Miller Consultants is proud to be piloting an organizational diagnostic tool for assessing a company's readiness for succeeding with sustainability initiatives.  The following is a sample of the 65 item on-line survey instrument:

Organizational Assessment:  Sustainability Initiative Readiness

Rate your level of agreement with each of the following statements.

1=strongly disagree    5 = strongly agree d/k=don’t know.

1……………2……………3……………4……………5 D/K

 

1. Our leaders have a clear vision for sustainability in our company.
2. Our suppliers are familiar with the concepts of sustainability and what our company is already doing. 
3. By and large, people in our organization are very engaged in their work.
4. We have a clear strategy for engaging each stakeholder group or individuals in our sustainability efforts and gaining commitment from them to our goals. 
5. Our company has a strong track record of implementing large-scale change successfully.
6. The level of trust within our organization is very high.
7.  People in the company have enough time to reflect and think about the outcomes of their actions. 

Each item is based on the outcome of at least one major research study of organizational attitudes and behaviors pertaining sustainability.  We are using the assessment to help companies develop their goals, strategies and roadmaps pertaining to the triple bottom line.   We are partnering with Summit Energy Management for our pilot.  For more information about the pilot and/or the instrument, contact us at kathy@millerconsultants.com or phone us at 502-452-1751. 

By Kendra Coleman

Over the years, we have seen clients pursue partnerships or relationships that are not good for business, or even for them personally!  And yet, they persist in trying.  That is until they don't …

 

 

The case that follows is about a time when we, at Miller Consultants, suffered the same challenges, and what we learned as a result.  We hope that our lessons learned will help you as you engage in new relationships with other businesses or groups.

Case:

In 2009 Networks Company decided it would focus on growing its business in a key emerging market. Both Networks Company and Miller Consultants had an interest in this market and specialized expertise that could yield great results.  This seemed a great opportunity to proactively partner.  We had worked with Networks Company for a few years providing their clients with leadership development and change management services to support their technical services. Our work together was successful, and we developed positive individual relationships with their staff.  At the business level, however, challenges based on differences in values ensued.   Time and time again, we disagreed about the best way to engage with our clients.    After several projects together, Miller Consultants advocated for greater collaboration and earlier involvement in projects.  For various reasons, we were not able to accomplish this proactive partnership with Networks Company.  Instead, we allowed the pace and amount of work to take precedent and we continued to try to address issues reactively.  We never really sat down to 1) get clear on our own requirements, or 2) discuss and negotiate our mutual needs and interests with Networks Company.

Through 2008, Miller Consultants had mostly joined Networks Company in its primary market.  They got the leads and pursued the technical work with clients.  They brought us in when the client requested change management or other organizational development services.  Because Networks Company “owned” the client, we decided, we would follow their protocols.   Per their own preferred consulting style, Networks Company regarded Miller Consultants more as functional experts rather than collaborative partners.

In 2009, we made a concerted effort to bring Networks Company into our markets with the intent that we would be equal and collaborative partners delivering a high-value, combined service to clients.  We assumed that they would follow our protocols and trust our knowledge of how to engage our clients, as we had done with them.  At the early stages, Miller Consultants initiated conversations to clarify roles and approaches to the work.   While both companies acknowledged our separate areas of expertise, we did not reach agreement about how we would work together to leverage these separate skills.  Instead, we got clear on the outcome (to win work focused in this new market) and the immediate next steps which were focused on how to win the work with the clients.  Perhaps most detrimental of all, we did not fully acknowledge as a team our lessons learned from our past working relationship – what supported us to do good work individually and together, and what got in the way of doing good work

Read full article

 

An Interview with Dr. Kathy Miller by Sue Morgan, OnTrack Consulting, LLC

The perfect person to talk with about sustainability is Dr. Kathy Miller, President of Miller Consultants, who has collaborated with clients for 30 years.

First, let’s set the stage. Encarta Dictionary defines ‘Sustainability’ as:
1) Able to be maintained (viable, defensible, supportable); and
2) Maintaining ecological balance, exploiting natural resources without destroying the ecological
balance of an area, (environmental, green, and balanced).  

Q:  Did you see Sustainability as a natural fit for your company?     

Kathy says it’s simple. “We have always focused on the long-term relationship with our customers rather than pushing products or services and engaging in short-term transactions. Kathy became particularly interested in the issues pertaining to the energy and environmental aspects of sustainability while working with one of Miller Consultants’ partner companies, MWH Engineering. MWH Engineering was building a new business in the area of strategic resource management. This business involved helping companies improve their energy and water efficiencies. This work uncovered some ‘softer’ needs such as how to get employees engaged in finding ways to increase energy and water efficiency. Frequently the work required getting employees to collaborate across unfamiliar boundaries within the company. The groups had differing perspectives and definitions of what needed to be addressed. Kathy says that she realized companies needed help in enabling the collaboration and engagement necessary to move these initiatives forward. 

