5.4 Cultural Alignment

Because this book is focused on changing from a reactive maintenance work culture to one that is reliability focused, we need to discuss what happens when the new role models are introduced. This is a real problem when trying to implement a reliability-focused work culture because invariably those who have been successful in the existing culture are usually not of this mold. Remember my example where my initial role model was highly reactive in a reactive culture and then a new plant management team was appointed with a reliability focus. In my case I made the transition, but what if I hadn’t?

A role model cultural mismatch can occur at every level within the organization. For example, a company is purchased and the new management team has different plans for the business than did the former. A new manager is hired with a different outlook. A new superintendent is promoted who decides a change is needed, and new foremen are hired who are not content with the status quo. In each of these cases, those in the lower tiers of the organization are confronted with new role models and a new set of expectations that may be far different than those of their prior managers.

Everyone at some time (and often more than once) will have this experience. Owners, managers, and supervisors change; the role you need to model for success often changes as well. You have two choices. First you can adopt the new cultural role model as long as it doesn’t con-

but I also decided that I would continue to function as I had in the past using those who trained me as my role models. This dilemma is similar to the one described in the previous section except I was not being asked to change and model a better behavior. In choosing to reject the role model of my manager, I often got into difficulty. Fortunately for me, the individual he hired was promoted to another plant and the manager retired shortly thereafter.

What I learned is that not everyone is a positive role model. We are often presented with what I will refer to as “good bad examples.” These are people who we can look at and say “here is someone who I do not wish to act like.” If you examine why you feel this way and adopt behaviors that are opposite and more in line with how you feel you should behave, then they will have done you a great service. They will have shown you a model that you will choose to reject for a more positive (and opposite) behavior.

5.6 Role Models Are Created NOT Born

Thus far we have assumed that our role models are proactively focused, the ones who will support the change in culture from one that is reactive to one that is proactive and reliability-focused. However, what if discover that the predominant role models throughout the organization are not those who support change, but instead those who support the status quo? An even more challenging scenario: What if proactive role models don’t exist at all in the organization? This is not an unrealistic expectation. Those who advocate proactive maintenance don’t survive long in a reactive work culture where success is viewed as being the best “fire fighter” you can be.

Figure 5- 3, which illustrates a reinforcing loop explains the problem faced by most reactive work cultures when it comes to developing role models who support a different type of work culture. In block 1, things break. Equipment breaks down and production is interrupted. Maintenance responds in block 2, making the quick fix and returning the equipment to service. In this environment, the fix is not reliability based; there is no time to discover what really went wrong so that action could be taken to prevent reoccurrence in the future. As a result of this type of work culture, those who made the quick fix are praised for “saving the day” and rewarded accordingly – block 3. This behavior is often a driving force for promotion. Block 4 has the balance of the people in the organization looking for someone to emulate. They are looking for someone who represents success and shows how things need to get done around here. So who do they copy? Not the preventive maintenance foreman (if one exists) because they are not the ones who get the rewards. Instead they copy our “fire fighter” and, in block 5, the existing culture is reinforced. Therefore, when things break the cycle is once again repeated.

The question that needs to be answered is how do you create new role models so that the organization will emulate a different behavioral style? You must change the organization’s focus by breaking the reinforcing loop. Figure 5-4 shows that changing the second block (how the organization views and makes repairs) breaks the cycle. If you can alter how things are repaired, then rewards will be given to those who fit the new model (block 3). People will see a different definition of success and emulate it (block 4) and when things break in block 5 the organization will respond in a different manner. Therefore, role models are created, not born. You identify the behavior you want the organization to model, then place people who exhibit that behavior into jobs of importance where they can visibly demonstrate the behavior you seek and, as a result, be copied.

An important point that needs to be recognized is that the site leadership must want to make this change. Although a new culture can spring up in one that has a different focus, it will not live a very long time. The predominant model and the supporting culture will extinguish it before it has a chance to thrive.

But what if the leadership does want to make the change? In this case, the existing role models will be given a different set of expectations. They will either comply or, over time, be replaced. The other alternative, one which is used more frequently than the former, is to bring in from outside the organization people who exhibit the new cultural behavior. They remove the old role models who can not adapt to the new way of working; they promote those who have adapted. The organization then sees these new managers as successful and, in the true definition of role models, emulates them.