Cheryl was waiting in the conference room when I arrived. I could see that her meeting had some unexpected twists.

“I felt like I had been fed to the wolves,” she started. “You were right, they said the problems with the finished goods were my problems. They said that I was responsible for the 2 percent increase in failure rate.”

I nodded. “So, how did your stomach feel?”

Cheryl looked genuinely pissed, but maintained her composure. “It was upside down. You could have cut the tension with a knife.”

“That’s good,” I said. “When your stomach is upside down, you are almost always talking about a real issue that needs to be out on the table.” Cheryl may have been looking for sympathy. “So, what did you say?”

“I practiced that stupid speech we talked about, so that is what I said. I told them that I needed their help. It felt strange. I didn’t like it. I felt like I was leaving my reputation totally in their hands. I felt like I was losing control.”

“And how did they respond?” I asked. “Did they argue with you?”

“Well, no,” Cheryl replied. “They were mostly silent. Then Hector pulled one of the parts from the reject pile. He pointed out a burr that was in the same place on every part. Sammy spoke up and said they had run short on that same part the week before. Get this. Because they were short, they used the rejected parts to finish the batch.

“They said they would have asked me what to do, but that I had been yelling at them, so they all kept quiet.” Cheryl stopped.

“It was a tough session?”

“It seems I was the problem. Yes, it was a tough session.”

Just because Cheryl saw the light didn’t mean she knew what to do or what to say. She knew she had sounded like a critical parent and invited the response of a rebellious child.

“And now, you have a whole group of rebellious children?” I followed.

“I suppose so,” lamented Cheryl. “I think I already dug a hole for myself. How do I get out of it?”

“What could you try?” I asked.

“What if I explained the connection between bad incoming parts and the failure rate of our finished goods?”

“So, you think if they understand the logic of the problem, things might be better?”

Cheryl bit her lip on this question. “I think they already understand the logic of the problem. I also believe they think it is my problem and that I have to solve it. And they don’t seem willing to help.”

“As long as they believe you are the critical parent, it will continue to be your problem and yours alone.” I let that sink in. “You have to invite them to willingly become problem solvers. You have to invite them to willingly become accountable for the solution.

“I don’t know what to do. When I got here, the failure rate was 18 percent. Now, the failure rate is 20 percent. I need the team’s help. But, I don’t know what to say.” Cheryl was disappointed in her setback, but determined to make some headway.

“Tell them just what you told me,” I responded. “Get your team together and give them that same short speech.

When I got here two months ago, the failure rate on finished goods was 18 percent. I have tried some things, but the failure rate has increased to 20 percent. If we are going to solve this thing, I need your help. I need your ideas. I need your follow-through. I cannot do this myself.

“Then call a meeting for 9:00a tomorrow. Ask each team member to come prepared to talk about ideas that may improve the failure rate. Let’s see what happens.” -TF

“Breaking the large group into smaller groups seems like a good idea,” said Rosa. We were talking about getting her department engaged in team problem solving. “I can see how that makes the contributions more anonymous.”

“It makes a huge difference. It allows the team to do something that it could never do before,” I said. Rosa’s eyes grew larger.

“What’s that?” she asked.

“Well, you know, Eric, your team’s eager beaver? When Eric has an idea, he is a little sensitive to the group’s response. Let’s say that one part of Eric’s idea has a creative spark, but the rest of the idea needs to be discarded. As long as it is Eric’s idea, the team has to tap-dance around, be politically correct and tactful. But if the ideas are flip charted from a small group, somewhat anonymous, whose ideas are they now?”

“Well, now they are the group’s ideas,” responded Rosa.

“So, if the ideas belong to the team, the team can now rip out that little creative spark, junk the rest of the idea, bolt the spark onto the back end of another idea, reverse engineer the logic and no one’s feelings get hurt.

“When it was Eric’s idea, the team couldn’t do that.” -TF

“I really feel awkward standing up in front of the group. I ask them a question and often, they just stare at me, like no one has a clue. I want them to participate, but they just don’t respond,” said Rosa. As the manager in her department, she had been trying to get more participation through team problem solving.

“Why don’t you think they speak up?” I asked.

“I don’t know,” Rosa continued. “I suppose they might be embarrassed or afraid someone will think their idea is stupid.”

“I think you are right. Fear can be very powerful. It can keep people from risking their ideas in front of a group. So, how can you reduce the fear?”

Rosa pondered the question, and then responded. “I guess I have to create a safe place, so no idea comes across as a stupid idea.”

I smiled and jumped in. “Here is something I often use. Before I ask people to respond in front of a group, I always ask them to write their ideas on paper. I call it, priming the pump. And if the group is a large group, I always bust it up into smaller teams. People are more willing to share their ideas in a small group than in a large group. Once everyone has shared their ideas in a small team, only then do I ask each team to report to the larger group. By then, most of the ideas are anonymous and the risk of embarrassment has virtually disappeared.

“When you engage your team in problem solving, an important job for the leader is to drive fear out of the room.” -TF