PREFACE:
In the previous article I suggested a number of areas where we have lowered our standards as a society. I paid particular attention to how our current “anything goes” attitude has harmed our national morality. In this preface I want to focus on another very important area where standards have been lowered, education.
I spent 34 years in public education and I’ve heard many arguments, both pro and con, with respect to lowered standards in education. I want to posit the possibility that both arguments are correct. For many students the standards have been raised. We now expect students to take more math, science, language arts, and social studies before they are allowed to graduate. Consider the graduation requirements from Belleville West High School from 1983: 3.5 units of English, 1 unit of Math, 1 unit of Civics, .5 units of Government, 1 unit of US History, and enrollment in Consumer Education for 1 semester, Physical Education for 7 semesters, and health for 1 semester. Today, that same high school requires: 3 units of Math and Algebra and Geometry content must be included in those 3 credits, 2 units of Science (not mentioned in 1983), 4 units of English Language Arts with 2 years of intensive writing experiences, 2 units of Social Studies including US History, Civics and Government, 1 unit from either Music, Art, World Languages, or Vocational Education, and 3 units of Physical Education.
So 30 years later we require more course work from students in order to graduate but what has happened to the best and brightest. Has our push to make sure these increased graduation requirements do not reduce the graduation rate caused us to lower our expectations for performance? In talking to several college instructors I have been left with the distinct impression that students who are coming to college having taken all the most demanding courses and with very good grades lack the skills that students brought to post secondary education 30 years ago. Is it possible that in our desire to improve the quality of American Education we have done nothing more than create a new, elaborate shell game? If we demand more from the average and below average student in order to graduate but at the same time demand less rigor in the preparation, have we gained or have we gone backwards.
This is the conundrum of lowered standards. We can appear to be raising standards while we are really lowering them. If as a business, in order to attract more customers, I start producing cheaper, lower quality products I run the risk of losing old customers who have relied on the quality products we have always produced. At the same time, I do not guarantee that my new strategy will result in an increase in customers. But I am afraid that this just might be the outcome of President Bush’s “No Child Left Behind.” In an attempt to increase standards for all, we may have seen as an increase in standards for some and a reduction of expectations for others resulting in a lower quality of education for everyone.
Whenever we start changing standards we must be certain that we do so with our eyes wide open. For every action there is a reaction. Many of the reactions to “No Child Left Behind” were entirely predictable yet our government chose to either ignore them or was blind to them. To believe that these problems would not crop up was either naive or a matter of indifference. But, it does provide an excellent example for everyone in both the public and private sector. These lessons can be used to help us understand the totality of the process as we try to either raise or lower standards. Our standards are a key component of our culture and as I have emphasized several times before, an organizations culture will be more powerful when it is created by choice as opposed to happening by chance.
So, as you read this article which focuses on reasons for lowering standards, consider the need for real dialogue about the process. We must be as certain as possible of the impact of what we do. I know that there are many leaders that want to “just cut to the chase” and “get-r-done” but doing so without fully considering the impact of the actions to be taken can result in disaster. And we need to consider input from all sources, even the folks we just don’t want to hear from. We can learn from the “naysayers” even though it can be painful to listen to them. They will bring up the issues that will most likely trip us up and they will most likely be holding those trip wires as you approach them. Listen and learn, it can save you a lot of headaches in the long run.
THE ARTICLE:
Do We Have to Lower Our Standards Part II
One of the biggest impediments to quality work is procrastination. It’s important to distinguish, however, between purposeful delay and procrastination. Just as procrastination can be an enemy to quality performance, rash decision-making can also hinder the effort. Taking time to contemplate the best course of action is a sound approach to getting quality work done. But putting things off without good reason leads to destructive procrastination.
Becoming too emotionally attached to a condition or process can be just as harmful to doing quality work as is procrastination. Getting too tied to the way things are puts blinders on us and we allow ourselves to become skeptical of new ideas and new ways of doing quality work. Sure, we get wrapped up in things we create but success depends on an open mind and being open to new possibilities.
Believe it or not, many people are afraid of success. They may think; “If I do too good of a job at this, what will I do for an encore?” We can lower our standards in fear of not being able to measure up in the future. If we hold back a little, we will always have room to do a little better and we’ll be confident that we can get it done. The fallacy of this thought process is two-fold. First, you will have to continuously hold something back and never get to a quality finish. Second, all of us have an incredible amount of untapped talent. To access our talent we have to stretch ourselves; move out of our comfort zones. Growth is uncomfortable.
There are also many people that make everything too complicated. Life is not simple but we don’t need to make it more complicated than it needs to be. I have a friend that asks a million questions. If you ask him what time it is, he’ll ask you ten questions before he simply tells you the time. Those ten questions might help him understand why you wanted to know the time but by the time you get to question 4 or 5, you’ve given up on ever getting the time of day.
Sometimes, however, if we really want to know something or get something valuable accomplished, we need to persevere. A lack of patience and persistence can also impact quality. I recently heard a speaker explain that the average sales person will give up after 2 or 3 contacts to a customer yet the average customer needs to hear the pitch 5 or 6 times before they will buy.
Finally, the desire for perfection is an enemy of quality. Reality tells us that everything is flawed. But, the highest quality items have the fewest flaws. If we strive for perfection, we will continue to work at perfecting our products, processes, or actions while the competition is putting some very good opportunities out there for everyone. We need to learn how to develop an acceptable concept of quality that is less than perfect simply because we are all human and none of us is perfect.
SUMMATION:
Once again, it really is about culture. I kind of feel like a broken record here but it cannot be over emphasized. As a leader, your influence on culture comes from what you do and don’t do and what you tolerate and do not tolerate. How your team addresses standards will depend on how you approach those standards. If you don’t hold them “sacred” nobody else will either. If followers can use all manner of excuses for letting quality slide, how will you ever maintain what you have and organic growth, that won’t be possible.
Putting things off because you have better things to do, getting too emotionally attached to the “old ways,” being afraid of success, making things too complicated, lack of perseverance, and the pursuit of perfection all can stifle real quality. We need to be careful whenever we are tempted to say, “That’s good enough.” The notion of “good enough” is usually not good enough. We also need to be wary of “it needs a few more tweaks.” Those perfectionists that keep trying to improve the product will never be satisfied. That is why we set standards. So instead of good enough we should listen for that meets or exceeds the standard and instead of a few more tweaks we should listen for how close the product is to our accepted standard. Then we will know how close we really are and for those perfectionists, once we’ve achieved the standard, we need to help them redefine perfection from what they see as quality to achieving the standard.
Standards are essential for any organization. Those organizations that haven’t taken the time to clearly define their standards will never know how well they are doing. If you can’t hit the standards you’ve set you must re-evaluate. That re-evaluation must consider products and processes as well as the standards. Lowering standards before you have evaluated input and outputs as well as processes is just giving in. Before any standard is lowered (or raised) there must be real evidence that the change is essential, not just the opinion of a few folks.
0 Comments