  Read Full Article 

 

 

Finally the corporate world is beginning to come to grips with what sustainability means to their companies and to their survival.  While varying definitions of 'sustainability' abound, more and more companies are embracing values related to sustainability and are defining actions to support the values.  Some are merely looking for ways to comply with new regulations.   Others are looking for better ways to manage their electrical and water resources, and reducing their carbon footprint.  Still others are taking much broader approaches and looking at how the company does business with its shareholders, suppliers, customers and employees.  No matter how narrow or broad a company defines its efforts, success will require activities to enable change within the company. 

Many times those who are assisting with change enablement  to support organizational initiatives use models  of change management.  However, change enablement for supporting sustainability efforts, whether broad or narrow, will differ substantially from the change management for most other corporate initiatives.  Sustainability initiatives are much more complex than almost any other corporate initiative that I have observed or assisted with in my 30 years of consulting.  Thus our traditional models for change are unlikely to be sufficient. 

Certainly some  parts of our traditional  models will apply.  However I do believe that fundamentally, our approach to change enablement for sustainability requires a new  paradigm: 

1. The changes required to enable successful sustainability efforts are enormously transformational.
2. The implications of the 'triple bottom line' are far-reaching and continue to evolve with more data, advances in technologies, etc.  Thus the change process must be organic.
3. Usually the initiatives include a very  broad range of stakeholders who must work together across internal and external boundaries to accomplish change .
4. Sustainability generally energizes the workforce.  Resistance is more likely to occur at the top of the hierarchy than at the bottom. 

We are beginning to build this new paradigm for change that companies are seeking as they take on the hard work of looking at corporate sustainability.  Our work is truly cut out for us! 

Will Six Sigma initiatives lead to sustainable change and long-term improvements in  quality within an organization?  I would argue that sustainable change will not result from Six Sigma projects if the focus is on the use of tools to drive short-term improvements that will result in  immediate impacts on the bottom line.    An article published by Aveta argued that all Black Belts must learn the principles and techniques of change management in order to succeed in their tool-based projects.  I would go several steps beyond this assertion and suggest that long-term, sustainable success will require more focus on the culture within which the improvement projects are embedded. 

As Liker and Hoseus argue in their book, Toyota Culture, the Heart and Soul of the Toyota Way, true sustainable success comes from embedding a philosophy of continuous improvement and respect for people into the organizational culture.  In his book Strategy for Sustainability, Adam Werbach stated that "being a sustainable business means thriving in perpetuity."  The short-term gains that come from Six Sigma projects can lead to businesses that thrive in perpetuity if the projects are couched within the context of an overarching long-term plan.  Leaders who strive to build sustainable organizations will build on the current cultural strengths while planning for cultural transformations over time.  This approach will require black belts to understand far more about change than how to succeed in their tool-based projects.  They will need to learn the processes that lead to transformations. 

Are we prepared to transform our organizations in order to sustain them? 

Are you looking for a way to keep your employees engaged through this time of high economic stress?  Leaders have found that their employees are motivated by assisting with their companies' green strategies.  People are excited about helping their companies reduce energy costs and increase profits while demonstrating a real concern for the environment.  However, the excitement must be sustained by a clear show of commitment from top-level leaders.  If employees suspect that the 'green' initiatives are merely flavors of the month, they will be cynical instead of engaged.  How do leaders successfully demonstrate commitment?  One means of demonstrating resolve is to provide the manpower and financial resources to enable success.  Also when leaders insert green-related targets into the Key Performance Indicators, their employees know that they are serious.  Leaders must find ways to create a culture where the commitment to sustainability, energy and water efficiencies is merely part of the fabric of how work gets done.   Commitment means long-term focus on the environmental challenges and opportunities within your business.  As Andrew Winston stated in his book, Green Recovery , "increasing engagement and knowledge around green issues isn't just about pumping up morale - it also gives your people a solid foundation to innovate and create value in new ways." 

As I have work ed with leaders who are challenged daily with the problems of these tough times, I have learned some tips for surviving and thriving: 

1.  Connect with those who care about you from the present and the past.
2.  Engage in activities that help you control your anxiety about the future.
3.  Don't get hooked by the small stuff .(Many are prone to volatility when under stress).
4.  Take the time each day to engage in at least one task or activity about which you are passionate.
5.  Several times a day ask yourself "what is the most important thing I can do now for the company?"
6.  Several times a day ask yourself, "what is the most important thing I can do now for me?"
7.  When faced with difficult challenges, reconnect with your core values to guide your decisions.
8.  Find joy every day in some part of your life and experience it fully. 
9.  Recognize that leadership is stressful and that only the resilient survive.
10.  Lead with strength and compassion.  Others are emulating you.   
 

