The final segment of The Goal: A Process of Ongoing Improvement follows Alex and his team as they try to determine how to maintain momentum after Alex and Lou leave the plant and promotions take effect. Alex is personally concerned with what he will do when he steps into his new position. Where should he begin? He poses this question to the group, who tells him to get to know his new co-workers better, tour the facilities, and so on. Essentially, they break this down into fact-finding, and then debate the usefulness of fact-finding and how to organize the information he may gain. This would use deductive reasoning, by starting with facts and organizing them to construct conclusions. Alex ponders how Jonah handled things, since Jonah is a physicist and has never worked in a plant, but yet is able to understand and effectively advise on plant improvements. Alex spends some time reading through popular science magazines and the like, and ultimately discovers that there is no secret of science that links to understanding the plant, but that the scientific method and inductive reasoning aid in finding the problems within the plant and ways to improve them. In this case, inductive reasoning would involve establishing a hypothesis and then finding the facts to support or disprove it.
The main gem of this segment of the book is not in what the group discusses, or even Alex's personal findings, but in how the characters work together. Bob, the soon-to-be plant manager, is skeptical and has difficulty thinking outside the box. Stacey has a bad habit of caving in and returning to old habits in regards to releasing materials in the plant, and is constantly apologetic and blaming herself for mistakes. Ralph likes to constantly revisit and revise old theories that the group has discarded to find benefits. He is very analytic and pulls his insight from different areas, such as chemistry, computer science, and history. Bob is frequently impatient with Ralph for bringing up topics that Bob has already abandoned. It seems that, quite possibly, the team's greatest challenge will not necessarily be to maintain and improve plant processes, but to work together without Alex ensuring that everyone's voices are heard.
In terms of Alex's personal life, his situation with his wife has more or less healed over. Now, every evening they discuss their day, and Alex discusses the plant and his ideas with Julie. It's simple, but it helps Alex and Julie to feel more involved in each other's lives and often helps to brainstorm new solutions to issues in the plant. The greatest thing that The Goal discusses, in my opinion, is to not let random facts cloud one's common sense. The best solutions for Alex's plant were guided by those who knew very little about working in a plant, because they were not side tracked by obscure details. Furthermore, The Goal teaches not to disregard the opinions of those around us, because sometimes even children can guide us in the right direction.
Friday, November 25, 2011
Thursday, November 17, 2011
Tearing Down Tiered Management
I find it ironic that, in Wednesday's class, the lowest group had to write slogans glorifying management when we suffered from poor management during the majority of the activity. During the activity, my group was stuffed into the dusty corner at the end of the hall away from all of the other groups, and did not receive any information until nearly forty-five minutes into the class. To top it off, the information came from another group and not our middle manager. Everyone seemed to be kept in the dark, and as a result, we achieved very little and never saw a single Goates Buck. Based on stories I've heard from other groups, the people who received Goates Bucks or direction had to approach the higher tiers of management, which we were instructed not to do. Overall, I feel like this activity showed that the exclusivity in tiered management needs to be broken down in order to respect those in higher positions, and also that lower level workers' needs must be addressed by those in higher positions in order to encourage a steady work flow. At this point, I'm interested in the discussion of the activity in class so that I can see how things worked for the middle managers and top managers.
Monday, November 14, 2011
Book Report 4: The Goal
In the fourth portion of The Goal: A Process of Ongoing Improvement, Alex is faced with yet another problem at his UniCo plant. After developing a system to move materials productively through essential bottleneck parts, the plant was able to ship significantly more orders, reaching a landmark for the company. However, in the process of moving items through the bottlenecks more quickly, the plant appeared to be developing new bottlenecks. According to Jonah's definition, the machines that began to hold up orders were not actually bottlenecks, though. The group had to brainstorm ways to keep the non-bottlenecks producing at the same pace as the bottlenecks throughout the entire plant. The solution that the plant receives is to cut batch sizes in half. By cutting down the batch sizes, materials can flow more quickly through each process. This will require more set-ups on non-bottleneck machines, but the plant is able to justify this since the non-bottleneck machines are able to have idle time as a result of the flow of materials being determined by bottlenecks.
