes, Agosto 13, 2010

Zombies in the Workplace by Jolito Ortizo Padilla -Speech Delivered at Australia National University during the World Business and Economic Forum


A major threat may exist in your workplace... the peril of zombiesm. In organization around the world, zombies have infiltrated all levels of the labor ranks, carrying their messages of victimhood and pessimism, they infect the whole organization at an exponential rate. At this very moment your organization could suffer from lifeless humans. Zombies could be undermining the mission, vision, and the very future existence of your organization.

The good news is that Zombies-ism has a cure. Many zombies can be brought back to life; restored as contributing members of the organization. The challenge is that the cure requires each zombie to recognize the condition, desire restoration to the living, and self administer the therapy. The living can coach initial consciousness in the lifeless; however to sustain existence among the living, each zombie must discover his/her own meaning in life and remain awake to that purpose -especially in challenging times.

Have no doubt, however; urgent action is necessary now. Zombie-ism, left unchecked , will destroy your organization from the inside out. Leaders at every level must be persistent in rooting out zombies and demanding their redemption or elimination from the workforce. Furthermore, it is essential for the human resource unit to revamp the hiring process to avoid this terminal virus into the organization.

How to Recognize Zombies

Once you know the dangers zombies pose to the organization and their behavior patterns, they are fairly easy to identify. For too long, hiring and retaining for skills alone caused leaders to be inclined to the Zombie threat. Skills have their value, but having a living work force is indespensible.

You can recognize a zombie by two using primary methods: conversation and observation of behaviors. These methods expose the zombie because a lack of consciousness is the key sign and becomes obvious immediately when connecting with a zombie.

First, the zombie's lack of awareness is detected through conversation. When inquiring about a rationale for performing daily tasks, the zombies are in the organization, they respond,"There's nowhere else to go," " I have to work here," "My schooling dicatated this job," or " I've never though about that." The zombie doesn't have a life of meaning , so the connection to devoting life energy to an organization, doesn't even emerge as a need or way of operating. Instead, they often see themselves as a victim of the organization, acting out of something akin to bondage.

Observing zombies's behavior shows them basically doing what they are told, which often the minimum required to stay on the payroll. Going through the motions of daily work was once acceptable.Pyramids were built, castles constructed and the industrial revolution launched when employment merely physical behavior. As the spirit of creation and mental problem -solving attributes became a prerequisite for organizational success, however, the zombies's coma like stance was acceptable.

Some observed zombie behaviors include:
-Minimal connection to daily work, organizational purpose, or team mission.
-Blaming the organization for a host of personal ills.
-Broken relationships always cited as the reponsibility of the other person.
-Downward spiralling conversations that seek to engage others in a negative mind-set.
- Seeing every other organization as a more desirable place.
-Holding conspiracy theories.
-Lack of initiative with with prodding by leadership providing their primary motivation.

In his popular cult book, The Zombie survival Guide, Max Brooks points out that zombies prey on all living creatures. Zombies suck the life out of all living organisms and the organizational climate. Zombies feed not only human resources but also on any living idea, initiative, creation, or vibrant venture. After all, if the zombie is lifeless, why wouldn't everything with which it comes in contact also share the same fate?

How Organization Foster Zombie-sm

A view of labor throughout history helps us to understand how organizations have fostered zombies. When strong arms, legs, and backs were the main ingredients for high quality labor or performance; the mind and spirit were seen as liabilities.Although it was important to have some mental faculties, in particular the mental capabilities that addressed the job at hand, no additional intellect was required or wanted. Asking too many questions was a certain way for getting, into trouble. Employers wanted hard but little else. Too much initiative was seen as a threat to leadership in the power- centric hierararchy of the past, and some of these Neanderthal organizations still exist today.

The world has undergone radical change in the past 100 years, however -and at an ever accelerating rate of change. To survive these days,an organization must call on the human capacities of mind and spirit. The total quality revolution of the 1980's engaged the entire workforce in problem-solving and improvement activities. Far from being a fad, the quality tolls and methodologies employed have become standard affair including lean, Six Sigma, and system engineering.

The next transformation in organizational performance involved leveraging the entire work force in a spirit of creation to generate competitive advantage. Although creation complements problem-solving, these two mental capacities and manifestations are significantly different. Creation relies on bringing into being that which does not exist at the moment. This is not the same as fixing what already exists. Creating a vision, generating dialogue, challenging conventionsl wisdom, and white sheet innovating are al born out of creative mind-set , sourced by human spirit. without spirit, there is no creation.

After millenniums of "dumping down,' the work force organizational leaders now need to awaken each individual. This is even worse when you realize that some of these leaders are dead to change themselves, holding on until retirement or a better job. Their skills sets may lack leadership altogether; they maybe just managers.

To address the zombie problem, organizations must change. Deep rooted systems, with underlying principles that are wrong for today's work force are entrenched. Policies galore hold the old organization in place, but the needed transformation often is limited to a few wall posters displaying outdated platitudes. Indeed, the challenge is great.

The Living

Fortunately, there are a growing number of people in the workforce who are among the living, people who are living lives of meaning. They are connected with their life purposes. They see their creative spirit as producing an opportunity to contribute to a collective mission; working with other living beings to generate value in the world.

Observed behaviors of these individuals include:
- Seeing causality in their actions (and lack of action) in creating the existing workplace.
- Possesing a strong sense of personal purpose.
- Applying their effort and determination toward projects and initiatives aligned with their purposes.
- Using upward spiralling talk that engages others in seeing the potential in every situation.
- Having an abundance based mental stance.
- Being conscious of the connection between all sentient beings.
- Displaying tenacity and perseverance in the face of barriers.

How Best to Address Zombies

We have worked with organizations around the world providing direct leadeship, and in later years, consulting with leaders on transformational approaches. We have seen incredible spirit not only in the eyes and ccomplishments of others, but also those who are comatosed and anesthetized.

Look around your workplace. What do you see? Are you perplexed? Do you wonder why zombies become zombies? You need to understand that they chose to be lifeless. There doesn't seem to be any five- year- old zombies, so something clearly happened on the way to their present condition. Did the excitement of life become routine? We believe that when life's purpose and meaning aren't clear, people are at risk of zombie-sm.Some become the walking dead during high school others with the help of mind- numling substances (including television), and some after years on the job.

Regardless of how they become infected, these people choose to fall under the spell of zombie-ism, becomong unconscious. This is an important mental position to understand. if you think society, the schools, family, or organizations have put them ro sleep; you are mistaken and posibly infected yourslef. Whether an organization has a great or por spirit, each person always chooses his/her response. If this were not the case, the many stories of the living emerging from dead situations would not exist. We are creatures of choice, creatures that create our world.

Awaking a zombie can be dangerous. After years of existing as one of the walking dead, a sudden awakening can be disturbing. Anger may be the first response. These zombies have participated at an acceptable, although low, level of performance in the past. With low organizational expectations and little performance feedback they were left to their infections and allowed to infect others. so start awakening in measured steps without retreating.

Call the zombie to consciousness by asking questions, such as:
- Why did you choose to work here?
- Why have you remained at this job?
- what purpose does your participation in this organization serve?
- What is your life's purpose?

With each question, allow time for consideration. Plant the seed of consciousness nd allow them to germinate. Know that we were not bornto be zombies. many people will leave the zombie state when they reconsider the price of unconsciousness.

Along with using these questions to awaken zombies, the benchmark must be set higher on performance. Reconsider the relationship among the performance standards, the quality of the output, and the excellence you expect. Lose your tolerance for poor work, for inadequate office relationships, and for feeble excuses. Inferior perfromance is just that, deficient and unaccepatble. Once you make a stand, the ball begins to roll.

Your enlivened spirit will have a positive effect. Understand that your spirit may create initial anxiety, like a flaming torch to a zombie, but your spirit also has a power of its own. Do not hide your spirit under a basket to comfort zombie. Let your spirit's power shine.

Awakening the Organization

Awakening individual zombies is critical action the living can take. There is an opportunity to help the walking dead become alive to their on spirit, awakening their own being, and the organization can help. Key steps to awakening the organization are listed below:

- Review policy and procedures from the point of their original expectations. Are they written to allow or foster zombies?
- Stop zombies at the door. Hire for spirit as well as skills. Change the interview approach to assess spirited performance in the whole life of the applicant.
- Set a meaningful mission and course for the oranization. Raise the community vision to make a breakthrough , transformative products and /or services.
- Involve everyone in both the daily work and in creating the organization of tomorrow. Once they get energy from creating a community, their eyes will stay open.
- Demand that your extended organizational system has life.No longer accpet suppliers and subcontractors.
- Speak to your customers as if they are alive. Your target should not be zombies. The living are always a better customer market.

The conscious leader has a special role to play. First, establish the expectation that zombie-ism is no longer acceptable. Given a deeper understanding by the leader of what organization requires, performance attention focuses on the zombies. It is your right to expect people to think and be creative. Zombie leaders often point to organizational barriers and past practices, which discourage them from setting higher expectations and holding people accountable. That is exactly why leader is there- to move the system forward. Of course, every organization has issues on barriers. What is needed to rid the system of Zombies is for leadership to make a stand. Otherwise, upper leadership should review the infected brains of the leaders themselves.

