Why isn’t the development of rational thinking process capabilities throughout an organization a key part of every organization’s employee development investment? In over fifty years of offering rational thinking process skill development, we see three barriers to companies making this investment in their people.
First, there is a lack of understanding of the need for training in how to think.
Daniel Kahneman, in his terrific book titled Thinking, Fast and Slow, describes our two modes of thinking; what he calls System 1 which is automatic, instant, intuitive and involuntary, relying on our perceptions of our knowledge and experience; and System 2 which is more structured, controlled analytical and effortful. Because System 1 is automatic and requires little or no effort, we have a natural bias towards its use. Yet Kahneman is able to demonstrate through the results of experiment after experiment, that System 1 thinking often leads us to erroneous conclusions of which we can see ample evidence every day in the business news. We are often unaware of the powerful influence of System 1 thinking and its potential for leading an individual or an organization astray. C-Suite executives frequently believe that they have developed strong decision making and problem solving skills based on their intelligence and experience.
They don’t think they personally need any improvement in the skills which got them to the top and, either others within the organization can do the same or “we can get more talented people to replace them.” They don’t recognize System 1 thinking and its limitations in themselves and they see poor decisions by others as a lack of inherent judgment, not as a lack of teachable skills.
Second, even if executives understand and accept the need for System 2 thinking skill development, they often think training is THE ANSWER.
They don’t understand that training does not develop skills in individuals. We hear repeatedly over the years, we need to make better decisions in this organization. Give us a three-day training program. No matter how effective the training is, with training alone, most participants retain less than 20% of any skill development training after six months and very few will actually use what they learn in the workplace. This should not be a surprise. We have all learned to drive a car. Many of us started with classroom instruction; but following that instruction, no one would have let us get behind the wheel of a car and drive off alone. We surely went through several months with a parent or instructor in the car with us, demonstrating good driving skills and giving continuous feedback and coaching while we drove, with the need for coaching diminishing as our skills improved. Only after the coach had high confidence we had mastered the skills of driving were we given the keys and allowed to drive off on our own. As with driving a car, mastery of any but the simplest skills requires the same level of support.
… a few organizations have made this journey and with spectacular results.
Third, they are not up for the effort.
For those who know that training alone is ineffective, they see the path to embedding rational thinking process skills throughout an organization as long and hard. They might see automation or software investments as easier paths to improving an organization’s performance. But in our experience, without rational process thinking to guide the decision making and inevitable problem resolution, complex automation or software implementation projects never deliver the promised benefits, and in some instances have brought an organization to its knees.
These barriers have kept many organizations from embarking on the journey of creating a critical thinking culture throughout their organization. But a few organizations have made this journey and with spectacular results.
Case Study: Rational Process Thinking and Corporate Culture
Let me tell you about the company I was fortunate to lead for 22 years and the journey we took to make Kepner-Tregoe rational process thinking tools a foundational element of our culture.
From 1987 until 2009, I was CEO of Interbake Foods, a food processing company headquartered in Richmond, Virginia. We competed in four business segments: Girl Scout cookies, contract manufacturing for branded companies, private label cookies sold to retailers, and baked ingredients for ice cream processors (primarily ice cream sandwich cookies and cones). Interbake had no brands of its own and competed on the basis of operational excellence. To be successful without the power of a brand we had to be a low cost, high quality manufacturing company with superior customer service. If we were operationally excellent at those three competitive parameters, we could profitably grow our business. If we failed to achieve operational excellence in any one of those elements, we were doomed in our industry to mediocrity or even failure.
In 1989, we began a journey to be the best in our industry on cost, quality and customer service. We choose three core initiatives to get there: automating our top 25 products, which were 70% of our total volume; implementing enterprise resource planning (ERP) and getting to a world class level; and implementing statistical process control (SPC) on all of our production lines while driving process control to the operator level with line leaders focused on process improvement. We felt strongly that carrying these three initiatives to a world-class performance level would deliver world-class results on cost, quality and customer service—our key competitive parameters.
