On 4/1/10 12:20 PM, Mr. Crow wrote the following question to members of the Deming forum:
> My question is “How would you change the system to drive a more long term
> approach that could enhance the ability of the U.S. to compete more
> effectively in world markets?” If “Optimization” is truly a win-win then how
> would you modify the system to get this result?
>>
At the risk of being branded a fool, I reply to Mr. Crow’s question dated, April Fool’s Day.
The mainstay of my career as an instructional design consultant tracked with the waves of deregulation in America — banking, transportation, communications, and energy. In the eyes of my clients, my assignment was to wean workers and managers from the teat of regulated markets and union sloth. The “theory” was that I would help to reignite the competitive spirit in the natural-born souls of workers and managers. The method was to organize work systems to produce a hellacious mix of fear and greed — pay for performance, performance measurement, re-engineering, lean, zero defects, TQM, and every man for himself in the meritorious pursuance of profits increasing at an ever increasing rate.
It took me quite a while to see the big picture and how my efforts were supposed to fit in. As things became clearer, I realized that my understanding of organizational systems placed my efforts at cross purposes with many of my corporate client-leaders. The collaborative systems I struggled to build in organizations were always torn down at the first opportunity, irrespective of the gains realized. Workers and managers were fired and hired, systems were subverted, and phony money-phony-time was the lingua franca. The culture of intimidation, lies, and deception ruled executive meeting rooms and the manufacturing floor.
When I first encountered Deming, it seemed clear to me that his advice to business leaders was under-girded by a far-reaching and deep counter-intuitive theory of enterprise. In an interesting and counter-cultural twist, I remember hearing him comment circa 1990, that deregulation and union busting were banes to the American project. As I recall, he did not dwell on the idea, but there it was. As one who was living it, I couldn’t have agreed more.
So allow me to offer some simple thoughts on how our system should be changed. I do not think these changes will produce a utopia, but they would allow the American enterprise to reverse direction, moving forward rather than backwards, as is now the case.
1. Institute an aggressive system of progressive taxation that favors the expansion of the middle class by redistributing wealth and opportunity.
2. Use the proceeds of progressive taxation to subsidize national projects including the creation of a cutting edge infrastructure, ecologically sound practices, and a social safety net that reduces fear and enhances the enfranchisement of all citizens.
3. Regulate market competition in a manner that encourages and rewards innovation in terms of product and service, and prevents and penalizes cheating the system in order to maximize profit.
4. Constantly update and improve our regulatory system in response to changing conditions, including those produced by the vagaries of markets, so that competitive playing fields are re-leveled. This is a necessary condition for employing PDSA to discover theory and method that works better, given our aims.
5. Build an educational system in which the entire educational enterprise is built upon a theory of knowledge, systems, the nature of variation, and the principles of conditional belief (SoPK) beginning at the pre-school level. Use teaching methods that foster curiosity rather than fear. Teach world religions, world languages, the development of mind, the creation of knowledge, the nature of change, the challenges of uncertainty, and statistical thinking. Continue thereafter, to teach our young to collaborate competitively to create new knowledge and new solutions in mind and in action, with the overriding aim to create a better world for themselves, their children, and their fellow human beings.
Step 5 is long-term but cannot succeed without using the stop gap measures suggested in 1-4.
The suggestions I make above are currently being debated in America, though the vision of those advocating change along the lines I list, is too politic, too confused, and too limited. The forces of reaction — moneyed interests and true believers — have numbed minds and muddled dialog to such an extent, that even the most modest attempts to turn the tide, are cast in Satanic narrative. Sadly, so long as the struggle of ideas for making a better world is cast in terms of angels and demons, truth and lies, good and evil, the prognosis for constructive change is not good.
It seems we have met the enemy and he is us.
