Covid-19, Doctor Fauci, Leadership and Change

Charged with the task of changing behaviors among a nation of over 300 million people is hard to grasp. However, those of us responsible for leading change, in our own organizations, should take note.

Leading our Nation’s medical response, was Dr. Antony Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). Fauci advanced a clear and fact-based explanation as to why changes in our behaviors were necessary. He laid out a series of actions that were well-defined and compelling, that if followed, was our best means of defense. Throughout, he communicated by providing regular factual updates complete with visual charts and measures emphasizing the dire need for change and the progress being made.

Lessons for Change Leaders
Whether Fauci followed a trusted leadership playbook or simply his natural instincts, he and his team validated for us, many of the most critical aspects in leading change.

We invite you to learn more about leading change in your organization in our new book The Five Keys to Continuous Improvement.

Visit our website: www.thefivekeys.org

Good Communication is the Bridge Between Confusion and Clarity

In leading change initiatives, we have yet to find an organization that communicates too much. Using all communication forms, channels, and techniques available exponentially increases support and participation. Update progress regularly, and share successes, failures, and challenges. Acknowledging disappointments and adversity demonstrates honesty and confirms real-life issues that need to be overcome.

Seek Feedback: In order to keep your fingers on the pulse, create opportunities for colleagues to provide you with their feedback – welcoming both good and bad. Learn from your colleagues what they think, their worries, and desires. Share what you learn with other leaders and resolve legitimate concerns.

We invite you to learn more about leading change in your organization in our new book The Five Keys to Continuous Improvement.

Visit our website: www.thefivekeys.org

Levels of safety and safety measures within the workplace are emotive subjects for the majority of organisations’ stakeholders whose interest in safety range from moral to profit grounds.

Despite significant safety-related improvements, the International Labour Organisation estimates that some 2.3 million women and men around the world succumb to work-related accidents every year – this corresponds to over 6000 deaths every day. Additionally, there are some 374 million non-fatal work-related injuries each year, resulting in more than four days of absence from work. Worldwide, there are around 340 million occupational accidents annually. The human cost of this daily adversity is vast and the economic burden of poor occupational safety and health practices is estimated at 3.9 per cent of global gross domestic product each year.

High safety risk industries, for example mining and manufacturing, apply significant resources in order to constantly refine safety policies and procedures. Figure 1 is an example of the range of practices a typical mine applies. These practices are extensive and consist of preventative measures and reactive measures, and also include leading and lagging safety performance indicators.

Figure 1: Mine Safety Practices

Our world-wide experience from consulting to mining and manufacturing industry clients led us to believe that many organisations are reaching a state of marginal returns in the pursuit of increased modifications and additions to safety practices.

Which additional initiatives should be considered that, proportional to traditional practices, will result in increased safety levels? When we consider the question, we need to be reminded that 99 per cent of incidents and accidents are caused by human error. Equipment failure, falls of ground, non-compliance and outdated procedures are all examples of human error. This solicits a further question: if human error practically causes all incidents and accidents, do we really understand the consequences of our employees’ thoughts and feelings (also referred to as employees’ state of mind) that led to said errors? And even if we do, do we have the necessary processes in place to support employees in this regard? Most organisations have some form of employee wellbeing support that typically addresses health and financial related concerns. The support, however, is often reactive and unfortunately sometimes subsequent to unsafe behaviour.

Our behaviour (actions) are determined by our thoughts and feelings and are also referred to as our thinking (or rational) and emotional drivers of behaviour. Figure 2 illustrates the major elements of the human brain. Our thinking and feeling take place in two areas namely the prefrontal cortex and the amygdala.

Figure 2: Elements of the brain

The prefrontal cortex is the part of the frontal lobe which lies in front of the motor area and is mainly involved in thinking about the future, making plans, and taking action. The amygdala is a collection of cells near the base of the brain. There are two, one in each hemisphere or side of the brain. This is where emotions are processed, given meaning, remembered, and attached to associations and responses to them (that is, emotional memories). Examples of emotions are joy, sadness, anger, disgust, and fear.

When we are highly emotional (positive or negative) up to 75 per cent of our prefrontal cortex capacity is used to manage our emotions – from there the saying that someone was too emotional to see events clearly and to act accordingly. Employees and leaders at all levels of the organisation experience stresses from many sources that include amongst others the following: leader-member exchange tension; strain between team members; production pressure; and perceived unsafe or unfair work conditions. Leaders and employees may also have to deal with personal challenges related to marital, health, community, and financial concerns.

Figure 3 depicts the so-called below the surface or unseen antecedents that determine our behaviour. Thoughts and feelings can be referred to as our state of mind. Importantly our state of mind is not a personality trait – we can change it, and we can control it. It does not mean “that is the way we are”.

Figure 3: Antecedents, behaviour and consequence

The typical behaviour that results from excessive negative and positive emotions (and therefore consumes too much of our rational or thinking brain) is:

a) Lack of vigilance – not mentally alert to the situation and environment;

b) Lack of caution – not thorough and careful;

c) Lack of, or over-confidence – low level, or unrealistic self-belief;

d) Non-compliance – not respecting standards and procedures; and

e) Lack of resilience – unable to persist in the face of difficulty and ability to bounce back.

What should management do, from a psychology of safety perspective, to not only improve safety levels, but also productivity? Figure 4 indicates a process to achieve the aforementioned.

Figure 4: Psychology of safety process

The process involves the following role players: the employee; a fellow team member; the employee’s leader; and the Human Resources department. The foundation of the process is self-awareness, self-management and support from others. The illustrated process is preceded with an awareness exercise to enhance management and employees’ understanding of the basics principles of the psychology of safety.

The process starts with data and information gathering consisting of a self-assessment, an assessment of the employee by a self-selected team member (brother/sister’s keeper), and an assessment by the employee’s leader. The assessment gathers data and information on the employee’s perceived level of vigilance, caution, confidence, compliance, and resilience. Feedback is subsequently provided to the employee. Being a process, the assessment step takes place periodically.

Equipped with the feedback (self and others), the employee would typically be required to develop and commit to a set of stop-start-continue actions. The commitment would be to the employee’s leader and his/her brother or sister’s keeper. The employees and their leaders are also workshopped on ways to improve vigilance, caution, etc. The stated process gathers individual-focussed information complementing the typically Human Resources-driven employee wellbeing processes.

To conclude, management can achieve significant and sustainable performance improvement by:

a) Acknowledging that employees’ (and management’s) performance is often constrained by a state of mind that inhibits rational thought;

b) Empowering themselves and their employees with essential practical knowledge on the psychology of safety; and

c) Implementing a process that improves self-awareness, that requires commitments to behaviour change and is supported by individual coaching and systemic Human Resources-driven activities.

References:
Gellar. E.S. 2001. The psychology of safety handbook. 2nd Edition. Lewis Publishers.
Harvard Business Review. March-April 2021.
Beatty, S. 2000. The human brain: essentials of behavioral neuroscience. 1st Edition. London, UK: Sage Publications. Inc.
https://www.ilo.org/moscow/areas-of-work/occupational-safety-and-health/WCMS_249278/lang--en/index.htm

MDW as a tool has assisted the Concentrator team to focus on the key operational aspects that reduce process variation from the set KPIs.

Would you like to send us a comment?
Write to info@cdi-ama.biz

Dr Floris Burger (Director of CDI Mining) was invited as a guest speaker to the South African Colliery Manager’s Association (SACMA) quarterly meeting that took place in Witbank on 1 November 2019. Floris’ presentation focussed on the concept of internal alignment within mining organisations.