Our fourth strategic initiative was to adopt Kepner-Tregoe rational process thinking and project management skills as foundational capabilities for every salaried employee and key operator in the business.
We quickly discovered that we had to add a fourth strategic initiative. We were generating a lot of data from our ERP and SPC initiatives, but there was considerable variation in the quality of the decision-making and problem solving being done with that data. We also found that installation and startup of our significant capital investments were taking far longer and were more costly than anticipated. Our fourth strategic initiative was to adopt Kepner-Tregoe rational process thinking and project management skills as foundational capabilities for every salaried employee and key operator in the business. We came to believe that mastery of rational process thinking throughout the organization would not only improve our results, but would also profoundly affect the culture, improving the capability of teams to work more collaboratively and effectively. We were right.
Since we had none of these capabilities in January, 1989, we clearly had a lot on our plate. The key drivers that made these changes a permanent, sustainable reality are training, leadership, and an infrastructure of support.
We had to train a lot of people in ERP processes, SPC techniques, and rational process tools. We decided to own the training. These core capabilities would be taught by internal resources, and those resources would come from senior staff and line managers. This choice was made to highlight that these capabilities are strategic and not the flavor-of-the-month.
We decided to train our leaders first and that every executive would be as knowledgeable about these core capabilities as any operator. Several executives became trainers. As CEO, I attended the Kepner-Tregoe, two-week, train-the trainer program and became a certified instructor of their problem solving and decision making tools, along with three other senior executives. We committed to training every salaried employee in a four-day program and every hourly machine operator and maintenance employee in a two-day program within three years, ultimately over 1000 employees. We also committed to building the support infrastructure within the business to provide feedback, coaching and incentives to embrace, master and use what was learned in the training and to build use of our core capabilities into every conversation with our people.
To build and sustain mastery of our core capabilities requires a structure of support.
To build and sustain mastery of our core capabilities requires a structure of support. With this in place, capabilities can be embedded into the way things are done and the culture of the organization.
Ongoing Skill Development Support: The best participants from training events were given additional training and opportunities to become process facilitators and coaches. From that group, the best of the best were given even more training to become trainers themselves.
Performance Management System: Knowledge and use of our core capabilities were built into our performance management system (key emphasis areas, 360 feedback, promotion criteria).
Process Integration: The requirement to use our core capabilities was built into every applicable process in the business. For example, no capital request above $50,000 could be submitted without a KT Decision Analysis attached. There could be no project startup without a documented KT Potential Problem Analysis. The ERP process became THE way we managed inputs and outputs to the business. SPC became universal on our plant floors.
Audits: The key driver for change was our use of executive audits. We did ERP audits, ISO audits and operational excellence (OE) audits. As an example, for the OE audits, a senior executive team usually led by me, visited each of our manufacturing plants every six months. We had unique audit forms for each position in the plant: key operator, line supervisor, department manager, and plant manager. The audit questions defined in detail what someone in the position would be doing if they were performing in our desired future state. As auditors, question-by-question, we would look for demonstrated performance or documented evidence that the person being audited was working that way. Over a three-day period we would interview every key operator, every line supervisor, department manager and the plant manager on all three shifts. Every deficiency we found was treated as an on-the-spot coaching opportunity. The fact that the senior team was there, digging deep into that level of detail, demonstrated we were serious and that this was vital to the future of the business.
We also found that after the first audit we really knew what was happening in each plant. This was a very different experience from sitting in a conference room and listening to the management team tell us what was going on and very different from a typical plant walk-through.
We would score the plant at the end of the audit, note the gaps, advise on priorities for allocating resources to close the gaps, and promise to return in six months. This put continuous pressure on the plant management team to focus on identified deficiencies and drive improvements before the next audit. Since they had copies of all the audit sheets for everyone interviewed, they could target where additional skill development was needed.
Interestingly, we found key operators grew to love being audited. The audits strongly communicated that their jobs were important enough for the CEO, VP of Operations, or VP of Sales to be there on every shift to talk to them one–on-one. They were eager to demonstrate their growing mastery.
