Issue link: https://www.e-digitaleditions.com/i/1302985
Pharmaceutical Technology Regulatory Sourcebook October 2020 67 The types of behaviors that we are focusing on here are not complex activities. Rather, they are the millions of tasks that happen every day—good documentation practices, correct garb, or proper cleaning of floors— simple tasks that, if not done correctly 100% of the time, can kill your costs. I'm going to describe the process that we discovered for creating a strong quality culture. I wish that I could tell you that our discovery process itself was rational. Alas, no, it was chaotic; slinging ideas at the wall and keeping the ones that work. The end result is elegant. Getting there was not. Forming habits We found that our technicians, the people with their hands on the work, were always busy. They were multi- tasking, and they were getting pulled in different direc- tions. "Hurry up and get that done! But pay attention to details." It turns out that attention is a limited resource. Wendy Wood explained at the American Psycho- logical Association's 122nd Annual Convention, "The thoughtful intentional mind is easily derailed, and people tend to fall back on habitual behaviors. Forty percent of the time we're not thinking about what we're doing. Habits allow us to focus on other things … Willpower is a limited resource, and when it runs out, you fall back on habits" (4). We found that embedding quality habits into our employees helps them do it right the first time by off- loading repeated good manufacturing practice (GMP) activities—such as initial date, fill-in-ALL-the-blanks, no-hair-outside-the-net—from their conscious to their unconscious mind. When we implant desirable habits into the members of an organization, we drive out undesirable behaviors. The advantage of good habits is that it costs very little to maintain them. Routine, yet quality-critical everyday tasks can be performed with little input from the prefrontal cortex. That leaves plenty of working memory for more complex tasks. The problem was that our employees already had bad habits. Now we had to figure out a way to change them. We knew that would be hard, and that we des- perately needed help. The cavalry Frederick Herzberg was a professor in the School of Business at the University of Utah. His research is foundational in the field of employee motivation (5). His research demonstrated that a true motivator is a factor that comes from an internal motor within the employee. Herzberg's factors that motivate employees in order of effectiveness are: • Achievement • Recognition • Work itself • Responsibility • Advancement • Growth. Note what is not on the list: money. It's not that Herzberg discounted money as a strong influence on employee behavior. Rather, money can be a pow- erful demotivator if the employee feels that they are not getting fair compensation. Paying more money beyond what the employee feels is fair, however, is not a motivator in Herzberg's definition because you have to keep shoveling more money in order to keep the employee producing. We didn't have that kind of money. We used Herzberg's two most important factors, achievement and recognition, to motivate employees to change their habits. Both of these factors are far cheaper than giving away the company's money, and amazingly, more effective.