South African mining organisations are facing numerous challenges: volatile commodity prices; policy uncertainty; rising input costs and; increasing and changing stakeholder expectations. In order to successfully address these challenges, each mining organisation needs to respond in a unified, aligned way. The presentation provided feedback of his research that determined the degree of perceived organisational alignment within South African based mining organisations and also the key enablers of organisational alignment.

The key finding regarding perceived organisational alignment was the significant variance between agreed objectives and goals and actual resource allocation.

Whilst the study identified eleven statistically significant enablers of organisational alignment the following three stood out:

1. Organisational Values: Emphasise the importance of intra-organisational value congruence and develop normatively desired behaviour representative of internal and external stakeholders.

2. Stakeholder Voice: Include the on-going identification of all stakeholder groups, market and non-market stakeholders, in the organisation’s strategic management processes and determine stakeholder needs and expectations on a routine basis.

3. Balanced Objectives and Goals: Organisations should firstly adhere to the principle that internal organisational variety (complexity) needs to match the extent of the external variety (complexity) imposed on the organisation. Secondly, they should recognise that “variety” refers to the range and dynamic nature of market and non-market stakeholder needs and expectations.  Finally, organisations should develop overall organisational objectives and goals that are most likely to promote joint production.

His closing remarks included that mining organisations in South Africa need to ensure that all legitimate stakeholders are more actively involved in the value creation and trade processes. Organisational alignment needs to be understood as ground-level pragmatism as opposed to lofty moral principles if it is to drive sustainable performance.

Presentation: Dr Floris Burger, Organisational Alignment, SACMA 1 November 2019

LinkedIn:        https://www.linkedin.com/in/floris-burger-8b450943/

Facebook:      @CompetitiveDI

Still on unlocking your organization’s potential through people…

Visionary companies compensate people well without discrimination. There’s no need in having a budget on team building events and motivation when you don’t compensate them well in the first place. The package should be attractive for all levels both junior and senior. There are industry averages for benchmarking; you can choose to be upper quartile. Visionary companies would rather pay everyone well and peg it to a high pressure team bonus system than underpay. When the junior staff feel well taken care of they won’t have a problem if the bosses are well taken care of too.

Some of the conflicts and industrial strikes witnessed around us are based on this one fact; the lower levels perceive that the senior ones are well compensated and better taken care of than they are. This creates the “WE” vs “THEY” mentality. With this you can’t build a lasting visionary organization. You will even have serious challenges achieving your short term objectives.

The right leaders will also help create an environment of empowerment and teamwork. Level 5 leaders allow their people to brainstorm and to problem-solve for decision making. They allow everyone in the organization to make a contribution and give an improvement idea regarding their work and business at large. They encourage original ideas from everyone in the organization. Some have stumbled on new products as a result of this. They foster team spirit and encourage cooperation between departments and teams, thus eliminating conflict and fostering growth.

Great leaders in visionary companies understand that the people dimension goes beyond their employees and extends to customer and suppliers as well. Toyota for example, a great visionary lean enterprise, has made Respect for People and Continuous Improvement its pillars. These visionary companies cooperate with their Key Accounts, Dealers, Agents, Distributors, Partners’ and Suppliers. They consider their partners’ incentives as equally important as employee pay packages. They will train and develop them in-order to build a lean, visionary enterprise. In most cases they have agreed to grow together. Toyota will go into a joint venture with a supplier it considers key, if it has to in order to meet its objectives, rather than list a new supplier. They want to retain their best partners as much as they want to retain their best employees!

Once you have set the people dimension well in place, be sure to anchor it to a culture of Continuous Improvement which should (if possible) be embedded in the company’s core values to ensure continuity & cushion the business against laxity which will very easily lead to complacency.

A great leader, also known as a Level 5 Leader, is one who possesses Extreme Personal Humility and Intense Professional will.

SOURCE:

Built to Last, Good to Great, The Toyota Way

Would you like to send us a comment?
Write to info@cdi-ama.biz

Research shows that all great and enduring businesses with at least 50 years of exemplary performance discovered one secret; there’s no short cut when it comes to success. They were blessed with Level 5 leaders through whom their enduring legacies were built.

A level 5 leader is not concerned about his/her personal credit or glory but rather how to build and leave behind a lasting successful business. These leaders understood that in order to win they must first answer the question of “Who” should be in the team.  With the right people in your team you can then steer the business in any direction that’s deemed appropriate.

But exactly who is the right person to have in your team? Level 5 leaders understand that the right person is best determined by more innate qualities e.g. Work Ethic, Adaptability, Integrity, Personal beliefs & values etc. These qualities can be taught but can’t be attained by people who generally aren’t built up as such. Rather than spend resources and time trying to change a person to be more motivated about their work you’d rather hire a person already self-motivated about life in general and help them acquire the skills needed for the job. For Level 5 leaders, Qualifications, Specialized skills and work experience were not a primary consideration. These can be acquired.

Once you have the right people in your team, then together you can figure out what suits the business best to make it valuable to society, shareholders and the workers in the long-run. The danger would be to identify the best business, strategy or continuous improvement initiative to get into and then due to lack of focus or a clear path for the future to keep changing when times are tough, or when we don’t quickly see results. At the slightest resistance we change or kill our continuous improvement programs before we have seen the results. A farmer will not simply quit his trade because of bad weather in one season. He must try for several seasons to really know if farming a particular crop is worthwhile or not.

Likewise our continuous improvement initiatives ought to be given a chance, 3-5 years to see initial results, and for sustainability we ought to hold onto them 10 years or longer because with every plough, the ground is getting more ready to yield a crop

A good strategy or continuous improvement initiative shouldn’t be abandoned every time we have a new CEO or Management Team. The enduring businesses (Over 100 years with the youngest being 80 years) spent a lot of years in the buildup, researching, testing & trying different options without making a profit, some near bankruptcy until their best ideas came to fruition. Once identified, they then stuck to the lane and have never looked back. Have profits followed them? Yes, year in year out for decades.

Consistency and focus will lead to sustainability of your strategic plans including Continuous Improvement Programs.  Sustainability will yield to an enduring legacy, which benefits Society, Team members and the business owners!

Don’t hang up your boots yet. Stay focused for sustainability.

REFERENCE COMPANIES:

Toyota Motor Company, Kimberly-Clark, Walgreens, Fannie Mae, Wells Fargo

Article 3 of a series of 3.

Inconsistency in our organization may be the quickest method of squashing a CI initiative. A clear message supported with consistent actions defines the expectations and standards that drive continuous improvement programs. Employees need to know what to expect and what is asked of them. Mixed messages and grey areas inspire the variability within organizations that can undermine the results we desire. Defined standards supported by accountability stabilize that daily rhythm of continuous improvement.

Finding this consistency and rhythm of your CI initiative alleviates the organizational fear of the unknown. There will always be a level of chaos or disruption in every organization. A CI culture identifies the process to address these disruptions and abnormalities. That process and new routines, can become that one dependable and constant factor in a world of chaos that any level of leadership or employee can lean on in a moment of crisis.

Employee participation to a new process is essential, but perhaps may even spark a rise in fear of failure, as the execution of these routines and behaviors are potentially out of our comfort zone. It may even be implied or misunderstood that failure equals punishment. Perhaps the most important key to a successful and sustainable CI culture is the engagement of our workforce! A statistic published by the Marketing Research Firm, Aberdeen suggests that Companies with engaged employees see 233% greater customer loyalty and a 26% greater annual increase in revenue. Implied punishment and fear is counterintuitive to CI success.

Utilizing tools such as coaching, visual management and reward and recognition provide an organization the opportunity to alleviate fear, encourage ownership, shift cultural habits and foster engagement. These tools are part of that daily CI rhythm and consistency necessary to close the gaps and sustain a CI culture.

Leaders inherently play the pivotal role of successful CI transformation. The journey starts in the day to day routines and activities that we perform as an organization – these “habits” secure the commitment of the leadership team and build the foundation for a new organizational culture. Accountability provides us an opportunity to reinforce our cultural habits, foster engagement and to provide sustainment. CI is a journey. It is a new way of working and thinking. It is a process. World Class results are the outcome of adhering to a good process!

To know more about this visit:

Article 2 of a series of 3.

Often, the introduction of a CI initiative is accompanied with some amount of training and education for all employees. Certainly, employees must understand the “Why” the initiative is important to the organization in order to foster engagement and commitment. Quite commonly, the “Why” is well received by all. However, the “How” we implement, can seem daunting to employees and a bit overwhelming and misunderstood. Perhaps, it is even perceived as more work and outside of the normal day to day tasks. So how does an organization take the first step?

Organizations frequently use the word transformation when describing the journey of a CI initiative. This implies that over a period of time; the organization has changed the way it thinks, performs and manages the business – a cultural shift – a transformation. A key principle of CI is small changes and improvements over time lead to large scale change and results. One can apply this same philosophy to the CI journey itself. By identifying key behaviors for leadership and implementing those routines and processes over time, we begin the CI journey, reinforcing the cultural shift and leading to large scale change - a transformation.

By providing supervisors and managers with a thoughtful and structured process for daily/weekly and monthly routines, we create the necessary momentum needed to lead this transformation. Adherence to this process is extremely important in the early stages and can help ease the overwhelming feeling of the “How do we do it?”. Until a new process becomes “the way we do business”, constant reinforcement, coaching and accountability is critical.

In Brandon Hall Group’s 2014 State of Performance Management Survey, 34% of global organizations said that executives do not hold leaders accountable for performance.

To assure sustainment of a new organizational culture, it becomes necessary to build accountability into the process. It is natural for leaders to fall back on what they know or what they have done in the past – especially in a moment of crisis for the organization. Certainly, new behaviors and routines take time to become the new standard or habits of the organization.

By providing our leadership with a clear set of expectations and obligations, we eliminate those grey areas of individual management style, define common goals, standardize best practices that drive performance and reinforce the commitment and support to the frontline workforce. Essentially, setting the stage and closing the gaps for a CI transformation.

To know more about this visit:

On 3^rd October CDI East Africa hosted a workshop to present aspects of the Mission-Directed Work-Teams™  (MDW™) program for workplace excellence at the Strathmore University Business School in Nairobi.

Faith Kimani, director of CDI - East Africa, coordinated the workshop and introduced Dr Ian Matheson of parent company CDI-AMA (Africa, Middle East, Americas). Ian shared many principles and anecdotes that differentiated the practices espoused in Mission-Directed Work-Teams™, and which resulted in superior performance compared with those adopted by traditional companies. Ian has been active in promotion of World Class business practice for over a quarter century and has been responsible for implementation of the program at sites in Europe, Asia, Australasia, Africa and the Americas. The program has been applied in 80 countries in all sectors of business in manufacturing, mining, government, banking, supply chain, administration and other companies.

The delegates were drawn from both Kenya and Uganda. Several had already commenced with the program at their companies. Feedback was positive and it has been decided that similar workshops should be scheduled in 2019. Details will be available next year. For further information on the program please contact Faith Kimani at Faith@cdi-ama.biz or Dr Ian Matheson at ian@cdi.biz, or alternatively check the website at www.cdi-ama.biz for more information and updates.

In the previous article on the subject of organizations as living systems it was explained that organizations function within an open system environment. In this article I will discuss how, within the aforementioned context, the application of Mission Directed Work Teams™ (MDW™) improves organizational performance.

First, organizational performance may be viewed as the degree to which the organization is able to maximize cash flow in a sustainable way. Second, the aforementioned can be achieved if the allocation of resources is balanced in such a way that the expectations of all its legitimate stakeholders are addressed in a sustainable way, that is, each stakeholder group needs to be satisfied with the appropriation of value as a result of the value created, measured against their contribution to the value creation process.

Systems theory is often used as a conceptual framework for describing and analyzing organizational-relevant events that are interrelated in a persistent manner. Such relationships are on-going because they sustain themselves by acquiring energy and information input from external, environmental events. These phenomena include groups of individuals in inter-dependent relationships, and the interaction of these individuals with their environment, governed by the principle of equilibrium.

The table below contains a summary of system characteristics and associated descriptions and is followed by a brief discussion on each characteristic. The article then discusses how MDW™ practices apply to an organization’s performance (that is, the system’s performance) and closes with suggested key habits of system-thinking managers.

Table 1

Inputs consist of information and signals from the environment and system functioning as well as materials and information that are to be transformed into products and services. Inputs also describe antecedents as well as enabling or constraining factors on role players’ interactions. These include individual characteristics (for example, competencies, personalities, personal values), team or group-level factors (for example, task structure, external leader influences, demographics), and organizational and contextual factors (for example, organizational design features, environmental complexity).

In an operational sense, throughputs refer to the processes required to transform inputs into outputs (typically goods and/or services), that is, to create value. Management’s role is to minimize waste by reducing variability between expectations (in between all legitimate stakeholders) and perceived organizational outcomes.

The cyclicality inherent in the throughput process is largely a process of dynamic planning and re-planning and includes episodic cycles. Episodic cycles refer to situations where different processes are executed at different times, depending on task demands. Whereas throughputs (deliberate processes to transform inputs) are considered to be the primary mediator between inputs and outputs, the emergence systems characteristic refers to internal system states that form over time and its formation is not a direct consequence of the inputs from the environment.

The perspective a manager or an organization as a collective will have of what the value creation process entails will depend on their view on what constitutes value to start off with. The value an organization plans to create is typically incorporated within its purpose or mission statement and subsequent strategic, tactical and operational objectives and goals, leading the discussion to the goals and outcomes systems characteristic. The goals and outcomes of a process may or may not be the same against what was expected (that is, the stated or unstated objectives and goals). Organizational and individual objectives and goals are often completely arbitrary, and the perceived organizational objectives and goals often vary from one person to the next. Importantly, goals are assumed as given inputs into decision-making processes. The values, experiences, and knowledge of leaders in the upper echelons of organizations impact the strategic decisions made by these leaders, ultimately influencing organizational performance. Conditioned by personal values and intra-organizational dynamics, all layers of management will interpret and filter top-down initiated assignments and events. The aforementioned emphasizes the openness of an organizational system.

Although an organization is cognitively open and therefore interacts with its environment – albeit not necessarily in a structured way – it needs to be operationally closed in order to allow constant alignment of purpose. This alignment is required as a counter to entropy – to do so organizations accumulate and store more energy than required as a form of negative entropy. This additional and often redundant energy takes the form of organizational expansion, elaboration and bureaucracy in the form of policy and procedures and is often perceived as constant conflict between flexibility and standardization.

