You can download excellent powerpoint slides on HR management, business strategy and personal development HERE.

You’ve probably read other recent testimonials to the concept of learning by imitating the behavior of models. Numerous publications ranging from TRAINING (June 1978) and Business Week (May 8, 1978) to the Journal of Nursing Administration (April 1978) have explained how and why the pro¬cess works. But these and other arti¬cles generally have steered clear of the nitty gritty details of how you go about setting up, running and evaluating a training program that revolves around behavior modeling. I would like to do just that.

You can download excellent powerpoint slides on HR management, business strategy and personal development HERE.

First, I suggest that you read Changing Supervisor Behavior, by Arnold P. Goldstein and Melvin Sorcher; this is the theoretical framework for the technique. Next, read one of the many good books that stress improving communications through increased empathy, respect and warmth. One particularly good one is Human Relations Development-A Manual for Health Sciences, by George Gazda, Richard Walters and Williams Childers.

A further review of the literature shows the variety of situations that respond to behavior modeling. At St. Luke’s, we use seven frequently:
• greeting the new employee
• introducing a new policy or pro¬cedure
• improving poor work habits
• improving poor performance
• the discipline interview
• performance appraisal
• reducing conflict between two subordinates

Your organization’s records and needs analysis may indicate other situations that require the employee to make a positive individual com¬mitment to alter his or her behavior. Analyze how your best supervisors handle these situations. Compare them with your worst supervisors. From these extremes of behavior, you can identify key points (usually five to seven) in the best supervisors’ com¬munications process for each situa¬tion.

Generally, these key points include:
• greeting the employee warmly and appropriately
• identifying the situation being discussed
• soliciting the employee’s sugges¬tions for improvement
• writing down those suggestions the employee chooses as most likely to be effective
• setting a follow-up date to review the situation
• expressing confidence in the employee’s ability to handle the situation properly

For each problem situation, adapt the key steps to reflect the language of that interaction.

Develop a script for a model interview between supervisor and em¬ployee, for each situation. The script should model the supervisor’s behavior, not the policy or procedure—hence the term “behavior modeling.” Because the model stresses the process of the interview, not the content, it requires a certain brevity and pace that are not necessarily realistic. The model will be attacked in class if it contains too many references to or-ganizational policies and document-able facts.

In the script, the supervisor should cover each key step in sequence. He should not move onto the next step until the prior one has been completed. The listener should hear the super¬visor control the interviewer’s pace. The subordinate should do most of the talking, but the supervisor stays in command.

Now, videotape your model inter¬views. (Using videotape recording and playback equipment is, of course, op¬tional but it makes the next step much more effective.)

Don’t worry if your players don’t fol¬low your scripts. What’s important is that the model follows the key steps for each interaction. If it does, then en¬courage your actors to use their own words and mannerisms.

At St. Luke’s, we began with super¬visors from one department. We have since done groups from many depart¬ments and, on occasion, from more than one institution. We also mix ex¬perience with inexperience. Members of the group, however, must have diffi¬culty with the same interactions.

At this point, our needs analysis is not complicated. Of our prospective participants, we ask, “What do you want to do better?” In a separate meet¬ing, we ask their managers, “What do you want them to do better?” Each group will use words like “morale” and “motivation”; get them to speak in terms of specific interactions, and you will find a remarkable degree of agreement between the two groups. You may have to bridge some minor gulfs, but the two will tell you quickly which of your models you will use— and if you will have to make more.

You can download excellent powerpoint slides on HR management, business strategy and personal development HERE.

I prefer to do this needs analysis or¬ally, rather than by questionnaire. This lets me probe below the gener¬ality and also lets me explain what I’ll be doing. But you can use printed sur¬veys before the meetings, if you wish.

Groups size in our classes has varied from four to twenty. The bigger the class, the longer each session lasts. We find 10 is the best size. Classes are at least two hours long and meet once a week. The participant receives a notice of time, place and topic for each class but no preliminary reading.

The first class is devoted to explain¬ing in detail the program’s specifics. The camera is turned on, and goup is seen on the monitor, but noth¬ing is recorded. When the group is comfortable with the TV, we turn off the equipment. The remainder of the class is spent reviewing the duties of a supervisor, the importance of com¬munication skills and the techniques of effective listening. Because the class is to learn behavior, not theory, the latter is never mentioned.

Each week thereafter, we cover another interaction. The format of each class is similar:
• Distribute the key steps, read them aloud, answer questions about them (10 minutes).
• Show the model tape for that in¬teraction (10 minutes).
• Talk about the model (5 minutes).
• Have the class in pairs, rehearse the model behavior; after 10 min¬utes, reverse the pairs, so each person is the supervisor (20 min¬utes).
• Turn on the television and record a pair rehearsing. At the end of the rehearsal, ask the “super¬visor” for his review; then solicit remarks from the “employee.” Play back the tape. Allow com¬ments from anyone in the room (30 minutes).

