Podcast appearances and mentions of David Langford

Whanganui District Council is trialling a so called citizens assembly to help it decide the future of the city's public pools. Almost 400 people applied and 40 have been randomly selected, using demographic information to get a good cross section of residents. They'll be paid $500 to attend up to five meetings. Whanganui District Council chief executive David Langford spoke to Lisa Owen.

How does "quality" apply in all areas of an organization? In this final episode of the Misunderstanding Quality series, Bill Bellows and host Andrew Stotz discuss lessons from the first twelve episodes, and the big ah-ha moments that happen when we stop limiting our thinking. TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.6 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz and I'll be your host as we dive deeper into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today I'm continuing my discussion with Bill Bellows, who has spent 31 years helping people apply Dr. Deming's ideas to become aware of how their thinking is holding them back from their biggest opportunities. Today is episode 13 and the title is Quality Management: Don't be limited. Bill, take it away. 0:00:30.5 Bill Bellows: Hey, Andrew. So this is episode. What number did you say it was? 0:00:36.2 Andrew Stotz: 13. Lucky 13. 0:00:38.1 Bill Bellows: Lucky 13. So then for those who are concerned about the use of the number 13, this is episode 14. 0:00:51.0 Andrew Stotz: I thought you're gonna say episode 12A. 0:00:54.7 Bill Bellows: And for those who don't mind the number 13, this is episode 13. And as we talked earlier, if Dr. Deming was to title the episode it would be... It would not be "don't." It would be "do not", do not be limited. So at the start I wanted to go back to review the path we're on. We've been on episode one back in end of May, Quality, Back to the Start. All part of the Misunderstanding Quality series for The Deming Institute. Episode two, we got into the Eight Dimensions of Quality with David Garvin. One of those dimensions was acceptability. 0:01:49.8 Bill Bellows: Another was reliability. Another was I say dependability performance. Okay. And I think it's important in a series about misunderstanding quality to look at the work of David Garvin. Just realize I think it's fascinating to... You move out of the world of the American Society Quality and control charts and whatnot. And that's why I think Garvin's work paints a nice... Gives a nice perspective to not be limited.  And then we got into in the third episode Acceptability and Desirability. Episode four, Pay Attention to Choices and the choice of differentiating acceptability which is I'll take anything which meets requirements, and desirability. 0:02:42.3 Bill Bellows: I want that little doggy in the window. Not any doggy in the window. And then we followed that with episode five, the Red Bead Experiment which for many is their first exposure to Dr. Deming's work. I know when I worked for the Deming Institute for a few years the Red Bead Experiment website was one of one of the most popular pages. I believe another one was the 14 Points for Management. And, personally, I've presented the Red Bead Experiment think just once, just once. And I'm going to be doing it at the 2025 at, let me back up, the Bryce Canyon Deming... The Bryce Canyon...Bryce Canyon Forum. I can't remember the name. It's a partnership between Southern Utah University and The Deming Institute, and we're doing it at Southern Utah University. And on one of those days, I'll be doing the Red Bead Experiment, which takes a lot of time and then studying to present it a few years ago I was getting all the videos that I could find of it, many of them on The Deming Institute web page and none of them have the entire data collection. 0:04:18.5 Bill Bellows: They kind of fast forward through six people putting the... drawing the beads each four times and when you're up on stage trying to do that, I had four people that's, you gotta do a lot of work to make it that exciting. But the reason I present it, I say I present it for a number of reasons. One is to do the classic "The red beads are not caused by the workers are taken separately. They're caused by the system which includes the workers. It's an understanding of variation and introduction to control charts" and all of that is as exposed by Dr. Deming is classic. 0:05:00.7 Bill Bellows: But, I'd like to take it one step further, which is to go back into that desirability thinking and look at the concept that we've talked about of going through the doorway and going past the achievement of zero defects, zero red beads, and realize that there's further opportunities for improvement when you start to look at variation in the white beads. And, that then takes into account how the beads are used. And that gets us into the realm of looking at quality as a system.   Looking at quality with a systems view as opposed... That's good, that's good, that's good. With or without an appreciation on how the bead is used. So anyway, that was episode five. We explored that. Next we got into the differentiation of Category Thinking and Continuum Thinking. 0:05:55.5 Bill Bellows: And for those who haven't listened to it, maybe not in a while, the differentiation is category thinking. Putting things in categories such as red beads and white beads are the... It could be any categories, categories of fruit, categories of religion, categories of political systems. We have categories and then within a category we have variation. We have different. We have apples and oranges and then we have a given type of orange. And then there's variation in the juiciness, ripeness. That's called continuum thinking, which goes back to, if we go back to the red beads and the white beads is notion that the white beads are not uniformly white, not uniform in diameter or weight. 0:06:44.5 Bill Bellows: And, what are the implications there? Well, if we think in terms of categories, red beads and white beads, if all the beads are white have we stopped improving? And Dr. Deming and I believe it was Point 5 of the 14 Points stressed the need for continual improvement. And yes, you can continuously improve and reduce cost, you can continuously reduce cycle time, but can you continuously improve quality? Well, not if you're stuck in a category of good, then the role of that is to just to remind people that there's opportunities to go further when you begin to look at variation in white, which is the essence of looking at how what you're looking at is part of a system, which Dr. Deming was well, well aware of. 0:07:33.7 Bill Bellows: Next we got into the Paradigms of Variation and a big part there was differentiating acceptability. Well, going beyond acceptability was differentiating accuracy from precision. Precision is getting the same result shrinking the variation, otherwise known as getting achieving great piece-to-piece consistency. Metrics that begin with the letter C and sub P could be Cp, Cpk, are the two most popular. Those are measures of precision that we're getting small standard deviations that they are very, very close to each other. But in the paradigms of variation that was what I referred to as Paradigm B thinking we're looking for uniformity. Paradigm A thinking being acceptance, we'll take anything that meets requirements... Or academically called paradigm A. Paradigm C is what Dr. Taguchi was talking about with the desirability, where we're saying I want this value, I want uniformity around this specific value. 0:08:43.9 Bill Bellows: Here what we're looking at is uniformity around the target, around an ideal, otherwise known as piece-to-target variability. And, the idea there is that the closer we are to that ideal, the easier it is for others downstream to integrate what we're passing forward. Whether that's putting something into a hole or does this person we want to hire best integrate into our system. So, integration is not just a mechanical thing. In episode eight we then got into Beyond Looking Good which then shatters the Paradigm A acceptability thinking, going more deeply into the opportunities for continual improvement of quality. 0:09:29.1 Bill Bellows: If you shift to continuum thinking. Next, Worse than a thief coming from Dr. Taguchi. And that's the issue of achieving uniform. Part of what we looked at is the downside of looking at things in isolation and not looking at the greater system. Then episode 10 we look at Are you in favor of improvement of quality? 0:09:53.6 Andrew Stotz: I'm in favor. 0:09:55.7 Bill Bellows: To which he would always say, but of course. That was a reference back to chapter one of The New Economics. And he said everyone's got an answer. Improving quality computers and gadgets. And what we spoke about is Quality 4.0, which is gadgets of the 21st century, tools and techniques. And again, what we said is, there's nothing wrong with tools and techniques. Tools and techniques are about efficiency, doing things well, but they lack what Russ Ackoff would say in asking, are we doing the right things well. And then episode 11 delved into what I've...amongst the things I've learned from Dr. Taguchi, To improve quality, don't measure quality. 0:10:42.5 Bill Bellows: If we have a problem with, we want to reduce scrap, we want to reduce rework, we want to eliminate the problems that the customer has experienced or that someone downstream is experiencing. And what Dr. Taguchi emphasized was start asking, what is the function of the thing we're trying to do? And the idea is that if you improve the function, then you're likely to improve the quality as measured by what the customer is looking for. If you focus on what the... If you focus your efforts on reducing what the customer is complaining about, you're likely to get something else the customer is complaining about. And for more on that, go to episode 11. 0:11:19.0 Bill Bellows: And then episode 12, Do specification limits limit improvement? Which again goes back to what I experienced on a regular basis is in my university courses with people I interact with and consulting is a very heavy emphasis on meeting requirements and moving on. And not a lot of thought of going beyond that or even that there's anything more to do, that's alive and well. And that's reinforced by Six Sigma Quality is filled with that mindset. If you pay attention closely to Lean Manufacturing, you'll see that mindset again, alive and well. So, what I wanted to get to tonight in episode 13, Quality. 0:12:04.3 Andrew Stotz: That was quite a review, by the way. 0:12:06.7 Bill Bellows: Yeah, Quality Management: don't be limited, as and I'm teaching for the sixth time a class in quality management at Cal State Northridge. The title used to be Seminar in Quality Management. The title this year is Engineering Quality Management and Analytics. One of the assignments I give them, essays, the quizzes, attending the lectures. 0:12:34.9 Bill Bellows: Learning Capacity Matrix that I learned about from David Langford. But what I was sharing with you earlier, Andrew, is one of the first things I thought about and designed in this course, back in 2019 was I could just imagine students going through the course. And, what I'm going to hear is, what I've heard before is professor, these are very, very interesting ideas, but I'm not sure how I would apply them where I work. Because where I work is different. It's different. And to avoid that question, I came up with an assignment I called the Application Proposal. And there's four parts to it. But part one is: imagine upon completion of this course. And I let them know about this in the first lecture and I say, imagine upon completion of the course, your boss, someone you work with, challenges you to find three things you can do within three to six months of the of the completion of the course. 0:13:34.6 Bill Bellows: And it must include something you learned in this course. I don't say what thing, I don't say two things, I don't say three things. I leave it to them. But all it comes down to is I'd like you to contemplate and within three to six months of the completion of the course, what could you do? And I call that the near-term application. Well, subtask one is come up with three. They have to meet your job, your role, not your boss's role, not another department's role. They have to fit your role because only you know then the method by which you would go about that. And, so for that near-term, I ask them to let me know what is the present state of that near term, the before, the current condition and what is the after. What is the future state of that near-term? So I assign that before the course begins, I give them until week five to submit and give me those three things. The reason I asked for three is if one, if the first one they give me, if they only asked for one and one didn't quite fit, then I say, well, okay, Andrew, go back and give me another one that same time. 0:14:49.7 Bill Bellows: So I said, give me three. And most often all three are fantastic. In which case I say they're all great. Which one would you like to do? But again, it has to fit their role because in Sub-Task 2, the next thing I want them to do is not so much tell me about the present state, tell me more about the future state. And again, the future state is how much can you accomplish within that three-to-six month period? And that's subtask two. Then they come back to me and tell me the plan. What is the plan by which you go from the near-term present state to the near-term future state, tell me about the plan. Tell me what some of the obstacles might be and how you plan to deal with the obstacles. And then I say now what I want you to do is imagine that is wildly successful, jump ahead a year and a half to two years and tell me what you would do next. How would you build upon this? And in that mid-term time frame, what is the present? What is the future of the mid-term? And then go a few years out and tell me how you're going to further expand on what you've learned. 0:16:03.4 Bill Bellows: I call that the far-term. And for the far-term, what's the present, what's the future? So when they submit that to me, then I come back with - it could be questions about some of the terminology.  It could be a suggestion that they look at something with the use of Production Viewed as a System. Or, I ask them to think about operational definitions or perhaps suggest a control chart and, or a book. So, part of the reason I wanted to bring that up is few of the title, few of the topics we are looking at are specifically quality related. They're all about improving how the organization operates. Which goes back to what Dr. Deming stressed is the importance of continual improvement. 0:16:50.9 Andrew Stotz: Can you explain that just for a second? Because that was interesting about quality versus improving the organization. What did you mean by that? 0:17:00.4 Bill Bellows: Well, I, they didn't come to me with this process I have, has lots, has a very high defect rate and I thought that's where I need to focus. Or this process has a lot of scrap and rework. That's where I want to focus. What I was excited by is that they were looking at how to take a bunch of things they already do and better integrate them. Just fundamentally what I found them thinking about is how can I spend time to organize these activities as a system and as a result spend a whole lot less time on this and move on to the next thing. And, what I found fascinating about that is if we keep our thinking to quality and quality's about good parts and bad parts, good things and bad things, and having less bad things and more good things, that could be a really narrow view of what Dr. Deming was proposing. Now another aspect of the assignment was not only do I want them to give me three ideas, we down-select to one. It could be they're writing a new piece of software. One of the applications has to do with a really fascinating use of artificial intelligence. 0:18:27.0 Bill Bellows: And what's that got to do with quality? Well, what's interesting is it has a lot to do with improving the functionality of a product or a service, having it be more reliable, more consistent, easier to integrate. But, the other thing I want to point out is not only do I ask them to come up with three things and then assuming all three things fit well with their job, their responsibilities, their experience.  What I'm also interested in is what from the course are you going to use in this application? And, two things came up that fit again and again.  One is the value proposition of a feedback loop. 0:19:12.9 Bill Bellows: And they would ask me, what do you mean by feedback? I said, well, you're going to come along and you're going to tie these things together based on a theory that's going to work better. Yes. Well, how will you know it's doing that? How will you know how well this is performing? And, I said when I see this is what people refer to as Plan-Do, but there's no Study. It's just... And, I saw that Rocketdyne, then people would come along and say, oh, I know what to do, I'm just gonna go off and change the requirements and do this. 0:19:44.6 Bill Bellows: But, there was no feedback loop. In fact, it was even hard to say that I saw it implemented. It just saw the planning and the doing. But, no study, no acting. 0:19:57.3 Andrew Stotz: Is that the Do-Do style? 0:20:01.3 Bill Bellows: Yes. But what was really exciting to share with them is I said in a non-Deming company, which we have referred to as a Red Pen Company or, or a Me Organization or a Last Straw. And I don't think we covered those terms all that much in this episode, in this series, we definitely covered it in our first series. But what I found is in a Deming or in a non -Deming company, there's not a lot of feedback. And even if I deliver to you something which barely meets requirements and we spoke about this, that in the world of acceptability, a D- letter grade is acceptable. Why is it acceptable? Because it's not enough. It's good parts and bad parts. And so even if I deliver to you, Andrew, something which barely met requirements, and you said to me, Bill, this barely meets requirements. And I say, Andrew, did you say barely meets requirements? And you say, yes. So, Andrew, it did meet requirements and you say, yes. So I say, "Why are you calling me Andrew?" 0:21:12.1 Andrew Stotz: By the way that just made me think about the difference between a pass fail course structure and a gradient course structure. 0:21:20.7 Bill Bellows: Exactly. 0:21:21.5 Andrew Stotz: Yeah. Okay. 0:21:22.5 Bill Bellows: Yeah. So even if you give me that feedback. I reject it. I'm just going to say, Andrew, move on. But I said, in a Deming organization, feedback is everything. The students were giving me feedback on the quizzes and some things that caused me to go off and modify some things I'm doing. And I told them, if I don't have that feedback, I cannot improve the course. So, I met with each of them last week for an hour, and the feedback I was getting is instrumental in improving the course for the remainder of the semester as well as for next year. And, so that's what I found is what really differentiates a Deming approach to improving a process or a service or a product is feedback, which goes then to watching how it's used. It is, I think I mentioned to you Gipsie Ranney, who was the first president of The Deming Institute, a Professor of Statistics at University of Tennessee, when she met Dr. Deming and later became a senior consultant, maybe advisor to General Motors Powertrain. And once she told me, she said to Dr. Deming "You know, Dr. Deming, what do people get out of your seminars?" And. he said, "I know what I told them. 0:22:42.0 Bill Bellows: I don't know what they heard." And, the challenge is without knowing what they heard, because we would also say, and I'm pretty sure we brought this up in one of our this series or the prior series, Deming would say the questions are more important than the answers because the questions provide them with feedback as to what is going on. So anyway, part of what I wanted to bring out today in this quality management, don't be limited, is whether or not you're focusing on quality per se, minimizing scrap, minimizing work. If you're trying to improve a process, again, you're not improving it necessarily because there's more I want to have less scrap. But if your improvement is, I want it to take less time, I want it to be easier to do. I want it to be cheaper to do. Well, while you're at it, think about a feedback loop.  And the role of the feedback is to give you a sense of is it achieving what you're hoping it would achieve? It would allow you over time to maybe find out it's getting better.  Maybe there's a special cause you want to take advantage of or a special cause you want to avoid.  But, without that feedback, how do you know how it's working and then beyond that? 0:23:55.7 Andrew Stotz: And where is the origin of the information coming from for the feedback loop? Is it a feedback loop within your area or is it feedback loop from the next process or what do you. 0:24:08.3 Bill Bellows: All of that. That's what I told her. I said one is, I said, when you're developing the process. I told them, I said, when you're. If in Sub-Ttask 1, your idea is to flowchart a process, come up with a template, a prototype. Part of the feedback is showing that to people. And part of the feedback is, does it make sense to them?  Do they have suggestions for improvement? Do they... Is there an issue with operational definitions?  There would be better clarity based on the words you're using.  You may say in there clean this thing, or early in the semester, one of the assignments I gave the students was to explain some aspect of the course within their organization. And then I thought, well, then now it will explain to who. And I thought, well, unless I say if I felt that without giving clarity to who they're explaining it to, they're going to get lost in the assignment. Am I explaining it to a co-worker? Am I explaining it to someone in management? Am I explaining it to the CEO? And, finally I just thought, well, that's kind of crazy. 0:25:18.3 Bill Bellows: I just said, well, as if you're explaining it to a classmate. But, my concern was if I didn't provide clarity on who they're explaining it to, then they're going to be all over the place in terms of what I'm looking for versus what they're trying to do. And that being feedback and that also being what I told them is part of collecting, part of feedback is looking for how can I improve the operation, how can I improve? Or, what are the opportunities for paying closer attention to operational definitions, which means the words or the processes that we're asking people to follow. 0:25:58.3 Bill Bellows: But, I found in in joining Rocketdyne, I was in the TQM Office and then I began to see what engineering does. Oh, I had a sense of that when I worked in Connecticut, paid more attention to what manufacturing does. Well, then when I moved into a project management office. Well, project management is just like quality management. It's breaking things into parts, managing the parts in isolation. And, so when I talk about quality management, don't be limited. There's a lot Dr. Deming's offering that could be applied to project management, which is again, looking at how the efforts integrate, not looking at the actions taken separately. 0:26:45.4 Andrew Stotz: And, so how would you wrap up what you want to take away. What you want people to take away from this discussion? You went over a very great review of what we talked about, which was kind of the first half of this discussion. And what did you want people to get from that review? 0:27:05.2 Bill Bellows: The big thing, the big aha has been: this is so much more than quality. And, I've always felt that way, that when people look at Dr. Deming's work and talk about Dr. Deming is improving quality, and then when I work for The Deming Institute, the inquiries I would get it was part of my job to respond to people. And they want to know I work for a non-profit, do Dr. Deming's ideas apply. And, so for our target audience of people wanting to bring Dr. Deming's ideas to their respective organizations, even though the focus here is quality, we call this series Misunderstanding Quality. At this point, I'd like you to think more broadly that this is far more than how to improve quality.  This is improving management of resources, management of our time, management of our energy.  So this is a universal phenomenon. Not again, you can look at it as good parts and bad parts, and that's looking at things in isolation. That's what project managers do. That's what program managers do. That's what organizations do relentlessly. And this is what Ackoff would call the characteristic way of management. Break it into parts and manage the parts as well as possible. 0:28:21.5 Bill Bellows: So, I just wanted to bring that back as a reminder of this quality, quality, quality focuses. There's a lot more to this than improving quality when it comes to applying these ideas. 0:28:34.7 Andrew Stotz: And, I would just reiterate that from my first interactions with Dr. Deming when I was 24, and then I moved to Thailand and I did finance business and all that. So I wasn't, applying statistical tools in my business at the time. That just wasn't where I was at. But the message that I got from him about understanding variation and understanding to not be misled by variation, to see things as part of a system. Also to understand that if we really wanted to improve something, we had to go back to the beginning and think about how have we designed this? 0:29:20.3 Andrew Stotz: How do we reduce the final variability of it? And, so, it was those core principles that really turned me on. Where I could imagine, if I was an engineer or a statistician, that I would have latched on maybe more to the tools, but from where I was at, I was really excited about the message. And, I also really resonated with that message that stop blaming the worker. And, I saw that at Pepsi, that the worker just had very little control. I mean, we're told to take control, but the fact is that if we're not given the resources, we can only get to a certain level. 0:29:58.3 Andrew Stotz: Plus, also the thinking of senior management, you are shaped by their thinking. And, I always tell the story of the accumulation tables in between processes at a Pepsi production facility. And that basically allows two operators of these two different machines to, when one goes down, let's say the latest, the farthest along in the production process, let's say the bottling goes down, the bottle cleaning process behind it can keep cranking and build up that accumulation table until it's absolutely full. And, that gives time for the maintenance guys to go fix the bottling problem that you have and not stop the guy behind. And, that was a very natural thing from management perspective and from my perspective. But, when I came to Thailand, I did learn a lot more about the Japanese and the way they were doing thing at Toyota. 0:30:51.4 Andrew Stotz: I went out and looked at some factories here and I started realizing they don't do that. They have their string on the production line, that they stop the whole thing. But the point is the thing, if a worker can't go beyond that, you know what the senior management believe about it. So, that was another thing that I would say it goes way beyond just some tools and other things. So, I'll wrap it up there. And Bill, on behalf of everyone at The Deming Institute, I want to thank you again for this discussion and for listeners. Remember to go to deming.org to continue your journey. And if you want to keep in touch with Bill, just find him on LinkedIn. This is your host, Andrew Stotz, and I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming and that is people are entitled to joy in work. 

Temporada 6, Episodio 1: Hemos VueltoNos complace anunciar el regreso de Martes de Terror en su sexta temporada.Este mes de septiembre, nos sumergiremos en un mundo de relatos de pesadilla y sueños extraños bajo el título Sombras del sueño.En este episodio inaugural, exploraremos si el regreso a casa después de unas vacaciones resulta favorable para Evaristo y compañía.Además, presentaremos el inquietante relato "A las 3.47 AM" de David Langford.Gracias a la colaboración de Hueso Producciones, disfrutaremos de la electrizante música de la banda Anvil.Si te gusta nuestro trabajo y quieres contribuir a nuestro crecimiento, puedes apoyarnos con un donativo en PaypalSíguenos enFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/EvaristoElepitafioInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/martesdeterror/Threads: https://www.threads.net/@martesdeterrorTiktok: https://www.tiktok.com/@evaristo_elepitafio?_t=8kd3bCldn1c&_r=1o en la web https://www.luxferreaudios.com/martes-de-terror/Conviértete en un seguidor de este podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/martes-de-terror--4855782/support.

David Langford, who serves as one of the Elders, gives a sermon titled "An Identity That Won't Crush You" from John 13:1-5 Subscribe for more content just like this! Website: http://montclair.church/ Facebook:   / montclair.church   Instagram:   / montclair.church   To support this ministry and help us continue to connect people to Jesus and to each other. Please go to https://www.montclairchurch.net/give Montclair Community Church 143 Watchung Avenue Upper Montclair, New Jersey 07043 info@montclair.church 973.746.0042

In the final episode of the goal setting in classrooms series, John Dues and Andrew Stotz discuss the last three of the 10 Key Lessons for implementing Deming in schools. They finish up with the example of Jessica's 4th-grade science class. TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.4 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz, and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W Edwards Deming. Today I'm continuing my discussion with John Dues, who is part of the new generation of educators striving to apply Dr. Deming's principles to unleash student joy in learning. This is episode six about goal setting through a Deming lens. John, take it away.   0:00:26.4 John Dues: Hey, Andrew, it's good to be back. Yeah, for the past handful of episodes or so, we've been talking about organizational goal setting. We covered these four conditions of healthy goal setting and then got into these 10 key lessons for data analysis. And then we've been looking at those 10 key lessons applied to an improvement project. And we've been talking about a project that was completed by Jessica Cutler and she did a Continual Improvement Fellowship with us here at our schools. And if you remember, Jessica was attempting to improve the joy in learning of her students in her fourth grade science class. So last time we looked at lessons five through seven. Today we're gonna look at those final three lessons, eight, nine and ten applied to her project.   0:01:15.7 AS: It's exciting.   0:01:17.1 JD: Yeah. So we'll jump in here. We'll kind of do a description, a refresher of each lesson. And we'll kind of talk about how it was applied to her specific project, and we'll look at some of her data to kind of bring that live for those of the folks that have video. Let's jump in with lesson number eight. So we've talked about this before, but lesson number eight was: more timely data is better for improvement purposes. So we've talked about this a lot. We've talked about something like state testing data. We've said, it can be useful, but it's not super useful for improvement purposes, because we don't get it until the year ends. And students in our case, have already gone on summer vacation by the time that data comes in. And you know that the analogous data probably happens in lots of different sectors where you get data that lags, to the point that it's not really that useful for improvement purposes.   0:02:15.8 JD: So when we're trying to improve something, more frequent data is helpful because then we can sort of see if an intervention that we're trying is having an effect, the intended effect. We can learn that more quickly if we have more frequent data. And so it's, there's not a hard and fast rule, I don't think for how frequently you should be gathering data. It just sort of needs to be in sync with the improvement context. I think that's the important thing. Whether it's daily or a couple times a day or weekly, or monthly, quarterly, whatever, it's gotta be in sync with whatever you're trying to improve.   0:02:50.5 AS: You made me think about a documentary I saw about, how they do brain surgery and how the patient can't be sedated because they're asking the patient questions about, do you feel this and they're testing whether they're getting... They're trying to, let's say, get rid of a piece of a cancerous growth, and they wanna make sure that they're not getting into an area that's gonna damage their brain. And so, the feedback mechanism that they're getting through their tools and the feedback from the patient, it's horrifying to think of the whole thing.   0:03:27.7 JD: Yeah.   0:03:28.3 AS: It's a perfect example of why more timely data is useful for improvement purposes 'cause imagine if you didn't have that information, you knock the patient out, you get the cancerous growth, but who knows what you get in addition to that.   0:03:43.7 JD: Yeah, that's really interesting. I think that's certainly an extreme example, [laughter], but I think it's relevant. No matter what our context, that data allows us to understand what's going on, variation, trends, whether our system is stable, unstable, how we should go about improving. So it's not dissimilar from the doctors in that example.   0:04:06.8 AS: And it's indisputable I think, I would argue. But yet many people may not, they may be operating with data that's not timely. And so this is a reminder that we would pretty much always want that timely data. So that's lesson eight. Wow.   0:04:22.6 JD: Lesson eight. Yeah. And let's see how we can, I'll put a visualization on the screen so you can see what Jessica's data look like. All right. So now you can see. We've looked at these charts before. This is Jessica's process behavior chart for joy in science. So just to reorient, you have the joy percentage that students are feeling after a lesson on the x-axis, sorry, on the y-axis. On the x-axis, you have the school dates where they've collected this survey information from students in Jessica's class.   0:04:57.0 AS: Can you put that in Slide Show view?   0:05:00.4 JD: Yeah. I can do that. Yeah.   0:05:02.7 AS: Just it'll make it bigger, so for the...   0:05:06.5 JD: There you go.   0:05:07.8 AS: For the listeners out there, we're looking at a chart of daily, well, let's say it looks like daily data. There's probably weekends that are not in there because class is not on weekends, but it's the ups and downs of a chart that's ranging between a pretty, a relatively narrow range, and these are the scores that are coming from Jessica's surveying of the students each day, I believe. Correct?   0:05:34.2 JD: Yeah. So each day where Jessica is giving a survey to assess the joy in science that students are feeling, then she's averaging all those students together. And then the plot, the dot is the average of all the students sort of assessment of how much joy they felt in a particular science lesson.   0:05:54.7 AS: And that's the average. So for the listeners out there John's got an average line down the middle of these various data points, and then he is also got a red line above and a red line below the, above the highest point and slightly below the lowest point. Maybe you can explain that a little bit more.   0:06:15.4 JD: Yeah. So with Jessica, you remember originally she started plotting on a line chart or a run chart when we just had a few data points just to kind of get a sense of how things are moving so she could talk about it with her class. And over time what's happened is she's now got, at this point in the project, which she started in January, now this is sort of mid-March. And so she's collected two to three data points a week. So she doesn't survey the kids every day just for time sake, but she's getting two, three data points a week. And so by March, she started just a couple months ago, she's got 28 data points. So that sort of goes back to this idea of more timely data is better for improvement.   0:07:00.9 JD: And a lot of times, let's say a school district or a school does actually survey their students about how, what they think of their classes. That might happen at best once a semester or maybe once a year. And so at the end of the year you have one or two data points. So it's really hard to tell sort of what's actually going on. Compared to this, Jessica's got these 28 data points in just about two months or so of school. So she's got 28 data points to work with. And so what her and her students are doing with this data then, one, they can see how it's moving up and down. So we have, the blue dots are all the plotted points, like you said, the green line is the average running sort of through the middle of the data, and then those red lines are our process limits, the upper and lower natural process limits that sort of tell us the bounds of the system.   0:07:50.4 JD: And that's based on the difference in each successive data point. But the most important thing is that as Jessica and her students are looking at this, initially, they're really just studying it and trying to sort of see how things are going from survey to survey. So one of the things that Deming talked about frequently is not tampering with data, which would be if you sort of, you overreact to a single data point. So let's say, a couple of days in, it dips down from where it started and you say, oh my gosh, we gotta change things. And so that's what Deming is talking about. Not tampering, not overreacting to any single data point. Instead look at this whole picture that you get from these 28 data points and then talk about...   0:08:41.5 JD: In Jessica's case she's talking about with her students, what can we learn from this data? What does the variation from point to point look like? If we keep using the system, the fourth grade science system, if we leave it as is, then we'll probably just keep getting data pretty similar to this over time, unless something more substantial changes either in the negative or the positive. So right now they...   0:09:10.1 AS: And I think for the listeners, it's, you can see that there's really no strong pattern that I can see from this. It's just, there's some, sometimes that there's, seems like there's little trends and stuff like that. But I would say that the level of joy in the science classroom is pretty stable.   0:09:32.1 JD: Pretty stable. Yeah. Pretty high. It's bouncing around maybe a 76% average across those two and a half months or so. And so, they, you kind of consider this like the baseline. They've got a good solid baseline understanding of what joy looks like in this fourth grade science classroom. Did that stop sharing on your end?   0:10:00.2 AS: Yep.   0:10:00.2 JD: Okay, great. So that's lesson eight. So clearly she's gathered a lot of data in a pretty short amount of time. It's timely, it's useful, it's usable, it can be studied by her and her students. So we'll switch it to lesson nine now. So now they've got a good amount of data. They got 28 data points. That's plenty of data to work with. So lesson nine is now we wanna clearly label the start date for an intervention directly in her chart. And remember from earlier episodes, not only are we collecting this data, we're actually putting this up on a screen on a smart board in the classroom, and Jessica and her students are studying this data together. They're actually looking at this, this exact chart and she's explaining sort of kind of like we just did to the listeners. She's explaining what the chart means.   0:10:54.2 JD: And so over time, like once a week she's putting this up on the smart board and now kids are getting used to, how do you read this data? What does this mean? What are all these dots? What do these numbers mean? What do these red lines mean? That type of thing. And so now that they've got enough data, now we can start talking about interventions. That's really what lesson nine is about. And the point here is that you want to clearly, explicitly with a literally like a dotted line in the chart to mark on the day that you're gonna try something new. So you insert this dashed vertical line, we'll take a look at it in a second, on the date the intervention started. And then we're also gonna probably label it something simple so we can remember what intervention we tried at that point in time.   0:11:42.7 JD: So what this then allows the team to do is then to very easily see the data that happened before the intervention and the data that happened after the implementation of this intervention or this change idea. And then once we've started this change and we start plotting points after the change has gone into effect, then we can start seeing or start looking for those patterns in the data that we've talked about, those different rules, those three rules that we've talked about across these episodes. And just to refresh, rule one would be if we see a single data point outside of either of the limits, rule two is if we see eight consecutive points on either side of that green average line, and rule three is if we see three out of four dots in a row that are closer to one of the limits than they are to that central line.   0:12:38.3 JD: So that again, those patterns tell us that something significant, mathematically improbable has happened. It's a big enough magnitude in change that you wouldn't have expected it otherwise. And when we see that pattern, we can be reasonably assured that that intervention that we've tried has worked.   0:12:56.0 AS: And let me ask you about the intervention for just a second because I could imagine that if this project was going on, first question is, does Jessica's students are, obviously know that this experiment is going on?   0:13:08.3 JD: Yes.   0:13:09.8 AS: Because they're filling out a survey. And my first question is, do they know that there's an intervention happening? I would expect that it would be yes, because they're gonna feel or see that intervention. Correct?   0:13:25.1 JD: Sure. Yep.   0:13:25.2 AS: That's my first point that I want to think about. And the second point is, let's imagine now that everybody in the classroom has been seeing this chart and they're, everybody's excited and they got a lot of ideas about how they could improve. Jessica probably has a lot of ideas. So the temptation is to say, let's change these three things and see what happens.   0:13:46.5 JD: Yeah.   0:13:47.1 AS: Is it important that we only do one thing at a time or that one intervention at a time or not? So maybe those are two questions I have in my mind.   0:13:58.6 JD: Yeah, so to the first question, are you, you're saying there there might be some type of participant or...   0:14:02.3 AS: Bias.   0:14:03.3 JD: Observer effect like that they want this to happen. That's certainly possible. But speaking to the second question, what intervention do you go with? Do you go with one or you go with multiple? If you remember a couple of episodes ago we talked about, and we actually looked at a fishbone diagram that Jessica and her students that they created and they said, okay, what causes us to have low joy in class? And then they sort of mapped those, they categorized them, and there were different things like technology not working. If you remember, one was like distractions, like other teachers walk into the room during the lesson. And one of them was others like classmates making a lot of noise, making noises during class and distracting me. And so they mapped out different causes. I think they probably came up with like 12 or 15 different causes as possibilities.   0:14:58.7 JD: And they actually voted as a class. Which of these, if we worked on one of these, which would have the biggest impact? So not every kid voted for it, but the majority or the item that the most kids thought would have the biggest impact was if we could somehow stop all the noises basically. So they came up with that as a class, but not, it wasn't everybody's idea. But I think we've also talked about sort of the lessons from David Langford where once kids see that you're gonna actually take this serious, take their ideas serious and start acting on them, they take the project pretty seriously too. So maybe not a perfect answer, but that's sort of what we...   0:15:38.0 AS: I was thinking that, ultimately you could get short-term blips when you do an intervention and then it stabilizes possibly. That's one possibility. And the second thing I thought is, well, I mean ultimately the objective, whether that's an output from a factory, and keeping, improving that output or whether that's the output related to joy in the classroom as an example, you want it to go up and stay up and you want the students to see it and say, wow, look, it's happening. So, yeah.   0:16:11.7 JD: And there's different ways you can handle this. So this joy thing could go up to a certain point. They're like, I don't know if we can get any more joy, like, it's pretty high. And what you could do at that point is say, okay, I'm gonna assign a student to just sort of, every once in a while, we'll keep doing these surveys and we will sort of keep plotting the data, but we're not gonna talk about a lot. I'm just gonna assign this as a student's job to plot the new data points. And we'll kind of, we'll kind of measure it, but we won't keep up with the intervention 'cause we got it to a point that we're pretty happy with. And now as a class we may wanna switch, switch our attention to something else.   0:16:45.2 JD: So we started getting into the winter months and attendance has dipped. Maybe we've been charting that and say, Hey guys, we gotta, gotta kinda work on this. This is gone below sort of a level that's really good for learning. So let's think about as a group how we could come up with some ideas to raise that. So maybe you turn your attention to something else, 'cause you can't pay attention to everything at once.   0:17:07.2 AS: Yeah, and I think I could use an example in my Valuation Master Class Boot Camp where students were asking for more personal feedback and I realized I couldn't really scale this class if I had to get stuck into hundreds of grading basically. And that's when I came up with the concept of feedback Friday, where one student from each team would present and then I would give feedback, I would give a critique and they would be intense and all students would be watching, it would be recorded, and all of a sudden all the issues related to wanting this personal feedback went away. And therefore, once I instituted it on a regular basis, I went on to the next issue and I made sure that I didn't lose the progress that I had made and continue to make feedback Friday better and better.   0:17:56.2 JD: Yeah. Yeah. That's great. That's great. I'll share my screen so you can kinda see what this looked like in Jessica's class now, what the chart looks like now. So now you see that same chart, that same process behavior chart, exact same one we were just looking at except now you can see this, this dashed vertical line that marks the spot where the intervention was started that we just talked about. And what the kids are actually doing, and Jessica are running a PDSA cycle, a Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle. That's the experimental cycle in her class. And what they're running that PDSA on is, again, how can we put something in place to reduce the distracting noises. And so what the students actually said is if we get a deduction for making noises, then there will be less noises. And so in the school's sort of management system, a deduction is sort of like a demerit.   0:19:00.0 JD: If you maybe went to a Catholic school or something like that, or some public schools had demerits as well, but basically it's like a minor infraction basically that goes home or that gets communicated to parents at the end of the week. But the kids came up with this so their basic premise is, their plan, their prediction is if there are less noises, we'll be able to enjoy science class. And if we give deductions for these noises, then there'll be less noises. So some people may push back, well, I don't think you should give deductions or something like that, but which, fine, you could have that opinion. But I think the powerful point here is this is, the students created this, it was their idea. And so they're testing that idea to see if it actually has impact.   0:19:44.8 JD: And they're learning to do that test in this scientific thinking way by using the Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle, and seeing if it actually has an impact on their data. So at the point where they draw this dashed line, let's call that March 19th, we can see a couple of additional data points have been gathered. So you can see the data went up from 3/18 to 3/21. So from March 18th to March 21st, rose from about, let's call it 73% or so, up to about 76% on March 21st. And then that next day it rose another percent or two and let's call that 78%.   0:20:28.1 JD: And so the trap here is you could say, okay, we did this intervention and it made things better. But the key point is the data did go up, but we haven't gathered enough additional data to see one of those patterns that we talked about that would say, oh, this actually has had a significant change. Because before the dashed line, you can see data points that are as high or even higher than some of these ones that we see after the PDSA is started. So it's too early to say one way or another if this intervention is having an impact. So we're not gonna overreact. You could see a place where you're so excited that it did go up a couple of days from where it was on March 18th before you started this experiment, but that's a trap. Because it's still just common cause data, still just bouncing around that average, it's still within the bounds of the red process limits that define the science system.   0:21:34.2 AS: I have an experiment going on in my latest Valuation Master Class Boot Camp, but in that case, it's a 6-week period that I'm testing, and then I see the outcome at the end of the six weeks to test whether my hypothesis was right or not. Whereas here it's real time trying to understand what's happening. So yes, you can be tempted when it's real time to try to jump to conclusion, but when you said, well, okay, I can't really get the answer to this conclusion until I've run the test in a fixed time period, then it's you don't have as much of that temptation to draw a conclusion.   0:22:14.1 JD: Yeah. And if I actually was... I should have actually taken this a step farther. I marked it with this Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle. What I should have done too is write "noises" or something like that, deduction for noises, some small annotation, so it'd be clear what this PDSA cycle is.   0:22:32.1 AS: In other words, you're saying identify the intervention by the vertical line, but also label it as to what that intervention was, which you've done before on the other chart. I remember.   0:22:42.1 JD: Yeah. And then it'd be sort of just looking at this when she puts this up on the smart board for the class to see it again too. Oh yeah yeah, that's when we ran that first intervention and that was that intervention where we did deductions for noises. But the bigger point is that this never happens where you have some data, you understand a system, you plan systematic intervention, and then you gather more data right after it to see if it's having an impact. We'd never do that ever, in education, ever. Ever have I ever seen this before. Nothing like this. Just this little setup combining the process behavior chart with the Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle, I think is very, very, very powerful and very different approach than what school improvement.   0:23:33.4 AS: Exciting.   0:23:34.6 JD: Yeah. The typical approach is to school improvement. So I'll stop that share for a second there, and we can do a quick overview of lesson 10 and then jump back into the chart as more data has been gathered. So lesson 10 is: the purpose of data analysis is insight. Seems pretty straightforward. This is one of those key teachings from Dr. Donald Wheeler who we've talked about. He taught us that the best analysis is the simplest analysis, which provides the needed insight.   0:24:08.1 AS: So repeat lesson 10, again, the purpose of...   0:24:11.6 JD: The purpose of data analysis is insight.   0:24:14.7 AS: Yep.   0:24:15.6 JD: So just plotting the dots on the run chart and turning the run chart into the process behavior chart, that's the most straightforward method for understanding how our data is performing over time. We've talked about this a lot, but it's way more intuitive to understand the data and how it's moving than if you just stored it in a table or a spreadsheet. Got to use these time sequence charts. That's so very important.   0:24:42.2 AS: And I was just looking at the definition of insight, which is a clear, deep, and sometimes sudden understanding of a complicated problem or situation.   0:24:51.6 JD: Yeah. And I think that can happen, much more likely to happen when you have the data visualized in this way than the ways that we typically visualize data in just like a table or a spreadsheet. And so in Jessica's case, we left off on March 22nd and they had done two surveys after the intervention. And so then of course what they do is they continue over the next 4, or 5, 6 weeks, gathering more of that data as they're running that intervention, then we can sort of switch back and see what that data is looking like now.   0:25:28.3 AS: Exciting.   0:25:30.3 JD: So we have this same chart with that additional data. So we have data all the way out to now April 11th. So they run this PDSA for about a month, three weeks, month, three, four weeks.   0:25:47.9 AS: And that's 11 data points after the intervention. Okay.   0:25:54.0 JD: Yep. Purposeful. So what was I gonna say? Oh, yeah. So three, four weeks for a Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle, that's a pretty good amount of time. Two to four weeks, I've kind of found is a sweet spot. Shorter than that, it's hard to get enough data back to see if your intervention has made a difference. Longer than that, then it's you're getting away from the sort of adaptability, the ability to sort of build on an early intervention, make the tweaks you need to. So that two to four week time period for your PDSA seems like a sweet spot to me. So she's continued to collect this joy in learning data to see... Basically what her and her class are doing is seeing if their theory is correct. Does this idea of giving deductions for making noises have an impact? Is it effective?   0:26:44.0 JD: So if they learn, if the data comes back and there is no change, no indication of improvement, then a lot of people will say, well, my experiment has failed. And my answer to that is, no, it hasn't failed. It might not have worked like you wanted, but you learn very quickly that that noise deduction is not going to work and we're gonna try some other thing, some other intervention. We learn that very very quickly within 3 or 4 weeks that we need to try something new. Now, in the case of Jessica's class, that's not what happened. So you can actually see that dotted line, vertical dotted line is still at March 19th, we have those 11 additional data points. And you can actually see, if you count, starting with March 21st, you count 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11 data points that are above that green average line from before.   0:27:45.5 JD: So originally the red lines, the limits and the central line would just be straight across. But once I see that eight or more of those are on one side of that central line, then I actually shift the limits and the average line, 'cause I have a new system. I've shifted it up and that actually is an indication that this intervention has worked, because we said... Now for those that are watching, it doesn't appear that all the blue dots are above that green line, but they were before the shift. Remember the shift indicates a new system. So I go back to the point where the first dot of the 8 or more in a row occurred, and that's where I have indicated a new system with the shift in the limits and the central line. So this, their theory was actually correct. This idea of giving a deduction for noises actually worked to improve the joy in Jessica's science class. It was a successful experiment.   0:28:52.7 AS: Can I draw on your chart there and ask some questions?   0:29:00.5 JD: Sure. Yeah.   0:29:00.6 AS: So one of my questions is, is it possible, for instance, in the preliminary period, let's say the first 20 days or so that things were kind of stabilized and then what we saw is that things potentially improved here in the period before the intervention and that the intervention caused an increase, but it may not be as significant as it appears based upon the prior, the most recent, let's say 10 days or something like that. So that's my question on it. I'll delete my drawings there.   0:29:46.3 JD: Yeah, I think that's a fair question. So, the reason I didn't shift those before, despite you do see a pattern, so before the dotted line, I considered that period a baseline period where we were just collecting 'cause they hadn't tried anything yet. So Dr. Wheeler has these series of four questions. So in addition to seeing a signal, he's got these other sort of questions that he typically asks and that they're yes/no questions. And you want the answer to all those to be yes. And one of 'em is like, do you know why an improvement or a decline happened? And if you don't, then you really shouldn't shift the limits. So that's why I didn't shift them before. I chose not to shift them until we actually did something, actually tried something.   0:30:33.2 AS: Which is basically saying that you're trying to get the voice of the students, a clear voice, and that may be that over the time of the intervention, it could be that the... Sorry, over the time of the initial data gathering, that the repetition of it may have caused students to feel more joy in the classroom because they were being asked and maybe that started to adjust a little bit up and there's the baseline, so. Yep. Okay.   0:31:01.6 JD: Yeah. And so this is sort of where the project ended for the fellowship that Jessica was doing. But, what would happen if we could sort of see what happened, further out in the school year is that, either Jessica and the class could then be sort of satisfied with where the joy in learning is at this point where the improvement occurred. Or they could run another cycle, sort of testing, sort of a tweaked version of that noise reduction PDSA, that intervention or they could add something to it.   0:31:43.0 AS: Or they could have run another fishbone point, maybe the noise wasn't actually the students thought it would be the number one contributor, but, maybe by looking at the next one they could see, oh, hey, wait a minute, this may be a higher contributor or not.   0:32:01.2 JD: Yeah. And when you dug into the actual plan, the specifics of the plan, how that noise deduction was going to work, there may be something in that plan that didn't go as planned and that's where you would have to lean on, 'cause we've talked about the three sort of parts of the improvement team that you need. You need the frontline people. That's the students. You need the person with the authority to change the system. That's Jessica. And then someone with the knowledge of the system, profound knowledge. That's me. Well, those, the Jessica and her students are the one in that every day. So they're gonna have learning about how that intervention went, that would then inform the second cycle of the PDSA, whatever that was gonna be, whatever they're gonna work on next. The learning from the first cycle is gonna inform that sort of next cycle.   0:32:51.4 JD: So the idea is that you don't just run a PDSA once but you repeatedly test interventions or change ideas until you get that system where you want it to be.   0:33:01.1 AS: So for the listeners and viewers out there, I bet you're thinking gosh, Jessica's pretty lucky to have John help her to go through this. And I think about lots of things that I want to talk to you about [laughter] about my testing in my own business, and I know in my own teaching, but also in my business. So that I think is one of the exciting things about this is the idea that we just, we do a lot of these things in our head sometimes. I think this will make a difference and, but we're not doing this level of detail usually in the way that we're actually performing the tests and trying to see what the outcomes are.   0:33:43.9 JD: Yeah I think that for school people too, I think when we've attempted to improve schools, reform schools, what happens is we go really fast and the learning actually happens very slowly and we don't really appreciate what it actually takes to change something in practice. And what happens then is to the frontline people like teachers... The reformers have good intentions but the people on the front line just get worn out basically, and a lot of times nothing actually even improves. You just wear people out. You make these big changes go fast and wide in the system and you don't really know exactly what to do on the ground because the opposite is having Jessica's classroom. They're actually learning fast but trying very small changes and getting feedback right in the place where that feedback needs to be given right in the classroom and then they can then learn from that and make changes.   0:34:49.8 JD: And again, it may seem smaller. Maybe it doesn't seem that revolutionary to people but to me, I think it's a completely revolutionary, completely different way to do school improvement that actually kind of honors the expertise of the teacher in the classroom, it takes into account how students are experiencing a change and then I'm kind of providing a method that they can use to then make that classroom better for everybody so and I think in doing so students more likely to find joy in their work, joy in their learnings, teachers more likely to find joy in their work as well. So to me it's a win-win for all those involved.   0:35:34.9 AS: Fantastic. Well, should we wrap up there?   0:35:40.6 JD: Yeah, I think that's a good place to wrap up this particular series.   0:35:45.1 AS: And maybe you could just review for the whole series of what we've done just to kind of make sure that everybody's clear and if somebody just came in on this one they know a little bit of the flow of what they're gonna get in the prior ones.   0:36:00.4 JD: Yeah. So we did six episodes and in those six episodes we started off just talking about what do you need to have in place for healthy goal setting at an organizational level, and we put four conditions in place that before you ever set a goal you should have to understand the capability of your system, you have to understand the variation within your system, you have to understand if the system that you're studying is stable, and then you have to have a logical answer to the question by what method. By what method are you gonna bring about improvement or by what method you're gonna get to this goal that you wanna set. So we talked about that, you gotta have these four conditions in place and without those we said goal setting is often an act of desperation.   0:36:49.7 JD: And then from there what we did is start talking about these 10 key lessons for data analysis so as you get the data about the goal and you start to understand the conditions for that system of process we could use those 10 data lessons to then interpret the data that we're looking at or studying and then we basically did that over the first four episodes. In the last few episodes what we've done is look at those lessons applied to Jessica's improvement project and that's what we just wrapped up looking at those 10 lessons.   0:37:23.7 AS: I don't know about the listeners and viewers but for me this type of stuff just gets me excited about how we can improve the way we improve.   0:37:33.4 JD: Yeah. For sure.   0:37:34.9 AS: And that's exciting. So John, on behalf of everyone at the Deming Institute I want to thank you again for this discussion, and for listeners, remember to go to deming.org to continue your journey. You can find John's book Win-Win W. Edwards Deming, the System of Profound Knowledge and the Science of Improving Schools on amazon.com. This is your host Andrew Stotz, and I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming, "People are entitled to joy in work."

