PEER-REVIEWED PAPER: SPECIAL ISSUE ON LEARNING ORGANIZATIONS
PEER-REV I EWED PAPER: SPECI AL I SSU E ON LEARN I N G ORGAN I Z AT I ON S
P ARTNERING I S THE F OUNDATION OF A
L EARNING O RGANIZATION
By Carl E. DeVilbiss, 1 P.E., and Patricia Leonard 2
A BSTRACT :
A simple model of an implementation strategy for cultivating a Learning Or-
ganization culture is ‘‘Transformational Leadership 1 Group Process = Learning Organiza- tion.’’ This article presents the four key dimensions of Partnering, the Partnering Effectiveness Model, and Principles of Productive Partnering as the basis, or foundation, for following this implementation strategy. Honoring the structure and operating principles of this scientific understanding of Partnering creates a cultural orientation that fosters individual and team learning. Many organizations and their leaders are well intended, yet lack an understanding of the unconscious beliefs, behaviors, and cultural influences that impede learning. Using the implementation process presented, we take a step-by-step approach to systematically exploring what is actually going on now, and how we want things to be. Then, recognizing the need for developing new skills, and change processes, it is a straightforward approach to execute an improvement plan that ensures success.
WHY BOTHER WITH A LEARNING
management, and budgeted 2/10 of 1% of the total proj-
ORGANIZATION?
ect cost for formal Partnering efforts. One of their goals was to achieve a 10% savings compared to detailed cost
A few years ago International Paper studied the con- models from very similar projects at different sites. At struction project delivery process by developing a heavy
the end of the project, they had achieved 15% savings industrial plant model. The same model project was
with excellent safety performance, early completion, and planned for completion in the United States, Europe, and
high customer satisfaction. That calculates as a 75-to-1 Southeast Asia, using those markets’ respective delivery
benefit to cost on dollars alone.
processes. Scheduled completion, from concept to op- Forbes Magazine identified TD Industries, a mechan- eration, was estimated at 24 months in the United States,
ical contracting firm, as the number two best employer
20 months in Europe, and 16 months in Southeast Asia to work for in the United States in 1998. Eligible com- . . . same project, different approaches. Their findings
panies had to have at least 500 employees, and selections showed that a Japanese construction firm’s approach
were based on employee surveys and interviews, plus would be to integrate all design and construction func-
business performance measures. A group of TD Indus- tions for a given segment of the plant. Process, facility,
tries’ employees shared how they got there in a presen- construction, and operations representatives all worked
tation at the 1999 Associated Builders and Contractors shoulder to shoulder in collaboration from the beginning,
convention. The two primary contributing factors were learning the same things together while they executed.
reported to be absolute commitment to Servant Leader- In July 1994, the Construction Industry Institute News
ship and high levels of trust throughout the company reported results of a project Mobil Oil chose to execute
culture. Employee testimonials came in the last segment using a formal Partnering approach. This was a storm-
of the presentation. Indications were that leadership is water recovery project at a refinery in Beaumont, Tex.
cultivated and nurtured at every level of the organiza- Mobil used Bechtel for scope definition and program
tion, that senior management has repeatedly demon-
strated that they highly value and respect every single
Pres., Aegis Building Concepts, Inc., P.O. Box 24537, Nashville, TN 37202.
employee, and that at least 32 h of formal training and
2 Owner, Patricia Leonard & Associates, 807 Hillmeade Dr., Nash-
development (Learning) is required of everyone every
ville, TN 37221.
year.
Note. Discussion open until January 1, 2001. To extend the closing
There are some very powerful lessons in these stories.
date one month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Man-
First, no company can expect to compete in the fast
ager of Journals. The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and possible publication on December 14, 1999. This paper is
paced global economy of the twenty-first century unless
part of the Journal of Management in Engineering, Vol. 16, No. 4,
they are highly effective and continuously getting better.
July/August, 2000. qASCE, ISSN 0742-597X/00/0004-0047–0057/
Second, the construction delivery process used in the
$8.00 1 $.50 per page. Paper No. 22170.
United States can be compressed to deliver projects in
JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT IN ENGINEERING / JULY/AUGUST 2000 / 47
1/3 less time by working together. Third, there are very fore the term was even coined. With this as a reference, significant benefits to cost examples that clearly show
we define a Learning Organization and introduce an im- the good business sense of Partnering. Finally, the two
plementation model for creating one. Models of the na- primary contributing factors in the success of a thriving,
ture of Partnering are presented. Then, we share an ap- high employee satisfaction organization are both based
proach to using these Partnering models to actually in the cultural orientation of its people. These are com-
create a Learning Organization. The key to this approach pelling arguments in favor of a Learning Organization.
is our implementation model: Transformational Leader- ship 1 Group Process = Learning Organization. Part-
BACKGROUND
nering, as we present it, is the foundation upon which this implementation model is constructed.