Final Warnings and Word of Hope

Left unchecked, zombies will enroll others to join the legions of the dead at work. In addition to being counter-productive in the workplace (and geting paid for this destruction), they are not neutral in their impact on the workforce. Zombies welcome co-workers to join them in listless existence and victim mind-set. You may see them attacking the new employee group, picking off the weak ones. During extended breaks nd water cooler conversattions, zombies enlist these new seekers of the corporate culture into the hopeless of inaction. Zombies may even manifest a smile or an unauthentic welcome, only to draw close to the new employee into this web of death.

Additionally, organizations experiencing low competition or the absence of obvious threats often overlook their zombies. The "fat" in their systems hides the danger of zombies, lulling leaders into avoiding addresing apparent personnel problems. Whether they are public, for profits, or NGO's,all organizations can fail. If not addressed, zombie-ism wil infect, spread , and cause organizations to fail, especially when organizations are under the inevitable stress the transforming world delivers.

There is hope, however.Labelling zombies recognizes threats. Moving to awaken zombies has the immediate payoff of employing the skills initially promised in the hiring process and post employment training. From lifeless to life filled, the converted zombie can serve as a great influence on others and pave the way to organizational success.

Zobies in the Workplace









Martes, Agosto 10, 2010

How To Kill an Idea in 10 Easy Steps -Jolito Ortizo Padilla -A Recap of My Experience with "Bahyas" in Middle East,Leading Me to Write this Concept.


You would think that in today's "more or less" climate every company would try to drum up as many new ideas as possible to find better ways to serve its markets. Unfortunately, it's not that easy.

The reality is that new ideas often are shunted by a clouded lens that was shaped through toil and investment in the status quo. It's why even the most radical ideas seem so obvious when we look back and ask ourselves why we didn't think of them sooner.

After working with and studying myriad organizations, I've discovered that there is a core list of bad behaviors that stand in the way of most ideas, and I call them innovation killers.

These innovation killers almost always are disguised as protectors of the organization, or more appropriately protectors of the past. Few people try to kill innovation outright. Their intentions are always good ones-minimize risk, deliver predictability, and satisfy market and analysts' expectations. The innovation killers always have armies of well-intentioned corporate citizens behind them, ready to defend their turf and keep innovation at bay lest it disrupt the status quo.

In today's overly conservative businesses this is especially true. Far too many good ideas are viewed as too risky or too uncertain to justify investment. If you're looking for certainty, however, you've picked the wrong century! Get used to living with ambiguity and get familiar with this list of 10 innovation killers so you're prepared to run away from them at top speed. (I have run away from the "bahyas" from their nonsense talking during the meeting by keeping my ideas to myself.)

1. Believing That Innovation Will Just Happen
The belief that innovation happens automatically makes about as much sense as the belief that a garden will sprout in your backyard without any planting, weeding, or watering. Attention to innovation is a requirement in today's world. Even in industries where the margin is slim-such as manufacturing and sourcing-innovation is a must. Here's the irony; you may feel you cannot afford to take a big risk, but that doesn't mean that somewhere on the globe you won't be challenged. As an example of how vulnerable standing still makes you, you need to think of the U.S. auto industry, which is locked in battle against foreign carmakers. You need to lobby for the importance of innovation, as well as the dollars and owners to support.

2. Telling Everyone to Think Outside the Box, Holding Brainstorming Session, and Then Calling It a Day
Great ideas are the seeds of innovation itself. Ideas are not in short supply. Spend an hour in a meeting with a few bright people and you will end up with dozens of new ideas. Then what? Where do those ideas go? Who evaluates them and shepherd them through the next stages? Companies that get innovation right embrace a holistic view and create a culture that it flourishes. They build, implement, and communicate a process to support innovation so that everyone knows how it works and is able to participate. In the end, for innovation to occur you need a formalized process for ensuring that ideas are nurtured.

3. Laying the Success of Innovation Solely on the Shoulders of Technologists
Technology should support innovation, not lead it. This is because innovation is first an issue of corporate culture, concerning things such as rewards, inspiration, and motivation. In any situation, you get two activities -the invention and the innovation, or the actual process of innovating. Information technology/systems department have the task of implementing the technology that best support the innovation process.

4. Creating an Obstacle Course of Ideas

If you want to guarantee a process that kills the innovative spirit, force people to take time away from their regular jobs to defend their new ideas. I am not trying to sound like a corporate radical, but bureaucracy and Byzantine processes discourage enthusiasm and participation. Ideas need a safe place to take shape. You must protect ideas long enough to evaluate and document them. Make this process even a bit cumbersome, and people will just avoid it, allowing their ideas to languish rather than going to the mat every time they have an idea. Eventually, you'll adopt the tongue-in -check mantra of the military: "The last thing you want to do is volunteer!"