Can a 4th grade class decide on an operational definition of "joy in learning"? In part 4 of this series, educator John Dues and host Andrew Stotz discuss a real-world example of applying Deming in a classroom. This episode covers the first part of the story, with more to come in future episodes! 0:00:02.3 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz, and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today, I'm continuing my discussion with John Dues, who is part of the new generation of educators striving to apply Dr. Deming's principles to unleash student joy in learning. This is episode four about goal setting through a Deming lens. John, take it away.   0:00:22.6 John Dues: Good to be back, Andrew. Yeah, we've been talking about organizational goal setting last few episodes. A couple episodes ago, we talked about those four conditions that organizations should understand prior to setting a goal. Then we sort of introduced this idea of trying to stay away from arbitrary and capricious education goals. And then we got into these 10 lessons for data analysis. And so what I thought we could do now is we've got that foundation in place is that we could take a look at an applied example in real classrooms of those 10 key lessons in action to kind of bring those alive. And I ran this project a few years ago with a teacher named Jessica Cutler. She's a fourth grade science teacher in our network. And she was going through something we call a Continual Improvement Fellowship. So we do this sort of internal fellowship where people can learn that sort of way of thinking, the tools, techniques, the theories related to the science of improvement. And then they actually take that right away and apply it to a problem in their classroom or their department or their school, depending on who it is.   0:01:55.0 JD: And so what Jessica was doing, what her project ended up being was she was trying to improve the joy in learning in her fourth grade science class. So it's interesting to see how that sort of project evolved. So I thought we could revisit each of the 10 lessons and how that lesson was applied in Jessica's improvement project. And we'll maybe get through three or four of the lessons today. And then over the course of the next few episodes, kind of get to all 10 lessons and think through how they were... How that went in her improvement project.   0:02:08.1 AS: Sounds like a good plan, practical application.   0:02:12.0 JD: Yeah. I mean, it was interesting too, because she didn't initially sort of consider joy as a possibility. She was thinking like, I'm gonna work on improving test scores or something like that was sort of her initial brainstorm. And then sort of pivoted to this when we kind of talked through what was possible from the Deming philosophy type of standpoint. So it's interesting to see how things evolve. But just to kind of revisit, so we talked through these 10 lessons. Lesson one was "data has no meaning apart from their context." So we talked about these questions that are important, like who collected the data? How was it collected? When was it collected? Where was the data collected? What are the values themselves represent? What's that operational definition for the concept under measurement? Have there been any changes to that operational definition as the project unfolds? And so even with a project with a teacher and her students, all of those questions are relevant. They're still important just because you're dealing with students that doesn't mean anything changes on that front. So it was important for her to sort of think through all of those things as she thought through the start of her project.   0:03:28.9 JD: And what her and her students came up with after they sort of decided that they were gonna focus on joy, they focused on this problem statement. And they were like, well, what do we want science class to look like? 'Cause that was sort of their starting point. And what her and her students...Oh sorry go ahead.   0:03:45.9 AS: One thing you started off talking about her, now you're talking about her students. So she got her students involved in this process. Is that what you're saying?   0:03:56.2 JD: Yeah. So they were working together from the very outset even...   0:04:02.0 AS: As opposed to a teacher talking through this with a principal or something in a faculty room and then thinking of how do I... Okay.   0:04:09.2 JD: Yep. That's right. Yeah. And so what they came up with is the sort of desired future state of science classes. "We are able to stay focused through science, enjoy science class and remain engaged." And so to give some context, what was happening is that she taught science and social studies and it was sort of like a back-to-back class period. And they would do science second. And so by the time they were doing science, sometimes the students were getting off task, disengaged. They weren't as engaged as either the students wanted to be or the teacher wanted them to be in that second lesson. So they, they came up with that as the thing they were gonna focus on. And then because they were gonna focus on joy in learning, they had to define what that meant. So what did joy in learning mean to that fourth grade science class? And what they came up with as a definition, which I really like, is "we wanna have fun learning, finding things we like to learn and have fun completing classwork and activities." So they came up with this operational definition. And keep in mind, these are fourth graders and Jessica's having these conversations like, what's the operational definition? That's not probably typical language you're gonna use with fourth graders. But if you walk them through these things, they actually pick up on it pretty quickly.   0:05:26.1 JD: It's actually pretty cool to see.   0:05:28.1 AS: And to them, a more simpler word sounds like was fun.   0:05:35.0 JD: Yeah, right. They wanted that to be a part of the science learning process. So basically, once they had the operational definition, they had to think through, well, how are we going to measure that concept that we've defined? And what they did was they just developed a simple survey. Jessica did it in Google Forms. just had, really just had two questions. The first question was, on a scale of 1 to 10, how much did you enjoy science class today? And then there was a second open-ended question that said, what made you enjoy or not enjoy class today? So it was fresh in the kids' minds. So basically, at the end, each kid has a Chromebook in Jessica's science class. She would just sort of share the link to the survey, and the kids would complete that as the closing activity for the lesson. So she would get two things out of it. So 1 to 10, just a real quick sort of numerical quantified value, how much the kids enjoyed science class that day. And then, because it had just happened, the students could say what they did and didn't like about the lesson. Oh, we haven't used computers in a few days. Or it'd be nice if I had a video to help bring this concept alive. Or there's a few words that you use that I don't know the definitions to. Could you add those definitions to the glossary? So just things like that, simple things like that.   0:06:55.9 JD: Right away. And then what Jessica could then do is take that information and actually adjust her lessons as she planned maybe for the next week, she could make those adjustments based on this feedback she was getting from the students. So that's sort of the application of lesson number one. So what are we measuring? How are we gonna measure it? When are we collecting this data? That type of thing. Lesson two, if you remember back from when we covered the lessons was "we don't manage or control the data. The data is the voice of the process," right?   0:07:28.9 JD: So we talked about this ideas that while we don't control the data, we do manage the system and the processes from which the data come, right? So, and this is really key conception of the system's view. You, you say you're going to improve this particular classroom. So that's the system. So you're not necessarily controlling the data. You're not controlling how the kids are evaluating, the numbers that they're putting one through 10 to assess joy in learning, but what the teacher and then the students, because of this project do have control over are the learning processes that are happening throughout science class, right? And so back to your point about you switch from talking about Jessica, the teacher to the students. And then you said "we" that's also a key conception of taking this approach, right?   0:08:24.4 JD: So what I think Deming would say is that when you're going to improve an organization, you have to sort of combine sort of three critical pieces. One thing is you need someone from the outside, from outside the system that has Profound Knowledge. And then that person or persons has to be collaborating with the people working in the system. So those are the students, they're working in the science class system. And, then you that third group or that third person is the manager or managers have that have the authority to work on the system. So in this case, Jessica has the authority to change what's happening in her science class.   0:09:10.2 JD: The students are the workers working in that science system. And then that third part is that person that has the sort of understanding of the System of Profound Knowledge and it's sort of bringing all of these parts together that really is how you begin to transition sort of conventional classrooms to those guided by the Deming quality learning principles, right?   0:09:33.1 JD: So in in the case of Jessica's project, that person that was, that had a System of Profound Knowledge lens was me. So I was sort of acting as an, the outsider, 'cause I'm outside of the science system. But I have this understanding of the System of Profound Knowledge. And I'm working with Jessica as she's working with her students, to sort of bring that lens to the projects.   0:10:00.4 AS: And what's the point of doing all that if she doesn't have the ability to make the changes necessary to test, if you're gonna if we change this, it's gonna result in something why go and do all this if you're just stuck in a system that you simply cannot change because of government regulation or whatever, maybe.   0:10:17.5 JD: Right. Yeah. So it's bringing all those pieces together. But what I found thinking about the three parts of a team that's working toward organizational improvement, what I've found in the past is, in my experience, whether it's a school improvement team or a district based improvement team, most of them are devoid of at least one parts of one of those components, usually two of those components, 'cause usually students aren't involved.   0:10:45.9 JD: And then in most school systems, there's no one with this outside knowledge, the System of Profound Knowledge lens, right. And I think it's what we're really doing is the students can identify the waste, the inefficiency, the things that aren't going well from their perspective, but we don't often ask them. Or if we do, we do it in a way where it's an end of year survey or an end of semester survey, but this is collecting that feedback in real time and then acting on it. We're not planning to do something next year with this feedback, we're actually planning to do something the next day, or maybe the next week, to adjust the science lessons.   0:11:24.8 AS: And it's one of those two things that come into my mind, what, how do you handle the idea that what's causing the impact on joy in learning could be that the student had a bad night, the night before. And I guess by doing many samples that starts to kind of wash out. And then the other question is since the students know that the teacher could likely make an adjustment, is there any possibility that they could be gaming or playing the system.   0:11:57.1 JD: Well, that's interesting, because I think, well on the first point. I think pretty quickly, my experience with this and David Langford I know you've talked to has echoed this sentiment is you know, he was working with high school students, this is an elementary project but either way. You may get some students that don't take this seriously. At first. And you may get some kind of crazy answers crazy brainstorms or crazy survey submissions, although I don't think Jessica got much of that.   0:12:30.2 JD: But in other projects I've gotten some stuff at the outset that was a little bit off the wall. But like David said to me when I first started this and then it's been my experience since is that kids, once they realize that you're actually gonna act on the feedback, as long as the feedback is in good faith. They actually start to take it seriously, pretty, pretty quickly. And so I think pretty quickly, those sort of types of worries go by the wayside. Now, I will say I did say that the...   0:13:01.1 JD: One of the components that has to be on this improvement team is the person that has the authority to change the system. So at the end of the day, even though we're gathering this input, Jessica's really the person as the teacher of that classroom that has the authority to make the changes to the system based on her judgment or, her professional judgment as a science teacher of what should happen. And so the students certainly offer feedback and inform that process, but ultimately it's Jessica that's gonna determine the changes to the system.   0:13:34.0 AS: I hear David in my ears saying, you know what, Andrew? You don't trust the students? They probably have a more honest, view of what's going on than most adults do. So yes, I hear the voice of David Langford.   0:13:49.2 JD: Yeah. Well, and interestingly, and we'll get into this towards the end, not today, but when we get to some of the other lessons, interestingly, not to give away the story, but, one of the things that was getting kids off track was a lot of noise during class, kids making noises. And they actually came up with this system where they were kind of penalizing each other. This was their own idea. And so, kids know exactly what's going on in class. And so it was interesting to see how they came up with some ideas to rectify that. But yeah, so it was really just bringing together, these three groups or, the group of students and then Jessica and then myself. It's that combination that's really where the power for improvement lies. And again, I, that type of partnership is just not typical in school improvement situations.   0:14:45.7 JD: So that's lesson two, applied. Lesson number three is "plot the dots for any data that incurs in time order." Right? So we've talked about this a lot. The idea behind the primary point of "plot the dots" is that plotting data over time helps us understand variation, and that in turn leads us to take more appropriate action. I think that what we decided to do with Jessica's project is, start plotting the points on a run chart and connect those points with a line, and then it becomes pretty intuitive as we're looking at that data, what joy in learning looks like in this science class. And then once we have enough data, we can turn that run part chart into a process behavior chart and actually add the limits.   0:15:40.2 JD: So, like I said, Jessica, once her and the class determined that what they were going to improve was join in learning, and they defined that concept operationally and created the survey, right away they started gathering this survey data as a part of the project, and usually they would gather the data maybe, two or three times a week across the course of this particular improvement project. So maybe I'll share my screen just so you can see what that initial run chart looked like. So, you have this run chart, and I left this in the spreadsheet so you could see the actual data. So as she began administering these surveys, she would send me the data and then I would create it the run chart for her, start plotting that data so that both of us could sort of see the variation in that survey data over time. And then she could actually take this, she would put this run chart on a slide, and every week or so she would actually show the students what the data looked like.   0:16:49.7 AS: And just to be clear, we've got a chart for those that are listening, we've got a chart that has a blue line and it's going up and down kind of around the level of about 79. So they've got points that are based, that are days. Some days are below that 79 some days are above. But also I'm assuming that those points are the output of all the surveys. So the average answer on that day from the survey as different from the average or median of all the day's output, correct?   0:17:31.1 JD: Yeah, that's right. So this is, the run chart from Jessica's class that's displaying the survey results. And what they're measuring is joy in science class as assessed by the students.   0:17:44.3 AS: On the first day, the students basically said, 75% of the respondents said that they had joy in science.   0:17:51.9 JD: That's right. So in this particular school year, which was two years ago, so we had done some of the project planning before kids went on winter break, and then when they came back from winter break, they were ready to start administering the survey. And we started plotting the dots, charting the data over time. So the X axis for those who are listening are the dates.   0:18:16.2 JD: The, Y axis is the joy in learning, percent of kids that the rating of the kids from one to 10. And then I just turn it into a percent. And so you have the green line, the central line running through is the median. We're using the median 'cause that's fairly typical for a run chart because typically run charts don't have as much data as a process behavior chart. And so, outliers can have a greater impact. So we're using the median to sort of control for that. Although this data's fairly tight. So on day one, like you said on January 4th of this school year 75, the kids sort of rated the joy in learning of that particular lesson as a 75% of 100. And then you sort of see it bounce around.   0:19:04.7 JD: That median of 79. And so what I'm showing is the data from the first 10 surveys that Jessica administered at the end of class. So over the course of 20 days from January 4th through January 24th, she administered that this survey 10 different times. So about two to three times a week. And so we see a high of about 83% joy in learning and a low of 67% joy in learning. And you have about half the points above the median, about half the points below the median. So even though it's only 10 data points, Jessica and her class, and then myself, we were starting to learn about what did joy in learning, joy in science class actually look like? Now that we have this definition and we're measuring it with these surveys and then plotting these data points. So again, she's actually putting this up on, on the, up on the screen so kids can actually see this. And what she said was after the 5th or 6th survey, and she's plotted this and put this up on a screen a few times, the kids are actually getting excited. And they're wanting to see their data. They're wanting to see what the results look like for each survey as she started plotting this.   0:20:30.6 AS: It's funny because I, when I was a loading supervisor at Pepsi, I started putting up the percent correct for each of the loaders in the warehouse. And I didn't make any comment or anything, I just put it up there. And yeah, people are interested when they start seeing numbers, they start thinking, they start asking questions.   0:20:54.3 JD: Yeah, and you can see too at a school, in a fourth grade science classroom, you can see all types of lessons, you can sort of build up this reading graphs, calculating percentages, using when do you use line graphs for some other type of graph?   0:21:10.2 AS: And why use median versus mean? Because a small amount of data could be distorted if you have a huge outlier.   0:21:18.8 JD: Yep, all kinds of practical lessons. So this brings us to sort of the last lesson for this particular episode. I think lesson four is two or three data points are not a trend, right? So, we've said that you should start plotting the dots as soon as you've decided to collect some type of data that occurs over time. And really when people ask me what type of data can you put on a run chart or a process behavior chart, there's almost any data that you're interested in improving in schools unfolds over time, almost all of it. Whether that's a daily cadence, a weekly cadence, monthly, quarterly, yearly, whatever it is, right? But the problem is the vast majority of data that we look at as educators and really probably most people, it's typically two or maybe three data points. But that doesn't tell you anything about how the data is varying naturally. So when we start thinking about this particular data, we start learning quite a bit. For one, as a teacher, I would have no idea how my kids would evaluate their joy in my classroom.   0:22:29.9 JD: And so I think if I was Jessica, I'd be pretty happy off of that, that the sort of average or the median rating is close to 80%, basically the rating each lesson has an eight out of 10. Right. I think a second thing is let's say we were a school district and we did systematically give our kids some type of survey that assess their satisfaction with the school. Right. Maybe they do it twice a year or annually. Right. And so after at the end of the year, you have two data points, but you don't really have any idea for what to do with that data. You have no idea if you collected three or four or five data points, what that would look like. And here she is in just 20 calendar days and a couple of school weeks. She's got 10 data points to work with already. So she's building that baseline of data. So I think what this is to me is just a very different approach to school improvement.   0:23:39.4 JD: And the tools are relatively simple. The ideas are relatively simple. But I think overall this really, the takeaway I want for folks is that this project really illustrates a very different approach to school improvement, guided by these sound sort of Deming principles for how to use data, to how to understand variation, to how to include the people working in the system, right?. We've talked about these arbitrary targets throughout this series, and you could see that when Jessica and her class would go to maybe set a goal for joy after collecting some of this data, that goal would be tied to something real. It's tied to actual data from the classroom. And you can sort of avoid goal setting as an act of desperation when you take this type of approach.   0:24:38.4 AS: Joy in the joy of bringing joy in science.   0:24:44.2 JD: Yeah, it's really all about this process, right? It's the kids getting into this process, that's the psychological part. They're involved in their educational process. And so that is completely different than what's happening in the typical classroom, I think, in the United States.   0:25:00.5 AS: You can imagine somebody not wanting to do this because they're afraid of what they're going to see.   0:25:07.0 JD: Certainly [laughter]   0:25:08.3 AS: Yeah.   0:25:08.7 JD: Certainly. Yeah. Hopefully they would be open to sort of collecting the data and being reflective as a professional. But I could see, maybe that's not, tha's not always the case. And another question, I kind of shared this project with some folks, in different settings, and one of the questions I typically get is, well, what about the science test scores? Like, this is great if kids have joy, I guess is kind of the reaction. But what... How does that impact the academics?   0:25:44.0 JD: And my response is, well if kids don't find joy in their learning and they're not engaged, what kind of results are you gonna get? [laughter] To me this is sort of like a part of the process that leads to academic outcomes, when you enjoy the things that you're doing, when you feel like you have some control over a process, maybe not the full control, but when you have some control, when you have input into something that you're doing all day long, you're gonna have more investment because, you know, because you're seeing that your input has meaning. That's really that psychological component.   0:26:18.2 AS: It's obvious, but maybe not proven.   0:26:21.9 JD: Yeah, I think so. I think so.   0:26:28.4 AS: Okay.   [SILENCE]   0:26:30.9 JD: Yeah. I think that's a pretty good spot to wrap up this opener with the... We covered those first four lessons and started to look at how this project unfolded in, Jessica's classroom. And I think, next we can kind of see as she gathered more data, what this looked like over time. And then as she sort of had that baseline in place, then the next thing we'll look at is: what did she do as a change idea or an intervention to try to make these rates go higher in her classroom?   0:27:08.4 AS: That's interesting. I mean, in my wrap up of this, I think how lucky, is Jessica to have someone from the outside? I think a lot of teachers and a lot of people in business, they don't really have anybody to go to. And the company's not providing that type of stuff or the school is not providing that. And so you just kind of make it up as you go along. And I think that's, that's one of the things, 'cause I'm, I think like probably other listeners and viewers who are, listening to this, they're thinking, I wonder if John could help me do that in my area? The idea of, we all know there's places that we could improve that we may not be. And if a school system can provide that, wow, that's a big... That's exciting.   0:27:56.6 JD: Yeah. I'd be happy to. And it was like a, it was definitely a mutual effort. Jessica put a lot of work into sort of, 'cause she has gone through that fellowship, she had to sort of learn all of these tools and then actually, turn around and put them into practice in her classroom. And she found ways to do this in a way where, she could still do the things she was required to do, like delivering the lessons that she was required to deliver and those types of things. But then she found ways to sort of incorporate what she learned in the fellowship to make her classroom better. Seeing that, seeing her openness to feedback that really made this like a, I think a, mutually beneficial experience. And I think the kids enjoyed it too.   0:28:39.2 AS: And the purpose of this series too is, the idea of how can you do this at home and how can you start doing it in your own school, in your own classroom, in your own life? And so I think I'm looking forward to the next session where we're gonna go deeper into... I've already got, a series of questions and things that I'm wondering, and then I saw some tabs in your, in your worksheet that I thought, okay, there's gonna be some more interesting stuff. So I think we're all gonna see you in that next section.   0:29:09.9 AS: And on behalf of everyone at the Deming Institute, I want to thank you again for this discussion and, taking the time to go through these steps with us. And for listeners, remember to go to deming.org to continue your journey. You can find John's book Win-Win, W Edwards Deming, the System of Profound Knowledge and the Science of Improving Schools on amazon.com. This is your host, Andrew Stotz. And I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming, and it's particularly apropos, people are entitled to joy in work.  

03:47, uno de los grandes cuentos de David Langford, nos sumerge en esa hora misteriosa de la madrugada donde el fino velo de la realidad se desgarra con frecuencia, dejando paso a las formas más aterradoras de nuestras pesadillas. El protagonista, Brian Dekker, empieza a experimentar una serie de sucesos extremadamente extraños precisamente a esa hora. Los elementos más perturbadores de sus pesadillas, como insectos, dientes, deformidades y ceguera, de alguna manera se filtran hacia la superficie de su conciencia, trastornando por completo su percepción de la realidad e incluso expandiéndola para incorporar lo más horroroso como parte de lo posible. ¡Felices pesadillas!😜 Una producción de Historias para ser leídas © voz y sonido Olga Paraíso La base musical y los Fx pertenecen a Epidemic Sound con licencia Premium autorizada 🛑BIO Olga Paraíso: https://instabio.cc/Hleidas 📢Nuevo canal informativo en Telegram: https://t.me/historiasparaserleidas Si esta historia te ha cautivado y deseas unirte a nuestro grupo de taberneros galácticos, tienes la oportunidad de contribuir y apoyar mi trabajo desde tan solo 1,49 euros al mes. Al hacerlo, tendrás acceso exclusivo a todos las historias para nuestros mecenas y podrás disfrutar de los episodios sin interrupciones publicitarias. ¡Agradezco enormemente tu apoyo y tu fidelidad!. Aquí te dejo la página directa para apoyarme:🚀🖤 https://www.ivoox.com/support/552842 ▶️Canal de YouTube Historias para ser Leídas con nuevo contenido: https://www.youtube.com/c/OlgaParaiso 🚀 Escucha el episodio completo en la app de iVoox, o descubre todo el catálogo de iVoox Originals

Who wins when teams and team members compete with each other? In this final episode in the Role of a Manager in Education series, David Langford and Andrew Stotz discuss why cooperation beats competition, particularly in schools. TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.5 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today I'm continuing my discussion with David P. Langford, who has devoted his life to applying Dr. Deming's philosophy to education, and he offers us his practical advice for implementation. Today we continue our discussion of Dr. Deming's 14 items that he discusses in The New Economics about the role of a manager of people after transformation. And we're talking about the 14th of these different 14 items. And this one I want to read out, it is, "He understands the benefits of cooperation and the losses from competition between people and between groups." We decided to title this one: "Do you think you're winning from competition?" David, take it away.   0:00:53.7 David Langford: That sounds great. Great. It's good to be back again, Andrew.   0:01:00.4 AS: Yeah.   0:01:00.6 DL: Yeah. This is a great point, and it really is the basis for Deming's philosophy about everything that he brought to management and it got people to think differently. When I would give seminars with educators around the world and stuff, and we'd start talking about the differences between competition and cooperation, I'd often get people speaking very strongly that, "Competition is the way the world works and you have to have competition to get people to do stuff. And sports teams are always competing." And when you start to think about it, sports teams that, that usually have a sole focus of just beating the, the other team, generally don't have multi-year winning streaks, [chuckle] because you're not building a program, you're not building a whole philosophy, a whole basis to how you do things.   0:02:06.0 DL: And I've made it a point to really listen to all kinds of interviews with coaches over time. And one common theme I usually hear over and over and over from really good teams is they'll talk about the next game that they're playing. They don't talk so much about, "We're gonna beat these people." They talk about, "This will be a really good test for us." Or they'll say something about, "We're probably gonna really learn a lot this weekend [chuckle] at this game." Well, to me, those are really good coaches because they're lowering the fear level, they're lowering the anxiety. And the better we... The irony of this statement, this point number 14, is the better you cooperate, the better you compete. [chuckle]   0:03:04.0 DL: And when you're not doing that, you potentially could just go down in flames. And the same thing happens in a classroom. If you set up a classroom so everybody's competing against each other, or what Deming called the artificial scarcity of top marks, you'll end up with a whole bunch of people that are just basically at each other's throats, not cooperating, not getting along. You'll have all kinds of discipline problems and behavior problems and things that are going on in classrooms like that because it's all just set up on a competition level. So grading on a curve is a scarcity, artificial scarcity of top marks. So if there can only be three top marks or three A's or whatever it might be in this class, and people that are actually struggling in the class and actually trying to learn, they're gonna quickly learn, "There's no point in me actually trying because there's no way I'm ever going to get to that point. There's only gonna be three people that are gonna get the A."   0:04:14.2 DL: And that's the biggest thing about this, is getting to the point where you're understanding the losses of setting up artificial competition for, whether it be grades or points on a soccer field, or whatever it might be. Deming often used the analogy of the difference between a bowling team and a orchestra in terms of cooperation. So people that go bowling, they're generally just out for your own score and whatever you're trying to work through, and it's not really a team activity. Even if you're on a bowling team, it's still... You're just doing your own thing and doing your own score.   0:05:07.8 DL: So they have a very low level of interdependence in that environment. But I used to be a band teacher and orchestra leader and things like that. And so when Deming used the analogy of an orchestra about that being the pinnacle of interrelationships, it really struck home for me that like he said, "A 1OO people in an orchestra or a band, they're not there to compete [chuckle] who can play the loudest or who could play the biggest solo or... " Right? 'Cause that'd be a terrible thing to listen to if you went to a concert like that.   0:05:47.3 DL: But the reason we give people standing ovations, is because we recognize the interdependence and the cooperation it takes to reach a pinnacle performance. Even in a very small group, maybe just three or four people in a band or something, it takes a tremendous amount of cooperation to get to that level of performance. And just imagine some of our famous rock bands and stuff, if everybody on the stage was competing against each other, it would sound terrible. [chuckle]   0:06:24.9 AS: Yeah. It's interesting about the orchestra concept. I like to talk... When I'm speaking to audiences about Deming's teaching, I say, "Imagine that we have a new generation of leaders that are KPI managers, and they sit down with every person in the orchestra and say, 'You've got a KPI, we've got a limited pool of bonus here, and we're gonna distribute it amongst all the players based upon who was the A players, and C players you're going to get zero.' And so now you need to think about what is your contribution here. And then you pull up... The curtain goes up and you rise up and everybody claps. And then everybody in the orchestra stands up and plays to their best ability."   0:07:03.6 DL: Yeah. You'd have chaos.   [laughter]   0:07:07.5 AS: It's interesting in this one that he sees the need to highlight that it's... He's talking about competition between people and between groups. Why did he have the need to say that rather than just competition in general?   0:07:25.1 DL: He did talk about competition in general a lot. He also talked about... He made statements like, "It's really good to have a good competitor." And that seems like it's the opposite of what this statement is about, but I think there's a difference between competition and comparison. So if you have another company, another school, another grade level. So let's say I'm a fourth grade teacher in an elementary school or something, and there's maybe three other fourth grade teachers in that same building. Well, I'm not trying to compete to [chuckle] win in that situation, I'm actually trying to cooperate. And the more that we all three cooperate together, share ideas, maybe even share kids and make a very fluid situation, everybody wins. The number of people that get to higher and higher and higher levels of performance increases and increases and increases.   0:08:35.9 DL: You may never get to a 100% of the people learning a 100% of the material a 100% of the time, but you're gonna get closer and closer and closer, the higher, the more that you cooperate. And the more that you set up competition, we're not talking about games, Deming talked about the difference between games that everybody knows it's a game. You go to a soccer game, everybody knows this is a game. We even call them games. [chuckle]   0:09:07.8 AS: Games.   0:09:09.4 DL: Something we can play, but that's not real life. And that's why I always try to explain to teachers that you can't set up your classroom as a game, because really what you're doing is teaching life and death situations. Somebody that can't learn to add is gonna have a tough, tough time in the rest of their life. So we can't just reduce it down to a simple game, or do this and you get a lolly or an M&M or a piece of candy or something. And we often have teachers that would say things like, "Oh, well, kids like that." "Okay. Well, I like that." [chuckle] But don't tie it to something so critical as performing well on fractions, [chuckle] that if you do really well on this, then you're gonna get a prize or you're gonna get something out of that. I remember, 'cause we're talking about the orchestra thing, as a band teacher, I had to learn the hard way when I was teaching young kids how to play, say, "Look, you need to be practicing 20 minutes a night. And that's the firm rule, is just you need to be doing that."   0:10:23.9 DL: Well, it was really pretty foolish on my part because they have a system too, and they have all kinds of things going on in their lives, that was what was happening. And when I really pushed it really hard, and they'd get little cards that they'd have to fill out how many times they'd practice, and their parents had to sign it and all this stuff. Well, what I found out is I had a bunch of kids cheating, writing down times even though they didn't practice. Some of them would even forge their parents' signatures, [chuckle] all kinds of stuff. And it's really easy to blame the individual and say, "Wow, look how ineffective kids these are. If I can get some better kids, we'd have a better program here."   0:11:05.7 DL: But after learning about Deming and studying all this, I made just one simple change. I just gave them a little run chart and I said, "All I want you to do is just mark down how many minutes a night you practice, that's it. And all you have to do is just, I don't care if it's one minute or no minutes, or whatever it might be, you just put that on this chart." And then we would turn that into a little run chart for a whole week's performance. And lo and behold, the average number of minutes per night that kids were practicing just went up and up and up because they wanted to see their chart get better. [chuckle] It's a human phenomenon that Deming tapped into, that people want to improve. And when they could just see the number of minutes going up.   0:12:00.5 DL: And I'd have really good conversations with them and sit down and say, "Hey. Well, how do you feel about that? Look at this. Look at your chart?" And you didn't have to have anybody verify it or anything else, but it was just you keeping track of your own performance within that. And then when we come together as a group, that's our time to optimize the situation. And Deming talked a lot about that. Sometimes people or groups would have to be sub-optimized, they may not be working to their full potential, so that the whole group or the whole system will work more efficiently. That's a hard concept to get somehow. But again, back to the orchestra thing, there's a lot of people in an orchestra when you play a piece that they're sub-optimized, [chuckle] they're just playing one little part of the whole big piece. [chuckle]   0:12:57.7 AS: Yeah. The cymbals.   [vocalization]   0:12:57.9 DL: Yeah.   0:13:00.8 AS: There's a moment.   0:13:02.7 DL: But it's necessary. [chuckle]   0:13:04.7 AS: There's a moment. T And just because the cymbals guy is sitting there and not participating, as long as he's contributing that moment, that's really performance in that sense. There's a quote that I like by what Dr. Deming said that's somewhat related to this, and I see this in my work with companies here in Thailand. And that is, "A company could put a top man or woman at every position and be swallowed by a competitor with people only half as good, but who are working together."   0:13:40.1 DL: Absolutely. Yeah, exactly. [chuckle]   0:13:43.4 AS: Yeah. I think that really says it all, as to what...   0:13:46.2 DL: Yeah. That's what he is getting at here. The more you cooperate, the better you're gonna compete, even though competition was not... Were really never your goal to start with.   0:13:57.9 AS: Yeah.   0:13:58.9 DL: Well, this made me think about when I was a high school teacher, and I tapped into how much the students really loved learning about Deming and everything. And we started going out and doing presentations actually, and going to the universities, corporations, all kinds of places to do presentations. And every person that did a presentation had to have like four or five people that were helping them, making sure that their video was working and making sure that the sound was right and all kinds of things. And the idea being so that they could concentrate on their presentation. And I'll never forget, we were at a state department somewhere, and somebody at the end got up and said, "The information you shared with us and everything is very [chuckle] profound and very wonderful, but the real show was the high degree of cooperation going on amongst all the students as things were happening." So somebody just didn't get up and do their thing and then just go sit down in a corner somewhere and just wait, everybody had an interrelated job to help people put on a really good performance, basically.   0:15:15.5 AS: Well, what a great way to end our discussion on the role of managers of people. And this was 14 items that Dr. Deming talked about in his book, The New Economics. And this final one, I think really stands out to me, and that is the idea of today, starting right now, stop pitting individuals and groups against each other and start figuring out how we can get people cooperating and how we can coordinate effort, because the coordination and the cooperation is where the real value is created and the real experience is created, whether that's in a classroom, whether that's on a factory floor, or whether that's in an office. All of those spaces, the idea of cooperation is so valuable for performance and getting the most out of people, but also, gosh, it makes it a happier day. [laughter]   0:16:17.8 DL: Absolutely. And not just limited to businesses and organizations, family works the same way. I have five children and I used to always tell people in my seminars, "How do I go about figuring out who amongst them is the greatest child?"   [laughter]   0:16:38.0 AS: Child of the month.   0:16:38.1 DL: Yeah. And out of five kids, what? Two or three of them were gonna be below average probably. [chuckle] And so, if you start thinking about it that way, you start thinking about, "Oh, we wouldn't wanna do that." But I had the opportunity to take our family to Europe, we went to Singapore, we went to all kinds of places. And I remember when we went to Singapore to visit relatives there, we had 15 pieces of luggage [laughter] that we flew with for the seven people that were all going on this trip. Well, no one person can be responsible for all that, it has to be an interrelated related system. And everybody's working for the common aim of to pull this off and make sure that we can go on another trip. And it's really enjoyable and everybody had fun. And so... That's my final comment.   0:17:32.0 AS: Well, let's wrap it up there. David. On behalf of everyone at Deming Institute, I wanna thank you again for this discussion. And for listeners, remember to go to deming.org to continue your journey. And listeners can learn more about David at langfordlearning.com. This is your host Andrews Stotz, and I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming. "People are entitled to joy in work."

What are unhurried conversations, and why should managers prioritize them? In this episode, David Langford and host Andrew Stotz talk about the kinds of conversations managers should be having with their team members. TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.5 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz, and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W Edwards Deming. Today, I'm continuing my discussion with David P. Langford, who has devoted his life to applying Dr. Deming's philosophy to education, and he offers us his practical advice for implementation. Today, we continue our discussion of Dr. Deming's 14 items that he discusses in The New Economics about the role of a manager of people after transformation. In the third edition, that's page 86. And in the second edition, that's page 125. So we are talking about item number 13, and in that point, I wanna read it to you. It says, "Number 13, he will hold an informal unhurried conversation with every one of his people at least once a year, not for judgment, merely to listen. The purpose would be development of understanding of his people, their aims, hopes and fears. The meeting will be spontaneous, not planned ahead." We're calling today's conversation the unhurried conversation. David, take it away.   0:01:17.5 David Langford: Thank you, Andrew. It's good to be back again. So always fun to discuss these points and talk about the depth of what it means and how to work through that. So once again, this all sounds really simple. You know, hey, just have this unhurried conversation with people at least once a year. When I talked to Dr. Deming about this years ago, he was recommending more like once a quarter, if you can do that, to work that through. But what are we really talking about? So in this world of managing with data and KPIs, key performance indicators and, you know, holding people's feet to the fire and really making them toe the line and all that kinda stuff, Deming is sort of just pretty much kind of the opposite. Those things all have their place and time, but that's not the kind of conversation that he's hinting at here or he's talking about here.   0:02:24.4 DL: I find it really interesting that he says, you know, it shouldn't be... The meeting will be spontaneous and not planned ahead. And so what he's getting at is that you're not, you're now coming in with an agenda for what you wanna hear from somebody. And on the opposite side, as an employee or somebody that you're working with, they're not prepared with some kind of an agenda where they're telling you what they think they... Where they're telling you what they think you want to hear, kind of thing. And I think that's what he is talking about why it needs to be spontaneous. He also goes deeper and he talks about, you know, find out people's aims and hopes and their fears and what's happening. And I was just thinking about that movie The Intern where the guy is hired in the company and he is 80 years old, and so they're doing the interview with him. And this young kid asked him the question, where do you see yourself in five years? I think, he looks at it and says, "You mean when I'm 85?" So, different...   0:03:47.4 AS: Dead.   0:03:48.1 DL: Yeah. Different points of life, different ways to think about it. So yeah. But he's just talking about, hey, just set up a time, be spontaneous, come in, sit down with somebody, and just not necessarily talking about business. Right? What are your hopes and fears and where do you see us going? And do you think we're on the right track? And...   0:04:13.2 AS: I'm curious, why do you think that... I mean, in some ways it seems like such an obvious thing. Why do you think he even needed to say this?   0:04:18.7 DL: Because it's not happening and it's even even worse today, I think, than in Deming's time in the 1990s when all this, all the computer technology, KPIs, all that stuff was just coming into being. Well, nowadays, it's sort of just a way of life to have all that kind of stuff. And I, I hate the phrase about being data managed or managing with data or data-driven. That's what it is. Well, we're a data-driven school district, and we make all of our decisions. Well, there's a lot of problems with that, just the word "driven" kind of drives people a little bit crazy about stuff. And really, the data is just there just to be informed. So you could still make informed good decisions, but I think Deming even talked about if you just make decisions just based on the data, you're probably gonna go out of business because you're not really paying attention to the people and what's really going on in the organization, what's happening and that type of thing.   0:05:34.4 DL: So it can also be really intimidating if you're the boss, and you're just popping in and saying, hey, you got a few minutes, you wanna sit and talk for a while? Because especially if you're in an organization where you've always... Or your predecessor, or you've always had an agenda for that meeting, it can be somewhat threatening for people. I know when I was a superintendent and I tried to do this with the principals that I was working with and stuff, and one of them, I'll never forget, she was just, she was just shaking the whole time. And I just had to say just, let's just sit here a minute and just calm down and what are you so nervous about? And just get to know her and everything else. Well, always before, the person before that had been the boss had come in and only time you had a meeting was when something was wrong.   0:06:42.7 DL: And she was gonna get ripped into. And so her fear was super great like that. Also found teachers just the same way that when as a new superintendent, I'd walk into their classroom just... I just wanted to sit and watch what's going on and maybe help out or participate or do whatever. And they'd just be almost shaking in their boots that the boss came in today. And what I found out is that it wasn't until at least six or seven months of doing that just spontaneously popping in, observing, watching what's happening, et cetera. Maybe chatting with them a little bit afterwards or doing something like that, that pretty soon that started to go away and people started to sort of function on a normal level. So one of Deming's 14 points in Out of the Crisis was pretty simple, drive out fear.   0:07:42.8 DL: And I think that's also what he's alluding to here is, here's a way that you can drive out fear, you know? And at the same time, just really get to know people. I've done a lot of study with neuroscience and the science of how do we actually think and et cetera. And there's a lot of that in neuroscience as well, that if you have a very fearful situation, you actually downshift and your brain actually shuts down. It goes into the survival mode of... And you're not gonna think creatively about a different option. You're simply trying to find out, what do I have to do to get out of this situation? And I think that's a lot of what Deming's talking about here is, hey, you gotta have these meetings and spontaneous and make it a joyful experience and just talk to people about what they wanted to have happen.   0:08:41.3 DL: Other thing I'll never forget in his seminars, he used to talk about this point or these points and stuff, and he said the purpose of the conversation is not for me to find out how you're doing. He said, I wanna know how I'm doing. And I remember the first time as a superintendent, sitting down with people and say, tell me about how I'm doing. They would look at me just kind of blankly like, what? Yeah. Well, how do you think I am doing with this job? And what do you think I need to be doing differently? And I always found those conversations really interesting, and again, it wasn't until like the second or third time having conversations with people that they actually started to tell you stuff that was useful. Because they don't wanna tell you something and then you end up firing them. So they have to have trust that you really do wanna find out how to improve, how to get better, so.   0:09:48.8 AS: Yeah, it's interesting. When I worked for Pepsi, when I first got out of university, it was three years I worked at Pepsi, and I would say we probably never had one company outing that I could remember. And in Thailand, I remember when I worked at one of my first jobs as a broker, and I was an analyst, and there was a questionnaire passed around, this was 25 years ago, that was questionnaire passed around, "Would you like to wear a company uniform to work?" And I said, well, obviously no. I was like, yeah, no.   0:10:27.9 AS: And then, I was stunned to see the results that majority of people said yes. And that's when I realized like, what Thais value in work is the comradery and the connection and the closeness. And they appreciate the relationship. And so therefore, you also have outings and things that we do and parties and go bowling or go hiking. And those things are where some of these unhurried conversations happen. Oh, well, yeah, this is what's going on at my home and with my family, and this is why I'm struggling and all that. And so what I realized in American culture, it's just not that common. You go into work, work's work.   0:11:14.4 DL: Yeah. So I'd say my last comment on this is that it's really not so much about work. I mean, it is work related, and obviously, there's an employee employer relationship going on, et cetera, but it's more about what you just talked about, really getting to know somebody, really getting to understand them. And again, back to neuroscience, I used to advise teachers all the time to try to do the same thing or at least do an exercise with kids. What's your aim? And have kids actually set aims and hopes and fears? And if you can do that very same thing. Where do you aim to be? And et cetera. Because if you have a second grader who wants to be an astronaut, and soon as you find that out, well, there's all kinds of ways you can tie everything that they're learning to eventually becoming an astronaut. And suddenly, everything that they're learning becomes relevant, and relevance is the key.   0:12:20.3 AS: Yeah. And the next year, they may say they want to become such and such, and then take that and run with it. You know? One of the last thing I would say about this that I always say when my students are giving their final presentations in my Valuation Masterclass Bootcamp, is I say, okay, now the last thing I want to tell you before you present is we're on the same team. Which I'm trying to convey to them that although I'm gonna critique you and I'm gonna challenge you and all that, we're here together for the same purpose.   0:12:54.6 DL: Yeah. I'm gonna give you feedback, but yeah, we're both here to accomplish the same aim, so.   0:13:01.4 AS: Yeah. So I love the unhurried conversation. So any last thing you wanna add to this before we wrap up?   0:13:08.9 DL: No, that's pretty much it. So I think we don't wanna make it too much out of it. I mean, it is on face value, it is pretty much what it says, have these conversations and understand who people are. And you'll find out that pays off in multiple ways down the road.   0:13:29.7 AS: So I'll wrap up by just saying to the listeners and the viewers out there, start today. Start today to have an unhurried conversation that's not connected to performance, compensation, company goals. It's an unhurried conversation to have two human beings sit down and take an interest in each other. And that's really the challenge I think that we got from this discussion. David, on behalf of everyone at the Deming Institute, I wanna thank you again for this discussion. And for listeners, remember to go to deming.org to continue your journey. Listeners can learn more about David at langfordlearning.com. This is your host, Andrew Stotz, and I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming. People are entitled to joy in work.

Slogans and exhortations don't work to motivate people. Targets usually encourage manipulation or cheating. John Dues and Andrew Stotz discuss how these three strategies can hinder improvement, frustrate teachers and students, and even cause nationwide scandals. TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.4 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz. I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W Edwards Deming. Today I'm continuing my discussion with John Dues, who is part of the new generation of educators striving to apply Dr. Deming's principles to unleash student joy in learning. This is episode 16, and we're continuing our discussion about the shift from management myths to principles for the transformation of school systems. And today we're gonna be talking about principle 10 "eliminates slogans, exhortations, and targets." John, take it away.   0:00:37.1 John Dues: Good to be back, Andrew. Yeah, we've been talking about these 14 principles for educational systems transformation for a number of episodes now. I think one, one important thing to point out, and I think we've mentioned this multiple times now, but really the aim in terms of what we're hoping the listeners get out of hearing about all these principles is really about how they all work together, as a system themselves. So, we started with create constancy of purpose. We've talked about a number of other things, like work continually on the system, adopt and institute leadership, drive out fear. Last time we talked about break down barriers. We're gonna talk about eliminating slogans and targets this time, which is principle 10. But really, as you start to listen to 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and now 10, what should start to become clear is how all of these things work together.   0:01:34.5 JD: If you are operating as a leader, for example, within sort of the Deming philosophy, one of the things you are gonna do is eliminate these slogans. So all these principles shouldn't be studied in isolation. We study them together, see how they all work together. But let me just start by just reading principle 10 so you have the full picture. So principle 10 is "eliminate slogans, exhortations and targets for educators and students that ask for perfect performance and new levels of productivity. Such exhortations only create adversarial relationships as the bulk of the causes of low quality and low productivity belong to the system, and thus lie beyond the power of teachers and students." So really what we're talking about is, what's wrong with slogans, exhortations and targets for educators and students, because these things are, pervasive, I think.   0:02:29.5 JD: We've seen them, we've seen the posters on the walls with the various slogans. And, of course targets are everywhere in our educational systems. In my mind the main problem is that they're directed at the wrong people. The basic premise is that teachers and students could sort of simply put in more effort, and in doing so, they could improve quality productivity, anything else that's desirable in our education systems. But the main thing is that, that doesn't take into account that most of the trouble we see within our schools are actually coming from the system. And I think we've talked about this quote is probably one of Deming's most well-known quotes, but he said, "Most troubles and most possibilities for improvement add up to proportion, something like this, 94% belong to the system, which is the responsibility of management, 6% is special." And that's more like, can be sort of tagged or pinned to individual students or individual educators working within the system. So I think that's a really important thing to revisit 'cause it sort of is at the heart of all of these, all of these principles.   0:03:47.7 AS: It's interesting, like, maybe you could give some examples of what type of, slogans or targets or exhortations that you've seen, in your career and what's going on in education these days.   0:04:06.5 JD: Yeah, I mean, I'm gonna give an example here, kind of walk through an example in a second. But there, they're really everywhere, I mean, to varying degrees probably in different places. But, one, that one that sticks out in terms of, a target is when I first started my career in 2001, I was a teacher in Atlanta Public Schools. And No Child Left Behind had just come out. And, basically as they, as the leadership at the school sort of presented what was in this legislation, you know, they would always put up a just chart that basically said, a certain percentage of students are expected to be proficient across the country on state tests. And that, that percentage would increase over time starting in 2001 when the legislation was rolled out. And by the 2013, '14 school year, the way the tables were laid out is that 100% of students would be proficient in reading and math across the country in third through eighth grade. And of course, that didn't come to fruition. There's no chance that that ever would be the case. And it was also the case that there was really no methods attached to that target. So that's a really good example of a target that was sort of pulled out of the sky. And, basically, over the course of a dozen years, it was supposed to sort of, so somehow magically come to be.   0:05:38.2 AS: That's great. The idea of 100%. I mean, like what fool would say that, you would have 100% of anything. I mean, you just can't get anything to that point. But one question I have about that, I suspect that in those types of cases, it just gets swept under the rug and nobody's looking at that number the way that they looked at it back then, but maybe, maybe they do look at it. But my question would be that No Child Left Behind if we were able to objectively measure the improvement that was caused by that, or a devolution, like did, if it was, what was the starting point, for No Child Left Behind?   0:06:26.0 JD: Well, so, it, that would vary by district. If I remember right, I think the, the target early in the 20000s was something like in the 50 or 60%, something like that, right? And then it would...   0:06:40.3 AS: Right, so let's say 50 to 60%. And I wonder at the end of that period of 2013, if we could objectively compare and calculate that number, what would be your estimate of where it would be if it was 50 to 60 originally, where do you think it was at the end of 2013?   0:07:00.0 JD: 50% to 60%.   0:07:02.4 AS: So no improvement?   0:07:02.5 JD: No. I mean...   0:07:02.5 AS: Incredible.   0:07:04.2 JD: That could vary a little bit by time and place, but it's a little bit even hard to pin down because, the way that the test was constructed in 2001 in Georgia, for example, would be different than the way the test was constructed by 2013-14. So even, even the test itself had changed, the standards had changed, a number of things had changed over time. Also, for folks that know much, about what was going on in Atlanta by, by 2013-14, the superintendent, who would've been the superintendent from about 2001 until, I don't know, 2010 or something, she was actually charged under the RICO statute for sort of, yeah, I don't know if that was warranted or not. I think it was unprecedented, that's for sure. But there was a cheating scandal that was systematic from superintendent to principals down to even teachers. That was pretty pervasive because there was a lot of, in Atlanta at least, there was a lot of monetary incentives tied to the test score improvements. And so I know that it did result in a number of people being charged with various crimes, including the superintendent and number of principals.   0:08:18.3 AS: That's incredible.   0:08:20.6 JD: Incredible. Yeah. Yeah.   0:08:22.8 AS: Yeah. And there was a trial, there was a trial, I'm looking here on the internet. The trial began on September, in September of 2014 in Fulton County Superior Court.   0:08:32.3 JD: Yeah. Right around that time.   0:08:33.7 AS: Incredible.   0:08:33.8 JD: And so I was gone from Atlanta by that time. So I don't know all the details, but I have read a little bit about it, and I think, again, because there's these targets, that's certainly not an excuse for systematically cheating on these tests for sure. But, a byproduct of some of these testing regimens and some of the monetary incentive systems that were put in place was, cheating did happen in, in a number of places in the United States. Especially at the height of when the scrutiny was highest on these test results. So again, it's not, that shouldn't be the expectation even in a system where there's a lot of focus, certainly, but it was a byproduct. So you, you would wanna ask the question, why did that, why did that happen?   0:09:20.5 AS: Yeah.   0:09:21.9 JD: I mean, I think, yeah, go ahead.   0:09:25.2 AS: I was just gonna say that I also wanted to talk about, we were talking before we went on about the word "exhortation," which is kind of an, an old word, kind of a, and so I was looking it up on the dictionary. It says, "an address or communication emphatically urging someone to do something," and they use an example of "no amount of exhortation had any effect." And then I thought about, one of the questions I always ask students when I start my class, is "who's responsible?" And I want the listeners and the viewers to think about this answer to this question. Who's responsible for students being on time to class, the student or the teacher? And of course, the majority of students are gonna say the student. And if I ask the teachers, of course they're gonna say, student, it's personal responsibility. And most of the listeners and viewers would probably say the same. And then I want to explain a situation that I do every time I start my class. My class starts at 01:00 PM in this particular semester. And as soon as the door, as soon as 01:00 PM came, I just locked the door and I started teaching.   0:10:39.8 JD: And this is university setting?   0:10:40.7 AS: This is at university.   0:10:44.0 JD: Yeah.   0:10:44.6 AS: And when I did that, the university students, some of them had the, they were outside and kind of knocking on the door or no, wondering if they can come in. And I didn't let them in until after five or 10 minutes of teaching. And then I let, I went out and talked to them a little bit about, being on time and, please, be on time to my class or else I'm gonna lock the door and you're not gonna be able to come back in. And so I did that a couple times until all the students, I have 80 students in that class, and they all were in. And the next time that I, had my class, 100% of the students were on time. They were in there and ready to go. In fact, I had a funny case, John, I was, I was visiting a client of mine, which is north of the city of Bangkok. And I told my client, I gotta get outta here now because if I'm late to my class, my students are gonna lock me out.   0:11:32.7 JD: They're gonna lock you out. Yeah.   [laughter]   0:11:33.0 AS: But the point of the story is for the listeners and the viewers out there, if you said that the students are responsible for being on time, but I've just presented a case where the teacher changed something about the way that the, the class was done. That changed the outcome of the students. Can you still say that it is the students, and in fact, if you were to, to listen, if you went, we went to a, a high school or university and we sat down with all the teachers that would they be saying no amount of exhortation had any effect on the students being on time. These guys are just irresponsible.   0:12:17.4 JD: Yeah. Yeah. It's interesting 'cause I think, David Langford, on one of the episodes he did, talked about the problem of kids being, or students being late to class. And in that particular scenario as a high school, and, when you ask the kids, why were you late? They said, "well, the teacher doesn't start until five or seven minutes into the period anyway, so why, why do I need to come on time?" So, there is some truth to thinking about who, who is creating the system, what is that system? What types of behaviors does that system encourage? That's certainly a good way to sort of analyze each, each situation.   0:12:53.7 AS: Yeah. I mean, it makes you think, and I think what David highlights too is like, what's the priority here? And, where do we want, is it so important that someone's gonna be there at exactly this moment or does it matter if it's five minutes before, five minutes after? And I think that there's, there's an interesting discussion on that.   0:13:13.1 JD: Yeah.   0:13:13.8 AS: And for the listeners and the viewers out there, you're gonna make up your own mind. But I think that the key thing is that what you're saying when you talk about 94% of, the output or the result of something is the result of the system. And that helps us to focus beyond just, putting the pressure on students or administrators or educators or employees.   0:13:36.1 JD: Yeah. Yeah. And I think, one of the tools that I've talked about repeatedly and I'm a very big fan of is, is the process behavior chart or what some people call a control chart. And the reason for that is because when you use that chart, you can then tell what problems are coming from the system itself, and that's the responsibility of management and what problems are coming from other causes and may take some other types of sort of approaches. I think just knowing that is a really important sort of upfront step when you're considering that 94%, 6% problem. You can actually tell what's coming from the system, and then there's one approach and what's coming from special, special causes. And then there's another approach to, to improvement. And I suspect that, you know, when you chart data in this way over time, the vast majority of systems are stable, but unsatisfactory.   0:14:38.5 JD: And I think that's probably where things like, targets, exhortations, these slogans when you have a stable but defective system, that's the point where, these exhortations, et cetera are particularly pernicious, you know? I think, goal setting seems like a good idea, but it's really useless in that type of situation. It's really often an active desperation actually, when you set a goal in a stable but defective system. So I was gonna sort of talk you through a, through an example of how this, perhaps, could show up.   0:15:23.6 AS: Yep.   0:15:26.2 JD: We... This is going back a couple years, but as the pandemic rolled out, and I think we've talked about this data before, but we were really closely charting and paying attention to: are kids engaged in remote learning? And again, this example's from the pandemic, but this can come from any data that that's important to you. And almost all of this data unfolds over time. But we were looking at, how, how engaged are kids in remote learning? And it was really important for us to first define engagement. And so for us, this question always comes up, what do you mean by engagement? For us, this meant, kids did a remote lesson with the teacher and then they had a practice set in math. So what percent of the kids completed that full practice set?   0:16:17.6 JD: And basically when we, when we charted this, what we see, we did this for, about five weeks. We charted the data. So we had about 24 days worth of data. This was eighth grade math. And the first day 62% of the kids were engaged the second day, 67, the third day, 75%, fourth day, 84%, and then down to 77%. And then the next day, 71%, the next day, 58%, the next day 74%. So you can kind of get the picture here that this data was sort of bouncing around. And when we took that out to 24 days, that first day was 67%, the 24 day was 68%. And then sort of, we looked at the average over those 24 days, it was about 67%, a high of, 84%, a low of 49%. But when you put this on a process behavior chart, what you see is it's a stable system.   0:17:17.3 JD: Meaning there are these ups and downs, some are above that 67% average, some are below it. When we look at sort of the natural process limits. So those are sort of the boundaries of the system based on the magnitude of the variability over time, it was sort of suggesting with this system, we could expect a low of 42% engagement, a high of 91% engagement, but mostly it's bouncing around this average. Now if imagine, that you're this eighth grade math teacher and the principal comes and says, this engagement data is not high enough, we're gonna create these posters across the school, we're gonna start this campaign. You can almost picture this in different places, right? And it says these posters say 100%...   0:18:06.3 AS: Graphic design.   0:18:07.0 JD: Yeah, that design, you have this poster and it says "100% engaged. We can achieve it if you believe it." Right? And you can almost imagine these posters going up in a school, and it's just this sort of proclamation. But when you look at the data, it's just a stable system. And what we can expect is this, these data points bouncing around the 67% average. School, the school leadership wants higher engagement rates. They want fewer days with the low rates. But the problem with a poster or a target or exportation is that you're, you're basically asking the teacher to do what they're unable to do. And we do this in all types of settings, all types of, work settings, not just, not just in education. If you look at this particular system, the upper limit's at 91%. So basically the...   0:19:10.0 JD: The system's not capable of achieving 100% remote learning engagement, and so basically the effect is then fear and mistrust towards leadership, and I think, you know, when you look at this remote learning engagement data, that's probably what happened to a lot of people, but if we go back to that No Child Left Behind example, the Federal Government, 'cause that's who is setting the proficiency targets, for No Child Left Behind, its federal legislation, teachers knew, principles knew that in many places, the system that was in place for education was not capable of hitting those targets, it just...   0:19:50.1 JD: It wasn't in the capability of the system, and then so if you are an individual operating within that system, you're trying to navigate that, you're gonna try to hit that target no matter what, and then in some places, they chose to do things that went as far as cheating, because they were trying to hit that target. Now, I'm not absolving those individual educators of responsibility, but it was that system that they were operating in that sort of caused that behavior to then happen. You know the worst case scenario is people did, the adults did cheat. And I'm sure there were other things that were happening in other places that didn't rise to the level of cheating, but I think we've talked about it before, there's really only three options in response to data that's not satisfactory. You can improve the system. That's the ideal. That's what we're talking about here. That's what we're going for here. You can sort of... What do you wanna call it? It's not as far as cheating, but you can sort of...   0:21:02.6 AS: Manipulate or...   0:21:04.4 JD: Manipulate the data in some way, or you can manipulate the system in some way, and that's I think what we were seeing. So the worst case scenario in Atlanta, they manipulated the data. But I think in many places, this idea of manipulating the system is less clear, but what happened in many places, and I think we've actually talked about this, that there was this over-emphasis on reading and math at the expense of other types of academics, and that's a manipulation of the system. That's not cheating necessarily, but it is sort of in my mind, sort of cheating kids out of a well-rounded education, and that was a product of so much emphasis on just reading and math test scores, and again, a lot of this was well-intentioned because people were...   0:21:53.5 AS: It's all well-intentioned. What are you talking about a lot of it?   0:21:56.9 JD: It's all well-intentioned but what actually happens as a result of putting these systems and these testing systems in place, and especially the sanctions or even the incentives on the positive side, the money. What actually happened...   [overlapping conversation]   0:22:10.6 AS: Holding back funding or providing additional funding, if you can hit these targets or that type of thing.   0:22:15.4 JD: Right, right, yep. And so you get all these unintended consequences that are produced as a result of the system, and we talk about these things as side effects, just like with drugs, there's these side-effects, but they're not really side effects, they're things that commonly happen, they're things that you would expect to happen as a result of doing these things, but we sort of put them in this... We've given this language as if they're these small things that happen over here, but really they're the sort of the typical unintended consequences that you could expect when you design a system in that way, whether the side effects of a drug or the side effects of cheating in a very strict, sort of, and regimented testing system, an accountability system in a school district.   0:23:03.6 AS: I couldn't help but laugh 'cause I thought about Robin Williams, and he had this skit he used to do when he was alive, and he talked about the drugs, drugs that people that the companies are marketing. And he said I was going through the side effects and I was like reading these horrific things that they had a list and he's like, I'd call that an effect.   0:23:21.4 JD: [chuckle] Right, right, yeah. Yeah.   0:23:24.0 AS: Let me ask you about this slogan, "We can achieve it if you believe it." Now, some students may respond to that, John, what do you say about the fact that... You know, because every time that you talk about getting rid of targets and getting rid of slogans and stuff, that people say, sometimes it works and it works for some people, and some people are driven that way, and when they hear that, they respond to it. What do you say to that?   0:23:57.5 JD: Well, I would say prove it, I wanna see if you're telling me that was actually successful, sometimes people will sort of dress up an anecdote. So, one, I'd wanna see the evidence that that did have the intended...   0:24:13.2 AS: Okay great answer and that's a lesson for everybody listening and viewing is always go back and say, prove it, 'cause I'm making an assertion.   0:24:21.3 JD: Yep. Yeah.   0:24:22.1 AS: And my assertion is that it helps certain people, actually, the burden of proof, of course, is on me as I make that assertion and you're asking me to prove that, which is a very, very logical and sensible thing to do. What else would you say?   0:24:38.0 JD: Well, well, I would say that, you know, Dr. Deming often talked about this idea, I think he got it from Taiichi Ohno, this idea of the loss function, which is basically like...   0:24:51.9 AS: Taguchi.   0:24:52.0 JD: Taguchi loss function, sorry.   0:24:54.4 AS: Yeah.   0:24:54.9 JD: And basically, think of an inverted parabola inverted U basically... And here is an optimum.   0:25:03.3 AS: Or think of a U. Think of a U.   0:25:03.4 JD: Now either side of it... An inverted U, yep, and the optimum is at the bottom of the U, but there's loss as soon as you start to move away from the U, but that loss comes on both sides. So, you know, the people that are anti-testing versus the people that wanna put strict sanctions and rewards in place, probably the answer is somewhere in between there, because we have to know how our students are doing, so we do need some data, so I would be probably a proponent of kids being given some type of standardized tests and can we sort of know the scores at the aggregate level, perhaps at the school level, by subject and grade level, but there's not sanctions and rewards tied to that in any way, it's just information. So that's one thing that'd be a big difference between, you know, between what we could be doing with this data and what's actually being done.   0:26:06.1 JD: So like taking the eighth grade math engagement data, for example. In terms of what would you do? I mean, I think if I was gonna put a poster up with sort of an explanation of how we're gonna approach the remote learning, maybe the first poster that I'd want staff to see is a list of what we're gonna be doing month by month to sort of deal with the reality of remote learning, maybe that first month, it's just making sure... The strategy is to make sure every kid has a device and access to reliable internet connectivity, right? That's very different than this proclamation, that 100% of kids is gonna be engaged, because as soon as I see that, as a teacher, I know that's not gonna happen. Especially if there's no other sort of methods tied to that. Maybe in month two, after I get all the kids devices and connectivity, that's reliable, we can do some training on, well, how do you even teach? What are the methods that a teacher can employ in a remote learning environment, and maybe all along, I am tracking the data, there's nothing wrong with tracking the data, but I'm putting it on that chart, I'm tracking it over time, and as we implement these various approaches to remote learning, I can see how that's impacting, but I'm doing that with students and teachers, and I'm not just plotting the data and then not giving a set of methods that sort of accompany the sort of march towards continual improvement.   0:27:47.2 JD: And the same thing, the same approach could be used with that test data from Atlanta, you know if the idea was, I'm gonna sort of start charting this data and seeing how we're doing over time, and I'm working with teachers and students to come up with ideas to how to improve this, to march closer to that 100% proficiency goal, I mean that's a noble goal, assuming that the test is well-constructed and that we want obviously more and more kids to be marching towards proficiency for sure, but we don't want all these other side games going on that come about when you sort of just simply have targets without methods, and I think that's the point. And if you take that approach, I think then teachers sort of understand that the leaders, the school leaders or the district leaders, they're taking some of that responsibility for a lack of engagement or low test scores or whatever it is, and they're trying to remove those obstacles systematically, that's a very different, different approach, 'cause I'm not suggesting that people shouldn't have goals. That's not what I'm suggesting. I set goals for myself all the time, I think they're actually helpful and necessary tools for individuals, but I think when you set numerical goals for other people without a set of methods to accomplish those goals, then you get the opposite effect of what was intended and you know, that's what I see happen over and over and over again in the education sector.   0:29:28.2 AS: And what I like to say is that two things about that, which is one is that if, if you're setting a goal, just don't tie compensation or other benefits to the goal or other punishment. Set the goal and then use it as a tool and track the information and discuss it. It's the same thing with compensation, once you start to tie compensation to specific goals, then you start to mess around with the incentive structure. And that's the first thing I also think the other thing I'd like to say is that if the object that you are measuring through your goal or target or whatever knows that it is being measured, look out. Now, I have a ruler right here, and if I measure the height of this glass, the glass doesn't know I'm measuring it, and so there's no change in anything in the glass, but when a human being knows that they're being measured, it causes a change. Just the knowing of that.   0:30:46.9 JD: Okay.   0:30:49.6 AS: So. Okay. So that helps us to understand about slogans, and what you're talking about is the idea of maybe replacing slogans with "How are we improving the system?" And, you know, I've started doing that in my Valuation Masterclass Boot Camp, where I was at the end of each session... At the end of each six week period, I have a survey that I give to students and I asked them for feedback, and how can we improve this? And then what I do is I take all those and I give them to my team and then we have a discussion and we kind of rank them, and then we go back on the final day and we say, by the way, these are the improvements we're making. And these are the improvements we did the last, this current time that you guys didn't realize, and then that way, the students also are kind of involved and interested in what we're doing, that we're asking for their feedback on how to improve the system, and we're telling them.   0:31:44.9 AS: I don't generally announce it beforehand, like put up something about, "Here's all the changes that we're making in this boot camp," 'cause I just want them to have a natural experience, I don't necessarily need them to be thinking like, "Okay, so this is new", and also some of the things that we're trying, we're testing and we're observing how they work and if they work, and so we may abandon that thing, so it may not make sense to just necessarily advertise it, but when we have some big things like this time, we got some excellent feedback in our last one, and now, I decided that when we do the boot camp, we're gonna have, let's say, 30 or 40 people, and we're gonna cover it one industry, we're gonna value companies in one industry, so we're gonna do the automotive industry, and then that allows everybody to work together in the first week, say, "Let's analyze this industry before I tell you which companies each of you are valuing." And so that's a new innovation that we're trying to do this time, and so there's a lot of work on our side to get that prepared.   0:32:46.7 JD: Yeah. And it sounds like there's methods, there's methods attached to the goal of improvement. That's the most important thing, I think.   0:32:58.1 AS: Yeah, I mean I feel like... One of the things I feel like, and I think maybe some of the listeners or viewers may feel like this, sometimes I don't measure it the way I maybe should. What I do is I get feedback from the customer, from the student in this case. And then I bring that feedback to my team and I ask my team to kind of rank what they think about those, and then we identify, let's say three of those recommendations that we think, Okay, this is good. Let's implement it. And then we test it. We don't have an exact measurement that say, "Okay, well, you wanna say, "Did that work at the end of a six-week period?" We just kind of know whether it worked or not, how much trouble it was, how much benefit we thought it got, and then we get some feedback at the end, and maybe the feedback from students at the end is part of the data. But I'm just curious, what are your thoughts about people who are doing things necessarily, they may be doing the right things, but they may not necessarily be measuring it in the way that they could or should, including myself. What are your thoughts on that?   0:34:08.7 JD: Yeah. I mean... Well, I mean, I think there's quantitative data and qualitative data, and it sounds like what you're doing is relying more on qualitative data, including this experience of the students. I mean, I think generally, probably some things lend themselves to more quantitative data, some things lend themselves to more qualitative data. I mean, I think the key here is to set up a system for improvement, identify what's most important to you in terms of... 'Cause you can't focus on everything at once, what are you gonna focus on? Get, you know, get other people involved. So it's not just coming from you, and it sounds like there's a team here working together, you're also doing it repeatedly over time. I don't think there's necessarily a right or wrong answer on this. I think the most important thing is to, for me, I think about looking at this stuff, putting the data on a chart over time, again, that can be quantitative or qualitative data, determine what the sort of capability of the system is, get some baseline data. I think that's really, really important. And then understand, is what you're seeing sort of typical, is it bouncing around an average within some limits, or do you see special causes in your data? I think those are the most important things.   0:35:57.2 JD: And then the other thing, I think if we're talking about a school and if we really wanna make breakthrough improvements, then I do think at the end of the day, that continual improvement sort of approach has to involve students and teachers, I think it has to. And so I think there's different ways to go about doing that, but I think if you do those things, then you're well on your way to improved outcomes.   0:36:25.1 AS: I do have one question I ask them at the end, and that is, I give them a range of value, and I say, now that you've experienced the Valuation Masterclass Boot Camp, how, what would you say is the value that you received? And definitely in the beginning that kept going up because we kept improving and they could feel that value, and I didn't give them any guidance, the rating did never change, but it was moving up. Now it's kind of flattened off, and so I think we've, we've got a challenge if we wanna bring that to another level, but that's one of them. Well, John, without, without any exhortations to the listeners, I would love it if you could just wrap up the main takeaways that you want us to get from this discussion.   0:37:15.7 JD: Yeah, I think you know, maybe putting a fine point on those things, I think what I've come to appreciate is continual improvement is really the combination of plotting data over time and combining it with that Plan Do Study Act cycle, which we've talked about multiple times. So the first recommendation is whatever metrics are most important to you, plot them on a chart in time order, and then... It can be intimidating at first. But the calculations on the process behavior chart, to add in the upper and natural process limits or control limits is really, really valuable, because then you can start to understand the capability of the system And then you start to understand what would it really take, what would we really have to do to actually shift those limits and indicate a pattern of the data that actually indicates that we've brought about improvement. The other reason those limits are really important is because it does help you understand, do you just have this common cause system where there's lots of different cause and effect relationships, but there's not really a single one you can hone in on, and so then you know you're not trying to improve one component, but the entire system systematically. So I think for those reasons, it gets a little technical with the process behavior chart, or the control chart but they are...   0:38:46.7 JD: I think it's the most powerful tool that we have in the continual improvement tool box. So I would highly suggest at least a couple of people on, on your school district team have that sort of skill set, because then you don't waste your time on improvement efforts, and you can also tell when something you tried has actually resulted in improved outcomes for kids or for teachers or for schools.   0:39:13.1 AS: John, on behalf of everyone at the Deming Institute and the listeners and viewers, I wanna thank you again for this discussion. For listeners remember to go to deming.org to continue your journey. You can find John's book, "Win-Win: Dr. W. Edwards Deming, the System of Profound Knowledge, and the Science of Improving Schools" on amazon.com. This is your host Andrew Stotz, and I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming, "People are entitled to joy in work."

