Molly Janczyk re: Baldrige Principles and Random Acts

From Molly Janczyk, January 11, 2008
Subject: Random Acts and Baldrige Behaviors

We can go to sources and nitpick lines forever.

For ex.:

Baldrige: Random Acts

Random acts is within the context of Random Acts of Improvement.

Jim suggests in my opinion that these are here-and-there issues which may or may not stay in effect. For ex., we may again be headed toward an entitled OEA driven STRS Board which may not like Leone's Travel Policy or Lazares' Ethics Policy, both now part of STRS by laws.

Let me quote some common threads on reading various resources for Baldrige Principles. Jim can then take some threads to support his, in my estimation, less favorable take on Leone results.

Behaviors for Baldrige:

1. Be Proactive: take initiative rather than reacting to situations

I feel Leone and Lazares do take this initiative and that Meuser and others react to this initiative negatively

2. Begin with end in mind: long term goals (new policies to correct past abuses: Leone and Lazares) need be a 'true north' principle and formulate personal mission statements that document purpose. Challenging leadership to set clear and compelling vision goals. (Leone and Lazares certainly do this while others are comfortable with status quo regardless of behavior and content saying: "Well the Exec. Direc. now knows what we want so we don't have to write a policy. Pretty sad business procedure).

3. First Things First: prioritize long term goals vs. less important issues. Activate how and what will be implemented. (All Leone and Larares' policies and motions focus on long term corrections of past problems of mismanagement and abuse).

4. Think Win Win: Solutions should benefit staff and sharehlders.

***No organization can be effective without clear approach for identifying and satisfying requirements of its customers/ shareholders: (retirees)

This needs innovative ways to break barriers between the organization and sharereholders and achieve mutually (organ./shareholders) beneficial outcomes.

5. Seek to Understand: build a culture that promotes understanding (that sure didn't happen with OEA bashing Leone for his 2003 Report on spending abuses at STRS by the 5 OEA Board members convicted of ethics violations with a statewide letter impugning his character and questioning his integrity; refusing to retract it when all points were researched, proven and verifiable. Then NEOEA questioned Leone's candidacy when a simple call to STRS verified it hoping, in my opinion, that it would raise doubts and lessen votes. Neither Leone nor Lazares were welcomed to the Board with any friendly gestures but instead greeted with snotty dismissing behavior and remarks such as : "I am not happy to see you here!" Leone has been called names: attack dog, crackpot, etc. and met with automatic opposition without even considering his motions in the minds of many onlookers. OEA is quick to blame all this on Leone who takes their behavior with a grain of salt but refuses to back down from their bravado attempts to dismiss him with false statements such as "Dennis, when this goes down, the motion is killed" when that is not the case. Some Board members speak out of what seems to be ignorance of procedure and policy.

What does Leone do: Speaks with certainly and strength so as to be heard and will not back down when he knows something is right. He refuses to compromise on issues which retirees tell him are important to them because he listens to retirees and bothers to respond which most Board members do not. Lazares and Leone speak always for retirees: "What would retirees think of this?" or "How does this affect retirees?" is a constant from their mouths, always aware of their customers: shareholders: retirees.

OEA calls Leone's and Lazares' motions micromanaging hurling remarks at them month after month at Board meetings trying to suppress their right to deliver their promises to us in accordance to the ORC: act solely on behalf of retirees for their benefit.

Promote understanding with managing by FACT, organization and learning; measurement and analysis and knowledge all requirements for decisions based on systemic process of collecting and analyzing relevant data. (All Leone and Lazares strengths and demands vs. voting on personality and personal feelings).

6. Synergies: methods the organization uses to identify and improve opportunities for teamwork (what does OEA and its Board members along with some other Board members do to promote teamwork vs. antagonism and disapproval directing their remarks of personality style?)
7. Sharpen the Saw: spirit of innovation and renewal promoting open and honest assessment of strengths and opportunities for improvement as a starting point. (clearly Leone and Lazares' style ((and CORE)))

Random Acts of Improvement : personal mission statement documents; this is a relentless stakeholder driver quality effort and not just random acts going in various directions as suggested reliant on today's Board. Any future Board may change any number of issues and policy.

This system may be systemic or planned or be implemented in random acts.

Suggestions for success:

1. Appoint committees to study issues considered 'dead horse' issues.

2. Switch tactics regarding issues which seem 'dead horse' issues. Use new ways and new standards and not what has always been done.

