Episode 221: Why Care? Psychological Wellbeing, Continuous Improvement and Leadership with Chris Warner

Speaker A: Welcome to the Enterprise Excellence Podcast where we explore how to engage and align everyone in an organisation to execute continuous improvement and innovation. This show brings you insights from global experts and practitioners who share their journeys in creating cultures of excellence to deliver sustainable results and a better future. Welcome to Enterprise Excellence Community and Podcast. It's such a pleasure to have Chris Warner on the show with us today. Chris has had a career in the automotive and mining industry, a massive one, leading excellence and cultures of continuous improvement. If there's someone that's actually achieved it, it's this person. Along with others, Chris wrote the book Flick the Switch which is focused on lean within the mining industry and co authored uh, the award winning book why Care that I was lucky enough to see him and his fellow authors receive in San Diego. Chris is now an advocate for psychological well being in the workplace. Studying, sharing his personal story and helping many in the field that drives such amazing results. People and organizations thriving. As a senior leader coach within the mining industry. Chris currently coaches leadership teams supporting them to support and lead their excellence journey forward. Let's get into the show and everyone m prepare questions as you go through and we'll cover a few topics and then we'll open it up. Chris, thanks for joining us today mate. I, I really appreciate it.

Speaker B: Oh it's, it's, it's, it's a real honor to be part of the group uh and to share some of these insights. Look forward to it.

Speaker A: Thanks mate. So Chris, just, just to kick off with mate, like you might just give a bit of background and context to the topic today.

Speaker B: Yeah, so um, uh everybody. So I live in, in Perth Australia and um, and I have been working within the, the lean environment, uh specifically within the automotive industry and the last 18 years within the mining industry. And um, I, if there were a few points I'd like to make from the start is that there's psychological well being cannot be collateral damage in uh, pursuing the improvement in performance. Now we have for decades looked at how we manage um, uh and control physical hazards. The emergence of elimination and or control of psychosocial hazards is an emerging science um and is being regulated in certain countries. But we still have a lot to do in terms of understanding it, applying it and ensuring that people thrive at work. Um, there's also a bit of a misconception in terms of certain terms that are used in industry. Uh, specifically psychological safety and psychological health and safety. Psychological safety comes from the book written by Amy Edmondson and it really talks about how do we create uh, a workplace where people are free to be themselves. There's candor and um, people can challenge the status quo in the pursuit of uh, improving uh, the workplace and performance that Psychological safety. Psychological Health and safety is um, an application of a risk management framework to psychosocial hazards. Um, one that actively works to prevent harm to the psychological health of workers, um, in negligent, reckless or intentional ways and promotes psychological well being. Uh, and this has been codified in ISO 4503. So we have two terms psychological safety and then we have an additional term called psychological health and safety. So we need to just um, make sure that we understand the differences and um, we don't confuse the two. Although there are interdependencies between the two. Ah, often there are misconceptions. We also need to accept that uh, people are being exposed to these hazards as we speak. Uh, that's within your organization, it's within companies across the globe. Uh, that acceptance is really important because what it does do is it puts a level of urgency in how we start dealing with this. Uh, it's a moral and economic obligation for organizations, leaders and team members to take accountability for um, helping us emerge this in industry, um, mature it and make the workplace a safer environment, um, for ensuring that people will thrive. Uh, there's no parent that wants to send their child into the workplace for them to leave in a worse state uh, than when they went in. So this is just a few little points, uh, just to kick us off that I just thought that we needed to cover.

Speaker A: And Chris, it's great how you mentioned that it's all connected but I know we're going to talk a bit about how it's all connected to business improvement too and excellence. There's no win lose here, is there? But Chris, just before we get into that, what led you to become interested in the connection between psychological well being and continuous improvement? Like how did those two for you?

Speaker B: Well, I think there's a few things. Um, the first thing was the emergence of the standard. Now uh, I was always trying to put into words my lived experience. So I have been speaking quite openly about my own journey, uh, having been exposed to hazards like this and how it had a personal impact on my life. Now at a point in time I didn't know that uh, it was a psychological hazard because the term hadn't been emerged really globally. Uh, once I heard about this term called psychosocial hazards, what it did for me is it put a, it put a name to what I had experienced on occasions in my 30 year career uh, that started getting me thinking about how it integrated uh, as the other side of the coin in trying to create a thriving workplace. And a thriving workplace is the input towards creating a thriving culture of continuous improvement. So my journey within lean across automotive and the mining industry driving a leading change, I came to understand that that continuous improvement and ensuring that we create a thriving workplace were two sides of the same coin. You can't create thriving improvement if you have people that are self preserving. So that really uh, got me, got me uh, thinking about the book and

Speaker A: talking more about uh, it and Chris too I can see when you talk about like psychological safety and that top level is that real safety to speak up and share. And I think about the safety connotation of you get to that place, we're all mates, we've got each other's backs, we're going to look out for each other, you know that sort of position. And it's um, the two are so connected there, aren't they? To create a culture of continuous improvement where everyone's thinking and improving all day like that's exactly where you've got to get.

