NC State of Business

My two year foray into becoming a part time farmer is without a doubt an ongoing lesson in hard work and a day to day revelation into how much I really need to learn about trying to manage a farm.
We have a number of beef cows that are finding life enjoyable in the east pasture, but as I have found out, they do require a daily maintenance routine.

These beef cows got me thinking about an article I recently read about a dairy milking operation (which I believe is an order of magnitude greater in the amount of effort required compared to a beef operation!) where an innovation brought solid mechanical engineering together with integrated computer systems technology to automate the milking process.

The system is such that the cows learn how to enter the milking stall when their udders are full and this new generation milker does all the work without any human intervention. Now that’s farming!

Data from the World Bank indicates that 30% of the German workforce is still employed in manufacturing versus only 21% of the US workforce.
To compete, with internal high wages and taxes, European companies have had to be innovative - an innovative marriage of engineering and computer technology that has lead to some very high tech machinery.

The opportunity to be innovative is in the American manufacturers hands. How well do you connect with new technology that could be used with your manufacturing expertise and products? Do you search and uncover technologies that could, when married together, provide a high tech version of a new product or service?

What is your company’s plan of action if a tornado warning is announced within a 10-mile radius of your facility? What actions will the receptionist take if a bomb threat is made? The time to determine the course of action is NOT during the emergency!

Planning for an emergency is more than conducting a fire evacuation drill once per year. Consider the following:

Identify potential emergencies, both natural and man-made, and develop plans to prevent and minimize risks.

• - If a fire, explosion, or chemical release occurs at your site, will you have control over the scene? Are local emergency responders familiar with your site and unique hazards?
• - Where will traffic be diverted so that emergency vehicles can access the site?
• - Who will communicate to the public and/or media, likely camped close to your campus if a major event occurs?
• - If employees are injured, where will employees be assessed for injuries prior to transport to further medical treatment? How will you reach family members of employees, possibly establishing a phone number to post regular updates?

The natural gas leak at a ConAgra plant in Garner in June 2009 was ruled accidental, but it was no accident that their emergency plan was in place and executed.

Practice! Conduct periodic testing of all emergency plans, in addition to the fire evacuation drills. Practice the tornado warning, the chemical spill response, the bomb threat, and others.

Evaluate and update the plans and procedures as necessary. Continually improve your plan and your response.

Fire Prevention Week is October 4 – 10, 2009. Why don’t you consider all emergency planning efforts that week?

A keyword search for “leadership” on Amazon will uncover 353,028 books. A search for “leadership” in the title narrows the choices to 26,880 books. Each book offers its own perspective into leadership. Even with such an expansive offering of insights, we are still seeking answers to effective leadership – a complex and elusive concept.

I certainly do not profess to have any magical answers about leading organizations. But I will offer that leadership should be considered from three broad perspectives – an individual’s attributes, the context, and the process of leadership. First, leadership is a set of attributes or behaviors of an individual. This is the most common thought we have about leadership. And we tend to emphasize developing an individual’s traits. However, this is only one aspect of leadership.

How important are attributes if the context is frequently changing and the changes are not recognized? So, the second perspective is to consider the role of context. Specifically, consider the role of the external and internal context on a leader’s effectiveness. The external context refers to the environment outside the organization. For example, recent economic changes have caused leaders to perform differently in order to be effective. The internal context refers to the “politics’ within an organization. This includes understanding the structures and informal influencers that affect decision-making of an organization. Awareness of the context suggests leadership must effectively scan the environment around them and account for the patterns of decision-making within the organization.

Finally, leadership is a process of interactions. A leader needs followers. A leader also needs to understand when to follow and let others lead based on their knowledge and expertise to solve issues. These series of ongoing interactions represent a process of human interactions that are greatly affected by the individuals involved. For example, a “dictatorial” leader is likely to have limited two-way interactions and minimal input from others in the organization. This approach may limit choices to discover the best answers.

So, how do you view leadership? How are you developing individual skills and attributes? How are you developing systems to continuously scan and understand the context? How are you using the information of scanning to minimize risks to the organization? Finally, how are you developing ways to encourage an effective process for leaders and followers to interact? I am interested in hearing your thoughts!

Companies are being asked to get certified to a number of different management systems including

• ISO 9001: Quality management System
• ISO 14001: Environmental Management System
• OHSAS 18001: Occupational Health and Safety Management System (NOTE: This is not an ISO standard)
• ISO 50001: Energy Management System
• Others

These Management Systems have a number of “common” requirements so that when they are implemented separately, there is a lot of duplicity and unnecessary efforts expended. To add fuel to the fire, registrars who come in to certify companies, may “double charge companies for auditing different systems. For example – a registrar may charge $25,000 for a 3 year service to conduct the registration audit and subsequent surveillance audits for an ISO 9001 system – and then charge a similar price for registration services of an ISO 14001 system. This would be OK except for the fact that common requirements for the two standards represent ~ 25-50% of an ISO 14001 EMS (see below).

.
Figure 1. ISO 14001 Requirements Compared to ISO 9001 Requirements

To alleviate to this situation, the ISO organization (International Organization of Standards), has started work to “harmonize” the structure and terminology of all ISO management system standards. The ISO TMB Technical Advisory Group 13 – Joint Technical Co-ordination Group (JTCG) is completing the development of 2 harmonization efforts:
• Develop common terms and core definitions for all ISO Management System Standards (MSS)
• Develop a common - High Level Structure for Management System Standards (Clause titles and Sequence of clause titles)

In this way, registration audits (and internal audits) could be conducted to cover multiple management system common elements in a single effort. This effort should be completed sometime in 2010-2011. Look for ISO standards created, revised or updated in 2010 or 2011 to be modified to this new ISO MSS requirements using the newly developed high level structure and common terms / core definitions.

When considering implementing a certified quality management system like ISO 9001, AS9100, or ISO/TS 16949, there is an important set of questions to initially think about. Why is it important for your organization to pursue this? Is your customer requesting it? Have you heard that you can’t bid on certain government contracts unless you are certified to ISO 9001 or AS9100? Why do you care right now?

The drive to implement a program because “our customer wants it” could lead you to a suboptimal outcome. For example, you may create the quality manual and the other required procedures because you “have to” not because you see a genuine need to do so, giving voice to the program, but no real action. If you are considering a quality management system just to be able to check a box, then I would encourage you to do some additional soul searching. If you start out doubting that a quality management system can improve your business, you may never achieve the full power of the system and it will become a burden not a benefit.

Steven Covey says “start with the end in mind”. So what does this mean for a quality management system? It means visualizing the system fully implemented and seeing the expected results of: increased customer satisfaction; improved consistency in your processes; reduced costs due to reductions in scrap and rework; improved employee morale because of improved communications; and increased business opportunities. Once you can visualize and internalize the benefits you can gain from an effectively implemented quality management system, then you can put the necessary plans in place to turn that vision into reality.

Start by building on the processes you already have in place and making adjustments as needed to meet any new requirements from the standard. The practices put in place should become part of your daily activities as opposed to something done only at certain times – like when it is time for an internal or external audit. Once you have defined your processes, then develop and track performance metrics for them so you know if they are effective. Next you need to continually improve your processes to enhance customer satisfaction, increase your competitive edge, and strive for excellence.

“We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.” Aristotle