TOCICO Past Conference Proceedings On Demand

Sl. No Conference-Name Authors Title Year Location Abstract Notes Authors Page
1 Online Multimedia Almeida, Guilherme Two sides of the same coin 2010 Aberdeen, WA Many companies have tried to implement Toyota Production System (TPS) or Lean, but none of them have reached the same level of results as Toyota does. This presentation will demonstrate that TPS is just one pillar that supports Toyota's business and human approaches. It will also present the framework that makes Toyota what it is comprising the contradicting expanding and integrating forces and how they relate to the founders' principles and the culture that makes working in Toyota a unique and rewarding experience. GUILHERME VENANZI DE ALMEIDA, TOC Expert / Consultant/ MBA, Vectis Solutions. Guilherme is a TOC consultant and trainer with TOCICO certification in SCM and CCPM. Has worked for more 20 years in the automotive industry successfully implementing synchronized pull flow operations in Brazil and Europe. Besides that he has a background in program and general management in a world class OE manufacturer. He took part in executive programs at INSEAD and HEC. https://www.tocico.org/page/2010OnlineMultimedia
2 Online Multimedia Two sides of the same coin 2010 Aberdeen, WA Many companies have tried to implement Toyota Production System (TPS) or Lean, but none of them have reached the same level of results as Toyota does. This presentation will demonstrate that TPS is just one pillar that supports Toyota's business and human approaches. It will also present the framework that makes Toyota what it is comprising the contradicting expanding and integrating forces and how they relate to the founders' principles and the culture that makes working in Toyota a unique and rewarding experience. GUILHERME VENANZI DE ALMEIDA, TOC Expert / Consultant/ MBA, Vectis Solutions. Guilherme is a TOC consultant and trainer with TOCICO certification in SCM and CCPM. Has worked for more 20 years in the automotive industry successfully implementing synchronized pull flow operations in Brazil and Europe. Besides that he has a background in program and general management in a world class OE manufacturer. He took part in executive programs at INSEAD and HEC. https://www.tocico.org/page/2010OnlineMultimedia
3 Online Multimedia Two sides of the same coin 2010 Aberdeen, WA Many companies have tried to implement Toyota Production System (TPS) or Lean, but none of them have reached the same level of results as Toyota does. This presentation will demonstrate that TPS is just one pillar that supports Toyota's business and human approaches. It will also present the framework that makes Toyota what it is comprising the contradicting expanding and integrating forces and how they relate to the founders' principles and the culture that makes working in Toyota a unique and rewarding experience. GUILHERME VENANZI DE ALMEIDA, TOC Expert / Consultant/ MBA, Vectis Solutions. Guilherme is a TOC consultant and trainer with TOCICO certification in SCM and CCPM. Has worked for more 20 years in the automotive industry successfully implementing synchronized pull flow operations in Brazil and Europe. Besides that he has a background in program and general management in a world class OE manufacturer. He took part in executive programs at INSEAD and HEC. https://www.tocico.org/page/2010OnlineMultimedia
4 Conference Proceedings Lang, Lisa 5 major marketing mistakes 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany 5 Major Marketing Mistakes: Marketing is connecting with your target market and showing them you have the stuff that solves their problem or delivers better outcomes / results, explaining it to them where they can be found and helping them to buy it. Here are 5 major marketing mistakes: 1. Not selecting a target market or niche. • Your target market is the people you want to sell to along with the products/ services you sell. People with specific needs and the specific stuff they need equal a target market. • Undesirable effects (UDEs) will only make sense to your market IF they are really THEIR UDEs. • The TOC buy-In process is missing layer 0. It's very difficult to gain buy-in from an unknown, un-described, entity. • If your target market is not specific enough, they won't relate. The more specific and targeted your market, the more you can talk directly to them and in their language. • Where do you make the most throughput for the least amount of your capacity? • What are your under exploited assets? • Opportunity is … a need to be fulfilled … a want to be addressed … a fear to be relieved … a problem that needs to be solved. For opportunity to flourish there needs to be an identifiable group that will buy it and a profitable way to contact and engage the target market. • When most hunters go out to hunt, they think like hunters. When a master goes out to hunt, he thinks like a deer. • Knowing what your market really wants and who they really are is very important. Communicating where they're at without making them wrong is important, while pushing their emotional hot buttons. Rationality is used as a tool to support the emotional. • Write your marketing to ONE very specific person (your Avatar – a member of your target market). • Market WHERE they hang out and in the way (type of media) they hang out. 2. Not measuring at all or not measuring the right things. • In operations we can physically see constraints. In marketing we don't have this ability – we need data. • What's working for you – twitter, LinkedIn, website, webinars, direct mail, Facebook, Interest, article writing, PPC, retargeting, blog posts, TV, banner ads, podcasts, cold calls, video marketing, leaving comments, mobile marketing, e-mail marketing, or what? • How many leads do you generate? By what method(s)? What is your conversion rate at each step of your sales inversion process? • What's your sales conversion process? Retention process? • What's your upsell and/or post sale process? • What do you spend on marketing and what ROI does each generate? (BTW your ROIs will be much better if you have a specific target market.) • When calculating your ROI, consider both time and money. • If you don't know these numbers, how will you know where to focus your efforts and what to improve? • Testing is how we improve our marketing. What to test, in what order depends on what your measures are indicating. Test your message - wording, pictures, colors, placement, fonts. Test the medium - direct mail, ads, videos, webinars, closing techniques. Test your sales process. Test where/ how your make your offers, as well as, the specifics of your offer. • The ability to turn floods of information into real knowledge has become one of today's most valuable resources. 3. Not understanding what you're selling. • It's not about you or your product / service. • It's about them and the outcome or better results they're seeking. • The customer doesn't want products, services or techniques – they want an outcome! • People want value. The way we offer them value is in the form of results which is in the form of our products or services. • Selling tangible, measurable results that the customer can expect to experience in the real world dramatically increases the price you can charge. • We want high value products/ services that are tailored to our customers needs so that they say to themselves – I never knew someone could understand this at this level. • If you don't understand your target market (#1) nor what you're selling, then you have no chance of knowing what competitive advantage to create or what mafia offer to make. 4. Doing nothing to generate leads. Thinking that hope and a website are a strategy. • The more you can spend to get a lead, the less you have to worry about competition. • There are lots of ways to generate leads. Which is best depends on your situation. That's why testing is so important. • You can start by seeing what competitors are doing. If they are using a particular lead generation method for more than 4 months, they are probably getting an ROI from it. • Draw your funnel and track the data. • There are 3 ways to GROW a business. 1) increase the number of customers; 2) increase the T per transaction; and 3) increase the frequency of purchase or repurchase. 5. Push marketing instead of pull marketing. • Leverage applies in marketing just as it applies in operations. It costs you the same to send out a flier that gets a 1% response rate or a 10% response rate. By working on the right things in your marketing you greatly increase your leverage. • Getting prospects to seek YOU out and/or realize 'I need help' is pull marketing. • Spewing everything you know out to your market is about you, not your customer. • Your marketing should itself be valuable. Give away some of your best stuff. • Get people to act NOW. • Give your prospects results in advance. • Call out the elephant in the room. • Repurpose content. • Inherent simplicity applies in marketing too. People want simple ideas, not complex ones. Influential writing is not about writing better, it's about simplifying things in a better way. • Without a detailed avatar of who you are marketing/ writing to/ for, and what makes them tick, you are engaging in blind target shooting. Title: 5 Major Marketing Mistakes 3 Learning objectives: 1. Attendees will learn the 5 major marketing mistakes most people make. 2. Attendees will learn how Theory of Constraints applies to marketing. 3. Attendees will learn how to avoid making the 5 marketing mistakes. 3 questions somebody would ask at the end of the presentation, speech or workshop to elaborate on the subject and improve understanding and transfer of ideas: • This does not make sense to us. If there were additional questions we could think of, we would adjust our presentation to address them. Summary for Conference Program. Marketing is connecting with your target market and showing them you have the product or service that solves their problem or delivers better outcomes, explaining it to them where they can be found and helping them to buy it. This marketing master class will cover 5 major marketing mistakes most people make and how you can avoid them. Theory of Constraints thinking and tools will be discussed as they relate to marketing. 1 hour 31 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
5 Conference Proceedings Stillahn, Brad 5 major marketing mistakes 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany 5 Major Marketing Mistakes: Marketing is connecting with your target market and showing them you have the stuff that solves their problem or delivers better outcomes / results, explaining it to them where they can be found and helping them to buy it. Here are 5 major marketing mistakes: 1. Not selecting a target market or niche. • Your target market is the people you want to sell to along with the products/ services you sell. People with specific needs and the specific stuff they need equal a target market. • Undesirable effects (UDEs) will only make sense to your market IF they are really THEIR UDEs. • The TOC buy-In process is missing layer 0. It's very difficult to gain buy-in from an unknown, un-described, entity. • If your target market is not specific enough, they won't relate. The more specific and targeted your market, the more you can talk directly to them and in their language. • Where do you make the most throughput for the least amount of your capacity? • What are your under exploited assets? • Opportunity is … a need to be fulfilled … a want to be addressed … a fear to be relieved … a problem that needs to be solved. For opportunity to flourish there needs to be an identifiable group that will buy it and a profitable way to contact and engage the target market. • When most hunters go out to hunt, they think like hunters. When a master goes out to hunt, he thinks like a deer. • Knowing what your market really wants and who they really are is very important. Communicating where they're at without making them wrong is important, while pushing their emotional hot buttons. Rationality is used as a tool to support the emotional. • Write your marketing to ONE very specific person (your Avatar – a member of your target market). • Market WHERE they hang out and in the way (type of media) they hang out. 2. Not measuring at all or not measuring the right things. • In operations we can physically see constraints. In marketing we don't have this ability – we need data. • What's working for you – twitter, LinkedIn, website, webinars, direct mail, Facebook, Interest, article writing, PPC, retargeting, blog posts, TV, banner ads, podcasts, cold calls, video marketing, leaving comments, mobile marketing, e-mail marketing, or what? • How many leads do you generate? By what method(s)? What is your conversion rate at each step of your sales inversion process? • What's your sales conversion process? Retention process? • What's your upsell and/or post sale process? • What do you spend on marketing and what ROI does each generate? (BTW your ROIs will be much better if you have a specific target market.) • When calculating your ROI, consider both time and money. • If you don't know these numbers, how will you know where to focus your efforts and what to improve? • Testing is how we improve our marketing. What to test, in what order depends on what your measures are indicating. Test your message - wording, pictures, colors, placement, fonts. Test the medium - direct mail, ads, videos, webinars, closing techniques. Test your sales process. Test where/ how your make your offers, as well as, the specifics of your offer. • The ability to turn floods of information into real knowledge has become one of today's most valuable resources. 3. Not understanding what you're selling. • It's not about you or your product / service. • It's about them and the outcome or better results they're seeking. • The customer doesn't want products, services or techniques – they want an outcome! • People want value. The way we offer them value is in the form of results which is in the form of our products or services. • Selling tangible, measurable results that the customer can expect to experience in the real world dramatically increases the price you can charge. • We want high value products/ services that are tailored to our customers needs so that they say to themselves – I never knew someone could understand this at this level. • If you don't understand your target market (#1) nor what you're selling, then you have no chance of knowing what competitive advantage to create or what mafia offer to make. 4. Doing nothing to generate leads. Thinking that hope and a website are a strategy. • The more you can spend to get a lead, the less you have to worry about competition. • There are lots of ways to generate leads. Which is best depends on your situation. That's why testing is so important. • You can start by seeing what competitors are doing. If they are using a particular lead generation method for more than 4 months, they are probably getting an ROI from it. • Draw your funnel and track the data. • There are 3 ways to GROW a business. 1) increase the number of customers; 2) increase the T per transaction; and 3) increase the frequency of purchase or repurchase. 5. Push marketing instead of pull marketing. • Leverage applies in marketing just as it applies in operations. It costs you the same to send out a flier that gets a 1% response rate or a 10% response rate. By working on the right things in your marketing you greatly increase your leverage. • Getting prospects to seek YOU out and/or realize 'I need help' is pull marketing. • Spewing everything you know out to your market is about you, not your customer. • Your marketing should itself be valuable. Give away some of your best stuff. • Get people to act NOW. • Give your prospects results in advance. • Call out the elephant in the room. • Repurpose content. • Inherent simplicity applies in marketing too. People want simple ideas, not complex ones. Influential writing is not about writing better, it's about simplifying things in a better way. • Without a detailed avatar of who you are marketing/ writing to/ for, and what makes them tick, you are engaging in blind target shooting. Title: 5 Major Marketing Mistakes 3 Learning objectives: 1. Attendees will learn the 5 major marketing mistakes most people make. 2. Attendees will learn how Theory of Constraints applies to marketing. 3. Attendees will learn how to avoid making the 5 marketing mistakes. 3 questions somebody would ask at the end of the presentation, speech or workshop to elaborate on the subject and improve understanding and transfer of ideas: • This does not make sense to us. If there were additional questions we could think of, we would adjust our presentation to address them. Summary for Conference Program. Marketing is connecting with your target market and showing them you have the product or service that solves their problem or delivers better outcomes, explaining it to them where they can be found and helping them to buy it. This marketing master class will cover 5 major marketing mistakes most people make and how you can avoid them. Theory of Constraints thinking and tools will be discussed as they relate to marketing. 1 hour 31 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
6 Conference Proceedings 5 major marketing mistakes 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany 5 Major Marketing Mistakes: Marketing is connecting with your target market and showing them you have the stuff that solves their problem or delivers better outcomes / results, explaining it to them where they can be found and helping them to buy it. Here are 5 major marketing mistakes: 1. Not selecting a target market or niche. • Your target market is the people you want to sell to along with the products/ services you sell. People with specific needs and the specific stuff they need equal a target market. • Undesirable effects (UDEs) will only make sense to your market IF they are really THEIR UDEs. • The TOC buy-In process is missing layer 0. It's very difficult to gain buy-in from an unknown, un-described, entity. • If your target market is not specific enough, they won't relate. The more specific and targeted your market, the more you can talk directly to them and in their language. • Where do you make the most throughput for the least amount of your capacity? • What are your under exploited assets? • Opportunity is … a need to be fulfilled … a want to be addressed … a fear to be relieved … a problem that needs to be solved. For opportunity to flourish there needs to be an identifiable group that will buy it and a profitable way to contact and engage the target market. • When most hunters go out to hunt, they think like hunters. When a master goes out to hunt, he thinks like a deer. • Knowing what your market really wants and who they really are is very important. Communicating where they're at without making them wrong is important, while pushing their emotional hot buttons. Rationality is used as a tool to support the emotional. • Write your marketing to ONE very specific person (your Avatar – a member of your target market). • Market WHERE they hang out and in the way (type of media) they hang out. 2. Not measuring at all or not measuring the right things. • In operations we can physically see constraints. In marketing we don't have this ability – we need data. • What's working for you – twitter, LinkedIn, website, webinars, direct mail, Facebook, Interest, article writing, PPC, retargeting, blog posts, TV, banner ads, podcasts, cold calls, video marketing, leaving comments, mobile marketing, e-mail marketing, or what? • How many leads do you generate? By what method(s)? What is your conversion rate at each step of your sales inversion process? • What's your sales conversion process? Retention process? • What's your upsell and/or post sale process? • What do you spend on marketing and what ROI does each generate? (BTW your ROIs will be much better if you have a specific target market.) • When calculating your ROI, consider both time and money. • If you don't know these numbers, how will you know where to focus your efforts and what to improve? • Testing is how we improve our marketing. What to test, in what order depends on what your measures are indicating. Test your message - wording, pictures, colors, placement, fonts. Test the medium - direct mail, ads, videos, webinars, closing techniques. Test your sales process. Test where/ how your make your offers, as well as, the specifics of your offer. • The ability to turn floods of information into real knowledge has become one of today's most valuable resources. 3. Not understanding what you're selling. • It's not about you or your product / service. • It's about them and the outcome or better results they're seeking. • The customer doesn't want products, services or techniques – they want an outcome! • People want value. The way we offer them value is in the form of results which is in the form of our products or services. • Selling tangible, measurable results that the customer can expect to experience in the real world dramatically increases the price you can charge. • We want high value products/ services that are tailored to our customers needs so that they say to themselves – I never knew someone could understand this at this level. • If you don't understand your target market (#1) nor what you're selling, then you have no chance of knowing what competitive advantage to create or what mafia offer to make. 4. Doing nothing to generate leads. Thinking that hope and a website are a strategy. • The more you can spend to get a lead, the less you have to worry about competition. • There are lots of ways to generate leads. Which is best depends on your situation. That's why testing is so important. • You can start by seeing what competitors are doing. If they are using a particular lead generation method for more than 4 months, they are probably getting an ROI from it. • Draw your funnel and track the data. • There are 3 ways to GROW a business. 1) increase the number of customers; 2) increase the T per transaction; and 3) increase the frequency of purchase or repurchase. 5. Push marketing instead of pull marketing. • Leverage applies in marketing just as it applies in operations. It costs you the same to send out a flier that gets a 1% response rate or a 10% response rate. By working on the right things in your marketing you greatly increase your leverage. • Getting prospects to seek YOU out and/or realize 'I need help' is pull marketing. • Spewing everything you know out to your market is about you, not your customer. • Your marketing should itself be valuable. Give away some of your best stuff. • Get people to act NOW. • Give your prospects results in advance. • Call out the elephant in the room. • Repurpose content. • Inherent simplicity applies in marketing too. People want simple ideas, not complex ones. Influential writing is not about writing better, it's about simplifying things in a better way. • Without a detailed avatar of who you are marketing/ writing to/ for, and what makes them tick, you are engaging in blind target shooting. Title: 5 Major Marketing Mistakes 3 Learning objectives: 1. Attendees will learn the 5 major marketing mistakes most people make. 2. Attendees will learn how Theory of Constraints applies to marketing. 3. Attendees will learn how to avoid making the 5 marketing mistakes. 3 questions somebody would ask at the end of the presentation, speech or workshop to elaborate on the subject and improve understanding and transfer of ideas: • This does not make sense to us. If there were additional questions we could think of, we would adjust our presentation to address them. Summary for Conference Program. Marketing is connecting with your target market and showing them you have the product or service that solves their problem or delivers better outcomes, explaining it to them where they can be found and helping them to buy it. This marketing master class will cover 5 major marketing mistakes most people make and how you can avoid them. Theory of Constraints thinking and tools will be discussed as they relate to marketing. 1 hour 31 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
7 Conference Proceedings Mabin, Vicky The thinking processes basics workshop 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Despite its well-known origins in production, popularized through The Goal, Theory of Constraints (TOC) is far more than a production philosophy – it can be applied to many other areas. As each new problem or environment was tackled, Dr Goldratt and his colleagues developed new solutions. But along with these new solutions, they also thought about how they thought about the problems, and how they went about devising solutions. The thinking processes (TP) are a distillation of their approach to problem solving and decision making – a codification of their thinking about their thinking. The result is a set of tools we can use ourselves to solve problems in our own lives, regardless of how complex or everyday they may be. This workshop provides an overview of the thinking processes, its component TP tools and logic rules that are used to create TP logic diagrams to represent situations and their resolution. We describe the original set of tools / diagrams, including the current reality tree and evaporating cloud, as well as more recent additions. We explain how they are created and used, and how they fit together to answer the key questions of change: why change, what to change, to what to change, how to cause the change and how to sustain the change. We explain the two types of logic used in the diagrams, namely necessity and sufficiency logic. We outline the set of logic rules, referred to as the ‘categories of legitimate reservation', which help us scrutinize the logic statements in order to construct robust trees as well as scrutinize others' diagrams. 1 hour 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
8 Conference Proceedings The thinking processes basics workshop 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Despite its well-known origins in production, popularized through The Goal, Theory of Constraints (TOC) is far more than a production philosophy – it can be applied to many other areas. As each new problem or environment was tackled, Dr Goldratt and his colleagues developed new solutions. But along with these new solutions, they also thought about how they thought about the problems, and how they went about devising solutions. The thinking processes (TP) are a distillation of their approach to problem solving and decision making – a codification of their thinking about their thinking. The result is a set of tools we can use ourselves to solve problems in our own lives, regardless of how complex or everyday they may be. This workshop provides an overview of the thinking processes, its component TP tools and logic rules that are used to create TP logic diagrams to represent situations and their resolution. We describe the original set of tools / diagrams, including the current reality tree and evaporating cloud, as well as more recent additions. We explain how they are created and used, and how they fit together to answer the key questions of change: why change, what to change, to what to change, how to cause the change and how to sustain the change. We explain the two types of logic used in the diagrams, namely necessity and sufficiency logic. We outline the set of logic rules, referred to as the ‘categories of legitimate reservation', which help us scrutinize the logic statements in order to construct robust trees as well as scrutinize others' diagrams. 1 hour 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
9 Conference Proceedings Marris, Philip TOC + lean + six sigma or TLS. What is it? Is it a threat or an opportunity for TOC? 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Is 'TLS' – the integration or combination of TOC (T) with Lean (L) and Six Sigma (S) – a good idea? What does it mean exactly? How do they reinforce each other? What are the incompatibilities? What are the case studies? Is it an opportunity or a threat for the TOC movement? Industrial improvement efforts over the past 20 years have been handicapped by quarrels concerning the relative merits of the different approaches and of the supposed incompatibilities or fundamental differences among them. TLS considers, on the contrary, that we should seek to combine them thereby creating a system that contains the best aspects of each movement. The author, Philip Marris, is the CEO of Marris Consulting, Paris, France. He has implemented TOC with Lean and/or Six Sigma in industry over 50 times in the past 25 years. He manages the 'TLS – TOC, Lean & Six Sigma' LinkedIn discussion group. Is 'TLS' – the integration or combination of TOC with Lean and Six Sigma – a good idea? Is the Theory of Constraints necessary but not sufficient? Or The 3 different movements can be summarized in the following way: • Theory Of Constraints (TOC ) o Focus on improving the system constraints that determine overall performance… o …and in this way significantly boost the return on investment and success of Lean & Six Sigma programs o Increase profits by increasing sales rather than by cutting costs and hence avoid headcount reductions o Developed by Eliyahu Goldratt in the 1980s • Lean Manufacturing / Toyota Way o By far the most widespread approach in industry throughout the world o A focus on eliminating all forms of waste o A multi-dimensional approach: management, Just-In-Time, 5S, Lean Engineering, … o Developed by the Toyota Motor Company in the 1950s, called 'Lean' since 1990 • Six Sigma o Reduce process variability to 3.4 defects per million occurrences o Mostly implemented using certified experts Green Belts, Black Belts, … o Includes a powerful tool to be used on important and complex problems (Design Of Experiments / DOE) o Promoted by Motorola & General Electric in the 1980s. • TLS: TOC + Lean + Six Sigma o Developed in 2006. The origins of TLS can be attributed to a seminal article published in the March 2006 issue of APICS magazine ‘Continuous Improvement Trio' by Russ Pirasteh & Kimberly Farah. What does it mean exactly? How do they reinforce each other? For example, in TLS, Six Sigma is used to increase Throughput just as much as it enables reductions in variability in processes. Can Kaizen be focused just on the constraints? What are the incompatibilities between the 3 different approaches? Is there a conflict between the Throughput World and Lean's waste elimination (O.E. reduction) focus? How does DBR or S-DBR compare with Kanban? Is 'one piece flow everywhere' compatible with TOC's buffers? Is it sometimes a good idea to improve the performance of a non-constraint? What are the case studies of TLS implementations throughout the world? What are the results? How fast was the improvement? Is TLS an opportunity because it enables the TOC movement to take advantage of the worldwide Lean movement to implement TOC more often? Could TLS trigger an increase in TOC's market share? Is it a threat for the TOC movement because Lean might conquer or digest TOC in the same way as Lean is currently predominating over Six Sigma? Industrial improvement efforts over the past 20 years have been handicapped by quarrels concerning the relative merits of the different approaches and of the supposed incompatibilities or fundamental differences among them. TLS considers, on the contrary, that we should seek to combine them thereby creating a system that contains the best aspects of each movement. 34 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
10 Conference Proceedings TOC + lean + six sigma or TLS. What is it? Is it a threat or an opportunity for TOC? 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Is 'TLS' – the integration or combination of TOC (T) with Lean (L) and Six Sigma (S) – a good idea? What does it mean exactly? How do they reinforce each other? What are the incompatibilities? What are the case studies? Is it an opportunity or a threat for the TOC movement? Industrial improvement efforts over the past 20 years have been handicapped by quarrels concerning the relative merits of the different approaches and of the supposed incompatibilities or fundamental differences among them. TLS considers, on the contrary, that we should seek to combine them thereby creating a system that contains the best aspects of each movement. The author, Philip Marris, is the CEO of Marris Consulting, Paris, France. He has implemented TOC with Lean and/or Six Sigma in industry over 50 times in the past 25 years. He manages the 'TLS – TOC, Lean & Six Sigma' LinkedIn discussion group. Is 'TLS' – the integration or combination of TOC with Lean and Six Sigma – a good idea? Is the Theory of Constraints necessary but not sufficient? Or The 3 different movements can be summarized in the following way: • Theory Of Constraints (TOC ) o Focus on improving the system constraints that determine overall performance… o …and in this way significantly boost the return on investment and success of Lean & Six Sigma programs o Increase profits by increasing sales rather than by cutting costs and hence avoid headcount reductions o Developed by Eliyahu Goldratt in the 1980s • Lean Manufacturing / Toyota Way o By far the most widespread approach in industry throughout the world o A focus on eliminating all forms of waste o A multi-dimensional approach: management, Just-In-Time, 5S, Lean Engineering, … o Developed by the Toyota Motor Company in the 1950s, called 'Lean' since 1990 • Six Sigma o Reduce process variability to 3.4 defects per million occurrences o Mostly implemented using certified experts Green Belts, Black Belts, … o Includes a powerful tool to be used on important and complex problems (Design Of Experiments / DOE) o Promoted by Motorola & General Electric in the 1980s. • TLS: TOC + Lean + Six Sigma o Developed in 2006. The origins of TLS can be attributed to a seminal article published in the March 2006 issue of APICS magazine ‘Continuous Improvement Trio' by Russ Pirasteh & Kimberly Farah. What does it mean exactly? How do they reinforce each other? For example, in TLS, Six Sigma is used to increase Throughput just as much as it enables reductions in variability in processes. Can Kaizen be focused just on the constraints? What are the incompatibilities between the 3 different approaches? Is there a conflict between the Throughput World and Lean's waste elimination (O.E. reduction) focus? How does DBR or S-DBR compare with Kanban? Is 'one piece flow everywhere' compatible with TOC's buffers? Is it sometimes a good idea to improve the performance of a non-constraint? What are the case studies of TLS implementations throughout the world? What are the results? How fast was the improvement? Is TLS an opportunity because it enables the TOC movement to take advantage of the worldwide Lean movement to implement TOC more often? Could TLS trigger an increase in TOC's market share? Is it a threat for the TOC movement because Lean might conquer or digest TOC in the same way as Lean is currently predominating over Six Sigma? Industrial improvement efforts over the past 20 years have been handicapped by quarrels concerning the relative merits of the different approaches and of the supposed incompatibilities or fundamental differences among them. TLS considers, on the contrary, that we should seek to combine them thereby creating a system that contains the best aspects of each movement. 34 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
11 Conference Proceedings Masuda, Kazuto Holistic management in a pharmaceutical company 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany It takes about 10-15 years to launch the new drug medicines after pharmaceutical companies discover the promising compounds. This means that pharmaceutical companies tend to accept the dilemma of not releasing new products immediately even though there are promising active agents at hand. Pharmaceutical companies also tend to have a large stock of inventory because the shortage of products supporting good health is not permitted. Senju Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (based in Japan) is faced with the same problems as other drug companies. Since 2012, we have started a holistic management with TOC to pursue 'harmony' and to build a 'well-muscled' operation. Through the company-wide TOC implementation, timelines of R&D projects were shortened aggressively, and delays of the schedule were recovered in close coordination and cooperation. The stocks of raw materials and products were kept at a low level by making win-win relationships with partners. Work itself became a learning environment and is helping our staff grow rapidly. The staff within and outside the company has begun to perform in harmony with each other. Although our challenge has just begun, we would like to share small successes which would lead to a large change in the pharmaceutical industry by this holistic approach. Drug medicines are the products which is indispensable in maintaining healthy life. It takes about 10-15 years to launch the new drug medicines after pharmaceutical companies find the promising compounds. This means pharmaceutical companies tend to accept the dilemma that cannot release new products immediately even though there are promising active agents at head. Pharmaceutical companies also tend to have a large stock because the shortage of products keeping good health is not permitted. Senju Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., based in Japan, develops and sells prescribed medicines and over-the-counter drugs for eye care, and is faced with the same problems as other drug companies. We are running a holistic management by TOC which widened a scope for suppliers, division in company, subcontractor, and medical experts for a performance gain of an entire system. Our R&D staffs have agreed to the timeline of the project which has been reduced aggressively, and have tried to recover from delays of the schedule in close coordination and cooperation. We have made win-win relationship with raw material suppliers. By company-wide TOC implementation, we achieved following results so far: ? The work periods of R&D project were shortened by 50% at the maximum. ? Inventory of products were cut by 60%. ? Inventory of raw materials were decreased by 66%. ? Equipment investment expense in warehouse of $6 million was saved. ? Inventory in suppliers were decreased by 60%. ? Throughput was increased by decision-making with the use of throughput accounting. Moreover, we realized that the work with the use of TOC is becoming a learning environment and it helps our staffs grow rapidly. Although our challenge has just begun, we would like to show small successes which would lead to a large change in the pharmaceutical industry by the holistic approach. 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
12 Conference Proceedings Sakuraya, Shinichi Holistic management in a pharmaceutical company 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany It takes about 10-15 years to launch the new drug medicines after pharmaceutical companies discover the promising compounds. This means that pharmaceutical companies tend to accept the dilemma of not releasing new products immediately even though there are promising active agents at hand. Pharmaceutical companies also tend to have a large stock of inventory because the shortage of products supporting good health is not permitted. Senju Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (based in Japan) is faced with the same problems as other drug companies. Since 2012, we have started a holistic management with TOC to pursue 'harmony' and to build a 'well-muscled' operation. Through the company-wide TOC implementation, timelines of R&D projects were shortened aggressively, and delays of the schedule were recovered in close coordination and cooperation. The stocks of raw materials and products were kept at a low level by making win-win relationships with partners. Work itself became a learning environment and is helping our staff grow rapidly. The staff within and outside the company has begun to perform in harmony with each other. Although our challenge has just begun, we would like to share small successes which would lead to a large change in the pharmaceutical industry by this holistic approach. Drug medicines are the products which is indispensable in maintaining healthy life. It takes about 10-15 years to launch the new drug medicines after pharmaceutical companies find the promising compounds. This means pharmaceutical companies tend to accept the dilemma that cannot release new products immediately even though there are promising active agents at head. Pharmaceutical companies also tend to have a large stock because the shortage of products keeping good health is not permitted. Senju Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., based in Japan, develops and sells prescribed medicines and over-the-counter drugs for eye care, and is faced with the same problems as other drug companies. We are running a holistic management by TOC which widened a scope for suppliers, division in company, subcontractor, and medical experts for a performance gain of an entire system. Our R&D staffs have agreed to the timeline of the project which has been reduced aggressively, and have tried to recover from delays of the schedule in close coordination and cooperation. We have made win-win relationship with raw material suppliers. By company-wide TOC implementation, we achieved following results so far: ? The work periods of R&D project were shortened by 50% at the maximum. ? Inventory of products were cut by 60%. ? Inventory of raw materials were decreased by 66%. ? Equipment investment expense in warehouse of $6 million was saved. ? Inventory in suppliers were decreased by 60%. ? Throughput was increased by decision-making with the use of throughput accounting. Moreover, we realized that the work with the use of TOC is becoming a learning environment and it helps our staffs grow rapidly. Although our challenge has just begun, we would like to show small successes which would lead to a large change in the pharmaceutical industry by the holistic approach. 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
13 Conference Proceedings Kishira, Yuji Holistic management in a pharmaceutical company 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany It takes about 10-15 years to launch the new drug medicines after pharmaceutical companies discover the promising compounds. This means that pharmaceutical companies tend to accept the dilemma of not releasing new products immediately even though there are promising active agents at hand. Pharmaceutical companies also tend to have a large stock of inventory because the shortage of products supporting good health is not permitted. Senju Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (based in Japan) is faced with the same problems as other drug companies. Since 2012, we have started a holistic management with TOC to pursue 'harmony' and to build a 'well-muscled' operation. Through the company-wide TOC implementation, timelines of R&D projects were shortened aggressively, and delays of the schedule were recovered in close coordination and cooperation. The stocks of raw materials and products were kept at a low level by making win-win relationships with partners. Work itself became a learning environment and is helping our staff grow rapidly. The staff within and outside the company has begun to perform in harmony with each other. Although our challenge has just begun, we would like to share small successes which would lead to a large change in the pharmaceutical industry by this holistic approach. Drug medicines are the products which is indispensable in maintaining healthy life. It takes about 10-15 years to launch the new drug medicines after pharmaceutical companies find the promising compounds. This means pharmaceutical companies tend to accept the dilemma that cannot release new products immediately even though there are promising active agents at head. Pharmaceutical companies also tend to have a large stock because the shortage of products keeping good health is not permitted. Senju Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., based in Japan, develops and sells prescribed medicines and over-the-counter drugs for eye care, and is faced with the same problems as other drug companies. We are running a holistic management by TOC which widened a scope for suppliers, division in company, subcontractor, and medical experts for a performance gain of an entire system. Our R&D staffs have agreed to the timeline of the project which has been reduced aggressively, and have tried to recover from delays of the schedule in close coordination and cooperation. We have made win-win relationship with raw material suppliers. By company-wide TOC implementation, we achieved following results so far: ? The work periods of R&D project were shortened by 50% at the maximum. ? Inventory of products were cut by 60%. ? Inventory of raw materials were decreased by 66%. ? Equipment investment expense in warehouse of $6 million was saved. ? Inventory in suppliers were decreased by 60%. ? Throughput was increased by decision-making with the use of throughput accounting. Moreover, we realized that the work with the use of TOC is becoming a learning environment and it helps our staffs grow rapidly. Although our challenge has just begun, we would like to show small successes which would lead to a large change in the pharmaceutical industry by the holistic approach. 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
14 Conference Proceedings Holistic management in a pharmaceutical company 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany It takes about 10-15 years to launch the new drug medicines after pharmaceutical companies discover the promising compounds. This means that pharmaceutical companies tend to accept the dilemma of not releasing new products immediately even though there are promising active agents at hand. Pharmaceutical companies also tend to have a large stock of inventory because the shortage of products supporting good health is not permitted. Senju Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (based in Japan) is faced with the same problems as other drug companies. Since 2012, we have started a holistic management with TOC to pursue 'harmony' and to build a 'well-muscled' operation. Through the company-wide TOC implementation, timelines of R&D projects were shortened aggressively, and delays of the schedule were recovered in close coordination and cooperation. The stocks of raw materials and products were kept at a low level by making win-win relationships with partners. Work itself became a learning environment and is helping our staff grow rapidly. The staff within and outside the company has begun to perform in harmony with each other. Although our challenge has just begun, we would like to share small successes which would lead to a large change in the pharmaceutical industry by this holistic approach. Drug medicines are the products which is indispensable in maintaining healthy life. It takes about 10-15 years to launch the new drug medicines after pharmaceutical companies find the promising compounds. This means pharmaceutical companies tend to accept the dilemma that cannot release new products immediately even though there are promising active agents at head. Pharmaceutical companies also tend to have a large stock because the shortage of products keeping good health is not permitted. Senju Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., based in Japan, develops and sells prescribed medicines and over-the-counter drugs for eye care, and is faced with the same problems as other drug companies. We are running a holistic management by TOC which widened a scope for suppliers, division in company, subcontractor, and medical experts for a performance gain of an entire system. Our R&D staffs have agreed to the timeline of the project which has been reduced aggressively, and have tried to recover from delays of the schedule in close coordination and cooperation. We have made win-win relationship with raw material suppliers. By company-wide TOC implementation, we achieved following results so far: ? The work periods of R&D project were shortened by 50% at the maximum. ? Inventory of products were cut by 60%. ? Inventory of raw materials were decreased by 66%. ? Equipment investment expense in warehouse of $6 million was saved. ? Inventory in suppliers were decreased by 60%. ? Throughput was increased by decision-making with the use of throughput accounting. Moreover, we realized that the work with the use of TOC is becoming a learning environment and it helps our staffs grow rapidly. Although our challenge has just begun, we would like to show small successes which would lead to a large change in the pharmaceutical industry by the holistic approach. 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
15 Conference Proceedings Miller, Ken Government xtreme makeover - Increasing our capacity to do more good (plenary session) 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Government is under incredible pressure right now. The economic crisis has hit it with a double whammy: exponential increases in demand and dramatically reduced resources. Government simply doesn't have the capacity to do all the good it wants to do in this world. How have governments responded to these new pressures? By trotting out the old ideas. More blue ribbon panels, travel moratoriums and calls for accountability. They cut back on paper clips and cut out the training. They outsource, upgrade and right size. Meanwhile droves of new customers are left waiting for help. The house of government doesn't need another layer of paint or some new carpet it needs an extreme makeover. And just like on the show it needs it done fast! This presentation makes obvious the real problems plaguing government, how you can join the crew and gives you the tools to complete the makeover. You will learn: • The one and only thing government needs to focus on to get out of this crisis • How government can perform its vital functions 80% faster at less cost with better quality • The DNA of government complexity and how we can genetically modify it • How to spot the 'moldy' thinking that is making government employees sick • How to get rid of 40% of an agency's workload • Where the hidden costs of government are • Why technology isn't the answer. Most importantly TOC practitioners will learn a new way of seeing the work of government and learn how they can help make that work great. 1 hour 7 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
16 Conference Proceedings Government xtreme makeover - Increasing our capacity to do more good (plenary session) 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Government is under incredible pressure right now. The economic crisis has hit it with a double whammy: exponential increases in demand and dramatically reduced resources. Government simply doesn't have the capacity to do all the good it wants to do in this world. How have governments responded to these new pressures? By trotting out the old ideas. More blue ribbon panels, travel moratoriums and calls for accountability. They cut back on paper clips and cut out the training. They outsource, upgrade and right size. Meanwhile droves of new customers are left waiting for help. The house of government doesn't need another layer of paint or some new carpet it needs an extreme makeover. And just like on the show it needs it done fast! This presentation makes obvious the real problems plaguing government, how you can join the crew and gives you the tools to complete the makeover. You will learn: • The one and only thing government needs to focus on to get out of this crisis • How government can perform its vital functions 80% faster at less cost with better quality • The DNA of government complexity and how we can genetically modify it • How to spot the 'moldy' thinking that is making government employees sick • How to get rid of 40% of an agency's workload • Where the hidden costs of government are • Why technology isn't the answer. Most importantly TOC practitioners will learn a new way of seeing the work of government and learn how they can help make that work great. 1 hour 7 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
17 Conference Proceedings Milroy, Peter The honeymoon is over – When cost reduction moves into the house of throughput 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany TeledyneDalsa is a Canadian company that has been implementing various aspects of TOC in operations since 2009. This presentation covers recent challenges posed by local improvements (cost reductions), and the actions taken to redirect and refine the improvement efforts to ensure the business retains benefits already gained from TOC. We will cover the nature of the cost improvements, and some of the negative effects seen when implemented in isolation of the TOC strategies already employed. We then cover the process and tools used to gain buy-in to a system-wide evaluation of the impact of cost reduction strategies (typically minimum order quantity and/or lead time increases). Finally we discuss lessons learned in trying to gain and sustain buy-in when parties don't necessarily share common goals. Teledyne-DALSA, based in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, is a low volume, high mix business designer and manufacturer of high-performance cameras. This presentation will address situations encountered where departments pursuing local cost-reduction objectives were negatively impacting other departments and the overall business. What to Change? After an extremely successful TOC implementation of DBR and Replenishment within the Operations Group, the Strategic Supply Account Management (SSAM) Group initiated activities to reduce purchase prices on inputs. For the most part this meant increased purchase minimums and extended lead times, which resulted in increased inventory, reduced working capital, and potentially increased obsolescence. The head of SSAM is primarily evaluated on 'BOM-Cost improvements', with small indirect weightings for improvements to working capital, inventory, and obsolescence. What to Change to? Create a framework to evaluate the working capital & inventory implications when trading off reduced prices with increased minimum order quantities (MOQ)s or Lead Times. The framework is largely driven by stock buffer dynamics: - Impact of MOQs, infrequent replenishments, and long lead times on inventory levels. - Cost of items, rates of consumption, degree of aggregation, and risk of obsolescence. Once there is a common understanding of the system-wide implications of MOQs and long lead times, then we should re-align performance objectives to be system-wide, and shared with other managers. How to Cause the Change? Work with Finance & Supply Chain group managers (those pushing for local cost reductions); improve their understanding of working capital implications of cost reductions and resultant MOQ or Lead Time increases; This meant extensive training on Inventory Dynamics in a replenishment environment, showing the impact that large MOQs and long lead times can cause. Enforcing the use of a simple tool to quantify the positives and / or negatives associated with conflicting objectives around cost, MOQ and lead-time reduction. Lessons Learned: Implement regular meetings on cost reduction opportunities; review proposals as a group before implementation; Full system impact analysis before implementation – throughput charts, working capital calculations, cost factors of the BOM. Change individual goals to align actions with system impact, not local impact Train & Discuss, don't assume people will resist, or won't get it; Product design should consider material input choices – capitalize on existing parts where possible; understand sourcing choices play a significant role in the final material cost %. 3 Learning Objectives: 1. Share a practical method to quantify T,I,OE impact of different supply chain parameters. 2. Share change strategies employed to gain buy-in. 3. Demonstrate importance of shared performance objectives. 3 Questions somebody would ask at the end: 1. Did you use clouds & trees to get people to understand their current situation? 2. What plans or challenges are there in moving this decision-approach through all of the company? 3. Did you consider change through 'decree' if discussions didn't go well? 34 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
