Motivating
Your Team
When I was a young supervisor, I sought out the ideal
way to motivate people. I thought that there had to be a universal,
optimal way to motivate the individuals on your team to perform at
their best. I eventually learned that no such thing exists.
People
are enormously complex. They are very different, from one person to
the next. And any one person changes through time, both short-term
and long term. So I started to think that a leader needed multiple
motivational methods to cover every person at any given time. This
immediately seemed impractical – far too many possibilities to keep
in mind.
At this point, I gave up and stopped trying to motivate
people. I just let them know what needed to be done and made sure
that they had everything that they needed to get it done.
Over
time I came to realize that most of the conventional methods of
motivating people were manipulative and ineffective. At best, you
might get a short term burst of productivity, but that was it. At
worst, you get cynicism and mistrust.
I’ve come to believe
that it’s actually human nature to be purposeful and productive. If
you accept this, than a leader’s job is to create an environment in
which his team can be productive and thrive.
All you need to do,
as a leader, is point in the right direction, get out of the way and
turn ‘em loose. In my experience, most people respond very well to
this kind of treatment.
Posted January 4th, 2022
I
once worked for a manufacturing company who’s owners were very
quick to lay-off their employees. If there was no customer orders to
work on, right now, then “Get out - Go home”. Very short term,
unpaid, lay-offs. One week, one day, and, yes, they would even send
people home in the middle of the day. The typical targets of these
lay-offs were the factory workers, but sometimes, high skilled office
workers would get hit too. While it never happened to me, I saw,
first hand, the impact of getting laid off had on my coworkers. More
about this later.
Now I understand the business case for
laying people off. If the company doesn’t have orders and the
worker is not making product, then that worker is not generating any
revenue. Cash flow stops – actually reverses. If the company’s on
the verge of bankruptcy and it’s very survival is at stake, then
lay-offs are absolutely necessary. But what if the company has enough
reserves and/or other sources of income to continue for a time?
An
alternative to quick lay-offs would be to ask every worker and
supervisor to create a list of projects that could be done during
slow-downs. Projects to improve safety, quality and/or productivity.
Continuous improvement projects. Kaizen projects. Then the cost of
keeping people on the payroll becomes an investment for the future
instead of an unrecoverable expense. Short term thinking versus long
term thinking.
Typically, the victims of lay-offs are the
lowest paid employees in the company. The ones who live pay cheque to
pay cheque, the ones who can least afford to have their income
interrupted. Getting laid off can be very traumatic for these
workers. It feels like a betrayal. It permanently changes their
attitude towards the company. Any loyalty they felt for the company
is gone. They realize that the company considers them expendable.
They feel disrespected. If they come back to work, they will never be
the same, never work as hard, never care as much.
And they
might not come back. Getting laid-off shakes a lot of people out of
their complacency and motivates them to seek out a better job. The
company risks losing the experience, skills and knowledge of their
employees. The high cost of employee turnover is well documented. The
attitude of the workers, who didn’t get laid-off is also adversely
affected and may prompt departures.
Of course, some
(most?) companies use slow-downs to weed out their less productive
employees – the ones who are not bad enough to outright fire, but
can be laid-off and never recalled. This strategy is more a reaction
to labour laws then questionable business policy.
But, the
impact on those not laid-off still needs to be considered.
Once
again, it all comes down to respect. If you respect your employees,
if you treat them as irreplaceable assets, not as expendable costs,
you have a much better chance of implementing a culture of continuous
improvement. And implementing a culture of continuous improvement
unlocks enormous benefits.
Posted 5 days ago
Many
manufacturing companies push hard to get their machine utilization
rate up to 100% and why wouldn’t they? The machines are expensive
and they have to pay for themselves. If a machine is sitting idle,
it’s not making money. This is one very important reason to run
shifts – to keep the machines running and producing around the
clock.
But there is a caveat.
While having a
machine utilization rate approaching 100% is a desirable goal, it
should never be the primary goal. Very simply, the primary goal is to
make a profit by satisfying your customers. Your customer doesn't
care what your machine utilization rate is, they want your product or
service "free, perfect and now" - or as close as possible
to "free, perfect and now". Having one or more machines
available for rush jobs or as backups for broken machines, can be
crucial for customer satisfaction. Stand-by machines are, of course,
a drag on machine utilization, but it may be a necessary one. To sum
up, the danger lies in getting obsessed with machine utilization at
the expense of higher priorities.