Systems theory influenced many management theorists to envision the organization as more organic and holistic, that is, as an “organism” rather than as a “machine”. Viewed holistically, then, all of an organization’s elements or components are “necessary” to be able to fulfil its purpose. The interdependence characteristic provides the primary reason for looking at an organization as a system. Interaction between role-players (including unilateral communication) takes place because role-players perceive an interdependent relationship triggered by a common goal, service-expectations and process or task dependency. Organizations are essentially a social system, that is, the interacting units are people. Interaction between internal role players as well as with external stakeholders is, therefore, the life blood of organizations. Mutual expectations are agreed upon and variances (outcomes versus expectations) are addressed. Critically, (albeit in a perfect competitive environment) organizations with a narrow view on external as well as internal interdependencies will eventually experience a decline in performance as relationships extinguish or become destructive due to the inadequacy of interaction.

Control mechanisms, that is, positive and negative feedback loops, maintain the system at some desired state. Triggers from the outside (environment) influence the system to adjust in order to maintain a degree of internal order in response to the external environment in which it is embedded. Negative feedback mechanisms reduce the effect of these fluctuations, while positive feedback mechanisms increase these fluctuations to sustain this equilibrium state.

Adaptation refers to the preservation and changing of the character of the organization. Adaptation also refers to the organization’s renewal as it responds to threats and opportunities in its environment. Organizations are required to change and adapt in response to environmental fluctuations in order to sustain function and retain advantage. Related to the concept of adaptation is organizations’ responsiveness. Responsiveness involves two organizational capabilities namely its ability to anticipate change in its external environment and also the speed it is able to respond. In an open system, environmental interchange is on-going and because the environment is in a constant state of change, the system must be adaptable. This adaptability should go beyond homeostasis to accommodate self-organization (control) following a destabilizing event. Parts of a system must behave in accordance with its rules and must adapt to the environment on the basis of feedback, which explains the ways systems use their own outcomes to gauge effect and make necessary adjustments.

Open systems are self-governing or autonomous, but not “independent” in as much as they are conditioned by the environment and its inputs. An open system must be capable of sensing deviations from the ‘‘assigned’’ norm and of correcting these tendencies thereby maintaining a degree of balance. A primary function of the interacting subsystems (that is, departments or groups of individuals within an organization) is to help maintain system balance. Not all systems have equal capacity to adapt. Highly chaotic systems cannot maintain their behaviors, as small forces can result in systems disruption (the so-called butterfly effect). Highly chaotic systems have too few stable components and tend to fail due to too little buffering and low adaptability. On the other hand, highly ordered systems are often too rigid to coordinate new behaviors and likewise tend to fail. As organizations expand, the need arises for increased integration and coordination as a counter.

The characteristic of equifinality in open systems means the same final state can be reached from differing conditions and a variety of paths. In an organizational context, equifinality therefore means that the final state – for example the performance goals of an organization – can be achieved through multiple and different organizational structures and processes, even if the contingencies the organization face are the same. Related to the equifinality characteristic of open systems the essence of systems thinking lies in a shift from seeing interrelationships rather than linear cause-and-effect chains.

System hierarchy refers to the attribute that every complex system consists of a number of subsystems that have levels of increasing complexity. Organizational subsystems are composed of interconnected role-players that form a network of linkages that interact nonlinearly to form the organization’s unique identity. The hierarchy of complexity within an organization would be: an individual, a group, and the organization.

How does Mission Directed Work Teams™ (MDW™) application improve system functioning – and thereby organizational performance? MDW™ is a structured process that intensively involves all team members in high-engagement top-down cascades creating understanding, dialogue, feedback (bottom-up) and accountability. It empowers team leaders to creatively align their teams and individual roles with the overall objectives and goals of the organization and to involve team members in problem-solving key variances.

The MDW™ approach considers current teams as the smallest unit of analysis from an organizational behavior perspective. This allows a sound balance between the overall macro view of the organization (the overall organization being more than the sum of its parts) and the opposite each-individual employee view on organizational behavior (a reductionist view).

Each team is required to develop their team purpose supporting the overall mission of the organization. The aforementioned, however, should not be a top-down process only. As teams develop their respective purpose statements it should inform the overall mission of the organization. Teams are, furthermore, required to routinely provide evidence of their understanding of the organizational mission, overall strategy as well as strategy execution status. To this end, it is expected of team leaders to engage in sense making, that is, team leaders need to describe and rationalize organizational-relevant events and circumstances to team members. It goes further, though, as team leaders need to put external-to-organizational events that impact the organization into context for team members. Linked to the development of a team purpose would be the norms and values the team members prescribe to. Striving towards adherence to common values has been proven to be a key organizational alignment enabler and it also contributes to system stability and predictability.

Next, team leaders and their team members need to manage the input of information from various stakeholders of which their team leader’s principal and the team’s customers are the primary sources. With frontline level teams, the aforementioned as well as the teams’ suppliers are focused on. However, the more senior the team, the wider the periphery of stakeholders will be and, therefore, increasingly includes the balance of stakeholders (e.g. organized labor, the community, external suppliers, government institutions, shareholders). Structured engagement between role players with the aim to reduce variances is the cornerstone of MDW™ practices, hence the identification of each team’s stakeholders, based on perceived dependencies, is of critical importance as to ensure the interacting units internal to the organization as well as with external parties are formally ‘’connected’’ and that mutual expectations are clearly defined.

The cyclicality characteristic of a system is dampened through the application of MDW™ practices since teams are required to continuously align and re-align their objectives and goals with that of their stakeholders, therefore applying a more dynamic approach compared to the typical quarterly individual performance management activities, for example. The use of standardized MDW™ visual tools also reduce perceived organizational complexity and system cyclicality.

Teams are required to identify a balanced set of objectives and goals aligned with their key stakeholders’ objectives and goals. Balanced objectives and goals will include aspects such as quality, speed, cost, safety and people. The aforementioned should, furthermore, reflect balance pertaining to time horizons (that is, short and long term objectives and goals). With set trigger levels for problem solving, team leaders engage in problem solving activities in order to return to plan but also to prevent re-occurrence whilst behavior that led to the meeting objectives and goals are strengthened. Team leaders need to continuously balance the resource allocation (time and material) between their key stakeholders in order to maintain the optimum level of system stability. When cascading objectives and goals, managers should be reminded of the equifinality system characteristic, that is, the same final state can be reached from different initial conditions as well as through different strategies. This will allow team leaders to creatively align their teams’ objectives and goals with the organizations mission and should result not only in more realistic and relevant objectives and goals but also increased ownership and subsequent increased accountability.

MDW™ practices are also well suited to ensure that all teams and by default, then, the organization, continuously adapt to its changing environments. This is achieved by teams staying ‘’close’’ to their respective stakeholders’ expectations and taking corrective (and preventative) action when expectations are not met (single feedback learning). Teams, however, are also encouraged to practice double feedback learning during which they challenge the assumptions behind objectives and goals for their validity. The aforementioned also counters entropy and often, organizations realize that continuous improvement is often only good enough ‘’just to keep up’’ with the changing environment, hence many organizations rather subscribe to continuous change instead of periodic efforts to make step changes.

To summarize. Through the application of MDW™ practices, organizations optimize system performance by institutionalizing structured engagement between stakeholders with the main objective being to reduce variances between expectations and perceived outcomes.

My suggested key habits of systems-thinking managers:

1. Optimise the overall purpose of the organization by looking for common objectives between stakeholders;
2. Identify the system elements by looking for patterns of interaction;
3. Identify the level and asymmetry of dependency between interacting units through the identification of cause and effect;
4. Provide context to subsystems (teams) by engaging in sense-making discussions; and
5. Facilitate learning experiences through inclusive problem solving.

In closing, from Yuval Harari – ‘’in a world deluged by irrelevant information, clarity is power’’.