18 Conference Proceedings Arndt, Tom The honeymoon is over – When cost reduction moves into the house of throughput 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany TeledyneDalsa is a Canadian company that has been implementing various aspects of TOC in operations since 2009. This presentation covers recent challenges posed by local improvements (cost reductions), and the actions taken to redirect and refine the improvement efforts to ensure the business retains benefits already gained from TOC. We will cover the nature of the cost improvements, and some of the negative effects seen when implemented in isolation of the TOC strategies already employed. We then cover the process and tools used to gain buy-in to a system-wide evaluation of the impact of cost reduction strategies (typically minimum order quantity and/or lead time increases). Finally we discuss lessons learned in trying to gain and sustain buy-in when parties don't necessarily share common goals. Teledyne-DALSA, based in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, is a low volume, high mix business designer and manufacturer of high-performance cameras. This presentation will address situations encountered where departments pursuing local cost-reduction objectives were negatively impacting other departments and the overall business. What to Change? After an extremely successful TOC implementation of DBR and Replenishment within the Operations Group, the Strategic Supply Account Management (SSAM) Group initiated activities to reduce purchase prices on inputs. For the most part this meant increased purchase minimums and extended lead times, which resulted in increased inventory, reduced working capital, and potentially increased obsolescence. The head of SSAM is primarily evaluated on 'BOM-Cost improvements', with small indirect weightings for improvements to working capital, inventory, and obsolescence. What to Change to? Create a framework to evaluate the working capital & inventory implications when trading off reduced prices with increased minimum order quantities (MOQ)s or Lead Times. The framework is largely driven by stock buffer dynamics: - Impact of MOQs, infrequent replenishments, and long lead times on inventory levels. - Cost of items, rates of consumption, degree of aggregation, and risk of obsolescence. Once there is a common understanding of the system-wide implications of MOQs and long lead times, then we should re-align performance objectives to be system-wide, and shared with other managers. How to Cause the Change? Work with Finance & Supply Chain group managers (those pushing for local cost reductions); improve their understanding of working capital implications of cost reductions and resultant MOQ or Lead Time increases; This meant extensive training on Inventory Dynamics in a replenishment environment, showing the impact that large MOQs and long lead times can cause. Enforcing the use of a simple tool to quantify the positives and / or negatives associated with conflicting objectives around cost, MOQ and lead-time reduction. Lessons Learned: Implement regular meetings on cost reduction opportunities; review proposals as a group before implementation; Full system impact analysis before implementation – throughput charts, working capital calculations, cost factors of the BOM. Change individual goals to align actions with system impact, not local impact Train & Discuss, don't assume people will resist, or won't get it; Product design should consider material input choices – capitalize on existing parts where possible; understand sourcing choices play a significant role in the final material cost %. 3 Learning Objectives: 1. Share a practical method to quantify T,I,OE impact of different supply chain parameters. 2. Share change strategies employed to gain buy-in. 3. Demonstrate importance of shared performance objectives. 3 Questions somebody would ask at the end: 1. Did you use clouds & trees to get people to understand their current situation? 2. What plans or challenges are there in moving this decision-approach through all of the company? 3. Did you consider change through 'decree' if discussions didn't go well? 34 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
19 Conference Proceedings The honeymoon is over – When cost reduction moves into the house of throughput 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany TeledyneDalsa is a Canadian company that has been implementing various aspects of TOC in operations since 2009. This presentation covers recent challenges posed by local improvements (cost reductions), and the actions taken to redirect and refine the improvement efforts to ensure the business retains benefits already gained from TOC. We will cover the nature of the cost improvements, and some of the negative effects seen when implemented in isolation of the TOC strategies already employed. We then cover the process and tools used to gain buy-in to a system-wide evaluation of the impact of cost reduction strategies (typically minimum order quantity and/or lead time increases). Finally we discuss lessons learned in trying to gain and sustain buy-in when parties don't necessarily share common goals. Teledyne-DALSA, based in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, is a low volume, high mix business designer and manufacturer of high-performance cameras. This presentation will address situations encountered where departments pursuing local cost-reduction objectives were negatively impacting other departments and the overall business. What to Change? After an extremely successful TOC implementation of DBR and Replenishment within the Operations Group, the Strategic Supply Account Management (SSAM) Group initiated activities to reduce purchase prices on inputs. For the most part this meant increased purchase minimums and extended lead times, which resulted in increased inventory, reduced working capital, and potentially increased obsolescence. The head of SSAM is primarily evaluated on 'BOM-Cost improvements', with small indirect weightings for improvements to working capital, inventory, and obsolescence. What to Change to? Create a framework to evaluate the working capital & inventory implications when trading off reduced prices with increased minimum order quantities (MOQ)s or Lead Times. The framework is largely driven by stock buffer dynamics: - Impact of MOQs, infrequent replenishments, and long lead times on inventory levels. - Cost of items, rates of consumption, degree of aggregation, and risk of obsolescence. Once there is a common understanding of the system-wide implications of MOQs and long lead times, then we should re-align performance objectives to be system-wide, and shared with other managers. How to Cause the Change? Work with Finance & Supply Chain group managers (those pushing for local cost reductions); improve their understanding of working capital implications of cost reductions and resultant MOQ or Lead Time increases; This meant extensive training on Inventory Dynamics in a replenishment environment, showing the impact that large MOQs and long lead times can cause. Enforcing the use of a simple tool to quantify the positives and / or negatives associated with conflicting objectives around cost, MOQ and lead-time reduction. Lessons Learned: Implement regular meetings on cost reduction opportunities; review proposals as a group before implementation; Full system impact analysis before implementation – throughput charts, working capital calculations, cost factors of the BOM. Change individual goals to align actions with system impact, not local impact Train & Discuss, don't assume people will resist, or won't get it; Product design should consider material input choices – capitalize on existing parts where possible; understand sourcing choices play a significant role in the final material cost %. 3 Learning Objectives: 1. Share a practical method to quantify T,I,OE impact of different supply chain parameters. 2. Share change strategies employed to gain buy-in. 3. Demonstrate importance of shared performance objectives. 3 Questions somebody would ask at the end: 1. Did you use clouds & trees to get people to understand their current situation? 2. What plans or challenges are there in moving this decision-approach through all of the company? 3. Did you consider change through 'decree' if discussions didn't go well? 34 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
20 Conference Proceedings Mohanty, Satyashri Managing the "long tail" problem in distribution and retail 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany One objective of the session is for people to learn about the additional solution components required along with the basic theory of constraints (TOC) distribution in environments, which present the challenge of a large variety of SKUs or a large number of small customers. Another objective is to explore how effective implementations are possible without diluting the essence of the TOC way of thinking or complicating the simple yet powerful solution of replenishment, aggregation and high inventory. The discussion points are related to the standard consumer goods strategy and tactic tree and explore the missing entities in the standard tree as well as providing a more detailed explanation of some of the parallel assumptions of the steps in the standard tree. https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
21 Conference Proceedings Kulraj, Puneet Managing the "long tail" problem in distribution and retail 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany One objective of the session is for people to learn about the additional solution components required along with the basic theory of constraints (TOC) distribution in environments, which present the challenge of a large variety of SKUs or a large number of small customers. Another objective is to explore how effective implementations are possible without diluting the essence of the TOC way of thinking or complicating the simple yet powerful solution of replenishment, aggregation and high inventory. The discussion points are related to the standard consumer goods strategy and tactic tree and explore the missing entities in the standard tree as well as providing a more detailed explanation of some of the parallel assumptions of the steps in the standard tree. https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
22 Conference Proceedings Managing the "long tail" problem in distribution and retail 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany One objective of the session is for people to learn about the additional solution components required along with the basic theory of constraints (TOC) distribution in environments, which present the challenge of a large variety of SKUs or a large number of small customers. Another objective is to explore how effective implementations are possible without diluting the essence of the TOC way of thinking or complicating the simple yet powerful solution of replenishment, aggregation and high inventory. The discussion points are related to the standard consumer goods strategy and tactic tree and explore the missing entities in the standard tree as well as providing a more detailed explanation of some of the parallel assumptions of the steps in the standard tree. https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
23 Conference Proceedings Mordoch, Avraham The journey starts with chaos: The organizational maturity model for projects management environments 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Three learning objectives: a) How to set up the objectives for a critical chain (CC) implementation in a project management (PM) environment? b) the PM environment is a complicated one. Focusing on the time dimension is extremely important but this is just the beginning for an ambitious implementation. There is much more than just time. c) The TOC body of knowledge could and should be pushed beyond its current limitations. Three questions are answered: a) How can one estimate the maturity stage of his organization? b) How can one know what is the entropy measure in his organization and, as a result, what are the implementation efforts needed to be invested? c) The model assumes a specific sequence of stages. How important is it to follow the suggested sequence? Can it be that for a specific organization there is a need for a different sequence? A definition of chaos from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary is 'The inherent unpredictability in the behavior of a natural system (as the atmosphere, boiling water or the beating heart)'. Many managers in all types of Projects Management (PM) environments are complaining that for sure something unpredicted will happen tomorrow, something that will take the 'perfect' plans astray. No doubt, after taking care of the crisis and putting things back into order, there is, of course, another unpredicted event and back again. The only thing that can be surely predicted is that unpredicted event(s) will occur. Exactly like in natural systems. There are three possible causes for a chaotic PM environment (with shared, or partially shared, resources): a) Not all projects have project plans. b) Not all projects are controlled periodically during execution. c) Not all projects are managed in more or less according to the same methodology. In to the Chaos Theory there are at least three characteristics for an environment so it can be considered as a chaotic one: Time Irreversibility, Unpredictability and Sensitivity to Initial Conditions and Bifurcation. Strangely enough, this is exactly what is happening when the above three causes are observed in PM reality. If the above is Chaos then our objective is Order. The entropy measurement, which measures the distance between total Chaos and good Order, is measuring the difficulties in achieving just the prerequisites for a good implementation of TOC. The change, going from Chaos to Order, brings significant benefits to the organization even before starting with the Critical Chain implementation. On one end we have the Chaos and on the other end we have the absolute ability of the organization to connect the excellent PM performance to the strategy of the organization and therefore being able to create repeatedly Viable Vision results. Between these two ends there are seven distinctive stages when each and every one of them will be discussed in full in the presentation: 0. Chaos 1. Systematic Order 2. Control of the time dimension 3. Enterprise PM and the PMO 4. Control of the Resources dimension 5. Control of the Cost dimension 6. Established PM strategy 7. PM strategy as a part of the organization strategy 8. Viable Vision results. There is only little flexibility in the sequence between the stages, Is the sequence from 1 to 7? Or is 1 the top? But each stage can be measured quite accurately and the organizational benefits of climbing on the above ladder can also be predetermined. During the presentation I'll take the participants through all the stages starting with the initial situation of a chaotic environment (or semi-chaotic according to its entropy measure) up to the achievement of repeatedly Viable Vision. For each stage I'll elaborate on the needed elements of completion the stage, including the benefits for the organization. 1 hour 24 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
24 Conference Proceedings The journey starts with chaos: The organizational maturity model for projects management environments 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Three learning objectives: a) How to set up the objectives for a critical chain (CC) implementation in a project management (PM) environment? b) the PM environment is a complicated one. Focusing on the time dimension is extremely important but this is just the beginning for an ambitious implementation. There is much more than just time. c) The TOC body of knowledge could and should be pushed beyond its current limitations. Three questions are answered: a) How can one estimate the maturity stage of his organization? b) How can one know what is the entropy measure in his organization and, as a result, what are the implementation efforts needed to be invested? c) The model assumes a specific sequence of stages. How important is it to follow the suggested sequence? Can it be that for a specific organization there is a need for a different sequence? A definition of chaos from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary is 'The inherent unpredictability in the behavior of a natural system (as the atmosphere, boiling water or the beating heart)'. Many managers in all types of Projects Management (PM) environments are complaining that for sure something unpredicted will happen tomorrow, something that will take the 'perfect' plans astray. No doubt, after taking care of the crisis and putting things back into order, there is, of course, another unpredicted event and back again. The only thing that can be surely predicted is that unpredicted event(s) will occur. Exactly like in natural systems. There are three possible causes for a chaotic PM environment (with shared, or partially shared, resources): a) Not all projects have project plans. b) Not all projects are controlled periodically during execution. c) Not all projects are managed in more or less according to the same methodology. In to the Chaos Theory there are at least three characteristics for an environment so it can be considered as a chaotic one: Time Irreversibility, Unpredictability and Sensitivity to Initial Conditions and Bifurcation. Strangely enough, this is exactly what is happening when the above three causes are observed in PM reality. If the above is Chaos then our objective is Order. The entropy measurement, which measures the distance between total Chaos and good Order, is measuring the difficulties in achieving just the prerequisites for a good implementation of TOC. The change, going from Chaos to Order, brings significant benefits to the organization even before starting with the Critical Chain implementation. On one end we have the Chaos and on the other end we have the absolute ability of the organization to connect the excellent PM performance to the strategy of the organization and therefore being able to create repeatedly Viable Vision results. Between these two ends there are seven distinctive stages when each and every one of them will be discussed in full in the presentation: 0. Chaos 1. Systematic Order 2. Control of the time dimension 3. Enterprise PM and the PMO 4. Control of the Resources dimension 5. Control of the Cost dimension 6. Established PM strategy 7. PM strategy as a part of the organization strategy 8. Viable Vision results. There is only little flexibility in the sequence between the stages, Is the sequence from 1 to 7? Or is 1 the top? But each stage can be measured quite accurately and the organizational benefits of climbing on the above ladder can also be predetermined. During the presentation I'll take the participants through all the stages starting with the initial situation of a chaotic environment (or semi-chaotic according to its entropy measure) up to the achievement of repeatedly Viable Vision. For each stage I'll elaborate on the needed elements of completion the stage, including the benefits for the organization. 1 hour 24 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
25 Conference Proceedings Muller, Wolfram Agile + critical chain = Agile enterprise 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Agile project management gets broad propagation. Its extreme lightweight steering has advantages – but are local optimizations and do not use the full potential. On the other hand critical chain is a full-blown project steering – but sometimes e.g. in sub-projects agile methods can be absolutely sufficient. So critical chain doesn't use the benefits of the agile methods. The presentation shows a two-phase approach to first make the agile methods compatible to critical chain and in the second step to improve the agile methods itself. All this is based on the thinking processes (TP) of the TOC and ideas based on drum-buffer-rope. The approach is validated in real projects and real teams' part of a worldwide active internet provider. As a result, agile methods can be used to steer sub-projects more lightweight. With small adjustments it's possible to get some buffer at the end to initially control the WIP. With the buffer at the end you can use progress-buffer-consumption monitoring. That makes agile compatible with CCPM. You do not need protection of sprints any more, therefore continuous flow is possible. The focus moves to reduce the inventory of open tasks. Maximum throughput and minimum lead time are now realistic and reachable. Critical Chain is an appropriate way to manage projects and project portfolios. Mainly in software development (but also in other domains) there are parts of projects that have very less outer dependencies and can be broken down into small comparable tasks. Since ten years, based on the agile manifesto, some agile methods to manage 'projects' occurred and gained a broad propagation (more than Critical Chain). Nearly all Critical Chain Implementations (especially in IT) now face the situation, that there are agile methods already in place with more or less success. Agile methods are very effective local optimizations – so they are mainly successful. On the other hand they are just partial solutions and many problems are unsolved: • To secure the throughput they limit the work-in-progress hard in a team - but they cannot deal with uncertainties and therefore they cannot commit on a specific scope to a specific time. There is no work-in-progress control over the whole 'project'. • Without an explicit buffer and committed due date there is no operational relevant monitoring possible – an equivalent to the fever curve status is missing. • There are still negative social group dynamic effects. Due to the lack of a project due date and buffer the only steering possibility are the small work packages (stories). Especially in Scrum the team has to commit on an amount of stories to deliver in some small time. If something goes wrong (and of course it does) the team is punished (in very subtle ways). As a result they buffer the stories and cause auf Parkinson they lose throughput. • Agile methods are, in the core, production systems. They deal with many small independent parts (stories in a backlog) and very short touch times. To get a good flow (Kanban) or to protect the team from outside (Scrum) they accept more open work in progress than necessary and a result the lead times are higher than necessary and the throughput is less then possible. Agile methods are a valid idea to easily steer production like sub projects. Currently Critical Chain is not really able to use this advantage on a broad scale. The agile methods are just partially solutions – so they do not user their full potential either. So potential in project management is lost! The solution should be to find a way to make agile methods compatible to critical chain, so they can be easily used when applicable. Additionally one has to find a way to define a project buffer and to get the progress to buffer consumption monitoring. Further on it will be important to improve agile methods to the theoretical optimal throughput and minimum lead time by reducing the inventory (open stories/task) to minimum and get rid of the unnatural batch sizes. The presentation shows, based on the TOC thinking processes and the knowledge of Drum-Buffer-Rope, how to improve the agile methods. All these improvements are validated in practice in real projects and teams. The presentation shows evidence and examples out of this practical experience (s. Reliable Scrum in Practice Blog ). The Change is undertaken in two Phases. First make Scrum/Kanban reliable (Reliable Scrum) and Second to apply Drum-Buffer-Rope like steering on the agile Teams (Ultimate Scrum). Reliable Scrum - the Idea is to initially control the work-in-progress for the projects (release). To do this you need explicit information about the amount of work (story points) you have to do and your capacity (velocity). You have to calculate the chance of success and negotiate with the stakeholder an appropriate amount of work compared to the time and resources you have. First you qualify you backlog. All stories needed for a specific release (project) are tagged. Missing stories are added. The stories are estimated (story points) and big stories have to be broken down into smaller ones. Together with the main stake holder (product owner) the team estimates a quota of additionally occurring story points in a realistic and a pessimistic case. As a result you'll get the probability curve of the backlog. After that you estimate the velocity (story points per week) until the end of the release. Normally you have some experience data out of former sprints – this will be the realistic case. So you just have to estimate the optimistic and the pessimistic value. That gives you the probability of the velocity. These two curves can be used to calculate the absolute probability of success over the time (s. Reliable Scrum Full Description ). Together with the stakeholders it's now up to the team to negotiate a reasonable scope/due-date or resources to get a realistic chance of success. This will be something around 80% (the upper turning point of the s-curve). As a result you get some buffer at the end of the release. So you are now able to use the known product-burn down-chart with the negotiated due-date to monitor the progress and the buffer consumption in a critical chain compatible way. This can be used to keep the work-in-progress under control. Ultimate Scrum - after having Reliable Scrum as an appropriate steering for the release in place, the focus changes to the inner management of the tasks in the team. The goal here is to have the minimum amount of open tasks. One side effect of Reliable Scrum is that there is no need of the sprints to protect the team from the management any more. So the team can easily switch from batch mode (sprints) to continuous mode (drum-buffer-rope). To achieve this, the process is divided into two stages. First stage is to break down stories into tasks. A task is defined as work with duration of about ½ a day. To do this breaking down into task takes typically something around ½ a day too. So the steering is easy (not even a drum-buffer-rope). The team has a task buffer. If there are less than one or two task in the buffer one team member gets the next story from the backlogs and starts to break it into tasks and refills the buffer. The next stage is to transform the tasks into delivered results. This is normally done in one, two or more stages. The steering of the inventory is mainly done based on the output of finished tasks. If one task is finished one new task is allowed to start. If there is the suspicion that there are too much open tasks then the rule is two tasks out – one task in. If a developer has nothing to do it's a strong indicator for a problem (impediment) that should be solved (before opening a new task). This is a 'one stage' Drum-Buffer-Rope-Steering. If there are more than one dedicated skill group it develops to a real Drum-Buffer-Rope steering. As a result the impediments are solved quickly. The amount of open tasks goes down to the amount of developer or resources in the team. The flow and throughput increases and the lead time reduce to the minimum. With Reliable/Ultimate Scrum you can integrate both worlds agile and Critical Chain. Both can gain advantages from each other and use their complete potential. As a result the focus of management goes away from the process – everybody knows that its operation on the theoretical optimum. The motivation of the team members increases dramatically. Quality reaches optimum. The new focus is on doing the right things and on the people itself. The new capacity is uses to develop educate, exchange best practices. The true leadership gets more and more effective. Outlook - if you now look at the project management as a whole, you see the three layers. Portfolio or multi project management looks like a production. The projects are staggered according to real or virtual drum. It's more or less a Drum-Buffer-Rope steering. The single projects are managed by the critical chain. The deviations are buffered and the steering is done by progress and buffer consumption. Sub-Projects, that have sometimes (not always) again the production character are again managed in a Drum-Buffer-Rope style. Based on the type of complexity and situation the best possible steering method is used. The Optimum in Throughput can be reached! 33 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
26 Conference Proceedings Agile + critical chain = Agile enterprise 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Agile project management gets broad propagation. Its extreme lightweight steering has advantages – but are local optimizations and do not use the full potential. On the other hand critical chain is a full-blown project steering – but sometimes e.g. in sub-projects agile methods can be absolutely sufficient. So critical chain doesn't use the benefits of the agile methods. The presentation shows a two-phase approach to first make the agile methods compatible to critical chain and in the second step to improve the agile methods itself. All this is based on the thinking processes (TP) of the TOC and ideas based on drum-buffer-rope. The approach is validated in real projects and real teams' part of a worldwide active internet provider. As a result, agile methods can be used to steer sub-projects more lightweight. With small adjustments it's possible to get some buffer at the end to initially control the WIP. With the buffer at the end you can use progress-buffer-consumption monitoring. That makes agile compatible with CCPM. You do not need protection of sprints any more, therefore continuous flow is possible. The focus moves to reduce the inventory of open tasks. Maximum throughput and minimum lead time are now realistic and reachable. Critical Chain is an appropriate way to manage projects and project portfolios. Mainly in software development (but also in other domains) there are parts of projects that have very less outer dependencies and can be broken down into small comparable tasks. Since ten years, based on the agile manifesto, some agile methods to manage 'projects' occurred and gained a broad propagation (more than Critical Chain). Nearly all Critical Chain Implementations (especially in IT) now face the situation, that there are agile methods already in place with more or less success. Agile methods are very effective local optimizations – so they are mainly successful. On the other hand they are just partial solutions and many problems are unsolved: • To secure the throughput they limit the work-in-progress hard in a team - but they cannot deal with uncertainties and therefore they cannot commit on a specific scope to a specific time. There is no work-in-progress control over the whole 'project'. • Without an explicit buffer and committed due date there is no operational relevant monitoring possible – an equivalent to the fever curve status is missing. • There are still negative social group dynamic effects. Due to the lack of a project due date and buffer the only steering possibility are the small work packages (stories). Especially in Scrum the team has to commit on an amount of stories to deliver in some small time. If something goes wrong (and of course it does) the team is punished (in very subtle ways). As a result they buffer the stories and cause auf Parkinson they lose throughput. • Agile methods are, in the core, production systems. They deal with many small independent parts (stories in a backlog) and very short touch times. To get a good flow (Kanban) or to protect the team from outside (Scrum) they accept more open work in progress than necessary and a result the lead times are higher than necessary and the throughput is less then possible. Agile methods are a valid idea to easily steer production like sub projects. Currently Critical Chain is not really able to use this advantage on a broad scale. The agile methods are just partially solutions – so they do not user their full potential either. So potential in project management is lost! The solution should be to find a way to make agile methods compatible to critical chain, so they can be easily used when applicable. Additionally one has to find a way to define a project buffer and to get the progress to buffer consumption monitoring. Further on it will be important to improve agile methods to the theoretical optimal throughput and minimum lead time by reducing the inventory (open stories/task) to minimum and get rid of the unnatural batch sizes. The presentation shows, based on the TOC thinking processes and the knowledge of Drum-Buffer-Rope, how to improve the agile methods. All these improvements are validated in practice in real projects and teams. The presentation shows evidence and examples out of this practical experience (s. Reliable Scrum in Practice Blog ). The Change is undertaken in two Phases. First make Scrum/Kanban reliable (Reliable Scrum) and Second to apply Drum-Buffer-Rope like steering on the agile Teams (Ultimate Scrum). Reliable Scrum - the Idea is to initially control the work-in-progress for the projects (release). To do this you need explicit information about the amount of work (story points) you have to do and your capacity (velocity). You have to calculate the chance of success and negotiate with the stakeholder an appropriate amount of work compared to the time and resources you have. First you qualify you backlog. All stories needed for a specific release (project) are tagged. Missing stories are added. The stories are estimated (story points) and big stories have to be broken down into smaller ones. Together with the main stake holder (product owner) the team estimates a quota of additionally occurring story points in a realistic and a pessimistic case. As a result you'll get the probability curve of the backlog. After that you estimate the velocity (story points per week) until the end of the release. Normally you have some experience data out of former sprints – this will be the realistic case. So you just have to estimate the optimistic and the pessimistic value. That gives you the probability of the velocity. These two curves can be used to calculate the absolute probability of success over the time (s. Reliable Scrum Full Description ). Together with the stakeholders it's now up to the team to negotiate a reasonable scope/due-date or resources to get a realistic chance of success. This will be something around 80% (the upper turning point of the s-curve). As a result you get some buffer at the end of the release. So you are now able to use the known product-burn down-chart with the negotiated due-date to monitor the progress and the buffer consumption in a critical chain compatible way. This can be used to keep the work-in-progress under control. Ultimate Scrum - after having Reliable Scrum as an appropriate steering for the release in place, the focus changes to the inner management of the tasks in the team. The goal here is to have the minimum amount of open tasks. One side effect of Reliable Scrum is that there is no need of the sprints to protect the team from the management any more. So the team can easily switch from batch mode (sprints) to continuous mode (drum-buffer-rope). To achieve this, the process is divided into two stages. First stage is to break down stories into tasks. A task is defined as work with duration of about ½ a day. To do this breaking down into task takes typically something around ½ a day too. So the steering is easy (not even a drum-buffer-rope). The team has a task buffer. If there are less than one or two task in the buffer one team member gets the next story from the backlogs and starts to break it into tasks and refills the buffer. The next stage is to transform the tasks into delivered results. This is normally done in one, two or more stages. The steering of the inventory is mainly done based on the output of finished tasks. If one task is finished one new task is allowed to start. If there is the suspicion that there are too much open tasks then the rule is two tasks out – one task in. If a developer has nothing to do it's a strong indicator for a problem (impediment) that should be solved (before opening a new task). This is a 'one stage' Drum-Buffer-Rope-Steering. If there are more than one dedicated skill group it develops to a real Drum-Buffer-Rope steering. As a result the impediments are solved quickly. The amount of open tasks goes down to the amount of developer or resources in the team. The flow and throughput increases and the lead time reduce to the minimum. With Reliable/Ultimate Scrum you can integrate both worlds agile and Critical Chain. Both can gain advantages from each other and use their complete potential. As a result the focus of management goes away from the process – everybody knows that its operation on the theoretical optimum. The motivation of the team members increases dramatically. Quality reaches optimum. The new focus is on doing the right things and on the people itself. The new capacity is uses to develop educate, exchange best practices. The true leadership gets more and more effective. Outlook - if you now look at the project management as a whole, you see the three layers. Portfolio or multi project management looks like a production. The projects are staggered according to real or virtual drum. It's more or less a Drum-Buffer-Rope steering. The single projects are managed by the critical chain. The deviations are buffered and the steering is done by progress and buffer consumption. Sub-Projects, that have sometimes (not always) again the production character are again managed in a Drum-Buffer-Rope style. Based on the type of complexity and situation the best possible steering method is used. The Optimum in Throughput can be reached! 33 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
27 Online Multimedia Ferguson, Lisa Anne 0 to 60: Introduction to project management 2012 Critical chain project management (CCPM) the TOC application for project management, was the second application of TOC developed by the founder of TOC, Dr. Eli Goldratt. CCPM was created to dramatically improve the flow and effective completion of projects in organizations. Key concepts in CCPM apply to individuals wanting to improve their personal and professional productivity as well. For example, reducing “bad multitasking” is a key factor in successfully completing more work more effectively. CCPM typically results in very high due-date performance (delivering well over 95% on or before the original promised due-dates, while in cases of late delivery the delay is much smaller than the prevailing delays in the industry) and less compromises on content/quality and the budget. 1 hour https://www.tocico.org/page/2012OnlineMultimedia
28 Online Multimedia 0 to 60: Introduction to project management 2012 Critical chain project management (CCPM) the TOC application for project management, was the second application of TOC developed by the founder of TOC, Dr. Eli Goldratt. CCPM was created to dramatically improve the flow and effective completion of projects in organizations. Key concepts in CCPM apply to individuals wanting to improve their personal and professional productivity as well. For example, reducing “bad multitasking” is a key factor in successfully completing more work more effectively. CCPM typically results in very high due-date performance (delivering well over 95% on or before the original promised due-dates, while in cases of late delivery the delay is much smaller than the prevailing delays in the industry) and less compromises on content/quality and the budget. 1 hour https://www.tocico.org/page/2012OnlineMultimedia
29 Online Multimedia 0 to 60: Introduction to project management 2012 Critical chain project management (CCPM) the TOC application for project management, was the second application of TOC developed by the founder of TOC, Dr. Eli Goldratt. CCPM was created to dramatically improve the flow and effective completion of projects in organizations. Key concepts in CCPM apply to individuals wanting to improve their personal and professional productivity as well. For example, reducing “bad multitasking” is a key factor in successfully completing more work more effectively. CCPM typically results in very high due-date performance (delivering well over 95% on or before the original promised due-dates, while in cases of late delivery the delay is much smaller than the prevailing delays in the industry) and less compromises on content/quality and the budget. 1 hour https://www.tocico.org/page/2012OnlineMultimedia
30 Conference Proceedings Naik, Rahul Godrej Security Solutions: Another Viable Vision from India 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Godrej Security Solutions, a manufacturing organization cuts through chronic problems faced by the entire industry and sets seemingly unrealistic benchmarks for the rest of the field. This is no small player or new player, it is a company that has been in this business for over 50 years and is an established market leader. Implementing TOC in its entire supply chain (raw materials, manufacturing and sales), in two years, the company has more than doubled its output from the same capacity, nearly tripled its profits and doubled its profitability. It is well on its way to achieving a Viable Vision by making its sales equal to profit in five years. Godrej Security Solutions (GSS) having an annual turnover of Rs 750 crones (approx. $150mn). It is in the business of manufacturing Physical Security products such as Safes, Strong Room Doors, Safe Deposit Lockers, Record Protection Equipments, Home Safes, Marine solutions and providing turnkey Premises Security Solutions. GSS is a division of Godrej & Boyce, India, a conglomerate of over 15 businesses in areas as diverse as appliances, engineering etc., having a turnover of over 1.2 Billion USD. GSS operates in two market segments i.e. Institutional and Retail. In Institutional segment its main customers are Banks, non-Banking Finance Companies, Jewelers, diamond merchants, post offices, etc. In the Retail segment it sells Home Safes to end consumers through a distribution channel. GSS is a market leader in India with around 60% market share. It also exports its security products to more than 50 countries. About the industry & situation prior to TOC implementation: Institutional Segment: GSS main customers are Banks. Whenever a Bank opens a new branch it requires physical security products such as Safes, Strong room door, safe deposit lockers & record protection equipment. If these products are delivered late, the entire branch opening is delayed. This damage is significant because delayed opening of a branch means loss of business, losing market share, incurring rentals and loss of reputation of the purchase person placing the order on GSS. The modus operandi of all these banks is that during first half of the financial year i.e. April to September they open few branches (this time is spent in planning, getting license, recruitment, etc.). Around 70% of branches open in the second half of the year i.e. from October to March. This skew of branch openings used to put severe pressure on the suppliers such as GSS to deliver on time as well as in a shorter lead-time. If the branches are not opened within a time frame, the license to open the branch expires. Moreover, during the second half of the year, even though the plant was over loaded due to the splurge of orders, sales were chasing orders even at a discount to meet their top line targets. This affected the profitability of the company. Manufacturing of physical security products involves assembly of a variety of components. Since the components were supplied from various sources (in-house or suppliers), there was significant de-synchronization at the assembly leading to peaks & troughs of load. Coupled with the fact that assembly preferred making standard products, which gave better productivity than non-standard products. All this added to unreliability and highly varying production lead-time. Frequent expediting due to customer complaints further added to the chaos in the plant. Prior to TOC implementation GSS delivery lead times used to vary significantly (anything between 4 to 12 weeks.) Due to poor on time delivery performance, bank's branch opening used to get delayed leading to severe customer dissatisfaction and subsequently loss of sale. The above factors affected the growth of GSS in spite of the industry growth. This led to a decrease in market share. Also the practice of getting orders even at a discount even when the plant was over loaded, affected the profitability of the company. Retail Segment: Home Safes is a completely new product category in India with very low market penetration. Availability of Home Safes in the distribution channel was poor and reach was limited. As a result growth in this segment was limited notwithstanding a large untapped market for such safes. TOC Solution that was deployed: TOC implementation started in October 2010. The following solution elements were implemented to triple the profits in 2 years: Institutional: • TOC Operations solution in the supply chain: Build Reliability as well as reduced lead times (On time with a shorter lead time) • An offer to key customers to pull ahead demand into the lean period (more orders in the first half of the year to even out the load on the plant) • T/CU based decision making: Orders of products with low T/CU were regulated by increasing prices/ensuring zero discounting • Throughput accounting based decisions at organization level to control discounting • Throughput based Incentive Scheme instead of top line based incentive scheme for Sales personnel Retail: • TOC Operations & Distribution solution: This dramatically improved availability in the supply chain • Inventory Turns offer to the distributors helped increase Range & Reach in the market. Results Achieved: Post TOC implementation the following results were achieved: Institutional: – On Time performance of the plant is around 80-90% (earlier it was 30%) – Production lead time has reduced by more than 50%. – Output from the plant has more than doubled with the same resources. – Overtime has reduced by 80%. – WIP has reduced by more than 40%. – FG stock has reduced by 60%. – Market share increased from 58% to 62%. – Profits have tripled. – Profitability (PBT/Sales) has more than doubled. Retail: – Availability increased to more than 95% & sustains at this level. – Sales has increased by 50%. – Reach has nearly doubled. 36 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
31 Conference Proceedings Shailesh, Ranjan Godrej Security Solutions: Another Viable Vision from India 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Godrej Security Solutions, a manufacturing organization cuts through chronic problems faced by the entire industry and sets seemingly unrealistic benchmarks for the rest of the field. This is no small player or new player, it is a company that has been in this business for over 50 years and is an established market leader. Implementing TOC in its entire supply chain (raw materials, manufacturing and sales), in two years, the company has more than doubled its output from the same capacity, nearly tripled its profits and doubled its profitability. It is well on its way to achieving a Viable Vision by making its sales equal to profit in five years. Godrej Security Solutions (GSS) having an annual turnover of Rs 750 crones (approx. $150mn). It is in the business of manufacturing Physical Security products such as Safes, Strong Room Doors, Safe Deposit Lockers, Record Protection Equipments, Home Safes, Marine solutions and providing turnkey Premises Security Solutions. GSS is a division of Godrej & Boyce, India, a conglomerate of over 15 businesses in areas as diverse as appliances, engineering etc., having a turnover of over 1.2 Billion USD. GSS operates in two market segments i.e. Institutional and Retail. In Institutional segment its main customers are Banks, non-Banking Finance Companies, Jewelers, diamond merchants, post offices, etc. In the Retail segment it sells Home Safes to end consumers through a distribution channel. GSS is a market leader in India with around 60% market share. It also exports its security products to more than 50 countries. About the industry & situation prior to TOC implementation: Institutional Segment: GSS main customers are Banks. Whenever a Bank opens a new branch it requires physical security products such as Safes, Strong room door, safe deposit lockers & record protection equipment. If these products are delivered late, the entire branch opening is delayed. This damage is significant because delayed opening of a branch means loss of business, losing market share, incurring rentals and loss of reputation of the purchase person placing the order on GSS. The modus operandi of all these banks is that during first half of the financial year i.e. April to September they open few branches (this time is spent in planning, getting license, recruitment, etc.). Around 70% of branches open in the second half of the year i.e. from October to March. This skew of branch openings used to put severe pressure on the suppliers such as GSS to deliver on time as well as in a shorter lead-time. If the branches are not opened within a time frame, the license to open the branch expires. Moreover, during the second half of the year, even though the plant was over loaded due to the splurge of orders, sales were chasing orders even at a discount to meet their top line targets. This affected the profitability of the company. Manufacturing of physical security products involves assembly of a variety of components. Since the components were supplied from various sources (in-house or suppliers), there was significant de-synchronization at the assembly leading to peaks & troughs of load. Coupled with the fact that assembly preferred making standard products, which gave better productivity than non-standard products. All this added to unreliability and highly varying production lead-time. Frequent expediting due to customer complaints further added to the chaos in the plant. Prior to TOC implementation GSS delivery lead times used to vary significantly (anything between 4 to 12 weeks.) Due to poor on time delivery performance, bank's branch opening used to get delayed leading to severe customer dissatisfaction and subsequently loss of sale. The above factors affected the growth of GSS in spite of the industry growth. This led to a decrease in market share. Also the practice of getting orders even at a discount even when the plant was over loaded, affected the profitability of the company. Retail Segment: Home Safes is a completely new product category in India with very low market penetration. Availability of Home Safes in the distribution channel was poor and reach was limited. As a result growth in this segment was limited notwithstanding a large untapped market for such safes. TOC Solution that was deployed: TOC implementation started in October 2010. The following solution elements were implemented to triple the profits in 2 years: Institutional: • TOC Operations solution in the supply chain: Build Reliability as well as reduced lead times (On time with a shorter lead time) • An offer to key customers to pull ahead demand into the lean period (more orders in the first half of the year to even out the load on the plant) • T/CU based decision making: Orders of products with low T/CU were regulated by increasing prices/ensuring zero discounting • Throughput accounting based decisions at organization level to control discounting • Throughput based Incentive Scheme instead of top line based incentive scheme for Sales personnel Retail: • TOC Operations & Distribution solution: This dramatically improved availability in the supply chain • Inventory Turns offer to the distributors helped increase Range & Reach in the market. Results Achieved: Post TOC implementation the following results were achieved: Institutional: – On Time performance of the plant is around 80-90% (earlier it was 30%) – Production lead time has reduced by more than 50%. – Output from the plant has more than doubled with the same resources. – Overtime has reduced by 80%. – WIP has reduced by more than 40%. – FG stock has reduced by 60%. – Market share increased from 58% to 62%. – Profits have tripled. – Profitability (PBT/Sales) has more than doubled. Retail: – Availability increased to more than 95% & sustains at this level. – Sales has increased by 50%. – Reach has nearly doubled. 36 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
