Comments on: How Does Your Team React to a New Person? http://www.leanblog.org/2009/07/how-does-your-team-react-to-new-person/ Mark Graban's leanblog.org - Lean Healthcare, Lean Thinking, Lean Manufacturing, Toyota Production System Thu, 09 Feb 2012 22:59:58 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Bruce Baker http://www.leanblog.org/2009/07/how-does-your-team-react-to-new-person/#comment-5149 Bruce Baker Mon, 06 Jul 2009 14:41:45 +0000 http://leanblog.bigbigdesign.net/2009/07/how-does-your-team-react-to-a-new-person/#comment-5149 We still have a lot of "We've always done it that way..."<br /><br />One way to change that is to let people who rate high on the following attributes on the bus (hiring - Jim Collins analogy):<br />*objectivity<br />*curiosity<br />*creativity<br />*internal locus of control<br />If you have these things as personality traits or drives or whatever then you naturally want to hear more and can evaluate it better.<br />I think in the case of people already on the bus it is a matter of focusing some amount of effort on the leaders (de jure and informal ones - de facto ones if you will) and get them thinking in a new way by teaching and showing (in parallel and under the radar). This means getting some things done via five why's and going to see the actual thing in the actual place with the leader(s) that you are trying to convert or 'convince' as quakers say. The reason that I recommend five why's and gemba is that - ideally - the real problem recognition will be simple enough (and therefore undeniable - perhaps epiphanic - once the leader deals with the natural level of cognitive dissonance) that it can lead to paradigm change. I also recommend these because they work a lot of the time.<br />If you have leaders who all have a high level of intellectual arrogance (often found in the absence of curiosity, creativity, and objectivity) then let me know what you have done that has been successful.<br />Note: 'informal leaders' as used in the above model don't (necessarily)show up on the org chart and finding them can be a big part of the battle. We still have a lot of "We've always done it that way…"

One way to change that is to let people who rate high on the following attributes on the bus (hiring – Jim Collins analogy):
*objectivity
*curiosity
*creativity
*internal locus of control
If you have these things as personality traits or drives or whatever then you naturally want to hear more and can evaluate it better.
I think in the case of people already on the bus it is a matter of focusing some amount of effort on the leaders (de jure and informal ones – de facto ones if you will) and get them thinking in a new way by teaching and showing (in parallel and under the radar). This means getting some things done via five why's and going to see the actual thing in the actual place with the leader(s) that you are trying to convert or 'convince' as quakers say. The reason that I recommend five why's and gemba is that – ideally – the real problem recognition will be simple enough (and therefore undeniable – perhaps epiphanic – once the leader deals with the natural level of cognitive dissonance) that it can lead to paradigm change. I also recommend these because they work a lot of the time.
If you have leaders who all have a high level of intellectual arrogance (often found in the absence of curiosity, creativity, and objectivity) then let me know what you have done that has been successful.
Note: 'informal leaders' as used in the above model don't (necessarily)show up on the org chart and finding them can be a big part of the battle.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]>