(1)
Top Down, Or Bottom Up?, Kathy Suerken
(2)
POOGI Forum Letter #12, (Part 1),
Eli Goldratt
Connections
(3) 5th Annual TOCFE International Conference/First Annual TOCFE
International Student’s Conference, Cheryl A.
Edwards
(4) Kay
Buckner-Seal, Cheryl A. Edwards
(1) Top Down, or Bottom Up?
From Kathy Suerken
Have you
ever tried to push TOC from the bottom up in your school system? Even those in our network who are at top
management levels of school districts probably see themselves connected to a
larger, higher system to which they are held accountable and which they would
like to see running on TOC. Therefore,
I think our readership will find the following essay highly relevant as well as
thought clarifying and (therefore) thought provoking.
When I was
trying to move my own district from the bottom up as a part-time classroom
teacher (sound ludicrous?), I frequently thought I was myself enrolled in “the
school of hard knocks.” After reading this essay, I much more fully understand “why” the
failures and “why” the
successes.
This essay
written by Eli Goldratt was recently distributed to a group of business people
with whom he has been corresponding since his satellite program was
launched. Eli calls this dialogue
network the "POOGI Forum" as he is using it as one way to keep
the TOC body of knowledge on a Process Of OnGoing Improvement.
It
is my assumption that discussion among us relative to the profound knowledge
within this essay will significantly enhance the application of TOC to the
world of education systems. In order to
achieve that, we need your thoughts/responses.
You can share them directly with the network through TACTics or “off the
record” with me at suerken@nwfl.net.
I will forward your messages to Eli but please send them through me as I
need to learn from your ideas to ensure that TOCFE is also on a Process Of
OnGoing Improvement.
Due to the length of the
article, we are dividing it into three installments.
By Eli Goldratt
To POOGI
Forum Members,
It's about
time to address the question that bothers most of us: How to implement a
holistic approach from bottom up? How
can a relatively low-level manager cause hes (his/her) whole organization to
change?
Why is it
such an important question? Why is it
that advocates of TOC, even if they are relatively low-level managers, are so
concerned about transferring their whole organization rather than concentrating
their efforts on improving their area of influence? Is it because unless the whole organization adapts TOC, no
section of the organization can implement it and realize major benefits?
That is
definitely not the case. For example,
an organization can implement TOC just in production while all other functions
of the same organizations are still deeply immersed in the cost world. TOC can be implemented in just one plant out
of many and, as described in The Goal, have a major impact on the bottom
line while all other plants are not even aware of TOC. Moreover, there are many cases where only
one department within a plant have implemented DBR and Buffer-Management and
drastically improved its performance.
As a matter of fact, there are numerous cases where not a whole
application but just one concept had been implemented, like cutting the batch
sizes or exploiting a bottleneck. The
same is true not just for production but for all other TOC applications; even
partial implementations bring substantial benefits. So why are we all so concerned about finding an effective way to
transfer an organization from bottom up?
I think that
it is because, by now, we are all painfully aware of the X-Y syndrome (the X-Y
syndrome was described in POOGI Forum Letter, # 8). It is the phenomena where X is improving, and Y is (now) the
constraint. X, being on the holistic
approach, realizes that further improvement to the company's bottom line
depends on Y improving its performance.
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?
At
the beginning of this year I invested a lot of time communicating with dozens
of Xs trying to figure out the answers for the above three questions. Thank you POOGI Forum members for your open
and candid collaboration.
As for the
first question there are three plausible answers:
1. The fear that major
improvements in one area will lead to a real damage somewhere else.*
2. The fear that corporate
will "trim" the excess capacity that have been revealed by the
improvements.
3. The frustration that so much more can be
gained and just because of "stupid inertia of Y" this real potential
is wasted.
*Footnote: There is one single case
where it can and does happen. When
production feeds distribution. For the
full analysis and solution for this case see Chapters 16 and 17 of Necessary-but-not-Sufficient.
From my
extensive communication I found that in the vast majority of the cases, answer
# 3 was the dominant factor.
This fact
surprised me. We are told that when
there is a threat on security, the desire for security becomes the main
motive. What we witness here is that
the desire for satisfaction (reason #3) is the overwhelming motive. So either the desire for satisfaction is
much stronger then the desire for security or that the Xs do not perceive a
real threat on their security.
It
might be that both explanations are correct since, in the vast majority of the
cases I examined, there was no threat on X.
Initially Y (and anybody else in the company) did not put any pressure
on X to revert back to tradition. On
the contrary, there was a broad recognition of the achievement of X. The situation started to deteriorate as a
direct result of X going out of hes way to poke Y to improve and at the same
time poke top management to change rooted policies and measurements. Does it mean that partial implementations of
TOC are secured? I don't think so since
X is typified by a strong motivation to improve, that is what caused hem
(him/her) to start the implementation in the first place. This same motivation is the one that makes
reason number three so dominant and the clash with Y is almost unavoidable.
End Part
1. Next week's installment will address
the other two questions. How would
you answer them?
(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)
(6) Kay Buckner-Seal, Cheryl
A. Edwards
We would like to thank Eli Goldratt for sharing a
letter from the POOGI Forum with us this week. It is a privilege to publish his work in TACTics for he
has provided us with a unique opportunity for learning and valuable
exchange. Think about the last two
questions concerning the issue: How to implement a holistic approach from
bottom up?:
• Why doesn't Y accept X’s common-sense
recommendations and improve?
• Why does X
lose the war?
Kathy asks,
“How would you answer them?” 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@resa.net.
Remember, if you would
like to keep your responses “off the record” then send it to Kathy at, suerken@nwfl.net.
As always, we are eager
to hear from you!