‘‘I think we’re here for each other.’’ —Carol Burnett
THE CROSSHEAD LINE STORY
The issue addressed in this article is how to be present for another in the truest sense—to be a productive part-
A Fortune 500 manufacturing company facing down- ner. We will refer to ‘‘Partnering’’ throughout this text.
sizing of a union seniority-based workforce chose to pur- That word has received much attention in recent years,
sue innovation and learning. A production line with a and almost everyone believes they know what it means.
demanding schedule and a fluctuating workforce took However, if you ask five people to define Partnering, you
action. Their goals were to meet present production re- will likely get at least four different definitions. Before
quirements and to establish a training and orientation we proceed, it is important for us to define what we
plan for new employees hired or transferred to the cross- mean by Partnering in this application.
head line.
When we use the term Partnering we are referring to After an initial exploration meeting, a plan was set in
a scientific process of two or more individuals, groups, place and agreed to by every operator on the line. This or organizations coming together to pursue a collabora-
Partnering agreement was necessary across all three tive venture. By using the term ‘‘scientific,’’ we are em-
shifts of operation. Representatives from all shifts were phasizing that it is a process that can be modeled, just
selected. Their responsibilities were to participate in de- as engineers model physical systems. We are also argu-
sign meetings, and keep coworkers covering line pro- ing that productive Partnering is governed by a set of
duction updated on progress. Those operating the line operating principles that, when honored and followed,
would ensure production requirements were met. A new always produce positive outcomes. By analogy—follow
energy and commitment emerged. A result of the first the laws of physics and a structure stands up under load,
planning meeting was agreement that they needed an break the laws of physics and it will likely fail. In this
orientation process for each new employee coming to article we will be presenting models of the scientific na-
the line. Orientation would consist of a video film brief- ture of Partnering and of the operating principles gov-
ing followed with an ‘‘on-the-job, hands-on’’ training erning its success.
and application session.
Learning Organizations, by definition, rely on individ- Outcomes of this planning meeting were shared with uals learning together, which is called Team Learning.
supervisors and coworkers. Agreement was reached to This level of learning can only occur in an environment
proceed. This Partnering agreement was very critical in that is perceived to be emotionally safe and of reason-
the following weeks as the realities of production de- able organizational risks. Such an environment must be
mands and new employee orientations continued from based in core values that recognize individuals, and their
ongoing layoffs.
interactions with others, as foundational elements of suc- Finally, it was time to produce the video. None of the cess. Consequently, we are also arguing that a Learning
operators had any experience in script writing or creating Organization is best built on the foundation of relation-
a training video. This entire process was a ‘‘learn-as-we- ships and interactions conducted within the Partnering
go’’ approach. Training was conducted on filmmaking process we will define and articulate.
and script writing. Day-by-day scripts and process doc- Partnering in its true sense is conducting all relation-
umentation were developed and completed for each ma- ships in accordance with universal principles, rather than
chining operation.
in patterns of behavior that do not honor ourselves, oth- The eyes of plant management and union personnel ers, and purposeful action. By focusing on productive
were on this group, which had half of their line people Partnering, you are focusing on the causal aspects of a
in meetings and the other half producing their product. Learning Organization culture. By comparison, most
This kind of committed effort from workers was new businesses measure performance in terms of effectual pa-
and skepticism lingered. However, production quotas rameters, such as profit, on time delivery, product qual-
were consistently met.
ity, customer satisfaction, etc. Causal aspects of business Once scripts were complete, a photographer was function produce positive results that compound
brought on board. The team informed the photographer throughout the organization, whereas effectual aspects
of their goals and directed shooting flow. At first line are in large part the result of other things happening first.
operators were hesitant to be filmed as operational steps We begin by telling a story about an actual group of
were shot. Soon the ‘‘hype’’ of being a star had off-shift people who developed into a Learning Organization be-
operators coming in from vacation to ensure that they
48 / JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT IN ENGINEERING / JULY/AUGUST 2000 48 / JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT IN ENGINEERING / JULY/AUGUST 2000
Saunders (1993) reflected on how we have approached Filming was complete, editing had been done, and a
the introduction of a Learning Organization. ‘‘Scientific showing date was established. All members of the line
management,’’ as developed by Frederick Taylor, served attended, and each felt he or she was an integral part of
the production lines of the first half of the twentieth cen- the final product. Pride was the overriding emotion in
tury. But the old school of thought has become increas- everyone; including supervisors. Teamwork had pro-
ingly outmoded as workers cease to be passive exten- duced a film that all members of the crosshead line had
sions of production line machinery and are required to helped complete. Workers who had rarely participated in
become thinkers and problem solvers, whose creative any activity other than running their machine were tell-
ability is a major factor in their usefulness to their com- ing other line personnel in the plant about ‘‘their’’ ori-
pany. Managers can no longer rely on military styles of entation film.
