communication in poultry grower relations: a blueprint to success

Communication in Poultry Grower Relations

Communication in Poultry Grower Relations: A Blueprint to Success

Larry Cole, PhD

El IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY PRESS / Ames

Larry Cole received a PhD from the University of Oklahoma. He has over twenty years of experience as a consultant to industry and organizations. He founded Cole Training Consultants and has provided a series of seminars for the U.S. Poultry 8r Egg Association.

0 2000 Iowa State University Press All rights reserved

Iowa State University Press 2121 South State Avenue, Ames, Iowa 50014

Orders: 1-800-862-6657 Office: 1-515-292-0140 Fax: 1-515-292-3348 Web site: www.isupress.edu

Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use, or the internal or personal use of specific clients, is granted by Iowa State University Press, provided that the base fee of $. lo per copy is paid directly to the Copyright Clear- ance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923. For those organizations that have been granted a photocopy license by CCC, a separate system of payment has been arranged. The fee code for users of the Transactional Report- ing Service is 0-8138-2736-112000 $.lo.

8 Printed on acid-free paper in the United States of America

First edition, 2000

International Standard Book Number: 0-8138-2736-1

Cataloging-in-publication data is available upon request.

The last digit is the print number: 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

Contents

Acknowledgments vii

Introduction

Chapter 1

Chapter 2

Chapter 3

Chapter 4

Chapter 5

Chapter 6

Chapter 7

Chapter 8

Chapter 9

Chapter 10

Chapter 11

ix

Where We Are Is from Where We Came

Inverting the Pyramid 17

Creating a Grower-Relations Corporate Culture 29

Moments of Truth: The Keys to Successful Working Relationships 55

Growers Speak to the Issue of Creating the Ideal Company-Grower Working Relationship 93

Knowing What Needs to Be Known

Making Decisions Closer to the Grower

Implementing the WOW! Factor 127

Building Better Bridges on the Way to Grower Relations 139

Leading Change 161

Integrating the Parts to Make the Whole

3

105

11 7

189

How to Contact the Author

Appendix A Grower Relations Survey 199

Appendix B Delmarva Survey 207

Appendix C Flock Services Report 214

Appendix D Excellence in Grower Relations 21 8

Appendix E

Appendix F Poultry and Environmental Dialogue 234

197

What Can Be Done to Create a WOW!? 226

V

Acknowledgments

I want to begin by thanking the Grower Relations Advisory Commit- tee sponsored by the U.S. Poultry & Egg Association for having the vision to make the statement that it is time the industry organizes an effort to promote grower relations. This committee provided the initial industrywide thrust that led to a series of seminars on this subject. In a sense this committee is responsible for this book being written.

Special acknowledgment is given to the hundreds of employees who attended the grower-relations seminars. These men and women con- tributed a great deal of the information that is contained in this book.

Many growers have likewise provided valuable contributions. A special thanks goes to those growers who were so willing to share their knowledge and perspectives during numerous grower meetings and focus group discussions. This information was crucial in writing a book that promotes open, candid, and healthy communication.

A very big thank-you goes to Don Dalton and Larry Brown. Without these two individuals, this book would not have been possible.

Don is president of the U.S. Poultry & Egg Association. First, I want to thank him for giving me the opportunity to work with him and his staff to develop and implement the grower-relations seminars. Second, his knowledge of the industry and guidance of the book’s focus were in- valuable to bringing this book to completion.

Larry is a vice president with the U.S. Poultry & Egg Association and is currently serving in the capacity of organizer of education seminars for the industry through the association. Larry read numerous drafts and provided thoughtful suggestions for improvement, and encouragement to continue writing when that encouragement was sorely needed.

Dan Cunningham, PhD, extension coordinator for the Department of Poultry Science at the University of Georgia, was an integral component driving the success of the grower-relations seminars. He served on the Grower Relations Advisory Committee and was a member of the seminar team. He reviewed and provided suggestions to improve various chapters of this book.

Next is Jim Ice, PhD, who is the acquisitions editor for Iowa State University Press. His patience and encouragement were important in the struggle to meet deadlines that would make this book a reality.

vii

... Vlll Acknowledgments

Then, of course, I wish to thank Doris King. Doris painstakingly edited the manuscript and ensured that the format met publication requirements. Her willingness to go the extra mile helped meet those deadlines.

Last but certainly not least is you, the reader. I want to thank you for reading this book and sincerely hope that it leads to the continued improvement and profitability of the grower-company working relationship, which is the reason this book was written in the first place.

Introduction

This book was written for one reason-to show individual companies and their respective growers a procedure to communicate and work together more effectively to help each other be more profitable. In doing so, I wanted to provide a step-by-step blueprint that can be readily followed by those proactive industry leaders who want to improve the grower-company partnership.

From its earliest beginnings the poultry industry was characterized by an interdependent relationship between the grower and feed company. The feed dealer was a trusted partner when the primary grower was the farmer’s wife as she grew chickens as a side business, to generate a little “chicken or egg money.” In those days the feed dealer provided credit for feed and flowered feed sacks, from which dresses and bonnets were made. It is quite amazing that today’s poultry industry emerged from this cooperative relationship.

This fledgling industry faced numerous challenges. Here are some of the more notable ones:

Meeting consumer demands for ongoing supplies of feed and chicks. Getting birds to the big-city markets. Generating financial support for growers to underwrite the cost of

Meeting consumer demand during World War 11. Surviving depressed poultry prices following the war. Meeting the initial challenge of increasing controls and regulations imposed by the federal government in order to protect this growing industry.

A common denominator for each issue was the emergence of leaders working together to resolve it. The industry grew and became healthier as the result of facing these early challenges.

The struggle to ensure an ongoing supply of chicks and feed created the opportunity to integrate the ownership of the hatchery and feed mills. This integration was not without its critics, but it eventually localized these two entities, along with the processing plant, to create an efficient system to mass-produce processed poultry. The “chicken money” of the housewife was replaced with a cash crop that has become an agriculture mainstay.

feed during grow-out time.

ix

X Introduction

The grower did not have the financial resources of the feed dealer. Consequently, the two parties had to find a way to support the grower financially until the birds could be harvested. The early days saw the feed dealer providing credit. The feed salesman was the first field service representative, who provided consultation along with the feed. These challenges were all frontrunners for today’s contractual relationship, which was designed to minimize the grower’s financial risk.

The demands to meet market and transportation needs ultimately led to a redesign in processing the birds. Gone was the New York style of leaving the head, feet, and entrails for the consumer. The new way consisted of a completely processed bird.

Working together in opposition to the federal government’s regulations and price controls in the early 1960s taught the industry that strong leadership, and organizing the interested parties to work together with a common agenda, could be beneficial for all.

The industry’s forefathers would probably be amazed at the growth of today’s industry. But if you look carefully, the growth pattern was in fact established by these early visionary leaders.

At one time virtually every farm produced chickens, and there were about as many feed dealers. As the demand for processed poultry increased, the pattern was established in these early days for growers to produce more chickens. Fewer farmers accepted the challenge to do so. The industry began the consolidation movement, depending upon fewer farmers to grow more chickens to feed the consumer.

Feed dealers likewise consolidated for economic reasons. Fewer play- ers became responsible for the surging poultry industry.

That trend to consolidate continues today. The industry is continually challenged by new growth opportunities.

The ever-changing needs of the consumer bring forth a variety of products to adorn the kitchen table. Furthermore, the very characteristics that brought chickens to America in the first place are creating global marketing opportunities to feed the world’s hungry.

Growth brings challenges. Today’s industry leaders need the vision to meet such challenges while recognizing that in doing so they are preparing the industry for a profitable tomorrow.

While the industry is excited about the tremendous growth opportunities, there are a number of operational issues that are applying pressure to the working relationship.

Food safety issues are on the forefront and will continue to be so. The industry has experienced an increase in government regulations with the implementation of the Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) regulations to promote a quality center-of-the-plate product.

Environmental issues are getting a great deal of attention. Manure

Introduction xi

management is a key issue, along with disposal of poultry house mortalities.

The issue of profitability has been a question since the beginning of the industry. I’ve already spoken to the issue of integration and the contractual partnership, which were pioneered to ensure the financial success of all concerned parties. Several contractual issues are being questioned today, for example, the competitive clause and the base payment mechanism. The bottom line question is, Is everyone profiting fairly rel- ative to one’s investment?

Realistically, the government is always willing to offer a helping hand. But does the industry want additional legislation and regulations? I think not. Most of the growers and company representatives with whom I’ve discussed this issue do not want the government’s assistance. Gov- ernment intervention does battle with the very core of the independent nature that has characterized this industry from its inception.

The majority of those with whom I’ve talked conclude that every challenge facing the industry can be solved by growers and company representatives talking with each other.

Again, I want to reiterate: The primary purpose of this book is to show growers and company representatives a process by which to communicate and work together to identify and solve the day-to-day issues impacting the profitability of both parties. It is my contention that, as everyone learns to work together more effectively, the trust levels between the respective parties will escalate to provide additional positive energy to meet the challenges of the industry. In reality the interdependent nature of the working relationships dictates that both parties’ needs be met in order for the industry to be successful. The industry needs proactive leadership to do just that.

A looming question that may exist in the mind of some readers is whether trust can be established quickly enough for the industry to solve its complex issues. Again, I think the mechanism is there for that to happen.

Testimony to that fact is the progress being made in the area of grower relations since the U.S. Poultry & Egg Association began its series of workshops on this subject.

In 1996 a committee was formed to develop a series of seminars designed to improve grower relations. The decision was to begin by offering such a seminar for field service representatives throughout the southeastern United States. Over one thousand company employees participated in this initial seminar series.

A second seminar was designed and offered to managers. At the time of writing this book this seminar is being scheduled throughout the southeastern United States.

xii lntroduction

A newsletter by the U.S. Poultry & Egg Association is now being published and sent to the field service representatives to promote the continued effort in grower relations.

Companies have responded positively to this effort. Not only did they bear the expense of sending employees to the seminar, but they have reported a surge of progress to improve grower relations. This progress has included the following:

Conducting focus groups designed to identify action steps to improve grower relations. Implementing a Grower Council designed to secure grower input in identifying and solving issues that will improve the working relationship. Creating management positions with the responsibilities to design and implement improvements in grower relations. Conducting grower surveys to quantify the strengths and opportunities to improve the working relationship. Realizing, ultimately, that growers and company representatives can work together to meet the challenges facing this exciting industry before government officials decide they must enter the working relationship formula to solve the industry’s problems.

The opportunities for the industry are better than ever. I believe that by continually walking the path of working together, the perceived in- surmountable mountains will become hills, the hills will become knolls, and these knolls will become the superhighway leading the poultry industry into an ever more successful future.

Communication in Poultry Grower Relations

1

Bird’s-Eye View

The reasons poultry was brought to America in

the first place are size easily transported, rela-

tively easily grown, and consumer appeal driving

the success of the business today.

Vertical integration began in an effort to ensure

an ongoing supply of feed and chicks and to

stabilize the income stream.

The Georgia dock market became the industry

standard.

The contractual relationship emerged to provide

Government price supports were considered to

a financial guarantee for the grower.

“save” the poultry industry from financial

disaster.

3

Communication in Poultry Grower Relationa Larry Cole

Copyright 0 2000 Iowa State University Press

Where We Are I s from Where We Came

Proactive leadership got us here today, and it will take us into the tomorrows.

ittle did those settlers know that when they brought chickens to LJ amestown America from Europe in 1607 they began preparing the New World for a major cash crop industry.

It’s interesting that the reasons chickens were brought to America in the first place include the same reasons American poultry companies are sending chickens back to the global market today. They are small, easily transported, fairly easily grown, and very tasty.

The interested reader is encouraged to read The Agribusiness Poultry Industry by Gordon Sawyer for a historical accounting of the chicken industry.

Today the poultry business not only includes broilers and egg production, but turkey production as well. Certainly our forefathers would be shocked with the rapid development of this global business and the variety of product that is marketed to today’s consumers.

The Father of Integration

Historians credit Jesse Dixon Jewell (from Gainesville, Georgia) as laying the foundation for today’s version of integration. Jewell was described as an optimistic salesperson.

A combination of events-the depression, the Georgia red clay, and a devastating tornado in 1936-combined to spur Jewell onward to revive his family’s failing feed business in a community that did not have many chickens, nor growers with money to purchase either chickens or feed. Now, that is optimistic thinking at its best.

His ingenious solution? He provided one-day-old chicks to farmers, gave them feed on credit, and when the chickens were ready for market, he picked them up and transported them to market. The farmers paid for the feed after the chickens were harvested. The grower-company partnership had begun.

4

Where We Are Is from Where We Came 5

Jewell borrowed this solution from the farmers in north Georgia, who received credit from the store to purchase seed and fertilizer. When the crop was ready to harvest, the store purchased the crop.

Just before World War 11, Jewell had a hatchery and constructed a processing plant so he could control his supply of baby chicks, improving both his ability to grow the chicks and his efforts to market. Still, he depended upon feed companies for a supply of feed. As it turned out, salespeople controlled the feed pipeline and could virtually dictate who would receive feed. Jewell’s processing plants created meat scraps that were needed by the feed mills. Consequently, Jewell was able to negoti- ate his feed supply.

In the early years the New York market was a dominant force in dictating how chickens were processed. The New York-dressed chickens had the feathers removed, but the head, feet, and entrails were purchased by the end user. Jewell found that consumers outside of the New York area were willing to buy processed birds with the head, feet, and entrails removed. The first birds were packed in ice and shipped to the marketplace in wooden barrels.

After World War 11, Jewell completed his vertical integration model by building a feed mill. He ultimately had complete control of growing poultry-feed mill, laying flocks, incubating, raising the chickens for market, warehousing, distributing, marketing, and by-product distribution.

Another factor driving the need for integration was geography. The existing hatcheries and feed mills were many miles away, making the availability of eggs and feed uncertain. Both to increase profits and to make these needed resources more readily available to local farmers, he decided to build his own mill closer to the farmer. This practice of close proximity of the farmer to the feed mill hatchery and processing plant still holds true today.

As is also true today, progress has its doubters. Jewell’s integration had its opponents. Some criticized centralizing the profits under one roof. These doubters contended that other peoplekompanies (for example, feed mill, feed dealer, and hatcheries) needed to make profits, and integration would rob them of a living. But integration was here to stay and flourish.

Jewell evidently had another characteristic that is crucial for the success of the poultry industry-he liked to communicate. He encouraged others, even competitors, to tour his facilities. He had a vision that the poultry industry’s success could play a significant role in his personal success. That same philosophy is true today as the poultry industry faces the challenge of global marketing and competition. The success of the industry to meet these challenges will surely produce success for companies and their growers.

6 Chapter 1

As an aside, I should note that the feed dealers were the anchors in this young industry for an obvious reason-chickens needed feed. Even today’s concept of the field service representative had its beginning in the feed business. Feed salesmen worked with farmers to raise chickens. They served as the growers’ primary consultants and became known as poultry experts. An indication of their influence was the fact that these experts were often consulted before veterinarians for disease control and bird health.

The Georgia Dock Market

Georgia processors are given credit for streamlining the processing operation. Harvested chickens were traditionally placed in a holding area at the processing plant and fed for a couple of days before being processed. Georgia processors, however, envisioned themselves as providing a service function. They wanted high volume. So they built larger processing plants and ran at higher processing speeds. They are also credited with introducing the processing procedure of scheduling truckloads of birds to arrive at designated processing times without the use of holding areas. The Georgia birds were completely dressed and pan ready.

The Georgia markets produced high volume with the lowest price. Their price became the standard for the industry. Wholesalers and retail- ers would compare prices with the Georgia dock market before making any purchase commitment.

Georgia processors established a procedure that became known as “the formula” and was widely used by the industry. A live chicken yielded about 70 percent usable meat. The live price, therefore, would be divided by the 70 percent to give the price of the meat delivered to the retailer. The processors would add a profit margin, and the retailer also knew the costs associated with delivery. This popular formula provided healthy profits and allowed buyers to be competitive regardless of the market.

Progress in the industry led to the demise of the formula. Processing plants began raising their own birds instead of relying on the feed dealers to ensure an ongoing supply. Eventually more and more birds were simply being transferred between divisions of the company. The question, “HOW do you set a price when you are buying from yourself?” ultimately outdated the use of the formula, but not before the Georgia formula had enjoyed about fifteen years of success.

Contracts

The poultry industry has a volatile pricing history, producing major peaks and valleys. Farmers began looking for a procedure to protect


them from the risk of heavy losses; thus the contracting system was born.

The first recorded use of the contract occurred when a Virginia feed dealer found that one of his farmers could not pay the bills. The farmer was reluctant to take continued financial risks, so the two worked out a procedure where both would share the risk and profits. The feed dealer provided chicks and feed. The farmer furnished the house and labor. When the birds were processed, the expenses were deducted, and each received SO percent of the profit.

As the investment costs continued to escalate, the farmer was ex- posed to greater and greater risks. This risk was not acceptable, and eventually the contract emerged into a 90-10 split. The grower received 10 percent of the profit with the guarantee the grower would not sustain a loss. That is, the feed dealer underwrote any losses incurred when the birds were harvested except for the labor that was provided by the grower.

The continued demand for processed poultry encouraged the feed dealer to place birds constantly. This process, too, was not comfortable for the grower, who felt as though birds were being placed at times when the labor would be lost. To encourage growers to place birds, the feed dealers began guaranteeing the grower a per-pound price.

One popular early version paid the grower two cents per pound and a bonus based on feed conversion. The grower received an excellent bonus if the feed conversion ratio was 2.25 pounds of feed for every pound of meat. A standard bonus was defined when the feed conversion was 2.50 pounds to one pound of meat. If the food conversation was equal to or exceeded 2.75 pounds per pound of meat, there was no bonus.

The contract method was not universally accepted. Many growers preferred being independent farmers, but economic factors following World War I1 strongly encouraged growers to adopt a procedure to minimize financial risk. The contract seemed to be the decision of choice. The feed dealer became the integrator, who provided the financing, chicks, and feed and harvested the birds. In return the grower had a guarantee against any loss.

In spite of its wide use the contract method had its early opponents. Major objections were:

1. Independent farmers were becoming fewer and fewer. 2. It was immoral for one company to harness the profits. 3 . The financial arrangements would ruin the poultry business if not

4. The antitrust laws prevented growers and businesspeople from all of farming.

working within such a contractual arrangement.

8 Chapter 1

The conclusion ultimately reached was that growers needed the financial partner in order to be profitable. The poultry industry had moved away from the early beginnings of raising a few chickens for egg money into an agricultural business. It became a cash flow crop, having replaced some row crops, such as cotton on some farms, and growers needed some guarantee for their financial investment.

The contract has been a successful anchor point for the poultry industry for some fifty years. The contractual partnership has allowed the poultry industry companies and growers to profit. It has been a win- win-win for these entities as well as for the consumer, who has been assured of an ongoing supply of poultry at relatively inexpensive prices. It has served as the model for other agricultural business, such as the pork industry.

The interdependency between feed dealers, processors, growers, and consumers had been woven in the 1940s. There is no doubt that vertical integration and the contract models allowed the poultry industry to grow into an agricultural business. The poultry industry has become a mainstay of the American agricultural front and as of this writing is competing successfully in the global economy.

Every success, though, has its share of challenges, and the contractual relationship has its opponents. Interestingly enough, some of the same growers’ perceptions are surfacing today that were mentioned in the late 1940s and early 1950s, namely

1. The poultry company harnesses the majority of the profits. 2. The company writes the contract and offers it to the grower with-

out regard for the grower. Because of the need for a revenue stream to pay for the growers’ investments, they accept the contract.

The competitive nature of today’s contract is also being questioned. Most of the growers are in favor of it because it rewards those who practice effective poultry management, and the nature of the bonus can put several thousand additional dollars into the grower’s financial bottom line. Those growers not in favor of pay based on performance believe it is not fair and should be replaced with a standard payment mechanism for all growers.

In spite of these questions the trend in today’s marketplace is to ex- pand the use of a contractual partnership. The turkey industry has geographic regions of independent growers. These growers can purchase their poults’ feed and sell their birds to independent processors. Discus- sions with both growers and company employees in these pockets of in- dependence indicate an interest in the contract model to ensure the success of the turkey industry.


Government Regulations

From success spring challenges. Meeting challenges stimulates growth. The poultry industry has a history of challenges that have served to make the industry stronger. From its early beginnings the industry had to organize an ongoing supply of feed and chicks/poults, process the bird, make it available to the consumer, and endure the cyclic market prices.

The vertical integration model was developed in an effort to localize the availability of feed and processing capabilities. The contract model emerged in an effort to minimize the grower’s financial risk through ensuring the availability of chicks/poults and feed.

Prior to 1959 a voluntary inspection system administered through the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) was implemented to ensure the quality of processed poultry. The inspection system served as a marketing tool to ensure that the consumer received quality-produced items. Beef products were stamped as USDA inspected, and at that time beef consumption exceeded that of poultry. The poultry industry wanted to be on the same playing field with beef and asked for the USDA Inspected Shield as a mark of safety, as well as the USDA Grade A bird as a mark of quality.

Industry leaders had been working to establish standardized poultry regulations to facilitate the ease of transporting poultry across state lines. Ultimately Congress passed a bill for mandatory inspection.

Obtaining the mandatory inspection process created additional challenges. Many processing plants were old and could not meet the new standards. Old plants had to be replaced. Doing so required upgrading and/or building plants to meet the sanitation requirements. These mod- ern automated plants increased the industry’s production capability. More birds had to be grown to fully utilize the production capability. Production now exceeded consumption and prices dropped markedly.

The low prices created another challenge-the threat of government price supports. This effort experienced head-on opposition as early as 1954 in an industry that was proud of a history of success without government intervention or controls.

The threat of government intervention surged to the forefront, and the Kennedy administration offered a farm program that included price supports to protect the producer. The government proposed to save the industry at a time when broiler production was at an all-time low and many feed dealers were facing financial disaster.

The poultry industry was divided as never before. A series of government-sponsored meetings ensued. Ultimately the government’s attempt to introduce controls died for lack of support from all segments of

10 Chapter 1

the poultry industry. The poultry industry charted a course to continue its free enterprise system devoid of government controls.

Prices ultimately became more stable. Initial efforts reduced production in the winter months, during which time there was less demand for chickens, and then increased production for the peak summer months. The cyclic production schedule was expensive, especially during the lower-producing months. The industry began offering a diversified product mix that helped stabilize the demand.

What Goes Around Comes Around

Government intervention and increasing regulation are again con- fronting the poultry industry. The current issues include food safety, animal welfare, the contractual relationship, and environmental issues. The industry is currently facing additional pressures that impact the company-grower working relationship, namely, the challenge to provide meat protein to developing countries and to maintain an available workforce. Let’s address each one of these issues in more detail.

Food Safety

The government has recognized food safety as a significant consumer health issue for decades. In the 1950s the government placed inspectors in the processing plants to visually inspect every carcass processed. These inspectors looked for diseases and any damage to the bird incurred during the harvesting.

Today the issue is more complicated, with an inspection process at- tempting to minimize a bacteria count that cannot be seen with the naked eye. January 1998 saw the implementation of another set of government regulations called the Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) to ensure the implementation of a quality control process to produce a clean, high-quality poultry product. The intent is to establish checkpoints in the processing plants to meet the USDA microbiol standards (that is, bacteria count). Microbiol testing is used to check the success of this quality control process. The standards become more strin- gent as the industry continues, successfully, to lower the bacteria count. As a demonstration of its leadership in the food safety arena, the industry is testing new intervention strategies to meet the future microbiol standards.

Food safety could further impact company-grower relations as the government endeavors to look at the farm operations in an effort to control bacteria in the live bird before it gets to the plant. Several practices being examined include the following:


Preventing wild birds from getting into the poultry house. Reducing beetles. Controlling rodents. Monitoring human traffic (house to house traffic) and other biose-

HACCP regulations could also be mandated for feed mills to further mi- crobiological control. The impact of such regulations on the grower remains to be seen.

The Food and Drug Administration is reviewing the use of antibiotics in the feed and its relationship to the consumer’s health. Everyone wants a healthy high-quality product for the consumer-the end user. After all, the consumer signs everyone’s paycheck, so it is in everyone’s best interest to ensure that poultry remains a valued center-of-the-plate product.

curity practices.

Animal Welfare

There are several sensitive issues within the category of animal welfare. These include

1. Bird density, or the number of birds per square foot of housing. 2. The number of birds that can be placed in a cage for egg produc-

3 . The live haul catching procedures. tion and/or transporting.

The first of these has in reality been more of an issue for the industry in European countries than in the United States. American-based industries initiated the application of their own standards through the Good Man- ufacturing Practices (GMP). These standards regulated bird density during the grow-out period to promote poultry health, uniform growth rates, and bird size in an effort to produce a quality product.

The live haul catching procedures, however, have received some public exposure from advocacy groups in an effort to draw attention to what they believed was the industry’s abuse of birds. The truth of the matter is growers, companies, and consumers want a quality product. Handling the birds in a manner to prevent injury and minimize mortality is a win for all parties.

In a positive light the increased publicity continues to emphasize that every phase of the poultry operation is designed to produce a healthy center-of-the-plate product for the consumer.

Contracts

Money! Everyone wants more money. The present contract model emerged in an effort to protect the

12 Chapter 1

growers by stabilizing their income stream. There are some who want to reexamine this model to determine if it continues to be fair to all parties.

At the present time each company writes its contract upon considering such issues as

Cost of fuel. Cost of housing. Cost to borrow money. Market demands. Improved production methods.

Once written, the contract is offered to the grower. Although the specifics vary from company to company, the ingredients include the following characteristics:

Per pound base pay. Incentive bonuses. Length of the contract. List of responsibilities to be completed by both the company and

Size of the bird.

Some growers argue that the present contract model is not working for the benefit of the industry. The following issues may not pertain to every company and certainly are not true for every grower:

grower.

The frequency of adjusting the base pay. Recognition of the grower’s expense. Performance-based incentives. The length of the contract. Growers’ input into the contract.

The bottom line is to find a way for both parties to make a fair profit. My position is that the industry can solve its own issues without the assistance of a third party offering regulations through legislation. I believe that creating the company-grower communication system outlined in this book will allow the opportunity to address such sensitive and controversial issues as money without the aid of third-party involvement. Additional legislative dictates simply make it more difficult for all parties concerned.

History shows that the industry has always demonstrated positive proactive leadership to promote success, and I believe it can continue.

Workforce

Available workforce is another challenge. Growers are quick to point out that the difficulty associated with finding good labor is one reason


most farms are family operated. No one takes care of the farm as devot- edly as does the owner. The same challenge is multiplied many times over for the processing plant.

This workforce deficit is recognized by everyone to be a crucial issue for the success of an industry that is so labor intensive.

I mention the challenge of the processing plants to maintain a necessary workforce because the plant is often not mentioned in discussions about company-grower relations. Yet the processing plant is an integral component of the team; it is essential for growers’ live production, and for personnel to work more closely together. After all, poultry management practices have a major impact on the efficiency of preparing the bird for the consumer.

Global Market

The average American consumes about ninety-two pounds of chicken and turkey products per year. Marketing gurus expect consumption to increase at a slower rate in the future. The export markets therefore represent the most significant growth opportunities.

Many emerging countries struggle to feed their bulging populations. Poultry protein is the ideal product for these countries for obvious reasons:

There is a short grow-out cycle. Poultry is economical to grow and process. It is easily prepared and rich in protein. It is universally accepted as a center-of-the-plate product.

With every opportunity comes its share of challenges. A primary one for these global markets is the capability to purchase the product. Find- ing a way to work successfully with the cyclical nature of the export markets can be profitable for both the American-based company and grower.

Another challenge is for American-based poultry companies to remain competitive in the global marketplace. Too frequently industries based in the United States have opted to move their operations to a foreign country to reduce the cost of producing finished goods.

The combination of increased government regulations and increased labor costs, combined with increased ingredient costs, may encourage poultry companies to think about moving their operations to other countries that have an emerging poultry industry without a lot of government intervention.

The American grower is already competing with growers in other countries. The industry wants to be careful not to create conditions in

14 Chapter 1

the United States that are favorable to increasing competition from other countries.

Environmental Issues

The two major concerns within this category are manure and poultry house mortality disposal.

First, manure management: The basic issue is the potential of nutrients such as phosphorus and nitrogen to affect the quality of the runoff and groundwater supply. Manure is an excellent source of nutrients for the growing of grass pastureland and crops. The misapplication, however, increases the probability that nutrients can negatively impact water quakty.

Some areas of the country are more adversely impacted than others because of the high density of poultry farms and specific geology of the area. Areas of the country with high poultry farm populations have established regulations for manure application.

The second overriding environmental issue is poultry house mortality disposal. Traditionally, burial has been preferred, but the quality of groundwater is threatened by this practice for obvious reasons. Fortu- nately there are other alternatives, including composting, incinerating, and rendering.

Composting is the most economical procedure, but again there is the potential for a buildup of residuals if its application is not properly managed. Gas to operate incinerators is expensive; therefore, relatively few farmers rely on this method.

Rendering is also an expensive alternative, requiring both a refriger- ated holding area on the farm and transportation to pick up the dead birds. This procedure, however, produces other challenges to ensure that the rendering facilities meet environmental regulations and biosecurity concerns-particularly concerns surrounding the transporting truck that travels from one farm to another to pick up the birds. In spite of these challenges some companies have significant financial investment in this procedure.

There is no question about the seriousness of these two environmental issues, and the industry has taken a proactive position. Representa- tives from the industry created a “Poultry and Environmental Dialogue” to study the issues and to recommend voluntarily implemented regulations. These regulations are summarized below and the published regulations are included in appendix F.

Each grower is to develop a Nutrient Management Plan, which is to include a Litter/Manure Management Plan. The elements for the Litter/ Manure Management Plan are as follows:


Proper storage Length of time. Facility. Siting of storage facility.

Record keeping Amount of litter. Clean out time/schedule. Third-party land application agreements if applicable. Alternative use agreements if applicable.

Name of alternative facility. Location of alternative facility. Type of alternative use.

grown; crop yield. Land application amounts; field applied to; when applied; crop

Mortality plan Composter facility or other legally approved disposal method. Catastrophic die-off plan. Incorporation of mortality into land application or alternative use plan.

Nutrient value for land application Time of sampling. Nutrient value for nitrogen; nutrient value for phosphorus. Soil-testing values.

Transportation

Notification

Each of these is discussed in more detail in appendix F, but you can see the comprehensiveness of the regulations. Additionally, there is a defined time line for implementation, with every grower expected to be in compliance by January 1, 2008. However, the regulations call for the elimination of burying normal poultry house mortality by January 1, 2002.

Other Initiatives

I want to emphasize another very interesting characteristic of the poultry industry as this chapter is brought to a close. In spite of their competi- tiveness, companies are also willing to demonstrate cooperation.

When a crisis occurs, everyone rallies to the support of the industry. There are examples of disease outbreaks in which companies and growers worked side by side and shared information to eradicate the problem.

16 Chapter 1

Table 1 .I Pounds per Capita Consumption of Poultry and livestock Year Beef Pork Total Chicken Turkey Total

1960 63.3 59.1 131.6 28.0 6.3 34.3 1970 84.4 56.0 145.7 40.4 8.1 48.5 1980 76.4 57.3 136.5 48.8 10.3 58.2 1990 67.8 49.8 120.1 63.0 17.6 80.5 2000* 62.0 53.0 116.8 80.4 18.0 98.4 'Forecasted by the National Chicken Council.

Representatives from the various companies readily share information while attending the numerous seminars offered by the U.S. Poultry & Egg Association, National Chicken Council, United Egg Producers, National Turkey Federation, and the American Farm Bureau, to mention a few. Industry leaders realize the industry's tremendous potential, and their spirit of cooperation is based on knowing that which is good for individual companies is good for the industry.

The poultry industry has achieved tremendous success, as depicted in table 1.1, provided by the National Chicken Council. As you can see, thirty years ago the per capita consumption of total poultry products was in the deep shadow cast by the per capita consumption of red meat.

Chicken consumption was essentially identical to that of beef in 1991 at 65.3 versus 66.8 pounds, respectively. Since then chicken consumption has continued to increase per capita, whereas beef consumption has decreased. Chicken now enjoys the esteemed position of being the most popular center-of-the-plate meat product.

The industry knows that the interdependent nature of the working relationship between the companies and growers got the industry to where it is today and is the kind of cooperation that is needed to underwrite the success of the industry for the future.

2

Bird’s-Eye View

The difference between a company that enjoys

good grower relations and one that does not lies

in values and behaviors.

Improvements in grower relations begin with

individuals.

Working relationships within the company

extend into grower relations.

The manager’s role and responsibilities now

include the traditional technical characteristics

of the industry as well as grower relations and

internal customer service.

The perceived value of a working relationship is

determined by what is expected from the work-

ing relationship versus what is received.

Inverting the organizational pyramid encourages

a thorough examination of the grower-company

working relationship.



Top-down change produces bottom-up

Growers and companies demonstrate their

commitment.

commitment by working together to help each

other to be more successful.

Inverting the Pyramid

Upside down can be better than right side up.

at is the difference between a company that enjoys excellent Wh grower relations and one that does not? The answer lies in behavior-the habitual way the company and

growers work with each other. Let’s look at some of these differences from both the company’s and the grower’s perspective to substantiate this point:

A feed mill that calls to inform the grower about a change in its feed delivery schedule, versus one that does not. A grower who adequately prepares the houses to receive the next flock of chicks/poults, versus one who does not.

0 A company that regularly schedules growers’ meetings, versus one that does not. A grower who implements sound poultry management practices, versus one who does not. A company that listens to its growers and works with their questions1 concerns, versus one that does not. A grower who listens to the company and demonstrates a willingness to understand the company’s perspective, versus one who does not. A company that is striving to improve its grower-relations corporate culture, versus one that is not. A grower who ensures that the roads are in a good state of repair, versus one who does not. A company that organizes grower advisory panels, versus one that does not.

18


Now, what is the difference? The behavior of working with each other. All companies and all growers have the potential of working together to help each other be more successful and hence profitable. If one grower can do what is necessary to have a profitable business, the potential is there for all growers to be profitable. The same is true for the company. If one company can work to improve continuously its grower- relations corporate culture, all of them can.

Without getting too psychological, behaviors reflect values. People do that which they value. For example, individuals who value their health participate in a regular exercise schedule and refrain from tobacco products or overusing alcohol. Spouses who value their relationships will inform their partners when the schedule demands arriving home later than originally planned. Those who value golf play golf. Those who value a belief in God will engage in behaviors that express their belief.

Another interesting phenomenon associated with values and behaviors- people always find time to do that which is valued.

Let’s peek inside some organizations for a moment to watch values at work. Those companies that value such workplace characteristics as trust, respect, and open communication will define and use such behaviors to create these core values. Those companies that value their employees’ ideas will develop processes to solicit and use employees’ ideas. It is worth reemphasizing: People do that which is valued.

It Starts with Me

People have the perplexing tendency to point fingers. It’s always some- body else’s fault that something did not happen correctly. Change is always for someone else. I’m sure you noticed that whenever you point your finger, there are always at least three fingers pointing back at you. That is Mother Nature’s way of saying, “It all starts with me.”

In the case of grower relations it all begins with each individual involved in the working relationship. This is true regardless of company values, practices, and procedures, or the particular growers one must work with. Each employee’s behavior is regulated by his or her personal values. The same is true for growers. Regardless of what company the grower works with, or the particular field service representative, a grower’s values will regulate how that grower wants to work with a company.

For example, suppose an employee whom we will fictitiously name “I Don’t Care” works for the “I Care” poultry company. Let’s further suppose, for the sake of our example, that the company is working in earnest to cement a working partnership with its growers.

How do you think the “I Don’t Care” employee will work with the

20 Chapter 2

grower within this corporate structure? You’re right. That employee will continue to sabotage the working relationship and the company efforts by doing such things as not listening to the grower, demanding that everything be done his or her way, and generally acting in an unfriendly manner.

Now, let’s reverse the situation. The “I Care” employee works for the “I Don’t Care” company. In spite of the company policies, procedures, and practices that interfere with establishing a loyal working relationship, the “I Care” employee will treat the grower with as much respect as she or he can and continue to be friendly, caring, and empathetic with the grower’s situation.

The same can be said for the grower. The “I Don’t Care” grower can continually show disrespect for the “I Care” Company. This grower can continue to act as though he or she is a victim of the working relationship: The company is doing everything it possibly can to make money at the expense of the grower; the company continues to send poor-quality chicks/poults and in general makes life difficult for the grower and the grower’s family.

Reverse the situation for a moment. An “I Care” grower working with the “I Don’t Care” poultry company will initiate efforts to work cooperatively with the company in an effort to create a win-win working relationship in spite of the clear indication that the “I Don’t Care” company does not want such a working relationship.

The point is that regardless of the environment within which one works, the individual’s personal value system can remain the dominant force. The thrust of this book is to encourage the definition and implementation of values to underwrite an “I Care” environment on behalf of both growers and companies.

Adopting this approach to improve the grower-relations culture means that all parties involved need to reexamine. their personal value systems and align them with those that are defined to regulate the desired culture. Any employees or growers not doing that will quickly find themselves not fitting in; they will in effect be saying, “I don’t want to be part of the team.” That message is certainly not a win-win working relationship. One purpose of this book is to encourage everyone to be part of the team, because that’s the only way to produce the synergy necessary for the entire company, the employees, and the growers to enjoy a win-win-win working relationship.

Internal Working Relationships

This book’s concept of serving internal customers is reflected in the value of helping each other be more successful. That means each department


knows what needs to be done to assist each other and completes these responsibilities-your priorities are my priorities when you need my assistance. The relationship between a supervisor and staff also fits into this paradigm. Each party does that which is necessary to help each other to be more successful.

The working relationship with internal customers is the focus of chapter 9, and I mention this subject at this time for two reasons. First is to point out the fact that coordination between departments has a tremendous impact upon grower relations. For example, the willingness for the feed mill to work with the field service representative and grower regarding feed quality is a central issue.

The second reason for highlighting this issue now is that grower relations can be thought of as an extension of internal customer service. Again, when the field mill manager works closely with the live production manager to empower the field service representative to make decisions about when feed needs to be reclaimed will certainly have a positive impact upon grower relations.

The live production manager’s willingness to delegate authority and use the specialized knowledge of the field service representative will likewise have a positive impact upon grower relations. In this instance the field service representative will feel valued and can easily extend these characteristics to the grower to create a win-win-win relationship.

The point is that every person must recognize his or her individual responsibility in the emerging role of grower relations. It is impossible not to lead by example because someone is always watching. Everything any employee or grower says or does not say, does or does not do, sets an example and communicates values.

Changing Roles

In the typical company-grower relationship the field service representative becomes the window through which the company sees the grower and through which the grower sees the company. There is no question about the significant role field service representatives play in grower relations; this puts additional demands upon these employees not only to be poultry scientists but to be interpersonal skill experts as well. As one grower so aptly stated, “Field service representatives need to be trained psychologists.”

Managers, too, have additional responsibilities. Traditionally managers have focused on the technical aspects of the poultry industry for obvious reasons. Most generally managers were educated in some phase of poultry science, and raising poultry is their business. The role of manager is also in a state of transformation. Managing internal customer

22 Chapter 2

services and grower relations have been added to managing the technical characteristics of the business. The challenge is to build management systems to improve continuously all facets of the business.

Most managers find internal customer service and grower relations a more difficult assignment. To begin with, managers have seldom been trained in these subject areas, thereby requiring an extra effort to continue their personal learning curves when they barely have enough time to keep their heads above water as it is. Working with people requires another set of skills involving a host of variables such as communication, trust, and developing respect. Even though all of us use these skills to some extent when we work, everyday thinking about establishing systems to develop and manage such skills is a different mind-set.

Consequently, it’s just easier to work with the technical side of the business as opposed to the people side. There is more direct control when working with the technical side. For example, if a flock of birds should become ill, medication can be applied. When the feed mill breaks down, it is repaired. If the live haul truck breaks down, another is sent in its place.

Problems in working relationships, however, are not as easily fixed. For example, you can perform in a manner to have a positive impact upon the working relationship only to learn subsequently that it did not. The live production manager may do everything she or he can think of to improve the working relationship with the feed mill manager without a positive result. The feed mill manager must also decide to be cooperative. The field service representative may adjust the waterers in the absence of the grower thinking that such an act of kindness will improve flock performance. Later the grower may complain about the representative adjusting equipment without the grower’s direct involvement.

In spite of trying to treat all growers the same, some growers will continue to feel as though they are victims of the working relationship. Company employees may exert extra effort to show the growers they receive the same quality of birds and feed, and the same technical assistance, as other growers. And still the grower has the right to think whatever the grower wants to think.

The technical side of the business is more empirical and concrete. Feed can be measured. Chickens can be counted. Everyone can see the flock’s performance. There is less opportunity for misperception because of the nature of these variables. Working with people issues, on the other hand, is more challenging because they are more abstract. What do communication, trust, and respect mean? What can be done to demonstrate these things? How does one recognize trust and respect if they walk through the door? How can they be measured?


Psychologically, such variables have remained abstract. I will show you how to operationalize such factors in the next chapter, but for now the point is that such abstractions are usually, understandably, perceived to be difficult.

Perceived Value

Because the field service representative is the window for grower relations, it appears only natural to begin efforts to improve grower relations with the field service representative. In doing so, however, it is important to recognize the additional pressure on other divisions of the complex. Let’s use the concept of perceived value to explain.

Perceived value derives from the combination of the quality of services delivered versus what was expected. The formula can be written as:

Perceived value = Received value Expected value

Perceived value is high when you expect good service and receive it or when the services received exceed that which was expected. Conversely, perceived value is low when the services received did not reach the expected level.

Suppose you call a retail establishment and the phone service received is absolutely excellent (perceived value is high). What would you expect when you walk into the store? Excellent service, right? Upon receiving excellent service, your perceived value is the same. What happens, then, if you receive lousy service upon entering the store? The perceived value plummets.

The opposite effect can also happen. Suppose the telephone conversation was pitiful. What would you expect upon entering the store? More of the same, right? But suppose the in-store service was excellent-now what do you think? The receptionist needs to be trained to provide a higher-quality service, right?

The same is true at the complex. Suppose the field service representatives provide excellent grower relations. What does the grower expect from the receptionist upon calling the complex? You’re right: excellent service. Suppose the receptionist is not friendly and acts indifferent to the grower’s needs? Perceived value plummets.

The Inverted Pyramid

Inverting the pyramid is another organizational concept that needs to be introduced in this discussion. The typical organizational chart is similar

24 Chapter 2

The Pyramid

CEO

Growers

FIGURE 2.1. The Pyramid, view 1.

to the illustration in figure 2.1. The senior managers are on the top of the pyramid, while front-line employees are on the bottom, working with the growers.

Psychologically, the person in the top position is considered to be most important, whereas those on the bottom are the least important. But that is contrary to the point I’ve been discussing about the field service representative being the window through which both the company and the grower see each other.

This organizational alignment speaks to another very important issue: Top-down change produces bottom-up commitment. Any change effort has to have commitment from the top. The commitment for organizationwide change, such as improving the grower corporate culture, needs to flow from the senior managers throughout the organization. Every manager needs to be part of this commitment. The field service supervisor must be as committed as the CEO to lead the change effort with the field service representatives.

