CONTENTS

TITLE PAGE

INTRODUCTION

UNIT 1. INTRODUCTION TO QUALITY MANAGEMENT

UNIT 2. EVOLUTION

UNIT 3. CUSTOMER FOCUS

REVIEW units 1-3

UNIT 4. LEADERSHIP

UNIT 5. ENGAGEMENT OF PEOPLE

UNIT 6. PROCESS APPROACH

REVIEW units 4-6

UNIT 7. IMPROVEMENT

UNIT 8.EVIDENCE BASED DECISION MAKING

UNIT 9. RELATIONSHIP MANAGEMENT

REVIEW units 7-9

UNIT 10. QUALITY STANDARDS

UNIT 11. QUALITY MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE

UNIT 12. QUALITY CONTROL

REVIEW units 10-12

UNIT 13. QUALITY ASSURANCE

UNIT 14. SERVICE QUALITY

REVIEW units13-14

APPENDIX

CONCLUSION

REFERENCES & RESOURCES

UNIT 5. ENGAGEMENT OF PEOPLE

Part A

Employee engagement does not mean employee happiness. Someone might be happy at work, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they are working hard, productively on behalf of the organization. While company game rooms, free massages and Friday keg parties are fun and may be beneficial for other reasons, making employees happy is different from making them engaged.

Employee engagement doesn’t mean employee satisfaction. Many companies have «employee satisfaction» surveys and executives talk about «employee satisfaction», but the bar is set too low. A satisfied employee might show up for her daily 9-to-5 without complaint. But that same «satisfied» employee might not go the extra effort on her own, and she’ll probably take the headhunter’s call luring her away with a 10% bump in pay. Satisfied isn’t enough.

Definition: Employee engagement is the emotional commitment the employee has to the organization and its goals.

This emotional commitment means engaged employees actually care about their work and their company. They don’t work just for a paycheck, or just for the next promotion, but work on behalf of the organization’s goals.

When employees care—when they are engaged—they use discretionary effort.

This means the engaged computer programmer works overtime when needed, without being asked. This means the engaged retail clerk picks up the trash on the store floor, even if the boss isn’t watching. This means the TSA agent will pull a bag suspicious bag to be searched, even if it’s the last bag on their shift.

Engaged employees lead to better business outcomes. In fact, according to Towers Perrin research companies with engaged workers have 6% higher net profit margins, and according to Kenexa research engaged companies have five times higher shareholder returns over five years. Improving employee engagement is not simply about improving productivity – although organizations with a high level of engagement do report 22% higher productivity, according to a new meta-analysis of 1.4 million employees conducted by the Gallup Organization.

In addition, strong employee engagement promotes a variety of outcomes that are good for employees and customers. For instance, highly engaged organizations have double the rate of success of lower engaged organizations. Comparing top-quartile companies to bottom-quartile companies, the engagement factor becomes very noticeable. For example, top-quartile firms have lower absenteeism and turnover. Specifically, high-turnover organizations report 25% lower turnover, and low-turnover organizations report 65% lower turnover. Engagement also improves quality of work and health. For example, higher scoring business units report 48% fewer safety incidents; 41% fewer patient safety incidents; and41% fewer quality incidents (defects).

While people define engagement in various ways, I prefer a plain and simple definition: People want to come to work, understand their jobs, and know how their work contributes to the success of the organization.

Jim Harter Ph.D., a chief scientist at Gallup Research explained what engaged employees do differently in an email interview: «Engaged employees are more attentive and vigilant. They look out for the needs of their coworkers and the overall enterprise, because they personally «own» the result of their work and that of the organization».

Harter, who has co-authored over 1,000 articles on the topic as well as two bestsellers, also says engaged employees «continuously recreate jobs so that each person has a chance to do what they do best». Engaged employees «listen to the opinions of people close to the action (close to actual safety issues and quality or defect issues), and help people see the connection between their everyday work and the larger purpose or mission of the organization». When engaged employee do this they create a virtuous circle where communication and collaboration nurture engagement and vice versa.

Considering the benefits, why do companies still struggle to foster engagement? Harter writes, «Many organizations measure either the wrong things, or too many things, or don’t make the data intuitively actionable. Many don’t make engagement a part of their overall strategy, or clarify why employee engagement is important, or provide quality education to help managers know what to do with the results, and in what order».

So where do you begin if you’re committed to improving engagement – but feel intimidated by that laundry list of pitfalls? One way to simplify it is to focus on purpose. Communicate the purpose of the organization, and how employees» individual purposes fit into that purpose. When employees «clearly know their role, have what they need to fulfill their role, and can see the connection between their role and the overall organizational purpose», says Harter, that’s the recipe for creating greater levels of engagement.