Who goes on the tape? Everyone plays the supervisor at least once. Who goes first? Ask for volunteers. No vol¬unteers? I pick the least aggressive person in the room to star as the supervisor first.

What order for the interactions? Start with the least threatening, and end with the most threatening. Do at least five; the key points are basically repetitive, and five weeks are needed for the rehearsals to be learned effec¬tively.

What is the pass-out material? Only the key steps for each week. Partici¬pants should refer to these as they re¬hearse and be encouraged to have them handy on the job. We also have these key steps in a check-off form and may distribute this to encourage the class to follow the televised rehear¬sals.

At one time, participants also re¬ceived brief outlines of situations to use as they rehearse. But we discarded these because few were used. Or, if they were, the actors got involved in our written words and not their oral ones. It’s best to let them use their own styles of communication to cover key points effectively.

Who acts in the ‘model tapes? Any¬one who is believable. At one time, we used actors from each department as we trained in it, but this had little effect and wasn’t worth the effort.

What about tests? The final class is a test, both written and behavioral. Participants arrive alone, complete the written test (on communication skills, not theory) and choose one of three situations. After a few moments to prepare, a tape is made; the instruc¬tor usually plays the employee. Total time is about 30 minutes.

Who works the TV equipment? No one. In reality, the trainer turns it on to play the model and then puts on the tape that records the rehearsals. Operating time takes no more than two or three minutes.

Evaluations can take the form of written tests, rehearsal tapes and/or the final test tapes. At St. Luke’s, we rely most heavily on the final test tapes. Participants are graded on: con¬trol of the interaction, ability to move the employee to a positive response to the problem and ability to follow the key steps.

Outside the classroom, statistical follow-up reveals that problems do re¬spond to the program. For example, new employee turnover decreases when participants study orientation of new employees.

You can download excellent powerpoint slides on HR management, business strategy and personal development HERE.

Validation? In December 1977, we requested nine randomly chosen graduates (10% of our total), trained from January 1975 to June 1977, to visit our training department. Arriv¬ing singly, each was given a typed de¬scription of a problem: One of their employees had a pattern of recent Monday lateness. After a few mo¬ments preparation, each indicated a willingness for the interview to begin. A trainer played the employee.

Some “testees” were stern and dis¬ciplinary, and some were paternalistic and helping. Each revealed his own personality and used his own com¬munications style in the interview. Each graded high in interactive control, employee contribution and fal¬lowing key steps. Even those who had participated three years earlier and who had received no overt reinforce¬ment from training scored well.

For before-and-after comparisons, these interviews were compared with the first taped rehearsal interview of each “testee.” Non training adminis¬trators scored each pair of interviews. In each case, “after” scored higher. Re¬tention of skills, even after 35 months, was significant.

At St. Luke’s, where the technique is called “behavior rehearsal,” we stress rehearsal rather than the model. It is rehearsal time that allows the participant to make mistakes in the classroom, not the work room. Re¬hearsal lets each person explore how best to play the role illustrated by the models.

Source : Terence O’Connor. January 1979. Training Magazine.

• Education is a joint enterprise: Students learn best when they con¬tribute to the educational process.

• As an instructor, you can be wrong at times, so admit mistakes. And don’t bluff if you don’t know.

• When preparing to teach a course, clearly define the course objectives, and select a text, teaching techniques, materials, and assignments to best meet those objectives.

You can download excellent powerpoint slides on HR management, business strategy and personal development HERE.

• In determining assignments, plan the course in its entirety and allocate sufficient time to cover the various topics. Plan for holidays, examina¬tions, review, etc.

• Remember: Most students want you to “take charge.” They want to feel they are being allowed to contribute, but, at the same time, they expect the instructor to provide direction.

• When you meet a class for the first time, clearly define the classroom structure, i.e., let the students know from the outset exactly what is ex¬pected of them and what they can ex¬pect from you. Introduce yourself to the class and say something about your background and qualifications. Like it or not, students are most often motivated by grades; therefore, define your grading system and adhere to it on an impartial basis. Distribute a course outline and schedule— and go over them carefully to give your stu¬dents an overview of the course.

• The course outline should contain: a) name of course, time and place it meets; b) name of instructor and how he or she may be reached; c) list of course objectives; d) title of textbook; e) assignments; f) course require¬ments; g) dates for examinations; h) policy on grading/attendance/class participation; i) resources available, e.g., books on reserve in library, au¬diovisual materials, etc.

