We teach "irresponsibility 101." what do you teach? (Management Issues).

As teachers and advisers for graduate and undergraduate students in health administration, we're always amazed at the perspective of new students, especially freshmen. Almost without exception, they express guilt at what they "got away with" in high school. When pressed, they'll openly admit

they didn't really apply themselves, yet they still got into college. This is no secret. In fact, one of the favorite topics at any college faculty eatery is how high schools have failed to prepare serious-minded students for college. We suspect employers likewise discuss how colleges have failed to prepare serious-minded workers for employment.

What we find particularly troubling about this scenario is that students begin their new academic experience expecting to be called to task. They expect to work harder than ever and to be held accountable for their actions. This transition to college probably is similar to the transition to the employment world.

Quality in School

So what happens? Teachers allow students who are searching for responsibility to behave irresponsibly. Teachers allow irresponsible behavior by lowering standards, often in the name of equity. Rather than spending time teaching basic skills or the common body of their discipline, teachers may spend time on the latest management or teaching fad or, even worse, on what the students consider "relevant." Here is an example of how relevance can become a detractor. Control charts are a powerful tool taught in our curriculum. However, instead of teaching the theory of control charts and then requiring the students to demonstrate its applicability to their chosen field, some teachers use examples that are specific to the students' interests. Although these examples make the study relevant and the class easier for the students, the teachers are preventing the students from learning how to apply a powerful theory or tool within a variety of contexts.

Teachers often accept weak excuses from students for shoddy work or no work at all. Students learn they can turn in substandard assignments and still be certified as competent in the material. College teachers in particular are guilty of allowing students to withdraw from classes with a passing grade when the record shows they are failing. Or they may allow students to take an "I" for incomplete rather than face the embarrassment of receiving an "F." The message to students is that rules and even policies developed at the highest levels are negotiable.

Quality on the Job

Interesting story, you say, but how does this apply to management? Managers are teachers and teach by example. Deming, the pioneer of the total-quality movement, wrote the following passage in an effort to convince all managers that one of their primary functions in the future will be teaching:

The prevailing system of management [and education] has destroyed our people. People are born with intrinsic motivation, self-esteem, dignity, curiosity to learn, joy in learning. The forces of destruction begin with toddlers and continue on up through the university years.

As managers and teachers, we wonder how many of us have let our employees off the hook by not expecting their best work, Worse, we then reward them for the substandard work they performed. How many of us have policies, systems, or even management styles that allow our employees to behave irresponsibly? How many of us have allowed employees to take sick time when we knew they weren't sick? A more pertinent question may be why do we let our employees off the hook? The explanations range from fear of conflict or possible litigation to a desire to be the employee's friend.

Still, is letting employees off the hook in the best long-term interest of the employees and the organization? The answer is no. Everyone wants to feel good about themselves, Negative performance appraisals are a source of conflict and frustration. Most people know when they are not doing their best work, and they would strive to excel if their managers held them accountable for their performance. To uphold standards when there is no reward is an example of integrity Many of those who did not perform to their best ability also know that neither the work nor their manager will challenge them to excel.

Motivating Employees

Consider the quote from Deming again. For many employees, the fires of motivation still burn. People who are denied the challenge to excel both in school and on the job are increasingly participating in sports, for example. They want to know how they are doing and want to be judged on results. A lack of preparation, effort, or dedication is readily apparent in sports such as running, mountain biking, triathlons, rock climbing, and adventure racing. In sports such as these, participants either accomplish the goal or not. There is no negotiation with fellow competitors, the weather, or the finish line. These sports reward achievement. Winners do not receive awards because they were nice people or tried hard.

Simply put, we agree with Deming. Many people possess "intrinsic motivation, self-esteem, dignity curiosity to learn, joy in learning." These are the people we want to employ Many of those working for us now may well still have these desires.

What are you doing to challenge your employees, to ignite the fires of their passion to excel? The challenge to managers is to set standards, hold people to those standards, and reward accomplishment of the standards. Quality occurs in the details, and highly motivated people attend to the details. Managers who let their employees off the hook do a disservice to their employees and their organizations.

Michael Nowicki, EdD, FHFMA, FACHE, is a professor of health administration, Southwest Texas State University, San Marcos, and a member of HFMA's South Texas chapter. His e-mail address is nowicki@swt.edu.

Jim Summers, PhD, CHE, is an associate professor of health administration, Southwest Texas State University, San Marcos. His e-mail address is summers@swt.edu.