32 Conference Proceedings Godrej Security Solutions: Another Viable Vision from India 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Godrej Security Solutions, a manufacturing organization cuts through chronic problems faced by the entire industry and sets seemingly unrealistic benchmarks for the rest of the field. This is no small player or new player, it is a company that has been in this business for over 50 years and is an established market leader. Implementing TOC in its entire supply chain (raw materials, manufacturing and sales), in two years, the company has more than doubled its output from the same capacity, nearly tripled its profits and doubled its profitability. It is well on its way to achieving a Viable Vision by making its sales equal to profit in five years. Godrej Security Solutions (GSS) having an annual turnover of Rs 750 crones (approx. $150mn). It is in the business of manufacturing Physical Security products such as Safes, Strong Room Doors, Safe Deposit Lockers, Record Protection Equipments, Home Safes, Marine solutions and providing turnkey Premises Security Solutions. GSS is a division of Godrej & Boyce, India, a conglomerate of over 15 businesses in areas as diverse as appliances, engineering etc., having a turnover of over 1.2 Billion USD. GSS operates in two market segments i.e. Institutional and Retail. In Institutional segment its main customers are Banks, non-Banking Finance Companies, Jewelers, diamond merchants, post offices, etc. In the Retail segment it sells Home Safes to end consumers through a distribution channel. GSS is a market leader in India with around 60% market share. It also exports its security products to more than 50 countries. About the industry & situation prior to TOC implementation: Institutional Segment: GSS main customers are Banks. Whenever a Bank opens a new branch it requires physical security products such as Safes, Strong room door, safe deposit lockers & record protection equipment. If these products are delivered late, the entire branch opening is delayed. This damage is significant because delayed opening of a branch means loss of business, losing market share, incurring rentals and loss of reputation of the purchase person placing the order on GSS. The modus operandi of all these banks is that during first half of the financial year i.e. April to September they open few branches (this time is spent in planning, getting license, recruitment, etc.). Around 70% of branches open in the second half of the year i.e. from October to March. This skew of branch openings used to put severe pressure on the suppliers such as GSS to deliver on time as well as in a shorter lead-time. If the branches are not opened within a time frame, the license to open the branch expires. Moreover, during the second half of the year, even though the plant was over loaded due to the splurge of orders, sales were chasing orders even at a discount to meet their top line targets. This affected the profitability of the company. Manufacturing of physical security products involves assembly of a variety of components. Since the components were supplied from various sources (in-house or suppliers), there was significant de-synchronization at the assembly leading to peaks & troughs of load. Coupled with the fact that assembly preferred making standard products, which gave better productivity than non-standard products. All this added to unreliability and highly varying production lead-time. Frequent expediting due to customer complaints further added to the chaos in the plant. Prior to TOC implementation GSS delivery lead times used to vary significantly (anything between 4 to 12 weeks.) Due to poor on time delivery performance, bank's branch opening used to get delayed leading to severe customer dissatisfaction and subsequently loss of sale. The above factors affected the growth of GSS in spite of the industry growth. This led to a decrease in market share. Also the practice of getting orders even at a discount even when the plant was over loaded, affected the profitability of the company. Retail Segment: Home Safes is a completely new product category in India with very low market penetration. Availability of Home Safes in the distribution channel was poor and reach was limited. As a result growth in this segment was limited notwithstanding a large untapped market for such safes. TOC Solution that was deployed: TOC implementation started in October 2010. The following solution elements were implemented to triple the profits in 2 years: Institutional: • TOC Operations solution in the supply chain: Build Reliability as well as reduced lead times (On time with a shorter lead time) • An offer to key customers to pull ahead demand into the lean period (more orders in the first half of the year to even out the load on the plant) • T/CU based decision making: Orders of products with low T/CU were regulated by increasing prices/ensuring zero discounting • Throughput accounting based decisions at organization level to control discounting • Throughput based Incentive Scheme instead of top line based incentive scheme for Sales personnel Retail: • TOC Operations & Distribution solution: This dramatically improved availability in the supply chain • Inventory Turns offer to the distributors helped increase Range & Reach in the market. Results Achieved: Post TOC implementation the following results were achieved: Institutional: – On Time performance of the plant is around 80-90% (earlier it was 30%) – Production lead time has reduced by more than 50%. – Output from the plant has more than doubled with the same resources. – Overtime has reduced by 80%. – WIP has reduced by more than 40%. – FG stock has reduced by 60%. – Market share increased from 58% to 62%. – Profits have tripled. – Profitability (PBT/Sales) has more than doubled. Retail: – Availability increased to more than 95% & sustains at this level. – Sales has increased by 50%. – Reach has nearly doubled. 36 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
33 Conference Proceedings Newbold, Robert C. Get rid of feeding buffers 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany (Hyde Park) Feeding buffers have been a standard and little-questioned part of the critical chain (CC) approach since the beginning. However, their application in practice can be difficult and confusing. Feeding buffers can create holes in the critical chain; their sizing and analysis is often problematic; and the target for feeding buffer protection – the critical chain – can change in time and makeup, rendering the original feeding buffers irrelevant. Some CC implementers have come up with complicated ways of getting around these problems, adding to the difficulty of the CC approach; others remove feeding buffers entirely, thus removing needed protection. The author argues that by estimating merge bias and determining task gating without using explicit feeding buffers, the buffers themselves can then be eliminated. The resulting schedules are more intuitive, more robust, and easier to analyze than traditional CC schedules. The argument: feeding buffers have been a standard part of the Critical Chain (CC) approach since the beginning. Their pluses include de-coupling critical chain tasks from variation on non-critical chains and helping determine task gating – how much non-critical tasks can be delayed from their early starts without affecting the critical chain. Over the years, a number of minuses have also appeared: feeding buffer insertion creates holes in the critical chain; they guard against merge bias, but are insensitive to the number of legs being merged; as usually implemented, their size does not take into account resource dependencies; the target of feeding buffers – the critical chain – can change in time and makeup, rendering the original feeding buffers irrelevant; their impact on the schedule is often difficult to analyze; and sometimes they even put protection in the wrong place. Some CC implementers have come up with various complicated ways of getting around these problems, but those techniques only serve to make CC more difficult to teach and use. Others remove feeding buffers, eliminating needed protection. Instead of creating feeding buffers, I argue for the following scheduling process: estimate the impact of merge bias at each integration point; determine how early to schedule non-critical tasks, based on the needed protection (accounting for merge bias); and add to the project buffer any needed protection that would otherwise require pushing out the end of the critical chain. The resulting schedules are simpler, more intuitive, more robust, and easier to analyze than traditional CC schedules. Some possible counter-points: • Feeding buffers are the best way to make sure that the appropriate attention is paid to non-critical paths. • We already have procedures in place that cope effectively with feeding buffers in our environment. • This approach requires software. • We know CC works with feeding buffers but we don't know what happens without. • We lose brand identity, because 'Critical Chain' becomes too close to 'Critical Path.' The conflict: figure. The apparent resolution is to break B-D (hence the title of the presentation), but the real resolution is to break D-D'. We can create a schedule that keeps needed protection, but eliminates the need for explicit feeding buffers, by (a) making the magnitude of merge bias visible, (b) using the quantified merge bias to help determine task gating, and (c) adding any extra needed protection to the project buffer. 30 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
34 Conference Proceedings Get rid of feeding buffers 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany (Hyde Park) Feeding buffers have been a standard and little-questioned part of the critical chain (CC) approach since the beginning. However, their application in practice can be difficult and confusing. Feeding buffers can create holes in the critical chain; their sizing and analysis is often problematic; and the target for feeding buffer protection – the critical chain – can change in time and makeup, rendering the original feeding buffers irrelevant. Some CC implementers have come up with complicated ways of getting around these problems, adding to the difficulty of the CC approach; others remove feeding buffers entirely, thus removing needed protection. The author argues that by estimating merge bias and determining task gating without using explicit feeding buffers, the buffers themselves can then be eliminated. The resulting schedules are more intuitive, more robust, and easier to analyze than traditional CC schedules. The argument: feeding buffers have been a standard part of the Critical Chain (CC) approach since the beginning. Their pluses include de-coupling critical chain tasks from variation on non-critical chains and helping determine task gating – how much non-critical tasks can be delayed from their early starts without affecting the critical chain. Over the years, a number of minuses have also appeared: feeding buffer insertion creates holes in the critical chain; they guard against merge bias, but are insensitive to the number of legs being merged; as usually implemented, their size does not take into account resource dependencies; the target of feeding buffers – the critical chain – can change in time and makeup, rendering the original feeding buffers irrelevant; their impact on the schedule is often difficult to analyze; and sometimes they even put protection in the wrong place. Some CC implementers have come up with various complicated ways of getting around these problems, but those techniques only serve to make CC more difficult to teach and use. Others remove feeding buffers, eliminating needed protection. Instead of creating feeding buffers, I argue for the following scheduling process: estimate the impact of merge bias at each integration point; determine how early to schedule non-critical tasks, based on the needed protection (accounting for merge bias); and add to the project buffer any needed protection that would otherwise require pushing out the end of the critical chain. The resulting schedules are simpler, more intuitive, more robust, and easier to analyze than traditional CC schedules. Some possible counter-points: • Feeding buffers are the best way to make sure that the appropriate attention is paid to non-critical paths. • We already have procedures in place that cope effectively with feeding buffers in our environment. • This approach requires software. • We know CC works with feeding buffers but we don't know what happens without. • We lose brand identity, because 'Critical Chain' becomes too close to 'Critical Path.' The conflict: figure. The apparent resolution is to break B-D (hence the title of the presentation), but the real resolution is to break D-D'. We can create a schedule that keeps needed protection, but eliminates the need for explicit feeding buffers, by (a) making the magnitude of merge bias visible, (b) using the quantified merge bias to help determine task gating, and (c) adding any extra needed protection to the project buffer. 30 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
35 Conference Proceedings Ojeda, David Building a decisive competitive edge in the microfinance segment in Mexico 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Mas Kapital is a Microfinance company located in Mexico. They have grown fast for the last 6 years but they were worried about the imminent threat of losing control of the processes and they decided to adopt the TOC philosophy in order to stabilize the company. In 2010 they met Dr. Goldratt and they decided to make a full TOC implementation grounded on their Viable Vision project. Since the beginning TOC tools were utilized in order to identify the undesirable effects. From this point we identified the major constraint as the loan submission analysis process, subordinated all the company efforts in order to only process good qualified potential customers and filter them in a better way to reduce credit risk and reduce bad debt, at the same time we divided the sales force responsibilities and tasks in order to focus the collections activity and align the promotion process to the real needs of the company, once we had the operations control TOC thinking processes were used to identify a significant need of the market and design Mas Kapital decisive competitive edge. • What to change? o Credit risk and unaligned operations in the microfinance segment. • What to change to? o Increase organizational financial stability by reducing credit risk and reinforced operations. Sustain and capitalize on this advantage. • How to cause the change? o Set the (loan submission) analysis process as the bottleneck and subordinate the organization on this, split the sales force activities in order to take control of the operations, develop a decisive competitive edge for the microfinance segment. • Lessons learned? Include successes, challenges, and obstacles and how they were overcome. Lessons learned: o How to apply TOC in the microfinance segment. o Synchronize operations on the field with the credit analysis capacity. o Reduction of multitasking on the key resources has resulted in improved loan recovery rates and improving the financial results. o Operational excellence and sales strategy results with the final customer. o How to use TOC to reinforce the best practices in the microfinance segment. Successes: • Set the loan submission analysis process as the CCR to focus the entire organization and at the same time reducing the debt from 12% to less than 2%. • Splitting sales force activities in order to recover accurately and reinforced promotion. • Built a mafia offer for the final customer increasing in sales. Challenges: • Sustain the loan submission analysis of the credits in order to maintain the debt low. • Reinforced the management skills with the thinking process tools across the company. • Demonstrate stability for the new investors. Obstacles: • Economic and financial crisis globally. • Lack of trust of the investors in Mexico. How they were overcome: Demonstrate stability and good financial performance beyond the competitors. Audience: New knowledge in service industry. Industry: Finance and Banking. Names and affiliations of all authors with the presenting author listed first David Ojeda, Mas Kapital CEO, practitioner Matias Birrell, Goldratt Consulting, Country Manager Chile, TOC Consultant Salvador Pena, Goldratt Consulting, Country Manager Mexico, TOC Consultant. Title: Building a decisive competitive edge (DCE) in the Microfinance segment in Mexico 3 Learning objectives: 1. Understand how to apply the TOC Thinking Processes to aid in the development of a Viable Vision Program for a services company. 2. Share and learn how to approach the principles of flow to admin and financial services 3. Discussing and sharing what constitutes the design of the DCE in Microfinance. 3 questions somebody would ask at the end of the presentation, speech or workshop to elaborate on the subject and improve understanding and transfer of ideas. 1. Why setting the analysis process as a bottleneck will maintain the bad debts to less than 2%? 2. What was the reaction of the competitors? 3. Having these results why is it difficult to obtain new investments? 29 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
36 Conference Proceedings Birrell, Matias Building a decisive competitive edge in the microfinance segment in Mexico 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Mas Kapital is a Microfinance company located in Mexico. They have grown fast for the last 6 years but they were worried about the imminent threat of losing control of the processes and they decided to adopt the TOC philosophy in order to stabilize the company. In 2010 they met Dr. Goldratt and they decided to make a full TOC implementation grounded on their Viable Vision project. Since the beginning TOC tools were utilized in order to identify the undesirable effects. From this point we identified the major constraint as the loan submission analysis process, subordinated all the company efforts in order to only process good qualified potential customers and filter them in a better way to reduce credit risk and reduce bad debt, at the same time we divided the sales force responsibilities and tasks in order to focus the collections activity and align the promotion process to the real needs of the company, once we had the operations control TOC thinking processes were used to identify a significant need of the market and design Mas Kapital decisive competitive edge. • What to change? o Credit risk and unaligned operations in the microfinance segment. • What to change to? o Increase organizational financial stability by reducing credit risk and reinforced operations. Sustain and capitalize on this advantage. • How to cause the change? o Set the (loan submission) analysis process as the bottleneck and subordinate the organization on this, split the sales force activities in order to take control of the operations, develop a decisive competitive edge for the microfinance segment. • Lessons learned? Include successes, challenges, and obstacles and how they were overcome. Lessons learned: o How to apply TOC in the microfinance segment. o Synchronize operations on the field with the credit analysis capacity. o Reduction of multitasking on the key resources has resulted in improved loan recovery rates and improving the financial results. o Operational excellence and sales strategy results with the final customer. o How to use TOC to reinforce the best practices in the microfinance segment. Successes: • Set the loan submission analysis process as the CCR to focus the entire organization and at the same time reducing the debt from 12% to less than 2%. • Splitting sales force activities in order to recover accurately and reinforced promotion. • Built a mafia offer for the final customer increasing in sales. Challenges: • Sustain the loan submission analysis of the credits in order to maintain the debt low. • Reinforced the management skills with the thinking process tools across the company. • Demonstrate stability for the new investors. Obstacles: • Economic and financial crisis globally. • Lack of trust of the investors in Mexico. How they were overcome: Demonstrate stability and good financial performance beyond the competitors. Audience: New knowledge in service industry. Industry: Finance and Banking. Names and affiliations of all authors with the presenting author listed first David Ojeda, Mas Kapital CEO, practitioner Matias Birrell, Goldratt Consulting, Country Manager Chile, TOC Consultant Salvador Pena, Goldratt Consulting, Country Manager Mexico, TOC Consultant. Title: Building a decisive competitive edge (DCE) in the Microfinance segment in Mexico 3 Learning objectives: 1. Understand how to apply the TOC Thinking Processes to aid in the development of a Viable Vision Program for a services company. 2. Share and learn how to approach the principles of flow to admin and financial services 3. Discussing and sharing what constitutes the design of the DCE in Microfinance. 3 questions somebody would ask at the end of the presentation, speech or workshop to elaborate on the subject and improve understanding and transfer of ideas. 1. Why setting the analysis process as a bottleneck will maintain the bad debts to less than 2%? 2. What was the reaction of the competitors? 3. Having these results why is it difficult to obtain new investments? 29 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
37 Conference Proceedings Pena, Salvador Building a decisive competitive edge in the microfinance segment in Mexico 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Mas Kapital is a Microfinance company located in Mexico. They have grown fast for the last 6 years but they were worried about the imminent threat of losing control of the processes and they decided to adopt the TOC philosophy in order to stabilize the company. In 2010 they met Dr. Goldratt and they decided to make a full TOC implementation grounded on their Viable Vision project. Since the beginning TOC tools were utilized in order to identify the undesirable effects. From this point we identified the major constraint as the loan submission analysis process, subordinated all the company efforts in order to only process good qualified potential customers and filter them in a better way to reduce credit risk and reduce bad debt, at the same time we divided the sales force responsibilities and tasks in order to focus the collections activity and align the promotion process to the real needs of the company, once we had the operations control TOC thinking processes were used to identify a significant need of the market and design Mas Kapital decisive competitive edge. • What to change? o Credit risk and unaligned operations in the microfinance segment. • What to change to? o Increase organizational financial stability by reducing credit risk and reinforced operations. Sustain and capitalize on this advantage. • How to cause the change? o Set the (loan submission) analysis process as the bottleneck and subordinate the organization on this, split the sales force activities in order to take control of the operations, develop a decisive competitive edge for the microfinance segment. • Lessons learned? Include successes, challenges, and obstacles and how they were overcome. Lessons learned: o How to apply TOC in the microfinance segment. o Synchronize operations on the field with the credit analysis capacity. o Reduction of multitasking on the key resources has resulted in improved loan recovery rates and improving the financial results. o Operational excellence and sales strategy results with the final customer. o How to use TOC to reinforce the best practices in the microfinance segment. Successes: • Set the loan submission analysis process as the CCR to focus the entire organization and at the same time reducing the debt from 12% to less than 2%. • Splitting sales force activities in order to recover accurately and reinforced promotion. • Built a mafia offer for the final customer increasing in sales. Challenges: • Sustain the loan submission analysis of the credits in order to maintain the debt low. • Reinforced the management skills with the thinking process tools across the company. • Demonstrate stability for the new investors. Obstacles: • Economic and financial crisis globally. • Lack of trust of the investors in Mexico. How they were overcome: Demonstrate stability and good financial performance beyond the competitors. Audience: New knowledge in service industry. Industry: Finance and Banking. Names and affiliations of all authors with the presenting author listed first David Ojeda, Mas Kapital CEO, practitioner Matias Birrell, Goldratt Consulting, Country Manager Chile, TOC Consultant Salvador Pena, Goldratt Consulting, Country Manager Mexico, TOC Consultant. Title: Building a decisive competitive edge (DCE) in the Microfinance segment in Mexico 3 Learning objectives: 1. Understand how to apply the TOC Thinking Processes to aid in the development of a Viable Vision Program for a services company. 2. Share and learn how to approach the principles of flow to admin and financial services 3. Discussing and sharing what constitutes the design of the DCE in Microfinance. 3 questions somebody would ask at the end of the presentation, speech or workshop to elaborate on the subject and improve understanding and transfer of ideas. 1. Why setting the analysis process as a bottleneck will maintain the bad debts to less than 2%? 2. What was the reaction of the competitors? 3. Having these results why is it difficult to obtain new investments? 29 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
38 Conference Proceedings Building a decisive competitive edge in the microfinance segment in Mexico 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Mas Kapital is a Microfinance company located in Mexico. They have grown fast for the last 6 years but they were worried about the imminent threat of losing control of the processes and they decided to adopt the TOC philosophy in order to stabilize the company. In 2010 they met Dr. Goldratt and they decided to make a full TOC implementation grounded on their Viable Vision project. Since the beginning TOC tools were utilized in order to identify the undesirable effects. From this point we identified the major constraint as the loan submission analysis process, subordinated all the company efforts in order to only process good qualified potential customers and filter them in a better way to reduce credit risk and reduce bad debt, at the same time we divided the sales force responsibilities and tasks in order to focus the collections activity and align the promotion process to the real needs of the company, once we had the operations control TOC thinking processes were used to identify a significant need of the market and design Mas Kapital decisive competitive edge. • What to change? o Credit risk and unaligned operations in the microfinance segment. • What to change to? o Increase organizational financial stability by reducing credit risk and reinforced operations. Sustain and capitalize on this advantage. • How to cause the change? o Set the (loan submission) analysis process as the bottleneck and subordinate the organization on this, split the sales force activities in order to take control of the operations, develop a decisive competitive edge for the microfinance segment. • Lessons learned? Include successes, challenges, and obstacles and how they were overcome. Lessons learned: o How to apply TOC in the microfinance segment. o Synchronize operations on the field with the credit analysis capacity. o Reduction of multitasking on the key resources has resulted in improved loan recovery rates and improving the financial results. o Operational excellence and sales strategy results with the final customer. o How to use TOC to reinforce the best practices in the microfinance segment. Successes: • Set the loan submission analysis process as the CCR to focus the entire organization and at the same time reducing the debt from 12% to less than 2%. • Splitting sales force activities in order to recover accurately and reinforced promotion. • Built a mafia offer for the final customer increasing in sales. Challenges: • Sustain the loan submission analysis of the credits in order to maintain the debt low. • Reinforced the management skills with the thinking process tools across the company. • Demonstrate stability for the new investors. Obstacles: • Economic and financial crisis globally. • Lack of trust of the investors in Mexico. How they were overcome: Demonstrate stability and good financial performance beyond the competitors. Audience: New knowledge in service industry. Industry: Finance and Banking. Names and affiliations of all authors with the presenting author listed first David Ojeda, Mas Kapital CEO, practitioner Matias Birrell, Goldratt Consulting, Country Manager Chile, TOC Consultant Salvador Pena, Goldratt Consulting, Country Manager Mexico, TOC Consultant. Title: Building a decisive competitive edge (DCE) in the Microfinance segment in Mexico 3 Learning objectives: 1. Understand how to apply the TOC Thinking Processes to aid in the development of a Viable Vision Program for a services company. 2. Share and learn how to approach the principles of flow to admin and financial services 3. Discussing and sharing what constitutes the design of the DCE in Microfinance. 3 questions somebody would ask at the end of the presentation, speech or workshop to elaborate on the subject and improve understanding and transfer of ideas. 1. Why setting the analysis process as a bottleneck will maintain the bad debts to less than 2%? 2. What was the reaction of the competitors? 3. Having these results why is it difficult to obtain new investments? 29 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
39 Conference Proceedings Pescara, Filippo The link between the S&T trees and the traditional TP analysis: A rigorous approach 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany How to build a logically consistent strategy and tactics (S&T) tree? How to scrutinize, validate or criticize a S&T built by others in order to improve its logical consistency? What are the links between the entities of an S&T tree and the traditional thinking processes (TP)? The rigorous definition of the assumptions contained in the steps or nodes (and of the sub categories to which they belong) allows us to build logical models that may be subjected to the filter of the 'categories of legitimate reservations', and thanks to that to improve the logical consistency of the S&T subject to the scrutinizing process. The presentation explores the connections between the traditional analysis carried out with the TP and the verbalization of the entities of S&T trees. The Strategy and Tactic tree (S&T) is a hierarchical structure that connects STEPs or NODEs in which there are entities that verbalize, at every level, objectives or strategies (S), and the actions or tactics (T) that describe how these objectives are to be achieved. The relationship between strategy (S) and tactic (T) is verbalized through a series of assumptions. These sets of assumptions are known as 'parallel assumptions' (we refer to them as 'PA'). In the presentation I define in a rigorous way the subcategories to which the PA belong. This definition will help to validate the logical consistency of STEPs, thanks to the formalization of logical structures that depart from the definition of such subcategories. To ensure the consistency of the STEPs, it is possible to define logical models (based on sufficiency logic) that incorporate both entities 'strategy' and' tactics ', and the different sub-categories of parallel assumptions. The consistency comes from the fact that none of the PA must be able to be questioned or invalidated. To ensure the consistency of the structure of an S&T is necessary to consider both the assumptions of necessity ('NA'), and assumptions of sufficiency ('SA') related to the strategies that must be accomplished. Also in this case it is possible to define logical models (based on sufficiency logic), incorporating the entities 'strategy' at different levels and assumptions of necessity and sufficiency. To define comprehensively the structure of an S&T we still have a problem: the assumptions described so far allow to precisely define the relationship between the STEP in terms of necessity and sufficiency, and to define the consistency both in terms of STEP, and between different levels; what is missing is the definition of the order in which the various tactics must be implemented and as a result in which order the strategies must be achieved. What to do first and what next? Even the assumptions of sequence can be defined in a rigorous way if you have a detailed analysis that employs the traditional TP. As well as a complete analysis carried out with the TP allows to have concrete reference elements for constructing the S&T, starting from a S&T is possible, by applying the logical models of consistency, validate both the individual STEP and parts of the logical structure by applying the 'CLRs' ('Categories of Legitimate Reservations'). Logic models of consistency are in fact structures based on the category of sufficiency (such as a CRT or FRT) that we can improve by challenging assumptions through the CLRs. At this point, according to both the guidelines outlined before, and the correspondences between entities in the S&T tree and entities of TP logical models, we can improve the S&T tree both in the verbalization of STEPs, and in structure. From the concepts expressed above starts a very interesting journey in which I highlight the connections between traditional analysis conducted with the thinking processes and the rigorous formalization of the S&T trees, that just because they are a different way of expressing the same concepts verbalized in the entities of traditional TP, they can be subjected to the critical filter of the Categories of Legitimate Reservation ('CLS'), and then improved in their logical consistency. In the presentation it will also be shown that the conceptual distinction between 'static' or 'situational' logic and 'dynamic' or 'transitional' logic are fundamental to correctly define the structure of a S&T. In order to illustrate the above concepts I will use a rigorous mapping of how all the entities of the traditional TP are located at the different levels in the STEPs (and in different parts of them) of the S&T trees. 34 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
40 Conference Proceedings The link between the S&T trees and the traditional TP analysis: A rigorous approach 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany How to build a logically consistent strategy and tactics (S&T) tree? How to scrutinize, validate or criticize a S&T built by others in order to improve its logical consistency? What are the links between the entities of an S&T tree and the traditional thinking processes (TP)? The rigorous definition of the assumptions contained in the steps or nodes (and of the sub categories to which they belong) allows us to build logical models that may be subjected to the filter of the 'categories of legitimate reservations', and thanks to that to improve the logical consistency of the S&T subject to the scrutinizing process. The presentation explores the connections between the traditional analysis carried out with the TP and the verbalization of the entities of S&T trees. The Strategy and Tactic tree (S&T) is a hierarchical structure that connects STEPs or NODEs in which there are entities that verbalize, at every level, objectives or strategies (S), and the actions or tactics (T) that describe how these objectives are to be achieved. The relationship between strategy (S) and tactic (T) is verbalized through a series of assumptions. These sets of assumptions are known as 'parallel assumptions' (we refer to them as 'PA'). In the presentation I define in a rigorous way the subcategories to which the PA belong. This definition will help to validate the logical consistency of STEPs, thanks to the formalization of logical structures that depart from the definition of such subcategories. To ensure the consistency of the STEPs, it is possible to define logical models (based on sufficiency logic) that incorporate both entities 'strategy' and' tactics ', and the different sub-categories of parallel assumptions. The consistency comes from the fact that none of the PA must be able to be questioned or invalidated. To ensure the consistency of the structure of an S&T is necessary to consider both the assumptions of necessity ('NA'), and assumptions of sufficiency ('SA') related to the strategies that must be accomplished. Also in this case it is possible to define logical models (based on sufficiency logic), incorporating the entities 'strategy' at different levels and assumptions of necessity and sufficiency. To define comprehensively the structure of an S&T we still have a problem: the assumptions described so far allow to precisely define the relationship between the STEP in terms of necessity and sufficiency, and to define the consistency both in terms of STEP, and between different levels; what is missing is the definition of the order in which the various tactics must be implemented and as a result in which order the strategies must be achieved. What to do first and what next? Even the assumptions of sequence can be defined in a rigorous way if you have a detailed analysis that employs the traditional TP. As well as a complete analysis carried out with the TP allows to have concrete reference elements for constructing the S&T, starting from a S&T is possible, by applying the logical models of consistency, validate both the individual STEP and parts of the logical structure by applying the 'CLRs' ('Categories of Legitimate Reservations'). Logic models of consistency are in fact structures based on the category of sufficiency (such as a CRT or FRT) that we can improve by challenging assumptions through the CLRs. At this point, according to both the guidelines outlined before, and the correspondences between entities in the S&T tree and entities of TP logical models, we can improve the S&T tree both in the verbalization of STEPs, and in structure. From the concepts expressed above starts a very interesting journey in which I highlight the connections between traditional analysis conducted with the thinking processes and the rigorous formalization of the S&T trees, that just because they are a different way of expressing the same concepts verbalized in the entities of traditional TP, they can be subjected to the critical filter of the Categories of Legitimate Reservation ('CLS'), and then improved in their logical consistency. In the presentation it will also be shown that the conceptual distinction between 'static' or 'situational' logic and 'dynamic' or 'transitional' logic are fundamental to correctly define the structure of a S&T. In order to illustrate the above concepts I will use a rigorous mapping of how all the entities of the traditional TP are located at the different levels in the STEPs (and in different parts of them) of the S&T trees. 34 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
41 Conference Proceedings Reiter, Shoshi SRL (self-regulated learning): The inner GPS for life long learning 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Rapid changes in modern life e.g. job-market, calls for educators to prepare students to cope with our dynamic changing reality. Our assumption is that a school's vision is to prepare students to best performance at present and for long-life. Actually schools are becoming less relevant to students. What is the constraint that stops the flow of students learning at schools? Never can one teacher serve all students in her class and meet all students' needs!! Teaching attention is a constraint! How can we elevate teaching attention in class? We learn by teaching! By using all human resources available in class; every student might be a teaching resource and a learner at the same time. How? By giving students the tools and skills needed. A holistic excited training program leads teachers, step by step, to become a 'learning coach'. Using the TOC philosophy and thinking processes (TP) enables educators to mentor students' self regulation for life-long. Testimonials of teachers implementing this program include: 'Classes gave me a different perspective on my work. I'm starting to listen to the students and to see the potential good in them. Many of the students' proposals will be used on the job. I believe that every teacher should participate in such training. Really, open eyes'. (Yvonne Chojnacka, Poland) Why Change ? Our assumption is that schools vision is to prepare students to their best performance at present and in the future for life-long learning. Do schools meet that goal? A science-technology oriented society, with its overload of information, uncertainty and rapid changes in job-markets, calls for educators to prepare students to cope with that reality. Actually schools become less and less relevant to students. We witness increase in dropout, frustration, decrees in learning outcomes and so on. Educators do more of the same, expecting that things do not get better. We have to face reality at school and outside school. What to change? School leaders are demanded to change learning style in order to use effectively time at school, and prepare students for Life-Long Learning. What is the constraint that stops the flow of students' learning? In traditional mode of learning the teacher is the one that sets the goal, the pace of learning, decides what to do, when and how! Never can one teacher serve all students and meets all needs!! Teaching attention is a constraint!! If we aim at 'no child is left behind', then, we need to find another learning style to elevate teaching resources in the class and promote students' skills for lifelong learning at the same time. What to change to? Lifelong learning calls for individuals' acquisition of skills for independent and adaptive behavior, information smart consuming, problem-solving, and making educated decisions to meet goals. Students should Be independent and autonomist at class. They should Have many opportunities to explore their individual best learning strategies, adjusted themselves to external demands, Have guided practice to overcome failure and close gaps to goals. If students will Be more self-determinate and Have the learning skills needed, then they might Behave responsibly and accountable for learning. Self-Regulated Learning (SRL) provides the skills needed and opportunity to practice them. SRL is a phenomenon where by a set of processes one raises motivation, performance and self-evaluation, in order to achieve goals. SRL can be thought regardless starting academic level. Every student in the class can be a teaching resource and a learner at the same time. We elevate teaching resources in the class by using all human resources available and use lesson time effectively. How to cause the change? We cause the change by shifting the role of Educators to a 'learning coach'. An exciting training program will lead teachers to mentor students for self-regulation. Aim of program is to focus teaching on those processes and skills for' knowing how' to implement SRL step by step. The trainees will acquire knowledge in the TOC philosophy and tools and use them on the process of goal setting, planning, self-evaluation and monitoring performance. The training program contains elements of SRL like resource management (knowledge, time, and environment), raising and sustaining motivation using positive physiology, analyzing successes and learning from failure. Self-evaluation is a main topic for changing behavior to achieve goals in a context, directed to an academic target. We provide the student the necessary conditions for life-long learning Expected outcomes of teachers training program: Teachers are able to create with their students, programs for learning goals implementing the SRL process and using the tools, Peer mediation & Team work while scaffolding the changes in learning style. Teachers Testimonials after training and implementation: 'That training made me realize the importance of a dynamic class. Peer learning, exchanging idea and yet keeping the boundaries made learning very beneficial. I will start implementing SRL in my class step by step' (H. R Israel). 'Studied this course, there are many ways to experience teaching and learning. Not only in frontal lectures most of us still do, but the way of coaching and training. We should appreciate different options of our students - not only through tests and quizzes, but in alternative ways, such as teamwork, creativity, cooperation projects, personal projects and more' (G.B Israel). 'Little success? Evaluative assignment, you believe it or not, was the presented by one of the weakest students.'. (A.R Poland) 'Last week, my students took an assessment in a team; they were surprised at how much that is excited. Valuable for me was their sincerity in this thinking, a full commitment to work and present its results!' (Y.C& A.M, Poland) Presentation Session Objectives: • Present research results of students' SRL using TOC tools. • Present a unique holistic training program for educators, fostering self-regulated students. To put theory into practice, based on research and the 'know how' of TOC. • Discuss the potential and relevancy of that training program to participant countries, to develop human resource academically, emotionally and socially at educational systems. 3 possible questions: 1. Do teachers resist the change? 2. What are the obstacles for implementation of SRL in heterogeneous class? 3. If we have to make a progress with curriculum and be on time for matriculation when will we have time to coach students? 33 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
42 Conference Proceedings SRL (self-regulated learning): The inner GPS for life long learning 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Rapid changes in modern life e.g. job-market, calls for educators to prepare students to cope with our dynamic changing reality. Our assumption is that a school's vision is to prepare students to best performance at present and for long-life. Actually schools are becoming less relevant to students. What is the constraint that stops the flow of students learning at schools? Never can one teacher serve all students in her class and meet all students' needs!! Teaching attention is a constraint! How can we elevate teaching attention in class? We learn by teaching! By using all human resources available in class; every student might be a teaching resource and a learner at the same time. How? By giving students the tools and skills needed. A holistic excited training program leads teachers, step by step, to become a 'learning coach'. Using the TOC philosophy and thinking processes (TP) enables educators to mentor students' self regulation for life-long. Testimonials of teachers implementing this program include: 'Classes gave me a different perspective on my work. I'm starting to listen to the students and to see the potential good in them. Many of the students' proposals will be used on the job. I believe that every teacher should participate in such training. Really, open eyes'. (Yvonne Chojnacka, Poland) Why Change ? Our assumption is that schools vision is to prepare students to their best performance at present and in the future for life-long learning. Do schools meet that goal? A science-technology oriented society, with its overload of information, uncertainty and rapid changes in job-markets, calls for educators to prepare students to cope with that reality. Actually schools become less and less relevant to students. We witness increase in dropout, frustration, decrees in learning outcomes and so on. Educators do more of the same, expecting that things do not get better. We have to face reality at school and outside school. What to change? School leaders are demanded to change learning style in order to use effectively time at school, and prepare students for Life-Long Learning. What is the constraint that stops the flow of students' learning? In traditional mode of learning the teacher is the one that sets the goal, the pace of learning, decides what to do, when and how! Never can one teacher serve all students and meets all needs!! Teaching attention is a constraint!! If we aim at 'no child is left behind', then, we need to find another learning style to elevate teaching resources in the class and promote students' skills for lifelong learning at the same time. What to change to? Lifelong learning calls for individuals' acquisition of skills for independent and adaptive behavior, information smart consuming, problem-solving, and making educated decisions to meet goals. Students should Be independent and autonomist at class. They should Have many opportunities to explore their individual best learning strategies, adjusted themselves to external demands, Have guided practice to overcome failure and close gaps to goals. If students will Be more self-determinate and Have the learning skills needed, then they might Behave responsibly and accountable for learning. Self-Regulated Learning (SRL) provides the skills needed and opportunity to practice them. SRL is a phenomenon where by a set of processes one raises motivation, performance and self-evaluation, in order to achieve goals. SRL can be thought regardless starting academic level. Every student in the class can be a teaching resource and a learner at the same time. We elevate teaching resources in the class by using all human resources available and use lesson time effectively. How to cause the change? We cause the change by shifting the role of Educators to a 'learning coach'. An exciting training program will lead teachers to mentor students for self-regulation. Aim of program is to focus teaching on those processes and skills for' knowing how' to implement SRL step by step. The trainees will acquire knowledge in the TOC philosophy and tools and use them on the process of goal setting, planning, self-evaluation and monitoring performance. The training program contains elements of SRL like resource management (knowledge, time, and environment), raising and sustaining motivation using positive physiology, analyzing successes and learning from failure. Self-evaluation is a main topic for changing behavior to achieve goals in a context, directed to an academic target. We provide the student the necessary conditions for life-long learning Expected outcomes of teachers training program: Teachers are able to create with their students, programs for learning goals implementing the SRL process and using the tools, Peer mediation & Team work while scaffolding the changes in learning style. Teachers Testimonials after training and implementation: 'That training made me realize the importance of a dynamic class. Peer learning, exchanging idea and yet keeping the boundaries made learning very beneficial. I will start implementing SRL in my class step by step' (H. R Israel). 'Studied this course, there are many ways to experience teaching and learning. Not only in frontal lectures most of us still do, but the way of coaching and training. We should appreciate different options of our students - not only through tests and quizzes, but in alternative ways, such as teamwork, creativity, cooperation projects, personal projects and more' (G.B Israel). 'Little success? Evaluative assignment, you believe it or not, was the presented by one of the weakest students.'. (A.R Poland) 'Last week, my students took an assessment in a team; they were surprised at how much that is excited. Valuable for me was their sincerity in this thinking, a full commitment to work and present its results!' (Y.C& A.M, Poland) Presentation Session Objectives: • Present research results of students' SRL using TOC tools. • Present a unique holistic training program for educators, fostering self-regulated students. To put theory into practice, based on research and the 'know how' of TOC. • Discuss the potential and relevancy of that training program to participant countries, to develop human resource academically, emotionally and socially at educational systems. 3 possible questions: 1. Do teachers resist the change? 2. What are the obstacles for implementation of SRL in heterogeneous class? 3. If we have to make a progress with curriculum and be on time for matriculation when will we have time to coach students? 33 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
43 Conference Proceedings Rendon, Alejandro Giving back simplicity to business (Releasing management attention capacity by transforming an ERP entirely to the world of TOC) 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The real restriction is the company's management attention of its executives, the business reality is reflected in symptoms such as: everything is urgent, the response rate should be very high, and if we don't have real and timely information to make decisions, opportunities are slipping. Given this, the technology has sought to provide solutions, but unfortunately the sophistication and habit of making almost everything complex, have not allowed it to be really effective for that purpose. The ERP's have been committed years of technology to give managers the power to improve their businesses, failing mostly trying. This presentation aims to show how Plastigomez SA, a theory of constraints (TOC) company with over 5 years of experience, building, capitalizing and sustaining a decisive competitive edge in their market, recognizes the need for reliable and timely information to release capacity management attention, and turns his attention to developing an ERP project. TOC OpenERP system was selected, which has over 6 years of operation, positioning itself as an ERP simple and robust, thanks to the efforts of a large community of developers with worldwide presence. TOCware Solutions SA is a partner company that has added knowledge of theory of constraints to each of the business processes implemented in OpenERP, culminating in a developed ready to use, complete and holistic ERP system. 23 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