management and instead must move in the direction of Word of the accomplishment spread, and the group
becoming teachers, coaches, and facilitators. A new era was asked to make a presentation at upper management’s
of human freedom, responsibility, and intelligence in the quarterly meeting. Supervisors and operators brain-
workplace has arrived.
stormed presentation contents and consensus was ‘‘The stage is clearly set for the Learning Organiza- reached. Next a presenter needed to be selected. This
tion. The old style of management, with its pyramid of step was a real surprise! A machine operator volunteered
power ascending to a single, all-powerful CEO, is yield- to make the presentation. He shared with the group that
ing to the very dynamics of shared power, teamwork,
he had always wanted to do something important and flattened organizations, and peer review.’’ had felt he would never get the chance because he had
So what is a Learning Organization? Senge (1990), in only an eighth-grade education. With teary eyes, all
his book The Fifth Discipline, stated that it is ‘‘an or- members readily agreed that Danny would be the pre-
ganization that is continually expanding its capacity to senter. Line operators offered to let Danny make the pre-
create its future. For such an organization, it is not sentation to them as practice.
enough merely to survive, survival learning or what is The day of the presentation to management a repre-
more often termed adaptive learning is important—in- sentative group from the crosshead line was sitting on
deed it is necessary. But for a learning organization, the front row projecting positive energy to support
adaptive learning must be joined by generative learning, Danny. Danny made a perfect presentation exhibiting
learning that enhances our capacity to create.’’ pride in his team, their product, and, most of all, in him-
Kline and Saunders (1993) stated ‘‘In a Learning Or- self for such a long desired accomplishment. Team mem-
ganization, leaders need to be willing to take the risk to bers on the front row cheered loudly for Danny’s display
model continuous learning and improvement themselves. of professionalism and then answered questions from the
How can they expect anyone else to be willing to take 100 or so present in the audience.
the risk of learning something new unless they’re willing The crosshead line was never the same. There were
to take it first?’’ This modeling style of leadership is no problems with production quotas, and selected em-
what we refer to as ‘‘Transformational Leadership.’’ ployees from elsewhere in the plant were glad to go to
Senge (1990) pointed out that ‘‘the new view of lead-
a line that was dedicated to improving their quality of ership in Learning Organizations centers on subtler and life.
more important tasks. In a Learning Organization, lead- There had been tremendous learning not only by line
ers are designers, stewards, and teachers. They are re- operators, but also by management through getting peo-
sponsible for building organizations where people con- ple involved in improvement and learning. The cross-
tinually expand their capabilities to understand head line was a sort of celebrity unit for many months
complexity, clarify vision, and improve shared mental to come.
models—that is, they are responsible for learning.’’ Learning, and feeling the power of making a differ-
We believe that a Learning Organization is established ence, can shift attitudes and resolve work environment
by creating a culture that nurtures and encourages lead- barriers and inefficiencies. Outcomes of this effort show
ership, creativity, empowerment and participation, con- that if people are given the chance to learn and get in-
tinuous improvement, and learning. To get there requires volved they will go beyond management’s expectations
an operating philosophy involving Transformational to contribute and improve. A learning culture has a vi-
Leadership plus Group Process.
sion, operating principles, boundaries, and expectations. Transformational Leaders are described by Hendricks All of these, with a coaching and facilitative leadership
and Ludeman (1996) in The Corporate Mystic as ‘‘peo- approach, can provide the environment that is necessary
ple who want to spawn more leaders.’’ Transformational for work to happen productively.
Leaders believe it is their responsibility to operate from
a Stretch, Support, and Connect model. By adopting
WHAT IS A LEARNING ORGANIZATION?
these leadership roles and by viewing each individual as part of leadership, we are establishing a cultural focus
‘‘In times of change, learners inherit the earth, while the necessary for a Learning Organization. A brief descrip- learned are beautifully equipped to deal with a world
tion of these three roles is in order. that no longer exists!’’ —Roland Barth
‘‘Stretch’’ has to do with challenging the status quo.
JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT IN ENGINEERING / JULY/AUGUST 2000 / 49
As a leader, one stretches when he or she is constantly
a ‘‘good idea,’’ and intriguing but distant vision until testing their own limits, growing, learning more about
people take a stand for building such organizations. Tak- themselves, developing new skills and processes. It also
ing this stand is the first leadership act, the start of in- means inspiring others to stretch and grow in all they
spiring (literally ‘‘to breathe life into’’) the vision of do. Plus from an organizational perspective, the stretch
learning organizations.’’
role includes always testing limits, policies, routines, Through Transformational Leadership plus Group Pro- processes, systems, etc. —is this what we need to be do-
cess, the ‘‘Learning Organization’’ (TL 1 GP = LO) can ing to move toward our vision?
become a reality. A commitment and focus on these ‘‘Support’’ is a key role for leaders in building the
causal elements can create businesses that will survive Learning Organization because it has to do with being
and prosper in the twenty-first century. We will now ex- there for others. A leader gives support in the form of
amine fundamental concepts, the key dimensions, and resources—financial, equipment, time, facilities, mate-
two contextual models of Partnering that allow it to be rial, manpower, etc., as well as interpersonal support in
recognized as a process for building the foundation for the form of encouragement, motivation, advocacy, em-
constructing this simple equation. pathy, etc. Another key aspect of support is in granting individuals and teams authority to take risks within rea-
WHAT IS PARTNERING?
sonable limits without fear of negative consequences for their mistakes or failures.