3. Visit sites showing effective efforts

4. Increase standards for 'dead horse' issues

5. Create test to measure efficiency

6. Compare today with 10 yrs ago

7. Tighten reins

8. Stop blame (OEA tactic pointing finger for 5 yrs at Leone)

9. New behavior and skills

10. GENERATE SHORT TERM WINS AND RECOGNIZE THOSE WHO MADE THEM A REALITY (That would be a novel approach for OEA)

11. All this builds toward an effective and efficient organization for shareholders.

The random acts to which Jim refers, (Do you want random acts or long term goals ) by Leone and Lazares ALL were towards long term goals of correcting past abusive behavior of the charged and convicted former OEA Board members, management problems and overspending. These changes were demanded by shareholders (retirees) and Leone and Lazares seem alone in making these policy changes on their behalf.

So, the answer to Jim's question is : YES! We do want these random acts building a better and more efficient and effective STRS as evidenced in the past 5 yrs. Those corrections are solely because of Leone and Lazares and CORE along with some Board members who finally approved (some were solid the whole time) this motions.

There is nothing in Baldrige that does not exemplify Leone and Lazares and they seem to be the members who most clearly and steadfastly adhere to its principles.

We can seek some policy and pull lines out of it for stating to the Board. But, in reality: WHAT DID OEA AND ITS BOARD MEMBERS ALONG WITH THEIR BLOCK SUPPORTERS DO TO CHANGE THINGS FOR THE BETTERMENT OF STRS FOR ITS SHAREHOLDRES: RETIREES?

We have asked and asked for items to post and circulate in a fair effort to promote these accomplishments but none have come to us.

We have asked time and time again for STRS Board members to take some word or phrase from Leone's legal issue motion or from my attempt at a beginning to resolve this issue and begin dialogue towards solution.

Nothing: True to form.

What does OEA and OEA-R want?

I think they want to misrepresent Leone's motions, raise question to his integrity and continue to throw out remarks to diminish his power base. I think he embarrassed them to the CORE and created internal shock waves from which they have not yet recovered.

I cannot imagine why else 5 years have been spent trying to take this man down with not one recognition of his record and accomplishments:

• Awards for investigating STRS and writing his report

• Awards for educator advocacy

• Continual and constant invitations to speak at RTA and to actives

• Many internal changes in policy at STRS

• Recognition statewide for his accomplishments but never, NEVER from OEA NOR ORTA in any real sense

WHY? Change. People fear it instead of welcoming it for improving matters. WHY? OEA, OEA-R, ORTA NEVER worked to stop the spending abuse of which they were aware, I am sure, and were thrown in the spotlight when Leone and Lazares did.

Their solution was to attack in a mean, vicious and character assassination which some actually try to explain away. Their solution was to try to raise questions about these 2 men and question their motives which have long been proven: To do the right thing.

Must we continue to hear this bashing month after month in what they think is a veiled attempt to control the Board and squelch Leone? Must we hear lines from principles theories now thrown out without context in desperate attempts to continue to excuse their behavior.

What is truth is:

These minds are not going to change nor is their behavior. We are stuck with them until they are gone. A new generation will come but long down the road.

Until then:

• Each new attempt you throw out will be researched and a retort back to show how it also applies to Leone and Lazares' constant quest for a better organization based on retiree requests.

• Each attempt will end with: WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TO STOP THE SPENDING ABUSES AND MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS AT STRS (I especially love those who say they were here before Leone: (Tim Myers: also the insults to Leone and Angeletti writer) Well, WHAT DID YOU DO? Turned the other way is my guess.

Each attempt will say: What are your specific steps towards resolution and compromise vs. just saying what you cannot do.

The new Exec. Direc. will hopefully be a man of the future and vision. There are excellent staff members at STRS but none were able to stand up to the entitled alliance culture of Dyer and the OEA-controlled Board. I guess they feared losing their jobs and security. It is hard to say no when your family depends on your salary. Some of them have told us that they wish for STRS to be returned to its former premier status of membership trust. Some have told us things we cannot share. We hope the new Exec. Direc. is a man of strong character who will not be turned by a dollar or questionable incentive offers polluting the staff with exceptions to policy and behaviors in subjective decisions. Only a top notch quality Exec. Direc. can run a top notch pension system posing no questions to its membership.

As Bill L. calls it: 'Molly's Missive'