Read & Lead

그래니트록(Graniterock,GR)의 사례를 읽고, 그래니트록사가 전반적으로 ‘발전을 촉진하는’ 메커니즘을 이용했는지를 분석하십시오. 이 코스에서 제시한 세 가지 메커니즘에 대해 각각 적어도 두 가지 이상의 예를 들어 설명하십시오. 또한, ‘발전을 촉진하는’ 기능을 하고 있지만, 이 과제에서 연구하는 세 가지 메커니즘의 범주에 포함시키기 어려운 예들을 추가로 확인하여 설명하십시오.


[1] ‘크고 위험하고 대담한 목표’(BHAGs: Big Hairy Audacious Goals) 메커니즘의 두 가지 예를 들고, 이 것들이 왜 ‘BHAGs’ 메커니즘에 해당하는지 설명하십시오.

GR’s core purpose is to nurture exceptional creativity and innovation by supporting people’s continuous and ambitious personal and professional growth in the pursuit of the highest quality products and services  which advance global business standards and practices. It emphasizes focusing on total quality of the company. One of its BHAG for stimulating progress in terms of highest quality is “Defect-free product”. It is definitely consistent with GR’s core purpose and so clear, precise and focused that it requires little or no explanation. The BHAG encouraged GR to train its all plant operators in statistical process control and made them identify opportunities for improvement toward their visionary goal of defect-free product, and that enabled the highest batching accuracy in the industry. GR’s efforts to reduce process variability and increase product reliability resulted in satisfying its customers and lowering variable costs. Evidently, GR has been dedicated to approaching its core ideology through setting up its BHAG and making it best to achieve it. 

Great! You proved that you understand and apply BHAGs concept. As you put it, “Defect-free product” can be an example of BHAGs in that it is consistent with GR’s core ideology and secure company-wide endeavor to achieve it resulting everlasting progress.

Another BHAG is “Win the Baldridge Award”. It is also obviously consistent with GR’s core purpose and so clear, precise and focused. Would you please explain why it is an example of BHAGs? What’s the relationship between winning M. Baldridge award and having a BHAG? GR’s first try to win the award in 1990 failed, but it gained the 138 valuable suggestions for improvement from the examiners. Because GR’s real goal is not just winning the award, but receiving as much feedback as possible from the Baldridge process, its first failure to win, after all, resulted in winning the award in 1992. The admirable point here is that GR prepared to prevent “we’ve arrived” syndrome by having follow-on BHAGs. GR’s CEO, Bruce Woolpert knew exactly that it was very important to instill drive for progress that resulted in a repeating pattern of BHAGs within the company and keep the company moving with a belief that vigorous movement in any direction is better than sitting still. Therefore, GR continued to pursue awards in which the application processes themselves provided additional insights into the business. In so doing, Woolpert and his team have brought their own philosophy of continual self-improvement to the Baldrige Program. That is the exact reverse of Ford’s case that it suffered from a complacent lethargy that can arise once a company has achieved one BHAG and does not replace it with another. GR’s case shows precisely how great companies should use their BHAG for continually stimulating progress of them. I am afraid that you have failed to explain the meaning of winning Malcolm Baldridge award.

[2] ‘잘 되는 것에 집중하라’(Try a Lot and Keep What Works) 메커니즘의 두 가지 예를 들고, 이 것들이 왜 ‘잘되는 것에 집중하라’ 메커니즘에 해당하는지 설명하십시오.

Bruce believed that if GR gave its people more responsibility, they would respond. 

That means GR give its people a lot of room to act and their enhanced involvement enables the elevation of its manager capability to focus on long-term planning. Therefore, GR got to have the high possibility of evolving into the organization that continually self-mutates from within, impelled forward by employees exercising its individual initiatives. Right. I am curious about something specific. GR understood exactly that encouraging individual initiatives would produce the raw material of evolutionary progress. “No more messiahs”(You should have explained it) is the good example of “try a lot and keep what works” mechanism. And of course, that is consistent with its core ideology. One of its core values is “people growth and development”.

