Both ends of the spectrum

The entry for this week will focused on the changes of one’s own perception and understanding by experiencing things from a different point of view. Things change once you ‘crossed over’ from one side to the other.

I started my career in the construction industry as an engineering consultant. My main job scope can be categorised into three major aspects, namely design administration, contract management and project supervision.

Design administration is basically the process of designing related building facilities and systems as requested by the client and at the same time complying with the relevant acts and regulations. Along the way, discussions and meetings were held to integrate the designs of all the consultants involved in the project.

The contract management aspect generally deals with the preparation of important documents such as the tender and contract management, appointment of contractors and as the project is undertaken, the changes and variations to be made until the project is fully completed.

Finally, project supervision involves the monitoring and supervision of the project once it gets off the ground. This part of the job also involves the liasing with the relevant authorities such as the local authority, the utilities companies and other related government bodies.

After working as a consultant for about three years (and feeling mighty good about it), I decided to change ‘sides’ and accepted the job that involves maintenance work. The use of terms such as ‘cross over’ and ‘sides’ may be a bit confusing but for anyone who is involves in the construction and property industry what it means is quite clear.

Generally, for every physical development it will of course start with the construction of the building/complex. This usually is considered to be the project phase. Once the phase has been completed it will then be handed over to the owner/client and the operation and management of the building will then commence. To simply put it, project and O&M are at the two extremes of the spectrum. By the way, the ‘sides’ are not in the form of rivalry, even though sometimes it can lead to heated arguments, but it is more in the nature of the work of both party.

The project phase usually involves the project managers, the consultants (like myself) and the contractors. The O&M generally is made up of the maintenance & management people and their contractors. Usually it is the project phase that is more glamorous while the O&M deals with the nitty-gritty things. In a way it is the epitome of the saying ‘it’s a dirty job but somebody has got to do it’. The idea is further extended by the fact that the project contracts are high and is completed in a relatively short time while the O&M contract is usually much lesser but longer.

So how come I decided to have a change in my career? And what are the things about me that have change personally following the ‘jump’ from one end to the other?

The answer to the first question is easy. It is for the money. The company that I decided to work for offered better pay and job security. I guess that is a change in itself albeit an easy one.

For the second question, it does not take long for me to realise what a big change it made on the way I view things as opposed to the previous three years. It may still involve buildings but it almost felt like I was changing my religion. Almost everything is different. It is not much the technical part but it is the way a certain issue is viewed and considered that differs greatly.

First and foremost, I found that most designs done by the consultants (like myself previously) are not perfect. I have to say a smack in the head is an understatement as previously I always feel my designs are the best that money can buy. I realised by now that most consultants, comes up with their design from their own point of view and not what the client really wanted or whether it is suitable for the project. Looking back, I now realised that quite a number of the design made by myself and my other consultant’s friends are based on how we like the building to look like and also operated. In other words, we are the designers and we design as what we feel it should be. Not much thought and consideration were given to those poor guys that have to operate and maintain the building. This is one thing that needs major change.

The second major thing that needs to change is the way that a project is handled to be as cost effective as possible without giving considerations to future problems that may arises. Cuts were made to avoid project overruns and to comply with the delivery date. Worse still, these cuts were made under the pretension of Value Engineering. What this does is two things, from a design point of view an initially comprehensive system became ‘semi-comprehensive’ while from a construction point of view a ‘lesser’ material or a cheaper method of work is being implemented. Most of the time it is a way of solving the issue partly and hoping that it will be resolved in the future by someone else with someone else’s money.

Another major grouse that I have, looking at things from my current viewpoint, is that not many owner/client/project team listens to what the O&M people have to say. It may be something major like the decision to install an additional air con system to something minor like identifying the location of the pipes for the domestic water system. I have experienced undertaking jobs that requires replacement of machineries that involved major structural modifications due to the inaccessibility of the said machineries. Sometimes the modifications to the surrounding walls and floors are more expensive than the cost of replacing the machinery.

There are many other things that I have experienced that have changed my views on how the construction industry needs to be managed and hopefully it will be in the future. What I am certain of, is the decision to make a career change a few years ago have certainly open up my mind and hopefully make me better equip to do my job.

