Skip to main content

The Definition of Inanity

Managers at my place of work dearly love to use this quote: “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.”  They attribute this to Einstein and it makes them feel smart; smarter than their employees for sure.  They can quote Einstein, and he was brilliant (at least as a young man), therefore they must be brilliant.
Unfortunately, no one is quite sure that Einstein ever actually said it. 
The quote is sure to tick me off, because the implication is that I’m too stupid to figure this out for myself.  I feel chided to change.  Well, folks, if you want to change, it helps to know what to change to.
Change is good.  Change is hard.  Michael Hutchence told us, “Don’t Change”.  Seasons change and so did I, according to Burton Cummings .  Carlin put a dollar in a change machine but nothing changed.  The great guru said that it is not necessary to change because survival is not mandatory. 
Let’s consider this for a second.  An organization that does not change will die.  Might not be today, might not be tomorrow, but eventually…  Therefore, you must do something different to stay alive.  I get that, and I suspect most people in middle management get it, too. 
What should change do for you?  In terms of the Theory of Constraints, the change should enhance your throughput, decrease your inventories or decrease your costs.   If it does not help your goals it does not help you.  Choose what you want very carefully.
I am in the middle of this rant for a couple different reasons.  Reason 1 is because some numb nut at a corporate conference used the quote today; ironically, I wrote the first paragraph yesterday.  Reason 2 is that my boss wants to change a bunch of things critical to how we do our business.  These changes will benefit us and it will improve our department.  I’m generally in favor of change and I fully support the things he wants to do.  There’s just one problem – they are all changes. 
Change is a deviation for the norm.  [ooh, chalk up another one in the duh freaking obvious column.]  Remember the days of VCRs?  For you young kids, a VCR was basically a cassette for your TV.  What?  What’s a cassette?  Hell, never mind.  Anyway, a video cassette recorder was renowned for being confusing to operate.  No one could take it out of the box, plug it into the back of the television, and start enjoying The Holy Grail right away.  The rite of passage was an hour or two with the manual so you could figure it out.  That or our parents just handed us the instructions and said, “Have at it.” 
The change came with a fairly detailed description of the steps you needed to take to reach your goal.  The RCA plugs came out of the back of the VCR and went into the back of the TV (if you were lucky).  Fifty-seven steps were necessary to record a program.  People who did not learn the manual, either for themselves or from a teacher/mentor, did not benefit from the change in the slightest.  To this day I do not think my dad ever recorded a TV show.  Not one.
Where is this going?  Let’s go back to my problem (remember this is always about me) and the changes my boss wants.  I need to convince the folks below me on the totem pole of life that this change will benefit them; otherwise why would they take the slightest interest?  And by the way the change needs to be good for them or they have no impetus for doing it.  WIIFM?
Once I’ve convinced them of the goodness of the change, I need to get them doing it differently.  I need to write the VCR manual, because I’m fairly certain few of the supervisors have ever seen a VCR before.  In our actual case, since I’ve beaten the VCR analogy beyond recognition, one of the changes is the method we use to measure our work.  Right now we assume it is right because we trust our vendors.  Occasionally we get hosed by our vendors and we don’t figure it out soon enough.  We need standard operating procedures (SOPs) for the supervisors and hourly folks to make their way through the labyrinth of doubts that come from doing something differently. 
Anything else is the definition of inanity…

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Who the &#$@^% are you?

I may have mentioned this in an earlier post, so forgive me for repeating, but I have never really fit the leadership mold of the plant where I work, and I suspect of the entire division of the company. They like the driver-driver model, type A personality. I’m not. On the Meyers-Briggs test I am right smack dab in the middle. In many places this would be a positive boon, but where I work I am considered weak, too accommodating, and a poor delegator. I would admit to the latter as something I need to improve (and would state unequivocally that it is better than delegating everything, which some of my co-workers do). I totally disagree that I’m weak (of course I do) and I’m proud that people think I’m accommodating. Ever since I started down the management track I have heard these complaints. I am certain that I was passed up for promotions because of these perceptions. I will freely admit that I have a naïve utopian worldview in which a for-profit company should be a meritocr...

Mysteries of Life

There are many mysteries of life that continue to astound me as I grow older and theoretically wiser.   A few I should mention: Why is popular music popular when it sucks asbad as it does ?   It makes me cringe.   Why do politicians of all stripes treat the public like a bunch of indolent morons?   Maybe we’ve earned it.   Lastly, why do people get promoted into management when they have absolutely no idea how to manage?   Conventional wisdom says that exceptional technicians (and I use this word in its broadest possible interpretation) tend to get promoted because they are exceptional technicians, not because they are good managers.   Rarely is there much thought given to the interpersonal gifts one may or may not have, especially in a technical organization.   I’ve found that many exceptional technicians are exceptionally terrible managers, and I bet that the same traits that make them good at their jobs are the very ones that make thei...

Setting Priorities

A manager will not be successful if he does not set priorities. Success comes in many colors and flavors, but if you measure it by the number of your employees who wish to remain your employees, a person who does not set priorities will not be successful. A manager who refuses to point the way is the antithesis of a leader; he is a bureaucrat. The corollary to this is that a good manager needs a good boss who is willing and able to set priorities. A weasel boss will not set priorities and then blame you when you fail to deliver. We will try to walk the fine line here, since we’re all middle managers, of managing versus leading. In some work dialects, they are synonymous. In some they have vastly different meanings. The fine line we’ll walk is that we will try to do more leading than managing. Leading is setting the way, finding the right path, being the good example, complimenting the good and coaching the bad, etc. Managing is ensuring report b-27 is complete, monitoring the abse...