Downsizing Digest Tuesday, 3 September 1996 Volume 01 : Number 006
In this issue:
"Dumbsizing"
Public Sector Continuous Improvement (fwd)
Re: "Dumbsizing"
re: The "Good Times Virus" HOAX!
Non-member submission from [timner@mail.ccnet.com (timner)] (fwd)
ANNOUNCEMENT: Alias Addresses
Aftermarth of Downsizing
Re: Aftermarth of Downsizing
Re: Aftermarth of Downsizing
Re: Aftermarth of Downsizing
downsizing experiences
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Rod Hagedorn
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 1996 11:21:34 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: "Dumbsizing"
I would like to pose a question to the downsizing discussion group. I
am confident that your opinions would be of great interest to all of
the group's members.
Recently, I heard the term "dumbsizing" used in place of "downsizing".
I think there is some truth in the word "dumbsizing", and I would like
to share my reasoning with the members of the group (and, hopefully,
receive some positive feedback!).
A friend and I were recently talking that, with an improving U.S.
economy, companies would likely have to begin rehiring many of the
people that were so carelessly "cast off" in recent years. This
includes not only the direct victims of corporate downsizing, but also
the indirect victims such as people who tried to enter/re-enter the
workforce and were consistently rejected (i.e., students, homemakers,
career-changers, etc.). Many of these individuals were highly skilled,
motivated professionals.
The conclusion we reached was that once things began to inevitably turn
around (and companies started hiring again), they may have to pay these
individuals more and try much harder to persuade them into coming back
to work after destroying the bond of trust that existed for decades.
Our reasoning: People don't just sit around waiting for the phone to
ring. Life goes on. Many have started moderately successful small
businesses or launched a private practice in their field, formed
consortiums with other professionals to offer "outsourced" services to
larger firms, continued their education/training by returning to school
(and thereby increased their "value" in the marketplace), or simply
taken early retirement and "bailed out" of the workforce altogether.
I believe there may be hundreds of thousands (perhaps millions) of
professionals who have simply "given up" on downsizing corporations and
found other, more satisfying means to live and work. Now that the
professional job market seems to have dramatically improved in the last
few months, many companies may actually be finding out that people
aren't as "disposable" as they thought they were.
My own example is a case in point. Four years ago, I attempted to make
a career change but was unsuccessful due to the combined effects of
economic recession and corporate downsizing. I was rudely and poorly
treated in many job interviews even though my credentials would have
easily placed me in the top 10 percent of all job candidates.
Since that time, I have earned a second graduate degree, acquired
additional training in my field, and I now run a relatively successful
consulting practice in addition to being an adjunct faculty member at
three local universities.
Suddenly, for the first time in over four years, I am being flooded
with potential career opportunities. So many that I don't even have
time to contact them all (with teaching and consulting keeping me so
busy). I would consider going back to work for a corporation, but
**only on my terms**. I will insist on at least being able to keep a
site on the Internet for my consulting practice (for _my own_ "job
security"), and I will insist on a substantially greater salary. I may
even insist on the terms of my employment being placed in a written
contract (depending upon the situation). In addition, if I am ever
treated rudely in another interview, I will simply get up and walk out
the door (tactfully, of course).
After earning two graduate degrees (and an undergraduate degree in my
field), working successfully at the Fortune 500 level, and starting my
own firm, I feel I deserve more respect than that. The fact is, *any*
human being deserves respect, and corporations must learn that people
can and will find other paths to success.
I am all for streamlining procedures, operating efficiently, and even
restructuring operations. But history may show that "dumbsizing"
delivered only short-term results with long-term consequences.
Rod Hagedorn, MBA, MS
Senior Associate
Profit, Inc.
------------------------------
From: "Bill Casti, CQA (Moderator)"
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 1996 08:45:40 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Public Sector Continuous Improvement (fwd)
FYI...
