ITF LEADERSHIP PARTNERSHIP
This is the home page for the Riverside County Regional Medical Center, Department of Mental Health, Inpatient Treatment Facility, Leadership Partnership.
The Partnership between SEIU Local 1997, UPEC Local 777 and the managers, supervisors and workers of the Inpatient Treatment Facility was formed in late 1998.
The Purpose of the Partnership is to:
Achieve and sustain an organizational culture characterized by:
The Code of Trust which each member of the Leadership Partnership has signed:
I will be honest, open and participate in good faith in the ITF/LP relationship, and I will treat others involved in this relationship with respect, courtesy and goodwill.
I will treat my participation on the ITF/LP as a commitment to my job, and I will attend all meetings unless unavoidable circumstances prevent me from so doing.
I recognize that disagreements will arise in ITF/LP meetings and I commit myself to resolve these issues in a positive and straight-forward manner. I will not act in a contentious or deceitful way.
I will support the consensus decisions of the ITF/LP. I will carry out my responsibilities to the ITF/LP in a conscientious and professional manner. I will not make statements or comments that may undermine the organization-wide efforts of the ITF/LP.
I will bring issues to the ITF/LP that are appropriate for ITF/LP consideration. I recognize that this is not a forum for personal gain, nor an opportunity to pursue individual grievances and I commit myself to participate for the benefit of the ITF/LP and ITF.
I will not use the ITF/LP relationship or information shared at the ITF/LP to the disadvantage of others.
I understand that each participant is unique and I respect the diversity that is present. Diversity is a strengthening force and I pledge to conduct myself in fair and unbiased manner.
I accept the seven principles of participative management and I will use these principles to improve the work environment, productivity at ITF/LP and service to our customers.
I support open communication and debate during ITF/LP meetings even if the opinions of others conflict with my own views. I am committed to safeguarding this free expression.
I will not withdraw, or threaten to withdraw my cooperation in ITF/LP activities in order to force any party to my way of thinking on any matter before the ITF/LP.
I recognize that the ITF/LP process is fundamental to the way ITF operates as an organization and will actively support ITF/LP activities. There shall be no retaliatory or vindictive actions in any form against any employee for requesting to participate, or for participating in the ITF/LP activities.
I accept that trust is a cornerstone of the ITF/LP process and I commit to building trust through open and constructive participation.
I acknowledge and commit to all the principles in this Code of Trust.
Members
The following members of the ITF partnership represent all the employees and managers of the ITF and can be contacted for more information or for addressing concerns of the Department.
Anna Fuzie Horace Johnson Belinda Chase Jan Gardner
Bobbie Maddox John Capsavage Celestine Snoddy J. Jackson
Cheryl Granger L. Ball Deborah Johnson Maverne Mitchell
Dr. Thor Reyes Norma Langevin Elizabeth Contla Patricia Fisher
Kristen Bostrom-Leon Clark Howard
Those persons participating in the Path of Dialogue class:
Charolette Madrid, Dan Marks, Fran Diaz, Denise Glenore, Suzanne Jakel, Shirley Talley, Susan Jacobs, Cira Cabrera and Jim Cazares
Meetings
The Partnership meets at ITF between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. on the second and fourth Tuesday of each month (MAY SCHEDULE ON FRIDAYS)
NEWS!
Look for information about the Partnership in the ITF Bugle! Soon we will be describing ways you can be involved! The Partnership Bulletin Boards have arrived and will be up this week.
Coming Soon...
Path of Dialogue Training for everyone!
A revitalized employee suggestion program (started August 1, 1999)
Feedback on employee opinion survey
The new employee Buddy-Program
A Quiet Room (90 day test starting August 1, 1999)
Orientation of current employees
ITF Leadership Partnership Agenda
Training and Meeting 8:30 a.m.to 4:30 p.m August 24, 1999
8:00 Labor caucus - Committee meetings
8:30. Regular Meeting of the Partnership:
Review Ground Rules
Appoint Action Monitor
Check in.
This is the time and place to bring up issues that have come up since the last time we have met. They are usually issues that if gone unchecked could work against the seven principles of partnership.
Issue Bin - We post items that came out of "check-in" for further consideration. We review status of existing items in bin.
Reports from Committees:
(1) Charter design
(2) Participative Management & Training
(3) Communication
Reports from ad hoc committees.
Mini training - The Empowered Manager
Next Meeting dates
11:30 - Lunch - Committee meetings
12:30 Training - Path of Dialogue Conducting Effective Meetings
Report of the Action Monitor
Meeting Evaluation
4:30 Adjournment
Leadership Partnership Minutes –February 8, 2000
All present except: Zina, BobbieGuests present: Linda Jefferson UPEC; Frank Runkle SEIU
Facilitator: Nancy Taylor
Liaison: Michele Pessolano
Co-chairs: Celeste Snoddy and Elizabeth Contla
8:00 a.m. - Labor Caucus
8:30 Regular Meeting of the Partnership
Ground Rules read.
Action Monitor – Cheryl Granger
Minutes of theJanuary 28, 2000 approved.
Check in:
Things not going so well and addressed during check-in:
Joint Commission coming in May
Committee Reports:
Commitment Planning Committee:
Participative Management and Training:
Communications Subcommittee:
A log book is being developed to assist in identifying New employees, when they received inservice orientation and who they have either selected or who has been assigned as their buddy. Maverne and John will be presenting information on the buddy program at the orientations.
Two suggestions were received:
(1) Regarding People cutting through the Nurses Station to sign in. The suggestion was made that people utilize the entrance past the double doors next to the laundry room. Signs will be posted on Unit A to this effect.
(2) The suggestion was made that Security be notified when 911 has been called so security can direct them when 911 arrives. It was also suggested that this same policy be in effect for all discharges and other expected deliveries. The Communications Committee is working with Dan Marks regarding the Chain of Command on this item. Until then staff is not to use the secuirty phone in the lobby. Staff is asked to request that Security call the unit or overhead page.
Ad Hoc Committees:
Labor and Management Caucus suggestions: everyone decided more clarification about what was to be done on these items was needed before discussion could take place. This will be put on the next agenda.
Consensus was reached that Jim Ronsee and Judy Pappas (Accts. Managers for RCRMC) will be invited to the next LP meeting 2/29/2000.
Evaluation of our meeting
Things that went well:
Everybody agreed
Meeting went faster than last week (5)
We saved discussion for the appropriate time.
Glad Jan is back (4)
We got some things done.
We switched LP meetings away from payroll weeks. (2)
Appears everything went well (3)
We started on time!
Even thought I was late I was still able to get my points made and addressed.
Thank you for all your prayers, love, support while I was off. I am deeply grateful.
Thank those who came up with something for check in.
Medication Nurse rotation – a great idea!
Isabel in new position as supervisor when Horace is not here. Does a good job and is able to keep the delicate balance of being line staff and acting as management. Isabel is offered the opportunity to select her own mentor should she wish to have one.
Thanks for Communications Committee posting minutes
Thanks to Naomi for getting the adolescents out of ETS in a timely manner.
Really learning Dialogue doing the Single Point Lessons. Glad it was well received by night shift.
Horace will clear staffing for Judy Pappas and Jim Ronsee to attend next LP meeting.
Needing improvement:
Everyone needs to bring at least one issue to check-in so LP will succeed. (2)
Seems like only Labor bringing in issues.
Issue about staff meeting was taken to supervisor. I would like to request that we allow enough time to address issues taken to others outside this meeting before bringing them in here.
Some Committees are not meeting.
A spot is not being used on the Labor side because the person selected has not been able to attend. (2) Celeste will check on this.
Still seems some parts of the meeting are slow.
I missed some of ClarkÕs report – and the issues concern me.
No replacement as yet for Dr. Reyes.
We are stuffed in this room. Deborah will look around for another location for next meeting.
Adjournment at 11:40A.M.
Next Meeting 2/29/2000. Location to be announced.
ITF Leadership Partnership Minutes - August 10, 1999
All present except: Kristen Bostrum Leon & Juanita Jackson. Guests: Linda Jefferson(UPEC),Ted Burnett (SEIU), & Theresa Conley (RCRMC)
8:00 a.m.- Labor Caucus
8:45 a.m. - Regular Meeting of the Partnership:
Ground Rules Read
Minutes of the July 27, 1999 meeting approved with corrections to be made on the web page.
Belinda Chase agreed to be Action Monitor.
Check In:
Things working for the Leadership Partnership:
Things working against the Partnership pulled off for further consideration:
Using the room in pairs (ok). People other than staff using the room (not o.k).
People (donÕt know who) eating in the room (not o.k)
Being used as an interview room (not o.k).
Clerical person picking up used food, etc in room (eating in room not ok).
Questions about "when I need it and it is being used, what do I do?"