EXERCISES

1. Sum up the main ides of the text and retell it in Russian.

2. Fill in the missing words from the box into the text below.

Marketers often 1)________ hours selecting and producing visual content to post on Facebook brand pages. Creatives, strategists, and managers can go round-and-around debating which images work and which don’t for a 2)________. Sometimes they debate over whether or not the brand should show people in brand images, and everyone has their differing 3)________.

At Taggs, we 4)________ to bring data to help settle the debate – Do people pictured in brand images help or hurt Facebook engagement?

Brand images without people would be 5)________ with greater engagement than those 6)________ including people. The hypothesis is based on our anecdotal observations that when a Facebook user encounters a brand image of a product, lifestyle, or landscape without a person 7)________, the user is better able to project themselves into the image and therefore more likely to like, share, or comment on the image.

We used Taggs 8)________ content marketing software to index 3,656 brand images published on Facebook since the start of the year. We collected these images from 14 leading Facebook consumer brands in 9)________ and restaurant sectors.

We 10)________ each image as having a person, not having a person, or showing only a part of a person, such as a 11)________ holding a product but without showing a person’s face. We found that over half of the images (54%) published by brands did not include people, and only 41% included a person.

3. Read the following article and make a rendering of it in English.

Ключ к резкому повышению эффективности компании лежит в понимании и разделении сотрудниками целей и ценностей Компании и их качественной деятельности, направленной на достижение этих целей. Им дают понять, что их успехи и неудачи играют важную роль для организации. Сотрудники таких компаний лучше информированы о целях и задачах организации, ее текущих успехах, проблемах и неудачах. И самое главное: такие сотрудники – самый мощный источник идей. Именно они, непосредственно вовлеченные в рабочий процесс, наиболее детально представляют себе реальные пути совершенствования и развития бизнеса.

Вот почему Система Качества направлена на постоянное улучшение системы управления, а вовлечение персонала в процесс непрерывного совершенствования является первостепенной задачей. Выполнение этой задачи снижает и затраты на прямой контроль, которого требуется кратно больше при равнодушном персонале. Качество – это не какое-то конкретное задание. Оно должно укорениться и официально закрепиться в каждом процессе. Это обязанность каждого. Задача руководства – укоренить и придать качеству официальный статус, чтобы управлять системой.

Все ведущие компании в своей стратегии вовлеченности персонала отводят ключевое место. Вовлечение мотивирует людей. Что самое ценное в сотрудниках? Творчество и воображение, которые ведут к решению проблем, инновации и росту, чувство предназначения, которое заставляет их работать вместе в общем направлении как команду, даже когда работать тяжело. То, что объединяет эти примеры – нельзя заставить творить насильно, как и втиснуть полет фантазии в узкие рамки регламента. «Все успешные исследования и инновации были выполнены людьми, получающими радость от своей работы» Э. Деминг. То есть, ключевым элементом вовлечения является эмоциональная приверженность. Начнем с понимания системы.

Система это сеть взаимозависимых элементов, работающих вместе для достижения единой цели. Предприятие – это система, в которой люди являются теми элементами, которые требуют постоянной настройки. Настроек руководителей для совершенствования системы недостаточно (даже исходя из соотношения численности руководителей и рабочих)  и необходимо создавать условия, чтобы каждый элемент системы, т.е. каждый сотрудник принимал участие в непрерывном совершенствовании. Руководству не известны абсолютно все проблемы предприятия. Есть проблемы и решения, которые может увидеть только сотрудник. Зачастую проблемы на местах представляются совершенно иначе, а, следовательно, могут возникнуть и нетрадиционные подходы к их решению. Это, прежде всего, относится к тем бизнес-процессам, в которых он участвует. Получается «участием каждого в управлении» – менеджмент качества реализуется на всех уровнях предприятия, во всех подразделениях и с участием каждого сотрудника.

Что же такое вовлеченность и чем она отличается от удовлетворенности текущим состоянием? Удовлетворенность текущим состоянием – пассивна, а вовлеченность это активная форма состояния личности. Вовлеченность – это нечто особенное, это другое эмоциональное состояние (Эмоции как источник энергии многократно превосходят еду), другое поведение. Это новый образ работника с осознанной ответственностью, которая способна породить «опережающую инициативу», поиск способов что-то лучше сделать и возможностей для эффективного достижения результата. Каждый раз, когда человек высказывает собственное предложение, свое мнение по поводу того, что и как лучше сделать, он берет на себя ответственность за обоснованность своего мнения. А значит, готов и в дальнейшем брать на себя больше ответственности за практическую реализацию своего предложения. Но чтобы вовлечь сотрудников, необходимо, чтобы они уже были удовлетворены.

Part B

A professor in a recent executive education program on leadership elicited a lot of laughs by telling the following joke: «A CEO was asked how many people work in his company: «About half of them», he responded». After the session, several participants put a more serious face on the problem when, while chatting, they bemoaned the fact that, in their organization, a significant number of people had mentally «checked out».