Listening to understand and learn is often harder than not-really-listening because you're thinking about what to say. Dr. Deming emphasized learning and was excited about ideas he heard from others every day. In this episode, David Langford and Andrew Stotz talk about why and how managers, including teachers, should listen to staff or students. TRANSCRIPT 0:00:03.4 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today, I'm continuing my discussion with David P. Langford who has devoted his life to applying Dr. Deming's philosophy to education and he offers us his practical advice for implementation. Today, we continue going through Dr. Deming's 14 items that he discuss in New Economics about the role of a manager of people after transformation. In the third edition, that's page 86. In the second edition, that's page 125. And we're talking about point number 12 and that is "he listens and learns without passing judgment on him that he listens to." And we decided to title this one, Do You Listen to Speak or Listen to Learn? David, take it away.   0:00:56.8 David P. Langford: Yeah. Well, thanks. It's good to be back, Andrew. Yeah, I was just, I was just thinking that when I was at Deming's conferences and a couple of times sat with him either after the end of the day or even at lunchtime, etc. Or just watching him interact with other people, it was often pretty amazing that he'd be chatting with somebody and then he'd pull out these little notebooks and he's all of a sudden just writing down something that somebody told him or that somebody said or... And later in the day, a lot of times he'd pull out the notebook and say to somebody, "Look what I learned today." And I was always just so impressed with that. And I don't know how many four-day conferences I was at with him, at least half a dozen, and always the same, always swan with that little notebook, always writing stuff down.   0:02:02.9 DL: And so this point comes to mind about how special that made you feel that here you have the master of the third industrial revolution, writing down what, what you say, people that he doesn't really know that well or something, but just a point that somebody made and how important that was to him and to keep track of that. And a lot of times I think we've lost that skill. And I like the title of this session because a lot of times when people are having even casual conversations, they're not really listening to what the person is saying. They're thinking about what they're going to say next or how they're going to respond to a point that was made. And when I really started taking these points to heart and thinking about it, even as a classroom teacher, I began to realize that I really wasn't listening to my students. I was preparing to talk at them. [laughter] I remember...   0:03:16.0 AS: And they were preparing to be talked at.   0:03:18.6 DL: Yeah. They're ready to take notes, and you know, but they weren't ready to think and offer opinions and to go through that whole process of working through it. I'll never forget my friend Dr. Myron Tribus, he was a professor at Dartmouth, I think in the engineering school. And for some reason, his whole lecture that he was going to do one day was just either lost or something just before he was ready to walk out in his classroom of 200 kids, students that he was working with and everything. And he thought, "Oh my God, what am I going to do? I don't have my notes. I don't have all this stuff and everything else." Anyway, he just started asking them questions and put them into groups and had the groups discuss things and then come back and pose questions and debate each other and talk and work through. And he told me he'd never had so many students on the way out of classes. "Wow, that was the best class we've ever had." [laughter]   0:04:21.7 AS: Such a great, a great opportunity when you come unprepared, but you've got a group of people in front of you with all kinds of opportunities to pull out discussions.   0:04:37.3 DL: It's sort of like, are you prepared to be unprepared? [laughter] So there's a difference, there's incompetence where you just come in and you don't know what you're doing and, you know, you're lost, or you're prepared, this is a plan that you're going to come in and actually listen to people and present and go through things. I remember even in a high school class that I had, one of the most successful things we did is, I may have told you this story before, but anyway, the library would get all the newspapers and then after a day they're no good. And so coming into class, I would just get all the newspapers from the previous day. And the challenge for the students was to go quickly through the newspapers and pick out relevant events happening around the world and be prepared to discuss that in small groups and stuff. At first, I just thought of it as an activity. And it turned into be so profound that students really thought deeply about stuff.   0:05:43.1 DL: And then they would take Deming principles and apply that to that situation, whether you're talking about world wars, or you're talking about the economics or business or education or whatever it might be. And I remember even just a few years ago, a student of mine, 35 years ago, ran into me and said, "I still remember doing that. I still remember those discussions going through." And most of the time, I was just sitting and listening to them discuss about things. And maybe I'd ask a few questions now and then about things or try to get them to think differently about something. But it was, there were no right or wrong answers, it was just getting people to think.   0:06:30.9 AS: There's so many different things going on in my head as you're talking about this. The first thing is I was thinking... I was thinking about three things. The first is, in order to achieve what he's talking about, first, you have to stop talking. And the second thing is what I've learned over the years is, the best way to stop, the next thing you have to do is stop thinking, because my mind's racing to think about what am I going to say next. And the best way to stop thinking is to take notes of what the person is saying, from my experience. Yesterday, I went to visit a, a prospective client, and I asked him to tell me about his pain that he's feeling in his business and why he's asked me to come. And I have in my notebook here, I've got it all listed out. And then I went back and I read them back to him. And it was kind of funny because I said, "Unfortunately, I just don't think this is enough pain." [laughter] But I don't think I could have said that if I hadn't really understood what his pain was. And so, we had a further conversation going deeper.   0:07:42.5 AS: But then the third part that Dr. Deming is talking about is not passing judgment. Wait a minute. Come on. I'm all about judgment. I know what's right. I formed my beliefs over many years. And you can also say that Dr. Deming passed some pretty tough judgment, you know. So, I'm just curious, as I think about those three things, how do you put that all together in your mind?   0:08:09.2 DL: Well, I was just thinking about one of the conferences that we were at. He always had an education day after one of his conferences. And so, there'd be educators from all over the state would come to his one-day conference. And I'll never forget the room was filled with like 300 school administrators, principals, some teachers, et cetera. And then there was a time to ask Dr. Deming questions. And this fairly young man got up and described the high school that he was a principal of, and there were 52 different languages spoken, and the gang violence that he was dealing with, and all just really detailed and clear. And he had data, and he really understood what was going on. He says, "So Dr. Deming, I need your advice about what, where I should go from here, what I should do." And Dr. Deming is sitting up on this big stage. He's probably 89 years old at the time, and he's got his arms folded, and he looks down, and he looks up at the ceiling.   0:09:14.1 DL: The silence is just deafening with 300 people there. And started to think, well, maybe he didn't hear the question or realize he's supposed to [laughter] he's supposed to answer or something. And finally, the guy couldn't stand it anymore at the microphone. He says, "Well, Dr. Deming, do you have an answer to my question?" And Dr. Deming said, "It's not the answer that's important. It's the question. And you've got that right." [laughter] Next question. [laughter] And there was just this ripple in the audience, like, "What does that mean? Oh, my gosh." Yeah. So when you're able to actually ask the right questions, then you're probably on the right track of figuring out what to do yourself. It's the people that aren't listening and aren't thinking about what is the next question? Or what question should I be answering?   0:10:10.3 AS: And what do you think about when he says... Now, we have to understand that, we're talking about managing your people here. So it's not like he's talking about when you're going out and speaking in the public necessarily, but he's talking about how you're developing your people and interacting with your people. And he's saying, without passing judgment. And I guess the first thing he said, if the way you interact with the people that you manage is to pass judgment on them, you're probably going to lose trust right away. And we've already seen that trust was number 10. So I guess what he's trying to say is, you know, listen and accept what you hear. I don't know.   0:10:55.2 DL: Yeah, I think what I've often taught teachers a lot is to learn to be comfortable with silence, too. You think you're the leader of people so you have to fill all the silence all the time. And you may ask a question, and then you have to just wait. And I'll never forget when I was working with Alaska Native students in Alaska, high school students, read a study that said the average time it takes for an Anglo Saxon teacher to ask a question and then answer their own question is like three seconds. You know, not really listening at all. The average wait time, response time for Alaska Native students was something like 20 seconds. So, here you have all these teachers that have come in from the outside that are starting to work with Alaska Native kids. And they, I remember vividly teachers saying, "Well, these kids just don't respond. They just don't talk. They just don't." Well, give them time. [laughter] It's not in their culture just to respond instantly every time you ask a question or like a game show host or something like that of how many questions can we get through in one hour or something.   0:12:19.3 DL: And I just noticed for myself that I had to do little things like learn to put my hand on my watch, while I, as a cue just ask... I asked somebody a question just to wait until I got that response. And sure enough, when I would wait, I would get really good thought out well...good responses. I didn't wait and I get just cheap answers that people are trying to give you what they think you want to hear.   0:12:53.8 AS: I just thought about how being a podcast host has helped me a lot in listening because, I'm doing two things, one is I'm shutting up. And there's so many times that I feel like, you know I think my discussions with you are a little bit different from my discussions I do on my other podcasts where here I think there's a lot more... We're going back and forth on a lot of things, which I really enjoy. But still, it's just, it's a lesson in being quiet. And what you just said reminded me of something I always said to people that came to Thailand, either managers or teachers, and I said, "Just because Thai people don't respond to your question doesn't mean they don't have an opinion." And I think it's the same thing as what you're saying. And therefore, you've got to use different ways. So in the case of Thailand, one of the ways you do that is you have... And I just saw a presentation recently by a Thai person and they messed up themselves because what they did is they asked the audience, "Raise your hand and ask a question."   0:14:05.0 AS: Which they knew that that's not how Thai people respond. They're not so brave as to do that. But luckily, that person also had a little venue that they could type in a question. And instead of in, they could have saved time by just not even saying, "Shout out your question," they could have just said, "Go to the app, type in your question now." And then people would have really... Eventually they got it. But it was just interesting to see even a native person not really realizing the way people respond.   0:14:39.4 DL: I just know, even in my own family have five children. Well, my wife and I have five children. [laughter] But when they were really little, by the time we got to probably the third one, we had to sort of just hold back the older kids, because we found out that they were just filling in all the blanks for the little ones that couldn't answer or couldn't answer incomplete sentences, or they were actually just completing their thoughts for them and things and just had to explain to them, "Look, you just have to wait and let them formulate an answer and let them talk, let them speak." Because they didn't realize that they didn't have that problem when they were that age. [laughter] They just had parents that were just doting on them and there weren't any other children around. So.   0:15:31.6 AS: Let the process happen.   0:15:33.8 DL: Yeah, it worked out really well because then we'd have fantastic dinner conversations in which all five of them at different ages could enter in and talk about it and enjoy experiences.   0:15:48.3 AS: One other thing I recently did in one of my classes that maybe I would talk about because there's an aspect of listening to it. Originally, this is my ethics in finance class, and it's a 15 hour class. And I can teach for 15 hours on the ethics material, but after COVID happened, it's like, why not just put it all on video. And so what I'm teaching is exactly mirrored to what's in the videos. So now what I did is I told the students, "Look, you're responsible for going through this material. I'm going to carry you through a portion of it. But from day one, I'm telling you, it's all in the videos. And then there's practice questions and things like that." So now what I do is I did... Originally, what I did is I taught for half the three hour session I would teach and then I would have them do case studies. But I realized that I wasn't happy with what the case studies were bringing out and so I switched it to debates.   0:16:47.4 AS: And now I give them topics and they have teams that debate. And I still had the problem that the audience wasn't participating or asking really great questions, it's almost like, it's the other team. So I required all teams to submit one, let's say two arguments with some sort of link to some evidence and two arguments against linked to some evidence, and they all have to submit that by Monday. And then I release that to the whole group, so that the teams that were preparing for Wednesday can see even wider view before they get up on stage. But the key thing is that what's happened now is that I don't have to ask any questions at the end. So I'm just listening. And it's fantastic, because the audience now, they've got good questions. And I just feel like when you talk about listening for me to be able to spend the second half of the class, I don't say anything.   0:17:44.3 DL: Yeah, so it seems like such a simple point. But I think when you really think about it, there's just a lot of depth there and reasoning. And you also made me think about, because you were referring back to the one of the previous points to and trust and stuff, but all of Deming's work was always an interrelationship of parts to the whole. So whether you're talking about the 14 points in his New Eco... Or the Out of the Crisis book, or you're talking about these 14 items for managers or whatever it might be. I was always so impressed that he always saw these things as an interrelated parts to the whole. So it's not like, "Hey, if you just start listening and just do this, then everything is just going to be great." Well, that's a piece of the puzzle, that's not the whole puzzle.   0:18:31.0 AS: It's a progression. Well, is there anything that you would add in wrapping up about listen and learn without passing judgment on the person that you're listening to?   0:18:46.5 DL: I think, I think the last thing is that as a manager of people, whether it's a teacher in a classroom or whatever it might be, you have to actually formally make time to do that. And I know that's really hard to do, but you think of a normal like classroom teacher, like K through 12 classroom teacher, maybe you have 30 kids in a class, how are you going to set up a system so that you're actually getting some time to listen and learn from individual students? And that's really hard to do. It can be done if you think about, "Okay, well, I got 25 kids, if I set up a time to listen to five a day, by the end of the week, I've actually got some one-on-one time with everybody involved with that." Or we've talked about too, in moving to small groups or even whole group kinds of sessions. But the whole point is that you are listening, and think how proud it makes people that you are listening.   0:19:56.3 DL: That's why I told that story about Dr. Deming, because I always felt really proud that he was really listening to what I was trying to say or explain or ask a question about.   0:20:07.9 AS: Yeah, I can't help but add to that, that I do one-on-ones with every one of my students in the Valuation Masterclass Bootcamp. Now, it's a 70% pass rate. So, I don't do those until the end of the course, but people line up video meetings, and we do it virtually because it's kind of, it's easier. But what I have is I have a series of about eight questions that I ask them. And then what I do is I just get them on the line and I say, "Okay, let's look at your first question I asked you, and here's your answer." And I read it back, and then I say, "Tell me more about that." It's incredible.   0:20:47.2 DL: And you have to be real quiet and listen. [laughter]   0:20:51.1 AS: Just tell me more about that. That's all you have to do. And I think that's what your last wrap up there just reminded me. And I think for all the listeners and the viewers out there, you know, "tell me more about that." Well, David, on behalf of everyone at the Deming Institute, I want to thank you again for this discussion. And for listeners, remember to go to Deming.org to continue your journey. Listeners can learn more about David at Langfordlearning.com. This is your host, Andrew Stotz, and I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming, "People are entitled to joy in work."

Perfection may be your goal, but unless you create an artificial environment, you're not going to get it. David Langford and host Andrew Stotz discuss how good managers/teachers let go of perfection and, instead, understand variation, then work on the system to produce better and better outcomes for everyone. TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.6 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today I'm continuing my discussion with David P. Langford, who has devoted his life to applying Dr. Deming's philosophy to education, and he offers us his practical advice for implementation. The topic for today is a discussion and a continuation of our discussion of Dr. Deming's 14 items that he discusses in The New Economics about the role of a manager of people after transformation. Today we're talking about point number 11. And that is, "he does not expect perfection." So we titled this one, "Are You Expecting Perfection?" David, take it Away.   0:00:51.8 David Langford: Great. Good to be back again, Andrew. Thank you.   0:00:53.7 AS: Indeed.   0:00:54.9 DL: So, yeah. Five simple words for a whole podcast. So what, what is Deming talking about here? Well, I think underneath these five simple words about expecting perfection is the whole concept of understanding variation and understanding systems, and understanding psychology and understanding how do you implement new theories and come up with new ideas and innovation. And that's Deming's concept of Profound Knowledge. And if you don't have some Profound Knowledge and understand basic statistical variation, then you do go about thinking, "Well, I can just, I can just expect perfection." I remember Deming talking about this point and saying, "I don't... " And I don't know if I have this exactly right. But he said, "I don't demand perfection, but I'm happy when I get it" or something to that effect.   0:02:04.0 DL: Meaning that when something just turns out perfect, you know, that's fantastic, but that doesn't take into account the variation in people and systems and process and everything that goes into a system. So basically in a school, in a classroom, I mean, one of the ways you can, you can get perfection, have everybody score 100% on a test or something like that, is to have students cheat. [chuckle] Because then everybody can get the same answers and do the exact same thing and there's no variation and there's no reason to have any discussion or anything like that. And actually, that actually happens in classrooms.   0:02:55.4 DL: If you make the expectation so high and then you create an artificial scarcity of top marks by grading on a curve or, or there's only one, one winner of a system, then the only way some people can get there is to cheat, is to do something. I remember a friend of mine got his MBA, Master's in Business Administration, and the environment was so competitive that when the teacher would give an assignment, the students would immediately run over to the library and check out all the books that had to do with that assignment, so other people wouldn't be able to learn. [chuckle] And because you know they're expecting perfection, expecting you to master this to get this. And it's really interesting because when people do things like that in systems, we often wanna blame the people without first blaming the system and basically, you as the manager of that system. So a teacher in a classroom, if you're not getting the perfection that you wanna have, you want to think about you know, "What am I doing? What can I be doing differently that might get us closer and closer to more and more people getting those top marks?"   0:04:31.5 DL: So when I first started learning about this, and this point actually really goes to Deming's work in education about grading, grading systems, and him talking about eliminating grades and so on and so forth. I went through the same process, because I couldn't stop giving grades, or I wouldn't have a job any longer. So I had to think about, "Well, I could stop...I could create processes whereby more and more people could get that A or could get that perfection or could get that top mark." So I actually went to my principal and asked him, I said, "Is there any state law or school rule or anything else that prevents all students from getting an A in my class?" And he laughed at me [laughter] and said, "Oh, no, it's not possible, but we'd love to have all the kids getting A's." Well, at the end of that year, I think out of the 134 students, I saw that I had I think about 132 A's. And as soon as I pushed that button and turned in my grades, the principal was in my room in about 10 minutes.   0:05:41.7 AS: Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding.   0:05:42.8 DL: "What are you doing?" [chuckle] "What are you doing?" And the academic counselor was right with him, and he said, "You're destroying the whole grading system." I said, "Well, thank you very much. That was my aim." But yet you'd have to think about if you want more and more students to get top marks, or whether you call it an A or whatever you wanna call it. By the way, sometimes I work with districts, they say, "Oh, we don't have grades anymore, so we just rank kids, four, three, two, one." [laughter] So it doesn't...   0:06:18.0 AS: That's smart.   0:06:19.6 DL: It doesn't matter. Yeah. It doesn't matter what you call it, yeah, you're still doing the very same thing. But you have to think about, "What would I have to do if I was to get every year more and more and more students to get those top marks?" Well, I would have to manage differently. I would have to let people... If they got something wrong, I would have to let them learn about it, right? And go back and fix it, and make it right. I remember talking with Dr. Deming about his own classes at New York University, and I said, "Well, what do you do?" And he said, "Well, you know, you're supposed to write a paper on something. And I read that and sometimes I'm a little concerned about what people have written or what they've done, and I'll say, 'We need to have a chat about this and talk about it.'" He said it's also a very good chance that they've come up with a different way of looking at things and a new idea that you didn't even think about, right? So it's not a matter of just doing it exactly the way, you know, the teacher wants it done. So anyway, that's my take on this.   0:07:40.2 AS: While you were speaking, I went on the Google, which is now our new brain. And I'm afraid that I feel like the definition of perfection or perfect has been changed. I haven't looked at it for a while, but it says, "Make something completely free from faults or defects." Okay? That kinda makes sense. That's what I always thought was perfection, but it has a further part. It says, "Or as close to such condition as possible."   0:08:12.2 DL: Ah, yeah. That's very Deming-esque, free of fault or defect. And Deming used to lamb-blast programs that were trying to teach people to be defect-free. And and I think that goes a lot to this very same point of thinking that you're gonna get perfection on things, not understanding that the normal variation that's in every system.   0:08:38.5 AS: So I think I've got my interpretation is for this one, "he does not expect perfection, he expects a distribution of outcomes."   0:08:52.1 DL: Yes.   0:08:54.6 AS: That's the way I would see it. That we understand that it has nothing to do with perfection, it has to do with understanding the outcomes of a system and the distribution or the variation of those outcomes. And when you truly understand that, it's much more valuable and important than understanding or sitting there and going, "I want perfection." So that, that... You talked about variation and stuff, to me, that's really a key thing that I interpret from this.   0:09:28.3 DL: Well, if you take any process, whether that's in a school or company or military or anything, and you implement this process and you have some kind of data on how did it go? What was that distribution of who did it really well, and the people in the middle, and some people at the end. Basically you look at the average performance and say, "Am I happy with the average," right? And I always tell teachers, "If you're happy with your average and you know it, clap your hands," which is [laughter] basically what you have to do. It's just to take a look at and using some Profound Knowledge. You look at the situation and you realize, "Yeah, I am happy with that average." Let's take for example, maybe you gave a test or you did something and everybody scored between 85 and 95, and the average was 90, right?   0:10:22.6 DL: But you know that you're probably going to revisit the same material two or three times coming up. Well, it, it doesn't make sense for you to spend a whole bunch of time trying to get everybody to get a higher score right now, because you know that your Profound Knowledge tells you that you're gonna be revisiting this later on. And that's what Deming's talking about here. And basically if you're not happy with your average and you know it, okay, then don't blame the students, because 98% of the reason you're getting the results you're getting is coming from the system itself.   0:11:06.6 AS: I was just thinking about a rocket that I believe Russia recently sent a rocket to the moon, and it ended up crashing, from what I remember reading. And it made me think about aiming for perfection and aiming for that one absolute outcome, when in fact there's a range of outcomes. And particularly when you're shooting something to the moon [chuckle], you know, like, and it may just be that there's a little mountain...   0:11:34.7 DL: Complexity of that, yeah.   0:11:36.2 AS: Yeah. There's a little mountain right there that you hadn't planned for, and how are you adjusting for various potential outcomes and understanding that rather than just pinpointing and saying, that's where we're gonna be 'cause chances are you're not gonna be there, so.   0:11:53.5 DL: Yeah, it's probably a good analogy. I imagine if you ask people that had been around NASA for what, 40, 50 years, et cetera, and ask them, how many perfect flights did you ever have? I would bet a large amount of money that they would say zero, [chuckle] because there was variation and complications of every single flight.   0:12:19.8 AS: Yep. Yep. So, I'll wrap this up by challenging the listeners and the viewers out there to focus on that distribution of outcomes. Someday one of those outcomes may be perfect but most days or almost every day, it's not gonna be, it's gonna be a distribution. And so if you do not expect perfection, rather focus on the distribution of outcome, I think you're gonna be in great position. David, on behalf of everyone at the Deming Institute, I want to thank you again for the discussion. As always, it's fun. For listeners, remember to go to deming.org to join, continue your journey and list...listeners can learn more about David at langfordlearning.com. This is your host, Andrew Stotz, and I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming, "People are entitled to joy in work."

"Trust me!' We've all heard it, and probably said it. But how do you build a culture of trust at work, or in a classroom? David Langford and host Andrew Stotz talk about how inclusive decision-making inspires trust, and leads to better outcomes. TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.5 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz, and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W Edwards Deming. Today I'm continuing my discussion with David P. Langford, who has devoted his life to applying Dr. Deming's philosophy to education, and he offers us his practical advice for implementation. Today we continue our discussion of Dr. Deming's, 14 items that he discusses in New Economics about the role of a manager of people after that manager has been through the transformation. This is on the third edition of The New Economics on page 86, and in the second edition on page 125. Now, today we're talking about point 10, which is a simple and short point, and it reads as follows, "He creates trust, he creates an environment that encourages freedom and innovation." So we decided to title, this one, "Trust Me." David, take it away.   [laughter]   0:01:02.3 David Langford: Thanks, Andrew. Good to be back again. So, yeah, this point it seems simple when you just read through it, and it seems logical like all managers of people would want to create trust with their people, but it's not like it happens automatically, [chuckle], and I think a lot of managers of people do things inadvertently, hopefully they're inadvertently, where they create distrust and stress, etcetera. One of those most obvious things is performance evaluations, "Trust me, and then I'm going to rank you amongst people in the department, and then we're going to have a prize for the top person and/or a bonus or something else within that."   0:02:03.6 DL: And people learn that you're not really interested in improving the product, the service, the classroom, the function of what's going on, you're really interested in who's pleasing you. [chuckle] And that's how you get a promotion, and that's how you move up is like, they'll... The old saying, "It's not what you know, it's who you know." And, I think that's really the heart of what Deming's getting at here, that you're supposed to create an environment of trust. And it doesn't just... It's not a pill you take and where you just all of a sudden you can say to people all you want to "trust me," [laughter] but it's over time, when you find out, "Are you trustworthy?" And if you prove not to be trustworthy, either you can't keep things confidential or you talk behind people's backs, or you, you know, any of those kinds of things, over time people start to realize you're not somebody to be trusted.   0:03:16.3 DL: I often heard Deming say things like, "If you create an environment where people can't trust you, pretty soon you're only left with the people who can't get another job." [laughter] "Can't go someplace else, because you're just not trustworthy." Well, the same thing happens in a classroom, a classroom teacher that is not trustworthy and can't build trust among a classroom of students, won't get the very best from those students. Pretty soon they'll only do what the teacher wants to be done, and then that's it. They won't think on their own. They won't... Deming is talking about they won't become innovative in what they're doing, because you're not a trustworthy person managing the class. And so how do you do that? How do you build trust over time? Well, a big part of that to me is involving people in the decision-making process. On the previous points, in this section that we're working through, Deming talked about, the role of a good manager and a leader and etcetera, and those kinds of things. Ultimately, you still have the formal position, right?   0:04:43.2 DL: And it's your job or in some cases, you're next on the line, if you don't make a good decision. But the more you can involve people in that process of making decisions, number one, you're going to come out with a better decision, because you just get more brains looking at a situation in ways that you just never thought about before. And number two, it's sort of a double-edged sword, not only did you get a better decision but whatever decision you do come up with gets implemented to a higher degree. So when I'm teaching teachers to do this with classrooms with students, I always tell them, you know, if you involve students in a decision-making process, and let's say that it doesn't turn out well, it wasn't a good decision.   0:05:42.8 DL: You win both ways, right? Because it wasn't just your decision. And it's the same way with a manager in a company. If it's just your decision and something doesn't work, people will just let it fail, they'll just let it not work because they had no part in it. They don't really care if it works or not. And they'll just let you, gladly let you fail in some cases and not bail you out. But if it's our decision and we all use some tools and processes and took the time to actually work through and figure out the best solution to something, then if things start to go wrong, people, because they have such strong trust in you and the organization, they're going to pick up the pieces. They're going to do stuff to make even a bad decision work, because they have ownership in it, and they're a part of that process.   0:06:45.3 AS: I wanted to briefly talk about trust because, it's such a interesting word and concept that I think we may just brush over. I remember reading a book by Dr. William Glasser called "Reality Therapy", and he worked with prisoners and others through his psychiatry. And one of the things he always talked about is that a key sign of mental illness, which he didn't... He actually said there was no such thing as mental illness. He said basically the issue was that that person did not have a trusting relationship with anybody, and therefore it was so hard... So then all the mental problems and emotional problems they went through were coping mechanisms.   0:07:29.8 AS: And that really rang true. And I think about my friendships with my best friend, Dale, who we run - he runs the coffee business. And I think about the relationships with my mom and dad and my sisters, and I can say none of them ever betrayed my trust. And I think I thought that was normal. But when I talked to my father just before he died, I asked him, "What is the accomplishment" of many accomplishments, including getting his PhD and being successful and all that? And he said to me... I said, "What is your number one? What are you most proud of?" And he said, "I built a trusting family." And now as I've grown, you know, and I've looked at that more, I really realized that is rare. And I want to just highlight that trust is rare.   0:08:19.2 AS: And the second way I want to highlight that is that, I teach in my ethics course, which I just teach ethics and finance all the time at university and for CFA, what I say... I ask people to raise their hand. I ask them, think about how many people you truly trust. If you had a really... And I want everybody who's listening and viewing, let me ask this question. How many people do you truly trust? If you had a secret, something that you did not want to get out to the world, but you felt like you needed to tell somebody, how many people would you trust? And the answer to that after asking thousands of people that question is about one or two. And my point, and I say academic research can oftentimes be interpreting surveys. That's a survey. That's some research. And what does it tell us? It tells us that trust is rare. And so when I hear the word trust, and I think about what he's saying, "He creates trust, he creates an environment that encourages freedom and innovation." I think that's extremely hard thing to do, and it's not happening much in this world.   0:09:38.5 DL: Well, you want that freedom and innovation because in a company that's creating new products or new ideas or things like that, and people are freely distributing or giving you those ideas. And so unless you have that sort of fertile ground for creating new ideas and innovation, you're just not going to get there. It pretty much means that everything has to be a top-down decision-made process of doing something. And you want tremendous growth. It's the same way in a classroom. It's interesting that we think that, "Oh, we have to do great trustworthy kinds of things." But it happens in such simple ways. Like a teacher might say, "Oh, well just take 10 minutes to finish this." And, uh, then a half an hour later they return back to what they were working on and stuff. Students quickly learn, you're not trustworthy, [chuckle] 10 minutes means 10 minutes. And I often tell teachers, just have a little stop watch or a little timer or something, and when you do something like that and you say, "Okay, we're going to take 20 minutes to work on this," then just set a timer. It'll keep you on, trustworthy, and it'll keep them on track as well and people will know, okay, we're there.   0:11:15.5 AS: Yeah. And I think the other thing I would say is when you're standing in front of a group of students teaching you have to really understand that they trust almost no one. And so...   0:11:26.1 DL: Yeah, that's true.   0:11:26.3 AS: They're observing your every action. And I say that they trust almost no one from my survey of people that I've been surveying asking this question. And maybe even ask your students, ask them a question such as, "How many people do you trust?"   0:11:44.2 DL: Yeah. Well, I've been involved as a student myself, and an assignment was given or a timeline, "Have this by Friday or be ready to discuss this by Friday." And then you get to Friday and the teacher doesn't follow through. And you've put in all this work and effort to be ready for Friday. And it's, "Oh, well, we'll just put that off until Monday." Well, you're not building trust, you're actually taking trust away. Stephen Covey says, "You're not adding to the bank of trust." [chuckle]   0:12:17.5 AS: And it is a bank and it is cumulative. One last thing about trust that I was thinking about is, you know, for managers right now in businesses, and I'm sure it's the same in education, it's all about KPIs and measurements. And one of the real destructive things of these measurements is they destroy trust, because the manager of people is sitting behind a desk looking at a chart and graph and not understanding a person's situation and basically blasting them. I think that it's possible if we could get to where some managers want to be, that you could implant some sort of electrical stimulus, so that if somebody doesn't hit their KPI, you just give them a volt, you give them a shot of electricity and say, "That's a reminder that you haven't, didn't hit your KPI." And I think about the relationships that I have of trust, and none of them were built through KPI. So I like the...   0:13:23.8 DL: No point, they already you have it.   0:13:26.1 AS: Yep. Maybe a good ending point. Anything you would add?   0:13:30.5 DL: Yeah. No, it's just on the surface this seems so simple. But what Deming often talked about Profound Knowledge, and the word profound means deep knowledge and understanding. So it's taking these points that he accumulated basically over a hundred years. And he makes it so simple, "Hey, just think about this, just do this and things will get better." So, trust me.   0:14:00.8 AS: Trust me. So I'm going to wrap this up by first asking the listeners and the viewers, how many people do you trust? And I want you to think about the people around you. Are they any different than you? They probably trust one or two people. And some people will say, "I trust no one." And an important part of this point, number 10, is to recognize that trust is rare and rare is valuable. David, on behalf of everyone at the Deming Institute, I want to thank you again for the discussion. And for listeners, remember to go to deming.org to continue your journey. Listeners can learn more about David at langfordlearning.com, and this is your host, Andrew Stotz. And I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming. I just never get tired of this quote. "People are entitled to joy in work."

Most of the time, variation between students or workers is the result of common cause situations, but sometimes you find folks who consistently aren't performing at the same level. Does more punishment work? What should you do instead? In the episode, David Langford and host Andrew Stotz discuss how managers (or teachers) should approach these "special cause" situations. TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.4 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz, and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today I'm continuing my discussion with David P. Langford, who has devoted his life to applying Dr. Deming's philosophy to education, and he offers us his practical advice for implementation. Today we continue our discussion of Dr. Deming's 14 items that he discusses in his New Economics book about the role of a manager of people after the transformation. This is on page 86 of the third edition, or page 125 of the second edition. And this is point number nine. Let me read it to you before we get started. So again, for a, the role of a manager of people, this is the new role of a manager of people after transformation. Point number nine, he will try to discover who, if anyone, is outside the system in need of special help. This can be accomplished with simple calculations. If there be individual figures on production or on failures. Special help may be only simple rearrangement of work. It might be more complicated. He in need of special help is not in the bottom 5% of the distribution of others. He is clean outside that distribution. And Dr. Deming presents a normal distribution and some other things, in this chart that he presents in this one. And we're gonna call this episode: Who Needs Special Help? David, take it away.   0:01:40.5 David Langford: Okay. Yeah, this is always a topic of discussion because, there's all kinds of management theories out there, right? About, how we manage, I can't remember who, was a proponent of just getting rid of the bottom 10% of your...   0:01:57.9 AS: Jack Welch.   0:01:58.0 DL: Organization every year. Jack Welch, yeah. Notoriously wrong, with that. And, or well, "if you can't cut it, out you go." And that all sounds good until it becomes so expensive to constantly be hiring new people and replacing people. And the fear level goes up so high that you can't get anything done because nobody wants to take any risks because you really can't take a risk because you might be gone. So Deming is saying a lot really in this point, he talks about the distribution of people. Well, so first thing is you have to figure out what is that distribution, right? So how are you calculating that? Or how are you figuring out what that performance level is? Well, as a teacher in a classroom, obviously, you have tests that you're giving, you have projects that are happening, etcetera. It is actually pretty easy to see that distribution of performance in a classroom. You give a simple test on something and then you look at the test results and you start to see, okay, everybody scored on this test from 70%-100% on this test, right? So you can say, okay, that's an average of about 85 or so for the whole class.   0:03:31.5 DL: When you look at it on a histogram scale like that, what Deming is really talking about, he's not talking about just the people that were scoring at the lower end of that distribution. People that were getting 70, 75, 80, etcetera. They were all at the lower end of the distribution of that system. But what it's showing is that's the capability of the system. You did something, you did a process with people, you tested the process, the process produced that curve, and on average, it gives you an average of 85. Now deciding whether or not that's good, is good, is good good enough, that's a whole different really discussion than what really Deming is talking about here. So he's not talking about people just on the lower end of a distribution of performance. He's really talking about somebody that's completely outside of that distribution. So in a classroom, if I did something like that and we did a project or a test or whatever, and everybody is scoring from 70%-100% except for maybe two people that got 10 or 5, right?   0:04:46.6 DL: Obviously these are two people completely outside of the system. And what he is really talking about is probably no amount of adjusting the system is going to help those two people. They are so far outside of the distribution that they really do need special help. So in a classroom that can mean, this could be children with special needs, they could be hearing defects, they could be the eyesight that, I don't know how many times I thought somebody was an understanding problem. And then we find out, oh, they couldn't see, either they couldn't see to read or they couldn't see the...   0:05:31.8 AS: Something very simple.   0:05:32.3 DL: The whiteboard in front of them. Yeah. And they got tested and got glasses and everything and wow, it just made a huge difference. But obviously when you have people in a special category, it's gonna take much more time and effort individually to deal with them. Right? And that's why it's called special, special needs, right? Because you are gonna take the time and effort individually to deal with those individuals. If you don't have anybody completely outside of the distribution of performance, then you're gonna go back and look at the system itself. So in my example, everybody is scoring from 70%-100% on some test that you give them. And the average is 85. Then you have to decide is good good enough, is that a good enough distribution on this? And as a teacher a lot of that has to do with understanding where does this fit in the entire curriculum.   0:06:40.2 DL: So is this a critical skill, that if these students don't have this skill and they don't have it just down pat, and are acing it, it's gonna cause huge problems later on. So it might be worth the time to go back and sort of rework that for the entire class and see if we can get a higher average. On other things, you might look at that and say, "Oh, okay. Only I know really the whole curriculum for the year, and I know that we're gonna be revisiting the same concept probably four more times throughout the year. So this average at this time of the year is probably good enough." I often joke with teachers and say, "If you're happy with your average, and you know it, clap your hands," so.   [laughter]   0:07:31.0 DL: But if you're not happy with your average and you know it, then you have to think about, okay, well what am I gonna do about it? Do I have the time to go back and rework this? And Deming in his example in figure 12, that he's showing there, is actually talking about moving in the entire system forward. So shrinking the variation so that it's not nearly as wide as it used to be, and more people are getting a higher average within that. So how do you get that higher average? Well, prevention is the key to quality. So every time you're doing a lesson that you've done before and you're taking that feedback that you've gotten before, folding that in. And this time when I did it, ah wow, we got an average of 89, or we got an average of 93, or...Excuse me. It's really difficult when you're improving a system and you're moving that average up, each time you go through something, when you start to get up and really high levels performance, going from 93 to 94 is a really big effort.   0:08:57.4 DL: There's gotta be something really happening there to get that next level result. And do you really have the time right now to get that? Or is it a problem of tomorrow that we have to figure out, okay, what are we gonna do in this system, in the future, to get a higher average? But I didn't believe, really, this when I started working with Deming, but then I went back and looked at all the grades and scores that I had given people, and I was so predictable. Every year I had the exact number, the same number of people getting A's or doing top-level work. I had the same level of percentage of kids that were failing I had... But of course it was always their fault, not my fault, so. And so that was really eyeopening to me that all I had been doing is just basically, for five or six years I had been doing the same thing over and over, and over, and expecting a different result. And it just doesn't work like that.   0:10:05.2 AS: Yeah, this one is interesting because first of all, he's presenting us with a distribution. We can see a normal distribution, and he's presenting also a more narrow distribution, saying that the goal is to try to, maybe in this particular case that he's showing to, he says, "You wanna work to improve the system by narrowing that distribution so that..." And shifting it, as we can see, as we've talked about. But I think also in this one, if you don't understand the system, you can get caught up in chasing performance in individuals that actually are just a normal outcome. And you miss the time that you need to spend to fix that special cause that needs to be fixed. So that was one of the things I took away from it. What do you think about that?   0:11:02.6 DL: Yeah, that's why he hated practices like grading on a curve. Which is notorious, it is still is notorious in many universities, grading on a curve. And... Because that shows no understanding of performance and distribution and average performance and it takes no accountability. And for you as the teacher, it just all blame on the student. "Well, if you tried hard, you could do that." Well, no, that's not true. There's only gonna be so many A's, so many B's, etcetera. So you're not gonna ever get there, so. But really this is about... Go ahead.   0:11:43.8 AS: To understand that a little bit more, so is the problem about grading on a curve that you're constantly... You're not necessarily improving? You're just like, "Well, this group had a curve that was here on the continuum and this group had a little bit better, they were better." And what is it? 'Cause I'd say grading on a curve is something that people on initial blush would think, "Isn't that what Deming is talking about?" I mean, we see normal distributions, we see curves. Explain that in more detail.   0:12:15.1 DL: You're creating an artificial scarcity of top marks. So only... No matter how well we do as a class, there's only gonna be so many top marks or people that are gonna get the top grade, right? And so you're gonna create all kinds of competition and you're gonna create all kinds of weird behaviors that go on. You're actually encouraging people to cheat. And I can't remember if I told you this story or not, but one of my children, she was in a advanced chemistry class or something, I think it was. And she comes home the first day of school and she said, "Dad, I think this teacher would be really interested in talking with you about what you do and improvement, and everything else." And I said, "Why?" And she said, "'Cause he said, well, everybody in here can achieve, everybody in here can get an A, can do well."   0:13:14.1 DL: She comes home the second day of school and she said, "I think I'm gonna drop this chemistry class." And I said, "What happened in two days?" She said, "He came back today and he spent the whole hour of the class explaining how he grades on a curve. So there's no way in the world that everybody in here is gonna get an A," right? You're creating an artificial scarcity of top marks and it's just not gonna happen. And I said, "Okay, well, just let me know what you decide to do with that." Well, she comes home the next day and she said, "I think I'm gonna stay in the class. I'm pretty sure I'm gonna be one of the people on top of the curve." And this was an honors chemistry class and in that class, half of the kids in that class had had straight A, 4.0 averages to that point. So, there was a bunch of kids that quit, 'cause they could not risk getting even a B in a class like that.   0:14:18.0 DL: But my daughter stayed in the class, at the end of the first semester, she comes home laughing one day and she said, "Dad, you'll never guess what happened." I said, what? And she said, well, this is a very, very smart group of kids. And not only did kids keep track of their own scores, they actually kept track of other kids' scores in the class as well. And I think there were one or two kids that found out that there were a bunch of kids that were just right on the line between a B and a C or something. But if those kids failed, it wouldn't make any difference to them. They're still gonna get the same grade at the end of the semester. Even if they didn't even take the final, it's not gonna affect them one way or the other, they're still gonna get that B or a C grade that was in that. But if they did fail it would mean it would change the curve and these other top kids could move up into the top echelon.   0:15:13.3 DL: And so they paid these kids $20 to fail the final. Well, somehow the teacher found out about it and then the principal found out about it. And there was a Spanish inquisition that was taking place and then they were talking about expelling kids and all kinds of stuff, I couldn't stand it, I had to go and talk to the principal and I said, how do you like it? He said, what do you mean? I said, "They're better at managing your system than you. They figured out how to play your game better than you. And you gotta be rewarding these kids not... And recognizing amazing statistical analysis and capability, not punishing them through that process, so." I think it was the same principal that said, "I know I'm having a bad day when your car is in the parking lot," so.   [laughter]   0:16:06.6 AS: Exactly. You should have said, you should have been... You didn't even realize you were teaching 'em a double major AP chemistry and AP statistics.   0:16:17.6 DL: Yeah, absolutely. So.   0:16:19.3 AS: Well, let's wrap this up by... I think the key thing of what Dr. Deming is telling us in this is about understanding your system and then identifying if someone is outside of the system, and that person or result outside of the system is... You know, warrants some special attention or special help and that that, you can't really know that without understanding the system and also not being too distracted by the variation that's natural from that system. And therefore, ultimately, once you understand that, then you really can clearly identify that some outcome or some individual is a special cause and then you can focus in on that and fix it. And so that's how I would summarize it. Is there anything else you'd add to that?   0:17:12.9 DL: Yeah. I was just was recalling that you are... Deming explaining several times that if somebody is outside of the systems that, far outside of the system, further rating and ranking are not gonna help them at all. Giving them more failures, more Fs, docking their pay. Whatever you're thinking of doing to somebody that's completely outside the system it's really not gonna help them at all in that process. And that... That's not help. Rating and ranking and bribing people to do better is not actually helping them. You actually have to study cause or the reason why that person is special cause and then do something about it. And in a classroom, and it could very well be that this person really doesn't belong in this class. They don't have the prerequisite skills that the other 98% of the class has. And so therefore they really don't even belong in this class. So that just means you have to get them in a different class or help them in some way to get caught up or, and it's gonna take more time and effort. Special causes take more time and effort. That's why they're special. So.   0:18:31.3 AS: Well, David, on behalf of everyone at The Deming Institute, I want to thank you again for this discussion. For listeners, remember to go to deming.org to continue your journey and you can also learn more about David at langfordlearning.com. This is your host, Andrew Stotz, and I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming, "People are entitled to joy in work."  

