Managing Change and Conflict in a Hostile Work EnvironmentManaging Change and Conflict in a Hostile Work EnvironmentWilliam D.

QuinnSouthwestern College1 Managing Change and Conflict in a Hostile Work EnvironmentAbstractThe follow paper will provide a real world example of a change initiative undertaken atan aircraft engine repair facility. Within this example there will be a step-by-step breakdown of the processes and strategies used to battle conflict amongst the employeesin the shop and to ensure a successful change initiative. Through the use of Kaizenmeetings, lean six sigma tools and modeling and conflict resolution a group of employeeranging from engineers and project leaders to shop floor employees were able to identifyand begin implementing changes in the shop all the while reducing their interpersonalconflicts with other members of the team.2 Managing Change and Conflict in a Hostile Work EnvironmentI am currently employed by General Electric in their Aircraft Engines businessunit in Arkansas City, Kansas. At our facility we are responsible for the maintenance andrepair of three commercial engine lines. These engine lines include CT7/T700, CF34 andCFM56. My specific role within the company is as a Six Sigma Black belt for our SmallCommercial engine lines (CF34 and CT7). My primary job function consists of studyingthe processes and materials used in the repair of an engine and finding ways to improveflow and reduce cost. If we spend money on something, it is my job to figure out a way toreduce its cost.As a general routine I walk the shop floor and try to learn as much about a processas I can, often following a particular engine part from the time that it is removed from theengine to the time that it is put back on. Sometimes I choose the areas that I walk basedupon shop data, sometimes I pick them at random and as is often the case, a conflictarises in the shop that requires my attention and analysis. For the purpose of this paper, Iwould like to discuss a recent conflict that occurred within the shop and discuss how Iwent about analyzing the problem, diagnosing a cure for that problem as well asmanaging the conflict that arose from both that conflict and the changes that I would beimplementing.The conflict began as a result of a $50,000 mistake in our rotor stator process. A part was ground incorrectly and was subsequently scrapped, forcing us to purchase a newunit. As a result each area of the shop floor began blaming each other for making themistake that lead to the scrapping of the part. The employees on the shop floor are allvery proud of the work that they do and the quality of the work that they produce, thusthere is a lot of tension every time a major quality issue arises such as this.3

EnvironmentThis is where my change process begins. My first task was to walk theCompressor Rotor and Stator process. The process involves two parts, the rotor and thestator. Both parts are measured on different machines and then the rotor goes on to be cutand ground and swapped out to match the required tolerances to fit inside of the stator.To begin the process the inspector physically marks a zeroing point on the rotor in order to have a baseline for each measurement. They then insert a dial gauge and spin the

