LMP Processes

When I was asked to represent The Permanente Medical Group at 2012 bargaining, I leapt at the opportunity. My own experience with partnership at Fresno Medical Center showed me what great things could be accomplished with collective problem solving.

I sat on the subgroup that looked at how to improve partnership to enhance performance and Kaiser Permanente’s operational agility. I was amazed at seeing so many people with different backgrounds sharing their thoughts and shaping the outcomes. From the highest levels of Kaiser Permanente and union leadership to the front line, everybody was around the table, and they were all equal in this venue. Everyone was heard and engaged.

I personally learned a lot from the different perspectives voiced by all of the individuals representing their fields. I strongly believe that collective wisdom is better than individual wisdom, and that with collective wisdom you can achieve anything in life. Interest-based bargaining, which assembles voices from all levels and reaches of Kaiser Permanente, is a great example of collective wisdom.

Another thing that struck me—how much folks craved the physician perspective. When I spoke, all 25 to 30 people in that subgroup really listened. And there were issues where a physician perspective was critical. That was a strong message I brought back to physicians. In most unit-based teams at Fresno, there is physician involvement. The intention is to bring those perspectives together to enhance the care for our members and patients. But does that mean if I walk into a UBT meeting I’ll see a doctor? Maybe yes, maybe no.

I’ve worked at Kaiser Permanente for 34 years, and I saw the pre-partnership years. They were contentious ones. We’ve had relative peace with coalition unions since partnership. That’s not to say that working in partnership is perfect in every way. It can’t be done without trusting each other. And how do you develop trust? Through transparency. The whole bargaining process was about transparency; essentially, everybody could share everything. That doesn’t mean people didn’t disagree.

The interest-based, collective approach takes into account everyone’s perspectives to reach a better outcome, which is ultimately a common goal—superior care for our members and patients.

I just used interest-based problem solving (IBPS) while I was at a union convention in Philadelphia. We got five people to rent a car together and go sightseeing on our one day off. So we had to decide what to do in Philadelphia for 24 hours. We brainstormed, then identified the ideas we all supported. We went to Valley Forge, Amish country and the boardwalk in Atlantic City. It worked great.

My husband and I used interest-based problem solving to make a decision about a major purchase recently. I used IBPS to get to “yes.” IBPS is the easiest way to organize your mind. My mind automatically goes to it and that whole process. If a conversation gets confusing, you can go back to the structure provided by it.

Being at a round table with interest-based problem solving is the best way to move health care forward. What we do at the bargaining table with IBPS is great, but we need to do a better job bringing that back to the workplace. We can make it better by having more frontline managers at the bargaining table.

Frontline managers, especially the newer ones, need a sense of the history and commitment of our National Agreement. And frontline managers need more support. There are still problems with backfill, with allowing employees to be involved in LMP activities.

The way we do business at Kaiser Permanente is the Labor Management Partnership, so we need to have those interest-based discussions. I’ve been involved in 2000, 2005, 2010 and 2012 bargaining. I am in awe of the great work labor and management representatives do—and how we can come up with common goals in a nonadversarial manner. I hope we all see it as a value.

A former KP administrator, Michael Belmont now works for Restructuring Associates Inc., the consulting firm that helped during the creation and initial implementation of the Labor Management Partnership and that now helps facilitate national bargaining. He sees interest-based bargaining as a way to solve the problems of the future, before they arise, instead of getting stuck dealing with the baggage of past grievances.

My time at Kaiser Permanente dates back to the late 1980s. I was assistant hospital administrator in Panorama City, dealing with several unions. We were facing so much discord. It was all-encompassing, and it took the focus off improvement issues. The move toward interest-based bargaining and [the] Labor Management Partnership allowed us to put the focus on improving the member experience instead of continually trying to resolve labor problems.

Partnership, especially interest-based bargaining, gives employees and their unions a chance to have an impact on things they might not otherwise. They have a say beyond wages, hours and working conditions. In 2012, there was a bargaining subgroup on growth, focusing both on growing Kaiser Permanente and the unions. In a traditional setting, that doesn’t happen. For employees and their unions, the other side of the interest-based process is responsibility and accountability to take on and help solve the problems of the organization.

When we do trainings on interest-based problem solving, people will say, “This is how I deal with relationships.” If you are going to be a good partner—and have a successful relationship with a partner, kids, friends—you have to have your partner’s interests in mind as well as your own. Making this connection helps people connect the strategy to their work lives.

After 2000 bargaining, the Southern California region was looking for a change in labor relations, away from traditional, toward partnership. We were trying to move labor relations away from being a wall between the unions and management and toward facilitating a productive relationship between unions and management. I saw a gradual transition toward more of a partnering role. I left KP in 2006. I could come back [with Restructuring Associates] as a neutral [party] in 2010 and 2012 because of the [nature of the previous] relationships with union and management officials.