We have not educated staff about the purpose and rules.
We still need furniture to make it comfortable.
The location is close to noise.
Suggestions that will be prepared as staff reports to the LP for further action.
Suggestions that came out of Check in:
(1) Break Room:
Linda Jefferson suggested and consensus was reached to establish an ad hoc Break Room Committee. Carol from Housekeeping, Luana Ball, Jan Gardner and Susan Rand will meet to determine if there is a problem or need arising from the break room conversion and report back to the LP on 8-24-99.
(2) Orientation of current employees:
Deborah, Horace, Linda, Denise and Ted will get this started before the next meeting of the Partnership.
Questions that came up during check in:
1. Can we turn the LP minutes into a newsletter printed on bright paper for general distribution – assigned to Communication Committee.
2. When are we going to start the Path of Dialogue Single Point Lessons - Deborah gave consultants green light to place order for materials.
3. Can we have the Union Representatives sign the charter – done today.
Other actions coming out of the check-in:
Celeste Snoddy and Elizabeth Contla were named the co-chairs of the Leadership Partnership effective the next meeting of the Partnership. The consultants will work with the co-chairs to help them take on their new roles and responsibilities.
Issue Bin Status:
Items were removed as completed or have changed status report dates (in addition to the above):
o Communication Strategy recommendations /Communications Committee / 8-24
o What to do with the undiscussables/ all / 8-24
Charter Sub-Committee Report:
Consensus was reached that all Union Representatives sign the signature page indicating their support of the charter which will be included in the final charter printing. Charter will go to print this week.
Charter committee will plan for a signing ceremony based on the printerÕs estimate for finishing the job.
Communication Sub-committee
The Quiet Room is located by the Security Station. Consensus was the Communication Sub-Committee will see that guidelines for usage and the purpose of the room will be sent to all employees and posted in the quiet room. Consensus was reached that the Communication Sub-committee will come up with a mechanism to objectively evaluate the effectiveness of the Quiet Room.
Another draft of the Communication Plan was distributed and will be developed for further discussion at the next meeting. Feedback requested by 8-17-99.
Suggestions: Two suggestions have been received and are being processed by the sub-committee. The sub-committee will receive and acknowledge receipt of suggestions. They will then ask for input from subject matter experts or managers. After input they will make a recommendation to the full partnership for acknowledging the suggestor and make a recommendation (if any) for an award to the suggestor.
Participative Management & Training Sub-Committee
Bar charts from the Employee Opinion survey showing the different responses from nursing employees with more and less than five years work at ITF. Employee data feed back meetings will be conducted over the next four weeks.
Results from small group around the data:
Themes from the data:
What are we as a leadership partnership doing to get these results (themes)?
What is keeping issues from coming to the Leadership Partnership?
Questions consultants would ask during data feed back sessions with employees.
Am I willing to walk the walk?
Ad hoc Committees:
TAP Turnover Committee unveiled a cause and effect diagram (Ishikawa Fishbone) showing the reasons and rationale for the current hiring and retention practices. The diagram will be used for further analysis to discover what actions may be indicated to reduce turnover in the future.
Clerical-Medical Records Committee Meeting (Deborah and Clark) report out on 8-24-99
Leadership Partnership membership status (Deborah and Union Reps) – SEIU/PERC announced they have selected two representatives. Consultants will work with the new appointees to orient them to the Leadership practices, policies, principles and protocols.
Policy and Practice Shift Review Assignment committee (Horace and Celeste) will report on 8-24-99
Deborah, Horace and Linda will meet with Denise and Ted about Current Employee Orientations
Task force on "Nurse Competencies" waiting for labor to appoint representatives – advise Deborah.
Vending Machine Ad Hoc Committee - Dan Mc Gilligan has sent letters to the vendor to add a Salad and Sandwich machine to ITF. Management waiting for a response and can not consider other options since this company is a sole source.
Partnership Bulletin Board – Consensus was reached that the Communication Sub-committee will have responsibility for seeing that all Partnership material is posted, including but not limited to, goals and purpose, vision and values, meeting agendas and minutes.
Leadership Partnership Training - Problem Solving - Part Three
At 1:00 p.m. Group Problem Solving Training conducted by Nancy and Martin; Nancy reviewed the six step problem solving model and indicated which method would most appropiately be used at each step. She introduced the Pareto analysis and the partnership worked through an exercise allocating per cent distributions. The purpose of Pareto is to identify in rank order the leading causes of a specific problem so that problem resolution efforts are directed toward the highest problem solving leverage targets.
Meeting Evaluation (evaluating the way in which we conducted the meeting - the quality of the meeting itself):
What went well in our meeting:
Need improvement:
Next meetings: August 24, September 14 and 28, October 12 and 26, November 9 and 23, December 14 and 28, 1999.
Meeting and training was completed at 4:45 p.m.
ITF Leadership Partnership Minutes - June 1, 1999
All present except: Belinda Chase, Patricia Fischer (in hospital) and Norma Langevin. Guests: Linda Jefferson (UPEC)
8:30 a.m. - Regular Meeting of the Partnership:
Ground Rules read.Consensus reached that the meeting will be cancelled at 8:30 a.m. if there are not at least 51% of both labor and management representatives present.
Minutes of the May 15, 1999 meeting approved
Luana Ball agreed to be Action Monitor.
Check In:
No items were pulled for further consideration.
Clark Howard will be on the Communication Subs Committee and Kristen Bostrom-Leon will be on the Charter sub-committee.
Issue Bin:
Items were removed as completed or have changed status report dates:
Charter Sub-Committee Report:
Consensus agreement reached on the following Charter sections as corrected or amended.
The Committee reported that the remainder of the Charter items will be presented for consideration at the 6-15-99 meeting.
Participative Management & Training Sub-Committee
Presented a third draft of employee opinion survey. LP asked them to do one more draft drastically reducing the number of questions. They will present final draft at the 6-15-99 meeting. They will also present the first draft of the behaviorialized values at the June 15 meeting.
Communication Committee
Presented problems they have with proposed Buddy Program. Consensus agreement was reached to send this work back to the Communication Committee for further work on a more simplified design.
No suggestions from Suggestion Box
No action to report on Sanctuary proposal. Having difficulty locating an appropriate room.
Training postponed ..."low chi".
Next Meetings:
June 15 and 22, 1999
ITF Leadership Partnership Minutes - May 15, 1999
All present except: Anna Fuzie & Norma Langevin. Guests: Linda Jefferson (UPEC)
8:30 a.m. - Regular Meeting of the Partnership:
Ground Rules read.
Minutes of the April 27, 1999 meeting approved with the following corrections:
Luana was not supposed to be part of the Clerical Concerns Meeting
John Capsavage agreed to be Action Monitor.
Check In:
The following items were pulled from the Representative check-in for further action:
Clarification requested regarding discharged employee and rumors of a possible conflict with a Social Worker.It was agreed that staff changes would be announced in the Bugle.
Parking Lot issue: this matter is resolved since it has been learned that employee parking is available near Administration. Consensus action that Deborah will make this information available to all employees along with a map showing all other available local parking options.
The dedicated drivers need information on their insurance coverage should an accident occur or if they should receive a traffic ticket. Deborah and Celeste will meet to put that information together.
There was a concern that the issue raised last meeting regarding senior employees being bypassed for requested shift changes did not get resolved in the manner agreed. People did resubmit their requests showing past dates of requests yet these requested did not get seen by Horace as he requested. Horace will check out request forms supplied by Juanita and explain reasons to the impacted employees.
There was a concern that people were pulled from areas and coverage is not provided behind them. Horrace said he wants to know when this happens among Nursing staff. OT is to notify their Team Leader who will notify Jan Garner when this happens.
There was a concern that the tone of the Medications memo was negative and not received well. Consultants suggested that we try our hand at rewriting the memo in Path of Dialogue Class after we get agreement from the author.
Night Shift does not feel a part of the organization; they were left out of the Cinco De Mayo celebrations. John Capsaveage indicated that the night shift can do whatever it needs to do but that they have to take the initiative themselves much like every other shift. The members will look for other ways to assure that Night Shift does not feel excluded.
Question raised why there is a staff shortage on night shift; there is a concern that everyone including supervisors are being stretched too thin. This question did not get answered or assigned for investigation.
There was a suggestion that more than one observer be permitted to attend Partnership meetings. This matter will be handled by the Charter design committee.
Issue/ Who assigned to handle / Status
Committee Reports:
Charter Design Sub-committee: No report .Will meet Friday May 22 to prepare Charter recommendations.
PMT Sub-committee:
(1) Asked for feedback on the draft employee opinion survey questions. The survey and survey process will be finalized at the next meeting.
