Jim Christenson retired last year after serving 40 years in university and federal facilities management. He can be reached at jchriste@umich.edu.
"If I really want to improve my situation, I can work on the one thing over which I have control-myself."
- Stephen Covey
What's going on?" is a general question that has many subsets. It is, of course, more specific to ask, "Are 99 percent of the widgets within tolerances?" Or, "What is the mean score on last week's customer survey?" Or, "How many days of backlog does each shop have?" But the real question always is, "What's going on?" That is the basic assessment question.
Asking the question is one thing. Finding satisfactory and factual answers is quite another. Making some measurements is easy. But usually the things most easily measured are least important and the things most difficult to measure are the most important.
Really quantifying what our customers think of our facilities services would be very helpful. But crafting a survey that paints an accurate picture is not easily done. Interviewing customers to determine their feelings about our service response usually yields a better picture of that customer's satisfaction, but it is neither quantifiable nor representative of the campus community. And taking the pulse of the campus community by interviews takes time. On the other hand, we can easily measure how many requisitions are sent to purchasing in an average day. But who cares?
Why should we ask the question in the first place? In an earlier column, I suggested that one of the jobs of a leader is to deliberately initiate change. But not just any change. There are a variety of logical reasons for change and a variety of guidelines available to help ensure that the change adds value. But in the context of assessment, change should take place if the actual situation does not match the desired situation. That is, if "what is" does not equal "what should be," a deviation exists. A deviation is quite likely to be a problem. And a problem usually requires a change in a process. So we return almost to the starting point: "What's going on?"
More than half a century ago, Dr. W. Edwards Deming, ignored by his fellow Americans, taught the Japanese how to ask the right questions. He convinced Japan's industry leaders that they could shed their image of being the manufacturer of shoddy merchandise. He told them that "the customer is the most important part of the production line" and that they should listen to their customers. And, of course, he taught them statistical quality control.
Most importantly, he taught them that quality begins in the production process, not in the quality control department. Making it right in the first place causes less rework and that results in fewer delays and lower costs. Further, he suggested that the person actually doing the work might have an idea or two about how to improve quality. It took Americans more than 30 years to recognize what the Japanese had learned in four years.
Assessment of the situation and improving the processes that affect the situation go together. The theme of this issue is Assessment and Continuous Improvement. These terms are purposely linked. It does no good to determine that "what is" does not equal "what should be" if nothing is done about it. The failure of the equation to balance calls for action.
Unfortunately, in the real life of the facilities manager, the number of deviations often greatly exceeds the manager's available time. Situation assessment or clarification is an evaluative technique. An experienced manager or leader makes this assessment quickly and subconsciously to determine which deviations are worth spending time on. The thought process probably includes the following:
If answers to these questions cause enough unease, the situation is given the valuable time needed to resolve it. Situation assessment requires that the person addressing the situation separate it into its parts. Usually the apparent issue is not the issue at all. And usually the issue is not one, but many. Finally, before action is taken, it is important that the assessment be based on facts insofar as that is possible.
Before we look at what to do with a situation, it's important to note that another of the jobs of a leader or manager is to look for situations where "what is" does not equal "what should be," where "what should be" is the standard or goal. The leader looks not only at "production" processes, but at how well the unit is tracking with its vision and strategic plan; the effectiveness of relations with customers; clarity of communications; tangible results from targeted training; the match between individual performance goals and results achieved; adherence to schedule; accuracy of estimates; the degree to which the organization meets budget goals; safety record compared with standards; condition of the campus compared with the expectations; and many more. The leader goes to these lengths because it takes much less time to close a deviation early rather than later.
Once the leader has determined that the results of a situation assessment require corrective action, a decision must be made as to what action is appropriate. Charles H. Kepner and Benjamin B. Tregoe, in their book, The Rational Manager, have some suggestions. Usually, but not always, the first action is to solve a problem. The appropriate first question often is, "Why did this happen?" A problem can be addressed by returning to the "is" word. We need to find out what is and what should be. Supporting questions might include: What specific item or action has deviated from the standard? And what very similar items have not? Where, specifically, is the deviation? Where is it not? When was the deviation first observed (by anyone)? What is the extent of the deviation?
Looking closely at the distinctions between what is and what should be helps specify the problem. And looking at any change (and its timing) that has taken place in one object or operation, without noticing changes in similar objects or operations, often uncovers the real cause.
Finding the cause of a problem is not the end, however. Something has to be done about the cause. Decision-making is the next step. The general question for decision-making is, "Which course of action should we take?" Sound decision-making starts with making a list of objectives for the decision. Describe what an excellent outcome would look like in qualitative and quantitative terms. Unless one starts with objectives, the first alternative that comes along looks good.
After listing as many objectives as possible, alternatives should be generated. Each is compared in turn with each objective to determine how well it meets the objective. The best fit is probably the best alternative. This process can be quantified by assigning a weight to each objective and assigning a score representing each alternative's success in satisfying the objective. Some of these alternatives may represent only a minor refinement that could constitute a step in continuous improvement. Or an alternative may define a change so sweeping that it would be categorized as starting over-business process reengineering or beyond. In the latter case, it may be wise to also determine the probability and the seriousness of potential adverse consequences of the decision.
Finally, if the situation warrants serious attempts to keep it on track, it may be worthwhile to plan for the future. What could go wrong again? What can we do to prevent it from deviating from our "what should be?" What contingency action can we take to mitigate the fallout if it still deviates despite these preventive actions?
I hope you cringed several paragraphs earlier when I wrote, "one of the chief jobs of a leader or manager is to look for situations where 'what is' does not equal 'what should be.' Some of you may remember the ancient (1981) book, The One Minute Manager, by Kenneth Blanchard and Spencer Johnson. These authors suggested that the key job of a manager is to catch people doing something right-and to praise that behavior on the spot. Assessment deals with comparing actual happenings with standards or ideals. Hopefully, that comparison does not always show a deviation. In an organization where worthy values are widely shared, "is" will usually equal or exceed "should." Then, it's not problem solving that is needed, but positive recognition of those responsible for making it happen.
My point is that assessment is only the beginning. It does no good to track down the answer to "What's going on?" unless you do something about the answer. So, while I urge you to ask the question often and in specificity, I also urge you to be prepared to follow through.
And don't forget to assess yourself, as Stephen Covey recommends in the opening quotation. Blanchard and Johnson would put it this way: "Take a minute: Look at your goals. Look at your performance. See if your behavior matches your goals." That's an assessment each of us might start the day with.