MH Marketing Sales Management

by Shawn P. Mullins

There are principles of engineering that can and should be used successfully by other segments of the manufactured and modular housing industries. These principles yield superior outcomes when used, so it makes sense to explore the ideas and put them to use.

Part I: Fundamental Principles for Avoiding Process Deficiencies:

I would argue that process deficiency is best summarized as a set of actions producing an unintended result. Typically, that result is an error or series of errors in our work product. In order to understand how certain actions and decisions affect eventual outcomes, one must focus on the framework of those decisions and the structure that either supports, or undermines those decisions. And while this forum is in no way a substitute for a qualified study of the topic by those more intellectually astute than myself, perhaps my words will at least provoke some interest and consideration where only apathy currently dwells.

As a veteran member of the manufactured buildings industry I have been exposed to quite an array of product, production methods, sales structures, engineering philosophies, and management styles. As such I have had ample opportunity and cause to develop methods and processes that function best at incorporating custom design ideas into production friendly, code compliant, and customer pleasing outcomes. My world is an environment where product and structural designs can be complex, production requirements are stringent, accuracy and productivity are expected to remain at high levels, and people in general have more questions for you than they do answers. This is in a nutshell the world of Engineering, Project Management and associated realms.

In order to survive and even excel in such an environment, one is forced to not only solve existing problems, but to find ways of preventing their reoccurrence, and perhaps more importantly, to intuitively adapt to a changing set of circumstances. Responsibilities and commitments must constantly be analyzed, prioritized, and have a particular process dedicated to them. As such, I have established three primary principles for which a process or task must include in order to be deemed reliable. While nothing is 100% fool proof, it has been my experience that following these principles takes care of about 90% or more of the potential problems. They are as follows:

1. The process must produce a repeatable result: Meaning that the activity or process must be able to produce the same result the majority of the time, AND without respect to a particular individual working the process. The focus is on the dependability of the process and not the individual. This is a critical difference in focus and the first place most process errors occur. If any of the individual steps in the process are weak then so too will be the result.
2. The process must allow for verification: Meaning that there has to be a way to verify or confirm the result is in compliance with whatever standards have been set. Ideally this verification is applicable to both the direct user and any secondary quality control measure being utilized such that the direct user is able to verify compliance separate and apart from any additional oversight.
3. The process must be simple to manage: Attempting to implement a complicated system as a means to address a specific issue is likely to produce other, unintended and negative consequences. It should also be noted that this is the element that allows for continued high productivity along with high accuracy. Simple processes means they are easier to learn and therefore more easily transferrable to others. This is paramount to replicating the process and increasing net productivity.

I will be the first to admit that none of these are particularly new or earth shattering concepts. Anyone involved in an Engineering, Quality Control, or similar process and analysis driven environment is likely to use similar techniques. Unfortunately, those techniques are often buried under a mountain of technical jargon or "geek quotient" for which the layperson has no real connection with. This in and of itself is a tremendous disappointment to me because it is through the daily application of these principles that one forms the habits and insight necessary to see through the forest of information overload, and begins to design successful processes and strategies.

Additionally, all three of these principles must be used in concert with one another and in spite of any other competing priorities for them to function appropriately. Doing so takes a certain measure of resolve, conviction and intestinal fortitude. Be warned, when a process doesn't fit these requirements and you are resistant to committing to a particular direction until it does, you may not be the most popular person. Allow me to qualify this comment by pointing out that often times internal customers will have individual agendas that dictate their problem be solved or assumed by someone else is short order. They just want the problem to go away.

As I write this article I am reminded of a particular example from during the work day wherein a production concern is proving challenging to tackle effectively. My colleague struggles with accepting that fact that the problem is complex and that it will take serious evaluation in order to be addressed successfully. I haven't yet been able to meet the principles for success so I must continue to work the pieces. Much like a puzzle needs all the pieces to fit in the proper order, so too does any process designed to address a particular concern. While lateral colleagues or those with narrow agendas may resist, it has been my experience that most upper management types or those with similar broader leadership beliefs will understand your motivations if properly explained to them. Don't be afraid to elaborate on your requirement, and more importantly, on the business need for a consistently deliverable solution. In most cases you will be given the latitude needed to properly asses and develop your process solution. It is important to note that I didn't advise rejecting a non-conforming solution entirely. Instead, keep working at it until the above objectives are met.

A productive approach is to design a process you believe fits the principles listed above, test it, verify the results, and then repeat as necessary to fine tune the results. Then and only then can you reliably commit to a specific course of action with any real measure of confidence. Over time you will develop a better instinct for what will work and what won't. You will begin to recognize and even predict potential process failures. The current issue that I am struggling with is evidence of this fact. I can instinctively see the potential failures so I know more work needs to be done.

When something goes awry and a mistake is made, too often we want to simply dismiss the error as a fluke, lack of attention, or some other uncontrollable variable. Why do we do this? Because it implies that we as managers, owners, and co-workers don't have to bear any of the responsibility for the mistakes. Yet in reality, until we have removed all of the crutches that legitimately allow an individual (or ourselves) to claim, "I didn't know", "I wasn't aware", or "no one told me", we have failed to do all we can to develop a structure for success. Those in positions such as myself have both a blessing and a curse. The blessing is that the nature of our work exposes us to a variety of inter-departmental and inter-disciplinary cooperation. Our daily work life overlaps Sales, Purchasing, Production, vendor relationships, customer contact, etc. Accordingly, we are forced to develop tools to properly manage all of this information. Tools of the trade become habits. Habits become tendencies. Tendencies become natural extensions of our personalities. The curse is that through all of this we can more easily identify where processes are breaking down, where more focus should be directed, and how a simple tweak here or there can make a world of difference in the quality of information being provided to us and others.

Try as we may to impart these epiphanies to others, the attempt is often met with a less than warm reception. The difficulty lies in getting those outside of the more analytical segments of our industry to recognize and appreciate the benefits of process analysis and design. This curse haunts us in our desire to share this knowledge and show others how much easier their lives can be if they would only come over from the dark side. This is not an exercise in futility or some activity undertaken for the sake of some disconnected purpose. It is as strongly connected to one's personal success and ambitions as is their choice of career, mate, and lifestyle.

All of these are areas in which the majority of us have specific intentions and desires for growth. Let's be honest with ourselves. None of us toil day in and day out for purely altruistic reasons. We have some personal and professional motivation that creates a desire to be successful in our endeavors. These are intrinsic and completely natural. Rather than fear or be ashamed of these realities, we should embrace this "positive power of selfishness" because by doing so we will free ourselves from the negative thinking that creates barriers to improvement and growth. The thinking that says "it isn't my job", "someone else will pick up the slack", or "one way is just as good as another" (when we know that isn't the case). The reality is that these negative attitudes don't benefit us like we might think. They are imposters masquerading as vehicles of individuality and independence. Who among us isn't willing to invest in something they are confident will benefit them? Who isn't willing to learn something new that has been proven to return personal or professional dividends?

Looking at your processes, analyzing their effectiveness, and objectively evaluating your success/failure rate will do all these things and more. You will benefit as much or more than others, and yet others win as well because your decisions and work product will be much more reliable. Your internal and external customers get better results and you get the credit.

Our industry and our realities have either significantly changed over the last couple of years and/or they are still undergoing change. Challenges will increase, not diminish, and we will be forced to do more with less. The difference between the winners and the losers always has and always will come down to determination, decisiveness, and discernment. Which camp are you in? Will you lead or just blindly follow?

Hopefully by now I've been able to lead some of you away from the camp of ambivalence and have left you wanting to learn more. As I currently envision it, future articles will focus on how we can best benefit from these strategies and will include additional examples of best practices. Preliminary titles include:

Part 2: Then vs. Now: A Changed Environment
Part 3: Drilling Down Operational Effectiveness

Looking forward to continuing our discussion…

Shawn P. Mullins has worked in the manufactured buildings industry for over 22 years. Over the course of his career he has held various leadership posts including: Engineering support and management, Estimating Management, and Operational support positions. His product experience covers a wide spectrum including: HUD, IRC, international and man camps, ANSI, light commercial, etc. Mr. Mullins currently holds a BSBA/Operations Management degree and is currently pursuing a MBA with a focus in Project Management. Industry held positions include Board of Directors, and Government Relations & Zoning Committee membership for the Arizona Housing Association. Mr. Mullins welcomes comments, feedback to his articles and industry connections via his Linkedin page at http://www.linkedin.com/in/shawnpmullins, or direct at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .