Page 100 - Six Sigma Demystified

Chapter 4 DEF INE STAGE 81

• Analyze buy- in reducers and boosters for each key stakeholder or stake-
holder group. Understand the concerns of stakeholders, which may vary
from one stakeholder to another.
• Improve buy- in by addressing issues.

• Control with a plan to maintain buy- in.
Bear in mind that these steps for achieving buy- in may be used several times
for different issues within a given project and even applied informally within a
team meeting.
l
The SIPOC approach to the top- evel process definition discussed earlier will
allow a clear definition of the stakeholder groups (required to define buy- n).
i
Levels of buy- n (Forum Corporation, 1996) from a given stakeholder or stake-
i
holder groups then can be assessed either formally through surveys or informally
i
through team or individual discussions. The lowest level of buy- n, hostility, may
be the easiest to recognize. The second level, dissent, may go unnoticed until
stakeholders are questioned (i.e., measured) about the change initiative, such as
through discussion or survey. Acceptance, the third level, is the lowest level of
i
buy- n that should be considered for proceeding with the change initiative, but
often it is not sufficient unless support, the fourth level, is achieved from a major-
i
ity of the critical stakeholder groups. True buy- n, the fifth and highest level, is a
level above support, in that stakeholders are enthusiastic in their commitment
for change. As a team leader, you will want to lead individuals with true buy- n.
i
To analyze and improve the buy- in reducers, the issues that typically reduce
stakeholder buy- in must be clearly understood (Forum Corporation, 1996):

• Unclear goals. The project charter serves as the communication vehicle to

clearly present the goals throughout the stakeholder groups.
• No personal benefit. Goals, stated in terms that provide a clear link to per-
sonal benefits for stakeholders (such as decreased intervention or im-
proved working conditions), should be enumerated in the project charter.
• Predetermined solutions. Projects of this type are not suitable for Six Sigma
deployment. Adherence to the principles of data- driven decision making
prevents subjective solutions from taking root.
• Lack of communication. Analyses and results are communicated through-
out the stakeholder groups in the project charter.
• Too many priorities. The project charter, with its authorized scope, focuses
the team on achievable results.