The plant is full of skeptics, but once Alex convinces the group to disregard the cost accounting aspects of their operations, it becomes clear that the plant can not only eliminate backups at non-bottleneck material; they can also determine fairly accurate due dates for customer orders. It becomes clear that with the new system the group has implemented, the average time for completion for customers orders has decreased from four months to four weeks. The next issue the plant faces is maintaining a steady flow of incoming orders to match their production speed. If operations continue at a brisk pace while the flow of orders stays the same, the plant will quickly work through all of its orders and run out of work. Alex contacts the marketing department and asks to promote the new, quick production times that the plant is able to offer. Soon enough, the plant is bringing in increased sales, and even regaining old customer contracts.
The next area of difficulty that Alex faces is trying to convince his managers that the plant is indeed on the right track, since all of their improvements go against traditional cost accounting procedures. After explaining the intricacies of the changes that have been implemented in the UniCo plant to the company's productions manager, who does not buy in to Alex's strategies, it appears that Alex's plant may quite possibly be shut down. However, when Alex speaks to his manager, he realizes that he is actually being promoted and will be in charge of managing three plants.
Alex has two months remaining at his UniCo plant, and has to determine who he wants to promote to fill newly vacated managerial positions, and is surprised by his group members' responses. His first challenge is to convince Lou, his accountant, to come with him as the controller. Lou is a year away from retirement and Alex thinks it will be difficult to convince Lou to step into a new position, but Lou is so motivated by the changes they have made in the plant and the new discoveries he has found in accounting methods that he asks Alex to bring him along. Next, Alex wants to put Bob in charge of production, but Bob does not want that position. Throughout all of the changes made in the plant, Bob has been the most skeptical. Seeing the success of the changes has made Bob want to become the plant manager, so that he can work to combine production with sales, which until then he never thought possible. The next question is who should be in charge of productions. As each position is filled or passed over, there is one consistency: everyone has become more passionate about their job and the ways that they can work together to make the plant as productive as possible.
Outside of the plant, Alex also manages to repair his relationship with his wife. They had been separated since the time of the hike, and Alex has tried to create more date nights and time for Julie to rekindle their relationship. After a certain point, Alex asks Julie to consider what she wants from their marriage. What is their goal? While it may not be as simple as running a plant, it helped the couple to recognize that they had been coasting on other people's expectations of what marriage should be, without making it their own. They began to take one another for granted and failed to communicate. Now, Alex and Julie are embarking on a second wind of their marriage, trying to implement those necessary changes to keep things running. They recognize that there will be bumps along the way, but they are willing to work through them, the same way that Alex was able to pick up the plant in its time of need.
The plant is full of skeptics, but once Alex convinces the group to disregard the cost accounting aspects of their operations, it becomes clear that the plant can not only eliminate backups at non-bottleneck material; they can also determine fairly accurate due dates for customer orders. It becomes clear that with the new system the group has implemented, the average time for completion for customers orders has decreased from four months to four weeks. The next issue the plant faces is maintaining a steady flow of incoming orders to match their production speed. If operations continue at a brisk pace while the flow of orders stays the same, the plant will quickly work through all of its orders and run out of work. Alex contacts the marketing department and asks to promote the new, quick production times that the plant is able to offer. Soon enough, the plant is bringing in increased sales, and even regaining old customer contracts.
The next area of difficulty that Alex faces is trying to convince his managers that the plant is indeed on the right track, since all of their improvements go against traditional cost accounting procedures. After explaining the intricacies of the changes that have been implemented in the UniCo plant to the company's productions manager, who does not buy in to Alex's strategies, it appears that Alex's plant may quite possibly be shut down. However, when Alex speaks to his manager, he realizes that he is actually being promoted and will be in charge of managing three plants.
Alex has two months remaining at his UniCo plant, and has to determine who he wants to promote to fill newly vacated managerial positions, and is surprised by his group members' responses. His first challenge is to convince Lou, his accountant, to come with him as the controller. Lou is a year away from retirement and Alex thinks it will be difficult to convince Lou to step into a new position, but Lou is so motivated by the changes they have made in the plant and the new discoveries he has found in accounting methods that he asks Alex to bring him along. Next, Alex wants to put Bob in charge of production, but Bob does not want that position. Throughout all of the changes made in the plant, Bob has been the most skeptical. Seeing the success of the changes has made Bob want to become the plant manager, so that he can work to combine production with sales, which until then he never thought possible. The next question is who should be in charge of productions. As each position is filled or passed over, there is one consistency: everyone has become more passionate about their job and the ways that they can work together to make the plant as productive as possible.