Knowledge versus Awareness
The ‘‘Connect’’ role has to do with leaders knowing The knowledge that win/win solutions are best is ob- when and how to link appropriate entities. A leader may
vious. But most of us have been raised in an environ- connect individuals who can help each other solve a
ment that treats interactions with others in a much more problem. It could be connecting two cross-functional
competitive vein. In other words, we are emotionally groups that can share expertise, or connecting one’s own
conditioned from our experiences to expect win/lose in- organization with an outside organization. It can even be
teractions. This applies to competition for limited busi- as simple as connecting an individual or team with a
ness opportunities, or to two people wanting the same source of information they need to be completely aware
position in a company, or to power struggles between of all the factors influencing their work.
two people in a romantic relationship. Our awareness ‘‘Group Process’’ is the second critical aspect of the
from past experiences tells us that we live in a risky, Learning Organization culture. Hendricks and Ludeman
competitive world. What is referred to here is a poverty (1996) state that ‘‘inside each of us there are two strong
consciousness, or competitive mindset, ‘‘I must struggle pulls. One is toward complete independence—becoming
to get my share of a limited pot.’’ our own person through and through. But there is also
This means the real challenge in Partnering turns out
a strong pull to commit ourselves in something larger: to be changing people’s awareness. We can tell you Part- communion with other people, a company or family, the
nering is the most practical, beneficial, expedient, co- universe itself. Both pulls must be honored and devel-
operative, cost-effective approach to any work challenge. oped fully.’’ Group Process is a vehicle to tap that in-
Plus, if you trust us, you might actually believe it. In trinsic need and a way to take advantage of the power
that case, we have shared knowledge that Partnering is of synergy and tap into a collective consciousness of
a positive approach that produces superior results. But, several people’s awareness focused on a common issue.
until you have had enough experiences to realign your The Group Process to which we refer here is not just
awareness, you will likely still be practicing your inter- getting together in a group to talk things over. There has
actions from a competitive orientation. Something like, been significant organizational and behavioral science
‘‘This approach makes sense, but I don’t really trust that research devoted to Group Process over the last 40 or so
I am safe from loss.’’ The reason so many of us feel this years. It is beyond the scope of this article to delve into
way is that we have not taken time to clearly model the the details of these findings; however, it is important to
Partnering process and define the operating principles realize that three Core Values and 16 Suggested Ground
that govern its effectiveness. Consequently, in all prob- Rules have come out of this research. Furthermore, there
ability we are routinely breaking the principles and re- is a keen appreciation of the value of having an expe-
turning to competitive strategies without recognizing it. rienced Developmental Facilitator as a guide in adopting
We will now define Partnering in order to set the stage Group Process operating norms. Schwarz (1994), in his
for using its structure and operating principles as the book The Skilled Facilitator, provided a deeper under-
foundation for deploying our implementation model: standing of both Group Process and facilitation.
Transformational Leadership 1 Group Process = Learn- Also, groups must be positioned to understand their
ing Organization.
roles in this new organization. Supportive processes must be designed, and employees must develop the skills
Partnering
that are critical to effectively operate in an environment What has emerged from our study and research is that where every employee is a leader and has something to
there are some fundamental principles, or governing contribute.
laws, that clearly describe what must be happening for As Senge (1990) said, ‘‘This new view is vital. When
Partnering to be successful. Furthermore, work with a all is said and done, learning organizations will remain
variety of groups helped us develop a model of the struc-
50 / JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT IN ENGINEERING / JULY/AUGUST 2000 50 / JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT IN ENGINEERING / JULY/AUGUST 2000
Partnering Models
scientific process governed by a straightforward, practi- Part of what Engineers do is to analyze models. Using cal set of principles. By studying these principles and
knowledge of physical principles and mathematics, they the structure of the process, we can recognize what ac-
set out to construct graphic and mathematical models of tions can be taken to support Partnering effectively.
real-world physical systems, and then use those models ‘‘Partnering is as exact a science as the physics of grav-
to predict the behavior of the actual systems. ity.’’
