STREAM ANALYSIS Diagnosing Organizational Change

Changes to INPO Assistance
INPO has received feedback that assistance often feels like an evaluation
New objectives and behaviors of assistance:
Be a part of the station team
Be more facilitative/consultative
Provide solutions, not just identify gaps
Information gained during an assistance activity cannot be used during a subsequent evaluation activity. It can be reviewed by the evaluator as part of their preparation. (This is not a change)

What is Stream Analysis?
A facilitated method to understand organizational issues and help prioritize and develop integrated responses to those issues (Jerry Porras, Stanford University)
A systematic and systemic approach for identifying and separating core problems from symptoms
An approach to identify organizational drivers for NRC cross-cutting issues in HU and CAP

Why Stream Analysis?
See relationships between issues formerly viewed as single, isolated problems
Identify the most important issues – common causes that drive multiple issues
Determine unseen relationships and causes
Promote a team approach to improving performance
Other; change management and root cause investigations/common cause analysis

INPO Performance Model
1.
ORGANIZATIONAL
FACTORS
2.
JOB-SITE
CONDITIONS
3.
INDIVIDUAL
BEHAVIOR
4.
PLANT
RESULTS

Overview of Stream Analysis Process
Day 1:
Describe the purpose and process of stream analysis
Stream the most recent evaluation AFIs
Determine the ‘causal’ relationships between the AFIs
Day 2:
Analyze individually
As a group, discuss hidden drivers and corrective actions

Process Overview –
How’s It Done?
Pre-work
Identify problem statements to be used
AFIs? PDs? Cause Statements? Outage Issues?
15-16 issues typically take a full day
Determine participants
Typically top 20-25 of leadership team
Load software
INPO license agreement
Make meeting arrangements
Create and send Base Document and instructions

Process Overview –
How’s It Done?
Train the participants – deliver presentation
Stream the problem statements
Problem statement owner provides a brief summary of the issue and their stream recommendation
Group discussion on stream recommendation
(15-20 min each)
Take vote on stream – Outcome desired is consensus – If consensus is not reached, ask decision maker for stream placement
Repeat the steps above until all problem statements are streamed
Often split, consensus vs. disagreement

Rules for Reaching Consensus
We will discuss issues then take a ‘vote’ to see how participants are leaning
Everyone must vote
Additional discussion and votes if necessary
If consensus is not reached, ‘Can you support this stream with no significant reservation?’ to the individuals of the minority streams
If any member cannot support the final stream decision, the decision maker determines the placement
Consensus / No-consensus threshold

Additional Thoughts
The discussion is what is most important, but there is limited time so make good use of it
If anyone feels strongly about a certain stream for an AFI recommend they take note of that
Stream from left to right

AFI Streams
Right Picture
Mission
Organizational Structure
Clear Direction
Ownership
Cultural Factors
Open Communication
Teamwork
Coaching
Values
Job Performance
Knowledge & Skills
Capacity and Readiness
Processes
Work Management
Administrative Controls
Hazard Control
Engineering
Human Resources

Definition: Clear Picture
Key Question:
Did the station or individual have a clear picture of WHAT should be done? (surprised, unclear)
May be deficient in areas such as:
Vision or Mission
Planning
Priorities
Role clarity
Communication
Standards and expectations

Definition: Processes
Key Question:
Did the station or individual understand HOW work should be done?
May be deficient in areas such as:
Work flow design
Documentation
Procedure development
Design bases and margins

Definition: Job Performance
Key Question:
Did the station or individual have the KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, or ABILITY to do what should be done?
May be deficient in areas such as:
Fundamentals knowledge
Technical qualifications
Training
Skill of the craft

Definition: Ownership
Key Questions:
Was the station or individual MOTIVATED to perform the work correctly? Do we just accept this?
May be deficient in areas such as:
Engagement
Accountability
Reinforcing standards
Coaching and mentoring
Teamwork

Streams
Right Picture
Mission
Organizational Structure
Clear Direction
Ownership
Cultural Factors
Open Communication
Teamwork
Coaching
Values
Job Performance
Knowledge & Skills
Capacity and Readiness
Processes
Work Management
Administrative Controls
Hazard Control
Engineering
Human Resources

Ownership
Diagnosis Chart
Right Picture
Processes
AFI #1
Job Performance
AFI #1
AFI #1
AFI #1

Ownership
AFI #5
Diagnosis Chart
AFI #6
AFI #7
AFI #3
AFI #8
AFI #2
AFI #4
Right Picture
Processes
AFI #1
Job Performance

ROOT CAUSE STREAMS
JOBS / PEOPLE
Selection
Succession
Training
Knowledge & Skills
Motives
Individual attitude
RIGHT PROCESS
Procedures / Work Packages
Work Management
Way We Do Business
Engineering Processes
Work Flow Design
PICTURE
Expectations
Behavior
Performance
Vision, Goals, Strategy & Plan
Passion
OWNERSHIP /
INVOLVEMENT
Communication
Oversight / Field Time
Coaching Desired Behaviors
Value Prevention
Rewards System
Engagement
Teamwork

Organizational Components of
Stream Model
Jobs/People
Individual based attribute
Skill and knowledge based
Process for selection solid
Individual’s attitude – not the cowboy
Individual ability to interact with others
JOBS / PEOPLE
Selection
Succession
Training
Knowledge & Skills
Motives
Individual attitude

Organizational Components of
Stream Model
Picture
This is the formal side of the organization – “what makes it tick”
Understanding what is excellence
It’s the message on how individuals and the organization is to behave or perform
It is the passion to succeed
PICTURE
Expectations
Behavior
Performance
Vision, Goals, Strategy & Plan
Passion

Organizational Components of
Stream Model
Right Process
Formal rules that define “ways of doing things”
Designed process or programs to get things done
“What is acceptable” to the organization
RIGHT PROCESS
Procedures / Work Packages
Work Management
Way We Do Business
Engineering Processes
Work Flow Design

Organizational Components of
Stream Model
Ownership / Involvement
By anyone in the organization
Coaching, mentoring, reinforcing at work locations
What is rewarded to “get it done!”
“Buy in” of the organization
OWNERSHIP / INVOLVEMENT
Communication
Oversight / Field Time
Coaching Desired Behaviors
Value Prevention
Rewards System
Engagement
Teamwork

ROOT CAUSE STREAMS
JOBS / PEOPLE
Selection
Succession
Training
Knowledge & Skills
Motives
Individual attitude
RIGHT PROCESS
Procedures / Work Packages
Work Management
Way We Do Business
Engineering Processes
Work Flow Design
PICTURE
Expectations
Behavior
Performance
Vision, Goals, Strategy & Plan
Passion
OWNERSHIP /
INVOLVEMENT
Communication
Oversight / Field Time
Coaching Desired Behaviors
Value Prevention
Rewards System
Engagement
Teamwork

Process Overview –
How’s It Done?
Create Linkages
Looking for a cause and effect relationship with a degree of significance
Review each combination of two problem statements
Problem 1 drives Problem 2
Problem 2 drives Problem 1
No relationship
Time
Typically 45-60 minutes for all linkages

Ground Rules
This should go quickly
Listen for initial response
Move on after one concurrence
You can go back, but… does it make sense?

Faciliator’s role
Challenge group think
Encourage different views
Involve the “silent” team members
Facilitate the discussion; not participate as stakeholder
Operate the software
Ground Rules

Process Overview –
Day 2
Homework – Analyze the Results
What key issues are driving the others
Typically 3-4 key drivers
The overall pattern of results and relationships
Those with only arrows out
Those with arrows in and out
Those with only arrows in
Those with no arrows
The streams

Process Overview –
Day 2
Discuss similarities, common causes, observations, and implications identified in homework
Determine next steps

Process Overview –
How’s It Done?
Clarify results and assess corrective actions
Results determine significance level
Drivers should receive a root cause
Root cause results should be integrated into high-level site planning – e.g. business plan
Review/validate current corrective actions to address drivers and identify additional actions
Owners of key drivers corrective actions should help fix symptom problem statements.
Recognize need for collaboration with development of corrective actions plans

Day 2 Management Team–
How’s It Done?
Camp Fire