2009 will certainly be a year that leaders will remember!  The challenges just keep coming.  For many leaders, the bad news has been relentless.  Yet, at the same time, the challenges have forced reflection, renewal and change. How often have we talked about how nothing is constant but change!  And yet I, for one, frequently spouted that phrase without any real emotional connection.  Seems like it takes on new meaning when times are really tough.   Change arrives whether we want it or not, whether we are ready for it or not, whether we are equipped to survive it or not.   Miller Consultants has entered our 30th year of business during these hard times.  In celebration, we decided to reconnect with all of our clients - or as many as we could find - to catch up and find out how all are faring in this down economy.  Little did we know that the stories we would hear and the relationships we would reestablish would inspire us to work even harder and smarter, and would fill us with gratitude. We are not only grateful to our clients for the first 30 years of service and relationships, we are ready to move forward towards this uncertain future, renewed and reinvigorated.  Leaders take note!  No matter how daunting the challenges, take the time to reconnect with those parts of your work that you really love and the people who make it all worth it. 

 Over the past year we have conducted hundreds of leadership assessments.  We have found a prevalent gap in leaders' comfort with and ability to deal with ambiguity.  They don't like  gray areas or uncertainty.  This phenomenon is troubling since we are in the middle of unprecedented uncertainty stemming from global competitiveness, economic pressures, and a new generation of workers who don't hold the same approach to work as the current leaders.   In fact, I could fill a few pages with all of the conditions that are currently creating a very uncertain business environment. 

Certainly traditional training and development will not address the issue.  Comfort with ambiguity can be developed (to a degree) through several avenues.  When we coach leaders facing this problem, we start with practical suggestions such as developing several scenarios concerning the future over which they have little certainty.  We ask them to develop plans for each of the possible futures.   For example, if the uncertainty pertains to the cost of raw materials, we would suggest that they generate several scenarios concerning how the costs could vary and how strategy could address the cost variations.  Or perhaps the uncertainty is with forecasting sales.  Once again we would suggest that they generate a series of scenarios concerning sales, factors that could affect sales and contingency plans for addressing each scenario.  We have found that this process of constructing scenarios and devising strategies for each gives the leaders a greater sense of control of the uncertain future. 

In addition to the practical scenario approach, we also use a deeper coaching process.  We work with  leaders around issues pertaining to courage, flexibility and the value of reflecting before acting.  We have found that some leaders become paralyzed by uncertainty while others act without thinking in order to reduce their own anxiety.  These deeper levels of coaching require our coaches to first diagnose the root causes of the discomfort and the likely behaviors of each individual leader.  Once the diagnosis is made, the coach can tailor a plan to the unique needs of the leader. Yes this process can be intense and takes time.  However the payoffs are great.  And can your company really afford to ignore the issues?  The question to ask when considering these coaching options is this:  In these times of great uncertainty and ambiguity, what is the cost to the company when leaders cannot deal with it?  What is the payback for moving leaders towards a more balanced reaction to uncertainty and a more productive approach to managing their discomfort with ambiguity?  The results will justify the efforts. 

Times are tough and we all need connections with others to help us through the turmoil.  Never has human touch been more important than now. 

I ran across an article recently that reported the latest research on how people feel about attending meetings.  The interesting conclusion was that people complain about too many meetings.  However, when their attendance at meetings is reduced, they report feeling isolated and missing the meetings.  The authors of the reports suggested that people underestimate their need for human interaction in this electronic world.  How much we still need to connect with people face-to-face, share jokes, stories, make eye contact.   Technology will never replace this need. 

I would certainly agree with those who suggest that meetings can be very inefficient, use up resources, and generally waste a lot out time.  However, I think that the suggestion that meetings should, therefore, be curtailed if not eliminated may be missing the point.  The key to successful meetings is for those conducting them to know how to structure them appropriately, who to include, how to help people prepare, how to determine the meeting type,what to cover, and how to follow up afterword.  Well-planned meetings can be unsurpassed for value.  Not only can much work get done in a meeting, but people can strengthen the bonds that allow them to be more engaged in their work and collaborate better with each other when the tasks require it.  Meetings solidify the ties that last long after the meeting ends.  I find that people are much more likely to contact each other by phone or email when they have a question or a need after they have established relationships with each other face-to-face.  Let's face it.  No one really likes to make cold calls -- even within their own company.

I do a lot of professional and executive coaching.  I carry out the coaching face-to-face and by phone.  Most companies prefer that the coaching be done via technology because it is more convenient and cheaper.  However, over the years I have discovered that the face-to-face coaching offers far more value for the money in comparison with the phone coaching. We can accomplish as much in one 2-hour face-to-face meeting as we would accomplish in weeks of phone coaching.  Communication is clearer. Connections are stronger and commitments to the process are greater.  

I'm not saying that people can make no progress in virtual meetings, one-on-one phone conversations, or through emails.  All of these approaches to working together have their place and their advantages.  I am saying that nothing will ever replace the face-to-face meetings that build human connections,  trust, collaboration and engagement .  Let's not give up on the necessity of the  'human moments' at work especially when times are tough and we are all feeling the stress of the challenges that we face.  The human touch is critical to productivity and morale in organizations facing hard times.