Ball Corporation - once famous for its glass jars - is one of today's leaders in the metal packaging business for the food and beverage industry and a major service provider to the government and the aerospace industry. More than 14,000 employees work for the 130-year-old company, which is headquartered in Colorado and has more than 90 locations around the world.

In May 2007, the leadership team of one of Ball's metal beverage packaging plants began to notice some disturbing trends including drops in production, decreased employee engagement due largely to poor leader performance, and increased turnover as longtime leaders began retiring.

The plant decided to partner with a program management firm - Training Modernization Group - for dedicated support during the analysis, design, pilot, and implementation phases. After a 90- day plantwide study that included analyzing key HR data reports, performance metrics, in-depth interviews with all levels of plant leadership, and a plantwide employee engagement survey, plant leaders uncovered several alarming issues:

  • Chief maintainers (first-line leaders) were not consistent in effectively assigning tasks and communicating goals and expectations to plant employees.
  • Production supervisors were making tactical and operational decisions instead of engaging in more strategic thinking and planning.
  • Managers did not have a system in place to motivate and engage employees to better performance and increased production.

To reverse these trends, Ball crafted a plan to

  • create an atmosphere that would motivate and engage employees and thus increase production
  • implement a systematic approach to leadership development that focused on improving core daily activities
  • develop leadership competencies that tie directly to the strategic goals of the business
  • improve bench strength and succession planning by developing a substitute leader system and formal training programs for chief maintainers and supervisors.

A Leadership Development Solution

In 2007, more than half of the 18 first-line supervisors who had been with the company for an average of 24 years were slated to retire within the next five years. In addition, production and performance goals weren't being met under the current plant leadership. To solve both issues, the management team committed to investing in the developing leaders and employees by creating a Leadership Performance Improvement System.

The goal was to develop effective managers and supervisors throughout the plant who could manage employees to meet and eventually exceed plantwide performance goals. The program also aimed to identify and develop future leaders, transfer knowledge to new employees, and create an engaged and aligned workforce. The plant instituted several leadership initiatives:

  • realignment of production leadership to ensure managers' and supervisors' actions were tied to business goals
  • chief maintainer and crew supervisor training program development and implementation to provide structured supervisory training as opposed to ad hoc or on-the-job training
  • individual development plans for all key leaders that are targeted to build upon the specific strengths and address specific growth areas for leaders to develop "high performance behaviors"
  • substitute leader qualification and training program to deal with the gap that happens when a manager is unavailable and the plant needs to keep daily goals on schedule
  • a modernized promotion process built upon a succession planning model.
  • boost employee morale and address the drop in production, Ball created several programs:
  • a team scorecard to communicate daily performance goals
  • rapid improvement events or "lean events" to improve processes and to develop cross-departmental teams in working together to solve problems related to production
  • "Business 101 Training" to help employees as well as all levels of management understand the key metrics that affect the business
  • a "Leader to Led Promise" to explain the organization's goals, roles, and responsibilities to new employees and plant managers
  • workforce reorganization to create more effective teams, which demonstrated the change in culture.

Results

The leader improvement process required commitment from leadership and every manager. Managers evaluated leadership behaviors and performance as part of their responsibilities. This program gave first-line leaders the training and development opportunities they needed to develop the essential behaviors required to get the most out of their teams, which ultimately improved production and employee morale.

In the 12 months following implementation (June 2008 - June 2009), production numbers met or exceeded their goals 38 out of the 52 weeks. In the 26 preceding weeks before the training solution, production goals had been achieved in only 15 percent of the time. The plant has realized a return-on-investment of more than $3,090,000 and increased production by 84 million units over the previous 12 months. Spoilage decreased by 24.5 percent during that timeframe. Customer complaints dropped by 50.4 percent compared to the previous 12-month period.

Results from the third annual employee engagement survey showed an improvement in 12 of 13 questions; perceptions of favoritism dropped more than 25 percent. The number of employees seeking promotion increased by more than 25 percent; five of six leadership positions were filled internally. The plant now has a pool of more than 30 qualified substitute leaders, including eight lead palletizers, 14 substitute chief maintainers, and eight substitute crew supervisors.

The leadership improvement process has helped firstline leaders strengthen their ability to identify and solve maintenance issues quicker and communication and cooperation across of all four crews has increased production.