What
Happens If People Really Are More Important Than Programs?
By
Janice Erwin
Edward Deming (1993), the father of Total Quality Management (TQM), asserted,
that “Workers are responsible for only 15% of the problems, the system for
the other 85%.” He also stated
that the system is the responsibility of management. He further suggested that
leaders provide core values, consistency of purpose, information, support,
training, integration, common language, continuing feedback, integrity, trust,
time, and resources. Employees, on the other hand, are responsible for
improving themselves and the work process so that the results of the
organization also continually improve.
TQM,
applied to education, requires leaders with a commitment to aims and purpose,
a shared common vision, as well as employee development in leadership and
pride in their work. A TQM model focuses on excellent, quick, high-quality and
flawless service. A TQM system stresses improved outcomes, cooperation,
teamwork, efficiency, productivity, and involved, informed, motivated staff.
Likewise,
Stephen Covey (1994) in The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People concurs
with these concepts. Habit 2, “Begin with the End in Mind”, teaches that
formulating a mission statement to express purpose and meaning will define the
boundaries to evaluate decisions and choose appropriate behaviors. Covey
purports that excellence within organizations is the result of commitment to
shared vision. He emphasizes, “Vision is the fundamental force that drives
everything else in our lives. It impassions us with a sense of the unique
contribution that’s ours to make. It empowers us to put first things first,
compasses ahead of clocks, people ahead of schedules and things” (p. 116).
Values,
purpose, and vision have been identified as the most distinguishing
characteristics of successful organizations. Collins and Porras
(1994) warn, however, that “there is a big difference between being an
organization with a vision statement and becoming a truly visionary
organization” (pp. 238-239).
Peter Senge
(1990) supports a generative process in a “learning organization” to
enhance and extend an organization’s creativity. He, too, believes a shared
vision provides focus and energy for learning and creates commitment rather
than compliance. Most importantly, opportunities to communicate, learn, experiment,
to be accountable for results, and to be a part in shaping the future combine
to nourish vision. Naturally, these activities, which stimulate growth, also
frequently create disequilibrium.
Margaret
Wheatly (1992) argues that discomfort brings
understanding, motivation, and satisfaction with successful, new approaches.
This flexible process allows an organization to become a viable, living,
adaptive, well-ordered unit. Some leaders are uncomfortable with periods of
turbulence and resort to rigid structures to regain control. Unfortunately,
this action eliminates learning as well as the processes of responding and
improving. To achieve a unified vision Sagor and
Barnett (1994) suggest the necessity of professional growth opportunities to
first develop and strengthen a set of cultural norms within the educational
arena.
Organizational
culture is frequently a scheduled topic during new employee orientation. In
many business environments, culture is best defined as “the way we do things
around here.” Many companies have traditionally demanded a formal and
structured routine. For instance, employees at PriceWaterhouseCooper
(PWC), a major accounting firm, must eat lunch either with their clients or
with their teams. Moreover, fast food is not an appropriate choice, for the
food must be served on a “real” plate. In addition, the dress code for
female employees dictates ultra conservative single color suits and no open
back shoes. Because their employees work at their clients’ locations, the
projected professionalism of PWC employees is crucial to the PWC image. On the
other hand, some corporations today are choosing a more informal and relaxed
working environment. As a result, casual dress has become a lifestyle trend.
Nevertheless, dress is merely one aspect that reflects the culture of a
particular work environment. Shaping an effective culture, which allows people
to do their work, is one of the most important responsibilities of a leader.
Schein
(1985) asserts that culture “influences the ways in which group members
perceive, think, and feel about the world thereby serving to stabilize that
world, give meaning to it, and thereby reduce the anxiety that would result if
we did not know how to categorize and respond to the environment” (p.312). Bolman
and Deal (1991) further define culture as “…both product and process. As
product, it embodies the accumulated wisdom of those who were members before
we came. As process, it is continually renewed and recreated and new members
are taught the old ways and eventually become teachers themselves.” (p. 231)
Beliefs, values, practices and artifacts define for . . .
members who they are and how they do things.” (p. 250)
Leaders train to become efficient in managing
the details of an organization. However, efficiency does not necessarily
result in effectiveness. Roger Duncan and Ed Pinegar
(2002) suggest that many of the best leaders are not formally trained or
skilled in the “nuances” of management. In fact, they may actually be
quite average in planning and organizing. Nevertheless, they wisely understand
that a leader’s purpose is to influence others to have a desire to be
better and to do better. They further clarify that influence is based on trust
and authenticity rather than on “manipulation” in any form. For example,
guilt trips are not motivation to change. When people understand and embrace
true principles for themselves, then they change and are more dedicated in
their responsibilities. Moreover, before they can influence, leaders must
demonstrate a personal and genuine concern. When a leader’s understanding
and appreciation are evident, his influence is not only magnified but also
multiplied, for it is highly contagious. In addition, if a leader truly
desires to influence, he must provide a climate to help people choose to do
well. External pressures may work for short-term change, but lasting
performance comes only through an internal, change of heart.
Clearly,
leaders must recognize the impact of culture on an organization. It not only
affects interpretation of events but also brings coherence through a united
purpose, a shared vision. To ignore this element could create unnecessary
roadblocks to new ideas and improvement as well as create a divisive work
environment.
References
Bolman,
L.G., & Deal, T.E. (1991). Reframing
Organizations.
Collins,
G.C., & Porras, G.I. (1994).
Build to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Companies.
Covey,
S.R. (1989). The
7 Habits of Highly Effective People.
Deming,
W.E. (1993). The New Economics for Industry, Government
and Education.
Duncan, R.D. & Pinegar,
E.J. (2002). Leadership
for Saints.
Sagor,
R., & Barnett, B.G. (1994). The
TQE Principal: A Transformational Leader.
Schein,
E. (1991). Organizational Culture and Leadership.
Senge,
P.M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning
Organization.
Wheatly,
M. (1992). Leadership and the New Science. San
Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.