For instance, by constructing a model of a bridge Before getting into the actual models, we first intro-
structure, an Engineer can predict the actual bridge’s be- duce the key dimensions that must be operating for Part-
havior. Selecting specific materials, he can then, know- nering success. Recognizing these dimensions and how
ing the behavior of the bridge, predict the size and shape we allow ourselves to not operate productively within
of each member so that it is strong enough not to break, them is the basis for understanding the significance and
or bend too much. This is a scientific process of pre- validity of the models.
dicting behavior through model analysis. ‘‘Dependability’’ is the first dimension. Inevitably,
Our first contextual model is the Partnering Effective- people associate trust with Partnering. Trust is an inter-
ness Model. This model was formulated over many years esting quality. We choose to trust and many factors in-
by trying to bring structure to how people come together fluence that choice, including our past experiences, our
in collaborative undertakings. The contextual aspect of emotional orientations, others’ behaviors, how well ex-
this model is that it can be adapted to virtually any ap- pectations have been expressed, etc. One thing is certain:
plication involving multiple views or interests. It applies we are not likely to continue to choose to trust if the
to interactions between two or more people, two or more object of our trust performs consistently in an unde-
groups, or two or more organizations. It is not a discrete pendable manner. Consequently, we can see that De-
model that has only certain, specific elements, because pendability is a causal dimension that allows us to build
no two partnerships are exactly alike. By comparison, trusting relationships.
two steel beams of the same size, shape, and material ‘‘Responsiveness’’ is the dimension that represents fo-
will inevitably behave the same. Thus a contextual cusing our attention outward. Responsiveness calls for
model presents a structural framework within which to us to proactively seek to understand and meet our part-
relate and interact rather than a definitive statement of ners’ needs, which may include helping them recognize
how things are.
their needs. Being very clear in defining all partners’ The second contextual model is Principles of Produc- needs and then taking action to help each other get their
tive Partnering. This is a group of principles, or rules of conduct, that, when applied, honored, and practiced, al-
needs met is what Responsiveness is all about. ways produce Partnering outcomes. This particular ‘‘Ability to Resolve Conflict’’ is third. Incumbent in model is fluid and evolving, but many of the fundamen- this dimension are two requisite actions. First is ac- tal truths of productive human interaction are captured knowledging that a conflict exists, and second is having and presented. You will likely recognize much of what the ability to engage in the conflict constructively with- is presented as common sense. This is usually the case out blaming and shaming one another, or trying to make with principles founded in fundamental Spiritual Truth.
someone ‘‘wrong.’’ Full resolution of conflict only oc- curs when partners are committed to working together in an open atmosphere. Each expresses his or her inter-
Partnering Effectiveness Model
ests in the issue, and then both work together to design The first model is not intended to be some rigorously
a solution that allows each partner to get as many of analyzed and experimentally proven theorem. We are their interests met as possible. This is a true win/win
sharing with you a structure of what makes Partnering resolution where everyone can walk away feeling as
work, and how we can use forethought to increase the good as possible.
chances for Partnering success. We encourage everyone ‘‘Faith’’ is the final key dimension. Here we actually
to look for their own lessons and opportunities to im- find three levels of Faith operating. There is Faith in
prove on the model any chance they get (Fig. 1). yourself that you are committed to doing the right thing
and are able to be a good partner. Next is Faith in your
Position
partner, that he or she is likewise interested in doing the Who are you? What is important to you? What are the right thing and has your best interest at heart. Last is
principles and values that you hold dear, to which you Faith in the process of collaboration. When a slipup oc-
are internally committed? What are your technical and curs, this calls for us to come together and seek mutually
interpersonal skills and capabilities? What are your ex- supportive actions to get back on course instead of re-
pectations: of yourself, of others, or your career, of your treating to our respective corners and talking about what
family? How do you feel about spirituality and faith? the other person did wrong.
What does quality mean to you? What are your strengths With these key dimensions of Productive Partnering
or assets; what are your weaknesses or liabilities? What in mind, we can look at the two models that define a
resources do you have available? What is your attitude? process for creating the kind of culture that supports a
Do you more frequently direct your attention inward or Learning Organization.
outward? All these questions pertain to ‘‘Position.’’ They
JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT IN ENGINEERING / JULY/AUGUST 2000 / 51
52 / JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT IN ENGINEERING / JULY/AUGUST 2000
FIG. 1. Partnering Effectiveness Model
have to do with ‘‘who’’ and ‘‘where’’ you are. Some elements of Position are as follows:
Principles Organization culture Behavior norms Technology resources Leadership style Authority Motivations Values Strengths Financial resources Equipment Character Accountability Needs Personality
Weaknesses Physical manpower Facilities Responsibility Expectations Consciousness Language Ethnicity Wants Location Likes Business structure National culture Dislikes Other partners
Skills
There are skill sets for both functional/technical activ- ities and for organizational activities. Having capable people in the right place at the right time is a primary causal aspect of success. Whether or not a person is ca- pable can be measured and documented. First, you have to develop an inventory of the required skills. Next, you devise a practical process for measuring those skills. Fi- nally, you measure the skills actually demonstrated and compare them to those required. So, how many busi- nesses out there conduct an organizational skills assess- ment for each employee? How many personal relation- ships are you in where you sit down with your partner and talk about ways to support each other in getting better at the skills of relating and interacting with each other? Skills that are necessary in Partnering are rarely formally addressed in our education process. Some ele- ments of Skills are as follows:
Knowing how to learn Communication—oral
and written Managing emotions Interpersonal relationships Stress management Decision making Goal setting/prioritization Problem solving Teamwork Self-awareness
Resolving conflict Planning Leadership Technical expertise Self-esteem Literacy Trust Coping Feedback Agreements Managing change
Dependability Faith
Evaluating alternatives
Process
Total Quality Management has been a popular disci- pline. There are a few people who are generally regarded as having been the originators of the concept, one of the more famous being W. Edward Demming. Dr. Demming was big on developing process models and analyzing them for waste (remember the discussion of models ear- lier?). There are statistical methods of modeling, col- lecting data, and analyzing it to identify types of process variation. By doing thorough modeling, collecting ap- propriate data, and using group problem-solving tech- niques, you can eliminate some kinds of variation and lessen the impact of others. In other words, you can im- prove your processes.
