Investing in the intellectual development of employees yields better quality, higher engagement and morale
The vast majority of employees come to work to do a good job and do their best to add value in their assigned roles. When they don’t—as eminent scholar W. Edwards Deming repeatedly pointed out—it is usually due to a failure of the management system, not the people. Poorly-designed processes and inadequate (if not actively harmful) management systems prevent workers from creating the value that companies need and customers expect.
Nowhere is this truth more evident than in the remarkable turnaround at NUMMI, the joint venture between Toyota and General Motors at GM’s Fremont plant in 1984. At the time, the Fremont workforce was considered to be GM’s worst. Workers regularly went on strike; they spent more time filing grievances than building cars; they even intentionally sabotaged quality. Absenteeism ran over 20 per cent. Alcohol, drugs—and even sex were for sale. Not surprisingly, the plant produced some of the worst-quality cars in the GM system—and to be the worst in GM’s system in the early 1980s meant quality had to be shockingly low.
When it started NUMMI, Toyota made a surprising decision to keep 85 per cent of the Fremont workforce. With essentially the same employees, something amazing happened: Absenteeism fell to two per cent; and in less than a year, quality was the highest in the entire GM system. If managers often complain about ‘dead wood’ in their workforce, NUMMI is stunning proof that in many cases management hires live wood—and kills it.
Consequently, the key question to ask is not, ‘How can employees add value to a company’; rather, it’s ‘How can management add value for workers?’
[This article has been reprinted, with permission, from Rotman Management, the magazine of the University of Toronto's Rotman School of Management]