🚀 go-pugleaf

NOTE: EVERYONE! Before posting again, please reread this list's
Subscriber Posting Guidelines at:

        http://www.quality.org/lists/qual-list.html

Please!
Bill

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 1997 09:06:51 -0600
From: becky knight <wilson11@FLASH.NET>
To: Quality@PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU
Subject: Re: TQM & Unions

> RTalwarCBT@aol.com wrote:
> >
> > Alan Crammatte decribed a problem of gaining support for TQM / improvement
> > when one of two site unions are set against it.
> >
> > Alan,
> > I don't know how much freedom you have to talk directly with the workers -
> > but if this could be done, I'd suggest the following:
> >
> > either
> > A) set up an open session involving employees from both unions and set out
> > the problem - do they want to go down the TQM path, do they see see potentia
 l
> > benefits for themselves and the organisation? If they believe there is some
> > value to be had from such an approach, you could then ask them to set their
> > minds to how we bring the union on board. A conflict resolution approach is
> > required - looking at the problem from the Union power broker's persepctive
 -
> > what are their concerns, current realities, future aspirations and use these
> > insights to drive your approach to the Union leader.
> >
> > or
> > B) An alternative approach designed to deliver the same outcome would be to
> > bring people together to talk about 'how do we succeed with TQM' - technique
 s
> > like open space might help here (contact me if you want a detailed
> > description or design ideas). Clearly the Union support issue is likely to b
 e
> > one of the challenges that emerges. Antoher benefit of this approach is that
> > it is more balanced - looking at all of the barriers and stakeholders rather
> > than just the union issue. In workers' eyes this may have more acceptability
> > as it is trying to address the complete picture and not positioning them as
> > the only problematic stakeholder group.
> >
> > Good luck - I'm sure you will get a lot more valuable ideas and advice from
> > fellow listmembers.
> >
> > Rohit Talwar
> > Centre for Business Transformation - London
> > tel 44 171 435 3570
> > fax 44 171 794 3568
> > rtalwarcbt@aol.com

 Rohit,
 I think you bring out a very, very important point here...that in the
 course of trying to communicate and solve problems one of the worst
 things that can happen is that the person(s) you are trying to talk to
 or work with percieves that you think THEY are the problem. It will end
 any useful conversation and defenses go up immediately. That works both
 ways. Consequently we negotiate after the crisis. This is crisis
 management and is very expensive in the long run for the business and
 for the union. Motivation ought to exist on both sides (you would hope)
 to find a way to share significant goals that are in the interest of the
 continuing success for everyone.

 On that note here is a quote (not a very controversial one and that is
 good, right? I had started a controversy without intending to at all and
 it shows how people interpret anothers intentions and this is dangerous
 as it distorts reality and creates those crisis that we do not want to
 have to spend our time on....)

 "Man does not live by words alone, despite the fact that sometimes he
 has to eat them."  - Adlai Stevenson
 --
 Becky Knight            wilson11@flash.net
 My opinions, like yours, are valuable if offered with the right motives.
 They do not reflect employer's or others who influence my opinions.