Bill
- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: 23 Jul 96 21:07:00 -0500
From: The TQM BBS
Subject: Public Sector Continuous Improvement
From: John Hunter
To: All
Subject: Public Sector Continuous Improvement
I would like to introduce two sources of Public Sector Quality Improvement
I am involved with: the Public Sector Continuous Improvement Site and the
Public Sector Network.
The Public Sector Continuous Improvement Site aims to support individuals
working with continuous improvement in the public sector. Currently you
can access suggested reading material, a library of documents available
online, organizations of interest and a guide to online resources. The
site will continually grow and improve. Access via www:
http://deming.eng.clemson.edu/pub/psci/
In 1987, the Public Sector Quality Improvement Network was formed by
practitioners in the State, Local and Federal government. In 1992, we
joined with ASQC and became the ASQC Public Sector Network. Our Mission:
We are an international network of people who exchange information and
learning to help ourselves and others to improve the quality of government
systems.
PSN executive council members:
Rebecca Meyers Chair NY State
Barry Crook Past Chair Multnomah County OR
Kim Peterson Chair Elect City of Austin, TX
Carolyn Farquhar Secretary Conference Board of Canada
We now have over 1,700 PSN members working in Local, State and Federal
governments internationally. I think it is a valuable resource and it
costs nothing to join so you have little to lose. You can call ASQC at
(800) 248-1946 and tell them you want to join the Public Sector Network.
Or write asqc@asqc.org (for the subject type: Public Sector Network) and
say you want to join the PSN--include: your name, snail mail address,
organization, e-mail, phone, fax (and home phone if you want). We will
send you some more information and our Quarterly newsletter.
You can request a copy of our directory to help networking among our
members.
We also have PSN info packets, containing timely articles on the following
topics:
State Government 150 pages 1995 H0903 $19.00 ($13.00 for ASQC
members)
Local Government 250 pages 1995 H0904 $21.00 ($15.00)
Federal Government 100 pages 1995 H0905 $19.00 ($13.00)
You can access text files of our past newsletters and other PSN info via
Clemson University:
http://deming.eng.clemson.edu/pub/psci/psn/index.html
***************************************************
*John Hunter
*asqcpsn@aol.com
*Cyberia Chair, ASQC Public Sector Network
*Webmaster, Public Sector Continuous Improvement Site
*http://pages.prodigy.com/john/hunter.html
***************************************************
- --
|PerMaNet : The TQM BBS 11:202/299
|Internet : The.TQM.BBS@tqm.permanet.org
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.
------------------------------
From:
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 1996 11:09:29 -0400
Subject: Re: "Dumbsizing"
In a message dated 96-07-23 12:28:55 EDT, Rod Hagedorn wrote:
<< After earning two graduate degrees (and an undergraduate degree in my
field), working successfully at the Fortune 500 level, and starting my
own firm, I feel I deserve more respect than that. The fact is, *any*
human being deserves respect, and corporations must learn that people
can and will find other paths to success. >>
Go for it Rod!
I left the 500 before downsizing became in vogue -- in those days we called
it organization changes.
I think your points are excellent, and portend a climate where the large
organizations must either change their ways or contract their past employees
as contract consultants/workers -- on the consultant's terms. To me -- and
William Bridges (JobShift) -- the contract worker concept makes the most
sense. And the net offers a great way for those with specific skills to
network and refer -- creating a true virtual organization. For the past 15
years I have obtained and referred contract contacts through an affiliate
network -- where the client gets the best resource that can be identified,
the consultant works only in their chosen area of true expertise, and rates
are reasonable because they don't include overhead charges (for those who are
doing the dumbsizing in the big companies). Since all these people run their
own companies, if they don't get respect it is their own fault! (Every once
in a while I have a serious talk with myself about benefits -- should I take
more time off or work harder and make more money. Even though I might
disagree with myself from time to time, I still get and give myself respect!)
The greatest part about doing your own thing is having fun doing it. And the
values you come to value may be quite different than when you would almost
"sell your soul" for that corner office. I would never go back to that
environment regardless of how much money was offered -- and I seriously do
mean that. There is so much more to life -- as Covey so beautifully points
out.