When things go wrong, who gets blamed? When things go right, who gets the credit? Dr. Deming wrote that good managers don't play the blame/credit game. Instead, they "study results [of feedback] with the aim to improve  performance." In this episode, David Langford and host Andrew Stotz discuss getting honest feedback, how to react, and why it's important. TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.7 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today I'm continuing my discussion with David P. Langford, who has devoted his life to applying Dr. Deming's philosophy to education and he offers us his practical advice for implementation. The topic for today is improving performance. Who's at fault? David, take it away.   0:00:28.8 David P. Langford: Hello again. So we are at point number eight on Deming's role of a manager of people. And it says he will study results with the aim to improve his performance as a manager of people. So once again, Deming wasn't into all the pronouns that we use now and everything. So when he says he, he means he, she, anybody that's a manager of people. So, our aim is to improve performance and everything that we do. Right. So I think what's going on with this simple point that he's making is to get people to think about when things go right, or things go wrong, who's at fault, or who gets the reward or who gets the blame for that process.   0:01:29.1 DL: And as a manager, if things are going well, of course, everybody wants to take credit for that, whether you're a teacher or superintendent, business owner, or whatever, then it was, the same way in politics, right? Everything's going well. Oh, I did it all. And if things are not going well, then obviously it was somebody else's fault. Right. Or if you're a manager of people, like what Deming is talking about here, we have a tendency to blame the individual without first thinking about ourselves as the manager of that situation. So I was just coaching a group of teachers and talking to them about how difficult it is to really think like that as a teacher. Because you think, "Okay, I worked really hard on this lesson, I got everything prepared, I came in and I did it."   0:02:23.8 DL: And I don't know how many times I've heard teachers say something like, "Well, I taught them, but they didn't get it." [laughter] Well, that's probably the problem, you taught them, but they didn't learn it. [laughter] Well, that's probably the problem, right? You taught them, but they didn't they didn't learn it, which is two different things. It's possible to teach and get learning, but it's better to create actual learning experiences through that process. So you have to think about if I'm not getting good results I don't care what your position is as a manager of people I have to turn the finger of blame back towards me and start to say, “Okay, what am I doing differently?” And that's a hard pill to swallow when you start to think like that and because usually most people are trying to put in their best efforts. And Deming said many times we're being killed by best efforts, [chuckle] which is like a crazy thought to think about, wow, I shouldn't be trying hard. Well, you should be working in the right way. So if you're not getting the results that you want probably the very first thing is to go back to the people that you manage and ask them what you're doing right and what you're doing wrong or what could be improved. And I have seen this with just very little kids, like three, four, five-year-olds, when the teacher says, "We just went through that lesson and it seemed like some of you weren't interested, you know, what was the problem?"   0:04:05.4 DL: And they'll tell you, [laughter], "Oh, you went too fast, or we didn't have time to think about it, or we needed more time." Or they'll tell you exactly what the problem is. And it's usually a better way to go than having your supervisor come in and do an observation, because your supervisor probably isn't there every day watching how you're managing people, how you're communicating, how you're having conversations, et cetera. But the people are there every day. And if we're talking about education and kids in classrooms, they're the ones that are experiencing your management style. [laughter] And I've found out that the more you ask, the better they get at giving you advice, telling you what to do. And when you do it, then you get even better advice. So I remember I think I may have told this story before, but I remember I had a new student that came to class and I was in a project like that and I asked the students, I said just take out some sticky notes or whatever you want to, and write down a few thoughts about how you think this last project went. What could be improved, how we could have changed it what, I might do differently next year, et cetera.   0:05:27.7 DL: Just things like that. Well, this new student, he was just like blowing this off and he was not paying attention. He's screwing around everything else. And I'll never forget one of the students that had been there all year, she turned to him and she said, You better take this seriously 'cause he's gonna do whatever we tell him.   0:05:44.7 AS: [laughter], wait, what?   0:05:49.3 DL: Yeah, I'll never forget the look on that kid's face. It was just like, Oh. And then he did... He started to sit up and take it seriously. So.   0:06:00.0 AS: Yeah. Well that's, it's... One of the interesting points about that is, when you ask for feedback, how do you receive it? I asked... I have a bunch of interns working for me right now. And I asked them to go through one of my online courses, and write down feedback in a document, a shared document that they're all writing into. It's brutal, David. It's brutal! And then when I see some stuff, my first reaction, "Oh, I can't do that because, yeah, I can't fix that because of, yeah." And it's just so hard to, you know, it's hard enough to ask, but it's even harder to receive in a way that you're able to really use that to improve yourself.   0:06:42.7 DL: One time I kept getting feedback from the students saying, you're going too fast, or you're talking too fast or can't understand it, or we need more time to process what you're saying or... I said, well, okay, I've been doing this a long time, so I've got habits and so I don't always know [chuckle] that I'm doing that. So let's work out a signal or something that if that's happening you can just suddenly kind of signal me that, okay, we need some reflection time here, or something to happen. [chuckle] And so they came up with this idea that they would pull on their ear lobe if I was going too fast or working through stuff. It's very disconcerting to... I'm into something. I'm really explaining a concept and I think I'm really doing a good job. And you look out and you see about six people going like this, and you're like, oh, oh, okay, I'm doing it again. [chuckle] But...   0:07:46.1 AS: That's one of the things that was lost in the Zoom era. It's harder to read the audience too, just to even figure out if people are understanding.   0:07:52.8 DL: Oh, yeah, absolutely. But Deming often said, help comes from the outside and by invitation. So when you're inviting those students or workers or whoever you might be managing to give you that feedback, it's just really amazing what can be accomplished like that. There's almost no problem that can't be solved, [chuckle] by using the people actually doing the work to give you the feedback.   0:08:27.1 AS: You know, when we started this episode, the one thing I started thinking about was that great saying that we all probably heard when we were growing up is "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink." And my mom said that to me, and my dad or anybody, I'd heard it a lot, but I guess what I thought when I heard you kick off this episode, I thought to myself, yeah, but what if you led them to the wrong pool of water? [chuckle] or the wrong place? And that there's a responsibility on the side of the teacher or the administrator to make sure that it's not enough to absolve yourself, "Hey, I did it and they didn't drink it," that's not acceptable or that's not enough.   0:09:13.4 DL: Yeah, over the last 40 years, I've heard some awful things from teachers saying things about students about...you know... Privately or not, this kid just doesn't wanna try or doesn't care, or this kid isn't one of 'em that came to mind was "this student isn't even worth my effort." So how do you know that? [chuckle] And, Deming said, "Why would I give somebody a grade when I don't know who among them is gonna turn out to be great someday?" And I might be limiting them with a grade at that point in time, but a feedback information on feedback about how to improve what, wow. People really received that really well. I think that's really what he is talking about here in point eight and I think it's pretty simple, but it's tough to do.   0:10:16.4 AS: So let's wrap this up by... First I'm gonna just read point eight again, and this remember that for everybody, I forgot to say it at the beginning, but this is from the Role of a Manager of People section of The New Economics. And point number eight, "he will study results with the aim to improve his performance as a manager of people." And, I think one of the things that stands out is study results also. What is the result that we're getting? And some of the things that we talked about is like asking the question, what can I improve as a manager of people? How do I seek out information to do that? And you said, the more you ask, the more and the better advice that you get. And you also mentioned his quote that help comes from the outside and by invitation. And so I think the main thing is being on a path and a desire to improve yourself as a manager of people. Anything that you would add to that?   0:11:19.4 DL: Well, what he is after is how do we go about improving? The classic way we do stuff is we send somebody to a conference or where, go give them some training or now put 'em on an online thing that they go through, all those kinds of things. And what Deming is really saying is, look, study the results. You need to know how you are doing. [chuckle] And once you start to figure that out, then they are going to do a whole lot better.   0:11:50.0 AS: Fantastic. Well, David, on behalf of everyone at The Deming Institute, I wanna thank you again for this discussion. For listeners, remember to go to deming.org to continue your journey. Listeners can learn more about David at langfordlearning.com. This is your host, Andrew Stotz, and I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming, "People are entitled to joy in work."

In this episode, John and Andrew shift from management myths (don't do this) to principles for transformation (do this instead) based on Deming's 14 Points for Management. This episode introduces the principles and the context you need to get started. TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.4 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz, and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today I'm continuing my discussion with John Dues, who is part of the new generation of educators striving to apply Dr. Deming's principles to unleash student joy in learning. The topic for today is shifting our focus from management myths to principles for the transformation of school systems. John, take it away. 0:00:31.8 John Dues: Yeah, Andrew, it's good to be back. It's good to make this shift from the sort of the "don't do this" to the "things that we should focus on" as leaders of our systems, whether it's in business or education or whatever. And just as sort of a recap, we did these three episodes on management myths, and I think I made this point where sort of the common thread amongst all those myths is that they suboptimize our systems. I think the key thing to look for, whether it's sort of something we should be doing or whether we should not be doing when it comes to management practices, is does the thing, whatever that practice is, does it fragment the whole into parts and fail to appreciate the organization as a system? I think that's sort of the key differentiator between what I would call management myths, and then the things that we should be doing, some principles that we should be following. And I think that Deming philosophy is the opposite of the management myths. 0:01:33.0 AS: It's so tempting to fragment... I like what you said, fragment the whole into parts and optimize those parts. That is just so natural for us in some way, that it's manageable, it's accountability. And what you've taught us is that well, actually it produces a suboptimal result for the system. So I think, it's exciting to move into like, okay, now I understand that, so what do we do? 0:02:06.4 JD: Yeah. And I think with the myths, a common...sometimes people are gonna push back, obviously and it can be hard to wrap your head around the myths because they're often common practices. That's how we're often trained in business schools or schools of education. But if you sort of start to unpack and say, "Okay, you say that practice is working in your organization, but tell me what you hear when you talk about a particular practice, let's say merit pay for example?” "No, that works for us. That works for our organization." But then you start to say, "What do you hear around that particular system?" And I think a lot of times people start to say, it sort of dawns in them that, oh yeah, departments are competing against each other. Well, we sort of go around the rules to do X, Y, and Z so we can get the reward. And when you start to sort of think about those things, you can see how those myths sort of lead you in the wrong direction and you wanna sort of steer towards these principles that guide you in the right direction. 0:03:03.7 JD: But I think it's important to understand those myths and then take that next step, that next step to follow the principles that Dr. Deming talked about. Of course, many people that follow Dr. Deming's work are familiar with his famous 14 Principles for Management. I basically took those 14 Principles and translated them into sort of a language that's closer to what education folks are used to. And really what I think they do is they provide this sort of strong philosophical foundation. The management myths, again, are the don'ts, the principles, the guiding principles are the dos. But I think it's always good to steer it back to sort of these central ideas, quotes from Dr. Deming or someone else that captured the essence of what you're trying to do. And I thought one of the Deming quotes that stuck with me when it came to transformation is that Dr. Deming said, "The transformation will release the power of human resource contained in intrinsic motivation." 0:04:14.3 JD: And so, a lot of times people talk about transformation, but what do you actually mean? And to sort of put it simply in the Deming world is: transformation is a process where you begin to understand the System of Profound Knowledge and that helps you pull away from this prevailing system of management, the management myths that we talked about, like accountability, or merit pay, or a number of the other things that we talked about and move to this new philosophy. That's where the transformation is actually happening. And again, these guiding principle... 0:04:47.5 AS: You said release the power of human resources contained in intrinsic motivation. Is that what you... Did I get that right? 0:04:53.1 JD: That's right. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So I said... 0:04:54.5 AS: Incredible. 0:04:55.5 JD: The transformation will release the power of human resource contained in intrinsic motivation. And so, what you're trying to do is set up your system to tap into that intrinsic motivation instead of stomping it out. And those management myths stomp it out. And then these guiding principles will lead us in a different direction. 0:05:13.4 AS: And one of the things I would like to just highlight is that, a lot of times I'd like to just go back to childhood and look at what do we naturally do? We naturally work together. We naturally make friends. We naturally try to solve problems and we share. There's just so much natural learning that goes on. And if we would just go back to that, instead what happens is, like you said about the myths, adults start layering on all kinds of systems that all of a sudden just crush. 0:05:52.4 JD: Yeah. I think a lot of that comes from optimizing for competition versus optimizing for cooperation. And if we really wanna make our systems work, then we have to do the latter. I think that's key. And one thing I was gonna do is sort of tie these principles and the myths back to two sort of major problems that have unfolded in education over the last 50 years. And I think we've sort of talked about this in some earlier episodes. But sort of that first problem I would frame as, you remember that Nation at Risk report that we talked about came out in the early '80s, so 40 years ago or no. So I think all of the sort of major federal education reform policies that have come out since A Nation at Risk have fallen prey to one or more of those myths. So that's the sort of problem one. 0:06:49.1 JD: About the same time in the late '80s, we saw this major shift in the demographics of the teaching profession that we've only just more recently started to realize. So this actually blew my mind when I read this in a research report. But basically in 1988, so not that long ago, the typical teacher in the United States had 15 years of experience. You fast forward to 2017, the typical teacher was in their first year of teaching. So we've had this dramatic shift where the model teacher used to be sort of mid-career, and now the model teacher, the most typical teacher in the US is in their first year, they're a beginning teacher. So that's gonna cause all sorts of problems. 0:07:39.0 JD: Now, part of the issue, I can't tie this back to the federal education policies, and I'm not attempting to do that. I think maybe a contributing factor to sort of the general ecosystem, but not maybe causality, that's too strong to say that it caused it. But there's one, there's been the significant growth in the teaching profession, meaning there's lots more teachers than there were today, or in 1988 as compared to today. So of course if you're gonna add teachers for all sorts of reasons, more specialization is required, kids receive special education services that require smaller groups and things of that nature. So that's led to this explosion in the number of teachers in the United States. 0:08:28.7 JD: But regardless of the cause, this means that large numbers of teachers are entering the profession and they're leaving the profession, so there's all this churn. And so when you tie these two problems together, so number one is you got the federal education policies following sort of a lot of those management myths, then you got this sort of significant change in teacher demographics. It's basically massive instability in the US's education ecosystem. 0:09:03.6 AS: And before you go on, that statistic is almost unbelievable. And I wanna get more from you on that later, but I just...in order for that statistic to be correct, it would seem like there was a huge drop off of older teachers exiting, as you mentioned. And also, I guess what would be correct is that it was a massive influx of brand new teachers. 0:09:34.0 JD: Absolutely. Yeah. 0:09:34.4 AS: Like huge. And it kind of depends on what year that happened, because if that's the case, that number will be changing very rapidly as those new huge mass of new teachers mature over time. I wonder, I have a lot of questions about that data and I'd love to see more of that. 0:09:53.9 JD: Yeah. And I think...I'm certainly not an expert in demographics in the US but I think what I've seen is there's both a graying and a greening of the profession. Meaning there's lots of people that are retiring or nearing retirement age and there's lots of new teachers. There's less people in the middle. And a big reason for the churn is, or to keep in mind, is that a lot of these new teachers are leaving, so they're being replaced by more new teachers. So I don't see this sort of subsiding anytime in the near future. 0:10:28.1 AS: Could you imagine running a business like that? It would be just impossible. 0:10:34.1 JD: No. No. And that's sort of one of my theses right now. And sort of tying back some of the work that I've done with the book I wrote is that there's this massive instability in the education sector. And part of the reason for that is that we as a sector lack this sort of solid philosophical foundation and a sound theory of management. And I think that's where the Deming Philosophy can actually fill in sort of this major hole in how we're operating in education. I think specifically that's where these 14 Principles for educational systems transformation, is what I call them, I think that's where these principles can come in and play a role in sort of stabilizing the education sector that's been so topsy-turvy for 30 years or so. 0:11:36.1 JD: So I think it's a good place to start with sort of an introduction to the 14 Principles. So the Deming sort of crowd will be familiar, if you're coming to this as an interested party but less familiar with Deming, you may not know. So I think there's some things to clarify that were a little bit confusing to me initially. 0:11:56.4 JD: One thing that you'll hear in the Deming community is people will refer to the 14 Points, but then also Deming sometimes called them Principles. He sometimes called them Obligations of management for clarity and just to be straightforward I just call them Principles, my 14 guiding principles. I think it's also important to sort of call out that while they're an important component of the Deming philosophy, they're not in and of themselves the Deming philosophy. I think that's really important to call out. And I think when you discover something like anytime you have a numbered list, like 14 this, or 10 this, or five this, I think there's this sort of almost human nature to sort of start to think of them as a checklist to be implemented. Really, they're not. They're not. You can't just do number one and then you do number two, and then you do number three. That's not how they're set up. Really, what they're set up to do is sort of open your mind to a whole new way of thinking in terms of how we organize and run our institutions, in this case, our educational institutions. 0:13:09.2 JD: And I think most importantly, these 14 Principles are these interlinked points within this larger management philosophy. And you can't simply put the points into action without first understanding why Deming wrote them in the way that he did. So, they're not super long. Some of the points are a couple pages, some of the points are just even a page or so in Out of the Crisis, one of Deming's books. So he is very deliberate about the words he chose and the framing of the Principles. 0:13:43.4 JD: And the last thing I would say, if you're sort of new to the 14 Principles, that you have to account for your organization's context. So you can't just adopt the 14 Principles without a deep appreciation of both the principles themselves, and that organizational context. If you just sort of tried to throw this into your system, without deep study and deep understanding that, it could cause sort of mass chaos. So I think those are some things that I would say to anybody that's considering looking at the the 14 Principles. 0:14:19.9 AS: Yeah. And the point is that the reason why it's not a checklist, it's because number one, it's hard, it forces you to think, number one. You really have to think about what it is that he's presenting. And number two is, it's even harder to implement, because once you start to realize that there's so much value in what he's saying, now you're gonna have to come up against the prevailing system of management, all the myths and all of that stuff. And that's the reason why, one of the reasons why it's not a checklist, it's 14 Points for Management. And here is what...and I can say I first read that when I was 22, 23 working at Pepsi, and now I'm 57 and I can say that I still look back at them and go, "Oh, now I see." 0:15:18.5 JD: Yeah. I think there will always be that. There will always be that, even for somebody that's done this for 30 years or 40 years, there's always gonna be that sort of continual "aha" moments, or connections. But you sort of have to go all in in the sense that you can't pick and choose like a menu, like, "I'm gonna do, of the 14 Principles I'm gonna do 1, 2, 4, 6, and 9," it just doesn't work like that. You have to sort of go in all in on the 14 Principles. It doesn't mean that you have to do them all at the same time, or at the same rate, but you can't just sort of pick and choose which ones you're gonna do. They work together. 0:15:55.9 AS: And it's interesting cause the first one talks about constancy of purpose. 0:16:00.8 JD: That's right. 0:16:00.9 AS: I would say that, that's the one that really challenges the management. I'm gonna be meeting with the management team of a...the ownership team basically of a factory in Thailand next week and what we'll be talking about is: how do you build constancy of purpose, or how do you think about that? And also the idea of constancy of purpose of thinking that our job is to improve. How do we keep learning? How do we keep improving so that we deliver more and better value to our customer, to our student, to whatever. And that, without that commitment, it's hard to do the other ones. But I agree that there's...you can jump around and think, "Okay, I can do this one right now, I can drive out fear right now. This one's gonna take more time," or that type of thing. So, yeah. 0:16:52.3 JD: Yeah. So I think that's a good segue and so, with that sort of introduction of mine, I think diving into Principle one, sort of the short version is "create consistency of purpose." And then I sort of took Dr. Deming's version and rewrote it for educators, and the way I did that was I said, "Create consistency of purpose toward continual improvement of high quality learning systems. These systems should be designed in such a way that they enable joy and work for staff, and joy in learning for students, with the aim that everyone can access opportunity rich lives in our society now and into the future." So that's sort of the long-term vision, that's the long-term purpose that we're working towards. Now you have to say, "Okay, now what do we have to do to get there?" That's the hard part. 0:17:45.8 JD: And I think, what I read from Dr. Deming is that he often spoke about two problems that all organizations face if they want to stay in business, whether they are a factory, or whether they are a school or some other type of organization, doesn't really matter. First, there's these problems of today, and second, there are the problems of the future. And both camps are a fairly daunting list, but we'll start with sort of problems of today. I think with all schools, but maybe even especially so for schools like where I work where they're... We're a network of public charter schools, we don't have any kids geographically assigned to us. But even for a traditional public school I think enrollment, student enrollment is a constant concern. "How are we gonna make sure that we are setting up our program so it best serves our students and families?" 0:18:48.3 JD: And I think if you think of the problems of today, of the typical public school, ensuring the quality of learning experiences, balancing the demands of local, state, federal education policies, attracting, retaining... Or attracting, training and retaining employees, making sound budgeting decisions, recruiting and retaining students. Fundraising is a component of our system. Acquiring, maintaining, upgrading school buildings, you could go on and on and on. It's pretty self-evident from that list that educational leaders could easily stay tied to those problems of today, and that would be more than a full-time job, just sort of keeping up. 0:19:40.8 JD: That's even before you consider this second camp, this idea of problems of the future. And that's really where constancy of purpose becomes especially important. And this is where this idea of continual improvement of the school district's competitive position within the educational ecosystem really comes into play. So why are parents gonna choose my school or my school system for their child? And a really important question for all school systems to consider: is the board and the superintendent dedicated to the short-term or are they dedicated to the long-term of the institution? And of course, short-term, maybe in a business setting may be quick profits. Short-term in a school system may be something more like really focusing on these state test scores. 0:20:47.6 AS: Pass the exam. 0:20:50.1 JD: Pass the exam, right. There are certain things we could do to increase those scores on the short-term. Or are we taking the mindset that our school is set up to ensure that our schools will be success...or our students will be successful 10 or 20 or 30 years from now. And focusing on short, long-term is not mutually exclusive. There's certainly things in the short-term you need focus on, certainly things in the long-term, but I think taking that long-term view is the most important. I am not as concerned with how a sixth grader in my system does on the state test, although that has some importance to me. What I'm most concerned about when I'm thinking about that 12-year-old is what will they be doing when they're 18, when they're 28, when they're 38. Did we set the right foundation for them on a long-term basis? And that's a really weighty responsibility for school to balance those two sets of problems, the everyday things that we have to deal with and then keeping our eye on future problems that we should be anticipating. 0:22:03.0 AS: Yeah, one of the things about that, that's interesting is that you're pretty much never pulled to future problems and you are constantly pulled into today's problems, and therefore majority of people just...all they can do is deal with today's problems and the idea of starting to think about how do we start to devote a portion of time, some of our thinking, some of our efforts. I remember Dr. Deming saying that somebody could put out fires for their whole career and never improve the system. 0:22:40.6 JD: Easily, easily. In fact, I'd say that's what most people do. 0:22:44.7 AS: Well, it's pretty exciting to be a problem solver and to walk in, "Alright, do this. Okay, I know this problem, we've seen it before, let's do this. Okay, here's how you solve that." And it's really exhilarating to go home from the end, at the end of the day, just say, "Man, I fixed a bunch of crises that came up. I'm the hero." 0:23:07.6 JD: Yeah, absolutely. And with Dr. Deming, he did give us some key things to focus on and he really talked about when it comes to this commitment to constancy of purpose, he really talked about this alignment of acceptance of these three obligations you talked about. First, one obligation is a focus on innovation. A second obligation was a focus or is a focus on research and education, kind of clump those together. And then the third obligation was to focus on continual improvement of, in our case, educational services. So it is helpful to go through just a little deeper on each of those obligations and what he meant. 0:24:04.1 JD: So obligation, one, is innovation. And so to your point about how we sort of shift some of our focus on to future planning. Well, one thing is, if you're gonna do that as a school or any type of organization, you have to allocate resources to long-term planning, whether that's staff that's focused on long-term planning specifically, or other types of resources. It could be new educational services, that better prepare students for the future of work, could be new curriculum resources. It could be educational technology. It could be the cost associated with those things. There could be new pedagogical approaches grounded in neuro-scientific discoveries as we learn how people learn, adjusting our instruction accordingly. 0:25:01.0 JD: New skills for teachers and administrators, training and retraining staff. All of these things are costs and you, and then they're upfront cost and though if we are gonna be serious about planning for the future that you then have to allocate some resources. And I think a key to this is the people that are working in your system, they have to have faith in a future. That's a pre-requisite for innovation. If all you're doing is putting out fires and not thinking about the future, if there isn't this unshakable commitment to quality, then especially middle managers, who in a school system is like principals and teacher leaders, the frontline people are the teachers, and of course the students, if they are skeptical about the future of your organization then they're not gonna put in best efforts, and then it's gonna be impossible to put any attention and energy towards innovation. 0:26:11.2 AS: So just to summarize that part, so is what you're saying is that the most important thing that you can do as a leader in a school, as an example, is to switch the focus from putting out the fires and stuff and start to say we need to think about innovation, research and education, and continual improvement, and get everybody focused on those things as the way forward? 0:26:42.4 JD: Yeah, that's certainly part of it. And I think saying things like, you know, talking about constancy of purpose explicitly. So I think saying like, teachers often get very stressed out about state test scores. So I would say okay, look, these things are important. There's something that we have to do. But what I'm most concerned about is the long-term health, well-being of our students. So that's what I'm most concerned with preparing them for. So I think even little statements like that, the sort of reorient people and how they're thinking about their sort of day-to-day, I think that's really important. And I think you also - doing things to tie back sort of that message to things concretely in your system such as having alumni come back and speak to your current students, having events where you can see sort of what students are doing now after they've left your system, that makes that connection real to that long term constancy of purpose. So I think it's all of those things. 0:27:54.6 AS: Yeah. So one of my questions you know to start to think about how we wrap this up is how does somebody take all of what you just described. We've shift from myths, now we're like, okay, let's focus on what we can do. What are some...what's one take away or something that you feel like somebody listening to this could go back to their classroom, back to their office as an administrator and say here's step number one I can take towards this? 0:28:34.9 JD: Well, I think one initial activity just to get a sense of where your system is, so let's say you're a superintendent and you have a team of five or eight people that report directly to you. I think going back and ask them to individually write what is our purpose? What's the...why are we here? What's our long-term purpose? And I'm betting that you're going to get five to eight different answers. So, I think that would be a helpful exercise, is just what do people see now as the core long term purpose of your organization, and I think there's many exercises you could build from just that simple question. 0:29:17.7 AS: Yeah, that's a...I'm absolutely sure you're going to get five different answers.  0:29:23.4 JD: Yeah. I agree. I agree. 0:29:25.8 AS: All right. So is there anything else that you want to add before I wrap up and summarize what we've been talking about? 0:29:35.1 JD: Yeah, I would just... Maybe just touch really quickly on those two other obligations. So innovation was the first one. The second one is Deming talked about research and education and I think when he was talking about education, he was talking about self-improvement and acquiring new knowledge and he differentiated that from training. You know, whereas training is something that you're going to do and once you do it, you expect to see it the next day. That's different than education, that's sort of acquiring new knowledge about the best way to teach or do some other key function. There needs to be a focus there. 0:30:11.1 JD: And then that third obligation is continual improvement. And what he's talking about there, at least in an education setting, is systems leaders have to continually improve the design of their educational services. You have to have this growth mindset. So because this particular obligation never ceases. You never stop improving. I mean as soon as you start thinking you've arrived, your organization has already started to move backwards. So that can be - you know depending on who works in your organization that can be a hard thing to sort of hear. Like I thought I had my lesson plans done. No, your lesson plans are continually improving. You're continually making them better. That doesn't mean you have to overhaul everything that you're doing all the time, but it does mean that even in small ways, I'm going to be working on that on a never ending basis. You know, for my teacher, it's my lesson plans. If I'm a systems leader, there are other aspects of my work that I'm going to continually improve. 0:31:12.5 JD: And I think, you know, you asked about what could people do concretely is, you know, once you understand what your core long-term purpose is, everybody in the system has to understand that. So customers, be it families or higher education, government, industry, whatever, that has to be employees, that has to be the suppliers to your system, which are families, other school districts. Everybody needs to know what that long-term purpose is and they need to know even explicitly that you're committed to those three obligations, that you're committed to sort of longterm success of your organization. 0:31:53.8 AS: You'll notice over my shoulder I have a piece of paper on the wall and when you were talking I walked over...I slid back to look at it and it's a reminder from David Langford, who teaches us so much and that is continual improvement. Not "continuous" and you said "continual." So the point is he makes is that if you say continuous, it's like just constantly improving everything. It's like jumbling things up forever as opposed to continual where you're codifying the things that are working, standardizing some things, and then moving on to the next step of learning. So... 0:32:35.9 JD: Yeah. I think Deming was wise in choosing those words always deliberately. Continuous sort of implies like software, always self-improving and never ends. But humans can't continuously go on. Continual means there's discontinuous improvement. There's stops and starts. There's changes in focus, those types of things. So it's another nod to the humanistic nature of the Deming philosophy. 0:33:01.8 AS: All right. So let me summarize. We started off by talking about, it's a shift from talking about the management myths, now we're into the principles for the transformation of school systems. And basically, I think you kicked it off by saying that when people are implementing the myths, they're sub-optimizing the system and they're fragmenting the whole into parts and thinking if they can just get those parts right, that's gonna get the best result for the system and that is unfortunately wrong and we've gotta look at it from a systems basis. 0:33:39.0 AS: And then also you mentioned the quote of Dr. Deming saying, "Release the power of human resource contained in intrinsic motivation." And that, I just love that. That really helps to understand what we're trying to do is that people do want to contribute and they want to contribute in a great way. And then you also talked about, start with constancy of purpose and an aim. And you talked about the balance of problems between of today and the future. And I was adding in that you're constantly pulled into problems of today, and you're never pulled into problems of the future. So it takes some discipline, as you said, to start to strike that balance. 0:34:22.5 AS: And then, you talked about the importance of really taking that long term view. Then you mentioned about the three obligations, which all seem to look towards the future, and therefore maybe that's a good way to start to draw your people into thinking about the future. And the first one you mentioned about was, that Deming talked about, and you mentioned about was innovation. He also talked about research and education, and you highlighted, when he talks about education, he's talking about self-improvement and how do we acquire new knowledge in this organization? 0:34:56.2 AS: And then the third one is continual improvement. And the point is in education, it's design of the educational services. And then finally I think a call to action, a challenge to everybody that you have now given us to say, how do we take this back to the classroom or as an administrator back to the school? And your point was maybe ask your top three to five people, whatever, to answer the question, what is our long-term purpose? And have them do it individually. Write it down in short little statement and what you pretty much guarantee and I would second that you're gonna find probably five different statements of purpose. And I think that then, a note that I took as you were speaking was, "Use that as a starting point to clarify your long-term purpose." So great call to action at the end of this one. Anything you would add to that? 0:35:52.0 JD: No, I think, that was a perfect summary. Without an aim, there's no system. So that long-term aim that defines your constancy of purpose is that good place to start like you just said. 0:36:06.0 AS: So ladies and gentlemen, there's your challenge. Go back and do that little bit of homework. John, on behalf of everyone at The Deming Institute, I want to thank you again for this discussion. And for listeners, remember to go to deming.org to continue your journey. Oh, and by the way, you can find John's book Win-Win with Dr. W. Edwards Deming, The System of Profound Knowledge and the Science of Improving Schools on amazon.com. This is your host, Andrew Stotz, and I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming. "People are entitled to joy in work."

Dr. Deming railed against performance appraisals, listing them 3rd in his Seven Deadly Diseases of Management and calling them "Destroyer of People." In this discussion, John Dues explains our cultural attachment to appraising workers and why it is a myth to assume that appraisals have any impact on performance at all. TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.3 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz, and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today, I'm continuing my discussion with John Dues, who is part of the new generation of educators striving to apply Dr. Deming's principles to unleash student joy in learning. The topic for today is a continuation of our discussion about management myths that keep fooling us, and we are gonna be talking about performance appraisals. John, take it away.   0:00:32.1 John Dues: It's good to be back Andrew. I thought it'd be helpful first to connect back to what we've done, because it'll help listeners connect the dots between the various episodes that we've done together. I think this is the eighth episode, so episode one and two were all about the System of Profound Knowledge as a theory, and then episode three, we started working on understanding the concept of variation, special causes, common causes, that type of thing, and then four and five, we switched gears and talked about how to then apply the System of Profound Knowledge in our organizations. And so we talked about two powerful tools, process behavior charts, and then the PDSA cycles.   0:01:21.9 JD: Episode six, we started talking about A Nation at Risk and the Sandia report and how calls for education reform haven't always been built on a solid philosophical foundation. And then last time I introduced this idea of living in an age of mythology, and we talked about two myths. The myth about best practices and the myth of the hero educator. And so today, like you said, I thought we continue that discussion of the myths with a focus on performance appraisals, which is something that is a little bit hard to understand, I think it was hard for me to understand initially, but it's something that I thought was important because it's something when I listen to Dr. Deming's recorded seminars, it's something that he railed upon often.   0:02:14.9 JD: And I think tying all of the myths to a couple of key ideas is helpful. So I think that first idea is that when we see outcomes in a system, they're more than the skills and efforts of the individuals that work within the system. So those results come from more than just how the individuals within that system are working. The outcomes, that second idea is that the outcomes are mostly attributable to the system itself, and workers are only one part of that system. I think that's really important. That underlies all these myths and certainly underlies this idea of the myth of the performance appraisal.   0:03:00.8 JD: And I think that when we're talking about these myths, so we've covered the theory, we've talked about some ways to apply that theory, that System of Profound Knowledge in actual organizations. When we're thinking about the myths, what I'm thinking about is, dos and don'ts. And so the myths are the don'ts. There are specific prescriptions following the Deming philosophy that leaders should learn to stay away from and why to do so. And then of course, the do's would be a set of guiding principles to follow, and I thought, right now, we're focused on the myths and as we get through this episode and maybe one more on the myths, then we would then focus on the "what do you do?" That's where the guiding principles would come in, and so Deming outlined all of this for us. The theory, the application, the Do's and the Don'ts, and so that's where I thought we would start today.   0:03:55.6 AS: That's great. And we were talking before we turned on the recorder about how performance appraisals are such a fascinating area, and I know for a lot of people, there's nothing else. That that is the key of how you manage people. Like, you're talking about the core. Without performance appraisals, people are gonna be lazy. Without performance appraisals, people are gonna get distracted. Without performance appraisals people aren't gonna work hard because they're not gonna get compensated. Without performance appraisals, we can't get this organization to work and everybody to work together and this is the ultimate incentive that we need to motivate humans. So boy, you're taking on quite a tough topic here, John. Tell us a little bit more.   0:04:45.6 JD: We'll see how we do. And one thing to clarify when I say performance appraisal, in my world, in schools, this is typically called the Teacher Evaluation. So it has different names, but, an evaluation, an appraisal, some type of rating and ranking of employees basically. So I think one thing that, and you kinda just brought this up, is "if I don't do a performance appraisal, how am I gonna give feedback to team members?" And I think that's a good place to start is that, of course, I think that leaders and managers should, as a part of their job, provide direction and give feedback to team members.   0:05:33.9 JD: But I think it's a far cry to make the leap that giving direction and feedback is synonymous with administering performance appraisals. And I actually think that performance appraisals can actually work against giving good feedback. But like as a starting point, what makes up the typical performance appraisal? Thinking about four parts, just so we are all starting from the same place.   0:06:06.7 JD: First there's standards that are set. "Here's the standards that are gonna be outlined in this performance appraisal." Then there's a time limit set to meet those standards, then the manager makes observations and judgments, and then finally, the evaluation is given to the individuals by the person sort of in the organizational hierarchy. I think a key thing that I've learned in studying the Deming philosophy when it comes to performance appraisals is that they fail to consider the role of the system on individual performance. So that's one problem.   0:06:50.2 JD: They also fail to appreciate the variation in performance attributable to common causes. So that's why I was connecting our earlier episodes on theory and the applications to performance appraisal, 'cause you have to understand that to understand why Dr. Deming was railing against performance appraisals in the way that he did, and those are two of the key reasons.   0:07:20.2 AS: Right. So a person being evaluated or being talked to with a performance appraisal, a common thing is, they could say, "wait a minute, you're saying I didn't do this, but I couldn't do this because the system has this whatever." Or you get a boss that's focused on common cause variation going, well, "you did this, and then that, and this guy did that, and this is and then all..." What they're really doing is chasing their tail on all of these common cause variation, which is not going to improve the system and it's just rewarding and punishing what is just a natural outcome of the system.   0:08:01.1 JD: Yeah, that's a big part of it. So if I'm a teacher and part of my evaluation is something like outcomes of students and how well I deliver the curriculum, the effectiveness of the curriculum, those types of things. Well, the vast majority of teachers didn't select the curriculum. So that's a good example of something that's a part of the system that a teacher has no control over typically, but that it could play a role in an evaluation, and there's all kinds of examples like that. That second idea in terms of the appreciation of where the person is falling performance-wise within that common cause system, what that means is that, sure, people could be performing at different levels, and there could be slight variations in that, but it's very possible that those ups and downs, just like any other ups and downs that we study are just common cause. And so it's not one person different from another within the rating system?   0:09:06.6 JD: Are they far enough outside that they show up as a special cause. That their performance shows up as a special cause. Because if it does in the case of a teacher or maybe a student that is outside of the system in terms of performance, then there may be special help or special support that's needed. But I think many, many times that's not the case, and that the ups and downs don't represent anything meaningful. And I think one of the things that helps bring this into view for people is to say, "well, how did you experience teacher evaluations or performance appraisal or whatever you call it in your system, how did you experience as...   0:09:50.6 JD: How did you experience that practice as a receiver of those things?" Because that puts you in a different mindset. For me, performance appraisals, when I've been evaluated, have largely been positive in terms of the overall rating, but they've also, a lot of times not made a lot of sense on any number of fronts. And so I think of, as a teacher in Atlanta, and Atlanta Public Schools had a teacher evaluation system, the principal would come in for one hour across the school year and observe me and write it up and formally evaluate me, sit down with me and go over that evaluation. Well, if you think about that, one hour of observation, the typical 180-day school year, seven hours a day, that's about 0.08% of the school year that the principal observed. So that's a big problem.   0:10:52.1 JD: So we're saying that that represents the entire...my entire time teaching across the school year. That one hour observation. So that's a major problem. Another issue is, what is it that I'm being evaluated on? One that stands out for me, and granted we were in a different time, 23 years ago, 22 years ago when I first was evaluated, but they're still a technology category in the evaluation. And so part of the evaluation was to "use technology effectively in a lesson." And so one of my first questions would be, well, "do you have to use technology in a lesson for it to be effective?"   0:11:40.4 JD: I think that would be questionable at best. But what if I use technology in some lessons and not in others, and the one you happened to observe, I didn't use it, right? You didn't see the ones where I did. I was working in a large urban school system, I had seven computers in my room and five of them didn't work on a regular basis. So that's another obstacle, right? And so I get this rating, I take it, I don't really say anything about the computers not working, or what about my other lessons where I did use computers, I just listen to this, but...   0:12:13.3 AS: Otherwise you're gonna be labeled as argumentative.   0:12:15.4 JD: I'm gonna be labelled as argumentative and the rating was fine as it was, although I lost some points for those things. It's probably not worth...it's not.... You kind of pick your battles. But the point is, what does that leave me with in terms of the taste in my mouth about my school, about this evaluation system, granted it's one part of the system and maybe I didn't care about it too much as long as the rating without a satisfactory level, but the point is, it didn't seem fair, it didn't seem to make sense, it didn't seem to line up with what you would need to look at in terms of what you need to make an effective lesson.   0:12:55.0 JD: And how many people are experiencing evaluations in those same ways, whether it's ridiculous and being evaluated for something that doesn't work in your room, like the computer's not working, or a smaller like, do you need computers to be a part of the lesson in the first place. And so there's all kinds of things like that that I think are part of a typical evaluation system.   0:13:22.0 AS: So to summarize what you're saying is one way to think about performance and appraisal is to think about your personal feeling when you're receiving your evaluation, and I would argue that most people don't feel great, it's not something they're really looking forward to.   0:13:36.2 AS: And the second way you can look at this is look at the person who's delivering it. If you're having to deliver performance appraisals, is that like your favorite day of the year that you're working with that person? Yeah, so that's a good way to look at it so that you kind of understand that there's just something that doesn't feel right here, but continue on.   0:13:56.6 JD: Yeah, it takes a tremendous amount of time and effort. No one actually likes the process, generally speaking, and I think the thing that I wanted people would hold on to was that they don't get magically better when you're on the other side and being the evaluator. So my feeling wouldn't change whether I'm on the receiving or the giving side of the evaluation system now, I think for some leaders, unfortunately, I think that changes as long as they're on the other side, it's fine, but I think that's why I think putting yourself back in the shoes of the person receiving the evaluation is a good thing to hold on to. "I'm not special, there's not something about my personal characteristics that make evaluation unnecessary for me, but everybody else needs those things."   0:14:43.6 JD: So I think holding on to that as you move, especially if you move into a leadership role is a really important mental model. I think another key thing is after the evaluation, all of these people for the most part, are gonna still be working together, and so another key question that I learned from a Deming student named Peter Scholtes in a book called, The Leader's Handbook, a great book.   0:15:15.8 JD: He said, "what are the factors that differentiate highly effective versus lower rated people?" He outlined these five factors, so there's A, would be native ability and your early education, the second factor would be, B, your individual effort, how much work am I putting in as a teacher, as an employee. C, would be training, an orientation that I get as a part of the onboarding process or the ongoing professional development that I get as a part of the job. D would be variability of the processes and systems that are going on within my job, and E would be the system evaluation itself to some of those things that we just talked about, is it fair? Is it well constructed? Is it representative of my total work, that little sample that's seen by the manager.   0:16:17.0 JD: And if you look closely at those five items, really only one of them, that being, I think I call it D, that individual effort is under the control of the individual person working in the system. The other four factors really don't have anything do with individual performance, but what the performance appraisal system attempts to do is solve that equation, A plus B plus C plus D plus E equals my rating, let's call it 100.   0:16:54.5 JD: But if you can't solve that equation, if you don't know already what the variables A, C, D and E account for in terms of its contributions to the rating, the only thing you know as an individual effort, right?   0:17:11.2 AS: And you don't really know that either.   0:17:17.0 JD: Yeah, fair enough, fair enough.   0:17:20.1 AS: So it's a shifting sand that you're working on, which is what probably one of the counter-arguments to performance appraisals is that there's just... It's so subjective and difficult, particularly, okay, if you're a narrow-minded person and you've never thought about the fact that there is variable B, C, D and E as an example, then...but once you start to think about those things, you realize that not only is it difficult to quantify and all that what a person's doing, and how do you factor in the fact that that person just went through the loss of a parent over the period of time that you appraise them. How does that impact performance?   0:18:02.5 JD: Any number of things. Any number of things. Yeah, I can think of a lot of examples when you start to unpack those various factors, like when you're talking to the manager, "oh, well, we didn't quite onboard them like we typically do now, no one acclimated them to our curriculum system" or whatever it is.   0:18:27.3 AS: But they're still responsible for delivery.   0:18:29.8 JD: Yeah, they still move forward with that response. And again, it's not that there's not gonna be variation in performance amongst employees, it's just, are we getting what we think we are from this rating and ranking system. I think what we're doing basically is disregarding the contributions of the system on the performance of individuals that are working within that system.   0:18:57.0 AS: And I guess if you talk about that to people, they're gonna be like, "Now you're unleashing something that's just unmanageable." Okay, yeah, fine. We're gonna start talking about the system and the impact and that everybody's just gonna blame the system! John, don't you know people are just gonna blame the system, then if we start talking about why it's not your responsibility.   0:19:23.2 JD: Yeah, I think, yeah, we'll kinda get into what's the prescription in terms of...what would of the prescription be from the System of Profound Knowledge in terms of what to do instead, but one thing to do, if you did have some type of evaluation system, you could just remove the numbers and have a narrative feedback on characteristics or competencies or capacities that are important for your particular organization. I think that that would be one way to handle it.   0:20:00.4 JD: Another great tool that I learned from David Langford is a tool called the capacity matrix, where you outline what are the capacities that are important for a given role that you want to see develop. You define a series of dimensions of growing from more basic to more proficient in a particular capacity, and then you ask the person to track their own learning in those areas, and as they self-evaluate, they have to provide evidence, be it - maybe they give a presentation or incorporated a technique into their lessons on a regular basis, or maybe they presented at a staff meeting, something like that, but they have to link the capacity development to some evidence that it's been put into place.   0:20:51.0 JD: That's another way to handle... The point is to develop the person and build capacity, that's a much more powerful way to do it, and I think the goal of starting to use the Deming philosophy is transformation, and I think what Deming was talking about when he talked about transformation is this process from going from - starting to understand these assumptions and these myths and then working to move away from them. So one of the things...one of the lenses I have just in studying the Deming philosophy is to ask questions because so many of the practices like the performance appraisal, prior to studying Deming, I never even stopped and said, "well, what is the theory behind the performance appraisal? Where did it come from? Why do people think it isn't an effective practice? Are there practices that would be more effective?"   0:21:52.3 JD: So just as a starting place, you can start to ask questions about some of these things that you probably never even stopped to think about. I think that was true for me, whether we're talking about these myths or any other number of things that are common in organizations, work settings, and we have this...   0:22:14.0 AS: And for performance appraisals: what is the theory behind them?   0:22:20.0 JD: That's a good question. That is a good question. Where did they come from? Well, I don't know for sure, but I know that...a lot of corporate practices can be traced back to things like the military and early railroads, which were some of the first organizations to have a larger staff that had to be organized in a way, and I know that in terms of the rail companies that you know, when there was a crash, there did need to be somebody blamed. And so you had to nail down who in the hierarchy... Where did things break down? It had to be an individual to blame when two trains ran into each other or the train ran off the tracks. And I think what Deming is saying it is what was actually the system that led to that crash, that's what we needed to study in a lot of cases, and almost in all cases, whether it's the train running off the tracks or the Challenger space shuttle disaster, almost all of them were of system problems and it wasn't one single individual that you could pin those problems on.   0:23:37.2 AS: And you could argue that performance appraisals are not really there in that case, like what you're talking about let's say is a train crash, it's not really there to some extent to blame... To improve the system, it's there to blame someone and then, "okay, we got our scapegoat, now let's move on."   0:23:54.4 JD: That's right, yep. Yeah, so with performance appraisal, it's not quite as dramatic as the train crash, but what's happening is that it leads to this rating and ranking of teachers, we do the same things with students, students have their own form of performance appraisals, even schools within state accountability systems have their own rating and ranking systems. So they reward at the top and punishment at the bottom, that's the typical present practice. And I think the better practice, what we're trying to move towards when you're managing through the Deming philosophy is: abolish the ranking in favor of managing the whole organization as a system, and what you wanna do is study and understand how every part of that system, every component whether it's grade levels or departments, whatever, how do they contribute to the optimization of the system.   0:24:57.8 JD: And so that's... What's the aim of your system, how do you optimize that? And I think a big part of this performance appraisal thing is that that practice is running in the other direction from optimization. You are incentivizing individuals to look out for themselves versus contributing to the aim of the organization.   0:25:26.7 AS: One of the things that people say is like, "What do I replace it with?" Well, in a lot of cases in education, you may not even have that choice, but in private business, you do, and I always say that...I always say "imagine that you're lost deep in the woods, and after hours of walking in one direction, you realized that you're walking in the wrong direction. However, you're unsure of the right direction, but you've received enough information to know that you're walking in the wrong direction. What would you do?"   0:26:05.7 JD: Perhaps stop going in the wrong direction as a starting point.   0:26:12.3 AS: And the point is, is that you don't have to know the right direction if you've identified the wrong direction. And so that's one of the challenges that we often get with performance appraisal is, "what are we supposed to do if we don't do that?"   0:26:28.8 JD: Yep, yep. And I think... And that's - when you start to understand the System of Profound Knowledge, you start thinking about ways that it can offer you guidance on a practice like the performance appraisal. And so what I tried to think through is, in terms of performance appraisal, what do each of the components of the System of Profound Knowledge contribute in terms of learning about the way...in terms of your analogy: the way to move...start to move in the right direction.   0:27:08.5 JD: And so there's the four components of the System of Profound Knowledge, we have Appreciation for a System, Knowledge of Variation, Theory of Knowledge and Psychology. And so each of those components has contributions to make in terms of rethinking the performance appraisal. So I was gonna break those down as a way to round down out our talk today. Some of this is a recap, but when I think about Appreciation for a System, we've talked about this, but that system is responsible for most of the observed variation between the performance of the individuals. It's most...Deming said up to 94%, depending on the situation, even up to 97% of the results that come out of the system can be traced back to the system itself, and only 3% to 6% were attributable to the individuals.   0:28:08.0 JD: So the system is the overwhelming contributor to that ranking within that, doesn't help anyone, nor the system improve. Giving somebody a rank, sorting people into good and better and best does not point the way towards improvement for the organization. So that's the Appreciation for a System contribution.   0:28:34.1 AS: Yep. We could say changing seats on the Titanic.   0:28:37.2 JD: Yeah, exactly. Exactly. Then we have understanding variation or Knowledge about Variation. So we've talked about this a little bit, but ranking people, especially when we're ranking within a common cause system, is misleading. 'Cause remember, even if there's ups and downs in terms of the data, the question isn't: is it different? It's: is it meaningfully different? And in a common cause system, even though there are some ups and downs, there's no difference. It's not of a magnitude that you can say, "yep, that's significantly different from one point to the next." And another thing to consider is there will always be variation. [chuckle] There's always gonna be variation between students, between teachers, between schools, between school systems, between states, whatever that thing is, there is variation in a natural state of affairs. So we have to come to grips with that.   0:29:40.9 JD: In terms of Theory of Knowledge, when we rate and rank people, it's a snapshot. Kind of like what I alluded to my observation in Atlanta being less than 1% of the total time that I was with my students. So that ranking doesn't take into account and any performance appraisal system I've ever been aware of that temporal spread. So in other words, I'm really more interested in what's the performance over an extended time period. And so when people would ask Deming, okay, you're saying, the performance appraisal is something we should abolish. Well, how much data would you need on an individual worker before you could rate them? And what he would say is 15 or 16 years. [chuckle]   0:30:32.1 JD: And basically what he's saying is, I think, is that, that's the amount of performance data you would need to plot. If you're doing it once a year, once you have 15 or 16 years, you can kind of get a sense of how that data is performing over time. That last component, maybe the most important is Psychology. I think one big problem is that those performance appraisals at their worst are debilitating to people, at their best, they're perceived to be arbitrary, like what I talked about. Certainly wasn't debilitating to get my rating, my rank and my rating in Atlanta, but it did...I did see the rating and the points I lost as arbitrary and meaningless, to be candid.   0:31:23.1 JD: And then another big part of that psychological component, especially when it becomes to rating and ranking students, is that this thing called the Pygmalion effect begins and it can really start to destroy cooperation. Whether that's students or teachers, but you this is basically this idea that once, let's say a teacher has a set of expectations about students, they start to take on those characteristics, whether it's in a positive or negative direction.   0:31:57.2 JD: And they've done some pretty fascinating studies on this Pygmalion effect in classrooms. There's one where it's like in the late sixties, basically a teacher was told that a set of students had performed really well on a standardized test. In reality, there was no difference between this group of students and the rest of the students. But because the teachers thought that, over time what the researchers found is that they started treating the students differently and it actually resulted in those students scoring higher on the standardized tests at the end of the year just based on those teacher expectations. And so, talk about a powerful, powerful set of effects within a rating and ranking system. And I think that's something we really need to consider in any type of institution, but especially a school system. So, yeah.   0:32:55.0 AS: I was just reminded of a quote that Dr. Deming said, which is, and I'm gonna, I'm gonna read it for for a minute here. I'm gonna read it in my Dr. Deming voice. "So evaluation of performance, merit review, or annual review. The idea of merit rating is alluring the sound of the words, captivate the imagination, pay for what you get, get what you pay for, motivate people to do their best for their own good. The effect is exactly the opposite of what the words promise." [chuckle]   0:33:32.1 JD: Yeah. I think that's what I found in practice, before I discovered the stuff I tried to improve our teacher evaluation system. And in reality that's just an effort that's not worth my time.   0:33:47.9 AS: He also said, "Annihilates teamwork, and it's purely a lottery."   0:33:53.3 JD: Yep.   0:33:57.7 AS: I wrote a blog post on this many years ago entitled, Why We Stopped Performance Appraisals at Coffee Works, my company. And this was... I published in 2016, and I just would... Maybe I'll just read a little excerpt here. What I said is, "The system was an annual review during which bosses in our companies met employees and scored them as A, B or C. I read Jack Welch's book and I thought, yeah, kick out the C players, this has made sense in the days when I was buying into that. We would use this to allocate bonus mainly to pay, A's and B's. A's a lot, B's a little bit, and C's nothing. And for years we've been seeing the weaknesses of this system, but didn't have the guts to abandon it, because we didn't have something to replace it.   0:34:50.5 AS: And so before you ask what we did to replace it, let's consider what we didn't like about it. Number one, it was unfair. Number two, it was subjective. Number three, it fostered favoritism. We saw that certain employees were continually getting positive ratings from their bosses. Number four, it failed to recognize what quality godfather Dr. W. Edwards Deming taught was that the majority of the output of any one employee is attributable to the system. And number five, it was time consuming and costly. Number six, it did not enhance employee performance. Number seven, it increased fear and caused suspicion. Number eight, it caused employees and departments to compete against each other rather than compete against our competitors or just take care of the customer.   0:35:34.2 AS: Number nine, it was completely inward focusing, encouraging employees to shift their focus from the customer during the time of performance appraisals. It's like you can't take care of the customer 'cause you gotta get all these performance appraisals done." Is there anything that you would add to that list of what you see in the education environment?   0:35:51.3 JD: No, I mean that's spot on. I mean, I think the key summary or takeaway is for any of these practices, be it performance appraisal or otherwise, is that thing optimizing the system? Is it making your organization better at achieving its aim? And you just named a whole lineup of things that said, "no, this is why in this particular practice performance appraisals, this is why Dr. Deming railed against them." So I think that, yeah, I think that was a great synopsis of many of the things that Dr. Deming talked about in his seminars when he railed on performance appraisals.   0:36:33.4 AS: So, as we wrap up, the purpose of today's discussion is to open up people's minds to understand what are performance appraisals, what are the myths behind it? What are the weaknesses of it? We also kind of said, even if you don't have a substitute, you could argue that you don't have to keep doing something that's damaging if you know that it's damaging. But we also know in an education environment, you may not have the power to make that decision. Like we had in our coffee business, it was like, "this isn't working, we're stopping. No more resources to this." We have that flexibility. So, we haven't spent any time talking about ways to do things and the positive aspect. But let's just wrap up this whole conversation. How would you kind of wrap up the message that you want the listeners and the viewers to get from this specific discussion?   0:37:29.4 JD: Yeah, I think because a lot of this, a lot of Deming's ideas were targeted at leaders and leaders at all different levels. And I think, what constantly happened to me was someone would say "what's your leadership style?" And I would typically cobble together some type of jargon in response to that question. But what Dr. Deming offers is a management philosophy: the groundwork, the framework, the foundation, the philosophical foundation, the myths to stay away from, a set of guiding principles that actually, when you dig deep and you study these things, they offer a way forward, a lens through which to make better decisions for your organization. And that's really what I take from this.   0:38:22.3 JD: There are many better ways to run our organizations. Performance appraisals are just one component of this, but hopefully what people are taking is that, hey, at the very least, the next time I have a leadership team meeting, I'm gonna bring this up and say, Hey, why do we do this? Is it leading to the type of results - like what you're alluding to with your business - that we think it is. And if it's not, what else could we do? How can we replace this, make it better? How can we at least begin to ask these questions instead of just carrying on? Because it's the way that we've always done things. So, yep.   0:39:00.6 AS: John, on behalf of everyone at the Deming Institute, I want to thank you again for this discussion. For listeners, remember, go to deming.org to continue your journey. This is your host, Andrew Stotz. I'm gonna leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming. "People are entitled to joy in work."  