We achieved and sustained Class A ERP status. We became the first baking company in North America to be ISO certified as a company at all locations. We reached a world-class level of performance in our use of SPC.
How was that reflected in performance? We more than doubled our pounds produced per employee while cutting our plant overhead cost per pound produced in half. Our order fill rate was consistently at around 99.8% with low raw materials and finished goods inventories and production schedules that were 80% stable during a week. In our consumer products business units we averaged less than two complaints from consumers per million packages sold. We achieved high market shares in the four niche markets where we choose to compete. All of this was accomplished while moving towards an employee to supervisor ratio of about 60 to one. Two of our smaller plants with 90 to 100 employees, ran 24 hours a day with only one manager on site. This was only possible because of the investment made in capability development, including the foundation of rational process thinking skills.
Where to Begin: A Strategic Approach To Organization-Wide Change
Training is just an event on the rod to skill mastery.
We know that frequently companies choose training for ill-formed reasons and with no plan for achieving sustainable skill mastery. Training is just an event on the road to skill mastery. The solution must be strategic.
There is no quick fix. It takes a long-term view and a strong senior leadership commitment to make a meaningful difference in how an organization performs.
Why make that monumental an effort? Because it is the only way an organization can drive long-term, sustainable, superior results. But the commitment must flow from an organization’s strategy, not from someone’s personal likes or preferences.
The core skill requirements of an organization should flow out of strategy.
As part of the strategic planning process, the executive leadership team should be asking: What core skills does the organization require to realize its strategy? Constant flawless new product launches (project management skills), superior consultative selling capability(selling skills), lowest cost manufacturing (lean/six sigma skills), exceptional product quality (SPC skills), superior customer issue resolution (troubleshooting skills), superior order fill rates (ERP skills). We have to choose the capabilities that matter most to create differentiation and competitive advantage. And having chosen, we must invest to create and sustain those capabilities. What do our people have to be great at to achieve the competitive advantage we’ve targeted? No enterprise can be great at everything. We have seen so many organizations frustrated because they have communicated their strategy to their people and then expected people to execute that strategy. But without consciously and deliberately giving people the knowledge, tools, skills and support to be able to execute the strategy, they have set everyone up for failure.
Strategic, core skills demand not just C-Suite support, but its direct involvement in developing and modeling those core skills.
Support is never enough to drive change. People hear what leaders say, but they pay close attention to what leaders do. If the leaders say we will use a formal, structured decision making process for all significant decisions and they master and always use that process, everyone else will quickly get on board. If, on the other hand, the leaders continue to make decisions by intuition and personal preference and expect everyone else to use the structured process, people will hunker down and wait until this fad also passes on.
The C-suite must invest in the infrastructure necessary to get from training to mastery.
This means moving from classroom instruction to using the strategic skills with a high level of proficiency every day in every applicable situation.
Leadership: The Key to Creating a Thinking Organization
Imagine an organization where everyone from the C-suite to the shop floor has mastered rational thinking processes for setting priorities, solving problems, making decisions and protecting and executing plans; where everyone has mastered the same thinking processes using the same approach and the same common thinking language. How much more effective would each individual be in contributing to the goals of the organization? How much more effective would work teams and project teams be in improving the processes of the organization? How much more effective would the executive leadership team be in making major strategic decisions for the organization and ensuring the execution of key strategic initiatives?
Through an investment in embedding mastery of rational process thinking, an organization can create sustainable competitive advantage, routinely finding better solutions to any issue faster than competitors, always working on the current vital few issues, always getting to root cause and fixing problems permanently and completely, always making the best-balanced decisions, and always executing those decisions and the plans to support them on time, on budget and error free.
Anything that can be described can be learned and mastered, including leadership.
If you wanted to create the thinking organization described above, what would it take? Obviously, it would take real leadership. That can seem quite daunting when leadership seems to be in such short supply. Where are we going to find the leaders to drive such significant change? The answer is that we can find them amongst ourselves. Leadership is work. All work is process. All processes can be described. Anything that can be described can be learned and mastered, including leadership. All it takes is the commitment and the will to take the risk and do the work.