So Rod, what do you do? How might we work together to help those poor senior
execs that can't get anything done anymore because they got rid of all the
real contributors?
John
John D. Tongren
JTongren@aol.com
Tongren & Associates
616-780-4440
Advocate CoActive Auditing
------------------------------
From: "Bill Casti, CQA (Moderator)"
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 10:30:20 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: re: The "Good Times Virus" HOAX!
**** This important message is being distributed by the QUALITY.ORG system
owner to all of the QUALITY.ORG mailing lists...if you're subscribed to
more than one mailing list at QUALITY.ORG, you'll get duplicates of this
message...my apologies, but it's unavoidable ********
Warning! There is NO SUCH THING as the "Good Times Virus"...Never has been!
It looks like "warning" about the so-called "Good Times Virus" is
starting to show up on mailing lists again, so let me remind you now NOT
to redistribute it to any of your other mailing lists. IT'S A HOAX. THE
"GOOD TIMES VIRUS" HAS NEVER EXISTED!
PLEASE do NOT distribute this hoax anywhere else.
For all the information on the "Good Times Virus" hoax, review this URL:
http://www.quality.org/qc/goodtimes.txt
and this one:
ftp://usit.net/pub/lesjones/good-times-virus-hoax-faq.txt
You'd check with a competent authority if someone unknown to you came up
to you on the street and told you the President had died. Why don't you
check with competent computer virus authorities when you read a message
from a stranger on the Internet about a purported virus?? Remember that
CREDIBLE and VERIFIABLE DOCUMENTATION is what we're all about in Quality,
and that should include the Quality we also exhibit in our computer
dealings. Just because you found it on the 'Net doesn't make it true.
Please do NOT further perpetuate these virus hoaxes like the "Good Times
Virus"!!!
Thank you!
Bill
==============================================================================
Bill Casti, CQA Email: help@quality.org
Domain Owner Pager: +1 800 604 6149
QUALITY.ORG Fax: +1 703 716 0479
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
QUALITY RESOURCES ONLINE at: http://www.quality.org/qc
==============================================================================
------------------------------
From: "Bill Casti, CQA (Moderator)"
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 20:42:53 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Non-member submission from [timner@mail.ccnet.com (timner)] (fwd)
NOTE: Respond only to the poster's address (see below) and/or to the
list, not to me.
Thanks.
Bill
- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 10:36:35 -0400
To: downsizing@quality.org
From: timner@mail.ccnet.com (timner)
Subject: your post
Dear Ken,
Read your post with interest. The "emotional life" of the organization
will eventually make itself known! I highly recommend that this executive
team consider using a wonderful process tool developed by J. Allan McCarthy
in Silicon Valley, The Transition Equation, to 1) re-define their
vision/mission, 2) involve their managers, and 3) communicate to all levels
of the organization so that everyone can move ahead together. Of course,
some attention also needs to be paid to how people are feeling--perhaps a
serious of facilitated debreifings by someone qualified to lead such.
To learn more about The Trans. Equation, call Marybeth Howard at (408)
286-1354 or fax to (408) 286-8614.
About debriefings, call me if interested in details: Dr. Jane Henderson,
(510) 672-8540.
Good luck!
Jane
------------------------------
From: "Bill Casti, CQA (Moderator)"
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 21:53:39 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: ANNOUNCEMENT: Alias Addresses
***This message is being mass-mailed to all quality.org lists and
addresses. My apologies for any duplicates you may receive, but it's
not easily avoidable.***
QUALITY.ORG is launching one of its few for-profit ventures, to pay for
upgrades to our system and equipment. We're going to be renting alias
addresses for $25.00 a year.
Beginning September 15th, everyone who wants one can have an email address
"@quality.org", by means of an "alias address" linked to your current or
future internet email account, no matter where or with what provider.