44 Conference Proceedings Giving back simplicity to business (Releasing management attention capacity by transforming an ERP entirely to the world of TOC) 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The real restriction is the company's management attention of its executives, the business reality is reflected in symptoms such as: everything is urgent, the response rate should be very high, and if we don't have real and timely information to make decisions, opportunities are slipping. Given this, the technology has sought to provide solutions, but unfortunately the sophistication and habit of making almost everything complex, have not allowed it to be really effective for that purpose. The ERP's have been committed years of technology to give managers the power to improve their businesses, failing mostly trying. This presentation aims to show how Plastigomez SA, a theory of constraints (TOC) company with over 5 years of experience, building, capitalizing and sustaining a decisive competitive edge in their market, recognizes the need for reliable and timely information to release capacity management attention, and turns his attention to developing an ERP project. TOC OpenERP system was selected, which has over 6 years of operation, positioning itself as an ERP simple and robust, thanks to the efforts of a large community of developers with worldwide presence. TOCware Solutions SA is a partner company that has added knowledge of theory of constraints to each of the business processes implemented in OpenERP, culminating in a developed ready to use, complete and holistic ERP system. 23 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
45 Conference Proceedings Ronen, Boaz Introducing the Superzouf method for service organizations 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Many service processes suffer from long overall lead times which result in reduced throughput, high work in process (WIP) and low customer satisfaction. We found that in most cases these processes have individual service level agreement (SLA) targets for each step of the process. It looks as if giving each department the responsibility for meeting its own SLA target is a good idea. But in reality the duration of steps in each department were never shorter than the required SLA and in most cases even longer though the actual touch labor duration is usually very short. We introduced the notion of 'Superzouf' in several service processes by setting only one global SLA for the whole process and aggressively reducing the amount of WIP in each department. Within several months the overall lead times of these processes were trimmed by more than 80% with subsequent improvement in customer satisfaction. A structured method for reaching this goal is described. This paper presents the 'Superzouf' method for service organizations and demonstrates how to reduce lead time by at least 80% within a short period of time. In service organizations we often face processes that take weeks or many days, while the total net time of all the activities of the processes may be no more than an hour. This is often the result of defining local SLA (Service Level Agreement) targets for each part of the process. For example, 4 departments are involved in a purchasing process. Each department has an SLA of 8 days. In reality, the Lead Time of the process will not be less than 32 days. This common phenomenon results in long respond times, low throughput, low service quality, customers' dissatisfaction and higher operating expenses. Long lead times occur because of the following reasons: 1. Parkinson's Law: 'Work will fill the time available for its completion'. If SLA is perceived as the standard that all cases should fit into, than the work at each department will take no less than 8 days. 2. The Student's Syndrome: 'Many people will start to fully apply themselves to a task just at the last possible moment before a deadline'. 3. Local view and local measurement: If the department managers are measured mainly by conformance to their local SLA, then they will have no motivation to improve their lead times. 4. The amount of Work in Process (WIP): The actual amount of WIP is proportional to the SLA and vice versa. Any attempt to improve the lead time requires first to reduce this WIP. Unfortunately, department managers have usually no motivation to do it this. Moreover, everybody in the company takes the 32 days lead time as a fact. The 'Superzouf' method for service organizations consists of 7 components: 1. Making sure that the throughput rate is higher than the input rate. If not, certain measures should be taken: Tactical Gating, Strategic Gating, the Complete Kit concept, etc.2. Determining the one global SLA for the whole process. The global SLA is set in several iterations: first, all existing local SLA's are cut either to zero, or by 50%. Later on, after a short stabilization period, they are cut again till we reach the 80-90% of the original time. 3. Global SLA measurement: all the departments that participate in the process are measured jointly on the new global SLA of the process. 4. Increasing throughput by implementing the Strategic Gating mechanism and avoiding unnecessary incoming missions. In Parallel, introducing the complete kit concept and Tactical Gating, where needed. 5. 'Work-table cleanup': a one-time effort to reduce the WIP in each department is done during overtime hours. This enables a proportional reduction of lead times. 6. The global SLA is set on a target which will be met in about 90% of the cases, not 100%! 7. Nominating the process owner: The major player in the process is defined as the owner of the process, even though he or she has sometimes only partial control over it. The 'Superzouf' method for service organizations was successfully implemented several service processes in a telecom company. Within 6 weeks lead times were reduced by about 50-80%. After an additional 4 months most processes exceeded 80% lead time reduction. For the sake of sustainability daily follow-up and control routines were introduced. Implementation success factors include: management involvement, training, goal setting and a global view. Again, the global optimum is superior to the sum of the local optima, and simple tools prove to be effective. Three learning objectives: 1. In service processes local SLA's should be eliminated. 2. Worktable cleanup is mandatory for lead time reduction. 3. Dramatic improvements can be eventually achieved via a step-by-step implementation process. Three Questions: 1. Is the 'Superzouf' method appropriate also for other environments rather than service organizations? 2. Can the method be applied to projects as well? 3. Isn't it simply a DBR implementation for service processes? 28 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
46 Conference Proceedings Asaria, Shany Introducing the Superzouf method for service organizations 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Many service processes suffer from long overall lead times which result in reduced throughput, high work in process (WIP) and low customer satisfaction. We found that in most cases these processes have individual service level agreement (SLA) targets for each step of the process. It looks as if giving each department the responsibility for meeting its own SLA target is a good idea. But in reality the duration of steps in each department were never shorter than the required SLA and in most cases even longer though the actual touch labor duration is usually very short. We introduced the notion of 'Superzouf' in several service processes by setting only one global SLA for the whole process and aggressively reducing the amount of WIP in each department. Within several months the overall lead times of these processes were trimmed by more than 80% with subsequent improvement in customer satisfaction. A structured method for reaching this goal is described. This paper presents the 'Superzouf' method for service organizations and demonstrates how to reduce lead time by at least 80% within a short period of time. In service organizations we often face processes that take weeks or many days, while the total net time of all the activities of the processes may be no more than an hour. This is often the result of defining local SLA (Service Level Agreement) targets for each part of the process. For example, 4 departments are involved in a purchasing process. Each department has an SLA of 8 days. In reality, the Lead Time of the process will not be less than 32 days. This common phenomenon results in long respond times, low throughput, low service quality, customers' dissatisfaction and higher operating expenses. Long lead times occur because of the following reasons: 1. Parkinson's Law: 'Work will fill the time available for its completion'. If SLA is perceived as the standard that all cases should fit into, than the work at each department will take no less than 8 days. 2. The Student's Syndrome: 'Many people will start to fully apply themselves to a task just at the last possible moment before a deadline'. 3. Local view and local measurement: If the department managers are measured mainly by conformance to their local SLA, then they will have no motivation to improve their lead times. 4. The amount of Work in Process (WIP): The actual amount of WIP is proportional to the SLA and vice versa. Any attempt to improve the lead time requires first to reduce this WIP. Unfortunately, department managers have usually no motivation to do it this. Moreover, everybody in the company takes the 32 days lead time as a fact. The 'Superzouf' method for service organizations consists of 7 components: 1. Making sure that the throughput rate is higher than the input rate. If not, certain measures should be taken: Tactical Gating, Strategic Gating, the Complete Kit concept, etc.2. Determining the one global SLA for the whole process. The global SLA is set in several iterations: first, all existing local SLA's are cut either to zero, or by 50%. Later on, after a short stabilization period, they are cut again till we reach the 80-90% of the original time. 3. Global SLA measurement: all the departments that participate in the process are measured jointly on the new global SLA of the process. 4. Increasing throughput by implementing the Strategic Gating mechanism and avoiding unnecessary incoming missions. In Parallel, introducing the complete kit concept and Tactical Gating, where needed. 5. 'Work-table cleanup': a one-time effort to reduce the WIP in each department is done during overtime hours. This enables a proportional reduction of lead times. 6. The global SLA is set on a target which will be met in about 90% of the cases, not 100%! 7. Nominating the process owner: The major player in the process is defined as the owner of the process, even though he or she has sometimes only partial control over it. The 'Superzouf' method for service organizations was successfully implemented several service processes in a telecom company. Within 6 weeks lead times were reduced by about 50-80%. After an additional 4 months most processes exceeded 80% lead time reduction. For the sake of sustainability daily follow-up and control routines were introduced. Implementation success factors include: management involvement, training, goal setting and a global view. Again, the global optimum is superior to the sum of the local optima, and simple tools prove to be effective. Three learning objectives: 1. In service processes local SLA's should be eliminated. 2. Worktable cleanup is mandatory for lead time reduction. 3. Dramatic improvements can be eventually achieved via a step-by-step implementation process. Three Questions: 1. Is the 'Superzouf' method appropriate also for other environments rather than service organizations? 2. Can the method be applied to projects as well? 3. Isn't it simply a DBR implementation for service processes? 28 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
47 Conference Proceedings Pass, Shimeon Introducing the Superzouf method for service organizations 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Many service processes suffer from long overall lead times which result in reduced throughput, high work in process (WIP) and low customer satisfaction. We found that in most cases these processes have individual service level agreement (SLA) targets for each step of the process. It looks as if giving each department the responsibility for meeting its own SLA target is a good idea. But in reality the duration of steps in each department were never shorter than the required SLA and in most cases even longer though the actual touch labor duration is usually very short. We introduced the notion of 'Superzouf' in several service processes by setting only one global SLA for the whole process and aggressively reducing the amount of WIP in each department. Within several months the overall lead times of these processes were trimmed by more than 80% with subsequent improvement in customer satisfaction. A structured method for reaching this goal is described. This paper presents the 'Superzouf' method for service organizations and demonstrates how to reduce lead time by at least 80% within a short period of time. In service organizations we often face processes that take weeks or many days, while the total net time of all the activities of the processes may be no more than an hour. This is often the result of defining local SLA (Service Level Agreement) targets for each part of the process. For example, 4 departments are involved in a purchasing process. Each department has an SLA of 8 days. In reality, the Lead Time of the process will not be less than 32 days. This common phenomenon results in long respond times, low throughput, low service quality, customers' dissatisfaction and higher operating expenses. Long lead times occur because of the following reasons: 1. Parkinson's Law: 'Work will fill the time available for its completion'. If SLA is perceived as the standard that all cases should fit into, than the work at each department will take no less than 8 days. 2. The Student's Syndrome: 'Many people will start to fully apply themselves to a task just at the last possible moment before a deadline'. 3. Local view and local measurement: If the department managers are measured mainly by conformance to their local SLA, then they will have no motivation to improve their lead times. 4. The amount of Work in Process (WIP): The actual amount of WIP is proportional to the SLA and vice versa. Any attempt to improve the lead time requires first to reduce this WIP. Unfortunately, department managers have usually no motivation to do it this. Moreover, everybody in the company takes the 32 days lead time as a fact. The 'Superzouf' method for service organizations consists of 7 components: 1. Making sure that the throughput rate is higher than the input rate. If not, certain measures should be taken: Tactical Gating, Strategic Gating, the Complete Kit concept, etc.2. Determining the one global SLA for the whole process. The global SLA is set in several iterations: first, all existing local SLA's are cut either to zero, or by 50%. Later on, after a short stabilization period, they are cut again till we reach the 80-90% of the original time. 3. Global SLA measurement: all the departments that participate in the process are measured jointly on the new global SLA of the process. 4. Increasing throughput by implementing the Strategic Gating mechanism and avoiding unnecessary incoming missions. In Parallel, introducing the complete kit concept and Tactical Gating, where needed. 5. 'Work-table cleanup': a one-time effort to reduce the WIP in each department is done during overtime hours. This enables a proportional reduction of lead times. 6. The global SLA is set on a target which will be met in about 90% of the cases, not 100%! 7. Nominating the process owner: The major player in the process is defined as the owner of the process, even though he or she has sometimes only partial control over it. The 'Superzouf' method for service organizations was successfully implemented several service processes in a telecom company. Within 6 weeks lead times were reduced by about 50-80%. After an additional 4 months most processes exceeded 80% lead time reduction. For the sake of sustainability daily follow-up and control routines were introduced. Implementation success factors include: management involvement, training, goal setting and a global view. Again, the global optimum is superior to the sum of the local optima, and simple tools prove to be effective. Three learning objectives: 1. In service processes local SLA's should be eliminated. 2. Worktable cleanup is mandatory for lead time reduction. 3. Dramatic improvements can be eventually achieved via a step-by-step implementation process. Three Questions: 1. Is the 'Superzouf' method appropriate also for other environments rather than service organizations? 2. Can the method be applied to projects as well? 3. Isn't it simply a DBR implementation for service processes? 28 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
48 Conference Proceedings Introducing the Superzouf method for service organizations 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Many service processes suffer from long overall lead times which result in reduced throughput, high work in process (WIP) and low customer satisfaction. We found that in most cases these processes have individual service level agreement (SLA) targets for each step of the process. It looks as if giving each department the responsibility for meeting its own SLA target is a good idea. But in reality the duration of steps in each department were never shorter than the required SLA and in most cases even longer though the actual touch labor duration is usually very short. We introduced the notion of 'Superzouf' in several service processes by setting only one global SLA for the whole process and aggressively reducing the amount of WIP in each department. Within several months the overall lead times of these processes were trimmed by more than 80% with subsequent improvement in customer satisfaction. A structured method for reaching this goal is described. This paper presents the 'Superzouf' method for service organizations and demonstrates how to reduce lead time by at least 80% within a short period of time. In service organizations we often face processes that take weeks or many days, while the total net time of all the activities of the processes may be no more than an hour. This is often the result of defining local SLA (Service Level Agreement) targets for each part of the process. For example, 4 departments are involved in a purchasing process. Each department has an SLA of 8 days. In reality, the Lead Time of the process will not be less than 32 days. This common phenomenon results in long respond times, low throughput, low service quality, customers' dissatisfaction and higher operating expenses. Long lead times occur because of the following reasons: 1. Parkinson's Law: 'Work will fill the time available for its completion'. If SLA is perceived as the standard that all cases should fit into, than the work at each department will take no less than 8 days. 2. The Student's Syndrome: 'Many people will start to fully apply themselves to a task just at the last possible moment before a deadline'. 3. Local view and local measurement: If the department managers are measured mainly by conformance to their local SLA, then they will have no motivation to improve their lead times. 4. The amount of Work in Process (WIP): The actual amount of WIP is proportional to the SLA and vice versa. Any attempt to improve the lead time requires first to reduce this WIP. Unfortunately, department managers have usually no motivation to do it this. Moreover, everybody in the company takes the 32 days lead time as a fact. The 'Superzouf' method for service organizations consists of 7 components: 1. Making sure that the throughput rate is higher than the input rate. If not, certain measures should be taken: Tactical Gating, Strategic Gating, the Complete Kit concept, etc.2. Determining the one global SLA for the whole process. The global SLA is set in several iterations: first, all existing local SLA's are cut either to zero, or by 50%. Later on, after a short stabilization period, they are cut again till we reach the 80-90% of the original time. 3. Global SLA measurement: all the departments that participate in the process are measured jointly on the new global SLA of the process. 4. Increasing throughput by implementing the Strategic Gating mechanism and avoiding unnecessary incoming missions. In Parallel, introducing the complete kit concept and Tactical Gating, where needed. 5. 'Work-table cleanup': a one-time effort to reduce the WIP in each department is done during overtime hours. This enables a proportional reduction of lead times. 6. The global SLA is set on a target which will be met in about 90% of the cases, not 100%! 7. Nominating the process owner: The major player in the process is defined as the owner of the process, even though he or she has sometimes only partial control over it. The 'Superzouf' method for service organizations was successfully implemented several service processes in a telecom company. Within 6 weeks lead times were reduced by about 50-80%. After an additional 4 months most processes exceeded 80% lead time reduction. For the sake of sustainability daily follow-up and control routines were introduced. Implementation success factors include: management involvement, training, goal setting and a global view. Again, the global optimum is superior to the sum of the local optima, and simple tools prove to be effective. Three learning objectives: 1. In service processes local SLA's should be eliminated. 2. Worktable cleanup is mandatory for lead time reduction. 3. Dramatic improvements can be eventually achieved via a step-by-step implementation process. Three Questions: 1. Is the 'Superzouf' method appropriate also for other environments rather than service organizations? 2. Can the method be applied to projects as well? 3. Isn't it simply a DBR implementation for service processes? 28 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
49 Conference Proceedings Roff-Marsh, Justin Solving the pofessional services dilemma 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Why it's NOT TRUE that this model is out-of-reach for sole practitioners. Our experiences in the USA: 1. Launched in the USA in midst of financial crisis (with no house list) 2. Failed to win clients with traditional approaches (and hundreds of thousands of Aussie dollars in promotional expenditure) 3. Justin initially built promotional machine single handedly – used initial wins to add virtual assistant 4. Three years later, the US operations surpassed Australia in sales. 12 steps to replicate what Ballistix has done. Here's a step-by-step plan to survive the transition unscathed: 1. Identify the ongoing services you could deliver to clients – and would be happy to deliver if you weren't (personally) providing those services. 2. Design a value proposition that ensures that clients have no net monthly outlay (ideally from month one). 3. Convert existing clients to new service offering. 4. Employ a smart, young graduate and teach him how to deliver. 5. Centralize the delivery of services wherever possible until your consultant become a facilitator. 6. Use the existing TOC applications as your religion. (Don't reinvent the wheel unless it's absolutely necessary.) 7. Get an executive assistant. 8. Use pay-per-click advertising to give away sample content and build a list. 9. Use auto-responder sequences and webinars to generate sales opportunities. 10. Sell solution-design workshops – make clients design their own engagements. 11. Use change-management initiatives as a hook to secure ongoing relationships. 12. Re-calibrate. There's a chasm that divides a consulting practice and a traditional business. Few can cross that chasm without falling into a wasteland of operational problems and marginal profitability. Most of those that do make the transition do it by pivoting out of the consulting business altogether and reemerging as software companies. This is the story of a 10-year odyssey – and of how one consultancy managed (eventually) to cross the chasm and emerge, the other side, with a profitable (and scalable) services business. You'll learn how Ballistix grew from a one-man consultancy to a profitable provider of outsourced services, with operations on three continents and millions of dollars in sales. And you'll uncover the critical injections that can help you to do the same. [Presentation overview: 90 minutes] Consulting isn't all bad. Consulting has its benefits: 1. You can earn great money 2. You are independent: self-employed. But there are problems. But there are downsides: 1. If you take a break, the money stops. 2. Work is inconsistent: it's either feast of famine. The direction of the solution. If you want the benefits, without the downsides, the direction of the solution is obvious: 1. Transition from the sole practitioner model to a true business 2. Employ more consultants The UDE's Sadly, though, this transition is not easy. As you grow: 1. Operational problems increase 2. Finding new clients becomes increasingly difficult 3. Profits vanish. The root cause. The root cause is simple – but difficult for consultants to accept: ? As a general rule, clients don't want consultants (although, they accept that, from time to time, they're a necessary evil) ? A small number of talented individuals are the exception that proves the rule – but when these individuals attempt to build businesses, their advantage tends to dissipate rapidly The proof is in the tasting: ? The poor long-term performance of most change initiatives is evidence of the poor fit between consultants and their clients ? Those consultants who do maintain long-term client relationships tend to do it by devolving into contractors (or, in other words, more expensive employees!) The Ballistix story: 1. The big idea: apply division of labor and industrialize the sales function. 2. Three pivots in 9 years: a. From a brain-on-a-plate to packaged consulting engagements b. From packaged consulting to change-management projects c. From projects to an outsourced service 3. Evidence of scalability: a. Operations on three continents b. All consultants are young and custom-trained (none have consulting prior experience) c. Happy, long-term clients d. Sales machine with protective capacity – and no evidence of diminishing returns e. The founder is no longer the CEO (instead, focusses on product-development and sales – and lives remote from the rest of the team) f. All team members are salaried, full-time employees (and, if they survive the first three months, they stay for many years)The critical injections The successful transition from sole-practitioner to true business has been enabled by four realizations: 1. The sale of change-management projects doesn't make sense – unless you're implementing software (or other technology) – and then you're not really selling consulting! 2. There's an inverse relationship between high fees and sustainability – always be looking to develop a less-expensive offering! 3. To scale, you must sell religion (an ideology, not a methodology) 4. To earn sustainable profits, you must provide an enduring service (sorry, there's no long-term value in training and coaching!) Our model. Our operational model provides high contribution margins, without any incentive for consultants to go-it-alone: 1. We recruit consultants and train them in a paint-by-numbers approach to the restructuring and ongoing management of critical sales infrastructure (customer service, inside sales, field sales, promotions, etc.) 2. We support each consultant with resources that multiply their capability (a communications team, a technology team, and recruiting, research and strategic-planning resources) 3. We sell 25% of each consultant's capacity to a client in the form of an ongoing engagement (clients pay what they'd pay a mid-level manager – but get an order-of-magnitude more benefit) Our sales model is lean and scalable: 1. We build a house list by giving-away copies of the first three chapters of The Machine (50-100 a week) using pay-per-click advertising 2. We generate sales opportunities by inviting our house list to regular webinars 3. We sell Solution-design Workshops (SDW's) on the phone (no face-to-face sales meetings – ever!) 4. 70% of organizations that purchase SDW's go on to purchase engagements 5. Although advertising suffers diminishing returns – this is offset by the increasing size of the house list (in Australia we have proved that, with a large-enough house list, minimal additional advertising is required to sustain steady growth). 1 hour 33 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
50 Conference Proceedings Solving the pofessional services dilemma 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Why it's NOT TRUE that this model is out-of-reach for sole practitioners. Our experiences in the USA: 1. Launched in the USA in midst of financial crisis (with no house list) 2. Failed to win clients with traditional approaches (and hundreds of thousands of Aussie dollars in promotional expenditure) 3. Justin initially built promotional machine single handedly – used initial wins to add virtual assistant 4. Three years later, the US operations surpassed Australia in sales. 12 steps to replicate what Ballistix has done. Here's a step-by-step plan to survive the transition unscathed: 1. Identify the ongoing services you could deliver to clients – and would be happy to deliver if you weren't (personally) providing those services. 2. Design a value proposition that ensures that clients have no net monthly outlay (ideally from month one). 3. Convert existing clients to new service offering. 4. Employ a smart, young graduate and teach him how to deliver. 5. Centralize the delivery of services wherever possible until your consultant become a facilitator. 6. Use the existing TOC applications as your religion. (Don't reinvent the wheel unless it's absolutely necessary.) 7. Get an executive assistant. 8. Use pay-per-click advertising to give away sample content and build a list. 9. Use auto-responder sequences and webinars to generate sales opportunities. 10. Sell solution-design workshops – make clients design their own engagements. 11. Use change-management initiatives as a hook to secure ongoing relationships. 12. Re-calibrate. There's a chasm that divides a consulting practice and a traditional business. Few can cross that chasm without falling into a wasteland of operational problems and marginal profitability. Most of those that do make the transition do it by pivoting out of the consulting business altogether and reemerging as software companies. This is the story of a 10-year odyssey – and of how one consultancy managed (eventually) to cross the chasm and emerge, the other side, with a profitable (and scalable) services business. You'll learn how Ballistix grew from a one-man consultancy to a profitable provider of outsourced services, with operations on three continents and millions of dollars in sales. And you'll uncover the critical injections that can help you to do the same. [Presentation overview: 90 minutes] Consulting isn't all bad. Consulting has its benefits: 1. You can earn great money 2. You are independent: self-employed. But there are problems. But there are downsides: 1. If you take a break, the money stops. 2. Work is inconsistent: it's either feast of famine. The direction of the solution. If you want the benefits, without the downsides, the direction of the solution is obvious: 1. Transition from the sole practitioner model to a true business 2. Employ more consultants The UDE's Sadly, though, this transition is not easy. As you grow: 1. Operational problems increase 2. Finding new clients becomes increasingly difficult 3. Profits vanish. The root cause. The root cause is simple – but difficult for consultants to accept: ? As a general rule, clients don't want consultants (although, they accept that, from time to time, they're a necessary evil) ? A small number of talented individuals are the exception that proves the rule – but when these individuals attempt to build businesses, their advantage tends to dissipate rapidly The proof is in the tasting: ? The poor long-term performance of most change initiatives is evidence of the poor fit between consultants and their clients ? Those consultants who do maintain long-term client relationships tend to do it by devolving into contractors (or, in other words, more expensive employees!) The Ballistix story: 1. The big idea: apply division of labor and industrialize the sales function. 2. Three pivots in 9 years: a. From a brain-on-a-plate to packaged consulting engagements b. From packaged consulting to change-management projects c. From projects to an outsourced service 3. Evidence of scalability: a. Operations on three continents b. All consultants are young and custom-trained (none have consulting prior experience) c. Happy, long-term clients d. Sales machine with protective capacity – and no evidence of diminishing returns e. The founder is no longer the CEO (instead, focusses on product-development and sales – and lives remote from the rest of the team) f. All team members are salaried, full-time employees (and, if they survive the first three months, they stay for many years)The critical injections The successful transition from sole-practitioner to true business has been enabled by four realizations: 1. The sale of change-management projects doesn't make sense – unless you're implementing software (or other technology) – and then you're not really selling consulting! 2. There's an inverse relationship between high fees and sustainability – always be looking to develop a less-expensive offering! 3. To scale, you must sell religion (an ideology, not a methodology) 4. To earn sustainable profits, you must provide an enduring service (sorry, there's no long-term value in training and coaching!) Our model. Our operational model provides high contribution margins, without any incentive for consultants to go-it-alone: 1. We recruit consultants and train them in a paint-by-numbers approach to the restructuring and ongoing management of critical sales infrastructure (customer service, inside sales, field sales, promotions, etc.) 2. We support each consultant with resources that multiply their capability (a communications team, a technology team, and recruiting, research and strategic-planning resources) 3. We sell 25% of each consultant's capacity to a client in the form of an ongoing engagement (clients pay what they'd pay a mid-level manager – but get an order-of-magnitude more benefit) Our sales model is lean and scalable: 1. We build a house list by giving-away copies of the first three chapters of The Machine (50-100 a week) using pay-per-click advertising 2. We generate sales opportunities by inviting our house list to regular webinars 3. We sell Solution-design Workshops (SDW's) on the phone (no face-to-face sales meetings – ever!) 4. 70% of organizations that purchase SDW's go on to purchase engagements 5. Although advertising suffers diminishing returns – this is offset by the increasing size of the house list (in Australia we have proved that, with a large-enough house list, minimal additional advertising is required to sustain steady growth). 1 hour 33 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
51 Conference Proceedings Schragenheim, Eli Learning from ONE event 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Learning from one event is an organizational methodology to inquire into single events that might point to a threat to the organization. The methodology is based on the thinking processes (TP), but uses them in a somewhat different way. This application was developed by Eli Schragenheim and Dr. Avner Passal. The idea is to identify a mismatch between the organizational accepted paradigms and reality, and to help in identifying the flawed paradigm, update it and implement changes according to the new learned lessons. This methodology is especially required for TOC implementations, because when some basic paradigms change then there is a real threat that some 'forgotten' paradigms are not in line with the new understanding. This methodology has been applied in government. The material and its relevancy to TOC implementations and to the TP methodology would be presented through two fictional cases presenting an unpleasant surprise (why change). The cases will be further developed by revealing through the suggested process some key facts and their related cause and effect, eventually leading to the identification of a flawed paradigm / assumption (what to change), through the update of that paradigm and its ramifications on the policies of the organization (what to change to). The unique character of the topic is the need to quickly learn from ONE event that signals that somewhere in the organization people are acting based on a flawed assumption. The TP tools are clearly learning tools, but they assume that the UDEs are known and recognized and the reason why they are not solved is an unresolved conflict. However, a new UDE is something we in TOC do not have, so far, a clear answer on how to handle it. Such an UDE could signal a developing threat to the organization. The master class would start with the following two fictional cases: Case 1: Your VP of Operations has submitted to you his immediate resignation. It took you by surprise. You think very highly on him and you do not have a natural replacement to the job. Some initial facts: • He says he has an offer to be the CEO of a very challenging company • He did not show any objections to the S&T that had started just 3 months ago, but did raise one or two negative branches that some people believed he did not received satisfactory answers • It was known that his wife had pressed him more and more to dedicate time to his family. It is worthwhile to inquire that event? What value could be gained? A discussion on what should the CEO and the organization do. Case 2: The company went through a successful implementation of CCPM. One important project was delivered to the client two months early. However, three weeks after the delivery the client came back complaining that one important feature, that was part of the agreement, was not developed. Some initial facts: • The necessity of the feature was the subject of various discussions between the project team, notably the chief engineer, and the client. • The chief engineer says the client's contacts were convinced the feature did not add value. • The client's engineering department were exposed to full demonstration of the output of the project and carried also their own acceptance tests and no formal complaint was raised ? until the CTO of the client checked the project and found out that the specific feature was not active. • The specific client is a very important to the company, thus the CEO has decided that the project team would develop the missing feature without any additional payment from the client and on the expense of several new projects that have been started. Is it worthwhile to inquire the event? What value do you hope to get? A discussion on what should the organization do beyond the immediate action to develop the feature. The main points of learning from one event: • Learning means updating our own cause and effect of our reality. • In times of change there is high chance of finding mismatch between one's understanding of the cause and effect and the new reality • A 'new UDE' is a signal of such a mismatch o A 'surprise' or a 'mystery' (a term used by Eli Goldratt) as a signal of flawed cause-and-effect o Can we rely on our existing intuition when we inquire such new UDEs? o Do we have a cloud/conflict when we tackle a new UDE??? • The GAP between prior expectations and actual outcome in reality as a trigger to learning • How do we tackle the explanation of 'it happened due to statistical flux'? • Gathering as many explanations as possible at an early stage to focus the search for facts! • The importance of checking the key cause-effect relationships by another effect that exists in reality (effect-cause-effect). • The logic cause-effect to check happenings in the past. • Cause and effect tree until the root operational cause explains all the facts. • The difference between the operational cause and the flawed paradigm. • Updating the paradigm/assumption. • Generalizing the ramifications using an FRT o Eliminating also the negative branches • The organizational problem of preserving the learning. The above cases, including more facts as revealed by an inquiry, will be used to explain the concepts. Alan Barnard has used some of the above concepts to develop an auditing methodology for checking the gaps between the planning and the actual execution. This is a valuable complementary part of the above methodology. It does not address the issue and a surprising event. The focus of the proposed methodology is to structure a process to deal with surprising single events – preventing the possibility of rolling negative ramifications of mismatch between the underlining paradigms and reality. Three learning objectives: 1. Understand the organizational need to identify signals that might point to a threat to the organization. 2. The criticality of verbalizing the gap between prior reasonable expectations and actual outcomes. 3. The difference between an operational cause and a flawed paradigm as a cause. Three good questions: 1. How to overcome the organizational fear to learn the right lesson? 2. What to do when the learning process is stuck? 3. Once the new policies are in place, how do we spread the knowledge that led to the new policies? 1 hour 27 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
52 Conference Proceedings Learning from ONE event 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Learning from one event is an organizational methodology to inquire into single events that might point to a threat to the organization. The methodology is based on the thinking processes (TP), but uses them in a somewhat different way. This application was developed by Eli Schragenheim and Dr. Avner Passal. The idea is to identify a mismatch between the organizational accepted paradigms and reality, and to help in identifying the flawed paradigm, update it and implement changes according to the new learned lessons. This methodology is especially required for TOC implementations, because when some basic paradigms change then there is a real threat that some 'forgotten' paradigms are not in line with the new understanding. This methodology has been applied in government. The material and its relevancy to TOC implementations and to the TP methodology would be presented through two fictional cases presenting an unpleasant surprise (why change). The cases will be further developed by revealing through the suggested process some key facts and their related cause and effect, eventually leading to the identification of a flawed paradigm / assumption (what to change), through the update of that paradigm and its ramifications on the policies of the organization (what to change to). The unique character of the topic is the need to quickly learn from ONE event that signals that somewhere in the organization people are acting based on a flawed assumption. The TP tools are clearly learning tools, but they assume that the UDEs are known and recognized and the reason why they are not solved is an unresolved conflict. However, a new UDE is something we in TOC do not have, so far, a clear answer on how to handle it. Such an UDE could signal a developing threat to the organization. The master class would start with the following two fictional cases: Case 1: Your VP of Operations has submitted to you his immediate resignation. It took you by surprise. You think very highly on him and you do not have a natural replacement to the job. Some initial facts: • He says he has an offer to be the CEO of a very challenging company • He did not show any objections to the S&T that had started just 3 months ago, but did raise one or two negative branches that some people believed he did not received satisfactory answers • It was known that his wife had pressed him more and more to dedicate time to his family. It is worthwhile to inquire that event? What value could be gained? A discussion on what should the CEO and the organization do. Case 2: The company went through a successful implementation of CCPM. One important project was delivered to the client two months early. However, three weeks after the delivery the client came back complaining that one important feature, that was part of the agreement, was not developed. Some initial facts: • The necessity of the feature was the subject of various discussions between the project team, notably the chief engineer, and the client. • The chief engineer says the client's contacts were convinced the feature did not add value. • The client's engineering department were exposed to full demonstration of the output of the project and carried also their own acceptance tests and no formal complaint was raised ? until the CTO of the client checked the project and found out that the specific feature was not active. • The specific client is a very important to the company, thus the CEO has decided that the project team would develop the missing feature without any additional payment from the client and on the expense of several new projects that have been started. Is it worthwhile to inquire the event? What value do you hope to get? A discussion on what should the organization do beyond the immediate action to develop the feature. The main points of learning from one event: • Learning means updating our own cause and effect of our reality. • In times of change there is high chance of finding mismatch between one's understanding of the cause and effect and the new reality • A 'new UDE' is a signal of such a mismatch o A 'surprise' or a 'mystery' (a term used by Eli Goldratt) as a signal of flawed cause-and-effect o Can we rely on our existing intuition when we inquire such new UDEs? o Do we have a cloud/conflict when we tackle a new UDE??? • The GAP between prior expectations and actual outcome in reality as a trigger to learning • How do we tackle the explanation of 'it happened due to statistical flux'? • Gathering as many explanations as possible at an early stage to focus the search for facts! • The importance of checking the key cause-effect relationships by another effect that exists in reality (effect-cause-effect). • The logic cause-effect to check happenings in the past. • Cause and effect tree until the root operational cause explains all the facts. • The difference between the operational cause and the flawed paradigm. • Updating the paradigm/assumption. • Generalizing the ramifications using an FRT o Eliminating also the negative branches • The organizational problem of preserving the learning. The above cases, including more facts as revealed by an inquiry, will be used to explain the concepts. Alan Barnard has used some of the above concepts to develop an auditing methodology for checking the gaps between the planning and the actual execution. This is a valuable complementary part of the above methodology. It does not address the issue and a surprising event. The focus of the proposed methodology is to structure a process to deal with surprising single events – preventing the possibility of rolling negative ramifications of mismatch between the underlining paradigms and reality. Three learning objectives: 1. Understand the organizational need to identify signals that might point to a threat to the organization. 2. The criticality of verbalizing the gap between prior reasonable expectations and actual outcomes. 3. The difference between an operational cause and a flawed paradigm as a cause. Three good questions: 1. How to overcome the organizational fear to learn the right lesson? 2. What to do when the learning process is stuck? 3. Once the new policies are in place, how do we spread the knowledge that led to the new policies? 1 hour 27 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
53 Conference Proceedings Schragenheim, Eli Implementing the process of high level decision making - A case study 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany One year after Eli Schragenheim has presented his vision within the Goldratt Foundation day, comes the demonstration of the proposed process for a manufacturing company producing files and drills, JK Files (India) Limited. The previous presentation was fully theoretical, pointing to a way in the future, without demonstrating real management dilemmas and how the process supports the decisions by surfacing the basic assumptions and how they are translated into bottom line results. Eli Schragenheim and Vector Consulting Group collaborate to materialize the vision and provide the TOC community with a demonstrated process of a case study. In this 30 minutes presentation Eli and Kiran show several critical high level specific business dilemmas and how they have been analyzed, using the expanded form of throughput accounting of last year. JK Files (India) Ltd, a subsidiary of Raymond Ltd, and a client of Vector Consulting Group, India, is today the largest producer of files in the world, with a market share of 32%. With Vector, the company has embarked on a journey to increase profit and profitability significantly through a company-wide implementation of TOC. The presentation will focus on three problematic top level decision areas, using the process developed by Eli Schragenheim and relies of T and OE, taken into account the possible limited capacity of several of the production lines. The company has four plants in India. The company exports 50% of its production to counties all over the world. The presentation would focus on the following top level decision areas: 1. What should be the product mix yielding the highest profits of the company? This is, of course, a key strategic question for the medium to long time frame. 2. In the short term the company lacks capacity, in other words one or more CCRs are active. The front of the planned load of several lines is 3-6 months, while the company makes monthly plans based on customer inputs for the next month. This raises the question what products, or t-generators , should be dropped from the regular offerings to the market, to not only improve reliability but also increase the total throughput to be generated in the short term. The products produced by JK have various throughput-rates to various customers ranging from mere 10% to 90%. The products also take different times on the critical resources. Different customers require to buy a basket of products, and JK has to supply all the products and quantities within that basket. The basket ordering results in differing discounts to various customers for the same products. A key high-level question is what should the pricing policy be? New lucrative customers are being added. Most of them ask for products from overloaded lines. Some existing load on the overloaded lines has to be reduced. Dropping some SKUs of the basket of existing customers, will not be acceptable to them. The company might lose the full customer basket and thereby some high throughput items as well. The key decision under consideration is which customer to drop. 3. What additional capacities are needed in order to support overall growth of 25%? Here again we need to consider the various throughputs of the current items and customer baskets. Of course, the decision process must ensure that the ROI is the maximum possible. The presentation will outline the analysis that merges the capacity profiles of several critical resources with the various T generated. Then considerations of the uncertainty, using pessimistic and optimistic predictions will be used. The presentation will be used to demonstrate the logic presented in the Chicago conference. It would present the choice of the critical resources, the resources that might become constraints depending on the product mix, the type of 'baskets' required by customers, some explanation of the various rates of throughput and the different choices that are checked through the 'simulation' of T and capacity. We'll discuss the options of adding capacity in the short term: mainly by adding manpower to allow for extra shifts during the weekend, but also by outsourcing (actually buying some parts that are usually produced internally). We'll dedicate most of the time to explain the decision at hand and how it has been checked and approved by both Marketing and Sales and Operations. Three Learning Objectives: 1. Understand how to evaluate delta-P = delta-T minus delta-OE of a decision being considered. 2. How to overcome the seemingly complexity of considering the limited capacity of more than one resource. 3. The power of being able to come up with a FAST calculations of the bottom line and how it enhanced the managers to test more options in order to achieve the desired high profits. Three good questions: 1. How much efforts have to be invested a-priori in preparing the information to be used in the process? 2. How to get a realistic modeling that is not too complex? 3. What is the correlation between the initial intuitive idea of what should be the decisions and the actual decisions made through the detailed process? 33 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
