Start with the specifics and then observe patterns

From WVO Designs Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Start with the specifics and then observe patterns.The issues log acts like a water filter that catches garbage.By examining the garbage and determining where it came from, you can determine how to eliminate it at the source.As you come up with the changes that will reduce or eliminate the garbage, the water will become cleaner.In addition to using issues logs to catch problems, you can use them to measure the numbers and types of problems, and they can therefore be effective metrics of performance.A common challenge to getting people to use issues logs is that they are sometimes viewed as vehicles for blaming people.If, for example, something goes wrong and it’s not in the issues log, the relevant people should be in big trouble.But there must be personal accountability.Detailed metrics measure individual, group, and system performance.Make sure these metrics aren’t being gamed so that they cease to convey a real picture.If your metrics are good enough, you can gain such a complete and accurate view of what your people are doing and how well they are doing it that you can nearly manage via the metrics.However, don’t even think of taking the use of metrics that far!Instead, use the metrics to ask questions and explore.Remember that any single metric can mislead.You need enough evidence to establish patterns.Metrics and 360 reviews reveal patterns that make it easier to achieve agreement on employees’ strengths and weaknesses.Of course, the people providing the information for metrics must deliver accurate assessments.There are various ways to facilitate this accuracy.Similarly helpful are forced rankings, in which people must rank coworker performance from best to worst.Forced rankings are essentially the same thing as grading on a curve. Metrics that allow for independent grading across departments and/or groups are especially valuable.Supposedly, if you throw a frog in a pot of boiling water it will immediately jump out.There is a strong tendency to get used to and accept very bad things that would be shocking if seen with fresh eyes.There is no other, or easier, alternative.So it’s really important to identify which of these categories the problem belongs to.They are outcomes produced by your machine, which consists of design and people.So when you have problems, your diagnosis should look at the design and the people to determine what failed you and why.An honest and collaborative exploration of problems with the people around you will give you a better understanding of why these problems occur so that they can be fixed.You will also get to know each other better, be yourself, and see whether the people around you are reasonable and/or enforce their reasonableness.Further, you will help your people grow and vice versa.Because it starts and ends with how you approach mistakes, I hope that I have conveyed why I believe this attitude about and approach to dealing with mistakes is so important.If you get adept at the process, it should take 10 to 20 minutes.As previously mentioned, it should be done constantly so that you have a large sample size and no one case is a big deal.What suboptimality did you experience?Is there a clear responsible party for the machine as a whole who can describe the machine to you and answer your questions about how the machine performed compared with expectations?Who owns this responsibility?What is the mental map of how it was supposed to work?They should lead to success anyway.What, if anything, broke in this situation?They will be descriptions.What is the systematic solution?How should the people / machines / responsibilities evolve as a result of this issue?Are there responsibilities that need either assigning or greater clarification?Are there machine designs that need to be reworked?Are there people whose fit for their roles needs to be evaluated?It is described by using adjectives rather than verbs.Keep asking why to get at root causes, and don’t forget to examine problems with people.Did his manager know that he wasn’t well trained and let him do the job anyway, or did he not know?