Speaker B: That's right. And, and to add on to that. So where there is self preservation there is no improvement. So you can't expect an individual to be associating the emotional and cognitive energy towards making improvements to their work in support of the organization's objectives if when they are consumed by these hazards within the workplace. So what they end up doing is managing the workplace instead of managing business risk. So again if people cannot enter the workplace free to be themselves and to be able to have conditions that enable them to you know, challenge bureaucracy, bring forward their ideas, you can't create that culture. So psychological well being is, is in a sense uh, a precursor to providing the atmosphere for improvement to thrive.

Speaker A: I m gotta admit myself Chris, I've been juggling at my brain for many years but I got to the place now that no excellence is achieved through autonomous, engaged, aligned, frontline team like it's given. And then the other thing that's got clear in my brain, it's all about leadership behavior and systems to create that. Like your views on that mate. Because when you think about that you're like far out. Well psychological safety, particularly at the front line, but it cascades, it's got to be everywhere is paramount.

Speaker B: So, so very absolutely look, leadership and the role of leadership in acknowledging that performance is achieved through leveraging the intellect of the people in their teams. And I'm talking about firstly the acknowledgement thereof. Because what Happens quite often is in the pursuit of achieving performance outcomes in the short term, the how becomes a little bit diluted. So what happens is you do whatever you need to do to achieve the outcome. Uh, what we need to understand is that in the absence of leaders focusing on systems, we have outcomes being extracted from individuals. So systems need to create psychological capacity versus erode it. So if we're not looking at a system view, then what we have is we have overburden, we have increased workload, we have people where their psychological capacity is just being consumed by achieving these outcomes, uh, in record time versus systems delivering that outcome, uh, and creating the capacity necessary for people to be even more creative and innovative.

Speaker A: I think Chris, one thing we should say too, and this often comes up, and when we hear the word systems, we often think about software. We're not talking about software, are we?

Speaker B: No, we're not, no, no, no, no. So we're talking about organizational systems, we're talking about how, how work actually occurs. Uh, quite often you'll have work as an intended. But this is why go see is so important. As leaders, they need to prioritize as part of their leader standard work, the act of direct observation. And they should ensure that a large proportion of their time is associated towards that. To look through the lens of psychological well being, when we go to the workplace, we now need to start putting in front of us an additional lens. And the lens is the observation of these hazards and how they are impacting individuals. We need to recognize that these hazards are not like a physical hazard. If you have to drop 20kg on my arm or your arm, um, it breaks. Same consequence. The consequence of psychosocial hazards on the individual is unique and is connected to their genetics, their workplace history, their personal history. So in that it's quite nuanced. So the leader has to not only learn about these hazards, but also develop a much deeper relationship with the individual to understand which hazards have the biggest impact on their well being and put in place controls to eliminate it and, or manage it from causing harm.

Speaker A: And uh, I gotta put a plug there, Chris. I guess that flows over to our book on with Dogs and Chris, on being an adaptive leader who serves but not too humble. Plug. I'm sorry mate. How did, how did the book why Care come about, mate? How did, how did that all then flow together? Because it's a brilliant book. I gained so much from it. But what was the startings of it?

Speaker B: I think again, as I said, two things. My lived experience dealing with my own mental health challenges. So I'm very open about that. I've dealt with uh, anxiety and depression, um, most of my life. Uh, so I, I would say it's. And, and 12 years ago I started becoming part of the solution. So I started saying I need to start um, bringing awareness that within the workplace you have a lot of people that deal with their own personal, well being healthy, you know, issues or um, and the other thing, uh, my exposure to lean thinking. So I think those two things, lived experience, um, and background in lean thinking, uh, the brutal exposure in my career to some of these hazards and how it's impacted me personally, uh, the loss of colleagues over my career due to the exposure of these hazards. And I'm talking about catastrophic loss and also the pressures of modern work. Uh, the modern, um, um, um, person is exposed to so many pressures. The workplace is exposed to geopolitical tensions, supply chain disruptions, technology, um, changes and the pressures are there. So the book was very much the convergence of those two things. Um, yeah, I love, I love the,

Speaker A: as you talk about those challenges mate, I, I love the fact that you've looked at the human side, but also the systemic side. Like Lean brings all, all that systematic element of systems thinking that you know, if our systems aren't working well, people under pressure, people don't have capacity, forces are coming down on them, things are breaking, defects are happening, all sorts of mess is going on. But then also if we don't have the psychological safety, belief in our leadership minds to be able to lead the empowerment autonomy forums for people to talk, share and speak, the two are so connected. It's, it's something I never thought about until I saw your book come along.