54 Conference Proceedings Kothekar, Kiran Implementing the process of high level decision making - A case study 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany One year after Eli Schragenheim has presented his vision within the Goldratt Foundation day, comes the demonstration of the proposed process for a manufacturing company producing files and drills, JK Files (India) Limited. The previous presentation was fully theoretical, pointing to a way in the future, without demonstrating real management dilemmas and how the process supports the decisions by surfacing the basic assumptions and how they are translated into bottom line results. Eli Schragenheim and Vector Consulting Group collaborate to materialize the vision and provide the TOC community with a demonstrated process of a case study. In this 30 minutes presentation Eli and Kiran show several critical high level specific business dilemmas and how they have been analyzed, using the expanded form of throughput accounting of last year. JK Files (India) Ltd, a subsidiary of Raymond Ltd, and a client of Vector Consulting Group, India, is today the largest producer of files in the world, with a market share of 32%. With Vector, the company has embarked on a journey to increase profit and profitability significantly through a company-wide implementation of TOC. The presentation will focus on three problematic top level decision areas, using the process developed by Eli Schragenheim and relies of T and OE, taken into account the possible limited capacity of several of the production lines. The company has four plants in India. The company exports 50% of its production to counties all over the world. The presentation would focus on the following top level decision areas: 1. What should be the product mix yielding the highest profits of the company? This is, of course, a key strategic question for the medium to long time frame. 2. In the short term the company lacks capacity, in other words one or more CCRs are active. The front of the planned load of several lines is 3-6 months, while the company makes monthly plans based on customer inputs for the next month. This raises the question what products, or t-generators , should be dropped from the regular offerings to the market, to not only improve reliability but also increase the total throughput to be generated in the short term. The products produced by JK have various throughput-rates to various customers ranging from mere 10% to 90%. The products also take different times on the critical resources. Different customers require to buy a basket of products, and JK has to supply all the products and quantities within that basket. The basket ordering results in differing discounts to various customers for the same products. A key high-level question is what should the pricing policy be? New lucrative customers are being added. Most of them ask for products from overloaded lines. Some existing load on the overloaded lines has to be reduced. Dropping some SKUs of the basket of existing customers, will not be acceptable to them. The company might lose the full customer basket and thereby some high throughput items as well. The key decision under consideration is which customer to drop. 3. What additional capacities are needed in order to support overall growth of 25%? Here again we need to consider the various throughputs of the current items and customer baskets. Of course, the decision process must ensure that the ROI is the maximum possible. The presentation will outline the analysis that merges the capacity profiles of several critical resources with the various T generated. Then considerations of the uncertainty, using pessimistic and optimistic predictions will be used. The presentation will be used to demonstrate the logic presented in the Chicago conference. It would present the choice of the critical resources, the resources that might become constraints depending on the product mix, the type of 'baskets' required by customers, some explanation of the various rates of throughput and the different choices that are checked through the 'simulation' of T and capacity. We'll discuss the options of adding capacity in the short term: mainly by adding manpower to allow for extra shifts during the weekend, but also by outsourcing (actually buying some parts that are usually produced internally). We'll dedicate most of the time to explain the decision at hand and how it has been checked and approved by both Marketing and Sales and Operations. Three Learning Objectives: 1. Understand how to evaluate delta-P = delta-T minus delta-OE of a decision being considered. 2. How to overcome the seemingly complexity of considering the limited capacity of more than one resource. 3. The power of being able to come up with a FAST calculations of the bottom line and how it enhanced the managers to test more options in order to achieve the desired high profits. Three good questions: 1. How much efforts have to be invested a-priori in preparing the information to be used in the process? 2. How to get a realistic modeling that is not too complex? 3. What is the correlation between the initial intuitive idea of what should be the decisions and the actual decisions made through the detailed process? 33 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
55 Conference Proceedings Implementing the process of high level decision making - A case study 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany One year after Eli Schragenheim has presented his vision within the Goldratt Foundation day, comes the demonstration of the proposed process for a manufacturing company producing files and drills, JK Files (India) Limited. The previous presentation was fully theoretical, pointing to a way in the future, without demonstrating real management dilemmas and how the process supports the decisions by surfacing the basic assumptions and how they are translated into bottom line results. Eli Schragenheim and Vector Consulting Group collaborate to materialize the vision and provide the TOC community with a demonstrated process of a case study. In this 30 minutes presentation Eli and Kiran show several critical high level specific business dilemmas and how they have been analyzed, using the expanded form of throughput accounting of last year. JK Files (India) Ltd, a subsidiary of Raymond Ltd, and a client of Vector Consulting Group, India, is today the largest producer of files in the world, with a market share of 32%. With Vector, the company has embarked on a journey to increase profit and profitability significantly through a company-wide implementation of TOC. The presentation will focus on three problematic top level decision areas, using the process developed by Eli Schragenheim and relies of T and OE, taken into account the possible limited capacity of several of the production lines. The company has four plants in India. The company exports 50% of its production to counties all over the world. The presentation would focus on the following top level decision areas: 1. What should be the product mix yielding the highest profits of the company? This is, of course, a key strategic question for the medium to long time frame. 2. In the short term the company lacks capacity, in other words one or more CCRs are active. The front of the planned load of several lines is 3-6 months, while the company makes monthly plans based on customer inputs for the next month. This raises the question what products, or t-generators , should be dropped from the regular offerings to the market, to not only improve reliability but also increase the total throughput to be generated in the short term. The products produced by JK have various throughput-rates to various customers ranging from mere 10% to 90%. The products also take different times on the critical resources. Different customers require to buy a basket of products, and JK has to supply all the products and quantities within that basket. The basket ordering results in differing discounts to various customers for the same products. A key high-level question is what should the pricing policy be? New lucrative customers are being added. Most of them ask for products from overloaded lines. Some existing load on the overloaded lines has to be reduced. Dropping some SKUs of the basket of existing customers, will not be acceptable to them. The company might lose the full customer basket and thereby some high throughput items as well. The key decision under consideration is which customer to drop. 3. What additional capacities are needed in order to support overall growth of 25%? Here again we need to consider the various throughputs of the current items and customer baskets. Of course, the decision process must ensure that the ROI is the maximum possible. The presentation will outline the analysis that merges the capacity profiles of several critical resources with the various T generated. Then considerations of the uncertainty, using pessimistic and optimistic predictions will be used. The presentation will be used to demonstrate the logic presented in the Chicago conference. It would present the choice of the critical resources, the resources that might become constraints depending on the product mix, the type of 'baskets' required by customers, some explanation of the various rates of throughput and the different choices that are checked through the 'simulation' of T and capacity. We'll discuss the options of adding capacity in the short term: mainly by adding manpower to allow for extra shifts during the weekend, but also by outsourcing (actually buying some parts that are usually produced internally). We'll dedicate most of the time to explain the decision at hand and how it has been checked and approved by both Marketing and Sales and Operations. Three Learning Objectives: 1. Understand how to evaluate delta-P = delta-T minus delta-OE of a decision being considered. 2. How to overcome the seemingly complexity of considering the limited capacity of more than one resource. 3. The power of being able to come up with a FAST calculations of the bottom line and how it enhanced the managers to test more options in order to achieve the desired high profits. Three good questions: 1. How much efforts have to be invested a-priori in preparing the information to be used in the process? 2. How to get a realistic modeling that is not too complex? 3. What is the correlation between the initial intuitive idea of what should be the decisions and the actual decisions made through the detailed process? 33 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
56 Conference Proceedings Sims, Chris SAP and TOC - A match made in Heaven? 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany It's been well over 10 years since the book, Necessary but not Sufficient (NBNS) was published and yet the rate of success in IT projects – including, unfortunately SAP implementations, has not dramatically improved. SAP's own benchmarking and research from other leading ICT research organizations shows that still around 70% of all ICT projects are not deemed a 'great' success. This is despite the fact that the power and coverage of the technology and implementation know-how has grown dramatically. Could theory of constraints help to unlock the inherent value potential of SAP? This paper aims to answer this question, starting with the complexities, trade-offs and uncertainties that make implementing an ERP system such as SAP so challenging. It then provides an overview of how a new NBNS/TOC-based 'ValueERP' process, originally developed by Dr. Alan Barnard at Goldratt Research Labs, was proven effective to unlock more value faster from SAP implementations at for example African Explosives, ABB, Ditch Witch, Daiwa House and BHP Billiton. In 2012, on the initiative of Chris Sims who heads up the SAP Business Transformation Services (BTS) unit for MENA region, SAP MENA (Middle East and North African) formed a research partnership with Goldratt Research Labs to further research and improve this ValueERP process to go beyond just using TOC to implement SAP and / or SAP to implement TOC with SAP MENA clients – one of the fastest growing SAP markets in the world. Chris and Alan will share their experiences and new insights from this research partnership, specifically how they are using NBNS and strategy & tactic (S&T) trees to identify and address the 5 main causes of value being lost within any IT implementation – not just SAP. They also share lessons learned in trying to implement TOC in the SAP services business in the MENA market unit and provide a peak at their future joint research focus on understanding and unlocking the 'real power of a technology such as SAP'. SAP Technology Today. The size and complexity surrounding SAP implementations these days is far greater than 10 years ago and yet methods for defining SAP requirements that could unlock real business value, planning and implementing such a solution have not moved on. There has to be a new approach and this paper will discuss how, using a new TOC based approach that capitalize and build on the insights from Dr. Eli Goldratt, Carol Ptak and Eli Schragenheim's book, Necessary But Not Sufficient, this can be done. TOC and SAP – The Story Today. This section recaps some of the successes that have happened when using TOC and SAP together, using a 'ValueERP' process originally developed by Dr. Alan Barnard to build on the insights of NBNS and will look at specific Goldratt Research Labs case studies including African Explosives, ABB, Ditch Witch, Daiwa House and BHP. This approach used a combination of using Critical Chain Project Management as well as using the NBNS and Strategy and Tactics Tree to define, achieve and sustain focus on the key value drivers during the SAP implementation. The Experiment in SAP MENA. In 2012, on the initiative of Chris Sims who leads SAP BTS (Business Transformation Services) MENA, SAP MENA formed a research partnership with Goldratt Research Labs to further research and improve this new process of using TOC to implement SAP and SAP to implement TOC at SAP MENA – one of the fastest growing SAP markets in the world. After a very short introduction to BTS in the MENA region the next section explains how SAP in MENA is using Theory of Constraints in its Service Business. The starting point is getting better at delivering projects faster with more value – taking a look at the standard key measurements and what is wrong with them and focusing on cycle time reduction – both to sell and deliver projects with more value. To transfer the knowledge to achieve this, the team used a combination of TOC and Agile based business games, simulations and real case studies that shows how it is possible to improve both the quality/value and speed of an implementation as well as to improve the retention rate of the consultants to generate higher profitability and much higher customer satisfaction. One of the key insights shared is that a good business case is not just a sales tool – using the insights from NBNS and Viable Vision to construct a Strategy and Tactics (S&T) tree and using Throughput Accounting to quantify the value expectations, it can be used both to provide a focused scope and implementation roadmap and to provide a simple framework to determine the impact and value of unplanned scope changes in both financial and non-financial terms. The section will also look at how TOC is used to manage the SAP MENA services business as well as how to transfer the necessary TOC and 'ValueERP' know-how to the SAP clients and their implementation partners using simulation games, case studies and the S&T. A Look to the Future and an Addition to NBNS. Assuming that a company does everything perfectly – what is the real value of technology like SAP. One of the fundamental areas of interest is to answer the question: 'What do companies need Real Time Data for?' – or better phrased; 'What does Senior Management Need Real Time Data for?'. It cannot be backward looking – it must be forward and yet predictive analytics are not the answer – they are simply a more sophisticated way of forecasting. The answer must be in scenario planning and – very importantly – in being able to 'experiment' quickly, cheaply and effectively. All the tools of SAP and TOC have a part to play in this – and the possibilities are almost infinite. 35 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
57 Conference Proceedings Barnard, Alan SAP and TOC - A match made in Heaven? 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany It's been well over 10 years since the book, Necessary but not Sufficient (NBNS) was published and yet the rate of success in IT projects – including, unfortunately SAP implementations, has not dramatically improved. SAP's own benchmarking and research from other leading ICT research organizations shows that still around 70% of all ICT projects are not deemed a 'great' success. This is despite the fact that the power and coverage of the technology and implementation know-how has grown dramatically. Could theory of constraints help to unlock the inherent value potential of SAP? This paper aims to answer this question, starting with the complexities, trade-offs and uncertainties that make implementing an ERP system such as SAP so challenging. It then provides an overview of how a new NBNS/TOC-based 'ValueERP' process, originally developed by Dr. Alan Barnard at Goldratt Research Labs, was proven effective to unlock more value faster from SAP implementations at for example African Explosives, ABB, Ditch Witch, Daiwa House and BHP Billiton. In 2012, on the initiative of Chris Sims who heads up the SAP Business Transformation Services (BTS) unit for MENA region, SAP MENA (Middle East and North African) formed a research partnership with Goldratt Research Labs to further research and improve this ValueERP process to go beyond just using TOC to implement SAP and / or SAP to implement TOC with SAP MENA clients – one of the fastest growing SAP markets in the world. Chris and Alan will share their experiences and new insights from this research partnership, specifically how they are using NBNS and strategy & tactic (S&T) trees to identify and address the 5 main causes of value being lost within any IT implementation – not just SAP. They also share lessons learned in trying to implement TOC in the SAP services business in the MENA market unit and provide a peak at their future joint research focus on understanding and unlocking the 'real power of a technology such as SAP'. SAP Technology Today. The size and complexity surrounding SAP implementations these days is far greater than 10 years ago and yet methods for defining SAP requirements that could unlock real business value, planning and implementing such a solution have not moved on. There has to be a new approach and this paper will discuss how, using a new TOC based approach that capitalize and build on the insights from Dr. Eli Goldratt, Carol Ptak and Eli Schragenheim's book, Necessary But Not Sufficient, this can be done. TOC and SAP – The Story Today. This section recaps some of the successes that have happened when using TOC and SAP together, using a 'ValueERP' process originally developed by Dr. Alan Barnard to build on the insights of NBNS and will look at specific Goldratt Research Labs case studies including African Explosives, ABB, Ditch Witch, Daiwa House and BHP. This approach used a combination of using Critical Chain Project Management as well as using the NBNS and Strategy and Tactics Tree to define, achieve and sustain focus on the key value drivers during the SAP implementation. The Experiment in SAP MENA. In 2012, on the initiative of Chris Sims who leads SAP BTS (Business Transformation Services) MENA, SAP MENA formed a research partnership with Goldratt Research Labs to further research and improve this new process of using TOC to implement SAP and SAP to implement TOC at SAP MENA – one of the fastest growing SAP markets in the world. After a very short introduction to BTS in the MENA region the next section explains how SAP in MENA is using Theory of Constraints in its Service Business. The starting point is getting better at delivering projects faster with more value – taking a look at the standard key measurements and what is wrong with them and focusing on cycle time reduction – both to sell and deliver projects with more value. To transfer the knowledge to achieve this, the team used a combination of TOC and Agile based business games, simulations and real case studies that shows how it is possible to improve both the quality/value and speed of an implementation as well as to improve the retention rate of the consultants to generate higher profitability and much higher customer satisfaction. One of the key insights shared is that a good business case is not just a sales tool – using the insights from NBNS and Viable Vision to construct a Strategy and Tactics (S&T) tree and using Throughput Accounting to quantify the value expectations, it can be used both to provide a focused scope and implementation roadmap and to provide a simple framework to determine the impact and value of unplanned scope changes in both financial and non-financial terms. The section will also look at how TOC is used to manage the SAP MENA services business as well as how to transfer the necessary TOC and 'ValueERP' know-how to the SAP clients and their implementation partners using simulation games, case studies and the S&T. A Look to the Future and an Addition to NBNS. Assuming that a company does everything perfectly – what is the real value of technology like SAP. One of the fundamental areas of interest is to answer the question: 'What do companies need Real Time Data for?' – or better phrased; 'What does Senior Management Need Real Time Data for?'. It cannot be backward looking – it must be forward and yet predictive analytics are not the answer – they are simply a more sophisticated way of forecasting. The answer must be in scenario planning and – very importantly – in being able to 'experiment' quickly, cheaply and effectively. All the tools of SAP and TOC have a part to play in this – and the possibilities are almost infinite. 35 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
58 Conference Proceedings SAP and TOC - A match made in Heaven? 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany It's been well over 10 years since the book, Necessary but not Sufficient (NBNS) was published and yet the rate of success in IT projects – including, unfortunately SAP implementations, has not dramatically improved. SAP's own benchmarking and research from other leading ICT research organizations shows that still around 70% of all ICT projects are not deemed a 'great' success. This is despite the fact that the power and coverage of the technology and implementation know-how has grown dramatically. Could theory of constraints help to unlock the inherent value potential of SAP? This paper aims to answer this question, starting with the complexities, trade-offs and uncertainties that make implementing an ERP system such as SAP so challenging. It then provides an overview of how a new NBNS/TOC-based 'ValueERP' process, originally developed by Dr. Alan Barnard at Goldratt Research Labs, was proven effective to unlock more value faster from SAP implementations at for example African Explosives, ABB, Ditch Witch, Daiwa House and BHP Billiton. In 2012, on the initiative of Chris Sims who heads up the SAP Business Transformation Services (BTS) unit for MENA region, SAP MENA (Middle East and North African) formed a research partnership with Goldratt Research Labs to further research and improve this ValueERP process to go beyond just using TOC to implement SAP and / or SAP to implement TOC with SAP MENA clients – one of the fastest growing SAP markets in the world. Chris and Alan will share their experiences and new insights from this research partnership, specifically how they are using NBNS and strategy & tactic (S&T) trees to identify and address the 5 main causes of value being lost within any IT implementation – not just SAP. They also share lessons learned in trying to implement TOC in the SAP services business in the MENA market unit and provide a peak at their future joint research focus on understanding and unlocking the 'real power of a technology such as SAP'. SAP Technology Today. The size and complexity surrounding SAP implementations these days is far greater than 10 years ago and yet methods for defining SAP requirements that could unlock real business value, planning and implementing such a solution have not moved on. There has to be a new approach and this paper will discuss how, using a new TOC based approach that capitalize and build on the insights from Dr. Eli Goldratt, Carol Ptak and Eli Schragenheim's book, Necessary But Not Sufficient, this can be done. TOC and SAP – The Story Today. This section recaps some of the successes that have happened when using TOC and SAP together, using a 'ValueERP' process originally developed by Dr. Alan Barnard to build on the insights of NBNS and will look at specific Goldratt Research Labs case studies including African Explosives, ABB, Ditch Witch, Daiwa House and BHP. This approach used a combination of using Critical Chain Project Management as well as using the NBNS and Strategy and Tactics Tree to define, achieve and sustain focus on the key value drivers during the SAP implementation. The Experiment in SAP MENA. In 2012, on the initiative of Chris Sims who leads SAP BTS (Business Transformation Services) MENA, SAP MENA formed a research partnership with Goldratt Research Labs to further research and improve this new process of using TOC to implement SAP and SAP to implement TOC at SAP MENA – one of the fastest growing SAP markets in the world. After a very short introduction to BTS in the MENA region the next section explains how SAP in MENA is using Theory of Constraints in its Service Business. The starting point is getting better at delivering projects faster with more value – taking a look at the standard key measurements and what is wrong with them and focusing on cycle time reduction – both to sell and deliver projects with more value. To transfer the knowledge to achieve this, the team used a combination of TOC and Agile based business games, simulations and real case studies that shows how it is possible to improve both the quality/value and speed of an implementation as well as to improve the retention rate of the consultants to generate higher profitability and much higher customer satisfaction. One of the key insights shared is that a good business case is not just a sales tool – using the insights from NBNS and Viable Vision to construct a Strategy and Tactics (S&T) tree and using Throughput Accounting to quantify the value expectations, it can be used both to provide a focused scope and implementation roadmap and to provide a simple framework to determine the impact and value of unplanned scope changes in both financial and non-financial terms. The section will also look at how TOC is used to manage the SAP MENA services business as well as how to transfer the necessary TOC and 'ValueERP' know-how to the SAP clients and their implementation partners using simulation games, case studies and the S&T. A Look to the Future and an Addition to NBNS. Assuming that a company does everything perfectly – what is the real value of technology like SAP. One of the fundamental areas of interest is to answer the question: 'What do companies need Real Time Data for?' – or better phrased; 'What does Senior Management Need Real Time Data for?'. It cannot be backward looking – it must be forward and yet predictive analytics are not the answer – they are simply a more sophisticated way of forecasting. The answer must be in scenario planning and – very importantly – in being able to 'experiment' quickly, cheaply and effectively. All the tools of SAP and TOC have a part to play in this – and the possibilities are almost infinite. 35 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
59 Conference Proceedings Sirias, Danilo A process to build strategy and tactic trees using a SWOT analysis 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The purpose of this presentation is to propose a process to build a strategy and tactics (S&T) tree using a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analysis as a starting point. The output of the SWOT analysis is used to determine the different assumptions that are part of the generic structure of the S&T tree at its different levels. In addition, each level of the S&T tree is designated a different title to create a language that facilitates communication. Finally, the output of the S&T analysis is summarized in a strategy map which is a tool to communicate graphically the relevant part of the organizational strategy. A case study of the process being applied in a development bank in Nicaragua is presented to illustrate the process. The purpose of this presentation is to propose a process to build an S&T using a SWOT (Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analysis as a starting point. The output of the SWOT analysis is used to determine the different assumptions that are part of the generic structure of the S&T tree at its different levels. In addition, each level of the S&T tree is designated a different title to create a language that facilitates communication. Finally, the output of the S&T analysis is summarized in a strategy map which is a tool to communicate graphically the relevant part of the organizational strategy. A case study of the process being applied in a development bank in a Nicaragua will be presented to illustrate the process. The level of the S&T and the SWOT ANALYSIS Level 1: Mission, Vision and Values of the organization. In level 1, just write the Mission, Vision and Values as they already exist. Level 2: Strategic and tactical directions. The necessary assumption is written as one of the major opportunities—found in the SWOT analysis—which the company decides to capitalize on. The Strategy, referred at this level as Strategic direction, is expressed as an objective which measures progress as the company capitalizes on the chosen opportunities. The parallel assumptions come from different sources: Which relevant strengths and weaknesses does the company have? What UDEs our clients have? What relevant threats exist in the environment? The Tactic, referred to as Tactical Direction, represents how the company is going to compete in the market place to move towards the strategic direction. Level 3: Strategic Objectives and Strategic projects. The necessary assumptions explain how specific weaknesses prevent the company from taking advantage of the chosen opportunity or make it vulnerable. The Strategy, referred at this level as Strategic objectives, is a set of objectives which measure the conditions needed to overcome the weaknesses on the path towards the strategic direction. These strategic objectives later determine the indicators that will define part of the strategy map (balance scorecard) of the company. As in the previous level, the parallel assumptions come from different sources: What strength does the company have? What weaknesses? What relevant threats exist in the environment? The Tactic show the Strategic projects needed for the company to reach the conditions reflected in the strategic objectives. Level 4: Specific objectives and guiding tactics. Specific objectives are milestones for each strategic project. To achieve these objectives, a tactic should guide its implementation. The guiding tactics at this level are tied to a specific methodology adapted by the organization to achieve objectives. For example, a company having as specific objectives to develop products for a given market segment, may decide to use QFD or some other tool as a guiding tactic. These strategic objectives also become part of the strategy map of the organization. 33 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
60 Conference Proceedings A process to build strategy and tactic trees using a SWOT analysis 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The purpose of this presentation is to propose a process to build a strategy and tactics (S&T) tree using a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analysis as a starting point. The output of the SWOT analysis is used to determine the different assumptions that are part of the generic structure of the S&T tree at its different levels. In addition, each level of the S&T tree is designated a different title to create a language that facilitates communication. Finally, the output of the S&T analysis is summarized in a strategy map which is a tool to communicate graphically the relevant part of the organizational strategy. A case study of the process being applied in a development bank in Nicaragua is presented to illustrate the process. The purpose of this presentation is to propose a process to build an S&T using a SWOT (Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analysis as a starting point. The output of the SWOT analysis is used to determine the different assumptions that are part of the generic structure of the S&T tree at its different levels. In addition, each level of the S&T tree is designated a different title to create a language that facilitates communication. Finally, the output of the S&T analysis is summarized in a strategy map which is a tool to communicate graphically the relevant part of the organizational strategy. A case study of the process being applied in a development bank in a Nicaragua will be presented to illustrate the process. The level of the S&T and the SWOT ANALYSIS Level 1: Mission, Vision and Values of the organization. In level 1, just write the Mission, Vision and Values as they already exist. Level 2: Strategic and tactical directions. The necessary assumption is written as one of the major opportunities—found in the SWOT analysis—which the company decides to capitalize on. The Strategy, referred at this level as Strategic direction, is expressed as an objective which measures progress as the company capitalizes on the chosen opportunities. The parallel assumptions come from different sources: Which relevant strengths and weaknesses does the company have? What UDEs our clients have? What relevant threats exist in the environment? The Tactic, referred to as Tactical Direction, represents how the company is going to compete in the market place to move towards the strategic direction. Level 3: Strategic Objectives and Strategic projects. The necessary assumptions explain how specific weaknesses prevent the company from taking advantage of the chosen opportunity or make it vulnerable. The Strategy, referred at this level as Strategic objectives, is a set of objectives which measure the conditions needed to overcome the weaknesses on the path towards the strategic direction. These strategic objectives later determine the indicators that will define part of the strategy map (balance scorecard) of the company. As in the previous level, the parallel assumptions come from different sources: What strength does the company have? What weaknesses? What relevant threats exist in the environment? The Tactic show the Strategic projects needed for the company to reach the conditions reflected in the strategic objectives. Level 4: Specific objectives and guiding tactics. Specific objectives are milestones for each strategic project. To achieve these objectives, a tactic should guide its implementation. The guiding tactics at this level are tied to a specific methodology adapted by the organization to achieve objectives. For example, a company having as specific objectives to develop products for a given market segment, may decide to use QFD or some other tool as a guiding tactic. These strategic objectives also become part of the strategy map of the organization. 33 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
61 Conference Proceedings Boeffgen, Manfred IEE CCPM implementation (case study) 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Since the 2008 crisis the automotive industry increased its pressure on costs in development and production. IEE could win additional projects as some competitors left the market during the crisis. To contain the cost IEE decided to use CCPM to manage the increased quantity of customer projects with the current development staff. From statistical evaluations IEE learned that the main problem in project management was not being on time. The strict regulations for program management in the automotive industry ensured that in all cases a product was available for Start of Production (SOP). To ensure that the SOP is always kept several risks must be taken. For example not all development tasks are finished in time. Especially several product validation tests were finished after SOP. This could lead to late changes or even changes after SOP of the car. CCPM as well as TOC in production addressed this problem part of a full Viable Vision implementation at IEE. Context: The IEE Group is a supplier in automotive safety sensing systems for occupant detection and classification, enhancing safety in vehicles produced by major car manufacturers worldwide. Founded in 1989 and headquartered in Luxembourg, IEE operates worldwide. IEE employs 1,600 people worldwide and operates technical centers in Luxembourg, Slovakia, the United States, China and South Korea, as well as a representative office in Japan and Singapore. Since the 2008 crisis the automotive industry increases their pressure on costs in development and production. The IEE group could win additional projects as some competitors left the market during the crisis. To contain the cost IEE decided to use CCPM to manage the increased quantity of customer projects with the current development staff. CCPM and TOC in manufacturing are treated as parts of a full Viable Vision implementation which was supported by Goldratt Consulting Israel. What to change? With the current development project approach IEE would not be able to manage the additionally won projects with the current engineering staff. As additional staff is expensive and difficult to find IEE searched for an innovative solution to release capacity in development. The CCPM logic was disclosed to a group of IEE managers in July 2011, through a training of 2 days given by Goldratt CZ. This initiative was taken by the production director implementing at this time TOC in production. From statistical evaluations IEE learned that the main problem in project management was not being in time. The strict regulations for program management in the automotive industry ensured that in all cases a product was available for Start of Production (SOP). To ensure that the SOP is always kept several risks must be taken. Not all development tasks are finished in time. Especially several product validation tests were finished after SOP. This could lead to late changes or even changes after SOP of the car. What to change to? In September 2011, the Advanced Engineering, a group of 30 persons, facing conflicting requests for development of new projects decided to implement the CCPM methodology. This initiative was transformed into a pilot implementation which involved Goldratt CZ and the usage of Concerto on this limited scale. The pilot implementation ended in January 2012, when the first project following the CCPM method has finished its development in time. A survey was done to assess the perceived methodology. The results were disclosed to General Management which took the decision to deploy the methodology worldwide. The overall implementation started in March 2012, starting with Luxembourg facilities and supported by Goldratt CZ and using Concerto software. How to cause the change? The following steps were implemented: Reduce Bad Multitasking: for IEE, it was to start its projects when required and not immediately as it was done usually. The projects are scheduled as late as possible protected by a project buffer. Full-Kitting: we tentatively implemented the full-kit concept, but we had to backtrack. It is used today to synchronize 2 project timings (e.g. system development with software development). Critical Chain Planning Buffering: It was the task on which we spent the most of our time, with a core team of Project Managers to define a proper project template. The pipelining and especially the DRUM identification were painful, as IEE had to change its DRUM during implementation, using Virtual DRUM instead… Managing execution: Trainings were given on a large scale to task managers, resources managers, project managers and executives. A total of 324 people were trained. Nevertheless, the reporting is still a difficult topic and is very sensitive to management attention. This leads to a project execution which is very unequal within the different divisions and sub-divisions of the company. Lessons learned: Today, CCPM is technically in place. All customer projects are treated according CCPM rules. As gains cannot be identified immediately simulations of the now possible throughput were calculated. The improvement in the simulated pipeline throughput lies in the range of 70 to 100% compared with the actual throughput. The paradigm shift from a 'normal' project management to Critical Chain Project Management is not yet fully in people's mind, accepted and lived. There are still doubts about the benefits and resistances against the method. The main implementation step which is today pending is the answer to the question: 'how to cause the change?'. Reviewing this point with Goldratt CZ, their recommendation is to follow this advice: 'An organization gets serious about the new rules only if it sees changes in policies and measurements. Currently, the CCPM core team is working on the subject with General Management. 31 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
62 Conference Proceedings Stenger, Frederic IEE CCPM implementation (case study) 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Since the 2008 crisis the automotive industry increased its pressure on costs in development and production. IEE could win additional projects as some competitors left the market during the crisis. To contain the cost IEE decided to use CCPM to manage the increased quantity of customer projects with the current development staff. From statistical evaluations IEE learned that the main problem in project management was not being on time. The strict regulations for program management in the automotive industry ensured that in all cases a product was available for Start of Production (SOP). To ensure that the SOP is always kept several risks must be taken. For example not all development tasks are finished in time. Especially several product validation tests were finished after SOP. This could lead to late changes or even changes after SOP of the car. CCPM as well as TOC in production addressed this problem part of a full Viable Vision implementation at IEE. Context: The IEE Group is a supplier in automotive safety sensing systems for occupant detection and classification, enhancing safety in vehicles produced by major car manufacturers worldwide. Founded in 1989 and headquartered in Luxembourg, IEE operates worldwide. IEE employs 1,600 people worldwide and operates technical centers in Luxembourg, Slovakia, the United States, China and South Korea, as well as a representative office in Japan and Singapore. Since the 2008 crisis the automotive industry increases their pressure on costs in development and production. The IEE group could win additional projects as some competitors left the market during the crisis. To contain the cost IEE decided to use CCPM to manage the increased quantity of customer projects with the current development staff. CCPM and TOC in manufacturing are treated as parts of a full Viable Vision implementation which was supported by Goldratt Consulting Israel. What to change? With the current development project approach IEE would not be able to manage the additionally won projects with the current engineering staff. As additional staff is expensive and difficult to find IEE searched for an innovative solution to release capacity in development. The CCPM logic was disclosed to a group of IEE managers in July 2011, through a training of 2 days given by Goldratt CZ. This initiative was taken by the production director implementing at this time TOC in production. From statistical evaluations IEE learned that the main problem in project management was not being in time. The strict regulations for program management in the automotive industry ensured that in all cases a product was available for Start of Production (SOP). To ensure that the SOP is always kept several risks must be taken. Not all development tasks are finished in time. Especially several product validation tests were finished after SOP. This could lead to late changes or even changes after SOP of the car. What to change to? In September 2011, the Advanced Engineering, a group of 30 persons, facing conflicting requests for development of new projects decided to implement the CCPM methodology. This initiative was transformed into a pilot implementation which involved Goldratt CZ and the usage of Concerto on this limited scale. The pilot implementation ended in January 2012, when the first project following the CCPM method has finished its development in time. A survey was done to assess the perceived methodology. The results were disclosed to General Management which took the decision to deploy the methodology worldwide. The overall implementation started in March 2012, starting with Luxembourg facilities and supported by Goldratt CZ and using Concerto software. How to cause the change? The following steps were implemented: Reduce Bad Multitasking: for IEE, it was to start its projects when required and not immediately as it was done usually. The projects are scheduled as late as possible protected by a project buffer. Full-Kitting: we tentatively implemented the full-kit concept, but we had to backtrack. It is used today to synchronize 2 project timings (e.g. system development with software development). Critical Chain Planning Buffering: It was the task on which we spent the most of our time, with a core team of Project Managers to define a proper project template. The pipelining and especially the DRUM identification were painful, as IEE had to change its DRUM during implementation, using Virtual DRUM instead… Managing execution: Trainings were given on a large scale to task managers, resources managers, project managers and executives. A total of 324 people were trained. Nevertheless, the reporting is still a difficult topic and is very sensitive to management attention. This leads to a project execution which is very unequal within the different divisions and sub-divisions of the company. Lessons learned: Today, CCPM is technically in place. All customer projects are treated according CCPM rules. As gains cannot be identified immediately simulations of the now possible throughput were calculated. The improvement in the simulated pipeline throughput lies in the range of 70 to 100% compared with the actual throughput. The paradigm shift from a 'normal' project management to Critical Chain Project Management is not yet fully in people's mind, accepted and lived. There are still doubts about the benefits and resistances against the method. The main implementation step which is today pending is the answer to the question: 'how to cause the change?'. Reviewing this point with Goldratt CZ, their recommendation is to follow this advice: 'An organization gets serious about the new rules only if it sees changes in policies and measurements. Currently, the CCPM core team is working on the subject with General Management. 31 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
63 Conference Proceedings Leponce, Fabian IEE CCPM implementation (case study) 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Since the 2008 crisis the automotive industry increased its pressure on costs in development and production. IEE could win additional projects as some competitors left the market during the crisis. To contain the cost IEE decided to use CCPM to manage the increased quantity of customer projects with the current development staff. From statistical evaluations IEE learned that the main problem in project management was not being on time. The strict regulations for program management in the automotive industry ensured that in all cases a product was available for Start of Production (SOP). To ensure that the SOP is always kept several risks must be taken. For example not all development tasks are finished in time. Especially several product validation tests were finished after SOP. This could lead to late changes or even changes after SOP of the car. CCPM as well as TOC in production addressed this problem part of a full Viable Vision implementation at IEE. Context: The IEE Group is a supplier in automotive safety sensing systems for occupant detection and classification, enhancing safety in vehicles produced by major car manufacturers worldwide. Founded in 1989 and headquartered in Luxembourg, IEE operates worldwide. IEE employs 1,600 people worldwide and operates technical centers in Luxembourg, Slovakia, the United States, China and South Korea, as well as a representative office in Japan and Singapore. Since the 2008 crisis the automotive industry increases their pressure on costs in development and production. The IEE group could win additional projects as some competitors left the market during the crisis. To contain the cost IEE decided to use CCPM to manage the increased quantity of customer projects with the current development staff. CCPM and TOC in manufacturing are treated as parts of a full Viable Vision implementation which was supported by Goldratt Consulting Israel. What to change? With the current development project approach IEE would not be able to manage the additionally won projects with the current engineering staff. As additional staff is expensive and difficult to find IEE searched for an innovative solution to release capacity in development. The CCPM logic was disclosed to a group of IEE managers in July 2011, through a training of 2 days given by Goldratt CZ. This initiative was taken by the production director implementing at this time TOC in production. From statistical evaluations IEE learned that the main problem in project management was not being in time. The strict regulations for program management in the automotive industry ensured that in all cases a product was available for Start of Production (SOP). To ensure that the SOP is always kept several risks must be taken. Not all development tasks are finished in time. Especially several product validation tests were finished after SOP. This could lead to late changes or even changes after SOP of the car. What to change to? In September 2011, the Advanced Engineering, a group of 30 persons, facing conflicting requests for development of new projects decided to implement the CCPM methodology. This initiative was transformed into a pilot implementation which involved Goldratt CZ and the usage of Concerto on this limited scale. The pilot implementation ended in January 2012, when the first project following the CCPM method has finished its development in time. A survey was done to assess the perceived methodology. The results were disclosed to General Management which took the decision to deploy the methodology worldwide. The overall implementation started in March 2012, starting with Luxembourg facilities and supported by Goldratt CZ and using Concerto software. How to cause the change? The following steps were implemented: Reduce Bad Multitasking: for IEE, it was to start its projects when required and not immediately as it was done usually. The projects are scheduled as late as possible protected by a project buffer. Full-Kitting: we tentatively implemented the full-kit concept, but we had to backtrack. It is used today to synchronize 2 project timings (e.g. system development with software development). Critical Chain Planning Buffering: It was the task on which we spent the most of our time, with a core team of Project Managers to define a proper project template. The pipelining and especially the DRUM identification were painful, as IEE had to change its DRUM during implementation, using Virtual DRUM instead… Managing execution: Trainings were given on a large scale to task managers, resources managers, project managers and executives. A total of 324 people were trained. Nevertheless, the reporting is still a difficult topic and is very sensitive to management attention. This leads to a project execution which is very unequal within the different divisions and sub-divisions of the company. Lessons learned: Today, CCPM is technically in place. All customer projects are treated according CCPM rules. As gains cannot be identified immediately simulations of the now possible throughput were calculated. The improvement in the simulated pipeline throughput lies in the range of 70 to 100% compared with the actual throughput. The paradigm shift from a 'normal' project management to Critical Chain Project Management is not yet fully in people's mind, accepted and lived. There are still doubts about the benefits and resistances against the method. The main implementation step which is today pending is the answer to the question: 'how to cause the change?'. Reviewing this point with Goldratt CZ, their recommendation is to follow this advice: 'An organization gets serious about the new rules only if it sees changes in policies and measurements. Currently, the CCPM core team is working on the subject with General Management. 31 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