Communication Sub-Committee:
(1) Reported on status of new employee buddy program.The members brainstormed a suggested list of suggested responsibilities of the Buddy, and mae other suggestions. They will finalize their recommendation at the June 1 meeting.
(2) Reported on the status of the Quiet Room. Based on site visits to other hospitals Committee made recommendations which will be acted on at the Meeting of June 1, 1999.
(3) Reported on the status of the Employee Suggestion Program. They will use guidelines for the County Program and review suggestions at every Communication Meeting. They will prepare and place an announcement in the Bugle that the Suggestion Plan has been activated.
(4) Bulletin Board - Have arrived and will be hung this next week.
(5) Graphics from Arrowhead Springs retreat - Will be displayed and Committee members asked to help with the hanging of the graphics.
(6) Presented draft for new employee orientation brochure.
Announcements:
Woody Wooley, SEIU, will no longer be representing ITF unit employees.
Kirsten and Clark will be assigned to sub-committee as agreed by by Deborah and Linda Jefferson.
Meeting Evaluation
What went well:
What can be improved:
Next Meetings:
June 1, 15 and 22, 1999
Training - Path of Dialogue (continued from last meeting)
All present except: Jim Cazares, Fran Diaz, Anna Fuzie, Dan Marks and Norma Langevan.
Principle Number 4 - Advocate in Ways That Make It Safe To Respond (Part of the Continuance Condition of Maintaining Mutual Respect)
Skills that we learned: (1) advocate tentatively, (2) end advocacy with inquiry and (3) share your path of meaning from left to right.
These skills help us stop choosing between candor and caring, and allow us to put even the toughest subjects on the table in ways that promote dialogue.
We generated a list of over thirty ways we can show dissrepsect in our conversations. We recognized we all do some of these things some of the time.
Session was about learning some fundamental ways to maintain respect while advocating our ideas, needs and feelings. Its about trying to do both mutual meaning and mutual respect, not one or the other.
Sometimes when we advocate about threatening or embarrassing subjects we often do so that invites resistance.Sometimes its not the "what" that gets communicated but rather "how" we approach the subject that gets a defensive response.
If we categorized signs of disrespect what we see is people going to the silence or violence modes, thus contributing to the downward communication spiral. Obvious signs of dissrepsect are attacking, labeling and the cold shoulder. What helps us stay on the part is to clarify mutual purpose, particularly using "what we do want" and "don't want" skills. We can also prevent disrespect with personal ground rules, self knowledge and control, self critique, managing expectations, appologizing appropriately and getting real time feedback.
Another subtle sign of disrespect is monologuing. Monologuing indicates that the advocacy is rigid or fixed! Statements like "these are the facts" also indicate rigidity. A manner of uncompromise or a tone of monotone, making statements and hardly ever asking questions, is the most disrespectful form of communication. It is a form of controlling, compelling and convincing; it is not dialogue.
When we "work on me first" we acknowledge that effective advocacy requires humility. We learn to create and maintain mutual respect by advocating in ways that encourage others to inquire into our meaning (in a sincere fashion) and not by forcing our viewpoint on others. It allows us to state our opinions effectively without annoying other people or making them defensive.
The goals is to pour ideas into the pool of meaning so they can be seen by everyone. It assumes that some of this meaning may be incorrect. The goal, then, is learning not converting others to my view. The test is weather you are anxious to be proved wrong! Maturity invites discomfirmation. If you are humble you do not need these skills, you do them naturally.
If you are not humble, trying to master these skills will help you become teachable and will help you improve your decisions and effectiveness.
Advocating tentatively is communicated in both tone and word. We preface statements with phrases that show how we arrived at our conclusions. They demonstrate an openness to receive conflicting data and a willingness to learn. Tentativeness is not mousiness. It does mean there is no need to blow others away.
Conclusions stated as facts invite resistance. For example, "that's a dumb idea", or "you've got a bad attitude."
End advocacy with inquiry; its a good way to increase the trust and respect levels of the interaction. Keep in mind that the purpose of inquiry is learning.Unfortunately most people don't inquire in this spirit.
When others are becoming defensive invite questions or opposing views.
Share your path of meaning from left to right. Events are filiterd through our observations (left). From these we draw conclusions. Based on these conclusions we chose our emotions. Based on our conclusions and emotions we act (right). Respectful and helpful advocacy includes the observations that support the conclusions presented. Without supporting observations advocacy is not open to inquiry and is incomplete. We strive to balance observations and conclusions.
Observations are what we see, touch, hear, smell or taste. They are hard data which most people would easily agree and they can validate through direct means. Conclusions are inferences we make based on observations.
ITF Leadership Partnership Minutes - April 27, 1999
All present except: Elizabeth Contla. Guests: Woody Woolley (SEIU) and Linda Jefferson (UPEC)
8:30 a.m. - Regular Meeting of the Partnership:
¥ Ground Rules read and invitation made to make additions or changes.
¥ Minutes of the April 13, 1999 meeting approved with the following corrections:
The matter on Norma Longevin should read "membership" not "replacement."
Concerns about the daily schedule should read "ITF/OT" not just "OT"
¥ Luana agreed to continue to be the action monitor.
Check In:
The following items were pulled from the Representative check-in for further action:
Shift assignment changes: A concern was raised that some more senior employees believe their requests for shift changes were not considered in favor of less senior employees, or employees who made requests for changes after they did, got preference; that these employees have not been able to get answers as to why their requests were not honored. Horace will address concerns or questions about shift assignments directly with employees involved and will report back to the Partnership; he asked that anyone who has requested to change shift assignment to resubmit the request. At the same time an ad hoc Partnership team composed of two management and two labor appointees will look into a long term approach to honoring requests for shift change; such approach may or may not include seniority as a criteria.
Twenty-eight clerical and medical records staff concerns were raised. Consensus was reached to add one additional manager and employee member to the ITF Leadership Partnership with the understanding that both of these additions will come from Records, management selecting one and UPEC the other.
Consensus was reached that Trish, Luana and the new Records labor representative will conduct a meeting of all clerical and records staff to (1) clarify the concerns adding more specificity where possible, (2) separate observations from conclusions, and (3) give management a list of the prioritized concerns so that they can have an opportunity to resolve them. Unresolved concerns will be brought to the full Leadership Partnership.
A concern was raised that current logistics made it difficult to conduct a physician's evaluation for discharge over the weekend resulting in a lack of bed space that would be otherwise available. Deborah will discuss this problem with Dr. Dorsey and report back to the Partnership.
The parking lot concern was brainstormed and a list of over thirty suggestions were passed to an ad hoc solution-finding committee consisting of John Capsavage, Celeste, Luana and Horace. They will meet with the Mental Health Department Safety officer to include his observations and findings. They will meet Tuesday, May 12 at 2:30 p.m.
Director's report:
John Ryan provided an update and answered questions on the HCFA concerns and the County's response. HCFA wants greater integration between ITF and RCRMC. Several alternatives are being proposed; physical re-location is very unlikely.
Teresa Conley, RCRMC Director of Nursing, is invited to attend and observe the next meeting of the Leadership Partnership.
Committee reports:
Charter Committee. Consensus was given on suggested charter language presented by the charter committee. They will add two new charter sections: Replacement of Members and Conduct required for Continuing Membership.
PMT Committee circulated a first draft of the employee opinion survey. They requested that if any members had suggestions they would like to receive them prior to the next regular partnership meeting.
Communication Committee reported that Dr. Reyes will be doing a sanctuary site visit at Parkview Hospital this Friday. On May 14 the Committee will bring back their recommendations on the Suggestion Box Policy. On the 21st they will bring back information on the new employee "buddy system."
Microwave Ad hoc committee - Reported that OT is making five flower arrangements that will be raffled. Proceeds will go to buy new microwave oven. Any left over proceeds will go to OT.
Issue Bin:
This list will appear in all of our minutes from now on.
Issue/ Who assigned to handle / Status
Training - Path of Dialogue (continued from last meeting)
All present except: Elizabeth Contla, Jim Cazares, Shirley Talley, Fran Diaz, and Charlotte Madrid.
Started off with Priming. Priming is our best guess about the other person's left hand column. It's the inquiry skill that's used when nothing else works.
People hold back because they assume bad things will happen when they open up. Combining Inquiry skills adds to the safety we create.
When you see verbal or non verbal signs of the left hand column IRP them out.
When we notice others acting out their LHCs we may see them take jabs or look uncomfortable.
To make it safe for others to check out LHCs invite, reflect to avoid emotional hooks, and prime to start the flow.
Invite means "we invite them to share their thoughts." It sounds like "I'd really like to understand, can you give me more information?"
Reflect mean, "describe what you are seeing and highlight differences between their actions and words." It sounds like "you generally have opinions yet you are not saying anything now."
