Better Factories Through Role Playing 160
pacopico writes "A former Ford executive has taken his unique brand of factory training to the public. According to Businessweek, Hossein Nivi has set up a new company called Pendaran that forces people to endure a week-long, manic training simulation that's meant to produce safer, better workers. The participants — lots of people from the tech and military fields — get yelled at by actors while they try to assemble things like golf carts and airplanes in a simulation that mixes virtual tasks on computers with real world tasks. After their spirits get broken, the workers actually start functioning as a well-oiled team. It sounds both awesome and bizarre."
these people should be embarassed (Score:2, Insightful)
they are lunatics and assholes
That does not sound awesome (Score:5, Insightful)
Getting yelled at until your spirit is broken? You think that sounds awesome?
This isn't new or unique, we've been whipping slaves as long as we've had them. Dehumanize people, then work them like animals. Woo hoo sign me up.
Re:That does not sound awesome (Score:5, Insightful)
Ya, same thought crossed my mind. Chain gangs work like a well-oiled machine too, once you've broken their spirits. I'm not sure why breaking people's spirit is considered "awesome". Submitter must be in management? Probably sounds awesome to them, since "workers" aren't really people after all..
Re:That does not sound awesome (Score:5, Informative)
I'm not sure why breaking people's spirit is considered "awesome".
If you RTFA, you'd see that they break people of their independent streak.
By forcing them into shitty conditions and allowing them to fail over and over, flaws are exposed and eventually self-recognized
The psychological pressure is there just to speed up the process.
There's nothing special about this course, other than it's being done to white/blue collar workers instead of raw military recruits at boot camp.
Re:That does not sound awesome (Score:5, Funny)
>If you RTFA
Heresy!
Re: (Score:2)
>If you RTFA
Heresy!
Even worse, he's standing out in the otherwise well-oiled chain gang of people who don't RTFA.
Re:That does not sound awesome (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course if you read reality into the lie, those people with and independent resistive streak, fail the course and are excluded from employment. Basically testing to ensure those people employed are meek, obedient and will accept abuse. That is all one week provides, the opportunity to exclude those not born to be slaves.
Re: (Score:2)
On the other hand, this is already done and has been for decades. It is called requiring a college degree. That's why it often doesn't matter what your degree is in or if it is related to the job -- just having the degree proves that you can sit down and shut up and do what you're told and buy into the institution for four or five years straight.
Re: (Score:3)
No, what you posted was typical, bog-standard anti-intellectual dribble. The failing of GPs degree wasn't in his reading skills, but in how not to overestimate the clueless.
Re: (Score:2)
Some people are unbreakable..and that's because they've spent most of their lives in situations like this course, being mistreated and manipulated. There is such a thing as going too far to save a buck as it can cause more damage than it fixes. While some people might benefit from this course, others could be made more resistant to hierarchy.. It's usually the latter who are actually smart enough to not need the training and who are the better employees. This 'course' is a one-size-fits-all attempt at we
Re: (Score:2)
This sort of effort is likely to turn an otherwise hard worker with a great work ethic who just happens to think for themselves instead of being an obedient sheep into someone who plays along on the outside, but harbors a seething hatred on the inside and therefore constantly sabotaged and undermines your system at every turn they can.
Re: (Score:2)
Until you realize what a buerocratic juggernaut the army is, and how its fraught with waste, ineffeciencies, miscommunication, very rarely works with great co-ordination as a whole. To the point is a joke.
Thinking for oneself never gets further than thinking on how to cheat the buerocracy or advance further. Technical correctness is admired, while failure to achieve broader goals is often met with amusement, because you can hide behind the buerocratic tape of "its
Re: (Score:2)
This sounds about right.
There are times when this instinct to work together and sacrifice personal agenda and initiative is useful. Times of crisis, ins war zone or natural disaster for instance. Any other time and its counterproductive. You lose all the best qualities of people and merely suppress the worst.
Well defined boundaries are good for children until they are ready to explore beyond them. Mature adults have already been through this.
Re: (Score:2)
There's nothing special about this course, other than it's being done to white/blue collar workers instead of raw military recruits at boot camp.