Quite clearly, CEOs and managers should be very concerned about a waste of time, effort and resources in their organizations. The reason is simple: If people are not engaged, how can these same leaders attain those business objectives that are critical to improving organizational performance?

What do we mean by employee engagement? How much does a lack of employee engagement cost an organization? What steps can leaders take to make employees want to give it their best? These and other questions are the focus of this article.

An engaged employee is a person who is fully involved in, and enthusiastic about, his or her work. In his book, Getting Engaged: The New Workplace Loyalty, author Tim Rutledge explains that truly engaged employees are attracted to, and inspired by, their work («I want to do this»), committed («I am dedicated to the success of what I am doing»), and fascinated («I love what I am doing»). Engaged employees care about the future of the company and are willing to invest the discretionary effort – exceeding duty’s call – to see that the organization succeeds. In his book, Rutledge urged managers to implement retention plans so that they could keep their top talent. The need to do so is supported by a 1998 McKinsey & Co. study entitled The War for Talent that reported that a shortage of skilled employees was an emerging trend. Today, there is widespread agreement among academics and practitioners that engaged employees are those who are emotionally connected to the organization and cognitively vigilant.

We believe that executives must be concerned about the level of engagement in the workplace. For example, the Gallup Management Journal publishes a semi-annual Employment Engagement Index. The most recent U.S. results indicate that:

•Only 29 percent of employees are actively engaged in their jobs. These employees work with passion and feel a profound connection to their company. People that are actively engaged help move the organization forward.

•Fifty-four percent of employees are not engaged. These employees have essentially «checked out», sleepwalking through their workday and putting time – but not passion – into their work. These people embody what Jack Welch said several years ago. To paraphrase him: «Never mistake activity for accomplishment».

•Seventeen percent of employees are actively disengaged. These employees are busy acting out their unhappiness, undermining what theirengaged co-workers are trying to accomplish.

A Towers Perrin 2005 Global Workforce Survey involving about 85,000 people working full-time for large and midsized firms found similarly disturbing findings. Only 14 percent of all employees worldwide were highly engaged in their job. The number of Canadians that reported being highly engaged was 17 percent. Sixty-two percent of the employees surveyed indicated they were moderately engaged at best; 66 percent of employees in Canada were moderately engaged. And 24 percent reported that they are actively disengaged; the corresponding number in Canada was 17 percent.

The survey also indicated that on a country-by-country basis, the percentages of highly engaged, moderately engaged, and actively disengaged employees varied considerably. And the results showed some interesting, perhaps counter-intuitive, results. For example, Mexico and Brazil have the highest percentages of engaged employees, while Japan and Italy have the largest percentages of disengaged employees. In their report, the authors interpreted these and other findings as an indication that employee engagement has relatively little to do with macro-economic conditions. Instead, it is the unique elements of the work experience that are most likely to influence engagement.

Should executives be concerned about these findings? Perhaps a more interesting question to executives is: «Is there a strong relationship between, say, high scores on employee engagement indices and organizational performance?» It seems obvious that engaged employees are more productive than their disengaged counterparts. For example, a recent meta-analysis published in the Journal of Applied Psychology concluded that, «… employee satisfaction and engagement are related to meaningful business outcomes at a magnitude that is important to many organizations». A compelling question is this: How much more productive is an engaged workforce compared to a non-engaged workforce?

Several case studies shine some light on the practical significance of an engaged workforce. For example, New Century Financial Corporation, a U.S. specialty mortgage banking company, found that account executives in the wholesale division who were actively disengaged produced 28 percent less revenue than their colleagues who were engaged. Furthermore, those not engaged generated 23 percent less revenue than their engaged counterparts. Engaged employees also outperformed the not engaged and actively disengaged employees in other divisions. New Century Financial Corporation statistics also showed that employee engagement does not merely correlate with bottom line results – it drives results.

Employee engagement also affects the mindset of people. Engaged employees believe that they can make a difference in the organizations they work for. Confidence in the knowledge, skills, and abilities that people possess – in both themselves and others – is a powerful predictor of behavior and subsequent performance. Thus, consider some of the results of the Towers Perrin survey cited earlier:

•Eighty-four percent of highly engaged employees believe they can positively impact the quality of their organization’s products, compared with only 31 percent of the disengaged.

•Seventy-two percent of highly engaged employees believe they can positively affect customer service, versus 27 percent of the disengaged.

•Sixty-eight percent of highly engaged employees believe they can positively impact costs in their job or unit, compared with just 19 percent of the disengaged.

Given these data, it is not difficult to understand that companies that do a better job of engaging their employees do outperform their competition. Employee engagement can not only make a real difference, it can set the great organizations apart from the merely good ones.

