The Sledgehammer Method

The BBQ Pit
1

Rousseau said this in the Midwestern Schools thread, and went on to describe the school’s “sledgehammer” approach to discipline. How if one person acts up, everyone is punished, etc.

(I didn’t want to hijack that thread.)

The company where I work is doing pretty much the same thing. Starting Tuesday, there will be no more food or drink allowed on the production floor. This draconian measure is being instituted in response to a small, nay, miniscule problem.

Apparently “stuff” accidentally ends up where it doesn’t belong – inspection doesn’t always catch it and a customer in Assboink, Iowa might open the box with our product in it and lo! and behold, a Snickers wrapper leaps up and bites their face off.

Okay, I understand the concern, quality and the customer are #1, yadda yadda, but the way to address it is to improve inspection (and watch out for the slobs), NOT to forbid our hard-working (and 99% tidy) people from chawing down on a Frito or sipping a Coke while they’re waiting for the next unit to come down the line.

The new policy is going to piss everyone off, and will contribute to the “us and them” mentality similar to what Rousseau described in her school.

The more petty rules are instituted, the more people want to rebel. Especially when they see themselves as good, hard workers who are being treated like children.

It sucks donkey dick.

2

I think when you end up punishing the lot for the few, you don’t teach the few ANYTHING, and you get the lot really ticked off and morale usually goes in the creek.

Over reaction to a situation is pretty normal, but it usually ends up backfiring worse than the original situation that needed addressing in the first place.

“Consider it a challenge…”

3

Ummm…

“History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it.” -Winston Churchill

4

Oh, don’t deny it, R.

5

Rousseau – you’re a “he”?

I guess the “whiny bitch” comment in the other thread threw me off.

Sorry. :slight_smile:

6

Good topic, Auntie Pam, and if I had “the answer” I’d be gazillionaire business writer instead of a befuddled twerp.

This is strictly anecdotal, but donkey’s years ago my dad bought a VW microbus. (Quit gagging; it wheezed and puttered us all over the country; didn’t like mountains though.) Anyway, it had a loud rattle we couldn’t solve. After endless hassle and lotsa bucks, turned out there was a coke can dumped in the door assembly.

I suspect there’s no easy answer. Treating employees like brainless drones encourages the syndrome. (Check out Rivethead; great book about life on a Detroit assembly line.) And it mandates no squealing/ratting/etc. on those who don’t perform. If a union is involved, that’s another level of red tape to deal with. (Not wrong, just reality.)

Wish I had the answer for this. Most folks take pride in their work. But how to handle those who don’t, without penalizing the innocent or asking them to be informers isn’t easy on any side.

My inclination is toward rewarding good workers and trusting that peer pressure will solve a lot of problem. Draconian, blanket rules usually don’t work: they justify the pissants and offend the good folks. But somewhere along the line (no pun intended) there has to be a check on casual mischief and don’t-give-a-damn slacking. It’s either management or peers, there isn’t anyone else.

Aren’t you glad I clarified that one?

Slinking away in depression,
Veb

7

Rewards would be good start. We haven’t done nearly enough of that.

My copy of Rivethead has made its way around the plant, from the shop floor to management and back, and each “side” seems to find what they need to justify their own positions. Weird, huh?

Appreciate the thoughtful input.

8

I don’t work in a plant, but think this still applies.

My boss is an intelligent, hard working woman. Her one fault in managing staff is that she won’t directly confront a worker when there’s a problem. She often runs the problem by me & gripes. My answer is always, “Well, maybe you should sit down and discuss it with them.” She never does. Instead, signs appear with “Do Nots”, or she cans something instead of solving the problem. All of my co-workers know who the dysfunctional cog is, and are starting to ignore or laugh at her, making the co-worker even more neurotic.

I don’t get it. If you are in a position that requires managing people, why not solve the problem directly? I suspect that this inability to maturely confront another person is at the root of these backasswards policies.

