discussion

WCM 610 MEASURE Supplementary Document

Identifying and measuring the different variables in organizational conflict will be your task when you complete the Measure phase of your final project. Below is an example of how to measure these variables quantitatively when interviewing stakeholders for the organization. Review this document carefully in order to complete the Module Three discussion on quantifying qualitative information in the Measure phase of the DMAIC process model. Recall the SMART goals from Organization A that you worked with in the Define phase in Module Two. The Gap in Points column indicates opportunities where SMART goals can be narrowly specified. Think of a funnel, and of moving your DMAIC process from the widest to the narrowest part of the funnel. Here you seek to quantify soft communication skills as a piece of the Measure phase of the interdepartmental relationship among teams at Organization A. Problems are identified in the key areas in the chart, and they are quantified. One could then take each specific piece of the Measure table and create specific SMART goals for each. Iteratively link the Measure phase back to the Define phase as you move back, as you would do in a real organizational conflict. In the Module Three discussion, in order to gain a conceptual understanding, begin by creating a flowchart to show relationships between and among the various pieces to be measured, and then put your findings (variables) and results (quantitative data) into your gap-analysis table. View the Organization A Example Flowchart to assist you with this. Notice how the flowchart includes a reflect and revise recommendation. DMAIC is a recursive process, rather than a linear process. Once you are fairly confident in the Define and Measure phase findings and results, move ahead to Analyze, bearing in mind that reflection, review, and revision of all earlier phases is critical. To see how to create a flowchart, view Microsoft PowerPoint: Create a Flow Chart. You may also find How to Make a Flowchart in PowerPoint helpful. (Note: The Measure phase here involves conflicts in groups. In Module Six, you will learn about Dr. Bruce Tuckman’s Five Stages of Group Development. Tuckman’s theory uses a model to help you to deconstruct the stages of how separate individuals become a viable team.) Next, you will take your actual organization’s conflict or the Garden Depot case study, and measure the problems you defined in Module Two. Use the Organization A Example Flowchart to help you to organize your thinking, and then put the information from your flowchart into a Measure gap-analysis table using the Measure Gap-Analysis Table Template. (See the completed example below.) While DMAIC as a methodology used in many organizations typically involves statistics, some conflict specialists find that a qualitative methodology produces key variables that can be used to define, measure, analyze, improve, and control the problems facing the organization. This involves the use of the in-depth interview process, asking open-ended “what” and “how” questions of employees, external stakeholders (e.g., customers), and leadership. The first column in the Measure gap-analysis table below shows variables. A variable is a piece of information that differs with each research participant (e.g., an interviewee), and also differs among research projects. Note that, in order to arrive at data that can be compared and analyzed, each participant (interviewee) must be asked the same questions. The variable may also be thought of as the outcome of the analyst’s research questions. By examining the variables in the Measure gap-analysis table below, you should be able to pose the specific questions that would be likely to result in the variables provided. You must first conceptualize what you want to know. Think of a funnel. Beginning with the broad question, “What happens when your team works on a project?” would lead to increasingly narrower questions, such as, “How well do interdepartmental teams collaborate on joint projects?” and, “What is your present level of satisfaction with the interdepartmental team collaboration, giving a percentage rating from 1 to 100% (with 100% being the highest possible rating for collaboration on joint projects)?”

From here, the situation and its issues can be deconstructed even further, to the asking of questions relating to specific projects, particular pieces or phases of specific projects, and the individual contributions of each team member, with a Measure gap-analysis table for each individual team member’s responses. You then can see what each individual’s experience of working with the team is, and create an overall table that shows the averages of each column. To protect the confidentiality of each individual team member who contributed to the figures, the overall table would be used when working with the team. In Organization A, the team’s individual members were asked key questions that provided the analyst with the data or information to understand, or define, the problems facing the team, from the perspective of each team member. Each individual team member was asked the same questions, and the spoken information, or data, was categorized into themes by the analyst. These themes are the variables, and the data that then needed to be subjected to the Measure part of DMAIC. To arrive at the Measure piece, each team member was asked to provide a numerical rating of the importance of the variable to successful team effectiveness. Each individual was then asked to provide a numerical rating for the level of skill satisfaction, to show how well the team performs in each variable now (second column). The results from each team member were then examined and analyzed in the Analyze phase of DMAIC. In the example, the results from one team member are presented. The opportunities for Improve and Control are found in the third column, Gap in Points. Improve recommendations must be specific, precise, and measurable. Here, you return to the creation of specific, measurable, attainable, realistic and relevant, and time-bound (SMART) goals, which the conflict specialist would help the team generate. In Control, the conflict specialist assists the team to be sure that the specific goals are being met and that the team is moving toward working autonomously.

Measure Gap-Analysis Table

Organization A

(Variables)

Importance (Percent of inputs that are critical or very important)

Skill Satisfaction (Percent of skill ratings at better than average)

Gap in Points (Reframe as possible opportunity; the higher the number, the more important satisfaction of the gap is)

Interdepartmental Team Collaboration on Projects

98 23 75

Interdepartmental Team Communication/Verbal Delivery of

Information

80 28 52

Effective Listening Among Individuals 95 15 80

Addressing Difficult Conversations 91 12 79

Written Communication/Email 82 32 50

Interdepartmental Team Meetings/Live Presentations

85 48 37

Interdepartmental Team Meetings/Virtual Presentations

40 67 -27 *Negative number

indicates that the issue is unimportant and skill

satisfaction is higher than the importance

For more information on qualitative research, variables, and qualitative methodologies, see Research Methods: Qualitative Approach. For more information on working with teams and generating team effectiveness, consult the following: Doyle, M., & Straus, D. (1993). How to make meetings work: The new interaction method. New York, N.Y.: Berkley. Schwarz, R. (2002). The skilled facilitator: A comprehensive resource for consultants, facilitators, manager, trainers, and coaches (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.