Human Performance Technology and the resulting improvement in productivity has a number of worthy outcomes including:
The number one reality for the employee is that productivity improvement means doing more with less. Regardless of what it is called, HPT, process re-engineering, automation, benchmarking, best practices, or training, a productivity increase equals doing more with less. Hence, the perception and often the reality of downsizing in the employees' minds.
In any performance improvement project the perceptions and realities must be dealt with by management and the project team. Project management guidelines will be covered shortly. First, why these issues arise from improving performance / productivity will be addressed. In addition to doing more with less, changes in work practices also liven the equation.
Changes in Work Practices
Depending on the frequency and effectiveness of performance improvement initiatives in an organization, employee reactions will range from excitement to "Here we go again." As an HPT practitioner, recognize that few employees really embrace major change in the daily work routine. This is a particularly important issue with older employees asked to learn new practices and technologies.
Not only are changes disruptive. Often employees are asked to spend time working on pieces of the change initiative while still being expected to maintain current productivity. Furthermore, employees become frustrated when project team members don't really hear what is being said.
Doing More with Less
In this potentially negative change environment, add in the idea of doing more with less, and look at how the idea of downsizing materializes.
In Example 1 the HPT intervention produced an annual profit increase of $5.4 million. The increase came, predominantly, by selling an additional 5,400,000 units built by the same 75 employees who improved their output.
What happens when the market cannot accept the new output?
Rembember that the average group originally produced 14,250,000 units per year.
14,250,000 units/131 UPH = 108,779 hours required
108,779 Hrs/2000 Hrs per year = 54 people required
Oops! The hourly employees won't know that this project could cost 21 production jobs. They will know that sales forecasts are flat in a competitive market and that they will produce more with less. From their perspective this is a downsizing project which will change their daily work routine and who their fellow workers are.
Hence, the title, Handling Improvement. HPT is not always a bed of roses, but there are ways, as well as a necessity, to deal with performance improvement in the organization.
Guidelines for Managing HPT Project Perceptions
The scenario above may seem harsh to practitioners new to HPT. However, it is management's responsibility and RIGHT to improve operating performance. The prior situation arises when management doesn't work at performance improvement. Then, confronted by declining markets, aging technology, and poor management, the fat of the good times can be haunting as well as daunting. Most businesses can handle the 28% reduction from above. Steel producers and railroads in the USA were devastated through lack of improvement. Though making a comeback, the US automakers suffered tremendously.
NOTE: REMAINDER STILL BEING WRITTEN