• When organizing a classroom pre¬sentation, try the “sandwich method”—tell students what you are going to tell them, tell them, tell them what you have told them. Studies reveal that most students want the instructor to draw appropriate conclusions rather than leaving the conclusions strictly to them.

• Avoid personal criticism of a stu¬dent when opposing his opinion or po¬sition on a given issue. Attack the ar¬gument, if necessary, not the student.
• Avoid sarcasm in the classroom. It usually backfires.
• Field trips, properly planned and organized, can be a tremendous rein¬forcement to classroom instruction. Schedule them frequently.

You can download excellent powerpoint slides on HR management, business strategy and personal development HERE.

• The first step in constructing a test is to consider the objectives of the course. Don’t construct a test which requires students to “read your mind”; let them know what you expect from them. Examinations shouldn’t be guessing games. Avoid making tests too long for the allotted time. Re¬member, a test that is easy to con¬struct (essay questions), will be time-consuming to grade. Conversely, a test easy to grade (multiple choice), will be time-consuming to construct.

• Students appreciate these charac¬teristics in their instructors: the abil¬ity to see subject matter from the stu¬dent’s perspective and the ability to communicate it on an intelligible level; a commitment to their fields and enthusiasm for the material; a willingness to listen and learn from students; a flexibility in conceptualiz¬ing subject matter.

• Spend adequate time in prepara¬tion.

• Obtain prompt and continuous feedback from students. Make certain they know what they are supposed to be learning. See that the presenta¬tions are not over their heads or too elementary.

• Pose study questions designed to focus on the major points in the as¬signments.

• Don’t hesitate to seek the advice of colleagues. Discuss teaching problems with them, observe their classes, and solicit comments from observers in your class.

• Don’t be afraid to experiment with different techniques or methods, even if only for a change of pace.

• Finally and foremost, remember that teaching is fun. Properly done, it should be a rewarding and satisfying experience for all concerned.

Source : Training Magazine, June 1978

You can download excellent powerpoint slides on HR management, business strategy and personal development HERE.

Plant a handful of seeds in fer¬tile soil. Water well and cull the weeds. Soon sprouts break the soil. Few gardeners, looking at these tiny greens, could pick the bloomers from the stunted runts. Yet some buds will blossom with stunning beauty, some will struggle along in the bloomers’ shadows…and some will never grow at all.

Liken that garden to your organization, and yourself to the gardner. Can you pick the new employee who will grow faster and better than the rest? Can you isolate those who will never, germinate at all? Can anyone? And how can you help those most promising buds blossom best?

Organizations use many methods to help employees grow. Some use formal training programs, based on the re¬sults of rigorous observation and testing. Others use a natural selection process, with high-potential new hires proving their worth through performance and perseverance. But, whatever the technique used, more and more organizations are finding that some form of intensive cultivation is necessary so their management spots are filled by those that thrive rather than those that just hang on the longest.

You can download excellent powerpoint slides on HR management, business strategy and personal development HERE.

Walt Mahler, author of Executive Continuity and well-known expert in the field of management development, suggests that well-managed com¬panies now watch “people flow” as closely as they watch cash flow. “A company is an ongoing enterprise,” Mahler explains, “and top management must maintain interest and ac¬tion decade after decade in the training and development of future executives. Without such involvement and commitment, no company can sur¬vive.”

Learning for every employee
The prime method used for ensuring executive continuity, Mahler says, has been the replacement chart, where designated successors were listed for each job. But this method is far from the “developed executive” method Mahler advocates, where top management takes an active role in training replacement leaders.

Management’s main contribution to executive development, Mahler be¬lieves, should be through a continued emphasis on the importance of learning for every employee. “Intensive programs often benefit just the 27-to-37-year-old who is earmarked for advancement. At most, that’s just 5 or 10% of the work force,” he says. “But if all employees are given an opportu¬nity to continue their education through company-sponsored educa¬tion programs and training, then it elevates the level of everyone’s job.”

You can download excellent powerpoint slides on HR management, business strategy and personal development HERE.

Mahler’s plan for executive devel¬opment focuses on several factors in¬fluencing growth. It is the job of train¬ing and management to see that those considered for top-level positions have:
• Early opportunity to serve as a supervisor, plus the chance to take significant risks and full responsibil¬ity.
• A variety of competent executive models to emulate.
• Experience with adversity— the opportunity to make mistakes and learn from them.
• Experience in more than one specialization.
• Constructive coaching by a superior.
• Periodic educational experiences.

The training department should design a system that gives high-potential employees those oppor¬tunities. Also, the department should gather data through tests, appraisals and other analyses to give sound in¬formation to executives about all candidates available. In addition, the training department should institute a program of educational courses through colleges, management insti¬tutes and trade organizations.