David Langford gives a sermon titled "The Coronation of Jesus as King of Kings" based on John 12:12-19. Subscribe for more content just like this! Website: http://montclair.church/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/montclair.ch... Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/montclair.c... To support this ministry and help us continue to connect people to Jesus and to each other. Please go to https://www.montclairchurch.net/give

The hosts welcome to the show Deacon Jake Schneider and Deacon David Langford, soon to be ordained priests of the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend with five others of their classmates.It's ordination season! Pray for all men being ordained to the Diaconate and Priesthood this year.

Is there a secret weapon for improvement? Yes! John and Andrew discuss how students fit into improvement projects - and how that translates to businesses. TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.0 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz, and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today, I'm continuing my discussion with John Dues, who is part of the new generation of educators striving to apply Dr. Deming's principles to unleash student joy in learning. The topic for today is "Engaging Students is the Secret Weapon for Improvement". John, take it away.   0:00:28.0 John Dues: Andrew, it's great to be back with you on the podcast. Yeah, this is sort of a revelation to me when I was working with... It's actually working with David Langford, and we were talking about, "How do you bring about improvement in schools," and at one point, he said to me, to kinda give it away at the top of the program here, "Students are sitting right in front of you, and they are the secret weapon when it comes to school improvement." Engaging them in those improvement processes is really the secret to improvement, because almost everything we want to improve in schools has to do with students, but we almost never directly engage them in this improvement process. It was so obvious they're sitting right there in front of me, but it wasn't until David said it that way that I said, "Oh, my gosh, all this time." Of course, as a classroom teacher or a principal, students were sometimes tangentially involved in improvement efforts, but how many times are they central to it, how many times do we put the data that we want to improve right in front of the students and elicit ideas for improvement as we watch that data move up and down over time? So it was a real sort of eye-opener for me to start thinking in that way.   0:01:50.8 AS: It's funny 'cause when I first started teaching many years ago, teaching finance, I was always worried that I would get a question that I couldn't answer. And what I came to learn from that was that a question that I couldn't answer is a great opportunity for a discussion. And then I would basically say, "Hmm, well, what do you think is the answer?" Now, in a way, I was playing a little bit of a trick 'cause I was deflecting the fact that I didn't have an answer. But I said, "What do you think? Okay, what do you think?" And then we started to construct and answer to that as best we could. And it took a lot of pressure off me because I realized that that discussion was a fine discussion to be had in the classroom around a topic that I wasn't exactly sure how to answer.   0:02:37.9 JD: Yeah, I think all of us try to hide our weaknesses, especially early on. We gain experience, it gets more comfortable to say, "I don't know," which is a fine thing to do as a experienced classroom teacher as well. And I'm thinking about in this context involving students, probably the best ideas for improvement are living right there with them, just like even if you didn't know the answer in your early classrooms, that sort of elicited a discussion that maybe was richer than it would have been otherwise. So I think, yeah in either case, involving students is a real sort of key to this improvement process, whether it's a single teacher in front of a classroom of college students in your case, or in my case, where we're trying to improve our system of schools.   0:03:30.7 AS: In my Valuation Master Class Boot Camp, which is like an online course, I have so much more flexibility than you have in high school. But I found one of the students was just really engaging and really supportive of the other students, so I hired him. And I said, "Why don't you become student experience? That's... Your job is about bringing that great student experience." And then whenever I kick off the Valuation Master Class Bootcamp, I ask prior graduates to come and speak and tell the students, give them some advice, and tell about the transformation that they went through in that course. So on the first day of class, they're inspired and encouraged, and then throughout the class, they've got a prior student guiding them and helping them get through where he knows are the most difficult parts. But you don't have that kind of flexibility, I would guess in your setting. Tell us more about that.   0:04:30.2 JD: Yeah, I think well, one I think that example that you just told is outstanding, and I actually think... I think it's a little bit of a misnomer. There are a lot of regulations, there are a lot of handcuffs on... To certain things in terms of what we can do and what we can't do. But actually we have fairly wide latitude. We're a small public charter school network, so we maybe even have more latitude than the typical traditional public school. We have the latitude of a district, so we're making decisions for district of schools, basically. And we're small, we're pretty nimble. We think innovation is pretty important. We think continual learning is important, and we put some processes in place to elicit that. Where there can be some roadblocks here and there, I think one of my jobs is actually find a way around those roadblocks, if they're in service of our mission and in service of helping students be educated at a higher level.   0:05:29.4 AS: So what I do is I ask the students at the end of the whole course, I say, "Tell me what you learned. What is the number-one thing that you took away," that type of thing. And I'm putting them in a pretty intense situation for six intense weeks, but then they've got a record of that, they've thought through that. And then when they come back, then they can share, "Here's what I went through, and here's my advice on how to get through it." And it is an idea in a school to say, having a list of the people who made it through the class on the wall.   0:06:03.4 AS: And then another idea is to find one or two students that would say... Come back and talk to the students to say, "Okay, this class is about American history, and the one thing that just lit me on fire is the story of Philip Sheridan when he was attacking... The US cavalry, was attacking the southern cavalry, and how he knocked out Jeb Stuart, and it just got me reading all this stuff from blah, blah, blah, blah, and then... " So, of course, that's big brainstorming, but that's an idea.   0:06:33.5 JD: Yeah, I think that... You said a six-week course. What you're describing is essentially that Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle, so I could see a scenario where in your six-week course where you run a PDSA on how are we gonna improve the class. And at the end, when you get to that act, you sort of decide with the class... What should I focus on for the next PDSA with the next class. And so in that way, you'd sort of be... Assuming you're re-teaching this class on an ongoing basis, you'd be sort of continually improving, and that's really the sort of... We talked about the Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle, the PDSA cycle, the last couple sessions, that's really what it is. It's where you leave off at the end of that cycle and you decide what you're gonna do next, feeds into that second cycle of improvement. So whether you called it that or not, it sounds like you're basically running PDSAs with the finance classes that you're teaching.   0:07:34.6 AS: Yeah. In fact, at the end of the class, I ask them another question, which is, what could we do to improve? And...   [chuckle]   0:07:43.3 JD: It's perfect.   0:07:45.5 AS: So the question... The problem that I faced was that the students said I want more one-on-one feedback, that they submit their assignment and they just get pass/fail or a grade and they don't get the feedback that they wanted. And really, I have to say, I was kind of upset about this reply because I felt like, "I can't do it, it's too many students," and my goal is to grow it so that I've got 100 or 500 students. How am I gonna scale it if it's about personal feedback? So we talked about it a lot for the next Boot Camp that came up, because we had seen this complaint coming up, and we came up with this idea. And I said, "Maybe... " And this... Part of this is talking to people like you and David Langford and others, maybe we need to do more work on clarifying the assignment. And so we went back and I said, "Look, every week we need to make it super clear on Monday what's the assignment for the week."   0:08:48.3 AS: And we even provided them kind of a score card of the way we're gonna look at it. "Did you do this? If you did that, you get a point. Did you do that? Did you check your grammar," whatever. And so we got much more clear, and then what we decided to do was to say, "Look, the teams will meet in the week, they always meet once a week, and they need to pick one or two people to present that on Friday." And then what we had is, we had the students present their work, just the best of the best, and I would say not the best of the best, but the ones that shows... Said, "I'm ready and I can do that," and then myself and my team gave them feedback after they presented, and said, "Okay, see that? Try to fix that. Make sure that you don't... " And then once we did that, what I then did is I took notes throughout those and recorded those, and then I improved again the description of the assignments and the common mistakes that people made. And so the next time that we did it, the next launch of the Valuation Master Class Bootcamp, we now had an even more clear focus on what you've got to do by the end of this week.   0:10:00.1 AS: And then finally, what I did is I called it Feedback Friday. And I said, "A whole week, we're working on a bunch of stuff but the end result is on Feedback Friday. One person, two people from your team is gonna present and you're gonna get critiqued and see how you do, and everybody's gonna watch that, it's gonna be recorded. Anybody can go through that." So we've been doing Feedback Friday now for three bootcamps and I would say all of the complaints related to feedback and not enough personal feedback are gone. And it wasn't through personal feedback that we resolved the issue of not getting enough personal feedback.   0:10:35.0 JD: Yeah. Well, that's a PDSA cycle for sure. Another thing I think of is what you... Sounds like you did over time as you iterated this class, and how you gave feedback, you actually found the actual root cause that was causing the problem. And the third thing I was thinking of, 'cause you talked about complaints, one thing we can do is overreact to complaints. So that's another thing that you could do is put the complaints on a process behavior chart, and if you get to a certain number, that might sort of signal that you have an issue. Otherwise, there may be an acceptable level... Number of complaints and... Or a third level analysis is, it's a stable number of complaints but the number is not acceptable to you as the instructor and so you wanna go about improving the whole system. It sounds like that's exactly what you did, sort of what we've talked about the last couple sessions, is you chart something, whether it's quantitative or qualitative data, you're keeping track of that, and then you're tagging it to this structured improvement process. And, yeah, it sounds like you're running the PDSA cycles for the class. It's pretty cool.   0:11:57.1 AS: That's a comforting message for the listeners and the viewers because what it tells you is that you don't have to be super official and have all of the tools that we learn from Dr. Deming's teachings that... First, is to start with the thought process. And my first thought process is, "I want my Valuation Master Class Bootcamp to be the best course in the world." That's all I want, just the best in the world, so I'm constantly wanting to improve. The second thing, I do not ever focus on competitors because my course is just so different, and all I focus on is the students. The third thing is I'm getting feedback on a consistent basis from the student about what they like and what it's worth to them. Because I also ask them, "Now that you understand exactly what's in the Valuation Master Class Bootcamp, what is the price that you think I should charge for this?" And my goal is that that price continues to rise as the perception of the value of the course rises. So I'm getting feedback, and then I'm looking at that feedback and I'm trying to identify what I think is the most important feedback that we've got to somehow resolve.   0:13:13.3 AS: And then I'm coming up with a theory that how, "Okay, wait a minute, if we clarify more about what we want, maybe that's gonna help, but even if we clarified our assignment, it wouldn't have helped the feedback. They still could have had the same problem of, "We're not getting any feedback." But then it was the idea of coming up with the Feedback Friday and really naming it. And that's what I've learned from the world of marketing and all that, is that you've got to name something and repeat it. And so all of that is... And then I keep wanting to repeat that process, which is why I love doing the bootcamp 'cause it's six weeks, every 10 weeks or so I do it again, and that gives us a perfect opportunity. And that's what teachers are doing, they're doing again and again, right?   0:13:53.9 JD: Yeah, yeah, and it makes me think... I'm obviously living in a different world than you in terms of who the students are and who the customer is. But we... In our network of schools, we have two elementary schools, two middle schools, and a lot of your description makes me think of this first ever PDSA cycle we ran a few years ago when we were working on an improvement project we called Eighth Grade On Track, which is just like what it sounds. How do we make sure that our eighth graders are on track to go to high school? We don't have a high school in our network, but we have a high school placement process. One of the things that parents expect of us is that their child is well-prepared to go to a good academically-oriented high school once they leave us, and, of course, high schools are also expecting that from us. So the parents are the customer expecting certain things from our schools. The high schools that we feed into are expecting certain things from our schools. So of course we can't fulfill our mission, we can't be an important part of that sort of education system, if we're not preparing our students to leave us as eighth graders and matriculate into a solid high school.   0:15:09.4 JD: And I remember working through, what does it mean to be on track in eighth grade to predict that you're gonna go on and be on track and do well in high school? One of the interesting things that, as I was reading some research out of the University of Chicago on this, was that when you look at students in middle school, you see grades start to drop that's actually a leading indicator of things to come in high school, which makes a lot of sense, 'cause if you start to experience academic issues in middle school, high school is a little harder, academically, plus some of the supports that are in place in elementary and middle school start to drop away so that makes perfect sense. Bs drop to Ds in middle school, and Ds drop to Fs in high school. And, man, if you're off track, even in your ninth grade year, students have a lot of trouble bouncing back from that. So I remember there was a student I was working with named James and this exact thing happened.   0:16:19.4 JD: I was looking at his grades, I was looking at his GPA, his attendance, his discipline record in sixth grade and everything was on track. In seventh grade, it was mostly on track. Things were looking pretty good. And then all of a sudden, here we are in the first trimester of eighth grade, and his reading grade dropped from a B in seventh grade all the way down to a D in that first trimester. In a lot of places, that's not gonna... Especially if the rest of his grades are pretty good, good attendance, he never was in trouble, he's not gonna get on a lot of people's radar. But we have this on-track system in place, so once we saw that data, our team, we said, "Wait a second, James was on track in sixth grade, on track in seventh grade, and now all of a sudden, he's off track in eighth grade," and we started asking why. So we're adults, we're sitting around the table in a conference room, "Why is James off track? Why is he off track in eighth grade? Well, his B in seventh grade dropped to a D."   0:17:25.8 JD: "Well, why is that? Why did that grade drop from B to D?" We're looking at his scores, and he's got pretty high reading test scores in his class. And then we look at his homework grade. His home grade's really low in his eighth grade reading class. And so then we asked this next question, "Why is James' eighth grade reading homework grade low?" And then we get stuck, and this goes back to this whole point of this episode, which is students are the improvement secret weapon. So we're sitting around this table and we say, "How do we figure this out? Why is his reading grade and homework grade, low? Let's go get it. Let's go get it." [chuckle]   0:18:10.5 AS: And for the people who are working in a manufacturing company listening to this, it's like sitting in your office above the factory...   0:18:19.1 JD: Exactly.   0:18:19.9 AS: And looking at the chart and thinking, "I wonder why this is happening."   0:18:24.0 JD: "Why this happening?" Yeah. So this is when the conversation gets really interesting. We had never done this before. We go get James on the spot from his eighth grade classroom and say, "Hey, we're doing this thing where we're just trying to figure out what's going on with your grades."   0:18:40.0 JD: We're asking some "why" questions. We're basically using the 5 why tool, we have a piece of chart paper and listing these things out, and so now we've invited him into the room, we just say, "Why is your reading homework grade low?" And he says, "Well, I really do the easier less-time-consuming homework first, math and science and history are fairly easy for me. So I do those first." A pretty typical answer from an eighth grade boy, and so what he's basically saying is he does his reading homework last, "Well, why do you do your reading homework last?"   0:19:28.9 JD: "Well, I don't like doing my reading homework, it's too much work." "Why do you dislike doing your reading homework?" "It's too much work. It takes too much time. I wait to the last possible moment." And we said, "Well, what is the last possible moment mean?" And he said, "Well, I usually not only do it last, I do it on the bus ride to school in the morning." It's dark. It's bumpy. That's the worst possible place to do the hardest homework, but that's what he's doing 'cause he does wanna get it done, he wants to turn in something, but he's not putting any type of effort, so now what we've uncovered is, why is it exactly that his homework grade is low?   0:20:02.9 JD: Now, if I was just an administrator sitting in my office, I could see that D and say, "James needs to go to after school tutoring," or "James needs to do this," or "James news to do that." But none of that, like what you were talking about with the student complaints in your class, none of that would have been the actual root cause of James' reading homework problem. So then we said, "Okay, now we know what the problem is, what are we gonna do about it?"   0:20:35.6 JD: And I had just learned about this Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle thing, and I said, "Well, let's sit down and write... Literally write out a simple PDSA with James." And the basic question was, if we could do reading homework first, could we raise that homework grade to at least a 70%? So we kinda looked at what his homework grade had been and what he needed to do to pass, and so that's what we settled on. We said, "James, what do you think about doing your reading Homework first?" And again, typical eighth grader here's where some of the psychology comes in, he says, "I don't know...   0:21:09.6 JD: I don't know if I really wanna do this. I don't think it's gonna work. I hate reading, I hate my reading homework," I said, "James, I hate getting up in the morning and running, but when I do it... When I get myself to do it, I feel better." He said, "Oh yeah okay, I could buy that." And I said, "Could you try this for just five days," and he looked at me, he kind of nods and I said, "No," I literally got up out of my chair, he got up out of his chair to go back to class and I said, "I need you to look me in the eye and shake my hand and tell me you can do this for five days." And he said, "Sure, I think I can do this."   0:21:54.1 JD: He said, "At the end of the day, when I'm sitting in my homeroom class, when we work on homework... Do you mind if I sort of sit in the back of the room so I can concentrate better?" "No problem. Great." So we write this down for the next five days, James is gonna work on is reading homework first, we tell the teacher that's in the homeroom so she can check to make sure he's actually doing that, and then we talked to the reading teacher and said, "Hey, can you give us James' last five assignments in reading and can you put the next five in this table to see if this is working." So just over the next five days, he does this, I check in with his homeroom teacher... Yep, he's working on his homework at the kidney table back in the back of the room.   0:22:33.5 JD: And then we start seeing the data come in, so whereas... Right before this intervention, it's one out of five, that's a 20%, three out of five, that's a 60%, three out of five... Those types of grades. First homework comes in five out of five, second homework comes in a three out of five. It's gonna take some time. Then it's 6.75 out of 10, it's five out of five, four out of five. And you start seeing this sort of momentum building, and after five days, he not only has a C on those assignments, he's very nearly got a B. And so we're studying this. And we're saying, "This seems like it's working pretty well." He sort of out-did even our predictions, and so we go to him and say, "What do you think about this sort of reading homework-first intervention?" And he says, "Yeah, it's going pretty well."   0:23:27.3 JD: "You're gonna keep doing it?" "Yeah, let's keep doing it." We design a second PDSA, We're gonna check in in two weeks now, so you can kinda see how this process goes, you create this very small plan, the student was hesitant, but he gave really great answers, insights into why his grade was low, he helped develop the plan, so now he's intrinsically motivated, 'cause this wasn't something that we did to him, we did it with him, and he's starting to get some momentum, he had some immediate success.   0:24:06.7 JD: And so you can see even just the small little change had this huge impact on this kid, and then he starts to build this momentum, and this has really changed a lot about how we approach changes, whereas before we'd sit in a room and plan, plan, plan, plan, plan, and then you go implement, you're like, "Oh man, I wasn't expecting this to happen, I wasn't expecting this to happen, I wasn't expecting this... " In five days, we went and saw "What would happen if we put this plan in place," and it worked pretty well, and all of a sudden we're gonna do it for 10 days instead of instead of five days.   0:24:40.3 AS: So let's just break it down for the... For the listeners to understand, we often talk about PDSA and all that, I think the first lesson that I would take from what you've said is that, yes, it can be a formal thing where we sit down and write down Plan-Do-Study-Act, and we go through it in a formal way, but it can also be just an informal process that we go through, but let's just break it down. They'll... Explain to us, P-D-S-A, how does that break down for this specific thing?   0:25:14.1 JD: Yeah, so the P would be the plan. And so I think the important thing to keep in mind here, is one... We wrote it down. You know, that sounds simple, but that's a big first step. We wrote the plan down, we made a prediction, we said, if James does this reading homework-first intervention, we predict that he'll have a 70% or higher on each of his homework assignments over the next five days, so we've quantified what we think is gonna happen. Then it's just the who, what, where, when, and of the plan. So it was literally like on March 22nd, 23rd, 26th, 27th and 28th.   0:25:54.7 JD: So on the next five school days, James is gonna work at the back kidney table, he's gonna work on his reading homework first, his homeroom teacher, Ms. Kramer, she knows that this plan is being put in place and she's just gonna check that he is working on his reading homework and then his reading teacher who is. Dr. Brennan, she said, "I'll record his homework scores as I get them over the course of each of those five days, so we can see if this is in fact having the sort of success that we think it is." So the plan is our hunch, it's really our theory about how we're gonna improve James' reading grade, but we don't know if that's actually connected to the real world in terms of if it's gonna be successful or not, until we actually put it in place. So we made a prediction, we made a plan that plan included who's doing what, when, and then it also included a plan for collecting just a little bit of data to see if this PDSA is on track so that's the P, the plan.   0:27:03.9 JD: In terms of the Do then after those five days, we just came back together as a team and just said, "What actually happened? Did James go and sit at the back kidney table? Did he do that each of the five days? Did he work on his reading homework first?" And it actually... This is a pretty simple plan and it's only over the course of five days, so in terms of implementation, the Do, everything matched exactly with what we put in the plan, and part of that is because the plan was simple, straight forward and on a really, really, really short time frame.   0:27:43.1 AS: So that is him doing the plan executing the plan.   0:27:44.4 JD: Us running the tests. Yeah us running the tests. Now on the study, the difference between the Do and the Study is the Study has... That the plan has been run, the test has been run, and now we have the data in and so we looked at what happened for the five days before we started the study, and over the course of those five days, he had gotten a 53% average on his homework on those five days pre-intervention, after the intervention began over those next five days, he earned a 79% average on his homework, and that 79% was 9% higher than what we had predicted, so the intervention actually went better than we thought at the outset, so that gives us evidence...   0:28:36.1 JD: That one, we know what we're doing in terms of creating the plan in the first place, and two, that the implementation can actually be put into effect in a real school, in real classrooms, with all the constraints that you have with time and all that, all that stuff. And I think another big thing besides writing it down, besides having the structure of this PDSA, we had James, we had James there, so I think it was a pretty good plan because of that. And so...   0:29:01.6 AS: And then, so what happened? Okay, so we've got the Study and what about Act? What does act mean in this case?   0:29:09.3 JD: Yeah, I think I mentioned this in one of the last two podcasts that when I think of Act, I'm gonna do one of three As, I'm gonna either Abandon the idea that we put in place 'cause it didn't go so well, I'm going to Adapt the idea 'cause some of it went pretty well, but maybe there are some things that need to be tweaked or iterated on, or I'm gonna Adopt it, this intervention went so well that it's gonna become a part of my system.   0:29:41.3 JD: So in this case, because we've only done this over five days and it was successful, but that's a pretty short time period, now we're gonna adapt it, we're gonna adapt it. And in this case, we're gonna... We call this thing reading homework first, that's the name of the intervention or change idea. Now, instead of five days, we're gonna do this for 10 days, and then one other piece of the Act is going back to the appreciation for a system component, that you can improve one part of a system and destroy the rest of it, that sort of idea. We're focused on reading. And everything else was pretty good when we started this focus, but we wanna look at James' whole system. In this case, we're talking about grades, so we're not gonna do sight of writing class and math class, and science and social studies, those types of things, because we're all focused only on reading, so we added that as a sort of a second component to the second cycle so we're gonna run a little longer. We're also gonna add his other grades to the data we're collecting just to make sure that those things stay on track.   0:30:53.4 AS: And one of the lessons I've learned, John, in the stock market where I basically spent most of my life is that you have to also double-check that your process didn't go wrong in some particular area or is biased, for instance, just the fact that we're paying attention to James... And maybe the teacher is gonna grade things slightly different now because they know that we're looking and we're trying for improvement, and so you also have to ask questions and try to understand where the biases are because you may come to a conclusion, "Wow, this is great." And then you wanna think, "I'm gonna apply this more across more students or across more systems," and then you find out that it starts to fail and why does it fail because there was some kind of fatal flaw in the process. Do you have any thoughts on that?   0:31:43.1 JD: Yeah, I think that goes back that I think... Something we've talked about very early-on in this series, maybe in episode one or two. This idea is there are goals for accountability and then there's goals for improvement, and I think... Now bias can happen at any point, for sure, because we are paying attention to this more, but when you're in a system and the goals are accountability-focused, you're much more likely to get that sort of nefarious or "I'm gonna change my behavior, maybe not in the best way, because I have to meet this goal - my job's at stake, or... "   0:32:30.2 AS: In other words, when you talk about goals for accountability, let's say that you went to that teacher and said, "You're gonna get a bonus if this one particular case is able to really improve." Okay, now you've brought in a whole another element into this thing.   0:32:41.1 JD: Yeah, that would be the carrot side or the stick side, you know, "If this kid's homework doesn't improve, you're gonna get a bad rating." Something like that, and that... Like I said, I think there's still always potential for bias or doing some things subconsciously in terms of how hard your grading him or something like that, but I think it's much less likely to happen if we're sitting down and saying as a group, "Hey, what can we do to improve James' approach to reading class?" Versus those things that we just talked about, whether it's a carrot or a stick, a ranking that could be impacted, those types of things.   0:33:20.1 JD: I think in focusing on improvement-oriented goals, you're much less likely to sort of see that... See that type of behavior. I think a lot of it goes back to what's the aim, what's the aim or objective of the PDSA, what's the aim of your system in general, what's the orientation you have in terms of how you manage as a principal, the teachers or the teachers managing the students, I think that's where you have to be careful. And this sort of improvement orientation, I think helps overall rating and ranking accountability-driven system.   0:33:58.4 AS: So let me try to summarize a little bit about what we've talked about, and for the listeners, this is kind of our way of trying to make sure that we all learn from what John's sharing here. So the first thing you were telling the story about how it's important when eighth graders leave because you're preparing them for high school, and you talked about the idea of being on track and when somebody starts to fall that it's hard to bounce back, and then you identified James.   0:34:26.8 AS: And then you said, "Okay, we saw something sliding there from a B to a D, and that was his reading grade," and you thought, "What could we do about this?" And your first reaction was to sit back in your offices looking at the data and thinking about it, but instead you say, "Well, let's just bring him in here and talk to him." So this is the secret weapon you're talking about is getting the student involved, then you went through a PDSA, so let's just try to review that briefly, so the plan is, you guys came up with an idea and you wrote it down, and you had...   0:34:58.6 AS: Like who, what, where, when? So that it was clear what was gonna be done, also you made a prediction, because if you don't make a prediction, you don't have some sort of theory, it's very difficult to really understand what happened, and as Dr Deming says, "Without a theory, there is no knowledge." And you also had a plan for collecting the data too, to make sure that you had that. Then Do, meaning that you ran the tests and James did what was planned... In this case, it went well, 'cause he actually did it, and then after that, you have to Study where...   0:35:36.1 AS: After the test was run, so the test has to be run first, the Do has to happen first, then you started to compare the outcome to your prediction, and as you said, it was slightly better than the prediction that you had made, and then you came to the Act section, where you had to think, "Well, do I abandon... " "Do we abandon this? Do we adapt it? Or do we adopt it?" And part of what you said was that it's about adapting a little bit, maybe and saying, "Okay, what we've... " "We've identified this as reading homework first, maybe now we're gonna test that on a 10-day basis," but you also had to think about it.   0:36:07.9 AS: This is a critical part, you had to think holistically, you had to think systems thinking, because your objective was not to increase the performance in one area at the cost of another, so you had to look at it holistically, and finally, we talked about the risks that something like, this can go wrong. And if you're tying goals to accountability to the people involved, and all of a sudden they're being punished or rewarded based upon the outcome of that result, it's gonna be much more risk that it's not gonna go properly compared to looking at goals for improvement, anything that you would add to that?   0:36:45.2 JD: I think that was a really perfect summary. I think it was spot on. Spot on and the only thing I'd say is not every PDSA is gonna work that smoothly, I think, but it illustrates the key points of what a PDSA is, how simple it can be, how to connect ideas that are sort of in the universe to reality, what actually happens in actual classrooms and schools when you try something. I think that's the power of the PDSA. I think you nailed it in your summary.   0:37:17.2 AS: So ladies and gentlemen, now it's your turn. What's something that you can do a PDSA on, just like John has described to us? And what improvements could that bring, and most importantly for the teachers and the administrators out there, my question to you is, do you realize that engaging students is the secret weapon for improvement? John, on behalf of everyone at the Deming Institute, I wanna thank you again for this discussion and for listeners remember to go to deming.org to continue your journey. This is your host, Andrew Stotz, and I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming, and that is people are entitled to joy in work.  

Dr. Deming encouraged lifelong learning for everyone, but particularly for managers and leaders. In this episode, David and Andrew talk about Deming's fourth point in his list for The Role of the Manager of People After the Transformation: "He is an unceasing learner. He encourages his people to study. He provides when possible and feasible seminars and courses for advancement of learning. He encourages continued education in college or university for people that are so inclined." TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.4 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today, I'm continuing my discussion with David P. Langford, who has devoted his life to applying Dr. Deming's philosophy to education, and he offers us his practical advice for implementation. The topic for today is Learning to Learn. And just as a reminder, we're going through the section of The New Economics third edition, it starts on page 86 for those who want to follow on, and for those who have the second edition, it starts on page 125, and the title of the list that we're going through is called Role of a Manager of People. This is the new role of a manager of people after transformation. And we are now talking about the fourth point on this list, which reads as follows: He is an unceasing learner. He encourages his people to study. He provides when possible and feasible seminars and courses for advancement of learning. He encourages continued education in college or university for people that are so inclined. David, take it away. 0:01:16.8 David Langford: Yes, good to be back, Andrew. So I always have to caution people, Dr. Deming wasn't into all the pronouns and everything that we use today, so he just means everyone. So if you're a manager... Yeah. So all of these points I, over the years, have taken to heart, and even as a classroom teacher I started figuring out, "Where do I start? What do I do?" Once I have been to a Deming seminar everybody wants to know, "What do you do Monday morning?" And these are really good places to begin, and you certainly can't do them all at once. It's sort of an inter-related system, and so when you start concentrating, you're always wondering, "Well, what do I do next as a manager?" Go back to one of these points to say, "Okay, have I done anything about that?" And so when you think about your role as a manager and if you think about yourself as a teacher, you're a manager, you're administrator, you're a manager, he's talking about... Anyway, if you're a parent, you're a manager of a family, right. And so you wanna think about it in those terms all the time. 0:02:31.2 DL: I never forgot even the very first seminar or the very first time I ever got to talk to Deming, and he was really interested in talking to me because there weren't very many educators at the time talking with him, and he was an educator. He was taught at New York University for 40 years, so I was really interested in talking to him about education and we were just chatting about the application of his thinking and theories to education. And while we're talking, he says, "Just a moment," and he pulls out this little notebook and he starts writing down what we were talking about. And I was just like, "Dr. Deming's writing down something I said, or we said, or we were talking about or whatever." And then come to find out his whole life he kept these little notebooks and sometimes if you were around them at the end of the day and people would be talking, he'd pull out his notebook and he'd say to people, "Look what I learned today." And that was just - flabbergasted about that, and not only is this guy 90, 91, 92 years old, but he was actually living this point every single day of his life. He was consulting... 0:03:48.8 AS: Yeah. And you can realize that when you read his work too, because he's always highlighting, someone said in a seminar or so and so said this, and that you now picture, he's taking a note and then later he's put in into his book. 0:04:03.2 DL: Yeah. When you're at the seminars, you hear him say, I'm eternally grateful to so and so for this point, or the Taguchi loss function, or all these amazing economical ways of thinking and management and all those kinds of things. He's really great at giving credit like that, but he was also very great at explaining that, hey, he'd learn something new. Even at his age, 90 years old, he was still learning things that were new to him. 0:04:35.3 DL: I was living in Alaska, at the time we were remodeling a house built in 1898. I happened to find a box of photographic plates in the attic, and when I was cleaning out stuff and everything, and these were late 1800s, and they were photographic plates on glass. The wedding that had taken place at the house that we then owned and we were remodeling, so that was pretty cool. As I was looking at the box, it said if you find any defect, anything... I can't remember exactly the wording on it but, "If you find anything wrong with these photographic plates, please contact us at this address, and also please add the box number of photographic plates, so we may find the person guilty of making the error and remove them." [laughter] 0:05:41.6 AS: What? [laughter] 0:05:41.6 AS: They're terminated. 0:05:44.4 DL: "Thereby improving the quality of our product." And this is... I'm not gonna say the name of the company, but it was a major company at the time, and I was so blown away by this so I took the box, took the plates out. I took the box to Dr. Deming at one of the seminars and brought it up to him and said, "I have a gift for you," and he said, "You do?" And I said, "Yes," and I told him where I found it, and I said, "I think you will really enjoy this label." And he read it and his mouth dropped open. He said, "Oh my god." I said, "I'm gonna give it to you as a gift." And he said, "Oh no, this is too valuable for you to give it to me." And then... So he made somebody go down and make a copy of it and turn it into an overhead thing, and he started using this at seminars because it was exactly everything that he was reversing in management thinking at the time, for the next 100 years he was reversing that thinking. 0:06:50.0 AS: It was just to put some context... 0:06:52.8 DL: And I was always so proud of that that I was one of those people that said... 0:06:57.3 AS: Look at this. 0:06:57.8 DL: Thanks to David Langford for this. That was my big contribution. 0:07:01.7 AS: There you go. And for the listeners out there who... To put this in a frame of reference, back in those days, the way that we presented, and I didn't so much 'cause I was pretty young when I went to my first Deming seminar, is that we had acetates or meaning transparent pieces of A4 or letterhead paper, letter paper, the size of that, it was just a clear plastic thing and then you would write on it, and then you would put it onto a screen which would then project up on to a wall. And so it was either that or we had rollers where you could roll the acetate across, so you'd write a little bit and then you'd roll it, and so that was the way that he did his presentations in those days. 0:07:46.5 DL: Yes. He was constantly rolling forward, rolling backwards and drawing right on the screen and working through, so... He was well-known for being very, I'm going to say, curt, but very direct, very short with people. When they asked a question, like people would line up at different points in time and get ready to ask him a question, somebody would come up and ask a question, and he'd say something like, "We already covered that this morning. Where were you, in the parking lot? Next question." 0:08:23.2 AS: Yeah, which is kinda scary for people in the audience. 0:08:25.4 DL: Yeah. Well, a lot of people viewed that as, "Oh well, he's not really interested in people learning about things." But no, it's just the opposite. If you are trying to ask a question simply to discredit him or to take him down in front of, or make yourself look better in front of other people, or things like that, he had no time for you and he would openly say, "I don't have time for this. I'm 90 years old or 92 years old. I don't... " 0:08:57.0 AS: I'm on a mission. 0:08:58.7 DL: "I don't have much time left and I don't have time to waste on you." And he wouldn't ever say that... 0:09:00.7 AS: But he would... 0:09:01.7 DL: But he would cut people off, for sure. 0:09:04.8 AS: And I remember that I felt pretty safe as a young guy with pretty innocent questions coming to him. I felt like he was very welcoming to the majority of people. But there was a certain thing that either someone that completely missed what was going on and he could get a little bit annoyed with that, or if it was someone at a senior level that should know this and they don't know it and, "I'm gonna make sure you never forget this interaction." And I remember the one that I remember from being in the seminar was when someone got up and said, "Since you're the father of TQM, I wanted to ask you a question about X, Y, Z." And Dr. Deming looked at him and he says, "What is TQM?" 0:09:48.7 DL: Yeah. He knew full well. 0:09:50.9 AS: And he goes, "Wait, wait, what? Wait, what? I don't understand 'cause I didn't know what he meant." 0:09:56.4 DL: Yeah. Well, not only was he an avid learner like that himself, he wanted everybody else to be like that too. You wanna do continually questioning, continually trying to understand, continually learning, apply, thinking on a level that most people were never taught to think on that level. 0:10:19.3 AS: I wanted to ask you a question about this from a bigger picture perspective, and that is to say that you're a learning company or you're an unceasing learner or we're into learning and all that. It's such an easy thing to say. 0:10:36.9 DL: Cliche. 0:10:39.4 AS: Yeah, it's cliche, yes. But it feels good to be able to say, we're a learning organization. We're trying to learn. But the fact is, is that he's... The reason why he's raising this is maybe most people really are learning or they're not a learning organization. Can you put it in that framework before we get into a little bit more detail on it? 0:10:58.8 DL: Yeah, absolutely. I thought the first time I went to see Deming, I was a year out from getting my Master's degree, right. And so I'm thinking, well, yeah, I'm a learner, right? I got my Master's degree and like you have a whole bookshelf behind you, yet people just listening can't see it, but you have a ton of books behind you, and I might have an entire library here myself, etcetera. And so I'm a learner, but at that time, I suddenly had this realization in probably the very first four-day seminar, I had never read anything that wasn't assigned to me. I've been going through school my whole life or being a teacher myself and teaching a curriculum or dictating what other people should read based on that curriculum, but I'd been... I don't know, probably since I was a little kid that I just went to a library and looked around and just picked out a book I wanted to read. And that started really my journey of thinking, "Okay, I have to be just learning all the time, I have to be reading all the time and thinking all the time," and have never forgotten that. And so that also causes you to have a very open mind about things. 0:12:23.7 DL: In the politically charged realm that we are now, there are so many people that you can't even talk about the opposite point of view. It's just a complete shut down of, "No, I'm not gonna talk... I'm not even gonna talk about that." I think Deming would just be shocked and dismayed about that, that if you can't argue with your boss he's not worth working for. 0:12:53.8 AS: Yeah. And also as a person that's lived outside of the US for many years and look back at the US, I realize that the collision of ideas and opinions is actually the whole process of learning. 0:13:09.0 DL: That's the whole point. Yes. 0:13:10.5 AS: That is how... That is kind of the history of how we've acquired new knowledge. 0:13:18.9 DL: Quickly and move a society for it or a business forward or whatever it might be. And so what he's talking about here in a company or a school, etcetera, if you're not constantly encouraging people to think and to learn and to understand, you're gonna become stagnant or not only stagnant, you're gonna go backwards, and I think about things. 0:13:44.1 AS: Can you explain this again? Going back to the big picture. I bet you that if you and I did a survey of top US companies that are successful, or the companies they're gonna all say... They're gonna all say, we're a learning organization. 0:13:58.5 DL: Right. 0:13:58.6 AS: And I just want to understand... 0:14:00.5 DL: When I started this journey, yeah, I studied Toyota because Deming had done a lot of work with Toyota and everything at the time. And one of the things I learned from one of the managers there, I said, "Well, how much time do you spend in training and development of employees?" And he said, "20% of the time." He said, "We're hoping to get to 40% of the time." "What? You mean 20% to 40% of the time you're actually training, developing people, giving them information, etcetera, instead of actually producing their products?" That didn't make any sense. So I went back to my school, I did an analysis, how much time did we actually spend with our staff and faculty in training, and it came up to be like 5% of the school year was actually spent in us training them in new concepts or ways to think, etcetera. 0:15:00.5 AS: And it's a great point... 0:15:03.8 DL: And I thought how much time do we spend training the students in thinking? 0:15:09.6 AS: Yeah. 0:15:10.4 DL: Well, zero. 0:15:10.6 AS: Yeah. It's a great point to stop for a moment for the listeners and the viewers to ask yourself, how many hours, what percent of the time, of the week, of the month, of the year do you spend or does your school or your firm spend in learning and training, in both training and education? I bet you it's not 20%. 0:15:39.5 DL: Well, the students that I was working with, these were just high school kids, and so we were going through these points and we're having this discussion, and I showed them the data, and they said, "Well, when do we get to learn?" And... "So what are you talking about? You're going to school." And they said, "No. You're learning all this stuff about Deming and discussing it and watching videos and everything. When do we get to do that?" And I realized I wasn't doing that with students, and so I put them to work because the teachers all said, "Oh, we don't have time for that. We're already crammed. We can't get through the curriculum. We don't have time for anything like that," and so I put the students to work to come up with a new master schedule and then come back and present it to the staff, and they came up with two... I think it was 60 or 90-minute sessions per week that they wanted to come together and just and learn, and it was just an amazing way to think about it. 0:16:42.7 DL: So one of those sessions I had each week with the entire student body, and basically I'd show them a Deming film or I'd show them something new or something that's happening in education, and I'd put them into groups and have them discuss about it, and what do you think about that and how could that be applied here, and what should we do differently? And then the other session was a session where they wanted to go anywhere that they needed to go in the building to get help and catch up on anything they needed to catch up on. And this is totally a foreign concept because we were constantly following every kid down, "Where are you going? You're going to the bathroom. Here's a bathroom pass and you're gonna go here and... " What? We're going to actually trust these kids to do stuff? So it took us probably a whole year to convince the staff, the administration and everybody that, "Okay, well, let's at least try this." Right. 0:17:41.0 DL: So the first time we ran a session like that where the students could go any... They could go to the science room, they could go to the computer lab, any place they needed to go to learn and catch up and get help or work or however they wanted to do, but they just had to be learning during that hour session. Well, the principal went around and actually counted kids in all these rooms and everything else, and lo and behold found out there were like 10 kids that took off and went to town. Right. So he calls an emergency meeting after that day and says to the whole staff, "We can't keep doing this. We got 10 kids that took off and just blew the whole thing off, and so we gotta change the whole master schedule and redo it and everything, and we gotta start over again." And I'll never forget 'cause we're just sitting there, sort of stunned. Trying to think, "Well, okay, now what are we gonna do? And then we're gonna have to redo everything." 0:18:46.0 DL: And all of a sudden, the science teacher said, "You know, in my room, I must have had 60 kids doing science, and he said, I'd say a majority of them weren't even doing stuff that was assigned to Science class. They were exploring all kinds of new concepts, asking me questions about all kinds of things in Science." And English teacher said, "We were having the greatest discussion about applied Romeo and Juliet to modern issues." She said, "I never had time for that in my classroom, but a whole bunch of us just ended up sitting around and we just started talking about the application of these things in a modern society." And almost every single teacher said the same thing. And then finally somebody said, "Well, how many students we have?" And I think at the time we had about 300 students, so 10 of them left. That means 290 students were actually engaged in learning and doing exactly what we want them to do, and we wanna throw this out because of special causes. And that's when I realized, oh, special and common cause - people are getting it. Our training is actually seeping into the terminology and the way of thinking about people. So we didn't throw it out and we kept it, and within a few weeks there wasn't anybody gone, because the kids that had took off came back. 0:20:19.3 AS: They got it out of their system. 0:20:21.5 DL: While the other kids said, we're talking about the great time they had, and not only that they were catching up on work that they didn't have time to normally, and all kinds of other things that went on. It even happenened in sports, a whole bunch of them went to the gym and just worked on basketball techniques, and even the PE teacher was amazed that I just had all these kids in their learning and wanting to know about, "How do you do a shot and how do you do this and how do you make this happen?" And teachers were just sort of dumbfounded about this, that students would actually learn on their own without being given a grade or forced to do something. 0:21:01.9 AS: And what I wanted to also think about is the idea that if we read the 14 points and trying to understand what Dr. Deming is telling us, there's this, number one, constancy of purpose, there's this real focus on improvement, there's a focus on the customer, not the competitor, to try to improve what you're delivering to the customer, and then you combine this focus on learning and training. You bring these things together and in some way, it's almost like you've created kind of a tunnel vision that's between your company and the customer and your company and the suppliers, and it's this obsession on these things. And at first, it's hard to understand, but as you start to see this obsession you realize this type of focus can... And because you're learning, everything you're gaining it's taking you to another level and another level, and then you're applying it for your customer, for your student, for your school, and next thing you know, you do that over and over again, and you will be at a very different place, and you'll also be at a place where people really feel great about it. That's not what's happening in learning organizations, companies that say we're a learning organization. Tell me more about that? 0:22:25.4 DL: Well, if you're continually learning like that as an organization and constantly expanding the ways of thinking, etcetera, when you get to major hurdles like Covid, etcetera, you have a whole staff, learned staff that's used to learning and used to figuring things out and used to thinking and coping with disasters or anything that goes on, and so the system doesn't fall apart, that's what I saw happening over and over in companies and schools and universities that I worked with for a long time, that those organizations could just overcome obstacles that would just be a huge thing to other systems, because they weren't used to learning or coping or understanding. They're usually used to just being told what to do. The same thing in education, the curriculum is coming down from the state or the national edict on X and... Oh, well, we just got... So they just learned to constantly be in a response mode, so they're not in a mode of constantly innovating, thinking, what can we do next. 0:23:41.7 DL: So I know in my school, I started... Not only did we have this one time a week where we could work with all the faculty and...or all the students, we just started having a faculty come in and learn with the students, which was a novel idea. Right? 'Cause normally we segregate them out and the faculty goes off and learns this stuff and comes back and does it to people. Right? But we just set up this learning session with students, faculty, everybody and faculty were learners and lo and behold, that's probably the best model that you could be in a school, is to show students that you're constantly learning, that you're constantly reading, you're constantly figuring something. "Hey, I read this thing last night. This book, it's really great. Da da da da da." 0:24:38.9 DL: I didn't fully realize the impact of what we had done until after the first year that we'd really tried to implement this and get stuff going. And during the summer time, teachers are usually... The school year ends and all the kids leave and you never hear from them until start the next school year up, right. So I'm out mowing the lawn in the summer time and my wife comes out with the phone and she says, "Hey, one of your students is on the phone." Well, I'm thinking that there must be some kind of accident that happened or something that goes on. And I'll never forget because when I'm talking to this student, I actually stopped. I was looking at the phone like, "Who are you?" Because he said, "Hey, I read this book and I just wanted to know if you read and there's some really interesting concepts that I picked up on it and wanna know if you'd heard about it." And I was so stunned 'cause 15 years, no student had ever done that. It never ever come up to me like that? Well, that summer, I had 12 students do that. Twelve of those kids called me over the summer, and I started to learn... When they'd call up, "Hey, what have you been learning?" And they, boom, they just tell you, because we had taught them to be learners, learning to learn. 0:26:00.9 AS: And what about people that are listening that are in, let's say, public schools or other places, and they feel constrained, they've got the mandates from on high, as you mentioned, and I think what I guess what I'm hearing is the idea that you may be less constrained than you think in that there may be more room to do and still be able to follow what you got to follow. What would you advise to them? 0:26:27.6 DL: Yeah. Well, if you have management of your organization, etcetera, that wants nothing to do with this and they're not really interested in making big changes or doing anything differently, etcetera, that doesn't preclude you from doing something as a teacher and I did the same thing. I'll give you an example, one of the classes I was... I can't remember the title of it now, but it's media management or something like that. I can't remember what we called it. But I just set up the first 10 minutes of class, I said the first 10 minutes of class we would get all the newspapers from the library that were used up the previous two or three days. And you got 10 minutes to go through the paper and pick out the most relevant things happening, and then share that with the rest of the group, and then we're gonna talk about Deming Management as applied to those issues. And it was such an amazing, amazing thing because the kids would talk about how stupid some of the things were happening politically, or this was happening, and it was totally contrary to what Deming talked about, and then they talk about what should happen, etcetera. 0:27:37.6 DL: So after about three or four years, I started taking students out on a tour, and we'd take any students who wanted to go and we'd raise money throughout the year and everything else, but we wouldn't go just on a field trip just to go to Disneyland or something. We went to universities, we went to major corporations, we went to places where we could learn stuff. And I'll never forget, the kids were at Motorola, Motorola, I think, it was in Phoenix, Arizona. And they had heard all about us and everything, and they set up all this thing, and our students would come in and give this whole presentation about Deming management applied to education. Well, when we got there, we walked into this room that they had set up for us, and there was literally a red carpet laid out, and in the back of the room was this whole banquet of seafood and just huge tables of food and everything else. Kids all walked in. And the CEO from Motorola is there and everything. And the kid says, "Who's this for?" And he says, "It's for you, we think you're the most important people in the country right now." 0:28:49.6 DL: These kids, a lot of them Native American kids, a lot of them from very rural background, you could literally see them grow 14 feet in that instance. I'll never forget because after we finished our presentation the CEO got up and he said, "I wanna know two things." He said, "Number one, how do I get my son in your school because he's not learning this in his school? And number two, I'm gonna set up a room across the hall, and I just wanna start interviewing people so you can come to work for us when you get out of high school." And some of those kids did actually get hired and go there. 0:29:32.3 DL: I'll tell you another story. The same thing, we took a group of kids to Texas and we went to one of the, I think, it was one of the oil companies, I think it was. And so the whole thing was, we said, "Hey, we'd like to come in and give you a presentation about what we're doing, how we're applying quality methods and thinking to education. We'd also like your managers to give us a presentation about what goes on here, what do you do, how do you apply these things and work things through." I'll never forget, we've finished our presentation at 45 minutes, kids were very efficient, they were all... That was part of it. Everybody was helping everybody do the presentations and work through that. And so their manager, I can't remember his title, but it had something to do with quality, the quality manager for the corporation or something, he gets up and start... He's got his presentation stuff and he starts giving a normal business presentation after these kids giving multimedia presentations for 45 minutes. And he talks for about 30 seconds about some of the things they're doing, and he said... He said, "Forget it," he said, "You guys already know more about this than we could ever hope to know about it." So he said, "What we wanna do is we've got all of our executives in the room, we just wanna pair up with these kids, high school kids, 15, 16, 17 years old, and have conversations about this and why it's applied. 0:31:00.3 DL: And I'll never forget, I walked by this girl that was talking to this high level manager at this petroleum corporation and they're arguing about intrinsic motivation and how employees have to be extrinsically motivated and everything else, and this girl, 16 years old is not backing down and she's just taking this guy to task. And finally they end their conversation and she leaves, and I walked over to him and I said, "Do you realize she's only 16 years old?" And he just looked at me, he said, "I forgot all about that." 0:31:34.1 AS: Yeah. 0:31:39.2 DL: See. And... 0:31:39.4 AS: Potential. The potential. 0:31:40.2 DL: Yeah. Deming often said that profound knowledge is not limited to age, and I didn't know what that meant for a long time until I started seeing young kids adapt these... Or absorb these concepts and take them to heart and be able to do it much better than us as adults, learned a different management thinking and we had to sort of transform ourselves. These kids they didn't know anything different. I think somebody asked one of the students one time how did you learn to do this or how did this happen or whatever? And they just looked at him and said, "Well, doesn't everybody do this?" 0:32:20.9 AS: Yeah. We stamped that out. 0:32:24.6 DL: They couldn't understand. 0:32:26.3 AS: We stamped that out at an early age. 0:32:26.3 DL: I'll give you one more quick story. We took the kids to visit a huge high school in California at the time, and that was probably about around 1991 or something like that. So computer technology was really starting to get into the schools, but our schools are already one-to-one technology and we had advanced technologies for all kinds of stuff and STEM and things like that. And so the principal is... Big high school in California, a pretty brand new high school, that's why we went there to cut and I wanted them to see what a big high school looked like, and we were going around, and he goes and he says, "We're really proud of this room," and he goes and unlocks the door. And this was in the spring probably around about March, unlocks the door and turns on the light and there's like 60 computers in there, all set up, all ready to go and everything. And one of the kids says, "Well, where is everybody? Why aren't people using them?" He said, "Oh well, you know, we haven't got the teachers trained and we're not ready to start using this, but we got it all purchased, we got it all set up and we're gonna start using it for... We're starting, using it next fall in September." And I'll never forget one of our students said, "Can we just take all those back with us and we'll ship them back to you in September." [laughter] 0:33:48.9 AS: Yeah, exactly. 0:33:50.8 DL: Said, "We know what to do with those." 0:33:52.3 AS: And if you unleash group of kids in there, before you know that they would be training the teachers on that. 0:33:57.7 DL: Yeah, absolutely, they'd be training the staff about how to do the stuff so. 0:34:01.2 AS: Yeah. I wanted to wrap up with a little bit of kind of discussion about the idea of... I'm gonna talk briefly just about business, just 'cause that's something I understand pretty well, and that is a lot of times when managers in businesses see the same mistakes happening, they're like, "We've got to stop. Who is responsible for this?" Or as you started the whole discussion, "We got to get rid of the person who's the problem." Or, "Why is everybody making these same mistakes or whatever?" And that's really the problem actually at leadership level, really it's the idea of how can we study this situation, how can we get together, pool our resources and our knowledge and make some scientific style analysis, like a PDSA, a Plan-Do-Study-Act, and try to understand and learn here what the problem is and how can we solve this problem. And that is the process of acquiring knowledge through the scientific method, but acquiring knowledge is meaningless if it's not continually applied, so then we take that knowledge and we build it into our training of the new workers or new employees that are gonna be in that area, so we never go back and make the same mistake. We've fixed it permanently, and we've trained people to another level. But of course we're gonna come up with another common problem that's showing up all the time, and we do the same thing, and then we improve that and we gain knowledge on that, and then we train so that everybody's operating at that next level. 0:35:33.4 AS: Now, when you do this over a period of years with this constancy of purpose of continually focus on learning, what ends up happening is that you have actually acquired a large amount of knowledge in your organization that does not exist in your competitor. 0:35:52.2 DL: That's right. 0:35:52.4 AS: In addition, you've codified it, you've quantified this to be in the behavior of your employees. So let's say you do that for one, two, three years, all of a sudden you have created a deep level of knowledge on a particular topic that your competitor does not have that deep of a level of knowledge on that particular topic. Now they may be... If they're a good competitor then they may be learning in another area, but let's just say that most new companies aren't learning. And the end of, end result is that you start to build a competitive advantage and that... 0:36:26.3 DL: Even though. 0:36:27.2 AS: Competitive advantage just shows that... That competitive advantage just could last for decades. 0:36:34.7 DL: Yeah. Even though defeating your competitor was not your aim. Your aim was learning and getting better all the time, but by doing that you became a very fierce competitor, you became very good at solving problems, moving forward, understanding new concepts, applying things quickly, adapting to new technology, whatever it might be. You become a very good competitor even though you're not actively trying to compete. People sometimes blame Deming saying, "Oh, you don't want... You're against competition," 'cause he talked about cooperation a lot. And he said, "No," he said, "The best thing you could have is a good competitor. Right? Somebody else that's innovating, somebody else that's thinking something. Getting you to think differently about things." So the great irony is the greater you cooperate and learn together, the greater you compete, even though you're not necessarily trying to compete. You see the same thing in sports. We have March Madness going on now. If you listen to coaches at the end of games or coaches getting ready to play really big games coming up, they'll say things like, "Well, this will be a good learning experience for us, or this will be a really good test for us." Those are the really good coaches because they're looking at every single game about, "What can we learn, how can we apply that to the next one, and how can we move forward?" 0:38:03.0 DL: One of those trips I took with students, I took them to an electronics corporation in Phoenix, I can't remember the name of it, I don't really remember what they were making, but it was very sophisticated electronics with chips and all of that kind of stuff in a dust-free environment and it's a huge room in which these panels... I think it was very sophisticated art tablets that they were making, but they had all these lights up around the room and everything red, yellow and different things, and so most... Every one of the stations had green lights and everything, and then all of a sudden a yellow light came on at one of the stations. And I said to the guy giving me the tour, I says, "Well, what happens now?" And he says, "Well, immediately, any managers that are available, we rush to that center to find out what's going on. There's an error or a problem or somebody has observed something that is going on there, and we try to actively fix it and try to understand it and fix it for tomorrow too and make sure it's not gonna happen again. 0:39:13.3 DL: And I said, "What's the red light for?" And he says, "Well, anybody in the entire corporation has the ability to stop the entire line and turn on the red light. And when the red light comes on the whole place shuts down." And this was like 300 employees that they had. The whole place shuts down and everybody has the authority to do that. And I said, "What happens then?" He said... Then he said, "All management empties out, comes down in a learning environment and tries to study what's going on, what has happened, how do we fix this, how do we make this." Well, that's totally different than if you make an error or you screw up, you might get fired. And if that's the case, you're not gonna share an error or a problem that's happening, right? You're gonna keep that and hide that or cover it up or do something else, because you have managers that don't understand this thinking so. 0:40:08.7 AS: Yeah. I saw just the opposite of that when I was working in Pepsi, that in the production and process, basically, you constantly running around trying to patch things up and not raise them to a higher level, and so you're constantly making the same mistake. I wanna wrap up this discussion by just going back to point number four now that we've been through so much about it. So this is, again, we've been reviewing the role of a manager of people. And the fourth point that he talks about here is, he is an unceasing learner, he encourages people to study, he provides when possible and feasible seminars and courses for advancement of learning, and he encourages continued education in college or university for people that are so inclined. David, is there anything you would add as we wrap up this discussion? 0:41:03.6 DL: Yeah. He does mention college or university classes, things like that, but he also was a very strong proponent that they just need to be learning. Learning a new language, learning new concepts, new things that are happening because you have active minds then and you have people making new connections and thinking, and it does something to your personality and the way you think about things, etcetera. And so he just said it could be anything, they can be learning basket weaving, but they just need to be learning all the time. 0:41:38.2 AS: Fantastic. Well, David, on behalf of everyone at the Deming Institute, I wanna thank you again for the discussion. For listeners, remember to go to deming.org to continue your journey. And listeners can also learn more about David at langfordlearning.com. This is your host, Andrew Stotz, and I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming, "People are entitled to joy in work."

