knowledge worker – DNC-Consulting

A Recent Customer Service Issue – Or, An Example of Why it is Past Time to Shift the Employment Paradigm

Many sources, most of them veterans, will agree with this statement, “Dealing with the Veterans Administration is an activity fraught with hostility.” On March 2013, I had the misfortune to experience another hostile occurrence. Following is what happened. The VA Hospital left a message in my voicemail alerting me that they had scheduled an appointment for me. The message included instructions for me to call if this appointment caused scheduling difficulties, which it did. I called the number, punched in the extension, was hung up on once, called back, and reached an appointment scheduler. The VA had scheduled my appointment for the middle of my workday, which required that I take time off my job to make the return call to discuss the scheduling conflict of the appointment. The request was simple; please change the appointment to either early morning or late afternoon. Although I requested no date preferences, travel and loss of work considerations were important and difficult to arrange and especially significant because I was a new employee and attendance is critical.

The attitude of the appointment scheduler went from simple hostility to overt and active hostility at my request to move the appointment time. The appointment scheduler reminded me in the most descriptive tones bordering, but not crossing into, profanity that it is “YOUR RESPONSIBILITY” [Emphasis his, meaning my responsibility] to keep the appointments as scheduled by the VA regardless of the inconvenience it causes me. December 2012, before the start of my current employment, this appointment had been scheduled three times. The VA canceled the appointment three times, and only once was the cancellation communicated to me prior to my driving to the hospital, checking in, and waiting for the appointment. The same appointment scheduler provided the same hostile attitude in person as on the phone and made the following statements, quoted verbatim:

“Employment is NOT an excuse for moving an appointment with the VA Hospital System.” [Emphasis his]

“Moving your appointment is a privilege being extended to you that has not been earned.”

Judging by certifications on the walls of this person’s office, he is an example of award winning customer service at the VA Medical Center. Having been a patient at several VA Medical Centers across the country, having been a customer at several of the VA Regional Offices, and having been a customer of the various VA Call Centers, unfortunately I have found this attitude typical. This conversation was reported to the Patient Aligned Care Team (PACT) for review. I declined further follow-up as unnecessary. The PACT team member did have a unique thought process; she continually returned with the same descriptive term for this incident, ‘not compassionate’. I refuted this determination several times claiming unprofessional, irresponsible, and ludicrous, but the main complaint continued to be ‘not compassionate’. The term simply does not fit the incident. This incident was not created by a lack of compassion, but through an organizational culture gone rogue, hostile, and grown wild.

Returning to the incident, let us be clear and simple; the problem is not the workload the scheduler was quick to point out and often stated the amount of appointments scheduled in a month; it is not the individual; always the problem remains with the system, the organization, the processes and procedures, and finally the training. This is institutional deterioration at its most egregious level. “Juran’s rule (Tribus, n.d., pg 5) whenever there is a problem, 85% of the time it is in the system; only 15% of the time will it be the worker.” This is very telling in this situation. Before looking to the worker, examining the system will be the answer 85% of the time. Organizational cultures are the “system” described by Tribus (n.d.) and Juran. Organizational Designers will specify cultural steps for improvement, thus the PACT team, the focus on compassion, and the ultimate deception ‘customer focus’ hidden under the guise “Patient Aligned Care.”

The problem is a dual core issue, no personal responsibility for outcomes and no personal accountability for results. This is the organizational culture feeding the hostility, the derision, and animosity found in all VA/Veteran interactions. The front-facing customer service agent is not held accountable nor feels a responsibility towards the work he or she performs. Because the same employee is protected in his work by the system, the system becomes a detriment to patient/customers and safeguards the individual from criticism and censure preventing the possibility of change in the individual. The incredible amount of bureaucracy legislated, litigated, and lumped upon the VA must be exposed to the disinfectant of sunshine i.e. brought to the public attention, reduced bureaucracy in support of veterans and their families, and new solutions created to improve service. The real solution is not focusing upon a culture grown wild, but short-circuiting the existing corporate culture to jumpstart a new culture. It is past time, especially where all government agencies are concerned, to shift the paradigm, remove the job security, and breathe the life of freedom and true customer centered focus, i.e. the taxpayer, back into the various government and non-government organizations.

Considering the above incident, if the scheduler was an independent knowledge contractor whose contract extension rested solely upon the referrals and customer surveys of the VA’s customers, the above incident would not have occurred because accountability and responsibility would demand the patient receive higher value as a customer. If the same accountability and responsibility were carried to the entire chain of command, to all the processes and procedures, and to the organizational hierarchies, the VA would not be the punchline before the epithet in a veteran’s story, but become respected for the work it does. Yes, the VA has a difficult task to perform. Yes, the workload is daunting. Yes, as a government entity, cost constraints and budget decisions matter more than patient care. Nevertheless, the patient should be more respected, valued, and serviced more appropriately. By shifting the employment paradigm, an advantageous outcome to all stakeholders involved in the organization is a firmly projected possibility.

