Implementing Change

JM in ATL

I have always been a strong believer of offering a solution for a problem, especially if I am going to complain about the problem.

I have a problem and no solution. Two departments which rely heavily on each other to make the company successful just don't work well together. (This issue is already being addressed).

One department head complains about how things are done in the other department and vise versa.

Well, I've always supported department A's standpoints and views, but just had an epiphany that it is actually department B who is in the right.

I want to propose that we change the way we currently conduct the business of these two departments, but don't have a suggestion of how. Dept. B's manager is not exactly the type of person I can get to help with this (long story for another day) and Dept. A's manager is not strong enough to realize that a change needs to be made and would therefore be useless.

Would you still propose the change without being able to have a strong plan of implementation behind the proposal?

Don D

Is this a situation H.R. has been assigned to work through? What is the impact of this 'problem' on the bottom line of the company or its daily operating efficiency? Does the senior manager at your organization feel the impact of this problem, and, if so, why is she/he not bellying up and solving it?

I guess I'm wondering why H.R. is involved, why the problem (if one exists) has not been identified and addressed by those who are paid to identify and address company problems that impact overall operations, and who has their head in the sand in your organization?

We've often told each other on The Forum that H.R. should not be the 'playground police' ensuring that everybody gets along and plays well together.

ray a

Let's see, you have two departments that don't get along. You have two managers that you describe as being part of the problem. I agree with Don, this needs to be addressed by their management. The only thing I would add is you could act as a resource giving advice to their boss helping to ensure he makes the right decision.

marc

How related are the issues of not getting along verseus the disagreement about the way things are done?

So if the business practices were addressed and everyone was in agreement about how things would be done going forward, would the conflicts go away?

I am all for addressing the problems and not the symptoms, but as both Don and Ray said, this sounds like an operational issue. If you have the operational responsibilities, then get the managers and other decision makers together and share your epiphany. If major changes are needed, then put a plan together and get everyone to buy in, if it's just a couple of minor things, make the little changes, let everyone know about the new expectations and go forward.

If you are not the decision maker, then they are the person(s) who need to institue all of this change.

If conflict still exists, there are plenty of threads in this forum that deal with different ways to address conflict, in fact, one of them is going on right now. Check it out.

JM in ATL

OK, I don't think I communicated what I wanted to say. Instead, as usual, I confused it with a bunch of irrelevant fluff.

I was speaking to the head of department B. He and I were discussing talking to his boss about changing his hours b/c of the problems he was having with getting work done in the time frame department A wanted it done. He was working 3 hours+ of OT each day b/c of the way department A has decided they want things done. Dept. B has always just had to go along with it.

While talking I realized that what we are doing is really @$$ backwards, but we have learned how to be efficient that way.

What I want to do is propose that we change the procedure for the benefit it will have for the employees involved. However, I do not work in either department therefore would not have a good enough working knowledge of how to begin to implement the change.

I'm sorry, but even though I am not the COO of the company I'm not just going to pretend like I don't see a problem that could be fixed. Thus resulting in much more satisfied employees just b/c it is not in my job description.

Even though it is something for operations to fix, if my employees are unhappy or disgruntled, then I get involved. We are a small enough company where I am affored the luxury to do so.

Don D

A better approach, as I see it, would be to sit down with the manager you had a discussion with, arrive at some things you both agree might solve the challenges. Then weigh whether or not you feel you should facilitate a similar meeting between the two managers. If so, pray for good outcomes, then recommend to them both that their joint plan be presented to the facility executive for approval. You've functioned in a facilitative/suggestion-making role and have enabled the managers to come up with their own solutions. They will grow from that as well as from going to sit with the executive to roll out the suggestions for change.

If you allow your epiphany to get in the way of those managers' personal growth from this exercise, you would have cheated them. This way, you haven't been an enabler, haven't seized ownership of problems that don't belong to you, have helped positive change happen and you all win. x:-)

mwild31

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 01-22-04 AT 06:32PM (CST)[/font][br][br]Good stuff from Don (not that he needs me to say that - it was just well said x:-)) - if your not in the position to make the changes or recommend the changes yourself - then don't & walk the supervisors through the issues. One thing though - when working as a 'mediator' it's important to remain objective - one way to do this is not to sum up who's right & wrong, rather to get the two managers together, walk through the issues & see what they arrive at. It will go wrong if you go into this or have a discussion with these folks already having a predetermined judgement.