Most people come into education familiar with classroom management and curriculum, but the concept of Profound Knowledge changes the way you view the entire field and your part in it. In the second episode of the Deming in Schools Case Study, Andrew and John talk about applying the System of Profound Knowledge to education.  0:00:02.0 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz, and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today, I'm continuing my discussion with John Dues, who is part of the new generation of educators striving to apply Dr. Deming's principles to unleash student joy in learning. The topic for today is applying Deming's system of profound knowledge in education. John, take it away. 0:00:26.8 John Dues: Andrew, it's great to be back. And excited to talk about this. One of the things I was talking about after... Thinking about after our last conversation was a moment I had where I realized as I worked with some senior leaders here is we have these two buckets of knowledge, one bucket I would call subject matter knowledge, and we talked about this a little bit last time, by subject matter, I don't mean knowing, reading or social studies or writing, but I mean the things that you need to know in your field, so for us it's classroom management, how to deliver a lesson, how to design a curriculum, those types of things, and that's always sort of been a part of my work and gained proficiency in that bucket over time, but what I realized in studying Deming is there's this whole other bucket or type of knowledge, what Deming called Profound Knowledge and that was missing across most of my career, and it was a revelation to understand that, "Hey, we need both of these things together to have any chance at improving our schools." 0:01:35.4 AS: It's interesting because the whole focus in most of education is to become a subject matter expert, and that's what's rewarded, that's what we're doing. And this whole way of, how do we see the world? Is such a unique thing. Maybe you can just go through a little bit on the system of profound knowledge as when you first came to it, and what does it mean to you?   0:02:04.4 JD: Yeah, I've been studying it for a handful of years now. Increasingly, it became this sort of foundational philosophy, and it really changed how I view the world, honestly, it wasn't only sort of in my work, although that's sort of where I started thinking most about Deming's ideas. It changed also sort of how I thought about my personal life, family, my own kids in school and their experience in school, so I had a profound impact on just about everything I was doing in my life, that's pretty foundational to discover a philosophy like this... 0:02:51.3 AS: Yeah, that's... I remember when I first understand... For me, it was variation and randomness that really kind of hit me because I was also working in the stock market, and I could see that there was a lot of randomness in the movement of stock prices, and then it was like all of a sudden, what I learned from the randomness aspect and the variation aspect was just like, it's like there's carpeting that we're walking on that nobody even realizes it's underlying everything, and it is this randomness, and we are trained to reject randomness because we're rugged individualists who are setting our own path and it's up to us to make a difference. And that type of thinking basically has to reject the role of randomness, so I know what you're saying about... That started to change the way I viewed the world. Continue on. 0:03:54.2 JD: I think building off what you're saying, there's a variation component to that, and that was sort of an entry point for me too as I read Donald Wheeler's Understanding Variation, which is sort of completely changed how I looked at numbers and data in our work here in schools, but I also think of what I'm hearing in what you're saying is complex systems, and so I think there was sort of an appreciation for systems thinking prior to Deming, but not in the same way, but I think for a lot of folks it's if we do A to B then C is gonna happen. And that's just not how things sort of unfolded in a complex system, be it schools or a company or a society or whatever you may be looking at, if you do A, then that may impact B, C, D, E, F, G in a certain way, and the outcome is gonna be impacted by all of those things, all of those changes, and I think that's sort of... You can start to see that when you start to understand variation, and then that other component, or first component of Deming's Profound Knowledge is Appreciation for a System. 0:05:07.4 JD: And I think that's sort of what he's getting at, that it's really hard to find causal links between things and if we're gonna search for those, then we need to appreciate our organizations as a system, how all of the departments or all of the grade levels in the case of a school are working together or not, and how something you do in one part of that system can impact positively or negatively, other parts of the system, even if what you did in the part of the system was a positive for that part of the system, they can actually destroy the system, and so all of these things were revelations or at least confirmations of things that maybe were in the back of my mind, before I had this understanding in writing from studying Deming's philosophy. 0:06:00.7 AS: And for the listeners or the viewers who aren't familiar with the System of Profound Knowledge, maybe you can just review the four points of it or the four parts, a little bit more. 0:06:12.2 JD: Yeah, System of Profound Knowledge. So four components, Appreciation for a System, Knowledge about Variation, Theory of knowledge and Psychology, and he called them a System of Profound Knowledge because the four components work together, that's the system part. And Profound Knowledge, what I learned over time, is that, what he meant by that is just sort of the deep understanding that comes through viewing your organization through the lens of Profound Knowledge, so when you bring those four things together, you get a different view of your organization, than without Profound Knowledge. And without Profound Knowledge, you are often misled, you often don't know when to react or not to react to something that's going on in your organization or system, with Profound Knowledge you now have a management philosophy by which to interpret that data that comes streaming at you, no matter what industry you're in, and gives you a way to map out how to react or again, not to react to that data. 0:07:18.8 AS: It makes me think there's a saying in Thai language about a frog under a coconut, and when you lift up the coconut, the frog kind of wants the coconut back on because that's their world. And I think about when you really come across the System of Profound Knowledge and you understand it, it's like that coconut comes off and you realize, Oh my God, I am part of a much bigger system, and all of a sudden things just open up and what was your experience when you first kind of started really realizing how this all works together. 0:08:00.3 JD: Well, maybe unlike the frog, I didn't wanna unsee it or I didn't want to be recovered, however, there certainly was... Well one, it took time for me to sort of understand what exactly Dr. Deming was saying, and I'm still trying to understand that fully, but the hardest thing was probably talking to people, really smart people, about Profound Knowledge and maybe them not sort of seeing the importance of it or the same level of importance that I thought that they should see or where we'll talk about it, it would be well-received, but then people would turn around and sort of revert back to the old way of thinking. And for me, it was just realizing that this just takes repeated practice, because it is really a completely new way of thinking. 0:09:00.9 JD: It's a completely new way to look at data or your systems, it's a completely new way to think about how do you bring new ideas to your organization, how do you test those ideas, it's really getting away from simple things like setting a goal without a method, it's appreciating the psychology of introducing changes to your organization. I found people are generally very open to new things, what they're not open to is being sort of yanked about constantly when we try this thing and that thing, and education has the same sort of problem in this area that other sectors like healthcare do, where the frontline people, teachers in our case, nurses in the case of healthcare where they're often being pulled this way and that with new initiatives to the point they get this initiative fatigue will wear people out and burn people out and then they leave because each leader comes in with their own pet idea and it's not grounded in this sort of solid philosophical foundation. 0:10:13.3 AS: One of the things that's interesting about the system of profound knowledge is that it can be a bit overwhelming for someone who's first coming upon it because it's like, Oh my God, there's a much bigger aim, and one of the reasons why we don't think in a systems way and why we do think silos is because it's easier, and so for some people it can feel like, Oh God, this is just overwhelming, and I'm just curious what your perspectives are on that, either for yourself or the people that you're working with there, and how do we make sure that you don't get overwhelmed by it? 0:10:57.6 JD: Yeah, it's a challenge because I originally came to the Deming Institute website and the profound knowledge page and went away because it didn't make sense to me initially, and it was two years later when I came back, and not that it was sort of some divine revelation, but I slowly, over time, it started to sink in, something caught my attention that this was worthy of study. So one thing I read, Dr. Deming said, you don't need to be eminent in all four areas or even any one of the four areas, but it does require serious study, so you're not gonna understand it in a day or a week or a month. I would also say anybody that gets serious about studying this philosophy, I would highly recommend reaching out to somebody that is further along in their understanding, and that's sort of a turning point, I think I mentioned in the last episode. Reaching out to Kelly Allen, who turned me on to David Langford that accelerated my learning, 'cause I could ask specific questions, and David could give me specific applications of Deming's ideas in schools, and that certainly helped to clarify a lot of things for me. 0:12:08.3 JD: So that's something I would highly recommend, but I would read widely, watch the videos, you can go to a four-day or sorry, two and half day seminar that the Institute does, and then reaching out to someone that is further along is something I'd highly recommend. 0:12:27.1 AS: Yeah, great advice. And just this podcast already is a starting point for the listeners out there. 0:12:33.2 JD: Yep, absolutely. 0:12:34.8 AS: One of the things that I say to my students in my valuation master class, they come to my class because it's like, Andrew, you got 30 years of experience as a financial analyst, and you were voted number one and you... This and that, and I really wanna learn from you. And when I come into class, I announce a couple of the things... And one of the things is I say, You Are Always Wrong. And I call it YAAW. And I try to help the students understand it, in the world of finance, there is no precision, like in the world of physics or the law of gravity or something like that, that you're always going to be wrong and therefore don't freak out over that. Understand that it's a system. The second thing that I tell the students, and this one I think really gets them, they don't really figure it out until the end, and that is in my class and in the world of finance, what I teach is, if I'm successful as a teacher in this specific area that I'm teaching, if you feel less confident when you finish my course, I've succeeded. 0:13:48.7 AS: And I think that students freak out because of I'm here to be more confident Andrew, and what I'm exposing them to is that it's a constant... We're walking on quick sand. We're operating in a world where even in the world of finance, just observing the world of finance, observing market prices and stuff can influence actions that we're taking in the market... Can influence market prices. So the complexity level is so high. 0:14:27.1 JD: Yeah, yeah, one of the things that makes me think of is sort of a... I don't know if I'd call it paradox, but one of the early places that I went even prior to sort of coming across, Deming's work is the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and they have it as their mission to bring the science of improvement to the education sector. And they have an annual Improvement Summit. The first time I went, I realized that they had this footer on all of their materials and it said, "Probably wrong, definitely incomplete." And that was a really great entry way into the science of improvement because that's the mentality you need when you start any type of improvement work, improvement project in your organization, and I sort of stole that idea and stuck it on all our materials. 0:15:27.8 JD: And I think the reaction from a lot of people first is similar to how you're describing the reaction of your students is that, wait a second, aren't you supposed to be an expert, don't you know what you're talking about? And I said, "No, that's not what this is about." This is about humbling yourself, realizing the complexity of the organizations that we're working in, and that at the outset of any improvement project, that there are gonna be things that you discover along the way that were completely unknown at the start, and so if you don't take that mindset and you rush in and you're sure of yourself, then you are set up for failure from the beginning, in my opinion. 0:16:09.7 AS: So if we go back to the title of this episode, Applying Deming's System of Profound Knowledge in Education, part of it is it starts to open you up beyond subject matter, and also it starts to help you understand that there's just a much more, a bigger world out there of influences that are driving us, and I think one of the things that's interesting about that is it... Young managers in the world of business are seeming to latch on to KPIs and feeling like it is a simple solution, we just define everybody's KPI, we nail them with it, we repeat it to them, we have them write it out in their goals and we measure it, and if they don't achieve it. Boom. And what Deming is teaching is just the opposite, that when you understand the system of profound knowledge, you understand that optimizing the output of any organization is a much more complex reality than just putting a KPI and a number on it. 0:17:18.8 JD: Yeah, I think of a colleague of a contemporary of Dr. Deming, who is still doing great work, Dr. Donald Wheeler said something to the effect of goal setting, KPI setting, goal setting is often an act of desperation, meaning like you don't know what else to do, so you set a goal, you don't have a method, you don't have a theory for how to improve, so you set this goal and then say something to the effect of, "I don't care how you get it done. Just get it done." Right, and then all hell breaks loose. And what do you think he's talking about is, if you don't understand the capability of your system, if you don't understand whatever area you're talking about, whatever area that KPI is in, if you don't understand how that data is varying over time, if you don't understand if there are just common causes, there are special causes in that data, you have no idea how to react nor do you know what your system was capable of the first place. 0:18:26.1 JD: That's sort of one of the sessions I led with leadership team here, and everybody kind of looks and says, Well, aren't we supposed to set goals? and there's really nothing wrong with setting goals in and of themselves, but we often set them in ways that are completely detached from reality, both in the magnitude of improvement that we're expecting and is a lack of understanding of how that same data has performed over time. 0:18:52.5 AS: Yeah, and it reminds me of Dr. Deming's statement of 'by what method?' 0:18:56.2 JD: By what method, yeah. 0:18:58.9 AS: So for, in wrapping up our discussion, I wanna go back and review some of what we've just talked about, so we're talking about applying the system of profound knowledge in education, and what you've talked about is the idea of coming into education, most people are very familiar with subject matter knowledge about classroom management and curriculum management and all that, but what was missing when you started your journey was this concept of Profound Knowledge, and once you started to understand it, it changed the way that you viewed the world, and then we just briefly talked about the idea, I wrote down something which was "probably wrong, definitely incomplete", and I would say that there are plenty of places where they think "definitely right. Probably complete." [laughter] 0:19:47.3 AS: And then you just mentioned the idea of setting goals, and I think Deming is not against goals, it's that goal is just one measure, I would say, if you set goals for individuals that incentivize them individually, you've created a big problem of competition, but most importantly, I think what you're saying is the idea of just setting a goal like, We wanna increase test scores by X or in my business, I want revenue growth to be up by 20% next year, the question really becomes by what method is there anything else that you would add to wrap up our discussion? 0:20:28.2 JD: Yeah, I think goals or quotas, especially if you're optimizing one part of the system, very likely to destroy the system as a whole, or at least sub-optimize it make it worse. I think Deming said something to the fact of quotas can be a fortress against improvement. Right. I think he was exactly right, because people start to do all kinds of weird things when you start to set quotas or goals, especially again, if they're incentivized as an individual, whether that's an individual worker or an individual department, things start to sort of happen in the opposite of what you wanted to happen when you do things like set goals, without that appreciation for the capability of the system in the first place, or an understanding of the data or an idea for how to improve, because it's like, well, if our goal... If we're gonna set a goal to increase test scores, let's say by 10% next year, why don't we do it this year? If we knew how to do that, what were we waiting on, why do we think we can do it next year, if we couldn't do it this year... 0:21:33.8 AS: Great points. Well, John, on behalf of everyone at the Deming Institute, I wanna thank you again for this discussion and for listeners, remember to go to Deming.org to continue your journey. This is your host Andrew Stotz, and I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming; people are entitled to joy in work.

In this new series on applying Deming to education, Andrew talks with John Dues, Chief Learning Officer at United Schools Network and long-time Deming practitioner. This is the first in a series of 12 episodes using John's school system as a case study for applying Deming in education. 0:00:02.3 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz, and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today, I'm here with featured guest, John Dues. John, are you ready to share your Deming journey? 0:00:17.7 John Dues: Yeah, Andrew I'm really glad to be here and looking forward to speaking with you today. 0:00:22.6 AS: Yeah, we've been talking about this for a while, and so it's exciting to kick it off. So let me introduce you to the audience. Ladies and gentlemen, John A. Dues is an accomplished education systems leader and Improvement Science scholar practitioner with more than two decades of experience. He is the Chief Learning Officer of the United Schools Network, where he directs the network's continual improvement fellowship and serves as an Improvement Advisor. He draws heavily on the work of Dr. W. Edwards Deming and his System of Profound Knowledge. He's currently continuing his education through the Improvement Advisor program at the Institute for Healthcare Improvement in Boston, Massachusetts. John, can you take a little bit and tell us about the story about how you first learned about the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming and what hooked you? 0:01:21.8 JD: Yeah, happy to do that. I sort of, I'm about 20 years into my career as an educator, and I sort of think about my career across four stages or so. Stage zero, I was a teacher, I didn't really know anything about classroom management or how to lead a class, it was a lot of trial and error type learning, and then I start to figure stuff out over time and stage one, I transitioned into now working at a series of Public Charter Schools is on the founding team of seven schools or non-profits sort of than this next stage. And I think a lot of my learning was sort of what I would call subject matter learning, so cognitive science, curriculum and lesson planning, how to use data to drive instruction, those types of things, and then about 2016 or so, I started learning about improvement science. I got an e-mail, it mentioned a book called Learning to Improve, and that got me sort of started on this path to learning the tools of improvement science, and I did that for four or five years, and then in about a couple of years ago, I stumbled across the W. Edwards Deming Institute website. 0:02:53.0 JD: And I had previously come to the website a couple of years earlier, and truth be told, I went to the System of Profound Knowledge page, it didn't make a lot of sense to me, and so I sort of let it lay for a year or two, and I came back to it in 2020, and not that all of a sudden it made sense. But there was something there that sparked this interest that's been going on for three years now, where I've devoured books, listened to interviews, and really gone on this journey to learn exactly what Dr. Deming was talking about with the System of Profound Knowledge. 0:03:36.5 AS: And when you think about the improvements that you're trying to do, or the problems that you were trying to solve, and then you started to see, let's say the System of Profound Knowledge, what was it that stood out as, Oh, that explains why this is happening, that explains why... What were some of those revelations and things that you could then bring back to your work... I'm just curious. How did that unfold? 0:04:06.2 JD: Yeah, it took some time. I mentioned sort of discovering the Institute website in about 2018 or so, and it not initially making a lot of sense, there's probably two things. One, candidly, I saw a System of Profound Knowledge, and I was like, Well, who talks like that? What is that... Like who calls their stuff profound knowledge? And then the second thing was when I looked over the four components, systems theory and the theory of variation and the theory of knowledge and psychology, frankly, most of it was incomprehensive to me, and a couple of years later, I come back, I'm a little further in this learning journey, and I go back to it, not that I had any type of instant revelation or anything like that, it has taken a lot of deep study, it did start to slowly make sense and what I realized... In one of the books I was reading is sort of this idea that there's these two complementary types of knowledge, one is subject matter knowledge, so in my case, it's those things I mentioned, knowing how to plan lessons, knowing how to do classroom management, the things that an educator that needs to know how to do. 0:05:28.3 JD: And then there was this whole other bucket of knowledge, which I realized when Deming said System of Profound Knowledge he meant the components interact, that's the system part. And then the profound part is just that you have a deep knowledge about your organization across those four components, and I realize there's this whole other sort of bucket of knowledge that we're not attending to, that tells us some of the most important information we need to know about our organizations, and it's only when you bring those two things together, the subject matter knowledge with the profound knowledge that you actually then can transform your organizations. And so that realization along the way was a big part of me sort of latching on to Dr. Deming's philosophy. And I'd say the second thing that I did very early on, besides reading the books and listening to a lot of the Deming Institute's podcast interviews was I started talking to people that appeared on those interviews, and so I reached out to Kelly Allan and then he turned me on to David Langford, who's probably the guy doing Deming in Education and started relationships with both of them, and they were very, very generous with their time and expertise, and that really allowed me to clarify my thinking now because I have this expert in Deming philosophy helping to guide me answer questions, and sort of that rounded out some of the knowledge I was doing in my self-study. 0:07:02.4 AS: Which I guess accelerates things. In my age when I was young, I sat into two seminars with Dr. Deming teaching and yeah. Okay, that answers a lot of questions, but we don't have that luxury anymore, so it's gotta be number one, reading the materials, watching the videos and all that, but also checking our understanding. And I know both Kelly and David are great resources. Kelly helped me when I was writing my book, Transform Your Business with Dr. Deming's 14 Points to help me think about things, and I know there's even more, so much more to learn, and I think that's where... What I think about the profound knowledge aspect, and I think what you said was, there's kind of... You have to have these two components. And its subject matter aspect, that's just a given when you're teaching and understanding how to teach, but then this whole other thing about the system aspect of it, the psychology aspect of that. 0:08:09.0 AS: And I have a question for you about education, let's say I graduated from high school, from a pretty good public high school in Ohio, and I'm just curious, if we went back to that school today, and I spent... I don't know what it was, seven hours a day at school, arrive at 8:00 and leave at 3:00 or whatever that was. I spent X amount of time at school and I accumulated X amount of knowledge during that time, and my question to you is, if we go now from 1983 when I graduated to here we are 50 years later, or so or 40... 50 years later, so now we're... Here we are in the future with so much knowledge, so much experience, our students are attending high school for either the same time and accumulating much more knowledge, or are they attending school for a much shorter time and accumulating the same amount of knowledge, or are we doing the same thing? 0:09:28.3 JD: Yeah, that's a really good question. I think there's sort of a relevant Deming quote that's something to the effect of "experience teaches nothing" and it's, basically it was saying, you have to have an underlying theory and then you build the knowledge and testing that theory and see how it works in the real world. So in a lot of respects, I think in the 40 years or so since you were in high school, probably a lot of schools haven't changed much, they do the same thing year in and year out, they're not really learning, they're... Like I said, across that 40-year time period, it's just sort of a repetition. Now, of course, if you went into that high school, there would be differences like the type of technology you'd see in classrooms. I think by and large, when you're talking about school, effectiveness people will argue about this, I think depending on how you're measuring that outcome, I think that schools are, generally speaking, better maybe than they were 40 years ago. Now, the problem is that better typically means that test scores are better, and of course, there's variation in this in both time and place and the variation, I don't think it's linear. 0:10:58.1 JD: I think there are ups and downs in different places based on a whole host of factors like the pandemic or even... There's less spending in schools out of the 2008 hiring crisis... Oh sorry, housing crisis, and those had an impact on things like test scores, but I think with Deming, and he was very interested obviously in education, he was a professor for 50 years, as you know at New York University. The subtitle of his last book had education in the subtitle. What he was really talking about when he was thinking about talking about education was transformation, and that was a complete change in state. And so when I hear your question, that's what I think of... I think of have schools, if they know the Deming philosophy, have they undergone a transformation following Deming's teachings, and I would say by and large, the answer to that question, not withstanding the sort of test score question, the answer to the transformation question is no. I think by and large, that's not what I've seen across my career. 0:12:11.6 AS: And if we think about a person listening into this conversation who's an educator and they're looking for new answers to maybe old problems. [chuckle] And they come across this podcast, they come across the material like you did, what's the hope that you can provide to them about how they could benefit either individually by thinking about and learning about Dr. Deming's teachings for their performance as a... Maybe as a teacher or as an administrator, and what hope or excitement can you provide them if they're an administrator of a school thinking, "Hmm, this is interesting, maybe this could provide me some things that I need to start to think differently about it." Tell me a little bit about the journey of you then learning about Deming and then start to... Bringing it into your institution. 0:13:11.2 JD: Yeah, there's a few things that I think of. So one thing is, if I've discovered the Deming philosophy and I'm an educator, how do I bring that to my school, or how do I bring that to my classroom or if I"m a systems leader, how do I bring that to my school district? And I think one of the things that I learned from David is you preach to the masses and work with the willing, and so thinking about intrinsic motivation, which I know David has talked about on your podcast, is you want people to opt in to going on this sort of learning journey with you, so that's one thing I think of. 0:13:50.8 JD: The second thing I think of is, and this was from David as well, when he started doing the Deming philosophy in his classroom and using the System of Profound Knowledge, he was a classroom teacher. And so everybody has this circle of influence, this circle that they have control over, and in his case, he didn't have control over the school building, the high school where he was... He didn't have control over the school district at the time, but he did have control over his classroom, and it was basically through applying the Deming ideas in his classroom that people started coming and saying, "Hey, what are you doing in here? There's something very different that's going on here," and then the principal got so interested in it, he said, "I'd like you to sort of teach people how to do this building-wide," and he became the director of continuous improvement there at his high school in Alaska. 0:14:42.6 JD: And then ultimately, he was encouraged by Deming to go off and consult across the world to bring these ideas to schools all over the world. So I think that's another thing that I think of. I also think that in some sort of ways, you can learn aspects of the Deming philosophy and start to apply them tomorrow. So when I think about something like knowledge about variation, I may know nothing about the technical aspects of a control chart, for example, but what I can do is I can take any data that I have that occurs across time and just plot those dots on a simple line chart and start to understand what that data looks like versus having those numbers in a spreadsheet, and then there's other aspects that do take time. 0:15:34.1 JD: I think one thing that Deming said in one of his books was, there's no instant pudding, and basically he meant that when it comes to organizational transformation, you're talking about a four or five or even 10-year journey and beyond to get this to take root in an organization. At the same time, it doesn't take 1000 people. And I heard David talk about this, and I heard Deming talk about this idea of you need to capture and educate and bring along about the square root of the number of people in your organization that really have a strong grasp of the System of Profound Knowledge and so if you're in a roughly 100-person organization, like mine I need 10 people that have learned these ideas and are interested in spreading them to their classroom or to their school, or in our case, into the network as a whole. 0:16:32.2 AS: And how did it go finding those people, and as you say, it's voluntary, you want those people to come, you wanna attract them, attraction rather than promotion. How did that journey go for you internally? 0:16:43.9 JD: Well, it's definitely ongoing. It's definitely ongoing, and I think it's going really well, it's a process, we're probably about two years into that process, and so in some ways it's now a core part of who we are. So a good example of that is going back to this idea of knowledge about variation two years ago, none of us had any knowledge of what a control chart or a process behavior chart was, and now we have dashboards that are shared system-wide on all kinds of measures that are important to us, where we're now looking at data over time and realizing that until we sort of understand the patterns that we see in that data, we don't really know anything about whatever that area is. So that's something that's taken hold and we've spread it pretty quickly across the network. Before we would say we overreact to maybe like a single test score or attendance is down this month. Now we step back and say, "Okay, what does that look like over 12 months, for 15 or 20 months? What are the patterns? Is it sort of a common cause, is it just a part of our system, or is there a signal here that we need to pay attention to." 0:18:01.4 JD: So in many aspects like that it's taken hold and in other aspects, it does take longer to implement and that... A good example there is, Deming said abolish grades, and he was pretty unequivocal about that he didn't good grades in his graduate statistical courses at NYU. That's a much harder thing to change, it's a much harder thing to get people to understand why he said that, even for myself to learn sort of... Why did he say that? Is it feasible? What's the replacement? Those all have... There's practical considerations when you're in a school system, you have to give grades, you have to have report cards, or you think you do anyway, and so things like that take time, and we're not there yet on some of Deming's ideas, like abolishing grades or changing our grading practices. 0:19:01.4 AS: It's interesting, one of the beautiful things about having a private company is that you can implement these things without kind of... I don't know, kind of regulatory oversight or that type of stuff. You just can implement it, and so there's an enormous constraint in that field. Now, let me ask you about the charts that you talk about. I wanna ask two questions. First question is, from your experience of having, looking at different charts related to education, if someone's listening to this, that it is working in a school or a classroom or whatever, they're looking at it, what would be one chart that you think that they could start on today and implement? And that's the first question I have, and the second one is about how do you prevent people from obsessing about the data in a chart and help them understand that this is about understanding a system, it's not obsessing about some KPI type of thing. So, curious what you would say to that. What would be a chart that someone could start with? 0:20:13.8 JD: That's a really good question. I have a lot of different ideas. One thing because it's so prevalent in our education system it's pretty much across the United States, is state test scores. Now in some of the aspects or... Yeah, I mean in some aspects, it's not the best thing to put in a chart because they typically only happen one time a year towards the end of the year. So it's hard to gather enough data to sort of use in practice on a day-to-day basis. On the flip side, I do think it's helpful to put something like state test scores, even though they only happen on an annual basis in a control chart or a process behavior chart, because I think people forget, frankly, they forget what happened just a couple of years ago in their system when it comes to state test scores. And so you see all these documents created all the way from State Departments of Education to individual schools that are marketing to parents in their area that basically are writing fiction about their test scores. "We improved from last year." Well, yeah, technically, maybe it went up 2%, but then it's down 5% from two years ago. And so I think plotting the dots to your test score data over 12 or 15 years gives a sense of how the data is bouncing around in average probably. 0:21:41.8 AS: Okay. 0:21:43.0 JD: And not in a meaningful way. I think in most circumstances. And I think allowing them to see those patterns is really important. And I think another sort of helpful layer to that is annotate that chart with things that have happened in either your school, your district, or even at a state policy level. Label when the test format changed. Label when the state standards change. Label the year that what kids needed to do to be you considered proficient, the cut score for the proficiency, label when that changed, 'cause these are all things that have happened in the last five or six years in most states, including Ohio where I am. And when you start to label those things and then you see the ups and downs that are associated with those labels, you start to say, "Oh, this picture of what's been happening in my system makes a lot more sense." And most of that is completely sort of out of the picture for most people. We don't really remember what happened three or four years ago, even if we have a general idea, we don't have it pinpointed to a specific year. When do we start testing on computers instead of paper and pencil? That's another example. Those all have impacts on tests scores. 0:23:01.2 AS: Okay. That's a great one for the administrators, but if you were in a classroom and you say, "I don't really have control over what goes on in my school so much, but I do enjoy this Deming journey, and I want to start to bring some of that into my classroom," what would be one chart that you would make? 0:23:23.1 JD: A couple of ideas that come to mind, maybe two, I'd share with you. One would be something like homework completion. What percent of the kids are doing either in class or it doesn't have to be homework, it would be in-class assignments? And I think the key here is, one, you have to operationally define what completion means. And that can vary by a classroom as long as everybody's on the same page. And then with that, put it up on the wall, on a piece of chart paper, because so often the things that we want kids to improve are hidden from them. They don't... Oh, I didn't know that 35% of the kids in this class didn't do the assignment from the day before right, but if they start to see that, and then we start to talk about it, and then we start to say, "Well, what are the barriers or obstacles to completion?" 0:24:13.9 JD: And then kids start to say, "Well, how can I help you?" You start to create this completely different mentality in your classroom. One classroom also that we had in our network of schools, it was a fourth grade Science teacher, she started tracking how much joy did you find in today's lesson? And so she would actually... The kids would do a short little survey and assign a number out of 100%. And then they would also have us. There was a spot in the survey to say, "What did you like about it, what didn't go so well? Or whatever, what could I improve?" This is the teacher saying that to fourth graders and they're charting that on a piece of paper. And then she's starting to learn, "Okay. These types of lessons are engaging, these types of lessons are not so engaging. The kids want more of this, enjoyment goes up when we do this as a class." And then they did that over the course of three or four months, and slowly over time, you see the engagement levels, the joy raising, kids are happier. They're more engaged in class. The teacher is having more fun. And so those are just sort of two things that I've seen done in our network of schools that I think had a really positive impact. 0:25:33.9 AS: That's exciting. And I think it goes back to the intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation. And ultimately kids wanna be engaged, everybody wants to be engaged in what they're going through. And the reason why they disengage oftentimes, is because we don't involve them. 0:25:55.9 JD: Right. Yeah, I agree, 100%. I think kids are really... Students and schools are the improvement secret weapon. I think a mindset shift for me was when you think about in your system, who is the worker? And a lot of educators think when you ask them that question, they'll say, "Well, teachers." And not that there's a right or wrong answer to this, but I think it's actually the students, because the thing that has to be created, high quality learning has to happen in their minds. So if they're the ones where the work has to happen, they have to be the workers. So I think of students as the workers and I think more of the teachers as the supervisors of that work. 0:26:43.6 AS: That's a great way to think about it, because it also kind of pushes it down for the teachers to think that their objective is really creating that environment for learning. I wonder when you started bringing the Deming philosophy into schools and your operations there, was there one point that was like there was resistance to or what do you think is the hardest to digest for teachers or a school system when they're looking at this? 0:27:21.6 JD: That's a really good question. I think in my own sort of personal opinion, I think that a lot of the Deming philosophy is paradoxical to typical management practices. And I think there's a lot of counterintuitive ideas in the philosophy. So I think you have to sort of be open to that from the start. And so when I first started talking with people about these ideas, I did it, both internally and with some people externally, and I just put together a presentation, I said, "I'm gonna show you this thing and I wanna collect your thoughts." And one of the first things I said is, "Before I say anything, I want you to have in your mind preemptively that you're gonna experience some serious cognitive dissonance with these ideas because they're so different than what you've heard before." So I did that as a primer, so people sort of had that expectation. I think, generally, what I find from folks is openness to the ideas. I think there's a challenge in unpacking, going back to something like I was talking about abolish grades. Unpacking why exactly did he say what he said? Whether it's abolish grades or any number of other points that he made. 0:28:52.4 JD: I think there's this sort of realization for a lot of people that when you say, "Well, what's your philosophy, or what's your educational philosophy, what's your management philosophy?" They don't really have an answer. I didn't have an answer, frankly, before I started studying this stuff. And that's a little bit convicting. And then once you decide to go on the journey, you realize, "Why do we do the things that we do?" You could ask that about a thousand things a day, whether it's a policy, a practice, just something we do, 'cause that's the way we've always done it here. And again, it's a little daunting when you start to think about, "Well, what is the underlying reason that we do this?" And so... 0:29:40.3 AS: It kind of shakes the foundation of your thinking. 0:29:43.1 JD: Yeah. It shakes the foundation, so you have to be open to that. And I think that's where the, "No instant pudding," quote from Deming comes in, is that you really have to be committed to this. And I think about a story I read in a book, Henry Neave's book, The Deming Dimension, where he basically says, "A Board engineer, a quality control guy comes to a Deming seminar one week, a four-day seminar, goes back the following week and he read the 14 Points. And one of them's about inspection and not relying or overlying on inspection. And he went the next week and fired all the inspectors in his plant." I think it was a Ford Plant. 0:30:32.7 JD: And basically, Henry Neave says, "That's not the right approach. You have to understand why you're doing what you're doing first before you do it." And you have to remember that that thing, in this case, it's inspection is a part of your system, so you can't remove it before you understand why you're doing that and what you're gonna replace it with. And that should probably happen deliberately and probably over time and not the next Monday after you've heard this idea. So it's a little of both. It's how do you start moving the needle and then how do you do it thoughtfully with an underlying understanding of the theory under all of these ideas? 0:31:13.7 AS: Another question is, if we think about the... Really, you have to, if you're bringing the Deming philosophy into a school as an example, you have to kind of convince administrators and you have to kind of... Let's say educate administrators, you gotta educate the teachers, and also there's the kids. And I'm curious, what are the things that teachers really get from the Deming like, "Okay, that makes sense." And let's strip away some of the complexity sometimes in the way that it's presented, but let's just take some of the basic principles, what are some of the things that the kids would naturally get like that makes sense to them? I'm just curious what your observations have been there. 0:32:01.8 JD: That's a really good question. How would I answer that? I think I'd start with myself first. I think because Deming talked about an individual transformation has to happen as a precursor to a larger organizational transformation. And so for me, it was starting to take many of the ideas I was reading and then think about the application in my own life, maybe as a student myself. And as I did that and I thought through those things, I never came up against something that didn't make sense to me. I think the trick is, especially for adults, is that I think in a lot of ways, a lot of people would latch on to the ideas for themselves, but this won't work for... Other people need something different. [laughter] 0:33:06.1 JD: I think that's... A good example of it is like performance appraisals. They've never been effective for me. I never have gotten great feedback from them, or I've felt they're unfair, or I got rated on my use of technology in my classroom early in my career, but there were no working computers, but everybody else needs a performance appraisal. So you come across a lot of stuff like that I think what you have to say, "Yep, that works for me in my life." And we have to take that same lesson and apply it to others, that's one thing I think about. It wasn't the exact question you asked, but that's one thing I think about. I actually find... There's things to learn in terms of teachers, but I actually think a lot of teachers sort of have a natural inclination for the general Deming perspective, Deming philosophy. I think things like grading, I think teachers would latch on to Deming's idea of abolishing grading, I think actually much faster than maybe the administrators would in a lot of ways. 0:34:13.3 AS: I think that would be a hard one for them. I remember when I went to my first Deming seminar and I was a young supervisor at a Pepsi factory in the US. And I appreciate that Pepsi put me into those seminars 'cause it really helped me, and I think I brought back stuff to the Pepsi factory in Torrance, California. But the one thing that really struck a cord with me is I didn't realize I was operating within a system. I saw individual efforts of myself and others and everybody running around trying to get things done, but I didn't see that the limitation on the output of our activity was, to a large extent, determined by the system within which we were operating. If we didn't have the resources, if we had an accounting department that was just trying to cut cost, and so we couldn't get the replacement parts for the machinery. I totally understood that once I studied Deming and learned about that. And so that's why I'm kind of thinking about what makes sense to teachers. 0:35:27.8 AS: So let's talk about kids for a moment. I think about joy in work, as Deming says, and just the intrinsic motivation. And I think about kids, they're just full of positive energy and rolling around, and there's just so much positive energy and it's like the world just starts beating them down over time. It's hard enough to overcome some of the challenges you're facing with your family at home, and then you come into a school and you've gotta operate within this framework. And it's like, I suspect that kids would appreciate the idea of bringing joy to the classroom, but what have you seen from kids? 0:36:11.5 JD: Well, I think you're onto something when you say, as kids sort of go on in their educational career, a lot of times are sort of beat down by certain aspects of the educational system. So I think one thing is there's a process to undo some of that. And that's probably what I see most with my own kids or students that I'm working with in our network. So if you ask a student or if you ask your own kids something like, "How was school today? Or how are you doing in science?" What they'll often tell you is a grade. "I got... I got... " "Okay, you had a test today. How was it?" "Well, I got a B." "Well, what did you learn?" And often times it's really hard to pull that out because they've been so trained to think about school as a series of grades or a series of silence, a series of percentages versus what did you learn? What are you taking from that? What does that mean? So I see a lot of that. I also see a lot of... There's a lot of reward and punishment that is a part of a lot of school systems, whether it's treasure boxes or reward systems in the classroom. And I was just as guilty as a teacher and frankly as a principal in that other school of having those systems. 0:37:49.0 JD: But when you say at the end of the day, "How was your day?" And they sort of tell you back what they were doing in the behavior point system versus what did they learn, and who did they talk to that day, and what did they take from the day. I think you quickly realize that even if the behavior system or the grading system had good intentions behind it, that kids are often experiencing those systems in a very different way. And so I think kids are very open to it, just like adults when you explain it, I think what's... The tough part is that they've been in the system that has all of these different sort of things that are wearing them down. And I think you have to unpack that and untie that and sort of re-educate I guess this, re-train them to think about school and academics and how they're interacting in school in a different way. 0:38:46.0 AS: And it makes you think that students are the secret weapon of the implementation of some of this, because I think there's a lot of... At first, when you come across the Deming material, it doesn't feel intuitive. It feels hard sometimes to understand, it can be confusing, but once you start to realize and understand it, you start to realize that there's a lot of intuitive nature of things. And a kid can observe random outcomes, and then they see adults rewarding random and then they're like, "Well, Johnny just got lucky in that particular thing or whatever." And so they can understand a lot of things, so maybe we can say that there is a little bit of a secret weapon there. 0:39:33.0 JD: Yeah, and kids are very intuitive, and so I think in going back to some of those rewards systems, I think one of the things that happens and we maybe don't pay enough attention to it, is as soon as there is a reward system, there's a game that starts. And so a good example of this is there's a number of reading, online reading programs where kids read a book and then they take a quiz that sort of assesses comprehension. And on the face it seems like a positive thing, oh, kids have read X number of words, I'll hear there's a lot, or X number of books, and they weren't reading before and this program gets him to read. But when you start to unpack that, you go ask a kid, "Well, what do you think of this program?" "Ah it's pretty boring, but I do get prizes." Or something like, "Well, I'm impressed, you've read 10 books this in the past couple of months, and that seems to be because you're doing this program." And he's like, "No, I just pick short books because I know I can read them faster." 0:40:41.9 JD: And so as soon as you start to put those you take sort of intrinsic nature of enjoying a book for the book's sake, for the story, and you instead tie it to some type of point system. There's all types of things, many of which are hidden that are the motivations just under the surface for why kids are doing what they're doing that you're missing because you're not talking to them, and not really listening to how they're responding to that reward system. So like even a positive thing like a reading program, that seems good on the face can often have an underlying darker nature that's going on. 0:41:17.9 AS: Yeah, and I think... I wanna wrap up this section of the discussion, and I think what I would like to wrap that up with is taking on what you were just saying is that when you are measuring anything and you find yourself wanting to add on additional measures, because they're getting... Things are getting disincentivized. So okay, now you say, "Okay, well, we've gotta track it by the length of books or we gotta track their eyeballs, or we gotta... " Every time that you find yourself having to add on some different type of measurement, I think it's a good time to step back and say, "What are we really doing here, and do we really understand the incentives that we're... The activities that we're really incentivizing by this, and are we really getting to our goal of that." And that's a painful discussion because as you say, you're still sometimes, you're gonna have to search for what's the replacement, what's the solution. But when you find yourself trying to add on more things to try to box the kids in, you're probably now caught up in this system of testing and scoring and measuring that is going out of control. 0:42:41.2 JD: Yeah, I think that's right. And the thing that I think of, and I can't remember where I saw it, if it was a Deming thing, or maybe I heard it from David Langford, it was a shift in perspective. In terms of your role as a teacher, or if you're the CEO of a company or the principal school, whatever it is, many of those folks myself included at one point, when you ask them what their job is, many people will tell you it's to motivate my students or motivate the people that work in my company. But probably a better frame is not to motivate them, but rather to remove the obstacles to them finding joy in learning or joy in work, and that's a different mindset, right? And so instead of incentivizing or coming up with different metrics in the case of that reading program, what I would be thinking about is, have I created a comfortable spot for kids to read in the classroom? Is there a good supply of books with lots of different interesting topics? Have I talked to kids about what they're interested in reading? Have I carved out a time in the day where everybody is reading? And so then instead of me pushing, now I'm removing obstacles that would prevent kids from reading in that example, and creating an environment that makes it much more likely that kids are gonna enjoy it and wanna keep doing it in an intrinsic fashion, rather than trying to monitor extrinsically. 0:44:11.0 AS: So let's wrap up by talking about what you've been working on, you've been working, you've been writing and maybe you can share where you're at and what you're producing. And then after that, I think we'll highlight to the audience what we're gonna do in the future episodes. So maybe tell us about what you're working on and kind of where that's at, and then why you're doing it, and what's the value that you think it can bring. 0:44:37.9 JD: Yeah, I'm actually, I'm writing a book on applying Deming's ideas to schools, it's sort of the tentative title is Win-Win, W. Edwards Deming the System of Profound Knowledge in the Science of Improving Schools. So I've actually found a publisher, I've completed a draft and submitted it to them, and so we're working right now on getting the book published. And so I'm hopping by the end of the school year that'll be out and published and available for folks, so that's the big thing I've been working on, I actually started in September of 2020. So it's been quite the project to bring it from just an idea to an almost published project, so hopefully soon that'll be ready. 0:45:25.6 AS: Exciting, and I think that leads us into we're gonna... You and I are gonna have some conversations about that book and about the things that you're learning and teaching throughout that, and we'll have a series that we'll be going through, which I'm excited to learn from you. Ultimately I have businesses, and I apply Deming's thinking in business, but also I'm a teacher so I enjoy everything that I can learn from people like yourself and David, and I know the audience will learn. So let me ask one last question, and that is, why Deming? And why now? Why is it important that it's Deming and why is it important that we are looking at this now? 0:46:14.1 JD: That's a really good question, I would say I consider myself a learner, I read a lot, I watch a lot, I listen to a lot of podcasts, and across my 20 years I've never found anything quite like the Deming philosophy. You search for these magic or silver bullets and they really don't exist, but the Deming philosophy really has been that thing for me, because I think what I didn't realize is the importance of an underlying philosophy for then everything else that you're doing. And that foundation is what the System of Profound Knowledge has really provided to me in my work. And I also mentioned as I thought through the ideas pretty deeply, and wrote about those ideas in the book, every time I had some dissonance initially with the Deming idea and then I put it in my own life, I worked it out and said, "Yep no, that... He was exactly right. Have we thought about how we interact in our organizations, how we interact with each other." And so not that the dissonance has gone away, not that I understand all of the ideas perfectly, but every time I've tested it and tried to falsify the philosophy or the theory I haven't been able to do it. And there's nothing else that I can say that I've worked with that has held up to that scrutiny like this philosophy. 0:47:49.7 AS: Fantastic. Well, John, on behalf of everyone at the Deming Institute, I wanna thank you again for coming on the show, and I wonder, do you have any parting words for our audience? 0:48:00.1 JD: Yeah, I think one of my favorite Deming quotes is really short and to the point, he said, "I make no apologies for learning." And I think that's a really good way to end the conversation, and what he meant by that was, you might have not have been doing it right before, but there's this opportunity to learn this new way. And that's sort of the opportunity that I've taken as I've discovered Deming's work. 0:48:28.4 AS: And that concludes another great story from the worldwide Deming community, remember to go to Deming.org to continue your journey. This is your host Andrew Stotz, and I'll leave you with my favorite quote from Dr. Deming, and that is people are entitled to joy in work.