Reference

Tribus, M. (n.d.). Changing the Corporate Culture Some Rules and Tools. Retrieved December 5, 2008, from: Changing the Corporate Culture Some Rules and Tools Web site: http://deming.eng.clemson.edu/den/change_cult.pdf

Shifting The Employment Paradigm – Or, Hastening The Trend to Stop Knowledge Loss

Several mainstream academic and corporate researchers are reporting a trend in employment, shifting from an employer-employee relationship with fixed costs to a non-traditional or contractor based workforce, where costs rise and fall as needed to fill business needs. American Express recently announced a huge layoff; other business organizations are also scaling back employee hours or executing mass layoffs. Since the New Year (2013), several business organizations have announced reductions, under Federal Government pressure, making full-time employees become part-time employees with less than 20 hours a week scheduled. Before implementing mass layoffs and the inherent drain of knowledge resulting from those layoffs, business leaders would do well to research shifting from employees to knowledge-based contractors, which has proven profitable and unencumbering to the ebb and flow of transition and to the uninterrupted, well-ordered processes of success as well as solving the unintentional consequences of unresolved patterns of cost escalating loss.

Consider the costs, not simply dollars and cents, but intellectual cost, productivity costs, time lost, and more that is now draining the resources of these organizations. The fixed employee costs are too egregious to be borne, but the need for the work of the employee remains. The fix to the problem continues to lie in disconnecting the employee and connecting that same worker to the organizational brand as an independent contractor.

For example, Company A employs 200 people. Federal Government Regulations declare that the new fixed income costs have risen to $10,000 per employee, totaling $2 million annually. Company B is a direct competitor to Company A and employs the same number of people, but 175 of these employees are contractors with various length contracts for specific work projects, hour of the day specified, and wages. Company B, according to the IRS, employs only 25 employees at the same cost per employee of $10,000 totaling $250,000. The advantages are obvious, realistic examples abound, and the process is slowly advancing. It is past time to hasten this work.

Consider the loss of intellectual power during a mass layoff. This is a potential (Blue) cost and the impact is measured in final (Green) cost outlays. John Q. Worker, has been with Company A for three years and has moved from production labor to supervisor, mainly by his competency in keeping production running smoothly. John and his senior team members have been groomed as subject matter experts and are recognized for their professionalism and work knowledge. John’s team is laid off along with several lower ranking members of other teams. The knowledge drain in production creates a debt into which training, time, and other company resources must be poured to recover the loss of knowledge when John and his team were laid off. In a down economy, how does Company A recoup the loss of knowledge? What happens if John and his senior team members, who all work well together, approach Company B and offer their knowledge for sale?

This single cost reflects a vast amount of organizational resources that will require double the cost outlay to replace. How is the investment doubled? John was just one person; however, the doubling of the investment comes from the immediate lack of knowledge coupled with the need to train a replacement on the job. Layoffs only work in boosting short-term profit margins but remain a permanent lose-lose situation for the business organizations due to the intellectual drain, the doubling of costs to replace and restructure, and the need for business to continue. Needs of business do not go away when employees are laid off. Yet, how many of these now doubled costs would be an issue if John was changed simply from an employee to an intellectual worker, in fact, all those who were laid off. John and his team would remain in their current roles performing their skills and talents with freedom and independence, and the company would gain a powerful resource for improving production as well as taking a straight loss and turning it into a permanent gain.

This is the power of the independent contractor model. Layoffs are straight loss scenarios: employers lose, employees lose, communities lose, states lose, and ultimately the entire society loses. Jobs lost in New York make for tougher times in California. Collins (2001) wrote, in his book ‘Good to Great,’ about this cycle of layoffs and the destruction caused. If American Business cannot or will not choose a different model to embrace, other than employee/employer, the American Experiment is doomed to fail; doomed because the same problems inherent in ‘Right to Control’ are the root causes to runaway government power grabs, compensatory spending problems, and theft of public resources for personal gain.

Other thoughts from Collins (2001) include the following gems for consideration, regardless of your level of leadership.

“Mergers and acquisitions play virtually no role in igniting transformation…” This means that changing organizations through merger or acquisition does not correct the core problems in an organization.

“Technology … has virtually nothing to do with igniting transformation…” Adopting new technology does not change core problems.

“Greatness is not a function of circumstance. Greatness … is largely a matter of CONSCIOUS CHOICE.” [Emphasis mine]

The final quote from Collins (2001) is the perfect thought: choose greatness, free the employee to become an independent contractor. This brings about the final conclusion discovered by Collins (2001): “… Good to great companies paid scant attention to managing change, motivating people, or creating alignment…” Collins (2001) declares this is possible because the workers were empowered with the dual culture of entrepreneurship and discipline. Other authors and business researchers are drawing the same conclusions. When the employee is empowered, truly empowered, the organizational leaders are free to drive the company because the people problem is solved and the freedom to use their skills and talents as a contractor perfects the processes and procedures.