The problem that often emerges in organizational change efforts is the expectation that change occurs from the bottom up. That would be like the senior managers announcing the commitment to improve the organization’s grower relations culture and expecting the field service representatives to be the only people within the organization to change. That simply does not work. There is an organizational syndrome very active in organizations, called “I’ll believe it when I see it.” Employees are always looking up, to model the behaviors of their supervisor. Ex-


The Pyramid

Commitment CEO Change

Growers

FIGURE 2.2. The Pyramid, view 2.

pecting bottom-up change to produce significant results is contrary to one of the basic laws governing organizations: leadership by example.

Senior managers must lead the change effort, as illustrated in figure 2.2. Let’s use an example to illustrate the importance of this concept. I was

working with a financial institution to improve its customer service culture. Upon returning from lunch with the bank president and several staff, I noticed some trash strewn about the front door and suggested that we take a minute to pick it up-at which the bank president calmly announced, “We have maintenance people who will do that.” Upon entering the privacy of his office, I told him that, basically, he’d just received an “F” in customer service leadership. He looked quite surprised and asked why. I then pointed out that he had an excellent opportunity to show his staff that he would do whatever was necessary to create a customer-friendly environment by taking a few minutes to pick up the trash. Instead he opted to ask others to do it. The message he gave his staff was the same: Find someone else to do that which needs to be done. This is not effective top-down change.

Senior managers lead the change effort in three areas: policy changes, holding the change process accountable, and the way employees work with each other.

Policy Changes

Reviewing existing policies to make certain they are promoting a grower relation’s corporate culture is a major initiative. For example, if the

26 Chapter 2

policy regulating call-in orders for feed dictates that the grower can call in at 1 1 5 9 on Sunday morning to order feed for that day but cannot do so at 12:01, is that a grower-friendly policy?

Another opportunity to consider changes in policy is when managing grower input. What about establishing advisory councils for live production, live haul, feed mill, and the hatchery? Scheduling growers’ input into the policy review process could also be beneficial and send an immediate message to the growers about the seriousness of the company’s effort to have an effective partnership.

Accountability

The lack of accountability is the culprit that often causes change efforts to be terminated without ever having the opportunity for success. I certainly do not want that to be the future fate of any change efforts associated with reading this book. Senior managers have to hold the process accountable. For the purposes of this conversation that means ensuring that every phase of the process is completed within the defined time lines. Accountability, like other characteristics of a successful organization, has to be scheduled. Successful implementation is reviewed on a timely basis, perhaps quarterly-but however often, without exception. Doing so sends a definite message throughout the organization about the level of seriousness of making changes. Everyone needs to know that this change effort is not going to end up in the “Idea of the Month” cemetery located behind the plant.

Working with Employees

It is important to work with employees in a manner that is consistent with the desired grower-relations culture. Suppose the company restruc- tures to obtain more input from growers. On the other hand, this same company discourages input from its employees. Do you see any incon- sistency in this example? Which of the two cultures will eventually sur- vive long after the other has become a memory?

Grower relations is a natural extension of how employees work together on a day-to-day basis. A serious effort to improve one’s working relationship with growers will include an assessment of the company’s own teamwork corporate culture. For example, another valuable component in any working relationship is being dependable and doing that which is agreed upon. If that particular behavior is to be institutionalized in the working relationship with growers, it only makes sense to do the same inside the company. Doing so allows this conduct to extend to the working relationship with growers.

lnverting the Pyramid 27

Growers

CEO

FIGURE 2.3. The inverted Pyramid.

Another excellent example is keeping people informed. Field service representatives often express concern that they are the last to know anything about the company and often learn what they know from the growers-the very persons they are supposed to keep informed. Grow- ers, of course, learn from truck drivers, who learn from. . . and the story continues.

A serious effort to keep everyone informed requires identifying the information to be shared and developing a mechanism to ensure that it is. An important objective will include identifying breakdowns in keeping each other informed, and determining to find a way to prevent interrup- tions in the communication process.

Leading the change effort as I have just described leads to inverting the organizational pyramid, as illustrated in figure 2.3.

Now, as every level of employee looks up, they all see those employees who are working closer to the grower. Ultimately the grower is included. In effect, the working relationship with the grower is the most important entity on this organizational chart, followed by levels of management.

As previously mentioned, this model changes the way the company does business. The management structure is asking and listening to understand each other’s input. It is reviewing corporate policy statements and behavior in terms of improving the working relationship with its growers. Inverting the organizational pyramid leads to restructuring the partnership with growers to ensure their input into policies, procedures, and activities that directly impact farm activities.

28

Commitment

Chapter 2

A Company-Grower Partnership Change

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

i

\ Management /

CEO

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I

FIGURE 2.4. The inverted Pyramid showing the company-grower partnership.

At first glance this inversion may appear to be too much of a change for a company to implement successfully. There is too much to risk. In reality there is very little risk and much to gain.

The traditional working relationship already includes fairly high levels of fear. The growers fear losing their contracts, and thus their revenue stream for their debt service. The companies fear organized activities by the growers that could force changes through legislation. In reality each party needs the other to guarantee success. However, allowing the fear to go unattended also allows it to take on a personality of its own. It can become a dominant force and wreak havoc in the working relationship.

The most effective antidote to fear is to work together and show each other there is nothing to be fearful about. Both parties want to be profitable.

Our work with both companies and growers clearly shows two major issues overriding the working relationship: communication (working together) and money. It is our contention that the money issue will take care of itself as the industry continues to improve the communication issues.

Company employees and growers working together can create the synergy necessary in a partnership to implement change, as illustrated in figure 2.4. Note that the dashed line represents grower involvement.

This partnership can be cemented by implementing the Grower Rela- tions Operating System outlined in the subsequent chapters of this book. In doing so, however, both parties must demonstrate their commitment to help each other to be more successful.

3

Bird’s-Eye View

The Grower-Relations Vision Statement identi-

fies the values that guide the company-grower


Statement illustrate three different approaches.

Three examples of a Grower-Relations Vision

Walking the talk of the vision statement, or

converting words into actions, is the next step.

Measuring the Grower-Relations Vision State-

ment increases the efficiency and productivity of

the company.

29



Creating a Grower- Relations Corporate Culture

To get where you want to go, you must know where you are going.

he process of improving the working relatjonship begins with know- T ing the grower-relations corporate culture you want to create. Remember the answer to our question, “What is the difference between

a company that enjoys excellent working relationships with its growers and one that does not?” The answer lies in the specific behaviors that constitute the working relationship. These behaviors are based on values or characteristics considered important for the working relationship.

We’ve often asked married seminar participants if they inform their spouse when work schedules demand that they come home later than usual. About half do. Now, what is the difference between these two sets of people? Are those that inform their spouse about their late arrival doing so out of fear of the consequences if they don’t? Perhaps so. Or do those married partners value their relationship and believe it is in the best interest of the marriage to inform their spouse about the change in schedule? Obviously, we would like to think it’s the latter.

Would you agree that those married partners who boastfully an- nounce, “My spouse will know I’m home when I get there” are acting rather selfishly? Certainly such behavior does not reflect the value of keeping one’s spouse informed.

The point here is that behavior reflects values. To promote effective communication while reading this book, let’s define “value” to mean “that which is important.” Now, what determines a value? The bottom line is values reflect thought, or a way of thinking. The sequence is, then, thoughts determine values that are reflected in behaviors (fig. 3.1).

You can watch anyone’s behavior to learn about his or her value system. Those individuals who participate in exercise programs value a healthy body, You know certain individuals who will do exactly what they agreed to do. You can depend upon them to keep their word. Being dependable is an important value for these people.

30


Imavgn.S pc> pzz> FIGURE 3.1. Thoughtslvalueslbehaviors sequence.

We asked hundreds of field service representatives attending a seminar on grower relations to identify the values deemed important to guide a grower-relations culture. These values appear in the following list, in descending order of the frequency with which each was identified:

Dependabilitykonsistency Open and honest communication Trust Respect Courtesy Knowledge Concerdcaring Sincerity Commitment Professionalism Friendliness Fairness Cooperation Loyalty Open-mindedness Strong work ethic Faith Common goals Leadership Positive mental attitude

You may not be completely surprised by the contents of this list, and I’m certain that none of these are foreign words.

I also asked growers to define the values deemed essential for a working relationship. The following list is also in order of frequency, the first being the most frequently mentioned:

Honesty and open communication Trust Respect Fairness

32 Chapter 3

Opportunity to provide input Being profitable Integrity Willingness to exceed expectations Knowledge and experience Common goals Loyalty Dedication Willingness to take on responsibility

Reviewing the most important items from both lists shows that both groups believe honest communication, fairness, trust, and respect are vi- tal characteristics for an effective working relationship.

Are you surprised by the similarity between the two lists? I hope not. An important point that is often discussed but frequently forgotten is illustrated here: In spite of our differences, we are all still very much alike. As you will learn, these similarities will be extremely important as you work to improve your grower-relations culture.

Grower-Relations Vision Statement

Now, here comes the anchor point for your grower-relations corporate culture-the vision statement-because it identifies the values that guide the working relationship. You may be thinking, “Oh no, here comes another well-written document for the wall.” Unfortunately, vision and mission statements have acquired “bad reputations” because companies invest resources to write them and very seldom if ever use them. It’s not fair to blame the statements for not being used. Actually, James Collins and Jerry Porras, in their book Built to Last: Successful Habits of Vi- sionary Companies, provide numerous examples of companies that use their vision statements to guide their success.

A vision statement is merely a tool. In order for it to work, people have to work it, which is why we’re emphasizing the importance of a working statement. This statement will define the behaviors that will institutionalize the grower-relations culture. Collins and Porras use the term “cultlike behaviors” to describe the process of institutionalizing a corporate culture. These cultlike behaviors constitute the way “things are done around here.”

Actually, your company already has a grower-relations corporate culture that has been institutionalized via cultlike behaviors. You already have established procedures and behaviors for working with growers. Generally, this culture is not defined but is created by the combination of personalities of the senior managers. There is nothing particularly bad


about this truism-it’s just the way it is. It’s like an organizational shadow that is not seen except through actions.

The Grower-Relations Vision Statement we’re addressing identifies important values and defines cultlike behaviors in order to institutionalize the culture. As you will see, this statement provides a description of the ideal working relationship.

Let’s review a few examples to illustrate several different styles of writing and to stimulate ideas for your Grower-Relations Vision State- ment. The first example focuses on the field service representative and provides a rather broad statement depicting ideal working relations. The second example is a brief vision statement centering on the idea of “putting growers first” and includes several points designed to provide additional descriptions of the desired grower relations. The third example, addressing the idea of “building a partnership,” was created by incorporating the values identified by the growers and field service representatives who attended the grower-relations seminar. These values are then defined to provide guidelines to regulate the working relationship.

Although we are including these three statements to illustrate different styles of writing, the important step is to write the statement in a way that ensures understanding. Now, let’s turn our attention to the statements.

The Field Service Representative is responsible for establishing and improving a mutually beneficial relationship with all producers and managing the delivery of all services and related activities t o maximize producer income and reduce company costs through improved flock performance.

We’re certain that you will agree this statement is an excellent beginning point. It identifies very important characteristics of the working relationship.

The second example attempts to further define what must be done to create the desired culture.

Meeting the challenge of putting growers first:

1. Growers’ needs are assessed. 2. To meet growers’ needs, flexibility is required. 3. Every contact with the grower is:

A. Professional. B . Caring. C. Courteous.

4. Growers are educated about all facets of the company.

34 Chapter 3

5. Employees are: A. Positive. B. Knowledgeable. C. Willing to go the extra mite to meet the growers’ needs.

6. Service is provided promptly. 7. Grower confidentiality is maintained.

The third example uses the values identified by growers and company employees. Note that each value is behaviorally defined to tell each employee and grower how to work with each other.

Building a working relationship that is characterized by trust, respect, honesty, and open communication.

Trust 1. Do that which was agreed upon. 2. Allow each other to do one’s job. 3. Keep confidential information confidential.

Respect 1. Ask each other for input. 2. Listen to understand that input. 3 . Use the input whenever possible. 4. Explain why the input was not used.

Honesty 1. Present the facts. 2. Make decisions based on facts. 3. Address issues that need to be discussed. 4. Admit not knowing the answer or when you are wrong.

Open communication 1. Keep each other informed. 2. Encourage each other to express one’s opinions.

I encourage writing a vision statement that speaks to the behaviors of both the company and growers, as illustrated in this third statement. But, again, the important point is to write a statement that everyone understands and can implement.

Walking the Talk

Defining the desired Grower-Relations Vision Statement provides direction. Equally important, though, is walking the talk of the statement. Nothing changes until behavior changes. For that reason there are two crucial points to be considered in writing the vision statement.


First is to exercise caution to ensure that it contains only that which the respective parties are willing to do. The psychological impact of creating the expectation that “something is going to happen,” and then it doesn’t, is more adverse than not creating the expectation in the first place. That could be disastrous for the working relationship. Second is the willingness to walk the talk of the vision statement, sending a very important psychological message about integrity and cre- dibility. The message is simple yet very powerful-doing that which was promised builds trust, which is what creates successful working relationships.

It is a well-known fact that words are worthless unless followed by behavior. The Grower-Relations Vision Statement must be defined in a manner to guarantee that everyone understands what is expected. The behaviors described by this statement will be the cultlike actions that will build the desired working relationship. Think of these behaviors as a job description or a behavioral agreement. These behaviors constitute the “way we do things around here.”

The information you are about to read is extremely crucial in terms of knowing how words are converted into behaviors, and for that reason I will go into some detail in my explanation. For illustrative purposes I will revisit each of the three previous Grower-Relations Vision State- ments to demonstrate how to convert words into action. The three statements are written in different styles to show you that no one style is right. What is important is that the words depicting abstract behaviors be so defined as to remove the guesswork and promote a common understanding.

Vision Statement 1: Responsibilities of the Field Service Representative

The first statement is a rather broad one, identifying three important characteristics of the working relationship between the field service representative and the producer. Groups of managers attending a seminar on grower relations were asked to generate a list of behaviors that could be institutionalized for each point included in the statement:

“To be responsible for establishing and improving a mutually beneficial relationship with all producers. ”

1 . Ask for and use each other’s input. 2. Keep growers informed through educational programs on such

topics as biosecurity, new technology, how global markets affect local production, and seminars for new growers.

3. Schedule contract growers to visit the hatchery and processing plants.

36 Chapter 3

4. Use grower surveys to learn about the strengths and opportunities

5. Ensure that everyone understands how the financial contract can to improve the existing working relationship.

provide a positive cash flow.

“To manage the delivery of services and related activities to maximize producer income.”

1. Promote the working relationship by using effective interpersonal skills.

2. Promote the growers’ self-esteem by recognizing a job well done, asking them to participate in company-sponsored education programs, and using their specialized knowledge.

3. Maximize feed delivery services to ensure that the proper feed is delivered on time.

4. Minimize layout times to maximize the number of flocks per house per year.

5. Implement biosecurity procedures to promote healthy flocks.

“To reduce company costs through improved flock performance.”

1. Improve teamwork within the divisions of the company to promote interdepartmental efficiency.

2. Identify and address the growers’ concerns and questions regarding flock performance.

3. Identify company-generated inconveniences and develop a procedure to minimize their reoccurrence-that is, develop a continuously improving environment.

Think of these statements as operational definitions that depict the desired behaviors. For example, the statement “Improve teamwork within the divisions of the company to promote interdepartmental efficiency” directs the live production, live haul, feed mill, and hatchery to work together to improve interdepartmental efficiency or to help each other be more successful. Because internal working relationships have such a powerful impact upon grower relations, I have devoted chapter 9 to the topic of teamwork.

Admittedly, some of these points could be even further defined to provide a clearer understanding; for example, under ‘‘using effective interpersonal skills,” specific skills and behaviors could be identified.

Vision Statement 2: Putting Growers First

The second vision statement, “Meeting the challenge of putting growers first, ” includes seven points highlighting behaviors designed to promote a working relationship.

Creating a Grower- Relations Corporate Culture 37

The first point, “Growers’ needs are assessed,” implies that the company will organize a systematic process to identify growers’ needs. The company has several options from which to choose:

1. Use field service representatives or other staff to assess growers’

2. Use annual grower meetings to solicit input. 3 . Organize grower discussion groups to meet with smaller groups of

growers. 4. Formalize the use of surveys, for example, to measure grower

opinion andor, upon completing grow-out, to measure the flock performance and the working relationship with the company.

The second point, “To meet growers’ needs, fZexibility is required,” directs employees to do that which is necessary to meet all needs. It’s relatively easy to operate from the my way principle, but this statement dictates that there is no “one way” to do things. Flexibility is the rule rather than the exception.

The third point, “Every contact with the grower is professional, caring, and courteous,” presents the challenge of knowing what “professional, caring, and courteous” means. Our research provided the following definitions for each of these values. As you read these descriptions, note that abstract words describing interpersonal skills can in fact be behaviorally defined to provide concrete guidelines regulating behavior.

needs through one-on-one meetings.

Professional

1. Company vehicles clean. 2. Facial hair neatly trimmed. 3. Company uniforms or other clothing clean and appropriate for the

job responsibilities.

Caring

1. Knowing some personal attributes, for example, the grower’s

2. Understanding the grower’s financial investment. 3 . Talking about what the grower is doing right. 4. Asking growers for their input.

birthday, hobbies, family members, etc.

Courteous

1. Returning telephone calls promptly. 2. Scheduling some personal visits with the growers at their conve-

3 . Doing that which was promised. 4. Being a good listener.

nience.

38 Chapter 3

The fourth point in Vision Statement 2 is “Growers are educated about all facets o f the company.” In the process of conducting grower focus groups I have found that it is very common for growers not to be aware of company policies. For example, one company has a published procedure for changing the feed depending upon the age of the bird. Not one member of the focus group was aware of the published schedule. (Subsequent to the focus group the live production manager reported that the schedule is now sent to each grower on an annual basis.) An- other example is the policy to pay for dead birds. Members of the focus group were not aware of the company policy to pay for birds that are inadvertently killed by the live haul crew.

A third example that came to light in our focus group was employee reaction to the construction of a new feed mill. Of course, the employees were excited about the new feed mill and the new location, but their excitement overshadowed any possible grower concerns. Although many were concerned about the location of the new mill and the availability of feed, the rationale for relocating the feed mill to the new site was never discussed.

Look for every opportunity to educate the grower about the facets of your company and each department of the complex. Consider the following possibilities:

Tourshideo presentations have proved to be valuable educational tools to present the department’s operations. The impact of global economies upon local operations is another very important issue in today’s market. All growers should have some knowledge of the company’s profitability. I had the opportunity to attend a Grower Association meeting at which an economist discussed the company’s small rate of return as compared to some other industries. Several of the growers commented about the eye-opening discussion.

There is no doubt about the importance of communication. It is so easy to get wrapped up in day-to-day details of the job and forget to keep everyone informed. Worse yet is assuming that everyone knows because you happen to know. A common complaint is “I’m the last to know,” which sends the psychological message that “I must not be important. ”

All this speaks to the issue of taking the time to develop a communication plan, defining what is to be communicated, and how. Then follow the plan. The plan may include such tools as tours, videos, newsletters, Web sites, and grower meetings.

The fifth point in the second vision statement speaks to the “Employ- ees being positive, knowledgeable, and going the extra mile to meet the


growers’ needs. ” Input from managers participating in the grower- relations seminar provided the following definitions:

Positive

1. Support all facets of the company when talking to growers. 2. Remember that mistakes are opportunities to improve. 3. Be emotionally consistent and offer friendly greetings. 4. Communicate constructive suggestions by emphasizing what the

grower needs to do to improve as opposed to pointing out mistakes.

Knowledgeable

1. Know the technical aspects of the growers’ job as well as company policies and procedures referring to contract growers, for example, the procedure to compute settlement checks.

2. Know and use effective interpersonal skills.

Willing to go the extra mile to meet the growers’ needs

1. Find out what the growers’ needs are. 2. Do that which is necessary to assist the grower to be profitable.

For example, one field service representative in the seminar had helped a grower install fans and reroute water lines on a Saturday morning. The grower had full-time employment in addition to the poultry operation, and Saturday morning was the only opportune time to complete the necessary changes.

“Service is provided promptly” is the sixth point. Some obvious examples are ensuring that feed is delivered as scheduled (or needed), chicks are delivered on time, and live haul picks up the birds as scheduled. In a more general sense, make sure that service is provided on the farm as it is needed.

The seventh and last point in the second vision statement is “Grower confidentiality is maintained. ” During one of the seminars I conducted, a service representative commented that he frequently compliments a grower by using h idhe r as an example when talking to other growers. If a grower is experiencing difficulty working with a particular issue, he offers advice by telling that grower about the success being achieved by one of his peers.

Admittedly, some growers are okay with being used as an example to help their peers, but others may prefer that their successful procedures remain confidential. One grower even commented that he frequently does not discuss his secrets with the field service representative in fear

40 Chapter 3

that these will be shared with others. This grower indicated there is no sense in creating additional competition by sharing his secrets.

The point is to obtain permission from the grower before sharing successful procedures with other growers.

Vision Statement 3: Building a Partnership

The third Grower-Relations Vision Statement was written to include the characteristics of the desired working relationship that emerged from our research with growers and company employees: trust, respect, honesty, and open communication. Each of these is defined in a manner to regulate both the grower’s and the employee’s behavior.

Trust. Our research shows that trust is typically defined to include the

1. Doing that which was agreed upon. 2. Allowing each other to do one’s job. 3. Keeping confidential information confidential.

The first is quite clear in terms of expected behavior. The bottom line is that when each party expects something to happen, it should happen within the agreed-upon time frame. If it is not going to happen, then the other person needs to be informed. For example, when the grower agrees to prepare the houses to receive the next flock, that should be completed as agreed. Or if the grower agrees to repair the road, then so be it. On the other hand, the company needs to be sensitive to the schedules for delivering feed, or for the arrival of the catching crews.

It’s so easy to rationalize something not being done by exclaiming, “There is so little time and there is so much to do,” and it can happen so frequently that missing schedules is just the way business is done. When this attitude prevails, trust will be the victim.

The second point, allowing each other to do one’s job, speaks to recognizing each other’s knowledge of the poultry industry and the grower’s knowledge of his or her farm. Growers can tell you about the different personalities of the poultry houses. Certain adjustments can be made in one house-to control humidity, for example-but the same adjustments will work differently in another house. Or birds just seem to be healthier and grow more quickly in one house than another. There may be a host of idiosyncrasies differentiating the houses. The field service representative can use the grower’s knowledge of each house to improve flock performance.

Of particular concern is a veteran grower working with a young, in-

following behaviors:


experienced field service representative. Growers don’t want some young college graduate to come onto their farms and start dictating what must be done.

However, the flip side of this discussion is the grower who recognizes and appreciates the knowledge and assistance offered by company personnel. I am not suggesting that the grower accept carte blanche the company’s recommendations for equipment upgrades, and other suggestions for flock management, but I am encouraging the grower to listen and explore how his or her flock might benefit from such suggestions.

The last behavioral definition for “trust” is confidentiality. Because I’ve already spoken to this issue, and will revisit it in chapter 4, I will forgo any additional discussion here.

Respect. The next value contained in the third vision statement is re-

1. Asking for each other’s input. 2. Listening to understand that input. 3. Using the input whenever possible. 4. Providing an explanation as to why the input is not used.

The field service representative and the grower have excellent opportunities to establish respect for each other by asking and using each other’s input regarding flock management, such as

spect, which is defined as follows:

Preparing the houses for chicks/poults. Adjusting waterers. Controlling temperature. Tending to flock health. Monitoring biosecurity control. Picking up birds.

The bottom line is, Asking for input should be a guideline for every interaction.

Listening naturally follows asking for input. Knowing how to listen is rarely the problem: We do that by closing the mouth and opening the ears, a technique taught since childhood. Doing it, however, is the problem. Actually to hear the words and understand precisely what the other person is saying constitutes the challenge. The brain is capable of processing 400-600 words a minute, while the average person speaks at the rate of 125 words per minute, thereby leaving considerable time for the brain to wander. Or time to prepare one’s own next statement instead of listening to the other person.

Most of us could benefit from the practice of listening carefully enough so that we can repeat precisely what we’ve heard to the other

42 Chapter 3

person’s satisfaction. I often suggest the simple act of writing the word “Listen” on a sheet of paper, or other obvious location, to serve as a reminder. The necessary self-discipline to be a good listener is definitely a skill worth acquiring.

Listening to and using that input sends a powerful psychological message: “I respect your knowledge.” Habitually sending this message is definitely a strong tool to help gain the respect of those with whom you work. If you should happen to doubt this statement, just think about how it feels to work with a person who believes his or her ideas are gifts from God and never uses those of others’. That person garners very little respect from colleagues.

The last point to be made is that the courtesy to explain why someone’s input was not used is also important. Be sure to present the facts or rationale for your decision. Admittedly, it often appears easier to ignore providing such rationale in hopes of avoiding any potential conflict. In the end, though, there is more to gain when the other person knows his or her input was given serious consideration, and understands the rationale for the final decision, than if that person simply feels ignored.

Honesty. Honesty is the next category in the third Grower-Relations

1. Presenting facts. 2. Making decisions based on these facts. 3. Addressing the issues that need to be discussed. 4. Admitting not knowing or making a mistake.

Presenting and making decisions based on facts is simply that- presenting the rationale for a decision. That also means letting others know when a decision is simply based on an intuitive hunch. Decisions on the farm are sometimes based on this intuitive hunch when:

1. The farm is experiencing higher than normal mortality. 2. The birds have stopped eating. 3. Other issues associated with flock health are in question.

I may be overstating a bit, but it’s always better to address the facts of an issue proactively, regardless of the degree of sensitivity or potential conflict. There is a natural temptation to avoid conflict, or or to reject playing the role of a messenger with uncomfortable news. But honesty in a working relationship demands addressing these issues.

For example, while conducting basic research for this book, I visited a farm that was obviously neglected. The farmer had not adequately prepared the house for the new chicks, which were scheduled to be delivered the next day. Old litter was still present in the corners and other

Vision Statement. Honesty was defined as


hard-to-clean areas. The heaters were not properly adjusted. Lightbulbs were not clean.

Honesty requires dealing with these issues before the birds are delivered, if possible, and addressing the consequences of not adequately preparing the house.

Honesty is also reflected in the following statements when a particular situation demands it: “That’s a good question; I do not know the answer, but I will find out.” Or, “I really messed up that time.”

The temptation is to protect one’s ego in such situations by trying to cover up not knowing certain information or making mistakes. But honesty demands better than that.

An excellent example of the positive impact of honesty emerged during a focus group discussion I conducted with growers. Poultry were being threatened by a disease outbreak in this particular geographic region. The growers participating in the focus group were very appreciative of the fact that company personnel admitted to being as perplexed as the growers were about the outbreak. This example leads us to the fourth and final point in the third vision statement:

Open communication. This value is reflected by

1. Keeping each other informed. 2. Encouraging each other to express one’s opinion.

In the example of the poultry disease outbreak, growers also expressed appreciation for the ongoing communication efforts to keep them informed about the status of the problem. The communication strategy included the following components:

1. Using the field service representative to communicate with the

2. Writing updates. 3. Conducting group meetings, although these were used cautiously

grower.

for biosecurity purposes.

Growers were encouraged to express their opinions about the situation. It was during one such exchange that the company became aware of some of the growers’ concerns. The company posted a list of farms affected by the disease, which everyone appreciated. The question raised was, “How long does a farm need to be disease free before it is removed from the list?” This question helped the company and growers define standard operating procedures for a farm to be removed from the list.

Unfortunately, a crisis must sometimes occur to bring out the best in us. In this instance the parties were working as partners in the fight to eradicate the disease. They had a common, well-defined goal. As a

44 Chapter 3

result, they mobilized their energy and acted as one. Therein lies the secret to a successful company-grower working relationship.

Advantages of a Grower-Relations Vision Statement

Now that we’ve addressed the writing of a Grower-Relations Vision Statement in some detail, let’s summarize the advantages in doing so.

A Guide to the Future

Writing a description of the desired working relationship provides a direction for future development. Knowing where you want to go is crucial for you to get there. This basic principle applies to every area of our lives.

This book provides an excellent example. It was written based on the vision of completing a book to discuss company-grower relations. This vision guided my behavior while making it a reality.

Other examples include the plans that drive the operations of a complex to achieve a level of financial success. There are plans to produce a defined product mix to ensure profitability, and the number of birds to be processed to meet these financial goals. There is a variety of other well-defined technical measures necessary to maximize efficiency-for example, desired feed conversion ratios, percent of hatchability, and liv- ability. Everything is driven by knowing where you want to go or what is to be accomplished.

A poultry economist once commented on the impact of the shrinking global market. He addressed the vision of the poultry industry as the worldwide primary supplier of protein. He argued that, to achieve this vision, there was a need for certain poultry companies to construct poultry processing plants in foreign countries, even though such construction appears at face value to create additional competition for the United States-based growers. All of this activity, of course, would be driven by a vision of a future in which U.S. growers would be ultimately protected.

Even a new truck driver, with a vision of loading birds for production, needs to know where he or she is going. An incident is reported in appendix E where a live haul crew inadvertently went to the wrong farm and loaded the wrong birds-birds that weren’t ready for production.

Never are we more painfully aware of the importance of knowing where we are going as when we discover we don’t know where we’re going.

Measuring Progress to Define Levels of Success

Defining the vision also can help you implement a measuring system to determine where you are in your progress toward your goals. Because


this kind of feedback is crucial, the idea of measuring will be discussed in more detail in a subsequent section in this chapter. You can attest to the fact that establishing one’s bearings is important by considering the last time you were lost in a strange city. The feedback from street names, buildings, and other sights was meaningless. The challenge is to develop a feedback system that will provide meaningful data as you develop the desired corporate culture.

Knowing What to Expect

Removing guesswork is another extremely important advantage of having a vision statement. I challenge you to ask your employees, “How do we want to work with our growers?” The answer generally given to this question is, “Treat the grower as you want to be treated.” The natural follow-up question is, “Well, how is that?” Now the answer is much more difficult. We typically don’t think in terms of defining specific behavioral interactions.

Even considering using the Golden Rule as the guideline (not the Golden Rule that states that those who have the gold make all the rules) leaves too many questions unanswered. How you like to be treated may differ from another employee’s preferences, and that certainly may be different from the grower’s. For example, some people are extroverted, energetic, impulsive, and humorous. Is it fair to assume that all growers fit this description, or even like to work with company employees who do fit this description? The answer is obviously no.

Defining expected behaviors helps everyone pull in the same direction. All employees (and ideally all growers) need to agree to live the Grower-Relations Vision Statement.

The Grower-Relations Vision Statement needs to be included as an integral component of the prospective employee and grower interview process, and again as part of the new employee and grower orientation procedure. Employees and growers need to know from the very beginning of their work with the company that they are expected to live this statement. If not, then they need not be a member of your team.

Institutionalizing the Culture

Sam Walton, founder of Wal-Mart, had a standard operating procedure that a Wal-Mart associate was to greet a customer whenever he or she came within ten feet of that customer.

In a similar manner the behaviors listed in the Grower-Relations Vi- sion Statement provide standard operating procedures for continuously improving the working relationship between the company and grower.

46 Chapter 3

These have to be implemented to create the desired culture. These are the “cultlike behaviors” discussed in the book written by James Collins and Jerry Porras, Built to Last. These have to be the behaviors that describe the way employees “do things around here.”

Creating a Grower-Relations Corporate Culture Independent of Personalities

As alluded to earlier in this chapter, generally the grower-relations corporate culture is defined by the personalities of company owners and other senior managers. This can be good, but it can also be disastrous.

It is good when the expressed values encourage a partnership in which the win-win philosophy is dominant. Conversely, if the I win-you lose attitude is expressed, the asymmetrical relationship will be fraught with problems, frustrations, and disappointments.

Defining a Grower-Relations Vision Statement based on the premise that both parties must be successful before either party is successful is definitely a win-win-win-win relationship for the grower, company, the industry, and the consumer.

For a moment consider the number of managers and other company employees who will touch the growers’ lives. Just think about the schizophrenic impact of leaving the grower-relations corporate culture to the whim of personalities. Doing so allows hundreds of people to provide their own personality template to the day-to-day working relationship with growers.

Let’s look at the scenario from another perspective. Can you imagine the confusion that would exist if individual managers were allowed to generate their own profit goals, their own financial procedures, or their own marketing plans? That would simply not be sound business practice. The company would financially go belly-up.

Managing grower relations through the implementation of a well- written Grower-Relations Vision Statement is simply prudent business practice. Doing so will help guarantee success for all affected parties.

With that in mind let’s proceed to consider the alternatives to writing a Grower-Relations Vision Statement.

To begin with, we encourage writing a statement that is concise, with the fewest words possible, so it can be remembered. The statements “Meeting the challenge of putting the grower first” and “Building a working relationship characterized by trust, respect, honesty, and open communication” meet these criteria. An easily remembered statement increases the likelihood it will be used.

Traditional thinking leads to company-generated statements for a couple of reasons. First, the company has more organized control over


the implementation of the desired corporate culture. Second, doing so demonstrates proactive leadership on the part of the company.

There are a couple of alternatives when writing a company-generated statement. The first is for senior managers to write the statement. This procedure has the advantage of senior managers’ automatically buying into the statement. It has the disadvantage of being labeled “the senior managers’ statement.”

Another approach is to use groups of employees to write the statement. This procedure has the advantage of encouraging employees to buy into the process because it is “our statement.”

An obvious challenge to be faced is the number of locations for larger companies. The answer in this case can be a hybrid of these two procedures. A corporate statement can be written identifying the overall values that will drive the success of the emerging partnership. Authority can be delegated to the individual complex for the creation of a local Grower-Relations Vision Statement that supports the corporate one. The corporate vision statement, of course, must be flexible enough to wrap around the uniqueness of each complex.

Or an organized approach can obtain input from employees throughout the company, to be finalized at the corporate level. Regardless of the procedure used, the bottom line is to use a statement at the local level that can be implemented and measured, with accountability for its implementation established.

The ideal approach to authoring the Grower-Relations Vision State- ment would consist of a procedure whereby the growers would assist in writing the statement. The vision statement would then define a set of desired behaviors for both partners.

The unique nature of the working relationship with the grower poses a challenge. There is no organized procedure to hold individual growers accountable for implementing their responsibilities associated with the Grower-Relations Vision Statement. Using grower input when writing the statement can increase the likelihood that growers will comply with the statement. One way to encourage both parties to be held accountable for the implementation of the Grower-Relations Vision Statement is to measure how well each party is implementing the statement, then publish the data.

The Necessity of Measuring a Grower-Relations Vision Statement

Just mentioning the word “survey” elicits a host of connotations, most of them not positive. Such responses as “hard work, time consuming, and w e never do anything with the data anyway” are typical. We intend to show you how easy it is to overcome such objections.

48 Chapter 3

We certainly don’t have to remind you about the importance of measurements. Your poultry business is operated on measurements. What do you think the company and/or grower would do if the following measurements were taken away?

Financial reports. Bird weight. Feed weight. Production report. Temperature gauges.

Our very existence depends upon some type of measurement system. Hunger and thirst are the body’s feedback systems to encourage you to eat and drink for survival. The nerves are constantly sending information about the body’s health status. Other measurement systems taken for granted include time, speedometers, heat gauges, and the list goes on and on.

Quite bluntly, we would exist in a chaotic, schizophrenic world-if we could exist at all. Measurement systems bring order to the universe. They provide essential information to know precisely what is happening. They give us information that we need to know.

It is also important to design and implement a measuring system to determine the success of the company-grower partnership.

Verbal feedback is obviously one information source, and a very important one. Company employees need to be constantly monitoring the working relationship and seeking the growers’ input regarding improving it. From the company’s point of view it is crucial for company employees to establish the necessary rapport and make it easy for growers to provide feedback. Chapter 4 will discuss these interactions in more detail.

Our research shows that most companies host grower meetings that are designed to obtain grower input. These meetings, however, generally provide opportunities for the more vocal and assertive individuals to express opinions. Many growers fail to capitalize on this opportunity for a variety of reasons, and not every grower attends.

We are proposing that individual companies establish a procedure to systematically complete grower surveys so that their perception of the working relationship can be quantified. Such surveys have several advantages for a company that wants to initiate proactive leadership in grower relations.

Number of Growers Involved

In contrast to the verbal few who speak up at grower meetings, or the couple of dozen participating in a focus group, every grower has the op-


portunity to express input through a survey. The actual number that completes the survey generally ranges from 25 to 60 percent. The percent can be increased when everyone sees how the data is used to improve the working relationship. Nothing can erode confidence in a survey more than those providing input never seeing how the data were used.

Anonymity

The anonymous nature is another distinct advantage of the written survey. Growers have the opportunity to provide input without fear of anyone knowing the specifics of that input, which encourages honesty.

The cover letter asking for the grower’s input usually serves three purposes:

1. Asks for the grower’s input. 2. Stresses that honest feedback is necessary to assist improvement in

the working relationship. 3. Assures that the data is anonymous and the completed question-

naire is sent to a third party for data tabulation, further protecting anonymity.

In spite of these precautions some growers will most likely be concerned about the questionnaire being marked in some fashion to track who said what. For that reason some growers will choose not to participate, and that certainly is a disadvantage of the survey methodology.

Another reason for not participating is the feeling the input will not be used. It’s the company’s responsibility to demonstrate proactive leadership and use the data. We encourage the company to publish both the results and its plans to use the data to improve service levels. Doing so makes a strong statement about the importance of grower input in improving the working relationship.

Statistical Perceptions

The two statistical calculations typically used to report survey results are percent of respondents selecting a response category, or the average score. Without getting too statistical, both calculations have the advantage of enabling the user to easily organize and understand the respondents’ input.

Identifies Strengths as well as Opportunities for Improvement

Have you noticed that it’s difficult to meet the challenge of improving something when you don’t know what needs to be improved? A written

50 Chapter 3

survey helps to identify the strengths of the working relationship as well as the opportunities for improvement. Guesswork is thereby eliminated.

Helps Develop Action Plans

Using the data allows you to concentrate on areas that will produce the most significant impact upon the working relationship.

There are basically two methodologies to developing such action plans: the company managers develop them, or they involve growers in the process. Let’s suppose the data show that the company can improve in the area of keeping the growers informed. We’ve seen that growers like to be kept up to date on such things as

New technologies. Biosecurity measures. Medications. Feedback on issues discussed with management.

Some of their suggestions on how to do this include

Educating the field service representative, who in turn communi-

Scheduling regular grower meetings/educational seminars. Issuing a biweekly newsletter. Developing a Web page.

As these ideas indicate, the important point is to convert the data into

cates with the grower.

action steps instead of letting it collect dust.

Measures Progress

A major advantage of an ongoing survey procedure is to measure progress from one time period to the next. Measuring progress is the only way to see progress.

Typically the survey procedure is completed annually. You may want to consider measuring the impact of specific strategies after a six-month interval. For example, suppose a company decides to implement communication strategies to keep field service representatives better informed, and to use a biweekly newsletter to keep growers informed. Af- ter a period of time a brief questionnaire could be inserted in the newsletter or mailed to the growers asking them to rate the effectiveness of these strategies. The questionnaire could also be used to identify specific information gaps that need to be addressed by the company and the growers.

Collecting data does not have to be the headache that most people get


whenever they think about a survey. The challenge is to use that old “KISS” or “Keep It Simple Stupid” methodology.

If the previous discussion has not convinced you to use a grower survey, perhaps my next point of how simple it is to write the questionnaire will be the convincing factor.

The basic grower survey was actually written when the Grower- Relations Vision Statement was written. There is no need to spend gru- eling hours on the task of wondering what needs to be asked and how to write the questions. Because the vision statement speaks to the desired working relationship, those are the characteristics that need to be measured. Simply reformatting the statement as illustrated in table 3.1 can create the questionnaire. You will recognize that this survey is based on

Table 3.1 Grower Survey

Instructions. Please indicate the degree to which you agree with each of the following statements by simply circling a number from number seven (Strongly Agree) to number one (Strongly Disagree).

Strongly Strongly Agree Disagree

1. Company employees do that which was agreed upon. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

2. I am allowed to do my job of growing chickens. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

3. Company employees keep confidential information confidential. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

4. My input is requested for decisions affecting my farm. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

5. Company employees listen to understand my input. 7 . 6 5 4 3 2 1

6. My input is used whenever possible. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 7. An explanation is offered when my input

is not used. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 8. Company employees present the facts as

they are. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 9. Decisions are made based on these facts. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

10. Company employces address issues that need to be discussed. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

11. Company employees readily admit not knowing the answer. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

12. Company employees readily admit when a mistake has been made. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

13. The company keeps me informed. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 14. I amencouraged to expressmy opinion. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

52 Chapter 3

the definitions from Vision Statement 3, discussed in this chapter. Other examples are included in appendix A.

A comment section can also be included asking for other suggestions for improvement, or any other comments the grower may want to express.

Before leaving this discussion, please note how simple it would be for the company employee to evaluate growers using this same survey instrument, but simply substituting the word “grower” for “company.” Field service representatives could very easily complete this questionnaire for each of their growers, and the aggregate data could be published along with the growers’ perception of the company. Doing so would allow the company and its growers to identify specific areas that each need to address.

Delmarva Survey of Poultry Growers

Before leaving this chapter I want to highlight a grower survey completed by the University of Delaware in December 1997. This survey was sponsored by the Delmarva Poultry Industry, Delaware Poultry Im- provement Association, the Maryland Farm Bureau, and the University of Delaware Cooperative Extension. The survey form was sent to all poultry operators, and 58.7 percent, or 1,344, growers returned a completed questionnaire.

The complete results are included in appendix B. The following list includes some of the highlights, demonstrating how the data can be used to improve the working relationship.

73 percent were satisfied with the poultry business. 75.5 percent were satisfied with their present company. Over 70 percent were optimistic about the future of the poultry industry on the Delmarva Peninsula. 88.9 percent agreed they had a good relationship with their flock supervisor. Only 43 percent agreed that the rotation of flock supervisors is beneficial. 63 percent understood how their settlement amount was calculated, and only 58.6 percent trusted the figures in their settlement. 53.2 percent felt their average chick quality was either fair or poor.

The obvious strengths listed in this summary are the relationships with the growers’ company flock supervisor and the poultry industry in general.

The opportunities for improvement are as follows:

1. Ensure that the growers understand the rationale behind rotation of flock supervisors.


2. Ensure that the growers understand the procedure to compute the

3. Ensure that the growers understand how chicks/poults are proc-

Each of these can be converted into specific action steps. The only question to be answered is the methodology used to educate growers about each of these concerns.

The Delmarva survey is a great service to the industry. It would be great to be able to compare similar data between states to identify industry trends and opportunities for improvement.

settlement amount.

essed for delivery to the farms.

Flock Services Report

We don’t want to give the impression that an annual grower survey is the only methodology used to collect data. Many companies evaluate the working relationship subsequent to the flock grow-out by asking the grower to complete a Flock Services Report. Typically the survey instrument is designed to rate chick delivery, feed delivery, live haul, the field service representative, and flock performance. A sample survey is included as appendix C for your convenience.

We’re sure you will agree that this methodology is a positive statement and an excellent time to evaluate the working relationship. The positive impact is further amplified when identified concerns are responded to promptly.

Because most of the flock surveys are not anonymous, a question may be posed about the validity of the information. Will the grower provide honest feedback? Field service representatives who use this procedure tell us most growers are honest and provide very useful information.

In closing this chapter I would like to emphasize one more time the importance of writing a Grower-Relations Vision Statement. Promoting a healthy company-grower partnership, and providing a blueprint to make crucial measurements possible and easy, are compelling reasons to devote time and energy to such a statement. It is worth repeating that to get where you want to go, you must know where you want to go and how to get there!