To get past this barrier we work on me first, us second by making it safe for others to go public with their private thoughts. We do that through (1) verbal persuasion - tell them its safe, (2) vicarious persuasion - show by talking with others about these subjects that it's safe, and (3) direct experience. Talk with them about the subjects and let them see it is a positive experience. Direct experience is the most influential strategy.
Key to priming and reflecting is non judgmental listening. It sounds like "anything you want to say to me is fine and I care."
Meeting evaluation
Here's what went well:
Areas for meeting improvements:
Next Meeting Friday May 14, 1999
Training Learnings from April 20, 1999 (no regular meeting)
Continuation of Path of Dialogue Training with an emphasis on achieving mutual purpose.
We fight endlessly over strategies when we fail to first establish common purpose.
The best antidote for conflict is to find Mutual Purpose. Move the conversation back to purpose. The key to moving back to purpose is to carefully separate the conversation about how from the conversation about what.
Once we've moved from strategies to purposes, possible options are easier to find. Getting stuck on strategies creates a forced choice and moves the interaction into win-lose negotiation.
Sometimes getting to Mutual Purpose requires outside help, mediation, facilitation or suggestions. While finding the solution can be tough, by establishing a shared commitment to find one and clarifying what the Mutual Purpose is, a solution becomes possible.
What makes this hard? Getting ego invested; limiting the search for alternatives; moving too quickly to strategy.
When mutual purpose is absent people go to silence or violence.
Principle #3 - Mutual Respect - Inquire in ways that make it safe to share.
The goals of dialogue are vitality and effectiveness, and we're effective to the degree we get all relevant meaning into the shared pool of meaning.
As we began our study of dialogue we concentrated on working on ourselves and on the barriers to dialogue that we create. We explored the tendency we have to revert to our native tongue. We learned that the way we draw conclusions can create unhelpful emotions in our relationships with others. We now are concerned with how to help others remove their barriers to dialogue. THE TWO SETS OF SKILLS ARE INQUIRY AND ADVOCACY.
Inquiry is the skill of respectfully asking questions or making statements to make it safe for others to share their honest feelings and information.
Advocacy is the skill of respectfully sharing our honest feelings and information without causing others to become defensive or to be annoyed.
The trick is to balance inquiry and advocacy...listening and sharing. When two people advocate and neither inquires, they create an Advocacy Face-off - Mutual Monologue rather than dialogue.
Balancing Inquiry and Advocacy means actively seeking the truth in what the other advocates before initiating an alternative view.
When people only Advocate and no one inquires, Mutual Respect, Mutual Purpose and Mutual Meaning are all put at risk. When respect is at risk, it's often because we fail to acknowledge the points of others. So often when someone makes a statement and we agree with some points but disagree with others, all we focus on are the points of disagreement...nothing goes into our pool of shared meaning. Pointing out areas of agreement builds Mutual Respect and helps define a common ground from which areas of disagreement can be addressed.
Hearing means a sound wave bouncing off my eardrum. Listening means I'm paying attention. Inquiring means I'm trying to learn. I'm actively looking for what's true in what others say to make it part of our shared meaning.
The objective of inquiry is (1) to make meaning clear and (2) to make it safe to add meaning to the pool.When trust and respect are present, meaning is contributed freely and openly. However, when trust and respect are not present, meaning is withheld---often with negative consequences. Used appropriately, the skills of Inquiry and Advocacy help make it safe to add information and feelings to the pool of available meaning. When used inappropriately, inquiry and advocacy can show disrespect and cause others to withhold information or meaning.
People only share as much as they feel safe sharing. We make assumptions about the consequences of saying or not saying certain things. Based on these assumptions, we'll either share or not share potentially threatening meaning.
Inquiry is hardest when we have already judged another person-out loud or in our mind. In this situation we have to work on ourselves first. We must learn to respectfully inquire until we're able to see how a reasonable, rational, decent person could think and act as the other is doing.
The first step to genuine Inquiry is curiosity. We must be willing, even eager, to reflect, explore and learn. To inquire is to learn. Learning is the spirit of Inquiry. To attain this goal we must be willing to suspend our opinions. That doesn't mean we give them up. We simply set them aside in the interest of gaining new perspectives. Skillfully inquiring into another person's thoughts or concerns expands available meaning and builds respect.
"IRPing" - Inviting, Reflecting and Priming
One way we demonstrate safety is by making statements or asking questions that encourage openness. Inviting is simply making statements that show a willingness to listen and learn.
Another way is to Reflect. When people start by discussing their own left hand columns (what they are thinking but usually are not saying) they demonstrate that it's safe to dive in. Strong emotions are the cue to begin reflecting. Reflecting helps you clarify what you think the other person is saying and helps you avoid taking things personally. Reflecting content helps clarify meaning before we jump to conclusions.
Priming is the skill we use when nothing else works. When you suspect the other person is carrying an "unsayable" left-hand column, prove that it's sayable by taking your best guess and saying it for the other person.
Minutes - April 13, 1999
Training cancelled at 9:00 a.m. The following class members were either absent or indicated they would leave the class early: Deborah Johnson, Charlette Madrid,Elizabeth Contla, Shirley Talley, Kristen Bostrom-Leon, Cira Cabrera, Dan Marks Susan Jacobs, Horace Johnson, Jim Cazares, Jan Gardner, Fran Diaz.
1:30 p.m. - Regular Meeting of the Partnership
All present except: Elizabeth Contla, Horace Johnson and Norma Langevin
Ground Rules read - no changes suggested.
Luana volunteered to be action monitor.
Minutes: The minutes of the March 23 meeting were corrected to show that no letter of commitment to the Leadership Partnership was requested from Dr. Dorsey.
Check In:
The following items were pulled from the Representative check-in list for further action:
Committee Reports:
Issue Bin:
This list will appear in all of our minutes from now on.
Issue / Who assigned to handle / Status
(If we have left anything off, please contact us by phone or e-mail or bring up at next meeting)
Training: "Integration" the sixth principle.
The following points were made:
Meeting evaluation:
Process that went well
Next meetings:
Check for Committee meeting time and place with Betty
MINUTES - ITF Leadership Partnership Minutes March 23, 1999
All present except: Maverne Mitchell and Bobbie Maddox
8: 30 a.m. - Continuation of perception meeting from March 16 , 1999
1:30 p.m. - Regular Meeting of the Partnership:
Ground Rules read and invitation made to make additions or changes (incorporating dialogue learning) at the next regular meeting.
Luana agreed to continue to be the action monitor.
There were three incomplete items from the last meeting of the partnership:
(1) The role of Doctor Dorsey in this process.
Deborah explained that she meets with Doctor Dorsey on a twice a week basis and that he has a full understanding of and commitment to the Leadership Partnership. She will discuss the matters that came up at this and the last business meeting and invite Dr. Dorsey to give the Partnership a letter of his personal commitment to the principles and goals.
(2) Those not involved (on ITF) don't understand what's happening
This matter will be addressed by both the training sub-committee and the communication sub-committee.
(3) Turnover and retention
Deborah invited two labor representatives to meet with she and Horace to discuss how to best approach the question of TAP employee turnover. They will bring back a recommendation to the partnership for consensus action.
Committee Reports and requests for action:
(1) Charter design - received consensus support for the first part of the new charter(language attached). The sub-committee hear and will consider all recommended language and syntax changes. The entire charter will be submitted to an omnibus motion before being adopted.
(2) Participative Management & Training - Reported that they are seeking one hour of CEU credit for each of the fourteen Path of Dialogue Single Point Lessons approved to be offered at the 2-23-99 meeting:
(3) Communication Subcommittee - Consensus reached on the following:
ITF will buy and place a Leadership Partnership Bulletin Board in a easily accessible place to post minutes of ITF-Leadership Partnership Meetings, Partnership Agendas, Partnership announcements, goals, Code of Trust, the Seven Principles and other Partnership information.
To immediately post LP goals and purpose in places employees frequently see.
To hang the full sized work of the graphic illustrator from the Arrowhead Springs workshop under plexi-glass in the main hall of the Center. The condition of consensus was that an estimated price and selection of the illustrator's work first be brought back to the Partnership for review.
Consensus was given to allow the Communication Sub-committee to manage the suggestion box. They will review all incoming suggestions and take appropriate action. Announcement of this change will appear on the new Partnership bulletin board.
The subcommittee asked Partnership for their input an advice for (1) creating the sanctuary room, and (2) the new employee buddy program. These matters will be agendized for the next Partnership meeting.
Mini training - The Empowerment Principle
The following Empowerment questions were all answered affirmatively (and correctly):
1. Important decisions that impact us are made by consensus.
2. Empowerment requires that we surrender the illusion of control over others.
3. It requires me to freely contribute my perspectives, values and experience to the shared pool of meaning trusting that others, if given reliable data, will come to see its value.