rotor slowly, looking for the highest measurement point at that specific location. Once theyfind it they write the measurement down and move on to the next measurement locationand then repeat the process. Once this inspector completes each measurement they takeout a sheet of paper and a calculator and calculate the tolerances for that specific part.From there the other part, the stator, is measured on a separate automated machine acrossthe shop. Once the machine and computer finish their calculations the inspector use themeasurement data to manually calculate the limits on the stator. Once both parts have been measured, the hand written and calculated tolerances of each part are compared anda machinist calculates what changes will need to be made to the rotor in order to get it to perfectly match the stator. Once this is done, the machinist enters the measurements intoa machine that tells it where and how much it needs to grind off of the rotor. Once this iscomplete the parts are mated together (assuming everything fits correctly) and processedon to engine assembly.After completely walking the process there were a few glaringly obvious problems that I noticed that could have led to the above issue or may lead to future problems. The first potential problem that I saw was that a lot of the measurement limitswere being hand written and hand calculated with a calculator. The problem with this is4 Managing Change and Conflict in a Hostile Work Environmentthat it leaves room for a fat finger error when making calculations. The other problemwith this is that these hand written calculations had to be passed on to the next person inthe repair process who often had trouble reading the other persons writing. The next problem that I noticed was that we were using a dial gage to take measurements on therotor. While the dial gage is perfectly accurate the dial can potentially be miss-read. Amiss-read dial means an incorrect measurement and tolerance calculation. The next issuewas the fact that the rotor inspector had to calculate the zeroing point every time theytook a measurement. While the inspectors are very good at their jobs, any shift in thezeroing point between measurements could create tolerance errors down the road.In addition to the potential problems that I identified, I also noticed a few process problems that could be improved upon. The first is again due to the handwriting of calculations, as this takes additional time every time a measurement is taken and acalculation is made. The second is that the calculation sheets must be carried across theshop and handed off to the next person in the process. The thing that I noticed was that because all of the calculations for the rotor were done by hand there was no digital recordof the measurement and therefore no ability to easily store and access the measurement of other rotors and stators for swapping purposes between engines. The third thing that Inoticed was that there was no digital communication between any of the areas involved inthe total repair process of the rotor and stator. All of the information was passed aroundon pieces of paper. If one of those pieces of paper were to get lost, the part would have togo back to be re-measured. The last thing that I noticed was that each of the threedifferent locations where work is performed on these parts is spread out in three different5 Managing Change and Conflict in a Hostile Work Environmentcorners of the shop. This creates unnecessary queue time when you have to wait for a parts handler to come get the part and transfer it over to the other areas of the shop. Now that I had a good understanding of the process and some of the potentialissues that could be causing errors I wanted to sit down with the shop and kick off a miniKaizen event. The purpose of the Kaizen event was to get the process owners together and work to solve the problem and iron out the conflict between the areas and shifts as agroup. As Todd Jick and Maury Peiperl state in their text Managing Change: Cases and Concepts , I wanted to spread revitalization to all departments without pushing it fromthe top (Jick, Peiperl pg 236). The first step in setting up the event was to go to theBusiness Leader to get his blessing and to go over some the things that I had foundduring my initial process walk. This is often the most important aspect of beginning achange process because top management will ultimately have the final say in how thingsare done, what changes are made and how funds are spent. Furthermore, their blessing ona project can be very influential in getting buy in from both the members of the groupworking the change and also

the rest of the shop. After getting his blessing to provide anyhelp that I needed I pulled in process owners from each area of the shop floor from bothshifts that touched the rotor or stator, the area supervisor and the process engineer for thatarea. All said and done we had a team 8 people including myself.I chose this group for three reasons, the first being that they are the ones that work the process everyday and they would be the ones ultimately responsible for implementingany changes to the process. It is my firm belief that if you are going to make a change toa process that will affect other people, you must have their involvement in the change process. Changes that are forced down upon people will receive less initial buy in, will6 Managing Change and Conflict in a Hostile Work Environmenttake a longer time to implement and will turn them off to the idea of any future changeinitiatives. I have seen and heard people on the shop floor speak of these types of changeinitiatives as being upper managements flavor of the week and that they will be heretoday and gone tomorrow.The second reason that I chose this group, and specifically the mix of themembers of the shop floor, was because they were each the unspoken leaders in their areas. By convincing them of the changes needed, everyone else in their areas wouldfollow.The third reason has to do with the conflict that we were experiencing betweenthe different areas of the shop as well as the conflict that existed between shifts. This iswhy I chose individuals from both shifts and each area. I wanted to force them to cometogether and work as a group, and in doing so, hopefully work out their differences. Thisis a tactic that many change leaders will shy away from or even consider an error. Onemight ask, why bring added conflict to a change process? My answer is that if you believe in your skills as a leader and more importantly your skills as a mediator, you canaccomplish two things at once. Change a process for the better and solve an ongoingconflict. A united group will accept and implement a change more quickly then a dividedone. Now that I had my team together I kicked off our first initial meeting by havingthe Business Leader come in and explain the reason that we were having the event and toshow his support of the work that we would be doing. Getting him to do this wasimportant to me because it would give me, the project leader, a certain level of indirect power and showed the group that I was an extension of his position. Project managers can