No kidding. I was wondering about the comments until now. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:That does not sound awesome (Score:5, Interesting)
That's what the summary makes it sound like, but that's not actually what they're doing.
The workers have access to help, safety information, proper procedures, etc...
Instead of using their resources to work correctly and efficiently they do what people tend to do which is ignore all the rules and safety training as much as possible until disaster strikes.
The course simulates disaster striking when procedures aren't followed. By forcing an instantaneous cause/effect environment they're making the workers see the effects of their actions. They fight and they fight until after a few days they stop running around cleaning up their messes and start to check the rules and do things the right way in the first place.
Yeah it's a bit pavlovian, but it's not crushing anyone's spirit, it's teaching them personal responsibility.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah it's a bit pavlovian, but it's not crushing anyone's spirit, it's teaching them personal responsibility.
So it's an instant quick-fix band-aid remedy for poor parenting?
Re: (Score:3)
This. The summary was sensationalized, probably to stoke just such a "discussion" as above. Which is too bad because the TFA provides plenty of fodder without embellisment.
While coping with stressful situations is a valuable skill to be teaching the workforce, I found it a bit ironic that one of the things the trainees were criticised for was not working to find the root causes of problems by cleaning up oil slicks instead of finding out how to prevent them, while apparently the management that sent these
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Depends. An awful lot of people really do need to have some fears, insecurities, and other walls broken down in order to really reach their potential. Without that, whenever something bad happens to them, like actually getting yelled at, or missing a deadline, or whatever, they just revert back to the good old human standard of denial and blaming others. Because that's what we do when confronted with something we aren't used to or comfortable with.
It's kind of like how anyone who wants to get into boxing
Re: (Score:3)
Sounds like an MMO raid to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:That does not sound awesome (Score:5, Interesting)
You can't get fired from the army, unless your convicted of a crime, generally pretty severe one too.
Everyone gets no-cost healthcare. To include prescriptions.
Probably the most proggressive pay-rating system in the entire country. Generals make a tiny fraction of what corporate officers make with similar amount of employees and/or responsibility, by a far margin. Enlisted make far more than their unskilled labor equivilants. When you talk about skilled labor, and total compensation, its about even with skilled labor.
Not only is management pay more proportial, its also decided in a much more fair method, and its also far more transparent. Its all listed online in an easy to read convienant format, here from the official DFAS(defense finance and accounting services):
http://www.dfas.mil/militarymembers/payentitlements/militarypaytables.html
Essentially your base pay is decided by what your rank is on one axis, and how long been in the military on the other axis. Everyone gets the same base pay, regardless of race, gender, back room deals, how well they know top brass, etc...
Also, you get special pays for doing things like being various kinds of doctor, sea pay, being on jump status, hazardous duty pay, combat pay, and other special bonuses for doing special, but important roles. These pays are generally flat rate, and listed on the same pay chart. All completely transparant.
No-cost housing, formerly no-cost, but now dirt cheap meals provided, and subsidized shopping at the PX.
There are many hazerous jobs, that you could die, loose a limb, or otherwise get critically injured. There is no job that the general public will do more to help you for on the job injuries. The people who experiment with robotic limbs, give soliders who lost them the first pick, over cops, construction, deep sea fishers, demolition workers, and even other potentially more dangerous work. The army wil also pay in full any injuries you get while serving them.
After the army breaks you down, and makes you into a fighting machine, they are not going to just kick you to the curb after got all they could from you. Corporate America will.
But I agree, apples to oranges, you can't compare federal service to private employement.
Re: (Score:2)
That sounds great, unfortunately, as reported here recently, the payroll system is borked...
Re: (Score:2)
After the army breaks you down, and makes you into a fighting machine, they are not going to just kick you to the curb after got all they could from you.
if you actually believe this, there's a little documentary I'd like you to watch. it's called Rambo: First Blood
Re: (Score:2)
Not to say the Army, nor the VA is perfect, or even great, but the level of care is far greater than you'd recieve elsewhere
Or we could, you know... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The beatings will continue until morale improves.
