The emergence of the textile industry has been witnessed steady. The hurricane of globalization has helped businesses to pull down the trade blockades, as well as the fast developing low-cost nations have changed the scenario of industries. The trend for shifting production facilities to low-costing nations is increasing day-by-day, and the previous major players such as US, UK, Germany, Italy and France are observing downfall in their textile industries. Cut-throat competition and demand compelled significant players in developed nations like US and Europe to establish production facilities in developing nations that have cheap labor costs and good skills.
The outsourcing product assortment involved largely indispensable articles with low-added value and lesser margins. However, in these nations, it was a complex procedure to make fashion products with high added value in terms of creative ideas, designing and know-how, specifically due to a complicated textile chain.
The rapid growth of the local economic scenario has elevated labor costing, and this has led to competitiveness with other developing and low cost nations. The first outcome of the higher cost was that the manufacturing facilities were moved to the cheaper nations.
Mass manufacturing is normally considered to cheap price and lower value addition. The movement of manufacturing units to these low-cost countries caters to the usual motive of buyers, who are looking for competitive prices and of manufacturers from developing countries who are concerned about larger volumes without big complications.
Cut throat competition, huge loss of mass production, and declining profit margins have led to trauma for the textile and apparel industries of the earlier major manufacturers. For them the only way-out was to march into new markets and making new products with added-value with more profit margins. Actually, to manufacture added-value assortment needs select raw materials, enhanced know-how, expert labor, technology and best quality control while the process, and usually lesser volumes. This might be a leading factor why added-value product assortments with complex manufacturing processes and lesser volumes are still made in the western countries.
Investigation, creativity and modernism are the major areas for the complete textile chain to triumph, and if one of these areas in the chain doesn’t perform well, then the complete chain faces unfavorable results. For example, if we study the Indian textile chain, we will come up to the shocking result that India imports fabrics from other countries utilized by local garment producers, despite its massive resources.
My belief is that you CANNOT MOTIVATE ANOTHER PERSON. That may sound rather pessimistic, but let's examine it from another perspective. As managers and leaders within our organizations, we CAN do much to create an environment where people will become self-motivated.
Let's look at the rationale for the belief that we cannot motivate another person. In our work with others over the years, we have discovered that behavior is almost always ?needs-driven?. What do we mean by that? Think of a newborn child. First the need occurs, then the feeling, then the behavior. The baby has a need for food, which triggers a feeling of intense hunger, which results in the baby crying. Most mothers and fathers can distinguish their newborns? cry for food from other sorts of cries.
As we grow older, other elements factor into our behavior, such as our values, our life experiences and our thoughts and feelings. It has been said we are either motivated by what we ?feel? like doing or by what we ?think? we should be doing. It is the old ?pleasure/fear? motivator. You may be familiar with the ?carrot/stick? concept as well.
In order for us to be more effective as leaders, and to create an environment where people are self-motivated, we must understand what lies below the ?needs-driven? behavior we are seeing. It is often just the tip of the iceberg. By getting to know our associates, we can better understand what is driving their behavior. This is one of the keys to creating a high performing team.
We use a behavioral-based model called DISC to assist our clients in better understanding these needs. For example, someone with a high Dominance style of behavior has a need for results and achievement. A person with a high Influence style has a need for social recognition and competence. Someone with a high Steadiness style has a need for acceptance and stability. And someone with a high Conscientiousness style has a need for accuracy and correctness.
Obviously, as human beings, we are much more complicated than this, but it can be a start in looking below the surface of the iceberg. Many of us have a combination of at least two of these styles, and sometimes three. The behavior we see is only the tip of the iceberg.
If each of these behavioral styles has different needs and goals, how can we begin to create an environment that works for most everyone? Here are five tips to get us moving in the right direction regardless of individual styles.
** Be clear on expectations up front **
Let people know what is important to you and what you expect from them. Share your own style and needs with your fellow associates and friends.
** Walk the talk and lead by example **
Step in to support your team at every opportunity. Maintain your own sense of personal integrity at all times.
** Get to know your people and what makes them tick **
Be a student of understanding differences, and adapt your style to meet their needs. Provide opportunities for people to operate from their strengths.
** Provide honest feedback, and continuous coaching **
Encourage an environment where team members can learn from one another, including from you, and you from them. Tell the truth.
** Encourage and reward accountability **
Provide reinforcement when people take initiative. Be the poster child for personal accountability. Admit mistakes and learn from them.
I once attended an advanced facilitation skills class, where the facilitator said something that has stayed with me all these years. She said, "you can't take a group any further than you are". Think about that. If I have issues around control, or trust, or rigidity, it will almost certainly surface in our work as a group or a team.
Keeping the above quote in mind, it also begs looking at a very difficult question. Am I possibly a part of the problem? Am I creating the right environment so people want to come to work and want to contribute fully?
If I can begin to work on myself first, things will begin to shift. I have to get honest with myself, and my own needs, to determine what is driving my own behavior. I have to slay my own dragons before I can create an environment where others can do the same. I must assess my own level of motivation and my own attitude, before I can support others in this endeavor. By working on my own self-management, I can create an environment where others are self-motivated, and where as a team we are more likely to achieve our goals. And who knows, we just might have some fun along the way as well.
Both Fibre2fashion Dharmesh & Paula Switzer are contributors for EditorialToday. The above articles have been edited for relevancy and timeliness. All write-ups, reviews, tips and guides published by EditorialToday.com and its partners or affiliates are for informational purposes only. They should not be used for any legal or any other type of advice. We do not endorse any author, contributor, writer or article posted by our team.
Paula Switzer has sinced written about articles on various topics from Customer Service, Travel and Leisure and Computers and The Internet. Paula Switzer works with leaders who desire increased sales, improved customer service and enhanced teamwork. Learn more about her work at her websites: Training Resou. Paula Switzer's top article generates over 12100 views. Bookmark Paula Switzer to your Favourites.
Adults With Aspergers Syndrome It has been determined to be linked to genetics, making it likely to be passed on within the family