Outside of the plant, Alex also manages to repair his relationship with his wife. They had been separated since the time of the hike, and Alex has tried to create more date nights and time for Julie to rekindle their relationship. After a certain point, Alex asks Julie to consider what she wants from their marriage. What is their goal? While it may not be as simple as running a plant, it helped the couple to recognize that they had been coasting on other people's expectations of what marriage should be, without making it their own. They began to take one another for granted and failed to communicate. Now, Alex and Julie are embarking on a second wind of their marriage, trying to implement those necessary changes to keep things running. They recognize that there will be bumps along the way, but they are willing to work through them, the same way that Alex was able to pick up the plant in its time of need.
Sunday, November 13, 2011
Ethics and Assertion
I wonder how much assertion plays into an individual's style of ethics. I know that, typically, I tend to follow an agent style of ethics. Part of this is because I feel that in order to succeed, I have to do what the person in charge of me wants. Essentially, my "people" is my boss. I do what is necessary to please my boss, and sometimes the decisions I make on the job coincide with my personal wishes, but I still need to frequently disregard my own desires in order to keep my boss happy and run the business well. I also know that I typically am only moderately assertive unless I have to be. I get the impression that a more assertive person would be able to disregard others' desires more easily and run things based on what they want, or according to a Machiavellian style, and someone who is not very assertive is more likely to make decisions based on what everyone else wants, or according to Plato's ethics. I am not sure how sold I am on this idea though, because it works on the assumption that wants and needs are perfectly aligned.
Friday, November 11, 2011
On Plato and Playing the Martyr
In class we discussed three main styles of ethics from Machiavelli, Lincoln, and Plato. According to Machiavelli, any means should justify an end, so long as the end is worth pursuing. Essentially, he believed that it was better to make decisions that will help one retain power. He also believed that it is more effective to be a self-centered leader who occasionally does nice things for the people than to be a selfless leader who occasionally disregards the desires of the people. Straying from the norm in the former situation would come as a pleasant surprise to the people, while the latter situation would only cause the people to lose faith in a leader. Lincoln's form of ethics is that of an agent, where a person should disregard personal desires and the desires of the general public to do what is best for the company. Finally, Plato believed that it is best for a person to be selfless and always disregard their personal desires to do what is best for the people. By doing so, Plato believes that by keeping the people happy, the benefits will flow into the individual's life as well, making up for the sacrifice.
Plato's style of ethics may appear ideal, but I find it difficult to view it as the best form of ethics. Essentially, it is too idealistic to believe that if a person sacrifices his or her own desires to do what is best for society, then society will be at peace and in turn the peace will overflow into the individual's life, compensating that person for his or her sacrifice. If one considers society as all people, then it is difficult to believe that one specific action will benefit all of society. If the action does not benefit all of society, then it seems unlikely that the results will be so positive that they will compensate the individual for sacrificing their own desires.
Essentially, I feel that Plato's ethics ask for an individual to play the role of the martyr. The individual performs selfless tasks for the good of the people, despite personal desires. Sure, great opportunities may flow into that person's life as a result of the decisions that they make, but if that person goes against their own moral values, then it could cause more detriment to the individual than the flow of positiveness from the people can justify. Unless an individual feeds off of the intrinsic value of doing what is right for the people, in which case the reward of a selfless action is found in the simple satisfaction of pleasing the people, it seems unlikely that a person will benefit from such an action. Furthermore, unless the individual's will is aligned perfectly with that of the people, it would appear that such actions are not entirely selfless since the individual will be performing an action to make his or herself feel good. In an ideal world, I think Plato's ethics are effective, but when applied in real-life situations, they do not provide enough of an overflowing benefit to the individual who is sacrificing personal desires to compensate for what the individual loses by passing on an action that would better suit personal wishes or morals.