The other thing to
consider is; how do you increase machine utilization to optimum
levels? Imposing a top-down strategy is one possible path. In my
experience, it is the least effective method.
Increasing
machine utilization is a huge task that involves many overlapping
processes, people, and details. The easiest and most effective way to
get there is to get everyone helping through employee empowerment and
continuous improvement. Cultivating a culture of continuous
improvement is a major challenge in itself, but the benefits are
enormous and extend beyond just machine utilization.
Posted 6 days ago
I
recently observed a manufacturing company struggling to hire a
replacement weekend shift supervisor – the long-time incumbent had
left. The plant manager was limited to promoting from within due to
the difficulties of finding a person with the right technical skills
who was also willing to work at below market pay rates that the
company typically offered.
A plausible, but less than
ideal candidate was identified and asked to assume the
responsibilities. It was at this point that the manager’s approach
went off the rails. Imagine the following conversation;
Candidate:
Yes, I am interested in becoming the weekend shift supervisor. How
much will my pay increase?
Manager: There will be no increase at
this time.
Candidate: When will I start?
Manager:
Immediately.
Candidate: When will you announce the
promotion?
Manager: We are not going to announce your
promotion.
Now it’s pretty easy to read between the
lines and extract the implicit message. The manager is implicitly
telling the candidate; We have have no confidence in your ability to
succeed at this new role so we are not going to commit to you – we
will just try you out and see what happens.
What happened
next was predictable. The candidate accepted the promotion for two
weekends and then resigned from it. Over the two weekends, the
candidate realized that the promotion, and the way it was offered,
was an insult and the additional, unrewarded responsibilities were
not worth the stress.
The consequences from all this are also
pretty easy to see. The company still doesn’t have a weekend shift
supervisor. The ex-candidate’s attitude towards the company and
management is going to be much more negative. His co-workers,
observing this or hearing about it, are also going to be far less
trusting of the management. Nothing good came from this or can come
from this.
A better approach when asking someone to take
on a new challenge is to fully commit to their success. You give them
the raise, you give them the title, you formally announce it to the
company. You tell them that you will support them if they have any
issues. In other words, your words and your actions express full
confidence in their ability to succeed in their new role.
The
timid, half-assed approach is self sabotage.
Great leaders make
a decision and then fully commit to it. Great leaders bring out the
best in people and make everyone around them better.
Posted 7 days ago
I’ve
had the good fortune of learning how to be an excellent
leader/manager from three bosses who knew what they were doing.
One
attribute they all had in common was that they were all open, honest
and realistic. By realistic, I mean that they all had a very firm and
accurate grasp of reality. No self-delusion, or wishful thinking –
they knew the score. And being open and honest implies
respect.
Number three on the list was my father, a
contractor. My father taught me to have deep respect for people who
were good at their job – didn’t matter what that job was, as long
as they were good at it. He also had a way of asking his employees to
do things in a way that made you feel unreasonable if you said no. He
would phrase it as a respectful request, rather than an order. He was
the boss, so he could deliver it as an order, but chose to treat
people respectfully instead.
Ranked a close second was Don
M. at the robotics startup. He came into the company as VP, helped us
go public, eventually left as president. He treated everybody with
respect, was open and honest always. If you asked him a question that
he did not know the answer to, he would reason it out, out loud,
right in front of you. Or just admit that he didn’t know – never
tried to bluff or weasel his way out of answering the
question.
First on my list was Brian B., night shift
supervisor at the bank card personalisation company. Brian was hired
to start up the night shift and was promised the production manager
position on days, when he was finished getting the night shift
rolling. Brian used to have an end of shift administrative task at
the computer every day. The computer was on a stand up desk in the
middle of the production room. Everyday a crowd of women would form
around him as he joked with them, gently teased them, even flirted
with them. He, like the others mentioned here, was very open, honest
and respectful. In return, everybody was very loyal to him and would
deny him no favors – if Brian asked for overtime, you did your best
to agree.
These three illustrated to me how important it
is to treat people with respect. And also that it can’t be faked.
