Listen to this column in your favorite format

iTunes or MP3

(Editor's Note: Our platform provider is currently having a problem accommodating iTunes files on Firefox browsers for those using PCs. We apologize for any inconvenience.)

Over the years, I have taught loyal readers of this column about "Spinning the Invoice Printer"; "Lean Orderly and Clean (LOC)"; and "Legal, Moral and Ethical (LME)". However, I have been gravely remiss in one area, an area in which I was immersed in serious training about forty years ago.

It was 1975 and I worked in Central Engineering at Procter & Gamble in Cincinnati, Ohio. Central Engineering had over 2,000 employees in those days. Several years before--I am not quite sure when, but before I arrived in February of 1974--company management had looked around and noticed that the entire company was heavily white and male. Always highly attuned and sensitive to public opinion, for public opinion then (as now) had a large impact on the results of a consumer products company, senior management decided this must change. Further, they decided that this change involved more than just hiring females and people of color. These new employees must be productive members of the team. In other words, P & G could not afford tokenism; these new team members had to be held accountable to the same high standards as everyone else.

****

Listen to industry news on Pulp & Paper Radio International!

****

In order to clear the decks so that everyone could be properly held accountable, it was determined that the male white employees most likely needed some training in attitude adjustment. In other words, senior management "got it"--that the worst kind of prejudice is not holding everyone to the same standards. This was a tricky concept for that time, African-Americans and women had been held down because society said they did not meet high standards: a stupid, broad-brush concept.

Central Engineering had the largest collection of personnel whose output was the most difficult to measure. We had no metronome as exists in production, namely a production line with nameplate capacity. We had no business goals that could be measured monthly, such as in sales and marketing. We had sloppy projects of all sizes and shapes, which while measurable on an individual basis, were not measurable in a macro sense.

So we became the trial training ground. We embarked on an interesting journey. Two of the biggest, most deeply pigmented industrial psychologists that could be found were hired and placed in our department. Training began. From early 1975 until I left for a field assignment in July 1977, I spent about six weeks in what we called in those days, "Black/White Training." Some was on site, some was on the job and some was at various private conference centers around Cincinnati. This training has affected my view of everyone--not just minorities and women--everyone whom I have met in the ensuing four decades.

****

The collapse of OPEC: Get out your calculators and spreadsheets ... Check out the latest edition of Strategic & Financial Arguments.

****

I will not presume to be able to distill that intensive training and forty years' application experience into one NI column, but I will give you some key introductory points.

1. The worst kind of prejudice is condescension and accepting less than at least standard performance from someone who is not like you.

2. If you tell different kinds of jokes and stories when minorities and women are not present than you do when they are, you are prejudiced.

3. Words matter. Yes, you must be politically correct at times. Use "effort hours" instead of "manhours." Use "accessway" instead of "manhole." Use "humankind" instead of "mankind." You get the idea.

4. If someone looks different from you, they have likely had life experiences very different from yours, and you should not assume they approach a given subject as you would. In fact, that person may just have a better approach.

Now why do we concern ourselves with these matters? On a personal level, it is simply the right thing to do. On a corporate level, everyone working together at maximum efficiency provides the overall best chance we have at being successful.

These thoughts are just a taste of the rich learnings I received so long ago. In the future, I will bring up other aspects of this viewpoint.

What do you think? You can take our quiz this week to share your thoughts.

For safety this week, I am glad the health field has largely been able to remove the stereotypes that used to be associated with their profession. When I have a health emergency, I want the best talent available and you should, too.

Be safe and we will talk next week.

You can own your Nip Impressions Library by ordering "Raising EBITDA ... the lessons of Nip Impressions."