LLC: A Case Study of Organizational Learning at EDS

Chapter Seven, The Selection Process

"What Soars Like An Eagle, Yet Flies In Formation?"
An LLC Participant

---

Previous chapters have reviewed the history, strategies and events within EDS leading up to the proposal and decision to pursue the LLC program. This chapter will evaluate the selection process of the SBU's and the SSU's that participated in the first LLC program. The participating organizations selected from three to six individuals to be their representatives in the first LLC training session. The individual selection process utilized by the two organizations investigated will be reviewed.

As described in Chapter Five, Kofman was conducting three day sessions within EDS at a rate of one every few months. One of these sessions was targeted at executives of EDS including many SBU Presidents and SSU Directors and members of the leadership council. Several of these leaders had already initiated independent organizational change or learning organization activities within their respective divisions. These executives were asked if they would be interested in being part of a larger effort. It was Clark's desire to have one focused organizational learning initiative within EDS as opposed to several disjointed activities. She thought EDS would achieve greater leverage if these individual efforts could be marshaled into one integrated approach for EDS. She saw Kofman's proposal for an eight-month program as the opportunity to do this. The SBU's and SSU's knew it was a pilot and that there were no guarantees.

---

Strategic Unit Selections

These leaders were asked if they would commit to this effort by providing participants, their personal support in a "champion" role and the necessary funding. Eleven of the Strategic Units and Centers of Service indicated they would be interested, ten of which actually participated in what was, by this time being called Leading Learning Communities. At the time EDS had approximately seventy-five different SU's. The ten SU's selected included four Strategic Business Units, four Strategic Support Units and two Centers of Service.

The four SBU's were included due to their extensive customer interactions and because they were already initiating some type of organizational learning activity. We studied two of the four SBU's: The Health Care Division and the North American Vehicle Platform Division. Dennis Drislane, President of the Health Care SBU, commented, "The more educated our people are on organizational change and personal empowerment the easier it is for them to assimilate into our customers' environment." Four SSU's, Corporate Information Systems, Leadership Development, Global Diversity and Strategic Planning were asked to participate due to their ability to leverage the learning throughout the corporation. These organizations, due to their functional responsibilities, have critical interfaces with all other units within EDS. EDS also selected two units who do consulting type work for clients. These units were Human Performance Services and Management Consulting Services. These units were selected with the intent to achieve commercial consultation benefits from the experience gained by LLC.

The agreement to participate was acquired by conducting one on one interviews with each one of the unit leaders and describing the pilot LLC project. They knew the basic structure, but did not have a detailed project plan. The typical EDS project proposal required defined objectives, goals, completion dates and measurable results, LLC had none of these at that time. The leaders of the SU's, previously mentioned, had various levels of exposure and knowledge on the subject matter of organizational learning. Some had been exposed through Kofman's three day sessions or having read The Fifth Discipline. Clark's personal creditability with the leaders of the SU's helped them say yes to the pilot. For some, their support was a leap of faith in concepts and principles they believed in without having a specific set of expectations or known outcomes.

---

Participant Selection

EDS leadership agreed to support this type of project. The program design specified that LLC participants should be in small teams of approximately four to five people. The criteria for selection of a participant was intended to be rigid. EDS wanted the participants to be "key influencers" within the organization or people in key positions. The LLC program assigned champions for each LLC participant. The champions were EDS senior executives who made the decision to participate in LLC and would provide management support to the participant throughout the LLC program. Many of the champions were concerned about committing their best performers to this effort. How could these key individuals be asked to take on the extra workload of an intense eight month program? The champions rationalized however, that these high performers are the people that are best able to influence change and are potentially the most open to be influenced by this type of a program.

The SU Leaders then determined the number of participants they wanted in the program and made individual selections. The SU teams ranged in size from three to six participants. In grand total, this amounted to thirty-five line and staff managers.

The champions wanted to select people who would make themselves truly available for the experience, were willing to learn and had the necessary energy to take on the extra work. They were also interested in individuals who could influence or introduce these concepts to the EDS work place in a positive way. The champions personally made the selections and asked the prospective participants if they would be willing to be one of the initial members of the LLC pilot activity. Renee Moorefield, Program Manager in the Leadership Development Unit, also interviewed the prospective candidates. The purpose of the interviews was primarily making sure they were open to this concept and had not just agreed because the boss asked them to participate. It was at this time the candidates could decline to participate without any fear that not participating would be negatively received. One potential participant did not participate and we were told this was not viewed negatively by that individual's management nor the Leadership Development organization. Clark commented, "Most invitees accepted the invitation with enthusiasm." There were a few who were not sure what they were getting into, but because of their job position such as human resource development or quality advisor, said yes with less enthusiasm. We will now consider the individual selection process utilized by the two SBU's, studied in this thesis; the Health Care Division and NAVP.

---

Health Care Division Selections

The Health Care SBU selected three individuals to send to LLC. One individual was selected because of her role as a change agent within the division. She worked regularly in both Dallas, Texas and Detroit, Michigan. Her recent career experience had dealt with organizational change issues in other divisions of EDS. This individual became aware of the LLC program before the selections were finalized. She informed her superior, who happened to be the SBU President, that this type of training was directly related to her job description and she felt EDS needed to provide her with this type of training. She commented that she would have left the SBU if she had not been selected to participate. The second participant was working with the first on changing or creating a new way of thinking within the Health Care Division and was also recommended by the first candidate to her superior. The second individual worked in the division's facilities in Dallas, Texas. Drislane also wanted to develop an organizational learning champion from the technical community within his division. He felt an individual with a technical background would add credibility with the systems engineers in the field. An individual that was highly respected and had an "old school" systems engineering background was desired as the division's third candidate. Drislane asked the Camp Hill group, a large EDS facility in Pennsylvania, to recommend the third candidate based on this criteria. The third individual was recommended because he was a recognized leader within the Camp Hill organization and had the ability to influence others. This provided the Health Care Division with a diverse group in both background and geography.

---

NAVP Division Selections

The NAVP LLC participants were all selected by Mark Moll, President of the SBU, based on his personal knowledge of his employees. Moll's desire was to select his team from candidates based on operational experience and diversity. Moll commented, "The credibility for this type of venture comes from the line people providing success stories, not from a staff function saying it is good for the company to do this." He selected one of the participants because of her prior accomplishments in team building at one of the assembly plants. Moll had just recently recruited her to join his staff to help establish a team environment for his immediate staff and the SBU. The second individual was selected because he was in a key operational position supporting a car group and was also a fully committed team player. The third individual was also from a car group and believed to be capable of holding a Senior Level Executive position at some future date. The fourth participant was selected because of his leadership potential and he was a direct report of the third participant. Moll wanted to see if having two layers of the organization versed in organizational learning had an impact on the ability to effect and impact the organization. The fifth individual was chosen to add diversity in both level and gender to the group. The sixth individual also added more diversity and supported the truck side of the NAVP organization. All candidates chosen were said to be high potential employees. Moll indicated that after he had made up his mind that these six individuals were the appropriate group to represent the NAVP organization in LLC, he had to defend his need for six positions with the Leadership Development organization.

All participants were highly regarded by their SU leader, who was typically also their LLC champion. They were considered capable individuals open to exploring new ideas. The participants were respected by their organizations and would therefore, be able to apply what they learned from the LLC program, in their respective units. The individuals that were considered, but elected not to participate, indicated that the time commitment required was a prohibitive factor. An operational or an organizational development background describes most of the LLC participants we interviewed.

---

Table of Contents | Previous topic | Top of Section | Next topic

---

Rules of the Game | Copyright | Site Map | FAQ | Contact Us

Recommended Browsers