64 Conference Proceedings IEE CCPM implementation (case study) 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Since the 2008 crisis the automotive industry increased its pressure on costs in development and production. IEE could win additional projects as some competitors left the market during the crisis. To contain the cost IEE decided to use CCPM to manage the increased quantity of customer projects with the current development staff. From statistical evaluations IEE learned that the main problem in project management was not being on time. The strict regulations for program management in the automotive industry ensured that in all cases a product was available for Start of Production (SOP). To ensure that the SOP is always kept several risks must be taken. For example not all development tasks are finished in time. Especially several product validation tests were finished after SOP. This could lead to late changes or even changes after SOP of the car. CCPM as well as TOC in production addressed this problem part of a full Viable Vision implementation at IEE. Context: The IEE Group is a supplier in automotive safety sensing systems for occupant detection and classification, enhancing safety in vehicles produced by major car manufacturers worldwide. Founded in 1989 and headquartered in Luxembourg, IEE operates worldwide. IEE employs 1,600 people worldwide and operates technical centers in Luxembourg, Slovakia, the United States, China and South Korea, as well as a representative office in Japan and Singapore. Since the 2008 crisis the automotive industry increases their pressure on costs in development and production. The IEE group could win additional projects as some competitors left the market during the crisis. To contain the cost IEE decided to use CCPM to manage the increased quantity of customer projects with the current development staff. CCPM and TOC in manufacturing are treated as parts of a full Viable Vision implementation which was supported by Goldratt Consulting Israel. What to change? With the current development project approach IEE would not be able to manage the additionally won projects with the current engineering staff. As additional staff is expensive and difficult to find IEE searched for an innovative solution to release capacity in development. The CCPM logic was disclosed to a group of IEE managers in July 2011, through a training of 2 days given by Goldratt CZ. This initiative was taken by the production director implementing at this time TOC in production. From statistical evaluations IEE learned that the main problem in project management was not being in time. The strict regulations for program management in the automotive industry ensured that in all cases a product was available for Start of Production (SOP). To ensure that the SOP is always kept several risks must be taken. Not all development tasks are finished in time. Especially several product validation tests were finished after SOP. This could lead to late changes or even changes after SOP of the car. What to change to? In September 2011, the Advanced Engineering, a group of 30 persons, facing conflicting requests for development of new projects decided to implement the CCPM methodology. This initiative was transformed into a pilot implementation which involved Goldratt CZ and the usage of Concerto on this limited scale. The pilot implementation ended in January 2012, when the first project following the CCPM method has finished its development in time. A survey was done to assess the perceived methodology. The results were disclosed to General Management which took the decision to deploy the methodology worldwide. The overall implementation started in March 2012, starting with Luxembourg facilities and supported by Goldratt CZ and using Concerto software. How to cause the change? The following steps were implemented: Reduce Bad Multitasking: for IEE, it was to start its projects when required and not immediately as it was done usually. The projects are scheduled as late as possible protected by a project buffer. Full-Kitting: we tentatively implemented the full-kit concept, but we had to backtrack. It is used today to synchronize 2 project timings (e.g. system development with software development). Critical Chain Planning Buffering: It was the task on which we spent the most of our time, with a core team of Project Managers to define a proper project template. The pipelining and especially the DRUM identification were painful, as IEE had to change its DRUM during implementation, using Virtual DRUM instead… Managing execution: Trainings were given on a large scale to task managers, resources managers, project managers and executives. A total of 324 people were trained. Nevertheless, the reporting is still a difficult topic and is very sensitive to management attention. This leads to a project execution which is very unequal within the different divisions and sub-divisions of the company. Lessons learned: Today, CCPM is technically in place. All customer projects are treated according CCPM rules. As gains cannot be identified immediately simulations of the now possible throughput were calculated. The improvement in the simulated pipeline throughput lies in the range of 70 to 100% compared with the actual throughput. The paradigm shift from a 'normal' project management to Critical Chain Project Management is not yet fully in people's mind, accepted and lived. There are still doubts about the benefits and resistances against the method. The main implementation step which is today pending is the answer to the question: 'how to cause the change?'. Reviewing this point with Goldratt CZ, their recommendation is to follow this advice: 'An organization gets serious about the new rules only if it sees changes in policies and measurements. Currently, the CCPM core team is working on the subject with General Management. 31 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
65 Conference Proceedings Stratton, Roy Buffer management in context (Encore) 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany This presentation explores the conceptual origins of buffer management in the context of TOC developments across make to order, engineer to order, and make to availability (MTO, ETO, MTA) manufacturing environments and more recently in the service sector. The presentation relates the buffer management concept to the seminal work of Shewhart (1931) and Ohno (1978) and discusses the practical and theoretical basis for extending the buffer management concept to enhance ‘lean' developments, with particular reference to construction and healthcare management. 35 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
66 Conference Proceedings Buffer management in context (Encore) 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany This presentation explores the conceptual origins of buffer management in the context of TOC developments across make to order, engineer to order, and make to availability (MTO, ETO, MTA) manufacturing environments and more recently in the service sector. The presentation relates the buffer management concept to the seminal work of Shewhart (1931) and Ohno (1978) and discusses the practical and theoretical basis for extending the buffer management concept to enhance ‘lean' developments, with particular reference to construction and healthcare management. 35 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
67 Conference Proceedings Stratton, Roy TOC - The process of on-going improvement? 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany This presentation clarifies the significance of the TOC five focusing steps, before relating this approach both philosophically and theoretically to other operations management theory and improvement strategies. Firstly, I clarify how the theory of constraints (TOC) five step process underpins both the thinking processes and the established drum buffer rope, critical chain project management, and make to availability) applications (DBR, CCPM and MTA). The 5 steps will then be related to broader academic theory and strategies, clarifying the underlying paradigm shift and the significant theoretical contributions associated with TOC. This identifies both the operational depth and the cross functional breadth of the associated theory. The presentation will then turn to consider how the TOC applications both extend and compliment other theoretical approaches that have also addressed related paradigm shifts in operations management theory. This section will highlight how TOC thinking has both clarified and extended the work of authors, such as Deming (1993) and Ohno (1988), in the process of creating a broader and more generalized theory. The presentation concludes by providing an understanding of how the theory provides a basis for extending the applications into complex service-based environments with particular reference to health and social care. The purpose of this presentation is to help clarify the conceptual basis of the five steps of focusing and its position with respect to operations management theory and other approaches to organizational improvement. This extended abstract has been set out in response to a series of questions to be addressed in the presentation. How central is the 5 step process to TOC applications (DBR, CCPM and MTA)? • The presentation will firstly clarify the more general application of the 5 steps and how they may be applied in the context of physical constraints (market/ resource/ supply), clarifying how policies commonly act as blocking factors. • Then the 5 steps will be linked to the specific application (DBR, CCPM and MTA) highlighting the linkage to the specific underlying assumptions and the common theme of aggregation and buffer management. How do these steps relate to broader operations and supply chain theory? • The presentation will explain the traditional domination of cost and efficiency models and local sub-optimization of trade-off choices. • Then the emergence of manufacturing strategy and the importance of aligning trade-offs at a strategic level (Skinner, 1969; 74; 86; Hill, 1985; Fisher, 97). • The challenge of the trade-off concept with the adoption of performance management strategies (Deming, 1982; Ohno, 1988; Womack & Jones, 2003). • The use of operations research laws to explain the need for variability buffering (Hopp and Spearman, 1995; Hopp, 2011). • Each time these theoretical developments will be related back to the 5 steps. So what is the distinctive contribution of the TOC 5 step process? • Goldratt (1990) addressed the theoretical breakthrough associated with the need to focus and align at a more operational but also more strategic level. o Focus and subordination is key to resolving the core conflicts through buffer aggregation and buffer management. o Even with the direction of the solution being established there were many levels of detail to be addressed in establishing a workable solution using the TOC TP o At the same time the wider opportunity to capitalize on the competitive advantage that results, as in the development of the S&T templates. o Although Hopp (2011) has clarified the role of variability and buffer choices his work does not extend to developing practical means of applying this core knowledge or capitalizing on it across the different functional disciplines. How do process management strategies differ from the TOC 5 step process? • Six sigma and lean have a common heritage that also challenged the relevance of cost measures and Shewhart (1939) and Ohno (1988) as did Ford (1926) focused on variation reduction and improved flow, respectively. Ohno's (1988) TPS emphasized waste as does ‘lean' (Womack et al., 1990). • Lean is also closely associated with improving flow. o Emphasis on reducing buffering through reducing variation everywhere. ? TPS Kanban - no buffer aggregation. How do the TOC 5 steps and process management strategies complement each other? • The TOC process does not explicitly address the need to reduce variation but it is implied in step 2 (Decide how to exploit). The concept of targeting improvement by reducing variation has been long established (Goldratt and Fox, 1986). • To achieve this, however, TOC is dependent on lean and SS to provide appropriate tools to reduce variation as an ongoing process. • Reducing the variation in turn reduces the need for buffering and improves the performance however, this is an ongoing continuous improvement activity which has no end. • The TOC 5 step ‘rule change' may be rapidly introduced through the applications, but the TOC TP are needed to creatively support the ongoing strategic realignment that is necessary. What opportunities are there to broaden the current TOC applications? • The presentation will conclude by summarizing the contribution offered by TOC and the TP and the need to have an in depth understanding of how TOC relates to competing philosophies in understanding the opportunity the TOC 5 steps offer in different situations. • Specific reference will be made of health and social care. 3 Questions following the presentation: Under what circumstances is TOC going to provide the most significant benefit? Should TOC always be used along-side process management strategies (e.g. lean and six sigma)? Which academic authors are most closely allied to TOC thinking? 31 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
68 Conference Proceedings TOC - The process of on-going improvement? 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany This presentation clarifies the significance of the TOC five focusing steps, before relating this approach both philosophically and theoretically to other operations management theory and improvement strategies. Firstly, I clarify how the theory of constraints (TOC) five step process underpins both the thinking processes and the established drum buffer rope, critical chain project management, and make to availability) applications (DBR, CCPM and MTA). The 5 steps will then be related to broader academic theory and strategies, clarifying the underlying paradigm shift and the significant theoretical contributions associated with TOC. This identifies both the operational depth and the cross functional breadth of the associated theory. The presentation will then turn to consider how the TOC applications both extend and compliment other theoretical approaches that have also addressed related paradigm shifts in operations management theory. This section will highlight how TOC thinking has both clarified and extended the work of authors, such as Deming (1993) and Ohno (1988), in the process of creating a broader and more generalized theory. The presentation concludes by providing an understanding of how the theory provides a basis for extending the applications into complex service-based environments with particular reference to health and social care. The purpose of this presentation is to help clarify the conceptual basis of the five steps of focusing and its position with respect to operations management theory and other approaches to organizational improvement. This extended abstract has been set out in response to a series of questions to be addressed in the presentation. How central is the 5 step process to TOC applications (DBR, CCPM and MTA)? • The presentation will firstly clarify the more general application of the 5 steps and how they may be applied in the context of physical constraints (market/ resource/ supply), clarifying how policies commonly act as blocking factors. • Then the 5 steps will be linked to the specific application (DBR, CCPM and MTA) highlighting the linkage to the specific underlying assumptions and the common theme of aggregation and buffer management. How do these steps relate to broader operations and supply chain theory? • The presentation will explain the traditional domination of cost and efficiency models and local sub-optimization of trade-off choices. • Then the emergence of manufacturing strategy and the importance of aligning trade-offs at a strategic level (Skinner, 1969; 74; 86; Hill, 1985; Fisher, 97). • The challenge of the trade-off concept with the adoption of performance management strategies (Deming, 1982; Ohno, 1988; Womack & Jones, 2003). • The use of operations research laws to explain the need for variability buffering (Hopp and Spearman, 1995; Hopp, 2011). • Each time these theoretical developments will be related back to the 5 steps. So what is the distinctive contribution of the TOC 5 step process? • Goldratt (1990) addressed the theoretical breakthrough associated with the need to focus and align at a more operational but also more strategic level. o Focus and subordination is key to resolving the core conflicts through buffer aggregation and buffer management. o Even with the direction of the solution being established there were many levels of detail to be addressed in establishing a workable solution using the TOC TP o At the same time the wider opportunity to capitalize on the competitive advantage that results, as in the development of the S&T templates. o Although Hopp (2011) has clarified the role of variability and buffer choices his work does not extend to developing practical means of applying this core knowledge or capitalizing on it across the different functional disciplines. How do process management strategies differ from the TOC 5 step process? • Six sigma and lean have a common heritage that also challenged the relevance of cost measures and Shewhart (1939) and Ohno (1988) as did Ford (1926) focused on variation reduction and improved flow, respectively. Ohno's (1988) TPS emphasized waste as does ‘lean' (Womack et al., 1990). • Lean is also closely associated with improving flow. o Emphasis on reducing buffering through reducing variation everywhere. ? TPS Kanban - no buffer aggregation. How do the TOC 5 steps and process management strategies complement each other? • The TOC process does not explicitly address the need to reduce variation but it is implied in step 2 (Decide how to exploit). The concept of targeting improvement by reducing variation has been long established (Goldratt and Fox, 1986). • To achieve this, however, TOC is dependent on lean and SS to provide appropriate tools to reduce variation as an ongoing process. • Reducing the variation in turn reduces the need for buffering and improves the performance however, this is an ongoing continuous improvement activity which has no end. • The TOC 5 step ‘rule change' may be rapidly introduced through the applications, but the TOC TP are needed to creatively support the ongoing strategic realignment that is necessary. What opportunities are there to broaden the current TOC applications? • The presentation will conclude by summarizing the contribution offered by TOC and the TP and the need to have an in depth understanding of how TOC relates to competing philosophies in understanding the opportunity the TOC 5 steps offer in different situations. • Specific reference will be made of health and social care. 3 Questions following the presentation: Under what circumstances is TOC going to provide the most significant benefit? Should TOC always be used along-side process management strategies (e.g. lean and six sigma)? Which academic authors are most closely allied to TOC thinking? 31 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
69 Conference Proceedings Taylor, Bill 12 questions: Standardizing the generic current reality branch 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany A standardized, easy to construct, current reality branch (CRB) was identified in TOCICO Chicago 2012 as a missing piece in the powerful array of theory of constraints (TOC) thinking processes (TP) solutions, which range from simple conflict / dilemma clouds to transformation strategy and tactics (S&T) trees implemented in CCPM. The 12-questions process has evolved from over a decade of practical experience in using the TOC TP to solve a variety of problems involving individuals and organizations, focused on providing answers to the 6 D's - Discomforts, Dilemmas, Doubts, Difficulties, Direction and Decisions -using necessity and sufficiency causality logic. The sequence of 12 questions, when asked by skillful TOC practitioners, can be the key to make the TOC TP, the crown jewel of TOC, accessible to non-practitioners. The 12-questions structure is a proposal for a universal current reality branch, a meta-structure that can become a building block of, and source of insight into, the construction of conflict clouds, negative branch reservations, chronic conflict, and standardized current reality trees, leading to formulation, sale and implementation of TOC-based solutions. 35 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
70 Conference Proceedings 12 questions: Standardizing the generic current reality branch 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany A standardized, easy to construct, current reality branch (CRB) was identified in TOCICO Chicago 2012 as a missing piece in the powerful array of theory of constraints (TOC) thinking processes (TP) solutions, which range from simple conflict / dilemma clouds to transformation strategy and tactics (S&T) trees implemented in CCPM. The 12-questions process has evolved from over a decade of practical experience in using the TOC TP to solve a variety of problems involving individuals and organizations, focused on providing answers to the 6 D's - Discomforts, Dilemmas, Doubts, Difficulties, Direction and Decisions -using necessity and sufficiency causality logic. The sequence of 12 questions, when asked by skillful TOC practitioners, can be the key to make the TOC TP, the crown jewel of TOC, accessible to non-practitioners. The 12-questions structure is a proposal for a universal current reality branch, a meta-structure that can become a building block of, and source of insight into, the construction of conflict clouds, negative branch reservations, chronic conflict, and standardized current reality trees, leading to formulation, sale and implementation of TOC-based solutions. 35 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
71 Conference Proceedings Thompson, John L. Developing depth on the management bench: Along with significant growth, management will be an emerging primary constraint 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Ambition in business requires an injection of healthy new thinking, a challenge to common practice. • Growth is based on creating significant differentiators in the market place. • Differentiation means addressing a market need in a way that no significant competitor can. • Operations must achieve new levels of performance to support the emerging market offers. • By definition – this requires management challenging their existing business beliefs and practices. Embarking on a growth strategy will stretch the current management to the limit. With increasing implementation success, management quickly becomes the organization's ‘strategic constraint'. The organization will simply run out of management capacity. This question will constantly repeat itself: 'If you want to grow, who is on your team?' An interesting dilemma emerges due to the new demands placed on the company: A: Sustainable profitable growth B: Quantum levels of improvement. D: Focusing on major constraining activities / resources only. C: Ensure corporate stability D': Focus on incremental improvement. Management is the ultimate constraint of a business. The management resource must be developed throughout the organization. The direction of the solution lies in achieving quantum improvement with the experienced management. However, equal and parallel effort must be taken to develop the next generation, small incremental improvement is the opportunity to nurture, incubate and provide opportunity for the next generation to develop technical and teaming skills plus the confidence that improvement is always possible and managing change is the path to success. Companies that exhibit sustainable growth, also have a passion to develop and grow managers as a core strategy… constantly placing challenges and demands on managers. This becomes a type of natural selection, a process by which managers push each other to achieve higher levels of skill. Much the same as Olympians push each other to the highest level of performance. Examples include: General Electric Company, Sony Corporation etc. known as a place of people development as much as delivery of goods and service. These giants have pools of emerging talent that can be unleashed on new opportunities. Developing this type of organization requires a mindset change: primarily thinking of the organization as a 'Leadership Factory' producing leaders and managers, an environment where goods and service are second. Develop people and results will follow: the objective is to populate the company with competence. Learning objectives: 1. Management is the ‘strategic constraint ‘of any ambitious company. 2. Growth is not sustainable if experienced management cannot rely on a pool of emerging talent within the organization. 3. Incremental improvement is an opportunity to identify, incubate and develop the next generation on management. Likely questions: 1. Do we have to develop everybody in the organization? 2. What about the personalities that clash when pushed to excel – will create a negative competitive atmosphere? 3. How do you motivate those who just don't want to learn, be challenged or even speak up in a meeting? Ambition in Business requires an injection of healthy new thinking, a challenge to common practice. • Growth is based on creating Significant Differentiators in the Market place. • Differentiation means addressing a market need in a way that no significant competitor can. • Operations must achieve new levels of performance to support the emerging market offers. • By definition – this requires Management challenging their existing business beliefs and practices. Embarking on a Growth Strategy will stretch the current Management to the limit. With increasing implementation success, Management quickly becomes the organization's ‘strategic Constraint'. The Organization will simply run out of Management Capacity. This question will constantly repeat itself: ' If you want to Grow, Who is on your Team?' An interesting dilemma emerges due to the new demands placed on the Company: A: Sustainable Profitable Growth B: Quantum levels of improvement D: Focusing on Major Constraining Activities/ Resources only. C: Ensure Corporate Stability D': Focus on Incremental Improvement. Management is the Ultimate Constraint of a Business. Management Resource must be developed throughout the organization. The Direction of the Solution lies in achieving Quantum Improvement with the Experienced Management. However, equal and parallel effort must be taken to develop the next generation, small incremental improvement is the opportunity to nurture, incubate and provide opportunity for the next generation to develop technical and teaming skills plus the confidence that improvement is always possible and managing change is the path to success. Companies that exhibit sustainable growth, also have a passion to develop and grow Managers as a core strategy…constantly placing challenges and demands on Managers. This becomes a type of natural selection, a process by which Managers push each other to achieve higher levels of skill. Much the same as Olympians push each other to the highest level of performance. Examples include: General Electric Company, Sony Corporation etc. known as a place of people development as much as delivery of goods and service. These giants have pools of emerging talent that can be unleashed on new opportunities. Developing this type of organization requires a mindset change: primarily thinking of the organization as 'Leadership Factory' producing Leaders and Managers, an environment where goods and service are second. Develop people and results will follow: the objective is to populate the company with competence. Leaning Objectives: 1. Management is the ‘Strategic Constraint ‘of any ambitious Company. 2. Growth is not sustainable if experience Management cannot rely on a pool of emerging talent within the organization. 3. Incremental improvement is an opportunity to identify, incubate and develop the next generation on management. Likely Questions: 1. Do we have to develop everybody in the organization? 2. What about the personalities that clash when pushed to excel – will create a negative competitive atmosphere? 3. How do you motivate those how just don't want to learn, be challenges or even speak up in a meeting? 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
72 Conference Proceedings Developing depth on the management bench: Along with significant growth, management will be an emerging primary constraint 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Ambition in business requires an injection of healthy new thinking, a challenge to common practice. • Growth is based on creating significant differentiators in the market place. • Differentiation means addressing a market need in a way that no significant competitor can. • Operations must achieve new levels of performance to support the emerging market offers. • By definition – this requires management challenging their existing business beliefs and practices. Embarking on a growth strategy will stretch the current management to the limit. With increasing implementation success, management quickly becomes the organization's ‘strategic constraint'. The organization will simply run out of management capacity. This question will constantly repeat itself: 'If you want to grow, who is on your team?' An interesting dilemma emerges due to the new demands placed on the company: A: Sustainable profitable growth B: Quantum levels of improvement. D: Focusing on major constraining activities / resources only. C: Ensure corporate stability D': Focus on incremental improvement. Management is the ultimate constraint of a business. The management resource must be developed throughout the organization. The direction of the solution lies in achieving quantum improvement with the experienced management. However, equal and parallel effort must be taken to develop the next generation, small incremental improvement is the opportunity to nurture, incubate and provide opportunity for the next generation to develop technical and teaming skills plus the confidence that improvement is always possible and managing change is the path to success. Companies that exhibit sustainable growth, also have a passion to develop and grow managers as a core strategy… constantly placing challenges and demands on managers. This becomes a type of natural selection, a process by which managers push each other to achieve higher levels of skill. Much the same as Olympians push each other to the highest level of performance. Examples include: General Electric Company, Sony Corporation etc. known as a place of people development as much as delivery of goods and service. These giants have pools of emerging talent that can be unleashed on new opportunities. Developing this type of organization requires a mindset change: primarily thinking of the organization as a 'Leadership Factory' producing leaders and managers, an environment where goods and service are second. Develop people and results will follow: the objective is to populate the company with competence. Learning objectives: 1. Management is the ‘strategic constraint ‘of any ambitious company. 2. Growth is not sustainable if experienced management cannot rely on a pool of emerging talent within the organization. 3. Incremental improvement is an opportunity to identify, incubate and develop the next generation on management. Likely questions: 1. Do we have to develop everybody in the organization? 2. What about the personalities that clash when pushed to excel – will create a negative competitive atmosphere? 3. How do you motivate those who just don't want to learn, be challenged or even speak up in a meeting? Ambition in Business requires an injection of healthy new thinking, a challenge to common practice. • Growth is based on creating Significant Differentiators in the Market place. • Differentiation means addressing a market need in a way that no significant competitor can. • Operations must achieve new levels of performance to support the emerging market offers. • By definition – this requires Management challenging their existing business beliefs and practices. Embarking on a Growth Strategy will stretch the current Management to the limit. With increasing implementation success, Management quickly becomes the organization's ‘strategic Constraint'. The Organization will simply run out of Management Capacity. This question will constantly repeat itself: ' If you want to Grow, Who is on your Team?' An interesting dilemma emerges due to the new demands placed on the Company: A: Sustainable Profitable Growth B: Quantum levels of improvement D: Focusing on Major Constraining Activities/ Resources only. C: Ensure Corporate Stability D': Focus on Incremental Improvement. Management is the Ultimate Constraint of a Business. Management Resource must be developed throughout the organization. The Direction of the Solution lies in achieving Quantum Improvement with the Experienced Management. However, equal and parallel effort must be taken to develop the next generation, small incremental improvement is the opportunity to nurture, incubate and provide opportunity for the next generation to develop technical and teaming skills plus the confidence that improvement is always possible and managing change is the path to success. Companies that exhibit sustainable growth, also have a passion to develop and grow Managers as a core strategy…constantly placing challenges and demands on Managers. This becomes a type of natural selection, a process by which Managers push each other to achieve higher levels of skill. Much the same as Olympians push each other to the highest level of performance. Examples include: General Electric Company, Sony Corporation etc. known as a place of people development as much as delivery of goods and service. These giants have pools of emerging talent that can be unleashed on new opportunities. Developing this type of organization requires a mindset change: primarily thinking of the organization as 'Leadership Factory' producing Leaders and Managers, an environment where goods and service are second. Develop people and results will follow: the objective is to populate the company with competence. Leaning Objectives: 1. Management is the ‘Strategic Constraint ‘of any ambitious Company. 2. Growth is not sustainable if experience Management cannot rely on a pool of emerging talent within the organization. 3. Incremental improvement is an opportunity to identify, incubate and develop the next generation on management. Likely Questions: 1. Do we have to develop everybody in the organization? 2. What about the personalities that clash when pushed to excel – will create a negative competitive atmosphere? 3. How do you motivate those how just don't want to learn, be challenges or even speak up in a meeting? 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
73 Conference Proceedings Ujigawa, Koichi Velocity-based buffer management (VBBM): A new buffer management practice to maximize the flow of the system in complex (as defined by the Cynefin Framework) environments 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Critical chain project management (CCPM) has provided significant contributions to the success of projects in various project environments. However, there are still large gaps between the current reality and our ambition in 'complex' environments such as software development for new products and major upgrades. Therefore, from the standing on the shoulders of giants (SOSG) process, a new buffer management practice, 'Velocity-based buffer management' (VBBM), was developed to fill in the gaps. Through this presentation, my experimental knowledge for performing VBBM are shared with you. If you find anything you agree with the following, I encourage you to participate in this presentation, and please help me to improve this knowledge together. Let's get on the shoulders of CCPM! 1. You believe in the power of CCPM and are interested in the agile method as well. 2. In your environment, you can determine 'what should be done' relatively easily. However, estimating 'how long' is extremely difficult. 3. Sometimes, your / your client's projects become 'foggy', when they are brand new or major upgrade projects. 4. You have some projects that are out of the pipeline. In other words, there are some projects that are managed with other measurement, instead of buffer status. 5. You want to manage your projects, more intuitively based on CCPM. 6. You believe that there is more room, for maximizing the flow of your system yet. If condition permits, we can obtain significant results sooner by using VBBM, because, it is a very simple and practical method. At this time, therefore, I would like to share my experimental knowledge for performing VBBM with the audiences, so that they may successfully implement it in their projects. In this presentation, the whole process for each phase such as full-kitting, project planning and project execution will be covered in detail. In the right environments for VBBM, the scope of the project needs to be negotiable or flexible. I will also present another option which I will refer to as the 'scope buffer', to be used when it is not possible or desirable to precisely define the complete scope of a project, before project execution starts. In order to bring TOC to the main way, one of the biggest challenges is to make TOC become another level by significant results even in so-called 'complex' environments. Therefore, I will share my thoughts (see below) from another perspective to challenge this with VBBM. - Buffer management in complex environments. How do we manage projects intuitively and simply with buffer management in the complex environment? - Locating VBBM in the Cynefin Framework. VBBM is mapped to Probe, Sense, and Respond in the complex domain. As redefined in this presentation, the target environments of VBBM, i.e. the enormity of unaffected area for CCPM, falls in the complex domain. The nature of the environments under which some types of projects are planned and executed, is becoming increasingly complex with time. This creates a challenge for the current methods and tools to remain relevant and effective over time. In order to maintain relevance in the face of increasing complexity, there is a corresponding need to pursue the inherent simplicity that is hidden by the complexity. According to Eli, 'The more complex the problem is, the more simple the solution has to be'. In order to make VBBM useful in the complex environment, and thus to make VBBM be contributory to bring TOC closer to the main way, we must have continuous improvement to keep it simple. Therefore, the feedback of the TOC community is critical to the POOGI process. 3 learning objectives: - Realizing one of the biggest challenges for our ambition -- making TOC the main way. - Getting on the shoulder of CCPM. - Having enough knowledge to implement VBBM immediately. 3 questions: - What is the appropriate iteration term? - How to utilize VBBM in other environments than software development? - In terms of mechanism of buffer management, what is the uniqueness of VBBM compared to the other TOC applications, e.g. conventional CCPM or DBR? 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
74 Conference Proceedings Velocity-based buffer management (VBBM): A new buffer management practice to maximize the flow of the system in complex (as defined by the Cynefin Framework) environments 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Critical chain project management (CCPM) has provided significant contributions to the success of projects in various project environments. However, there are still large gaps between the current reality and our ambition in 'complex' environments such as software development for new products and major upgrades. Therefore, from the standing on the shoulders of giants (SOSG) process, a new buffer management practice, 'Velocity-based buffer management' (VBBM), was developed to fill in the gaps. Through this presentation, my experimental knowledge for performing VBBM are shared with you. If you find anything you agree with the following, I encourage you to participate in this presentation, and please help me to improve this knowledge together. Let's get on the shoulders of CCPM! 1. You believe in the power of CCPM and are interested in the agile method as well. 2. In your environment, you can determine 'what should be done' relatively easily. However, estimating 'how long' is extremely difficult. 3. Sometimes, your / your client's projects become 'foggy', when they are brand new or major upgrade projects. 4. You have some projects that are out of the pipeline. In other words, there are some projects that are managed with other measurement, instead of buffer status. 5. You want to manage your projects, more intuitively based on CCPM. 6. You believe that there is more room, for maximizing the flow of your system yet. If condition permits, we can obtain significant results sooner by using VBBM, because, it is a very simple and practical method. At this time, therefore, I would like to share my experimental knowledge for performing VBBM with the audiences, so that they may successfully implement it in their projects. In this presentation, the whole process for each phase such as full-kitting, project planning and project execution will be covered in detail. In the right environments for VBBM, the scope of the project needs to be negotiable or flexible. I will also present another option which I will refer to as the 'scope buffer', to be used when it is not possible or desirable to precisely define the complete scope of a project, before project execution starts. In order to bring TOC to the main way, one of the biggest challenges is to make TOC become another level by significant results even in so-called 'complex' environments. Therefore, I will share my thoughts (see below) from another perspective to challenge this with VBBM. - Buffer management in complex environments. How do we manage projects intuitively and simply with buffer management in the complex environment? - Locating VBBM in the Cynefin Framework. VBBM is mapped to Probe, Sense, and Respond in the complex domain. As redefined in this presentation, the target environments of VBBM, i.e. the enormity of unaffected area for CCPM, falls in the complex domain. The nature of the environments under which some types of projects are planned and executed, is becoming increasingly complex with time. This creates a challenge for the current methods and tools to remain relevant and effective over time. In order to maintain relevance in the face of increasing complexity, there is a corresponding need to pursue the inherent simplicity that is hidden by the complexity. According to Eli, 'The more complex the problem is, the more simple the solution has to be'. In order to make VBBM useful in the complex environment, and thus to make VBBM be contributory to bring TOC closer to the main way, we must have continuous improvement to keep it simple. Therefore, the feedback of the TOC community is critical to the POOGI process. 3 learning objectives: - Realizing one of the biggest challenges for our ambition -- making TOC the main way. - Getting on the shoulder of CCPM. - Having enough knowledge to implement VBBM immediately. 3 questions: - What is the appropriate iteration term? - How to utilize VBBM in other environments than software development? - In terms of mechanism of buffer management, what is the uniqueness of VBBM compared to the other TOC applications, e.g. conventional CCPM or DBR? 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
75 Conference Proceedings Updegrove, David Unlocking the secrets of critical chain success and sustainability 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany It is empirically clear that many critical chain (and other TOC) implementations fail either from the beginning or after a period of time as short as one or two years. This includes some implementations that were initially extremely effective, published successes. The purpose of this workshop is to provide insights into how to avoid this outcome and greatly enhance the chances of not only success, but long-term sustainability with ever-increasing results. Areas of focus include crucial preparatory steps that are not well documented in the existing literature, the hidden power of the projects company S&T tree (even for functional implementations), and the way to spread true cultural change through the implementing organization. Finally, three simple questions are proposed for each implementation step that create a world of difference for the prospects of phenomenal success and sustainability of the critical chain implementation. For those who might now specialize in critical chain, much of the material is also applicable to all TOC implementations and strategy and tactics (S&T) trees. At the 2012 TOCICO International Conference in Chicago, Dr. Ajai Kapoor made the remarkable statement that in his experience, the average Critical Chain implementation had a half-life of 2 years. This statement not only rings true, but Dr. Kapoor may have in fact been generous. This is disturbing in light of the fact that most of us want to help realize Eli Goldratt's vision of making TOC the main way of business around the world. It is empirically clear that many Critical Chain (and other TOC) implementations fail either from the beginning or after a period of time as short as one or two years. This includes some implementations that were initially extremely effective, published successes. Multi-year successes with increasing efficacy do exist, but are extremely rare. The proposed workshop suggests that it is possible to reverse this situation. The remedy for avoiding failure and enhancing the probability of success lies in issues of preparation and implementation structure which is not well addressed in existing CCPM literature. It is contended that the best Critical Chain implementations have been a mixture of luck and good intuition on the part of implementers and executives. But luck and intuition cannot, and in fact are not the solution for making effective, long-term sustainable implementations the norm rather than the exception. One crucial common error is launching into Critical Chain planning and buffering too early in the implementation. The material presented will detail the necessary preparatory steps and cultural changes in the organization that should occur first. Done correctly, the cultural changes are not as difficult as often feared. In addition, it is proposed that the Projects Company S&T tree contains the secrets for success. The S&T tree is often ignored or avoided as a 'Viable Vision tool,' when in fact the detail in 3.11.1 and below is applicable to every implementation, whether it be a Viable Vision or simply functional. Even if the S&T tree is used, there can be a tendency to 'brush over' seemingly innocuous entities which are in fact essential to success. In many cases, the answer is hiding in plain sight. Finally, by answering three simple questions about each implementation step, the S&T tree can be turned from a seemingly academic record of guidelines and suggestions into a living, vital instrument for action and real implementation success. These questions, while simple, are in fact capable of being a driving force to ensure success. The relevant questions are: 1) Was the step implemented correctly? 2) Were the expected results of the step fully realized? 3) Did any UDEs appear as a result of taking this step? 4) What mechanism(s) have been put in place to ensure compliance with the step over time? This workshop focuses on Critical Chain as an application of TOC, but in fact it is relevant to all applications and all S&T trees. It is expected that the workshop will deliver practical, immediately actionable information that can bring real results for implementers and organizations, even to the point of being a significant factor in helping to make TOC the main way of doing business. 1 hour 4 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
76 Conference Proceedings Unlocking the secrets of critical chain success and sustainability 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany It is empirically clear that many critical chain (and other TOC) implementations fail either from the beginning or after a period of time as short as one or two years. This includes some implementations that were initially extremely effective, published successes. The purpose of this workshop is to provide insights into how to avoid this outcome and greatly enhance the chances of not only success, but long-term sustainability with ever-increasing results. Areas of focus include crucial preparatory steps that are not well documented in the existing literature, the hidden power of the projects company S&T tree (even for functional implementations), and the way to spread true cultural change through the implementing organization. Finally, three simple questions are proposed for each implementation step that create a world of difference for the prospects of phenomenal success and sustainability of the critical chain implementation. For those who might now specialize in critical chain, much of the material is also applicable to all TOC implementations and strategy and tactics (S&T) trees. At the 2012 TOCICO International Conference in Chicago, Dr. Ajai Kapoor made the remarkable statement that in his experience, the average Critical Chain implementation had a half-life of 2 years. This statement not only rings true, but Dr. Kapoor may have in fact been generous. This is disturbing in light of the fact that most of us want to help realize Eli Goldratt's vision of making TOC the main way of business around the world. It is empirically clear that many Critical Chain (and other TOC) implementations fail either from the beginning or after a period of time as short as one or two years. This includes some implementations that were initially extremely effective, published successes. Multi-year successes with increasing efficacy do exist, but are extremely rare. The proposed workshop suggests that it is possible to reverse this situation. The remedy for avoiding failure and enhancing the probability of success lies in issues of preparation and implementation structure which is not well addressed in existing CCPM literature. It is contended that the best Critical Chain implementations have been a mixture of luck and good intuition on the part of implementers and executives. But luck and intuition cannot, and in fact are not the solution for making effective, long-term sustainable implementations the norm rather than the exception. One crucial common error is launching into Critical Chain planning and buffering too early in the implementation. The material presented will detail the necessary preparatory steps and cultural changes in the organization that should occur first. Done correctly, the cultural changes are not as difficult as often feared. In addition, it is proposed that the Projects Company S&T tree contains the secrets for success. The S&T tree is often ignored or avoided as a 'Viable Vision tool,' when in fact the detail in 3.11.1 and below is applicable to every implementation, whether it be a Viable Vision or simply functional. Even if the S&T tree is used, there can be a tendency to 'brush over' seemingly innocuous entities which are in fact essential to success. In many cases, the answer is hiding in plain sight. Finally, by answering three simple questions about each implementation step, the S&T tree can be turned from a seemingly academic record of guidelines and suggestions into a living, vital instrument for action and real implementation success. These questions, while simple, are in fact capable of being a driving force to ensure success. The relevant questions are: 1) Was the step implemented correctly? 2) Were the expected results of the step fully realized? 3) Did any UDEs appear as a result of taking this step? 4) What mechanism(s) have been put in place to ensure compliance with the step over time? This workshop focuses on Critical Chain as an application of TOC, but in fact it is relevant to all applications and all S&T trees. It is expected that the workshop will deliver practical, immediately actionable information that can bring real results for implementers and organizations, even to the point of being a significant factor in helping to make TOC the main way of doing business. 1 hour 4 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
77 Online Multimedia Ferguson, Lisa Anne Lessons learned on writing transformational strategy and tactics trees 2012 The transformational strategy and tactic tree (TSTT) is the key enabler for an organization to achieve its goal or high level strategy. The TSTT effectively synchronizes all the important actions/tactics needed at all levels of the organization to achieve win-win-win collaboration based on the logic presented in the TSTT implementation plan. In this webinar, Dr. Ferguson will share lessons learned from teaching others how to write TSTT's for the past four years. After that, the webinar will be open for discussion and questions. 51 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2012OnlineMultimedia
78 Online Multimedia Lessons learned on writing transformational strategy and tactics trees 2012 The transformational strategy and tactic tree (TSTT) is the key enabler for an organization to achieve its goal or high level strategy. The TSTT effectively synchronizes all the important actions/tactics needed at all levels of the organization to achieve win-win-win collaboration based on the logic presented in the TSTT implementation plan. In this webinar, Dr. Ferguson will share lessons learned from teaching others how to write TSTT's for the past four years. After that, the webinar will be open for discussion and questions. 51 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2012OnlineMultimedia
79 Online Multimedia Lessons learned on writing transformational strategy and tactics trees 2012 The transformational strategy and tactic tree (TSTT) is the key enabler for an organization to achieve its goal or high level strategy. The TSTT effectively synchronizes all the important actions/tactics needed at all levels of the organization to achieve win-win-win collaboration based on the logic presented in the TSTT implementation plan. In this webinar, Dr. Ferguson will share lessons learned from teaching others how to write TSTT's for the past four years. After that, the webinar will be open for discussion and questions. 51 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2012OnlineMultimedia
80 Online Multimedia Ferguson, Lisa Anne Strategy and tactics trees – Ask the expert 2011 Dr. Ferguson, the author of the chapter on S&T trees in the Theory of Constraints Handbook will provide a brief overview of S&T trees and then open the webinar to questions. Those unable to attend the live webinar are welcome to send questions to be answered in the webinar (assuming there is enough time) via e-mail to lisa.ferguson@illuminutopia.com. 30 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
81 Online Multimedia Strategy and tactics trees – Ask the expert 2011 Dr. Ferguson, the author of the chapter on S&T trees in the Theory of Constraints Handbook will provide a brief overview of S&T trees and then open the webinar to questions. Those unable to attend the live webinar are welcome to send questions to be answered in the webinar (assuming there is enough time) via e-mail to lisa.ferguson@illuminutopia.com. 30 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
82 Online Multimedia Strategy and tactics trees – Ask the expert 2011 Dr. Ferguson, the author of the chapter on S&T trees in the Theory of Constraints Handbook will provide a brief overview of S&T trees and then open the webinar to questions. Those unable to attend the live webinar are welcome to send questions to be answered in the webinar (assuming there is enough time) via e-mail to lisa.ferguson@illuminutopia.com. 30 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