Speaker B: Yeah, I think I was just. I became deeply convicted through my own experience and through the observation of many people who would then speak to me, due to me, uh, speaking about my own journey, that you can never expect individuals to be contributing towards improvement of their work in support of the organization's objective. If they are not in an atmosphere that is conducive for that, it is. If people are, for example, if you are not managing high workload, just for example, um, and that exposure is causing harm to the individual, then how do we expect them to actually apply creative thinking to improvement when their thinking is constantly focused on just surviving? Their emotional and cognitive energy is associated with surviving the workplace. We cannot expect someone in that condition to be associating their emotional and cognitive energy towards creativity and innovation. We have to first create the environment for that to be freely, uh, shared, um, for the benefit of the individual and feeling fulfillment at work and the organization thriving. So it's a moral and economic imperative. Mhm.

Speaker A: Now Chris, I understand through the conversation that there's two parts, this equation, there's, there's the system part which is, could be how do we plan, how do we run our stream, how do we create flow, how do we create really consistent quality and process that uh, the environment's calm and smooth. But there's also this behavioral aspect which is how we lead people and how we engage people or not. But what would you say made of the key components that you've written about? And why care? But you've always or also seen where you go guys, focus on this. These are the things that will help you systemically but also behaviorally create a thriving team and organization.

Speaker B: So I would say we need to emerge m the capability of leaders being system architects. So what what we typically do is we reward leaders for results. So you reward them for the outcome. You set the objective for them to meet the outcome. What we don't reward is the ability of the leader, and I specifically say ability of the leader, uh, to be able to design, manage and improve the systems that their team members are exposed to. So what we need to do is bring to bear the requirement as a capability for leaders to be system architects. In the absence thereof, all we have is we have individuals that are working within the workplace. If they don't have a safe environment, they will never tell you that they are overburdened, that they are uh, um, facing uh, burnout, that they are struggling. What you have, you know, the worst waste is the waste you cannot see. And a lack of people thriving is for me the highest order waste. In lean we talk about the under utilization of intellect. Now if we aren't focusing on systems, if we aren't teaching leaders to be system architects, um, then what we're doing is in a sense being negligent to the uh, well being of individuals. Because systems deliver outcomes. And if we're not focusing on systems, then what will happen is outcomes will be extracted from the emotional and cognitive energy of individuals. And that is not limitless. Humans aren't machines. So the, a key term that emerged in the book was psychological capacity. And that is the emotional and cognitive energy available at a point in m time, um, for an individual to thrive. Um, and it's not limitless. Uh, and in the absence of systems being designed for outcomes, it gets consumed and can cause harm.

Speaker A: You can imagine it's that that world we all talk about of living in firefighting but the level of, the level of anxiety, like it's, it does things to, it does things to humans but it's so prevalent at the minute. Chris. Like if I look at Australian industry, I'd go that most people are just living in firefighting every day. Go, go, go, go, go, go, go. What would you say, mate? What would you recommend as some key systems for leaders to focus on or steps to take systems and behaviors to really start to turn this? Because I'd pose, mate, the systems thinking has been lost from our consciousness over the last 30 years. From what I think.

Speaker B: Yeah, yeah, I agree with you. I would say there needs to be a lot more effort put in across industry on systems thinking, but also uh, the development of the capability and the role requirement of leaders to focus on that. Um, and I would say that some of the practical things that leaders should be doing almost immediately is they should be reading the standard ISO 4503. They should start equipping themselves with understanding of these different types of hazards. And most importantly, and we write about this in the book, we need to start improving the one on one engagement. So some people don't you ask them when was the last time you had a uh, one on one engagement with your leader? And some people will say, well, six months ago, three months ago. And I immediately in that answer start to understand the value the leader puts into understanding the individual. Not managing their work, but understanding the individual, the uniqueness of the individual and how workplace conditions can impact them uniquely. Now that requires the leader to acknowledge and prioritize time to do that. And in a world where you're being called on to get results quickly to achieve the outcome, um, acknowledging that is important is a decision that leaders make themselves. But it's becoming a critical imperative to manage and deal with the demands of the workplace and demands on organizations. And then finally, as I said earlier, I think we need to add the additional lens in negoci activity to look for these hazards and start putting in plan, proactive plans to eliminate them and uh, or control them. So those are a few practical things that we can do immediately.