Leadership Process Model
What does the leadership process look like? There are eight steps. All must be followed. Leave out any one step of the process, and successful change becomes unlikely. Every step benefits from the use of rational thinking processes.
- Understand the current state of the organization. What about the current state of our organization is keeping us from realizing our full potential? Given our strategic focus, what do we have to be great at in order to differentiate ourselves and deliver a unique value proposition, and what are the gaps between what we have to be great at and where we are today?
- Develop a vision of what the organization would look like if we were already great at these key differentiators. By vision, I don’t mean the usual two- or three-sentence vision statement which may inspire but which does not inform. A meaningful vision of a desired future state is a detailed description of what capabilities people will have mastered, what they will be doing, what tools they will be using, and what systems will be in place. For Interbake, the audit forms were a documented, detailed description of what behaviors in our desired future state looked like for every key position in the business. These audit forms communicated a clear destination for everyone. Audits clearly answered the question for each individual, what do you expect of me. Only then could the leadership start to build plans to get from here to there; and only then could they clearly communicate to everyone what “there” looks like.
- Check alignment of the vision with the current culture. How aligned is the current culture with where you want to take the organization? This assessment will give you some idea of how difficult making changes will be. For example, if you have an informal culture and you are trying to introduce defined formal processes you need everyone to adhere to, you are going to have a much steeper mountain to climb than if you already have a formal, process centered culture. Understanding how the culture will facilitate the changes or slow them down should inform the planning for change.
- Communicate every day and in every way where we are going and why it matters. Many times we hear from clients, everyone knows the change strategy but for some reason they are just not getting on board. We have published the key elements of our changes in our company newsletter, on posters and in at least a couple of speeches from the CEO. We know that people rarely buy in to change from these types of communications. The communications plan must be embedded into everything the organization does, including in the next four leadership process steps.
- Resource the changes that have to happen. Because in Step 2 we developed a very clear, specific definition of what people would have to be doing differently from what they are doing today, we are able to develop concrete plans on what knowledge, skills, tools, and systems people will need and we can prioritize, plan and resource the journey from here to there. Without adequate planning and resources, change will not happen. The resourcing plan is also a clear communication to the organization that this change is important and we are committed to it.
- Plan and demonstrate how leadership is going to model the change. This is perhaps the most important form of communication. Unless leadership shows direct involvement in the changes and visibly demonstrates what the changes look like, people will not be motivated to change. It will seem easier to wait it out until, like all past initiatives, this too passes away. In the Interbake example, leadership attended the core trainings and not only mastered the core capabilities, but also committed themselves to teaching those core capabilities. In addition, the audit process gave leadership an opportunity to demonstrate their commitment to change and the importance of specific changes to the organization. Leadership found opportunities to ask questions and to use the language of the core capabilities everyday to reinforce and model how we do it in this organization. This can’t be by accident or left to individual choice. It must be planned and executed by the entire leadership team.
- Establish clear metrics to measure progress towards the defined future state. For many people within an organization, the journey towards significant change may seem too far and too hard. Leaders must establish not only measures for the final destination, but also milestone measures that break the journey up into digestible bites and give people a sense of progress. As has been said many times, what gets measured gets worked on. All of the audits at Interbake were scored and gaps were identified to be worked on before the next audit.
- Recognize and reward. And finally, as progress is made, we must celebrate progress and recognize and reward early adopters to encourage people to come on board. In the Interbake audit process, we celebrated progress on audit scores, recognized individual contributors, and awarded financial incentives based on meeting specific change goals.
Of course, throughout this leadership process, decisions have to be made, priorities set, problems resolved and plans made and successfully executed. Mastery and use of rational thinking processes is foundational for any leader working in this or any other process. Adoption of rational thinking processes by the executive leadership team is the solid foundation upon which the thinking organization will be built. A company can find success within the first 4-6 months post implementation through high performers achieving real business results. These results tend to build on one another and over time multiply and spread throughout the organization. When it is successful it is imbedded into the culture and becomes the way you do business.