Interest-based bargaining is focused on solving problems up front rather than on grievances. People have to unlearn a lot of habits and build a lot of trust. There was 50 years of baggage [when the partnership started]. A traditional approach leaves lots of scars. Traditional is the comfort zone for most organizations. Traditional approaches are backwards looking: They are about solving problems from the past that pile up and wait for bargaining. Interest-based bargaining is about solving problems and issues that may come up in the future. Using the interest-based approach in bargaining and in day-to-day work is a much more forward-looking way to solve problems—and so much more effective.

No one does it like we do.

Our negotiations for a new National Agreement will be one of the largest private-sector contract talks in the United States this year. No one else brings together such a large and diverse group of representatives from labor and management—plus physicians—to arrive at a single contract for so many union locals nationwide.

We’re so accustomed to this being our norm, it’s easy to forget how revolutionary our Labor Management Partnership is—and how democratic our interest-based methods are.

“At the table, everyone has an equal right to speak and explain their interest,” says Linda Gonzales of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, which helps facilitate the negotiations. “There’s more open dialogue and sharing of information.”

The tone set by interest-based bargaining carries over to the work of unit-based teams. UBTs were one of the outcomes of 2005 bargaining. Today, they are the engine for performance improvement at Kaiser Permanente. They are also the structure giving frontline workers a voice in making decisions. The work UBTs do to improve care for KP members wouldn’t be happening if partnership weren’t in place, and if each successive national agreement didn’t commit everyone to finding innovative ways to address common interests.

It’s not always smooth sailing. But the interest-based model grounds everyone in shared values.

“There are some hard issues, and bargaining still has to take place,” says Joel Cutcher-Gershenfeld, a professor at the Institute of Labor and Industrial Relations at the University of Illinois. “At the end of the day, you have to find the right balance.”

The Transportation department in the Northwest is coming out of a tumultuous time. A lack of trust between managers and employees created a barrier that affected morale—and made it difficult to focus on improving routes and processes.

The department uses a robust but complex process for optimizing its routes. For maximum efficiency, it has to integrate a variety of work streams and figure out where there are redundancies that can be eliminated. Because of the complexity of the process, however, it had been more than 15 years since the criteria and requirements for the transportation system from the customer’s point of view had been reviewed.

Eventually, the UBT worked out a thorough route-modernization plan based on data-driven service requirements and metrics that established parameters on how to revise and design its routes.

But before it got there, it had to fix its communication, which broke down so badly the team entered into an issue resolution. In the Northwest, the LMP Education and Training department is responsible for facilitating issue resolutions.

Blame-free solutions

“There was a lot of tension in the department, and people were nervous about losing their jobs as a result of our work around revamping routes. Poor communication was a problem,” says Greg Hardy, sponsor and manager of the department.

The issue resolution process uses interest-based problem solving, and that helped the team focus on a common goal: Serving its customers was the top priority and improving communication was a necessity. From there, other agreements came more easily, and the department was able to maintain staffing levels and improve processes as a result of its efforts.

Improved communication improves service

As a result of the improved communication, the team was able to improve service levels and achieve the efficiency and cost savings it had strived for.

“We have a group of dedicated workers who want things done the right way,” says logistics supervisor Chris Dirksen, the team’s management co-lead.

When it came to improving communication, the team members’ first step was to get a baseline measurement of what they were trying to improve. They created a survey that would measure not only communication but also morale and UBT effectiveness. Once they had that information, they created a SMART goal: to improve employee perception of communication, morale and UBT effectiveness by 15 percent within three months, raising the overall survey score from 2.55 to 2.93 by February 2014.

As the team began to investigate the issues, it discovered email was not a good form of communication. Fewer than 20 percent of the team members knew how to log on and use Lotus Notes. The team brainstormed ways get employees to use Lotus Notes email and frontline staffers began to instruct and coach one another.

Three months later, the team sent the survey out again and found it had met its goal. Perception of communication improved 48 percent, morale improved by 56 percent and UBT effectiveness improved by 21 percent. The team scored 3.4 on its survey, exceeding its stretch goal of 2.93, and anecdotal reports are that the communication success is continuing now that the team has successfully completely the issue resolution.

New ways to communicate

Team members use several means now for communicating with one another, including email. A communication board has been set up in the department’s headquarters, near dispatch, that includes information about the projects the team is working on, notes from UBT meetings and a copy of the department’s weekly e-newsletter, “Heads Up.”

In addition, the team has gone from a representative UBT to a general membership UBT and now has regularly scheduled meetings throughout the region, so that all employees are able to participate. “This has been our biggest success to share information,” says UBT union co-lead Nickolas Platt, a courier driver and member of SEIU Local 49.

“It’s cool to watch from meeting to meeting how more people show up each time,” Hardy says. “The engagement of the team has increased as we began to see improvement, and people could see change.”