Another concept in quality-oriented philosophies is that of a quality deviation. Quality deviations can be products manufactured outside of acceptable tolerance, or things like missing deadlines. In Total Quality Man- agement practices, it is generally accepted that on the order of 90% of quality deviations can be traced to some process problem rather than human error. We believe the same order of significance holds true for working to- gether. In the Partnering Effectiveness Model, Process is about identifying, documenting, and continuously im- proving the processes used to interact with each other. You will see some words repeated from the skills ele- ments. This is because individuals’ and groups’ capabil- ities are defined with skills, but the group application of those skills shows up in Partnering processes. Some el- ements of Process are as follows:
Team planning Problem solving Relationship building Teambuilding Decision making Process modeling Communication Conflict resolution Data collection Data analysis Quality measurement Cost and price analysis
Building trust Cause and effect analysis Trending Benchmarking Documentation Contracting Continuous improvement Performance measurement Consensus building Scheduling Progress review
The Model as a Guide
The Partnering Effectiveness Model is a fairly com- prehensive contextual model of one way to look at the structure of Partnering. However, the model is just a guide. Productive Partnering will require you to come together in the formative stages and select from all these elements the ones that are appropriate. It is also a con- venient frame of reference to do your own brainstorming to identify other elements you might want to include. This is a contextual structure that can be used to guide steps toward cultivating the supportive culture necessary for a Learning Organization. It can be as detailed, or as The Partnering Effectiveness Model is a fairly com- prehensive contextual model of one way to look at the structure of Partnering. However, the model is just a guide. Productive Partnering will require you to come together in the formative stages and select from all these elements the ones that are appropriate. It is also a con- venient frame of reference to do your own brainstorming to identify other elements you might want to include. This is a contextual structure that can be used to guide steps toward cultivating the supportive culture necessary for a Learning Organization. It can be as detailed, or as
nificance of these principles is that no system (partner- ship, or organization) is static. All systems are always
Principles of Productive Partnering
either improving or declining in effectiveness. Principles Our second contextual model is a compilation of op-
of Improvement are the guiding structure that keep us erating principles that, when honored and practiced, al-
focused on knowing how we are doing and looking for ways produce Partnering results. We have conducted
ways to continuously get better.
Partnering workshops in projects where someone later reported that Partnering failed. Upon investigation, we
Principles of Productive Partnering
invariably find that participants quit following agreed upon procedures, or fell into unproductive behavior pat-
• Purpose —What are we trying to accomplish to-
terns, such as blaming each other. What this suggests is gether and why are we doing it? Clearly define that you cannot fail at Partnering as long as you follow
and articulate the common purpose of the under- the principles. But you can fail to follow the principles,
taking. Identify and acknowledge partners’ subpur- which simply means you have stopped Partnering. Prin-
poses that may compete with common purpose. ciples of Productive Partnering, as we have articulated
Conduct a comprehensive risk analysis to identify them, fall into five categories: Purpose, Character, Di-
all risks —common and individual. Recognize rection, Agreement, and Improvement.
Partnering is a means to an end; increased profit, ‘‘Purpose’’ has to do with what we are doing and why
reduced cost, growth, continuous improvement, we are doing it. ‘‘I think we’re here for each other,’’ is
and satisfaction are the desired results. Create new,
a statement of purpose. Purpose is the foundation of any more productive, less stressful ways of working to- undertaking. When we know why we are doing some-
gether that better engage the energies, talents, and thing, it is much more likely we can tolerate challenging
motivation of participants. Embrace change at times without drifting into doubt or questioning others’
every opportunity. Have faith! Know that there will motives. Agreeing up front on the collective purpose in
be setbacks and failures, however, Partnering is the
a Partnering relationship is probably the single most im- only approach that makes sense in the long run. portant aspect of collaborative efforts.
