What distinguishes this from process improvement teams, taskforces and

quality circles?
workout emphasizes speed (solutions generated and decisions made in the
matter of a few days) and managerial accountability (managers own the
problems and must respond immediately and decisively to team
suggestions) much more than some of the other techniques. In addition,
because workout teams exist only for the short term, opportunities for
participation in a team are greater over time than in some other team-
based, problem-solving approaches.
A decision to implement workout is a cultural decision and should not be
taken lightly. It represents a cultural intervention designed to enhance the
empowerment of employees and the openness of management to their ideas.
It is designed to create a culture where paralysis by analysis (Quinn, 1994b)
is taboo. If executives are not committed to such values, they should not
embrace workout as a technique.
Costs
Not inexpensive endeavors. Most organizations will lack the internal
facilitation skills needed to help a group solve problems thoroughly and
efficiently, at least at the beginning, and will want to follow GEs example
of using outside facilitators. In addition, the organization will have to pay
for facilities, not to mention the payroll costs of a sizeable group of people
meeting away from work. The executive team must be made aware of
these costs and encouraged to weigh them against the benefits to be
gained from addressing the firms recalcitrant problems and the
reinforcement of the values described earlier.

Risks
a half-hearted foray into workout that is allowed to wither and die probably
does more to undermine the values of empowerment than never
implementing workout to begin with.
Is is not wise to assume that workouts would be so overwhelmingly successful
that they would gain a momentum all their own. Unfortunately, culturally
unnatural acts seldom easily gain momentum and require constant
reinforcement and tending.

Publicity
The executive team must sell the program internally. It is particularly useful
if the management team differentiates workout from any other similar efforts
in the organization. It is helpful to emphasize that the program represents an
emphasis (or re-emphasis) on workout-consistent cultural values. If the
publicizing comes after some preliminary workouts, as was the case in our
situation, these experiences (and hopefully wins) can be used to
communicate the nature, goals, and outcomes of workout
Generally, we suggest that, prior to announcing the program to all employees,
efforts be made to sell the program to those mid-level managers and
supervisors who must ultimately own the process and the outcomes of
workout. It is not a good idea to blindside them with a general announcement
first. An important component of the executive teams efforts to persuade the
rest of management must be an emphasis on the utility of the approach as a
tool to generate solutions to vexing problems the organizations faces, the
executive teams commitment to the program, and the fact that all managers
will be held accountable for working within the dictates of the program.
With workout, employee participation is crucial to success, so getting an
initially positive message to them is vital to the acceptance of the program.
This message may be delivered via a variety of conduits. Employee
newsletters, meeting agendas, and/or workplace displays (e.g., posters and
signs) would be appropriate means to convey to the employees that the
workout program is being launched. We found that one of the best ways to
communicate the nature of the program within the organization was sharing
the outcomes of the first workout session. The presenters of this
information were one of the sponsoring managers of that workout and some
of the workout participants.
Organizations needs to create a strong education/information campaign
within the organization after our initial workout success
he big lesson for us in all this is that successfully introducing workout
requires an integrated communication effort that has to be based on
executive-level commitment to the program and its cultural implications.
People knowingunderstanding and buying in at executive and
management levels is crucial
Ie, On several occasions, it became obvious that outside of the people
assigned to the initial workout, very few organizational members were
aware of what workout was. This certainly limited any grassroots
discussion of the project or broader organizational support and
commitment.

Facilitators
ne of the features that distinguishes GE-style workouts from many other
group-based, problem-solving approaches is the use of professional facilitators
external to the organization.
we found that having at least two facilitators who work well together for each
session was desirable. Facilitating is hard work and such an approach allowed
one facilitator to take detailed notes while the other ran group problem
solving; it also allowed them to work with subgroups simultaneously.
Feedback from participants indicated that they strongly supported the use of
outside facilitators because of the efficiency they helped create and the
impartiality they possessed regarding the problems being discussed.
we feel that initially facilitators should be external, but as the process
becomes more natural (or culturally accepted), internal facilitators can be
used if provided the appropriate training and experience.

Select problem domain. The issues addressed by workout can be broad, such as
improving productivity, increasing customer satisfaction, and reducing costs in
a particular area, or more narrow, such as improving the waiting experience
for customers (
Our client requested problem submissions from their managers to be reviewed
for the workout initiative. However, in some cases the impetus for a workout
may come from upper-level managers who see a cross-functional issue that
workout could address. In these cases, it is important to spend extra time
preparing the management sponsor for the upcoming workout.