4

Bird's-Eye View

The specific interactions between growers and

company employees constitute the critical

moments of truth that create perceived value.

Employees and growers identify the most impor-

tant moments of truth for live production, live

haul, hatchery, and feed mill.

The following are eleven moments of truth

that can continuously improve interpersonal

relationships:

1. Trust

2. Respect

3 . Confidence

4. Treating everyone fairly

5. Performance evaluations

6 . Clean language

7. Emergency procedures

8. Personal relationships

55



9. Teaching

10. Dealing with reluctant growers

11. Grower recognition

Managers are advised to begin the process of

writing a Grower-Relations Moments of Truth

Training Manual to document the “how-tos” of

implementing your moments of truth.

Moments of Truth: The Keys to Successful Working Relationships

Money can’t buy moments of truth, but these priceless behaviors can determine your success.

t’s time to introduce another term-the “moments of truth,” or the I crucial interactions that determine the rapport and quality of the working relationship between the company and contract grower.

Jan Carlson coined this phrase in his book The Moments of Truth to describe the specific interaction that occurs between a company’s employee and its customer. As president of the Scandinavian Airlines, Carl- son used the concept to regain market share and profitability. A moment of truth is that precise moment the customer decides if he or she appreciates the company and will return as a customer. Carlson understands the rather simple fact that customers write your paycheck.

His philosophy is quite simple: Put customers first. So he organized a cultural change that examined every interaction with the customer and empowered employees to make decisions on behalf of the customer.

Knowing that moments of truth are important drives Herb Kelleher, president of Southwest Airlines, to schedule time each week to work on the front line serving employees. He also wants to set the example that everyone is working for the customer.

56

Moments of Truth 57

We’ve already discussed Sam Walton’s infamous moment of truth. Every Wal-Mart associate was expected to offer a friendly greeting to a customer whenever they were within ten feet of each other. The importance of the moment of truth led Wal-Mart to initiate the greeter program. Wal-Mart wants the customer to feel valued and important. After all, customers spending dollars is what made Wal-Mart the success story of the decade.

Carl Sewell, in his book Customers for Life, describes how he reorga- nized his Dallas-based car dealership to be customer service driven. He, too, relied on the moment of truth concept to ensure that customers got what they wanted-good service. His philosophy included:

1. Ask the customers what they want, and they will tell you. 2. Do what you say you’re going to do, and do the job right the first

3. Have a plan in place to deal with things when they go wrong. 4. Remember that customers judge a dealership by how well they are

5 . Give the people who deal with customers authority to resolve

Sewell is constantly asking customers what they want through discussion groups and written surveys. The only way to know is to ask. He uses this information to continuously improve his dealership’s services. Cus- tomers now have after-hour telephone numbers to call when service is needed, and service hours have been changed to meet the customer’s needs.

To minimize the possibility that something can go wrong, he stan- dardizes operating systems and ensures that all employees are trained to use the systems to provide high-quality services. Customer research shows that a satisfied customer will return to a place of business and tell four other potential customers. An unhappy customer will tell approximately twenty other people. Sewell wants his customers to be part of his company’s advertising campaign to identify new customers.

Customer research also shows that customer loyalty is increased whenever a company immediately fixes the consumer’s problems. Such customers are actually more loyal than those who never experienced a problem. To improve customer loyalty, Sewell believes the people who work with the customer must have the authority to resolve problems.

I am reminded here of a story about a banking customer who could not find a parking place in the bank’s parking lot and was forced to park in a metered space. As luck would have it, he received a five-dollar parking ticket while in the bank. When he learned about the ticket, he promptly took it to a teller and asked the bank to pay for it since he was conducting business in their location. The teller refused. He asked to see

time.

treated by everyone they come in contact with.

problems.

58 Chapter 4

a manager, who also refused, stating that the bank’s policy was not to re- imburse parking tickets. The story goes that the customer promptly withdrew his seven-figure account from that bank.

You would agree refusing to take care of the customer was an expensive experience for that bank.

Moments of Truth and Perceived Value

Moments of truth have a powerful influence. We can understand their power by thinking about how our personal moments of truth guide the many daily decisions we make. We evaluate service we’ve received and tell people about our experiences.

I recently had an occasion to call my car insurance carrier. The receptionist answered the phone with a cheerful “Thank you for calling. . . .” Upon being asked if a certain individual was available, she grumbled, “I don’t know if she is here or not.” Thinking I had been put on hold, I muttered, “Wow, that’s great customer service.” The receptionist heard the comment and grumbled right back, “YOU better believe it!”

Would you consider that interaction a positive or a negative moment of truth? Does even hearing the description of the interaction influence your perception of that company? Sure it does. That’s the power of the moment of truth.

While I was conducting a focus group for a company, several growers talked about a company receptionist who must be a cousin to the one just described. They disliked having to call the complex because they were forced to interact with a person who was neither friendly nor trusted. Is this a positive or a negative moment of truth? Is this the image you want your company to project?

I have been purchasing suits from an individually owned clothing store for over twenty years. My wife has frequently asked me about purchasing them from one of the large retail stores because of the increased suit selection and lower prices. But the level of customer service drives my loyalty. For example, just recently I purchased a new suit, and after I wore it once, it appeared as though something was wrong with a small portion of the fabric. I returned the suit to the store’s owner, who quickly asserted, “Now, don’t worry-we will take care of the suit.” Peace of mind-that’s customer service.

Now, for the ultimate challenge. Divide your customer service interactions into three categories: poor, okay, and excellent. Which category do you think will receive the highest count?

Excellent customer service is rare, in spite of the well-known fact that customers make decisions about the company based on how they are treated.

Moments of Truth 59

Growers make decisions about the company based on how they are treated, as well. If your growers were keeping score, would they have more excellent, fair, or poor interactions with the company? What do you want them to have?

Remember the discussion about perceived value in chapter 2? The moment of truth is the defining characteristic of perceived value. Let’s explain.

Moments of Truth and Grower Relations

I borrowed the moment of truth concept for my work with grower relations because the specific interactions between a grower and company determine the perceived value of the working relationship. I discussed specific behaviors in chapter 3 that operationally define the Grower- Relations Vision Statement. These behaviors constitute moments of truth that determine the rapport, chemistry, and perceived value in the working relationship.

For example, many participants in focus groups mention they do not understand the settlement procedures. It is interesting to note that the Delmarva survey mentioned in chapter 3, and included in appendix B, support these findings. Is not understanding the settlement procedures a positive or a negative moment of truth? Suppose the settlement check arrived in the mail and was less than the grower expected. Is that a negative or a positive moment of truth?

Several companies schedule their field service representative to discuss the settlement check with the grower. Is that a positive or a negative moment of truth?

The moment of truth is the engine that drives the success of the working relationship. For that reason it is important for a company to identify crucial moments of truth and decide how each of these are going to play out. In essence, I’m recommending the definition of standard operating procedures just as it is employed in the technical aspect of the complex.

Standard operating procedures drive the success of every part of the complex. There are standard operating procedures to mix feed types and to hatch chicks/poults, for example. It’s not even conceivable that a complex manager would consider managing the complex with random, hap- hazard procedures. That would spell doom and gloom for the business. And employees are expected to adhere to these standard operating procedures.

The moments of truth demand the same attention to detail as do other operating procedures. They need to be identified, the standard operating procedure defined, and employees expected to implement them.

60 Chapter 4

That is the only way to ensure success. If not, these crucial interactions will occur in a random manner according to the values and whims of personality.

Continuously Improving the Moments of Truth

The old clicht “Doing that which you’ve always done will get you what you’ve always gotten” speaks to the issue of continuous improvement because that clichii is now outdated. The new one reads, “Doing that which you’ve always done will get you less and less.” It’s amazing how quickly we can get behind while trying to stay the same.

That principle applies to our challenge to continuously improve the moments of truth. A processing plant’s operations manager quotes his grandfather’s favorite expression, which speaks to the need to continuously improve: Good, better, best. Never let it rest until your good is better and your better is best.

To illustrate the importance of this clichii, I will revisit a moment of truth previously discussed. Remember the conversation about the live production manager who printed and distributed a feed schedule explaining the type of feed needed by age of the bird? The manager was proud of his efforts to ensure that the growers fully understood the change in feed schedule.

But the focus group research showed that growers were not aware of the printed schedule. At that time the schedule was printed and distributed annually. The question was posed, “How could this moment of truth be improved?” The field service representative now distributes and discusses the schedule with the growers at the beginning of every flock.

Proactive leadership will want to create a culture that encourages continuous improvement. Have you ever considered the fact that it is difficult not to be successful when you are constantly striving for improvement? Every employee and grower needs to be trained to ask the question, “How can this be improved?”

Moments of Truth and Pressure on Organizational Systems

Field service representatives are the windows through which the company views the grower and through which the grower views the company. Probably some 80 percent of the interaction a grower has with a company is with the field service representative. In essence, the field service representative bears the awesome responsibility to regulate the rapport with the grower.

In view of the field service representative’s role, it’s logical to assume that this working relationship is the point of entry to improving grower

Moments of Truth 61

relations. It may be the beginning point, but I caution you there is more-much more.

Let’s return to our discussion and formula regarding perceived value.

Perceived value = Received value

Expected value

Suppose that significant steps are made to incorporate growers into improving the moments of truth with the field service representatives. As such improvements are made, what does the grower expect when working with other departments of the complex? Obviously, improved performance.

The net result is that improving performance in one area puts additional pressure on other departments of the complex to do the same.

Let’s further suppose status quo is the name of the game with live haul, the feed mill, or the hatchery. No attempts are made to improve. What image is being communicated to the grower? Is the company serious about improving the relationship? No. Is the live production manager serious? Yes.

Let’s return to our feed mill example. The grower can call Sunday morning at 1159 and receive feed Sunday afternoon. But if that call is made two minutes later, feed is not delivered until Monday. The suggested policy change is obvious. If live production is working to ensure grower-friendly policies, then the same is expected from the feed mill.

Another often expressed concern is the trash left behind by the live haul crew. If live production is working to improve grower relations, then the expectation is created that live haul will do the same.

The Two Categories of Moments of Truth

Moments of truth fit into two categories: face-to-face and non-face-to- face. Face-to-face includes all those interactions directly involving a company employee and the grower. To illustrate the importance of such interactions, several company managers have asked me to discuss such issues as facial hair and a clean truck in grower-relations seminars. Growers are asked to keep a clean farm. That means keeping the grass mowed around the poultry houses, not parking machinery next to the house, seeing that trash is removed, and so on. If the growers are asked to keep a clean farm, then it only stands to reason that the company personnel should likewise present a professional appearance.

Many companies have uniforms to promote a professional appearance. To be consistent with the demands on the grower, company trucks need to be clean and facial hair neatly trimmed.

Non-face-to-face interactions include such things as receiving settle-

62 Chapter 4

ment checks, newsletters, correspondence, and other written documents in the mail. The fact that all of these send a message is easily forgotten. What if the grower receives a written document that has several typo- graphical errors? The message being sent is that someone is not paying attention to detail. The logical question in the mind of the receiver is, “What other details aren’t being attended to?”

The legal contract provides another example. Just mentioning the words “legal contract” elicits the reaction that here we have a difficult document to read. It sometimes seems that lawyers obtain a certain de- light in increasing the reading difficulty, all the better to prevent laypeo- pie from understanding. But the contract should be readable and easily understood by all parties.

We must remember that everything sends a message. The title of this book was chosen very carefully because it represents a very important moment of truth. So important that several groups of company employees and growers were asked to help select it.

Eleven Moments of Truth

Now let’s turn our attention to eleven moments of truth identified by growers and company representatives as crucial to promoting effective interpersonal relationships. These eleven were identified because they speak to the heart of the communicatiodworking relationship between the field service representative and the grower. Highlighting these particular moments of truth does not detract from the previous discussion regarding any moment of truth. I think you will agree as you read this special subset of moments of truth that they determine the special rapport or chemistry in the unique working relationship that exists between the field service representative and the grower.

1. Trust 2. Respect 3 . Confidence 4. Treating everyone fairly 5 . Performance evaluations 6 . Clean language 7. Emergency procedures 8. Personal relationships 9. Teaching

10. Dealing with reluctant growers 11. Grower recognition

Before considering each of these moments of truth, I need to discuss three important issues. First is the blatant omission of “communication”

Moments of Truth 63

from this list. Communication was not included as a separate category because, as you will see, it is an integral component of all of these moments of truth. Specific behavioral attributes of communication are included within the discussions on both “Trust” and “Respect.”

Second is the relationship between these eleven moments of truth and the Grower-Relations Vision Statement. These moments of truth emerge from the values contained within each Grower-Relations Vision Statement discussed in chapter 3. In some cases the moments of truth actually appear in the statement. (Review the third vision statement we included as an example that contains many of these values.) Although these eleven moments of truth can easily be included as definitions in such statements, it is important for you to understand that none of them must be specified in the Grower-Relations Vision Statement. Fur- thermore, even though we list these eleven moments of truth as being focal points in the working relationship, it is important for the company and growers to customize by deciding on their own crucial moments of truth.

The third issue is the very important role of the manager to teach the moments of truth that need to be addressed. Traditionally, the manager’s role has been defined in terms of ensuring that the technical aspects of the job are completed. But the manager’s responsibility also includes teaching hisher employees the technical skills needed to successfully complete one’s job responsibilities, or to ensure that needed training is received.

Teaching grower relations is now being added to the manager’s responsibilities. The sheer weight of adding yet another responsibility to an already heavy load can make most managers cringe. To make matters worse, grower relations are more difficult to teach than technical skills. Let’s explain.

Technical skills are more concrete-easier to see and to measure. Such skills often include a base level of knowledge and procedures to complete a job successfully. When an employee lacks certain knowledge or is not correctly following procedures, then that is fairly obvious. The necessary corrective steps are clearly and unambiguously defined.

Grower relations include interpersonal skills that by their very nature are more abstract, more difficult to define, and therefore more difficult to see and measure. Many authors and managers refer to these as the “soft skills.” I prefer to use the term “interpersonal” or ccsocial” skills, because the word “soft” implies being less important than the technical or hard skills. That is simply not the case. In fact, soft skills determine the success of hard skills.

Most managers have a degree in some aspect of poultry science and so have acquired the necessary knowledge to implement technical opera-

64 Chapter 4

tions successfully. Heretofore grower relations have not been included as part of the academic curriculum. Now managers are being asked to teach something they’ve not been trained to do. That’s a case of double jeopardy. How can they teach something if they have not been taught themselves? That may be a difficult assignment for some.

This book was written to assist these managers by offering the necessary blueprints to be used in their teaching efforts. Now let’s turn our attention to the eleven crucial interpersonal moments of truth. You have seen a couple of them during our discussion of the Grower-Relations Vision Statement in chapter 3.

Trust

It has been said that trust is the lubricant for all successful working relationships. “Trust” is a commonly used word, as if everyone understands what it means. To determine for yourself if people understand it, ask ten people to describe the necessary behaviors one needs to engage in to build trust in a working relationship. Our guess is you will get several different answers-perhaps even ten.

A natural place to begin is the dictionary. A current Webster’s defines trust as a “firm belief or confidence in the honesty, integrity, reliability, justice, etc., of another person or thing.” The logical follow-up question is, “How do you teach these ingredients?”

In a search to make trust a teachable behavior, I’ve conducted research with thousands of employees during the past ten years. These employees have told me that the following behaviors contain the nucleus of what we call “trust”:

1. Dependability, or doing that which has been agreed upon. 2. Communicating-keeping everyone informed. 3. Keeping confidential information confidential. 4. Allowing individuals to do their jobs.

Dependability This behavior is quite simple-keep your word and do what you say you will do. There are several key situations in the company-grower relationship that involve scheduling or doing that which has been agreed upon. These are

Delivery of chicks/poults. Feed deliveries. Live haul. Preparing houses for a new flock. Completing agreed-upon poultry management practices.

Moments of Truth 65

You probably don’t have to be reminded about the concerns raised by these issues. Nor do you have to be reminded how frustrating it is to expect something to happen and it does not. This frustration is only com- pounded when money is involved.

But look at the impression that’s given when the typical scenario includes scheduling something to happen and it doesn’t happen. Is that a way to build trust in the working relationship? No, because we’re teaching each other to “say one thing and do something else.”

It’s quite simple to say that commitments should be honored. But we don’t live in a perfect world, and events are going to interfere with the most well-planned schedules.

In terms of building trust, it is much better to underpromise and overdeliver than to overpromise and underdeliver. It is easy to get caught in the emotional web of being a nice guy-wanting to please. When this happens, the temptation to overpromise is intense. Resist the temptation, anyway.

Keeping one’s word represents an excellent opportunity for continued learning. Employees and growers can identify those specific situations in their working relationship when action often does not follow the promised word. Upon identifying these situations, you will also want to identify a procedure to minimize their reoccurrence.

At a personal level an individual may forget to do that which was promised. Forgetting is a forgivable sin when the person readily admits, “I blew that one.” It is particularly embarrassing, however, when the grower reminds you about forgetting something. We’ve all been there, done that, and have that T-shirt. At that precise moment we would like to crawl into a hole and cover our head. Some of us even frantically search for a rationalization to save face. The best strategy is to admit the truth. The situation can be salvaged simply by telling the grower, “Thank you for reminding me. You’re right, it completely slipped my mind. I will make certain that the job gets done.” Then do it pronto. The same goes for the grower.

Keeping our word presents another interesting dilemma. What happens when a field service representative makes a commitment to another part of the complex and that commitment is not met? Not only are such situations embarrassing, but they too adversely impact the trusting environment you are working to build.

Such situations represent a splendid excuse to point fingers: “Those blankety-blank people working over there never do what they agree to do.” Is that a positive or a negative moment of truth? All employees must realize that publicly chastising another department is a reflection on their own department, because all the departments are part of the same company.

66 Chapter 4

Common sense dictates that an employee not criticize a grower in front of other growers, so why criticize another part of the company?

I’ve asked field service representatives attending my seminars to define the most appropriate manner of working with the grower under these circumstances. Their suggestions included the following:

1. Apologize to the grower as soon as you realize you won’t be able

2. Work with the department to identify what specifically caused a

3. Let the grower know what caused the problem. 4. Work with the other department to identify what can be done to

make sure the problem doesn’t reoccur. 5 . Share the revised procedure with growers.

I’m sure you would agree that completing these action steps is a better idea than pointing fingers.

Trust is a two-way street, and growers likewise play an integral role in developing trust. So when the grower agrees to follow the suggestions offered by his or her field service representative, the grower should follow through. When it is promised that the roads will be maintained, houses prepared for new flocks, or weeds mowed around the houses, then these tasks should be done without question.

to make good on a promise.

change in the schedule.

Communicating People who are kept informed feel very important. That is the power of information.

For some people, keeping information to themselves gets all wrapped up with their ego. To maintain an important or superior position, these people want you to be aware of the fact that they have privileged information. Sounds like games children play, but with a little thought, each of us can identify one or two such individuals. Perhaps even you and I are among them.

We are not playing children’s games here. We need to recognize the lesson: Keeping people informed is an integral part of establishing trust.

There are two criteria to be met when keeping people informed. First is knowing what is to be communicated, and second is knowing the best way to communicate it.

The best way to know what growers need to know is to ask them. Our research shows growers want to know

The reasons for suggesting capital investment changes, and data showing a return on the investment.

Moments of Truth 67

More about the entire operations of the company and how these impact the grower-for example, world markets, sales processing plants, and so on. When the company has a problem that will affect the grower-for example, the feed mill is not working. When the company suspects the grower may have a problem. The best methods to improve flock performance. Genetic capabilities of the birds. The company’s expectations of the grower. Company-defined performance standards. Quality of the feed as determined by its content. The particular flock and genetic characteristics of the chicks/poults. Biosecurity issues and literatureheminars on bird diseases. Follow-up on issues discussed at growers’ meetings.

Knowing what growers want to be kept informed about is a dynamic body of knowledge that will vary with circumstances. Consider the previous example about growers wanting to know why a particular site was selected to construct a new feed mill. Growers assumed the new location would impact the availability of feed. Those growers whose farms were close to the old feed mill were now going to be separated by some twenty miles. These farmers had some concerns that were not being addressed.

Biosecurity issues represent another very important matter. Research for this book happened to be conducted in a geographic area that was experiencing a disease outbreak. Farmers needed to know about the outbreak. First, they wanted to know which farms were being added to the list of affected farms. Second, they wanted to know which growers were being removed from the list and the criteria used to make that decision. Third, they asked if feed and live haul trucks were adhering to the biosecurity practices necessary to prevent the spread of the disease.

After deciding what needs to be communicated, the next issue is to develop a communications plan to distribute the information in an accurate and timely manner. We asked both company employees and growers about the best way to keep growers informed. Employees offered these suggestions:

1. Publication of a monthly newsletter. 2. Annual grower dinners. 3. Keeping the field service representative informed, who then is the

communication conduit to the farmers. 4. Regularly scheduled meetings organized according to those work-

ing with a given field service representative. 5 . Regularly scheduled tours of the complex. 6 . Thank-you notes recognizing a job well done.

68 Chapter 4

Growers added a couple of other suggestions to this list:

1. A company Web site. 2. A toll-free telephone number programmed to give daily updates re-

3. A telephone chain to be used during emergencies.

Regardless of the procedure ultimately used, use it and use it consistently. Too many times growers and even company personnel mention that a communication procedure was initiated and over time disap- peared without any explanation for the change. The two most often mentioned problems were grower meetings and newsletters. Scheduling grower meetings and writing newsletters require consistent effort and hard work. For these reasons it is easy to put both of them on the bottom of the priority schedule until there is enough time to do it right. In this busy world there is never enough time. Time must be scheduled. Consider the message sent when such procedures become a memory: You are not important enough for us to put forth the effort.

Quite frankly, I don’t think that’s the message you want to send. If a decision is made to discontinue using a communication tool, then let everyone know and give the reasons for the change. Remember: Keeping people informed builds trust, and they will appreciate your efforts in this direction.

Growers also need to keep the field service representative informed about the flock’s performance and their use of poultry management techniques.

Honesty is another important consideration when keeping people informed. There is no alternative to presenting the facts, but there are at least three situations in which honesty is absolutely crucial for field service representatives. These are:

garding complex activities.

1. When you do not know an answer to a question. 2. When the information is not ready for distribution. 3. When a hardball question is outside your area of responsibility.

First, consider the domino reaction that occurs in those instances when you do not know the answer. Not having the requested information is embarrassing. Embarrassment is uncomfortable. Being uncomfortable often leads to being defensive to protect the ego. Protecting the ego can lead to making excuses or blaming another entity for the lack of knowledge.

There is a better way. Be honest. Consider saying something like, “That is a good question and it deserves a good answer. Right now I don’t have that information. I will get it for you.” Then keep that commitment. Hon- esty is great therapy. It feels better than making excuses or blaming.

Moments of Truth 69

Second, when information is not ready for distribution, remember the premise that honesty is the best policy is the only feasible approach. Say something like, “I know you’re anxious to learn about the policy. The company is still working on that issue, and the information will be made available to you as soon as it is ready.”

It is relatively easy to think about such words in the comfort of the office-but much more difficult when being asked face-to-face while visiting a farm. For that reason put these suggested phrases into your own words and practice them until you’re comfortable using them.

Third, remember that if hardball questions are left to the grower’s imagination, you can create a lot of problems for yourself. Such questions illustrate the importance of identifying these moments of truth in advance, and training all employees how to respond to them. Some of these kinds of questions may include the following:

1. Why are growers not paid more? 2. What rationale did the company use to develop the pay scale? 3. Why does the pay scale create a competitive environment among

4. Why do we have to upgrade equipment? 5. Why does the company object to the growers’ association? 6. Why does the company purchase new equipment when growers

7. Who is going to pay to comply with environmental regulations?

growers?

have not received an increase in their contract?

Again, the best policy is to anticipate such questions, prepare answers, and formulate a communication plan to distribute the information. Include training employees as part of the communication plan. It is crucial for all employees to be providing the same message to all growers. Nothing is more damaging than growers receiving different information from different employees. For one thing, that erodes trust. Who can you believe? For another, the company will be communicating that it does not know what it is doing. That isn’t going to help build trust either.

Because different companies will have different answers to such questions, we will refrain from offering specific answers here. Go to it, and good luck.

Honesty is a requirement for growers as well. The field service representative andor other company personnel need to know the facts in order to provide maximum assistance to the grower. Not being honest would be like going to your doctor when you’re ill and providing a wrong description of your symptoms. That’s not the way to maintain health.

70 Chapter 4

Confidentiality A grower may ask you about the operations of another grower. Or you may feel compelled to tell one grower about something another grower is doing to improve flock performance, or something that is being done that has an adverse impact upon flock performance. Be aware that both circumstances can sabotage trust in the working relationship. Talking to one grower about another automatically creates distrust.

Remember our discussion in chapter 3 about the field service representative who raised the issue of complimenting a grower by sharing some of that grower’s best management practices with others? If the field service representative had shared this information without permission, you can imagine how betrayed the grower might feel. On the other hand, some growers might, in fact, be complimented by this act. How do you know until you ask the grower? The bottom line is, asking for the grower’s permission to share information is central to the issue of confidentiality. Be sensitive to confidentiality. If company employees are dili- gent students and eagerly learn from the growers, they can in fact acquire a body of knowledge that can readily be shared without breaching confidentiality.

Letting People Do Their Jobs The fourth element necessary to create trust is allowing the farmer to use his or her knowledge without micromanaging. An average field service representative will see more birds in a year than an average grower will work with in a lifetime. That difference can easily lead to the attitude on behalf of the field service representative: “My way is the right way.”

The situation is complicated a bit by the fact that growers are not company employees. So the challenge is to guide the grower in a manner that will encourage cooperation, which speaks to the importance of personal rapport in general, and the element of trust in particular. If growers trust you, they will more likely have confidence in your suggestions for improvement.

Using a bell-shaped curve as the reference point, growers can be placed into three categories: high performing, average, and low performing. These differences demand different working relationships. The lower-performing grower will need more attention than growers in the other two categories.

There is no magic formula to apply in deciding the degrees of freedom given to each grower, but there are some guidelines to be considered for this working relationship:

1. “My way” thinking often converts to “Let me tell you what to do” behavior. Instead, introduce your suggestions by asking questions

Moments of Truth 71

rather than dictating or demanding. For example, “Would you agree that doing so-and-so would improve . . . ? ”

2. Ask the grower for suggestions and use them whenever possible (this is, in fact, the essence of showing respect, which is discussed in the next section).

3 . In those instances in which “my way” will be “the way,” the pressure can be eased by saying something like “I understand your concern about trying this idea. . .” “In view of the situation we’re working with, let’s go ahead and try. . .” As much as possible use the pronouns “we” or “us” instead of “I.”

Growers likewise need to allow field service representatives to do their job and offer assistance to improve the flock’s performance. That means listening and using their suggestions. That’s not to say growers must accept these suggestions without question, but working together to find solutions to improve the grower’s profitability is everyone’s objective.

Respect

Respect is another essential ingredient of the professional partnership. Ask people how to gain respect, and the typical response is “It must be earned.” That response doesn’t offer much help when trying to teach what must be done to build a corporate culture characterized by respect. How do you teach “I t must be earned?”

I have found that the cornerstones of respect include the following:

1. Ask for input when solving problems. 2. Listen to that input. 3. Use the input whenever possible. 4. Explain the reasons why input is not used.

Ask for Input Now we’re working at the heart and soul of the company’s grower- relations values. How much opportunity is there for grower input? The primary focus of this section is employee-grower interaction.

Growers want to be recognized for their knowledge of their farm. They know the different personalities of each house. They know the history of the farm. They are independent farmers who do not like to be told what to do in a demanding, dictatorial manner. They want to be respected, and one of the best ways to do that is to solicit their input in decisions that affect their investment.

Growers want to benefit from the education offered by the field service representative, while at the same time be recognized for their knowledge of the industry. They want a win-win working relationship.

72 Chapter 4

Growers want to be considered as a partner in this working relationship, as they have a significant financial investment at risk as well. Some- times they feel as though their investment is not recognized’as a con- tributing factor to the success of the company. As working partners, growers have expressed an interest in being asked about issues that affect the daily management of their farms. For example, they appreciate questions on

1. Bird health and medication practices. 2. Adjusting equipment. 3 . Feed quality and delivery. 4. Chick quality. 5 . Biosecurity. 6. Environmental issues, for example, litter and disposition of dead

7. Strategies to work more effectively with field service represen-

8. Company policies that impact grower relations. 9. Procedures to address growers’ concerns.

birds.

tatives.

10. Contractual relationships.

This verbal interchange between the grower, the field service representative, and the company is a key ingredient for each to feel like an equal partner in the working relationship.

Listen to the Input The logical next step is to listen after asking for input. There is no doubt that listening is a very important communication tool that is frequently abused. Not knowing how to listen is not the root cause of not listening. Everyone listens to understand something every day. The problem is trying to do it consistently.

Unless people are willing to work at it, it does very little good to remind them that active listening consists of the following behaviors:

1. Refrain from interrupting. 2. Listen carefully enough that you can paraphrase what has been

3. Ask questions to clarify. 4. Provide the necessary eye contact and facial expressions to show

The question is, What can be done to help people use these tools? I suggest using a reminder to listen. One of the best reminders is to write the word “Listen” where it will be noticed. I have learned to rely on this simple technique, and it works.

said to the other person’s satisfaction.

the person you are, in fact, listening.

Moments of Truth 73

A real test of strength of any working relationship is when those involved can provide immediate feedback. Any individual who is serious about listening should want to know when he or she is being perceived as not listening. Rarely, though, is such valuable feedback readily offered.

Use Each Other’s Input Using each other’s input is an excellent demonstration that you respect and have confidence in one another. Remember that the farmer lives with the farm twenty-four hours a day. He or she knows the personality of the farm. The employee is likewise a walking encyclopedia, having acquired knowledge from multiple sources. You want each other to feel successful.

Those instances in which an idea does not work will give the company employee or grower an occasion to practice effective interpersonal skills. A failed idea can hurt the ego as much as a working idea can give it a boost. This delicate situation requires a comment like, “That seemed like a good idea, and now we’ve got to find another.”

Too many times such instances are used to play one-upmanship. Any slight indication that even hints of the “I told you it would not work” message can drive a wedge in the working relationship. This speaks to the emotional aspect of the communication. Even thinking such thoughts may allow facial gestures to communicate the disastrous message. So if that thought should flash across your mind, be very conscious of your nonverbal gestures. At this precise moment you will want to provide a positive statement indicating the next proactive step.

Using each other’s ideas can create a tremendous amount of rapport and cement a very effective working relationship.

Explain Why Input Is Not Used Common sense dictates closing the communication gap to let people know what happened to their suggestions. All too often, though, these end up in the bottomless proverbial black hole that has been complained about since the beginning of time. It’s easy to use the “out of sight, out of mind” management philosophy, especially if the issue is a sensitive one.

Growers want feedback on issues discussed at grower meetings and questionskoncerns addressed with their field service representative. Not being kept informed of the status of an issue sends the message that neither the issue-nor the grower-is of particular importance to the company.

Such situations beg for proactive management to keep growers informed. Tell growers when a decision has not been made on an issue. When a decision has been made that is different from the one suggested by a grower, explain how the suggestion was taken into consideration

74 Chapter 4

during the decision-making process and give the rationale for the final decision. Doing so gives growers the opportunity to agree with you. Even if the grower still disagrees with the final decision, respect will be gained by bringing closure to the issue with solid justification of the company’s viewpoint. At least everyone now knows the status of the issue, which is better than not knowing.

The final decision may be a frustrating one, but knowing input was used and the rationale behind the decision is better than hearing something like, “I just think it will work better this way,¶¶ or “That’s company policy,” or “We’ve always done it that way.”

Providing such feedback is an excellent opportunity for the manager to work as a team with the field service representatives in developing a rationale that can be used by every employee when faced with the same situation. Doing so ensures that a common response is given to all growers, which presents the clear picture of an organized company.

Contrast this organized approach with the often expressed concern I heard while completing the research for this book: Growers many times will receive different information from two or more employees. Or that growers learn which employees to ask because their suggestions are more likely to be accepted by one employee than by another. Organizing information as suggested in this section can help minimize these differences and confusion.

Confidence

Confidence is another quality that promotes a successful working relationship. I have just completed discussion of two major ingredients in the formula that promotes confidence: trust and respect. The third ingredient is knowledge.

CONFIDENCE = TRUST + RESPECT + KNOWLEDGE

We are speaking to the technical knowledge of poultry science and being able to provide the grower up-to-date information.

Because the topic of product knowledge is discussed in detail in chapter 6 , I will mention only that this third ingredient places another responsibility on the management structure to ensure that all employees keep abreast of new developments. The speed at which technology and basic knowledge are changing today is mind-boggling and requires a structured, ongoing training process.

The issue of confidence readdresses the issue that confident people realize their limitations and readily admit to not knowing and/or making mistakes. Confident people proactively find answers and correct their mistakes.

Moments of Truth 75

Treating Everyone Fairly

It’s human nature to like some people more than others. This fact leads to the temptation to allow those growers who are liked more degrees of freedom than those who are not liked. The potential exists to listen more carefully to the preferred growers, allow them to try their ideas more frequently, and work outside company policy when it is convenient. On the other hand, those unfortunate individuals who are not liked are required to adhere to the letter of the company policies and to do as they have been instructed. Admittedly, it is more difficult to listen to someone who is not liked, and to use that person’s suggestions. The criteria, however, for using or not using the grower’s ideas needs to be based on the value of the idea rather than on who is offering the idea.

Having the reputation of playing favorites can be the kiss of death when it comes to maintaining professional relationships. It opens the door for growers to play the “necessary game”: Do that which is necessary to get on the “favorites list.”

The antidote for favoritism is being aware of the temptation to play favorites and exerting the necessary self-discipline to apply company policies and procedures consistently to all growers.

Growers similarly like some field service representatives more than others. The temptation exists to discount information from those not liked and allow these feelings to interfere with the working relationship. A more effective way is to be aware of frustration in the working relationship and to do that which is necessary to work in a win-win manner.

A grower once shared with me his technique of “testing” every new field service representative by “ranting and raving in their face” in an effort to overpower them. Many were intimidated and allowed the grower to do what he wanted to do. He thought such tactics were fun.

There is no doubt that treating everyone fairly is a difficult assignment. It is an assignment, though, that must be met to promote effective working relationships and personal integrity.

Pevfomance Evaluations

The primary purpose of this discussion is to reemphasize the importance of measuring performance. The only way to know where you are is to obtain feedback. To be maximally effective, a formalized feedback system needs to offer both parties the benefit of feedback from the other.

I have already discussed the importance of measuring in chapter 2 while using as ongoing measurement tools both the Grower-Relations Vision Statement, as the basis for grower surveys, and a flock satis-

76 Chapter 4

faction survey. But here I am proposing that the traditional procedures of informal feedback obtained while the field service representative is working with the grower, and information obtained at growers’ meetings, be the stepping-stones to formalize an additional measuring system.

Formalizing verbal feedback through an ongoing series of focus groups can also be an effective tool. This procedure varies from the discussions conducted at growers’ meetings in that an outside facilitator is used to conduct focus group discussions to interject objectivity and obtain information in an environment that may be more conducive to open and candid discussions.

Another procedure is a flock improvement plan. One field service representative showed us his procedure of evaluating the most recent flock’s performance to identify specific flock management techniques that can be used to improve the performance of the next flock. Data can be obtained from this procedure by noting the suggestions and achieved results.

Too often just mentioning the word “evaluation,” or even “collecting data,” elicits concern and even fear about how the data is to be used, if it is used at all. The best method to remove this fear is for everyone to see how the data were used to define and implement strategies for continued improvement. After all, continued improvement is the basis for an effective working relationship.

Clean Language

“It is impossible to avoid leading by example, as someone is always watching” is the reason language is considered an important moment of truth. Every word spoken by a company employee tells the listener about that employee and projects an image about the company as well.

Here is another example of the importance of values: The employee’s value system may include the use of certain four-letter words. What if the grower is offended by such trash talk? Would the use of such words represent a positive or a negative moment of truth? Would such talk be instrumental in improving the working relationship with that grower?

On the other hand, an employee can be offended by the grower’s language. Ideally, of course, the grower will also be sensitive to the employee’s value system.

Or the grower’s gutter talk can tempt the employee to engage in similar language. Resist the temptation, anyway.

Best practices include being cautious and using words other than pro- fanity, sexual innuendo, and socially or culturally sensitive expressions.

Moments of Truth 77

Emergency Procedures

It may seem rather mundane to include this topic as a special moment of truth, but you may be surprised to learn that confusion often exists about knowing whom to call during emergency situations. Consider the inclusion of this moment of truth as another reminder to ensure that everyone understands who is to be contacted during emergencies and in particular after-hour situations. As you know, being a farmer is a twenty-four-hour business, whereas company employees tend to work eight- to ten-hour shifts. Why is it that emergencies tend to schedule themselves at the most awkward moments?

As field service representatives will tell you, they are the default persons whenever the grower is in doubt about whom to call.

The suggestion offered here is to decide up front who gets called during an emergency. Create documentation to identify the emergency, the individual to be contacted, and the telephone number. Distribute this information to all concerned. The document may look something like this:

Telephone Situation Person Number

1. Problem with feed 2. Bird health 3 . Natural disasters 4. Chicks/poults not delivered 5. Live haul did not show 6. Other

Personal Relationships

Company employees represent a significant other in the lives of the growers and their families. Field service representatives in particular are an integral component in the grower’s financial web of security. My discussion of this issue will first focus on what needs to be known about the grower and his or her family. I refer to that as a “grower profile.” Then I will focus on the specific interpersonal skills necessary to promote an effective working relationship.

Knowing personal characteristics can be extremely important in a working relationship of this kind. A new grower I know of once expressed dismay about an innocent mistake made by a field service representative in reference to her sister, who happened to be visiting the farm. The field service representative continued to refer to the sister as the grower’s daughter. The grower was offended and embarrassed to the point of not being willing to correct the employee.

78 Chapter 4

We’ve asked both growers and company employees what employees

Names of family members living on the farm, their participation in farm activities, and what they do off the farm (for example, what school the children are attending). Hobbies and other outside interests (such as fishing, hunting, participation in organized sports, and civic activities). Previous experience with the poultry industry, performance history, and objectives for the farm. Other jobs and business interests, and general schedule. (Is the grower available full- or part-time on the farm? Where can the grower be contacted in case of an emergency?)

need to know about the grower and her or his family. Here’s the list:

Grower’s goals for the farm. How to work most effectively with the grower. (General remarks

Family health problems and/or handicaps. Financial status. (Is the grower profitable?) Religious preferences.

We encourage standardizing the information in a grower profile, to be maintained in the grower’s file. The grower profile is part of the product knowledge that is discussed in chapter 6-that is, basic information that company employees need to know about the grower with whom they work.

Growers also need to have information about the field service representative. Our research suggests field service representatives could prof- itably share the following information:

Formal education in poultry science. Experience in the poultry industry. Personal goals within the poultry industry. Personal hobbies. Family members and what each does. Religious preferences.

Besides gathering the kind of information just described, a company employee will also need to be prepared for a multitude of possible interpersonal moments of truth. Listed below are the major behaviors that my research deemed important.

on the grower’s values, personality; work habits, and so on.)

A Friendly Greeting and Using the Grower’s Name The importance of a smile cannot be overemphasized. Everyone has one to share. Most everyone likes to receive one. As basic as it seems, the smile tells the other person you appreciate the opportunity to interact.

Moments of Truth 79

Yes, there are times when one really does not feel like putting on a smile. Funny thing about smiling and being friendly to others-you are always the first to benefit from your own acts of kindness. Actually being nice to others on those emotionally down days can increase your emotional energy.

The issue of emotional consistency is also relevant to this discussion. Waiting to see the person’s mood before deciding how to interact with him or her is not necessarily conducive to an effective working relationship. Yes, everyone has emotional ups and downs, but it behooves us to strive for emotional consistency. It is okay even to admit you’re having a “bad day,” as long as you don’t take it out on anyone,

Dale Carnegie reminded us that the sound of one’s name is sweet mu- sic to the ears. You are reminded of that fact whenever you are incor- rectly called by the wrong name, or when you’re embarrassed at calling someone else by the wrong name. There is something magical about a name, and people do like to hear their own.

A Handshake You receive a definite impression about a person by how that person shakes your hand. The simple act of shaking hands has changed in nature over the years, and here I am speaking of the traditional handshake, where both individuals’ hands are parallel to each other. Let me present three categories of the traditional handshake: soft; a firm, about-right handshake; and the knuckle cruncher.

I encourage people to pay attention to the pressure being exerted during a handshake. A firm handshake sends the message of equal partners in the interaction. A very soft, limp handshake communicates a lack of assertiveness, strength, and self-confidence. It is essentially a submissive interaction.

Then there is the overpowering, knuckle-crunching handshake. The hand is squeezed too tightly and the arm is pumped too aggressively. The message being communicated is one of aggression and dominance.

There is another interesting characteristic about the psychological sig- nificance of the handshake. A dominant position is communicated when you project your hand with the palm facing down, thereby requiring the other person to shake your hand with the palm facing upward. If you want to communicate the position of an equal partner, use the old- fashioned handshake with the hands parallel to each other.

Eye Contact Eye contact is another important act of communication. Making eye-to- eye contact sends the message of honesty, acceptance, and that you enjoy

80 Chapter 4

the interaction. Eye contact is especially important during the initial greeting.

Avoiding eye contact gives the impression of not being confident, or of something being hidden. Obviously, neither one of these promote an effective interpersonal moment of truth.

On the other hand, intense eye contact that stares the other person down is likewise uncomfortable. It’s as if the recipient is being placed in a submissive position, which also sabotages the interaction.

The bottom line is to “watch your eyes’’ and use them to promote an open, accepting interpersonal interaction.

A Sense of Humor Part of the research for this book included riding with field service representatives to visit farms. These employees were always asked about the necessary characteristics of a good field service representative. A common response was a sense of humor: laugh; have fun working with growers.

Everyone has a sense of humor-to varying degrees. It is also possible to continue improving one’s sense of humor by looking for something funny in every situation. Learn to laugh at yourself, as well. Instead of being embarrassed by some silly, ridiculous thing that has happened to you, share it with others to enjoy the humor. Doing so sends a message of being confident and open. Most of us don’t have to look very far to find one of these experiences.

I had a routine (like many other people) of going into the gas station to pay for gas after filling my car. One time, after paying for the gas, I promptly drove away. On this particular day I had to enter the gas station while gas was being pumped. Now, what was my routine while in the station? Pay for the gas, return to the car, and drive away. You guessed it. There was a thumpety-thump sound, and when looking back in the rearview mirror to investigate the sound, I saw an individual standing and staring helplessly after the car. Sure enough, there was the hose strung out on the ground and the nozzle sticking out of the gas tank.

Research indicates that laughter elicits biochemical changes that promote physical health. The positive effect of laughter upon emotional health is, of course, well-known. Nothing feels better than a good old belly laugh during those tense moments when stress has stopped being our friend and is acting more like an enemy.

Research also shows that the average adult laughs seventeen times a day in contrast to the three hundred times the average six-year-old laughs per day. Adults say that the cruel realities of the workday beat the laughter out of the body. Here is one instance we would benefit from listening to our children and taking their advice-laugh frequently.