Nothing formal at TI
Texas Instruments, a pioneering electronics firm, uses all these ap¬proaches and more to ensure that candidates are available for all posi¬tions opened through expansion or re¬tirement.

Although Texas Instruments does not have a “fast-track” program, up-and-comers have a wealth of educa¬tional opportunities and are encour¬aged to take advantage of these at company time and expense. “Based on the length of time an employee has served with us,” explains Erskine Hightower, manager of training and development, “they can be paid salary for every hour they attend college or graduate school.”

For example, TI’s Engineer Devel¬opment Plan operates on a sliding scale. An employee with five years’ experience, taking sophomore-level courses, would be paid full salary while attending college, yet work only four hours each day. And TI would pick up 90% of the tuition and books.

Graduate engineers can complete a master’s degree in one of four job-related disciplines without ever leav¬ing the plant. Through TAGER—, Texas Association of graduate Edu¬cation and Research—lessons are microwaved into rooms at TI and each student is linked to the classroom by telephone. A courier service picks up homework assignments and delivers materials to the student. “With TAGER,” Hightower explains, “a stu¬dent can complete all 43 credits of an M.S. without ever going on campus, except to register.”

You can download excellent powerpoint slides on HR management, business strategy and personal development HERE.

In many ways, Texas Instruments’ method of management development is a natural selection. “If you want to go to school and get ahead,” High tower says, “there’s no reason not to. And education really pays off. We’re a technologically-based company and need all that additional brainpower to stay competitive. We don’t give pref¬erential treatment to anyone, but we try to put high-fliers in the limelight and give them a chance to perform. If they do, there are plenty of ways for selection, where the fittest and most energetic flowers bloom the best, then AT&T’s assessment center is the program reserved for the dedicated horticulturist.

Assessment centers are not new selection devices. They’ve been used since WWI, when countries found that “command by nobility of birth” did not lead to the best fighting force. And they were refined by the Office of Strategic Services, who used centers to select WWII spies. In the business world, however, they did not become popular until the mid-1950’s.
One of those early pioneers, still ac¬tively working as AT&T’s director of management selection and develop¬ment research, is Dr. Douglas Bray. In 1956, Bray began a longitudinal study of the development of young managers for AT&T.

That study is still going on today, having filled five binders of in¬formation for each of the 274 partici¬pants. [For a more detailed description of the original AT&T study, read For¬mative Years in Business, by Bray, Campbell and Grant (1974: Wiley-Interscience, New York). This volume details the procedures and results obtained from the first decade of the study. And attend session #201 at TRAINING ‘78. Titled “What We Have Learned About Management and Managers From 20 Years Applying the Assessment Center Method,” led by Bray and Bill Byham, president of Development Dimensions.

“Assessment centers are very be¬havioral in method,” Bray says. “Rather than test, we emphasize situations where the participant has to do something, to behave.” For instance, an AT&T assessment runs half a week. During that time, the participants are observed by a staff of assessors (typi¬cally chosen from among line managers, on temporary duty) as they run a small business, empty an overflowing in-basket with appropriate action taken on each item, or present ideas or concepts to groups of their peers.

You can download excellent powerpoint slides on HR management, business strategy and personal development HERE.

“We feel this is much better than a battery of tests,” Bray adds, “because it is a direct, not a derived, assessment. We actually watch people do some¬thing, not speculate on whether or not we think they could do it.”

AT&T’s assessment focuses on sev¬eral factors, including administrative skills, interpersonal communications, general mental ability, work and career involvement, ability to perform under stress and ability to work independent of others. Based on the partic¬ipant’s response, the assessor rates the employee according to a fairly rigid guideline— probability that the par¬ticipant will reach a certain level of management within a given time.

“Over 16 years for the pilot group,”Bray declares, “46% of those we pre¬dicted would do well, did; and 19% we predicted would do poorly, did do poorly.”

Although no one is stating that as¬sessment centers are infallible indi¬cators of business success or failure, the results of
AT&T’s experience show that early assessment can spot potential high achievers…and potential problem employees, as well as suggest remedial skills a candidate should develop to be of greater benefit to the organization. AT&T now operates scores of centers throughout the country, assessing more than 30,000 em¬ployees per year.

But AT&T is a giant organization, hiring thousands of employees each year. Would assessment centers work just as well for smaller businesses? “I believe so,” says Bray, “because when you only hire 20 or 30 employees per year, good assessment can have a rapid impact.” Several companies, in¬cluding Development Dimensions In¬ternational at Pittsburgh and As-sessment Designs of Winter Park, FL, offer courses in how to set up an as¬sessment center. And many com¬panies, both large and small, are find¬ing that these programs do help isolate and assist high potential employees.

For trainers, the isolation and as¬sistance of high potential personnel is a two-fold challenge. First, trainers must help the operating divisions develop efficient performance appraisal tools so that line managers can adequately assist all employees to reach top performance. And, second, trainers must develop or coordinate educational opportunities so that high po¬tential employees can receive the additional training and skills they need to truly have high potential performance.

As Mahler indicated, management continuity is the crucial factor in the long-term success of most companies. Just as a garden may blossom with flowers after an initial seeding, yet gradually produce fewer and fewer blooms as the soil loses richness, so can companies operate for a short term with little regard for depleting their resources. But the agricultural principles of crop rotation, culling the weeds and helping the high bloomers, feeding the soil and bringing high performers into, the sunlight have analogies in the world of business. Given the correct management cli¬mate, trainers can do much to ensure that every employee has a chance to grow…and that high performers can get the education, training and development they need to blossom beauti¬fully.

You can download excellent powerpoint slides on HR management, business strategy and personal development HERE.

Source : Training Magazine, September 1978

You can download excellent powerpoint slides on HR management, business strategy and personal development HERE.

The Scanlon Plan is the brainchild of the late Joseph N. Scanlon, a union official who became an instructor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Scanlon devised a system in which the people who actually do the work and know it best can have the opportunity to find ways to do it more efficiently, and to be rewarded if indeed more efficiency results. The plan differs from a suggestion system in that Scanlon rewards are distributed to the entire group involved in the work rather than to an individual who originates the idea.

In profit sharing, by contrast, work¬ers may receive a bonus without know¬ing why they are getting it or without having participated in the decisions or plans that led to the increased profit. For example, irrespective of produc¬tivity, the sale of a division may pro¬duce a large profit that is reflected in the year-end bonus. Very often, too, there is such a time lag between con¬tribution to profits and distribution of a bonus for that contribution that workers don’t see the connection.
Workers in a Scanlon Plan receive monthly or quarterly bonuses that are directly tied to improvements in effi¬ciency.

To illustrate (a bit simplistically), the normative cost of labor in a typical month to manufacture a prod¬uct is $40,000. If suggestions from employees are adopted that reduce the labor costs to $38,000, the bonus dis¬tributed for one month is $2,000.

The first step in instituting cost-saving methods is the departmental production committee, which meets at least once a month. Consisting of rep¬resentatives of the work force and management, it reviews employees’ suggestions on decreasing waste, im¬proving procedures, scheduling, and any other changes that might lead to higher productivity or lower costs.

You can download excellent powerpoint slides on HR management, business strategy and personal development HERE.

Each month or quarter, depending upon the schedule of bonus payments, the plant- or office-wide screening committee meets. This, too, is com¬posed of labor and management representatives. Members of this committee consider the minutes of each lower-level production committee meeting, record all suggestions accepted by the production committees, and review those that were rejected. Management may reserve the right to accept or reject any suggestion, no matter what a production committee has decided.

In addition, the screening commit¬tee discusses anything that might af¬fect the plan, such as problems in the sales force or strikes that may slow distribution. And it reviews the fig¬ures for the period just ended to fix the bonus or deficit.
In some organizations, the entire bonus goes to the production force. In others, 75% goes to the workers, 25% to the company. Usually, a portion of the bonus is put aside to cover periods in which there may be deficits. If the plan calls for such a reserve fund, part or all of it may be distributed at, say, the end of 12 months— as an addi¬tional bonus after all the deficits are covered.

Proponents of the Scanlon Plan claim that this kind of bonus-sharing encourages initiative and collabora¬tion among employees. The plan, they say, reduces resistance to change, since change is advocated bilaterally by labor and management instead of being dictated from on high. Most im¬portant, perhaps, is that people who make a special effort are rewarded for that effort.

Why, then, in the 40 years since its inception, hasn’t the Scanlon Plan be-some widely accepted by American in¬dustry? For one reason, the plan doesn’t work well in organizations ;hat offer individual incentive plans, such as piecework.
But other reasons fall in the cate¬gory of speculation. Some executives apparently feel that, where a union exists, a Scanlon Plan seems to give it more “legitimacy.” Other unionized companies say that the Scanlon Plan has eased their relationships with the bargaining units and brought the union closer to the problems and objectives of management. But, they tress, the union must be in on the initial phases of approving a Scanlon Plan.

You can download excellent powerpoint slides on HR management, business strategy and personal development HERE.

Bringing the union into the plann¬ing is a delicate issue with manage-lent and labor. Union leaders on the committee may be leery about being indentified with management. Management may be equally uncomfortable about the possible identification. Even where a union is not an issue, some managers feel that, under a Scanlon Plan, they may be giving up leir prerogatives. After all, they are used to judging the feasibility of ideas.

Under the Scanlon Plan, employees on the production and screening communities also have votes. Some executives experienced in the an report that it may cause some comfort for managers: Employees gin to put pressure on management be more effective and do a better job planning.

One encounters skepticism in some executives who say the plan sounds too good to be true. And, indeed, in some ceses this has been so. In one company, verse circumstances beyond the control of management resulted in two years without a bonus being distributed. It nearly wrecked the plan.

What may actually be the most significant inhibitor is the relative lack of specific or hard data. A few companies have trumpeted their success stories with the plan. But others decline to publicize their experience, saying that ! Scanlon Plan has provided a competitive edge, the extent to which they 1 keep to themselves, thank you.

Source : Thomas Quick. Training Magazine. January 1979.

You can download excellent powerpoint slides on HR management, business strategy and personal development HERE.

First, both companies have drawn training directors from line management, choosing company generalists rather than career training and development professionals. Second, both have an active and effective performance appraisal system, using both supervisory judgment and other tools to select high-potential employees. Third, both companies are committed to a philosophy that makes employee education and training important ingredients for success.

In 1976, Motorola Communications Group appointed John Mes-serschmidt, a marketing specialist, as director of training and development. Working closely with Dr. Paul Patinka, director of human resources for the Communications Group, Mes-serschmidt revamped Motorola’s training and development function, bringing it in line with budget re-quirements and the needs of a compet¬itive marketplace.

You can download excellent powerpoint slides on HR management, business strategy and personal development HERE.

Dr. Patinka administered a battery of questionnaires, lasting eight hours, to a group of managers covering a range from those considered highly successful to those considered not so successful. Based on a comparison of the responses of these two groups, a scoring key and subsequently a shorter experimental battery was de¬vised. Efforts are now being made to determine the extent to which this battery has value as an indicator of employee potential for management.

The results of the battery are also being looked at as a possible aid in helping employees find out what skills they are deficient in and must remedy. They help management identify those employees with the potential for ad¬vancement. And they can hopefully help the training department design programs to improve the skills of in¬dividual employees.

But, Patinka warns, the battery, still in the experimental stage, is not an absolute indicator. “Any techniqu¬es, such as tests, biographical data in¬ventories or assessment centers, are merely probability devices. The best you can say is there’s a reasonable probability that this person has what it takes to be a manager— as well as we can measure. And that’s a powerful qualifier.”

You can download excellent powerpoint slides on HR management, business strategy and personal development HERE.

“Potential” vs. “Performance”

Patinka distinguishes between “po¬tential,” as measured by tests or as¬sessment centers, and “performance,” governed by a number of factors other than potential. “Take a high-performance engine, for instance,” he illustrates. “It may have enormous ca¬pacity for power, but if it isn’t tuned right or has broken parts, it may never realize its full potential. In a similar way, some high-potential employees may also have to be ‘tuned’. It takes a very special kind of supervisor to nur¬ture employees who may be abrasive, aggressive—and brilliant.”

Motorola’s Communications Group uses several methods to identify high achievers— the judgment of super¬visors, past performance, and current rate of growth. “There is a good corre¬lation between battery results and judged potential,” Patinka concludes. “But the real value of the scores is what they add to other methods, either reinforcing or calling into question what performance and observation show about the employee.”

As a former line manager, Mes-serschmidt knows weir what skills were required by Motorola. As director of training, he set out to see that those skills were available to employees.

“Although we have a policy of edu¬cational assistance that makes it pos¬sible for all employees to attend col¬lege or graduate school at little cost,” Messerschmidt says, “we insist that the education be job-related. In the past, when schools enrolled one of our employees, we just had to accept their degree and the curriculum that went with it. But now, with the downturn in enrollment, schools realize they must tailor their product more closely to what business needs.”

Messerschmidt contacted several area colleges, outlined Motorola’s needs and asked to review their cur¬ricula. “The results were pheno¬menal,” he recalls. “Based on such devices as Patinka’s battery, we could determine what courses our em¬ployees needed. And many colleges began to modify their programs to meet those needs.”

In addition, Messerschmidt advo¬cates a different program for advanced education than is offered by many graduate schools. As ah employee de¬signs a career plan, he or she consults with the training department to see what skills are needed for the next step up. Then the employee enrolls in the school that offers the best courses in that area. After several job trans¬fers, an employee may have course-work in several disciplines.