4. It requires us to disclose all the information we have when we are about to make a decision.
5. It anticipates that when people are compelled or controlled they may comply but they may not commit.
6. It expects conversation to be free from attacking, blaming, criticism, labeling, victimhood or furthering one's own interests.
7. It places considerable emphasis on achieving win-win (interest-based) solutions.
8. It requires us to behave authentically without collusion.
9. It requires us to get all of our information into the common pool of knowledge and encourage everyone else to do likewise.
10. It implies that we will give a reason or come up with an alternative when we can not give our consensus.
11. It requires us to suspend negative assumptions about one another's motives.
12. It requires us to increase our personal knowledge and ability to share knowledge with others.
13. It is served by a search for mutual meaning to accomplish mutual purpose in an atmosphere of mutual trust.
14. It means that we avoid stereotyping, judging others or bringing our fixed positions to the ITFLP decision making process.
15. The primary intent of empowerment is learning, increasing our mutual effectiveness and gaining willing commitment from others.
Next Meeting will be on April 13, 1999; Path of Dialogue Training at 8:30, regular meeting following lunch.
Meeting Evaluation:
Things that went well:
Things that need improvement:
Too much of an emphasis on wording things positively --- should be o.k. to use negative examples.
Adjournment
Minutes -March 9, 1999
All members present except Norma Langevin
Facilitators: Martin Nelson & Nancy Taylor
Guests: Linda Jefferson UPEC
Training
Nancy and Martin led the morning training, Part Three-Path of Dialogue. We continued the "my difficult person" assignment.We encouraged participants to really search for the "other point of view" until they find a reasonable one. We learned that we tend to make up motives for others' behavior by committing the Fundamental Attribution Error...when we mistake bad motive with bad behavior. We learned that anger and self-justifying thought are good cues for out need to use this fix. We try to attribute good motive then check it out...our answers to these questions may still not be correct, but asking these questions puts us in a frame of mind that opens up to alternatives. Own it; understand it; check it out. When we are really stuck on our negative attributions we must come up with four or five answers to the "attribute good motive" question.
Silence and violence are often driven by a second thinking habit---Victim Thinking. A victim is someone who hates the results they are getting and thinks they can do nothing about it. Self justification and blame go together. Sure signs of Victim Thinking are any story or conclusion that (1) makes others 100% responsible and all-powerful in creating my problems and (2) make me 0 percent accountable and powerless to change what is. Coupled with the FAE we feel totally free to go to silence and violence-and become an avenging angel or a suffering saint.
Working on me first means telling complete stories. We are on the Path of Dialogue when we ask: How am I creating what I don't want? What did I do or not do that created this result? How am I eliciting the other person's behavior?
We enter Dialogue through Mutual Purpose. I contribute my perspective, my view, my values and my experience to the shared pool of information, trusting that others, if given reliable data, will come to see the value of what I've contributed. I also trust that others may have valid alternative viewpoints that will better inform my decisions. Having shared in the contribution, I also share in the commitment, as they do.
The steps are (1) commit to seek mutual purpose, (2) separate strategies from purpose and (3) brainstorm alternative strategies.
The members conducted their regular Leadership Partnership Meeting in the afternoon.
Opening:
Action Monitor:
Check In:
The following items were pulled from the check in list for further discussion and or action:
(1) The role of Doctor Dorsey in this process.
(2) Those not involved (on ITF) don't understand what's happening
(3) Turnover and retention - After several caucuses and an unsuccessful consensus action the labor side withdrew from the meeting stating they needed more time to think about this matter.
The meeting will be reconvened for the remainder of the agenda on March 23, 1999
Minutes -February 23, 1999
All members present except Thor Reyes and Norma Langevin
Facilitators: Martin Nelson & Nancy Taylor
Guests: Linda Jefferson UPEC
Training
Nancy and Martin led the morning training, Part Two-Path of Dialogue. We continued the "begin with me first, then us" part of the dialogue training. Notions introduced were "the fundamental attribution error", "victim thinking", "attributing positive motives", "getting the rest of the story", "Path of Meaning", the need for us to examine the thoughts that lead to our feelings, the speed with which we get to unchecked emotions, the difference between observations and conclusions, how we can suspend and change assumptions, the choices we make in our thinking impacts the results we get, the "downward communication spiral", more on the "silence to violence continuum" (group average scores were Silence 4, Dialogue 6, Violence 2.5).
The members conducted their regular Leadership Partnership Meeting in the afternoon.
Opening:
Action Monitor:
Check In:
The following items were pulled of the "check in" list for discussion and action:
Committee Reports:
Charter (John, Deborah, Juanita and Cheryl).
Training (Jan, Luana, Trish, Anna)
Participative Management (Horace, Norma, Celeste, Elizabeth )
Communication (Maverne, Belinda, Bobbie and Thor)
The web site for the partnership is www.taylor-nelson.com/ITF.html
The subcommittee brainstormed a list of 56 suggested communication ideas. They multivoted (prioritized) the list to nineteen items and invited the Partnership to add others. The Partnership brainstormed five additional ideas. The entire list was then prioritized and the following nine suggestions were returned to the Sub-Committee for fine tuning and implementation:
Mini-training
Martin conducted a training session on the seven principles of Participative management with an emphasis on the principle of wholeness.
Next meeting:
The next regularly scheduled meeting and training is March 9, 8:30 to 4:30. Path of Dialogue Training will be in the morning and the business meeting will be in the afternoon.
Meeting Check Out and adjournment:
Things that went well Things that can be improved
The training (8) The Wholeness exam (2)
Productive Meeting Interruptions
Atmosphere were information could be shared
around some decisions made by management
Have more information to share on the units regarding
information raised
Good meeting (3)
Decisions got made
Minutes of the ITF Leadership Partnership January 12, 1999
All members present.Facilitators: Martin Nelson & Nancy Taylor.Guests: Linda Jefferson UPEC
Training
Nancy led the morning training session. The members played out the role of various organization members in trying to decide the cause of a mail delivery problem. The point of the training was to illustrate (1) everybody comes to problem solving with their own interests, perspectives and agenda, (2) people have different notions of what problem solving is all about, (3) without an agree-upon problem solving process people are talking about different aspects of the problem, symptoms, solutions, possible causes, etc. at the same time, (4) everybody has a different emotional investment in resolving the problem and getting their solution selected, (5) there are two levels of attention working - the content (what) and the process (how) and if one gets short changed the problem solving process breaks down, and (6) our training together will emphasize structured approaches to group work and strategies to effectively deal with group dynamics when solving problems.
The members conducted their regular Leadership Partnership Meeting in the afternoon.
Opening:
Nancy provided her version of how the "check in" at the beginning of the meeting works. Until we are more ready for group problem solving most of the early emphasis will be on how the par ties are working together between meetings. Rumors, unchecked assumptions or incidents which are not fully understood need to be addressed of they are impacting our ability to build the partnership. The point is to begin keeping small agreements so we can weave new fabric of trust.
Action Monitors - Luana and Jan volunteered to be the meeting's action monitors.
Minutes of the December 15, 1998 meeting approved with following corrections:There was consensus on starting meetings at 9:00 a.m. Spelling errors were noted and will be corrected in the future.
Check In - The following items were added to the Issue Bin.
1. Pay practice for working lunches.
2. Avoiding abuses on the holiday rotation schedule
3. Rumors
4. How to integrate new employees positively
5. Per diem role in preceptor ship training
6. Communicating changes in a trust building way
7. Eliminating areas of duplication
By consensus action the "rumor" item was referred to the Communication Committee and the "avoiding abuses on the holiday rotation schedule" item was referred to the Participative Management committee.
Consultants role.
Martin described the consultant's role.
Purpose Statement - Bobbie and Ann reported that they reviewed and were satisfied with the purpose statement sentence on customer service and that no change is being recommended.
Committee Reports:
Charter (John, Deborah, Juanita and Cheryl) - they have received six sample charters and will begin working on them.
Training (Jan, Luana, Trish, Anna) - They will use the needs assessment data collected today to help prioritize future training.
Participative Management (Horace, Norma, Celeste, Elizabeth ) - Reported they are working on a Preceptor ship Training proposal.
Communication (Mavernie, Belinda, Bobbie and Thor) - There is now a web site that can be accessed. It is rather large and will be smaller when the new charter includes the glossary of terms (and can be removed from the site). It was requested that first names be eliminated from the site. The page needs to be retitled "Regional Medical Center". The Committee purpose was stated as "to clearly convey what the partnership is about, who the team members are, to provide a history of the partnership and to seek input from others."
The Committee is working on how to convey their pride in working at ITF. They are thinking about pride signs and buttons. The committee is also exploring the possibility of creating a sanctuary were employees can work through their differences peacefully.
Mini-training - Martin conducted a training session on the seven principles of Participative management with an emphasis on the principle of representation.