• Character —What are attributes of a good part-
‘‘Character’’ has to do with knowing who we are and ner? Respect other people—their rights, privi- understanding who our partner is. Principles of Character
leges, property, and private life. Do not encroach are similar to the Position elements of the Partnering
on any of these. Tell the truth, be open to hearing Effectiveness Model. For instance, the writers have sig-
other truths, and consider alternative interpretations nificantly different personalities and styles of behavior.
of your truth. Be courageous; acknowledge and One is primarily rational and analytical, oriented toward
share your fears and insecurities, and help others collecting data and forming judgments. The other is in-
acknowledge theirs. Know what is right for you, tuitive and perceptive, a big picture thinker. Together we
your personal convictions (principles and values), make a powerful partnership, but we have to focus on
and do not compromise them. Genuinely commit the value in each other’s contributions or we find our-
yourself to common purpose and interests, and selves frustrated with our different behavioral styles.
consensus objectives. Build trust by being com- ‘‘Direction’’ is the set of principles that we use to form
petent and keeping agreements; behave dependa- the road map for progress. These principles are the basis
bly. Be responsive to your partner’s needs; seek to for establishing priorities, guidelines for decision making
understand them and be proactive in meeting them. and problem solving, and parameters for measuring
Be strictly honest about material, workmanship, progress. Direction calls for us to focus attention on
record keeping, etc. —integrity. Be willing to suffer causal aspects first. For instance, going at conflict is very
in support of a common purpose. Voluntarily sub- important. Partners address issues early and resolve them
mit to the actions and operating rules necessary to before they fester and become bigger problems.
achieve the common purpose—Self-Discipline.
A frequently overlooked group of principles is Sincerely dedicate yourself to helping your partner ‘‘Agreements.’’ An example of how we slip here is
win and to learning from your partner every chance agreeing to a deadline when you know rationally that
you get. Evaluate issues and situations fairly— you cannot make it. Another example comes from a
avoid judgments and blame. company we have worked with. While interviewing
• Direction—What are the priorities and how do
hourly employees to help the company inventory its we know we are making progress? Clearly define workforce capability needs, we encountered a common
all partners’ roles and responsibilities; write them complaint of management. The most frequent critical ob-
down, and review them periodically. Discuss and servation was that workers were routinely told some-
agree on consensus operating norms—communi- thing would happen, and then it did not. This is obvi-
cation, feedback, documentation, work processes, ously damaging to morale, but worse, it is indicative of
conflict management, decision making, etc. Prior- an organizational culture that does not recognize the
itize objectives and actions for rational guidance, significance of leaders doing what they have agreed
and do not get sidetracked. Plan—encourage all to do.
partners’ contributions and buy-in to the plan for
JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT IN ENGINEERING / JULY/AUGUST 2000 / 53
54 / JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT IN ENGINEERING / JULY/AUGUST 2000
mission accomplishment; known activities, and contingencies. Honestly assess the character of in- dividuals and the culture of organizations to iden- tify possible problems, and then deal with them. Conduct a thorough inventory of all partners’ re- sources —assets and liabilities, strengths and weak- nesses; complement strengths and compensate for weaknesses. Recognize and respect the significance of relationships; plan to build, monitor, and main- tain them. Identify, anticipate, and articulate pos- sible problems that could arise. Face problems early; do whatever it takes to resolve them before they become bigger problems. Define, articulate, and communicate consensus performance param- eters and target levels of effectiveness; measure progress within them.
• Agreements—Who is doing what? Make clear, appropriate, doable agreements; be sure you know what the agreement is. Reinforce agreements when appropriate with fair and equitable written con- tracts. Only make agreements for yourself or your represented organization. Only make agreements you intend to keep. Be willing to renegotiate an agreement if something makes it undoable. Give early warning if you will be unable to keep an agreement for any reason. To the extent you can, fix broken agreements and make amends. Agree in advance on how to handle problems. Know the agreed upon boundaries—personal, organizational, contractual—and respect and enforce them appro- priately. If necessary and appropriate, agree to dis- agree on some things that are not mission critical. Do all you have agreed to do. Be courageous enough to hold your partner accountable for his or her agreements without blame or shame.
• Improvement—How can we get better? Always look for more ways to help your partner win. Doc- ument appropriate processes to monitor them— flowcharts, statistical models, task analyses, etc. Analyze processes to identify sources of waste and eliminate them. Monitor performance within con- sensus parameters. Periodically review targets and change them if appropriate. Periodically poll par- ticipants’ attitudes and opinions; honor and hear them, then take action to improve. Always seek out and eliminate sources of fear. Carefully design, and continuously refine rewards and incentives that support the common purpose. To the maximum ex- tent possible, work with verifiable, repeatable data. Never discount an idea or suggestion until it has been rationally evaluated. When problems arise, perform cause and effect analyses to learn from mistakes and improve processes. Celebrate mis- takes as opportunities to improve. Always seek sources for new and better information and ways —articles, research, programs, training, etc. Honor your partner; constantly seek opportunities to re- inforce your commitment to him or her and affirm his or her value to you.