Paradigms

Last weekend I went back to my hometown for a short visit to see my parents. My hometown by the way is a small town in the state of Negri Sembilan that I believe 7 out of 10 Malaysians will have difficulties locating it on a map prior to the March 11 elections. The reason why I believe it is more popular now is because our Member of Parliament just happens to be the Prime Minister’s son-in-law but that is another story altogether.


Whittling the time away in the afternoon and since it is Ramadan and lunch is literally off the menu, I sat down and spoke to my eldest brother on a variety of issues from politics to cars to renewable energy. My brother and I could not be anymore different than we are now. Even in our physical looks not many will say that we are brothers. He was born twenty years before me which practically means we are almost a generation apart. The types of education we received are also different. He is a retired teacher who received his post secondary education locally while I had the opportunity to study engineering overseas. By the way, he is the eldest and I am the youngest.


However, since we are the only sons, we seldom passed the chance to talk about things that concern us as a family and the nation in general. What I realised after our casual conversation the other day is, both of us tend to view things differently. But that I would say is the beauty of it all. We can still talk together even though we are different.


Our paradigms are different. Period. I take for example the discussion we had on cars using alternative energy. It just happens recently that the national car maker, Proton, has a prototype of an electric car that they were showing off to the public. I commented that Proton should just abandoned this type of technology and even the hybrid technology in favour of hydrogen fuel cell technology as I feel it has a brighter future and will outlast the other technologies.


My brother then asked why can’t we have a car that generates its own power. A car that runs on battery but also has some sort of a generator like the dynamo for our bicycle lights. As the car moves along, the dynamo will then constantly recharge the battery. In that way, the battery will never run flat and we will have a car that runs forever.


That triggers the engineer in me. I started giving ‘lectures’ about thermodynamics, efficiency of machines, definition of μ and why there is no such thing as a Perpetual Motion Machine. He listened intently and seems to understand what I was talking about. Anyway, a few hours later, while driving back home I realised that what actually happened was that I was stuck in my own paradigm. Having been trained as an engineer, anything that challenges my engineering principles got shot down almost immediately. To me (along with my paradigm) the idea is totally absurd.


Still thinking about it I do realised that the idea at least merit some consideration. Yes, there will never be a Perpetual Motion Machine (that is my paradigm talking), nothing can run on nothing forever but through some modification and innovation at least some of the target can be achieved.


The discussion does open up an interesting view point or in other words, it introduced an avenue that may be a bit unconventional but still an alternative nonetheless. I think that is the most important thing. What we do is being dictated by what we have learned and experience which than made us fail to see it in any other way or from any other point of view. A bit like the Swiss watchmakers who failed to see the advantages of quartz watches.


Back to my brother, we then talked about various renewable energy and the advantages of each one of them. As usual, he would ask me about things that I believe not many engineers would ask. This is down to the simple fact that those engineers, like myself, have and will consistently fall back to our education and basically disregard any idea that goes against our engineering background. I have to say, it is a refreshing way of looking at things.

In a way, I did experience a change in my outlook and views about the things around me a few years back. It happened when I was promoted to a managerial position. Life as an engineer for me is quite simple. Almost everything is almost black and white. You do get your ‘grey’ problems once in a while but nothing that cannot be addressed. For example, if a machine is not functioning, there must be an explainable reason behind it. It can be as simple as not having the switch on to major issues such as total breakdown due to wear and tear.


Being a manager on the other hand it is a little bit more complex. The ‘greys’ are too many. You not only have to rely on your technical skills but also on other skills such as finance, budgeting, human resources and communication along with other ‘human’ skills. It is the ‘human’ part that I took a long time adapting to. I noticed that my views and the way I made decisions change. In a way there is a shift in my paradigm.


When earlier I just could not comprehend why a certain decision is made by the top management, I would understand it fully when I myself started implementing it. I believe this can be attributed to the new experiences I have gone through.


In other words, even on a personal level, paradigms are important yet we have to give it room to ‘shift’ as we go along. Only then can we achieve the things that we aspire to.

The importance of stakeholders support

One of the most important thing, and quite often underestimated, when it comes to making changes is the support of the stakeholders. The stakeholders in question are not just the ones who make the decisions but also the ones to carry out the changes. More often than not, the people that make it work are the group that is more likely to be left behind in any discussions.