Consider the words of Ralph Stayer, CEO of Johnsonville Sausage. In the book, Flight of the Buffalo: Soaring to Excellence, Learning to Let Employees Lead, he writes:

I learned what I had to in order to succeed, but I never thought that learning was all that important. My willingness to do whatever it takes to succeed is what fueled Johnsonville’s growth. In 1980 I hit the wall. I realized that if I kept doing what I had always done, I was going to keep getting what I was getting. And I didn’t like what I was getting. I would never achieve my dream. I could see the rest of my business life being a never-ending stream of crises, problems, and dropped balls. We could keep growing and have decent profits, but it wasn’t the success I was looking for.

The CEO observed that his employees were uninterested in their work. They were careless – dropping equipment, wasting materials, and often not accepting any responsibility for their work. They showed up for work, did what they were told to do, and, at the end of their shift, went home; the same routine would be repeated the next day. An employee-attitude survey showed average results. To Stayer, it appeared that the only person who was excited about Johnsonville was himself. He began to feel like a baby-sitter for his executives and staff. Stayer also realized that he could not inspire Johnsonville to greatness and as a result, the business he was running was becoming vulnerable.

Stayer found solutions to these problems in a meeting with Lee Thayer, a communications professor. Thayer explained to Stayer that a critical task for a leader is to create a climate that enables employees to unleash their potential. It is not the job of a CEO to make employees listen to what you have to say; it is about setting up the system so that people want to listen. The combination of the right environment and a culture that creates wants instead of requirements places few limits on what employees can achieve. Thayer’s message resonated with Stayer, as it should among business executives.

Stayer began to recognize the difference between compliance and commitment, and that an engaged workforce was what he needed to help improve organizational performance. He also learned that he needed to change his own leadership behaviour first. Leaders cannot «demand» more engagement and stronger performance; they can’t stand on the sideline and speak only «when the play goes wrong» if an engaged workforce and great performance are what they desire. But what should leaders do, or consider doing, to increase the level of engagement among employees?

The ten C’s of employee engagement

How can leaders engage employees» heads, hearts, and hands? The literature offers several avenues for action; we summarize these as the Ten C’s of employee engagement.

1. Connect: Leaders must show that they value employees. In First, Break All the Rules, Marcus Buckingham and Curt Coffman argue that managers trump companies. Employee-focused initiatives such as profit sharing and implementing work–life balance initiatives are important. However, if employees» relationship with their managers is fractured, then no amount of perks will persuade employees to perform at top levels. Employee engagement is a direct reflection of how employees feel about their relationship with the boss. Employees look at whether organizations and their leader walk the talk when they proclaim that, «Our employees are our most valuable asset».

One anecdote illustrates the Connect dimension well. In November 2003, the CEO of WestJet Airlines, Clive Beddoe, was invited to give a presentation to the Canadian Club of London. Beddoe showed up late, a few minutes before he was to deliver his speech. He had met with WestJet employees at the London Airport and had taken a few minutes to explain the corporate strategy and some new initiatives to them. He also answered employees» questions. To paraphrase Beddoe, «We had a great discussion that took a bit longer than I had anticipated». Beddoe’s actions showed that he cares about the employees. The employees, sensing that he is sincere, care about Beddoe and the organization; they «reward» his behavior with engagement.

2. Career: Leaders should provide challenging and meaningful work with opportunities for career advancement. Most people want to do new things in their job. For example, do organizations provide job rotation for their top talent? Are people assigned stretch goals? Do leaders hold people accountable for progress? Are jobs enriched in duties and responsibilities? Good leaders challenge employees; but at the same time, they must instill the confidence that the challenges can be met. Not giving people the knowledge and tools to be successful is unethical and de-motivating; it is also likely to lead to stress, frustration, and, ultimately, lack of engagement. In her book Confidence: How Winning Streaks and Losing Streaks Begin and End, Rosabeth Moss Kanter explains that confidence is based on three cornerstones: accountability, collaboration, and initiative.

3. Clarity: Leaders must communicate a clear vision. People want to understand the vision that senior leadership has for the organization, and the goals that leaders or departmental heads have for the division, unit, or team. Success in life and organizations is, to a great extent, determined by how clear individuals are about their goals and what they really want to achieve. In sum, employees need to understand what the organization’s goals are, why they are important, and how the goals can best be attained. Clarity about what the organization stands for, what it wants to achieve, and how people can contribute to the organization’s success is not always evident. Consider, for example, what Jack Stack, CEO of SRC Holdings Corp., wrote about the importance of teaching the basics of business:

The most crippling problem in American business is sheer ignorance about how business works. What we see is a whole mess of people going to a baseball game and nobody is telling them what the rules are. That baseball game is business. People try to steal from first base to second base, but they don’t even know how that fits into the big picture. What we try to do is break down business in such a way that employees realize that in order to win the World Series, you’ve got to steal x number of bases, hit y number of RBIs and have the pitchers pitch z number of innings. And if you put all these variables together, you can really attain your hopes and dreams … don’t use information to intimidate, control or manipulate people. Use it to teach people how to work together to achieve common goals and thereby gain control over their lives.