Moments of Truth 81

This next point may initially appear to contradict the advice to laugh, but it doesn’t. Be careful interjecting humor into a conversation dealing with a serious subject matter. This humor may be interpreted as a sign of nervousness. It may also be seen as evidence that the conversation isn’t being taken as seriously as it should. Either way, the humor may interfere with the discussion.

There is no magic formula for when you should inject humor-trial and error will be your best teacher. When in doubt, though, it is always best to exercise caution. And a final caveat, to be on the safe side: Keep the humor clean.

Asking Questions about Family Members One of the most effective interpersonal tools is to talk in terms of the other person’s interests. This maxim speaks to the importance of the grower and employee profiles. Stay in touch with family events and ask about them, especially when there is a medical concern or other family emergency.

Talking about family matters shows you care. Now that I’ve said that, let me also issue a caution. Some individuals

are more willing to talk about such matters than others. Be sensitive to that fact by asking an initial question and then gauging how much information the other person is willing to share. That person will communicate a willingness to discuss the matter by remaining on the subject, or will conveniently switch the conversation to another topic. Whatever the lead, follow it.

Discussing Hobbies The point about discussing the other person’s interests also pertains to discussing hobbies. In some respects hobbies are less personal and may be an easier subject to discuss than family matters. Remember that such discussions are great opportunities to show your interest in the other person. Most people like to know that other people find them interesting.

Discussing Other Farm Operations This point probably goes without saying, but it’s offered here as a reminder. Here is a chance to discuss a subject that will surely be of interest: the other operations of the farm. Your abiding curiosity in these things tells the grower you are aware of and interested in the farm as a whole, and this will make a positive lasting impression.

Letting the Other Person Dictate the Pace of the Conversation I’ve had field service representatives tell me that to visit each of their farms in a given week would allow them about ten minutes of quality conversation with each grower.

82 Chapter 4

It’s a given fact that everyone has too much to do and too little time to do it in. Rushing through a conversation is an effective way of telling the person she or he is not important. That’s not the message you want to convey.

With practice you can be in a hurry but act as if you have plenty of time. When visiting the farm act as if that farm is the most important farm to be visited today. While there, be certain the grower has the opportunity to discuss questions or concerns. In those instances in which time is severely limited, let the person know that at the beginning of the conversation. You will find that most people will even help you monitor your time.

Teaching

Field service representatives are in the pivotal position of being a teacher to the growers. To be maximally effective, the teacher must be liked, trusted, and respected and must demonstrate knowledge of the poultry industry.

There are several characteristics the employee must assume to be an effective teacher in this situation. The first is patience. Having knowledge can be both a blessing and a curse. It’s a blessing because of the opportunity to help those who need the knowledge, and a curse when those who need it resist accepting it. The resistance may stem from not understanding the information or the benefits to the grower, or the grower may simply not have confidence in the teacher. The end result is the same-a very frustrated employee.

A popular approach to managing this frustration is to become more demanding and dictatorial. With continued resistance from the grower, the words “You will do it my way” will quickly flow from one’s mouth. These words merely add fuel to the fire. Growers have a tremendous financial and emotional investment in their farm and generally do not like to be told what to do.

There is a better way. Being patient requires the management of one’s emotions, which in turn requires employees to issue a set of self- instructions. They must literally tell themselves to remain calm, relaxed, and in control. They can follow these instructions by, first, changing their posture. There is a natural tendency to become tense and physi- cally more rigid when frustrated and defensive. Assuming a more comfortable posture to relax the muscles can actually reduce tension and frustration.

Ask questions to learn more about the grower’s objections. Doing so provides the opportunity to address these concerns. Obtaining the neces-

Moments of Truth 83

sary information to respond to any concerns can actually improve the employee’s knowledge of the subject matter, and answering the questions increases the probability of your advice being accepted.

An effective teacher knows the limits of his or her knowledge. Ques- tions can be asked that challenge that knowledge, and it is important to be comfortable saying, “That is a good question, and I don’t have the answer. I’ll find out for our next conversation on this subject.” Not knowing is not a weakness. Instead, it is a sign of strength and confidence.

It’s easy to expect other people to accept quickly any advice being offered on improving flock performance-and surprising when that does not happen. It will be to your advantage always to prepare for some initial resistance in order to be in a position to respond to all questions and concerns immediately. Anticipate the questions to be asked and prepare your responses in advance. Here is another opportunity for the team of employees to work together and conduct a brainstorming session to identify questions growers will ask. Preparing answers as a team will improve the quality of the answers.

The teacher, though, is also a student. The employee must be willing to learn from the professional grower.

One thing is certain: The farm is a classroom providing ample opportunities for all parties to continue their learning.

Reluctant Growers

How do you manage a grower who does not do what has been agreed upon in advance? For example, I visited a house that was supposed to be ready to receive a flock of chicks. The birds were scheduled to be at the farm in a couple of hours. The house was not ready. The shutters and fans were dirty. Fans were not in the side wall. Lightbulbs were dirty. There was an insufficient amount of litter, and the old litter was not adequately removed.

According to the field service representative the grower knew what preparations were required to receive the new flock. What would you do?

Given this example, company personnel attending the grower- relations seminars offered responses that varied from refusing to place the birds if there was another farm ready to receive them, to placing the birds and penalizing the grower by extending the out time between flocks.

Conflicts are inherent in every working relationship. Regardless of what one might think, conflicts are not the problem. How we work with the conflict is the problem.

There are five commonly used strategies to resolve conflicts. Each

84 Chapter 4

High t A S S E R T I V E

Compete

Compromise

1 Avoid

Collaborate

Accommodate

Low I High

FIGURE 4.1. Strategies to resolve conflicts.

strategy is based on a combination of two behavioral dimensions: assert- ing oneself, and cooperating with others (figure 4.1).

As you read the following descriptions of each strategy, you will note that each can be your friend as well as your enemy, depending upon whether it is over- or underused. Our goal is to learn when to use each strategy appropriately. To learn more about how you use these strategies, we encourage you to contact Xicom Incorporated, 60 Woods Road, Tuxedo, New York 10987, to purchase a copy of the Thomas- Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument. This instrument helps you recognize how frequently you use each of the five strategies. For the purposes of this book I will summarize each of the five strategies and their associated uses.

Avoid This strategy is based on the failure to assert one’s opinion, as well as to cooperate.

When this strategy is inappropriately used, every effort is made to avoid the conflict. Issues that need to be addressed are not. Avoiding the conflict often allows very important issues to magnify in intensity and creates a working climate of not making decisions-or of decisions being made by default. Both parties lose under these circumstances, since neither receives the benefit of the other person’s thinking.

As you might imagine, the personal reputation of the employee who overuses this strategy suffers greatly and becomes known as deserting the kitchen when the fire gets hot.

Moments of Truth 85

There is an emotional price associated with this strategy. The user generally feels a great deal of frustration for not being assertive enough to work with the issue successfully. This in turn may adversely impact feelings of self-worth and confidence.

On the other hand, there are issues that need to be avoided. Perhaps the issue simply does not warrant your involvement. In the scheme of things, it’s no big deal.

Another time avoiding can be the preferred choice is during a heated discussion, when both parties need a cooling-off period so that the ultimate decision can be based on logic rather than on emotions.

Accommodate The strategy to accommodate is based on low assertiveness and high cooperation.

Overusing this strategy can result in the same emotional price as that of the avoidance strategy-frustration and loss of self-respect. The net result is submitting to the other person’s demands, thereby creating the I lose-you win working relationship.

The negative impact upon the working relationship by overusing this strategy includes depriving others of the benefit of your thinking and failing to achieve even a part of your objectives.

From a personal standpoint this strategy leads to your acquiring the reputation of not having the courage to stand up for what you think is right. Others learn to get what they want from you by offering only a little resistance.

On the other hand, this can be a very useful strategy if it is the basis of respect for others. There may be no harm done, necessarily, by allowing others to try their ideas. It may even be a better best way!

Using this strategy increases the likelihood that the other person will be more amenable to those situations in which you have to use a more assertive strategy. You can see the obvious human-relation advantages this strategy provides. You lose some to win at another time.

There are other situations, as well, when this strategy is the appropriate choice. It would be to your advantage to agree with the other person when recognizing that your viewpoint is wrong, or is simply not being accepted, and you run the risk of sabotaging the working relationship. For example, the grower’s superior knowledge of his farm may encourage using this strategy.

Sometimes the difference between the avoid and accommodate strategies is not very clear. The major difference is the willingness to discuss the issue when using the accommodation strategy. There is not even an attempt to discuss the issue when it is being avoided.

86 Chapter 4

Compete The underlying intent of this strategy is “I win, you lose. ” This is a very assertive strategy, with little if any cooperation.

As with the other approaches, overusing this strategy can damage working relationships. It creates a great deal of fear and intimidation, driving the other person to withhold important information. For example, growers may withhold information about mistakes or other occur- rences that adversely affect flock performance.

Furthermore, the user of this strategy acquires the reputation of habitually exhibiting “my way” thinking. A negative consequence of this reputation is not learning about the creative ideas of others. Addition- ally, others may simply do things without telling you. The net result is the loss of a learning opportunity.

Then again there will be circumstances when using this strategy is very appropriate. For example, a quick decision may be needed to protect the flock’s health or performance. Or, based on the field service representative’s work with other growers, he or she knows someone else’s idea is right for the situation.

With some sympathy the field service representative can encourage the grower to accept the idea when it is offered by saying something like, “I know you do (may) not agree with my decision, but I am asking you to trust me on this one. I, like you, want what is best for the flock’s performance, and this decision will improve that performance.” Contrast what you’ve just read with the more dictatorial message that sounds something like, “Regardless of what you might think, this is the way it will be done.” There is no question as to which is the more grower friendly.

The challenge is to think of grower-friendly words during the heat of the discussion. An excellent technique to increase the likelihood of being user friendly is to practice. Write a script to use in such situations, and practice the script. Driving time offers a great opportunity to do this. Role-play various scenarios in the privacy of your pickup.

The final topic of this section includes steps to remain calm; you will find these suggestions helpful whenever you struggle to control your emotions.

Compromise If you review figure 4.1, you will note that accommodation is midway on both dimensions of assertiveness and cooperation. As you read the following information, note that the parties involved win some as well as lose some.

The usual goal of using this strategy is to find a “quick fix”- something both parties can live with right away. The problem with overusing the strategy, though, is acquiring the reputation that everything

Moments of Truth 87

is negotiable with you, and that you won’t stand up for what is right. Fur- thermore, long-term goals are sacrificed in favor of short-term thinking.

Compromising can help the user buy time to reach the long-term solution. Placing the chicks until the grower effects the more permanent solution of adequately preparing the house could be a good compromise.

This strategy can also be appropriate when dealing with an issue that is of moderate importance to both you and the grower. Reach a solution and move on, even though a better solution could probably have been secured with more time and thought.

Collaborate This strategy represents the epitome of a partnership because the final decision meets everyone’s needs. It is based on a win-win foundation.

However, it can also be overused to the detriment of the working relationship. Relying solely on this strategy can consume valuable time on trivial matters, because no decision is made until everyone offers input and a solution can be found that meets everyone’s needs.

This strategy can also be a ploy to avoid the responsibility of taking risks with a speedier decision. When that happens, you may acquire a reputation of trying to please everyone while avoiding having to make a decision. People can easily become disgruntled because every minor issue gets talked to death before anything can happen.

When used appropriately, however, collaboration is a powerful tool. It allows the affected parties to participate in the decision-making process, which thereby increases the probability that the final decision will be supported. In the process of making the decision, there is also the added benefit for both the grower and company employee to learn from each other while finding a solution.

Collaborating is based on several skills, some of which we’ve already discussed. First, there is the willingness to listen to each other’s points of view. That requires a candid, free-flowing information exchange without the fear of intimidation or reprisal. Second is the willingness to make decisions based on the facts of the case. As you know, that requires keeping an open mind to consider all options.

The Conflict-Resolving Process I am also advocating that a formal policy be established outlining proce- dural steps to resolve conflicts with growers. Most of the employees who shared information during the discussion of this topic in the grower- relation seminars noted that their company has an unwritten policy to follow the line of authority. The conflict moves to the live production manager if it is not resolved at the field service level. The next step would be to the complex manager.

88 Chapter 4

I encourage the establishment of written policy and procedures to clarify the process. The following two examples are a couple of procedures that were shared with me in seminars. I do not advocatethe adoption of either procedure but report them here for illustrative purposes only.

First example

1. The grower presents the complaint in writing to the field service representative or broiler manager within two days of the occurrence.

2. If the issue is not resolved within three days at this level, the grower can notify the live production manager and/or complex manager in writing, who has five days to respond in writing. Fol- lowing the written response, the parties have three days to resolve the issue.

3 . If the issue is not resolved, either the grower or the complex manager may request that the complaint be referred to a mediation committee by giving the other party a written notice of such a request within two days of the action completed in step 2.

4. Both the grower and company have two days to select their representative for the mediation committee. The grower shall select another grower, and the company selects another employee. Both parties are to be independent of the issue. These two members will select a third member within two days.

5 . The three-person mediation committee has five days to meet, review the facts, interview interested parties, and submit a recommendation to the grower and company.

6 . If the issue is not mutually resolved, either party has two days to submit the issue to binding bilateral arbitration in accordance with the Rules of the American Arbitration Association.

Second example. This second example provides slightly less structure

1. The grower consults with the field service representative to seek resolution of the problem.

2. If not resolved at this level, the grower is asked to contact the broiler manager, breeder hatchery manager, or live production manager.

3 . The grower is asked to contact the complex manager should the issue not be resolved in step 2.

4. The grower can issue a written request for a committee of three fellow growers and two managers to resolve the issue should the complex manager not be able to resolve it.

than the first, but is still an effective option.

Moments of Truth 89

5 . The growers on the committee are randomly selected from a pool of qualified participants who have been trained in hearing and resolving conflicts. The complex manager will select two company managers to participate in the session, with one being designated the group leader. The committee listens to the issue and conducts a subsequent meeting to reach a consensus to resolve the issue. The committee then meets with the grower and the complex manager to report the decision.

Ideally, of course, neither procedure will be frequently used. Having a procedure available simply offers both parties the security of an organized process to resolve differences.

Personal Skills Before leaving this topic, let’s examine the struggle to remain emotionally in control.

It is easy to allow emotions to run out of control during moments of open conflict. Whenever that happens, you can quickly enter into “I’ll protect me” behaviors that can sabotage conflict resolution. Such behaviors include the following:

The employee stops listening to the grower and instead listens to his or her inner emotional reaction, which often involves a tightening in the stomach, anger, and thoughts that “I am losing control.” Anger intensifies and neither party is listening to the other. Words may be spoken that are later regretted. The employee moves into the power position and uses the conflict strategy to attack the opponent: “You’ll do as I say because I am right.” Or the employee may exit the conversation to escape from the situation. Nobody wins in this scenario.

If the discussion escalates to these proportions, then it probably is wise to use the “avoid” strategy to allow everyone a cooling-off period before a decision based on logic can prevail.

There is a better way, which you might want to begin practicing. The following guidelines can assist you to maintain emotional control:

Tell yourself to remain calm and emotionally in control. Use the other person’s name as frequently as possible. Talk in a softer voice. Empathize with the other person’s point of view. Demonstrate your understanding by paraphrasing what you have heard.

90 Chapter 4

Relax your body as it tends to become rigid during stressful mo-

Remember the objective to find a workable solution based on the ments. Assume a more comfortable position.

facts of the situation.

Grower Recognition

Most if not all companies have a formal program to recognize the grower of the month, quarter, and/or year. The most common is the annual grower appreciation dinner and/or company picnic. This formal recognition is usually accompanied by an article in the company newsletter.

Recognition is always good for the ego-but still more can be done. There is another recognition procedure that begs to be mentioned,

and that is a day-to-day “Thank you for doing a good job.” Everyone needs positive feedback, and there are a couple of opportunities to give such feedback that need special mention: service reports and grower meetings.

Many growers told us about critical remarks written on service reports that document the field service representative’s visit. Rarely is the service ticket used to document positive recognition for a job well done.

The service report is a communication tool to document instructions pertaining to flock performance or other related matters. As you are about to see, there are many ways to say the same thing; thus, writing service reports can be an excellent training session to improve the company’s moments of truth. For example, let’s consider several ways to write instructions to adjust the height of the waterers.

“The waterers need to be raised. Raise the height by one inch.” “Why have you not raised the waterers by one inch?” “Raising the waterers by one inch will make it easier for your birds

I’m sure the psychological message inherent in each statement is clear. Yes, it may take a couple extra words and seconds to write the third statement, but the positive human-relations benefit is certainly worth the extra time.

In addition, the service ticket can be used to recognize positive contributions. For example:

to drink. Thanks for attending to this matter.”

“Thank you for raising the waterers. That improves bird perfor-

“I also want to thank you for . . .” “I noticed that you . . . that’s great!”

mance.”

Moments of Truth 91

The regularly scheduled grower meetings represent another opportunity to recognize growers. Growers of the month and quarter can certainly receive more immediate recognition. It can also be a time of sharing. For example, ask certain growers if they would lead the discussion on particular topics or share some phase of their management techniques (confidentiality is maintained, as the grower can always decline the invitation).

Another form of recognition is to follow up on issues discussed at these meetings. Such action sends the message “You are important.” There is no question about the importance of these meetings, even though both growers and company personnel have reported that the growers who could benefit the most from these meetings often do not attend. Keep the meetings on schedule, anyway.

The bottom line is to use every opportunity to pat growers on the back for a job well done. An interesting phenomenon may happen: We tend to receive that which we share with others, so don’t be surprised if the growers pick up the practice and begin offering the company and its employees “pats on the back” for jobs well done.

Grower-Relations Moments of Truth Manual

I encourage you to put your moments of truth in a training manual to be used for ongoing training with employees and growers. It can also serve as an integral component of the orientation procedure for prospective employees and growers. The manual tells the reader what is expected.

The manual is under constant revision as you identify improvements in the existing moments of truth, as well as identify new ones that you want to incorporate into your grower-relations corporate culture.

The content of this manual contains the heart and soul of the grower- relations corporate culture.

Bird's-Eye View

This chapter focuses on growers' descriptions of

the ideal working relationship between them and

each department of the complex.

Many of these descriptions complement the

moments of truth discussed in chapter 4.

Each company and its respective growers are

encouraged to describe their ideal working

relationship.

93



Growers Speak to the Issue of Creating the Ideal Company- Grower Working Relationship

Is the best ever good enough?

n this chapter I approach the moments of truth regulating the I company-grower working relationship from another perspective: by asking growers to describe their ideal working relationship with each department of the complex. The following information summarizes their descriptions and is being offered to stimulate thought as you begin your efforts to improve the moments of truth in your own grower-company working relationship.

Live Production

Consistent Information

The growers expressed a need to receive consistent information regardless of which field service representative the grower is talking to. The variability in information offered by different field service representatives can be confusing.

The challenge for live production in particular, and for the complex in general, is to identify these inconsistencies and standardize the information being disseminated. There are a couple of ways to do this. First, the live production personnel should identify the crucial moments of truth in terms of poultry science practices and, as a team, decide what is to be communicated to the grower. Second, the company needs to ask those growers who have worked with different field service representatives to identify the instances in which they were given inconsistent information.

Regardless of the particular procedure selected to identify inconsistent information, you will want to institutionalize an ongoing process to keep this information up to date. It is in everyone’s best interests to make sure inconsistent information is kept to a minimum, if not prevented altogether.

94

The Ideal Company-Grower Relationship 95

Continuity of Field Service Representative

Growers want the same field service representative for obvious reasons. First is the importance of receiving consistent information, as discussed in the preceding section. Second is creating teamwork. Both parties learn what to expect from each other. When the chemistry in the relationship is working, trust can quickly emerge.

Many growers mentioned the need to train inexperienced field service representatives-even those who are college trained. Some of the issues that have emerged with inexperienced field service representatives are

Using medication as the panacea for all problems. Giving inappropriate instructions that adversely impact flock per-

Adjusting equipment without the grower’s awareness and/or approval. Arrogantly acting as if they know it all.

Once the field service representative is “trained,” it is easier to continue working with someone whom you know, and with whom a relationship has been established.

formance.

Listening to the Growers

Growers live with their farms. They know the idiosyncrasies of each house. Veteran growers have years of knowledge. They have obtained the equivalent of a doctorate by attending classes on the farm. Many are also college educated. A grower is every bit as much of a professional as other college-educated people and expects to be recognized as such.

Additionally, the growers have hundreds of thousands of dollars in- vested in their poultry operations. They want to be recognized for their investment and the associated risks.

Growers are asking to be recognized as partners. They want to be involved in making those decisions that affect their flock performance and bottom line profitability-which leads us to the next moment of truth in the ideal working relationship.

Asking the Growers’ Advice

Growers want to be asked for their opinion. One of the most frustrating elements in the working relationship is a field service representative who dictatorially tells the grower what to do. In a general sense most people do not like to be told what to do, and neither do most growers.

Growers have told me about the service reports and the constant “to do” lists regardless of what has been completed. Growers have men-

96 Chapter 5

tioned field service representatives who walk through the houses looking for burned-out lightbulbs and other questionable items rather than offering suggestions for improving flock performance. Perhaps one grower put it best when he said, “Field service representatives should act like consultants to help us grow better birds rather than as policemen to find something wrong.” Even pointing out such things as the need to replace a lightbulb can be done in a manner to suggest improvements rather than to identify what is wrong. The psychological message growers want to receive is that the field service representatives, or other employees, are there to help the growers be more profitable rather than to discover whatever problems they suspect may exist.

Growers want field service representatives to offer suggestions rather than to demand. And we’ve already discussed the most powerful tool to use when offering a suggestion-phrase it in a question: “What do you think would happen if we did . . . ? ”

Keeping the Growers Informed

This issue was discussed in some detail within the section pertaining to trust and is mentioned here as a reminder of the ideal working relationship. Growers want to be kept informed about such crucial issues as bird diseases, biosecurity practices, and how the settlement check is calculated. Other items mentioned by growers were flock characteristics of the chicks/poults, the schedules for bird delivery, and live haul.

The courtesy of being kept informed builds trust and shows the growers you care enough to ensure they have the information they need.

Empathy

Does the field service representative act as though she or he understands the grower’s risks of being a farmer? Several growers suggested that the field service representative’s first year of training ought to consist of growing birds to acquire a better understanding of the grower’s life.

The impact of a field service representative utterly lacking in empathy is illustrated in two stories shared with me by growers.

One grower had something go wrong with his flock-to this day no one is quite certain what-but the end result was a loss of some three thousand birds. The field service representative told the grower, “That loss is no big deal-you still have some fifteen thousand birds!”

Another grower was told by his field service representative, “Your problem is you’re trying to treat growing birds as a business!”

Obviously, both stories point out the need to educate company personnel about the financial characteristics of the business.


Perhaps the issue of being empathetic can best be illustrated in the words of one grower who said, “I know the field service representative understands my problems when she comes in and works with me.”

Authority

The benefits of empowering field service representatives to make decisions on the farm cannot be overemphasized. I’ve heard of several instances in which the service representative had to check with his or her supervisor about issues before a decision was made. Of course, doing so consumes valuable time. There is also the risk that the issue will not return to the farm and will get lost in the company’s bureaucracy.

Several field service representatives and growers mentioned the frustration of making a joint decision only to have that decision overturned by a supervisor. Such instances are rich learning opportunities to decide who does have the authority to make decisions. Efforts to improve grower relations will also include the necessary training to make decisions closer to the grower, which is the focus of chapter 7 .

Positive Attitude

The final characteristic of a grower’s ideal working relationship with live production was the need for the field service representative to be positive and supportive. A positive attitude, of course, means smiling, exchang- ing friendly greetings, being generally supportive of other departments in the company, expressing optimism that the grower can improve flock performance, and recognizing the grower for a job well done. I’ve discussed this last issue previously, but the importance of such a psychological incentive is worth repeating.

Live Haul

Cleanliness

A major frustration for many growers is the litter left behind by the live haul crew. Growers mentioned the soft-drink cans, wrappers, and even toilet paper strewn about their farm.

Growers recognize that catching birds is not the most desirable job, and the task of employing people who will complete the job responsibly can be a real challenge. They try to be empathetic to the company’s dilemma but in turn want the crew to respect their farm.

Some growers have reported positive results by providing soft drinks and other food items for the crew. Others have successfully provided

98 Chapter 5

Porta Pottis. Several growers told us the crew is more responsible when the grower is present to monitor catching the birds.

Field service representatives and live haul managers have told us they randomly show up at farms to observe the catching crew. Doing so places additional accountability on the catching crew to respect the farm.

Biosecurity

The growers want to know that best practices are being implemented to prevent the spread of disease. Biosecurity practices are obviously more of a concern during times of disease outbreaks. The concern is whether the trucks and equipment are cleaned upon leaving one farm and before entering the next. Growers also want to be assured that employees change clothes between jobs.

In general, they want assurances that everything possible is being done to prevent the spread of disease.

Scheduling Information

There are two facets of scheduling that were mentioned when growers described their ideal working relationship with live haul. The first was adhering to the schedule or informing the growers about changes. The second was knowing when only part of the flock is going to be picked up.

Growers know that some variability is going to occur as a natural practice of doing business. But a major change in the live haul schedule can be frustrating when the grower is waiting for the live haul crew to arrive. In addition to personal frustration, the delay has an impact on the flock, which is without food and water. Perhaps a policy could be implemented to inform growers about delays that exceed a certain amount of time.

Another aspect of the scheduling procedure is knowing what determines the time of day the birds are caught on a given farm. Some growers have asked why their birds are always picked up at a specific time. Informing growers about how the pickup schedule is determined can at least remove one perplexing question for some.

Another aspect that often leaves the grower wondering is when only part of the flock is picked up. Growers want to be informed about the need to pick up only part of the flock. Efforts to inform the grower about a partial pickup prior to the live haul crew’s arriving on the farm will be appreciated and alleviate some frustration.

Every delay is perceived to have a negative impact upon the grower’s financial bottom line, thereby constituting a negative moment of truth. Finding a way to keep the grower informed can minimize the impact of delays that will inevitably occur.


Catching Birds

Catching and handling birds constitute a major moment of truth. The grower has diligently worked with the flock for several weeks and wants others to treat the birds with the same level of respect.

To ensure understanding on the grower’s part, the best practices taught to the crew can be shared with the grower. For example, how close does the crew need to be to the cage to place the bird safely?

Another issue of concern is the expected number of bird fatalities during catching. What is the company’s policy about paying for these fatalities? The importance of defining a procedure to continually educate growers was highlighted during a focus group discussion in which several growers admitted not knowing their company’s policy of paying for dead birds.

Weighing Birds

I’ve heard numerous stories of birds remaining in trucks for several hours before they were weighed at the processing plant. One such story had the birds left on the truck for eighteen hours before being weighed. The message inherent in such stories is a lack of knowledge about the standardized procedure for weighing birds.

Again, the challenge is to seize the opportunity to ask growers what is the best way for them to be certain the birds remain on the truck a reasonable amount of time before arriving at the scales. Do growers need to tour the facilities to observe the actual practice? Could the field service representative or other company employee provide a description or compile data to show the actual time lapse between flocks arriving at the plant and the time of weighing?

The confusion apparent in this discussion concerning live haul issues illustrates the importance of teaching growers about all facets of the plant. Confusion stems from lack of knowledge. Taking the time to educate can be a great investment.

Feed Mill

Feed Quality

Feed and water are the two ingredients that drive the growth of the bird. The fact that the growers have more direct control over the quality of water than over the quality of feed probably explains some of the their concerns about feed quality. Occasionally the birds will not eat the delivered feed, or growers have heard about such incidents from their peers, which causes further concern about feed quality.

100 Chapter 5

Listening to the growers’ concerns about feed quality is another critical interaction in the working relationship. Any behavior that even hints at an unwillingness to listen to such legitimate concerns leads to the sus- picion that something is wrong, or that there is a deep, dark secret no one is supposed to know about.

The company wants high-quality feed, as does the grower. Growers want to know the feed ingredients. Sharing this information may require a review of the company’s policy. If there is a company policy that pre- vents the sharing of this information, then perhaps revisiting the benefits of the policy with the growers would be beneficial.

Another approach to assure the growers about the quality of the feed is to provide tours of the facility and explain the quality-assurance process being implemented to prepare the feed.

Growers have mentioned receiving feed that has a mold; then they are responsible for purchasing whatever is needed to cure the problem. The question inevitably asked is, “Why is the grower solely responsible financially for correcting a problem created by the company?” As both parties continue working together to improve the grower-company working relationship, practices that seem to place a burden on either party need to be examined.

Feed Schedule

In this high-tech world it is sometimes difficult to remain high touch. For example, those instances when the grower needs feed yet the computerized schedule indicates otherwise provide crucial moments of truth that need to be managed. Which does the feed mill personnel believe-the grower or computer?

Other issues raised by growers include the following:

1. Sometimes a grower will place a call to order feed, but that request will be superseded by another grower who waited to call when she was completely out of feed. The second grower, of course, did not follow established practices, but the grower who followed the rules gets penalized.

2. A grower places a second call to order feed when his first call did not result in a delivery. The grower gets charged for calling in late when the first call was made within the scheduled time line.

On the other hand, company personnel will tell you about the grower who starts calling several days prior to the time when he or she needs feed. Now we’ve returned to the importance of trust and respect on both sides of the working relationship. Such incidences need to be discussed


with everyone involved so growers can decide how to work with other growers who play games with the schedule.

Such reported frustrations provide excellent opportunities to improve the working relationship. Perhaps policies need to be revisited to make certain everyone understands and behaves in accordance with the rules. For example, company policy may stipulate that a grower who is out of feed take scheduling precedence over one who has called in to order feed but who is not out. Everyone needs to understand that the intent of such a policy is to ensure that no one runs completely out of feed, or at least that the time when feed is not available to a bird is minimized. This policy is an attempt to benefit all growers.

Then, too, the feed mill may need to revisit its procedure to work with growers when necessity requires a change in the schedule. A powerful moment of truth would be to call the grower and explain the revised delivery schedule based on the new set of circumstances. The grower will certainly appreciate the call that communicates the feed mill cares.

1 don’t have to remind you that caring is one fuel source that drives the success of the working relationship.

Truck Drivers

A couple of issues emerged regarding truck drivers. The first was a concern over the drivers respecting the farm and equipment. The truck should be kept on the road as much as possible. Other moments of truth mentioned by growers were informing a grower when damage has occurred during the feed delivery process, ensuring the feed bins are closed, and practicing biosecurity procedures.

The second issue pertains to inexperienced truck drivers. Asking the grower how to operate the truck has the tendency to erode confidence in the working relationship. Not a positive moment .of truth, to say the least.

The Hatchery

Keeping the Growers Informed

Concerning the hatchery, communication issues emerge once again, and there are several to be addressed in this section.

First, the growers like to be kept informed about the schedule, and changes to the schedule, to deliver chicks or poults. Growers, of course, understand that the best-planned schedules can go awry, thereby dictating schedule changes. But they generally would like for either the driver or the hatchery to let them know when to expect their birds, at least within the technological capabilities of the company.

102 Chapter 5

Second, growers want to know about flock characteristics. Chick and poult quality is a major issue, for obvious reasons. In essence, the question is, What flock characteristics can be shared with the grower? There may be reasons why flock characteristics cannot be shared, and these reasons should be explained to the grower. For example, some growers told us that their company purchases additional birds from another company. For whatever reason the perception was the birds from this hatchery did not perform well. The growers asked that these chicks be distributed to all farmers instead of to only a few. In this instance the company could benefit by explaining its practice of purchasing birds from another hatchery and the procedures by which those birds are distributed to its growers.

Then there is the psychology of knowing, or at least thinking you know. A field service representative once admitted giving a grower inaccurate information regarding the flock characteristics of some chicks. Believing that the chicks came from a high-quality flock, the grower experienced birds that actually performed remarkably well.

The Pygmalion effect is a well-documented event-people perform according to expectations. One of the earliest studies indicating as much occurred in the classroom. Students with identical intelligence scores were randomly assigned to classrooms. The teachers were told which students were supposedly exceptionally intelligent. Interestingly enough, these students achieved higher levels of success over the course of the academic year than did their peers. Even their intelligence test scores showed greater increases than did those of their counterparts.

The same effect occurs in the working environment. If a supervisor expects an employee to perform well, that employee generally meets those expectations.

This field service representative basically suggested that the same phenomenon can happen in the poultry industry. That is, if the grower thinks the birds originated from a high-quality flock, then their performance just might reflect the growers’ expectations. Quite frankly, this does suggest an interesting research project-though perhaps not a practical one. Several characteristics might be monitored under experimental conditions during the grow-out period: health, feed conversion, grower’s concerns, and so on, to study the Pygmalion effect, the impact of which would be of interest to all parties.

The third issue pertains to the logic of regulating routes. Growers mentioned that the truck comes close to their farm without placing the birds, then shows up several hours later. Because the grower understandably wants to place the birds as quickly as possible, it is logical to wonder why the birds were not placed when the truck passed the farm the first time. Describing how the routes are decided may be an agenda item for the next growers’ meeting.


Placing Birds

Several issues have been identified by growers concerning bird placement. Most growers would like to know if the grower or driver decides the order of which birds are placed in the houses. Growers have expressed an interest in making this decision.

Let’s use this example to illustrate the conflict resolution strategies previously discussed. Is this a decision that would best be left to the growers? If so, then accommodate the growers by allowing them to make that decision. If not, and there are valid reasons for the driver to make the decision, then the reasons should be communicated so the rationale can be more fully understood.

The second concern is that growers prefer to put birds from one flock in the same house, as opposed to separate houses. Again, if there are reasons driving the decision to split the birds, then growers would surely appreciate knowing the reasons. But perhaps this is a chance to accommodate the grower by a more homogeneous placement of birds.

The third concern is understanding the rationale for split loads. Pro- vide whatever reason dictates the need to split the load. At least hearing the reasons can help reduce some of the growers’ confusion and associated frustration.

Creating Your Own Ideal Working Relationship

The point made throughout this book is the importance of the company and grower defining their own ideal working relationship by writing a Grower-Relations Vision Statement and identifying crucial moments of truth. Then put these words into action.

6

Bird’s-Eye View

Product knowledge is knowing enough to

successfully complete one’s job responsibilities.

Product knowledge consists of two categories:

Training and testing are the two essential tools

companywide and department specific.

to ensure that employees have the needed

product knowledge.

Department-specific product knowledge includes

knowledge of live production, live haul,

hatchery, and feed mill.

105



Knowing What Needs to Be Known

Never underestimate the importance of knowing what one needs to know to be a high performer.

ommunication is a key ingredient in every working relationship. To C use this tool effectively, one must identify the information that needs to cross the bridge between company and grower, and this information must be accurate. I asked both growers and employees to identify what they needed to know to promote a successful working relationship.

Product Knowledge

Product knowledge is the information employees and growers are expected to know. Speaking from the company’s perspective, there are two categories of product knowledge to be considered when implementing the Grower-Relations Operating System. The first is basic information about the company that everyone is expected to know; the second is the specific information pertaining to each department that growers and employees are expected to know.

The importance of employees knowing strategic information is two- fold. First, the message communicated is that of a well-organized and trained company. It is easier to have confidence in and trust a company that is efficient and well run. The second is for employees to have the necessary knowledge to complete their job responsibilities efficiently.

Every one of us has had experiences with a company whose employees appear completely disorganized. For example, I recently ordered a large pizza from one of the well-known pizza franchises at a cost of thir- teen dollars. Upon arriving to pick it up, I noticed a sign that read “Two medium-size pizzas for fourteen dollars.” 1 asked the sales clerk, “How could two pizzas be purchased for just a dollar more and have much more pizza than the one large?”

To make a long story short, eventually three employees got involved in this project and were reading the menus and other documentation to find the answer to that question. No one knew whence it came. Finally I

106

Knowing What Needs to Be Known 107

told them to forget it, I had simply asked out of curiosity, and proceeded to give the sales clerk a credit card to pay for the pizza. Without hesi- tation she yelled at the top of her voice, “Does anyone know how to run the credit card machine?” Which speaks to the importance of department-specific product knowledge.

The remainder of this chapter addresses product knowledge from several different perspectives. First, I discuss the basic knowledge that all employees and growers need to know about the company. Second, I discuss the knowledge that these same individuals need to know about specific departments. Naturally, the emphasis of this knowledge is with live production. Third, I address some department-specific information that employees working in live haul, hatchery, and the feed mill should be expected to know to likewise improve grower relations.

You have seen some of this information discussed in previous chapters. It is revisited here to illustrate the importance of product knowledge as an integral component of your grower relations corporate culture.

Basic Knowledge Employees Are Expected to Know

My experience has been that most companies take basic product knowledge for granted. There is no standardized procedure to ensure that employees do in fact know what they are expected to know about the company. It is assumed they acquire their basic knowledge about the company simply by being employed.

To test this assumption, write down the basic information you believe employees should know. Then introduce the old college “pop quiz” at the next staff meeting to test the employees on their knowledge of that information. I must caution you: You may be disappointed in the results.

My experience in a variety of industries is that employees know about 50 percent of what managers would expect them to know about the company. Again, though: no sense in blaming employees. Until they are told what specific information they are expected to know, and are trained on the information, there is no reason to commit it to memory.

The same is true for growers. There is certain information growers are expected to know about the company. My experience is that managers agree with this statement but do not implement a procedure to assure that growers have this information. This procedure could be an agenda item at a growers meeting. Again, the “pop quiz” idea could be introduced in a manner that would be enjoyed by all.

True, there is little control over the growers regarding training and testing on product knowledge, but that should not prevent introducing the idea to the growers, anyway.

108 Chapter 6

I am offering the following list of companywide product knowledge employees might be expected to know. The final list, of course, needs to be drafted by the company.

Geographic Regions

The employees could be expected to know the number and geographic locations of company complexes. This becomes obviously more difficult as the company grows.

Employees

The number of employees within the employees’ complex, and the approximate number of employees companywide, is information that could be included on any list of basic knowledge about the company.

Growers

The number of growers working with the employees’ complex, and the approximate number of growers companywide, could also be included. Associated with this information is the live production capacity of the complex in particular and the company in general.

Policies

There will be a host of company policies and procedures that employees will be expected to know.

Ownership

The company’s ownership, or list of senior managers in a publicly held company, is also essential information.

Birds

The breed of chicken used by the complex and the particular product mix prepared by the complex are the kinds of information that can be added to the basic product knowledge requirements.

Customers

Employees could be expected to know who the company’s major customers are and the particular product mix received by each customer.


Basic Knowledge That Growers Are Expected to Know

Now, what would growers be expected to know about the company? Again, my experience has shown there is little effort to organize this information, so I’ve listed some ideas to be considered. In addition, some of the items discussed in the previous sections about employees’ basic product knowledge could easily be included in a list of basic product knowledge for growers.

After-Hour Emergencies

The importance of knowing whom to call in case of after-hour emergencies was discussed in chapter 4 as one of the eleven crucial moments of truth.

Contracts

Growers should know and understand the basic agreement stipulated in the contractual relationship. Of particular importance is knowing how the settlement checks are computed. My research, as well as that of others, suggests that many growers do not understand the settlement procedures.

Feed

Each grower should know how the feed type changes with the age of the bird, or at least be able to retrieve the published schedule provided by the company.

Poultty Science

The basic poultry science practices would naturally be included in any expectations of growers’ knowledge of the company.

Company Employees

Growers should know the names of the complex managers and those responsible for live haul, live production, feed mill, and hatchery.

Growers

Added to this list should be a basic knowledge of the contributions of the growers themselves, in particular the total number of growers and total production for the complex.

110 Chapter 6

Education Program

Growers should be aware of the special seminars and other educational programs offered by the company, to include, but not be limited to, seminars for new growers and seminars on diseases, biosecurity practices, environmental issues, and financial aspects of the poultry industry.

Global Economy

Growers should also have some general knowledge of the interaction between the global economy, worldwide sales, consumer consumption rates, and how these factors impact local production.

Department-Specific Information That Field Service Representatives and Growers Should Know

Now let’s turn our attention to the departments of the traditional complex-live production, live haul, feed mill, and hatchery-and discuss what field service representatives and growers might be expected to know about each of these departments. Please note that the focus in this section is the specific interaction between the field service representative and the grower. The next section will discuss the product knowledge that employees in other departments need to know to promote grower relations.

Live Production

Grower Profile The grower profile, discussed in some detail in chapter 4, includes the personal information that field service representatives in particular should know about each grower with whom they work. These profiles need to be reviewed and updated on a regular basis to ensure that the information is both current and accurate.

Contract The basic contractual relationship and the formula to calculate settlement checks could be included in this product knowledge category. Such knowledge is obviously more crucial for those employees who participate in the grower-friendly procedure of meeting with the grower to explain the final settlement. These employees must also know how to explain the procedure so growers can understand. Knowing is one thing; being able to communicate understanding is another.

Companies who send the check in the mail are encouraged to identify


a representative whom growers can call to answer questions about the final payment.

Equipment Changes and Renovations Asking the grower to invest additional dollars to upgrade equipment and/or make other renovations can be a very sensitive issue for obvious reasons. The field service representative needs to be in a position to explain the benefits associated with the changes. It may go without saying, but the grower will at least want to know:

The reason(s) the company is making the recommendation. The amount of the investment. The impact upon flock performance and expected financial return. The number of years it will take to recapture the initial investment. The source of the company’s data.

During my work with growers, the question has been raised as to whether the company is receiving financial benefit from the equipment company regarding the recommended changes. Understandably, the company personnel may take offense at such questions because the company’s integrity is being questioned. As I will address in chapter 10, when I discuss resistance to change, such questions can be used to facilitate the change process. In this instance the grower is simply expressing the need for additional information about a very important issue and asking to be assured that the numbers being presented are in fact realis- tic expectations instead of some theoretical formulation.

In reality the company should want to create an environment that encourages every grower to identify freely their questions and concerns. Each question is additional assistance in helping the company to prepare the grower to implement the change. Such questions indicate a positive interest on the grower’s part and are rich opportunities to continue the learning curve for both parties.

Policy Changes Field service representatives attending the series of grower-relations seminars expressed the importance of being kept informed about changes in policy or procedures that impact the grower. If the field service representative is going to be the effective window through which the grower sees the company and the company sees the grower, then a communication procedure needs to be established to keep them in the information loop.

Getting Caught between the Growers and the Company This is a special category of information that needs to be addressed. Both growers and company employees discussed instances in which the

112 Chapter 6

field service representative gets caught between what the grower would like to do and company policy and procedures. A company working to improve grower relations will want to work with its growers to identify these moments and decide how each will be managed. Both field service representatives and growers will appreciate this effort. Completing this process will help the employee be more efficient, and a more effective communicator with growers, by equipping him or her with the necessary product knowledge.

I asked both field service representatives and growers to identify questions growers ask that place the employee in an awkward position trying to represent the company adequately. This section summarizes their responses.

The issue most frequently cited by growers was the variability in the age of the bird at grow-out. Growers want to know when their flock will be harvested and the factors determining any variability in the standard grow-out schedule. A major concern was the perception of growing larger birds and making less money. These factors, of course, impact the growers’ bottom-line profitability. Providing the necessary information to promote understanding will be a positive moment of truth.

Associated with grow-out is the load-out times. When is the load-out crew scheduled to be on the farm? The contractual relationship often stipulates that the grower will be available during load-out times. If that’s the case, growers need to know the schedule to arrange their own schedules accordingly. Then, too, many growers and employees noted that growers are often not present during load-out even though the contract so stipulates. Both parties could benefit from clarification of this issue. Why include the statement in the contract if it is not enforced?