Log In Sign Up Browse

Managing Change and Conflict in a Hostile Work Environmentcorners of the shop. This creates unnecessary queue time when you have to wait for a parts handler to come get the part and transfer it over to the other areas of the shop. Now that I had a good understanding of the process and some of the potentialissues that could be causing errors I wanted to sit down with the shop and kick off a miniKaizen event. The purpose of the Kaizen event was to get the process owners together and work to solve the problem and iron out the conflict between the areas and shifts as agroup. As Todd Jick and Maury Peiperl state in their text Managing Change: Cases and Concepts , I wanted to spread revitalization to all departments without pushing it fromthe top (Jick, Peiperl pg 236). The first step in setting up the event was to go to theBusiness Leader to get his blessing and to go over some the things that I had foundduring my initial process walk. This is often the most important aspect of beginning achange process because top management will ultimately have the final say in how

thingsare done, what changes are made and how funds are spent. Furthermore, their blessing ona project can be very influential in getting buy in from both the members of the groupworking the change and also the rest of the shop. After getting his blessing to provide anyhelp that I needed I pulled in process owners from each area of the shop floor from bothshifts that touched the rotor or stator, the area supervisor and the process engineer for thatarea. All said and done we had a team 8 people including myself.I chose this group for three reasons, the first being that they are the ones that work the process everyday and they would be the ones ultimately responsible for implementingany changes to the process. It is my firm belief that if you are going to make a change toa process that will affect other people, you must have their involvement in the change process. Changes that are forced down upon people will receive less initial buy in, will6

Managing Change and Conflict in a Hostile Work Environmenttake a longer time to implement and will turn them off to the idea of any future changeinitiatives. I have seen and heard people on the shop floor speak of these types of changeinitiatives as being upper managements flavor of the week and that they will be heretoday and gone tomorrow.The second reason that I chose this group, and specifically the mix of themembers of the shop floor, was because they were each the unspoken leaders in their areas. By convincing them of the changes needed, everyone else in their areas wouldfollow.The third reason has to do with the conflict that we were experiencing betweenthe different areas of the shop as well as the conflict that existed between shifts. This iswhy I chose individuals from both shifts and each area. I wanted to force them to cometogether and work as a group, and in doing so, hopefully work out their differences. Thisis a tactic that many change leaders will shy away from or even consider an error. Onemight ask, why bring added conflict to a change process? My answer is that if you believe in your skills as a leader and more importantly your skills as a mediator, you canaccomplish two things at once. Change a process for the better and solve an ongoingconflict. A united group will accept and implement a change more quickly then a dividedone. Now that I had my team together I kicked off our first initial meeting by havingthe Business Leader come in and explain the reason that we were having the event and toshow his support of the work that we would be doing. Getting him to do this wasimportant to me because it would give me, the project leader, a certain level of indirect power and showed the group that I was an extension of his position. Project managers can7

Managing Change and Conflict in a Hostile Work Environmentoften find it difficult to lead a team when they have no immediate power over the processor the people involved. Rather then try to gain power through force I prefer to gain itthrough passive linking as I did above. William Wilmot and Jason Hockers text, Interpersonal Conflict explains how detrimental the use of force can be to gain power ina conflict or change situation. They state that the more you struggle against someone,the less power you will have with that person. (Wilmot, Hocker pg 139). My techniqueof passive linking involves linking myself to the strategies of upper management andexplaining that they want to see the change and what their expectations are. By doing thisthe people involved with the change understand what my position is and what function Iam there to serve.Once the Business Leader finished his introduction I reiterated his statements and began to discuss the goals and objectives of our mini Kaizen event. Our goals weresimple. Identify the areas of the process that could be improved upon, discuss potentialtools that could be implemented to make their jobs easier and come away from the eventwith an implementation strategy to make everything work. I wanted our goals to besimple and to the point. This would not be a complicated change and thus I did notwanted to have a complicated set of goals. My strategy was to identify the problems andgo out and fix them.

Furthermore, I made it clear to everyone that I was not there to tryand cast blame on any group for the recent error that had spawned this event and that the purpose was not to point fingers at anyone. Often times when an error occurs in the shopand an event like this is pulled together people become defensive when we startdiscussing where potential problems may lie. Digging into any process will expose8

Managing Change and Conflict in a Hostile Work Environment problem areas and it is important that you, as a leader, make sure that everyone in thegroup understands that they are there to make the business better and not to find blame.As we began digging into the process I immediately noticed that there was sometension in our group between two of the shop floor employees. When one would saysomething, the other would disagree almost immediately. While they werent directlyhostile, their body language and subtle remarks made it easy to see how they felt abouteach other and their negative attitude was rubbing off on the other members of the group.To combat this I tried to get each member to explain themselves and why they agreed or disagreed with the other person in the group. By doing this it forced them to think for aminute and actually try to put a reason behind their negative attitude. A snide remark issomething that is easy to come up with, but when you have to try to explain why youmade that snide remark, it often makes people realize that are speaking irrationally andwithout grounds. In using this technique I had to be careful that I did not push theseindividuals into silence, as that was not what I wanted. They were knowledgeablemembers of the team and I knew that they would provide positive input; I just had to break down the barriers that they had put up. In order to continue breaking down these barriers and pull them from going into a silent disposition, I worked to remind them thereason that we were there and that we had to continue to improve our quality andefficiency to remain competitive in the market. Essentially I was trying to mobilizecommitment to change through a joint diagnosis of business problems (Jick, Peiperl pg234).My next attempt to bring the group together and defeat the conflict between theshop floor employees was to turn to their vanity. As I mentioned above I explained to9

Managing Change and Conflict in a Hostile Work Environmentthem the importance of this event for the business and then explained to them that theywere they key members of the group and that they were the ones that worked the processeveryday and knew its ins and outs. I wanted them to know that I was not there to forcesomething down upon them. I was there to help bring out ideas. They were the expertsand they held the power. I wanted to empower them by explaining to them that we weredependent upon each other. I wanted to establish a power-dependence relation[ship](Wilmot, Hocker pg 122) amongst themselves and with me. Often times, hourly personnel can develop feelings of powerlessness because they feel that they are thereonly to turn wrenches and to be told what to do. I have heard employees say that they hadsimply stopped suggesting ideas that could potentially improve the shop because theywere tired of no one doing anything about it or even looking into it. Furthermore, manyviewed events such as these as an excuse for management to make a bunch of changesand further force things upon them. I wanted the individuals in the group to know thatthis was not the case and that they were there as equal participants in the event.Slowly but surely the team started to come together and the individuals that hadintensified the conflict by making snide remarks were now working together andexpanding upon ideas or providing valid constructive criticism. While we had spentalmost a day and half crawling through the beginning stages of the event because of theinitial conflict, I felt that it would pay off in the long run when we try to implement our changes. Avoiding conflict can often be a good strategy and can make an event runsmoothly with great idea generation, yet when you go to implement the process you mayquickly find out that because you did nothing to address the existing conflict between theemployees that were purposely left out you will have an extremely difficult time getting Log In

Sign Up Browse

Managing Change and Conflict in a Hostile Work Environment problem areas and it is important that you, as a leader, make sure that everyone in thegroup understands that they are there to make the business better and not to find blame.As we began digging into the process I immediately noticed that there was sometension in our group between two of the shop floor employees. When one would saysomething, the other would disagree almost immediately. While they werent directlyhostile, their body language and subtle remarks made it easy to see how they felt abouteach other and their negative attitude was rubbing off on the other members of the group.To combat this I tried to get each member to explain themselves and why they agreed or disagreed with the other person in the group. By doing this it forced them to think for aminute and actually try to put a reason behind their negative attitude. A snide remark issomething that is easy to come up with, but when you have to try to explain why youmade that snide remark, it often makes people realize that are speaking irrationally andwithout grounds. In using this technique I had to be careful that I did not push theseindividuals into silence, as that was not what I wanted. They were knowledgeablemembers of the team and I knew that they would provide positive input; I just had to break down the barriers that they had put up. In order to continue breaking down these barriers and pull them from going into a silent disposition, I worked to remind them thereason that we were there and that we had to continue to improve our quality andefficiency to remain competitive in the market. Essentially I was trying to mobilizecommitment to change through a joint diagnosis of business problems (Jick, Peiperl pg234).My next attempt to bring the group together and defeat the conflict between theshop floor employees was to turn to their vanity. As I mentioned above I explained to9