Another example is its passion for benchmarking. GR has two kinds of benchmarking methodology for gathering ideas and observing the quality efforts of other companies. With one numerical benchmarking GR found that on-time delivery was critical from customer survey, they started exchanging statistics and information with a world-leader in on-time delivery. That helped the company focus on improving customer service that was one of its core values (dedication to customer service excellence). And GR also did pioneering benchmarking to explore for good business ideas in a fashion that was intended to shake up mental models and assumptions of the surrounding world. Although the companies they look at for benchmarking are simply interesting and not related in a direct way with Girl’s operation, they believe that if they get one good idea from a benchmarking visit, it’s worth it. Girl’s clinging tenaciously to new ideas is also based on its core value, continuous improvement as a way of life. Rather than protecting the work of past, GR people really encourage and support both incremental and sweeping change and recognize that risk-taking and honest mistakes are unavoidable parts of doing this. That’s the mechanism, “try a lot of stuff and keep what works”.

I believe that you has a good understanding on the concept of “try a lot and keep what works”. But I am afraid that you have failed to offer the right examples. For example, benchmarking is a mechanism for GENI rather than “try a lot” in that it cause intentional dissatisfaction with its status quo prompting pursuing something more and better. And in the case of “no more messiahs”, you should have explained what is it and why, do you think, it is related with the “try a lot” mechanism.

[3] ‘지속적인 발전의 추구’(Good Enough Never Is) 메커니즘의 두 가지 예를 들고, 이 것들이 왜 ‘지속적인 발전의 추구’ 메커니즘에 해당하는지 설명하십시오.

GR has the discipline of self-improvement that stands out as one of the clear differences between the visionary and comparison companies. That’s the IPDP(Individual Professional Development Plan). It is composed of developmental objective, developmental experiences to help achieve a developmental objective and measures to show that the objectives had been met. Its purpose is future development, not used to determine an individual’s past job performance. It is focused on managers’ role as leaders, teachers and coaches. And it can develop a great deal of perspective on how people should be developing and alternative ways to motivate new learning experiences for people. It is forward-looking, encourages people growth, and increases accountability. GR is creating development experts through creating mechanisms of discontent that brings about change and improvement from within, yet is consistent with its core value This is just about GENI. (people growth and development, continuous improvement as a way of life).

As you said, IPDP can be a good example of GENI in that it is in line with GR’s core value and force future-oriented changes.

Anther example show “good enough never is” mechanism is that GR’s long-term investment for training people. Bruce created “Graniterock University”, which grew to include over 50 different courses, seminars and lectures every year on various topics. All GR people were encouraged to attend, as well as their spouses fro many courses. In 1991 GR invested on average $1,700 per employee, compared with an average of $529 per employee in the mining industry and $127 in the construction company. That corresponds to 1% of gross sales. This belief that GR people are a large part of its competitive edge made GR consistently demonstrate a penny-foolish, pound-wise attention on people training that has incite continuous improvement into the future. Instead of waiting for the world to impose the need for change, GR's likely to be and earlier adopter than the competitors.
Good. Advanced training system can be used as GENI mechanism.

[4] ‘발전을 촉진하는’ 기능을 하고 있지만, 이 과제에서 연구하는 세 가지 메커니즘의 범주에 포함시키기 어려운 예 하나를 추가로 확인하여 설명하십시오. (2점)

GR has a unique mechanism for stimulating progress. That is open door policy and suggestion card programs. GR believed that communication flow within the organization was very important as well as knowledge flow within it. GR broke communication barriers within the company and announced a formal, 24-hour a day open door policy, whereby anyone could carry a concern or question directly to any level of management. And GR formalized comment/suggestion card program and provided other vehicles to people who were not comfortable in a direct-face-to-face discussion. In GR, people can talk directly to their supervisors and get issues addressed immediately, and this work for the majority of issues. Open door policy was the great example of clock-building that made GR people build good rapport with each other regardless of levels. That means GR has the high possibility of stimulating progress through keeping any problems, issues under control and keeping movements moving based on enough communication between employees and their proactive involvement. This is another mechanism that GR has been using for stimulating progress.

You got it again. GR has a great communication system like open-door policy and suggestion card program. As you put it these are a good examples of clock building principle rather than an example of 3 mechanisms of stimulating progress. Communication system can be used both to preserve the core and stimulate progress.

Instructor Feedback: In this task, you’ve derailed for a while but returned to normal quickly. So I think you are somewhere between NI and M.

Assessment: If you want, you can keep M grade. But I recommend you to try again for an E grade.