To differentiate a Lean-Technical blog from a Lean-Leadership blog, I will name blogs about leadership with “Lead with Lean”.
As I reflect on current events and the state of our nation, I can not help but wonder if there might be a place in government for what Lean Leaders know is the practice of Servant Leadership.
We know in Lean that the voice of the customer (VOC) is of utmost importance. Organizations that proactively seek to understand the VOC and then develop product/service to meet the need of the customer and then develop the technical competency of the employee population to deliver delightful service to the customer, remain relevant overtime. We know this practice works in the marketplace. As business leaders, we know it.
What about with government and elected officials?
Once in office, don’t the politicians need to seek to understand the voice of the constituents on practical and tactical matters (not just high level political ideology) so that he/she might actually represent the people in the work of government?
My observation is: As an adult, I have lived in seven states across our great nation. In each state, I observed candidates for public office “go to the gemba” so to speak. The candidates campaign, go door to door, meet-n-greet at the grocery store, hand out fliers all aimed to convince me as a constituent to vote for them. Once in office, however, those same individuals no longer seek out my voice as a constituent. Once in power, they no longer go to the gemba to seek to understand the needs of the people that they represent. It is up to the constituent to seek out the elected official to make his voice be heard and understood. In my adult experience, I have observed only one elected official, who happened to be at the national level, consistently seek out the voice of the constituent over the course of his tenure. Regardless of political views, there seems to me to be a gap in the practice of the elected officials in seeking out the voice of the constituent. The lack of this proactive practice seems backwards to me, especially in today’s day and age with the reach and accessibility of technology.
In business, we would recognize the lack of practice as complacency and if we were hired to lead and transform a corporation we would be proactive in seeking out the voice of the customer. We would be proactive in understanding the stakeholder landscape holistically. We would be proactive about designing systems that enable value to be delivered consistently to the customer. We would be proactive about being good stewards towards our customers, employees, and communities. To deliver value, we would need to collaborate across the organization with appreciation for our different experiences and perspectives. We would be respectful of one another.
I simply think that what we know works in business might also be relevant in government. The electoral college was designed to represent the constituent on practical and tactical matters that impacts American lives in the communities in which we live. It is not only philosophy or ideology. Without the voice of the constituent proactively being heard and sought out on a regular cadence, how do the actions taken on the Hill actually represent the will and need of the people in the community “gemba”?
Might the voice of the constituent matter not only at the polls but more importantly after the polls?
Everything ALFO 