4. Convey: Leaders clarify their expectations about employees and provide feedback on their functioning in the organization. Good leaders establish processes and procedures that help people master important tasks and facilitate goal achievement. There is a great anecdote about the legendary UCLA basketball coach, John Wooden. He showed how important feedback – positive and constructive – is in the pursuit of greatness. Among the secrets of his phenomenal success was that he kept detailed diaries on each of his players. He kept track of small improvements he felt the players could make and did make. At the end of each practice, he would share his thoughts with the players. The lesson here is that good leaders work daily to improve the skills of their people and create small wins that help the team, unit, or organization perform at its best.

5. Congratulate: Business leaders can learn a great deal from Wooden’s approach. Surveys show that, over and over, employees feel that they receive immediate feedback when their performance is poor, or below expectations. These same employees also report that praise and recognition for strong performance is much less common. Exceptional leaders give recognition, and they do so a lot; they coach and convey.

6. Contribute: People want to know that their input matters and that they are contributing to the organization’s success in a meaningful way. This might be easy to articulate in settings such as hospitals and educational institutions. But what about, say, the retail industry? Sears Roebuck & Co. started a turnaround in 1992. Part of the turnaround plan was the development of a set of measures – known as Total Performance Indicators – which gauged how well Sears was doing with its employees, customers, and investors. The implementation of the measurement system led to three startling conclusions. First, an employee’s understanding of the connection between her work – as operationalized by specific job-relevant behaviors – and the strategic objectives of the company had a positive impact on job performance. Second, an employee’s attitude towards the job and the company had the greatest impact on loyalty and customer service than all the other employee factors combined. Third, improvements in employee attitude led to improvements in job-relevant behavior; this, in turn, increased customer satisfaction and an improvement in revenue growth. In sum, good leaders help people see and feel how they are contributing to the organization’s success and future.

7. Control: Employees value control over the flow and pace of their jobs and leaders can create opportunities for employees to exercise this control. Do leaders consult with their employees with regard to their needs? For example, is it possible to accommodate the needs of a mother or an employee infected with HIV so that they can attend to childcare concerns or a medical appointment? Are leaders flexible and attuned to the needs of the employees as well as the organization? Do leaders involve employees in decision-making, particularly when employees will be directly affected by the decision? Do employees have a say in setting goals or milestones that are deemed important? Are employees able to voice their ideas, and does leadership show that contributions are valued? H. Norman Schwartzkopf, retired U.S. Army General, once remarked:

I have seen competent leaders who stood in front of a platoon and all they saw was a platoon. But great leaders stand in front of a platoon and see it as 44 individuals, each of whom has aspirations, each of whom wants to live, each of whom wants to do good.

A feeling of «being in on things», and of being given opportunities to participate in decision making often reduces stress; it also creates trust and a culture where people want to take ownership of problems and their solutions. There are numerous examples of organizations whose implementation of an open-book management style and creating room for employees to contribute to making decisions had a positive effect on engagement and organizational performance. The success of Microsoft, for example, stems in part from Bill Gates» belief that smart people anywhere in the company should have the power to drive an initiative. Initiatives such as Six Sigma are dependent, in part, on the active participation of employees on the shop floor.

8. Collaborate: Studies show that, when employees work in teams and have the trust and cooperation of their team members, they outperform individuals and teams which lack good relationships. Great leaders are team builders; they create an environment that fosters trust and collaboration. Surveys indicate that being cared about by colleagues is a strong predictor of employee engagement. Thus, a continuous challenge for leaders is to rally individuals to collaborate on organizational, departmental, and group goals, while excluding individuals pursuing their self-interest.

9. Credibility: Leaders should strive to maintain acompany’s reputation and demonstrate high ethical standards. People want to be proud of their jobs, their performance, and their organization. WestJet Airlines is among the most admired organizations in Canada. The company has achieved numerous awards. For example, in 2005, it earned the number one spot for best corporate culture in Canada. On September 26, 2005, WestJet launched the «Because We’re Owners!» campaign. Why do WestJet employees care so much about their organization? Why do over 85 percent of them own shares in the company? Employees believe so strongly in what WestJet is trying to do and are so excited about its strong performance record that they commit their own money into shares.

10. Confidence: Good leaders help create confidence in a company by being exemplars of high ethical and performance standards. To illustrate, consider what happened to Harry Stonecipher, the former CEO of Boeing. He made the restoration of corporate ethics in the organization a top priority but was soon after embarrassed by the disclosure of an extramarital affair with a female employee. His poor judgment impaired his ability to lead and he lost a key ingredient for success – credibility. Thus the board asked him to resign. Employees working at Qwest and Continental Airlines were so embarrassed about working for their organizations that they would not wear their company’s uniform on their way to and from work. At WorldCom, most employees were shocked, horrified, and embarrassed when the accounting scandal broke at the company. New leadership was faced with the major challenges of regaining public trust and fostering employee engagement.