"Aliasing" means that you will still keep whatever email address and
service provider you already have, but that you will also have a
portable "@quality.org" address, which you can take with you to any
service provider. All email directed to your quality.org address will be
automatically rerouted to you at wherever your email account is. Aliasing
does NOT provide you with an account on or access to the quality.org
system. It just gives you a publicly-distributable address with the word
"quality" in it.
The aliasing will be ready to launch on September 15th. Orders will be
accepted any time before then, for rollout on that date. Orders received
after the rollout date will be effective for twelve (12) months from the
date we receive your check/money order. Checks returned for NSF will have
their aliasing immediately disabled.
Payment should be by check or money orders for twenty-five dollars ($US
25.00), made payable to: Casti Consulting, and mailed to:
Casti Consulting
PO Box 53
Herndon VA 20172-0053
Be sure to include:
- your fullname & mailing address
- your current email address (to which your quality.org address
will be aliased)
- your preferred QUALITY.ORG email addresses (please give us your top
three choices, in order of preference, in case your #1 & #2 choices are
already distributed)
- remember that you'll have to let us know if you change your
primary service provider, so we can redirect your alias address, too
IMPORTANT NOTE: ASQC Sections--current and future--and the groups and
individuals who already have quality.org alias addresses are
"grandfathered" and will not be affected by this for-cost venture.
Regards.
Bill
==============================================================================
Bill Casti, CQA Email: help@quality.org
Domain Owner Pager: +1 800 604 6149
QUALITY.ORG Fax: +1 703 716 0479
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
QUALITY RESOURCES ONLINE at: http://www.quality.org/qc
==============================================================================
------------------------------
From: Ken Thornton
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 1996 14:08:48 +1000 (EST)
Subject: Aftermarth of Downsizing
Our public owned multi-site organisation has just completed
(hopefully) a 6 year re-organisation/disaggreation/downsizing
(voluntary redundancy) programme. This has seen a once 10,000
strong organisation evolved into three ~ 1500 people
organisations. In addition attempts have been made to introduce
Self-Managed Teams at many sites including my own.
The cumulative result being, that while site output appears not
to have been affected as a result of these changes, morale is
low, there is internal bickering between work groups, and the
relationship between staff and management is in a malaise.
Production and Maintenance Team Leaders appear to be alianated
from their Manager. Support staff who are caught up in the
staff/Team Leader/Management bickering are unsure of their role
in the organisation, not knowing which group to side with.
Non-management people are saying that they cannot get the
required work completed because of a lack of staff. Management
are saying why can't everybody see what the 'new world' is about
and work accordingly
At a site that has achieved the highest national OH&S rating for
at least 2 years running disputes in the areas of training, and
health and safety are current.
In a newly legislated competitive market environment it seems
that people on site are fighting amongst themselves, when the
real 'enemy' is outside the site fence.
I would be interested in any comments, recommendations that
people might have on this state of affairs.
------------------------------
From: Ray Martin
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 00:38:15 -0500
Subject: Re: Aftermarth of Downsizing
Ken, other Downsizing colleagues:
Ken, because you have non-management and management, you don't have self
managed teams (IMO).
I otherwise defer to an Atlantic Monthly article by Peter F. Drucker:
http://www.theatlantic.com/atlantic/election/connection/polibig/reallyre.htm
My approach is the one explained in the article. Please let me know if
I can help.
Ray Martin
rmartin@texas.net
Ken Thornton wrote:
>
> Our public owned multi-site organisation has just completed
> (hopefully) a 6 year re-organisation/disaggreation/downsizing
> (voluntary redundancy) programme. This has seen a once 10,000
> strong organisation evolved into three ~ 1500 people
> organisations. In addition attempts have been made to introduce
> Self-Managed Teams at many sites including my own.
>
> The cumulative result being, that while site output appears not
> to have been affected as a result of these changes, morale is
> low, there is internal bickering between work groups, and the
> relationship between staff and management is in a malaise.
> Production and Maintenance Team Leaders appear to be alianated
> from their Manager. Support staff who are caught up in the
> staff/Team Leader/Management bickering are unsure of their role
> in the organisation, not knowing which group to side with.