BTW, Ben Hamper, author of Rivethead, is now writing a column on the internet for Michael Moore. It’s as beautiful as the book! www.michaelmoore.com

9

Oh, yeah, this is the Pit…

Fuck that shit, Boss! If you can’t solve yer problems and don’t take my advice, stop getting me involved and making my blood pressure go up when you implement your pitiful attempt at a solution. I’m sick of it!

10

U.S. management (I can’t speak for the rest of the world) has an enormous blind spot. There is no training for the actual managing of people. People are promoted for technical skills or for having outlasted their peers in a position or for sucking up to the boss, but once they have become “managers” they are expected to suddenly know how to deal with all the little human foibles that help a department meet its goals or prevent it from meeting any of them. There is simply not enough time, energy, or attention paid by corporate America to what it takes to manage.

Of course, once a person has made it in to management, all of their future reviews will be based on their ability to be good administrators (which is a totally separate skill set).

I wish I knew a way to get the attention of American business leaders on this subject, but I suspect that we will never address this issue. Having found a good boss, I am not (willingly) leaving his outfit, but if he were to be struck by lightning, I am sure that I would be living on Tums and Rolaids within a short time.

Tom~

11

Bless you, Tom! You cogently put into few words what the Peter Principle means. It’s true; supervisors get promoted for skill on the job but rarely get any help on the huge changes that come with people managment. Folks who were formerly friends and buddies all of a sudden turn into “them”. (Like the rock song says, “My friends say I’m different; I haven’t changed”)

Worse, all of a sudden they’re responsible for front-line input on policies that are often unclear, stupid and counter productive. But their asses are on the line. The lucky ones can retain loyalty and translate front-line issues into change without betraying individuals. But it sure ain’t easy. And it’s so much harder when you have to do right by the slackers, the good folks who ignore stupid rules but get the job done well, and the bottom line service needs.

An overused quote, but apt: “What we have here is a failure to communicate”.

Veb

12

Ye gads, I must be the most simple-minded fella in business today. “Punishing the many for the sins of the few” is, as far as I’m concerned, simple cowardice masquerading as authority.

Let’s don’t pussy-foot around the issue –

If somebody screws up around here they get a chance to explain. If I don’t like the explanation they get a single warning, and if they screw up again they get sacked. Period.

Business isn’t a goddamned experiment in jurisprudence and social justice, and I have a responsibility to the people who aren’t screwing up to make sure that their ability to support their families isn’t jeopardized by some idiot who wants to plead that it’s society’s fault that he can’t think straight.

They can take that crap back to their mommy’s apron and cry to their bleedin’ hearts content, but it just won’t play in real life. Competent authority will neither compromise the integrity of the product nor the dignity of the people producing it to accomodate a few fools who just plain picked the wrong vocation.

Dr. Watson

13

You’d probably know better than me, but I’m not sure you can make that blanket statement about all of corporate America, Tom. My father works for a very large American company (whose stock has currently hit the shits, incidentally). He started with them over 20 years ago in a warehouse. He got promotions based on his work there, yes. But once he got into management, he had go to all kinds of seminars about dealing with people. I didn’t know my father when he started working in the warehouse, but he was just a kid from Brooklyn College, and I don’t get the impression that he was blessed with a great deal of management ability. But he’s continued to do well as a manager, and continued to get advancements (as evidenced by the fact that I’m out here in the fucking Midwest again), largely in part to all the training he had to go through. I’m not saying that he has a degree in social psychology or anything, but he was hardly thrust into management without any instruction. That may not be true of all, or even many companies, but my personal “experience” is that there is some kind of education that companies provide for new managers. And it seems logical that they would–it’s good business.