Next meeting:
Committee will meet with consultants on February 2, 1999. 8:00 am Charter; 10 am Communication; 3:30 Training; 4:00 Participative Management
There will be a three day consecutive training on the Path of Dialogue on February 9, 10 and 11 running from 8 to 4:30. We can include four additional persons in this training, two from management and one from each union.
The next regularly scheduled meeting and training is February 23, 9:00 to 4:30.
Meeting Check Out and adjournment:
Learning from the representation quiz - 2 Some still assume the worst of managers without questioning them
Communication is better in terms of listening and sharing - 3 Role playing - 2
Things are more comfortable and easier - 4 Negative assumptions and interpreting
Increased trust - 2 Uncertainty about the lunch issue
Increased eye contact Still some interrupting & side conversations
Communication is more open - 2
Structure, information and learning is a real plus.
Perspective broadened with new information
We are closer to working the ITF issues.
The mailroom exercise helped a lot.
Some people stepped outside of themselves.
Letting things go.
Minutes of the ITF Leadership Partnership December 15, 1998
All members present.Facilitator: Martin Nelson
Guests: Wooley and Jefferson
Opening:
Martin explained how the "check in" at the beginning of the meeting works. This is the time that representatives of employees and managers bring issues to the partnership for resolution, or report on items that show we are making progress as partners. Until we are more ready for group problem solving most of the early emphasis will be on how the par ties are working together between meetings. It was observed that even though we are working more on relationship and skill building at first, when problems are raised management hears them and can try and do something about them in the conventional fashion.
Rumors, unchecked assumptions or incidents which are not fully understood need to be addressed and brought to closure. It is the responsibility of representatives to do this; if they have nothing to share at check-in we assume they are not fulfilling this responsibility.
If there are major problems that must be discussed please use the current chain of command, and if an unresolved item needs to be agendized for a future meeting, please let the facilitators know.
A "flag list" is maintained to record items that require further attention or items for which we do not yet have the tools to handle.
Minutes of the November 17. 1998 meeting were approved by consensus.
Anna Fuzie and Bobbie Maddox are fine tuning the "customer service" statement wording for Partnership approval at the next meeting.
Everyone present received the full signed code of trust.
Training:
Martin conducted a mini training lesson on the Path of Dialogue. Dialogue is the flow of clear meaning toward a mutual purpose accomplished in an atmosphere of mutual respect. When we move off the Path of Dialogue we are usually communicating somewhere on the silence to violence continuum. The members of the Partnership took a self evaluation test to determine their "native tongue" ; that is, where are they on the silence to violence continuum when they fall off the Path of Dialogue.
Politicking is selectively hiding and showing our meaning It may reveal itself in sarcasm, understating and couching.
Hiding is talking without revealing anything.It may be characterized by saying "yes" but meaning "no". It may include cynicism or defensive or self deprecating remarks.
Withdrawing is pulling out of communication. It's characterized by verbal or non-verbal disengagement language and behavior.
Monologuing is talking with the primary purpose of getting you to do what I want. It is any attempt to convince, compel or control the outcomes of the conversation by tone, lan gauge or body messages. It's characterized by overstating arguments, raising one's voice, subtle threats or innuendo, pointing one's finger to intimidate, filibustering, creating a tone or impression that does not invite questions or response, etc.
Labeling is putting people into categories or turning people into things in order to get what you want. We feel we can do and say things to a thing, class or category of people, etc., that we cannot do or say to a human being.Labeling generally escalates violence.
Attacking is communicating for the sole purpose of punishing, hurting, discounting.It is characterized by blaming, shaming, intimidating.When we move to attacking, violence becomes important as an end in itself.
Everyone was reminded to practice the skills learned at each meeting. They were also encouraged to bring their three-ring binders to each meeting.
Meetings - We will meet the second and fourth Tuesday of each month from 9:00 a.m. to 4: 30. The meeting will start with a training module and the afternoon will be a business meeting. The next meeting will be January 12, 1999
We adjourned at 2 p.m.
The Communication Sub-committee invites you to look at the ITF Leadership Home Page under construction at: http://www.taylor-nelson.com/ITF.html Your suggestions are welcome.
Background
Members of the Partnership Communication sub-committee have prepared the following background information to help ITF employees better understand the work we are doing, what and when outcomes can be expected, what the issues are the come up at various stages of the Partnership's development and growth.
Start Up Phase. During the first few months, the members of the ITF Leadership Partnership will be designing the structure which will govern their continuing work. Emphasis will be placed on learning how to make decisions and solve problems in a group setting. We will be working on us...learning to trust one another and accepting the responsibility of following through on commitment we make to one another.
During the second phase the effort will be focused on building good relationships throughout the department and solving problems.There will be a heavy emphasis on learning the business of running the business.
The third phase will be characterized by relationship building and training activity focusing on the various work sites and shifts. Here is where the tire meets the road. All members of the department will receive communication and problem solving skills so that participation in decision making is a way of life at ITF. The Leadership Partnership will have more influence on the key decisions made in the Department.
Facilitators
If you would like to have more information or wish to comment please contact the Partnership facilitators, Martin Nelson or Nancy Taylor.
The role of the facilitators is to:
The Seven Core Principles
The following comments are intended to help the parties better understand how the seven principles might be helpful in influencing an important issue like designing work site (link pin) architecture.
1. SELF DESIGN
Every participative management effort is designed around the unique work culture of the organization. The parties determine and design answers on their own rules, around who should participate, what the subjects of participation should be, how disagreements will be handled, what the relationship to collective bargaining is, how participation will be encouraged, what training is needed, how representatives will be chosen, etc. The parties will probably first attempt to reach agreement on how they will structure and govern themselves, what a design should look like and who might best be asked to participate. At first representatives are picked. After the design has been completed one half of the representative are elected by their peers or selected by the Union.
2. REPRESENTATION
Unlike top-down management schemes, representatives come to the process chosen by their peers (and constituencies). The employees decide on half the players and management picks the other half. Representatives are formal and informal organization leaders who have the ear of their constituents and who are known for honest and faithful communications. The representatives are the backbone of the participative management process. They must have self esteem and willingness to learn and stretch their abilities.
Some issues that come up:
Representation means that we do whatever needs be done to insure employees and management have a voice in decision-making. Not every employee nor manager can come to the participative management party so there needs to be a representation process. This serves both the unions and management. What we find is that trained labor and management committee members are anxious to use all the tools of participation, like interest-based problem solving, to assure all the interests of the many constituents are elevated.
The interests of the parties are to achieve effective constituent representation. This is an interest of both unions and management since no-one wants to replow old ground if there isn't a representative of the constituents present. The goal is to get enough high quality representation so the parties know that decisions will not be made without someone there representing their interests. This is more of an issue in appearance than substance. Some people believe their interests will only be protected if their people are there. Putting their people "there" is a sign that they are doing a good job of "representation"...this is the old notion of representation.
That there is equal representation from the parties; that no one union has more representation presence than others. There is no guarantee that there is a back-up person or that there is a minimum number of employees inherent in the definition of representation. Indeed, when the link pin chooses a member to link back to the ITF/LP, it is often one person from one union or one manager that is expected to elevate and communicate concerns and information in both directions. The parties agree it is unfeasible to have representatives from each union and all aspects of management.
That there are sufficient numbers of representatives on any committee so that if one person is absent someone else will be there to cover the meeting. This interest can be met through communication and cooperation between labor and management members to assure no decision will be made without the involvement of other key labor stakeholders.
Some issues that come up:
Managers don't walk the talk.As representatives of the new way of doing things managers are watched closely to see if they are indeed trying to manage in new ways, involving others in decisions that effect them, treating everyone with respect and using good dialogue skills.Managers are under pressure to demonstrate they areas concerned about achieving high levels of morale as are the employee representatives.
Employee members get in trouble. Managers and others are expecting a substantial effort from employees to model the kind of responsibility and accountability they have come to expect from one another. Employee members are under a lot of pressure to demonstrate that they are as concerned with organization productivity as are managers.
3. WHOLENESS
There are no sacred cows; everything that management can decide is on the table; everything management can recommend the labor-management committee can recommend. Unlike Quality Circles, this process assures everyone is an equal partner in the consequential decisions made effecting the success and quality of working life of the employee AND organization.
Some issues that come up:
Employees sometimes are not willing to take on the tough issues and accountability consequences of higher levels of supervision or management. Management and supervision sometimes are not willing to give up their discretion around these issues. An early test will be to see how managers and supervisors involve their employees in decisions that impact them, and how well employees raise to the challenge of making decisions that are best for the organization.