Select and prepare management sponsors. Workout sponsors put themselves on the line by turning
over a problem to the workout team and having to respect (but not necessarily approve) their
recommendations. For an organization with a traditionally bureaucratic culture, this step can be
extremely stressful. For that reason, the choice of the sponsoring manager is probably as
important as the choice of a problem (in cases where the problem is specific to one work group,
the manager and the problem are necessarily selected at the same time). For this reason, it is
our belief that early workout sponsors should be those managers who embrace the concept of
employee empowerment and desire the opportunity to sponsor a session so that these sessions
can serve as models for other managers of what is possible and the benefits to be gained. It is
also possible that a workout session can have co-sponsors. Two of the workout sessions we
facilitated for our client dealt with problems occurring when two departments interacted. In
both cases, the managers of those departments cosponsored the workout session.
anxiety-producing situation, especially for managers who have had the
workout process thrust upon them by the organization.
Sometimes, as a manager at workout, you feel foolish, like, why didnt I listen to this
before? Some people have this perception, gee, if I sit on the hotseat and if Im insecure
about taking someone elses idea, instead of coming from me, its going to look like I dont
know what I am doing. You have to get over this mindset. I never felt intimidated; I always
felt invigorated.
The sponsoring managers must be instructed on how to encourage the process. It is
extremely important that the managers not create an environment in which employees
believe that retribution is the reward for participation in workout. Finally, the managers
must be provided with information about the overall process and their roles in it. They need
to see the big picture as represented by a template such as the one we offer here.

Identify potential participants. Participants can come from across levels,
functions, and work areas. It is important that efforts be made to have all
groups that are involved with a problem domain be represented. In our very
first workout session, the group was continually confronted with the fact that
it was missing information about a small, but significant part of the work
process it was trying to improve because the group responsible for that part
was not represented on the team. Ideally, participants would fairly represent
the group from which they were drawn. Care should be taken not to select
only those individuals with which the manager feels comfortable. Care also
should be taken not to try to select only malcontents. In later workout
sessions (once the process is established), participants can also come from
suppliers, customers, and other stakeholders. Selection of potential
participants should be a collaborative effort between the management team
and the sponsoring manager with facilitator input. It is also important to
consider the work schedules of potential participants, particularly if critical
areas must remain covered during the workout sessions. Once potential
participants have been identified, the sponsoring manager should contact
them, tell them about the planned session, and invite them to participate. In
our view, it is important that the choice to participate be voluntary. Often
workout participants will be dealing with problems that will affect the
activities of their coworkers and they have to feel that their participation in
such sensitive activities is not coerced.


Prepare participants. Participants need two forms of preparatory information:
information about the workout process itself and information regarding the
problem issues to be addressed in their particular workout. Ideally, as part of
the effort to publicize the workout effort, employees will have had an
opportunity to attend sessions describing the workout process and have had
training in problem-solving tools such as process mapping. Some sort of
general introduction to the program should occur and the management
sponsor should further clarify the nature of the workout effort when asking
the individual to participate. Unfortunately, in our experience, we found that
relying on the sponsoring managers to contact and educate participants on the
workout process is unreasonable if the sponsoring managers are themselves
somewhat in the dark about the process. After conducting several workout
sessions, we believe that a manual should be prepared for the participants.
This manual should contain the information identified above details about
the workout process, problem-solving models, and data specific to the
problem domains they will be asked to address.

Ideally, participants should also be trained in the problem-solving process and
be familiar with tools such as process mapping and cause-effect diagrams.
However, such intensive preparation is often not economically feasible in
many organizations, including our clients. In those situations, the role of
workout facilitator becomes more important and the facilitator has to guide
participants through the problem-solving process and introduce appropriate
problem-solving tools when appropriate.


Of crucial importance is the charge given to the workout team. Managers should
make clear to the participants the problem or issue they are being asked to
work on and the bounds within which any solutions they recommend must
fall. (If there are budgetary or other constraints that dictate acceptable
solutions, participants must know them.) It is crucial that the charge make it
clear that the workout is not just a gripe session or a wishing session. This is
not to say that creativity is not desired; it is. However, the charge must inspire
the participants to address issues within the problem domain and within their
purview. In one of our early workout sessions, one of the sponsors told the
group that this was the opportunity to really get creative and generate the
ultimate wish list. Unfortunately, this charge to the group left us as
facilitators continually trying to refocus the group on solutions that were
economically and practically feasible.


