Replying to LO28709 --
Greetings Jan, fellow list members,
In LO28698 Alan talks about "Risk Management" and states
>The risk management approach covers Operational Risk (quality, safety,
>environment, security). Administrative risk control means the use of
>documented management systems such as ISO9000, ISO14000, AS4801.
Where I work we are soon to be audited against ISO 9000:2000 for the first
time. For the past 24 Months, those of us involved in quality systems
have been systematically piecing together an Integrated Management System.
Our Level 1 Manual was signed off by the senior management team late last
year. Each division is now developing their Level 2 Manual following a
sample we developed after the Level 1 Manual was signed off. I completed
the L 2 Manual for my unit sufficiently for my manager to sign it off as
completed and we have been using it for 6 weeks now. Our Manuals are
integrated in that they encompass the same three standards Alan mentioned,
Safety, Quality, Environment.
Now Jan you make the following statement
>Risk management is indeed the issue that prevents us to reach continuous
>development and "cover your ass" is the systematic strategy deployed.
And here is how that works. We have several safety requirements we need
to address to keep us on track to a target of 'Zero Harm'. Each division
carried out a self assessment on how well they currently addressed each
point. I conducted the survey for 2 divisions and debated the fact that
three points in both divisions were worthy of just 2 out of a possible 5.
In both cases, I was able to supply enough information for the managers to
(in one case grudgingly) agree they were not real flash - only worth 2.
One of my colleagues from a different division was instructed by his
manager to fill the survey out and to make sure their division was not
"put in a bad light" - cover our ass for us! He was aghast and was
seeking my opinion. I sent him both of the surveys I had completed, his
manager relented and he was able to tell it like it was. We have come
such a long way over the last 5 years - kicking and screaming and spending
millions on consultants. And don't get me wrong I have learnt so much
from many of them that have genuinely toiled to make a difference then
thrown their hands up in disgust.
Jan you also say
>I would look for the cost of accidents as the driving for force behind
>improvements, not presciptive rules and laws.
There is a big slice of this driving force in our improvements. We have a
system in New Zealand called Accident Compensation whereby when people are
injured at work they receive 80% of their salary while rehabilitating.
Every employer pays levies and the size of the levy is heavily influenced
by your accident rate and how robust your systems are in the ongoing
management of safety. In environmental terms, there are substantial fines
for exceeding discharge levels and under the legislation the courts have
the power to fine the manager responsible for the exceedance. Need I say
more?
So when one is attempting to be authentic and live their truth they need
the skin of a Rhino if they are to do so in what appears to be an
international climate (there must be some genuine organisations
-commercial- out there?) On that note Keith entered the thread with this:
>I have often talked to my wife and soulmate about this issue. There is a
>role for idealism in business but it must be mixed with a strong dose of
>pragmatism if it is to be effective. When most people have a goal of
>returning home from work without emotional bruises, it is difficult to
>remain optimistic about changing things in a major way.
I mentioned earlier how I learned from many of the consultants the company
engaged - we even had a version of Landmark Coporations 'Forum' - well
they mostly taught me personal mastery and to have immunity from emotional
bruising (in my knowing) however the fortunes of the company continue to
decline. Yet Keith went on to say:
>Where the changes have had effect, I have usually held an internal
>executive position, empowered by the CEO and aided by an able internal
>credible change agent. OTOH, in my current role, the job at hand is
>fundamentally simpler, but the need to remain "fresh" in our collective
>desire for excellence remains a challenge for the whole management team.
The signs are good at work, I'm hoping this is where we are now and our
CEO continues to support our quality, safety, environmental managers by
way of our Integrated Management System and that we have learnt not to
cover our ass's when the external auditors visit, and if the change is
permanent, then I hope it's not too late to fully resuscitate our ailing
organisation and we have really started healing from within - using our
own talent - our internal consultants and trainers?
Dennis.
--"Dennis Rolleston" <dennisr@ps.gen.nz>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.