An engineer approached an operator with a suggestion, “I think it might reduce our assembly issues if you washed the parts in a cleaning solution prior to attaching them. What do you think?”

“It might be worth trying.”

“I’ll get the correct cleaning solution for you; and if you don’t mind, try it for a few cycles and let’s see if it helps.”

“Be glad to.”

In another case, an engineer suggested to an operator, “I’ve made some slight adjustments in the design of these attachments.  They are going to work a lot better for you.” 

The operator, handling the new attachments like the hot end of a branding iron, clumsily affixed them to the part.  The result was a failed inspection.  “It doesn’t work,” the operator reported, seemingly pleased about the failure.

Both engineers proposed minor changes, but the tone and relationship dynamics were markedly different. The first exchange was collaborative, respectful, and open-ended. The second was more directive, with little room for dialogue or ownership.

Even the most well-intentioned improvements can falter if the human element is overlooked. Change is not just a matter of logic—it’s a matter of connection.