4. INTEGRATION
This process becomes integrated into the decision making structures so that it is not perceived as a "flavor of the month" activity; it be comes a way of life when management asks, "I wonder what the employees will contribute to the thinking about this", and when employees ask "how is what I am about to do going to effect our organization success?" In other words, it is the real decision making work of the organization and, as such, has priority over other work. This and other aspects of the participative management process is usually codified in a multi-year agreement so all parties have confidence this work will survive any changes in leadership.
Some issues that come up:
The interest of labor are to assure important issues are bought to the party. They would expect that management would desire the widest possible participation in such decisions so want more people involved. It is for this reason that start up labor-management committees and link pins favor more involvement over less involvement. If there is doubt as to the size of the link pin we recommend going to a larger size for some finite period of time while employees are trying to win converts to this new way of doing things and there is so much start up committee work that needs to be shared.
The interests of management are to assure that bringing issues into the labor- management process does indeed result in better decisions. They worry that too many representative will take too much time and resources to make good decisions expeditiously. Having more people involved in the process is an investment in the future of collaboration. Most managers want many people involved in the change of paradigm so as to improve the chances the whole organization will transform, elevating the values, attitudes and beliefs of the shadow organization and integrating them into the traditional organization..
5. EMPOWERMENT
All decisions fed to the process are resolved by consensus agreement The true test of management's commitment is demonstrated by their willingness to feed relevant issues to the process and the parties resolving those issues expeditiously without pursuing narrow self-interests. Third party facilitation has proven to be the key to successfully assuring the process neither favors management nor the employees. At the beginning trust is low and problem solving skills need to be developed; there is no substitute for third party neutral assistance so the parties can navigate through tough decisions and conflicts while learning new skills and building new history.
Some issues that come up:
Union interests are that they will be fully empowered to make decisions on an equal basis with management; that they can do the right things without fear of reprisal. Union members are not as accustomed to working together as management staff, so they need more reassurance from team members who can support them during the start up phases. This is an argument for more rather than fewer participants.
Management interests are that employees and managers together make the best choices for the success of the organization; that large groups trying to solve problems and produce outcomes bog down in meeting ineffectiveness; that there are considerable manpower and overtime costs with larger groups.This is a legitimate argument for fewer members. It is harder to reach consensus with larger groups. The unions respond that this is the work of the organization and there is a synergy to larger groups working together to produce outcomes that off set the inefficiencies.
6. EQUALITY
The Participative Management Team is evenly divided between labor and management appointees. All sub- committees and communications are also done by balanced labor-management teams. Ground rules expressly forbid "pulling rank" or engaging in retaliation or recriminations. Consequences are spelled out.
The equality principle attempts to assure there is an equal number of management appointees and labor appointees. In the old days management might pick labor representatives who were friendly to management views or who could be seduced into horse trading (see glossary) with management. This principle is designed (1) to assure constituents that the ITF/LP is not a management driven activity, and (2) that there is an equal commitment from labor and management to make this process work.
Successful labor management-participation means the parties will use the tools of participation to assure a level playing field: a third party neutral, IBN, codes, ground rules and visions, training and use of new collaborative skills, non-adversarial conflict resolution techniques, and difference valuing skills, etc. There is a need to assure on-lookers and stakeholders that the process is more fair than other ill-conceived programs the organization may have sponsored; there needs to be enough labor and management representatives to do the work of the effort together, and there need to be enough of both parties learning the seven principles to make this process work.
Issues that come up:
Interests of the parties is that there is visible commitment to fairness. Management does not want to be seen in a bent over position and labor wants to know that management is committed to the process of "participation".There is a natural inclination for labor to want more labor and management representatives participating.
Interests of management is that achieving equality doesn't cost too much compared to other things competing for scarce dollars.There is a natural inclination of management to want a smaller number of labor and management representatives.
Interests of the Unions is that there is not only equality with management but that unions are treated equally. This is especially true if there has been an uneven relationship between union or unions and management in the past, or there are new unions on the property.Because there are several unions involved there needs to be compromises on trying to achieve some proportional sense of representation since this would consume too many management resources to achieve equality.
7. Stewardship
This principle requires the parties to consider service over self interest. It requires the parties to put aside past conflicts and personal or organization biases, politics and agendas, and seek the higher ground and greater good of the labor-management process and organization well-being over the long haul.
It is this principle that comforts us that the parties will reach a decision that raises above all their personal concerns in favor of the organization and ITF/LP success.
The notion of stewardship needs to be extended to all members of the work unit. They become stewards of their own work. It is for this reason that only work unit employees are selected, usually by their peers, to serve on the work unit (link pin) committees.
The notion of stewardship also asks the parties to make decisions that don't over-burden the system to the point its may become overly expensive to make the process succeed.
Glossary of Terms
ACBD - refers to the words, "always consult before deciding." It is one of the lower levels of the participative decision making process. A higher level would be "make all decisions by consensus".
Accelerating Consensus - Refers to the techniques used to get a large number of issues reduced to a smaller number of issues. Techniques include straw voting, straw designs, multivoting, the nominal group technique, weighted polling, negative polling, interest-option matrix, etc.
Acceptable Solution -An IBN term that means the solution meets as many of the interests as possible, or the solution meets more of the key interests than other solutions.
Action Monitor - Someone who volunteers or is selected to keep track of all the decisions made during the course of a meeting. These actions are reported at the end of the meeting so everyone knows what was decided and who has responsibility for acting. Can replace minute-taker.
Ad Hoc Committees - Created to work on just one problem and then are disbanded. The charter usually allows non Labor-Management committee members to participate on such committees in order to further the principles and practices of participative management throughout the department.
Administrative Prerogative - An obsolete term contradictory to the principles of equality and practices of participative management. It is sometimes also referred to as "management rights" or "executive privilege". This does not mean that management can not make important operational decisions, but if they do there is always the question as to why they did not bring the matter to the Parties at a formal meeting or Link Pin or other agreed-upon or approved arrangements to achieve labor-management commitment. See Executive Decisions. See Defect.
Advocacy - the Dialogue skill of speaking up effectively - clearly stating purpose and meaning in ways that maintain Mutual Respect and Mutual Purpose.
Advocacy Spiral - Dysfunctional behavior whereby the more I assert my role the more you resist. Process continues until (1) someone gives in or (2) someone defects. Team tries to spot the spiral and head it off before it consumes members.
Affect -Is the non-verbal posture, body language, tone of voice, facial expression, demonstration or lack of emotion used in communication. Includes such things as volume, intensity and timing. Affect often conveys commitment, urgency and intensity and makes up 37% of any message communicated (words are 6%, ritual and practice 57%). See Ritual and Practice.
After-Only Test - Most commonly experienced when someone decides something and the decision is reviewed by important others after it is made. A little bit like Monday morning quarter-backing yet a very important tool for a labor-management committee to look over and review the climate of compliance with the seven principles.
Asking For Consensus - When a member feels all parties have been sufficiently heard and wants to see if the team can support a given action he or she may call for consensus. Unlike voting, the facilitator starts with one person and goes around the room until there is no consensus or consensus is given by everyone (see "consensus"). If someone gives their conditional consensus, then the facilitator starts all over again to see if the previous members can live with the "condition" (see "conditional consensus"). Same as "calling for consensus".
Attacking - A non dialogue violence strategy; communicating for the purpose of punishing or hurting.
Brainstorming - A solution-generation technique that is either structured or unstructured. Unstructured brainstorming is the calling out of ideas with all members using freewheeling imagination without any judgments from others on the team. Structured brainstorming is the same, but the chair person(s) calls on each person going around the room.
Bull & Matador - A metaphor that means that we want to avoid being the bull charging from one side of the ring to the other, but rather the matador who stands in the middle and without a great deal of energy orchestrates the outcome (remember which one usually gets carried out!)
Carom shot - A usually negative comment or observation not said directly to the person who was the intended target. but sort of banked off the wall intended to hit the target with subtlety. A sneaky zinger (see zinger).
Caucus - A time out for either the labor or management side. A Caucus can be called at any time by any member of either labor or management for any reason. Usually a caucus is called because a member feels there is a misunderstanding that must be cleared up and wants to check out the misunderstanding (or an observation or whatever) rather than jeopardize the labor-management collaboration process by raising the concern in open meeting when trust is low.
Change - Requires a felt need to do something, the involvement of a respected other, a notion of a desirable changed state that generates a higher sense of self esteem, and requires a moving of the commitment to change from external to internal, specific rather than general plans, and new or revised social ties.
Charter has come to mean the labor agreement between the agency and the employee organization setting out the objectives and formal organization systems, architecture and arrangements to achieve quality of working life, that is, the enhancement of both organization productivity and employee morale. The charter is the corner stone guarantee that the seven basic principles of participation, protections from abuse, and codes of value-based behavior and trust will obligate the parties over the long haul regardless of changes in leadership. The duration of the charter usually goes from two to five years and is designed and approved by consensus of the parties.