Speaker A: I love it. Because with the go, uh, see, look, listen, learn and then the one on ones, it's definitely going to give as leaders you the insight of the impacts and challenges which then I guess Chris, you can then look at the systems around that.

Speaker B: Yeah, exactly. Because that will then start exposing. You can then start asking yourself what are the systems that are creating these conditions? Um, and you can start saying what is it about, uh, the design, management and improvement of these systems, uh, that is allowing this to happen. So you're exactly right. It provides you with the evidence to actually then work back into the systems.

Speaker A: I ran an event yesterday myself with a senior HIPAA senior leaders at a, uh, VISTAGE event. And I did a tree of behaviors and systems and explored ideal behaviors and system impact. And it was just amazing how many gaps there were that. There just aren't systems there even. It's just a formal, informal flow of things that either get good outcomes or cause carnage on people. And so it could often, I guess, be a lack of systems that actually causes either, like variable outcomes.

Speaker B: And, and what I would say, um, Brad, if, if let, let's work backwards from what, what organizations are being faced with at the moment. And we refer to it in the book as vuca, you know, volatility, uncertainty, complexity, ambiguity, it's everywhere. We see it on the news, we see it, um, and this VUCA floods the borders of organizations every single day. Now what buffers that is a thriving culture of continuous improvement where we are leveraging the intellect of every single individual towards proactively ensuring that that volatility and uncertainty doesn't flood the workplace, consume the psychological capacity of people, and as such not help the organization buffer it. Now, leaders play a key role in that. But we've got the vuca. We need a continuous improvement system in itself. However, uh, it's not enough. What the CI system needs is to leverage available psychological capacity. In the absence of capacity, it cannot leverage anything. It has nothing to work with. So psychological capacity needs to be optimized, um, and it's optimized through the elimination of these hazards. These hazards impact individuals uniquely. The frequency, severity and duration of exposure to these hazards, um, can cause the likelihood of harm. And in that is the role of the leader. So we can go all the way from this volatility that is being brought into the border of the organization all the way down to how we treat the individual. And that's why the book talks about thriving. Individuals create thriving cultures of improvement because it is the nucleus of the organization and that's where the energy for the organization is creating. Created. It's like a little, you know, atom. The energy sits right in the core and in mass, it provides a shield around the organization to manage and help buffer, uh, what organizations are faced.

Speaker A: And Chris, on your journey, what are some examples of, like a success story you've seen where a site or even a team or a whole organization's been able to shift, uh, and improve systems and leadership Beliefs and behaviors to be able to really create that thriving, calm, quality organization where people and the company are thriving.

Speaker B: So I think I've seen what's worked well. I've also seen what's not worked well. Now, unfortunately, we still have workplaces where people are coming to work and they are struggling to get through the day. All right, now, in that is the imperative that we address this with seriousness. It's not supposed to be overly theoretical, although there is theory to it. There's, uh, a practical context. And it's not about tomorrow. Uh, it's not about, uh. I had someone say, culture takes time. I said, we have no time for this. People are being harmed today. We need to get on with it, educate ourselves and start becoming part of the solution. Now, leaders that have accepted that accountability have created atmospheres, which I've seen in my career in many teams, where we have the collective group, Whether it be 10 people in a team or 100 people, that are actively, and I refer to these as micro improvements, um, that are actively raising and implementing small improvements to their work that in mass, have a large impact, cultural impact on the organization. Um, and as, um, Stephen Dog and my dear colleague talks about a lot, is that we need to be making sure that individuals make those improvements. And I'll get him to mention it just now, that we're able to help individuals reduce the cycle time between idea raised and the implementation thereof. So these workplaces where you rarely see this working is you can actually measure it based on the rate at which ideas are, uh, coming forward and being implemented. And if you look at the companies such as Toyota and you know, many others is you have millions of micro improvements being implemented. Uh, to close off this point, the bigger an idea becomes, the more it's constrained. So we've applied a project centric definition to the term continuous improvement in many areas. Uh, but we have to reduce the definition of the term to the individual feeling free to improve their work. Again, in mass, based on your question, I've seen teams that have implemented tens of thousands of ideas in two to three years. Implemented right, not raised. Um, that's one indicator where you can see you've got a culture where people feel free to just improve things. They feel safe to do that. And I've seen that in many teams.

Speaker A: That's amazing, Chris. And I might, I don't know, dargs, if you're in a state to be able to add to that. I love that piece you guys are talking about right now around reducing the cycle time to get improvements implemented. And I'm guessing too there's part to that with escalation because there is cases where things can't be improved at the front line. I've got to go up to a next level to be executed.

Speaker B: That's right.

Speaker A: Hey dogs, I'll let you continue.