References:

• Burger, F.J. 2016. An organizational alignment framework to improve South African mining companies. North West University.
• Burnard, K. & Bhamra, R. 2011. Organizational resilience: development of a conceptual framework for organizational responses. International journal of production research, 49(18):5581-5599.
• Burnes, B. 2009. Managing change. 5th ed. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
• Capra, F. 1996. The web of life. Anchor Books.
• Carroll, A.B. & Buchholtz, A.K. 2012. Business and society: ethics and stakeholder management. 8th ed. Mason, OH: South-Western College.
• Colbert, A.E., Kristoff-Brown, B.H., Bradley, B.H. & Barrick, M.R. 2008. CEO transformational leadership: the role of goal importance congruence in top management teams. Academy of management journal, 51(1):81-96.
• Ford, R. 2008. Complex adaptive systems and improvisation theory: toward framing a model to enable continuous change. Journal of change management, 8(3/4):173-198.
• Gresov, C. & Drazin, R. 1997. Equifinality: functional equivalence in organization design. Academy of management review, 22(2):403-428.
• Gunaratne, S.A. 2008. Understanding systems theory: transition from equilibrium to entropy. Asian journal of communication, 18(3):175-192.
• Jensen, M.C. & Meckling, W.H. 1976. Theory of the firm: managerial behaviour, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of financial economics, 2(4):305-360.
• Kahn, A., Barton, A. & Fellows, S. 2013. Organizational crises and the disturbance of relational systems. Academy of management review, 38(3):377-396.
• Kozlowski, S.W. J. & Ilgen, D.R. 2006. Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams.   Psychological science in the public interest, 7(3):77-124.
• Lazenby, J.A.A. 2007. Ethics, identity and organizational learning: challenges for South African managers. Proceedings of world academy of science, engineering and technology, 24:25-30, October.
• Lepmets, M., McBride, T. & Ras, E. 2012. Goal alignment in process improvement. The journal of systems and software, 85:1440-1452.
• Mathieu, J., Maynard, M.T., Rapp, T. & Gilson, L. 2008. Team effectiveness 1997-2007: a review of recent advancements and a glimpse into the future. Journal of management, 34(3):410-475.
• Sabherwal, R., Hirschheim, R. & Goles, T. 2001. The dynamics of alignment: insights from a punctuated equilibrium model. Organization science, 12(2):179-197.
• Schneider, M. & Somers, M. 2006. Organizations as complex adaptive systems: implications of complexity theory for leadership research. The leadership quarterly, 17:351-365.
• Smets, M., Morris, T. & Greenwood, R. 2012. From practice to field: a multi-level model of practice-driven institutional change. Academy of management journal, 55(4):877-904.

To know more about this visit:

The issue of “trust between Leadership and Employees” as a prerequisite to launching a Continuous Improvement (CI) effort warrants exploration. Few could argue that having a trusting relationship, as employees and management begin working more closely together, is advantageous. But what happens when trust is low? Is it wise to “jump in” and begin an all-out CI initiative when little trust exists? And, what if trust between the parties further deteriorates during the process? Should you throw in the towel and try another time?

Some argue that, without a foundation of trust, nothing can be accomplished, and those, foolish enough to try, are doomed to failure. The solid ground of being able to count on each other (leadership and employees) to act in certain ways, they say, is essential to building a successful and sustainable program. It’s asserted that trust must be strong and is a precondition to beginning any worthwhile effort. I disagree.

High levels of trust are often lacking in organizations, and yet these businesses have no choice but to improve performance in order to be competitive in their industry. Distrust may have been fomented over years or even decades, and people have learned to be wary of promises of new investment and employee engagement. Employees, salary and hourly alike, have learned to always keep their eyes wide open and expect that this “flavour of the month” won’t last very long. No one wishes to play the fool! Employees and Leaders, by experience and instinct, look out for their own personal interests and don’t necessarily equate success of the business to their individual benefit.

So, the question remains, when trust is weak and yet change is necessary, is it wise to move ahead?

I SAY YES and suggest you take the leap and begin now – regardless of the trust level. The very fact that consideration is being given to launching a CI effort is evidence that improving performance is vital – to both the business and ultimately to all employees. It is also a fact that neither leadership nor employees can go it alone – they need each other.

So, after years in the trenches and launching several dozens of CI efforts, I have come to the view that real trust can be a by-product of working more closely and collaboratively together. When people do what they say they will do repeatedly, time after time, trust will increase.

To know more about this visit:

Success is a concept that is understood by most people without even giving a precise meaning to it, because everybody, in the course of life, has already been in situations where the “success” or “failure” in a specific activity would have a huge impact in their future life. Who has never experienced anxiety before, during or after that important GCSE or matric exam?

The success for organisations can be defined as something similar, but in this case “the success” should be very specific and defined. To achieve the survival of the company, to succeed consistently and systematically in its operations or to thrive positively can be synonymous with the success that companies should and can aim to achieve.

Therefore, success is not static, something that is achieved and there ends the story, like an Olympic medal can mean for a great athlete. Success is something that should be achieved and nurtured at all times, even considering that, at the time of its existence the meaning of success can be modified, being adapted to the size of the organisation.

The achievement of success is particularly critical in every type of organisation from small owner-managed businesses to medium and large companies managed by big teams of people of different disciplines. In this moment, as noted by Peter Drucker, it is necessary to accord a special attention to cooperation, synchronization and communication between people.

Whatever the nature of the search for the desired success, it will only be successful if the personnel cooperate with each other in an active and conscious way to achieve the goals and objectives. It is necessary that people want to work together, much more than to work individually.

In addition to working together, it is critical that the work is synchronized in a correct way. It is not worth working together, but finishing the processes at an inopportune moment, when they have not generated the desired results.

The processes of communication allow that cooperation and synchronization can occur in an active and precise way. The precise transmission of necessary information, with the clear feedback of its receipt and understanding is what will assure that the organisations achieve and maintain more results, in the greater meaning of PROSPERITY ALWAYS!

The researchers of the success of the organisations, being managers, thinkers, directors, managers of processes of continuous improvements, agree, however, that the key to the success of any organisation lies in the people who work in it and their relationships.

For this reason, to achieve success, an organisation should be successful in organisation of its people, in cooperation, synchronization and communication amongst them all.

For this reason, to help companies, of any size, around the world, the team of Competitive Dynamics International, especially CDI Brasil, has created MDW Program – Mission-Directed Work Teams, following and implementing the best world practices to achieve and sustain the SUCCESS OF ORGANISATIONS.

To know more about this visit:

Have you heard something like this: "I can not make the meeting today, so  I will re-schedule it for...".

Throughout my career as a consultant in continuous improvement and business transformation, I have had the opportunity to visit many organizations in different countries of North and South America. Regardless of the industry, the size of the organization or the region in which they are located, I have found that one of the first obstacles, when starting the journey towards world-class, is the skepticism around holding regular team meetings.

The apathy to meet (especially of active operational people) can have many origins and a lot has been written on the subject. There are numerous articles on how to hold an effective meeting.

Maybe, instead of repeating constantly how to have effective meetings, we should pay attention to the cost of having unproductive meetings.

According to research done¹, only in the United States of America:

• There are 11 million ineffective meetings every day. This amounts to 4 billion a year.
• More than 50% of the people surveyed said that having meetings is an unproductive activity. This amounts to 2 billion a year.
• Unnecessary meetings cost companies $ 37 million annually, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
• Two thirds of the meetings end before reaching a decision. This means that problems are not resolved in time or are not resolved at all, delaying the achievement of objectives.