Re: (Score:3)
Given how shitty American-built cars tend to be despite great pay and benefits, I think the training and manipulation might work better.
American Cars are fine now (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Europe's a big enough market that we started building them a bit better. Mostly because it was too expensive to run one production line for crap American Cars and one for Decent Euro cars. They're not great, but they'll do 140,000 miles.
The problem with trying to break into Europe is extreme protectionism. No barriers between Germany and France, but between Germany and anywhere outside the EU is a 25% tax barrier.
This is why Europeans have to get a Euro car that does 200,000 K's instead of a Japanese car that does 500,000 K's (I sold my EK Civic at 300,000 K's, if the next owner takes care of it it'll run for another 300,000 K's, hell if he runs it into the ground it'll reach 400,000 K's before it dies).
It's also why Ford has differe
Re: (Score:2)
That must be why I've never ever seen a Honda or a Toyota, or a Hyundai.
OK, the latter are Korean, but I doubt you'd know the difference.
Re: (Score:2)
That must be why I've never ever seen a Honda or a Toyota, or a Hyundai.
OK, the latter are Korean, but I doubt you'd know the difference.
I'd know the difference being a connoisseur of JDM cars but I think it's clear you dont.
In case you missed the point, it's because of Europe's protectionism. Toyota manufactures the Euro Yaris in Fracne, the Auris and Avensis in the UK, the Dyno, Hiace and Optimo in Portugal to get around this.
Germany pays EUR 29,990 (US$39,396) for a Toyota 86 (Scion FR-S for the 'Muricans) where as Americans pay around US$25-29,000 depending on the model, options and local taxes and Australia (the land of overpriced
Re: (Score:2)
Ford use smaller engines in Europe because literally every single mainstream car manufacturer uses smaller engines, because that's what the market demands. A 2 litre engine is larger than average here. The most common BMWs are 318s, and there are cars with sub-litre engines driven by actual people. I don't really understand that, I drive a 330, but that's what people want. There isn't the phenomenon in the US where a Camry needs a 3l V6 or it's "underpowered".
I don't know what you're talking about with options.
The market doesn't really demand it, again, its government.
Europe has really high taxes on large engines. Manufacturers really dont have a choice. This is why a Toyta Auris has a 1.3L engine in Europe but an Australian Toyota Corolla Hatch is a 1.8L. The market isn't demanding smaller engines, it's demanding lower prices and manufacturers are meeting that with smaller engines.
As for features, this is everything from climate control to seat warmers to LSD's (Limited Slip Differentials). European base m
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah... Pretty much every one I know who drives a recent American car routinely gets 100k+ miles. Hell, warranties running 150k+ miles aren't exactly uncommon anymore.
Pull your head out of your ass and leave the 1960's and join us here in the 21st century.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, said great pay and benefits are no longer available in many cases. People who were grandfathered in may still have them but the people joining up now certainly don't.
(*) FYI, Gung Ho [wikipedia.org] wasn't intended as a documentary.
Re: (Score:2)
There isn't such a thing a 100% American built car.
Most cars perceived as being built in America are mostly made in Mexico.
Re: (Score:2)
Tell that to the INS, you goddam wetback.
Oh that... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You mean because GM, Ford, Chrysler (the companies) will be given contracts to build the tanks/etc, or do you mean because we need skilled/experienced workers, factories and other infrastructure?
If it's the latter, I'd argue that bailing out the domestic auto industry is not required. The government could seize any of the foreign factories operating in the US--you think the average line worker at the Hyundai factory in Tennessee is going to say no when he's told he's building tanks now for the US military
I'm a level 14 welder! (Score:3)
Re:I'm a level 14 welder! (Score:5, Funny)
I put on my robe and wizard hat.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Managers use Charisma. Intelligence is a dump stat.
[John]
Re: (Score:2)
That's because he's the DM.
How much does it cost? (Score:5, Interesting)
The Marine Corps Called... (Score:5, Insightful)
After their spirits get broken, the workers actually start functioning as a well-oiled team. It sounds both awesome and bizarre.
This has otherwise been known as "Boot Camp" or "Basic Training" for generations of soldiers.
Re: (Score:3)
Attempts to apply military methods to civilian business tend to fail dramatically, because:
1. Business is not war.
2. Corporations are not armies.
3. Corporate imitations of military training are almost invariably done by and for spoiled brat MBA types who love to think of themselves as macho warriors, but wouldn't last five minutes humping a pack and a rifle.
Re:The Marine Corps Called... (Score:5, Interesting)
1. Business is not war.
It's (generally) bloodless and unarmed, but the basics are all there.
2. Corporations are not armies.
Would it really be such a bad thing to view them as such?
3. Corporate imitations of military training are almost invariably done by and for spoiled brat MBA types who love to think of themselves as macho warriors, but wouldn't last five minutes humping a pack and a rifle.
So then have them go through the training as well. The top military had to go through it to get where they are, so why not the top corporate?
Re: (Score:3)
So then have them go through the training as well. The top military had to go through it to get where they are, so why not the top corporate?
The top military are officers, not enlisted men. While enlisted soldiers can later go through officer's training, or even be promoted in extraordinary circumstances in wartime, generally military organizations aren't actually absolute meritocracies that promote people in stages all the way from the bottom to the top. Not that officers don't go through their own tough training, but some of the expectations are fundamentally different.
Re: (Score:2)
So then have them go through the training as well. The top military had to go through it to get where they are, so why not the top corporate?
The top military are officers, not enlisted men. While enlisted soldiers can later go through officer's training, or even be promoted in extraordinary circumstances in wartime, generally military organizations aren't actually absolute meritocracies that promote people in stages all the way from the bottom to the top. Not that officers don't go through their own tough training, but some of the expectations are fundamentally different.
This,
With all three branches of (Australia's) military you can enlist as a regular soldier (seaman or airman) or as an officer. Regulars can be promoted or can opt to officer training (you'll need your CO's approval though). I.E. A regular enters the navy as a seaman an officer enters the academy as a Midshipman and is promoted to Acting Sub Lieutenant when they graduate. For a Seaman to get to Acting Sub Lieutenant without going through the academy (Read: on merit) they need to go through the NCO and wa
Re: (Score:2)
The OP is correct, the top military generally went through pretty much the same training as the enlisted ranks. When they were junior officers it's wasn't just the same training - it was the same training right beside the enlisted ranks. And it's the type of training described in the article.
Most civilians don't realize that when a miltary member says 'training' he means a lot more than just sitting in a lecture. It also includes simulators, drills, paper exercises, field exercises, a wide variety of han
Re: (Score:2)
I never said that officers don't go through their own similar training and I recognized that there is a path for enlisted men to some day become one of the chiefs of staff. In the corporate world, you can similarly, in theory, start in the mail room and become CEO, but that sort of thing is the exception, not the rule. This isn't the old days any more where an officer's commission required a relative with a title, or at least a hefty sum of money, but there's still one door for enlisted men and another for
Re: (Score:2)
In other words, you either didn't read a word I wrote, or lack the intelligence to understand what I write, or are just utterly fucking clueless.
Because your reply does nothing but repeat your original ignorance.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I did repeat myself because you seemed to not have grasped what I was saying the first time, Your hostility isn't particularly useful or needed. My point still stands: top military brass typically haven't gone through the same training as typical enlisted men. I didn't say that they didn't get training, or that their training was easier or that they have never been through the same training. There's nothing in your post that materially disagrees with that statement.
I should also point out that my comme
Re: (Score:1)
2. Everyone has to work
If corporations are allowed to pretend business is war, then logically, we will all be in hell every day until we retire or die.
Chicago let business and war mix for a while in the twenties. Ask them how that worked out.
Re: (Score:3)
It's (generally) bloodless and unarmed, but the basics are all there.
No they're not. Not even close. The defining aspect of war is two (or more) large armed groups trying to kill each other. Not in the metaphorical "we're going to kill the competition" way, but in the actual piles-of-corpses, starving-refugees, survivors-crippled-for-life way. If you think that's what business looks like, it's because you have no idea what war looks like, and I envy you your ignorance.