Managing Change and Conflict in a Hostile Work Environmentthem the importance of this event for the business and then explained to them that theywere they key members of the group and that they were the ones that worked the processeveryday and knew its ins and outs. I wanted them to know that I was not there to forcesomething down upon them. I was there to help bring out ideas. They were the expertsand they held the power. I wanted to empower them by explaining to them that we weredependent upon each other. I wanted to establish a power-dependence relation[ship](Wilmot, Hocker pg 122) amongst themselves and with me. Often times, hourly personnel can develop feelings of powerlessness because they feel that they are thereonly to turn wrenches and to be told what to do. I have heard employees say that they hadsimply stopped suggesting ideas that could potentially improve the shop because theywere tired of no one doing anything about it or even looking into it. Furthermore, manyviewed events such as these as an excuse for management to make a bunch of changesand further force things upon them. I wanted the individuals in the group to know thatthis was not the case and that they were there as equal participants in the event.Slowly but surely the team started to come together and the individuals that hadintensified the conflict by making snide remarks were now working together andexpanding upon ideas or providing valid constructive criticism. While we had spentalmost a day and half crawling through the beginning stages of the event because of theinitial conflict, I felt that it would pay off in the long run when we try to implement our changes. Avoiding conflict can often be a good strategy and can make an event runsmoothly with great idea generation, yet when you go to implement the process you mayquickly find out that because you did nothing to address the existing conflict between theemployees that were purposely left out you will have an extremely difficult time getting10

Managing Change and Conflict in a Hostile Work Environmentany of your changes to stick. The conflict between employees can often intensify whenyou have one set of employees trying to implement a change and the other side resistingit simply because they do not like them. Every project leader must understand thedynamic behind the process that they are tackling and the group of employees that theyare working with. Now that we were beginning to act like a team we began going through some of the project management tools that would help us understand the process and identifyareas of concern. Our first task was to create a process map. Many times people becomeso transfixed on their small sphere of influence and the job that they are working that theydo not see or understand everything else that is going on around them. The process mapis a great tool for the team to see the entire process laid out step by step. The idea behinda positive process map is to lay out each step in the process and identify how long each of those steps take, how long the queue time is between those steps, where decisions need to be made along the process, who is responsible for making them and where processvariation may exist. Once everyone in the group had an understanding of the process we began to expand upon each of the areas that we identified as having variation. Processvariation is the downfall of a lean process thus it is important to identify where it existsand how it comes to be. From there we went on to discuss who the owners were of thesubprocesses where the variation occurred and began brainstorming ways in which wecould fix the causes of that variation. By identifying the owners of these sub-processeswe were able to narrow in our focus as to how the variation could come to exist and howwe could influence it.11