As you might imagine, compensation is another frequent issue. Even though defining the specifics of the contractual relationship is certainly not the purview of field service representatives, that does not stop growers from asking about contractual price increases. It could be beneficial to train personnel on how to answer such questions.

The issues of chick/poult quality and delivery schedule to the farm were other issues raised by growers and field service representatives. Should the field service representative be included in the communication loop to know the particulars? There were several quality issues raised by growers concerning the hatchery. The first was knowing the characteristics of the particular flock the chicks/poults come from. Second was the question, Why are so many different breeds represented in the flock being placed? The third concern was the birds’ health. Why is the grower charged for medication needed by the newly placed chicks/poults? The growers’ position is, of course, that the hatchery should be responsible for these costs.


Most growers realize the normal variability in flock performance, and every grower will occasionally receive a lower-performing flock. Some growers, however, think they get more than their share of “bad flocks. ”

The delivery schedule is another area about which product knowledge is important. The two most frequently cited issues were knowing what happens when the chicks/poults are not delivered as scheduled, and the rationale for splitting or staggering the delivery of the chicks/poults.

Equipping field service representatives with the necessary information to answer such questions successfully will certainly be regarded as positive moments of truth.

Live Haul As you know, live haul represents another sensitive operations area. Per- haps growers need to have a more complete understanding of these operations to appreciate more fully the scope of this work. Growers know it is hard work. Do they know the difficulty of keeping employees, hiring employees, the number of truckloads of birds that are picked up daily, and other challenges of the job? Field service representatives can again play a pivotal role in promoting understanding.

I’ve already mentioned the importance of knowing the pickup schedule and of growers being informed about the variability associated with this schedule. The company needs to address “who communicates what to whom” during those times when circumstances demand a change in schedule.

Other product knowledge the field service representative might need to know about live haul operations include

Company policy about paying for birds that are killed during pickup. Number of birds per truckload. When the truck is weighed. Biosecurity practices.

Feed Mill

There are several feed characteristics in the following list that the field service representative could be expected to know.

Percent of protein and energy content of the feed. Feed pellet size associated with the age of the bird. Quality standards. Schedules for feed delivery (as mentioned previously). Knowing how the truck is weighed. Accounting for split loads.

114 Chapter 6

The feed mill is a very sensitive issue, to say the least. The field service representative can help the grower understand the scope of the feed mill’s operations by knowing the number of feed trucks operating, the number of truckloads that are delivered daily, and the total number of tons delivered weekly. Without making excuses for anyone, Murphy’s Law will operate to impede the efficiency of feed delivery. Field service representatives can help growers understand these inefficiencies when they are continually apprised of such situations.

Hatche y

Now let’s turn our attention to the hatchery. I’ve already mentioned that growers would like to know the flock number and flock characteristics from which their chicks/poults originated. A working knowledge of the hatchery operations could include the biosecurity practices, sexing, de- beaking, toe clipping, and vitamins and antibiotics the birds have received. A working knowledge of the hatchery could help growers understand that it is virtually impossible to schedule a “bad flock of birds” to a given grower.

I’m certain you noticed the importance of an intricate working relationship between live production and the other departments of the complex while reading about product knowledge. This subject is the focus of chapter 9. The importance of such teamwork also highlights our discussion in chapter 2 about the pressure that is applied to the entire organization when improving grower relations.

Department-Specific Product Knowledge for Live Haul, Hatchery, and Feed Mill Employees

The last product knowledge to be discussed is that of the live haul, hatchery, and feed mill employees. These employees can be placed in two categories: those who interface with the grower and those who do not.

Obviously, each needs the necessary product knowledge to complete the responsibilities of his or her job successfully. Those employees working with growers need additional training similar to that which we’ve been discussing for field service representatives to answer the growers’ questions. This speaks to the issue discussed in chapter 2 that improving grower relations with one department of the complex puts pressure on the other departments to do the same. The contrast of working with well-trained field service representatives as opposed to other staff who are not so well trained can actually increase frustration levels. I list here several product knowledge suggestions for employees, and I encourage you to derive your own list, then train and test employees on your iden-


tified product knowledge. My list emerged from the focus groups conducted with growers.

Feed mill truck drivers 1. The same feed characteristics as previously discussed for the field

2. Truck operations. 3. Personal information about the grower as described in the grower

profile. 4. The procedures to order feed-computer programs that track feed

delivery schedules as well as other complex specific procedures.

service representatives.

Live haul crew 1. Bird sizes to be harvested. 2. Procedures to handle the bird. 3 . Respecting the grower’s property by preventing damage and clean-

liness.

Hatchery 1. Flock characteristics of chicks/poults. 2. Health and other characteristics of the birds being placed. 3 . Personal information about the grower as described in the grower

Finally, the issue of knowing the importance of not giving information one is not qualified to give needs to be mentioned. It is damaging to the working relationship for employees to speculate or give incomplete information about a subject to the grower, or to another employee for that matter. That’s how rumors get started and false information is disseminated. We can do better than that. Implementing a training process to keep employees informed about product knowledge ran minimize such adverse impacts. This training needs to include how to answer questions when one does not know the answer. You will recall that in chapter 4 I suggested the employee admit to not knowing the information, then commit to learning the answer.

This is sound advice for all employees at all times, no matter whom they may be dealing with.

profile.

Feature/Benefit Analysis

In closing this chapter, I want to introduce the feature/benefit analysis concept as a tool to facilitate the mastery of product knowledge for all involved parties. This tool can be extremely beneficial when introducing new ideas or policies.

116 Chapter 6

The process is simply to list the features of the issue being discussed, then conduct a brainstorming session to define the benefits of the feature and select pertinent ones for distribution. Benefits can be identified by answering the question, “Why is this feature necessary?”

Using this analysis increases one’s product knowledge, which helps equip those involved to provide more effective explanations to others. When dealing with rather sensitive issues, such as equipment upgrades, the benefits associated with the recommendation can actually be put in writing to ensure that every grower is receiving the identical information. You will quickly recognize the power of this simple technique once you begin using it.

In closing this chapter I would like to reemphasize the importance of using one of the company’s most valuable assets-its employees-by educating them so they have the necessary information to answer growers’ questions. Such positive moments of truth will impress the growers!

7

Bird's-Eye View

Delegating authority to make decisions to the

lowest level is a two-step process.

1. Identify the decisions to be delegated so

everyone understands his or her level of

authority.

that employees are empowered to make

decisions.

2. Establish an accountability process to ensure

There are three ways to identify decisions to be delegated:

1. Ask employees.

2. Remember that every decision the manager is

asked to make is a red flag: Supervisors

should teach employees to think on their own.

3. Ask growers.

117



Field service representatives identify decisions

they want to make that are currently made by

their supervisor.

Growers identify decisions they want their field

service representatives to make.

Managers speak on the issue of empowerment.

Empowerment is a tool that can make every

employee more productive.

Making Closer to

Decisions the Grower

Recognizing employee/grower value through empowerment can be an exhilarating experience.

ow it is time to put the inverted pyramid discussed in chapter 2 to N work by moving decision making closer to the grower. In the traditional organizational alignment everyone is always looking up to the supervisor for answers to questions, and solutions to problems. Unfortu- nately, it is easy for the supervisors to acquire the mind-set that an integral component of their responsibility is to answer questions and solve problems posed to them by their employees. When that happens, the supervisor teaches the employees to search for help instead of to think on their own.

It is easy to talk about the importance of empowerment and delegating authority to the lowest level in the organization, but there are several reasons why it is difficult to put these words into action. Some of these reasons are

1. Supervisors are so accustomed to answering all the questions and solving all the problems, they never think about empowering.

118

Making Decisions Closer to the Grower 119

2. The corporate culture dictates autocratic, dictatorial, and controlling behaviors. Everyone operates from the “cover my tail feathers” management philosophy by removing the risk of making a decision. So decision making gets pushed to the top and nothing gets done in the absence of the decision.

3. Managers simply do not trust the employees to make decisions, for whatever reason. It could be the managers simply don’t trust themselves, and consequently do not trust others. Perhaps the employees are not well trained and there are good reasons for not trusting them to make decisions.

4. Then, too, the immediate up-line supervisor may be so difficult to work with that the manager feels as though it is imperative to protect him- or herself by controlling the decision making.

5. Supervisors may feel as though they do not know how to encourage employees to make decisions.

The corporate culture is the root cause we see in most organizations struggling with the issue of empowerment. The unwritten law is that the up-line supervisor makes the decision. This culture has to be changed if the empowerment process is going to work. And, yes, the change can be quite a challenge, but it can be accomplished by remaining focused and determined.

An important ingredient in the change process is the top-down change producing bottom-up commitment. Let’s explain.

I was once asked to assist an organization to change its corporate culture to become more customer friendly. When I completed an initial assessment, a report of findings was presented to the chief executive officer and his staff outlining two behaviors that had to be addressed. The first was the perception that senior managers were not friendly. The employees felt as though they were insignificant members of the organization because senior managers would not greet or notice them in the hallways.

The CEO agreed that he seldom talks to employees and stated rather emphatically that he was not going to start.

The second observation was that all decisions rose to the top. Again the CEO agreed and stated that, too, was not going to change. Upon hearing these fateful words, I made the recommendation that any attempt to change the company’s environment terminate with this conversation. The organization could only get worse by talking about the importance of creating an empowering organization yet never allowing actions to follow words. Fortunately, the CEO followed the advice.

Another example was the CEO who tightly controlled the decision- making process to the point that virtually every expenditure over fifty dollars had to have his approval. Very frequently such purchases had to

120 Chapter 7

have four different supervisor signatures. A study concluded that over two-thirds of the purchase orders in this company were for less than two hundred dollars. A recommendation was made that supervisors be allowed the authority to make expenditures up to two hundred dollars and use the budget report to monitor such purchases. The CEO would not allow it, and the bureaucratic process continued that brought these purchase decisions to his desk. You can imagine the frustration experienced on the part of the employees.

An interesting note about power and influence: The more that is shared with others, the more one has. That statement appears illogical. How could anyone have more of anything by giving it away?

Let’s look at decision making from the standpoint of completing job responsibilities. Any given individual can only make X number of decisions. If that person controls the decision-making process, then that’s the amount of work that will get done in the time available. By allowing one person to participate in making decisions, the number of decisions has been increased by some factor we will call Y. The number of decisions two people can make ( X + Y ) is certainly more than one person can do. The buzzword in today’s business community is “empowerment.” The bottom line is to give employees the authority to make decisions on what they think needs to be done.

Delegating authority is not the same as delegating responsibility. An employee may be responsible for completing a task without the authority to make decisions on how the task is to be completed. When responsibility is delegated in absence of authority, the employee must return to the supervisor whenever a decision needs to be made. When authority has also been delegated, the employee can make whatever decision needs to be made to get the job completed as agreed upon.

Identifying Empowering Decisions

The first step to bring empowerment into the organization’s comfort zone is to identify the decisions to be delegated. There is only one way to accomplish this step, and that is to take the necessary time to actually identify each individual decision. There are three tools available to help with this identification process. The first tool is to complete brainstorming sessions a t every level of management to identify those decisions to be delegated. The second tool is to red-flag every decision the supervisor is asked to make. That is, anytime the employee asks a supervisor a question or for help to solve a problem, that should serve as a red flag for both parties to ask, “Who should be making this decision?” The answer will be the employee, in a serious effort to empower. The third tool is to ask the grower what decisions the field


service representative can make that would facilitate the working relationship.

I recommend using all three approaches for each department of the complex to identify decisions to be delegated. As these are identified, every employee needs to know his or her authority in the decision- making process. For example, I once worked with an organization that admittedly was autocratic and controlling. The CEO wanted to empower the employees to make decisions. All the employees were so informed, and the process began. In actual practice, though, employees continued to avoid making decisions that contained any element of risk. The avoidance strategy was the rule rather than the exception.

These decisions were used as learning opportunities by identifying the staff who had the authority to make the decision in accordance with the core value to empower. In a demonstration of empowerment the staff were discussing a critical issue for the growth of the company. True to form, the staff looked to the CEO to make the final decision. At that point the CEO politely excused himself and said, “I will live with whatever decision you make.”

The second phase of the empowerment process is one of accountability. Most companies struggle with accountability. People become busy,

priorities shift, alligators begin to bite, and before you know it, employees forget to use the systems that will bring about success. Ac- countability is making certain that people do that which is expected of them. In terms of our discussion here, accountability is knowing the decisions that are now being made closer to the grower at every level of the complex.

To know for certain that the empowerment process is working, one must actually see it in operation or measure it. Of the two, measuring may be the easier. It is more difficult for upper-level managers actually to be present to see the empowerment process in action.

I am a strong advocate of the position that to see change, it must be measured. Doing so requires getting information from employees and/or growers. An easy format is simply to list the decisions that have been moved closer to the grower and ask employees if they are now making these empowered decisions. Growers could also be asked about the decisions that field service representatives are empowered to make.

Another component of the measurement process is to obtain information from both the growers and employees about the impact of the empowerment process. What are the benefits associated with the empowerment process? Is it saving time? Is it making jobs easier? Is it improving grower relations?

In the final analysis accountability is simply each level of management asking to see the documentation associated with the empowerment

122 Chapter 7

process on a regularly scheduled time line-for example, quarterly or biannually. This document will contain three important elements:

1. The new decisions that have been delegated closer to the grower. 2. The data demonstrating that the empowerment process is working. 3. The data showing improvements in grower relations.

Consider listing the “empowered decisions” in the Grower Relations Manual for training purposes.

Empowerment of Field Service Representatives

While I was conducting research with field service representatives, a couple examples were brought to my attention that raised the question, Who makes the decision?

Suppose there is a need to medicate. Based on the field service representative’s knowledge of the farm, she or he wants to do one thing, while the veterinarian suggests something else. Who makes the final decision?

When I’ve used that illustration during the seminar, most of those in attendance indicated that the veterinarian should make the final call. Some participants noted that the veterinarian should certainly consider a field service representative’s input, while others indicated that the decision should be made by the veterinarian independently of anyone else’s input.

Creating the environment of making decisions closer to the grower would encourage input from the field service representative in these instances.

A second example is feed. Suppose the birds are not eating the recently delivered feed. Who makes the decision as to whether the feed is picked up or remains on the farm? About half of the participants indicated the feed mill would make the final decision. The other half said the field service representative would, but many of these indicated the decision should be made in concert with the supervisor.

My point is decisions must be scrutinized in terms of the new standard to move decisions closer to the grower. Other decisions field service representatives thought they could make and/or contribute to include the following:

Requiring extra clean-outs. Determining bird density. Repairing damage caused by live haul and feed trucks. Picking up prospective growers. Providing credits. Determining bird size for a given farm. Upgrading equipment.


Examine the instances in which the field service representative gets caught between the company and the grower, as discussed in chapter 6- for example, variability of the age of bird at grow-out, load-out times, and changes in schedules. When possible, empower the field service representative to deal with such issues.

Decisions That Growers Want Field Service Representatives to Make

I’ve also had the opportunity to ask growers to identify those situations in which their field service representative needs the authority to make decisions on the farm.

The growers’ first issue was the medication example just cited. They wanted field service representatives to have more authority in deciding when to medicate and what medicine to use. After all, the field service representative knows the history of the flock and farm, which the grower always wants considered in the final decision. The veterinarian, on the other hand, may never have seen the farm.

As you might imagine, feed is another issue. The growers want the field service representative to have the authority to reclaim the feed. Considerable time can be lost in the bureaucratic process involving the feed mill and other necessary parties while the birds are not eating. Of course, the universal perception is that the feed mill does not want to remove the feed regardless of the consequences to the flock. This “us versus them” attitude is certainly not conducive to the teamwork being discussed in this book.

Making adjustments for lost birds is another issue identified by the growers. Growers ask that their field service representatives be given the authority to provide financial compensation when birds require medication or are lost due to a company practice.

Growers also want to be assured that their field service representative has the authority to represent them to the company and that other company employees listen to this authority. The two instances most frequently mentioned were listening to the grower’s input when the company is requesting equipment changes, and requesting financial assistance on behalf of the grower. Growers understand the field service representative’s dilemma of being a company employee while at the same time being their designated representative to the company. This dual responsibility places additional pressure on the company to demonstrate that field service representatives are in fact able representatives for the growers.

Furthermore, growers want to try out their own ideas, and they want their field service representative to have the authority to confirm those

124 Chapter 7

ideas. As a matter of fact, some growers told us they test ideas and don’t tell their field service representatives.

Several growers voiced concerns about whether a company can successfully empower its field service representatives to make decisions like the ones discussed here. The basis for their concern is the misperception that field service representatives are evaluated in terms of identifying what is wrong on the farm. The role of policing, it seems, is not conducive to empowering. This expressed concern speaks to the very need to improve grower relations.

Management Speaks on the Issue of Empowerment

The managers who spoke on this issue categorized their comments according to feed mill, hatchery, and live production.

Feed Mill

Managers identified a couple of feed-mill-related issues on which growers need more authority. First is deciding how the feed is distributed on the farm. The second is preparing the weekly inventory, as well as the ending inventory. Some managers indicated they are already using growers to prepare their ending inventories with a great deal of success.

The managers also agreed that field service representatives should have the authority to decide if and when feed is to be reclaimed.

Hatchery

Managers thought the field service representative should be given the authority to decide if birds should be placed or not depending upon whether the house has been adequately prepared to receive the new flock. The managers also thought the field service representative should have the authority to issue credits for any chicks/poults that are dead upon arrival.

Live Production

The issue of medication emerged again during discussion of live production. Managers thought the field service representatives could work with the growers to make decisions regarding medication in those situations that do not warrant a prescription. Another decision to be made in concert with the grower is a change in feed schedules as dictated by flock performance.

The last item mentioned was physical damage created by company


personnel. Managers thought the field service representatives should have the authority to authorize repairs for such damage.

Empowerment Increases Productivity

Yes, investing the time to identify and move decisions closer to the grower will yield benefits. To begin with, all employees will be more productive, as they won’t be waiting for up-line supervisors to make a decision. There is less risk of decisions getting lost in the halls of bureaucracy because there is less bureaucracy.

The empowering process recognizes employees as valued contributors to the organization. Employees like to be respected for their specialized knowledge, and they like to use this knowledge. Morale will be improved. The employees will be more loyal to the organization (which is becoming a rarity in the corporate community).

Service quality will likewise be improved. It simply stands to reason that creating an environment in which people are encouraged to express their ideas will result in better ideas. Better ideas naturally lead to improved service levels and quality product.

It only seems fitting to end this chapter as I began and to remind you that power is increased when given away. This point often baffles managers who prefer to exhibit their power by centralizing authority. They fail to realize how their actual power is limited by their self-imposed cen- tralization rather than by extending their influence to allow others to use their creative talents and participate in the process.

8

Bird’s-Eye View

The WOW! factor is designed to add value when

a major interruption occurs in the working

relationship and to provide nontraditional

services that demonstrate a commitment to

improving the working relationship.

WOW! consists of

The formula to turn inconveniences into a

1. Identifying the inconvenience.

2. Identifying what can be done to fix it and to

3. Adding extra value to demonstrate caring.

ensure it does not happen again.

The discussion herein of nontraditional coopera-

tive efforts to improve the working relationship

will focus on the subject of conflict resolution,

one state’s effort to implement best management

practices, and one company’s initiatives to form

a committee to identify and solve issues.

Managers also speak to the issue of the WOW!

factor.

127



Implementing the WOW! Factor

You can tell how great a person is by how that person treats others.

he essence of the WOW! factor is to show a level of concern about T and interest in improving the working relationship. Such opportunities to improve and create a WOW! are organized in two categories for the sake of this book: Rectifying those times when an inconvenience or major interruption in the working relationship occurs, and providing nontraditional delivery systems. The nature of the company-grower relationship makes it easier for the company to take the lead and implement the WOW! factor, and for that reason the bulk of this chapter focuses on company leadership. Grower input, however, can be an integral component of this process.

Inconveniences

Joel Barker reminded us in his book Paradigms: The Business of Discov- ering the Future that saliva and spit are essentially the same. The only differences are perception-one’s particular paradigm or way of thinking- and location. Saliva is traditionally in our mouths and considered essential for good health. Spit, on the other hand, is considered dirty and nasty and is typically emitted from one’s mouth. They are identical fluids, but in different locations.

My point is that inconveniences are traditionally considered as something nasty and bad, like spit, when actually they constitute excellent opportunities for improvement that can lead to increased loyalty. Tradi- tional customer service research shows that you are more loyal to a company that immediately corrects any inconvenience it created for you than is a customer who never had a problem. The company shows you they care about you by correcting the problem, and you repay them with increased loyalty.

Contrast that scenario with that of a company that creates an inconvenience but does nothing about it.

One of the more absurd examples of this situation occurred for a mother and daughter I know who were doing some last-minute Christ-

128


mas shopping. Just before leaving the mall, they decided to visit one more store. After looking but not buying anything, they departed. As they exited, the security alarm sounded, but, knowing they had not purchased anything, they continued to their car.

To their amazement a store employee caught up with them and de- manded they return to the store to review the contents of their Christ- mas packages. The mother tried to explain they had not purchased anything at that particular store but finally relented and accompanied the employee back to the store.

Once inside, the company employee began unwrapping Christmas packages until they found an item purchased from another store with the security button still attached. The mother had the receipt to show that it was purchased and not stolen. Convinced that the mother and daughter had not removed any item from the store, the employee let the mother and daughter return to their car.

Now, here comes the customer service fiasco. The company employee did not apologize for the inconvenience nor offer to rewrap the packages! It was a terrible ending to a sad event.

Upon returning home, the mother wrote the president and included her cut-up credit card.

Research shows that an inconvenienced or unhappy customer will tell approximately twenty people about their problems with a given store. A satisfied customer will only tell three or four people.

The question to be addressed by both growers and company in the discussion pertinent to this book is, What do I want other people to say about me? We’re not advocating that either party purposely create inconveniences in a design to improve loyalty in the working relationship. Murphy’s Law makes certain these inconveniences occur frequently enough without intentional assistance from humankind. We are encouraging the creation of a corporate culture that will use such incidences to identify opportunities to improve the working relationship.

The following is a very useful formula to turn inconveniences into opportunities:

1. Identify the opportunity. 2. Consider alternatives to fixing the probIem and implement one. 3. Do something extra to add value.

Identifj the Opportunity

This is the easy part. Any event that constitutes an interruption in the efficiency or effectiveness of the working relationship constitutes an opportunity. These have become such an integraf component of the day-to-

130 Chapter 8

day operations that they are no longer considered significant. I am encouraging making the See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil, do no evil approach a memory. Instead, put each inconvenience under a micro- scope for further examination while asking the question, What improvements can be made so this does not happen again?

I've had the opportunity to work with both company personnel and growers to identify inconveniences created by both parties. These are being offered here for general information and to stimulate your curiosity as to what is happening in your environment. I'll begin this discussion by listing the top five inconveniences created by the company for the grower, by each department of the complex.

Feed mill 1. Allowed the grower to run out of feed. 2. Damaged property (for example, created ruts hitting the feed bin). 3. Delivered too much feed, or it was not distributed to the various

4. Spilled feed onto the ground. 5. Delivered the wrong type of feed for the age of the bird.

Hatchery 1. Truck did not arrive as scheduled. 2. Split deliveries of chicks/poults. 3. Too many breed flocks sources represented with the chicks/poults. 4. Poor poultlchick quality. 5. Poor attitude of the truck driver.

Live haul 1. Split the farm over multiple days. 2. Changed the pickup day so the grower had to change the waters

3. Did not arrive at scheduled time. 4. Did not respect grower's farm and left trash on the premise. 5. Delayed weighing the birds.

Live production 1. Management can't be reached by phone when there is a problem.

feed bins correctly.

and feeders.

- P *:- f - 1 ---- f ^I 1^&^

Implementing the WOW! Factor 13 1

identify their own inconveniences by department. Asking growers for this input sends another strong message that you are serious about improving the working relationship.

A common concern when considering grower input to identify inconveniences is the possibility of creating a “griping session.” That does not have to be the case. Small groups of seven to ten growers can be used. Position the meeting as a necessary prerequisite for improvement- you’re here to identify opportunities for improvement. Frustrations in the working relationship serve as signals to identify these opportunities.

Another approach is to use field service representatives to ask growers, or to distribute a questionnaire to growers asking for their input.

The important point is to secure the input. I’ve also had the opportunity to work with both groups to identify the

inconveniences created by the grower for the company. The more frequent ones listed were:

1. Not ready for the hatchery to deliver chicks/poults. 2. Not ready for live haul to pick up the birds. 3. Weights sent in late or inaccurately. 4. Failure to remove feedwater according to the schedule prior to

5 . Poor road conditions for the trucks. 6 . Equipment not properly maintained. 7. Not being accessible when the field service representative visits

8. Not following good poultry management practices or the com-

9. Not doing what was agreed to be done.

pickup.

the farm.

pany’s advice.

10. Not sending in fat samples on a timely basis.

Realistically, not all problems can be solved at once. So you will want to prioritize the issues. In doing so you may want to identify those inconveniences that can be fixed quickly. Solving these and communicating success are an excellent strategy to show all parties a willingness to improve. Working on the easier problems also provides the opportunity to practice the new working relationship before you tackle some of the more challenging issues.

Consider the Alternatives

This step simply requires taking the time to conduct a brainstorming session with employees and/or growers. You will want to think about different approaches to fixing the inconvenience and improving the working relationship.

132 Chapter 8

For example, growers have complained about live haul crews not respecting their property. Some of the alternatives to remedy this situation include:

1. Grower monitoring crew’s behavior. 2. Grower providing a Porta Potti. 3. Company providing a Porta Potti. 4. Grower providing food for the crew. 5. Grower providing trash containers.

Each of these alternatives has been implemented with varying degrees of success. A grower in one of our focus groups encouraged other growers to invest in a Porta Potti. This grower reported that the live haul crew appreciated the act and worked harder to keep the farm clean. Furthermore, a company reported that when it purchased Porta Pottis for each of its live haul trucks, both growers and crews expressed their appreciation.

Another problem often cited is that of poor bird quality. Some growers have actually expressed the belief that they were selected “always” to receive birds of low quality. What are the alternatives to resolve this problem?

1. Providing literature regarding the hatchery practices. 2. Providing flock characteristics to the growers. 3. Offering tours/videos of the hatchery to observe the process first-

Remember the Pygmalion-effect story about the field service representative who worked with a grower who constantly complained about the quality of the birds. The problem persisted in spite of efforts to assure the grower that he was not being selected to receive poor-quality birds. So when it was time for the grower to receive more birds, the employee told the grower the chicks originated from a flock the grower thought was good. In reality they were the same birds that the grower had been receiving. The flock performed beautifully.

We’re not suggesting that misleading the grower be the alternative of choice. The example does illustrate the importance of perception.

Another company conducts tours of the hatchery to show growers that it is virtually impossible for poor-quality chicks to be identified and sent to any given producer while processing thousands of birds on a daily basis.

Growers often raise questions about feed quality. As with receiving chicks/poults, some growers feel like a victim of the feed mill. What are the options to show the growers there is no way for them to be identified to receive poor-quality feed?

hand.


1. Feed analysis. 2. Tours of the feed mill.

One company elected to conduct tours of the feed mill to show the computerized process of mixing feed and how it is virtually impossible to isolate “bad feed” and put it on a certain truck to be given to an identified grower.

A related feed issue was the concern raised by growers to receive the correct feed for their farm. The company began placing a seal on the truck before leaving the feed mill; the feed could not be unloaded until the grower removed the seal. The procedure removed any doubt associated with receiving the correct feed.

My position is there is a solution for virtually every problem when time is taken to define it and growers and employees approach the problem in a logical, problem-solving format.

Do Something to Add Value

The intent of this phase is to go beyond solving the problem and do something extra to show the person inconvenienced that you care about the working relationship.

The clothing store incident we discussed is an excellent example. At the very minimum the store employee should have apologized and rewrapped the Christmas gifts. Doing something extra could have been a gift certificate as payment for the woman’s inconvenience and an en- ticement for her return to the store. These simple actions could have turned a travesty into a laughing matter. As it turned out, she is no longer a customer and has since shared her experience with many others.

Remember the bank customer who pulled a seven-figure account because the bank refused to pay a five-dollar parking ticket? That five- dollar investment would have been returned a hundredfold.

After attending one of the grower-relations seminars a complex manager decided to add value by offering the growers and their spouses a free meal whenever the feed truck was later than scheduled.

As mentioned at the beginning of the chapter, it is easier for the company to organize the opportunity to add value when it creates interrup- tions in the working environment than for growers to do the same. Indi- vidual growers, however, can seize the initiative and take advantage of the opportunities their inconveniences create to show the company they care enough to improve the working relationship. Growers can also solicit the company’s input about what can be done to add value to the working relationship in the event of such inconveniences. An excellent time to secure this input is at a company-grower meeting. The point I

134 Chapter 8

want to make in this discussion is that added value sends the very strong message about wanting to improve the working relationship. The bottom line is, It is important for all parties to demonstrate a willingness to help each other to be successful.

I have listed several real-life examples of inconveniences created by all parties in appendix E, so you can see that no one individual or company has the corner on Murphy’s Law. An excellent exercise would be to consider what you would do if any of these situations occurred within your complex. An even better idea would be for you to use your own inconveniences when completing this exercise.

Also, included in appendix D are several examples that can be labeled “Excellence in Grower Relations” for your reading. I encourage you to generate your own list of such events and share them with growers and other employees.

Nontraditional Delivery Systems

Implementing an innovative delivery system demonstrates taking a risk-doing something that hasn’t been tried before. Several such instances were brought to my attention while completing research for this book.

Conflict Resolution

The organized procedures for conflict resolution presented in chapter 4 (that is, the moment of truth when working with reluctant growers) between growers and management constitute a nontraditional service delivery system. These are attempts to create a win-win environment for both the grower and the company as defined by the respective peer groups.

Alabama’s Best Management Practices

In Alabama a list of “Best Management Practices” was developed to improve the relationship between a companies and their growers. This list was developed by a committee that included a grower and a company employee representing each company in the state. I include the list in its entirety with permission from the Alabama Poultry & Egg Association. I am certain you will agree that the content of the following twenty-one statements can play an important part in the success of the poultry industry. More important is the fact that the poultry industry in Alabama demonstrated what can be accomplished when members of the industry work together,


1. All live birds are weighed at the plant by a bonded weighmaster on certified scales. Scales are checked daily by the weighmaster and routinely by State Weights and Measures, as required by law. Producers are allowed to personally watch live birds being weighed.

2. All feed is weighed at the feed mill by a bonded weighmaster on certified scales. Scales are checked daily by the weighmaster and routinely by State Weights and Measures, as required by law. Producers are allowed to personally watch feed being weighed.

3. Companies provide to producers a written chain of command to use in addressing questions or concerns with their company. Pro- ducers are encouraged to work through the chain of command until their question or concern is adequately addressed.

4. Companies provide all documentation that impacts a producer’s settlement check in a timely manner. This is also required by the Federal Packers and Stockyard Act. Producers are encouraged to work through the provided chain of command if they have any questions concerning documentation that affects their settlement check.

5. Companies will have employee/producer meetings on a regular basis to share information and create a better dialogue of communication between the company and producers.

6 . The industry has developed a program to better educate producers about the various facets of the poultry business, including poultry production processing, hatchery operations, feed mill operations, and how they affect each other and the entire process. In addition, the Alabama Poultry & Egg Association will place a renewed emphasis on grower education through the annual grower meeting and the Grower Committee. Producers are encouraged to attend educational seminars and meetings.

7. Companies will set up tours of the poultry complex to better inform and educate producers about the various facets of the industry.

8. All efforts will be made to ensure proper handling of birds from farm to plant, including the removal of birds killed by catching crews. Damage by catching crews of producer’s equipment or facilities will be reimbursed by the company.

9. Producers can pass on or sell their poultry farm as long as the building facility is acceptable to their company and the new owners are capable of operating the facility in a way that will produce a quality product.

10. The producer makes the final decision in purchasing new equipment. Minimum standards may be required by the company.

136 Chapter 8

11. Companies will work with the producer on an individual basis to address chick quality concerns whenever they may arise.

12. Even though final bird condemnation is controlled by the USDA, inspector companies will work with the USDA to improve the inspection process.

13. Auburn University, in cooperation with the AP&EA grower committee and poultry companies, will develop general information to help potential producers better estimate expected income and expenses from a poultry operation.

14. Companies provide prompt payment to producers in accordance with the Federal Packers and Stockyard Act.

15. Companies will employ a system to insure that company employees who also grow chickens will not be shown any favoritism.

16. Producers are required to dispose of dead birds daily using a method of disposal approved by the Department of Agriculture and their company. Disposal methods may be inspected by company personnel for compliance. Birds may not be placed on a farm with inadequate bird disposal. The Alabama Poultry & Egg Association, in cooperation with the Department of Agriculture and Auburn University, will provide to producers a list of the proper bird disposal alternatives.

17. Companies are encouraged to develop long-term contracts. 18. Producers can join any organization or association. A producer’s

membership in any organization will not affect his settlement in any way.

19. The industry will develop educational opportunities for service people to attend that will enhance their communication skills. The Alabama Poultry & Egg Association will also incorporate more communicatiodinterpersonal programs in their workshops and seminars.

20. Companies and producers will be mindful of the changing economic needs of each other.

21. DOAs will not be charged to producers.

Working Together to Achieve Success

Cooperative efforts between companies and growers are beginning to produce significant improvements. I present here a couple of different approaches for your information and consideration.

One such cooperative effort took the form of a committee of growers, company personnel, university faculty, and representatives from the financial community, and resulted in the following accomplishments:


1. The company purchased fans in large enough quantities to secure a discounted price and passed this price to the growers, who in turn could pay for them over a six-flock period without interest charges.

2. A similar arrangement is being made to develop a program for sprinklerffogger systems, as well as a winter ventilation program.

3. A program has been instituted for the company to pay growers a daily rate for each day exceeding a defined number of out-time days.

4. A grower survey has been implemented in which the grower evalu- ates the quality of chicks placed.

5. The committee has also served as a forum to provide a variety of seminars, including sessions on: A. The day-to-day issues that affect the company in particular and

the poultry industry in general. B. The technical aspects of the poultry business-for example,

biosecurity and the implications of withdrawing feed and water prior to live haul picking up the birds.

6. The committee is also addressing litter disposal and contracts.

The committee’s work has been well received. Grower feedback has shown that 98 percent of the growers are very pleased with the progress being made through this committee.

Every grower is encouraged to present issues to the committee by either:

1. Presenting the issue to any committee member. 2. Sending a letter to the committee. 3. Requesting to address the committee.

A second model to structure a cooperative effort is a committee made up of growers and company personnel. The committee identified and prioritized issues, and the progress to date includes, but is not limited to, the following:

1. A video was produced about feed delivery on two farms from the same load, to show how the feed is scaled so that growers can check their feed tickets to make certain they received all of their feed. The company is also reviewing procedures to reduce the percent of split feed deliveries.

2. The feed mill changed feed delivery hours to minimize running out of feed on weekends; growers are asked to check feed bins to prevent this problem.

3. A procedure was developed to ensure an accurate count of dead birds during live haul.

138 Chapter 8

4. A procedure was developed whereby damage to the farm is repaired as quickly as possible.

5. The procedure to evaluate producers’ performance was reviewed, and the committee elected not to drop the worst-performing flock among the last six.

6. The condemnation clause was changed so that one-half the condemnation for Sep/Tox Air Sac and IP will be charged against the flock.

7. A study was completed that concluded that settlement performance and breeder flock age appear to be independent.

8. A decision was made that field service representatives will stop at the grower’s home to facilitate the grower’s awareness of the visit.

Managers Speak to the Issue of the WOW! Factor

Managers attending a seminar on the subject of grower relations spoke on the issue of a nontraditional working relationship and offered the following suggestions:

Feed mill 1. Provide annual bin maintenance. 2. Notify the grower prior to feed delivery.

Hatchery 1. Conduct a flock evaluation regarding the chick/poult quality.

Live production 1. Compensate the grower when chicks/poults cannot be placed in a

2. Have the field service representative hand deliver the settlement

3. Provide an annual top grower bonus of one thousand dollars. 4. Provide college scholarship for the top grower.

Live haul 1. Provide sufficient resources to catch all birds at night. 2. Ensure that the grower understands reasons for the live haul

As simple as it is, we often fail to remember that every success, every progress, begins with an idea followed by the courage to go wherever the idea leads. The purpose of this book is to encourage creating a culture to stimulate tomorrow’s ideas today.

timely manner.

check to the grower.

schedule.

9

Bird’s-Eye View

Working relationships with growers are an

extension of the working relationships within

the complex.

It is important to realize that the internal

customer bases consist of the working

relationship between a manager and staff

and between two or more departments.

to be successful.

The essence of teamwork is helping each other

The core values discussed in terms of the

Grower-Relations Vision Statement can also

be used in a Teamwork Vision Statement so

employees know how to work with each other.

Students become teachers when the manager and

staff develop and implement action steps to help

each other be more successful.

Building stronger bridges between departments

consists of defining and implementing action

steps to help each other be more successful.

139



Measuring progress with your internal customers

is essential to becoming a leader in grower

relations.

Managers working to improve internal and

external working relationships need to know

and manage their personal resources to set the

example for continuous improvement.

Building Better Bridges on the Way to Grower Relations

Working together creates the synergy to fuel improvements in grower relations.

t is easy to think of the working relationship with the grower as I something independent of the working relationship within the complex. The truth of the matter is it can be thought of as a natural extension of that working relationship. Consider for a moment a complex that enjoys excellent communication and working relationships. It will be relatively easy to extend these good habits to working with growers, and employees will have more energy to do that. Contrast that environment with one that could be described as fraught with communication problems and conflicts within and between departments. The employees in this environment are not practicing behaviors conducive to grower relations and probably do not have a lot of positive energy to work on improving these working relationships. The internal struggles can be overpowering.

To be complete, this book must also show you a process to continuously improve the internal working relationship, as it has done with grower relations.

140

Building Better Bridges 141

Internal Customers

Before getting into the specifics of the working relationships, there is another concept to be considered to put our discussion into perspective: internal customers.

Customers in the general sense are those that receive services from a supplier. In terms of organizations there are two basic internal customer bases.

Interdepartmental

The working relationship that is most readily recognized is the interdependency between departments. Live production, live haul, hatchery, and the feed mill are each other’s customers.

The silo management practice is too widely accepted. This practice is characterized by each department behaving as if it is self-contained and independent of other departments. In reality we know that is not the case, but knowing it does not prevent managers from acting out the role anyway.

The mind-set to be implemented is to help each other be successful. The new practice is “Your priorities are our priorities whenever you need our assistance.” Helping each other to be successful requires the managers to implement a simple process that will

1. Identify what is needed from each other to be successful. 2. Implement these ideas to ensure success. 3. Measure the success achieved.

I will address this process in more detail after introducing the next set of internal customers.

In trad epartmental

There are actually two customer bases within this category. Those employees reporting to a manager constitute one customer base. Think about that for a moment. Can the complex manager be successful without other employees? Obviously not. Every manager needs employees to be successful.

The other customer base is managers, who serve as customers to their employees. This one can be a little more difficult to accept. Remember the inverted pyramid discussed in chapter 2? Using this model, managers and employees cement a partnership for success, and managers will do what is necessary to finalize this partnership.

The chemistry of the working relationship is a very important deter- minant in the formula of success. One simple question clearly empha-

142 Chapter 9

sizes that point: Would you rather help someone be successful that you like or you don’t like?

We’re not advocating that managers try to win popularity contests, nor are we saying that every employee has to like each other to have a successful department. But it is crucial for a manager to do that which is necessary to create a psychological climate that fosters effective working relationships.

These customers must also answer the question “What can I do to help you be more successful?” In doing so, the same simple formula must be integrated into the working relationship:

1. Identify what can be done to help each other be successful. 2. Implement those behaviors. 3. Establish a feedback process to measure success.

Treat Me like a Grower

Many field service representatives in the grower-relations seminars expressed a desire to be treated in the same manner they were being trained to treat growers. Several even emphatically expressed that trust, respect, and open communication would never work at their workplace. Think about the impact of that statement for a moment. Is that the reputation you would desire for your complex?

It will be a lot easier for managers to solicit cooperation from their employees to work in a beneficial partnership with growers if in fact a similar partnership exists between field service representatives and managers.

In chapter 2 I briefly addressed the impact of several interactions involving companies, employees, and growers who were fictitiously named “I Care’’ and “I Don’t Care.” Now let’s look at the impact when these same fictitious names apply to individuals within the company, and the extension to grower relations. Suppose for a moment that the predominant management practices were described as “I Don’t Care.” That is, employees are not valued. They are told what to do. When to do it. How to do it. They are told to keep their opinions to themselves until their opinions are asked for. There is no effort to keep employees informed, and “trust” is just another five-letter word in a current Web- ster’s dictionary.

Now, what is the likelihood this “I Don’t Care” management style will successfully implement an “I Care” working relationship with the growers? Do you think employees will believe ‘‘I Don’t Care” managers when they talk about creating an “I Care” relationship with growers? (One would have to wonder what these employees tell growers about their “I Don’t Care” managers, right?)


Contrast the scenario we’ve been discussing with that of “I Care” managers who value their employees by asking for input, listening to that input, and using it whenever possible. Additionally, these same managers are emotionally consistent and work to keep their employees informed. Let’s also assume, for the sake of discussion, the “I Care” managers build trust by being dependable, keeping confidential information confidential, and using the specialized knowledge of their employees. In this case creating an “I Care” working relationship with growers will be a natural extension of the day-to-day teamwork culture.

Personality Drives a Teamwork Culture

We would like to think that “I Don’t Care” management practices are not existent in today’s workplace. Yet Chauncey and Hare present evidence to the contrary in their book Work Abuse. These two authors concluded that 95 percent of today’s managers practice an autocratic, dictatorial style of management in spite of all the talk about teamwork.

Part of the problem is allowing the teamwork corporate culture to be personality driven. Managers often fail to realize the immense impact their personality has upon their corporate culture. Furthermore, this impact is positively correlated with the level of management. For instance, the complex manager’s personality will have a more widespread influence than that of the live production manager’s. The live production manager’s personality, however, will be felt by the employees in live production.

As the result of this direct impact, managers get labeled. Let’s describe a couple of managers (using fictitious names) to illustrate this statement. Pete is a nice guy, works hard to be liked by his staff. In doing so, he rarely holds anyone accountable. He just wants things to happen because his staff are good folks and that was what was agreed. He believes himself to be a good listener yet constantly interrupts his staff to interject his opinions.

Pete describes the teamwork corporate culture in terms of being friendly, cooperative, keeping everyone informed, and empowering. The employees (including those who report to Pete) have a different description-micromanaging, confusing, not knowing each other’s priorities, not being kept informed, and a lack of cooperation.

What is the reason for the two different perceptions? We don’t see ourselves as others see us.

Then there is Richard, who is intense, overbearing, and emotionally inconsistent. One day he is in a good mood, but it is anyone’s guess what the mood will be tomorrow. There are days when Richard rants and raves in the face of employees to get things done. Richard’s description

144 Chapter 9

of the teamwork corporate culture is a team working together to do whatever is necessary to get the job done. He actually thinks employees enjoy working for him.

Those working with Richard have a different description. They feel intimidated and at the same time angry about the emotional displays of Richard’s anger. Richard is neither liked nor respected. The employees would prefer to work elsewhere.

Let’s consider one more example-Harry, Mr. Enthusiasm. He is energetic, friendly, humorous, busy, tending to the many irons he has in the fire. Harry would describe the culture as being productive, promoting, having good interpersonal relationships, and cooperative. His team members would agree with that description and add a couple more. Harry cannot be depended upon to follow through with what he promises. He is too busy and forgets what he said he would do. The employees wait forty-eight hours before beginning any initiative Harry suggests. Why? Harry has the reputation of changing his mind frequently. Many wasted hours have been spent on an initiative only to have the priorities change and the once important project fade into a memory.

Although all three descriptions are fictional, the culture is driven always by the manager’s personality. There is a better way, and that is to define the core values that are essential to working relationships within the organization, as done in chapter 3 with the Grower-Relations Vision Statement. As a matter of fact, the identical values can be used.

Teamwork Core Values

The organization needs to decide the desired teamwork culture, or how employees are expected to work together, for the same reasons that drive the importance of the Grower-Relations Vision Statement. The first thing to do is define that which is expected, so everyone knows what is to be achieved. Remember: To get where you want to go, you must know where you want to go. I encourage the writing of a Teamwork Vision Statement using employee input, as outlined in the chapter on the Grower-Relations Vision Statement. I recommend that this statement be brief, as depicted by the following example, so it can be easily remembered:

We are committed to teamwork characterized by trust, respect, open communication, and a positive attitude.

Please note that this statement can use the same values as in the Grower-Relations Vision Statement, or different ones to fit the teamwork culture you want to achieve. The important point is to customize, to make the statement right for your organization.


Second, defining each of the values creates the performance standards to help each other be successful. As you review the following definitions, consider the question, Are any of these impossible to do? Our guess is that your answer is, No, it’s just a matter of doing.

For illustrative purposes I will use the core values of teamwork, trust, respect, communication, and positive attitude included in the foregoing Teamwork Vision Statement.

Teamwork

A major ingredient in teamwork (that is, cooperation) is the performance standards necessary to help each other become more successful. These might read as follows:

1. We understand each other’s needs. 2. We willingly help each other succeed. 3. Problems are solved in a win-win manner.

We Understand Each Other’s Needs We must talk to each other! We must tell each other our priorities and what we need from each other to successfully achieve these priorities.

We Willingly Help Each Other to Succeed Willingness to help each other can be demonstrated in two distinct ways. First is assisting each other to accomplish the interdependent priorities. In other words, your priorities are our priorities when you need our assistance. Second is volunteering to assist those who need assistance.

Problems Are Solved in a Win-Win Manner Collaboration is the rule rather than the exception. Problems are solved based on the understanding of what is necessary to promote the company’s agenda rather than on an individual’s or department’s agenda.

Trust

Trust has often been identified as the primary lubricant for working relationships. It was also a major moment of truth discussed in chapter 4. Revisiting trust provides the following definitions, which are as true for internal working relationships as they are for grower relationships:

1. Dependability by doing that which has been agreed to be done. 2. Communicating by keeping everyone informed. 3. Keeping confidential information confidential. 4. Allowing individuals to do their jobs.

146 Chapter 9

Dependability It is easy to say one thing and do something different. Sometimes there is good logic to do so when additional data has emerged dictating a change in the initial decision.

Sometimes the logic is missing. People just get busy and forget or pro- crastinate. Then too we would be remiss if we failed to mention that sometimes someone commits to doing something while knowing full well that it won’t be done.

Being dependable, to build trust, requires doing that which has been agreed upon, or letting people know when it can’t be done and the reason for the change.

Communication Keeping everyone informed is a continuing challenge. Meeting this requirement can be a lot easier than one might think. There are only two questions to be considered: What information do people need to know? What is the best way to communicate that information?

Yes, processing these two questions will require a meeting. We hesitate to use that word because of the images that are evoked whenever the “meeting” word is used. Meetings, however, have gotten a bad rap. The problem invariably is how the meeting is conducted-starts late, conversation wanders, nothing is decided, ends late. How to conduct meetings is not the topic of this book, but our guess is that knowing how to run the meeting is not the problem. The problem is actually doing that which is already known about effectively conducting meetings. But that’s another story for another time.

Answering these two questions can help you define the most effective communication strategy. Once the strategy is defined, implement it consistently.

My experience shows that implementation often becomes a problem. It’s impossible to know the number of newsletters that died after the first few issues. No one had the time to continue writing it. Even staff meetings have been lost in the world of good intentions.

Confidentiality What else needs to be said to emphasize the importance of keeping confidential information confidential? It is nothing more than keeping one’s mouth shut at the proper time.

Allowing People to Do Their Jobs The final leg in building the chair of trust is allowing individuals to do their job. That means following rhis simple formula:


1. Define that which needs to be accomplished. 2. Allow the employee to decide the best way to achieve the defined

3 . Agree upon an accountability system. 4. Use the accountability system.

Too frequently managers want to tell their employees what needs to be done, how it is to be done, and when to do it. This micromanagement style consumes considerable time, is expensive, and erodes morale. One of two things needs to happen with this type of management style in a world of too much to do with too little time to do it. The manager needs to change his or her behavior and allow employees more freedom, or the manager needs to be recycled into another position or career that is more suitable to that particular management style.

results.

Respect

When I addressed respect during the discussion of the grower-relations moments of truth in chapter 4, I outlined four behaviors that can be used to institutionalize this core value. These same definitions will wark for internal customer service as well:

1. Ask employees for input when solving problems. 2. Listen to that input. 3. Use their ideas whenever possible. 4. Explain the reasons their suggestions are not used.

Ask for Input Employees appreciate the opportunity to provide input when they know for a fact that input will be seriously considered. Not many people like to be ordered around, told what to do, and how to do it. After all, employees have a brain, the ability to think in terms of specialized knowledge, and a keener understanding of issues than they are often given credit for. Here I speak about employees at all levels within the organization, not just front-line employees.

Asking for input is so easily accomplished. All that is necessary is for the manager to ask, “What do you think needs to be done?” In reality so many managers are entrenched in making all the decisions and telling their people what to do, they don’t even think about asking for input even when their employees present excellent opportunities to do so. For example, what is the typical response when an employee presents the manager a question or problem? The manager provides an answer instead of adopting the rule Bring me a solution when you bring me a problem. A red flag should go up every time an employee asks a

148 Chapter 9

manager for assistance. That flag should be a signal for the manager to ask the employee, “What do you think ought to be done?” This teaches the employee to think.

Employees may appreciate guidelines to assist their formulation of a recommendation. You may find the following such guidelines helpful:

1. Define the issue. 2. Decide on the alternatives to resolving the issue. 3. Choose an alternative. 4. Determine both the positive and negative consequences associated

with the chosen alternative.

Listen We could certainly waste words and paper by listing the behavior set associated with active listening, because knowing how to listen is generally not the problem. There are times when everyone listens very well. Lis- tening well consistently is the challenge.

Here is a simple solution: Listen to understand so you can repeat what you’ve just heard.

You may want to incorporate the following suggestion into your behavioral repertoire to improve your listening skills: “In other words, you are saying . . .”

You will be impressed with your reputation of being an effective listener. Most of us do such a lousy job listening that an excellent listener sticks out like a sore thumb. It’s amazing how much you can learn about both the person who is talking and the subject matter being discussed by listening.

To promote use of your listening skills, write yourself reminders to listen. Strategically place these reminders where they will be most beneficial for you.

Another idea for consideration is to ask your supervisor, peers, or staff to provide you with immediate feedback. Ask them to remind you when it appears that you are not listening.

My wife employs a cute technique to remind me to listen. Whenever she is talking, and it appears I’m not listening, she simply walks off without finishing the sentence. Excellent feedback-and it works!

Use the Input Watch your employees glow with pride when you use their input. You hired your employees’ total body, including their brain, not just their legs, to carry out instructions. Develop the habit of using the ideas generated by that priceless body part-the brain.

Take this excellent tool a step further and publicly recognize employ-


ees for their great contributions. You will soon have your employees’ respect and loyalty. Plus, your job will get a lot easier and you will perhaps have more time on your hands. Now, that would be nice, wouldn’t it?

Explain Why Input Is Not Used Being asked to provide input that eventually finds its way into that bottomless black hole is frustrating and demoralizing. Chronically failing to provide feedback leads employees to the conclusion their input is not valued. They feel betrayed and manipulated to think the opportunity for input was valid, when in fact the decision was probably already made and the request for their input was mere courtesy.

Employees will understand a logical explanation detailing the reasons their suggestions were not used. They may not like the final decision but will appreciate being told the fate of their involvement.

Communication

As we address the value of communication, it is interesting to note the interrelationship of teamwork core values, because three major components of communication have been previously discussed within the trust and respect categories. These three are:

1. Keeping employees informed. 2. Keeping confidential information confidential. 3. Asking for employee advice.

Honesty I am going to add a fourth characteristic-honesty. The prevailing question is, What can be done to promote honest communication?

Present the facts. As much as you can, present the hard numbers summarized in reports. For example, instead of telling people about the budget crunch, show them the financial facts of the budget. Share as much data on a regular basis as possible-production, quality, and safety, to mention a few. Managers often make the assumption that people are not interested in such things, but most are. Remember that people are interested in just about anything that is associated with their company and employment. Why do you think the rumor mill is so active?

A similar scenario is presenting the logic of decisions instead of telling others, “I just think it is best,” or something like “It was my decision to make, and I made it.” These types of responses give the impression that something is being hidden. Such impressions are obviously contrary to creating an environment of honesty.

150 Chapter 9

Immediately admitting making a mistake is an excellent tool to communicate honesty. Think about the impact of honestly exclaiming, “I really blew that one.” People like to hear the truth. Telling the truth encourages others to do the same.

Contrast the impact of telling the truth with that of pointing a finger and blaming another person. Doing so tells others it is okay for them to do the same. I don’t believe that is the teamwork corporate culture you want in your company.

Positive Attihtde

The last value contained in our Teamwork Vision Statement is exhibiting a positive attitude. This value may be defined in the following manner:

1. We look for the good in every situation. 2. Mistakes represent learning opportunities. 3. We are friendly to each other.

We Look for the Good in Every Situation Something good always emerges from the ashes of adversity. In the day- to-day operating world there are several opportunities to see this good. For example, the frustration and disappointment that occur in working relationships with our internal customers actually represent opportunities to improve instead of succumbing to the typical display of emotion, followed by doing nothing.

Then, too, the mere fact of coping with adversity makes individuals and organizations stronger. We must remember that today’s challenges are the footsteps leading to tomorrow’s successes.

Mistakes Are Learning Opportunities Mistakes actually teach us how not to do something. Conversely, they can teach us how to do something if the student within each of us will wake up and learn.

Managers obviously play an important role in setting the stage for the implementation of this kind of learning behavior (as they do with all the others). It is time to revisit the results Daniel Oestreich and Kathleen Ryan report in their book Driving Fear out of the Workplace-that 70 percent of employees are afraid to express themselves in organizations for fear of retaliation. Mistakes in these organizations drive the “cover your behind’’ mentality. How can an environment characterized by teamwork, trust, respect, communication, and a positive attitude be created under the umbrella of fear? It’s not going to happen.

We think you will agree that a better way is to recognize the teacher


named “mistake” and identify what we have learned from having experienced it.

We Are Friendly to Each Other If you want to have a little fun, ask your fellow employees to define the word “friendly.” That can be a difficult assignment for a word that we use so readily-as if everyone understands it.

The employees with whom we’ve worked define this word every day by smiling at each other, offering friendly greetings such as “Good morning,” and talking in terms of the other person’s interests. You can add to the list, but these examples demonstrate the fact this abstract word can be defined, in fact, quite easily. Special training is not required to implement these behaviors: It’s a matter of doing.

ATouch of Humor

Before proceeding to the next section, in which I illustrate how to develop strategies to promote effective working relationships, there is a bit of humor to be shared in this discussion of teamwork core values. I’ve discussed the importance of offering behavioral definitions to institutionalize internal working relationships. Can you imagine published corporate culture values that read something like the following?

Empowemzent

Authority to make decisions is tightly vested in the CEO and other senior managers. All employees are encouraged to ask for permission to make an independent decision.

Cooperation

Take care of your own business and keep your nose out of the business of others.

Trust

We don’t do what we say we will do; instead, we say one thing and do something else.

Communication

We tell the employees only what we think they need to know. Further- more, employees are not encouraged to express their opinions.

152 Chapter 9

Openness

Establishing fear in the workplace is the rule rather than the exception. Employees need to know that quick and severe consequences will be forthcoming upon saying or doing something stupid.

For just a moment suppose the internal culture could be described as what I’ve humorously presented here. I think you would agree that such an organization would find it difficult, if not impossible, to improve the grower-relations culture as encouraged in this book. On the other hand, aligning the core values of the internal structure to complement the desired grower relations provides the opportunity for everyone to win.

Your Option of One or Two Vision Statements

Another option to accomplish this alignment, as you probably already. have surmised, is to write one statement that outlines the desired behaviors for both the grower-relations culture and the teamwork culture. In the preceding example I presented a separate statement for the internal working relationship to demonstrate the flexibility of adding some different values. It is possible that you will have additional values for your internal working relationship. For example, some that have been used in my work with organizations have included

Challenging work Creativity Enthusiasm Individual growthkontribution Progressive thinking Quality Safety

It is fine to use either the same or different vision statements. The choice is yours. The important point is to define the desired behaviors that drive your defined culture.

Walking the Talk

Because of the organizational syndrome I’ll believe it when I see it, the importance of the supervisor modeling desired teamwork behavior cannot be overemphasized. Relying on the “Keep It Simple” philosophy, managers can lead by example to improve the working relationships within their department, and cooperate with other departments by using the very useful formula you’ve seen before:


1. Define the behaviors that need improvement. 2. Implement the improvements. 3 . Evaluate success.

Students Become the Teachers

One excellent procedure is to ask the employees to be their manager’s teacher. In doing that the employees list the behaviors their manager could implement to help them be more successful. The manager completes the same assignment-that is, identifies what the employees can do to help h idher be more successful. The manager and staff decide on the final list.

For example, one staff suggested their manager could help them to be more successful by

1. Providing a better definition of “priorities” to ensure they were

2. Listening to the facts before making decisions to ensure that deci-

3 . Identifying those decisions that could be moved closer to the grower.

The manager made two suggestions: First, the staff were asked to bring a solution with their problem, and second, they were asked to express their disagreement with the manager.

This information is presented in a report card format, and each employee receives a copy to serve as a daily reminder of what each party has agreed to do to help each other.

After four to six weeks the department can monitor improvement by simply checking the level of progress. The staff obviously rates the per-

completing priority items in an ever-changing environment.

sions are based upon solid information.

Table 9.1 Teamwork Report Card

Intradepartmental Staff Recommendations Excellent Good Fair Poor

1. Defines priorities better. ~~~-

making decisions. ~~~~

3. Empowers us to make decisions.

2. Lets us present the facts before

~~~-

Manager Recommendations 1. Recommends a solution when

2. Lets me know when you disagree presenting a problem. _ _ _ _ ~ ~

with me. ~~~~

154 Chapter 9

formance of their supervisor, who in turn rates the performance of the staff. Another excellent procedure is to ask each party to rate his or her own progress. Doing so allows a comparison of the self-rating to the rating provided by the other.

This simple report card procedure is an excellent communication tool for the department to address what can be done to improve the working relationship. The measured progress identifies areas for continued improvement, as do the differences in perceptions between the self-rating and that of the staff.

We must remember a very crucial aspect of organizational life-we serve as each other’s mirrors. The only way to know if we are helping each other is to communicate, talk to each other, give each other feedback. The simplicity of the report card system provides the opportunity to share important feedback.

The manager’s desire to strive for continuous improvement is the important point in the process of identifying what needs to be done to improve the working relationship. This attitude encourages employees to assume a partnership role to drive the success of working together. It is the manager’s responsibility to create the psychological environment in which employees feel free to express their opinions without fear of retaliation.

Building Stronger Bridges

A similar process is used to identify what needs to be done for the various departments to help each other be more successful. First, two departments need to agree to improve their teamwork. Second, the respective department managers should ask their staff what the other department can do to help them be more successful.

Note the importance of identifying behaviors to improve the working relationship, as opposed to identifying those behaviors that are frag- menting the working relationship. Let’s explain the reason for using this procedure.

Have you noticed how defensive you become when someone offers you constructive feedback that you know is true? Becoming defensive is part of your natural defense system designed to protect yourself emotionally. This emotional immunity system operates on the same principle as the physical one-remove all foreign objects that could cause bodily harm. Constructive criticism is one of these foreign entities.

To bypass the defense system, the focus is on improving behavior instead of telling each other what is wrong.

While completing research for this book, I had the opportunity to ask department managers what might be done to help each other be more


successful. Because the focal point was live production, the following information pertains to the working relationship between live production and the other departments of the complex.

What the Feed Mill Can Do to Help Live Production Be More Successful 1. Meet the defined delivery schedules. 2. Prevent feed spillage at the farm. 3 . Prevent damage to the roads and farm equipmentfbuildings. 4. Follow the biosecurity procedures. 5 . Ensure truck drivers are trained to operate the truck. 6. Divide feed according to the schedule.

What Live Production Can Do to Help the Feed Mill Be More Successful 1. Provide accurate directions to the farm. 2. Put signs on farms. 3. Put numbers on feed bins. 4. Provide accurate inventories. 5 . Submit timely orders to ensure organizing schedules to meet the

6. Maintain good roads on the farm. 7. Help schedule needed feed delivery to prevent weekend calls. 8. Provide feedback on the quality of service.

grower’s needs.

What Live Haul Can Do to Help Live Production Be More Successful 1. Keep the farm clean. 2. Keep from damaging property. 3. Catch the birds as scheduled. 4. Pick up dead birds. 5. Communicate any problems or property damage to the field serv-

6. Treat the birds in a manner so the grower knows that the catchers

7. Keep cages and other equipment repaired as needed. 8. Keep all equipment in the actual loading area.

ice representative immediately.

are concerned about the birds.

What Live Production Can Do to Help Live Haul Be More Successful 1. Distribute catch schedule in a timely manner. 2. Ensure that birds are ready to be picked up. 3. See that loading areas are in good shape. 4. Make sure the houses are dry. 5. Remove any dead birds from the house prior to live haul arriving

6. Make sure that the grower is available at the start of catching. on the farm.

156 Chapter 9

What the HatcherylBreeder Can Do to Help Live Production Be More Successful

1. Produce top-quality chicks. 2. Ensure more uniform flock sources. 3. Communicate any variance to the delivery schedule immediately.

What Live Production Can Do to Help HatcherylBreeder Be More Successful

1. Send additional labor to the farm to unload chickslpoults. 2. Improve broiler-house temperatures. 3. Immediately communicate changes in schedules to place chicks/

4. Communicate problems concerning the quality of chicklpoults.

The preceding information is offered to stimulate ideas, and I strongly encourage you to complete the exercise within the complex. Decide what is needed from each other to promote success of the operations. The report card format can be easily adapted to the interdepartmental working relationship, as illustrated in table 9.2. Ensure that every employee has a

poults.

Table 9.2 Teamwork Report Card

Intradepartmental Live Production Needs from Feed Mill 1. Meet the defined delivery schedule. 2. Prevent feed spillage at the farm. 3. Prevent damage to the road and

farm equipmendbuildings. 4. Follow the biosecurity procedures. 5. Ensure truck drivers are trained

regarding truck operations. 6. Divide feed as scheduled.

Feed Mill Needs from Live Production 1. Give accurate directions to the farm. 2. Put signs on farms. 3. Put numbers on the feed bins. 4. Take accurate inventories. 5. Submit timely feed orders. 6. Maintain good roads on the farm. 7. Help schedule feed delivery to

8. Provide feedback on feed quality. prevent weekend calls.

Excellent Good Fair Poor