Respect shows through in all the tiny, daily interactions that you
have with people, especially bosses. Bad bosses also give themselves
away when they’re talking to you about other people in a
disrespectful manner. If they talk disrespectfully about people who
are not in the room, it’s safe to assume that they’re not
respectful, in general.
The power of treating people with
respect is apparent when you realize that none of these three used
any of the conventional motivational techniques, but all of them got
the best out of people.
There is an undeniable advantage
to working at many different companies and having many different
bosses along the way. Some of your bosses will demonstrate the best
ways and some will show you how not to do things. Always something to
learn.
Posted 8 days ago
Paul Akers (2 second lean guy, that I previously mentioned) has posted a new video on YouTube where he talks about leadership.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31BdXWI80H4
It's
a good talk, typical for him, in that it doesn't get very abstract or
philosophical, but has good practical advice and interesting stories
in support of his points.
One thing that Paul doesn't talk about
here is leading by example. I want my team to treat each other in a
professional, business-like manner, i.e., to be polite and respectful
to each other. So I deliberately and explicitly model that behaviour.
I treat everybody with respect and dignity in pretty much every
situation. I typically never have to talk about it - the behaviour
catches on.
Another thing that I do at work is joke around a
lot. I like to keep things light-hearted. We all have to put in our 8
plus hours a day, 5 plus days a week, so let's inject a little humour
and fun into our day.
Related to this, I also try to make
everything easier - work shouldn't be a constant, frustrating
struggle. An example of this is set-up reduction - if I and/or my
guys can reduce the time-consuming obstacles and waste in the machine
set-up process, it means less frustration and more efficiency and
productivity. Which typically leads higher quality work and greater
job satisfaction.
And, of course, this is why I love Paul Akers
2-second lean - it greatly accelerates the making of work easier and
more efficient.
Posted 5 months ago
I've
developed a system for training new CNC machine operators, over time,
that's proven to be fairly effective. Executive summary: It's about
getting some repetitions in while increasing participation. This
training has to be effective because if the new operator makes a
mistake anywhere along the process, it can lead to a catastrophic
crash of the machine.
First, I show the sequence of steps
required, while explaining the reasons for those steps.
Then, I
have the new operator perform the same sequence, with me telling them
what to do each step along the way, I will also repeat, or elaborate
on, the reasons for each step.
Keep in mind that the opportunity
to train the second and third times might not come up for
days.
Lastly, I have the new operator perform the operation
themself under my supervision. I will intervene if they make a
mistake or get stalled. I may repeat this last training, if I judge
it to be necessary.
Posted 5 months ago
Lately, I've been watching videos about Lean Manufacturing by Paul Ackers of Fast Cap. I love his approach to it. He makes it mostly about eliminating waste and continuous improvement, with some 5S thrown in (3S actually) and keeps it simple and fun. And he pushed hard to thoroughly integrate into his company's culture. He's here on LinkedIn and has lots of videos on YouTube and free ebooks on his websites.
Posted 6 months ago
Leadership
Principle 2:
I find it useful to think of the other departments
in my company as internal customers and suppliers. In my current
role, I oversee a department that makes parts for a number of other
departments that perform assembly tasks. I look at those assembly
departments as my customers and that it is my job to keep them happy.
In other words, to give them what they need in order for them to do
their job, just like Principle 1. I can also be a demanding customer
to my internal suppliers - I insist that they provide me with what I
need in order to do my job. If this metaphor is embraced across the
company, it helps keep everyone focused on the essential - which is,
of course, to keep the end customer happy.
Posted 2 years ago
After
many years in a variety of leadership roles, I have developed a set
of leadership principles to guide me in my day to day activities in
my current position as a supervisor. Of course, I also observed
carefully the best of the leaders that I followed during my younger
years. My number one principle, the most fundamental, most essential
principle is simply, make sure that your team has everything they
need to do their job(s). This can include the obvious, concrete-level
items like raw materials and tools, to more abstract-level things
like time, organization and training. If I'm in a mid-level position,
I also expect my immediate supervisor to provide me with everything
that I need to do my job - even if I have to ask for it.
To
repeat, this is my most important leadership principle - more
principles to follow.
Posted 2 years ago