The other basics of military life, like honor, discipline, and mutual respect? Only if you're very, ver
Re: (Score:2)
So then have them go through the training as well. The top military had to go through it to get where they are, so why not the top corporate?
Because the Marines are under the direct command of the government, and the corporate heads are those steering the wheels of government. What could possibly go wrong?
Re: (Score:3)
Not really, it's more like politics (lots of talking, some shouting but nothing ever gets done). MBA's like to pretend that business is war because it makes them feel like important generals, not just the douchebag with a nice suite they really are.
Business is not war precisely because it lacks the destruction and death that acompanies war. Even cold wars claim 1000's of lives.
Re: (Score:2)
2. Corporations are not armies.
Would it really be such a bad thing to view them as such?
Yes, it would be such a bad thing. If you make living together in society a zero-sum conflict game, you get hell, not society.
You say that as though modern life isn't already a zero-sum game, both on the individual and on the societal level.
Re: (Score:2)
You say that as though modern life isn't already a zero-sum game, both on the individual and on the societal level.
Nonsense. Since the end of the Cold War, the number of wars world-wide has fallen to an historic low, and economic growth has grown to historic highs. Since 2000, trade has flourished and the world economy has grown more than 4% annually. That is better then ever before in history. War has winners and losers. But with peace, we can all prosper, and it is not "zero-sum".
Re: (Score:2)
"Prosperity" is not created out of thin air. Something must be given up in order to attain it. That you are not the only one that had to give something up for it is irrelevant.
Re: (Score:2)
"Prosperity" is not created out of thin air. Something must be given up in order to attain it.
So then what you are saying, is that since our global economy grew by 4% annual, then the economy of another planet must have declined by the same amount. Do you have any evidence that this is true?
Re: (Score:2)
Well clearly it requires materials and effort.
But when the first caveman skinned a bear and sat on it he didn't make anyone else's arse any colder.
Re: (Score:2)
Well clearly it requires materials and effort.
But when the first caveman skinned a bear and sat on it he didn't make anyone else's arse any colder.
Except for... you know, the bear.
For some people, that doesn't matter. For others, there's concerns about the long-term that may not be obvious; for example, the survivability of the bison... I mean bear.
Re: (Score:2)
I suppose if you consider the time before humans and the time after humans, then OK sure it's zero sum I suppose because we're all going to be heatless dust one day.
But in the meantime, looking at the era of human existence, I don't think life has ever been a zero sum game. We create and capture things from what was previous useless... that alone makes it not zero sum.
Re: (Score:2)
If you make living together in society a zero-sum conflict game, you get hell, not society.
Wars tend to be negative-sum games.
Re: (Score:2)
2. Corporations are not armies.
Would it really be such a bad thing to view them as such?
Uhh, yeah, kind of...
I'm not going to the stockade because I decided to quit my job in the middle of a project.
I'm also not going to risk my life for the success of a project.
Re: (Score:2)
Attempts to apply military methods to civilian business tend to fail dramatically, because:
1. Business is not war.
2. Corporations are not armies.
3. Corporate imitations of military training are almost invariably done by and for spoiled brat MBA types who love to think of themselves as macho warriors, but wouldn't last five minutes humping a pack and a rifle.
#1 is all you need for this argument.
In the US, and most of the western world, there is no reason to allow yourself to be brutalized mentally and physically for a job unless that job is saving lives (either your own or others).
But having it do to you while working to make Ford vehicles slightly faster so that the company can turn a (larger) profit? No thanks.
I could see something like this working if they tied incentives to both your individual performance and the performance of your "unit", people might b
Oh, bullshit. (Score:5, Insightful)
The Pendaran method, designed to force participants to rise above chaos and develop problem-solving techniques, is diametrically opposed, a sort of indictment of Six Sigma and other beloved corporate training regimes.