Prepare the groups represented by the participants. One of the major mistakes
we made early on was not ensuring that the broader groups affected by a
particular workout were made aware of it. Of course, publicizing the workout
process to the whole organization should familiarize all employees to the
process in very general terms. However, we found that, without our
intervention, employee stakeholders in problems that were slated to be
addressed by a workout session were rarely aware that such a session was
going to happen unless they had been asked to participate. Drawing
participants from a group and then leaving those behind in the dark about
what is going on creates two problems. First, there is the possibility that the
uncertainty generates mistrust in the process or its purposes. Second, by not
letting others in a group know that some of its members will be participating
in a workout focused on a specific problem area, those individuals are
deprived of the opportunity to discuss their own concerns and ideas with
participants before the workout.

Select and prepare the site. Initially, workout sessions should be held off-site, to
minimize interruptions and signify the importance of the activity. No ties or
suits! It is not necessary to be far off site; no overnight trips are necessary.
Nevertheless, the goal is to eliminate any temptations of leaving to check on
activities in the organization. Participants should not be too accessible or find
the organization too accessible for them. It is a good idea to make sure the
meeting facility is reasonably comfortable and has large tables on which to
work. It is also a good idea to have a telephone and organizational phone book
readily accessible in case the group needs to call someone for information
germane to its problem-solving activities.

Beepers and cellular phones should be discouraged. We learned of their
disruptive capabilities all too well during our first workout. One of the
participants would routinely go to the back of the room to communicate with
his/her subordinates about ongoing operations. These interruptions were very
disruptive to the flow of discussion and problem-solving activities.

In addition, flipcharts, tape, markers, notebooks, pens, pencils, etc. should be
provided to the participants. Food and beverage should be available. To
provide a break during the session, a separate area for lunch and breaks is
encouraged. From our perspective as facilitators, break and lunch times
provide an opportunity to witness first hand the interaction dynamics between
the various work groups represented by the participants. During an early
workout, the participants who worked in one unit avoided the staff from the
other unit during breaks. This was an indicator of an issue that later came out
during some problem-solving sessions. The members of the first work group
felt the participants from the second group did not appreciate the difficult
circumstances in which they worked.


Recommendations spanning other areas?
During several of our workout programs, well-thought-out plans for
implementation were agreed to, but the responsible manager did not have the
authority to give approval to all that the plan would encompass. Thus, there
needed to be post-workout meetings with other managers who were not
involved in the workout. As facilitators of the process, we often found
ourselves attempting to maintain the spirit and integrity of the
recommendations with managers who did not spend time with the workout
team. If recommendations are rejected or altered by higher managers, efforts
to inform team members of the change and rationale behind it are important
to retain the integrity of the process.
The probability of having to go beyond the sponsoring manager for approval is positively related
to the size of the problem and negatively related to the level (in the organization) of the
sponsoring manager. Problems assigned to workout can be wide spanning to start with or they
can be discovered to be wide-spanning during the early problem analysis stages of the workout
process. The wider the problem becomes, the more likely that managers who are not part of the
process will have their area of responsibility addressed in the recommendations of the workout.
However, if the sponsoring manager for a workout occupies a higher level position in the
organization, there is a greater likelihood that the areas addressed in the recommendations may
still be under the sponsoring managers purview. The response to this problem (assuming the
occurrence of these meetings is not desired) is to select participants who represent all areas
affected by the chosen problem domain and to ensure the sponsoring manager is at a level at
which approving recommendations will not be problematic.

Post-Workout Period

The post-workout period is a critical point in this process. Fresh from the high of intense,
empowering, problem-solving sessions, the participants will return to their respective work
groups. At this point, the credibility of the program is at stake. The participants will undoubtedly
discuss with coworkers what recommendations were made. Failure by management to follow
through on these recommendations will doom the process immediately. In order to facilitate
action-oriented behaviors after the workout, several roles must filled by sponsoring managers,
participants, and facilitators.

Faciliators
hroughout this process, the facilitator(s) must encourage the executive
team to hold management sponsors accountable for progress, and
encourage the sponsors to take responsibility for implementation. If the
executive team has failed to commit fully to workout, one clear sign will be
continual reliance on the consultant/facilitator to prod sponsors to follow
up with implementation promises.
For workout to be successfully implemented, executives and sponsoring managers must be
willing to address lack of follow-up on the workout recommendations as they would any
other performance deficiency.



If an organization is not committed to this process for the long run (i.e., nurturing the process until it
is institutionalized in the corporate culture), it may best be left alone so as not to become a
program of the month and to contribute to the damaging of organizational credibility.