Practitioners and academics have argued that competitive advantage can be gained by creating an engaged workforce. The data and argument that that we present above are a compelling case why leaders need to make employee engagement one of their priorities. Leaders should actively try to identify the level of engagement in their organization, find the reasons behind the lack of full engagement, strive to eliminate those reasons, and implement behavioral strategies that will facilitate full engagement. These efforts should be ongoing. Employee engagement is hard to achieve and if not sustained by leaders it can wither with relative ease.

EXERCISES

1. Sum up the main ides of the text and retell it in Russian.

2. Read and translate the following word combinations from English into Russian.

If  1)__________ are to reach high levels of engagement, then it is essential that they – at very least – are able to meet the basic  2)__________ of what employees want from work. Whilst many companies are doing an excellent job, the global engagement figures  3)__________ that many businesses are also failing to cover the basics.

It is not 4 )__________, however, to understand why. Since the turn of the century, businesses have witnessed and experienced several gigantic  5)__________. The technology  6)__________ and the rise of the internet has  the way we live, interact with our environment and communicate with each other. It has also transformed the way people work.

Additionally, there was a  7)__________ financial crisis that also re-defined the business landscape. Companies had to become more agile, more focused on innovation and competition became fiercer than ever. Businesses had to do more with less resources, as did  8)__________.

Most recently, the changes in the composition of the workforce has had a profound impact on what (younger) employees  9)__________ from work and the company they work for. As a result, organisations are having to re-think the way they approach recruitment,10) __________ branding and how they connect with employees.

3. Read the following article and make a rendering of it in English.

Опыт внедрения и улучшения СМК в различных странах показывает, что преобразования возможны, когда хотя бы 20-25% работников положительно настроены на перемены и активно участвуют в их разработке и внедрении.

Таким образом, мы подошли к третьему из 8 принципов менеджмента качества – «вовлечение персонала». Приступая к обсуждению данного принципа, давайте, сначала определим суть перемен, связанных с внедрением и улучшением СМК, как они влияют на работников и с какими трудностями столкнется организация на пути преобразований.

Усовершенствование деятельности организации при помощи внедрения или улучшения системы менеджмента качества, как правило, сопровождается организационными изменениями. При этом руководство организаций ожидает, что персонал будет работать еще более продуктивно, чем раньше. Однако практика показывает обратное.

Организационные изменения не всегда приемлемы и выгодны работникам. Не стоит ожидать, что сотрудники, включая линейных и даже топ менеджеров, радостно воспримут предстоящие перемены. Большинство сотрудников могут быть не согласны с изменениями – начнут открыто выражать недовольство, «ставить палки в колеса» или просто не будут работать, т.е. всячески саботировать, дискредитировать и задерживать перемены. При этом сопротивляться могут как отдельные сотрудники, так и целые группы.

•чувство дискомфорта у работников от изменений (отсутствие уверенности, страх неизвестности и неопределенности, ощущение наличия опасности для их работы, должности и статуса в организации);

•несогласие работников с методами, которыми проводятся изменения;

•чувство несправедливости, возникающие у работников от того, какие выгоды получают другие от перемен;

•неприятие характера перемен, которые идут вразрез с собственными меркантильными интересами работника;

•работники не видят выгод от перемен;

•и т.д.

Менеджеры, кроме того, могут противиться переменам, если имеется опасность для их статуса и позиции руководителя: риск уменьшения полномочий, вознаграждения за их труд, влияния на принятие управленческих решений, и как результат, снижение престижа и репутации в организации.

Приведу лишь пару примеров реакции сотрудников на преобразования из моей личной практики.

Небольшая казахстанская компания «ХХХ» приступила в 2005 году к внедрению системы менеджмента качества, чтобы быть включенной в базу данных поставщиков крупной нефтяной компании. Руководитель компании «ХХХ»  планировал также при помощи детального описания процессов и методов работы в ходе разработки СМК добиться большей прозрачности процессов и взаимозаменяемости сотрудников (на случай  их отпуска, болезни или увольнения). Однако предстоящие перемены вызвали недовольство некоторых сотрудников, но больше всего – специалиста по логистике и таможенному оформлению грузов.

Будучи единственным специалистом в компании в этой области, данный сотрудник имел большие привилегии и материальные выгоды в качестве «незаменимого» работника на данной должности и не хотел расставаться с таким положением вещей. Сначала он всячески препятствовал описанию его процесса и рабочих инструкций – устраивал саботажи, не предоставлял необходимую информацию, а когда понял, что изменения неизбежны, поспешно уволился из компании.  Позже, в процессе описания и анализа процессов, были выявлены проблемы с качеством и эффективностью работы данного специалиста. Возможно, это также явилось причиной его поспешного увольнения.

Part C

Engagement is a very trendy word, and while it is so powerful, because of its (over)use, people are making it harder to understand and think about than is necessary.  In fact, it is writers, speakers and consultants (yep, people like me) who are adding to the confusion by injecting complexity where it isn’t needed.

So let’s get past all of that right now.  Let’s get to the heart of the matter.  Let’s talk about what people really want in their lives. Because when they have these at work, they will automatically and effortlessly be engaged in their work.

Warning – this list includes seven powerful ideas, but it doesn’t include the item most people think would be at the top of the list.  (Go ahead, make your mental list now and see if the omitted one is on your list.)

Meaning. People want to be a part of something useful, valuable, and bigger than themselves.  Help people see how what they do makes a difference for others, for the community, the world or whatever.  Make sure people can see the mission of the organization and how they can fit in to it.  Even more importantly, help them see why this mission is important.

Expectations. People want to know what is expected of them and what behaviors are valued.  When people know what is really expected, they work with less stress and higher confidence and productivity. Do your team members know what you expect of them?  Do they really know? Have you taken time (lately) to discuss and clarify the expectations and needs of the work?

Targets. People are naturally competitive (if only with themselves), so help them compete by giving them (or helping them create) goals. Whether the work is highly creative or more mundane and repetitive, goals drive satisfaction and fun.  Do your people have clear targets to shoot for?

Relationships. Human beings want to feel connected to other people, and work is a logical place to have that need met – after all we spend more waking hours at work than in any other activity. Does the working environment allow for and promote the development of strong working relationships? Do people feel a personal connection to you?

Input. The people who do the work have a valuable perspective. They have ideas, and they’d like to share them. You don’t need to implement every idea, or accept every solution suggested; but if you openly ask for and value those ideas, some will make a difference.  And the process of asking will engage people in powerful ways. Are you making it easy (and expected) for people to share their ideas?

Belief. People want to be around people who believe in them.  We will do our best work when we know that those around us want the best for us and believe we can achieve the best.   Do you believe in the capacity and potential of your people?  If so, do they know?  If not, why not?

Freedom.  We are talking about human beings here, not robots – and people don’t want to be robots.  Even in the most regulated and procedure-driven job, there is room for freedom and personal choices.  Are you giving people the chance to express themselves and make adjustments, while still reaching the quality and quantity targets a job requires?

The good news for every leader or manager reading these words is that you can create an environment and lead in a way to provide more of these.  These are in your control, regardless of your industry or company culture.

Notice this list doesn’t include pay.  Do people need money and look for it from their job?  Of course – that doesn’t mean more pay will automatically create greater job performance.  So let’s be clear: pay is important and it only goes so far.  Commitment, motivation, work ethic, and yes, engagement, are not based on pay.

This list won’t really surprise you, because it includes many of the things you want too, doesn’t it?  Keep that in mind and remember that your people are people, and we all want more of these things in our lives and work.  When you provide them, engagement ensues.

For even more resources, join us for the Remarkable Learning teleseminar, The Importance of People: Delivering on the Promise of Employee Engagement, and learn how to create and sustain employee engagement and reap the benefits of an energized and excited workforce!

EXERCISES

1. Sum up the main ides of the text and retell it in Russian.

2. Read and translate the following word combinations from English into Russian.

Whenever a group of 1)_________ gather to discuss «what is engagement», a discussion about diversity of language usually 2)_________. Depending on the situation in which you are working, «engagement» can cover consultation, extension, communication, 3)_________, public participation, participative democracy or working in partnership.

For our purposes, «engagement» is used as a generic, inclusive term to describe the broad range of 4)_________ between people. It can include a variety of approaches, such as one-way communication or information 5)_________, consultation, involvement and collaboration in decision-making, and empowered action in informal 6)_________ or formal partnerships.

3. Read the following article and make a rendering of it in English.

Казахстанская компания «YYY» в 2011 году решила усовершенствовать действующую  СМК и заодно привести ее в полное соответствие законодательству РК. Ранее система была разработана иностранными специалистами и консультантами и не учитывала некоторые особенности местного законодательства.  На этот раз для совершенствования системы менеджмента качества были привлечены опытные казахстанские специалисты в области систем менеджмента, хорошо ориентирующиеся в местном законодательстве.

Однако некоторые нововведения сразу вызвали негативную реакцию сотрудников юридического департамента, т.к. представляли угрозу сложившемуся особому статусу департамента в организации и их личным интересам. Эти изменения в итоге должны были снизить вероятность возникновения судебных разбирательств, инцидентов, споров с заказчиками, поставщиками, партнерами, работниками и т.д., и, как следствие, привести к уменьшению денежных вознаграждений сотрудников юридического департамента за участие в разрешении таких ситуаций, снижению влияния руководителя юридического департамента на руководство и управленческие решения. При этом объем работ юридического департамента увеличивался  за счет предполагаемой более тесной и активной работы с другими департаментами. С целью недопущения таких невыгодных для них перемен сотрудники юридического департамента всячески препятствовали им – пускали в ход интриги, устраивали саботажи, настраивали негативно руководство и сотрудников организации и т.д.