Speaker C: Yeah, great conversation. Um, yeah, thanks Chris, for the, for the note. But I, uh, think the key here is how do we, we have a fundamental duty as a leader is to create an environment where everyone is, you know, free to come to work being their true authentic selves. You know, when you look at organizations today, we've people coming into the organization in the world of Vuca, they're living in, as Chris mentioned, we're living in volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity. We have lots of stuff going on in our worlds. We've got rising interest rates, we've got uh, mental health, well being, psychosocial hazards. We've got people working, living at home, working at home as well, uh, with domestic, uh, violence situations and uh, struggling through those challenges. Um, and we forget as a leader we have a duty of care to make sure that not just our people working from home or psychologically and well being and say from a wellbeing perspective, but also how do they come to work today? Because, you know, you look at people that join the workforce today, I mean, I've seen this myself and learned my own lessons learned. We have people joining the workforce today that don't even know how to use Microsoft Outlook because they're so used to using Snapchat and TikTok and Instagram. They struggle to actually speak to people on a corporate level. So what are we doing as leaders to create that environment for them to flourish as well. So I think as a leader we need to go a bit deeper, think, you know, off the back of what Chris is talking about and also the other books that we've written is how do we as leaders start to think of not just the individual that's in front of me, but what are all the intrinsic and extrinsic interferences going on with that individual?

Speaker B: That's right.

Speaker C: And when we really, truly understand every individual in our workforce, we can start to dance with that interference. We can start to put support mechanisms in place to help them through that. And when we do that, we start to get a level of performance we've never even dreamed of having before. Because you get people who not just come to work to give you their hands, they give you their hearts and minds as well. So I think leadership is not, is not a Ride. It's a privilege. Um, you know, and if, you know, if you've got a workforce of two or 300 people, you don't just impact the lives of those two or 300 people, you impact the lives of their families, friends and communities in which they serve. And I think that's the piece that leaders need to, need to grapple with. Um, I won't take over from you, Chris, but you know, great conversation. Yeah. And such an important topic. And I think the Chris, the work that Chris does, certainly in educating me as well, uh, is fundamental in, in how we create leaders of the future. So really good topic. Thanks for having me on.

Speaker B: Thanks man.

Speaker A: I think I just want to add guys, like one thing, shout out to you guys is just the tightness and psychological safety you guys have got amongst each other. You know, Like, I think that's a shout out to you that you're living by example, you know, with what you do. And I love it. Even the hugs, guys. I appreciate the hugs too when I get to see as well.

Speaker B: I think what, what's interesting is I can be a hazard. Now that's quite confronting. The manner in which I approach work, the manner in which I engage with people, I have an accountability to help create the atmosphere. Yes, there's a leadership obligation, but, but uh, poor team member support is a psychosocial hazard. And, and some of the biggest stresses in my career have, uh, been when I don't trust someone I work with. Now that's something I can't always control. But it certainly had a big impact. So most certainly with people I interact with. Um, uh, you know, we need to role model this ourselves.

Speaker A: Uh, I love it. Well everyone, I'm going to open up to questions to the group in a moment, but just while everyone thinks of some questions, I've just got one final question for you, Chris. Like what's been the primary challenge that you've seen with trying to shift this where leaders can be more systematic and look and improve the systems of the organization and also behaviors to create an outcome?

Speaker B: Yeah, I would say, um, people are just busy. You know, there's the strains and pressures put on leaders specifically. And um, they just got to get stuff done. Uh, so there's the challenge for people to slow down. In order for this to work, you've got to slow down and you've got to understand, um, as you rightfully say, rather than just doing work, we have to think about work. So we need people and certainly leaders to be associating in their standard work time to Observe and to think about this. In addition, one of the biggest challenges is a low level of uh, understanding of these hazards. We have to get people, we have to educate people, we have to get leaders to start learning about this. So when you use terms such as psychosocial capacity or psych, psychosocial hazards, people don't really know what you're talking about. Which is fine in that is the reason why we need to be promoting and helping people understand it. So I would say that's a challenge. And thirdly, I would say there's just fear of doing the wrong thing. Um, so, so, so I think with, with certain people, especially leaders, they walk on eggshells when it comes to the well being of people and they've had their own experiences. Um, and there's, there's, there's sometimes just a little bit of nervousness in reaching into this, uh, so that there's courage that's needed.

Speaker A: Um, yeah, I can imagine. Especially from past lived experiences. So, Chris, there's already a few questions in. I might just check. Wade, are you right to come off mute and ask your question directly, mate, by any chance? Or I could read it out. Yes, thank you sir. Amazing discussion. Thank you Chris, for sharing really candidly, um, your why and the sort of person that you've become to speak about this. I'm fascinated with, um, as I'm hearing you say it, um, I'm fascinated with this idea of shifting from non compliant to compliance, but going beyond that and going to that place of excellence. And so I'm thinking of not just resilience, but anti fragility.