~~~~

~~~~


copy of the report card to serve as a daily reminder of what has been agreed to do to help other departments. Table 9.2 is offered to illustrate the process.

After a period of several weeks the employees in both departments can rate the other to provide feedback regarding the progress being made. The departments can also rate themselves to provide a comparison of their perception with that of their internal customer’s.

The essence of this procedure is to implement a simple process to identify specific action steps to improve teamwork and provide a feedback system regarding the implementation of these action steps. Helping each other has a way of making each other’s job a little easier.

In the age of the computer I need also mention that technology is available to measure both intradepartment and interdepartment working relationships on-line. The TeamMaxTM team-building methodologies provide the opportunity to establish an ongoing measurement process of the working relationships in a manner similar to the way an organization provides ongoing measurement of the technical aspects. These methodologies are designed to promote development of the manager’s performance as well as teamwork. To learn more about this technology, contact Peoplesystems Software, Inc., at 800-709-6778.

Personal Requirements to lead the Grower-Relations Culture

Know who you are. The manager’s job requires the use of resources to have a successful

department. These resources include the growers, employees, poultry, other departments, budgets, equipment information, and company policies, to name a few. The manager must know the strengths and weaknesses of each of these resources to utilize them successfully in an effort to be a high-performing, profitable department and company.

The same is true at a personal level, where the resources are divided into three broad categories: thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. Within these categories are included a variety of information such as personal motivation, interpersonal skills, willingness to change, creativity, and emotional stability.

These resources can be further categorized into strengths and weaknesses. For example, willingness to change may be a personal strength while one’s lack of effective interpersonal skills constitutes a weakness.

The important point is to know your personal strengths and weaknesses, as these are the resources that are going to drive your success.

It is a sad commentary, but it is estimated that at best you are using 10 percent of your human potential. What would happen to your organization if you used only 10 percent of the resources available? Disaster.

158 Chapter 9

To make matters worse, there is a relatively low percentage (10 percent) of people who are committed to developing their personal potential. One of the major reasons for this is that humans tend to take the path of least resistance and do that which is easy. Yes, humans tend to be lazy. They get into ruts-doing today what was done yesterday and using today to predict what will be done tomorrow. I have an interesting question for you. What is the difference between a rut and a grave? The depth! Which speaks to the fact that you must select your ruts very carefully, as one tends to be in them for a very long time.

I’m sure that you recognize that managers do not have the luxury to be lazy. Most managers are in their positions because they are able to “get things done.” Being a high performer continues to be a prerequisite for success, and for being a role model to employees.

The second reason most people do not develop their potential is they do not know how. Very little if any focus is directed to teaching people how to develop their human potential. Unfortunately, doing so is not the subject matter of this book. I can say, though, that those individuals who are committed to personal development are standing on the edge of their personal comfort zone. They are constantly looking for ways to improve, and challenging themselves by taking the risk to step out of their comfort zone and travel uncharted waters.

Knowing your personal strengths and weaknesses, unfortunately, is not as easy as looking into the mirror to see your personal characteristics. That, too, requires an effort on your part. To complicate matters, each of us has an emotional blind spot, or scotoma. There are certain characteristics that are not readily obvious. For example, I’m reminded of a manager who complained about the plant manager’s being autocratic, dictatorial, and unwilling to listen to the presented facts. Guess who was also autocratic, overbearing, and wouldn’t listen to other people? You’re right-that very manager. But he was not able to see that he used the very behaviors he complained about.

Being sighted does not equal seeing. There are certain behavioral characteristics of our own that we have a very hard time seeing. The old clichC “See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil, do no evil” seems to be appropriate here. Think of your emotional blind spot as a protective shield. It is protecting you from yourself.

Perhaps the protective shield is keeping uncomfortable information from entering your consciousness. The challenge, then, is to learn and grow to the point where you can remove at least portions of the shield.

Think about the company for just a moment. You certainly do not want the company to be a victim of itself, and you work diligently to identify and remove those things that sabotage the company’s performance. That only makes sense. Consider doing the same for yourself, so


that your own bad habits no longer interfere with achieving performance excellence.

When the Student Is Ready, the Teacher Appears

Changing requires a commitment to personal learning. Constantly ask yourself, “Why did I think, feel, or act that way?” Another important self-examination question is “What did I learn about myself during that experience? ” Opening yourself to personal learning through asking such probing questions will produce significant insights. Answers will appear in the conscious level of thought at the most unexpected times-while driving, just before going to sleep or immediately upon waking, and while completing your exercise routine.

Also, watch how what you do and say impacts others. You can see the behaviors that negatively impact your working relationships. Demon- strate your commitment to continuous learning by changing such behaviors. Focus on doing that which promotes positive working relationships.

Another activity that can be a good source of information is the completing of self-assessment tools. There is a multitude of such instruments available that allow the individual to assess almost everything imagin- able. But remember to complete such instruments with an open mind. You may not agree with the complete assessment, but continuously ask yourself the question “Could this really be me?”

The last source of information you need to continue the personal learning curve is the people with whom you live andor work. Ask trusted individuals about their perception of your behavior. Ask them to watch you and offer suggestions for improvement. Everyone could benefit from a coach-another set of eyes to help you see yourself.

Getting to Know Me Is My Greatest Challenge

The key that will allow you to see the truth is your willingness to accept the pain of the truth. But there is no other option if you want to be a high performer. And being a high performer is the only option to lead your employees to want to offer impeccable internal customer service and be leaders in the emerging field of grower relations.

10

Bird’s-Eye View

Resistance is typically considered an enemy of

the change process, whereas I propose that you

consider it as a friend of the change process.

Understanding the four sources of resistance

will promote understanding that resistance is a

normal component of the change process.

There are ten strategies that can be used to

transform resistance into energy for the change

process.

The respective sources of resistance interact with

each of the five distinct phases of change, and

you will learn which strategy to use to facilitate

the change process.

Working with resistance will actually guide you

to do a more effective job leading the change

effort.

161



Leading Change

You can pull a rope anywhere but you cannot push it anywhere.

ow it’s time to pull it all together. The preceding chapters of this N book show how to implement each of the major components of the grower-relations culture. Now is the time to implement. I say that, knowing full well that even using the word “change” calls forth a multitude of reactions-not all of them positive.

This chapter provides crucial information to lead the change effort while using resistance to change to promote the effort. You will learn:

1. The four major sources of resistance. 2. The ten strategies to work with resistance. 3. The dynamics associated with the five stages of change.

Learning to Like Resistance

Let’s begin by discussing everyone’s favorite subject-resistance. The problem is, resistance has acquired a bad reputation. Resistance is not bad-it is good. I’ll explain that statement.

According to a current Webster’s, resistance is “the power to resist; specifically, the ability of an organism to ward off disease.” Change is often perceived as a disease instead of a healthy entity. Let’s return to Webster’s. “Resist” is defined as “to withstand, oppose, fend of f , stand firm against, oppose actively, fight, argue, or work against. ”

I would have to agree that all of these words sound negative. The key words to the argument that resistance is good, however, are “the ability of an organism to ward off disease.”

Resistance can be thought of as an organizational immunity system. Its primary function is to protect the organization against foreign entities. There is no resistance until the foreign entity, in this case change, is detected. Upon being detected, the immunity system is activated for the right reason to protect the organization.

Resistance, therefore, is telling you that people are experiencing change. You do want people to experience change, right? Therefore, re-

162

Leading Change 163

sistance is telling you exactly what you want to hear. That’s not bad, that’s good!

The reason resistance has acquired such a bad reputation is that people fail to realize what I just told you. Instead, they find it all very uncomfortable. Humans have the tendency to avoid that which is uncomfortable and therefore allow change efforts to wither on the vine. The problem is that the employees responsible for implementing change do not know how to work with resistance, to use it as fuel to propel change. They succumb to the pain and let yet another change effort enter the Idea of the Month Cemetery located just behind the complex office.

Understanding the Four Sources of Resistance

Number One: Easier to Remain as Is

The recognition that implementing a change effort to improve grower relations can be a win-win-win for the company and grower does not negate the fact that it is easier to continue with the existing grower- relations culture than to change it.

Think of the existing day-to-day working relationship as the organizational comfort zone. The culture may not be defined on paper, but these behaviors are fundamental characteristics of the company. Inte- grating the content of this book into your culture will change the comfort zone.

There are multiple factors emerging from this source of resistance. First is that hard work is required. To improve the grower-relations culture means that employees and growers must do things differently. Now you see the problem. A very easy illustration of this point is for you to clasp your hands. Is your left or right thumb on top? Now clasp your hands so the other thumb is on top. Uncomfortable, isn’t it? With practice, clasping your hand with this thumb on top could become comfortable, but that would require focused effort on your part. It’s just easier to remain with your existing way of clasping your hands.

It is certainly easier to continue relying on the organizational comfort zone than to implement the process outlined in this book. This brings to mind an outdated clichC, which states, ‘‘If you continue to do that which you’ve always done, you will continue to get that which you’ve always gotten.” The question is, Are the existing behaviors getting the company/grower working relationship where it needs to be to ensure the success of both parties? If not, the answer is to change.

Second, time is required to implement changes. Let’s continue with the clasping-your-hands example. Time would be needed to practice the

164 Chapter 10

behavioral change for the new hand clasp to become comfortable. This is in stark contrast to the fact that we live with a microwave mentality. We want everything now. The speed at which technology changes is in part creating this microwave mentality. The computer used to write this book was outdated the day it was purchased. The race is on to find a faster everything. When it comes to people changing, though, the old- fashioned rule applies that change takes time.

Time is also required to change an organization’s culture. Some experts believe that three to five years of focused effort are required to make a significant impact upon the culture. Thinking about these time requirements can be disheartening. You will want to make a significant impact immediately. And that can be done.

Look at the culture in another perspective. Organizationally speaking, your company will be working on the grower-relations corporate culture for the life of the company. Those that follow you will, we hope, continue your good work. It is a timeless task.

Third, for a variety of reasons some growers and employees want everything to remain as is. They are satisfied. A manned shuttle mission requires more fuel the first six feet of the journey, to lift the deadweight from the launch pad, than is required for the remainder of the journey. In the case of change not only must the inertia of deadweight be overcome, but generally there will be growers and employees who actively resist the change. These people work against the change effort. Can you imagine the shuttle being sent into orbit without removing the support that is holding it up? That would be tragic.

In OUT research with growers we found growers who are extremely satisfied with their working relationship. But even the very controversial topic of money generates different opinions. Of course everyone wants to make more money. But the competitive nature of the contract has a history of success, and many growers like the opportunity to be paid according to their performance. On the other hand, there are growers who desire a level playing field.

Even the subject of this book has varying degrees of support. Some growers and employees consider this book a waste of time, effort, and paper. Others believe this is the right book for the right time.

Number Two: Fear of the Unknown

Walking down a new road creates uncertainty. You don’t know what you will find on this journey, or what will happen. There is a multitude of questions without answers. Will growers try to take advantage of thc effort to improve working relationships? Can employees be successfully empowered? Are mistakes really learning opportunities, or opportuni-

Leading Change 165

ties to punish? Will creating avenues for grower input be a successful avenue to improve the working relationship? Or will structuring more input from both employees and growers lead to a travesty? What happens if we start this stuff and it doesn’t work?

Growers may also experience some concern. Is this a really serious effort or wasted words? Will the company address only the minor issues, leaving the major ones unattended? Growers consistently at the top of the pay scale may wonder if changes will adversely affect their income (don’t mess with success).

Unanswered questions are uncomfortable. A risk is required to obtain the answers.

For example, a company decided to implement its first grower survey. The decision to do so was not an easy one. There was considerable ap- prehension on the part of the management staff about the results. Will the only participants be those growers who want to hammer the company? Will information be obtained that can be used to improve the working relationship? Will the growers take this initiative seriously and realize the company’s intent to improve the working relationship? What if the initiative fails?

Fear chipped away at the confidence to complete the survey, but it was completed anyway and very successfully.

Throughout the process of completing research for this book numerous employees discussed in one breath the benefits associated with a formalized procedure to obtain grower input. In the next breath, however, they discussed the fear associated with opening those doors.

As I’ve discussed previously, fear is a characteristic of the industry. Growers are fearful that the company will terminate the contract, leaving them with a debt that cannot be serviced. Poultry companies are fearful of the potential consequences of growers’ attempts to organize.

The inherent fear of the change process can have a paralytic effect. It can lock you into the comfort zone unless you understand the dynamics of the change process and use fear as an energy source for change.

Number Three: Personal Consequences

This source of resistance can be summarized in one question: “What will happen to me?” Notice that the issue of fear creeps in again!

There are several concerns that could arise from this sodrce of resistance. The issue of job security can certainly have a major impact upon one’s willingness to take a risk. What will happen to one’s status within the company if a major effort to improve grower relations is implemented and not successful? Or worse, if it leads to a deterioration in the working relationship?

166 Chapter 10

Growers may also be concerned about their personal consequences. Will the changes affect their payment? Some may even wonder if changes will adversely affect the contract, or possibly terminate it. Will they have to change how they manage their farms?

This issue speaks also to the importance of the culture associated with internal customer service. The degree that risk taking is encouraged or that mistakes are viewed as learning opportunities will impact the willingness of employees to participate in the risks associated with improving grower relations.

Personal consequences may also emerge as an issue during the process of moving decisions closer to the grower. Managers may question their personal worth as employees are empowered to make decisions that were once their personal domain. The potential loss of status or emerging feelings of worthlessness can have a devastating impact on an individual. And then there is the issue of what happens when more authority is delegated and the person misuses that authority or blatantly makes a wrong decision.

The consideration of personal consequences is definitely a factor in deciding the degree of risk a person is willing to take.

Number Four: Con/ision

The emergence of confusion, arising from a variety of sources, also enters the equation. The discomfort associated with the previous three sources of resistance will bring several questions to the fore: Should the company enter into the process to improve this aspect of its corporate culture or remain as is? What happens if the effort is initiated and fails? Do we have the stamina to persist when the going gets tough?

The confusion associated with such questions is itself uncomfort able. The natural tendency to avoid that which is uncomfortable on1 adds to the confusion. The overriding question, then, remains: Why should a process in which there is so much confusion and discomfort be continued?

The answer is simple: Resistance is a normal process of getting to where you want to go. Now let’s work with this resistance.

4

Ten Strategies to Work with Resistance

There are ten strategies that can be used to reduce the intensity of the resistance. Each of these ten strategies will be discussed to facilitate understanding how each is used during the actual change process.

Leading Change 167

1. Remaining as Is Is No Option

A decision has to be made that maintaining the existing company- grower corporate culture is not an option. Improvements are needed.

This decision must be made on facts. An effective strategy is to conduct brainstorming sessions with employees and/or growers to identify reasons improvements must be made.

Sharing this list with all employees and growers again communicates the seriousness of this effort.

There are several broad initiatives that are driving the winds of change. These include but are certainly not limited to the following:

1. Environmental issues. 2. Increased threat of legislation. 3. Taking advantage of the worldwide opportunities to provide poul-

try to developing countries. 4. Improving profitability of both grower and company. 5. Public health. 6 . Available workforce.

There are certainly others that you can add to the list, and many of these may be specific to your particular location. The important point here is to create a major energy source to propel the change effort. As I will discuss more specifically in this chapter, a great deal of energy is required to move the organization out of its comfort zone. This is the energy source that will accomplish this feat.

There is the temptation to assume everyone knows the reasons driving the change and therefore not to complete this strategy. Resist this temptation and conduct a formal process to define the list of reasons driving the change effort.

2. Lock onto the Vision

I cannot overemphasize the importance of this strategy. As I will depict later in this chapter, this is the energy source that will pull you through the difficult storms of resistance.

When the vision is lost, or worse yet never defined, people give up. You know that at a personal level when working to change a bad habit. For example, losing weight and stopping the use of tobacco products are two behaviors that numerous people have tried to achieve without success. The reason people quit trying to change the bad habit is that the discomfort associated with changing the behavior is greater than the excitement associated with the vision of being fifty pounds lighter or living in a tobacco-free environment. Without an exciting vision the change effort loses the necessary energy to continue.

168 Chapter 10

3. Expect Resistance

As mentioned in the previous section, not everyone will jump onto the bandwagon to improve grower relations. It really is a paradox how something that can be so good for the company grower and industry will not be welcomed with open arms. But that is the way it is. The resistance will fit into two categories: active and passive.

Active resistance is the preferred of the two sources. Active resistance is characterized by employees and/or growers openly expressing their displeasure about the proposed changes. The aforementioned Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil, and d o no evil is the strategy of choice. These individuals want everything to remain as is, and you will hear such comments as

“If it’s not broken don’t break it.” “What we’ve been doing has gotten us this far and it is goo

“We’ve been doing it this way for twenty years and there is no rea

“Give me more money is the only change that is needed.” “I’m profitable today and I don’t want anyone to mess with success.”

Needless to say, listening to these verbalizations is not always comfortable. Often they are misperceived to be personal attacks, which serves to intensify the pain. It’s important to realize the individuals are ventilating-letting off steam. During such times it’s easy to forget that resistance is letting you know that the change effort is being felt. So resistance is telling you exactly what you want to hear: Improving grower relations is on the move.

Listen to the active resistance. Learning the specific objections can give you the information that is needed to minimize resistance. In general resistance is expressing disbelief that the change will benefit the re- sistor. Perhaps the benefits of improving grower relations need to be discussed and/or further defined. Consider each objection as a question. For example, the first three objections listed in this section speak to the issue of continuing successful management practices. The question being addressed here is, How are these changes going to benefit me? Then answer the question. The benefits can include improved scheduling of feed delivery, opportunities for additional grower input, employees having more authority to address growers, concerns in the field, and so on.

The latter two are concerns about profitability. The question really being asked is, How are improvements in grower relations going to make growers and the company more profitable? Answer the question. The improvements can lead to more effective biosecurity measures, dis-

1 enough to drive future success as well.”

son to change now.”

Leading Change 169

ease control, and poultry science practices, all of which can have a positive impact on the financial bottom line.

Considering an objection to be a question in disguise can remove some of the sting and help you maintain the necessary emotional control

In an effort to prepare for resistance from both growers and employees, conduct a brainstorming session to generate a comprehensive list of objections. Then prepare a response to each objection. Discussing the answers can serve to minimize both employee and grower resistance and prepare employees to help minimize grower resistance. Keep this list current by adding new objections identified by either employees or growers.

Openly encouraging employees and growers to identify objections sends a very strong message that it is okay to raise an objection. Actually doing so facilitates the change effort by having the opportunity to answer each objection. The greater the number of objections identified and answered, the easier the change effort can be!

Passive resistance is demonstrated by an unwillingness to participate. This can be demonstrated in a nonchalant, or “I don’t care,” attitude. It may also manifest itself in the failure to complete tasks that employee or grower know need to be done.

The most effective strategy to work with passive resistance is to convert it to active resistance by discussing it. Point out the “I don’t care” attitude, or the failure to do that which needs to be done, and ask if it is in response to the change effort. Even if employees and/or growers deny that it is, a clear message is being sent that it’s okay to discuss resistance.

1 to respond effectively to the objection. \

4. 20-60-20 Rule

This rule states that 20 percent of the growers and employees will resist efforts to improve grower relations, 60 percent will take a “wait and see” attitude, and the remaining 20 percent will be eager to participate in the change. The actual percentages may vary somewhat in actual practice, but the intent of the rule applies.

There will always be those who resist the change efforts. The resistance may in fact be couched in terms of what is best for the organization, but it is usually based on a personal agenda, that is, the change is not perceived to be a personal benefit.

This resistance always seems to startle the leaders of change even though, intellectually, they know some will resist. The important points to remember when working with this group are

1. Listen to learn about their particular resistance so that you can counter their specific objections.

170 Chapter 10

2. Structure their involvement in the change strategies to improve

3. Move on.

A word of caution is that the squeaky wheel gets the grease. Resist the temptation to spend an inordinate amount of time trying to convince the resisters to “change their minds” while sacrificing attention to the other two groups.

It is important for the 20 percent who are eager to change to know how crucial they are to the change effort. This is the group that deserves and needs the bulk of the attention. You want this group to be actively and vis- ibly involved. The formal and informal leaders who will generate the excitement for the improved grower relations will emerge from this group.

The contagious excitement generated by the top 20 percent group can encourage the “wait and see” group to join the bandwagon of change. Think of this group as hanging in the balance. Their momentum can swing to whichever group appears to be winning. It is crucial for the “wait and see” crowd to see the serious effort and success associated with the change effort. You obviously want this group to propel the success of the effort.

Who knows? Some of the hard-core resisters may ultimately change their minds and join the crowd as well.

grower relations.

5. Design and Implement Change Strategies

Talk must be converted into behavior. That means instead of talking about the importance of creating a Grower-Relations Vision Statement, one must be defined and implemented. Instead of talking about collecting data through a grower survey, the survey must be completed and the data used to improve the working relationships. Instead of talking about the importance of the moments of truth, these must be identified and implemented.

In other words, instead of simply reading this book and talking about the processes that can be used to improve the grower-relations culture, the processes must be put to work. Doing, doing, and doing becomes the battle cry instead of talking, talking, and talking.

I hesitate to bring up the importance of meetings again, but the best way to ensure that the process I’ve been discussing occurs throughout the complex is to hold regularly scheduled meetings to implement the process. The agenda items continue to be:

Improving the moments of truth. Identifying decisions that can be made closer to the grower, and strategies to improve internal customer service.

Leading Change 171

Identifying company- and grower-generated inconveniences that

Improving product knowledge. Including grower input and involvement in the process. Using survey data to improve the working relationship.

The entire process discussed in this book is not going to happen with- : the structure to make it happen. The preceding paragraph just iden- ed the major components of this structure. Now it is up to the man- :Is to ensure that this structure is institutionalized as an integral nponent of the culture. Accountability is an essential component of the structure. That is, a tem must be implemented to ensure that each step of the process is npleted on a timeline. The best way to do this is to use the state of ssouri’s “Show Me” slogan. Again, utilizing the KISS method (Keep It iple Stupid), the following is offered as a suggestion to help you see elements of the process occur:

need to be addressed.

rcess Element Accountability

iwer-Relations Vision Statement antify Collect the data iments of truth :isions made closer to the grower

The final statement

Record in a training manual Identify the decisions

)duct knowledge List of both complexwide and department-specific test scores

)W! factor Identified inconveniences and added value; recommended ideas for nontraditional service delivery

Iccountability is a lot easier than many people think. It is simply a tter of making sure that what is scheduled to be done is done and re is a process to see the completed product. This process is so simple t a report can be sent throughout the organization to share informa- i with sister complexes within the company.

Remember Murphy’s Law

need to remind vnii that the hect-laiA nlanc him= i n t e r r n l n t ; n n c L a c -

172 Chapter 10

learned as the result of Murphy sticking its ugly head into the operations? How could the process be established to ensure that a particular event does not occur again? In other words, instead of griping, groaning, moaning, and losing emotional control, accept the fact that a teacher by the name of Murphy has stepped forward to teach you something.

For example, a frequently mentioned opportunity for improvement by growers (notice the positive reinterpretation of a Murphy’s Law incident) is the schedule to deliver feed. Suppose the complex has implemented procedures for ensuring on-time feed delivery and the schedule is missed anyway. The missed schedule is an opportunity to be creative to improve the system.

7. Lead by Example

One may think this particular strategy applies only to managers, but it is relevant for all employees and growers. It has been said that the most important sentence consisting of ten two-letter words is “If it is to be, it is up to me.” In essence every employee and grower has the responsibility of showing other growers and employees how to create the desired grower- relations corporate culture defined in the Grower-Relations Vision State- ment. This is done by behaving in a manner that supports the statement.

Organizationally speaking, it is true that managers must model the behaviors expected from their employees. For example, the management staff must cooperate with each other if they expect their employees to do the same. It would be rather asinine for a given manager to bad-mouth another manager to his or her employees and expect those employees to cooperate fully with employees in that department. This is operating with two sets of rules-do as I tell you, don’t do as I do-which obviously is not an effective management strategy.

There is no way that managers can escape the awesome responsibility of leading by example. Everything said and not said, done and not done, sends a message, and someone is always watching. Managers, therefore, must be the leaders in the internal customer service process discussed in chapter 9, and must practice the behaviors described in the Grower- Relations Vision Statement.

Now that I’ve said that, let me end this section by issuing the reminder that every employee and grower must realize his or her individual responsibility to be a working partner in this relationship.

8. Reward to Suppout the Change

You are about to read two of the most difficult words in the English language. Are you ready? Thank you. Why do I say they are difficult? Be- cause they are so infrequently used.

Leading Change 173

What do you tell a stranger who happens to open a door for you? Thank you, of course. What is said if an employee does the same or other acts that benefit you in some way? Generally nothing because of the “Well, they better because they get paid to do so” mentality.

People need recognition for their effort and successes. An interesting study would be to determine who receives the most recognition for helping another person-strangers, fellow employees, growers, or family members. What do you think the results of the study would be? My guess is strangers would be the designated winners.

The interesting dilemma is that even those managers who say, “I don’t need recognition for everything I do, and others shouldn’t either-our salary is payment enough” use feedback every morning when they look into the mirror to shave, brush their teeth, or in general make sure their appearance is acceptable for public exposure. These folks will say, “But that’s different.” The principle is the same: People need to know how they are doing, and in the poultry industry employees and growers need to serve as each other’s mirrors.

Growers want to read and/or hear the words “Thank you.” As we’ve already mentioned, many growers told us they would like field service representatives to use the service report to let them know what they are doing right, not just to list those things that need to be done.

Positive recognition is even more important when implementing changes. It is a psychological system used to measure success.

9. Measure Success

This particular strategy speaks to the issue that to see change, it must be measured. I’ve discussed a variety of methodologies to measure change in perception. Once change is measured, communicate the results to show progress.

In the absence of quantifying, it is important to communicate to all employees and growers the changes being made. That can be done by generating a list of changes made to improve the working relationship, and distributing the list to all employees and growers.

Remember: Seeing is believing.

10. Communicate

A communication plan is necessary to meet the challenge to keep growers and employees informed about the changes being made and the associated progress.

There are obviously a variety of communication vehicles from which to choose. Regardless of the communication method chosen, the pri-

174 Chapter 10

mary spokesperson at the complex is the complex manager. Similarly, the president/CEO of the company is the primary spokesperson for the organization. When these individuals talk, people listen.

I will speak to the communication issue at the complex level for the purposes of this book. The particulars, of course, will generalize to other levels within the organization.

The complex manager’s presence at staff meetings throughout the organization, and at growers’ meetings to discuss the grower-relations process, sends a very strong message: This issue is important. Other managers also need to schedule time with their respective staffs to discuss all aspects of the change process. Because the management structure leads the change effort, it is crucial for these individuals to communicate the same message.

There is a responsibility to continue the communication efforts at the informal levels as well. That means discussing the change process during lunch breaks, at the water fountain, in the designated smoking areas, or wherever staff congregate.

The point is to saturate the organization with the change effort to send a very strong message about the seriousness of the effort.

What often occurs is that senior managers know a great deal about the change effort, and it is assumed that others are as knowledgeable. Communication does not occur by osmosis and requires a structure to ensure that it is working.

A regularly scheduled “Change Bulletin” can also be published to complement attendance at formal and informal staff meetings. In this instance both growers and employees receive a copy. The two topics to be thoroughly discussed are the changes being implemented and the progress being achieved.

Often, however, the first two or three issues are published as scheduled; then the enthusiasm for writing it begins to wane and the temptation is to implement the procrastination strategy. After the publication gets behind schedule, there is the tendency not to publish it at all.

Guard against these temptations. It is important to publish the Change Bulletin as scheduled to continue communicating the seriousness of this effort.

Last but certainly not least is educating field service representatives and using them as a communication conduit to discuss with growers on the farm the strategies being implemented and the associated improvements.

The content for the communication plan emerges from the other strategies:

1. The reasons Remaining as is is no option, as discussed in strategy one.

c

Leading Change 175

2. Where the change effort is leading, as described in strategy two. 3. The fact that some growers and employees may not want to

change, as discussed in strategies three and four. 4. The specific change strategies to improve the company-grower

relationship, as discussed in strategy five. 5. What was learned when Murphy’s Law started to work with the

change effort, discussed in strategy six. 6. The measured success of these strategies, as discussed in strategy

nine. 7 . Providing positive recognition for the contributions and successes

of both growers and employees, as described in strategy eight.

Leading the Change Effort Using the Ten Strategies

This section will show you how to meet the challenge to use these ten strategies in facilitating your change effort. The following discussion will describe each of the five phases of change and the particular strategies used within each phase. The five phases are

1. Frustration. 2. Honeymoon. 3. Pessimism. 4. Optimism. 5. Success.

Phase One: Frustration

The primary characteristic of this phase is to identify the reasons driving the need to improve the company-grower working relationship. In other words, remaining as is is no option.

As I’ve mentioned before, the company already has an existing company-grower corporate culture. Regardless of how that may be described, think of that culture as the company’s comfort zone. It is the status quo. It is the way of doing day-to-day business.

The challenge is to identify why the status quo is no longer an option. What are the reasons to move the organization out of the comfort zone? I discussed the identification of these reasons in strategy one and how important it is to fan the fires of being frustrated with the comfort zone by encouraging all employees to participate in the process of listing these reasons. If possible, use grower input to help identify the reasons.

The tendency is to avoid this very essential first step because identifying the reasons to change looks very much like a gripe session-nor do people like to be reminded of what is wrong. Frustration is your organi-

176 Chapter 10

Phase One: Frustration

Process of Change

Comfort

Existing culture - Push

FIGURE 10.1. Process of change: Phase one-frustration.

zation’s best friend, and the items listed can serve as excellent guides for improvement-it is imperative to know what can be improved before you can begin work. This information is crucial to stoke the fires of change. As we’ll also see in the later phases of change, this information can be used, as well, to minimize the potential damaging effects of resistance.

As depicted in figure 10.1, frustration with the status quo is the initial energy source to move the organization forward. This energy has to be of such magnitude as to begin moving the organization out of the comfort zone onto the road to change. At this point it is the only energy source encouraging change.

As soon as efforts to improve grower relations begin, resistance begins from each of the four sources and initially is stronger than the energy for change, as demonstrated in figure 10.2.

Working with Resistance The strategies used within each stage will be listed by the number associated with that strategy. For this reason the numbering will not be in sequence.

Strategy One: Status Quo Is No Option. The reasons driving the change effort have been identified through employee (and grower, when possible) input.

Strategy Three: Expect Resistance. As soon as discussion begins on improving the company-grower working relationship, expect some growers and employees to express the desire to maintain the status quo.

Leading Change

Energy for Change

177

High

Y

Low

Change - - - Resistance

I-.

I

Frustration

Time

Energy for change: Phase one. FIGURE 10.2.

Strategy Four: 20-60-20 Rule. Some percent of the growers and employees will fall into these three categories: actively resisting, waiting to see, and those eager to participate in the change effort. Structure the involvement of all three groups while knowing there will be different levels of interest in participating in the process. Remember to work very closely with those eager to participate in the change effort, as these leaders will play a major role in successfully improving the company-grower relations.

Strategy Ten: Communicate. At this point it i s important that everyone know the reasons driving the change effort. As strange as it may seem, you want to fan the fires of frustration to generate the necessary energy to move the organization out of its comfort zone.

Phase Two: Honeymoon

The primary characteristic driving this phase is the Grower-Relations Vision Statement, describing the vision of where the change effort is leading.

As previously discussed, the more input that can be received from both the employees and the growers in writing this statement, the better. Input into the vision statement encourages ownership on the part of those who participated in writing it. Ownership reduces resistance while

178

0 Comfort

Chapter 10

Phase Two: Honeymoon

Process of Change

_I___, Push

FIGURE 10.3. Process of change: Phase two-honeymoon.

Vision 0 ____, Pull

driving enthusiasm for the implementation of the stated vision. Once the Grower-Relations Vision Statement is defined, there are two sources of energy encouraging change: the frustration of the comfort zone, and the new vision. These sources are depicted in figure 10.3.

These two sources generate a great deal of interest and excitement for improving grower relations. As depicted in figure 10.4, the energy for change escalates upon writing the Grower-Relations Vision Statement, while resistance subsides.

The primary resistance operating during this phase is the fact that it is easier to remain as is.

Working with Resistance The excitement for the change is high. Achieving the desired working relationship with the growers almost seems easy. There are four strategies that can be used to facilitate the change effort.

Strategy Two: Lock onto the Vision. The process of defining the vision creates considerable excitement. Some growers and employees are hoping this is not a false set of expectations-just another idea that will die before its time.

Strategy Five: Design and Implement Change Strategies. Now it is time to convert words into action. This is done by using the contents of this book:

Administering the grower survey, to identify the benchmark data. Defining and implementing the moments of truth.

Leading Change

Energy for Change

179

High

E

N

E

R

G

Y

Low

FIGURE 10.4.

Change - - - - Resistance

L - - .

b

Frustration Honeymoon

Time

Energy for change: Phase two.

i’

Ensuring that everyone possesses the necessary product knowledge. Moving decisions closer to the grower. Implementing the WOW! factor.

Strategy Seven: Lead by Example. The leaders need to assume a very visible role to lead the change effort. Remember: Top-down change produces bottom-up commitment. This top-down change includes:

1. Being an active participant in writing the Grower-Relations Vision Statement; identifying and writing the moments of truth; working with product knowledge; moving decisions closer to the grower; implementing the WOW! factor.

2. Discussing the company-grower relations improvement process at staff and grower meetings as well as informally when talking to employees and growers.

3. Ensuring that the Change Bulletin is published and distributed according to schedule.

4. Holding the entire process accountable.

Strategy Ten: Communicate. Now it is time to fan the fires of excitement by ensuring that everyone knows where the change effort is leading. The more excitement generated, the easier for the organization to move forward.

180 Chapter 10

Phase Three: Pessimism

The predominant characteristic of this phase is the realization that the change effort is much more difficult than first realized. That is an optimistic thought, isn’t it?

Actually, improving the grower relations has entered into a very crucial stage. The pain of change may exceed the excitement of improving the working relationship with growers. Resistance is emerging from every source.

Fear of the unknown, and wondering what is going to happen with this process, continue to be factors. Are we going to make the working relationship worse? is a natural question during this stage. The fear of that happening can cause one to second-guess the wisdom of starting this effort in the first place. These fears are based on the fact that there is so much “crazy stuff” happening, and little progress is being recorded.

I t is easier to remain as is because hard work is required to make these changes. Time has to be scheduled to define the changes, and it takes time to make the changes. The entire process is consuming more of the valuable resource of time than originally expected. Then, too, not everyone is really excited about the proposed changes. The active resisters are especially vocal during this time. These folks are saying such things as, “I told you this was not going to work.”

At this point it would just seem a lot easier to admit that this effort is a mistake and return to business as usual.

Personal consequences enter the picture because the associated diffi- culties are often taken personally-‘‘I must have done something wrong!” Another prevailing thought is, “HOW is this mess going to impact my career?”

Confusion is rampant. As depicted in figure 10.5, the frustration of the comfort zone, and the vision described in the Grower-Relations Vi- sion Statement, continue to be the two energy sources encouraging change. However, humans tend to avoid that which is uncomfortable, and the resistance encourages the change agents to give up while the comfort of the comfort zone looks extremely appealing. These two energy sources encourage the termination of the efforts to improve the working relationship. The basic question being considered is, Should we abandon the effort?

As presented in figure 10.6, the energy for change has plummeted while resistance has skyrocketed. The strength of the energy sources has reversed, and the change effort is at a very critical stage because of the strong temptation to quit. Actually, quitting is more appealing than continuing the pain of change.

Leading Change 181

Phase Three: Pessimism

Process of Change

6 Push

t Pull

C 0 N F U S E D -

FIGURE 10.5. Process of change: Phase three-pessimism.

High

E

N

E

R

G

Y

Low

Energy for Change

Change - - - 1 Resistance -I- T I

- Pull -

Push

Frustration Honeymoon Pessimism

Time

FIGURE 10.6. Energy for change: Phase three.

182 Chapter 10

Working with Resistance: Part 1 No question those employees and growers who are leading the change effort are being tested. The bad news is that the test is uncomfortable and the effort to improve the working relationship often becomes a victim of the resistance. It has been estimated that some 70-80 percent of the corporate change efforts fail due to this massive resistance within the first eighteen months. The good news is the reversal of energy is a natural part of the change process, and it too can be managed and converted into energy to assist the change effort with a little work (there’s that word again).

Strategy One: Remaining as Is Is No Option. Ensure that all departments and growers review the reasons why remaining in the comfort of the comfort zone is no option. For example, without proactive leadership from the industry, federal and state governments will continue their efforts to strangle the industry with regulations that both parties will undoubt- edly find unpleasant. That fact alone is a strong stimulus to continue!

Strategy Two: Lock onto the Vision. Revisit the Grower-Relations Vision Statement and its application. The importance of the strong mag- netic quality is very evident during such difficult times. As a matter of fact, this vision is the primary energy source that will pull the change effort out of the doldrums.

Strategy Three: Expect Resistance. During the difficult times it’s easy to forget that such resistance is a normal component of the change process. With time and work this too shall pass.

Strategy Four: 20-60-20 Rule. Continue to work with the employees and growers who are actively participating in the change effort. Let the active resisters sing their tune. Listen to their words. Learn from what is being said. Continue including the resisters in the change effort, but give most of your attention to those who support the culture change being implemented.

Strategy Five: Design and Implement Change Strategies. the menu of activities already discussed:

Work with the moments of truth. Delegate decision making to the lowest possible level to get closer

Train and test product knowledge. Turn inconveniences into opportunities to improve. Implement the WOW! factor.

Continue

to the grower.

Leading Change 183

Strategy Six: Murphy’s Law. The teacher Murphy is still around. Continue to use Murphy’s Law as a learning opportunity.

Strategy Seven: Lead b y Example. It is important for those growers and employees leading the change effort to be very visible within their respective groups. This visibility of both formal and informal leaders implementing the change strategies in spite of the resistance communicates a very important message that the train of change is still on track.

Strategy Eight: Reward Change. The public recognition for those implementing change remains crucial for a couple of reasons. First, these change agents need to know they are being supported during such difficult times. Second, everyone needs to see that progress is recognized.

Strategy Nine: Measure Success. Success can be measured in a variety of ways. First is the progress associated with the actual implementation of the change strategies. Identify how service and the working relationship have been improved. Second is the use of numbers-that is, grower survey, teamwork report cards, reduction in the number of recorded inconveniences and/or complaints, and so on.

Strategy Ten: Communicate. There is no question about the importance of this strategy. The basic responsibility of ensuring that effective communication exists falls onto the shoulders of the complex manager-but all leaders, both growers and other employees, share in this responsibility.

Meeting the challenge of this responsibility means discussing grower relations at staff and grower meetings, ensuring the Change Bulletin is published as scheduled, and using electronic means of communicating that might be available, such as the Internet. The content of these communications is included in the preceding nine strategies. Openly communicating every aspect of the change process shows that it is okay to discuss the frustrations and disappointments, as well as the successes. Again, the train of change is on track and entering better times.

Phase Four: Optimism

The major defining characteristic of this phase is the realization that the effort can be successful-there is light at the end of the tunnel, and it is not an oncoming train. Implementing the ten strategies is finally paying off. Growers and employees are beginning to see progress and believing that the effort to improve the working relationship is a serious one.

184 Chapter 10

Phase Four: Optimism

Process of Change

- Push

FIGURE 10.7. Process of change: Phase four-optimism.

- Pull

As can be seen in figure 10.7, the sources of resistance have evapo- rated except for the ease of remaining as is. It is always easier, even at this stage, simply to remain as is and do nothing to change.

The energy sources have once again metamorphosed. Resistance has plummeted while energy for change has dramatically increased, as illustrated in figure 10.8.

Working with Resistance: Part 2 The change in forces does not mean that it is time to rest on the success being achieved; it is important to continue implementing the strategies to facilitate the process.

Strategy Two: Lock onto the Vision. Continue talking about the Grower-Relations Vision Statement and the importance of creating this culture.

Strategy Five: Design and Implement Change Strategies. Continue walking the talk of the moments of truth, improving product knowledge, identifying decisions to be made closer to the grower, and implementing the WOW! factor.

Strategy Seven: Lead by Example. The leaders of the change effort must continue carrying the change banner for all to see.

Leading Change 185

Energy for Change

High

G

Y

Low

FIGURE 10.8.

Change - - I Resistance /

Frustration Honeymoon Pessimism Optimism

Time

Energy for change: Phase four.

Strategy Eight: Reward the Change. Saying “Thank you” continues to be an important psychological message for those working hard to promote the new culture.

Strategy Nine: Measure Success. Seeing is believing, and measuring change continues to be the only way to see it.

Strategy Ten: Communicate. Shouting success for all to hear continues to guarantee success.

Phase Five: Success

Finally there is a sigh of relief. The change effort has successfully tra- versed the rough waters. The improvement in the working relationship is evident. The Grower-Relations Vision Statement is becoming a definite reality as the company and growers work together to help each other to be successful (figure 10.9).

The new culture is a proactive process to identify the challenges and find a way to work together to promote each other and the industry. Now there is the realization that working together creates a positive synergy to resolve the environmental issues, the demands for more regulation, and the need for increased profit margins.

Figure 10.10 points out the level of success achieved, while resistance has all but faded from one’s memory.

186

0 Comfort

Chapter 10

Phase Five: Success

Process of Change

Change 0 Push -

FIGURE 10.9. Process of change: Phase five-success.

High

Y

Low

Energy for Change

Change - - - - 1 Resistance

\ --I-,

I I

I - b

Frustration Honeymoon Pessimism Optimism SUCCESS!

Time

FIGURE 10.10. Energy for change: Phase five.

Working with Resistance: Part 3 Now a word of caution: The new culture is entering another danger zone. The temptation may be to sit back and enjoy the fruits of the work. Granted, there is the need to enjoy the success, but continue talk-

Leading Change 187

ing about the Grower-Relations Vision Statement, implementing change strategies, leading the change effort, recognizing positive contributions, measuring success, and communicating to ensure that everyone is kept informed.

Constantly but constantly keep looking for opportunities to improve. Without constant pressure to improve, the new culture can quickly fall into a state of atrophy. Remember: The rose garden will quickly grow weeds when left unattended.

Unless you are sitting on the edge of the comfort zone, you are taking up too much space.

11

Bird’s Eye View

Implement top-down change when you have

Develop those personal skills necessary to

the authority to do so.

influence those with authority to implement the

top-down change process.

189



Integrating the Parts to Make the Whole

s you read this book, you probably made the same observation I A made while working with growers and company employees-the same issues emerged regardless of whether I was talking to growers in Georgia, Mississippi, or Arkansas or company employees in Alabama, Delaware, Maryland, or the Carolinas.

Your interpretation may vary from mine, but I categorize the recur- ring incidenceshsues into the following broad categories.

1. Keep informed of the facts. 2. Have input into decisions that affect the individual. 3. Work with all parties to resolve those things that interfere with the

4. Take proactive action to promote the growth and profitability of

5. Use effective interpersonal skills to promote the working rela-

The homogeneity of the issues can actually facilitate an industrywide effort to build stronger working relationships. The U.S. Poultry & Egg Association has been the catalyst to promote an industry effort by offering seminars and by implementing an ongoing communication plan.

The U.S. Poultry & Egg Association, however, cannot do what needs to be done at the local level. The responsibility to begin such efforts virtually rests with the integrator. In turn, growers have the responsibility to cooperate in a good faith effort to promote the company-grower agenda to provide a fair profit for all parties.

The contents of this book provide you with a comprehensive model to define and measure the implementation of your desired grower-relations culture. But this model is a tool, and like any tool, its usefulness is in being used. Your next step is putting the tool to work, and that’s exactly what I want you to do.

The more authority you have within your grower-company configu- ration, the easier it is for you to put the tools contained in this book to


the industry.

tionship.

190

Integrating the Parts to Make the Whole 191

work for you. That is, if you are the president or CEO of the company, you obviously have more potential to have a positive impact on grower relations than does a complex manager, who in turn has more potential than does the live production manager or field service representative. Growers, field service representatives, and lower-level managers may very well ask the question, “Improving grower relations sounds good, but what can I do about implementing the suggestions I’ve read about in this book?” As you can see, we’re back to top-down change producing bottom-up commitment. For that reason I will address using the tools I’ve outlined in this book from two perspectives. The first is from the position of having the authority to implement top-down change. The second is from the perspective of the grower and employees, who do not have this authority.

Senior Managers Walking the Talk

This book was written in a blueprint manner to facilitate its use by senior managers in implementing cultural change. I’m sure you’ve heard the statement about meeting the challenge of eating an elephant one bite at a time; I’m advocating that you follow the same process to use this book by implementing one chapter at a time. Senior managers can do that by defining accountability procedures and associated timelines for each level of the organization to complete its responsibilities in the change process. Let’s revisit each chapter to summarize the step-by-step process to be completed, beginning with chapter 2, as chapter 1 provides a historical perspective. This summarization will give us a good opportunity to present a bird’s-eye view of the entire book. While we are doing that, I want to ask you to think of each chapter as part of a road map leading to the success of the grower relations.

Chapter 2: Review the implications of inverting the pyramid. Per- haps the most important issues to be addressed during these discussions are empowering employees and growers and seeking and using input from growers and employees throughout the organization. Realize the dangers of starting and stopping, to put another wasted effort into the Idea of the Month Cemetery. Make the commitment to begin, and establish procedures to continuously improve grower relations. Chapter 3: Schedule a process to write your desired grower- relations culture. Too often people want to jump into the middle of making changes without first creating the vision of what they really want to achieve. This speaks to the fact that to get where you want to go, you must first know where you want to go.

192 Chapter 13

Chapter 4: This chapter speaks to the heart of the changes to be made in the communicatiodworking relationship between the company and grower. Once this process is started, it never ends. An integral component is for senior managers to review corporate policies to ensure that they encourage the implementation of the desired grower-relations culture. Chapter 5: This chapter is actually a continuation of the process initiated in chapter 4, to provide additional moments of truth that you may want to incorporate into the working relationships. Chapter 6: Describes the importance of product knowledge and outlines the need to identify both companywide and department- specific product knowledge. The bottom line is that each employee knows the information needed for the successful completion of his or her responsibilities. Employees who have this product knowledge project the image of a well-organized company. Chapter 7: Speaks to the issue of moving decision making closer to the grower. Doing so requires identifying those specific decisions that are to made by the grower or field service representative. As you know, this empowerment process is easier for some individuals to implement than others, which is why such decisions need to be identified in writing instead of leaving it to the fate of one’s personality. Chapter 8: Shows you how to turn inconveniences in the working relationship into opportunities for improvement. It is tempting to begin improving grower relations by identifying issues that interfere with the working relationship and then to begin resolving these issues. Of course, it is important to do just that, and I’m suggesting there is a lot of work that needs to precede this step. Chapter 9: Teamwork within the complex is often not discussed in the same breath as with grower relations, but I contend that it is an integral component of the process and really serves as its anchor. For that reason this chapter points out a simple process that can be used to help each other be more successful within the complex, which will surely have a positive impact upon grower relations. Chapter 10: This chapter is crucial both to understand and to lead the dynamics of the change process. It’s surprising how much is written about change, yet it continues to be such a misunderstood concept. This chapter attempts to remove some of the mystery by showing you the ten strategies to work successfully with the resistance that is associated with each of the five stages of change.

t

I

Integrating the Parts to Make the Whole 193

Being a Change Agent When You Think You Can’t

Those managers with authority to implement change now have a road map to do so. Let’s turn our attention to those individuals who want to implement change without the necessary organizational authority to use that road map. Most of us have been in that position before, and it’s easy to feel helpless. But we are far from being helpless. You can be a very in- fluential person when you are using the right interpersonal skills to encourage those who have authority to improve grower relations. Let’s discuss these skills.

Be the Person Other People Like

Being liked is perhaps the most important personal characteristic to exhibit. Think about the people you don’t like for just a moment. You have no doubt noticed that you do not enjoy being around such people. One thing is for certain: you cannot hear what they say when you are not around them. Even when circumstances place you in the company of these people, you may hear their spoken word, but it is more of a challenge to listen to understand. Their words are filtered by your perceptions of the individual and are quickly discarded.

Contrast the person you don’t like with one you do. You enjoy the company of this person, so there are plenty of opportunities for him or her to influence your thinking. You listen to understand the person’s point of view quite easily. The two of you can even disagree with each other without damaging your personal relationship.

Now you must make a decision. Are you going to be a person whom others enjoy or a person who is avoided?

If you want to have a positive impact upon your grower-relations culture, I encourage you to be the person others like. It is imperative for you to be accepted by the people within the system you want to change. That acceptance will largely be determined by how you interact with those in the system. To be accepted requires that you use the moments of truth discussed in chapter 4. For the sake of the present discussion, let’s highlight some behaviors that will have a major impact upon your ability to influence change.

Friendliness Be consistently friendly. As simple as being friendly sounds, it is easy to negate the importance of greeting people with a smile while using their names. You want these behaviors to send the very important psychological message that you are glad to see them.

194 Chapter 11

Positive Attitude Exhibit a “good mood. ” That means being friendly and consistently demonstrating an optimistic attitude by looking for the good in everything that happens. Combine looking for the good with knowing that you can achieve whatever you want to achieve. Expect good things to happen. Talk about good things happening.

The popularity of the rumor mill is testimony to the fact that people usually enjoy talking about the ugly things in life. Talking about such things has the negative impact of making you feel bad. Griping and groaning is no way to influence people. You only acquire the reputation of being just that-a negative person. If you are a grower, you want to emphasize the positive characteristics about being a poultry farmer and working with your company. If you are an employee, you want to emphasize the benefits associated with working with your growers and company. Take note that being positive is a very powerful magnet. Peo- ple are generally flooded with the negative characteristics of living, and being positive is “that breath of fresh air.”

Yes, most of us have our bad moments. We get depressed, we worry, and we even exhibit anger from time to time. Plus, change is not a straight-line function. As discussed in chapter 10, frustrations and disappointments pave the road of change. Sometimes it seems that you take two steps backward for every step you take forward. Or your words of wisdom fall onto deaf ears. When you experience such frustrations, you have the option to act like a victim or use the experience as a teacher and learn from it. You can be a better person, grower, and/or employee as the result of successfully meeting such challenges. You simply have to define how you have improved as the result of the experience.

Before you think this conversation is too Pollyannaish, it’s perfectly okay to let others know when you are disappointed or experiencing some difficult times. But that can be done without a volcanic emotional eruption. As a matter of fact, I encourage you to leave ranting and raving to your private moments. Think about the destructive impact demonstrating fits of anger has upon the working relationship. You can rest assured that demonstrating anger will interfere with your ability to influence positive change. You cannot openly demonstrate anger toward those who have the authority to implement change and then expect those folks to listen and accept your suggestions willingly.

There is another personal characteristic that fits into this discussion, and it is the person who has the reputation of having mood swings. One day you can work with this person successfully; the next day he or she acts like a volcano ready to erupt. And then there are those days when the eruption occurs and you never know when it will happen.

You can never guess what mood such individuals will be in until you

lntegrating the Parts to Make the Whole 195

see them. Consequently, you feel compelled to be on your guard constantly when working with them.

Do you enjoy working with such mood swings? Most of us don’t. People won’t enjoy working with your mood swings, either.

Yes, we all have our emotional ups and downs. On those days when your emotional and/or physical energy is at a lower level, you can exert a little more effort to regain your positive demeanor. Or let people know that your fuel tank is on empty. In spite of this you can continue to use the interpersonal skills that will promote good working relationships. Self-discipline and emotional control need to be the rule rather than the exception.

Cooperation Acquire the reputation of being cooperative. Cooperation is defined behaviorally by helping others to be successful. That means doing that which you know needs to be done without being told; or, when you have agreed to do what is suggested by your supervisor or field service representative, then do it. Develop the reputation of being proactive to get things done.

There are four other behavioral characteristics associated with cooperation that need to be mentioned. First is participating in company functions. Be present at every function sponsored by the company. Sec- ond, when volunteers are requested, be one of the first to raise your hand. Third, work to create a win-win environment. Look for ways to collaborate and reach long-term solutions that are beneficial to all parties involved. Doing this requires that you practice the skill of listening to understand the other person’s point of view. In essence, work to support the grower-company agenda as opposed to your personal agenda. Fourth, work with an open agenda. There is no substitute for being honest or, as it is often expressed, for “being on top of the table.” Let people know what you are doing instead of operating with a hidden agenda.

Understanding Change

Read, reread, and reread again chapter 10. Know how to implement change.

An overlooked strategy in the change process is identifying the specific reasons why the status quo is no longer an option. Most people assume that everyone understands the obvious reasons driving change. As a change agent you must document the reasons change is imperative instead of depending upon understanding by osmosis or assuming that others know.

A second major initiative is to define what you want the change to look like when it’s completed.

196 Chapter 11

These two objectives are the starting points, and you will continue to edit both of these as you work to introduce and implement change.

Timeliness

A most frustrating element occurs when you are gung ho about your idea and you seem to be the only one who is. Too frequently individuals mismanage such resistance. Remember: Getting upset at the obstacles and doing anything that can sabotage the working relationship can interfere with your being a change agent. Instead, listen to what those who do not support your idea are saying. Initially they resist simply by saying they are not convinced. Ask them about their reasons for not accepting your idea. As you learn this information, then you can modify your list of reasons dictating change and/or where you think the change effort ought to lead.

By all means be persistent. Most people quit at the first hint of resistance. It’s amazing how an idea that is not accepted today becomes one of tomorrow’s best ideas. The poultry industry has no way of knowing the progress that has been lost because someone had a good idea and did not follow through on it.