We are proud to present the 2022 Annual Ruth Bishop Address.Professor Ruth Bishop AC led a team of researchers to the landmark discovery of rotavirus in 1973, a major breakthrough in tackling one of the most significant causes of infant mortality worldwide. The team's discovery kick-started the successful 30-year endeavour to develop a rotavirus vaccine.In 2019, the Indo-Pacific Centre for Health Security established an annual health security address, named in honour of the Australian scientist and microbiologist for her leadership and dedication to science and global health.On 22 November 2022, the Centre held an In Memoriam address presented by University of Melbourne's Professor Graeme Barnes and Professor Julie Bines following Ruth Bishop's passing earlier this year. Ruth's brother David Langford spoke on behalf of the family.We encourage you to reflect on this address at @CentreHealthSec on Twitter and Facebook.Reflections from the eventVale Ruth, a great scientist, inspiring mentor and leader, and wonderful human being.Jim Buttery, Murdoch Children's Research InstituteAs a fellow virologist, I am only too aware of the positive impact that Ruth made to our community. Not only the science, which has had an enormous global health impact, but also in her mentoring of young scientists and her ongoing legacy as a role model in our discipline. She will, and is, sorely missed amongst our community.Professor Paul Young, University of QueenslandThank you very much, I am very honoured to collaborate with the team and thank you so much Professor Bishop for her legacy and we are going continue her work with all Australian scientists, especially with Prof Julie Bines and team.Jarir At Thobari, Universitas Gadjah Madah

David and Andrew's discussion of how using Deming in the classroom not only inspires achievement it also creates collaboration among excited students. TRANSCRIPT 0:00:01.9 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz, and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today, we continue our series of Deming in Education with David P. Langford where we explore Deming's thinking to create joy in learning. David Langford has devoted his life to applying Dr. Deming's philosophy to help everyone get the most out of learning. Today's topic is "By what method?" David, take it away.   0:00:28.9 David Langford: Great. So in previous broadcasts, we've talked a lot about deadlines and processes, and operational definitions and quality standards and all kinds of things like that. So today I wanted to talk about, "By what method?" Dr. Deming tattooed that on my forehead, because so many times people would propose things to him and he would say, "By what method?" in his Deming voice. It's all about the method of what it is you're going to do. So what I learned to do is, instead of trying to calculate, "Is this a 92 or an 88 or 88.1?" and then I got the student upset with me, and then because I gave them an 89, I messed up their GPA, and now, so now they're not gonna get a scholarship, and now Mom and Dad is mad at me and it just goes on and on and on. And so, instead of trying to improve that process, I started working on a method to completely get out of it, and especially today, especially in K-12, lots of schools are trying to go to what they call standards-based grading, where they want all students to achieve, but unless... If you start applying a new theory like that, but you keep it in the old system for the last several hundred years, you're gonna have problems.   0:02:08.0 DL: So I had to figure out how can I do that? What can I do? Well, over time it slowly evolved into a process where if somebody turned in an assignment and it met or exceeded the standard for the assignment, then I started to say, "Well, you got that one", to kids and students. Well, that finally, I started to realize, well, why can't that just be my grade book? Either you got a one, which signifies that on this assignment, you did it to standard and you did everything required and you got a one, or it's just blank. If it's just blank, it means you still have to keep working on it to get a one.   0:02:57.9 AS: Just to clarify that. When you say met or exceeded, that's one statement, that's not saying met is one thing and exceeded is another. Is that correct?   0:03:06.3 DL: That's right.   0:03:07.2 AS: Okay.   0:03:07.3 DL: Because yes, we have a quality standard with this assignment, but I may be really interested in this, and so I did a whole bunch more than was required. Right? And so, I still wanna recognize that with students, "Look at, look at this, look what this. You did this and you went above and beyond the standard." Right?   0:03:27.8 AS: Right.   0:03:28.3 DL: So you still get a one for doing that, and I'm not gonna take away your desire to go above the standard by giving you A+++ or all kinds of games that teachers play. You got that one, which is awesome, and the rest is just joy and learning for you. Or if you went above the standard, okay, I might give you a chance to share what you did with the rest of class.   0:03:58.6 AS: That's what I was just thinking about. Yeah.   0:04:01.8 DL: Yeah, yeah. And I'm gonna ask you, I'm gonna ask you, "Would you be willing to share this?" I'd say, 99% of the time, kids said, "Yeah, yeah, I'd be glad to share this." And I would say the same thing to them. "Okay, but when you share what you did and the level you took this to, I want you to describe by what method did you do that."   0:04:23.2 DL: And it was so fascinating because students would say, "You know, this is what I did, and this is my project, and this how it turned out, and I'm really proud of it and everything... " Okay, by what method did you do that? "Well, I set aside 10 minutes every day just to work on this project." And amazingly, you'd see other students in the class go, "Oh, that's how they did that. They weren't just smart." Right? Because the traditional system pegs people like that. You got smart kids and the not so smart kids, right? And kids start to learn, "Well, she's just a lot smarter. So that's why she could do that." No, she had a method. Right? She may be smart too, she may have a preponderance of neurons in that part of her brain that just helps her be really good in that area. I also bet that person had a method that got him to that level, and if I give them a chance to share that method, other people can learn from that.   0:05:29.5 AS: Can I go back? Just take a step back and talk about when Dr. Deming said, "By what method?" Let's just talk briefly about what he meant by that, because sometimes, you know, we have scrutiny, let's say in management, in companies, by saying, "I don't want you to hit your goal by doing something unethical. You've gotta live up to our values. So if that's your method, don't do it. But any other method, I don't care." Right? So we oftentimes think "by what method" only applied maybe to the ethical behavior of an employee, but why is Deming saying, "By what method?"   0:06:05.6 DL: Well, you have the same thing in education. Why do we have cheating in education? And then, teachers start spending all their time trying to catch the cheaters, right? So they come up with all tricks and even when taking SAT tests and national tests, right, "We have to space them four feet apart and we have to do this, and we have to have it timed, and you have to have to work this, because we have to catch the cheaters, and that's our job because we think are our job's inspectors", right? Well, when you start to take all of that out and saying, "Well, no, that's not my job. My job is to set up the environment and the system in such a way that you can achieve, and if you don't get it to the level I want you to get to, what's gonna happen, well you're gonna get help". Novel idea. And in some cases, you're gonna get a lot of help and it's gonna be pretty intense feedback that it turns out, in neuroscience, that in order for you to switch on basic, your learning genes, you need intense and immediate feedback on stuff. So the quicker I can get you feedback on stuff, the more likely are, you're gonna change it and you're gonna make it.   0:07:25.3 DL: I never forget, my son was in high school in an honors English class, and he worked at the beginning of the school year to write this really difficult 15, 20 page paper that they were required to do and everything else. Well, he didn't get it back 'til the following February, after he'd written it in September. And to the teacher's credit, she had 130, 15, 20 page papers to get through, but by the time he got his paper back, I remember him bringing it home and he said, "Yeah, I don't even know what we were doing or why we even wrote this thing." So the feedback really wasn't useful because it wasn't immediate and it wasn't intense, and getting into that point. So, I wanna get back to "by what method are you gonna track this performance" because as you work through, and that's where the idea about the ones emerged, and it emerged with students where they said, "Oh, that's an easy one," they had lots of good metaphors like, "Did you get that one?" And, "Oh, that's an easy one." And "What happens if you didn't get that one?" Well, you can go to somebody who did get their one. Maybe somebody turned theirs in early, and they got a one that met or exceeded the standard... This would be an awesome person for you to go to and get feedback from them.   0:08:52.0 DL: So all of a sudden I was doubling and tripling and quadrupling the number of teachers in the classrooms, because all of these students could help other students if they want to. You don't have to, but if you want to share, share your information. Now why can't can you share your information about how you mastered something or achieved at a high level? Because it's not working to your detriment. See? And the fact that I got my one, and then you work to get your one, is not hurting me at all. I am still, I still aced this, I still got it all correct, whereas...   0:09:34.2 AS: So you're taking a competition that people are, and the ranking and the striving, and the idea that there's only gonna be five As in this class type of thing, and trying to make it more cooperative. Let me ask you a question about the zeroes and one. For the typical teacher or professor out there, are they able to use zeroes and one? Or are they forced to do A, B, C, D, F?   0:10:02.7 DL: Well, some of that goes into what kind of learning management systems do they have in place and does that fit? Does a round peg fit in a square hole? And how could you do that? And lots of methods to make it happen, if you wanna do that.   0:10:21.8 AS: You get a lot of objections, I'm sure, from people saying, "No, you have to have that competition or else people are just gonna, the students are just gonna be lazy and they're not gonna be excited, and you gotta motivate them through this competition and internal competition in the classroom" and all that, whereas when you...   0:10:38.1 DL: Creating that artificial competition just causes more students to quit, give up, do poor quality work because they already know they can't compete with these top level kids that are in the class, so why would I even try?   0:10:53.2 AS: I'm just thinking, I'm just writing down the idea of we want to inspire them to learn, not pound them or rank them into learning.   0:11:05.0 DL: Or do things to try to motivate them to get it to that level. All true motivation is internal, and unless you're creating systems that enable the individuals to tap into that, you're not gonna motivate people. And students are gonna get away... You could punish them. You could do all kinds of things. I read an article just recently, teacher was pontificating, "Should I finally get rid of depriving students of recess to get them to do work?"   0:11:42.8 DL: I think Dagwood in the cartoons one time said, "That's a great idea 'til you think about it." That, here you have, especially at an elementary level, kids that desperately need to get out and run around and get the cerebral fluids going up and down their spinal column, and come back with a renewed sense of energy. Right? And to attack stuff.   0:12:10.1 AS: It's exactly what they need.   0:12:13.2 DL: Right. Exactly what we need, but no, I'm gonna deprive you of that and force you to stay in during recess and now you're gonna be tired and upset, etcetera. And now I got that to deal with on the other side. You just compound your problems over and over, and probably 94% of the reason that they didn't get the work done is the fault of the teacher and the system to begin with.   0:12:37.4 AS: And coming back to the idea of the teacher that goes, "Oh, David, so what now, I have to inspire my students?"   0:12:46.2 DL: Well, that's what... Books have been written on that, and that's been going on for years and years and years. But the thing is, students are already inspired. So, the only thing you can do by trying inspirational methods is de-motivate them to give up. Right? And even... I remember having students come into my class on the first day of school, and just three or four of them just put their heads in their desk and not even look up, and it was hard for me to start to believe, "Oh yeah, these guys are inspired." But if you go back in their history, and these were high school kids, well, for the last 10 years, what, they've been beaten down by grading systems and told they can't do stuff and punished into compliance and rewarded and punished and over and over and over... "It's just a whole lot better just to put my head down and pretend to go to sleep and endure this rather than actually try to participate." So when you get to that kind of a situation, you have to think about, "Alright, I have to change this situation," and watch how behavior changes, rather than what most educators even today are taught. They basically leave the situation alone and try to punish people into compliance with that.   0:14:10.1 AS: Yeah, so for the listeners out there, think about it. Where in your life are you trying to punish or browbeat compliance, versus inspiring excellence? And I'm thinking myself, David, about my challenge I faced with my mother and trying to figure out how to keep her healthy at 84. And, yeah, recently it's been a bit of browbeating, and you've made me think. And I think that this discussion helps all the listeners think about that. I want to just go back to the topic and I wanna try to summarize and see if you can bring what you want the takeaways to be. The topic of today's discussion is, "By What Method?" What are the key takeaways that you want the audience to get as we wrap up?   0:14:56.5 DL: Well, if I think about Deming talking about the evils of grading systems, so if I'm not gonna do that by what method am I gonna do? As a teacher I do have to track progress and I do have to know that people are achieving, etcetera. So by what method am I gonna do that? And what I'm describing is not necessarily the only method, it's the method that I came up with the help of my students over many, many years. And that enabled for almost every student to get an A. And as a high school teacher I saw about 135 kids a day in about six different class periods. And before I met Deming, when I looked back at the grades that I had, the highest number of As I ever got was about 10-15% of students in that process. And when I went to this method I was getting, out of 135 kids, one year I got 133 kids that all had As. And I didn't, it wasn't like we got smarter kids. [chuckle] I got a new method by which students could get there. And change the method, you get a different behavior, and you get a different result.   0:16:14.6 AS: Great. So David, thanks for your contributions and on behalf of everyone at the Deming Institute, I wanna thank you and our listeners for striving to bring joy in learning.

In this episode, David and Andrew continue to talk about the thorny problem of tracking student progress - grading - and how to remove it from the classroom.  TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.3 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz, and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today, we continue our series of Deming in Education with David P. Langford, where we explore Deming thinking to create joy in learning. David Langford has devoted his life to applying Dr. Deming's philosophy to help everyone get the most out of learning. Today's topic is a continuation of the discussion on tracking progress in learning. David, take it away.   0:00:34.4 David Langford: Thank you, Andrew, it's great to be back again. In the previous podcast, we were discussing tracking learning and the typical way to track learning is grading people; A, B, C, D, and F, and Deming was very adamant that we could significantly improve the education system if we just stopped grading people. So, in my work with education over the last 30 years, a lot of educators get that, and they don't like grading and they've never liked having to do it and being the final judge. And then there's another whole group that thinks it's their right to judge people and give them a grade about what they could do. So, I mentioned in one of the earlier broadcasts that Deming said, "Why would I wanna judge somebody today when I don't know who's gonna turn out to be great in the future?" So I wouldn't wanna do anything that's gonna limit them.   0:01:33.2 DL: So as a teacher myself, having to think through that and having to actually work inside of a grading system and try to figure out what you could do, I think you first have to go through the thought process; is it possible for everyone in a class, for instance, to achieve. And if you say to yourself, "No, it's not possible." I had some students that said, "It's just not possible," they can't do it, you're probably never gonna get there. But if you start to say, "if it was possible, what would we have to change in the system in order to optimize everybody getting to that point?" Well, it always turns out that through neural science, every educator, even parents, will tell you that everybody learns at a different rate. You give somebody a complex problem or something somebody might be able to answer that in three seconds, and other people it might take them a very long time, but they could eventually get it, it just might take a lot longer for you to get there. And so, we sort of truncate that in education, and we talked about, last time, about deadlines and what deadlines mean, and those are mostly for the person managing the class to keep the class moving, right?   0:02:57.1 DL: Because if I just sort of make it open-ended and say, "Okay, well, everybody has to get to a certain level of performance, and we'll just keep it open until you get there," most teachers will tell you it would just be chaos, so the idea of changing a deadline to a target date, so... Yes, here's what you need to know and learn, or the process of what you need to go through. And our target date for you to finish this is this Friday, so then we run into the problem, well, what happens if somebody doesn't do it, or they don't do it at all, right? Well, in the current systems, if somebody doesn't do it at all, some teachers actually like that, 'cause then you don't have to grade people, you just give them a zero, right? And you go on. But if you think about, "no, my job is to optimize that child's performance." So if you didn't get it done, then we're gonna have a conversation. "How quickly can you get it done? When can I expect to see this?" That you're not getting off the hook, so to speak. I observed this with high school classes I was teaching when I first met Deming, and students would just tell me, "just give me a C," or "just give me a C or a D or something", and sometimes they would be basketball players or something like that, and they'd say, "Well, I just need a D so I can play basketball."   0:04:29.6 DL: "So that's all I really want. What do I have to do to get a D?" [chuckle] So all this thinking theory comes into play when you think about, "Okay, well, how do I have to change the system?" So if I change the system to one in which I say, "Well, there is no such thing as sub-level of poor performance." [chuckle] That make sense?   0:04:54.2 AS: [chuckle] No. What does that mean?   0:04:57.2 DL: I want everybody to do A-level type work, so if I'm gonna try to get everybody as close as I can to that, then we're gonna have to define that, and Deming would call that an operational definition. So it has to be very clear to everyone; what do you have to do to get to this level of performance? And then if people understand clearly what that operational definition is, I called it a quality standard; here's the quality standard for this, and I learned over a period of time to always ask students, "If you were to do this really well, what would it be like? Or what would it look like?" And boy, they're really strict on it, and they were often more strict than I. But first getting their input also, I got their buy-in on it, they said, "Well, it should be this and it should be... The writing should be clear." "Well, what does that mean? Writing should be clear?" So we're gonna have to operationally define that and that process could take a while. But Deming talked a lot about that prevention is the key to quality, so I'm probably gonna spend more time up front when we have an assignment, or task to be done, or a project, or whatever you wanna call it, and defining the standard for quality, because as we go through the process, I basically want people to self-evaluate themselves, right? And whenever they...   0:06:35.6 DL: Yes, we have a target date that we're gonna need to get this in by Friday to stay on our overall plan for the whole quarter semester, whatever it might be, so I'm gonna have to share that with them also. Right? 'Cause there's ramifications if we don't get this done by Friday, that's gonna cause us to fall behind as a whole class. If we keep on that track, we're gonna get further and further behind. So this thinking all comes into play because you also have to understand special and common cause variation that Deming talked about, and in other broadcasts we'll get much deeper into what that means statistically in education. But briefly, so here I have my target date on Friday, and then the projects come in, then I have to take a look as a teacher, do I have common cause variation with that, meaning that probably 90... Deming talked about 90%, 94% of the students all attempted to do something. And then I have special cause variation, so I have some kids that didn't do it at all, or they did it so poorly that they're gonna need special help.   0:07:50.2 DL: That's what Deming talked about. They don't need more rating and ranking, it's not gonna do any good. They need special help, which means I'm gonna have to spend time with them one-on-one and go through, well, What didn't you understand? And what can we do and how can I help you? And so and so forth. That's gonna take my time. Then I have the common cause variation, which is that 94% of students who didn't make an attempt. I wanna take a look at all of that work and start to say, Okay, are there common cause problems within that? So probably most of the reasons that you're getting common cause variation or problems from a whole classroom of students has to do with your process as a teacher. [chuckle]   0:08:35.7 AS: Interesting, it makes me think about delivery of products in a company.   0:08:42.8 DL: Yeah, it's the same principle. Same principle.   0:08:42.9 AS: Yeah, you've got an objective that you wanna deliver this exactly two hours after you've packaged it in the warehouse or whatever, you want it to arrive, but there's a lot of different factors. But let's say you set a target time based upon the location that you're delivering to, and in the queue of where that is, but you've set an approximate time and your objective is to try to hit as closely to that time. Now, many people may say, Oh no, actually your objective is to hit earlier. But not really, I think to make it a really robust system, you need to be really accurate. And so when I think about it with education, I would say that from a... You want everybody to submit at a certain time, but you're gonna have a small number of people that are just super stars, they're gonna submit early, and majority of people that there's gonna be this long tail of submitting late.   0:09:32.2 DL: So you can have special cause variation on the high achieving end in education, and you can have special cause variation on the lower end, not cheating. And both of those you wanna handle it as special causes. You remind me of... I had a college professor one time that very clearly told us all, "Do not hand anything in before it's due, even if you're finished." And I went up to talk to him afterwards. I said, "Why do you tell people to do that?" And he said, "Well, you just give me more time to grade your work."   0:10:08.7 AS: [laughter]   0:10:09.4 DL: "And I will find something wrong with it." So it's like inspectors in a house, if your job is to be an inspector, that's what you're gonna do. You're gonna find something wrong. Otherwise, why do we have you.   0:10:22.7 AS: Yeah. "I didn't find anything there. I didn't find anything there." What are you doing?   0:10:26.2 DL: Yeah. Why do we need you then? Right. So, I want to get back to this process of, Yes, you have a target date, etcetera. So if I have common cause variation and a large percentage of the students are not meeting the target date and hitting the target standard for that, that's probably a systems problem, a common cause problem. And when you go back and you ask students why, Why is your work not meeting the standard? It could be internal forces, outside forces, there could be all kinds of things like that, that... Maybe the common thing is, Well, I didn't have enough time. Alright, then, where's your time going? What are you doing with your time? We can track that. We can figure that out, etcetera. And you may be right, the task that I'm giving this group actually requires much more time, so in my process upfront, if I'm going to the students and saying, Okay, here's the quality standard for this assignment, how much time do you think you're gonna need to get your work to this standard and turn that in? And so I created a tool for doing that, called the Loss function to figure out, and I got that from the Taguchi loss function and Deming.   0:11:55.0 DL: And I'd just ask students, How many days is it gonna take you to get it to this level? And that was also fascinating too, because many, many times they would take a look at everything that needs to be done, look at all of the other things that they need to do, and they would set a timeline shorter than what I would have done. So I'm actually improving the quality of all the work and shortening the timeline at the same time, which is gonna enable me to move kids to a higher and higher level than ever thought possible before in the same process, simply by asking them. And some things, yes, it might be shorter and some things it might be a bit longer. But I'd rather err on the side of a bit longer and have more students get to an A-level or a quality standard for this than do the opposite process, just arbitrarily set a due date and then grade all of the people performances that comes in. So if we get to the target date, and I look at a child's work. I'm looking at it, I'm not grading it, I'm looking at it to see, does it meet or exceed the standard for this assignment? If it meets or exceeds. Great, [chuckle] right.   0:13:16.2 AS: Yep.   0:13:16.7 DL: And then we can talk about you know how do we put that in a marking book or whatever it might be. What if it doesn't meet or exceed I asked Deming this question, because he taught at New York University, I said, What do you do when you get papers in, and clearly it's not to the standard that you think it should be. He said, Well, I have a conversation with them. I teach, a very, very strange practice, right?   0:13:42.6 AS: Yeah.   0:13:43.7 DL: I'd go back to them, I start to say, Well, I need more explanation about this, or I don't think this is quite right, and I think if you corrected this, you might be right or this, and then they get time to correct that and make it right. It turns out psychologically, which is part of Deming's profound knowledge right... Psychologically, this has huge impact, the power that if I didn't quite get there in the time that I was supposed to get there, I can go back and fix it. I can do it, yeah because...   0:14:14.6 AS: Welcome to the real world.   0:14:16.6 DL: Yes, because my job is to make sure you learn this. Right. Not to play some grading game or... Time game, right? My job is, you see that you learn this material and basically remember it for the rest of your life.   0:14:30.9 AS: Yep. So in the last couple of minutes, let's try to wrap up what we've learned, what we've discussed, I just think about some of the things that I wrote down while you were talking... Right? You made me think like, Okay, the goal of the system of education is to help each kid optimize their learning rather than just a classroom or a teacher optimizing their job. The second thing is, we talked about that you can let go of deadlines, and once you do that, you need to set better maybe operating, operational definitions or what you call quality standards, to more clearly design what it is or define what it is, is a good outcome this is the book, it's called Tom Sawyer. And these are the things that I want you to get out of it, or you internally, or as you said, you can go to the students and talk about what you want out of it, and then special help. The other thing you said is there's special help or special causes where we have someone, for instance, that's struggling, needs special focus, not rating and degrading them with that. What else would you add to the summary of the learnings from that.   0:15:58.0 DL: When you hold everyone to a high standard, you're actually improving performance for the whole system and for the whole standard for everybody and then what people quickly learn is that... Well, if I turn something in on the due date, just because I wanna turn it in on that date, what's gonna happen to me? One, I'm just gonna get a whole bunch of feedback and I'm gonna have to fix it, and now I have twice as much work to do, because now we're going on to the next thing that I need to be working on, and I have to get this fixed up. So what you're teaching people is try to do it right the first time, build quality into your processes, and that was partly my job as a teacher too, is to teach them how to do that, so they get closer and closer and closer to that target date and so they always feel gratified. And in doing that, basically, you can get to a point where almost everyone in your class is getting an A or what we would call A-quality work, right? And when that happens, you have joy in learning, and you have it on a massive scale because everybody's very happy and so...   0:17:13.6 AS: That's great, I love that. And the other thing I was just thinking about is you said something really kind of mind-blowing right at the end, and that was the idea of once you start working with someone and you start... You know you forget about the deadline, like what if we let go of the deadline I can imagine parents thinking that, but what you just said is, you open up a whole new world to this kid who may have been just always struggling with this deadline, and instead you're saying, I want your contribution, no matter what the deadline says, and that... Then as you said, opens up a whole new world for that student to think, Wow, okay, this is different, now I really wanna contribute and so.   0:17:58.1 DL: Well, it's that you... Some people think that maybe this is semantics, etcetera, but by not using the word deadline and I change that to a target date... Makes much more sense. This is the target date. Did I hit the target date? Yes, great. I have nothing to worry about and my work meets or exceeds the standard. Awesome, great. You have nothing to worry about, right? I didn't meet the target date, okay, I got some worries, I gotta get this fixed up, or it didn't meet the standard, Oh, I gotta get this fixed up. So anyway, my goal is to get them to have that joy in learning, because if you think about a student that sort of slopped through it and didn't do a good job and is continually getting Cs, Ds and Fs on things, there's not much joy in that right, right?   0:18:52.7 AS: Definitely. Definitely.   0:18:52.8 DL: You want people to feel really proud of the work Deming talked about that too. Pride of workmanship.   0:18:58.1 AS: And ranking doubles down on that unhappiness feeling that they're feeling right then.   0:19:02.7 DL: Absolutely.   0:19:04.9 AS: So, David, thanks for your contribution, and on behalf of everyone at the Deming Institute, I wanna thank you and our listeners for striving to bring joy in learning.

David and Andrew continue their discussion on how to track student progress when you don't use grades or other conventional methods. TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.3 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz, and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today, we continue our series of Deming in Education with David P. Langford, where we explore Deming thinking to create joy in learning. David Langford has devoted his life to applying Dr. Deming's philosophy to help everyone get the most out of learning. Today's topic is a continuation of the discussion on tracking progress in learning. David, take it away.   0:00:34.4 David Langford: Thank you, Andrew, it's great to be back again. In the previous podcast, we were discussing tracking learning and the typical way to track learning is grading people; A, B, C, D, and F, and Deming was very adamant that we could significantly improve the education system if we just stopped grading people. So, in my work with education over the last 30 years, a lot of educators get that, and they don't like grading and they've never liked having to do it and being the final judge. And then there's another whole group that thinks it's their right to judge people and give them a grade about what they could do. So, I mentioned in one of the earlier broadcasts that Deming said, "Why would I wanna judge somebody today when I don't know who's gonna turn out to be great in the future?" So I wouldn't wanna do anything that's gonna limit them.   0:01:33.2 DL: So as a teacher myself, having to think through that and having to actually work inside of a grading system and try to figure out what you could do, I think you first have to go through the thought process; is it possible for everyone in a class, for instance, to achieve. And if you say to yourself, "No, it's not possible." I had some students that said, "It's just not possible," they can't do it, you're probably never gonna get there. But if you start to say, "if it was possible, what would we have to change in the system in order to optimize everybody getting to that point?" Well, it always turns out that through neural science, every educator, even parents, will tell you that everybody learns at a different rate. You give somebody a complex problem or something somebody might be able to answer that in three seconds, and other people it might take them a very long time, but they could eventually get it, it just might take a lot longer for you to get there. And so, we sort of truncate that in education, and we talked about, last time, about deadlines and what deadlines mean, and those are mostly for the person managing the class to keep the class moving, right?   0:02:57.1 DL: Because if I just sort of make it open-ended and say, "Okay, well, everybody has to get to a certain level of performance, and we'll just keep it open until you get there," most teachers will tell you it would just be chaos, so the idea of changing a deadline to a target date, so... Yes, here's what you need to know and learn, or the process of what you need to go through. And our target date for you to finish this is this Friday, so then we run into the problem, well, what happens if somebody doesn't do it, or they don't do it at all, right? Well, in the current systems, if somebody doesn't do it at all, some teachers actually like that, 'cause then you don't have to grade people, you just give them a zero, right? And you go on. But if you think about, "no, my job is to optimize that child's performance." So if you didn't get it done, then we're gonna have a conversation. "How quickly can you get it done? When can I expect to see this?" That you're not getting off the hook, so to speak. I observed this with high school classes I was teaching when I first met Deming, and students would just tell me, "just give me a C," or "just give me a C or a D or something", and sometimes they would be basketball players or something like that, and they'd say, "Well, I just need a D so I can play basketball."   0:04:29.6 DL: "So that's all I really want. What do I have to do to get a D?" [chuckle] So all this thinking theory comes into play when you think about, "Okay, well, how do I have to change the system?" So if I change the system to one in which I say, "Well, there is no such thing as sub-level of poor performance." [chuckle] That make sense?   0:04:54.2 AS: [chuckle] No. What does that mean?   0:04:57.2 DL: I want everybody to do A-level type work, so if I'm gonna try to get everybody as close as I can to that, then we're gonna have to define that, and Deming would call that an operational definition. So it has to be very clear to everyone; what do you have to do to get to this level of performance? And then if people understand clearly what that operational definition is, I called it a quality standard; here's the quality standard for this, and I learned over a period of time to always ask students, "If you were to do this really well, what would it be like? Or what would it look like?" And boy, they're really strict on it, and they were often more strict than I. But first getting their input also, I got their buy-in on it, they said, "Well, it should be this and it should be... The writing should be clear." "Well, what does that mean? Writing should be clear?" So we're gonna have to operationally define that and that process could take a while. But Deming talked a lot about that prevention is the key to quality, so I'm probably gonna spend more time up front when we have an assignment, or task to be done, or a project, or whatever you wanna call it, and defining the standard for quality, because as we go through the process, I basically want people to self-evaluate themselves, right? And whenever they...   0:06:35.6 DL: Yes, we have a target date that we're gonna need to get this in by Friday to stay on our overall plan for the whole quarter semester, whatever it might be, so I'm gonna have to share that with them also. Right? 'Cause there's ramifications if we don't get this done by Friday, that's gonna cause us to fall behind as a whole class. If we keep on that track, we're gonna get further and further behind. So this thinking all comes into play because you also have to understand special and common cause variation that Deming talked about, and in other broadcasts we'll get much deeper into what that means statistically in education. But briefly, so here I have my target date on Friday, and then the projects come in, then I have to take a look as a teacher, do I have common cause variation with that, meaning that probably 90... Deming talked about 90%, 94% of the students all attempted to do something. And then I have special cause variation, so I have some kids that didn't do it at all, or they did it so poorly that they're gonna need special help.   0:07:50.2 DL: That's what Deming talked about. They don't need more rating and ranking, it's not gonna do any good. They need special help, which means I'm gonna have to spend time with them one-on-one and go through, well, What didn't you understand? And what can we do and how can I help you? And so and so forth. That's gonna take my time. Then I have the common cause variation, which is that 94% of students who didn't make an attempt. I wanna take a look at all of that work and start to say, Okay, are there common cause problems within that? So probably most of the reasons that you're getting common cause variation or problems from a whole classroom of students has to do with your process as a teacher. [chuckle]   0:08:35.7 AS: Interesting, it makes me think about delivery of products in a company.   0:08:42.8 DL: Yeah, it's the same principle. Same principle.   0:08:42.9 AS: Yeah, you've got an objective that you wanna deliver this exactly two hours after you've packaged it in the warehouse or whatever, you want it to arrive, but there's a lot of different factors. But let's say you set a target time based upon the location that you're delivering to, and in the queue of where that is, but you've set an approximate time and your objective is to try to hit as closely to that time. Now, many people may say, Oh no, actually your objective is to hit earlier. But not really, I think to make it a really robust system, you need to be really accurate. And so when I think about it with education, I would say that from a... You want everybody to submit at a certain time, but you're gonna have a small number of people that are just super stars, they're gonna submit early, and majority of people that there's gonna be this long tail of submitting late.   0:09:32.2 DL: So you can have special cause variation on the high achieving end in education, and you can have special cause variation on the lower end, not cheating. And both of those you wanna handle it as special causes. You remind me of... I had a college professor one time that very clearly told us all, "Do not hand anything in before it's due, even if you're finished." And I went up to talk to him afterwards. I said, "Why do you tell people to do that?" And he said, "Well, you just give me more time to grade your work."   0:10:08.7 AS: [laughter]   0:10:09.4 DL: "And I will find something wrong with it." So it's like inspectors in a house, if your job is to be an inspector, that's what you're gonna do. You're gonna find something wrong. Otherwise, why do we have you.   0:10:22.7 AS: Yeah. "I didn't find anything there. I didn't find anything there." What are you doing?   0:10:26.2 DL: Yeah. Why do we need you then? Right. So, I want to get back to this process of, Yes, you have a target date, etcetera. So if I have common cause variation and a large percentage of the students are not meeting the target date and hitting the target standard for that, that's probably a systems problem, a common cause problem. And when you go back and you ask students why, Why is your work not meeting the standard? It could be internal forces, outside forces, there could be all kinds of things like that, that... Maybe the common thing is, Well, I didn't have enough time. Alright, then, where's your time going? What are you doing with your time? We can track that. We can figure that out, etcetera. And you may be right, the task that I'm giving this group actually requires much more time, so in my process upfront, if I'm going to the students and saying, Okay, here's the quality standard for this assignment, how much time do you think you're gonna need to get your work to this standard and turn that in? And so I created a tool for doing that, called the Loss function to figure out, and I got that from the Taguchi loss function and Deming.   0:11:55.0 DL: And I'd just ask students, How many days is it gonna take you to get it to this level? And that was also fascinating too, because many, many times they would take a look at everything that needs to be done, look at all of the other things that they need to do, and they would set a timeline shorter than what I would have done. So I'm actually improving the quality of all the work and shortening the timeline at the same time, which is gonna enable me to move kids to a higher and higher level than ever thought possible before in the same process, simply by asking them. And some things, yes, it might be shorter and some things it might be a bit longer. But I'd rather err on the side of a bit longer and have more students get to an A-level or a quality standard for this than do the opposite process, just arbitrarily set a due date and then grade all of the people performances that comes in. So if we get to the target date, and I look at a child's work. I'm looking at it, I'm not grading it, I'm looking at it to see, does it meet or exceed the standard for this assignment? If it meets or exceeds. Great, [chuckle] right.   0:13:16.2 AS: Yep.   0:13:16.7 DL: And then we can talk about you know how do we put that in a marking book or whatever it might be. What if it doesn't meet or exceed I asked Deming this question, because he taught at New York University, I said, What do you do when you get papers in, and clearly it's not to the standard that you think it should be. He said, Well, I have a conversation with them. I teach, a very, very strange practice, right?   0:13:42.6 AS: Yeah.   0:13:43.7 DL: I'd go back to them, I start to say, Well, I need more explanation about this, or I don't think this is quite right, and I think if you corrected this, you might be right or this, and then they get time to correct that and make it right. It turns out psychologically, which is part of Deming's profound knowledge right... Psychologically, this has huge impact, the power that if I didn't quite get there in the time that I was supposed to get there, I can go back and fix it. I can do it, yeah because...   0:14:14.6 AS: Welcome to the real world.   0:14:16.6 DL: Yes, because my job is to make sure you learn this. Right. Not to play some grading game or... Time game, right? My job is, you see that you learn this material and basically remember it for the rest of your life.   0:14:30.9 AS: Yep. So in the last couple of minutes, let's try to wrap up what we've learned, what we've discussed, I just think about some of the things that I wrote down while you were talking... Right? You made me think like, Okay, the goal of the system of education is to help each kid optimize their learning rather than just a classroom or a teacher optimizing their job. The second thing is, we talked about that you can let go of deadlines, and once you do that, you need to set better maybe operating, operational definitions or what you call quality standards, to more clearly design what it is or define what it is, is a good outcome this is the book, it's called Tom Sawyer. And these are the things that I want you to get out of it, or you internally, or as you said, you can go to the students and talk about what you want out of it, and then special help. The other thing you said is there's special help or special causes where we have someone, for instance, that's struggling, needs special focus, not rating and degrading them with that. What else would you add to the summary of the learnings from that.   0:15:58.0 DL: When you hold everyone to a high standard, you're actually improving performance for the whole system and for the whole standard for everybody and then what people quickly learn is that... Well, if I turn something in on the due date, just because I wanna turn it in on that date, what's gonna happen to me? One, I'm just gonna get a whole bunch of feedback and I'm gonna have to fix it, and now I have twice as much work to do, because now we're going on to the next thing that I need to be working on, and I have to get this fixed up. So what you're teaching people is try to do it right the first time, build quality into your processes, and that was partly my job as a teacher too, is to teach them how to do that, so they get closer and closer and closer to that target date and so they always feel gratified. And in doing that, basically, you can get to a point where almost everyone in your class is getting an A or what we would call A-quality work, right? And when that happens, you have joy in learning, and you have it on a massive scale because everybody's very happy and so...   0:17:13.6 AS: That's great, I love that. And the other thing I was just thinking about is you said something really kind of mind-blowing right at the end, and that was the idea of once you start working with someone and you start... You know you forget about the deadline, like what if we let go of the deadline I can imagine parents thinking that, but what you just said is, you open up a whole new world to this kid who may have been just always struggling with this deadline, and instead you're saying, I want your contribution, no matter what the deadline says, and that... Then as you said, opens up a whole new world for that student to think, Wow, okay, this is different, now I really wanna contribute and so.   0:17:58.1 DL: Well, it's that you... Some people think that maybe this is semantics, etcetera, but by not using the word deadline and I change that to a target date... Makes much more sense. This is the target date. Did I hit the target date? Yes, great. I have nothing to worry about and my work meets or exceeds the standard. Awesome, great. You have nothing to worry about, right? I didn't meet the target date, okay, I got some worries, I gotta get this fixed up, or it didn't meet the standard, Oh, I gotta get this fixed up. So anyway, my goal is to get them to have that joy in learning, because if you think about a student that sort of slopped through it and didn't do a good job and is continually getting Cs, Ds and Fs on things, there's not much joy in that right, right?   0:18:52.7 AS: Definitely. Definitely.   0:18:52.8 DL: You want people to feel really proud of the work Deming talked about that too. Pride of workmanship.   0:18:58.1 AS: And ranking doubles down on that unhappiness feeling that they're feeling right then.   0:19:02.7 DL: Absolutely.   0:19:04.9 AS: So, David, thanks for your contribution, and on behalf of everyone at the Deming Institute, I wanna thank you and our listeners for striving to bring joy in learning.     0:18:52.8 DL: You want people to feel really proud of the work Deming talked about that too. Pride of workmanship.   0:18:58.1 AS: And ranking doubles down on that unhappiness feeling that they're feeling right then. 0:19:02.7 DL: Absolutely. 0:19:04.9 AS: So, David, thanks for your contribution, and on behalf of everyone at the Deming Institute, I wanna thank you and our listeners for striving to bring joy in learning.    

David Langford gives a sermon titled "How to Discover and Use Your Spiritual Gifts". This sermon is on spiritual gifts.

The CEO of Langford International, Inc., David P. Langford, is an international educator, consultant, speaker, author, and trainer who focuses on successfully implementing and applying quality improvement theory, processes, and tools in education. Mr. Langford is the only educator to be awarded the Deming Medal for Excellence in the Application of Statistics in Industry Worldwide for outstanding leadership in combining statistical thinking and management to restore joy in the education system. Langford has developed Langford Learning, a theory of improvement built upon the fundamental teachings of W. Edwards Deming's SoPK (System of Profound Knowledge). Langford Learning incorporates quality improvement methods that enable people to implement and establish strategies and processes that sustain Joy in Learning and create Joy at Work. Langford Learning integrates eight components: a Study in Psychology, Systems Thinking, Understanding Variation, The Theory of Knowledge, Neuroscience, Intrinsic Motivation, use and application of the Probletunity PDSA 9-Step Process, and 64 Quality Improvement Tools. For over three decades, Langford has worked with a diverse range of education organizations – from Pre-K to University – and has taught classes for the University of Alaska, and Central Washington University. Mr. Langford is a member of the Advisory Council for the W. Edwards Deming Institute and the Montana State University Billings College of Business. He has consulted with businesses including Sprint Corporation, Boeing, General Motors, the U.S. Naval Academy, and The Department of Defense. Worldwide, over 50,000 people have attended his Quality Learning Seminars, Leadership Training, and other online training presentations. In addition to leading quality improvement seminars nationally and internationally, Mr. Langford provides professional Consulting, Customized Training, and Keynote presentations specific to learning, applying, and studying the continual quality improvement process. He continues to lead colleagues to create dynamic and sustainable systemic improvement in learning organizations. Featured in the PBS Documentary Quality... or Else, and a highly respected leader in Quality Improvement in Learning Organizations, David P. Langford is the author of Tool Time for Education,Tool Time for Business, Tool Time for Healthcare, and co-author of Tool Time for Lean and Orchestrating Learning with Quality. David P. Langford has published numerous articles and created innovative quality improvement tools such as the Capacity Matrix, Consensogram, If... Then, Morphing, P3T, Parking Lot, and System's Progress. Langford graduated from Montana State University Billings with a B.S. in Education, and he holds a Master's degree in Educational Administration and Supervision from Arizona State University. Mr. Langford's teaching background is in music, technology, and administration. He has also held the position of School Superintendent in southern California Link to claim CME credit: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/3DXCFW3 (https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/3DXCFW3) CME credit is available for up to 3 years after the stated release date Contact CEOD@bmhcc.org if you have any questions about claiming credit.

David Langford gives a sermon titled "What Are Spiritual Gifts?". This sermon is on spiritual gifts. We apologize for the audio quality about half way through this podcast. The power in our church went out and we had to record the audio on a cellphone.

David Langford is the founder and CEO of Langford International, Inc. He is an international consultant, author and educator whose focus is to create sustained systemic improvement in student learning, school leadership and organizational processes. The concepts of Quality Learning, Quality Learning Performance, Just-In-Time Learning, the Self-Managed Classroom and Exponential Learning emerged out of these efforts. For over 20 years, he has trained colleagues in public and private K–12 school systems, universities, colleges, preschools, chambers of commerce and business divisions ranging from Boeing and General Motors to government agencies such as the Department of Defense. He has worked with organizations throughout the United States, as well as in Canada, Europe, Asia, the Middle East and South America. . Connect with us: David Langford: david@langfordlearning.com | langfordlearning.com Hunter Flesch: https://linktr.ee/edessentials --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/edessentials/support

In today's BVBC Pastor Speak podcast, Pastor Derrick talks with David Langford about the importance of the Value Them Both amendment in the state of Kansas. Mr. Langford is leading information outreach to faith groups about the history of this amendment and why our votes are critical.

David Langford covers Galatians 4:8-11 with a message entitled "Knowing and Being Known By God... The Great Antidote To Idolatry". This message is the fifteenth part of our Galatians series.

A las 3.47 AM, uno de los grandes cuentos de David Langford, nos sitúa en esa hora incierta de la madrugada, donde a menudo se desgarra el delicado velo de la realidad para admitir las formas más espantosas de nuestras pesadillas. En este sentido, el relato podría haber servido de inspiración para la leyenda de las 3.33 de la madrugada; horario que, según algunos, equilibra lo real y lo ilusorio en un plano donde pueden manifestarse nuestros miedos más profundos. Puedes leer este y otros muchos relatos en El Espejo Gótico: www.elespejogotico.blogspot.com Estudio de locución: - Micrófono: Neumann TLM-103 - Interfaz: Universal Audio Apollo Twin - Cabina: Demvox ECO100 - Plugins: Universal Audio Estoy en Twitter: @VengadorT Te ofrezco mi voz como locutor online profesional, con estudio propio. Si crees que mi voz encajaría con tu proyecto o negocio contacta conmigo en info@locucioneshablandoclaro.com Escucha el episodio completo en la app de iVoox, o descubre todo el catálogo de iVoox Originals

The reasons landowners decide to put family land under a conservation easement are as varied as the landowners who make them. TALT closes several conservation easements a year, forever protecting the wide-open spaces of Texas. In our latest podcast, Chad Ellis explores conservation easements with several landowners who recently went through the easement process.

In our 44th "Deming Lens" episode, host Tripp Babbitt shares his interpretation of wide-ranging aspects and implications of Dr. Deming's theory of management. This month he looks at the audience demographics of the Deming Institute Podcast. Show Notes [00:00:14] Deming Lens - Episode 44 [00:01:09] The US [00:02:58] By Country Breakout [00:06:14] Top 5 Downloaded Episodes     Transcript [00:00:14] In the 44th episode of The Deming Lens, we'll take a look at the audience that listens to the Deming Insitute podcast.   [00:00:31] Hi, I'm Tripp Babbitt, hosts of the Deming Institute podcast, and in this final episode of our covid filled year of Twenty Twenty, I wanted to cover the audience that the Deming Institute podcast has been playing to.   [00:00:55] And I'm not at liberty to share what the numbers are, but I can share kind of what the coverage is for the world.   [00:01:09] Basically, first of all, shouldn't be any surprise to anyone that all 50 states in the United States have at least listen to the Deming Institue podcast over the years. And it's been almost it'll be seven years, I believe, in April that we started the podcast. But just some kind of interesting statistics and maybe not statistics, but rankings the top states, which shouldn't surprise anyone. Top three states that listen to the podcast are California, Texas and New York.   [00:01:54] And then the states with the fewest downloads are North Dakota, Montana and Alaska.   [00:02:05] And I just every once in a while, I'll go back and I look at some of these statistics and I find them interesting just to kind of and I never I don't can't remember that I've shared these before. But again, I think they're they're interesting now, the top five cities in the US that as far as listenership or downloads are New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Washington, D.C. and Chicago. So I don't know that there be any particular surprises with regards to what the top five cities would be in the US listening to the podcast. Now, this I did find interesting. I did. I also ran data on the top five countries. Well, no surprise the United States has over 50 percent of the listenership.   [00:02:58] Now, at one point when we first started the downloads in the in the US represented 80 percent or more of all downloads. And over the last few years, especially over the last three years, the US number percentage has gone down. It's just a little over 50 percent now. Then you have the U.K., which kind of stands alone at second. And then if I were to probably group the next group and this is where it got a little surprising for me was Canada, which doesn't surprise me, but India, Australia and the Philippines, of all places, I, I kind of expected the India listenership to go up over time as we've interviewed some folks from from India. But the Philippines kind of surprised me. I would guess that as far as the rate of increase of the downloads, India is has definitely shot up the list the fastest the Philippines. I haven't done all the analysis on it, but in essence, kind of came out of nowhere. So it just it just kind of surprised me. And and so that makes basically the top six with the US, UK, Canada, India, Australia and the Philippines. And then there's kind of another group and I'll just kind of round up the top ten, which are Germany, Mexico, Ireland and Brazil. Now, the thing I got curious about were which countries were listening. And then that became a little bit of an overwhelming exercise. So I try to go look at it a different way, which is which countries aren't listening. And there are three and maybe four.   [00:05:04] And I explain that in a second. But the first one is Chad in Africa and the Western Sahara. And there have never been anybody from those countries. So if you knew somebody in that country, have them listen to the podcast and and then we can check them off the list. Another one is Turkmenistan. Hopefully I'm saying that correctly has not. Had anyone from that particular country listen to the podcast and then this one is the one that I'm not sure about, and it's it's Svalbard, which is actually part of Norway. So we've we've had a lot of listeners from Norway and I sometimes some of these ancillary and I don't know what you would call them. I think they reference them as an archipelago kind of standalone, but they're part of Norway doesn't show up.So I'm wondering if it just is something within. Libsyn too. We put our podcast on.   [00:06:14] So those are some of the things that I found looking through here now, the top five podcast episodes, not surprisingly.   [00:06:24] And this one created, I think at the time, some degree of controversy was the conversation I had with Ron Moen about the PDSA cycle where Dr. Deming, he had notes from from Dr. Deming and communications with them that PDC AI was I forget the exact words Dr. Deming used, but something to the effect of, you know, a an abomination of PDSA.   [00:06:54] And that particular episode, it, I think I say, shocked me. But I've seen PDK over the years so often.   [00:07:05] And I started seeing people change over from PDCA to PDSA based on just that podcast alone, that podcast episode alone, the second most listen to podcast kind of surprise me. And some of these are skewed. And I explained that here in just a minute. But what was lujah on who owns a automotive repair shop? And we did an interview with him back in 2015 and it was a good interview. I was a little surprised of the amount of people that had listened to it. But then as I started thinking about it and looking at the Deming Institute website, a lot of these top five that I'm going to go through are promoted on their particular website so they'll show up on a particular page or a popular page.   [00:08:01] So they're people naturally click on them and listen to them.   [00:08:07] The third most listen to podcast episode was Paula Marshall. And I really need to go back in there and do some of the work that I do today on fixing that particular episode. But that whole conversation about how Dr. Deming took Paula Marshall, who owns Bamma companies, and they make apple pies, it was really interesting to me and I learned a lot by listening to that not long after and when I went to the Library of Congress and actually looked through Dr. Deming's files that are there at the Library of Congress for folks to be able to read. But it was a good episode. But I just need to clean up the audio on that a little bit. I didn't have the knowledge I have today and how to do that. I was really early on in doing interviews and podcast episodes. The fourth is the one I did with the Deming Lens, which was point one of Dr. Deming's Fourteen Points.   [00:09:17] I did a whole series on the 14 points where we went through each of the 14.   [00:09:25] I pulled some of the information from the blog. I pulled it from out of the crisis. I pulled it from my notes that I took during Dr. Deming's four day seminar back in the late eighties and.   [00:09:43] So that one obviously shows up on some of the Deming Institute pages also, and then fifth was David Langford on using Dr. Deming's ideas and improving education.   [00:09:54] And David, as someone that I interviewed several times over the years, talking about how he how he applies Dr. Deming's ideas to education. And David is definitely someone who worked with Dr. Deming and, you know, trying to promote his ideas within education.   [00:10:19] So I just thought it was interesting and kind of the end to end the year. I have like I like I said, I haven't really talked about these. And as I mentioned, I'm not at liberty to give the actual volume that are out there.   [00:10:36] But I felt it was OK to at least share some of the things that about the podcast itself and relatively neutral terms. And so that's it for twenty twenty. And I hope everyone has a good into a tough year as far as twenty twenty goes. And as we go into twenty, twenty one, you have a lot of great hopes.   [00:11:05] We have a vaccination now, we have a vaccine now and so there's hope out there again. And getting out of this particular crisis that we're in which is going to lead to a whole series of new problems and individual countries that they're going to be facing in the upcoming years. And a lot of them have to do with the amount of money printing that that is going on, a lot of countries to just kind of keep things going. So best wishes for twenty, twenty one.   [00:11:43] Hi, this is Tripp Babbitt, one way that you can help the Deming Institute and this podcast is by providing a reading on Apple podcasts. If you have additional comments, you can reach me at Tripp@Deming.org.  