Managing Change and Conflict in a Hostile Work EnvironmentWith our variation identified and our brainstormed ideas written on sticky notes pasted all over the wall I lead our team on to the next exercise known as an Impact toEffort chart. This is a very simple exercise that uses a two-axis graph, with the measureof impact upon the process on the y-axis and the measure of effort required to completethe task on the x-axis. The idea behind the chart is to place each brainstormed idea on thechart in accordance with how much positive impact it will have on our process and howmuch effort it will take to implement it. I created a graph for each of the different areas of variation and then asked the group to direct me in where to put each of the idea stickynotes. Once this was completed we had an easy visual picture of the quality of each ideaand we were able to identifying which ideas we wanted to work towards implementing.In total we felt that there were four changes that we could implement that wouldimprove the quality of our measurements and communication as well as improve our total process. The first was to purchase a digital probe with a data port connection. The digital probe would provide an easier to see readout gage for the inspector, and the data portconnection would allow the measurement data to be stored directly onto the computer.The second idea was to purchase a data processing tool called Lab View. Lab Viewwould allow us to automatically record hundreds of measurements and identify where thehigh and low measurements are located. Lab View would also allow us choose a zeroing point on the first measurement that would remain consistent no matter where we took themeasurement on the rotor. The last positive thing about Lab View is that all of the datacan be stored on the computer in an excel file that would allow us to write a macro program to auto calculate all of the tolerances that we had previously been calculating byhand. The next change was to work with IT to link each of the computers in the areas12

Managing Change and Conflict in a Hostile Work Environmentwhere the rotor and stator are worked so that the measurement data taken in one areacould be transferred automatically to the next step in the process. The inspector would beable to automatically transmit the tolerance data calculated through Lab View to themachinists machine where the rotor would be routed to be cut. The last change that wedecided upon was a data storage program that would allow us to store all of themeasurement data from each of the rotors and stators that we had in the shop. From therewe would write a program that would automatically select the rotor and stator in thesystem that were the best match for each other. By doing this we would be able to reducethe amount of parts that we would have to replace and the amount of

material that wehave to grind off in order to get the rotor and stator to match. Now that we had thoroughly thought out each of the changes that we wanted toimplement, we focused our efforts upon the actual implementation and control strategy.Implementation is the most important part of any change and a poor strategy can easilyderail any project. Many projects leaders and teams are often so focused on trying tocome up with solutions to their identified problems that they forget to discuss how theywill implement their changes and what controls they will put in place to keep the changegoing. In order to implement the digital probe, all we needed to do was to fabricate a probe tip to fit our existing measurement rig and the extra digital probe that we sitting inour calibration lab. From there, the control was as simple as taking the dial gauge probeout of the shop. To implement Lab View (which we were already using in other areas of the shop) we would have to load the software onto the necessary computers and write the programs to make the necessary calculations. Once this was in place we woulddiscontinue the use of hand written tolerance sheets by taking the templates off the floor Log In Sign Up Browse

Managing Change and Conflict in a Hostile Work EnvironmentWith our variation identified and our brainstormed ideas written on sticky notes pasted all over the wall I lead our team on to the next exercise known as an Impact toEffort chart. This is a very simple exercise that uses a two-axis graph, with the measureof impact upon the process on the y-axis and the measure of effort required to completethe task on the x-axis. The idea behind the chart is to place each brainstormed idea on thechart in accordance with how much positive impact it will have on our process and howmuch effort it will take to implement it. I created a graph for each of the different areas of variation and then asked the group to direct me in where to put each of the idea stickynotes. Once this was completed we had an easy visual picture of the quality of each ideaand we were able to identifying which ideas we wanted to work towards implementing.In total we felt that there were four changes that we could implement that wouldimprove the quality of our measurements and communication as well as improve our total process. The first was to purchase a digital probe with a data port connection. The digital probe would provide an easier to see readout gage for the inspector, and the data portconnection would allow the measurement data to be stored directly onto the computer.The second idea was to purchase a data processing tool called Lab View. Lab Viewwould allow us to automatically record hundreds of measurements and identify where thehigh and low measurements are located. Lab View would also allow us choose a zeroing point on the first measurement that would remain consistent no matter where we took themeasurement on the rotor. The last positive thing about Lab View is that all of the datacan be stored on the computer in an excel file that would allow us to write a macro program to auto calculate all of the tolerances that we had previously been calculating byhand. The next change was to work with IT to link each of the computers in the areas12