Shift the paradigm, free the employee, and watch the business become great.

How does Company B from our example manage all the contracts? The HR team contracts two-contract lawyers for contract design. One full-time IT person engineers the contract website where the prospective contractor creates a contract using options personally motivating to the contractor. Upon legal endorsement of the validity of the newly created contract, the head of the HR Team, working in concert with the head of the department, makes operational changes to meet essential requirements, which are presented to the potential new contractor for negotiation and agreement. Upon reaching an initial agreement, the document goes back to HR Legal Team for final review and approval. Once completed, the new contractor signs with the department head and work begins.

References

Collins, J. (2001). Good to great why some companies make the leap… and others don’t. (1st ed.). New York, New York: HarperCollins.

Shifting the Employment Paradigm – Or, “I do not want to be an Employee”

The largest tax increases in history are inundating every business organization in America. With President Obama’s re-election more taxes and problems are developing as anti-business, big government, politicians and are going to keep on attacking the golden goose of business until everyone is beholden to the Federal Government. This is a cold, hard, ugly truth. Maybe, it is time for business to strike back by shifting the paradigm. Small business owners complain that even with current order demands, lay-offs must occur. Medium size and large business organizations echo the same problem with ever increasing magnitude. Business owners, decision makers, stakeholders, lend a moment of your time.

The formula for knowledge has always been education plus experience multiplied over time. [(Ed + Ex) = K] Returning to these roots is paramount to getting business back on track in a hostile government situation. Every day consultants are hired and invited into business organizations for a synopsis and opinion. Taking this thought one step further, consider those currently labeled as traditional “employees” and rebranding them as contracted knowledge consultants is simply an extension of a thought that can return American Business back to its roots. Before WWII’s industrial capitulation to the Federal Government, what workers knew, how hard they worked, and their willingness to sign-on for the long haul were paramount to a successful organization.

These days are not that far gone, nor are they not able to return. Employees cost big money. The taxes, the benefits, the tools, the resource drain, all form a dubious risk, with little return, and a constant headache of hiring more people to now watch, manage, and interact with the employee. What happens if this paradigm shifts? Instead, of hiring employees, Human Resources begins to arrange human capital who freely associate with your business brand as they grow their own business brand as independent contractors, knowledge vendors, or knowledge working consultants.

Consider the secretary, administration assistant, or executive assistant. Their skills are unique, the knowledge possessed valuable, and their methods for working in a storm invaluable. Co-opting them into knowledge vendors does two things: raises their status and allows innovation into an arena stifled by paperwork and business processes.

Call centers; replace the phone reps with knowledge consultants. The task shifts from simply answering the phone to having a personal interest in remaining affiliated with a brand. Consider the change in attitude apparent to the customer from the first interaction. What are the possibilities of a customer service rep abusing a customer when the rep is now a vendor, affiliated with your brand, knowing their personal brand is both reflected in their take home pay and future contracts are dependent upon current actions?

Long has responsibility and accountability been missing from the manufacturing employee and the construction employee regardless of union membership. How many times would manufacturing employees destroy company property and waste production time and construction employees work intentionally slow to delay projects and increase costs if they knew their reputation and future contracts are dependent upon current actions and knowledge and, therefore, have a personal stake in the business outcome.

This model eliminates much of the middle management landscape as their roles have diametrically changed. Those remaining as traditional employees in this organizational model would possibly be restricted to a small core of individuals oriented as service delivery officers knowledgeable for their expertise areas on the corporate level, i.e. IT/IS, HR, CFO, Operations, etc., wholly customizable to organizational needs, security concerns, and future goals. Their role has changed from management of numbers and data to leaders of people. This new organizational model places business owners and service delivery officers into partnership with the knowledge contractor.

This idea means the average employee right now will need assistance in understanding contracts, and human resources will need to ramp up to fill a new market of vendor management and contract negotiations, central to their role in human capital development, and both of these skills sets are trainable and easily conquered.

Instead of laying-off an employee, present to the employee the opportunity of becoming a knowledge consultant affiliated with your organization, explain the plan, co-opt their ideas into this rough outline, and grow your organization. The best ideas will come from your current employees desiring to become knowledge contractors for a customized solution to your organization. Your company and individual consultants singularly contract these negotiations. Over time patterns in contract negotiations, will emerge bringing efficiency and additional cost savings. By working with employees, honestly communicating, and searching for answers outside the box, dynamic change will come back to America and business will see a better day.

This concept is not new; benchmark current commission sales reps and current vendor contracts. The training is available through public sources online. Many organizations stand at the ready to assist in a transition to this model and are local to your organization. Additional assistance and information is available. Please contact me using email.

–

Dave Salisbury is pursuing is PhD in Management as an Organizational Psychologist. He possesses a dual Masters in Adult Education and Training and an MBA in Global Management specializing in Human Resource Management. He is available at mdavesal@gmail.com.

Spread the word:

Like this:

Spread the word:

Like this:

Spread the word:

Like this: