Julie in LO8426, replying to Malcolm in LO8016, was discussing the need
for the involvement of the 20% with antagonistic views and the danger of
discounting or ignoring their input.
I agree with her 20% views -- we need that perspective.
My mental framework is Spectator Sheep who hang on the boundaries going,
"Naaaa. Baaaaa." as they stand on the hillside observing the other 80%.
But my experience is that these same Spectator Sheep are actually tigers
under protective sheepskin coverings -- if one can animate and motivate by
gaining their direct and active involvement, they add greatly to the
overall quality and impact of the group's efforts.
For me, they represent a most valuable group of objective observers of the
process itself. Yet somehow (and this is not a rigid assumptions about
actual causality), their initial involvement of sharing their perspectives
may have been punished, so they resort to active non-involvement.
It's not idealism that they should be involved. The reality seems to be,
based on my 20 years of getting their ideas and implementing some of their
suggestions for improvement, these people often have divergent yet
practical ideas for implementing change and improvement in the workplace.
The key is gaining their trust as well as their active involvement with
the team.
For the Fun of It!
--Scott Simmerman Performance Management Company, 3 Old Oak Drive, Taylors SC USA 29687-6624 74170.1061@compuserve.com
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>