Saturday, May 21, 2005

Things I would like to see in a new LANL

From Anonymous:

1. I would like to see management set a goal to reduce the number of meetings everyone
has by 50 per cent.
2. I would like to see an end to "Brown Bag Lunches."
3. I would like to see a complete overhaul of the training system and to see the amount
of time waisted in training by 80 per cent.
4. If I never attend another so called award ceremony where half of the people have contributed
little or nothing to a program receive some kind of award or kudo it would make me very happy
5. I would like to see a system where those individuals who work productively are rewarded
6. I would like to see a system where the concept of "Metrics" is completely overhauled.
7. It would certainly help if the diversity office just disappeared.
8. I would like to have a commitment from whoever takes over this lab to never, most especially
during a time of war, shut this institution for anything other than the most catastrophic circumstances.
9. I would like to see this "behavior based style of management" thrown out the window and
would be delighted to see violators of our safety and security regulations held accountable
for their indiscretions monetarily.
10. I would like to see an end to about 80 percent of the politics I witness on a daily basis.
11. I want an environment where I can come in, do my job and go home feeling proud of the
good work that I have done as opposed to being harassed, intimidated or threatened for
having done too much work.
12. I would like to have the opportunity to work for the respect I know I can earn from my
management and peer group.
13. I would like to see the dignity of work restored in the work place.
14. Look folks, it should be clear that I ain't no management type. I'm just a good ole redneck
cowboy from Texas and all I want to do is to have a good opinion about myself and the work I do.


from a Tennessee boy, I think it is the role of management to provide an environent where these things (#1-14) happen.

When I was a group leader I asked a former LBL Deputy Director "what is my product?" His response -"happy people doing their work"

That should be our goal.
If I can add one to the list:

In recognition of the fact that any sizable project requires multi-disciplinary participation, I would like to see management start attacking "org chart parochialism" in all forms:

a) "My people are the experts on subject X, give me control of everything related to that."
b) "We will hold manager X responsible for any incidents among 'his' people."
c) "Don't work with expert X in another division, give the work to novice Y in our division."

Lets leave the territory marking and pecking order maintenance to the military. Good people doing what they're good at are quickly recognized as authorities in a given area.
The quality of a person's work and achievements as a scientist, engineer, technician, or admin should be the criterion for hiring and promotion.

My pet peeve - when promoting to a position that involves leadership of people (as opposed to projects), promote people who have risen through the ranks and have demonstrated that they can lead people. Leadership is not a popularity contest, and leaders need to be able to make decisions, and empower those who they are leading to make theirs.
Given the comment by the "good ole' redneck from Texas" about the diversity office, I can see there is a class action suit against LANL for discrimination against women and Hispanics.
There is some substance to what he says, but I don't find racism attractive.
08:52:57 AM wrote that s/he doesn't find racism attractive. Indeed, it is repulsive.

The class-action suit may serve as evidence that the Diversity Office, and quite possibly the EEO office, are at least partial failures.
Can I add one more to this? Show respect for and acknowledge the value of the people who work here. We've been put down for the past two years. Our accomplishments have been belittled and our benefits have been taken away. It's hard to feel good about going to work in this environment.
A couple more to add:

I'd like to see the managers use the same tools as the work force or at least be familiar with them rather than detach themselves from the rank and file and then act surprised when they actually view or experience the workings of a dysfunctional system.

I'd like to see Public Relations be proactive in publicizing the projects and efforts that are helping the world deal with issues that may improve life for everyone - cancer research (as mentioned elsewhere on the blog), medical treatment improvements (I've heard of improvements from individuals and then googled names and sure enough, they're doing good work!), etc. Also, PR should be more thorough and forthright in defending those who are much maligned in the press. When there are articles or stories out that we're being dishonest or other issues and yet within the org we may hear that things are not as the press reports, we seldom hear of the PR office correcting the media's account of the issue. Why is that?

I'd like to have evidence over the long haul that the support system is really in existence to serve the work being done, not feed off of the funding and perpetuating itself unnecessarily. I know it takes a good deal of support to allow the scientist to do science, but often I hear that they are the ones who are trying to wade through the muck to get what they need and still produce something of value with the little time they can commit to the core goals of their work. Before you set your sights on my comment, I AM part of the support structure and yet I see that there is clearly something amiss with the status quo.

I'd also like to see systems which are cost-effective, meet the needs and are usable within a decent period of time. I've heard of proposals to use a system 'out of the box' or ones that are modular (CMMS?) that somehow got ambushed on their way to production and ended up not meeting the needs or the stated objectives. We have some of the greatest computing ability in the world and yet we can't seem to apply it accurately or effectively in-house. Nor do I advocate home-grown systems necessarily, but somewhere, somehow the situation is bungled up badly if the average worker is confused daily with what info goes where or where to start to comply with the multitude of systems to feed in order to do your work and get your compensation for it.

I'd like to not have sticker shock be a routine crisis to contend with when requesting upkeep of the facility or mundane operational tasks. You have to wonder why a simple painted line that costs more than an automobile (in the private sector) and takes longer than a baby to deliver!

I'd like to suggest an AD of UNcommon Sense be added to the chain of command. Someone who might perpetually ask, "Does this pass the HA HA test?"
My thoughts:

1. That would lower overhead as there would be a need for LESS managers.
2. Brown Bag = Brown nosers.
3. No amount of training is going to keep the stupid from doing something stupid. May be less as they are now spending more time in training rather than doing work.
4. I always loved it when certain groups get awards for just doing what they are paid for.
5. HR needs to have a process that really works and then those that work productively are properly rewarded in yearly increases and promotions. Thats they way it works in industry.
6. Metrics is just some clueless managers way of manipulating success.
7. Who?
8. Ditto
9. Pay cut or zero raise
10. Good Luck
11. Thats called recognition which has all but disappeared.
12. Most managers do not know who does what and who really contributes to the health of there organization.I had maybe a couple of managers in my 20+ years that knew who did what and was right on the money. Unfortunately they all moved on.
13. New Management
14.Ditto although I am not from Texas.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?