RE: More on Homer Sarasohn

[Miller Charles L SSSD <MillerCL@SUPSHIP.NAVY.MIL>]

  Mr. Sarasohn and Mr. Protzman were respectfully and soon fondly doing
their job.  The system of government put them their and they were provided
the resources they needed.  It was not and easy task.  One of the most
valuable actions taken was to move in with the Japanese and walk miles in
their shoes.  I think Mr. Sarasohn and Mr. Protzman and Mr. Deming did that.

  Change is discontinuous.  The prewar activities, the war activities, the
post war activities, all had dedicated managers doing their best.  They had
innovative ideas yet not enough attention was paid to them or value was
placed on their activities.  So many unknowns and unknowables.
  When publicity is gained then bells ring and those in the publicity arena
or system do their thing.  The first explorer who died on a strange
continent is not known.  
  Bringing this back to my world.  I am a part of what was the critical mass
at the time we were trained.  The people who actually made it happen are
lost in the shuffle.  Some senior managers have, over time taken credit for
the accomplishments of others, only when it was politically wise.  The man
who did the most during this pioneering stage is avoided by a lot of our
managers because they never bought into the change.  This man is one of my
mentors and I am proud to know him.  Was their a mentor/mentee relationship
between Mr. Sarasohn and Mr. Protzman and Mr. Deming?  The government my
have moved Mr. Sarasohn and Mr. Protzman out before moving Mr. Deming in.
Which manager was responsible for the smooth transition of leadership?

  Respectfully,
  Charlie
  millercl@supship.navy.mil
===========================================================================

>From den.list-request@deming.ces.clemson.edu Thu Jun 15 19:07:47 2000
Received: (from slist@localhost)
	by deming.ces.clemson.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA03676
	for den_moderator@deming.ces.clemson.edu; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 19:07:46
-0400 (EDT)
X-Envelope-From: ferrell1@home.com  Thu Jun 15 19:07:42 2000
Received: from mail.rdc1.ne.home.com (imail@ha1.rdc1.ne.home.com
[24.2.4.66])
	by deming.ces.clemson.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA03671
	for <den.list@deming.ces.clemson.edu>; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 19:07:42
-0400 (EDT)
Received: from cx382547b ([24.7.39.168]) by mail.rdc1.ne.home.com
          (InterMail vM.4.01.02.00 201-229-116) with SMTP
          id <20000615230740.NQAF14727.mail.rdc1.ne.home.com@cx382547b>
          for <den.list@deming.ces.clemson.edu>;
          Thu, 15 Jun 2000 16:07:40 -0700
From: "Robert A. Ferrell" <ferrell1@home.com>
To: <den.list@deming.ces.clemson.edu>
Subject: RE: Who owns the system
Approved: den_moderator@deming.ces.clemson.edu
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 18:07:52 -0500
Message-ID: <000e01bfd71e$8883e840$a8270718@blvue1.ne.home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <61.4670243.2675b619@aol.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Content-Length:  2429
Status: RO

JDKromkowski wrote in part -- So do many Top Management proclaim that
the have empowered their workers and therefore may hold them
accountable for too many read beads.


I as curious how many different definitions exist in the DEN for words
such as:
accountable
responsible
empowered

To me these words are overused, misused, and carry widely diversified
meaning.
If these are important parts of management and leadership, to what
extent?
How do we make that clear to those so crowned?
Is the use of such terms just another means for managers to say what
(or who) they did to handle a problem, it didn't work, and wash their
hands of any unfavorable opinions?

How does holding someone accountable produce improvement?
Is it just another stick of fear?

Does being responsible mean you are the designated stick receiver?
Is being responsible the same as being a target?

If I empower someone does that mean I tell them they are the target
before a mistake is made?
If I am empowered does that mean I am fore-warned?

I might say 'I empower you with responsibility to manage work flow X.
You are accountable for Y results' or I might say 'you are the
pre-designated (empowered) target (responsible person) for the
production of Y and this is my giant stick. (accountability)

My understand of the terms in brief:
Accountable - a previously agreed upon understanding of the logical
and natural consequences
Responsible - the ability to choice a response within the boundaries
of the system
Empowered   - provided the resources (training, money, equipment,
policies, people, freedom, creativity, talent, initiative and
energy...)

IMO, none of these can happen usefully unless leadership designs a
good system.

That should start the gears turning,
Robert A. Ferrell
mailto:ferrell1@home.com

careerism - n
the policy or practice of advancing one's career often at the cost
one's integrity
Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary
Copyright 1990
======================================================================