About SoLOrganizational LearningPublications & ResourcesConsulting & ProgramsCommunities & ConsortiaJoin SoLMember Access
Home > res (OLD) > AutoCoDeltaLH.html
Delta Learning History

The Learning Initiative at the AutoCo Delta Assembly Plant

(Only the first chapter is available on line. To order the complete version of the paper,
see Ordering Information)

Ann R. Thomas

Table of Contents

Forward
Chronology
Introduction
1. Roots of Change: Discovery and Experimentation
  1. AutoCo Global Integration Sparks a Pilot Effort
  2. Individual Learning Precedes Organizational Initiatives
  3. Plant Manager as Driver and Model
2. Progressive Learning: Can Everyone Learn to Teach?
  1. Training 1: Learners as Teachers
  2. Practicing the Principles in Real Time
  3. A First Test: The Bad Audit
  4. Training II: Intense Learning Together
3. Learning Organization Skills Lead to Hard Results
  1. Building Trust: A Wider Test of Commitment
  2. Moving to a Practice Field
  3. Cross-Functional Teamwork
  4. Watching the Metrics
  5. Learning on the Two-way Radio
4. Expanding the Practice to the Entire Operation
  1. Training III: Focus on Production Workers
  2. Follow-on Practice and Learning
5. Leaders and Ideas Move on in the Larger Organization
  1. Operating Committee Maintains Direction
  2. Extending Learning to the Larger System

Forward

Before I arrived at Delta, I knew little about organizational learning. However, it was obvious on my first visit that the Plant Manager and the Operating Committee members were excited about their journey to develop a learning environment at Delta.

The atmosphere of the first Operating Committee and Quality meetings I attended was incredibly different from anything I had experienced or led. It was quite remarkable to me to see the openness, the team collaborative effort, and the willingness to share and offer feedback. It was not a "one-person show." When I saw the past 12 months' worth of external indicators and cost performance data under the tenure of the previous Plant Manager, I recognized that learning organizational practices and integration of the `five disciplines" were crucial elements in Delta's achievement. I knew Delta was on the right track and I wanted to be a part of it.

Not until I read the Learning History, however, did I realize the responsibility that was on my shoulders as the new Plant Manager, and the expectations of our people that we continue what had begun the year previously. My commitment to sustaining the learning principles and leadership behaviors intensified. I am confident we will continue to integrate organizational learning into all initiatives and phases of our business.

I am aware that to embrace ideas and behaviors so significantly different is quite challenging for those of us who have been in the typical autocratic manufacturing environment for our entire career. How to transition into a new set of behaviors and serve as a model and a champion is formidable, but my confidence in accomplishing this is greater than any of the obstacles I can foresee.

It is my hope that the Delta story will serve as an encouragement for others to focus on "learning how to learn." We believe the effort has paid off in terms of business results; a more creative, enjoyable workplace, and personal growth at the individual and team level. We are using the Learning History to help us reflect on what we have learned in our journey so far, and what we will do to continue meeting the challenges that lie ahead.

Delta Plant Manager

November 1996 - Present

Back to the Table of Contents

Chronology

New Plant Manager ArrivesOctober 1995
First Half of Operating Committee Members Attend Core Course January 1996
Second Set of Operating Committee Members Attend Core Course February
Operating Committee Facilitates Learning Workshop for Direct Reports April
Quality Meeting Practice Field BeginsMay
MR Level and OC Members Facilitate Back-to-Back, Learning Workshops July
First of 20 Weeks of Best-in-Class Launch Training Begins, 2 Shifts September
Plant Manager Leaves for New Position.November 1996

Back to the Table of Contents

Introduction

This is the story of a learning organization initiative at AutoCo's Delta Assembly Plant, told primarily in the words of participants. The narrative is drawn from interviews with approximately 40 people. Encompassing the leader's term at Delta, the primary focus is on events happening between October 1995 and November 1996.

The document presents the personal decisions, experiences, results, and attitudes related to the organizational learning initiative. Contributors are identified by titles, rather than names, to encourage people to speak openly in the interviews and, to allow readers to focus their thoughts on events and experiences rather than on personalities. Similarly, the story is told without company references so that readers can relate to the general experiences.

In many cases the comments and stories represent a number of others' experiences. In some cases, different people hold different views about the same events, and those differences are reported here. Overall, the intent of the document is to provide a wide view that will stimulate conversation in the larger AutoCo system and others, based on descriptions of learning at both the individual and organizational levels.

Interviewees primarily included people who worked at Delta and were involved in the learning organization effort. Additional interviewees included AutoCo Division Managers who were accountable for Delta's performance at the time, and individuals who provided process support from the Company's Process Improvement Office. Each quote has been approved by the person who made it, and several people reviewed the entire document to assure as much accuracy as possible.

This documentation project was funded by the Learning Organization Department of the AutoCo Process Improvement Office, for the purpose of recording a learning initiative in a form that would spark conversation and discovery related to the on-going creation of learning environments. The format follows that of a learning history, developed by George Roth and Art Kleiner of Reflection Learning Associates, Inc. and the Society of Organizational Learning. Many of the learning organization tools and concepts mentioned were introduced in The Fifth Discipline, written by Peter Senge who founded the Organizational Learning Center at MIT.

Three types of information are contained in this document. The across-the-page paragraphs provide background information and introduce key themes arising from the interviews. The "jointly-told" story is narrated by interviewees in the right-hand column. Observations and questions from the learning historians are contained in the left-hand column. As you read, you are encouraged to add your own comments and questions prior to sharing your reactions and insights with others.

You may also want to consider the following comment:

Observing others' successes can show us possibilities, expand our thinking, trigger our

creativity. But their experiences can never provide models that will work the same for

us. It is good to be inquisitive; it is hopeless to believe that they have discovered our answers.

from A Simpler Way,

by Meg Wheatley & Myron Kellner-Rogers, 1996.

Back to the Table of Contents

1. Roots of Change: Discovery and Experimentation

The idea of becoming a Learning Organization (LO) was discussed at AutoCo on and off for nearly a decade; yet only a few pilot efforts to create such environments were initiated. Meanwhile, AutoCo employees increasingly recognized that ongoing change in global market requirements and in technology required them to expand their capacity for working together, and working with more information, more complexity, and more change-hence, the interest in learning.

This is the story of a group of leaders who were willing to experiment with the creation of a Learning Organization at AutoCo's Delta Assembly Plant which is located in the northeastern part of the United. States.

AutoCo Global Integration Sparks a Pilot Effort

AutoCo Global Integration was announced in the Spring of 1994 as a major restructuring of the Company to address the more global nature of the business. It introduced a set of strategies to create more responsive, integrated processes for achieving market goals. Some people were surprised that learning was not one of the explicit strategies associated with Global Integration, although the need for learning was frequently acknowledged.

Interest starts at the top: Could learning and its associated culture changes take place without this initial spark and driver? Company Organizational Learning (OL) Consultant: About the time that Global Integration came along, the head of Vehicle Operations (VO) plants in North America and I had a conversation about leadership styles and the change in culture that were going to be required to support Global Integration. I mentioned some of the LO concepts, though not by name, and he thought they were pretty interesting. A while later he came to my office with a brochure for the first annual conference sponsored by the Organizational Learning Center at MIT. The title of the conference, "Sustaining Transformational Change", had caught his attention. "This is what we have to figure out for Global Integration," he said. "Maybe we should get some people to go to this".

So, we identified four area managers from different plants, and they and I went to the conference. We all found value in it and later made a presentation to the Company VO Manager and his staff. We recommended the five-day MIT/Organizational Learning Center's Core Course, as the next step. Three managers, including a person new on the Company VO Manager's staff, and I went to the course in Boston. The Delta Assembly Plant was one of seven plants that reported to the new person.

Understanding the possibilities of radical, new concepts takes time Company Program Operations Manager: I was getting my feet wet having just arrived in this country, but I thought going to the five-day LO Core Course might be a good idea. Interest in these ideas had started for me four or five years ago, when I attended one of the Executive Development Center sessions at which Peter Senge was presenting. I thought it sounded very good, as lots of ideas do, but I wasn't quite sure what to do with it.
A group experience seems to help individuals identify potential applications. When I went to the five-day course, it made a lot more sense than it did before. Maybe its not something you can pick up naturally the first time around. You need to experience it, reflect on it, and then go on to learn more. Fortunately I was there with the AutoCo OL Consultant and three others from various plants. To have others there who understood the Company, the pressures we were under, and the things we were trying to do, was very helpful.

I kept saying, "I believe this is the right approach. We have the belief and desire to do it, [but] I'm not sure we have the management culture for AutoCo Global Integration." Clearly we at AutoCo were not learning from past mistakes and clearly we had not learned how to learn, except through pain. I recognized that a lot of this was about culture change which is probably the most difficult thing to do. It's not something you do quickly nor can you do it on your own. It's about experiments, and AutoCo Global Integration seemed to say to me that we needed to change.

The Plant Manager recognized the organization's need for self-development So, when I returned, I looked around for a plant that might be willing to take on the LO principles. I thought if we were going to be successful introducing LO into an assembly plant, two important ingredients were a relatively small community and good union/management relations. Delta had these.

Also, just about that time, a new Plant Manager was going into Delta. He was very thoughtful, experienced, and he seemed to embrace a lot of the things that a LO gives you direction to do. He believed very much in the fact that the organization had to develop itself, had to work within itself.

I talked to him about this and he said, "Give me some time to think about it."

Leadership doesn't happen in a vacuum. A collaborative partner to help the leader plan the process was important in other LO efforts as well as in this one. Learning Coach: My role became one of collaboration and support for [Plant Manager] during the first six months or so. We talked a lot about what needed to be happening, ways to address issues, and what kind of talk was important in meetings. We debriefed many meetings-sometimes more than once a day. I think I served as a sounding board and a source of feedback as he was experimenting and learning to lead this effort.

What were the risks? What could have gone wrong?

How critical is the shared risk and support provided by the boss?

 Company Program Operations Manager: I saw my role as supporter of the process from the organizational level, and I thought I would need to be an advocate but I never did. [Plant Manager] was confident in his ability to run the organization.

[However,] he asked, "Why should I take on the LO change with the risk of not being successful?" We talked it through.

I told him that he worked for me, so if the whole thing doesn't work out it will be a reflection on the fact that we tried something and it didn't work. I had decided it was good to take that risk, but a plant manager doesn't have the same level of security. The closer you are to actually producing the vehicles, the less secure you feel about the time frame on which you're measured. His risk was greater.

Company Program Operations Manager: With a plant willing to proceed as a pilot, I just decided it was a good risk. I was empowered to run my business the way I needed to run it, and as long as I could get bottom line results at the end of the period, there wouldn't be any problem. So I told [Company Vehicle Operations Manager] what I was going to do and then I didn't talk about it anymore.

Back to the Table of Contents

Individual Learning Precedes Organizational Initiatives

With financial support from the Division and logistical help from the Company Organizational Learning Team, The ten Delta Operating Committee members found their way to participate in five-day LO Core Courses off site. The experience provided time to reflect and think in new ways, removed from the intense pace of the plant environment.

The Operating Committee (OC) is the top decision-making group in the Plant and is led by the Plant Manager. Members include people accountable for key operations-Body, Paint, and Final Assembly Areas; Finance, Manufacturing Engineering, Materials, Quality, Human Resources, and the Vehicle Team. The OC meets formally several times a week to address short and long-term plant issues.

Area Manager and OC Member: It was clear from the beginning that when [Plant Manager] arrived in October 1995, his management style was a lot different. We were adjusting to it. He had told us that he had 51% of the vote, so when he came to the members of the Operating Committee (OC) in early November saying that [Company Vehicle Operations Manager] was willing to send us to the sessions at MIT, we said, "Sure, we'll try, maybe it'll do us some good." We had a very tight-knit OC. We knew how to work hard together and so we were willing to do it.

Area Manager: I first heard about the LO approach when [Plant Manager] volunteered the plant. I was one of the first to go to the core course at MIT-we drove nearly all night through the blizzard of '96 to get to Boston. I didn't know very much about what the content would be. If anything, I expected something like the systems work I was used to in MBA school, but this was totally different.

Several managers spoke of the personal growth they experienced in the Core Course. Is personal work a necessary step in developing LO leadership? Some of the exercises we got into stuck with me-concepts like "fixes that fail" and "unintended consequences". It wasn't until the third or fourth day that I could begin to see visions of what I wanted in work and in my personal life. Some people, because of the bad weather, showed up later in the week. I noticed that they were only talking about work, whereas the rest of us who had been there for a few more days had moved to a different level of thinking and conversation. The biggest things I got out of it were the personal aspects as well as the people part.

Someone mentioned to me that they saw a change in me after I returned-it may have been a little more self-confidence. I know I was more peaceful and that lasted at least a month. So yeah, the course itself had a transforming effect on me and others too. I remember [another Area Manager] being sarcastic about how we were talking when we first got back from Boston. It was surprising that later he came back from the Core Course a different person too.

From the beginning, a skilled, knowledgeable process coach was an important factor Company OL Consultant: I told the Plant Manager that if there is a person at Delta identified to be your confidante and coach, make sure the person attends the Core Course with you, as he or she will need to be right there learning too. He identified the Training Leader [Learning Coach]. This was a bit of a stretch because she was not part of the OC and was an outside contractor to AutoCo. However, she attended the session in Boston and that turned out to be a very good decision, because she was able to play a strong role right from the start.

Delta deliberately chose to use LO language to help distinguish the new culture. What is the danger of the language being seen as "cultish"? Area Manager: We didn't realize how tight-knit our group was, until half had gone to the Core Course and half hadn't. When the first group came back, it was like they were speaking a foreign language. They kept talking about "unintended consequences", and "mental models" and I remember after about a week saying in a meeting, "Would you guys cut that out?" So there was a little bit of competitive anxiety between the two groups until the rest of us went to the five-day course in March.
A local university and AutoCo jointly designed a five-day Core Course to serve local needs. I went to the first local university, five-day session, a course which was patterned after the MIT course. We all came away from that week understanding what the other guys were talking about, realizing that it wasn't as difficult or cryptic as it had sounded. We took away something personally that would help us not only in business, but also in our personal life. It was something almost spiritual: I identified some of my strengths and weaknesses and realized, without sharing with anyone, that I can capitalize on weaknesses as well as strengths.

Area Manager: I notice that I can become more physically and mentally relaxed if I practice some of the techniques I learned at the five-day course. In the day-to-day press of activities, if I don't take the time, the pressure starts to build up again. This tells me that I can control how I feel. There are things on the outside that are going to happen that I can't always control, but I can control how I feel.

Back to the Table of Contents

Plant Manager as Driver and Model

Even before attending the Core Course, the Plant Manager had sought to develop within the plant a stronger willingness to ask questions, a higher level of trust and in general, a stronger relationship with the Union. He had based this approach on the idea that performance, in terms of quality, would improve, as communications became more meaningful and productive throughout the plant.

The Plant Manager was seen as the driver and model of the new behavior. At the same time he wanted to empower people at all levels to be more accountable for their decisions and results. He took on the role of head coach.

Company Program Operations Manager: I essentially said to [Plant Manager] that if the organization is going to change, the first person who had to change was the leader of the organization, in this case, him. If he didn't embrace the principles-didn't walk the talk, as they say over here-then he wouldn't get the results he wanted. Even then it would take a long time, so the leader also has to be patient.

Moving to a LO usually requires significant behavior changes. How important is the role model in generating this kind of deep culture shift? OC Member: There was a big difference in this plant as soon as [Plant Manager] came here. His method of management is basically who he is. It really complements LO concepts. When you have a Plant Manager who promotes a lot of dialogue from the very beginning, the direct reports act that way too. We were a pretty effective group to start with, but we all calmed down and talked more.

Did the leader hold on to too much? Was the issue of a shared coaching role "undiscussable?" Quality Superintendent: [Plant Manager] was quite an inspiration for me. He was a good listener and he taught me to listen. Especially, he taught me that there were other ways to manage.

Learning Coach: Most of the Managers were still not comfortable confronting the Plant Manager. He provided the opportunity when he asked, "What are you thinking?", but he needed to find a way to draw them out more. My vision was for him to become less involved and the Area Managers to begin to lead in the larger meetings. This whole topic of the leader's visibility was not discussed and it ought to have been for the sake of long term change for Delta.

Back to the Table of Contents