Исходя из выше сказанного, сопротивление – это естественная и предсказуемая реакция людей на преобразования в организации, особенно, если предстоящие или уже сделанные изменения затрагивают их интересы. Этот столь очевидный факт почему-то часто и ошибочно не учитывается руководителями организаций при внедрении преобразований. Вне зависимости от причин, сопротивление персонала способно привести к тому, что все новшества  «умрут еще в пути» – останутся лишь разработанными на бумаге и не приведут к запланированным результатам.

Я была неоднократно свидетелем тому, как столкнувшись с негативной реакцией персонала на изменения, первые руководители организаций поспешно определяли причину проблем лишь в ответственных за внедрение, улучшение системы менеджмента качества, иногда заменяли консультантов, представителя руководства по СМК или сотрудников департамента по СМК (к большой радости протестующих). Но, как показала практика, ситуация от этого не менялась в лучшую сторону (поскольку не были устранены коренные причины проблемы). Тогда у руководителей наступало разочарование в самой системе менеджмента качества и/или  «опускались руки». Однако именно руководство может  сделать  процесс изменений более спокойным и с минимальными потерями для работников и организации.

Не существует единственного правильного решения для организаций, как превратить сопротивляющихся сотрудников в своих союзников. Каждая организация должна выработать свой подход. Однако в положениях стандартов, спецификаций по системе менеджмента качества (ISO 9000, ISO 9001, СТ РК ИСО 9001, API Q1, API Q2, ISO TC 29001, ISO IEC 17025, ISO 9004 и т.д.) руководителям организаций предлагается отличный инструмент – вовлечение работников (третий из 8 принципов менеджмента качества).

 «Люди на всех уровнях – самое важное в организации и их полная вовлеченность позволяет их способностям быть примененным на благо организации». (ISO 9000)

Применение этого принципа на практике согласно рекомендациям ISO 9004 подразумевает:

•осознание работниками  важности своей роли и вклада в организации;

•определение работниками ограничений, мешающих их работе;

•осознание работниками их ответственности за проблемы и принятие соответствующих решений;

•оценку работниками результатов их деятельности в сравнении с личными задачами и целями;

•активный поиск работниками возможностей повышений их компетентности, знаний и опыта;

•свободную передачу работниками своих знаний и опыта внутри организации;

•открытому обсуждению работниками проблем и спорных вопросов.

Ключевые преимущества для организации от применения этого принципа согласно ISO 9004:

•мотивированные, верные и вовлеченные работники;

•новый и творческий подход к достижению целей организации;

•повышение ответственности работников за результаты собственной работы;

•огромный добровольный вклад персонала в постоянное улучшение.

На самом деле, для того, чтобы идеи руководства были реализованы и достигли запланированных результатов, необходимо, чтобы  работники поняли, захотели и реализовали их. Вовлечение работников в разработку и внедрение преобразований позволит им понять, принять и реализовать новые требования.

Как гласит пословица: «Скажи мне, и я забуду. Покажи мне, и я не запомню. Вовлеки меня – и я пойму». Известно также, что люди охотнее всего поддерживают и отстаивают то, что создали сами.

Существуют различные способы вовлечения персонала в процессы преобразований. Для начала необходимо сделать разъяснение и, возможно, провести обучение работников, чтобы каждый работник понимал, что от него требуется, для чего вводятся изменения и т.д.

Необходимо помнить, что любые преобразования, особенно вначале, нуждаются в поддержке руководства, чтобы интерес к новому быстро не угас. В первую очередь, необходимо поддерживать линейных руководителей, от которых напрямую зависит вовлечение персонала.

Для большей вовлеченности всего персонала, рекомендуется делегировать больше ответственности на нижние уровни управления. При этом необходимо сначала подготовить персонал к новой для них ответственности.

Если руководство организации хочет в короткие сроки добиться при помощи преобразований хороших результатов, необходимо обеспечить, чтобы цели отдельных работников были максимально приближены к целям организации. Главная роль здесь отводится материальному и моральному поощрению работников.

Наиболее эффективным способом реализации принципа «вовлечения работников» организации в процесс внедрения или улучшения СМК, проверенным на практике, является создание рабочих групп. В группы рекомендуется включать наиболее компетентных и/или авторитетных представителей от каждого подразделения. При этом нужно помнить, что дополнительный труд сотрудников рабочей группы должен быть вознагражден. Прошли времена сознательной вовлеченности персонала в процессы преобразований.