“Many universities don’t want to work this way,” Messerschmidt says, “because they can’t plan on ha ring a student’s tuition money continually over the next few years. And the say, the degree will be outdated if it takes several years to complete. I don’t agree. The employee may not have had an accounting course for several years, but probably he or she uses that knowledge every day. I’d like o see a program based on a under standing among the college, the training department and the employee that an employee will receive an MBA at an appropriate point in his or her career if he or she follows a career path and continues to take courses regularly.”

Under the Motorola model, as out¬lined by Messerschmidt and Patinka, a few trainers can administer several programs. “I prefer this system,” Patinka explains, “because it means I can always hire expert help from out¬side for special projects. And I can sus¬pend such help during budget crunches and still maintain my permanent staff.”

Motorola’s training and develop¬ment is presently managed by Jerry Moch, who took over from John Mes¬serschmidt (promoted back to a mar¬keting spot). Like Patinka’s develop¬ment division, Moch’s department has a small staff that administers many programs. “We use the community col¬lege system extensively,” Moch ex¬plains, “so we don’t have to rely on our own experts to be available all the time to teach classes. In addition, many community colleges supplement teachers with an adjunct staff of ex¬perts from the business world, so we get the benefit of their experience.”

Moch adds that community colleges are quite responsive to business needs. “Their charters usually indicate that they must offer courses that meet the demands of the community,” he says. “As part of the community, businesses can help determine what bourses should be included.”

You can download excellent powerpoint slides on HR management, business strategy and personal development HERE.

Meanwhile, at McGraw-Hill Ralph Denton, like John Messerschmidt, came from a line division to training. Again, like Messerschmidt, he has returned to a line division after completing a revision of McGraw-Hill’s performance appraisal and management development department.

“Our program is about 70% devel¬opment and 30% performance apprai¬sal,” Denton calculates. “First, we de¬signed a set of job standards and criteria to measure performance. Then we developed an individual develop¬ment plan (usually consisting of after-hours education) and a series of in-house training sessions to respond to general needs.”

Those with top management poten¬tial get priority for training sessions. [n addition, McGraw-Hill has a successor program that identifies who will take over specific management jobs about 18 months before that job becomes vacant, thus giving the successor time to increase skills before ;hey are required.

Within the organization, there are two distinct employee groups — editors and sales representatives. For editors, McGraw-Hill offers many programs, both designed by the com¬pany training department and pur¬chased from outside vendors. Also, each new editor becomes part of a “buddy system.” A senior editor, not involved in supervision, provides an easily accessible source for information and answers for a new employee. This also helps groom senior editors for future supervisory positions.

The sales organization uses a com¬bination of formal training and field experience to develop future sales managers. Sales reps are frequently brought to New York for seminars or special courses and often work with regional managers to learn new skills. In addition, a different region’s sales force gathers each month to discuss a current sales problem. These “consen¬sus reports,” based on tapes of that discussion, are sent to the other re¬gions as possible solutions to selling problems.

For both editors and sales reps, a four-page performance appraisal and assessment tool is used:

Page One: Personal identification and three summaries— What the employee does well, what he or she does not do well, and what is being done about those areas that need im¬provement.

Page Two: Performance factors— How does this employee measure up to the standard?

Page Three: Performance Sum¬mary— Is this employee promotable? If so, when and to what job? What plan of action must be followed to prepare for that promotion?

Page Four: List of seminars and courses offered— What courses has the employee taken? What are recommended?
This performance appraisal goes up the management chain and then to the training department, where it is coded onto a computer. The computer readout helps management and training identify high-potential employees and suggests who should attend what courses.

“McGraw-Hill’s senior manage¬ment really makes this system work,” Denton believes. “The computer can pump out data. But unless management is willing to fund the programs required, nothing much will happen. “Arlene Anns, Denton’s replacement as director of training, agrees. “We look at people as a Venture fund,’ ” she explains. “And that fund provides the ideas and abilities McGraw-Hill needs to continue growing. As trainers, our job is to provide the day-to-day environment for training and the skills people need to move ahead”.

You can download excellent powerpoint slides on HR management, business strategy and personal development HERE.

Source :
Training Magazine. September 1978.

You can download excellent powerpoint slides on HR management, business strategy and personal development HERE.

When the workers in the Harman experiment were, in fact, given more of a say, they began to fashion new ways of doing things at the plant. They formed cooperative work teams, as¬signed responsibilities and controlled their own time and scheduling. As ob¬servers described it, people became more involved and interested in their jobs.

The results of the experiment? Absenteeism and turnover declined, product quality improved, collective bargaining was facilitated, and there were significant labor-cost savings, which were shared by employees and management. The workers even had enough free time to start their own school, where they studied everything from welding to accounting, and to publish their own newspaper.