To have an idea of what your particular scenario is, you only need to do the calculation: how much time is spent in all those meetings and how much does it cost in terms of unproductive employee hours? What is the value of an inconclusive meeting?

All of you who are or have implemented MDW ™ know that team meetings are an essential element towards improving communication and achieving goals in the organization and that there is also a correlation between effective teams and the results of the organization.

So, why do we continue having fruitless meetings? Neuroscience gives us a possible answer:   Habits.    Or simply put,  "This is the way we've always done it."

From experience, I offer you a series of clues that can help you know the existence of this problem by identifying if your team has these habits:

1. Meetings ramble on with no predetermined time standards.

Unplanned events are a source of stress at work. The absence of a plan or frequent postponement of meetings will introduce significant stress in the team through continuous changes in the daily work routine.

2. Distractors are allowed to interrupt the meeting.

An interruption of 5 minutes may require approximately 20 minutes for the team member to recover the initial concentration level. This category includes the WhatsApp being answered during the meeting and the e-mail that we can not wait to read.

3. It is acceptable practice that the participants to the meeting arrive unprepared (without issues clarified, solutions considered or pertinent data gathered).

This is one of the key reasons whereby decisions are not made on time and the negative effects of the problem persist.

4. The meeting is handled as a brainstorming session.

This is one of the most common issues that mask the experience of point 3, mentioned above. Members arrive at the meeting to "throw ideas into the air" instead of coming up with firm ideas, based on facts and previously submitted information.

5. Nobody is held accountable (or responsible) for closing the actions of the meeting.

The group is allowed to delay the execution of decisions as many times as they wish. They do not follow-up on agreed actions and do not worry about clearly summarizing new ones at the end of the meeting.

6. The actions are not clearly described.

Each action agreed should include the deliverable and output to be obtained, the responsable person and the due date.

7. Generating a good vibe in the group is more important than the productivity of the team.

Personal relationships are not the same as productive relationships. The ideal is to achieve the second without sacrificing the first.

If you are part of the 50% of the population that considers team meetings a waste of time, the probability is high that you are following some of the steps mentioned above.   The good news is that every habit can be changed, through:

(a) The constant application of the the good practices until they becomes new habits. Try to eliminate all the negative behaviours described above.

(b) Introduce a program which will address the negative practices, which render our meetings unproductive.

Notes:

(1 ) https://www.bls.gov/

To know more about the importances of habits in a productive environment visit:

Show & Tell Online in Spanish

In this Show & Tell Online we discuss:

• Characteristics of a succesful continuous improvement initiative.
• Role of leaders within the organization.
• Key ingredients for sustainability of results.
• Lessons learnt while implementing MDW™.

Originally aired: 17 January 2018 at 19:00 UTC.

Hosted by:  Rosa Zapata (Partner, CDI Latin America)

Time: 76 minutes.

When embarking on a new program, the question we often hear is “How soon will it be before we see results?”. The answer is always “It depends!”.

Any site has a combination of low-hanging fruit and the less obvious improvement opportunities. Curtiss-Wright’s Shelby, NC plant proves that with good leadership, energized teams and visual management it is possible to start harvesting very quickly. The site experienced a major upswing in quality and overall business results as described in this excerpt from their in-house magazine SOAR.

The best news is that these improvements have been sustained and continue to grow. Is it the same in your site? If not your company might be missing out.

For more information about this you can visit:

The results have exceeded our original expectations and have really been nothing short of spectacular...

See full  

In a very small company one frequently encounters Jacks-of-all-Trades, who know almost everything that is going on in the company. They understand both the suppliers and the customers, they know the people in the company by name, they arrange production schedules and equipment maintenance. Without them the company would be paralysed. However, as the company grows these key players must be replaced by systems, which provide the same service. None is more important than the Supply Chain Management (SCM) function. They are the brain and spinal cord, i.e. the Central Nervous System, which must be able to guarantee that materials, spares and services are available at exactly the right place, in exactly the right quantity and at exactly the right time.

One such large, successful company is Sasol. Sasol is a leading global player in the petrochemical business, based in South Africa but with operations around the world. In early 2016 Sasol engaged CDI to introduce the Mini-Business^® model in Procurement teams in three centres, and has seen significant performance improvements in almost all of their key performance indicators. 2018 will see the process rolled out further into Demand Management teams in several centres. These critical players provide the link between the operational sites and the Procurement functions to ensure excellence in the supply chain. The first workshop is now behind us and we look forward to seeing the same success as was delivered in Procurement.

We started with CDI at the end of 2013. At the time we had low performance in cost, efficiency, safety and quality. Also, we had a low level of people engagement towards business objectives. After a leadership reorganizaation and rethinking strategies, we started to strongly follow and monitor the implementation of MDW ^TM module 1 as one of the pillars for change. This module was key to aligning the efforts of operational staff with the plant strategy, mission and vision, as well as in the incorporation of a greater number of people in managing change through innovation, recognition, commitment and creating the required sense of belonging. The Multi-Level Meeting has been a key element to achieve this.

As a result, we can say that the targets expected to be achieved in a three years plan were achieved mostly in the first year. For example: 12% improvement in OEE Crushing, 25% improvement in cost per tonne Crushing, 7% improvement in specific steam consumption, 45% improvement in accident statistics, 3% improvement in recovery of fat, and much more.

A good strategy together with a good choice of goals, committed managers and senior management assistance in implementing MDW ^TM was very important.

We have much to do, but the results exceeded our expectations in the first year. This is an example of what aligned, committed and motivated people can achieve, even in a complex and challenging environments like ours.

Carlo Westaway

Irrespective of the quality of their communication, world-class organisations always strive to improve their practices related to this topic. This is no exception at the Entyce Beverages Coffee and Creamer plant in Johannesburg, South Africa, a division of the AVI Group of Companies.

Carlo Westaway, the operations executive for the above plant is continuously working on initiatives to improve communication and improve engagement amongst the employees reporting to him.

Carlo fully subscribes to the fact that monthly multi-level meetings improve top-down, bottom-up and horizontal communication. After some very successful MDT1 multi-level meetings where team leaders presented their monthly mini-business results to the plant leadership and peers, Carlo identified at least two improvement opportunities related to multi-level meetings.

Opportunity 1: MDT2 Multi-Level Meetings
As leading by example is a key value for Carlo he also instituted a monthly multi-level meeting for the MDT2 teams at the plant. At this session, each Head of Department presents progress on key deliverables to his/her peers. The MDT1 and MDT2 multi-level meetings take place during successive weeks each month and the presentation agenda for each level of team is determined by the key opportunities and initiatives at the plant.

Opportunity 2: Team Leaders Presenting to Business Executives
Not only is the multi-level meeting an ideal opportunity to highlight progress and opportunities, it is also a perfect springboard to celebrate success and recognize good performance. Carlo has therefore given winning team leaders from the MDT1 multi-level meetings the opportunity to present their multi-level meeting presentation to the business directors during the monthly director’s visit to the plant. This has assisted Carlo to indicate to the directors the personal and team development practices achieved through MDW.

Another key drive at the plant to keep all employees informed of the latest news and information is a regular newsletter, covering various topics that is posted at various key positions on site as well as handed out to employees.

Below are contents from the Entyce Beverages Coffee and Creamer plant “Spill the Beans” Newsletter (Quarter 4, 2017). This edition gives specific attention to the MDW teams at the plant.

Well done to Carlo and his team for driving great people practices to improve engagement!