In our 40th "Deming Lens" episode, host Tripp Babbitt shares his interpretation of wide-ranging aspects and implications of Dr. Deming's theory of management. This month he looks at the book, The Reckoning" and some of the implications of it. Podcasts mentioned in this episode: 1. Paula Marshall 2. Kevin Cahill 3. Ed Baker 4. Monta Akin 5. Clare-Crawford and Bob Mason   SHOW NOTES [00:00:14] Deming Institute Podcast - Episode 40 [00:00:27] Episode 40 - My Top 5 Favorite Episodes [00:02:06] 1. Paula Marshall [00:04:20] 2. Kevin Cahill [00:05:17] 3. Ed Baker [00:08:52] 4. Monta Akin [00:10:09] 5. Clare-Crawford and Bob Mason TRANSCRIPT Tripp Babbitt: [00:00:14] In the fortieth episode of The Deming Lens, I will go through my top five favorite podcast episodes. Tripp Babbitt: [00:00:27] Hi, I'm Tripp Babbitt, host of the Deming Institute podcast and the Deming Lens, and this is Episode 40. I thought I would switch things up a little bit. I was doing a lot of reflecting over the past week or so, thinking about all the people I've had the pleasure of interviewing for the Deming Institute podcast. So I kind of came up with lack of a better term, my five favorite podcast episodes. And there are a ton of people that merfolk every interview I've done. I've either learned something or just had great enjoyment. Tripp Babbitt: [00:01:08] And talking to folks that admired the work of W. Edwards Deming, people like Alfie Kohn and David Langford and Dick Steele and Ron Moen and Cliff Norman and Dan Robertson and I could go on and on and on. There are a ton of good interviews, some better than others, as I got better at doing podcasting. But it was it has been a real enjoyment for me to learn from different people and not just gaining knowledge, but but the. History of how different people came into contact with Dr. Deming's work or him or himself. And so my top five, I'll just first name them, go through him a little bit, and I hope that you'll take an opportunity to listen to some of these folks. Tripp Babbitt: [00:02:06] But my number one is Paula Marshall. Second is my inaugural interview with Kevin Cahill. My third was Ed Baker and my fourth was Monáe Aiken from Leander School District, and my fifth was Claire Crawford and Bob Mason that I had the opportunity to talk to. So let me just talk about starting with Paula Marshall. I, I love that episode so much because not only did you get a little history, but Paula Marshall is a dynamic person. She has a lot of personality. She's fun to talk to. And she owns a company called Bamma Companies, and they make the apple pies for McDonalds all over the world and still do. And so she runs this family, basically family initiated and family owned business. And we got into a conversation about performance appraisals. And I wish I would have known about better audio quality back in those days because is one of the early interviews. But my interview with her is a little bit sketchy on the audio. Tripp Babbitt: [00:03:19] But overall, it was one of those interviews that just I got a lot of energy from it, like a lot of energy from Paula Marshall and talking about her experience in having poor quality at Bamma companies and how she was kind of nudged towards going to one of Dr. Deming's four day seminars, her interactions with them, but also just how he interacted with her and going and moving away from performance appraisals and what she had done up to that point. I'll let you listen to the episode itself. But and I later had the opportunity to meet Paula at a couple of Deming Institute events. But I think you will enjoy it if you haven't if you've not listened to some of the early interviews. Again, I apologize about some of the quality of it. I was the no, really what I was doing at the beginning. Now we're six years later. Seven years later. Tripp Babbitt: [00:04:20] The second one is Kevin Cahill, the inaugural. Now, obviously, even when I interviewed Kevin, I did not have my own equipment. I hadn't purchased any equipment because I wasn't sure how this would go. And the equipment for podcast can be very expensive once you start getting mixers and digital recorders and things of that sort. So I actually had a friend that had podcasting equipment and so I use that for my interview with Kevin. But I really enjoyed that interview because of the stories he told about Dr. Deming, including how what happened the night that he watched the NBC White Paper. If Japan can, why can't we? And just the the storytelling there and the history of it isn't lost with me. Tripp Babbitt: [00:05:17] Third, Ed Baker, now Ed Baker.He his interview was interesting to me. He he traveled along with Dr. Deming, with Ford. And it kind of goes through the Ford story, talks about Taylorism. He talks about the improvement methods of today. Tripp Babbitt: [00:05:37] But the reason I probably enjoyed the Ed Baker interview is because I had to prep so much for that. Not only did I read his book, but I read about it. Baker looked for previous references and other books, but I just remember it from a lot of preparation standpoint. I read the book twice, but I think before we did the interview and there's a lot of good things in there. He'll tell basically the message that I that I think I got out of that interview was, you know, whether it's Lean or Six Sigma or TQM or any other improvement methodology that most of the people that are enjoying those methodologies are missing the system of profound knowledge. Tripp Babbitt: [00:06:21] So, again, that would be appreciation for system theory and knowledge, theory, variation and psychology and and those four things that were being emphasized as opposed to just the statistical process control types of things that a lot of people focus in on, on Six Sigma and Lean. I think this is quite a. Tripp Babbitt: [00:06:47] Quite a bit of this, but he also talks about in there about Jim McConville, our mattress Mac, as he's known at gallery furniture in the story of what happened there. Tripp Babbitt: [00:06:58] And that was one of the Jim McIngvale is a person that has been mentioned a number of times in Dr. Deming's books as someone who changed from very sales type of attitude to understanding a system. And he's he's well known in the Houston area for a lot of things that he's done, like when they had the hurricane, how he opened his stores and just let people in during that time period and kind of not only paying it forward, but that, you know, these are it's funny you think about if people are selfish enough, they'd be altruistic as kind of the thing because you treat everybody really well. And I think that that when I think of Jim McIngvale, I think of that quote, not that he said it, but just what applies to to him. But Ed Baker talking about that story was good. Excuse me. Good for me. He also was very influential in that interview. Got me thinking about thinking and how we need to change thinking the way we think about things. And I developed this model I call the ninety five method, but it involves looking through a customer lens but looking through a thinking lens. And and Ed Baker talks quite a bit about thinking and influence the udemy training that I put it put out there based off of a lot of the things out of that interview and what kept getting deeper and deeper in understanding, thinking that was going on, mental models and things of that sort. Tripp Babbitt: [00:08:52] The fourth interview that I really enjoyed was with Monta Akin, and Monacan is a, first of all, just a sweetheart of a person, but she shared the story. She worked at the Leander School District. I believe she's retired now. Tripp Babbitt: [00:09:09] But how she had listened to things that were happening with David Langford and Sitka, Alaska, and about how education was being applying the Deming method with some of the things that David Langford was doing. Tripp Babbitt: [00:09:28] And she was really the first person to really talk about education. As someone from a school district, I'd listen to the story of David Langford and had interviewed them, but just her grasping some concepts and, you know, waking up in the middle of the night while watching, you know, if Japan can, why can't we? And our interactions with David Langford all were really relevant to me. And I'm kind of a, I don't know, amateur history buff, not only about Dr. Deming, but but a number of other things and really enjoyed that history. Tripp Babbitt: [00:10:09] And the fifth person that I really became one of my favorite episodes is with Claire Crawford Mason and Bob Mason, her husband, and just a number of things that really stand out in my mind. I go back to all five of these quite often, actually. And Claire Crawford, Mason talks about how she first met Dr. Deming and and some of the things that were happening that led up to the white paper of Japan can why can't we, which you can watch at the Deming Institute website. I think it's also on YouTube, if I remember correctly. Tripp Babbitt: [00:10:45] But kind of the the what launched Dr. Deming back in this country, even though he was already famous over in Japan and just the history of how everything kind of degenerated into this white paper. And, you know, we didn't have a like today for some of you, we don't have a thousand.We didn't have a thousand channels back in 1980, basically ABC, NBC and CBS. Tripp Babbitt: [00:11:15] And that was it. I mean, really that that you would listen to. So they almost had those three stations had a virtual monopoly on as far as television goes or communication goes. But the history of that is really relevant to me. I enjoyed that type of history, again, the same type of thing with mine again. And, you know, there were different quotes out of there. You listen to how Dr. Deming loved the fact that Bob Mason went to Harvard. We went to the business school and how Dr. Deming thought they were teaching the wrong things in Harvard Business School. Tripp Babbitt: [00:11:56] And every time he would meet with Bob or see Bob, you would ask him about all the bad stuff that Harvard was teaching about business, which is not only funny, but it was interesting to me. So anyway, those are my top five. Tripp Babbitt: [00:12:12] I didn't mean to slight anybody. I've learned so much from working with all of these or interviewing all of these different people and some of the conversations that I've had with them and certainly the post conversations that I've had with a lot of these folks about things that maybe were more relevant to me or thought were relevant to me and not necessarily relevant to the broader audience. Tripp Babbitt: [00:12:35] But anyway, those are my top five. I will put links to those and this episode so people can can go and listen to them on their own. But that's what I wanted to cover this week. I hope this change would be a little bit different for you and learning about some other episodes and some of the things we've I don't know what the number is now of episodes that we've done, but it's a lot. So thank you for listening and we'll talk again in a month or so. Tripp Babbitt: [00:13:10] Thank you for listening to the Deming Institute podcast, stay updated on the latest blogs, podcasts, programs and other activities at Deming dot org.    

Show Notes No Agenda Episode 1267 - "Trust Stamp" "Trust Stamp" Direct [link] to the mp3 file ShowNotes Archive of links and Assets (clips etc) 1267.noagendanotes.com Sign Up for the newsletter Archive of Shownotes (includes all audio and video assets used) archive.noagendanotes.com The No Agenda News Network- noagendanewsnetwork.com RSS Podcast Feed Experimental IPFS RSS Feed Get the No Agenda News App for your iPhone and iPad Get the NoAgendDroid app for your Android Phone Torrents of each episode via BitLove document.write("Last Modified " + document.lastModified)This page created with the FreedomController Credits "Trust Stamp" Executive Producers: Sir Onymous of Dogpatch and Lower Slobbovia Tony Cabrera No Agenda Shop Earl Walkman of Buckeye Troy Kropog Sir Julian (Earl of the South Bay and Autonomous Cars) Mr. Seven from Lotusland Steven Schnuelle Associate Executive Producers: Colin Preston Sir Peet Sir Ever of the What David Langford Emma Pilgrim Dave Basore Maleka Cook Become a member of the 1268 Club, support the show here Knights & Dames Andrew -> Sir Andrew David Langford -> Sir Sidereal Art By: Darren O'Neill Engineering, Stream Management & Wizardry Mark van Dijk - Systems Master Ryan Bemrose - Program Director NEW: and soon on Netflix: Animated No Agenda End of Show Mixes: John Fletcher & Carolyn Blaney - Tom Starkweather - Jesse Coy Nelson Sign Up for the newsletter ShowNotes Archive of links and Assets (clips etc) 1267.noagendanotes.com New: Directory Archive of Shownotes (includes all audio and video assets used) archive.noagendanotes.com RSS Podcast Feed Get the No Agenda News App for your iPhone and iPad Get the NoAgendDroid app for your Android Phone No Agenda Lite in opus format NoAgendaTorrents.com has an RSS feed or show torrents document.write("Last Modified " + document.lastModified)This page created with the FreedomController 17230 Keywords

In our 34th "Deming Lens" episode, host Tripp Babbitt shares his interpretation of wide-ranging aspects and implications of Dr. Deming's theory of management. This month he looks at joy in learning with a discussion on grades in schools. Show Notes [00:00:14] Deming Lens #34 - Joy in Learning? [00:01:47] The Deming Players in Education [00:03:32] Wisconsin School Replaces Grades [00:04:29] Dr. Deming on Education [00:07:25] Experimentation Leading to Improvement is Needed [00:09:08] Andrea Gabor - Special Needs School [00:09:55] 13% Don't Graduate from High School [00:11:07] Artificial Scarcity [00:13:17] Alfie Kohn on Grades     Transcript Tripp: [00:00:14] In the thirty fourth episode of the Deming Lens, we'll take a look at Dr. Demings views on joy in learning specifically around grades.   Tripp: [00:00:28] Hi, I'm Tripp Babbitt, host of the Deming Institute podcast in this Deming lens.   Tripp: [00:00:34] I have been listening to the television and reading some things about education and it really brought me back to Joy in learning and I apologize ahead of time. This is going to be some random thoughts. I often do that just to provoke conversation amongst people within the Deming community about maybe what should be going on with education. We've had in the Deming community, a lot of people speak about education. Chief among them is David Langford and I've interviewed David a few times. If you go to podcasts, Dot Deming, Dot, Oregon, you do a search on David Langford. You can listen to some of those interviews. And also, I've had a few conversation with Andrea Gábor, who wrote a book about Dr. Deming, who is a and she is a Deming advocate, but she writes quite a bit about education. Another person heavily involved from the Deming community is Alfie Cohn, who's written many, many books. And I've interviewed Alfie on the podcast also.   Tripp: [00:01:47] And all of these people. Alfie, I almost look at as philosopher slash educator about education in and of itself. David Langford's in kind of the front lines associated with the education system. And Andrea writes quite a bit for Harper's and Bloomberg in a number of other mediums that she communicates through. And if you get a chance, read some of her stuff. She's a very prolific writer. No one but two. She's heavily and deeply involved and tracking history of things like charter schools and government run schools and things of that sort, which is a lot of controversy.   Tripp: [00:02:42] But what got me started on this education thing this week was I saw the interview on one of the networks about a Wisconsin school system that had eliminated grades.And it just kind of set my mind to the thinking, you know.   Tripp: [00:03:07] How long have we been at this? Within the Deming community about trying to change the education system, we're certainly not the only ones trying to influence that. And these. This interview was a basically instead of having grades, they had something else. And I will go into the detail of that, because I don't think it's that significant.   Tripp: [00:03:32] But you can look into the Wisconsin school system without grades and it kind of replaced it more with adeno something more.Well, let me just kind of break down what they what they wrote. It's the they have exceeding meeting, developing and emerging students. And the article doesn't go into enough depth.   Tripp: [00:03:58] So I'm not really even get a link to it. As far as what's the result of this system, it was more of a attack on them eliminating grades. And I'm not sure that replacing it with what they have is has created any new results for it.   Tripp: [00:04:16] But then I started to go back to my Deming.Books and. It took me back to the basics.   Tripp: [00:04:29] You know, Dr. Deming wrote in the New Economics about a system of schools and he writes a system of schools, public schools, private schools, Peru for all schools, trade schools, universities, for example, is not merely pupils, teachers, school boards, boards of regents and parents working separately to achieve their own aims. It should be instead a system in which these groups work together to achieve the aims that the community has for the school growth and development of children and preparation for them to contribute to the prosperity of society. And Dr. Deming goes on to write, It should be a system of education which pupils from toddlers on up through the university take a joy in learning free from fear of grades and gold stars. And which teachers take joy in their work. Free from fear and ranking. It should be a system that recognizes differences between pupils. And differences between teachers. Such a system of schools would be destroyed if some group of schools decided to band together to lobby for their own special interest. They, together with all the schools, would be in time, would in time be losers.   Tripp: [00:05:51] And, you know, I think the takeaway for me from the New Economics from this is the joy in learning piece and how we've built these schools around the grading system.   Tripp: [00:06:06] It's so it it takes over the thinking of really everyone in that system. And Dr. Deming obviously railed against grades, but you look at each of the stakeholders in it.   Tripp: [00:06:21] You know, pupils focus in on the grade and not the learning. And I think that, you know, as I look back at when I was growing up, you know, that was it. It was degrading care, what you learned. Let's get a good grade, because that's what people paid attention to. You know, and teachers are dealing with grades all the time. What's going to be on the test is question often asked to teachers. And, you know, even parents, you know, I was given five dollars for every a I got. And if it was anything other than an add and get anything.   Tripp: [00:06:59] So, you know, we've got this entire system with people that have grown up this way.And, you know, if it was, quote unquote, the way I had to live with it and not even good, then you should have to live with it, too.And I think this is a this is a universal problem. And the fact that we have this in education then is reflected in business, too.   Tripp: [00:07:25] I came across the article and linked and that Clifford Norman posted and, you know, talking about how, you know.Businesses maybe are finally starting to experiment. I thought, geez, you know, shouldn't we be doing that all the time and learning? And the problem might think we have is the fear of experimentation. And Doug Hall's talks quite a bit about that and innovation. There's this fear of failure. We don't innovate enough. And you've got you, Cliff Norman and this article that, you know, experimentation. It's like something new. And it was in Harvard Business Review is where the article was from. And it really does set my mind thinking about how little we experiment with the aim of learning.   Tripp: [00:08:19] It's kind of a you know, it's proving silly. It's it's a zero sum game.   Tripp: [00:08:24] There's gonna be winners and losers in all of these situations. And we tried it your way. You were wrong. And, you know, this is kind of bleeds out into Democrats and Republicans and conservatives and liberals. And I keep wondering, where's the learning? Forget about the joy in learning. But where's the learning in general?   Tripp: [00:08:44] In some in these systems. But going back to education, you know.   Tripp: [00:08:51] Eliminating grades challenges our education system and the people in it and the people I just talked about, the administrators, the teachers, the parents and the students, but the existing system is leaving people behind.   Tripp: [00:09:08] I just read an article by Andrea Gabor about a special needs school that was really doing some great things that cost per pupil was higher, which you might expect because somebody with, let's say, autism is going to have to get some extra help. But think of the benefits of that. If you can get this student to function normally within society and learn at the same time become a productive member.Back to Dr. Demings Aim. And unfortunately, I had to look up the numbers, but there in our existing system leaves too many behind.   Tripp: [00:09:55] How many people just give up? Ultimately, because, you know, they aren't getting good grades in school. Well, we know from the figures that I just saw, about 13 percent never graduate from high school, you know? So what happens with these people? And now some of them go on to great careers and find their find their ability to learn. But unfortunately, the barrier was our education system.   Tripp: [00:10:24] So I really you know, as as I look at this, I'm saying, what do we do next? What can we do as a a community? Deming, the Deming community to live through this education system.   Tripp: [00:10:43] And as I said, the people that I mentioned earlier are people all working on it.Are are all voices within the education system. But it just doesn't seem that learning is happening quite a quite a bit. I made some notes as I started going back to similar videos of David Langford talking at some of the Deming conferences and things.   Tripp: [00:11:07] And I think the words that kept coming up in my mind were artificial scarcity, the artificial scarcity that grades produce within the education system.   Tripp: [00:11:21] And and David Langford talks quite a bit about that in that, you know, why can't everybody get an A in a particular class and shouldn't that, you know, over whether there should be grades or not, everybody should have the opportunity to achieve, you know, in a state status.   Tripp: [00:11:40] And by virtue of putting the grades in school, we're creating this system of koc of competition. And I was always fascinated by some of the stories that that David talks about, about his students. You know, once they got kind of everybody is gonna get an a what's what's focus on learning how the people that got something much faster were able to help the people that weren't quite connecting and humorously.   Tripp: [00:12:11] He talks about how, you know, he's listening to these conversations between somebody who's understanding it and somebody who doesn't understand it.   Tripp: [00:12:21] As far as his students and how this person with the understanding would communicate in a way that David said, you know, I'd I'd I'd like they'll never get this by what they're saying, but it connected and that person was able to learn. And, you know, this goes back to some of Russell, a cough stuff that, you know, he talked quite a bit about the education system, specifically talks in terms of, you know, the traditional education system that focuses on teaching and not learning.   Tripp: [00:12:57] And he put a lot of emphasis on the fact that the actual learning comes about by teaching. And so the teacher learns more, but the student doesn't get it. We've lost the aim of what education is really all about.   Tripp: [00:13:17] So, you know, I wrote some a few things down that even Klfie Cohn talked about. One is the effects of grades. He says three things. Grades tend to diminish interest. The extrinsic motivation drives out the intrinsic motivation because the focus is all on the grade and not really the learning. The second thing he says is grades create a preference for the easiest possible task. So if you're going to get graded on something, why would I take on something hard, because if I'm going to want to get a grade, I want to get the way. I don't want to have to, you know.   Tripp: [00:14:01] Put extra effort in. And then get a C or a D. Because I wanted to challenge my learning. The third thing is grades reduce the quality of the student's thinking. And here he goes in and and talks about cheating. And you know how we'd generate this fear of failure. And it just you know, as you read all these things, you get back to really what the education system should be about, which is developing lifelong learners.   Tripp: [00:14:33] So my final question is, if learning is the aim, then what is the method that we're going to use and how are we going to continue to learn about what actually works rather than fighting over who's the winner and who's the loser of the last idea?   Tripp: [00:14:54] This is really ingrained in our society now, and I see this every day. And a lot of the transactions that you have in talking with people is somebody has to win and somebody has to lose. And this is really damaging not only our education system, but the way we go about thinking in politics and business and just about everything else. I hope this stimulated some conversation. If you listening to this about what the state of the education system in Yaffe through the lens of the grades. But like I said, I like to Deming lens to to become something more of stimulating conversation about very tough, big issues that are out there.   Tripp: [00:15:44] Thank you for listening to the Deming Institute podcast. Stay updated on the latest blogs, podcasts, programs and other activities at Deming.org.  

In our 33rd "Deming Lens" episode, host Tripp Babbitt shares his interpretation of wide-ranging aspects and implications of Dr. Deming's theory of management. This month he looks at transforming an organization using the Deming Philosophy. Show Notes [00:00:14] Deming Institute Podcast -Deming Lens Episode 33 [00:00:28] Changes to Release of Episodes [00:01:00] Transformation [00:01:43] Transformation of an Organization [00:04:42] Three Reasons to Transform [00:06:42] Transformation from The New Economics and Out of the Crisis [00:08:35] Continuous cs. Continual Improvement     Transcript Tripp: [00:00:14] In the thirty third Deming lens, we'll talk about transformation and the Deming philosophy.   Tripp: [00:00:28] Hi, I'm Tripp Babbitt, host of the Deming Institute podcast this month we're making some changes, I'm going to be doing 12 to 15 episodes during the course of 2020 and that that could be subject to change. But right now the plan is that I will at least do one of these Deming lens per month unless there's an interview that will be conducting.   Tripp: [00:01:00] This month, I'd like to cover transformation and transformation is significant to me because it was the first time I had heard it really applied to an organization back in the eighties when I was listening to Dr. Demings four day seminar and when he mentioned transformation for an organization, I thought that was so unusual.   Tripp: [00:01:28] I'd always heard people transforming themselves may maybe going from, you know, alcohol abuse to being sober or the way that they changed their lives, those types of things.   Tripp: [00:01:43] But it's the first time I heard the word transformation applied to an organization, so. I'd like to just kind of give you some observations, some quotes from Dr. Deming from both Out of the Crisis and The New Economics. And the first quote that I have written out here is the first step, and this is from out of Out of the Crisis step in the transformation is learn how to change.   Tripp: [00:02:12] That is to understand and use the 14 points and to cure themselves of the diseases, long term solvency, them solving problems big and small will not halt the decline of American industry, nor will computers, gadgets and robotic machinery and not even statistical methods.   Tripp: [00:02:33] So this is one of the things that really stood out to me in that he was saying and Out of the Crisis. The first step transformation is to learn how to change. And I would agree with that. I think that it and it's something that is very personal. But I think a lot of people, when they were first listening to Dr. Demings message thought transformation in terms of not necessarily themselves, even though they may have been transformed as an individual, but thinking in terms of the organization and in The New Economics, he said that the transformation begin.   Tripp: [00:03:19] The first step to transformation is with the individual. So The New Economics, which was written later, I think kind of qualifies that that change really has to happen at the individual level before you can really move to the organization. Now, I've experimented with different ways of doing this over the years and definitely there are some people that are not going to get transformed. You have to find people who are exploring or curious or put them in a mode of discovery in order to transform themselves.They have to be you know, you can't.   Tripp: [00:03:59] As I've mentioned in other episodes of this podcast that you cannot out logic somebody. You can not.Argue with them. They're not going to accept some of the things they're telling. And I've worked hard over the years to find ways for them. Them being the individual to discover for themselves and some people you spend some time on and others are never going to accept it. And that's just the nature of people. But, you know, I think the key here in making a transformation is getting to that critical mass of people.   Tripp: [00:04:42] Now, Russell, Ackoff mentioned the three ways that that reasons that people would be willing to transform themselves. The first way is that they're in a crisis. And the second way is that the CEO adopts it. And I think we see some of that with a lot of the people in the Deming community.   Tripp: [00:05:01] You had extaordinary leaders like Dick Steel and Paula Marshall and others that have gone out there and just said this is the right thing for me. Now, some of these people worked with Dr. Deming himself. So that obviously makes it a little bit easier to adopt. The third thing is that and where most transformation happens is going to be by other people within the organization that think it's the right thing to do for their company, for their organization. And they just kind of pick up the they got the gantlet and say, I'm gonna I'm gonna do this and they get other people involved. And I think that's not a bad way of going about it. You'd have to start somewhere. And as Dr. Deming told David Langford in a previous interview that I had with David was that when you reach a critical mass of people, so if you get a hundred people in your organization that Dr. Deming said the square root. Now, whether he made that up or whatever, it kind of makes sense to me. If you get 10 people on a 100 person organization to adopt that thinking, that's that's a lot of power within an organization to be able to make change within it. So this idea of starting with the individual does make sense to me. And then as you get to understand the first of all, the Deming philosophy or have a method to do so that you can begin the transformation from there.   Tripp: [00:06:42] So let me walk through a few of the things that I've written down. I just kind of pulled out from the word transformation. That was pretty repetitive. One thing that he said quite often in The New Economics and Out of the Crisis was that the transformation is to a new style of management. And and he really emphasized this multiple times in both books. Now, obviously, in the The New Economics would talk in terms of system, a profound knowledge. And then out of Out of the Crisis talk in terms of 14 points and the deadly diseases. But. He he was very adamant within the new The New Economics know, this is not for application to just shut the shop floor, and where we see a lot of the activities are the transformations going on. These wonderful things happen at the worker level and middle management gets a little bit weaker sometimes depending on who's champing at the bit. You know, you get to the executive, the executive level and then it gets a little rougher go and then obviously things die out. I think, you know, as I reflect on years of working with the Demings philosophy, I think the problem is we haven't focused on methods for executives to be able to adopt the Deming philosophy. I think it just makes sense at a worker level. I've never had a seminar or a workshop or a speech that I've given where the workers aren't standing there or sitting there shaking their heads.   Tripp: [00:08:35] Yeah, well, this yeah, it makes perfect sense, you know, to me. But you know, this isn't what our management's doing. And so we're Dr. Deming focused his time and effort was with management. And management is not a a does not necessarily want to be complicit in change. He liked the system the way that they like. And transformation for them is something. Now, that's something for the shop floor. And I think that these are some of the failings associated with things like Six Sigma and lean on other things that he talked about that, you know, he talked quite a bit about. It's not spontaneous. You have to kind of struggle with some of these concepts. I think at an individual and organizational level, as I've witnessed over the years, that there is no instant pudding. He also talked quite a bit and this is an interesting one to me because he talks in terms of its transformation is discontinuous. Now, I and the Deming users group that I participated in here in Indianapolis, one of the things we'd always say is continual improvement as opposed to continuous improvement. And that was a way for me anyway, as I could tell, whether people were Deming followers in the area by the words that they use, if they use the words continual improvement as opposed to continue suppor movement.   Tripp: [00:10:01] I knew that they were kind of in the Deming community.And the reason I was given that there is a difference between these two words is that it's an improvement is not continuous, it's not a straight line up, or that sometimes you have to take a couple steps back before you can move forward, which makes perfect sense when you start to look at plan to study, act and and experimentation sometimes. You know, this experiment is going to fail and you've got to move on to either another idea or pivot from it or scrap it or whatever you need to do. One other thing that he talked about in The New Economics was when I looked up, transformation was coming, that that the transformation has come from an outside view. And I think this is so important. And sometimes people say, oh, well, I need to get a consultant and then to be able to do the transformation. I certainly believe that can probably facilitate things happening faster for you. But I think more importantly is that you're taking a different view of your organization in order to make the transformation of yourself personally. It's something that I've been very passionate about as finding ways or methods for people to follow so that they can get an outside view, but not necessarily have somebody on site with them.   Tripp: [00:11:36] He also talked in terms of an Out of the Crisis, he talked on the transformation, that it's a directed effort and that it's a long term commitment and that it's everybody's job is job. And those are the primary words that are associated with Dr. Deming and transformation. One last comment I'll make about transformation is when you when you work with people, when or when I've worked with organizations, some people say, well, this is just common sense. And you know, Dr. Deming, I always laugh because when Dr. Deming would would talk in terms of what commonsense has told us to do in the past, and they are things like rank people on the job, the rank teams, divisions, dealers, the costs in hospitals reward the best, punish the worse quotas. Speak to a person that made the error. Reward the salesman of the month. All of these things are things that obviously people thought were common sense.   Tripp: [00:12:52] And I and a lot of them are steeped in different thinking.   Tripp: [00:12:58] And this is the transformation. It's it's a transformation of the way that you think. And taking the Deming philosophy and applying that to yourself first. You getting getting a view, then I think you can begin to look at the organization and maybe pull other people and get to the critical mass that we talked about in order to make that transformation.   Tripp: [00:13:26] Thank you for listening to the Deming Institute podcast. Stay updated on the latest blogs, podcasts, programs and other activities at Deming dot org.  

In our 29th "Deming Lens" episode, host Tripp Babbitt shares his interpretation of wide-ranging aspects and implications of Dr. Deming's theory of management. Show Notes [00:00:15] Deming Lens - Episode 29 [00:00:32] Point 14 - Take Action to Accomplish the Transformation [00:02:23] Two Takeaways - Top Management Leading the Transformation and Critical Mass [00:03:55] Top Management vs Individual Transformation [00:05:14] Critical Mass [00:08:40] Dr. Ed Baker - The Symphony of Profound Knowledge [00:11:17] Doug Hall - Innovation     Transcript Tripp: [00:00:15] In the twenty ninth episode of the Deming Lens, we go through the last of Dr. Demings 14 points. Point 14, take action to accomplish the transformation.   Tripp: [00:00:32] Hi, I'm Tripp Babbitt, host of the Deming Institute podcast, and I took a bit of a hiatus from Demings 14 points for a while because when I was researching all 14 points probably close to a year ago before I even started this Deming lens, focus on the 14 points of Dr. Deming. I really got sidetracked on what I believe Dr. Demings challenge to people using his philosophy, whether that's people within the Dumain community or from without the Deming community. And it actually helped me to launch a podcast that I'll talk about later because of point 14, which is accomplished the transformation. And I have some thoughts about that and some things that maybe we can all do moving forward. But as usual, I'd like to start with Dr. Deming talking about point 14,.   Dr. Deming: [00:01:43] Number 14. Let's get about it. How do you go about top management? I think we reconstituted that movement will have to come from top management. You must create a critical mass in the company that understands the job of top management is. Otherwise, they cannot do the work. There's critical mass. How do you go about seminars, teaching, providing fit material, classes? Anything. Do it.   Tripp: [00:02:23] Now, there's a few things that Dr. Deming actually two things that Dr. Deming talked about in this segment that we just listened to. He talked about top management and he talked about critical mass. And when you look at top management as the focus to make the transformation that seems to come into conflict with some of the things that the director of the Deming Institute, Dr. Demings grandson, Kevin Cahill, talks in terms of that you have to transform the individual. Now, how can you focus on top management versus the individual? Well, you have to start with somebody in a position within the organization. And top management in order to really begin the transformation. But the transformation does begin with that individual, someone, you know, within the existing hierarchy, because they haven't been enlightened by the Deming philosophy. So there has to be someone that sees some worth within the organization. Now, I'm not going to say that it's just top management, cause certainly I have seen and I am of the belief that you can start from other parts of the organization to begin to get the second item. Other than top management, which is a critical mass.   Tripp: [00:03:55] But going back to this kind of top management versus individual transformation in order to get resources, typically you're going to need to get top management involved to do you know whether it's education or console consulting or just allowing time resources to be able to work on the philosophy itself will involve someone that can.   Tripp: [00:04:22] Give you resources within an organization to do so. Now, that doesn't mean you can't do something on your own. I certainly started that way by reading Dr. Demings books and things of that sort. But it certainly is helpful to have someone in an executive position or a position of influence. Maybe you would be a better word to help get things kicked off. So I don't see Dr. Demings focus on top management and Kevin Cahill's talking about. You have to begin with the transformation by individual. Those two things, I believe, are. They work together. It's part of a part of the system. Now, let's talk about the critical mass.   Tripp: [00:05:14] The second component, which is something that I I had read many times and out of the crisis and the new economics and things of that sort. It wasn't till a conversation with David Langford that I started looking at this critical mass. And David Langford told me that Dr. Deming shared with him when he asked him about, you know, what is the what is a critical mass within an organization? And that Dr. Deming said that it was the square root of the number of people in the organization. So a critical mass for a hundred person organization would be 10 people.   Tripp: [00:05:54] And I thought, OK, so what in essence he's saying is if you can get a critical mass of people within the organization thinking in the ways of the Deming philosophy, then you can begin to make the transformation. And David Langford was a teacher, so he wasn't an administrator of the school, but he was able to get the the resources because he made a compelling argument associated with transforming, transforming a school in the Deming philosophy in Sitka, Alaska, because of.   Tripp: [00:06:35] His ability to work with Dr. Deming and then apply those principles to beginning that transformation. So it is possible. And I again, I've worked with organizations where I've started with people that were more middle management and beginning to see things differently and using different tools that got the interest of executives.   Tripp: [00:07:02] And then we start to pull them in. So there are ways to make the transformation happen. And to begin to get a critical mass of people.   Tripp: [00:07:12] Now, I always focus on people that are open to the message. So if there's someone within an organization that calls me up and they'll say, I'd like to get started in this, then I will give them a series of things to read. We'll have a few conversations and they can begin to not only transform themselves, but then they can also begin to transform other people by sharing what it is that they're learning. And I give them a variety of things to do. And I've done this for many years now, kind of a almost a personal coaching.   Tripp: [00:07:46] So there is a way to transform yourself nowhere where no matter where you sit within an organization with the aim of getting a new perspective, a new way of thinking within the organization, starting with yourself. So this is going to be part of the Deming Institute's focus is how do we transform the individual? Now, here is something that I think is the challenge.   Tripp: [00:08:21] If you go back to the interview I did with Ed Baker, he was asked by Dr. Deming or had a conversation with Dr. Deming, where Dr. Deming said to to Ed Baker that he needed to write a book because he had a different perspective than Dr. Deming had different education.   Tripp: [00:08:40] There are a lot of things that Ed Baker had that Dr. Deming said because of these things, because you have a different perspective that, you know, I'd like to see you write a book. Now, if he didn't do it properly for 30 years later. But but he wrote he you know, he wrote a very good book called The Symphony of Profound Knowledge. So here's the kicker. Basically, as I was going back through Dr. Demings 14 points, it came to mind to me that Dr. Deming was looking for a variety of perspectives on communicating the DMA, the Deming philosophy. Now, none of them are Korac. None of us are Dr. Deming. Some of us have studied Dr. Deming for a long period of time, especially within the Deming community. But we all have a perspective and we all have something to offer in the way of either a model or a blog, podcast or whatever. And so this is one of the reasons that I launched a podcast called Mind Your Noodles. So where I'm taking neuroscience and some of the findings in neuroscience that actually seem to be supporting a lot of what Dr. Demings message was and his philosophy and begin to build a model based on the Deming philosophy. Now, I'm not the only one out there doing this, but I think there ought to be more. I think Dr. Demings philosophy and if you listen to some of the things that he said, it was almost a challenge to all of us that were followers to what was to come up with a way to accomplish the transformation. Now, be the first one to say, I know he would quote, I believe from George Box that there is no perfect model. Some are useful. So we can have to take that. But I I believe there's more to be offered by people doing things to promote the philosophy, not necessarily as the forefront, but as a underlying base to the lot of the things that we're doing. So my attempt was coming up with a podcast and beginning to build, in essence, a model based on the dumbing philosophy. Now, others have done this.   Tripp: [00:11:17] There's Doug Hall, who does and uses the Deming philosophy in his innovation methods. So he's come up with a method for a system for doing. Innovation based in the Deming philosophy, is it flawed? Yeah.   Tripp: [00:11:40] So it was mine, by the way. And is it constantly being scrutinized and upgraded and updated and refined and all of that? Yes, because he has gone through middie iterations as I'm going through as I build my model.   Tripp: [00:11:59] And actually Doug's innovation piece fits into the model that I'm building. So, yeah, we've got this people. We have people out there that have ideas about how to do the Deming philosophy and we can can continue to learn. But I'd like the idea of learning from doing by virtue of a blog. By virtue of our podcast. Speaking of whatever it might be, where you can continue to refine your message as well as get the message out to people.   Tripp: [00:12:40] So my challenge to people that are interested in the dubbing philosophy. People from within the community is to do those things.   Tripp: [00:12:49] Go out and write a start a blog, do a podcast. You'll build a platform, a stage where the Deming philosophy can be communicated moving forward and refine it. Dr. Deming was the first one, in essence to say, you know, I make no apologies for learning and I think advancing the thinking associated with the Deming philosophy. For those of you who think that the Deming philosophy is the static thing, it can't be because Dr. Deming was hardly static. It's constantly adjusting his theories. He was constantly adjusting his philosophy from what he he saw. And things have changed. And I think that in order to keep up with the changes that are happening, we've got to find new platforms, new stages, books, podcasts, whatever it might be to be able to communicate the Deming philosophy in a way that we can continue the learning. So that's the last of the 14 points and my thoughts about some of the things, though, that I believe as a community we need to do moving forward to continue to refine it.   Tripp: [00:14:08] Thank you for listening to the Deming Institute podcast. Stay updated on the latest blogs, podcasts, programs and other activities at Deming dot org.  

A las 3.47 AM (3.47 AM) —a veces traducido al español como: Las 3.47 de la madrugada— es un relato de terror del escritor inglés David Langford (1953— ), publicado en la antología de 1983: El libro horripilante (The Gruesome Book). A las 3.47 AM, uno de los grandes cuentos de David Langford, nos sitúa en esa hora incierta de la madrugada, donde a menudo se desgarra el delicado velo de la realidad para admitir las formas más espantosas de nuestras pesadillas. En este sentido, el relato podría haber servido de inspiración para la leyenda de las 3.33 de la madrugada; horario que, según algunos, equilibra lo real y lo ilusorio en un plano donde pueden manifestarse nuestros miedos más profundos. El protagonista de A las 3.47 AM, llamado Brian Dekker, comienza a experimentar una serie de sucesos sumamente extraños a esa hora de la madrugada. Los peores ingredientes de sus pesadillas —insectos, dientes, malformaciones, ceguera—, se filtran de algún modo hacia la superficie su consciencia, trastornando por completo su percepción de la realidad; o peor aún, ensanchándola para incorporar el horror más abyecto como parte de lo posible. Análisis de: El Espejo Gótico http://elespejogotico.blogspot.com/2018/08/a-las-347-am-david-langford-relato-y.html Texto del relato extraído de: El Espejo Gótico: http://elespejogotico.blogspot.com/2018/08/a-las-347-am-david-langford-relato-y.html Musicas: - 01. Hour of Gothic Music Instrumental-2 (Youtube) ~ All music is composed by Derek and Brandon Fiechter. - 02. Musica instrumental de terror miedo halloween misterio Live Better Media https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-wUpZIkIng. (Youtube) Nota: Este audio no se realiza con fines comerciales ni lucrativos. Es de difusión enteramente gratuita e intenta dar a conocer tanto a los escritores de los relatos y cuentos como a los autores de las músicas.

A las 3.47 AM (3.47 AM) —a veces traducido al español como: Las 3.47 de la madrugada— es un relato de terror del escritor inglés David Langford (1953— ), publicado en la antología de 1983: El libro horripilante (The Gruesome Book). A las 3.47 AM, uno de los grandes cuentos de David Langford, nos sitúa en esa hora incierta de la madrugada, donde a menudo se desgarra el delicado velo de la realidad para admitir las formas más espantosas de nuestras pesadillas. En este sentido, el relato podría haber servido de inspiración para la leyenda de las 3.33 de la madrugada; horario que, según algunos, equilibra lo real y lo ilusorio en un plano donde pueden manifestarse nuestros miedos más profundos. El protagonista de A las 3.47 AM, llamado Brian Dekker, comienza a experimentar una serie de sucesos sumamente extraños a esa hora de la madrugada. Los peores ingredientes de sus pesadillas —insectos, dientes, malformaciones, ceguera—, se filtran de algún modo hacia la superficie su consciencia, trastornando por completo su percepción de la realidad; o peor aún, ensanchándola para incorporar el horror más abyecto como parte de lo posible. Análisis de: El Espejo Gótico http://elespejogotico.blogspot.com/2018/08/a-las-347-am-david-langford-relato-y.html Texto del relato extraído de: El Espejo Gótico: http://elespejogotico.blogspot.com/2018/08/a-las-347-am-david-langford-relato-y.html Musicas: - 01. Hour of Gothic Music Instrumental-2 (Youtube) ~ All music is composed by Derek and Brandon Fiechter. - 02. Musica instrumental de terror miedo halloween misterio Live Better Media https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-wUpZIkIng. (Youtube) Nota: Este audio no se realiza con fines comerciales ni lucrativos. Es de difusión enteramente gratuita e intenta dar a conocer tanto a los escritores de los relatos y cuentos como a los autores de las músicas.

Recorded July 27, 2019 We both decide that exercise in the summer is a good thing (what are we thinking?) Then we go over our favorite things we can do in air conditioned rooms like reading and our recent trips to the movie theater. We obsess over our favorite podcast player and each try to claim our favorite podcasts for ourselves. Nate brings his hill to die on this week with the LeVar Burton Reads podcasts, especially episode 19: “Different Kinds of Darkness” by David Langford. Give it a quick listen and enjoy our discussion. Books Name of the Wind by Patrick Rothfus Mr. Popper’s Penguins by Richard and Florence Atwater Bezus and Ramona by Beverly Cleary Movies Spider-Man: Far From Home Weathering with You Overcast, our podcast player Podcast Picks News: Because News Technology News: Upgrade DnD: Dragon Friends, Critical Role, Total Party Kill General Interest: Hello Internet Writing: Writing Excuses Christian: Grace Church, Holy Post Comedy: Nobody Listens to Paula Poundstone Tech General Interest: Accidental Tech Podcast Game Show: Incomparable Game Show Also favorites: Reconcilable Differences Robot Or Not The Incomparable Cortex LeVar Burton Reads 19: "Different Kinds of Darkness" by David Langford Theme by Michael AD https://soundcloud.com/michael-ad/the-deep-end used with permission

In our January 2019 interview podcast, his 8th session with Tripp, Superintendent David Langford reflects on the state of education, the system, and how its set up, including various ways in how schools are working to move from “theory to practice” in their understanding and application of the Deming philosophy. Highlights include: The short term thinking which Dr. Deming warned us of, whether looking at profit or test scores Longer term strategies are sacrificed for short term results People get creative when driven to “show the numbers” Myths about charter schools being able to select their students Lack of a level playing field The strength and will power required to absorb the impact of a special cause being treated as a  common cause Rare to find Profound Knowledge Fear manifests itself in many ways Dr. Deming encouraged David to consult for education systems The right to joy in work and joy in learning Blaming the individuals vs. the system in which they operate How to change the system to all for joy in learning The role of rewards in narrowing one's focus The fears and motivations of a school board Possible agendas of school board members An onboarding process for board members There are pockets of excellence in education systems   For more information about David's current work with Ingenium Schools, please visit ingeniumfoundation.org

In our July 2018 interview podcast, his 7th session with Tripp, Superintendent David Langford reflects on the efforts of the entire staff of Ingenium Charter Schools to move from “theory to practice” in their understanding and application of the Deming philosophy. Highlights include: David's (new) role as superintendent Ingenium operates with 6 schools across Los Angeles, CA Restoring joy and meaning to learning as Ingenium's constancy of purpose Meaningful and relevant learning Moving from theory into practice 5 areas of practice (focus): SoPK, intrinsic motivation, continual improvement, neuroscience, and (project-based) quality learning experiences Student involvement Dashboards for monitoring joy in work Students learning about common and special causes of variation Student feedback on their experiences within Ingenium schools Neuroscience research For more information about David's current work with Ingenium Schools, please visit ingeniumfoundation.org

Host Stephanie Bee uses primary sources to tell stories that could have only happened online. ==Additional links== http://unenumerated.blogspot.ca/2012/07/pascals-scams.html An archived version of Roko’s original thread: https://basilisk.neocities.org RationalWiki’s comprehensive thread on the Basilisk, which has a great talk page: https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Roko%27s_basilisk David Langford’s ‘BLIT’: http://www.infinityplus.co.uk/stories/blit.htm ♪Robert Gross - Big Yud♪ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXARrMadTKk The ending music is paniq's "Masagin".

A group of children form a secret society around a mysterious and powerful artifact. This story appears in David Langford's collection DIFFERENT KINDS OF DARKNESS. This episode is brought to you by Audible (audible.com/levar) and Tripping.com (www.tripping.com/LEVAR).

In our third "Lens" episode, hosts Tripp Babbitt and Bill Bellows share their interpretation of wide-ranging aspects and implications of Dr. Deming's theory of management. Topics in this episode include: Most popular videos on The Deming Institute's YouTube channel in 2017 Video on The 14 Points, with 46,000 views, leads the list, followed by the NBC White paper, “If Japan Can, Why Can't We?” at 39,000 views Commentary on John Hunter's blog, "Transformation of the Individual and the Organization", highlighting David Langford's 2012 conference presentation Commentary on Bill's blog, “Learning to Discern – Quality & Quantity” and how quantity relates to a focus on actions and quality, as defined by Dr. Deming, relates to a focus interactions Commentary on Bill's blog, “Profits, Pragmatism, and the Possibility of Possessing “Other Eyes"” and how pragmatism in an organization inspired by Deming management differs from pragmatism in an organization governed by the prevailing system of management. Commentary on John Hunter's blog, “Applying Quality as a Business Strategy at Hallmark Building Supplies,” highlighting Louie Paynter's 2012 conference presentation Thoughts on how to make a difference (with Deming management), from where you are (in an organization)

In our May 2017 podcast, his sixth session with Tripp (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th), David Langford, author, consultant, President, Ingenium Schools, and, 2017 ASQ Deming Medal Recipient, offers insights on his efforts to lead a Deming transformation within Ingenium Schools. In his latest podcast, David reflects on 31 years of learning and applying the Deming philosophy to enrich society, with a focus on advancing education systems.   Beginning with his first conversation with Dr. Deming in 1986, when he personally answered David's phone call from Sitka, Alaska, he has been on a personal learning journey, including mentored from Dr. Deming.   With encouragement from Dr. Deming, David reached out to Myron Tribus, who traveled to Sitka to learn more about David's efforts to bring Dr. Deming's theory of management to his high school education system.   Soon thereafter, David and Myron were speaking together at conferences about their efforts to improve education systems, using a Deming lens. Fast forward to 2016, when David was selected to serve as president of Ingenium Schools and shift from “living vicariously as a consultant” (with Langford Learning) to “get back to the laboratory” of an education system in a full-time capacity.  In this month's podcast, David goes down memory lane with Tripp to explore topics such as:  His first phone call with Dr. Deming Collaborating with his mentor, Myron Tribus A 25+ year career as a consultant with Langford Learning An offer from founder and previous president, Glenn Noreen, to join Ingenium Schools Daily Innovation at Ingenium Schools, with 160+ employees Have the fundamentals in education changed? Finding meaning in the Pythagorean Theorem Profound Learning Experiences Looking for the smallest things which can have the biggest impact Making decisions in a school system, both with and without the System of Profound Knowledge Running meetings with "our" agenda vs. "the boss's" agenda What teachers can do in a class room, in the absence of pre-determined answers to their questions When teachers shift roles from managing behaviors to mentoring Shifting from 1-way to 2-way conversations “Ingenium Huddles” Receiving the 2017 Deming Medal from the American Society for Quality For more information about David's current work with Ingenium Schools, please visit ingeniumfoundation.org

A Moment with the Colonel fulfills and obeys The Great Commission... Matthew 28:18-20 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.  Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:  Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen. We do this by sharing the word of God, praying for people in order to obey the commandment in Matthew 10:8...Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give. We are trained disciples of The Elijah Challenge and minister healing and deliverance to those who need a miracle.  We minister to non-believers, non-followers of Jesus to believe and follow Jesus with signs and wonders following. We are open to train those who would like to be trained in The Elijah Challenge so that they are more equipped to win the lost to the kingdom because the harvest is great and the labors to work the harvest are few.

In this week's podcast, Kevin Cahill, Executive Director of The W. Edwards Deming Institute® and David Langford, CEO of Langford Learning, Inc., introduce The Deming in Education Initiative.  Kevin and David share how The Deming in Education Initiative was conceived, the impact of the Deming Philosophy on education, and where the Initiative is going in the future. The initiative first began many years ago when David joined the Deming Institute Advisory Council to help with their efforts to apply the Deming philosophy in education. But the roots of Deming in Education go even further back.  As David explains, improving education was “a great love” of Dr. Deming, as an educator who taught at NY University for 40 years.  Many of Dr. Deming's theories and teachings are directly focused on the education system.  After working with Dr. Deming from 1986 to 1993, David began implementing the concepts in his own education system, finding that students easily took to the new approach. Over the last 25 years, David has seen the Deming teachings make a profound and lasting impact on improving school culture and the learning process in the US and around the world.  It is the only philosophy that improves all aspects of the education system.  That impact has inspired Kevin, David and The Deming Institute to commit a deeper focus on developing a long term, sustainable, systems approach to improving education for all students, through The Deming in Education Initiative. For more information about David's current work, with Ingenium Schools, please visit ingeniumfoundation.org  

A Moment with the Colonel fulfills and obeys The Great Commission... Matthew 28:18-20 18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.  Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:  Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen. We will do this by sharing the word of God, praying for people in order to obey the commandment in Matthew 10:8 Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give. We are trained disciples of The Elijah Challenge and minister healing and deliverance to those who need a miracle.  We minister to nonbeliever or non-followers of Jesus to believe and follow Jesus with signs and wonders following. We are open to train those who would like to be trained in The Elijah Challenge so that they are more equipped to win the lost to the kingdom because the harvest is great and the labors to work the harvest are few.

The Space Welders return to the space waves with special guest David Langford (www.nurtuur.com).

This week's podcast features David Langford, CEO and Founder of Langford International, Inc. and Deming Institute Advisory Council member. In David's third podcast he explores ways to get started in employing the Deming philosophy in education. In many instances this requires an "out of body experience"; stop playing the blame game, stop being a victim. He tells us to stop worrying about the bigger system and start optimizing the performance of the group, which you have influence over.  David shares an example of a student whose "new" knowledge and appreciation for a system led to a study of the most common systemic questions asked by students. Listen as he reviews what they learned - to stop wasting time on things that are not meaningful, to start concentrating on things that are and get those to a higher degree of performance and to concentrate on deep learning experiences with lasting impact. David explores how a small group of committed people working in a consistent fashion can transform an organization. You don't have to be "all in" to create transformation. It can start with you. For more information about David's current work, with Ingenium Schools, please visit ingeniumfoundation.org  

This week's podcast features David Langford, CEO and founder of Langford International, Inc. and Deming Institute Advisory Council member. David discusses "Education as a System" and using the four parts of Deming's "System of Profound Knowledge" to make a systemic change to the current education system. He talks about the "aim" and "product" of the education system. "What are we trying to accomplish?" "Are we just trying to improve test scores or are we trying to teach kids to think?" David talks about the difference between studying and learning and the diminishing returns you receive when you have a whole system based on memorization. And why attempts to improve the system through programs such as "No Child Left Behind" and "Race to the Top" do not work. Listen as David explores "what is good learning" and how changing the education system through "continual improvement thinking" (rather than just adding programs) will lead to better results for students and teachers; a win-win for all.  For more information about David's current work, with Ingenium Schools, please visit ingeniumfoundation.org

This week's podcast features Monta Akin, Assistant Superintendent for Leander Independent School District in Leander, Texas. Monta shares her Deming journey and the compelling story of Leander Independent School District's transformation.  It begins when Monta was first introduced to Deming when she came across the PBS series "Quality or Else" featuring David Langford. What caught her attention was his Deming-based systematic approach to education, creating passion in students by engaging them in the practice of improvement.  Serendipitously, the next day Monta picked up an educational magazine with information on a David Langford seminar. She rallied a few Leander colleagues to attend. It totally changed how they looked at instruction and the partnership with students. They realized that to be a great school district they would have to do something different.  As they began adopting the Deming philosophies, Monta and her colleagues discovered how transparency built teamwork and realized the detrimental effect of fear, especially of teacher ratings. This led to a major change in how they conducted evaluations; a pivotal moment in their transformation.  Monta shares the positive results at Leander independent School District, and why after more than 20 years, she is still passionately committed to the Deming philosophy.

In this third episode of The Deming Podcast, moderator Tripp Babbitt interviews David Langford. David serves on The Deming Institute's Advisory Council and is the CEO and founder of Langford International.  David shares the challenges he faced as an educator in Sitka Alaska, his introduction to the teachings Dr. W. Edwards Deming, and his work with the Leander Independent School District where they have been applying Dr. Deming's principles since 1992. Go to Deming Today™  for more information on the Leander story. David will be speaker in the Education track at the 2014 Deming Institute Fall Conference Oct 18-19 in Los Angeles, CA as well as leading and facilitating a special 2-Day Pre-Conference session on Education Oct 16-17. 

Cheryl Morgan interviews Graham Sleight about the new third edition of the famous Encyclopedia of Science Fiction which is due to be launched any day now. Graham is the business manager for the enterprise. The encyclopedia is being written primarily by John Clute, David Langford and Peter Nicholls, with a large number of guest specialist contributors. The official website of the new encyclopedia is here. There is also a working website here with sample entries and the contact form by which the editors can be contacted. The encyclopedia blog, which Graham mentions in the interview, can be found here. The new encyclopedia is part of the Gollancz SF Gateway project, which is online here.

David Langford is a British author, editor and critic, largely active within the science fiction field. He publishes the science fiction fanzine and newsletter Ansible and writes a regular column for SFX magazine.