>
> Non-management people are saying that they cannot get the
> required work completed because of a lack of staff. Management
> are saying why can't everybody see what the 'new world' is about
> and work accordingly
>
> At a site that has achieved the highest national OH&S rating for
> at least 2 years running disputes in the areas of training, and
> health and safety are current.
>
> In a newly legislated competitive market environment it seems
> that people on site are fighting amongst themselves, when the
> real 'enemy' is outside the site fence.
>
> I would be interested in any comments, recommendations that
> people might have on this state of affairs.
------------------------------
From: "Michael D. \"Mike\" Townes"
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 07:29:41 -0700
Subject: Re: Aftermarth of Downsizing
In a word, what is needed is Leadership.
You appear to be 'managing' to get by, but peopla are crying for
leadership. By one definition, a leader is simply someone who has
earned the right to have followers.
- --
Michael D. Townes
Goodwood Management
12459 Goodwood Blvd., Baton Rouge, LA 70815-6725 U.S.A.
mdtownes@premier.net 504-273-4383 FAX 504-296-7621
------------------------------
From: Asif Raza
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 08:33:13 +0700
Subject: Re: Aftermarth of Downsizing
Ken,
In my opinion the situation your organization is going through is
the reaction to a major change effort. Your org has let go about 5,500
people - more than half the employees - plus broken into three parts. Such
a major change, and the shock resulting from it leads to what I call
"Organizational Trauma". When work is redistributed there often is
uncertaintly and confusion which leads to conflict.
You say that output has not been affected as a result of these
changes. This leads me to belive that you are using new technology (?) or
new methods of production. If this is true, the new work environment adds to
the problems created by downsizing and reorganizing.
On the other hand you write
>Non-management people are saying that they cannot get the
>required work completed because of a lack of staff.
I am not sure what you mean as you had said that "output has not
been affected".
>In a newly legislated competitive market environment it seems
>that people on site are fighting amongst themselves, when the
>real 'enemy' is outside the site fence.
If you could tell us which industry you belong to, it would help
understand the situation better.
Sincerely,
Asif Raza
Loyola University Chicago
------------------------------
From: Asif Raza
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 09:12:14 +0700
Subject: downsizing experiences
Hello everyone,
Some of you know I am writing my dissertation on how downsizing is
done, and what are its effects on employees, and the organization. I had
entered an organization just after it downsized and studied it for a year.
During this period I interviewed employees at all levels. Since I studied
only one organization I feel the need for more data. Data that I could compare.
So I have a *major* question for the members of the list. Could you
describe your personal experiences with downsizing in detail? The question
is for four groups of people: (1) those who were let go, (2) those who had
the job of planning and letting others go, (3) those who were left behind,
and (4) consultants who helped plan and execute the process.
What I need to know is:
Why did the organization plan to downsize? What alternatives were
considered?
How was the plan made? (meetings among top executives, level of
involvement of lower levels, etc)
How was it decided who to keep and who to let go?
What attention was given to the redistribution of work among those
left behind?
Any plans made for retraining employees (if needed)?
How was the plan executed? (How were employees told they are no
longer needed? How long before the downsizing stared?)
Details of severance packages, and outplacement.
Was early retirement offered? How many took it? (percentage)
What was the effect on employees? And the organization as a whole.
(How was morale before the downsizing, and after? Any effects on absenteeism?)
How has the organization structure changed after the downsizing?
How long did it take for the organization to recover? (If it did)
How did it affect your personal life?
It would help if you stated your position in the organization, and
the size of the organization.
I realize this is a long list of questions and will be very time
consuming. In return I will summarize the responses and post them on the
mailing list.
You could reply directly to me. I assure confidentiality. Or you
could reply to the mailing list.
I would very much appreciate detailed replies.
Please feel free to add other things which are of interest but not
asked.
Sincerely,
Asif Raza
Phd Candidate
Loyola University Chicago
------------------------------
End of Downsizing Digest V1 #6
******************************