On to the topic…again, the only experience I have in the business world is from my part-time jobs. But I can definetly speak to the contrast between the “sledgehammer” method versus the alternative in high school. I can’t really discuss this on the other thread, because it more or less immediately disintegrated into name calling. Here at my new school, they definetly subscribe to the sledgehammer mentality. When they have discipline problems with a minority of the students (tardiness, trash in the hallways, etc), they take it out on everybody. What this fosters is the “us vs. them” mentality, which isn’t good for anyone. The result is that the administration and faculty has adopted a rather didactic, parental demeanor towards the students, like I remember from elementary school. And that just precipitates more disciplinary problems, cause the students have more of an urge to rebel. So the final product is a high school where the students act like children, and the faculty treats them as such. But the faculty’s treatment is what’s causing the kids to act this way, and vice versa, so it’s a never-ending cycle.
In contrast, in my old school the students were treated with a little more respect. The teachers (for the most part) said “hey, you’re getting to be adults now, and you know right from wrong, and you’ve been in school for umpteen years so you know the rules. Just treat me with respect, and I’ll treat you with respect until you lose it, and then we’ll have a problem.” And I have to say, there were much much much less discipline problems there. There wasn’t really a feeling of “us vs. them,” and it was generally a better atmosphere. A lot of people in the other thread are of the mentality that high schoolers need to be given strict rules and consequences in order to conform. This is not true at all, and I imagine that the same applies to the average workplace.

“History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it.” -Winston Churchill

14

It seems to me if the consequence is directly connected to the problem, then it isn’t so much a punishment as simply, well, a consequence. If eating on the floor causes wrappers to get in the boxes, then it’s reasonable to not have food on the floor. Now, if you all had your pay docked, that would be something else. But they had a problem; food wrappers were getting in the boxes. They had a solution: prohibit eating.

15

Right, but now responsible people who are thoughtful and considerate enough to pick up after themselves are feeling the “consequences” of the actions of a few of their peers. There’s no reason why Auntie Pam should be denied her Fritos and Coke because the person next to her is a slob.

“History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it.” -Winston Churchill

16

Rousseau

Sorry. I missed that in the Constitution. We have a right to eat on the job now? From where I sit, not eating on the job doesn’t sound much like punishment.

The front office staff takes food, soda, candy or coffee to the reception desks all the time. No management complains, or criticizes. Everyone of the staff is extremely neat and careful. One day, after many days of no incidents, someone spills a cup of coffee–freak accident, no one to blame, really. The carpet ends up permanently stained, and one of the key boards resists attempts at cleaning. Now management has to decide: which is worth more, employee morale or replacing computers and carpet? It’s a tough call, but after the “no food or drink around computers” went into place, morale went up. Seems there was less jealousy and bickering–and the customers were treating them better!

rocks

17

Just to compound the fracture…

I came down on you pretty hard in the other OP, Rousseau, but the situation is somewhat different here. In your example, you contend a better high school treats people like adults and doesn’t sweat stuff like tardiness and disruptions. (In fairness, you raised other issues, but I’m trying to keep this fairly on topic.)

Problem is, some chronologically advanced folks still don’t behave like adults. And the specific examples you cited are individual and provable. In order to discipline someone–the scalpel vs the sledge hammer–it has to be documented and provable.

Someone spills a soft drink on a product, or tosses a snack wrapper in a shipping box. What would you as a buyer think? Probably disgust and a low opinion of the company. All the skill and care all the those good workers put in just got wasted, thrown away by a few losers.

BUT it’s damned hard to isolate problem workers to the extent of court proof if needed. People hate to rat out other people because let’s face it, nobody really likes a tattletale. But if you’ve never faced unemployment and arbitration hearings, don’t for one instant underestimate how damned hard it can be to “solve” problem employees.

Like I said, there’s no clean answer to this one. Even the worst bozo, slacking, goof off coworkers seem more real–with a claim on decent behavior–than the conceptual reality of good work thrown away and slowly erosion of business reputation.

A police-state atmosphere of employees narcing on one other is poisonous. But the grim reality is that proving, pruning and making discipline/firings stick can sometimes be nearly impossible. That’s why cameras, spies, etc. get planted–which is just swell for morale and trust, too.

In my experience, a strong dose of peer pressure works best. A coworker with the guts and standards to say, “don’t throw that crap in there” is more effective than a thousand rules, supervisors, etc. But it’s a circular problem. The weight has to be toward building trust and loyalty. If the work environment allows good folks to do good work, most losers and jerks will move on, early on, of their own will.

Veb