No, it's just yet another stupid "corporate training regime" designed to separate MBAs from their and everyone else's money. Which wouldn't be a problem, except for the "everyone else" part--companies actually spend money on this kind of crap instead of on things like, you know, salary and benefits for the people who actually do the work that keeps the company in business. And there are more and more of these parasites infecting the corporate world every year, which ought to be enough to convince the Invisible Hand cultists that maybe there's something wrong with their cherished idea that the market weeds out inefficient management ... except they're all too busy congratulating themselves on buying into the latest bullshit fad to pay attention.
Re: (Score:3)
Commie. My skepticism about the invisible hand totally fucking vanished when I learned that I could spend other people's money to pay it to give me invisible handjobs.
Clearly, you are just a envy-driven agent of class warfare and collectivism.
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, you caught me. Guess I'll have to find some other group of running-dog lackeys to subvert to the cause of the glorious peoples' revolution of the international brotherhood of the proletariat. ;)
Re: (Score:2)
No, it's just yet another stupid "corporate training regime" designed to separate MBAs from their and everyone else's money.
FTFA
Lasleyâ(TM)s company, Edw. C. Levy Co., helps steel companies turn slag material into cement, road paving, and other products. It has sent a few dozen people through the Pendaran program and noted a 60 percent to 70 percent safety improvement among those teams, which translated into a $1 million annual savings from higher productivity. Now the company looks to put the majority of its 1,800 people through the course. âoeThe first three days may be the worst thing you can imagine, but then the clouds part and real change happens,â Lasley says.
Injuries and safety violations are measurable metrics.
Actually teaching people how to work as a team is not bullshit.
Bullshit is when a program claims to teach teamwork, but doesn't.
Re: (Score:2)
So, they sent a few dozen people through the program and got a $1 million annual savings out of it. So we're talking what? $20,000 to $40,000 savings per person? Just how many accidents are these people getting into in the first place? Frankly, it sounds like hyperbole or fishy accounting to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Every con man trying to sell you on the latest management fad will show you "measurable metrics" (and will often use silly phrases just like that) to prove that their Latest And Greatest will make things better. Which means, of course, that last year's Latest And Greatest, and the one from the year before that, and the year before that, are all bullshit--but this Latest And Greatest is the real deal! Trust me! We've got metrics!
Whatever. As a statistician, I smell cherry-picking. And it's amazing how e
Re: (Score:2)
In the past ten years, my hourly pay (with the same company) has literally quadrupled.
Has my work improved because of this? No, not at all: I'm still the same asshole as before. I just know more stuff than I used to, and I'm more expensive than I used to be.
But having been through the Army's basic training at Fort Gordon, I can see the merit of breaking people down: At the b
Re: (Score:2)
Rather than repeat myself, I'll just say that I give my reasons for rejecting the idea that this will reap any of the same benefits as military basic training does here [slashdot.org]. Short version: business isn't war, and the corporate world's half-assed attempts to play soldier are doomed to failure.
Re: (Score:2)
Because...why? Because you say so?
Re: (Score:2)
For the reasons I gave in the post I linked to, and which other posters expanded on in the thread. If you don't want to bother reading through it [shrug] that's not my problem.
Re: (Score:2)
I did read your post.
The question stands.
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, I'll try to explain it again. My three main points:
1. Business is not war, because under normal circumstances, business does not involve killing people. Microsoft is not going to bomb Google's headquarters. Target submarines are not going to stalk ships carrying goods for Wal-Mart. Ford is not going to dispatch a battalion to move into a GM plant, kill or take prisoner all the GM employees found there, and hold the plant against attempts to take it back.
2. Corporations are not armies. The most
Re: (Score:2)
One word: Clausewitz.
Re: (Score:2)
1. Not all military action involves killing people. Sure, war does connotate killing; but not all militaries are at war.
2. I quit the US Army. They even paid for my ticket home. I did not go to jail, I was not threatened, and nobody shot me for doing so. I am not the only person who has done this.
3. I think that you just attempted to differentiate two personality types, but actually only managed to show that they're not really very different at all.
Re: (Score:2)
1. Not all military action involves killing people. Sure, war does connotate killing; but not all militaries are at war.
A military is either at war, training for war, or a lousy military. I don't know of any fourth option.
