(1)
POOGI Forum Letter #12, (Part 2), Eli
Goldratt
(2) Kay
Buckner-Seal, Cheryl A. Edwards
Connections
(3) 5th Annual TOCFE International Conference/First Annual TOCFE
International Student’s Conference, Cheryl A.
Edwards
NETWORKING
(1) POOGI Forum
Letter #12, (Part 2)
By
Eli Goldratt
In last week’s TACTics, we
featured POOGI Forum Letter #12, (Part 1).
Here is an excerpt:
X is pressing on Y to use TOC in order to improve. Y tries to explain that "it won't work
here, we are different." War
starts between X and Y. A war that
usually ends with X being defeated and the TOC implementation stagnates or even
disappears.
Let's investigate the X-Y syndrome in more depth. There are three questions that beg an
answer:
1. Why does X go out of hes
way to poke Y?
2. Why doesn't Y accept X’s common-sense recommendations and improve?
3. Why does X lose the war?
In part 1, Eli provided three plausible answers to question #1, above. This week, part 2 of the letter will give us
insights on questions #2 and #3.
Communicating
with many Xs helped to gain a deeper insight to the first question. As for gaining answers for the latter two
questions, I was very disappointed. The
answers that I’ve got from the Xs for the second question (why Y doesn’t
listen) were always in the form of unflattering remarks about Y’s
management. The answers that I’ve got
for the third question (why X loses) were even more bitter opinions about top
management.
Since my
basic assumption is that people are not bad or dumb I could not accept such
answers. I was stuck.
But, as it
usually happens, when your mind is concentrating on a problem you become much
more attuned to the hints that reality constantly throws your way. Early this year, I was invited to be the
keynote speaker of a conference organized by Industry Week, a conference
that was dedicated to the announcement of the "10 best plants in the
U.S." The groups that led the
implementations in each of the ten plants gave the other presentations.
I was asked
to give the first presentation, probably to set the theoretical ground. As I frequently do when speaking with people
from production, I asked the audience about The Goal. Overwhelming, majority did read it. They love this book. They call it common sense. But when I asked how many actually
implemented it, only a handful raised their hands.
When I was
sitting there listening to the testimonials of the "10 best plants,"
it started to dawn on me that I actually don’t know why only a small percentage
of the readers implement TOC. I
realized that all the explanations I raised to this strange phenomenon are
false.
You see, the
presenters, even though they were aware of The Goal and agree that it
make perfect sense, none had used any of the ideas in their efforts to improve
their plants. Rather they were talking
about efforts that extend over four to six years and were listing long lists of
action items. For example, the first
group had presented a list of thirty-two action items. One of the items was "improvement
projects.” They said that just in 1999
they have completed 1,742 improvement projects. The plan for this year is to exceed 2000 improvement projects.
And the
results? I was not overly
impressed. Regarding improvements in
inventory, lead time and due-date performance, they were on the level that I
come to expect as standard after six months of TOC implementation. But most have achieved only a modest increase
in the plant throughput. And that is
after mammoth efforts over many years.
So what is
actually happening? Why didn’t they use
the common-sense ideas they read in The Goal and achieve much more, with
a fraction of the time and efforts? All
my usual explanations were clearly false.
These people had the authority to implement major changes. They had the time and the budget. They had phenomenal determination. These people were real doers, no doubt about
it. The conclusion that I was forced to
make is that there must be something that I still don’t know what it is, a
force powerful enough to block most people from using the TOC way.
Once we
accept that there is some powerful force, whatever it is, that blocks most
people from using TOC, we shouldn’t be surprised that Y is usually not
listening to X. We also shouldn’t be
surprised that usually top management is not residing with X but with Y. In other words this, still unnamed, force is
probably the one blocking the movement from bottom up.
The only
thing that, at that stage, I knew about this "mysterious" force is
that since the process of moving a company from top down is working extremely
well, there must be something in the process of the 4x4 that naturalizes this
force.
That was not enough of a clue. But these same ten presentations gave me the key. It turns out that these plants are widely
used as references by the JIT/TQM/LEAN community. No wonder that delegations from other plants are visiting to find how exactly to improve. All presenters, without any exception, were
complaining that their visitors are "looking for a silver bullet.” “There is no ‘silver bullet,’" the
presenters passionately stressed. "It is hard work, by everybody in the
plant. Hard work for a long, long
time.”
During the
two days conference I heard the phrase “There is no silver bullet” so many
times that at last it penetrated my thick scalp. They all believe that there are no silver bullets, that you can
not achieve something meaningful without hard work for a long time.
No wonder
that most of us are open to believe that the long way is the only way. That notion, almost a way of life, is what
all of us were brought up to accept; by our parents, by our teachers. We have been taught that "a cent,
plus a cent,
plus a cent plus...” is the way to make a fortune.
We
were trained to accept it, except when technology is involved. When dealing with technology, we are always
looking for a breakthrough, for the thing that will double performance without
a change in efforts. As a matter of
fact, it is not just technology, it is all of hard sciences. I think that one of the first scientists had
verbalized it in the most beautiful way:
"If I can find a leverage point and a long enough lever I can move
the earth." —Archimedes.
Which one of
the two philosophies, "a cent plus a cent" or "a leverage
point," is currently dominating the field of management?
End Part
2. Next week's installment will
conclude POOGI Forum Letter #12..
(2) Kay
Buckner-Seal, Cheryl A. Edwards
In part 2, of POOGI Forum Letter #12, Eli asks: “Which one of the two
philosophies, ‘a cent plus a cent’ or ‘a leverage point,’ is currently
dominating the field of management?”
This question can very well be applied to the field of education: Which one of the two philosophies, “a
cent plus a cent” or “a leverage point,” is currently dominating the field of
education?
What do you
think? If you would like to share your
responses directly with the network through TACTics,
then send them to Cheryl A. Edwards, 2253 S. Hill
Island Rd., Cedarville, MI 49719, USA.
Or, send hyperlink to <redwards@sault.com> or
<bucknek@earthlink.net>.
Remember, if you would
like to keep your responses “off the record” then send them to Kathy at, suerken@nwfl.net.
Eli, thanks
for the challenge!
(3) 5th Annual TOCFE
International Conference/First Annual TOCFE
International Student’s Conference
From Cheryl A. Edwards
“The best way to predict the future is to create it through
TOC."
TOC
for Education, Inc. presents the 5th Annual TOCFE International Conference and
the First Annual TOCFE International Student’s Conference!
Date: June 25-28, 2001
Location: Detroit, Michigan USA
Hotel: Northfield Hilton
5500 Crooks Road
Troy, Michigan 48098
248. 879. 2100
The
Northfield Hilton is adjacent to Interstate 75 at Crooks Road, Exit 72
Reservations: 1. 800.
HILTONS
Ask for TOC for
Education’s special room rates.
Single or Double Occupancy
Per night $139.00 U.S. + Tax (6% Michigan Sales Tax and 7%
Occupancy Tax). This rate includes
breakfast for two.
Transportation: Detroit
Metropolitan Airport (DTW)