Speaker B: Yes.

Speaker A: And so what, what, what does that mean? What does it take to create a, um, virtuous, um, pattern of anti fragility in an organization that is currently hazardous?

Speaker B: So this is, this is a really, a good, a really good question. Thanks, Wade. Um, so again, within organizations we have been saturated with the resilience narrative. We've heard it, we've got resilience programs, they're everywhere now. There's nothing wrong with that. There's nothing wrong with trying to help people be more resilient. The issue in most cases is not the individual, it's organizational factors. We have to shift the narrative away from the individual and the expectation that they need to be more resilient. This isn't a resilience issue. This is the, it's an organizational issue. It's a leadership issue. It's a prioritization issue. It's an uh, education issue where people, leaders and organizations understand that what depletes capacity, psychological capacity are uh, things that they can eliminate and control. We need to be going to the root cause. The root cause isn't resilience. The root cause are these hazards. And these hazards are both in work design, they are in leadership, they're in work design and how the workplace has been designed. They in there are ah, behavioral aspects, there are team aspects. I mean there are many of these hazards. Um, so I would say that people uh, will be able to help the organization pursue its targets and aspirations if the organization helps them to be in the most conducive psychological state to bring creativity and innovation into the workplace. So I appreciate that we need to continue helping people be more resilient. Most people are resilient. Let's focus more on organizational factors. We have to move the narrative,

Speaker A: the system and behavior piece.

Speaker B: That's right.

Speaker A: So Chris, um, Jim's got a question. I don't know if you can come off mute Jim M. And ask around standard work like that system of quality and standard work. And I'm thinking of a quote from Taichiano on this one, so I might, I might share. I'll be

Speaker D: no standard, no continuous improvement. Yeah, I suppose there's a bit of a tautology between following a standard and creativity in the workplace where they can be seen as conflicting. Yes, but, but when you directly observe somebody uh, doing work through the lens of a standard, you often see lots of wife jump out in terms of not only psychological but physical safety, etc. But when it does come down to that crux whereby it's not okay to get a result by any means. Yes, there needs to be a structure or a standard on how we do the work. And ideally that's built upon a thousand ideas locked in to standardize work. I think you've hit a fundamental whereby I work for a company that has a hundred, uh, locations across Australia and New Zealand and what's rarer than hen's teeth is that moment when a supervisor actually challenges somebody who's doing some work but to the standard, whether it be safety standard, quality standard. That's a point whereby you can either make a relationship or break a relationship and lead us with the skills to be able to challenge in a respectful way so that we calibrate somebody back to the standard. It's just so, uh, rare. And it's one that if we don't get right, people will find any way to hit their KPIs, hit their month, hit their whatever. So on those systems of standardized work really is an ah, antidote to vuca. And it could be a, a mechanism to provide psychological safety in terms of, as long as you're following the, the best safe ways that we've defined, you should be rewarded for that. But I think it's very rare. Have you had experience in that space?

Speaker B: Yeah. So it's, again, a good point. So there's this tension that I've always observed in the workplace when you talk about standard work. Um, um, you know, you think that you're trying to control individuals. The lack of, uh, role clarity is a psychosocial hazard.

Speaker D: Yeah.

Speaker B: So the lack of an individual understanding expectations, understanding what the role requires, understanding what good looks like, the exposure, uh, the duration, frequency and severity of exposure to that leads to the likelihood of harm. So standard work, role clarity, role ownership is critical towards helping individuals be able to come to work and feel fulfilled in their work. If standard work is used as a controlling mechanism, you create a hazard. We need to use standard work as the foundation of, for creativity. So often, often, uh, people will go, standard work is in, in conflict to creativity. No, it's the foundation upon which you allow people to work without ambiguity of what's expected of them. Once you have taken that tension out, they can then improve what they do.

Speaker A: I think that's a good point, Chris, on what you guys are talking about, because I see work environments where people have standard work, but it's been written by some quality team that really doesn't understand the process and they're shoving it down people's throats, but people are sitting there going, but the process doesn't work. I can't do this. But when you've got a quality system that's been built by the people doing the work, and then it's improved every day by the people doing the work, you get psychological safety. But, man, I see it a lot where the QA team's developing the SOPs, and then they're just trying to ram at home.