2. I quit the US Army. They even paid for my ticket home. I did not go to jail, I was not threatened, and nobody shot me for doing so. I am not the only person who has done this.
How exactly did you do that? If you mean you just put in your time and didn't re-enlist, you have to know that's not the same thing as walking off the job.
3. I think that you just attempted to differentiate two personality types, but actually only managed to show that they're not really very different at all.
My point is that people like this are a minority in the military, and are generally despised by those who have to put up with them, whereas they absolutely dominate corporate culture.
more simulation / hands on training is needed all (Score:2)
more simulation / hands on training is needed all over.
Six Sigma and other beloved corporate training regimes. are seem to be that PHB stuff run by people who don't know much about the real work.
Breaking their spirit (Score:1)
"After their spirits get broken, the workers actually start functioning as a well-oiled team."
I'm pretty sure that after how corporations have been treating workers for the last couple of decades, and especially during the past five years, any spirits the workers have don't need much to be broken.
...military crap... there's better methods (Score:5, Interesting)
I believe I did this in the military, in the basic training (you know, the part where a drill sergeant shouts at you a lot).
It was called "team building exercises".
It did wonders to make us see all officers as idiots.
Sure, it also made us help each other along the exercises and get to see the worst sides of each other. But I don't think it made us a more lean team. Really not worth the cost of how much we learned to hate the military and it's idiots.
Doing that kind of crap to team up factory workers? Eh.
Send them out on a week long survival course (one where you actually learn something and get to enjoy the nature) or even better, have them team up in paintball teams for a week. Or build fighting robots together, why not, without the shouting.
Don't even have to involve actors. That would be enough to have them work together as a team, and they wouldn't actually hate the bosses' guts for the rest of their life.
Only idiots deserve to get shouted at. Ever.
Re: (Score:2)
You're an outlier - experience proves that in the real world, over the long run, it does work for the vast majority of the trainees.
Arbeit macht frei (Score:3)
Over the factory gates.
Dad? (Score:2)
Hazing? (Score:2)
I've always wondered about these sorts of worker training programs. The boot camps, the firewalking, paintball, etc. If they're mandatory, how are they not a form of hazing?
Holy hits batman (Score:2)
Parent managed to get Role Playing, manic, simulation, broken, and well-oiled into one article. Google is going to be sending some seriously confused people to this article.
From the Desk of Linus Torvalds (Score:5, Funny)
" After their spirits get broken, the workers actually start functioning as a well-oiled team"
Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
L Torvalds
Er.. (Score:4)
>After their spirits get broken, the workers actually start functioning as a well-oiled team.
You should know you can learn to work as a well oiled team without breaking anyone's spirits.
Usually it involves good communication, clear roles, sensible motivation structures and weeding out the dickheads.
Sounds reasonable (Score:2)
Take away someones humanity and you take away human error?
Baskin-Robbins Manufacturing (Score:3)
Wow, just what we need to stay competitive...another "flavor of the month" management scheme.
Add this to Quality Circles, TQM, 5-S, Six-Sigma, LEAN, and all the rest of the psychobabble bullshit. This is what happens when MBAs and HR types try to do what engineers are taught to do.
Maybe if the bean-counters didn't fuck the process up in the first place with impossible OE and COMG KPI's, revolving-door personnel policies, zeroed-out training budgets, and Run to Fail maintenance programs, they wouldn't need to piss money aware on ludicrous self-congratulation seminars.
not going to work (Score:2)
Inhumane and Perverted (Score:3)
This sounds too much like the robber barons are regaining control. Workers are simply a resource (like water or electricity) meant to be consumed while incurring as little cost as possible and ultimately discarded.
Having been in the military, I can say without fear of contradiction, that this is what boot camp was back during the Vietnam "conflict." It also was my son's experience during Desert Storm. Now, from what I hear, the DI's have been backed off somewhat. Nothing like the scene from "Full Metal Jacket."
Just wait until someone with a sketchy psych profile is in the mix and somebody gets killed or commits suicide.
"well-oiled team"? (Score:2)
A well-oiled team? Well, that's just kinky.