Check-in is a process whereby members of the parties or committees are required to share observations, assumptions, rumors, gossip, events, news or other matters that have come up since the last time the group met together that if unchecked or unacknowledged would either work against the principles of participation or not be given credit for working for participation. Check-in is also the time to identify items that require further work or consideration.
Co-chairs are effective labor -management equality-based teams that assure that both labor and management equally share in the responsibility and authority of conducting effective meetings and causing a level playing field. The role of the co-chairs is spelled out in the Charter.
Coercion Cycle - the notion that power begets power; that if we feel we have "lost" today, we will "get even" tomorrow.
Collateral Organization - See Parallel Organization
Collaboration means "win-win". It is the higher ground above compromise that we all strive to achieve. It is based upon enhancing current relationships and upon integrating resource versus dividing or distributing the resources. Collaboration is as much concerned with meeting the needs of others as it is for meeting one's own needs.
Collusion means we side with people simply because they are "one of us" or we can cut a deal with them at the expense of others. We may badmouth or talk about people inside or outside of the meeting because they are part of the other side. We may join with others in the bathrooms or parking lot or executive offices to talk about stuff we should deal with openly and with people who can do something about the problem or who should be part of the transaction.
Command Decisions- means someone makes the decision alone without prior discussion with subordinates. This method is quick and it capitalizes on the manager's being best informed; the responsibility for the decision is clear. Where there is trust in the manager, command decisions are trusted. Can be off-putting if parties are believing matter should be consensus-based decision. See "after-only" decisions.
Commitment: The notion that we will not necessarily give our personal commitment to decisions that do not involve us in a substantial way. There are many things we will comply with, but commitment brings our heart, flexibility, perseverance and energy.
Commitment Plan - A matrix that identifies people who will lead change, need to support it, who just need to know about it, whose approval may be required and who might block it, etc.
Committees - The backbone of a structured participative management agreement and organization. Committees do all the hard work in gathering data, doing problem solving and making recommendations to the parties between meetings. Because the committees have both labor and management representatives, agreements reached in Committee should be easily approved by the organizational labor-management team.
Communication means hearing and experiencing both the content and meaning of words, body language and written things. See Dialogue. It is the total responsibility of representatives to assure quick and accurate organizational communication.
Communication Cycle - The true phenomena whereby only 30% of a sender's original intended message is received accurately by the receiver.
Communication Formula - Making "I" statements that make it clear about what I observe, how I interpret what I see, how I feel about what I am interpreting and what I now want based on all this.
Conditional Consensus means that some one is agreeing to support the action provided some other thing happens that can not be decided at the moment or there are certain standards of expected behavior or levels of productivity prerequisite to the consensus. This is not to be confused with nor may it be done as a "horse trade."
Congruence - What we say and do, how we say it and do it, our humor and our stories, all our symbols and artifacts, the character of our relationships and attitudes, our formal stuff and our in formal stuff, etc., all are totally consistent with the values and principles of participative management serving to elevate human dignity, respect, trustworthiness, honesty, sensitivity, stretch ing for one another, continuous improvement, personal worth and personal courage.
Consensus means that everyone has had the opportunity to be heard, every view has been solicited and everyone agrees to support the proposed (nominated) action. Consensus is not unanimity. Giving consensus may mean for some people that they have a view that there is a much more preferred course of action yet they can live with the action proposed. Consensus-based decision is at the core of the participative management business and is a demonstration of the basic principle of Empowerment. We never vote, it pits us against each other...we will take the time on important issues to achieve consensus, and this means either "yes" or "no"...there is no room for equivocation. It usually means we understand the proposed action, we have had the opportunity to influence the proposed action and we can live with it even though it may not be our first choice solution. There is an implied obligation that if I can not give my consensus then I have responsibility for coming up with acceptable options. To understand this, please see definition of "unanimity" which is very different.
Constituency means that everyone at the party represents someone, their constituents. If representation is successful then the needs, requirements and commitment of constituents is furthered. Since this form of participative management is a republican-democratic form of government, the constituent is the customer of the elected and appointed representatives.
Consultative Decision - means talking with individuals or the entire work group and then mak ing the decision yourself. Only people you believe have relevant information participate. Can be off-putting if parties are believing matter should be consensus-based decision.
Contrasting - a Dialogue skill that clarifies meaning giving contrasting examples - stating what you do and don't intend, do and don't mean, and do and don't want; used to maintain the conditions for dialogue when either Mutual Purpose, Mutual Respect or Mutual Meaning may be at risk because of possible misinterpretation.
Continuous Improvement means the never ending process of searching for work improvements even though they be small improvements, based on the notion that we can never reach 100% perfection. Our goal at work is to continuously search for new ways to make every detail of our work and work life better. It is the notion that if people think it ain't broken, break it! It is the notion of continuous learning both as individuals and as an organization.
Convenience-based Decisions - good for relatively unimportant decisions, such as where to place the water cooler. Means making the decision in whatever manner seems the easiest such as through delegation, asking for volunteers, or appointing someone to make the decision. Can be off-putting if parties are believing matter should be consensus-based decision.
Criteria - Objective standards of measurement against which the parties compare options. See standards.
Culture means the formal and informal values, attitudes, beliefs, mores, rules, history, stories, artifacts, climate and environment reflected in, by and influencing the work place and people.
CYA means Check Your Assumptions. Conflict, mis-communication and positional bargaining and problem solving can result from un-checked assumptions. See Fundamental Attribution Error.
Cycle of Pain - The dysfunctional process which traps an individual(s) into role dependency on pleading, anger, discounting and power. See Congruence.
Defect - a verb that means a team member or party in an IBN negotiation withdraws to a win-lose strategy, attitude or position. It might also means that a person has decided not to be governed by, advocate or respect the principles of participative management or the ground rules.
Defect Behavior - when a person defects they may substitute their own views for the largest and most productive views of their constituents; they may act in an unaware, narrow, intolerant and rigid way that does not permit for a full range of dialogue and exploration of options and possibilities; they may revert to simple slogans, stereotypes, zingers and hurtful humor; they may fall back to past behavior that got them what they wanted at the expense of others. See Congruence. See Horse Trading.
Design Team - This is the start up labor-management group that decides how the future participative management structure and practices will look. Some design teams actually begin solving problems but their problem solving capacity is reduced because labor members may not have yet been elected as representatives (see Representation) or the members may have not been trained in problem solving and other tools to reach genuine consensus. Usually the design team converts into the ongoing participative management team following elections.
Dialogue - It is the free flow of clear meaning toward a mutual purpose accomplished in an atmosphere of mutual respect.
Dividing the Orange - An IBN term that means win-win, collaborative problem solving which strives to achieve the interests of all parties without making compromises.
Downward Communication Spiral - the predictable course of an interaction that happens when people assign negative motives to the observations they make regarding others' behaviors and begin reacting defensively to their own conclusions. When I act and someone else interprets and reacts to what they believe is behind my action; they in turn act and I in turn interpret and act, causing us to downward spiral into the toilet.
Drama Triangle - the dysfunctional roles people let themselves or others play or be stereotyped as playing as either perpetrator, victim or rescuer. See Congruence.
Elephant on the Table - An expression used when someone thinks the parties are in avoidance or ignoring important issues. Someone might volunteer, "I think we have an elephant on the table" meaning the parties are not dealing with the tough issues that need to be dealt with.
Empowerment - All decisions fed to the process are resolved by consensus agreement. The true test of management's commitment is demonstrated by their willingness to feed relevant issues to the process and the parties resolving those issues expeditiously without pursuing narrow self-interests. Third party facilitation has proven to be the key to successfully assuring the process neither favors management nor the employees. At the beginning trust is low and problem solving skills need to be developed. The parties learn to use standards rather than power in resolving conflict.
Entrepreneurial contract - Everyone takes responsibility for the organization's success; they act autonomously and are driven by enlightened self interest . Their behavior is authentically in service of the organization and making a personal contribution.
Equifinality - The term which means there is always more than one way to "skin a cat" or solve a problem. We believe that a technically superior solution is inferior to one where the parties own it as a result of their work and commitment.
Equality -means the labor and management team is evenly divided between labor and management appointees. All sub committees and communications out are also done by balanced labor-management teams. Ground rules expressly forbid "pulling rank" or engaging in retaliation or recriminations by either labor or management. Consequences are spelled out. When equal numbers are impractical roles, rules and relationships are changed to cause a level playing field. third party neutral assistance so the parties can navigate through tough decisions and conflicts while learning new skills and building new history.
Executive Decisions are those decisions made my management that can withstand the after-only-tests of the seven principles (empowerment, equality, wholeness, etc.). Every manger is entitled to make decisions but participative managers have made a commitment to first involve empl