Today, experiments like the one at Harman International are being tried by dozens of organizations. The simple idea that workers should be given more say is the basis for what is being called labor-management cooperation or, more broadly, the “quality of work life” movement. And an increasing number 01 behavioral scientists, man¬agers and labor leaders feel that these efforts to create genuine employee participation in decision making are one of the potentially most powerful and far-reaching new ways of improv¬ing organizational effectiveness.

Quality of work life (QWL) is not a single theory or technique; it’s not a job-enrichment, profit-sharing or in¬centive scheme. QWL is a process of joint decision making, collaboration and building mutual respect between management and employees. This process seems to cause a change in people—in how they feel about them¬selves, their work and each other. It is this change in the human climate that QWL advocates claim increases satis¬faction and facilitates better solutions to management and production problems.

QWL endeavors have taken a vari¬ety of forms. General Motors, America’s largest industrial employer, has made a major commitment to QWL and has plant-level labor-management committees involved in everything from specifying tools and setting up safety committees to altering traffic flow and redesigning jobs. At the Rushton Mining Company, workers have rotated tasks and taken over su¬pervisory roles. And organizations ranging from Heinz and Nabisco to the Tennessee Valley Authority have ini¬tiated employee participation. For companies like these, the claims of ec¬onomic impact have been signifi¬cant—in savings from lower turnover, absenteeism and accident rates, re¬duced supervision, better product and service quality, and more efficient working methods.

A number of city governments are involved in QWL projects. In 1972, Jamestown, NY, was economically depressed and losing industry. Mayor Stanley Lundine brought together the city’s management and labor leaders to form a joint committee that set up QWL programs in a dozen area com¬panies. After three years, unemploy¬ment was down from 10% to 4%, exist¬ing industry was expanding, and the Cummins Engine Co. had been attracted to the area.

Lundine was so impressed with this dramatic rise in productivity that he went on, as a con¬gressional representative, to initiate a labor-management cooperation bill. Lundine’s proposal recently became law as part of the Humphrey-Hawkins Act. And the federal government, which has already supported a number of QWL projects, will be spend¬ing millions of dollars in this area over the next few years.

You can download excellent powerpoint slides on HR management, business strategy and personal development HERE.

While there are over 200 labor-management committees in American companies and localities, only a handful of QWL programs have been as comprehensive and successful as Harman or Jamestown. The fact is that, while employee participation may seem like a simple idea, it implies a major change in the way organizations are run. A so-called QWL project that consists merely of suggestion boxes or that isn’t supported by management and union leadership is destined to fail. Authentic employee par¬ticipation requires the empowerment of people and is a slow process of comprehensive organizational change.

Social scientist Dr. Michael Mac-coby, one of the architects of the Harman project, has written: “Most people want to do a good job and resent being treated as if they lack the ability to think and understand the legitimate problems of a business. In turn, most managers are not hard-hearted but rather fearful that if they let down their guard, unions and workers will push them around.”

While managers and supervisors may be threatened by a loss of control, union members are often suspicious that QWL is just a work speed-up in disguise or a threat to their adversary solidarity. These kinds of concerns are dealt with in most QWL programs by establishing basic ground rules, among them that people will not lose jobs if productivity increases and will share in economic gains that may result.

All QWL efforts involve extensive education and training—in organiza¬tion assessment, technical skills, communications, team building and joint problem-solving. In fact, QWL is a burgeoning new area in the training and HRD field. There are centers and consultants throughout the country involved in facilitating and assisting QWL programs. Research is being con¬ducted by social scientists at the Wharton School, UCLA, Ohio State, the University of Michigan and other institutions. The American Society for Training and Development has recently established a committee to ex¬amine QWL and its relationship to HRD. And each year there are new con-ferences and workshops to educate people about QWL and develop the HRD skills it requires.

There is a large body of theory and research to support the QWL concept. The work of behavioral scientists from Elton Mayo to Maslow, McGregor and Likert suggests that participatory management can release human en¬ergy. A rising concern with productiv¬ity and new questions about what people can expect from work are fi¬nally putting these beliefs into action. Many experts feel that current indus¬trial problems, such as absenteeism, turnover and sabotage, are the result of the increasing job dissatisfaction of a more educated and demanding work force. Others see automation and new technology necessitating the redesign of jobs and work roles.

The move to improve the quality of working life is not just a humanistic cause or productivity campaign. Rather, it indicates a growing belief that the future of American industry lies in finding more effective and dem¬ocratic ways of supporting and using skills, energy and ideas of people.

You can download excellent powerpoint slides on HR management, business strategy and personal development HERE.

Source :
Deborah Shaw Cohen. Training Magazine, January 1979.