Implementing Learning Organization Principles and Quality Assurance: The Department Director’s View by Betty Elliott

mplementing the Portfolio System of Selfneam ManagementTM developed I by Sheila Murphy Associates proved to

be a worthwhile learning experience. Throughout the process, I discovered new aspects of staff performance and relating. Most importantly, I learned how others learn, and how the intersection of discov- eries often brings about unanticipated challenges and opportunities.

Betty Elliott is Associate Dean of

Instruction and Course Development at Rio Salado Community College. She

may be reached at (602) 51 7-8285.

Project Success Factors There were several key factors associated with the project’s success, the first of which was the time the project consultant invested in interviews with individual staff members. During the pilot project, staff were interviewed in detail no fewer than three times, with meetings lasting from 30 to 60 minutes. These meetings provided staff the opportunity to clarify their ideas and beliefs and to establish a comfort level with the consultant.

Another factor was the opportunity to participate in designing and shaping the instruments customized for departmental use. The external project consultant demonstrated a commitment to incorpo- rating staff suggestions, which further enhanced commitment and buy-in to the project. Following periods of extensive use, some instruments were altered in an effort to increase their practical value. The frequent opportunities to interact with and critique the customized system com- ponents reinforced staff empowerment by demonstrating the importance of their role in the process.

A third factor in the project’s success was the systemization of staff development efforts. One of the system’s most valuable strengths

was its methodical, yet customized, approach to building on staff strengths and applying those strengths to a common pur- pose. Although learning is constant in the College system, some learning was not prop- erly recognized and did not stick, because there was no systematic approach to recog- nizing, capturing, and communicating it. The system helped all of us by furnishing a flexible receptacle for addressing and improving continual discovery.

The focused, scheduled time with the departmental leader was a fourth factor. Many individuals expressed excitement over this ingredient. Staff members indi- cated that the system furnished an orga- nized way of establishing frequent dia- logue with me in my capacity as depart- ment head. This led to discoveries about new areas of competence and curiosity and it resulted in unexpected successes and new sources of learning. In addition to focusing on current projects and growth targets, the meetings offered my staff the opportunity to voice their plans for future and continued growth. This was an excel- lent method of learning about individual aspirations, and it strengthened my ability to support the staff.

A fifth factor was the systematic clarifica- tion of personal mastery through record- ing of key accomplishments. Staff found that the system facilitated “sanctioned bragging” that otherwise would not have seemed appropriate. They were required to have focused dialogue with me concerning their accomplishments and the meaning of those accomplishments. So often, organi- zational life precludes this type of commu- nication. In fact, the sheer velocity of movement means that employees may miss important opportunities to reflect upon what has succeeded.

Capturing information that helped identify mental models contributed to the pro- gram’s success as well. The system provid- ed a unique way of approaching the dis- covery of mental models through one-on- one dialogue between staff members and myself. In my experience, group settings pose a more challenging scenario for iden- tifying and clarifying mental models, so the individual meeting structure was wel- come and useful. I learned the extent of variation in the staff‘s ability and inclina- tion to reflect. For some employees, reflec- tion appeared to be a veritable way of life. They routinely found “ways in” to their own learning. Other individuals found it difficult to dwell on the many possible meanings associated with their experience and their progress. In all cases, individuals became increasingly familiar with their own mental models and the way in which those models intersected with those of other staff members.

The system improved planning and time management. Staff became more proficient in their ability to anticipate coming needs and to work backwards from major events. I was especially gratified by the way that individuals and teams were able to structure projects and quantify their needs in terms of the components and resources they needed for success. Another valuable benefit was the staff‘s growing recognition of the impact scheduling has on others. Given the nature of the depart- ment’s work, many individuals had previ- ously perceived themselves as-and func- tioned as-individual contributors. The system helped them recognize the part they play as team members belonging to a larg- er entity.

The system helped staff achieve agreed- upon goals and objectives. Individual, cus- tomized performance contracts offered staff a systematic means of:

structuring worthy projects resulting from specific learning; providing mutual accountability of employee and leader through the pro- fessional contract; providing expectations for follow-up review with the leader; and expanding staff understanding of the time, staffing, and money necessary to complete a project.

I was especially pleased with the way the staff responded to these contracts. They were able to clarify appropriate roles for

each of us to play in completing worthy projects.

The system enhanced team learning. Staff learned to share, rather than accumulate, knowledge from experience because the system emphasized the value of function- ing as a team. The system actually reward- ed them for the amount of learning they could generate through team efforts. Staff reported feeling that is was okay not to know everything and they benefited from sharing learning and requesting clarifica- tion in a positive environment.

Integration of the learning organization. Most profoundly, staff gained a vehicle for integrating the key principles of learning organizations into their daily functioning. The system expedited the application of learning, which made a distinctly positive difference in overall staff performance.

Appreciation of diversity. Individuals approach accomplishment and problem- solving in different ways. As a point of serendipity, heightened awareness of the value and role diversity plays provided an important lesson.

Many individuals had previously perceived themselves as-and

functioned as-individual contributors. The system helped them recognize

the part they play as team members belonging to a larger entity.

Finally, the system improved the staff’s awareness of the impact of individual and

Unexpected Results: Staff Performance

group decisions on the department, other departments, the College, the district, and the community. They came to value indi- vidual and group emphasis on the impor- tance of placing focused, systematic atten- tion on improvements at all levels affecting the organization.

Expected Results: Staff Performance My staff demonstrated improvements in five different areas.

Empowerment. According to plan, staff demonstrated enhanced empowerment, personally initiating and following through on performance improvement projects and services designed to assist the client group.