83 Online Multimedia Baptista, Humberto Weaving together the thinking processes and the strategy and tactics trees 2010 Aberdeen, WA In the past few years strategy and tactic trees (S&Ts) re-emerged as a powerful tool to guide large projects like Viable Vision ones. The cause-and-effect logic is apparent on the S&Ts, but it is not clear how do the S&Ts relate to the thinking processes (TP). This presentation maps the logic and communication used in the TP and the S&Ts to their roots and reconnects these two thinking tools. The presentation will cover where the TP intersect with the S&Ts and where they don't, what are the boundaries and applicability of each and how they should be used in concert. About Humberto R. Baptista, Consultant, Vectis Solutions Humberto is a TOC leverager, a TOC Instructor for Goldratt Schools since 2004 and one of the leading experts in TOC Strategy and Tactics. He led translation efforts (TOC Insights, GS material, GWS in CCPM and Viable Vision S&Ts), taught TOC Application Experts in Logistics, Project Management and Sales & Marketing and Project Leaders in many countries. Currently he heads up an experimental TOC firm in Brasil and continues to expand the TOC knowledge in: TOC Principles; Strategy and Tactic Trees, advanced topics of TOC Finance, TOC for NPO (including Government, Health and Education) and techniques for teaching TOC. https://www.tocico.org/page/2010OnlineMultimedia
84 Online Multimedia Weaving together the thinking processes and the strategy and tactics trees 2010 Aberdeen, WA In the past few years strategy and tactic trees (S&Ts) re-emerged as a powerful tool to guide large projects like Viable Vision ones. The cause-and-effect logic is apparent on the S&Ts, but it is not clear how do the S&Ts relate to the thinking processes (TP). This presentation maps the logic and communication used in the TP and the S&Ts to their roots and reconnects these two thinking tools. The presentation will cover where the TP intersect with the S&Ts and where they don't, what are the boundaries and applicability of each and how they should be used in concert. About Humberto R. Baptista, Consultant, Vectis Solutions Humberto is a TOC leverager, a TOC Instructor for Goldratt Schools since 2004 and one of the leading experts in TOC Strategy and Tactics. He led translation efforts (TOC Insights, GS material, GWS in CCPM and Viable Vision S&Ts), taught TOC Application Experts in Logistics, Project Management and Sales & Marketing and Project Leaders in many countries. Currently he heads up an experimental TOC firm in Brasil and continues to expand the TOC knowledge in: TOC Principles; Strategy and Tactic Trees, advanced topics of TOC Finance, TOC for NPO (including Government, Health and Education) and techniques for teaching TOC. https://www.tocico.org/page/2010OnlineMultimedia
85 Online Multimedia Weaving together the thinking processes and the strategy and tactics trees 2010 Aberdeen, WA In the past few years strategy and tactic trees (S&Ts) re-emerged as a powerful tool to guide large projects like Viable Vision ones. The cause-and-effect logic is apparent on the S&Ts, but it is not clear how do the S&Ts relate to the thinking processes (TP). This presentation maps the logic and communication used in the TP and the S&Ts to their roots and reconnects these two thinking tools. The presentation will cover where the TP intersect with the S&Ts and where they don't, what are the boundaries and applicability of each and how they should be used in concert. About Humberto R. Baptista, Consultant, Vectis Solutions Humberto is a TOC leverager, a TOC Instructor for Goldratt Schools since 2004 and one of the leading experts in TOC Strategy and Tactics. He led translation efforts (TOC Insights, GS material, GWS in CCPM and Viable Vision S&Ts), taught TOC Application Experts in Logistics, Project Management and Sales & Marketing and Project Leaders in many countries. Currently he heads up an experimental TOC firm in Brasil and continues to expand the TOC knowledge in: TOC Principles; Strategy and Tactic Trees, advanced topics of TOC Finance, TOC for NPO (including Government, Health and Education) and techniques for teaching TOC. https://www.tocico.org/page/2010OnlineMultimedia
86 Online Multimedia Ferguson, Lisa Anne Understanding more about the standing on the shoulders of giants process 2012 One of the last key pieces of knowledge that Dr. Eli Goldratt shared with us was the Standing on the Shoulders of Giants Process. The six steps of the process are explained in this presentation. Part of this explanation includes some history of Dr. Ferguson's time working with Dr. Goldratt on the paper titled 'Standing on the Shoulders of Giants ' (SOSG). For example, Level 1 of the S & T tree contains the strategy is the common objective (A) of the core conflict of the organization or the huge pot of gold: the parallel assumptions (PAs) (include one or more of the following: facts to lead us to conclude what the tactic must be in order to achieve the strategy/goal of the organization; The needs of the organization in the core conflict (B and C); The assumption(s) challenged underlying the core conflict (under B-D, C-D' and/or D-D' arrows); A statement providing hope (leading to the direction of the solution); The tactic is the one statement of the injection that challenges one or more of the assumptions underlying the core conflict or how the organization intends to achieve its strategy/goal; SA(s) is/are commonly about the power of focus (i.e. the constraint). the purpose and level of detail of each level in the S & T tree are provided. The content of the strategy, parallel assumptions, tactics, necessity assumptions and sufficiency assumptions is discussed. This presentation offers several examples of applications of this process in order to facilitate a better understanding of the six steps. Dr. Ferguson explains how to apply the six steps to achieving excellent health of individuals. 1 hour 17 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2012OnlineMultimedia
87 Online Multimedia Understanding more about the standing on the shoulders of giants process 2012 One of the last key pieces of knowledge that Dr. Eli Goldratt shared with us was the Standing on the Shoulders of Giants Process. The six steps of the process are explained in this presentation. Part of this explanation includes some history of Dr. Ferguson's time working with Dr. Goldratt on the paper titled 'Standing on the Shoulders of Giants ' (SOSG). For example, Level 1 of the S & T tree contains the strategy is the common objective (A) of the core conflict of the organization or the huge pot of gold: the parallel assumptions (PAs) (include one or more of the following: facts to lead us to conclude what the tactic must be in order to achieve the strategy/goal of the organization; The needs of the organization in the core conflict (B and C); The assumption(s) challenged underlying the core conflict (under B-D, C-D' and/or D-D' arrows); A statement providing hope (leading to the direction of the solution); The tactic is the one statement of the injection that challenges one or more of the assumptions underlying the core conflict or how the organization intends to achieve its strategy/goal; SA(s) is/are commonly about the power of focus (i.e. the constraint). the purpose and level of detail of each level in the S & T tree are provided. The content of the strategy, parallel assumptions, tactics, necessity assumptions and sufficiency assumptions is discussed. This presentation offers several examples of applications of this process in order to facilitate a better understanding of the six steps. Dr. Ferguson explains how to apply the six steps to achieving excellent health of individuals. 1 hour 17 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2012OnlineMultimedia
88 Online Multimedia Understanding more about the standing on the shoulders of giants process 2012 One of the last key pieces of knowledge that Dr. Eli Goldratt shared with us was the Standing on the Shoulders of Giants Process. The six steps of the process are explained in this presentation. Part of this explanation includes some history of Dr. Ferguson's time working with Dr. Goldratt on the paper titled 'Standing on the Shoulders of Giants ' (SOSG). For example, Level 1 of the S & T tree contains the strategy is the common objective (A) of the core conflict of the organization or the huge pot of gold: the parallel assumptions (PAs) (include one or more of the following: facts to lead us to conclude what the tactic must be in order to achieve the strategy/goal of the organization; The needs of the organization in the core conflict (B and C); The assumption(s) challenged underlying the core conflict (under B-D, C-D' and/or D-D' arrows); A statement providing hope (leading to the direction of the solution); The tactic is the one statement of the injection that challenges one or more of the assumptions underlying the core conflict or how the organization intends to achieve its strategy/goal; SA(s) is/are commonly about the power of focus (i.e. the constraint). the purpose and level of detail of each level in the S & T tree are provided. The content of the strategy, parallel assumptions, tactics, necessity assumptions and sufficiency assumptions is discussed. This presentation offers several examples of applications of this process in order to facilitate a better understanding of the six steps. Dr. Ferguson explains how to apply the six steps to achieving excellent health of individuals. 1 hour 17 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2012OnlineMultimedia
89 Online Multimedia Ferguson, Lisa Anne 0 to 60: Introduction to operations and production 2012 Drum buffer rope (DBR) and buffer management, the TOC application for operations/ production, results in dramatic improvements in the flow of products, orders and/or customers in both manufacturing and service organizations. DBR and buffer management was first described in the best-selling novel, The Goal, which was written by the founder of TOC, Dr. Eliyahu M. Goldratt. Vast experience shows that, in traditionally run plants, DBR and buffer management typically (but not always) leads only to good results and to no negative ramifications: lead time shrinks to less than half, due date performance improves considerably, throughput goes up and excess capacity is revealed. In service organizations, waiting and service times decrease dramatically, quality and customer satisfaction improve and excess capacity is revealed. 1 hour 2 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2012OnlineMultimedia
90 Online Multimedia 0 to 60: Introduction to operations and production 2012 Drum buffer rope (DBR) and buffer management, the TOC application for operations/ production, results in dramatic improvements in the flow of products, orders and/or customers in both manufacturing and service organizations. DBR and buffer management was first described in the best-selling novel, The Goal, which was written by the founder of TOC, Dr. Eliyahu M. Goldratt. Vast experience shows that, in traditionally run plants, DBR and buffer management typically (but not always) leads only to good results and to no negative ramifications: lead time shrinks to less than half, due date performance improves considerably, throughput goes up and excess capacity is revealed. In service organizations, waiting and service times decrease dramatically, quality and customer satisfaction improve and excess capacity is revealed. 1 hour 2 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2012OnlineMultimedia
91 Online Multimedia 0 to 60: Introduction to operations and production 2012 Drum buffer rope (DBR) and buffer management, the TOC application for operations/ production, results in dramatic improvements in the flow of products, orders and/or customers in both manufacturing and service organizations. DBR and buffer management was first described in the best-selling novel, The Goal, which was written by the founder of TOC, Dr. Eliyahu M. Goldratt. Vast experience shows that, in traditionally run plants, DBR and buffer management typically (but not always) leads only to good results and to no negative ramifications: lead time shrinks to less than half, due date performance improves considerably, throughput goes up and excess capacity is revealed. In service organizations, waiting and service times decrease dramatically, quality and customer satisfaction improve and excess capacity is revealed. 1 hour 2 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2012OnlineMultimedia
92 Online Multimedia Ferguson, Lisa Anne Strategy and tactics for hospitals 2010 We present the generic Strategy and Tactics tree for hospitals for how to implement TOC to improve healthcare quality, provide a more rewarding environment and improve financial performance. Then, we share experiences of implementing TOC in both public and private hospitals.  1 hour 21 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2010OnlineMultimedia
93 Online Multimedia van Gelder, Antoine Strategy and tactics for hospitals 2010 We present the generic Strategy and Tactics tree for hospitals for how to implement TOC to improve healthcare quality, provide a more rewarding environment and improve financial performance. Then, we share experiences of implementing TOC in both public and private hospitals.  1 hour 21 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2010OnlineMultimedia
94 Online Multimedia Strategy and tactics for hospitals 2010 We present the generic Strategy and Tactics tree for hospitals for how to implement TOC to improve healthcare quality, provide a more rewarding environment and improve financial performance. Then, we share experiences of implementing TOC in both public and private hospitals.  1 hour 21 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2010OnlineMultimedia
95 Online Multimedia Strategy and tactics for hospitals 2010 We present the generic Strategy and Tactics tree for hospitals for how to implement TOC to improve healthcare quality, provide a more rewarding environment and improve financial performance. Then, we share experiences of implementing TOC in both public and private hospitals.  1 hour 21 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2010OnlineMultimedia
96 Online Multimedia Huitti, Petri Running focused supply chain Improvement with TOC & lean 2011 The webinar provides a simple improvement approach and examples of how to apply TOC and lean principles with the selected value stream especially in the business-to-business ( B2B) environment. Can this be done e.g. with an important customer dissatisfied for delivery performance and with risk of losing sales or with a critical supplier causing disturbances to production. Suitable e.g. for doing a small scale SCM improvement in an organization where TOC is not known or as a showcase, a starter or part of a wider improvement. The idea is to select the most business critical value stream where benefits are substantially bigger than the effort or cost of improvement and involve people running the process in the improvement. When used to improve certain value streams through the company, from sales to purchasing, can reveal more generic issues causing disturbances to flow (on which to focus later on). Under scope can be order-delivery process, and where relevant, also demand supply planning. 56 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
97 Online Multimedia Running focused supply chain Improvement with TOC & lean 2011 The webinar provides a simple improvement approach and examples of how to apply TOC and lean principles with the selected value stream especially in the business-to-business ( B2B) environment. Can this be done e.g. with an important customer dissatisfied for delivery performance and with risk of losing sales or with a critical supplier causing disturbances to production. Suitable e.g. for doing a small scale SCM improvement in an organization where TOC is not known or as a showcase, a starter or part of a wider improvement. The idea is to select the most business critical value stream where benefits are substantially bigger than the effort or cost of improvement and involve people running the process in the improvement. When used to improve certain value streams through the company, from sales to purchasing, can reveal more generic issues causing disturbances to flow (on which to focus later on). Under scope can be order-delivery process, and where relevant, also demand supply planning. 56 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
98 Online Multimedia Running focused supply chain Improvement with TOC & lean 2011 The webinar provides a simple improvement approach and examples of how to apply TOC and lean principles with the selected value stream especially in the business-to-business ( B2B) environment. Can this be done e.g. with an important customer dissatisfied for delivery performance and with risk of losing sales or with a critical supplier causing disturbances to production. Suitable e.g. for doing a small scale SCM improvement in an organization where TOC is not known or as a showcase, a starter or part of a wider improvement. The idea is to select the most business critical value stream where benefits are substantially bigger than the effort or cost of improvement and involve people running the process in the improvement. When used to improve certain value streams through the company, from sales to purchasing, can reveal more generic issues causing disturbances to flow (on which to focus later on). Under scope can be order-delivery process, and where relevant, also demand supply planning. 56 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
99 Online Multimedia Hutchin, Ted Making choices using clouds 2011 Managers manage and leaders lead, but in both cases they have to make choices!  But how do we make choices?  What are the assumptions that lie behind every choice, even when we feel we have no choice?  Can we articulate the choices facing us? Can we properly define the choices, understand them, and surface the assumptions that inform our choice making? Here lies a whole series of questions, and then, having made the choice we are faced with even more.  This time the 'choices' we need to make are between competing decisions.  Every choice we make usually mandates a series of decisions, and for every set of decisions there is always at least two options, two competing avenues that appear to take us toward the goal set by the choice already made – but how to make those choices?  And then what about those decisions that although necessary to take us towards the goal, based on the choice made, create for us enormous problems and thus we are facing a conflict of subordination.  And then, what happens when our dominant paradigm is one that although we are clear about the choice made, even clear about the decisions we have to take, consider that the change that the decision we are about to take so jeopardizes one of our dominant paradigms that we cannot take the decision thus cannot achieve the outcome of that decision, thus cannot deliver according to the choice made – we are locked into a paradigm and can, and often does, paralyses our progress towards our goal in life. 1 hour 5 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
100 Online Multimedia Making choices using clouds 2011 Managers manage and leaders lead, but in both cases they have to make choices!  But how do we make choices?  What are the assumptions that lie behind every choice, even when we feel we have no choice?  Can we articulate the choices facing us? Can we properly define the choices, understand them, and surface the assumptions that inform our choice making? Here lies a whole series of questions, and then, having made the choice we are faced with even more.  This time the 'choices' we need to make are between competing decisions.  Every choice we make usually mandates a series of decisions, and for every set of decisions there is always at least two options, two competing avenues that appear to take us toward the goal set by the choice already made – but how to make those choices?  And then what about those decisions that although necessary to take us towards the goal, based on the choice made, create for us enormous problems and thus we are facing a conflict of subordination.  And then, what happens when our dominant paradigm is one that although we are clear about the choice made, even clear about the decisions we have to take, consider that the change that the decision we are about to take so jeopardizes one of our dominant paradigms that we cannot take the decision thus cannot achieve the outcome of that decision, thus cannot deliver according to the choice made – we are locked into a paradigm and can, and often does, paralyses our progress towards our goal in life. 1 hour 5 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
101 Online Multimedia Making choices using clouds 2011 Managers manage and leaders lead, but in both cases they have to make choices!  But how do we make choices?  What are the assumptions that lie behind every choice, even when we feel we have no choice?  Can we articulate the choices facing us? Can we properly define the choices, understand them, and surface the assumptions that inform our choice making? Here lies a whole series of questions, and then, having made the choice we are faced with even more.  This time the 'choices' we need to make are between competing decisions.  Every choice we make usually mandates a series of decisions, and for every set of decisions there is always at least two options, two competing avenues that appear to take us toward the goal set by the choice already made – but how to make those choices?  And then what about those decisions that although necessary to take us towards the goal, based on the choice made, create for us enormous problems and thus we are facing a conflict of subordination.  And then, what happens when our dominant paradigm is one that although we are clear about the choice made, even clear about the decisions we have to take, consider that the change that the decision we are about to take so jeopardizes one of our dominant paradigms that we cannot take the decision thus cannot achieve the outcome of that decision, thus cannot deliver according to the choice made – we are locked into a paradigm and can, and often does, paralyses our progress towards our goal in life. 1 hour 5 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
102 Online Multimedia Hutchin, Ted CCPM – Coaching dimension insights 2011 Critical chain project management (CCPM), from the earliest beginnings to one of the major shifts in project management over the last forty years, represents a paradigm shift in project management and one that is still being explored. CCPM is not just about managing projects or about managing programmes. CCPM is a business methodology that challenges the way you do business, the way you manage people, the way you engage with clients and suppliers – it is a systemic way of managing in the project environment if not THE way to manage! There are software systems, training systems, implementation systems all designed to help you implement and manage according to CCPM principles BUT despite all the success that has been achieved there are still three areas to be addressed: 1. The people dimension. a. This is about developing internal people to maintain and sustain the progress – always challenging the status quo, never satisfied with 'now' and looking to what must be done tomorrow, this is a leadership role rather than a management one. We have too many managers and not enough leaders. Leaders are people who can inspire, who can encourage, who can help to draw out of those around hidden potential, leadership is a necessary condition for any organization and that includes project driven ones. b. It is also about managing the change process – this is where coaching comes in – working with each individual, sitting alongside, helping them to overcome the barriers they perceive will prevent them from moving forward. This is about helping those involved to see just how the changes will affect them, and allow them to be what they wanted to be in the first place – good project managers, good resource managers, good engineers and so on. This is about releasing the potential within each person and using that potential to gain significant economic advantage and secure jobs into the future. 2. The metric dimension. a. It is an old cliché but if the measures don't change neither will much else – and still many people even within successful CCPM organizations have not thought through the metric changes required. So a short part about the importance of changing the metrics for any chance of a successful implementation, 3. Sustaining the progress. a. The technology does not sustain progress, people do, so invest in the people, recruit the best when needed, train them, coach them, allow them to make mistakes, and above all train and coach them to make really informed choices. 1 hour 1 minute https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
103 Online Multimedia CCPM – Coaching dimension insights 2011 Critical chain project management (CCPM), from the earliest beginnings to one of the major shifts in project management over the last forty years, represents a paradigm shift in project management and one that is still being explored. CCPM is not just about managing projects or about managing programmes. CCPM is a business methodology that challenges the way you do business, the way you manage people, the way you engage with clients and suppliers – it is a systemic way of managing in the project environment if not THE way to manage! There are software systems, training systems, implementation systems all designed to help you implement and manage according to CCPM principles BUT despite all the success that has been achieved there are still three areas to be addressed: 1. The people dimension. a. This is about developing internal people to maintain and sustain the progress – always challenging the status quo, never satisfied with 'now' and looking to what must be done tomorrow, this is a leadership role rather than a management one. We have too many managers and not enough leaders. Leaders are people who can inspire, who can encourage, who can help to draw out of those around hidden potential, leadership is a necessary condition for any organization and that includes project driven ones. b. It is also about managing the change process – this is where coaching comes in – working with each individual, sitting alongside, helping them to overcome the barriers they perceive will prevent them from moving forward. This is about helping those involved to see just how the changes will affect them, and allow them to be what they wanted to be in the first place – good project managers, good resource managers, good engineers and so on. This is about releasing the potential within each person and using that potential to gain significant economic advantage and secure jobs into the future. 2. The metric dimension. a. It is an old cliché but if the measures don't change neither will much else – and still many people even within successful CCPM organizations have not thought through the metric changes required. So a short part about the importance of changing the metrics for any chance of a successful implementation, 3. Sustaining the progress. a. The technology does not sustain progress, people do, so invest in the people, recruit the best when needed, train them, coach them, allow them to make mistakes, and above all train and coach them to make really informed choices. 1 hour 1 minute https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
104 Online Multimedia CCPM – Coaching dimension insights 2011 Critical chain project management (CCPM), from the earliest beginnings to one of the major shifts in project management over the last forty years, represents a paradigm shift in project management and one that is still being explored. CCPM is not just about managing projects or about managing programmes. CCPM is a business methodology that challenges the way you do business, the way you manage people, the way you engage with clients and suppliers – it is a systemic way of managing in the project environment if not THE way to manage! There are software systems, training systems, implementation systems all designed to help you implement and manage according to CCPM principles BUT despite all the success that has been achieved there are still three areas to be addressed: 1. The people dimension. a. This is about developing internal people to maintain and sustain the progress – always challenging the status quo, never satisfied with 'now' and looking to what must be done tomorrow, this is a leadership role rather than a management one. We have too many managers and not enough leaders. Leaders are people who can inspire, who can encourage, who can help to draw out of those around hidden potential, leadership is a necessary condition for any organization and that includes project driven ones. b. It is also about managing the change process – this is where coaching comes in – working with each individual, sitting alongside, helping them to overcome the barriers they perceive will prevent them from moving forward. This is about helping those involved to see just how the changes will affect them, and allow them to be what they wanted to be in the first place – good project managers, good resource managers, good engineers and so on. This is about releasing the potential within each person and using that potential to gain significant economic advantage and secure jobs into the future. 2. The metric dimension. a. It is an old cliché but if the measures don't change neither will much else – and still many people even within successful CCPM organizations have not thought through the metric changes required. So a short part about the importance of changing the metrics for any chance of a successful implementation, 3. Sustaining the progress. a. The technology does not sustain progress, people do, so invest in the people, recruit the best when needed, train them, coach them, allow them to make mistakes, and above all train and coach them to make really informed choices. 1 hour 1 minute https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
105 Online Multimedia Lang, Lisa Mafia offers: Ask the expert 2011 Chapter 22 of the Theory of Constraints Handbook is Mafia Offers:  Dealing with a Market Constraint. One should read this chapter to determine what a Mafia offer is, the content, and various Mafia offer types prior to viewing this presentation. During this Q&A webinar with Dr Lisa you can ask questions about the chapter or about Mafia offers in general.  This is a rare opportunity to ask the expert about YOUR Mafia offer or implementation challenges! 1 hour 24 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
106 Online Multimedia Mafia offers: Ask the expert 2011 Chapter 22 of the Theory of Constraints Handbook is Mafia Offers:  Dealing with a Market Constraint. One should read this chapter to determine what a Mafia offer is, the content, and various Mafia offer types prior to viewing this presentation. During this Q&A webinar with Dr Lisa you can ask questions about the chapter or about Mafia offers in general.  This is a rare opportunity to ask the expert about YOUR Mafia offer or implementation challenges! 1 hour 24 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
107 Online Multimedia Mafia offers: Ask the expert 2011 Chapter 22 of the Theory of Constraints Handbook is Mafia Offers:  Dealing with a Market Constraint. One should read this chapter to determine what a Mafia offer is, the content, and various Mafia offer types prior to viewing this presentation. During this Q&A webinar with Dr Lisa you can ask questions about the chapter or about Mafia offers in general.  This is a rare opportunity to ask the expert about YOUR Mafia offer or implementation challenges! 1 hour 24 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
108 Online Multimedia Lang, Lisa Dr. Lisas mafia offers: Q & A session 2011 Create a market offer so good, your customers can't refuse it and your competition can't or won't offer the same – that's a ‘Mafia offer'!  A 'Mafia offer' sounds like something out of a movie, not something that could actually allow you to increase and control your sales.  It turns out that Mafia offers are possible for the majority of companies.  The reason that most companies don't know that they have one or know what it is, is because they just don't know how to develop them.  If you read Dr. Goldratt's book It's Not Luck or one of the other Theory of Constraints (TOC) books, you read about how we use cause-and-effect logic (also called Theory of Constraints Thinking Processes) about your customers, your industry, and about your company to create the offer.  You also know that it's not easy to do.  Join this Q&A webinar to ask Dr. Lisa questions on how to develop Mafia offers. This is a Q&A session only...no presentation will be provided, so come prepared with your questions!  Please read Chapter 22 of the TOC Handbook to help prepare for this webinar. https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
109 Online Multimedia Dr. Lisas mafia offers: Q & A session 2011 Create a market offer so good, your customers can't refuse it and your competition can't or won't offer the same – that's a ‘Mafia offer'!  A 'Mafia offer' sounds like something out of a movie, not something that could actually allow you to increase and control your sales.  It turns out that Mafia offers are possible for the majority of companies.  The reason that most companies don't know that they have one or know what it is, is because they just don't know how to develop them.  If you read Dr. Goldratt's book It's Not Luck or one of the other Theory of Constraints (TOC) books, you read about how we use cause-and-effect logic (also called Theory of Constraints Thinking Processes) about your customers, your industry, and about your company to create the offer.  You also know that it's not easy to do.  Join this Q&A webinar to ask Dr. Lisa questions on how to develop Mafia offers. This is a Q&A session only...no presentation will be provided, so come prepared with your questions!  Please read Chapter 22 of the TOC Handbook to help prepare for this webinar. https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
110 Online Multimedia Dr. Lisas mafia offers: Q & A session 2011 Create a market offer so good, your customers can't refuse it and your competition can't or won't offer the same – that's a ‘Mafia offer'!  A 'Mafia offer' sounds like something out of a movie, not something that could actually allow you to increase and control your sales.  It turns out that Mafia offers are possible for the majority of companies.  The reason that most companies don't know that they have one or know what it is, is because they just don't know how to develop them.  If you read Dr. Goldratt's book It's Not Luck or one of the other Theory of Constraints (TOC) books, you read about how we use cause-and-effect logic (also called Theory of Constraints Thinking Processes) about your customers, your industry, and about your company to create the offer.  You also know that it's not easy to do.  Join this Q&A webinar to ask Dr. Lisa questions on how to develop Mafia offers. This is a Q&A session only...no presentation will be provided, so come prepared with your questions!  Please read Chapter 22 of the TOC Handbook to help prepare for this webinar. https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
111 Online Multimedia Moura, Eduardo The need to integrate TOC, lean, six sigma and management by processes 2010 In this presentation, the authors show the need and advantages of integrating TOC (Theory of Constraints), Lean Production System, Six Sigma and BMP (Business Management by Processes) into a coherent system for organizational development and improved business performance. Besides the unique contributions that each one of those methodologies provide, there is a synergistic effect between them that are not currently recognized and exploited in most organizations around the world. The vast majority of consulting companies typically specialize and offer just one of those methodologies, but their client companies do have a need to reap the benefits of a holistic approach, in order to continuously improve their competitiveness. The authors also emphasize the importance of creating an organizational environment where the know-how provided by those four methodologies are built upon a philosophical base (the know-why established by the core values, mission and long-term vision), with the improvement efforts oriented around a few critical aspects of the business system (the know-what summarized in the National Quality Award criteria). Guidance is also provided about how to start the practical implementation of the proposed approach, and a case study is presented. 59 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2010OnlineMultimedia
112 Online Multimedia The need to integrate TOC, lean, six sigma and management by processes 2010 In this presentation, the authors show the need and advantages of integrating TOC (Theory of Constraints), Lean Production System, Six Sigma and BMP (Business Management by Processes) into a coherent system for organizational development and improved business performance. Besides the unique contributions that each one of those methodologies provide, there is a synergistic effect between them that are not currently recognized and exploited in most organizations around the world. The vast majority of consulting companies typically specialize and offer just one of those methodologies, but their client companies do have a need to reap the benefits of a holistic approach, in order to continuously improve their competitiveness. The authors also emphasize the importance of creating an organizational environment where the know-how provided by those four methodologies are built upon a philosophical base (the know-why established by the core values, mission and long-term vision), with the improvement efforts oriented around a few critical aspects of the business system (the know-what summarized in the National Quality Award criteria). Guidance is also provided about how to start the practical implementation of the proposed approach, and a case study is presented. 59 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2010OnlineMultimedia
113 Online Multimedia The need to integrate TOC, lean, six sigma and management by processes 2010 In this presentation, the authors show the need and advantages of integrating TOC (Theory of Constraints), Lean Production System, Six Sigma and BMP (Business Management by Processes) into a coherent system for organizational development and improved business performance. Besides the unique contributions that each one of those methodologies provide, there is a synergistic effect between them that are not currently recognized and exploited in most organizations around the world. The vast majority of consulting companies typically specialize and offer just one of those methodologies, but their client companies do have a need to reap the benefits of a holistic approach, in order to continuously improve their competitiveness. The authors also emphasize the importance of creating an organizational environment where the know-how provided by those four methodologies are built upon a philosophical base (the know-why established by the core values, mission and long-term vision), with the improvement efforts oriented around a few critical aspects of the business system (the know-what summarized in the National Quality Award criteria). Guidance is also provided about how to start the practical implementation of the proposed approach, and a case study is presented. 59 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2010OnlineMultimedia
114 Online Multimedia Roberts, Debi Educational research investigating any impact TOC may have on emotional literacy highlights that TOC can be effective in reducing stress and increasing levels of concentration 2011 Robert's research considered whether TOC in combination with a story could enhance the emotional literacy of ten year olds.  Her webinar shares details of that research and the implications for education and business including; 1. What you NEED TO KNOW about group emotional literacy. 2. That you NEED TO KNOW about the levels of stress all children endure as part of their daily experience of school and how TOC can reduce that stress. 3. How TOC can be effectively taught to youth to impact BOTH their social and learning skills, supporting students engage, achieve and flourish both now and in the future. 40 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
115 Online Multimedia Educational research investigating any impact TOC may have on emotional literacy highlights that TOC can be effective in reducing stress and increasing levels of concentration 2011 Robert's research considered whether TOC in combination with a story could enhance the emotional literacy of ten year olds.  Her webinar shares details of that research and the implications for education and business including; 1. What you NEED TO KNOW about group emotional literacy. 2. That you NEED TO KNOW about the levels of stress all children endure as part of their daily experience of school and how TOC can reduce that stress. 3. How TOC can be effectively taught to youth to impact BOTH their social and learning skills, supporting students engage, achieve and flourish both now and in the future. 40 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
116 Online Multimedia Educational research investigating any impact TOC may have on emotional literacy highlights that TOC can be effective in reducing stress and increasing levels of concentration 2011 Robert's research considered whether TOC in combination with a story could enhance the emotional literacy of ten year olds.  Her webinar shares details of that research and the implications for education and business including; 1. What you NEED TO KNOW about group emotional literacy. 2. That you NEED TO KNOW about the levels of stress all children endure as part of their daily experience of school and how TOC can reduce that stress. 3. How TOC can be effectively taught to youth to impact BOTH their social and learning skills, supporting students engage, achieve and flourish both now and in the future. 40 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
117 Online Multimedia Roff-Marsh, Justin How to sell through intermediaries (agents, distributors and manufacturers reps) 2010 Structuring a relationship with intermediaries is particularly sensitive because tight integration is critical — but, by their very nature, intermediaries need to retain the ability to operate autonomously. Roff-Marsh (developer of Sales Process Engineering) presents — for the very first time — a detailed and practical approach to the structuring of these relationships. He'll provide an acid test for evaluating the viability of intermediary relationships, as well as a detailed plan to deliver a win for the firm, a win for the intermediary and a win for the ultimate customer. 1 hour 3 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2010OnlineMultimedia
118 Online Multimedia How to sell through intermediaries (agents, distributors and manufacturers reps) 2010 Structuring a relationship with intermediaries is particularly sensitive because tight integration is critical — but, by their very nature, intermediaries need to retain the ability to operate autonomously. Roff-Marsh (developer of Sales Process Engineering) presents — for the very first time — a detailed and practical approach to the structuring of these relationships. He'll provide an acid test for evaluating the viability of intermediary relationships, as well as a detailed plan to deliver a win for the firm, a win for the intermediary and a win for the ultimate customer. 1 hour 3 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2010OnlineMultimedia
119 Online Multimedia How to sell through intermediaries (agents, distributors and manufacturers reps) 2010 Structuring a relationship with intermediaries is particularly sensitive because tight integration is critical — but, by their very nature, intermediaries need to retain the ability to operate autonomously. Roff-Marsh (developer of Sales Process Engineering) presents — for the very first time — a detailed and practical approach to the structuring of these relationships. He'll provide an acid test for evaluating the viability of intermediary relationships, as well as a detailed plan to deliver a win for the firm, a win for the intermediary and a win for the ultimate customer. 1 hour 3 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2010OnlineMultimedia
120 Online Multimedia Roff-Marsh, Justin How to use social media to generate sales opportunities for professional services 2011 When Justin Roff-Marsh emigrated to the US to launch a subsidiary of his consulting firm, he under-estimated how difficult it would be to generate sales opportunities in this mature and hyper-competitive market. He quickly discovered that traditional marketing approaches -- even those that work well for his firm's clients -- simply failed to work (these include public relations, house events, trade shows and targeted direct mail campaigns). Fortunately, as a result of a year of frantic experimentation, Justin arrived at a lead-generation formula that is both low-cost and remarkably effective. In this webinar he charts his journey of discovery and details the formula. Although this formula incorporates social media (Justin has transitioned from a skeptic to an reserved evangelist) it does not require the kind of all-in commitment that other evangelists are advocating. Justin describes an approach that involves just the bare essentials (no Facebooking, Tweeting or blogging for the sake of blogging!)  As well as describing a do-it-yourself approach and laying bare his own costs and statistics, Justin allocates enough time for a question-and-answer session. 1 hour 5 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
121 Online Multimedia How to use social media to generate sales opportunities for professional services 2011 When Justin Roff-Marsh emigrated to the US to launch a subsidiary of his consulting firm, he under-estimated how difficult it would be to generate sales opportunities in this mature and hyper-competitive market. He quickly discovered that traditional marketing approaches -- even those that work well for his firm's clients -- simply failed to work (these include public relations, house events, trade shows and targeted direct mail campaigns). Fortunately, as a result of a year of frantic experimentation, Justin arrived at a lead-generation formula that is both low-cost and remarkably effective. In this webinar he charts his journey of discovery and details the formula. Although this formula incorporates social media (Justin has transitioned from a skeptic to an reserved evangelist) it does not require the kind of all-in commitment that other evangelists are advocating. Justin describes an approach that involves just the bare essentials (no Facebooking, Tweeting or blogging for the sake of blogging!)  As well as describing a do-it-yourself approach and laying bare his own costs and statistics, Justin allocates enough time for a question-and-answer session. 1 hour 5 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
122 Online Multimedia How to use social media to generate sales opportunities for professional services 2011 When Justin Roff-Marsh emigrated to the US to launch a subsidiary of his consulting firm, he under-estimated how difficult it would be to generate sales opportunities in this mature and hyper-competitive market. He quickly discovered that traditional marketing approaches -- even those that work well for his firm's clients -- simply failed to work (these include public relations, house events, trade shows and targeted direct mail campaigns). Fortunately, as a result of a year of frantic experimentation, Justin arrived at a lead-generation formula that is both low-cost and remarkably effective. In this webinar he charts his journey of discovery and details the formula. Although this formula incorporates social media (Justin has transitioned from a skeptic to an reserved evangelist) it does not require the kind of all-in commitment that other evangelists are advocating. Justin describes an approach that involves just the bare essentials (no Facebooking, Tweeting or blogging for the sake of blogging!)  As well as describing a do-it-yourself approach and laying bare his own costs and statistics, Justin allocates enough time for a question-and-answer session. 1 hour 5 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
123 Online Multimedia Scheinkopf, Lisa Linear high touch time: A new TOC application 2012 When companies manage their production according to drum-buffer-rope (DBR), and their projects according to critical chain project management (CCPM), they improve performance –they improve the flow of the goods or services they provide, and in the process become much better at meeting the commitments they make to their clients, and significantly increase their productivity. However, there are many companies that have operations that are considered 'production,' but have some characteristics that could be characterized as 'more projects than production' – for example, instead of touch time which is negligible relative to the lead time, their touch time comprises 20% or more of the lead time. Or, they have operations that are considered 'projects', but have some characteristics that could be characterized as 'more production than projects' – for example, instead of a highly complex 'A' type flow structure to build what they sell, they have a much simpler, more linear type of process. 46 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2012OnlineMultimedia
124 Online Multimedia Linear high touch time: A new TOC application 2012 When companies manage their production according to drum-buffer-rope (DBR), and their projects according to critical chain project management (CCPM), they improve performance –they improve the flow of the goods or services they provide, and in the process become much better at meeting the commitments they make to their clients, and significantly increase their productivity. However, there are many companies that have operations that are considered 'production,' but have some characteristics that could be characterized as 'more projects than production' – for example, instead of touch time which is negligible relative to the lead time, their touch time comprises 20% or more of the lead time. Or, they have operations that are considered 'projects', but have some characteristics that could be characterized as 'more production than projects' – for example, instead of a highly complex 'A' type flow structure to build what they sell, they have a much simpler, more linear type of process. 46 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2012OnlineMultimedia
125 Online Multimedia Linear high touch time: A new TOC application 2012 When companies manage their production according to drum-buffer-rope (DBR), and their projects according to critical chain project management (CCPM), they improve performance –they improve the flow of the goods or services they provide, and in the process become much better at meeting the commitments they make to their clients, and significantly increase their productivity. However, there are many companies that have operations that are considered 'production,' but have some characteristics that could be characterized as 'more projects than production' – for example, instead of touch time which is negligible relative to the lead time, their touch time comprises 20% or more of the lead time. Or, they have operations that are considered 'projects', but have some characteristics that could be characterized as 'more production than projects' – for example, instead of a highly complex 'A' type flow structure to build what they sell, they have a much simpler, more linear type of process. 46 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2012OnlineMultimedia
126 Online Multimedia Schragenheim, Eli Management dilemmas and how to learn from a fictional case 2011 There is no need to read the book to participate. The topic is how to learn and how to teach others using fictional case studies. How much information should be included in a fictional case? The first riddle will be used as an example. This is a Q&A session with Eli Schragenheim, author of the book Management Dilemmas. Have your questions ready ahead of time! NEW INFORMATION: Eli will be using a dedicated case written specifically for this webinar to present to you instead of the current riddle that has been published on the TOCICO website. Please be prepared for this new case, but still have your questions ready! 1 hour 1 minute https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
127 Online Multimedia Management dilemmas and how to learn from a fictional case 2011 There is no need to read the book to participate. The topic is how to learn and how to teach others using fictional case studies. How much information should be included in a fictional case? The first riddle will be used as an example. This is a Q&A session with Eli Schragenheim, author of the book Management Dilemmas. Have your questions ready ahead of time! NEW INFORMATION: Eli will be using a dedicated case written specifically for this webinar to present to you instead of the current riddle that has been published on the TOCICO website. Please be prepared for this new case, but still have your questions ready! 1 hour 1 minute https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
128 Online Multimedia Management dilemmas and how to learn from a fictional case 2011 There is no need to read the book to participate. The topic is how to learn and how to teach others using fictional case studies. How much information should be included in a fictional case? The first riddle will be used as an example. This is a Q&A session with Eli Schragenheim, author of the book Management Dilemmas. Have your questions ready ahead of time! NEW INFORMATION: Eli will be using a dedicated case written specifically for this webinar to present to you instead of the current riddle that has been published on the TOCICO website. Please be prepared for this new case, but still have your questions ready! 1 hour 1 minute https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
129 Online Multimedia Schragenheim, Eli Never say I know series 2: Diving into the buffer and buffer management 2012 The importance of buffering in the wider sense is discussed. Remember Eli Goldratt's insight: 'Never let something important to become urgent!'. The key insight of the 'Red-line' in buffer managing is discussed. Managing a buffer is different than managing the whole protective mechanism. Additionally, monitoring the 'number of reds' is a key indicator of management. 1 hour 28 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2012OnlineMultimedia