Managing Change and Conflict in a Hostile Work Environmentwhere the rotor and stator are worked so that the measurement data taken in one areacould be transferred automatically to the next step in the process. The inspector would beable to automatically transmit the tolerance data calculated through Lab View to themachinists machine where the rotor would be routed to be cut. The last change that wedecided upon was a data storage program that would allow us to store all of themeasurement data from each of the rotors and stators that we had in the shop. From therewe would write a program that would automatically select the rotor and stator in thesystem that were the best match for each other. By doing this we would be able to reducethe amount of parts that we would have to replace and the amount of

material that wehave to grind off in order to get the rotor and stator to match. Now that we had thoroughly thought out each of the changes that we wanted toimplement, we focused our efforts upon the actual implementation and control strategy.Implementation is the most important part of any change and a poor strategy can easilyderail any project. Many projects leaders and teams are often so focused on trying tocome up with solutions to their identified problems that they forget to discuss how theywill implement their changes and what controls they will put in place to keep the changegoing. In order to implement the digital probe, all we needed to do was to fabricate a probe tip to fit our existing measurement rig and the extra digital probe that we sitting inour calibration lab. From there, the control was as simple as taking the dial gauge probeout of the shop. To implement Lab View (which we were already using in other areas of the shop) we would have to load the software onto the necessary computers and write the programs to make the necessary calculations. Once this was in place we woulddiscontinue the use of hand written tolerance sheets by taking the templates off the floor 13

Managing Change and Conflict in a Hostile Work Environmentand writing a Quality Control Work Instruction (QCWI) that would require the use of theLab View generated tolerance sheets. The final two changes would be implemented over time as the IT resources became available. These changes could be implemented easilywith no issues for concern from the shop.In order to combat any potential push back from the shop floor we agreed to firstmake the computer programs almost completely self automated so that the employeeworking them would not have to work their way through any confusing screens. Second,we would tie in all of the changes by offering additional computer and tooling training tothe employees in each location so that they could understand how to use the new digital probe and the associated computer programs. Often the most common gripe thatemployees have about new changes is that they are confusing and that they are pushedout with little to no training. With representatives from the shop floor on the team wewere able to brainstorm and head off any areas of potential conflict and adapt their program and training to fit their needs.After four days of Kaizen meetings we presented our findings to the shop in anopen forum type of setting. We split the presentation up amongst each member of team,ensuring that the members from the shop floor were responsible for describing thechanges that we had planned to introduce. By making them present the changes, it toldthe rest of the shop that they had had representation in the event and that they agreed withthe changes that would soon follow.So how did everything turn out? We are currently in the process of programmingthe Lab View software to be able to record and translate the data in the manner that wewould like. We have the digital probe ready to go and have already made it available for use on the shop floor. Currently it is not connected to the computer, but we have received positive feedback on its ease of use and the easy to read digital display. All of thecomputers in each area are now linked to a stored drive on our network server and areready to transmit and store data. The rotor and stator best fit program is still on thedrawing board as we are waiting for the IT resources to become available. As a team wefeel that we were not only able to fix our quality concerns and improve the overall process, but to also help resolve much of the conflict that existed between work groupsand shifts.

Log In Sign Up Browse

Managing Change and Conflict in a Hostile Work EnvironmentWith our variation identified and our brainstormed ideas written on sticky notes pasted all over the wall I lead our team on to the next exercise known as an Impact toEffort chart. This is a very simple exercise that uses a two-axis graph, with the measureof impact upon the process on the y-axis and the measure of effort required to completethe task on the x-axis. The idea behind the chart is to place each brainstormed idea on thechart in accordance with how much positive impact it will have on our process and howmuch effort it will take to implement it. I created a graph for each of the different areas of variation and then asked the group to direct me in where to put each of the idea stickynotes. Once this was completed we had an easy visual picture of the quality of each ideaand we were able to identifying which ideas we wanted to work towards implementing.In total we felt that there were four changes that we could implement that wouldimprove the quality of our measurements and communication as well as improve our total process. The first was to purchase a digital probe with a data port connection. The digital probe would provide an easier to see readout gage for the inspector, and the data portconnection would allow the measurement data to be stored directly onto the computer.The second idea was to purchase a data processing tool called Lab View. Lab Viewwould allow us to automatically record hundreds of measurements and identify where thehigh and low measurements are located. Lab View would also allow us choose a zeroing point on the first measurement that would remain consistent no matter where we took themeasurement on the rotor. The last positive thing about Lab View is that all of the datacan be stored on the computer in an excel file that would allow us to write a macro program to auto calculate all of the tolerances that we had previously been calculating byhand. The next change was to work with IT to link each of the computers in the areas12