An interesting case study that happened to me a few years back emphasises this particular issue. In 2001, I joined a company, which is a member of an organisation of around 20,000 employees, that is involved in the property management business. We managed around 16 buildings in JB and in KL and almost all of the buildings are either owned by our parent company or companies within the group. Let just called this company Co A.

In 2004, a major restructuring of Co A resulted in the formation of two additional companies, Co B and Co C. I left Co A to join the newly formed Co B along with some 70 other employees. Things were relatively going well, though as expected of a new company there will be hiccups, and most of the staff can be said are proud to be part of the new company.

However, it was deemed not good enough by the management. One of the reasons was, the management felt that organic growth was ‘too slow’ and we have to find ways to make the company grow on a much faster rate. Furthermore, with the clientele almost exclusively made up of companies within the same organisation and contracts from external parties not forthcoming, a strategy was drawn up to make Co B be bigger quicker.

A few months thereafter, along comes a company that was up for sale and was desperately looking for a buyer, let us called it Co D, and after a few months of discussion a deal was struck and Co D was acquired. Unlike Co B, Co D was a privately owned company that has experience in securing contracts from the Government and Private sector. When the two groups of employees, of Co B and Co D, became one, everything that could go wrong, went wrong (initially).

In hindsight, I would have to say that the intention was good and noble. I, for one, would congratulate the management for having the vision to carry out what was deemed the best for Co B. I mean what is the point of starting a business if there is no growth.

Yet somehow along the way, the change process was not properly planned and the changes lead to massive dissatisfaction among the employees, especially those who are originally from Co B. In less than a year, a few of the managers and executives left the company to work elsewhere and I was among one of them. To be honest, at that point of time, I just could not figure out what actually went wrong?

Reflecting on the issues that were raised, especially after having the benefit of studying change, there are a few things that the management could do to avoid such problems cropping up during the initial part of the exercise. Mind you, Co D is doing well at the moment yet if the appropriate actions were taken, a lot of the initial confusion, heartaches, misunderstanding and conflicts can be avoided.

The first, I believe, is the timing of the acquisition. The merger of Co B and Co D took place a little more than a year after the restructuring of Co A. In other words, the changes happened too quickly. To apply the sigmoid curve reference, Point A started too soon for most of the employees of Co B. Considering the transformational changes that they have went through, a period of stability and adaptability is surely most welcome. Yet, talks with regards to the acquisition started around eight months after the formation of Co B and this has created a sense of insecurity among the employees.

The most important factor in creating a lot of dissatisfaction, however, is the failure to get the support of one of the most important stakeholders namely the employees themselves. It was felt that the exercise was forced upon them without any detail explanation and discussion. The management concentrated a lot of efforts in trying convince the powers that be and to get the approval for the takeover, until it reach a point the employees felt left out and being left in the dark.

Brief explanation sessions were actually conducted but it was deemed insufficient and a lot of the questions remained unanswered. At times, it felt like getting into a planned marriage without actually knowing who your spouse will be.

I believe if the management sat down and properly discussed it with the employees, and maybe applied the Change Equation tool (Beckhard & Harris), at least some of the employees could have been won over. As it was, some of the employees did not even get to the exploration phase of change, let alone the commitment phase, before they left the company. As I have stated above, I believe it is not much the intention of the exercise that is being resisted but the feeling of insecurity and that they (the employees) will gain nothing for the exercise that have caused the dissatisfaction.

Referring to Kotter’s Eight Steps of Change, practically the first five steps were being overlooked and it was a straight jump to step no. 6. No effort was made to create a climate of change neither was there any effort on engaging the whole organisation. I guess what happened proves the importance of having a proper action plan.

Alas, much credit has to be given to the management in stabilising the company albeit after the initial problems and significant losses on the human resources front. The current staff especially the lower and middle management employees are practically unrecognisable from the staff that first started in the company.

In conclusion, I would just like to say that spending time to talk and convince the stakeholders would not only help to avoid a lot of the initial resistance towards change but will also make the change process a much more pleasant experience.

To change or not to change.