There is no magic formula that I am aware of that indicates when the timing is right to introduce an idea of change. Unfortunately, the human tendency is to not change unless forced to by a crisis. I am not advocating that you create crises to force change, but this fact does speak to the importance of documenting the reasons driving the recommended change. Then be persistent. Continue introducing the idea at appropriate moments without being a pest. Remember: If others become tired of your constantly badgering them about something, your good idea gets lost in the damaged personal relationships.

In Closing

We’re at the end. At the risk of being redundant, I hope you put the contents of this book to work for you. The future growth of the industry is dependent upon growers and companies working together to ensure one another’s success.

If you should have any questions about the content herein, or about how to use the information, please contact me.

How to Contact the Author

arry Cole, Ph.D., founded Cole Training Consultants, which special- L izes in implementing organizational change. He is also cofounder of Peoplesystems Software, Inc., which created the TeamMaxTM software to measure working relationships within organizations.

His professional career includes several changes. He began by teaching college, which was followed by an eleven-year stint as a chief executive officer of a comprehensive mental health center. Next he worked with a marketing research firm and served as a radio talk show host until he founded his own firm in 1989.

As an author, he wrote the book Frustration Is Your Organization’s Best Friend, a syndicated newspaper column, and numerous articles on change and grower relations.

He is a member of the National Speakers Association and is nationally recognized as a speaker on change teamwork and personal motivation.

Please contact the author with your questions or when you need a speaker or a consultant.

Larry Cole, Ph.D. Cole Training Consultants 5 Towering Pines Conway AR 72032 1-800-8 80-1 728 Voice

[email protected] www.peoplemax.net

1-501-327-41 16 FAX

197



Appendix A

Grower Relations Survey

First Example

This survey is included as an example, and for your use and modification to meet your unique set of needs.

Instructions. Please indicate the extent you agree with each statement by circling a number ranging from Number Seven (Strongly Agree) to Num- ber One (Strongly Disagree).

My Field Service Representative Strongiy Strongly Agree Disagree

1. Refrains from adjusting equipment unless the health of the bird is being threatened.

2. Trusts me to do what is right. 3. Respects my knowledge by allowing me

to try my ideas after discussing them with himher.

biosecurity practices.

regarding use of medications.

necessary.

changes.

4. Keeps me informed about disease and

5. Informs me as to why a decision was made

6. Can make the decision to remove feed if

7. Explains reasons for making equipment

7 6 5 4 3 2 1 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

7 6 . 5 4 3 2 1

7 6 5 4 3 2 1

7 6 5 4 3 2 1

7 6 5 4 3 2 1

7 6 5 4 3 2 1

If you were going to make one suggestion to improve the working relationship with your field service representative, what would it be?

199



200 Appendix A

Overall, how would you rate the performance of your field service representative? 1. Excellent 2. Good 3. Average 4. Fair 5. Poor

The Live Haul Crew Strongly Strongly Agree Disagree

1. Keeps my farm clean. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 2. Practices biosecurity procedures. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 3. Catches the birds in a manner to minimize

bird damage. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 4. Keeps us informed about schedule

changes. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

If you were going to make one suggestion to improve the working relationship with live haul, what would it be?

The Feed Mill

1. Is concerned about the quality of the feed. 2. Provides a poundage schedule of the type

3. Practices good biosecurity procedures. 4. Keeps me informed about changes in

5. Puts feed ticket in the mailbox or

6. Keeps lids closed. 7. Brings the exact feed order.

of feed by age of the bird.

feed delivery schedule.

container.

Strongly Strongly Agree Disagree 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

7 6 5 4 3 2 1 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

7 6 5 4 3 2 1

7 6 5 4 3 2 1 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

If you were going to make one suggestion to improve the working relationship with the feed mill, what would it be?

The Hatchery Strongly Strongly Agree Disagree

1. Provides information about the source of identification of the chicks/poults received. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

Grower Relations Survey 201

2. Keeps me informed about the delivery

3. Practices good biosecurity procedures. schedule. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

7 6 5 4 3 2 1

If you were going to make one suggestion to improve the working relationship with the hatchery, what would it be?

The Company Strongly Strongly Agree Disagree

1. Keeps me informed about the company. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 2. Asks growers for their input into issues that

affect the grower. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 3. Acts as if it genuinely cares about the

growers. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 4. Provides necessary literature for growers

to know about diseases and biosecurity practices. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

5. Please list the subject matters you would like the company to address in Grower Council Grower Educational Seminars. 1. 2. 3.

Please check one of the following per category:

Number of years you have been growing for the company. [ ] 10+ years [ ] 6-9 years [ ] 3-5 years [ ] Less than 3 years

Do you generally fall into [ ] Top half of the settlement? [ ] Bottom half of the settlement?

Would you recommend the company to future growers?

1 1 yes [ I N 0

202 Appendix A

Would you like for us to know the name of your field service representative and/or your name? If so, please add them in the following spaces.

Field service representative

My name is

Appendix B

Delmarva Survey

This survey is being reprinted with permission from the Delmarva Poul- try Industry, Inc. Please contact Delmarva Poultry Industry, R.D. 6, Box 47, Georgetown, Delaware 19947-9575; phone 302-856-9037 or fax

We have chosen to use the following number categories to present the results for your convenience.

1 = Very Satisfied 2 = Satisfied 3 = Somewhat Satisfied 4 = Somewhat Unsatisfied 5 = Unsatisfied 6 = Very Unsatisfied

302-856-1 845.

1 = Strongly Agree 2 = Agree 3 = Somewhat Agree 4 = Somewhat Disagree 5 = Disagree 6 = Strongly Disagree

1. We would like to begin with some questions about your satisfaction as a poultry grower. Please indicate if you are Very Satisfied to Very Unsatisfied for each question. 1 2 3 4 5 6 My business as a poultry grower. 11.5% 35.3% 26.7% 11.1% 10.0% 5.4% My relationship with my present company.

My relationship with my flock supervisor.

The income I receive from my poultry operations.

13.1% 37.5% 24.9% 11.0% 9.4% 4.1%

32.1% 39.5% 14.6% 6.4% 4.7% 2.7%

3.7% 17.5% 26.0% 15.9% 18.4% 18.5%

2. The following questions relate to your feelings about the future of Delmarva’s poultry industry. Please answer if you Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree to each question. 1 2 3 4 5 6 I am optimistic about the future of Delmarva’s poultry industry. 7.6% 35.3% 29.9% 13.6% 8.0% 5.5%

207



208 Appendix B

The poultry industry needs more government regulations. 6.1% 8.1% 17.3% 12.8% 23.1% 32.6% I would recommend the poultry business to someone who is interested. 5.9% 20.3% 22.9% 12.1% 14.6% 24.3%

3. The next set of questions is concerned with communication between growers and their companies. Please answer if you Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree with each of the statements.

1 2 3 4 5 6 I can speak freely with representatives of my present company.

Company management understands concerns of growers. 4.5% 17.8% 29.6% 16.6% 16.9% 14.6% If I have a question I can get a prompt response from my company. 10.2% 31.8% 30.9% 11.6% 8.5% 6.9% I get the experience and support I need when there is a problem with my flock. 11.8% 34.3% 26.6% 10.9% 10.2% 6.3% My company will retaliate if I raise concerns.

My company provides information I need to know. 8.9% 35.1% 31.8% 10.8% 8.1% 5.2% When new technology is introduced, I get adequate information from my poultry company with which to make decisions.

Communication between growers and companies is adequate. 5.5% 21.6% 26.3% 18.6% 13.7% 14.4% My company is concerned with helping me increase my profit from my poultry operation.

I consider myself a full and equal business partner with my company.

15.6% 34.5% 23.3% 9.4% 11.1% 6.1%

10.7% 19.7% 27.0% 18.3% 16.5% 7.7%

6.5% 30.1% 32.5% 13.2% 12.0% 5.7%

6.3% 19.4% 27.7% 15.9% 14.9% 15.7%

6.9% 16.9% 19.6% 14.1% 20.4% 22.1%

4. What is your relationship with your current flock supervisor? Please respond if you Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree for each question. 1 2 3 4 5 6 I have a good relationship with my current flock supervisor.

My current flock supervisor helps me be a better grower. 24.3% 31.5% 25.0% 8.8% 6.1% 4.3%

32.7% 42.4% 13.8% 5.2% 4.0% 1.9%

Delmarva Survey 209

My current flock supervisor is adequately trained.

I rely on my current flock supervisor for advice.

The rotation of flock supervisors is beneficial. 6.2% 15.5% 20.9% 15.8% 22.6% 19.1% My flock supervisor visits my farm at least on a weekly basis.

27.3% 40.6% 18.6% 5.7% 4.8% 3.0%

24.9% 32.6% 22.8% 7.4% 6.7% 5.6%

44.3% 46.5% 5.2% 1.5% 1.7% 0.9%

5. While you have a flock, how many times a month do you communicate with your flock supervisor? 4.6 times a month (average)

Please indicate for each statement if you Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree. 1 2 3 4 5 6 I understand how my settlement is calculated.

I trust the figures in my settlement statement.

I trust the feed weight ticket matches the feed delivered to my farm.

Settlement comparisons should match large growers with large growers and small growers with small growers.

I understood the terms and conditions of my contract when I first signed it. 9.2% 46.7% 28.8% 5.9% 5.6% 3.8% I currently understand the terms and conditions of my contract.

I would like more information about problems with my performance.

My average payment is adequate to handle my poultry expenses.

The settlement statement and the flock supervisor provide me with enough information to help me improve my performance.

Grower payments tied to the performance of other growers should be kept.

6. The following are questions about your contract and settlement.

7.2% 27.1% 28.7% 11.1% 12.6% 13.3%

4.3% 24.3% 30.1% 14.8% 11.8% 14.7%

4.2% 22.4% 30.0% 16.6% 10.6% 16.1%

33.4% 28.0% 18.0% 6.2% 8.1% 6.3%

8.9% 45.1% 29.8% 7.7% 4.9% ' 3.7%

25.7% 46.3% 19.6% 3.7% 3.8% 0.9%

3.5% 17.1% 24.5% 13.9% 18.4% 22.5%

5.6% 22.3% 28.1% 18.3% 15.9% 9.7%

14.7% 26.9% 24.5% 10.6% 9.7% 13.6%

210 Appendix B

I am getting a fair return on my investment.

My cash flow from poultry has improved over time.

A noncompetitive square foot contract should replace current contracts.

The arbitration procedures outlined in my contract are fair.

3.4% 14.6% 21.7% 17.4% 18.9% 24.1%

3.1% 13.9% 19.8% 15.1% 18.7% 29.4%

12.1% 14.5% 22.8% 15.2% 16.3% 19.2%

3.4% 19.6% 36.7% 17.1% 12.5% 10.7%

7. In your opinion how many flocks should your contract be guaran- teed for? 29.6 flocks (average)

the last year. 4.6% Excellent 41.4% Fair 42.3% Good 11.8% Poor

8. Please rate the average quality of chicks your operation received in

9. How consistent was your chick quality over the last year? 26.2% Consistent 56.8% Somewhat Variable 17.0% Highly Variable

growers? 8.7% Yes 39.3% NO 51.9% Don’t Know

11. The following are a set of questions that relate to future programs to improve the poultry industry. For each question please indicate if you Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree. 1 2 3 4 5 6 There should be a special company program for new growers with more frequent visits and support. 21.5% 38.7% 25.1% 5.8% 5.8% 3.0% There should be a special program for growers who have fallen below average with emphasis on problem identification and resolution.

My company should have a grower committee to discuss issues and concerns with company representatives. 33.1% 44.9% 16.5% 2.2% 2.2% 1.0% Educational programs are needed to help producers better estimate income and expenses.

10. In your opinion is chick quality evenly distributed among all

27.9% 42.2% 20.9% 3.6% 3.9% 1.5%

20.9% 35.3% 27.5% 7.4% 6.8% 2.0%

Delmarva Survey 211

12. I would be interested in training for growers on such things as new technologies and management techniques. 61.3% Yes 13.1% No 25.6% Don’t Know

13. For each of the following sources of information please indicate with a check if you rely upon them for information on general poultry issues, information on new technology, or one-on-one personal assistance in your poultry operation. (Percent who said yes)

One-on-one General Information Personal Poultry on New Assistance Information Technology

73.2% 44.1% 56.4%

60.7% 32.8% 27.0%

My Company

Other Growers

Suppliers

DPI

My Lender

Extension

32.8% 54.6% 18.7%

55.5% 31.3% 5.5%

11.2% 3.0% 19.9%

21.9% 13.1% 6.7%

Now we would like to ask a few questions about your poultry operation. 14. What kind of poultry operation do you have? (Check only one.)

67.9% Broilers/Cornish 2.5% Pullets 26.0% Roasters 3.5% Hatching Eggs

15. Please indicate which company you currently deal with and for how many years. Current Company 20.2% Allen’s Hatchery Inc.

7.4% Hudson Foods Inc. 10.2% Mouritaire Farms of Delmarva Inc.

Perdue Farms Inc. 5.8% Showell Roasters

14.8% Delmarva Broilers/Cornish 14.2% Delmarva Roasters 6.8% Milford Broiler

14.4% Townsends Inc. 6.2% Tyson Foods Inc.

Number of Years 7.8 6.4 7.3

9.6 15.0 9.8 6.6

10.1 8.9

212 Appendix B

16. Where is the primary location of your poultry operation? State Couplty (Top three)

Maryland 54.4% Wicomico 16.4% Delaware 43.0% Sussex 36.3%

Virginia 2.5% Worcester 12.2% 17. What is the total tillable acres used for your farm operation?

Total tillable acres 204 (average) Tillable acres you own 108 (average)

18. Please answer the following questions regarding all the poultry ~~

houses in your operation. (Answers given as averages) Total number of houses in your operation. Total number of houses you own outright. How many houses do you hold a mortgage on? How many houses are currently under contract? What is the age of your oldest house? What is the age of your youngest house? How many houses use tunnel ventilation? How many houses are positive pressure? What is your total capacity in birds?

19. Do you own or lease a computer? 53.5% No 46.5% Yes

If yes, please answer the following questions: I use my computer in my farm operation. I have access to e-mail. I have access to the World Wide Web. I use a spreadsheet program.

3.0 1.8 1.8 2.8

21.6 11.8 0.6 1.4

65,035

67.8% Yes 44.2% Yes 42.3% Yes 46.6% Yes

Now we would like to ask a few questions about the primary operator for this operation. All information will be kept confidential. 20. In what year were you born? 1946 (average) 21. Are you male or female? 74.9% Male 25.1% Female 22. Which category best represents your current education level?

11.6% Less than high school 62.1% High School Degree (or GED) 14.7% Associates or Trade School Degree

8.4% Bachelor’s Degree 3.2% Graduate Degree

23. In total how many years have you worked as a poultry grower? 19.3 Years (average)

Delmarva Survey 213

24. Are you a full- or part-time poultry grower? 65.0% Full-time poultry grower 20.5% Part-time poultry grower work mostly on farm 14.470 Part-time poultry grower work mostly off farm

25. Does your spouse have nonpoultry (off-farm) employment? 9.8 % No I am not married

43.1% NO 13.0% Yes part-time 34.2% Yes full-time

26. Is your spouse actively involved in your poultry operation? 9.7% No I am not married

33.1% No 57.2% Yes

agriculture, and off-farm sources? (An estimate is fine.) Poultry 53.4% Other agriculture 17.5% Off-farm income 29.0%

member? (Percent who said there were a member) 82.0% Delmarva Poultry Industry Inc.

49.9% Farm Bureau

27. What percentage of your family income comes from poultry, other

28. Which of the following poultry-related organizations are you a

2.3 % Delmarva Poultry Improvement Association

Appendix C

Flock Services Report

A Flock Services Report is completed by the grower following each flock. The report is designed to evaluate the working relationship with the complex and the field service representative, and the flock’s performance. The ultimate objective is to identify what can be done to improve the working relationship.

We encourage you to provide this report to the grower at the beginning of each flock to provide a basis for them to collect the information necessary to complete the evaluation.

An additional suggestion for consideration is to compile this information on a semiannual or annual basis and share it with all company personnel and growers.

1. Fardgrower name:

2. Field service representative name:

3. Date flock placed:

4. Date flock processed:

Chick/Poult Delivery 1. Where you notified of the chick/poult delivery date?

2. Was the deiivery date met?

3. Where you notified of the chick/poult delivery time?

4. Was the delivery time met?

5. Were the hatchery employees courteous?

Yes No

Yes No (Please specify how late.)

Yes No

Yes No (Please specify how late.)

Yes No (Please explain.)

2 14



Flock Services Report 215

6 . Where you satisfied with the quality of the chicks/poults? (Please circle one.) Very Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied (If Dissatisfied please explain.)

Please comment. 7. What could be done to improve chick/poult delivery to your farm?

Live Haul 1. Were you notified in advance of catch and feed withdrawal times?

Yes No 2. Did the live haul crew arrive on time?

Yes No (How late?) 3. Did the live haul crew pick up their trash?

Yes No 4. Was there any damage to your farm?

Yes (Please specify.) No 5. Was any damage incurred by the live haul crew repaired by the com-

6 . Were all members of the live haul crew courteous?

7. Were you satisfied how the live haul crew caught your birds?

pany in a timely manner? Yes No (Please explain.)


Please circle one. Very Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied (If Dissatisfied please explain.)

Please comment. 8. What could be done to improve the pickup of birds on your farm?

Field Service Representative 1. Did the field service representative visit the flock on a regular

2. Did the field service representative return all calls in a timely

3. Were your questions/concerns answered in a timely manner?

4. Were the recommendations offered by the field service representative

5. Did the field service representative have the necessary authority to

schedule? Yes No (Please explain.)

manner? Yes No (Please explain.)


practical and helpful? Yes No (Please explain.)

complete hidher job to your satisfaction? Yes No (Please explain.)

216 Appendix C

6 . Was the field service representative able to obtain necessary information from other complex representatives in a timely manner?

Yes No (Please explain.) 7 . Were you satisfied with your working relationship with the field

service representative? Please circle one. Very Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied (If Dissatisfied please explain.)

8. What could be done to improve the field service representative’s performance on your farm? Please comment.

Feed Mill I. Did you experience “feed outages” during this flock?

2. Where you notified in advance about feed delivery schedules?

3. Were these schedules met? Yes No (How late?) 4. Were all the feed tickets left at the farm at the time of delivery?

Yes No (Please explain.) 5 . Were the feed tickets complete and accurate?

Yes No (Please explain.) 6 . Was any feed spilled during unloading?

Yes No 7. Was there any damage to the farm while delivering feed?

Yes (What was the damage?) No 8. Did the company repair the damage in a timely manner?

Yes No (Please explain.) 9. What could be done to improve the delivery of feed on your farm?

Yes (Please list dates.) No

Yes No

Please comment.

Flock Performance 1. Were you satisfied with the performance of the flock during the

grow-out period? Please circle one. Very Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied (If Dissatisfied please explain.)

2. What could be done to improve flock performance on your farm? Please comment.

Flock Services Report 217

Company Performance 1. Did you contact any other company personnel other than your field

service representative about a problem with the birds? Yes (What was the problem?

Please specify person contacted and date.) No



2. Was the problem resolved in a timely and satisfactory manner?

3. Did the company work to make the flock profitable for you?

Appendix D

Excellence in Grower Relations

The following examples depicting excellent company-grower working relationships were provided by the participants in the Grower-Relations Seminars offered by the U.S. Poultry & Egg Association. These are offered both to illustrate the good work that is occurring in the field and to stimulate ideas on your part of what can be done to improve the working relationship between your company and its growers.

* * * A grower called one evening at nine-thirty to tell the company that his

feed bin collapsed after being filled. It was about to rain so the field service representative drove forty-five miles and helped the grower shovel feed.

* * * A field service representative’s wife makes all the growers a loaf of

bread for Christmas. This act of kindness helps each grower feel as if he or she is part of our family.

* * * A grower lost a sixteen-thousand-capacity broiler house and a flock

of five-week-old birds due to a fire. A storm had occurred several hours earlier, and it was uncertain if the fire was caused by the storm or faulty wiring. The company paid the grower based on his last ten flocks, which netted the grower about four thousand dollars more money than if the company had adhered to the contract.

* * * A grower’s infant son required major surgery. The field service repre-

sentative managed his four houses for him for several days so the family could be with their son.

* * * Due to a divorce a grower was now operating the farm on her own.

She is determined to succeed. The field service representative spent considerable time with her to teach her how to manage the flocks. She is becoming one of the company’s better growers.

218



Excellence in Grower Relations 219

* * * The live haul schedule was changed and the field service representa-

tive visited the farm to notify the grower. The grower, however, was not at the farm, so a note was left regarding the changes. The grower did not see the note and was not ready for the live haul crew, which arrived earlier than previously scheduled. The grower called the field service representative, who went to the farm, took responsibility for not communicating directly with the grower, and helped prepare the houses.

* * * A grower got behind cleaning out the houses, so the field service rep-

resentative borrowed one of the company’s sprayers and disinfected the house on a Sunday afternoon.

* * * A field service representative helped a grower wash down the houses

one Saturday afternoon so the chicks could be placed on Monday. * * *

A flock of broilers was scheduled to be picked up on Friday. A problem at the process plant changed the schedule, so the flock was resched- uled to be picked up on Monday. The birds were without feed for eight hours on Friday, so the company added a point to their average weight for every hour the birds were off feed.

* * * A grower called at nine P.M. to report one of his houses had gotten

flooded. The field service representative went to the farm to help the grower move turkeys and clean out the house. The next morning the representative made arrangements for a truck from the rendering plant and helped the grower pick up dead birds.

* * * The brother of one of the growers died unexpectedly. She called her

field service representative to inquire about finding a temporary employee to work her breeder farm. The field service representative volun- teered to assist and scheduled his lunch and after-work hours to assist the grower.

* * * A grower was killed in an accident. The flock was about one week

from being picked up. Even though the company did not have a market for that size turkey, it picked up the birds. The house remained empty for three months until the widow could prepare herself to continue the farm operations.

* * * A grower lost thirty thousand market-age broilers due to a power fail-

ure. The birds lay in the house for twenty-four hours, as this particular grower did not have friends or equipment to assist the clean-up. The

220 Appendix D

field service representative, live haul manager, and company veterinarian recruited other growers to assist in the clean-up. The field service representative missed her daughter’s first Bible school program while assisting this grower.

* * * An elderly and widowed egg producer had a house collapse during a

snowstorm. She did not have the cost for replacement. Church members heard of her plight and salvaged the walls and some equipment. The company and a couple of contractors donated time and material to replace the house. All this labor saved her eighty thousand dollars.

* * * Poults were placed on a grower’s farm one Saturday morning. The

grower’s brother was getting married that afternoon, but around noon the poults started piling. The field service representative walked the birds for three hours to let the grower attend the wedding.

* * * A field service representative helped a first-time grower place a flock.

At nine P.M. the grower called to report the birds were piling. The representative drove seventy miles to assist this grower, as the grower was more comfortable with the representative’s assistance than receiving instructions via the telephone.

* * * A field service representative unexpectedly arrived at a farm at three

A.M. to help place a flock of poults. The grower mentioned that it had been several years since a representative had helped place a flock.

* * * A field service representative spent several hours each week teaching

a new grower about the building equipment and managing the flock. The grower’s first flock was number one upon settling and has remained one of the company’s top growers.

* * * A grower had a history of being near the bottom of the settlement list.

Finally he complained and said he would do anything to make a change. The field service representative suggested that he needed to detect ammonia, to which the grower replied he could not smell it anymore. The grower is now using his granddaughter to detect ammonia and runs fans until the odor disappears. He is now one of the top producers and routinely buys the representative’s lunch. (Who, of course, makes certain he visits the farm around lunchtime!)

* * * A grower was building a new house and renovating two existing

houses. During the construction the company realized the contractor had forgotten the louvers at a cost of about sixty-five hundred dollars.

Excellence in Grower Relations 22 1

Discussions with all parties resulted in the contractor providing the louvers at cost and the company added one year to the contract.

* * * The gas company called a grower to inform her about the need to cut

off the gas for maintenance. The grower had two-week-old poults. The field service representative was called and arranged for another representative, who, along with the grower, walked the house to prevent piling.

* * * A company recently initiated a grower newsletter and scheduled

meetings with growers per each representative’s route. Additionally, committees are being formed with growers to solve issues to improve the working relationship.

* * * A grower was informed that birds were to be placed on a Wednesday.

Instead they were placed on Tuesday. The truck driver called the field service representative to report the grower was not present. So the field service representative drove the two hours to the farm, placed the birds, and remained on the farm until the grower arrived at seven P.M.

* * * The last truckload of birds had an accident and turned over shortly

after leaving a farm. The company paid the grower based on the heavi- est load of the previous trucks.

* * * One of a grower’s houses did not get charged for fuel consumption.

The accountant wanted to charge the fuel to the next flock, which would have adversely impacted the incoming flock’s performance before it arrived on the farm. The field service representative asked the accountant to recalculate the cost, which ultimately was less than one hundred dollars. The live production manager elected to forgo the expense, since it was the company’s error.

* * >E

A grower had a serious medical emergency that required his family to be off the farm for three weeks. The field service representative managed the farm in the grower’s absence.

* * * A new grower was experiencing a great deal of difficulty getting the

houses prepared for the first flock. Field service representatives worked through the weekend and into the early-morning hours of the day to ensure the houses were prepared. The grower was impressed and sent a letter of gratitude to the operations manager.

* * * A hurricane created major losses for several growers. The company

provided additional compensation to assist these growers. Even the

222 Appendix D

growers who did not sustain property damage were adversely affected due to the loss of power. The company provided financial assistance to this group of growers as well.

* * * A grower lost over one-third of his flock due to the hurricane. The

field service representative calculated the projected loss of income for the grower, and the insurance company ultimately paid the full projected loss.

. * * A grower suffered a loss of fifteen hundred birds, because the temper-

ature in the chick bus was too warm. The field service representative arranged for an extra two thousand birds to be delivered the next day to compensate for the loss. The representative worked with the grower until all the birds were leveled out. The grower’s performance escalated after this experience and now is one of the company’s more successful growers.

* * * One grower kept a feed diary and believed he had been shorted. The

live production manager reviewed the grower’s records and credited fifty-seven hundred pounds of feed. As the result of this correction, the grower is one of the company’s strongest supporters.

* * * A grower got a load of very salty feed, which caused his birds to flush

and ruined his litter quality as well as his feed conversion. The manager made sure the bad feed was picked up promptly and gave the grower credit for the damage it caused. The grower settled above average. The grower told other growers about the situation, which had a very positive impact upon the company’s working relationship with all growers.

* * * An elderly grower was experiencing a problem with runting birds.

The company told her to hand-feed the first week. The field service representative visited the farm daily and fed the birds.

. * * A grower’s well ran dry. The field service representative helped haul

water to the grower’s farm. * * *

During an unusually hot summer, one of the company’s best producers lost eight thousand birds. An amp breaker tripped during the middle of the night and the curtain failed to operate properly. With no liability to be found on the grower’s part, the company quickly replaced the birds. Other growers were impressed with how the company worked with this producer.

* * *


A producer’s son became seriously ill. The community held a benefit supper and provided and cooked the meat for the benefit.

* * + A grower’s birds contacted cocci. The field service representative

drove several hours to get medicine and return to the farm. The grower, in the meantime, had to report to his place of employment. The field service representative started the medication in the grower’s absence. The grower wrote the production manager complimenting the field service representative’s quick response.

* a 4

A farm had been damaged by winds. The birds were caught and transferred to a company farm. The farm manager cared for the grower’s birds for several weeks.

* * * Field service representatives worked through the night to help a

grower move the five-week-old broilers after severe storm damage. Then they remained on the farm to help feed the remaining five houses with one small generator, which allowed feeding only one house at a time.

* * * The field service representative fed a farmer’s hen flock at four-thirty

A.M. while he was in the hospital for a week. The serious illness required the spouse also to remain at the hospital, and the farm labor was not properly trained to feed the flock.

* * 4

A grower was experiencing major bird health problems, so the field service representative began working on the farm three or four days a week and on weekends. They discussed and implemented poultry management practices affecting the birds’ health. The grower appreciated the employee’s concern for his financial success. Today the grower is one of the company’s best.

* * * A series of company-created inconveniences caused a flock to per-

form much worse than average. The company paid the grower an average of the last three flocks to compensate for the company-influenced poor flock performance.

* * * Live haul crushed a fan and some wire lying in tall grass near the

road. Even though both were very old and possibly not working, the live haul manager purchased a new direct drive fan and high-quality wire to compensate the grower’s loss.

* * . A grower reported that he was shorted on the number of chicks dur-

ing a period the hatchery was upgrading their equipment. The hatchery

224 Appendix D

personnel visited the farm and counted the 24,300 chicks to ensure the grower a mistake had not been made.

* . * The hatchery truck was going to be late to the farm. The hatchery

personnel tried to contact the grower via phone without success. A hatchery employee drove to the farm and explained the reasons for the delay to the grower. The employee also remained on the farm to help unload the chicks.

* * * A rumor among the growers was that culls from the hatchery were al-

ways delivered on specified days of the week. To dispel the rumor, hatchery tours were conducted for the growers. The results were amazing. Growers quit complaining about the hatchery practices.

* * * In spite of continued teachings about ventilation, a particular grower

continued poor management practices and lost a flock of birds. After several discussions with the grower, a joint decision was made to allow the grower to continue growing birds. Today he is one of the company’s better growers and friends of the complex personnel.

* * * One of three houses received feed that caused the birds to be off feed

for three days until the root cause was determined. The company caught the two good houses independently of the third and paid the grower for all houses based on the performance of the two good houses.

* * * A grower’s young daughter died, and the grower just gave up on the

chickens, which were within two weeks of being harvested. The field service technician recruited a couple of growers to assist him to care for the birds during this interim.

* * * A grower received five thousand too many chicks in one house, and

that many too few in the other. The company was not notified until the birds were three weeks of age. The company scheduled drivers, managers, and field service technicians to catch and correct the count in each house. The farmer was impressed by the company’s response.

* * * An assistant broiler manager would periodically call the top five

growers and congratulate them and call the five bottom growers and ask what we could do to help them.

* * * One of the company’s lowest-performing growers happened to have a

great deal of difficulty with chicks at the time of delivery. The company sent additional personnel for three consecutive days to assist this grower.


Before this experience the grower did not trust the company. After the experience the grower became a strong supporter of the company and related his experience to other growers.

* * *

Growers Help Field Service Representatives

A live haul crew were preparing to leave a farm when the grower arrived with a variety of breakfast foods and drinks to reward the crew for doing such a good job.

* . * A seventy-eight-year-old grower told his field service representative

that he would transfer feed out of the bins of his three houses in prepa- ration to order his final feed. His assistance saved the representative valuable time and prevented the company from scheduling a couple of trucks to assist in the process. Much younger growers had never volun- teered to transfer feed and always complained bitterly when they had to do it.

Appendix E

What Can Be Done to Create a WOW!?

The following examples depict a variety of inconveniences occurring in the company-grower working relationship. These are offered in the interest of sharing information and to encourage growers and company employees to work together to find solutions to the inconveniences that occur in their working relationship. As discussed in chapter 8, when inconveniences do occur, what can be done to show you care about the working relationship?

* * * A truck driver delivered three loads of feed, added the weight of the

three loads, and left a total for the grower. The three loads totaled 62,060 pounds, and the grower disagreed with the total. Later the field service representative calculated the total from the driver’s notebook, and the total was 52,060 pounds.

* * * The company agreed to let a grower make the necessary equipment

changes to grow six-pound chickens. Soon after the conversion the company pulled this size bird from the region.

* * * A grower was not told about the change in schedule for the live haul

crew. Consequently, feed was taken away from the birds on the wrong day and it had to be turned back on. To compound the problem, the grower then ran out of feed and the feed mill was unable to deliver feed for several additional hours.

* * * A field service representative habitually preaches about the need for

clean, debris-free eggs. Then the company constantly returns dirty egg racks to the grower, and the representative is continually apologizing to the grower.

* * *

226




A field service representative had misread the placement schedule and had a grower work extra hard to prepare the houses. When the grower called the hatchery regarding the schedule, he learned the representative had given him the wrong date-one week early.

* * * A grower received the wrong feed. The field service representative

told him the feed would be reclaimed, which it was some five hours later. Five hours after that the new feed arrived and it, too, was not the correct feed. This really hurt the relationship with the grower and destroyed the trust with the feed mill when other growers learned about the scenario.

* * * A company informed its growers they needed to have certain equip-

ment installed within a timeline or they would not receive any more birds. The deadline passed and several growers had not installed the equipment. The promised consequence did not happen. Of course, the growers who underwrote the expense of the equipment change got upset.

A grower had three houses of birds scheduled for live haul. For some reason each house had to be picked up on different days. Then, to make matters worse, when chicks were placed, the hatchery split the houses over two days.

* * *

* * * A live haul crew was given the name and general directions to a farm.

It so happened there were two growers with that same last name who lived about a mile apart. As luck would have it, the live haul crew pulled into the wrong farm. The crew noticed the house was not prepared and the birds looked smaller than expected. But the crew proceeded to load the birds anyway.

* * * A regular field service representative was on vacation so a new repre-

sentative visited the farm. The representative had never met the grower. The weather was hot and a critical time for the birds. Upon meeting the grower the representative asked about the temperature in the house. Im- mediately after the grower answered, the representative exclaimed, “Don’t lie to me!”

* * * A feed truck delivered feed to the wrong farm. The driver realized his

mistake after unloading about one-fourth of the load, but proceeded anyway. He returned to the feed mill before notifying anyone of the mistake.

A final feed order was placed by the field service representative for a Saturday delivery. The truck driver was given the ticket but decided it was not worth his time to deliver the relatively small amount of feed.

* + *

228 Appendix E

Feed was not delivered until the following Tuesday, which was the date the birds were to be picked up.

* * * A field service representative began dating a grower’s daughter. Un-

fortunately, the relationship did not last, thereby creating some tension between the grower and the representative.

* * * Much to the disgruntlement of the growers, a company decided to

discontinue grower appreciation day. Traditionally the day consisted of a meal, games for the children, bingo for the adults, and the presenting of grower awards.

* * * One of the top growers’ birds were scheduled to be picked up on a

Thursday night. The processing plant experienced mechanical problems, so only one of the two houses could be picked up. The second was scheduled for Sunday night. The crew did not show up at the designated time, After two hours the grower called to learn the crew would be another two hours late. No one called to inform the grower about the delay. The fact that the daytime temperatures approached one hundred degrees added fuel to this fire.

* * * The temperature was ninety-five degrees with high humidity. The

field service representative spent three hours working three houses without seeing the grower. As the representative was leaving the farm, he stopped at the house to report his progress to the grower’s wife. The grower was in the house eating ice cream and lying on the couch in his underwear. The grower and his wife immediately started complaining to the representative about not receiving a bonus check and that the feed mill was shorting them on feed. The representative became angry and a lengthy argument ensued.

* * * A grower canceled a family trip because the turkeys were supposed to

be loaded on Sunday. The company employee actually misinformed the grower about the load-out time; it was Tuesday.

* * * During a conversation with a grower’s wife a field service representa-

tive criticized the quality of education of one of the schools in the district. It just so happened the grower’s children attended that particular school.

A field service representative medicated one house of turkeys. Two days later the grower called in to report that the birds in the other house needed medication. The message got twisted and communicated to the representative that the birds in the medicated house continued to be sick.

* * *


Instead of calling the grower Friday evening, the representative waited until Monday.

* * * A group of growers were being given special treatment by allowing

them more turkeys per square foot than normal. A field service representative inadvertently told another grower, who became upset about the “favoritism.” Subsequent to this conversation other growers soon learned about the practice.

* * * A field service representative thought there was too much ammonia in

a house, so he raised the curtains on each side of the house one January day. The seven-week-old turkeys began piling and fifty were killed before the grower checked the flock.

* * * A feed mill went down and neither the field service representatives

nor the growers were informed about the expected twelve- to twenty- four-hour hour delay in feed delivery.

* * * A company started using a lower-energy, less efficient feed without in-

forming the field service representatives. The growers began to complain about the birds’ performance before the representatives were eventually told about the switch.

* * * A grower was neglecting his birds and running the risk of high mor-

talities. The field service representative fixed the problem, after which the grower returned to the farm. The representative complained about the poor management practices and the fact that the grower was not available to assist the representative. The representative became angry, cursed the grower, and threatened to remove the birds.

* * * A live production manager visited a grower who had just received a

new flock. The manager noticed several problems but elected not to discuss them with the grower while visiting the farm. Instead he wrote the grower a letter pointing out what needed to be corrected.

* * * The grower received poults that were dry and weak, resulting in a

high mortality. The flock never recovered from this poor start. * * *

A company’s growers call in their feed orders on Mondays. One Sat- urday a grower with six houses was out of feed in three of them. The grower moved feed from one house to another and by Sunday was to- tally out of feed. To complicate the matter, the birds were scheduled to be vaccinated Monday morning. As it turned out, the company em-

230 Appendix E

ployee who took the order forgot to call it into the feed mill before leaving on vacation.

* * * A field service representative worked to start a young couple in the

turkey business. The grower’s wife was expecting their first child. Upon arriving on the farm one morning the representative found the couple in their home with the wife lying on a couch. The representative kiddingly said, “What’s the matter, do you have the flu?” To which the grower quickly responded, “No she miscarried last night.”

* * * A grower received a bad load of feed and the field service representa-

tive took samples to have them tested at the company laboratory. By the time the representative received the results, the feed had been eaten, causing a drop of 12 percent in production for a ten-day period. The laboratory results were needed before the feed mill admitted an error.

* * * A grower lost his contract with the company due to poor perfor-

mance and no attempts to improve. A field service representative had to visit the farm to pick up some company items. The grower resisted and a very ugly argument ensued.

* * * A company’s policy is to discuss settlement checks with the grower. In

this particular instance the grower was not available, so the “poor” settlement check was left at the farm and a message was left on the answering machine. This turned out to be a lose-lose situation, as the field service representative never discussed the settlement check nor changes that could be made to correct the situation.

* * * A feed mill was out of operation for several days as the result of a

storm, causing several growers to be without feed. Several good growers left the company because of this feed outage.

* * * Problems at a processing plant shut it down from Thursday to the fol-

lowing Sunday. This delay caused several growers to lose a lot of birds without any compensation from the company.

* * * Chick mortality was at unprecedented levels on several farms. Field

service representatives and complex managers were never able to determine the cause. Upper management continued to blame the growers, which caused a strain with grower relations.

* * * A feed truck ran over some feed bin lids. The grower asked the com-

pany to replace them, but that did not happen.


* * * A hatchery’s schedule caused a two-day delay in placing a flock for a

grower. The field service representative became extremely upset at the hatchery and “labeled” the flock bad before it even arrived on the farm. This attitude escalated into a major problem between the company and grower, as well as between live production and the hatchery.

. * * A grower had been in the business for three years, during which time

he continued to have problems understanding the need to comply with company policies and procedures. The end result was consistently poor- performing flocks. Then he turned the grower operations over to an employee, who knew even less about poultry management. The result was a loss of sixteen thousand birds within three weeks.

* * * A farmer began calling the feed mill three days before running out of

feed. Feed was not delivered until after he had been out of feed for two days. The field service representative acted as though the situation were the grower’s fault. The end result was a very strained working relationship with this grower.

* * . A field service representative happened to tell grower A about a poor

management practice of grower B. As it would happen, grower A told grower B what the field service representative had said. The representative apologized to grower B, but the working relationship continued to be strained for over a year.

* * * A grower complained that his chickens needed a certain type of high-

protein feed. Since it cost more, the decision was made to put the number of the desired feed type on the feed ticket. The grower’s birds laid well until late in the flock, when it so happened the correct numbers had been inadvertently placed on the feed ticket. The grower and his wife argued with the field service representative for an hour until the representative told the grower the truth: that his flock had been receiving the same feed during the entire period so the problem could not be the feed.

* * * A long-distance move was required to transfer pullets to a henhouse

during the summer. The field service representative assured the grower the move would be made at the coolest time of day and that he would es- cort the move. The move actually took place earlier in the day, and the field service representative was not able to arrive at the farm until after the transfer. Four hundred birds were lost in the transfer, and the grower was upset. The field service representative had been working for over

232 Appendix E

twenty-four hours and lost his temper with the grower, emphatically stating the grower would just have to accept the loss and move on.

* * * A field service representative was working with growers in one of the

“smaller” geographic areas served by the complex. The respective growers expressed concern about the company leaving the area. The field service representative encouraged them to outperform other regions and certainly the company would not leave. Unfortunately, the company did just that, and the growers believed the field service representative had lied.

. * * A grower called in the feed inventory on schedule. The feed mill dis-

patcher’s boss thought the inventory was incorrect and called the grower to check the inventory again. The grower did so and the inventory was the same. The grower felt as though the company thought he was in- competent.

* * * A field service representative grew tired of making suggestions to a

below-average grower to improve flock performance and the grower’s not following his advice. The field service representative decided to take the matters into his own hands and made several needed changes without input from the grower. The grower did not appreciate the field service representative’s making the changes.

* * * Fan manufacturers recommended placing fans in the center of a house

to tunnel-vent the six-hundred-foot house. Later it was learned that the fans needed to be placed at the end of the house for maximum performance. The growers were asked to move the fans at their expense.

* * * The accounting department double-billed a grower for twelve thou-

sand pounds of feed, resulting in the grower’s being at the bottom of the settlement instead of the middle. The grower found the error and it was corrected.

* * * A company announced during a meeting with growers and represen-

tatives from the financial institutions that a raise was going to be scheduled for the growers. Nine months later nothing had been said or done about the announced raise.

* * * A company announced the forthcoming publication of a newsletter

and initiated a contest among the growers to name it. The top three names were to win prizes. Nothing was done about the newsletter.

* , *


An experimental vaccine was tried on a flock. Unfortunately, it seemed to have adverse effects upon flock performance. The grower was not compensated for the apparent loss in production attributed to the vaccine.

x- * * One of three growers’ houses burned. The grower asked to rebuild in

order to reestablish the revenue stream, and the company would not ap- prove it. This had a tremendous impact upon the morale of other growers, who interpreted this action to mean the company was not expecting to remain in the area long-term.

* * * A grower ran out of feed on three consecutive weekends.

A company had an inaccurate age for a grower’s flock. As a result, the birds were harvested at forty-six days instead of forty-three. As it so happened, the temperature soared to over one hundred degrees the day before the birds were to be picked up. The grower lost three thousand birds.

* * *

Appendix F

Poultry and Environmental Dialogue

Introduction

Protection of the environment and in particular the protection of the nation’s water quality is important to the poultry industry. As the industry has developed and grown over the last several years, the industry has recognized its role in, and has taken proactive steps to protect, the environment. Both the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the US. Department of Agriculture (USDA) are encouraging a voluntary approach to handling nonpoint source issues related to animal agriculture. The voluntary strategies outlined in the overall program will ensure that the industry is taking a lead role in promoting the protection of the environment and water quality through the implementation of Litter Man- agement Plans.

The implementation of LittedManure Management Plans by all independent and contract poultry producers will ensure that the nutrient value of the poultry litter is managed in an environmentally friendly fashion. It would be difficult for the poultry industry to dictate to private contract producers and farmers how they should manage the nutrients on their whole farm operation. However, it is entirely feasible for the poultry industry to accept their contribution to the overall nutrient issue through a LittedManure Management Plan. The development and implementation of LittedManure Management Plans in poultry production operations will ensure that the littedmanure is properly used on the land for its nutrient value or is transferred to an alternative user program.

The industry has instituted both company and academic research on feed formulation to ensure better utilization of the feed by the bird, encouraged and in some cases required the use of litter storage facilities and dead bird composters, the modification of watering devices in the grow-out operations to eliminate liquid runoff and ensure optimum litter control, and the implementation of improved ventilation to reduce mortality. While these steps have been on a voluntary basis by the indus-

234



Potiltry and Environmental Dialogue 235

try, the industry recognizes that additional measures need to be taken to ensure the continuation of, and the enhancement of, the nation’s environmental protection and water quality improvement efforts. It is antic- ipated that the program outlined in this document will build on the existing strengths of the poultry industry and will assist in the obtainment of the national water quality goals set forth in the Clean Water Act. At the same time it builds on the sustainability of the poultry industry.

The poultry industry is like a three-legged stool made up of the companies, the individual producer, and the American grain farmer. Each is dependent on the other. The strategies outlined in this document focus on the companies’ technical and financial assistance in cooperation with various government and private agencies with the environmental stew- ardship of the individual poultry producer and the grain farmer. The document also indicated to the general public and to the government regulatory agencies that the industry has its own expectations when it comes to environmental protection.

This environmental framework and implementation strategy for poultry operations is a voluntary program. It is not designed nor intended to replace, substitute for, or supersede any local, state, or federal statutory or regulatory program. Moreover each company must enter into contractual and other commercial relationships independently. Companies may not agree upon individual contractual terms nor may any industry association require that companies incorporate or implement any of the specific recommendations embodied in this voluntary program.

Poultry/litter/manure are excellent sources of organic nutrients and can be incorporated into most farming operations when properly managed. For poultry producers the proper management of littedmanure is a major consideration in their daily operations. Whether the material is utilized as a nutrient source on land controlled by the producer or is provided as a nutrient source on other lands or is offered as a material in an alternative user process, the proper management of the littedmanure is essential. Storage, transportation, application, disease prevention, and proper documentation are just a few of the items that need to be fac- tored into the littedmanure management decision-making process.

Litter/Manure Management Plan

It shall be the policy of the poultry industry to develop producer contract language and incorporate into their company operations a Litter/ Manure Management Plan. This policy is effective on the date of adoption and should apply as follows:

1. All new producers that are brought into a company’s live production program after the adoption date of this policy should have a

236 Appendix F

Litter Management Plan in place prior to the placement of birds. This includes producers who change integrators.

2. Should a producer add capacity, the LitterlManure Management Plan should be modified prior to the placement of additional birds.

3. All existing producers within the company’s live production program should be on the following recommended implementation schedule or as soon as existing long-term arrangements can be modified.

4. Producers signed after January 1,1993, and before adoption date of the policy should have a LitterlManure Management Plan by January 1,2001.

5. Producers signed after January 1, 1988, and before December 31, 1992, should have a LitterlManure Management Plan by January 1,2003.

6. Producers signed after January 1, 1983, and before December 31, 1987, should have a LitterlManure Management Plan by January 1,2005.

7. Producers signed before December 31, 1982, should have a Lit- terlManure Management Plan by January 1,2008.

8. All company-owned operations should have a LitterlManure Management Plan by January 1,2001.

It is the intent of the Litter Management Plan to address the nutrient value of the litterlmanure produced in the poultry operation and to effectively plan for its use. The LitterlManure Management Plan should be designed, written, and implemented as either a component of or within an approved Nutrient Management Plan meeting or exceeding NRCS standards or as a stand-alone document that utilizes third-party land application or alternative use programs.

Proper litterlmanure management is an essential component of a successful poultry operation. Many elements make up a LirterlManure Management Plan. Elements that should be included in a LitterlManure Management Plan are listed below.

Proper storage Length of time Facility Siting of storage facility

Record keeping Amount of litter Clean-out timelschedule Third-party land application agreements if applicable Alternative user agreements if applicable

Poultry and Environmental Dialogue 237

Name of alternative facility Location of alternative facility Type of alternative use Land application amounts, fields applied to when applied, crop

grown, crop yield

Mortality plan Composter facility or other legally approved disposal method Catastrophic die-off plan Incorporation of mortality into land application or alternative use plan

Nutrient value for land application Time of sampling Nutrient value for nitrogen, nutrient value for phosphorus Soil testing values

Transportation

Notification

Proper Storage

At the time littedmanure clean-out is conducted, the litterlmanure is often required to be placed in storage. While litter storage does present an additional expense, it is a useful tool in a comprehensive Litter/Manure Management Plan. LittedManure storage facilities can be divided into two basic categories: temporary structures and permanent structures. It is desirable to have a permanent structure for littedmanure storage.

Whether the structure is temporary or permanent, the siting of the facility is important. The following general guidelines should be implemented in siting and construction of a litter storage facility:

1. Easy access and terrain should be maintained to keep site grading to a minimum.

2. A 100-foot buffer strip should be maintained from wet areas, drainage ditches, streams, rivers, ponds, lakes, or other surface- water bodies.

3. Permanent structures should have a base or floor of concrete or impermeable clay.

4. Permanent structures should be designed in accordance with the USDA NRCS guidelines or the equivalent.

5. Temporary storage should be covered with plastic or similar material to prevent runoff.

238 Appendix F

Litter stored for a period of three months or longer should be kept in a permanent storage facility. Litter that is utilized in a land application program and is applied directly from a poultry production house during a clean-out operation does not have to have storage capabilities.

Record Keeping

Record keeping is an essential and a critical part of a well-run Litter/ Manure Management Plan. Accurate records are important as a tool in the development of future plans and assist in demonstrating the effectiveness of the plan. Records should be maintained for at least three years. Records should be kept at the farm site.

Records should be maintained in the following areas:

Amount of litter producedlstored Clean-out time/schedule Third-party land application agreements if applicable Alternative use agreements if applicable Amount of littedmanure shipped to the alternative use program The name of the alternative use program The location of the alternative use program Land application Soil test results Amounthate of manure applied Fields applied to When applied Crop grown Crop yield (where applicable)

Examples of record-keeping documents are provided as a reference. Exact copies of these example record-keeping forms are not required to meet the record-keeping portion of a LittedManure Management Plan.

Mortality Plan

Proper management of mortality is a routine component of poultry production. Effective mortality management assists in disease prevention, nutrient management, and environment control. The use of composting, rendering, incineration, or other methods that are legally approved are acceptable methods of normal mortality management. Catastrophic mortality may be handled by one of these methods or with burial that meets all federal, state, and local regulations. However, dead bird burial for normal mortality should be eliminated by January 1, 2002. Any mortality plan should be incorporated in the overall Litter Management Plan.


Nutrient Value of the Litter

Litterlmanure should be sampled for its nutrient value. Sampling of litter should occur no greater than 90 days prior to land application. The nutrients of principal concern are nitrogen and phosphorus. This is especially critical for any land application litter management program. Records should be kept of all nutrient tests including date of test, type of litter sampled, and the nutrient value of the litterlmanure.

Transportation

When transporting litterlmanure to an alternative use location, to a land application site, or to any other location using the public roads, trucks or vehicles shall be covered and/or be contained well enough to prevent loss of material.

Notification

Prior to the implementation of a litterlmanure management plan the producer shall notify the appropriate State Agency that a litterlmanure management plan has been developed and will be implemented.

Alternative Use

It shall be the policy of the poultry industry to investigate and implement where feasible economically sensible alternative uses for litter other than direct land application of litterlmanure for its nutrient value. Companies may engage in individual research, facilitate academic research, fund en- trepreneurial enterprises, or enter into joint venture or other business partnerships.

Goals of any alternative use program should include

Economically sound business principles Financial incentive for individual producers to participate Sound environmental uses

The use of poultry litterlmanure as a direct source of nutrients in an agricultural setting is an excellent method of recycling nutrients back through the crop or animal production chain.

However, there are some lands which cannot responsibly receive poultry litter due to existing high levels of nutrients. The nutrients of concern are primarily nitrogen and phosphorus. Economically sound alternative uses of poultry litterlmanure need to be implemented. These alternative use programs can be established on a regional basis, a state- wide basis, or at the individual company level.

240 Appendix F

It is critical to note that the issue of alternative uses of poultry littedmanure does not fundamentally change the issue of nutrients or pollution. To date any alternative use program merely changes the form and the environmental media in which the nutrients need to be dealt with. Both nutrients of concern, nitrogen and phosphorus, are elemental and cannot be destroyed. Changing the form of the nutrients may allow for more feasible uses such as golf courses, landscaping areas, energy production, and nutrient recovery.

In the case of burning litter from poultry operations for BTU value and generating electrical power or steam, the residual ash contains highly concentrated levels of elemental phosphorus. Emissions from the burning process could also contain elevated levels of Nox, a leading contributor to air pollution. Even if the Nox is “scrubbed” out of the emissions, the nitrogen is contained in the wastewater stream of the air control equipment. The use of poultry litter as a fuel source in electrical generation is an extremely capital-intensive alternative use method.

Two other often suggested alternative uses of broiler litter are composting and pelletization. Both of these methods still rely on the letter for its nutrient value. Whether the compost is used in organic farming or as a soil amendment in garden soils, the nutrients go back on the land. Whether the pelletized litter is used as a fertilizer source in growing grain crops or in landscaping, the nutrients go back on the land. In either case the effective management of the elemental nutrients is essential.

Feed Formulation and Nutrient Reduction

It shall be the policy of the poultry industry to engage in, facilitate, or in some other fashion research, and where economically feasible and without any detriment to the health of the bird or to the bird, to effectively metabolize the feed formulation to implement nutrient reduction strategies in feed formulation. This can be accomplished by the addition of en- zymes, reduction in nutrient concentrations, modifications in existing formulations, or by any other reasonable method.

In an effort to quantify the effectiveness of this nutrient reduction strategy, the industry shall establish a baseline measurement of nutrients in feed stocks. On an annual basis until January 1, 2005, the industry will measure the reduction of nutrient levels in feed produced. This information shall be reported in a unified national report submitted to the U.S. En- vironmental Protection Agency Assistant Administrator Office of Water.

Education

It shall be the policy of the poultry industry to aggressively facilitate the education of producers, service personnel, other segments of the poultry


industry, government regulators, and the general public on the environmental issues related to poultry production and processing. This education should include the value of poultry littedmanure and mortality, their proper management, and their impact on the environment. Educa- tion and training are also considered to include innovative technology transfer, and research outreach programs.

The industry can implement this strategy through broad-based interaction with the state land grant universities, other institutions of higher learning, government agencies (USDA Resource Conservation Service), poultry associations, and public service announcements.

Financing

Implementation of any new program, either voluntary or regulatory, will require additional funding. The poultry industry has historically used several avenues both private and public to finance the implementation of new programs. This environmental framework and strategy is no different.

Public Funding

Producers will continue to utilize to the fullest extent possible the federal and state cost share funding programs for water quality LitterlManure Management Practices.

USDA will continue its support for and more favorably increase its support and request additional funds under the Environmental Quality Incentive Program (EQUIP), the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), and the Small Watershed Protection Program (PL 83-566).

The poultry industry fully supports the President’s Clean Water Ac- tion Plan as it relates to funding of capital improvements needed by producers to implement water quality-related littedmanure management practices.

EPA should at a minimum continue its support for and more favorably increase its support and request additional funds under the Clear Water Act 319 Program (Nonpoint Source Management Program) and the Clean Water Act Waste Water Treatment and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds (SRF).

EPA should encourage the States to evaluate the use of state funds both matching and nonmatching to redirect state spending to agricultural nonpoint source efforts.

All interested parties should be seeking additional funds to support poultry industry environmental management efforts including efforts to remove barriers in Federal and state legislation to allow use of available

242 Appendix F

funds for construction of needed facilities, use of Transportation De- partment buffer and wetland conservation funds, and other funds that may be available to meet environmental objectives.

Private Funding

Integrators will continue to fund projects through their traditional channels and will increase funding as needed to meet the national goals of water quality improvement and protection. Avenues of funding available to the integrators include but are not limited to the following:

Direct payments to the producers through the standard payment

Providing low-interest loan programs for producers to meet their por-

Funding nutrient management and best management educational pro-

Funding local and regional education research, and technical assis-

channels

tion of the cost-share match

grams for the producers

tance programs

Compliance Assurance

A voluntary program needs to have a strong component of compliance assurance. To the extent industry has committed to have each producer and company-owned operation operate under a Litter/Manure Manage- ment Plan it is incumbent on the industry, both the integrators and the individual producers, to do their part in compliance assurance.

Under this voluntary framework and implementation strategy there are three components to compliance assurance. Each must function to have a successful program.

Producer

Each producer should have a LittedManure Management Plan in accordance with the time schedule noted above in the section titled: “Litter/ Manure Management Plan.”

Each producer should report on an annual basis to the appropriate state agency:

The amount of littedmanure removed from the growing houses The amount of littedmanure land applied for nutrient value The amount of litterlmanure transferred for alternative uses


Poultry Integrators

Each integrator should facilitate the education and training of their grow-out personnel, producer service personnel, or any other integrator employee that interacts on the farm with the producer in the principles of litter management.

The integrator service personnel should request to verify if each producer has the required Litter/Manure Management Plan and that the producer has submitted an annual report to the appropriate state agency.

The integrator should report for each of the integrator-owned operations on an annual basis to the appropriate state agency:

The amount of littedmanure removed from the growing houses The amount of littedmanure land applied for nutrient value The amount of littedmanure transferred for alternative uses

Regulatoty Agencies

The regulatory agencies reserve the right to inspect the producer’s Litter Management Plan and any records relating to the Plan during reasonable and routine business times and within the scope of the agency’s statutory authority.

The regulatory agencies reserve the right to investigate any and all complaints related to the producer’s operation or the integrator’s operation within the agency’s statutory authority.

Questions about this document may be directed to the National Chicken Council at 202-296-2622.

communication in poultry grower relations: a blueprint to success

Documents