To know more about this, visit:

What do you think about when you hear the word NASA? Surely, some alternatives could be: ships, space travel, technology and science ... but, if you are like me, in addition to these words, surely you also have the perception of a place where people work with a high – if not the highest - Technical and scientific level in its field.

Chris Hadfield, Canadian astronaut, describes in his book An Astronaut's Guide to Life on Earth, not only the rigorous training that astronauts undergo, physically and mentally, but also, the mystique that exists in NASA to analyze every situation ... it does not matter how small or insignificant it may seem. Imagine having to screw something, wearing a heavy suit that makes movement difficult, in an environment where everything - including that screw - is hostile! It's no wonder that the ability to make Formal Problem Resolution is vital for NASA and that each astronaut must possess it. Considering all this, engineers and scientists at NASA should be able to solve any problem and not need anyone else, right? Not so much ...

In 2016, NASA made public the Space Poop Challenge, which sought to solve the management of human waste in space. Considering that every day, the possibility of humans traveling to Mars or beyond takes more weight, giving a solution to this type of situation becomes imperative. The interesting thing about this initiative is that the challenge was launched to the public, so that any citizen could offer suggestions on how to solve this problem satisfactorily, and help NASA with, say, this small detail.

5,000 proposals were received, 19,000 people grouped into 150 teams from each country and continent participated. In February 2017, NASA announced the winner, Mr. Thatcher Cardon, whose proposal was based on his experience as a surgeon. Its design has a tiny air chamber in the crotch of the suit, through which items such as catheters and inflatable panels can be passed.

This story is interesting because it confirms something that we often forget: Human beings like to solve problems. From the moment we learned to make fire to this day, fighting against climate change, our history and evolution has been based on the Formal Problem Resolution.

In most companies and business environments, it is probably where we least remember this. The maelstrom of everyday life and the volatility of markets makes us assume that only those who are in a leadership position have the ability to understand daily problems and provide solutions. The participation of the collaborators, especially those in highly operational positions, is almost nil and, all the potential of obtaining creative and economic solutions for the company, is lost. In addition, there are other factors that influence us to not take advantage of all that potential in companies:

1. The human being, by nature, likes to solve problems, but that does not mean that the way he does it is the most efficient. It is not about knowing what tools exist, but about which one should be used in each case in particular.
2. Formal Resolution of Problems, requires a good dose of humility and not trying to impose the point of view we have or force what we believe is the solution, but address the situation without prejudice. Arrogance does not fit in the Formal Problem Resolution.
3. Complying with points 1 and 2 is not enough, but a healthy problem solving culture is generated. A culture, where - as in NASA - no situation remains uninvestigated and without finding the root cause.

Let's accept it, to solve problems (claims of a client or a high number of defects) in a correct and definitive way is not easy and takes time, which is a contradiction in the time in which we live, where we expect things to happen quickly, and where managers expect the answers to occur almost spontaneously. And, if we add to this an atmosphere of fear or retaliation, things get complicated. But with determination and an adequate process, it is possible to improve the quality of the analysis process and therefore, the quality of the results, based on a true Organizational Culture of Formal Problem Resolution.

I find the elements in this story almost symbolic, and as NASA has realized that the alternatives to better solutions increase when we involve more people. The human being likes to solve problems ... and he likes to be part of the solution even more. Can you assure that in your company each collaborator is a true problem solver? If your answer is no, your company is wasting a golden opportunity and it´s time to do something about it.

To know more about how to achieve a true Culture of Formal Problem Resolution visit:

References:
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/16/tech/nasa-space-poop-challenge-winner-announced-trnd/index.html
An Astronaut's Guide to Life on Earth. Hadfield, Chris. Hachette Book Group, 2013.
Más sobre Chris Hadfield (youtube song).

When I first thought of team metrics, I thought it was just a boring thing to learn and taking 8 minutes out of our day (was a waste of time). But since a year has passed, I have learned so much of what everyone does in the company that contributes to make it better. This process helps everyone get along better and being willing to help one another to improve - for the company and to reach a goal for yourself. It’s not just individually coming to work day by day, you have an open area to learn from - the mini-business unit. It’s all about what you make of it.

Prior lean implementations gave us improvements in process but did not really involve the people. The MDW^TM structure is all about getting the people engaged.

Mission-Directed Work-Teams® has consistently demonstrated a very positive impact on plant safety measures.
Significant declines in work related lost time injuries are noted, improving both the health and welfare of the employees and the bottom line costs to the enterprise. The added plus is that the process fosters a culture of safety awareness

Lorem ipsum donec mattis mi congue non pellentesque luctus, sociosqu justo id ultrices sapien aliquet curabitur iaculis, ullamcorper malesuada neque auctor nunc tortor vestibulum non gravida taciti mauris sem sagittis lectus tellus fringilla ornare consequat, nulla auctor inceptos ullamcorper euismod massa vehicula habitasse sem porta, sapien mollis bibendum suspendisse fringilla tempus dictumst.

Finally, for many of us headphones have become as much a fashion item as a piece of audio gear. That’s fine, but you don’t have to sacrifice decent sound for an eye-catching design, though you’re likely to pay.

Curabitur aptent pharetra porta lorem viverra nec vivamus fermentum dapibus, auctor odio lorem cubilia ultrices ut dictum tempus, donec elit aliquam nisi augue ipsum malesuada quisque aenean commodo nullam molestie aenean. Malesuada quisque aenean commodo nullam molestie aenean. Lorem ipsum donec mattis mi congue non pellentesque luctus, sociosqu justo id ultrices sapien aliquet curabitur iaculis, ullamcorper malesuada neque auctor nunc tortor vestibulum non gravida taciti mauris sem sagittis lectus tellus fringilla ornare consequat, nulla auctor inceptos ullamcorper euismod massa vehicula habitasse sem porta, sapien mollis bibendum suspendisse fringilla tempus dictumst.

Curabitur aptent pharetra porta lorem viverra nec vivamus fermentum dapibus

Lorem ipsum donec mattis mi congue non pellentesque luctus, sociosqu justo id ultrices sapien aliquet curabitur iaculis, ullamcorper malesuada neque auctor nunc tortor vestibulum non gravida taciti mauris sem sagittis lectus tellus fringilla ornare consequat, nulla auctor inceptos ullamcorper euismod massa vehicula habitasse sem porta, sapien mollis bibendum suspendisse fringilla tempus dictumst.

Photographer: Frank Behrens

Ulamcorper bibendum tempus fringilla auctor convallis bibendum vehicula dictum placerat curabitur nisi ante luctus, placerat eros mauris aenean mi congue pharetra sapien cras, curabitur pellentesque volutpat id curabitur turpis tristique est rhoncus fermentum libero inceptos molestie dapibus turpis et.

Lorem ipsum donec mattis mi congue non pellentesque luctus

Curabitur aptent pharetra porta lorem viverra nec vivamus fermentum dapibus, auctor odio lorem cubilia ultrices ut dictum tempus, donec elit aliquam nisi augue ipsum malesuada quisque aenean commodo nullam molestie aenean. Lorem ipsum donec mattis mi congue non pellentesque luctus, sociosqu justo id ultrices sapien aliquet curabitur iaculis, ullamcorper malesuada neque auctor nunc tortor vestibulum non gravida taciti mauris sem sagittis lectus tellus fringilla ornare consequat, nulla auctor inceptos ullamcorper euismod massa vehicula habitasse sem porta, sapien mollis bibendum suspendisse fringilla tempus dictumst.

Curabitur aptent pharetra porta lorem viverra nec vivamus fermentum dapibus,auctor odio lorem cubilia ultrices ut dictum tempus, donec elit aliquam nisi augue ipsum malesuada quisque aenean commodo nullam molestie aenean tristique lectus iaculis viverra consequat conubia, ultricies ad fames malesuada justo bibendum lobortis nec. Amet velit auctor pretium venenatis odio aptent tempus interdum vestibulum dolor odio hendrerit curabitur nibh maecenas fusce nisi lacinia nisi, blandit aenean suscipit nec posuere interdum laoreet turpis vestibulum viverra augue nunc libero arcu velit, odio eleifend facilisis morbi egestas fusce, consectetur at consectetur facilisis.

Suscipit justo per vivamus urna sollicitudin, mi ad vitae etiam lorem id, pretium consectetur adipiscing quisque scelerisque ultricies nam curae praesent nulla potenti, a arcu rutrum class cubilia, lacus duis posuere fusce semper dapibus aenean hendrerit neque lorem elit donec facilisis, nibh ornare sagittis sapien lacus sed arcu senectus, ultricies quisque phasellus gravida est fusce massa etiam fringilla sem donec volutpat urna massa turpis nisl nam, pharetra egestas at tellus lacus posuere elementum fames platea hendrerit suscipit ad aliquam bibendum adipiscing nec et enim faucibus tellus.

Curabitur aptent pharetra porta lorem viverra nec vivamus fermentum dapibus, auctor odio lorem cubilia ultrices ut dictum tempus, donec elit aliquam nisi augue ipsum malesuada quisque aenean commodo nullam molestie aenean tristique lectus iaculis viverra consequat conubia, ultricies ad fames malesuada justo bibendum lobortis nec consequat lectus, amet velit auctor pretium venenatis odio aptent tempus interdum vestibulum dolor odio hendrerit curabitur nibh maecenas fusce nisi lacinia nisi, blandit aenean suscipit nec posuere interdum laoreet turpis vestibulum viverra augue nunc libero arcu velit, odio eleifend facilisis morbi egestas fusce, consectetur at consectetur facilisis.

1. Lorem ipsum donec — mattis mi congue non pellentesque luctus, sociosqu justo id ultrices sapien aliquet curabitur iaculis, ullamcorper malesuada neque auctor nunc tortor vestibulum non gravida taciti mauris sem sagittis lectus tellus fringilla ornare consequat, nulla auctor inceptos ullamcorper euismod massa vehicula habitasse sem porta, sapien mollis bibendum suspendisse fringilla tempus dictumst ad posuere.
2. Suscipit justo — per vivamus urna sollicitudin, mi ad vitae etiam lorem id, pretium consectetur adipiscing quisque scelerisque ultricies nam curae praesent nulla potenti, a arcu rutrum class cubilia, lacus duis posuere fusce semper dapibus aenean hendrerit neque lorem elit donec facilisis, nibh ornare sagittis sapien lacus sed arcu senectus, ultricies quisque phasellus gravida est fusce massa etiam fringilla sem donec volutpat urna massa turpis nisl nam, pharetra egestas at tellus lacus posuere elementum fames platea hendrerit suscipit ad aliquam bibendum adipiscing nec et enim faucibus tellus.
3. Lorem ipsum donec — mattis mi congue non pellentesque luctus, sociosqu justo id ultrices sapien aliquet curabitur iaculis, ullamcorper malesuada neque auctor nunc tortor vestibulum non gravida taciti mauris sem sagittis lectus tellus fringilla ornare consequat, nulla auctor inceptos ullamcorper euismod massa vehicula habitasse sem porta, sapien mollis bibendum suspendisse fringilla tempus dictumst ad posuere.
4. Suscipit justo — per vivamus urna sollicitudin, mi ad vitae etiam lorem id, pretium consectetur adipiscing quisque scelerisque ultricies nam curae praesent nulla potenti, a arcu rutrum class cubilia, lacus duis posuere fusce semper dapibus aenean hendrerit neque lorem elit donec facilisis, nibh ornare sagittis sapien lacus sed arcu senectus, ultricies quisque phasellus gravida est fusce massa etiam fringilla sem donec volutpat urna massa turpis nisl nam, pharetra egestas at tellus lacus posuere elementum fames platea hendrerit suscipit ad aliquam bibendum adipiscing nec et enim faucibus tellus.
5. Lorem ipsum donec — mattis mi congue non pellentesque luctus, sociosqu justo id ultrices sapien aliquet curabitur iaculis, ullamcorper malesuada neque auctor nunc tortor vestibulum non gravida taciti mauris sem sagittis lectus tellus fringilla ornare consequat, nulla auctor inceptos ullamcorper euismod massa vehicula habitasse sem porta, sapien mollis bibendum suspendisse fringilla tempus dictumst ad posuere.
6. Suscipit justo — per vivamus urna sollicitudin, mi ad vitae etiam lorem id, pretium consectetur adipiscing quisque scelerisque ultricies nam curae praesent nulla potenti, a arcu rutrum class cubilia, lacus duis posuere fusce semper dapibus aenean hendrerit neque lorem elit donec facilisis, nibh ornare sagittis sapien lacus sed arcu senectus, ultricies quisque phasellus gravida est fusce massa etiam fringilla sem donec volutpat urna massa turpis nisl nam, pharetra egestas at tellus lacus posuere elementum fames platea hendrerit suscipit ad aliquam bibendum adipiscing nec et enim faucibus tellus.
7. Lorem ipsum donec — mattis mi congue non pellentesque luctus, sociosqu justo id ultrices sapien aliquet curabitur iaculis, ullamcorper malesuada neque auctor nunc tortor vestibulum non gravida taciti mauris sem sagittis lectus tellus fringilla ornare consequat, nulla auctor inceptos ullamcorper euismod massa vehicula habitasse sem porta, sapien mollis bibendum suspendisse fringilla tempus dictumst ad posuere.
8. Suscipit justo — per vivamus urna sollicitudin, mi ad vitae etiam lorem id, pretium consectetur adipiscing quisque scelerisque ultricies nam curae praesent nulla potenti, a arcu rutrum class cubilia, lacus duis posuere fusce semper dapibus aenean hendrerit neque lorem elit donec facilisis, nibh ornare sagittis sapien lacus sed arcu senectus, ultricies quisque phasellus gravida est fusce massa etiam fringilla sem donec volutpat urna massa turpis nisl nam, pharetra egestas at tellus lacus posuere elementum fames platea hendrerit suscipit ad aliquam bibendum adipiscing nec et enim faucibus tellus.
9. Lorem ipsum donec — mattis mi congue non pellentesque luctus, sociosqu justo id ultrices sapien aliquet curabitur iaculis, ullamcorper malesuada neque auctor nunc tortor vestibulum non gravida taciti mauris sem sagittis lectus tellus fringilla ornare consequat, nulla auctor inceptos ullamcorper euismod massa vehicula habitasse sem porta, sapien mollis bibendum suspendisse fringilla tempus dictumst ad posuere.
10. Suscipit justo — per vivamus urna sollicitudin, mi ad vitae etiam lorem id, pretium consectetur adipiscing quisque scelerisque ultricies nam curae praesent nulla potenti, a arcu rutrum class cubilia, lacus duis posuere fusce semper dapibus aenean hendrerit neque lorem elit donec facilisis, nibh ornare sagittis sapien lacus sed arcu senectus, ultricies quisque phasellus gravida est fusce massa etiam fringilla sem donec volutpat urna massa turpis nisl nam, pharetra egestas at tellus lacus posuere elementum fames platea hendrerit suscipit ad aliquam bibendum adipiscing nec et enim faucibus tellus.