At last, after two weeks of completing the Leading Organisational Change module, which was well led by one Mr. Cliff Chalon, I have the opportunity to sit down and write my first entry in my first ever blog. I guess in a way this is a change in itself, albeit an evolutionary one, of my own mindset. Mind you, I always think that guys (or girls) that blog are people who have too much time on their hands, unlike yours truly of course J.

The module was an eye opener of sort as I never realised that this so called change management was a process that is well defined and well proven over the years. Like what Cliff said, it is not like just saying ‘Change lah’ and everything will somehow change.

Another thing that struck me was the importance of change and the timing of it. I mean the sigmoid curve, which became the ‘cool’ word to say during class, really tells quite a story. Looking at things that is either happening and, more importantly, not happening around me, a lot of it I can now relate to this peculiar looking ‘line’.

For instance, Liverpool Football Club. I fell in love with this club as a five year old boy living in a small one bedroom flat in Singapore. In the 70s and in the 80s, ‘we’ were the dominant force in English, European and dare I say World football. But everything changes in the 90s. We played the same way, the club was managed the same way and was even owned by the same people but we don’t seem to be able to win the league anymore. I can understand now that this inability can be attributed to the aversion towards change and not only that, we are already too far up the curve that we are now playing catch up.

Sir Alex Ferguson, the manager to that-other-team-that-wears-red, once famously said after his appointment that he aims ‘to break the dominance of LFC’. A transformational change if you ask me especially considering that t-o-t-w-r have not won the league for 20 years up to that point. And it took him almost 6 years to achieve what he promised.

I believe this, in a way, shows the importance of making change and the timing of it. Too late and too little and you may suddenly find your rivals way ahead of you. And of course there is that little thing about changing while we are in a strong position i.e. start changing at the A point. Not many of us have the will nor the vision to do that. As the saying goes, if it ain’t broke don’t fix it. Guess the saying doesn’t really apply in the current environment we are living in.

Going back to LFC, at least now I can see that things are on the up. Senor Rafael Benitez, since his appointment in season 2004-2005, has made a lot of changes especially in the manpower aspect. He sold of a lot of his predecessor’s players and brought in new players he feels can help the team (a drastic action). He also brought with him new coaching staff and reassigned the roles of the existing ones (a developmental change). And as a result, these changes/actions have brought us our fifth European Cup in that same season. We’ve won an FA Cup and a European Super Cup since then but you can see that Senor Benitez is still ’changing’ the team.

One of the major changes, and my favourite one I might add, is the development of LFC’s youth team and players. Whereas traditionally, the youth players comes from the surrounding Merseyside area i.e. Scousers like Steven Gerrard, Robbie Fowler, Michael Owen and Steve McManaman, now we have youths from as far away as Finland and Hungary playing for the Under-16 teams. This change have benefited the local lads especially in the aspects of ball playing skills and technique as English players are traditionally known more for their physique and strength. The result of this policy has bear fruits in the form of winning back to back FA Youth Cup in 2006 and 2007 and also becoming the Reserves team champion in 2008. The significance of winning the Reserves league is more appreciated considering the team was made up of youngsters compared to other teams that fielded experienced professionals that weren’t selected for their first team.

Studying LFC and relating it to the things that I have learnt in the LOC module have made me understand what went wrong though it doesn’t really tell me a sure-fire way of correcting it. What it does tell me is that changes have to happen and if it is done correctly, results will be more than satisfactory. There is also the aforementioned thing about changing at the A point. In other words, the process of change is ever ongoing.

During the class, a lot was said about change and a lot of references were made to various authors, thinkers, lecturers about change and the importance of it. One author talked about shifting paradigm while others talked about change management plan and still the consensus is that change is a need and not an option to stay relevant. However, in hindsight, I would like to note here that this idea may not be as modern as we think.

Around 1400 years ago, someone said (literally translated) “Treasure 5 things before the coming of 5 things.

i. Health before sickness

ii. Youth before old age

iii. Wealth before poverty

iv. Leisure before occupation

v. Life before death”

The saying above was attributed to a hadith from Prophet Muhammad p.b.u.h. and narrated by Tirmidzi. In a way it encompasses the idea regarding the need to change before change is enforced upon us.

As a conclusion, I can say that this thing we called change management, and all the processes that comes with it, is essential not only on an organisational level but also on a personal level.