Managing Change and Conflict in a Hostile Work Environmentwhere the rotor and stator are worked so that the measurement data taken in one areacould be transferred automatically to the next step in the process. The inspector would beable to automatically transmit the tolerance data calculated through Lab View to themachinists machine where the rotor would be routed to be cut. The last change that wedecided upon was a data storage program that would allow us to store all of themeasurement data from each of the rotors and stators that we had in the shop. From therewe would write a program that would automatically select the rotor and stator in thesystem that were the best match for each other. By doing this we would be able to reducethe amount of parts that we would have to replace and the amount of material that wehave to grind off in order to get the rotor and stator to match. Now that we had thoroughly thought out each of the changes that we wanted toimplement, we focused our efforts upon the actual implementation and control strategy.Implementation is the most important part of any change and a poor strategy can easilyderail any project. Many projects leaders and teams are often so focused on trying tocome up with solutions to their identified problems that they forget to discuss how theywill implement their changes and what controls they will put in place to keep the changegoing. In order to implement the digital probe, all we needed to do was to fabricate a probe tip to fit our existing measurement rig and the extra digital probe that we sitting inour calibration lab. From there, the control was as simple as taking the dial gauge probeout of the shop. To implement Lab View (which we were already using in other areas of the shop) we would have to load the software onto the necessary computers and write the programs to make the necessary calculations. Once this was in place we woulddiscontinue the use of hand written tolerance sheets by taking the templates off the floor 13

Managing Change and Conflict in a Hostile Work Environmentand writing a Quality Control Work Instruction (QCWI) that would require the use of theLab View generated tolerance sheets. The final two changes would be implemented over time as the IT resources became available. These changes could be implemented easilywith no issues for concern from the shop.In order to combat any potential push back from the shop floor we agreed to firstmake the computer programs almost completely self automated so that the employeeworking them would not have to work their way through any confusing screens.

Second,we would tie in all of the changes by offering additional computer and tooling training tothe employees in each location so that they could understand how to use the new digital probe and the associated computer programs. Often the most common gripe thatemployees have about new changes is that they are confusing and that they are pushedout with little to no training. With representatives from the shop floor on the team wewere able to brainstorm and head off any areas of potential conflict and adapt their program and training to fit their needs.After four days of Kaizen meetings we presented our findings to the shop in anopen forum type of setting. We split the presentation up amongst each member of team,ensuring that the members from the shop floor were responsible for describing thechanges that we had planned to introduce. By making them present the changes, it toldthe rest of the shop that they had had representation in the event and that they agreed withthe changes that would soon follow.So how did everything turn out? We are currently in the process of programmingthe Lab View software to be able to record and translate the data in the manner that wewould like. We have the digital probe ready to go and have already made it available for. Currently it is not connected to the computer, but we have received positive feedback on its ease of use and the easy to read digital display. All of thecomputers in each area are now linked to a stored drive on our network server and areready to transmit and store data. The rotor and stator best fit program is still on thedrawing board as we are waiting for the IT resources to become available. As a team wefeel that we were not only able to fix our quality concerns and improve the overall process, but to also help resolve much of the conflict that existed between work groups and shifts. Reference Wilmot, W. W., Hocker J. L. Interpersonal Conflict 7 th Ed . New York, NY: TheMcGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2007Jick, T. D., Peiperl M. A. Managing Change: Cases and Concepts 2 nd Ed. New York,BY: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2003