5.Viewing "Different" and "New" as Bad
I've heard legions of very smart people say, "That's just not the way we do it around here!" and that's the single most incredible aspect of my job. If anything is certain in life it is that every single idea we hold as indisputable, eventually will be disputed and trumped by another. Barring the most basic moral truths and human values. ideas are meant to be disproved and replaced with newer ideas. Yet the fear of the "new" is always present. So the next time you want to say, " That's not the way we do it here," substitute, "We prefer to let someone else do it that way and succeed in figuring out how to make it work so that they can take our customers away." "Doesn't sound comforting, does it? Today's world requires companies to become more like Gillette, which invest enormous amount of money in developing products to compete with existing ones. Gillette's reasoning is simple; if it doesn't innovate on its product, someone else will.

6. Handing Over the Good Ideas to the Legal and Accounting Departments
Ideas are fragile;they're broken or sqaushed easily. On the surface, giving the care of those ideas to legal or accounting may make sense because some of the greatest issues with protecting new ideas are legal and financial. Create support and ownership for innovation at management uppermost tiers.

7. Being Very, Very Afraid of Failure
I've found that failure -tolerant management is the third most important ingredient in creating innovative culture. Although it's possible to build an iterative process and lessen the cost of failure, the bottom line is that the market is fickle, and you can't predict what will happen.

Here's the scary truth: You will fail sometimes. Like a child learning to ride a bike, you simply cannot move ahead wihout taking a few knocks. The question is," Are you in the kind of organization that can embrace innovation in spite of that?" What doesn't work out is merely a learning experiences and , therefore, fodder for innovation cycle. Use case studies, research, and other approaches to show naysayers why learning experiences are a must in today's corporate environment.

8. Innovate Only When You Need To
It's tantalizing to innovate on demand. It appears to cost less, focus on specific issues, and provide a rallying cry when a crises looms. Beside, it is the way most innovation seems to occur. This is like trying to stay healthy by waiting for a life threatening condition to arise before paying attention to your health. A crisis is certainly a motivator, but it is also the most expensive way to innovate in terms of costs, resources, and image.

Unfortunately, we have become accustomed to crisis-driven innovation over the better part of the last 200 years as the industrial model was taking shape in many nations globally. Continuing to approach investment innovation from the standpoint of zero-based budgeting only serves to drive innovation costs up and to reinforce the lack of ongoing process that contribute to a culture and business model of continuous innovation.

9. Leaving Innovation up to the "Innovators"

Every organization has handful of people who are considered thought leaders. Sometimes they are leaders, other times well tenured individuals, and sometimes people tasked with coming up with big ideas.In all these cases, the implication is that only these big thinkers can create big ideas. It may be true that these are the brightest minds of the organization, but ideas can and should come from everyone in the organization. Focusing on just the "big" ideas or just the "big" minds is equally dangerous; it creates barriers for incremental innovation and encourages ideas to find a home elsewhere. You still might need someone help you understand the process of innovation and jump start your "innovation Zone," but it has to become your "innovation zone."

10. Encouraging Everyone to Drop Any and All Ideas Into Electronic Submission Box
This last point may surprise you. After all, isn't the whole point of innovation to encourage idea submission? Yes, but there's a very important caveat: You must evaluate every innovation effort and check it for practicality and suitability for the organization. Some of the biggest failures I've seen involve companies where ambition to solicit ideas far exceeded the capacity to evaluate them.

The reality is that when you ask someone to submit an idea you have to acknowledge it with sincere evaluation, no matter how silly the idea may appear. Organizations make two fatal mistakes in this regard. First, they put one part time person at the narrow end of a very large funnel of new ideas. This is a setup disaster; no one person can keep up with the flow, and it's too easy to shoot down ideas that don't pass some unwritten code of accessibility. Second, the ideas languish in a nondescript repository with no taxonomy to group them, combine them, and make it possible to mine them. You must treat ideas with respect. Whatever systems you put in place must have boundaries for what constitutes an idea submission. For example, what core values or hurdles must it pass? You must have a transparent process for the evaluation.

You need to involve the submitter and communicate the idea's status. I often use the analogy of dropping off a child at day care. Parents who use day care are concerned justifiably and have many questions of the provider before they will leave their chid. What is the environment? Will staff care for and nurture them? Will parents be involved, contacted, and counseled if needed? Will children benefi from the experince? All of these are some sorts of questionsto ask the brainchildren entrusted to an innovation management system.

Overcoming the 10 innovation killers can be daunting challenge for many organizations. The innovation killers are not behaviors that change overnight. They require a sustained and systematic appraoch. The best way to begin chipping away at them is to create a team specifically tasked with nurturing innovation throughout the organization by establishing an innovation zone where new ideas can take root. It's key that such a team does not own or co-opt ideas, but instead nurtures and grows them.