Accountability. Staff improved in their ability to account for and report on actions and results pertaining to planned accomplishments.

Celebration of accomplishments. Staff increased their ability to identify and extend their accomplishments, appropri- ately recognizing their own and others’ strong performance for the good of the department and the organization.

The system produced unexpected results, the first of which was a recognition among staff that the department is part of a system. Student Services affects all other depart- ments of the College, as other departments affect Student Services. Although rhetorical recognition of this perspective may have prevailed prior to the pilot project, staff indicated a more profound awareness of this concept through their use of cus- tomized forms. The system facilitated staff‘s perception of other departments as allies, rather than as possible foes.

There is also a perception of a broader scope of individual jobs. Pilot program participants generally came to view their jobs in light of their impact on the larger system. In addition, employees noted the degree to which their jobs are part of a large, interactive fabric of mutually rein- forcing elements. This change created a deeper understanding of the impact of individual components and the relation- ships between them in a system.

The staff made significant progress toward shared vision. The interaction between managers and employees fostered dialogue that in turn prompted a congruent organi- zational vision among staff. I was able to

40 performance improvement / October 1997

integrate the variety of perspectives brought forward by employees into an agreed-upon vision for the department and the organization. The impact of this par- ticular improvement appeared to have pos- itive implications throughout the College.

The system provided the necessary struc- ture for a wide variety of departmental and individual improvements. Most fun- damental was the potential for enhancing the level of trust among individuals. Although no single system can guarantee trust, the system did furnish the context for trust-building by means of providing time, structure, and guidelines for improve- ment.

Challenges to Staff Members Applying the system brought several chal- lenges to the fore. For one thing, partici- pants differed in their ability to reflect. Reflecting upon events, accomplishments, context, and opportunities appeared to come naturally for several employees, but others found this process difficult. The sys- tem relies on reflection as a prerequisite to learning. Not only must participants care- fully record what has occurred, they must then evaluate the meaning of what has happened, with respect to the system of events. it was useful to facilitate discus- sions with individual staff members by posing questions. For some individuals, reflection occurred in response to ques- tions during our meetings. For others, reflection took place either independent of such questions or during private time fol- lowing the meeting and were reported and discussed later. The key point was that staff showed diversity in their ways of learning and reflecting, which reinforced the need for me as director to recognize different perspectives, mental models, and individual processes with an open mind.

The system proved to be time-intensive. implementing it required the management and staff to commit to following the prin- ciples and practices included therein, regardless of the myriad of possible excus- es for failing to do so. Commitment from the top of the organization was a prerequi- site to the system’s success and precluded the entropy that probably have resulted otherwise. it was essential for all partici- pants to agree on a time commitment and to allocate that time. My own time was affected significantly because of the indi- vidual meetings.

Participants were required to write their observations down, which caused difficul- ties for those who had an aversion to writ- ing. Some staff members had difficulty with the mechanical act of putting thoughts into a tangible form, and others were concerned with how their material would be used and who would see it.

Management Requirements The system demanded a great deal from me. it was important for me to maintain and update a record of the staff‘s shared issues and opportunities. When staff mem- bers invest the time, energy, and attention in the system, it is essential that manage- ment maintain running records of their observations. It is important to maintain perspective on current and anticipated needs for resources and to foster a shared vision within the department.

it was also important that I be sensitive to individual needs and requirements, includ- ing those related to attention deficit disor- der (ADD). During the pilot project, I found it advantageous to interview a staff member who was unable to complete physical forms because of ADD challenges. I captured the staff member’s ideas, tran- scribed them onto the necessary forms, and facilitated a highly satisfactory set of interactions.

i needed to integrate the findings of indi- vidual staff members into a coherent pic- ture of departmental issues and opportuni- ties, and I spent a significant amount of time listening to staff. The system required considerable reflection, hypothesizing, and feedback from staff, and we exercised our skills in facilitating dialogue, shaping premises, and melding visions into a single coherent whole.

Time management skills were important. The provision for structured, scheduled interaction between individual staff mem- bers and myself was one of the greatest points of effectiveness in the system. It was essential to find a way to make this process work, even in the face of a demanding schedule. Successful implementation required at least one hour per staff mem- ber per month.

Results The system provided certain personal and

professional benefits to me as department head. Recalling that the pilot project took place immediately following a restructur- ing, I was able to use portfolio learning to discern characteristics of my own manage- ment style. in addition, I used the learning to determine the impact of my style on individual and team performance within the department.

I improved the quality of my interaction with my immediate superior. By conscien- tiously applying the system, I was able to enhance an already positive working rela- tionship. The resultant learning helped me clarify departmental progress, define my own management style, articulate depart- mental issues and challenges, and specify accomplishments of the department. Sharing information with my boss helped create a situation of success and fostered my boss’ trust in my ability to make deci- sions, which gave me the freedom to be innovative.

Staff provided me with more specific and better prepared requests for project or per- formance support. The system offered a context within which they were able to clarify the timeframes and expectations connected with their projects. Using the professional contract form and the time planner form helped they improve projec- tions for time and material resources.

I enjoyed more valuable, concentrated, and clear interaction with staff because of the scheduled appointments. Where staff members would previously drop by my office and visit for an unspecified period of time, they now participated in the disci- pline of scheduling meetings and using their allocated time effectively. This process clarified expectations and improved productivity. Staff organized their thoughts and solved problems before meeting with me, resulting in their provid- ing more concise and focused information. This helped me to be more useful to staff in responding to their ideas. Improvements occurred both on an individual and a departmental level, and helped bring train- ing needs to the surface.

Implementing the system brought much success in individual and group learning. It fostered a commitment to the discipline of learning, and I continue to use it today.