The Partnering Effectiveness Model and Principles of Productive Partnering define a structural context and guiding principles to create a Learning Organi- zation culture. Our awareness tells us they are good models. Our experience in working with a variety of applications has supported their validity repeatedly. However, the extent to which you personally, or any organization, can benefit from these models is up to you and the organization. Use them as a guide to cul- tivate meaningful interactions among people, groups, and organizations and you will be ‘‘building the foun- dation of a Learning Organization.’’
IMPLEMENTATION
‘‘One of the difficulties in bringing about change in an organization is that you must do so through persons who have been most successful in that organization, no mat- ter how faulty the system or organization is. To such persons, you see, it is the best of all possible organiza- tions, because look who was selected and look who suc- ceeded most within it. Yet these are the very people through whom we must bring about improvements.’’ —from the second inaugural address of George Wash- ington
When it comes time to implement changes to move closer to being a Learning Organization, there is one reality that all organizations share. That is, the need for everyone to get there together. Everyone includes lead- ers, employees, owners, clients, suppliers, community, and the global economy in general. All aspects of the business operation must be engaged in productive Part- nering if you are to create a true Learning Organization, because there must be learning garnered from every el- ement, every nook and cranny of business function. This is why ‘‘Partnering is the foundation of a Learning Or- ganization’’—you must Partner across the board: leaders with employees; employees with each other; business with clients, suppliers, regulatory agencies, etc.
When it comes time to put all this into action, it is very important to ‘‘keep it simple, stupid’’ (KISS). How- ever, simple and easy are not synonymous. As is implied in the quote that opens this section, we are dealing with changing habitual patterns that have likely been per- ceived by their owners to be an integral part of success. This is where Transformational Leadership comes into play. Transformational Leaders lead change by changing themselves to model the way. What is important to rec- ognize here is that everyone must become a Transfor- mational Leader in any company that wants to become
a Learning Organization. Also, in large part, becoming
a Transformational Leader is synonymous with being a productive partner as we are defining it. This is true be- cause productive partners accept responsibility for mod- eling productive behavior and take action to change un- productive behaviors—Principles of Character. And employees throughout must be willing to Partner with each other in order to cultivate Group Process.
Everyone probably recognizes that changing habitual patterns of attitude, belief, thought, feeling, and behavior Everyone probably recognizes that changing habitual patterns of attitude, belief, thought, feeling, and behavior
own plan and test results as you proceed. each other in their mutually beneficial endeavors. The
In the Partnering Effectiveness Model there are three most productive and expedient way to grow and change
components —Position, Skills, and Process. Take the as an individual is to do so within the nurturing, sup-
challenge of developing Transformational Leadership. portive, and limit challenging environment of a com-
The first step is to look at Position. Where are we now, munity of like minded, committed people. The Partner-
and where do we want to be? This may include research- ing Effectiveness Model represents the structural context
ing books available on leadership, or perhaps taking for creating this culture, and the Principles of Productive
some training on leadership styles and processes. How- Partnering are the operating guidelines for conducting
ever, the objective here is to realistically assess what is relationships and business productively.
actually going on now and to determine how everyone Now, let us revisit our basic equation: Transforma-
wants your organization to be operating. Once your Po- tional Leadership plus Group Process equals Learning
sitioning assessment is done, you now have to determine Organization (TL 1 GP = LO). Transformational Lead-
the Skills that are required for each person and group to ership has been described and related to everyone in the
be capable of operating within the new Position. Skills organization. There are a variety of models of ‘‘leader-
that are weak or missing must be developed. Finally, we ship’’ available in the business section of any bookstore.
look at Process. What exactly needs to be done to get Each presentation of these models will include examples
there, one step at a time? As unexpected conditions of how they can be applied to make anyone a good
emerge, how will we deal with them? How often will leader. Yet, each person, and each organization, is
we meet to review progress, and what parameters will unique. Anyone can exercise what has been referred to
we measure to know how we are doing? Transforma- earlier as ‘‘adaptive’’ learning to pick up aspects of lead-
tional Leadership is developed by Positioning people and ership from one or more models. However, each person
the organization, developing Skills, and designing and has to find his or her own style, and process, for being
monitoring Processes.
a leader. Also, while there is extensive research and Position, Skills, and Process are the three elements we guidance available on developing Group Process, each
can rely upon at every step in the change initiative. group, or organization, must honor the need to invest the
These can be linked to the three roles of the Transfor- time and effort into developing Group Process for itself.
mational Leader. Stretch is a Positioning role—Where This is where the Partnering models come in.
are we and where do we need to be? Support is a Skill Our implementation process for creating a Learning
role—What needs help or improvement: listening, meet- Organization must include focusing on creating a culture
ing conduct, teamwork training, etc.? Connect is a Pro- that operates effectively within the key dimensions of