Speaker B: And I'd say, Brad, another hazard that really impacts people is not feeling like they have any ownership in their work. As you've just said, the lack of people feeling like they can own, uh, what they do, that they can challenge how systems or the lack of systems are impacting their work, challenge bureaucracy, come up with those micro improvements can actually demoralize people. And can I just say that we talk a lot about the big end of town. We talk about sexual harassment, bullying. We talk about the big end of town a lot. But it is the what can cause as much harm. So if you think about, um, sexual Harassment severity high. Let's say frequency one. So duration once. All right, now let's talk about the other hazards. And that is let's talk about incivility, frequency, daily duration the last year, severity maybe not as high. We need to start talking about those hazards that are insidious. And it's like a gearbox with a drip. Those hazards can cause tremendous harm if people are exposed to it over time. Lack of role ownership, lack of job clarity causes people to feel demoralized. In some cases, connected in with the genetics of a certain individual can cause such anxiety that it can cause harm to the point that it takes a lifetime to recover, uh, and needs to be managed.

Speaker A: Mhm. Too true. Too true. I think too the other thing I'm seeing out there too guys, and this is for everyone, like with all my customers now, I do the frontline work every time I connect with them, which is great because it really teaches you how that environment is like actually going there and doing the work. And the other thing I'm seeing on this quality front is you can't see the process. So all SOPs and work instructions and information is stored up on SharePoint. But when you're on the workplace, you physically can't see what you're meant to do. And then you overlay lookless and learn and gamble with it or go see the leader, can't see what should be done. And so that's just wild at the minute. Like, it's like workplaces are like deserts. So I think there's a massive challenge around psychological safety, putting people into a desert and going follow the process.

Speaker B: And I would say Brad, that uh, in order for an organization to see a step change in performance, we need to see a step change of direct observation. Yeah, there's the, there's the, there's, there's the correlation between understanding the truth and, and, and we, we have leaders that will apply go see. They'll wire it into their standard work. But it'll be the occasional let me go there, there and there and get us and get a very thin slice understanding. Whereas what this requires intentionality. It requires deliberately planning your time to understand at a much deeper level, valuing that and prioritizing that as a leadership imperative. No longer is the concept of mere go see acceptable. We need a new term. Uh, and that is a deeper go and see with a different lens to understand what individuals are being faced with. People come to work to do a good job. Trust me, in most cases it's not a people issue. It's not a resilience issue. It's an exposure issue to systems or hazards that should be eliminated and or controlled.

Speaker A: I think we got a common friend in Chris Butterworth with his look, listen, learn language. I love adding the act to the end of that too, but. Hey Naomi M. Are you able to come off mute? Naomi, you got a great question there for Chris. Happy to read it out if you can't. Okay, I'll read it out here for you, Chris. So Naomi's written what has been the most surprising gaps when you see those beginnings to recognize it as a hazard. So when companies start to understand it's a hazard, what do we see as the biggest gaps? Yeah. So what would you say Chris, when you first look at a site, what would you say are the biggest system gaps or the behavior gaps that you're like? These are typically what you see playing out.

Speaker C: Yeah.

Speaker B: So uh, what I would say just in lead up to that is in Australia and I think Canada, it's regulated. Um, so we, the standard is an international standard. Uh, certain countries are regulating that. Uh, organizations manage psychosocial hazards as they do with physical hazards. Australia is one of those. Uh, there are case studies emerging now where the uh, where the concept of psychological health and psychosocial risk management are being brought to bear. We'll see more and more of that emerge. Uh, but it, it, it. When you walk into a workplace, the first thing I look for is how people are engaging with each other. So I will look at the construct of the workplace and whether the work design just from my own lens is conducive for being, you know, helping people execute fulfilling work. And then I'll start listening and I'll start listening to how the leader engages with the team. I'll start listening to our uh, team members engage with each other. It's very quick to understand the atmospheric within a team. When you go in there deliberately to just watch and observe, you'll very quickly look at the use of language, the tone, the construct of the workplace. Um, so for me, and one of, one of the hazards that I've seen over and over is high workload. Um, high work demand is a hazard as is low work demand. And in many workplaces high work demand is plaguing the well being of people. And high work demand is quite often the outcome of systems that have not been deliberately designed to ensure uh, that there is an appropriate level of demand for people to thrive and help the business improve. So the individual is having to deliver the outcome. Uh, when a system needs to do that. Yeah, where the results of the capacity is being extracted from good people.

Speaker A: I'm seeing at the minute, Chris, a lot of poor, uh, systems around machine care and asset reliability than just driving insane work. Demand loads on people because then you're getting machine reliability and then your people work overtime, they're under pressure, everyone's into it and then the next day things break down again and like, you know, there's an easy fix, but it's just that systemic approach to actually fix it and get the right system going. Hey, Terence, I'll, I'll hand over to you, mate. M. I know you got a question there.