Plato's style of ethics may appear ideal, but I find it difficult to view it as the best form of ethics. Essentially, it is too idealistic to believe that if a person sacrifices his or her own desires to do what is best for society, then society will be at peace and in turn the peace will overflow into the individual's life, compensating that person for his or her sacrifice. If one considers society as all people, then it is difficult to believe that one specific action will benefit all of society. If the action does not benefit all of society, then it seems unlikely that the results will be so positive that they will compensate the individual for sacrificing their own desires.
Essentially, I feel that Plato's ethics ask for an individual to play the role of the martyr. The individual performs selfless tasks for the good of the people, despite personal desires. Sure, great opportunities may flow into that person's life as a result of the decisions that they make, but if that person goes against their own moral values, then it could cause more detriment to the individual than the flow of positiveness from the people can justify. Unless an individual feeds off of the intrinsic value of doing what is right for the people, in which case the reward of a selfless action is found in the simple satisfaction of pleasing the people, it seems unlikely that a person will benefit from such an action. Furthermore, unless the individual's will is aligned perfectly with that of the people, it would appear that such actions are not entirely selfless since the individual will be performing an action to make his or herself feel good. In an ideal world, I think Plato's ethics are effective, but when applied in real-life situations, they do not provide enough of an overflowing benefit to the individual who is sacrificing personal desires to compensate for what the individual loses by passing on an action that would better suit personal wishes or morals.
Thursday, November 3, 2011
Kiss of Death
Saying "good job" is kind of like saying "I love you." Once you throw it out there, it's difficult to stop saying it, and it begins to lose it's meaning. Sometimes you start to say it out of obligation, and if you stop saying it, the other party becomes skeptical or changes their performance. Verbal kiss of death.
It's easy to see "good job" being used to manipulate people to do things the way we want them done. Praise is a biscuit, and we want to train the dog to sit. Once the dog is trained, it does not seem necessary to reward a general behavior or performance, so we stop giving the dog treats. The dog will stop sitting on command because it no longer receives a treat, or reward, for that behavior.
When dealing with people, we can tell someone that he or she is doing a good job, and they may continue to perform in that same way, rather than developing another behavior that may be equally or more impressive. People grow to expect praise for certain behaviors, or only perform in ways that will earn them a "good job." Overall, praise is a way to manipulate people that can ultimately hinder a person's natural development.
It's easy to see "good job" being used to manipulate people to do things the way we want them done. Praise is a biscuit, and we want to train the dog to sit. Once the dog is trained, it does not seem necessary to reward a general behavior or performance, so we stop giving the dog treats. The dog will stop sitting on command because it no longer receives a treat, or reward, for that behavior.
When dealing with people, we can tell someone that he or she is doing a good job, and they may continue to perform in that same way, rather than developing another behavior that may be equally or more impressive. People grow to expect praise for certain behaviors, or only perform in ways that will earn them a "good job." Overall, praise is a way to manipulate people that can ultimately hinder a person's natural development.
Getting There is Getting By
I believe that personal passions are the greatest motivators. In class, we discussed money as a motivator, but money can only do so much. Really, anything that you can place a price tag on may be almost worthless in terms of motivation. Sure, initially a person may work towards a cash incentive, or try to input more effort into their job to justify making more money, but there comes a point where people realize it is not necessary, and they stop putting forth the extra effort. Essentially, the best motivators have a deeper meaning and touch upon an individual's key values.
The best example of motivation in my life is the work I do for WSYC-FM. I put in anywhere from thirty to forty hours a week in reviewing new music for the station, contacting promoters and musicians, programming, and putting together radio charts. I don't make a penny. For me, I feel satisfied simply by helping independent musicians reach new listeners and expand their fan base. When I was thirteen, I started listening to Kevin Devine, a straight-forward singer/songwriter and amazing lyricist who was playing in coffee shops and church basements. Two weeks ago, I was able to see him perform a sold-out concert at the Highline Ballroom in NYC with a full backing band, touring off of his new album which is reaching the top of CMJ's Radio 200 charts. This is why I do what I do. Music is one of the most important things in my life, and the more I can help the people who make music, the more fulfilled I feel at the end of the day, no paychecks attached.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)