Speaker D: Yeah, sorry. Good morning, Chris.

Speaker B: Hi. Hi, Terence.

Speaker D: One, um, thing I've sort of picked up and I'm, I'm just sort of learning and trying to um, get my head around everything is it seems that we're talking about leaders that already have an inkling into psychological safety and psychosocial safety. What, what happens um, when you're in an organization where leaders still have that very old school opinion of, uh, you know, take a teaspoon of cement and harden up.

Speaker B: Yeah.

Speaker D: Um, and the more you try and talk about psychosocial safety and psychological risk and, and how it affects improvement, you actually end up becoming the problem.

Speaker B: Yes.

Speaker D: Rather than them listening and adapting. Because I suppose in a way it's changed and it become at four cycle, psychosocial in my opinion, falls out of people's control as a group.

Speaker B: Yes, yes, yes.

Speaker D: So, uh, how do we get individuals to understand it?

Speaker B: Very good, very good question. So m. I would say the first, the first almost like brutal answer is uh, leaders will be held accountable legally in Australia. So leaders have to get on board. So uh, the, the, the case studies are emerging and there are leaders that are getting him on board and there are leaders, as you said, teaspoon of cement. They'll get caught out. Yeah, they will need to. And the day will come, um, when they will be held accountable for not proactively helping eliminate or create the conditions for psychological well being. So I'd say that's a bit more of the hard edged answer. Yeah. Uh, I would say the, the second answer to your question, which is very valid is we need to as improvement, as change professionals, become part of the solution by associating our narrative to these, this interdependent link. So as we are bringing forth the, the, the, the, the imperative of improvement and creating that culture, we have to in leading that change, bring forward the associated link with well being. So we have to help educate the workplace. And like you said, you're Going to find people that'll just not get it. And one thing I learned in life is I'm surrounded by ignorance, including my own. So what I try and do is I take people out of a box and I just go, that's your reality. Uh, this is something that's coming and I'm gonna play my role. Um, I'm not gonna force you, but I'm gonna play my role in doing what I do to bring, bring this to bear. So I hold myself accountable. Um, to do that. Yeah.

Speaker D: So basically lead the charge and.

Speaker B: That's right.

Speaker D: And try and hook the wagons up as you go.

Speaker C: That.

Speaker B: Exactly, exactly. Because you're gonna find people that just are not interested. But yeah, um, but we have to do it because as profess as professionals, improvement is about care of people. I mean it's all about people and they and their, and their well being. But thanks mate, it's a really good question.

Speaker D: I think, I appreciate it.

Speaker A: I think too team. I think with any of the spinner cement leaders or a lot of leaders it can be they're so driven by results. I want better results. I want better results. It's like this is how you get better results. Like that's one pattern I've seen all over the world. All the people I've spoken to, all the companies I researched, all the things I've done. It's like you got to get to the place where you got autonomous, engaged, self managed teams that are lined up. The only way you get that is with great systems and ideal leadership behavior. But man, the results you get. And Chris, you've seen it and all of us have seen it through organizations. Like you're in a very big one right now and the results are amazing. And um, it's a common pattern but it's still hard like trying to get those leaders to understand that this is how you get results and also get your life back. Because those spinner cement leaders, they're often in chaos, aren't they? Living a highly stressed, pressured life too. But like guys, we're at. Everyone we're at the end of the event and Chris, that was such a great conversation, such great questions and mate, this is a topic we need to keep, keep continuing. I think like there's so much in this space and I know you're working on a new topic at the moment so I think we'll line something up again down the track mate, no worries.

Speaker B: Thanks everyone for the opportunity to share on. I appreciate it so much.

Speaker A: Thanks Chris and thanks everyone who's contributed have a great day.

Speaker D: Thanks Chris. Appreciate it so much.

Speaker B: Cheers team. Keep well.

Speaker D: All right.

Speaker A: What a great episode. Remember, you can Visit our website enterpriseexcellencegroup.com au to get hold of resources and other information on this important topic. Please like subscribe and share this podcast to help others gain insights and create a better future. There were two key takeaways for me from this episode. The first was the strong connection between the socio technical systems that Chris is talking about. You know, the element of leadership behaviour and leadership beliefs and approach to create that environment but also the processes and structures to create systems and structures to actually create a socio, you know, safe environment. The second key takeaway was just the purpose that Chris and others involved with him are uh, leading with to create this amazing future of thriving individuals and organizations. I just credit them so much. It's truly people living with purpose and the more we can do it with more organisations throughout Australia and the world, the better outcomes for everyone. Both thriving people, but also organisations delivering more economically, um, but also more environmentally. Thanks again Chris for your time and knowledge. Thanks for helping us create a better future. Bye for now.