130 Online Multimedia Never say I know series 2: Diving into the buffer and buffer management 2012 The importance of buffering in the wider sense is discussed. Remember Eli Goldratt's insight: 'Never let something important to become urgent!'. The key insight of the 'Red-line' in buffer managing is discussed. Managing a buffer is different than managing the whole protective mechanism. Additionally, monitoring the 'number of reds' is a key indicator of management. 1 hour 28 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2012OnlineMultimedia
131 Online Multimedia Never say I know series 2: Diving into the buffer and buffer management 2012 The importance of buffering in the wider sense is discussed. Remember Eli Goldratt's insight: 'Never let something important to become urgent!'. The key insight of the 'Red-line' in buffer managing is discussed. Managing a buffer is different than managing the whole protective mechanism. Additionally, monitoring the 'number of reds' is a key indicator of management. 1 hour 28 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2012OnlineMultimedia
132 Online Multimedia Schragenheim, Eli The flaws of both cost-per-unit and T / CU as critical information for a variety of decisions 2011 Concentrating on the specific area of decisions where management accounting has a devastating impact.  The webinar first inquire into the real faulty assumption behind the concept of 'cost-per-unit'.  Understanding the flaws of the concept is a key to understand the current reluctance of replacing cost-per-unit with something else.  But, does the current BOK of TOC offer a full support to the decisions currently supported by the 'cost-per-unit'?  The webinar discusses some common misunderstanding of the theory of constraints (TOC) concepts, notably how the T/CU might lead to wrong decisions.  Thus the boundaries of the current knowledge of TOC regarding throughput accounting are properly understood, and the difficulty in providing a wider support to these decisions are discussed in order to pave the way for a direction of solution.  The role of uncertainty in such decisions is brought up.  The impact of the current lack of tools to support those decisions is demonstrated by a leading example. In this series Eli Schragenheim (the other Eli) wishes to think aloud on how TOC guides us to be better decision makers.  The most interesting question to be dealt in the series is what 'hard decisions' are and how to make them 'not-too-hard decisions'?  There are two different categories of causes for the difficulty to arrive to a clear decision: complexity and uncertainty.  Complexity is nicely handled by TOC through focusing and outlining the cause-and-effect relationships of the most critical elements.  In itself this is already a valuable addition to the work of Herbert Simon, another influential figure on management. Uncertainty is another element where TOC has provided certain solutions for some specific cases, but, yet, does not provide a generic way to systematically deal with uncertainty. 1 hour 26 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
133 Online Multimedia The flaws of both cost-per-unit and T / CU as critical information for a variety of decisions 2011 Concentrating on the specific area of decisions where management accounting has a devastating impact.  The webinar first inquire into the real faulty assumption behind the concept of 'cost-per-unit'.  Understanding the flaws of the concept is a key to understand the current reluctance of replacing cost-per-unit with something else.  But, does the current BOK of TOC offer a full support to the decisions currently supported by the 'cost-per-unit'?  The webinar discusses some common misunderstanding of the theory of constraints (TOC) concepts, notably how the T/CU might lead to wrong decisions.  Thus the boundaries of the current knowledge of TOC regarding throughput accounting are properly understood, and the difficulty in providing a wider support to these decisions are discussed in order to pave the way for a direction of solution.  The role of uncertainty in such decisions is brought up.  The impact of the current lack of tools to support those decisions is demonstrated by a leading example. In this series Eli Schragenheim (the other Eli) wishes to think aloud on how TOC guides us to be better decision makers.  The most interesting question to be dealt in the series is what 'hard decisions' are and how to make them 'not-too-hard decisions'?  There are two different categories of causes for the difficulty to arrive to a clear decision: complexity and uncertainty.  Complexity is nicely handled by TOC through focusing and outlining the cause-and-effect relationships of the most critical elements.  In itself this is already a valuable addition to the work of Herbert Simon, another influential figure on management. Uncertainty is another element where TOC has provided certain solutions for some specific cases, but, yet, does not provide a generic way to systematically deal with uncertainty. 1 hour 26 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
134 Online Multimedia The flaws of both cost-per-unit and T / CU as critical information for a variety of decisions 2011 Concentrating on the specific area of decisions where management accounting has a devastating impact.  The webinar first inquire into the real faulty assumption behind the concept of 'cost-per-unit'.  Understanding the flaws of the concept is a key to understand the current reluctance of replacing cost-per-unit with something else.  But, does the current BOK of TOC offer a full support to the decisions currently supported by the 'cost-per-unit'?  The webinar discusses some common misunderstanding of the theory of constraints (TOC) concepts, notably how the T/CU might lead to wrong decisions.  Thus the boundaries of the current knowledge of TOC regarding throughput accounting are properly understood, and the difficulty in providing a wider support to these decisions are discussed in order to pave the way for a direction of solution.  The role of uncertainty in such decisions is brought up.  The impact of the current lack of tools to support those decisions is demonstrated by a leading example. In this series Eli Schragenheim (the other Eli) wishes to think aloud on how TOC guides us to be better decision makers.  The most interesting question to be dealt in the series is what 'hard decisions' are and how to make them 'not-too-hard decisions'?  There are two different categories of causes for the difficulty to arrive to a clear decision: complexity and uncertainty.  Complexity is nicely handled by TOC through focusing and outlining the cause-and-effect relationships of the most critical elements.  In itself this is already a valuable addition to the work of Herbert Simon, another influential figure on management. Uncertainty is another element where TOC has provided certain solutions for some specific cases, but, yet, does not provide a generic way to systematically deal with uncertainty. 1 hour 26 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
135 Online Multimedia Birrell, Matias Safety net concept - Between paranoia and hysteria for the sales department 2011 Sometimes, the sales department is pushed by their own objectives or finance to get more sales no matter what when sales start dropping and it seems that throughput may not cover operating expenses for a significant period. What is paranoia in such a case? 41 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
136 Online Multimedia Safety net concept - Between paranoia and hysteria for the sales department 2011 Sometimes, the sales department is pushed by their own objectives or finance to get more sales no matter what when sales start dropping and it seems that throughput may not cover operating expenses for a significant period. What is paranoia in such a case? 41 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
137 Online Multimedia Safety net concept - Between paranoia and hysteria for the sales department 2011 Sometimes, the sales department is pushed by their own objectives or finance to get more sales no matter what when sales start dropping and it seems that throughput may not cover operating expenses for a significant period. What is paranoia in such a case? 41 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
138 Online Multimedia Schragenheim, Eli Between complexity and uncertainty 2011 Defining the importance and scope of complexity and uncertainty are discussed first. Citing the views of Professor Herbert Simon and linking them to the general approach of TOC, especially regarding the question of 'should we strive to make our decisions optimal?' come next.  A critical realization is the distinction between the way decisions are made by an individual for himself/herself and by the same individual on behalf of an organization.  A critical question is how to deal with decisions in complex situations?  This is where the TOC tools, like the cloud and the cause-and-effect trees could become handy, especially under the umbrella of focusing on the few truly significant elements. Then the troubling question arises on how to deal with uncertainty.  When uncertainty comes on top of significant complexity are we truly in a worse state? The answer and mainly the arguments that the combination actually simplifies the decision-making process might be a surprise. The key direction for the solution has to define the supporting information elements required for making good decisions. About this series: Being able to make good decisions is a requirement of any manager and leader. In this series Eli Schragenheim (the other Eli) wishes to think aloud on how TOC guides us to be better decision makers. The most interesting question to be dealt in the series is what 'hard decisions' are and how to make them 'not-too-hard decisions'? There are two different categories of causes for the difficulty to arrive to a clear decision: complexity and uncertainty. Complexity is nicely handled by TOC through focusing and outlining the cause-and-effect relationships of the most critical elements. In itself this is already a valuable addition to the work of Herbert Simon, another influential figure on management. Uncertainty is another element where TOC has provided certain solutions for some specific cases, but, yet, does not provide a generic way to systematically deal with uncertainty. 1 hour 30 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
139 Online Multimedia Between complexity and uncertainty 2011 Defining the importance and scope of complexity and uncertainty are discussed first. Citing the views of Professor Herbert Simon and linking them to the general approach of TOC, especially regarding the question of 'should we strive to make our decisions optimal?' come next.  A critical realization is the distinction between the way decisions are made by an individual for himself/herself and by the same individual on behalf of an organization.  A critical question is how to deal with decisions in complex situations?  This is where the TOC tools, like the cloud and the cause-and-effect trees could become handy, especially under the umbrella of focusing on the few truly significant elements. Then the troubling question arises on how to deal with uncertainty.  When uncertainty comes on top of significant complexity are we truly in a worse state? The answer and mainly the arguments that the combination actually simplifies the decision-making process might be a surprise. The key direction for the solution has to define the supporting information elements required for making good decisions. About this series: Being able to make good decisions is a requirement of any manager and leader. In this series Eli Schragenheim (the other Eli) wishes to think aloud on how TOC guides us to be better decision makers. The most interesting question to be dealt in the series is what 'hard decisions' are and how to make them 'not-too-hard decisions'? There are two different categories of causes for the difficulty to arrive to a clear decision: complexity and uncertainty. Complexity is nicely handled by TOC through focusing and outlining the cause-and-effect relationships of the most critical elements. In itself this is already a valuable addition to the work of Herbert Simon, another influential figure on management. Uncertainty is another element where TOC has provided certain solutions for some specific cases, but, yet, does not provide a generic way to systematically deal with uncertainty. 1 hour 30 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
140 Online Multimedia Between complexity and uncertainty 2011 Defining the importance and scope of complexity and uncertainty are discussed first. Citing the views of Professor Herbert Simon and linking them to the general approach of TOC, especially regarding the question of 'should we strive to make our decisions optimal?' come next.  A critical realization is the distinction between the way decisions are made by an individual for himself/herself and by the same individual on behalf of an organization.  A critical question is how to deal with decisions in complex situations?  This is where the TOC tools, like the cloud and the cause-and-effect trees could become handy, especially under the umbrella of focusing on the few truly significant elements. Then the troubling question arises on how to deal with uncertainty.  When uncertainty comes on top of significant complexity are we truly in a worse state? The answer and mainly the arguments that the combination actually simplifies the decision-making process might be a surprise. The key direction for the solution has to define the supporting information elements required for making good decisions. About this series: Being able to make good decisions is a requirement of any manager and leader. In this series Eli Schragenheim (the other Eli) wishes to think aloud on how TOC guides us to be better decision makers. The most interesting question to be dealt in the series is what 'hard decisions' are and how to make them 'not-too-hard decisions'? There are two different categories of causes for the difficulty to arrive to a clear decision: complexity and uncertainty. Complexity is nicely handled by TOC through focusing and outlining the cause-and-effect relationships of the most critical elements. In itself this is already a valuable addition to the work of Herbert Simon, another influential figure on management. Uncertainty is another element where TOC has provided certain solutions for some specific cases, but, yet, does not provide a generic way to systematically deal with uncertainty. 1 hour 30 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
141 Online Multimedia Schragenheim, Eli Dealing with common and expected uncertainty in decision making 2011 Handling uncertainty, especially within organizations, has to make a clear distinction between two different types of uncertainty. One is defined as a state where a real disaster is possible, but with very low probability.  The other faces 'common and expected uncertainty'.  The webinar describes the current common misunderstanding of the second type of uncertainty, in spite of its huge economic impact on every organization.  The concept of 'the reasonable range' and how it is connected to the TOC notion of a 'buffer' is presented. These concepts, coupled by some simple lessons from statistics, are translated into a decision-making process and it invokes even the POOGI (process of ongoing improvement) concept to further improve the way common and expected uncertainty is handled.  The webinar would demonstrate the generic solution in the known TOC methodologies for S-DBR, distribution and CCPM and might show further insights where different buffering schemes should be used. About this series: Being able to make good decisions is a requirement of any manager and leader.  In this series Eli Schragenheim (the other Eli) wishes to think aloud on how TOC guides us to be better decision makers.  The most interesting question to be dealt in the series is what 'hard decisions' are and how to make them 'not-too-hard decisions'?  There are two different categories of causes for the difficulty to arrive to a clear decision: complexity and uncertainty. Complexity is nicely handled by TOC through focusing and outlining the cause-and-effect relationships of the most critical elements.  In itself this is already a valuable addition to the work of Herbert Simon, another influential figure on management. Uncertainty is another element where TOC has provided certain solutions for some specific cases, but, yet, does not provide a generic way to systematically deal with uncertainty. 1 hour 27 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
142 Online Multimedia Dealing with common and expected uncertainty in decision making 2011 Handling uncertainty, especially within organizations, has to make a clear distinction between two different types of uncertainty. One is defined as a state where a real disaster is possible, but with very low probability.  The other faces 'common and expected uncertainty'.  The webinar describes the current common misunderstanding of the second type of uncertainty, in spite of its huge economic impact on every organization.  The concept of 'the reasonable range' and how it is connected to the TOC notion of a 'buffer' is presented. These concepts, coupled by some simple lessons from statistics, are translated into a decision-making process and it invokes even the POOGI (process of ongoing improvement) concept to further improve the way common and expected uncertainty is handled.  The webinar would demonstrate the generic solution in the known TOC methodologies for S-DBR, distribution and CCPM and might show further insights where different buffering schemes should be used. About this series: Being able to make good decisions is a requirement of any manager and leader.  In this series Eli Schragenheim (the other Eli) wishes to think aloud on how TOC guides us to be better decision makers.  The most interesting question to be dealt in the series is what 'hard decisions' are and how to make them 'not-too-hard decisions'?  There are two different categories of causes for the difficulty to arrive to a clear decision: complexity and uncertainty. Complexity is nicely handled by TOC through focusing and outlining the cause-and-effect relationships of the most critical elements.  In itself this is already a valuable addition to the work of Herbert Simon, another influential figure on management. Uncertainty is another element where TOC has provided certain solutions for some specific cases, but, yet, does not provide a generic way to systematically deal with uncertainty. 1 hour 27 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
143 Online Multimedia Dealing with common and expected uncertainty in decision making 2011 Handling uncertainty, especially within organizations, has to make a clear distinction between two different types of uncertainty. One is defined as a state where a real disaster is possible, but with very low probability.  The other faces 'common and expected uncertainty'.  The webinar describes the current common misunderstanding of the second type of uncertainty, in spite of its huge economic impact on every organization.  The concept of 'the reasonable range' and how it is connected to the TOC notion of a 'buffer' is presented. These concepts, coupled by some simple lessons from statistics, are translated into a decision-making process and it invokes even the POOGI (process of ongoing improvement) concept to further improve the way common and expected uncertainty is handled.  The webinar would demonstrate the generic solution in the known TOC methodologies for S-DBR, distribution and CCPM and might show further insights where different buffering schemes should be used. About this series: Being able to make good decisions is a requirement of any manager and leader.  In this series Eli Schragenheim (the other Eli) wishes to think aloud on how TOC guides us to be better decision makers.  The most interesting question to be dealt in the series is what 'hard decisions' are and how to make them 'not-too-hard decisions'?  There are two different categories of causes for the difficulty to arrive to a clear decision: complexity and uncertainty. Complexity is nicely handled by TOC through focusing and outlining the cause-and-effect relationships of the most critical elements.  In itself this is already a valuable addition to the work of Herbert Simon, another influential figure on management. Uncertainty is another element where TOC has provided certain solutions for some specific cases, but, yet, does not provide a generic way to systematically deal with uncertainty. 1 hour 27 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
144 Online Multimedia Schragenheim, Eli Discussing questions and reservations raised by the viewers 2011 This webinar serves as a buffer for the whole program: make sure the points have been truly radiated and clarify some of the issues. It also adds the dimension of responding to questions, arguments and reservations made by the participants throughout the program.  Having a special session for discussing reservations allows the participants to have appropriate time to digest and react and eventually also give Eli Schragenheim the time to react. In this series Eli Schragenheim (the other Eli) wishes to think aloud on how TOC guides us to be better decision makers.  The most interesting question to be dealt in the series is what 'hard decisions' are and how to make them 'not-too-hard decisions'?  There are two different categories of causes for the difficulty to arrive to a clear decision: complexity and uncertainty.  Complexity is nicely handled by TOC through focusing and outlining the cause-and-effect relationships of the most critical elements.  In itself this is already a valuable addition to the work of Herbert Simon, another influential figure on management. Uncertainty is another element where TOC has provided certain solutions for some specific cases, but, yet, does not provide a generic way to systematically deal with uncertainty. 1 hour 26 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
145 Online Multimedia Discussing questions and reservations raised by the viewers 2011 This webinar serves as a buffer for the whole program: make sure the points have been truly radiated and clarify some of the issues. It also adds the dimension of responding to questions, arguments and reservations made by the participants throughout the program.  Having a special session for discussing reservations allows the participants to have appropriate time to digest and react and eventually also give Eli Schragenheim the time to react. In this series Eli Schragenheim (the other Eli) wishes to think aloud on how TOC guides us to be better decision makers.  The most interesting question to be dealt in the series is what 'hard decisions' are and how to make them 'not-too-hard decisions'?  There are two different categories of causes for the difficulty to arrive to a clear decision: complexity and uncertainty.  Complexity is nicely handled by TOC through focusing and outlining the cause-and-effect relationships of the most critical elements.  In itself this is already a valuable addition to the work of Herbert Simon, another influential figure on management. Uncertainty is another element where TOC has provided certain solutions for some specific cases, but, yet, does not provide a generic way to systematically deal with uncertainty. 1 hour 26 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
146 Online Multimedia Discussing questions and reservations raised by the viewers 2011 This webinar serves as a buffer for the whole program: make sure the points have been truly radiated and clarify some of the issues. It also adds the dimension of responding to questions, arguments and reservations made by the participants throughout the program.  Having a special session for discussing reservations allows the participants to have appropriate time to digest and react and eventually also give Eli Schragenheim the time to react. In this series Eli Schragenheim (the other Eli) wishes to think aloud on how TOC guides us to be better decision makers.  The most interesting question to be dealt in the series is what 'hard decisions' are and how to make them 'not-too-hard decisions'?  There are two different categories of causes for the difficulty to arrive to a clear decision: complexity and uncertainty.  Complexity is nicely handled by TOC through focusing and outlining the cause-and-effect relationships of the most critical elements.  In itself this is already a valuable addition to the work of Herbert Simon, another influential figure on management. Uncertainty is another element where TOC has provided certain solutions for some specific cases, but, yet, does not provide a generic way to systematically deal with uncertainty. 1 hour 26 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
147 Online Multimedia Schragenheim, Eli Never say I know series 1: How many constraints might be active at the same time in an organization? 2012 This presentation covers • What is a constraint and what is a core problem?   o Is a policy constraint a constraint?  How come? • How fast can the constraint move? o Meaning, the older constraint stops to be a constraint as another one emerges as the current constraint . • A new claim:  Any organization faces TWO different constraints at any given time! o Each impacts a basic necessary key process for the organization. o One controls the flow of T. o The other controls the growth of the organization. 1 hour 30 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2012OnlineMultimedia
148 Online Multimedia Never say I know series 1: How many constraints might be active at the same time in an organization? 2012 This presentation covers • What is a constraint and what is a core problem?   o Is a policy constraint a constraint?  How come? • How fast can the constraint move? o Meaning, the older constraint stops to be a constraint as another one emerges as the current constraint . • A new claim:  Any organization faces TWO different constraints at any given time! o Each impacts a basic necessary key process for the organization. o One controls the flow of T. o The other controls the growth of the organization. 1 hour 30 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2012OnlineMultimedia
149 Online Multimedia Never say I know series 1: How many constraints might be active at the same time in an organization? 2012 This presentation covers • What is a constraint and what is a core problem?   o Is a policy constraint a constraint?  How come? • How fast can the constraint move? o Meaning, the older constraint stops to be a constraint as another one emerges as the current constraint . • A new claim:  Any organization faces TWO different constraints at any given time! o Each impacts a basic necessary key process for the organization. o One controls the flow of T. o The other controls the growth of the organization. 1 hour 30 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2012OnlineMultimedia
150 Online Multimedia Schragenheim, Eli Assessing the future value of new products 2011 In 2000 Eli Goldratt developed a set of six questions for assessing the value of new technology.  These questions open the mind in a way that reminds us of the five focusing steps.  Eli Schragenheim presents the six questions, explains how to use them not just to new technology, but to any new product and how to use the questions to define the various target market segments for which the new product should be aimed at. Riddle no. 3, published in September, presents a case which might require the kind of thinking that the material presented could invoke. 1 hour 27 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
151 Online Multimedia Assessing the future value of new products 2011 In 2000 Eli Goldratt developed a set of six questions for assessing the value of new technology.  These questions open the mind in a way that reminds us of the five focusing steps.  Eli Schragenheim presents the six questions, explains how to use them not just to new technology, but to any new product and how to use the questions to define the various target market segments for which the new product should be aimed at. Riddle no. 3, published in September, presents a case which might require the kind of thinking that the material presented could invoke. 1 hour 27 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
152 Online Multimedia Assessing the future value of new products 2011 In 2000 Eli Goldratt developed a set of six questions for assessing the value of new technology.  These questions open the mind in a way that reminds us of the five focusing steps.  Eli Schragenheim presents the six questions, explains how to use them not just to new technology, but to any new product and how to use the questions to define the various target market segments for which the new product should be aimed at. Riddle no. 3, published in September, presents a case which might require the kind of thinking that the material presented could invoke. 1 hour 27 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
153 Online Multimedia Taylor, Bill The 12 questions - A SOSG approach to TOC TP – Part 1 2011 This presentation provides a 12-question template for orgaizating the thinking processes content. The 12-questions structure is a proposal for a universal current reality branch, a meta-structure that can become a building block of, and source of insight into, the construction of conflict clouds, negative branch reservations, chronic conflict, and standardized current reality trees, leading to formulation, sales and implementation of theory of constraints-based (TOC-based) solutions. View an introductory presentation for this webinar by clicking on the following link: http://prezi.com/adjczxnrd8qq/12-questions-sog-for-toc-tp/ 1 hour 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
154 Online Multimedia The 12 questions - A SOSG approach to TOC TP – Part 1 2011 This presentation provides a 12-question template for orgaizating the thinking processes content. The 12-questions structure is a proposal for a universal current reality branch, a meta-structure that can become a building block of, and source of insight into, the construction of conflict clouds, negative branch reservations, chronic conflict, and standardized current reality trees, leading to formulation, sales and implementation of theory of constraints-based (TOC-based) solutions. View an introductory presentation for this webinar by clicking on the following link: http://prezi.com/adjczxnrd8qq/12-questions-sog-for-toc-tp/ 1 hour 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
155 Online Multimedia The 12 questions - A SOSG approach to TOC TP – Part 1 2011 This presentation provides a 12-question template for orgaizating the thinking processes content. The 12-questions structure is a proposal for a universal current reality branch, a meta-structure that can become a building block of, and source of insight into, the construction of conflict clouds, negative branch reservations, chronic conflict, and standardized current reality trees, leading to formulation, sales and implementation of theory of constraints-based (TOC-based) solutions. View an introductory presentation for this webinar by clicking on the following link: http://prezi.com/adjczxnrd8qq/12-questions-sog-for-toc-tp/ 1 hour 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
156 Online Multimedia Taylor, Bill The 12 questions - A SOSG approach to TOC TP - Part 2 2012 This presentation provides a 12-question template for orgainzing the thinking processes content. Part 1 was presented in 2011. View an introductory presentation for this webinar by clicking on the following link: http://prezi.com/adjczxnrd8qq/12-questions-sog-for-toc-tp/ 1 hour 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2012OnlineMultimedia
157 Online Multimedia The 12 questions - A SOSG approach to TOC TP - Part 2 2012 This presentation provides a 12-question template for orgainzing the thinking processes content. Part 1 was presented in 2011. View an introductory presentation for this webinar by clicking on the following link: http://prezi.com/adjczxnrd8qq/12-questions-sog-for-toc-tp/ 1 hour 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2012OnlineMultimedia
158 Online Multimedia The 12 questions - A SOSG approach to TOC TP - Part 2 2012 This presentation provides a 12-question template for orgainzing the thinking processes content. Part 1 was presented in 2011. View an introductory presentation for this webinar by clicking on the following link: http://prezi.com/adjczxnrd8qq/12-questions-sog-for-toc-tp/ 1 hour 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2012OnlineMultimedia
159 Online Multimedia Camp, Henry Fitzhugh The TOC distribution solution: How to move your company / client 2011 I created this webinar as a way to move the world to adopt TOC.  My assumptions are that the initial driver must be commercial and it must be easy for everyone involved. Once the TOC distribution solution, which we call elucidate, is broadly implemented, companies will understand that they cannot further lower inventories without immediately risking sales.  This spells the end of recessions, due to eliminating 'the whipsaw effect' – passing ever greater reductions in orders up a supply chain. Without recessions, confidence and investment remain strong, accelerated by TOC.  The new effect is like detonating a chain reaction Prosperity Bomb. 1 hour 5 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
160 Online Multimedia The TOC distribution solution: How to move your company / client 2011 I created this webinar as a way to move the world to adopt TOC.  My assumptions are that the initial driver must be commercial and it must be easy for everyone involved. Once the TOC distribution solution, which we call elucidate, is broadly implemented, companies will understand that they cannot further lower inventories without immediately risking sales.  This spells the end of recessions, due to eliminating 'the whipsaw effect' – passing ever greater reductions in orders up a supply chain. Without recessions, confidence and investment remain strong, accelerated by TOC.  The new effect is like detonating a chain reaction Prosperity Bomb. 1 hour 5 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
161 Online Multimedia The TOC distribution solution: How to move your company / client 2011 I created this webinar as a way to move the world to adopt TOC.  My assumptions are that the initial driver must be commercial and it must be easy for everyone involved. Once the TOC distribution solution, which we call elucidate, is broadly implemented, companies will understand that they cannot further lower inventories without immediately risking sales.  This spells the end of recessions, due to eliminating 'the whipsaw effect' – passing ever greater reductions in orders up a supply chain. Without recessions, confidence and investment remain strong, accelerated by TOC.  The new effect is like detonating a chain reaction Prosperity Bomb. 1 hour 5 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
162 Online Multimedia Newbold, Robert C. The art of change: Making TOC stick 2009 Problem statement: Change is hard: Many types of implementations (ERP, EPM, PMOs, TOC) have trouble generating long-term behavior changes. This presentation describes the problems of making change stick. While Rob has worked in critical chain project management for over a decade, the points in this presentation apply to change in general. The major objectives of this presentation are: Good: To learn a few useful ideas to improve your implementation planning and execution; Better: Think more from the point of view of the “changes” rather than the “changers”; Best: Consider a new paradigm for causing and continuing change. Some problems are linear thinking and first person bias (how will I measure you). The real question is how will people measure themselves? The cycle of trust (willingness to depend on someone or something, in a specific context) is Instigation – Expectation – Dependency – Result – Validation then back to Instigation or Expectation. The cycle of results is given: Urgency (Describe a vision) – Expectations – (plan, create ownership) – Commitment (implement) – Value (Measure results) – Validation (communication, reevaluate, reinforce). The standard implementation plan used today is described as a linear plan and first-person bias. Implementation plans should follow the cycle of results framework. We provide a check list which includes: find the urgency; define expectations and values for everyone; communicate expectations; distinguish expectations from commitment; obtain commitment by planning, building ownership, provoking responsibility; and communicate results to refine expectations. 1 hour 11 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2009OnlineMultimedia
163 Online Multimedia The art of change: Making TOC stick 2009 Problem statement: Change is hard: Many types of implementations (ERP, EPM, PMOs, TOC) have trouble generating long-term behavior changes. This presentation describes the problems of making change stick. While Rob has worked in critical chain project management for over a decade, the points in this presentation apply to change in general. The major objectives of this presentation are: Good: To learn a few useful ideas to improve your implementation planning and execution; Better: Think more from the point of view of the “changes” rather than the “changers”; Best: Consider a new paradigm for causing and continuing change. Some problems are linear thinking and first person bias (how will I measure you). The real question is how will people measure themselves? The cycle of trust (willingness to depend on someone or something, in a specific context) is Instigation – Expectation – Dependency – Result – Validation then back to Instigation or Expectation. The cycle of results is given: Urgency (Describe a vision) – Expectations – (plan, create ownership) – Commitment (implement) – Value (Measure results) – Validation (communication, reevaluate, reinforce). The standard implementation plan used today is described as a linear plan and first-person bias. Implementation plans should follow the cycle of results framework. We provide a check list which includes: find the urgency; define expectations and values for everyone; communicate expectations; distinguish expectations from commitment; obtain commitment by planning, building ownership, provoking responsibility; and communicate results to refine expectations. 1 hour 11 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2009OnlineMultimedia
164 Online Multimedia The art of change: Making TOC stick 2009 Problem statement: Change is hard: Many types of implementations (ERP, EPM, PMOs, TOC) have trouble generating long-term behavior changes. This presentation describes the problems of making change stick. While Rob has worked in critical chain project management for over a decade, the points in this presentation apply to change in general. The major objectives of this presentation are: Good: To learn a few useful ideas to improve your implementation planning and execution; Better: Think more from the point of view of the “changes” rather than the “changers”; Best: Consider a new paradigm for causing and continuing change. Some problems are linear thinking and first person bias (how will I measure you). The real question is how will people measure themselves? The cycle of trust (willingness to depend on someone or something, in a specific context) is Instigation – Expectation – Dependency – Result – Validation then back to Instigation or Expectation. The cycle of results is given: Urgency (Describe a vision) – Expectations – (plan, create ownership) – Commitment (implement) – Value (Measure results) – Validation (communication, reevaluate, reinforce). The standard implementation plan used today is described as a linear plan and first-person bias. Implementation plans should follow the cycle of results framework. We provide a check list which includes: find the urgency; define expectations and values for everyone; communicate expectations; distinguish expectations from commitment; obtain commitment by planning, building ownership, provoking responsibility; and communicate results to refine expectations. 1 hour 11 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2009OnlineMultimedia
165 Online Multimedia Ziv, Yoav Doing projects right - Its about time! 2011 Why are projects constantly late? You might think that the problem is poor planning or lack of discipline. Not true! Find out the real reason in this webinar. Challenges are also well known: Changes in scope, delays in finalizing customer requirements, getting the right level of skill (stress, thermal,…, delays in supplier negotiations, vendor delays, uncertainty in every step, and technological challenges. But the root cause is project schedules cannot be followed in reality as it is uncertain. Coordination and control are impossible; priority conflicts are bound to happen. Recall Gantt charts were invented a 100 years ago and no breakthrough in project management until critical chain. We make projects run 20-50% faster. Project management Is broken. We fix it by synchronizing execution in real time. 33 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
166 Online Multimedia Doing projects right - Its about time! 2011 Why are projects constantly late? You might think that the problem is poor planning or lack of discipline. Not true! Find out the real reason in this webinar. Challenges are also well known: Changes in scope, delays in finalizing customer requirements, getting the right level of skill (stress, thermal,…, delays in supplier negotiations, vendor delays, uncertainty in every step, and technological challenges. But the root cause is project schedules cannot be followed in reality as it is uncertain. Coordination and control are impossible; priority conflicts are bound to happen. Recall Gantt charts were invented a 100 years ago and no breakthrough in project management until critical chain. We make projects run 20-50% faster. Project management Is broken. We fix it by synchronizing execution in real time. 33 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
167 Online Multimedia Doing projects right - Its about time! 2011 Why are projects constantly late? You might think that the problem is poor planning or lack of discipline. Not true! Find out the real reason in this webinar. Challenges are also well known: Changes in scope, delays in finalizing customer requirements, getting the right level of skill (stress, thermal,…, delays in supplier negotiations, vendor delays, uncertainty in every step, and technological challenges. But the root cause is project schedules cannot be followed in reality as it is uncertain. Coordination and control are impossible; priority conflicts are bound to happen. Recall Gantt charts were invented a 100 years ago and no breakthrough in project management until critical chain. We make projects run 20-50% faster. Project management Is broken. We fix it by synchronizing execution in real time. 33 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
168 Conference Proceedings Baptista, Humberto The five fears and the human potential 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Goldratt describes in the introduction of 'Management Science' the 3 fears: Fear of Complexity; Fear of the Unknown and Fear of Conflicts. These 3 fears are usually met with behaviors that distort and waste human and therefore management attention. In this presentation a broader view is presented and 5 fundamental fears that waste and distort the performance of humans are analyzed and their interrelations and consequences are presented. These fears are the main, and probably the sole source of waste of the human potential and while we can counter these fears with better behaviors the full realization of each individual's potential is limited not only by how well this individual deals with these fears but also how well individuals around him/her do. Goldratt introduced in the introduction of 'Management Science' the 3 fears: Fear of Complexity; Fear of the Unknown and Fear of Conflicts. The fear of complexity is normally met with a subdivision of a complex situation or system and a subsequent disregard for the interrelationships in the system and a focus on the local optimization of each part. The fear of the unknown is normally met with more control and finer and finer resolutions of measurements without any regard to the noise level and the impact of taking the measurements. The fear of conflicts is the fear of the tug-of-war or unresolved conflicts is usually met by ineffective compromises where one or both needs involved in the conflict remain partially or completely unfulfilled. In this presentation we'll connect back the 3 fears to the basic principles of TOC and present the 5 fears that limit the human endeavor. These fears are the fears of: Complexity, Guilt, Conflict, Unknown and Change. Each has its sets of wasteful and distorting behaviors and the interrelations amongst them reinforce the negative effects. After exploring the 5 fears and the relationships among them we'll analyze how to behave to face these fears in such a way that will allow each individual to deal with the challenges expressed in each fear in a manner that avoids distortions and wastes. Finally a new fundamental process of five steps is presented on how to systematically deal with the 5 fears and a small but comprehensive S&T regarding this process is outlined and shared with the audience. 28 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
169 Conference Proceedings The five fears and the human potential 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Goldratt describes in the introduction of 'Management Science' the 3 fears: Fear of Complexity; Fear of the Unknown and Fear of Conflicts. These 3 fears are usually met with behaviors that distort and waste human and therefore management attention. In this presentation a broader view is presented and 5 fundamental fears that waste and distort the performance of humans are analyzed and their interrelations and consequences are presented. These fears are the main, and probably the sole source of waste of the human potential and while we can counter these fears with better behaviors the full realization of each individual's potential is limited not only by how well this individual deals with these fears but also how well individuals around him/her do. Goldratt introduced in the introduction of 'Management Science' the 3 fears: Fear of Complexity; Fear of the Unknown and Fear of Conflicts. The fear of complexity is normally met with a subdivision of a complex situation or system and a subsequent disregard for the interrelationships in the system and a focus on the local optimization of each part. The fear of the unknown is normally met with more control and finer and finer resolutions of measurements without any regard to the noise level and the impact of taking the measurements. The fear of conflicts is the fear of the tug-of-war or unresolved conflicts is usually met by ineffective compromises where one or both needs involved in the conflict remain partially or completely unfulfilled. In this presentation we'll connect back the 3 fears to the basic principles of TOC and present the 5 fears that limit the human endeavor. These fears are the fears of: Complexity, Guilt, Conflict, Unknown and Change. Each has its sets of wasteful and distorting behaviors and the interrelations amongst them reinforce the negative effects. After exploring the 5 fears and the relationships among them we'll analyze how to behave to face these fears in such a way that will allow each individual to deal with the challenges expressed in each fear in a manner that avoids distortions and wastes. Finally a new fundamental process of five steps is presented on how to systematically deal with the 5 fears and a small but comprehensive S&T regarding this process is outlined and shared with the audience. 28 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
170 Conference Proceedings Baptista, Humberto Three layers of logic or never say "I know" when it comes to thinking 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The TOC thinking processes (TP) capture and communicate effectively a number of instances of cause-and-effect logic, but sometimes even a sound logical TP diagram may neither capture nor communicate a good enough model of reality. In this presentation besides the causality layer two other layers of assumptions that underpin cause-and-effect thinking as well as practical examples of their use are presented. Then the consequences for the form and use of TP tools are explored. 37 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
171 Conference Proceedings Three layers of logic or never say "I know" when it comes to thinking 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The TOC thinking processes (TP) capture and communicate effectively a number of instances of cause-and-effect logic, but sometimes even a sound logical TP diagram may neither capture nor communicate a good enough model of reality. In this presentation besides the causality layer two other layers of assumptions that underpin cause-and-effect thinking as well as practical examples of their use are presented. Then the consequences for the form and use of TP tools are explored. 37 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
172 Conference Proceedings Barnard, Alan Overcoming limiting assumptions using the change matrix cloud 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany In THE GOAL, Dr. Eliyahu M. Goldratt showed how we could apply the scientific method to turn, what many considered as the art of managing operations within a manufacturing company into more of a science. In the foreword to THE GOAL, Goldratt suggested we could all be outstanding scientists as it involved only two simple steps. The first step is to have the courage to face (important) inconsistencies between the expected or desired state and our actual reality. Step 2 is to (have the courage) to challenge the basic assumptions related to this inconsistency or gap. This paper provides an overview of 4 new innovations within the field of applying these two simple steps of the scientific method to the ongoing challenge of finding and solving important problems (that limit or even block achieving more system goal units) with win: win solutions. The four innovations which is proposed as a simpler and faster way to invent simple yet powerful solutions in any field include the change matrix cloud, planning vs. execution conflict, 4 Methods for resolving any conflict, and 3 types of 'Yes, buts' to improve. The presentation also includes case studies showing the application of these 4 innovations to the private sector, public sector and with individuals. In THE GOAL, Dr. Eliyahu M. Goldratt suggested we could all be outstanding scientist as it involved only two simple steps. The first step is to have the courage to face (important) inconsistencies between the expected or desired state and our actual reality. Step 2 is to (have the courage) to challenge the basic assumptions related to this inconsistency or gap. This paper provides an overview of new developments within the application of these two simple steps to the ongoing challenge of finding the right (most consequential) problems to solve and a simple and fast way to solve these with powerful win: win solutions. The five focusing steps developed by Dr. Goldratt in the early 1980's, provided a practical way to achieve Step #1 – finding the most important inconsistencies or problems to solve. The Conflict Cloud developed by Dr. Goldratt in the late 1980's, provided a practical way to achieve Step #2 – challenging basic assumptions to resolve inconsistencies that will improve system performance in win: win way. The 'Buy-in' process that included the four aspects of change developed by Dr. Goldratt in the late 1990's, provided a practical way to prepare better for getting the buy-in from stakeholders for any new changes, especially if these new changes are real breakthroughs, likely to be met with resistance to change. This paper will present 4 new innovations, building on Goldratt's inventions of the Five Focusing Steps, the Conflict Cloud and Change Matrix and Buy-in Process to provide a potentially simpler and faster to invent breakthroughs within any field or subject matter. These four innovations include:1. How to combine the Conflict Cloud and Change Matrix into the new Change Matrix Cloud (CMC) that offers the positives of both methods without their major negatives. 2. How to define and resolve both the Planning (Systematic) and Execution (Symptomatic) Conflict from a single Undesirable effect and its associated Gap Analysis (to validate the system wide importance of removing the Undesirable Effect) 3. The 4 methods to resolve any Change Matrix Cloud (Change++, Not Change++, Change + Not Change, Another Change) 4. The 3 types of 'Yes, buts' to all stakeholders to challenge and contribute to improving any proposed change. The Full analysis of these 4 innovations will be presented, together with case studies showing their application within the private sector (Daiwa House Japan), public sector (Utah State Government) and with individuals (Odyssey Program) in the 'Standing on the Shoulders of Giants' framework proposed by Dr. Goldratt for presenting new knowledge. 1 hour 30 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
173 Conference Proceedings Overcoming limiting assumptions using the change matrix cloud 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany In THE GOAL, Dr. Eliyahu M. Goldratt showed how we could apply the scientific method to turn, what many considered as the art of managing operations within a manufacturing company into more of a science. In the foreword to THE GOAL, Goldratt suggested we could all be outstanding scientists as it involved only two simple steps. The first step is to have the courage to face (important) inconsistencies between the expected or desired state and our actual reality. Step 2 is to (have the courage) to challenge the basic assumptions related to this inconsistency or gap. This paper provides an overview of 4 new innovations within the field of applying these two simple steps of the scientific method to the ongoing challenge of finding and solving important problems (that limit or even block achieving more system goal units) with win: win solutions. The four innovations which is proposed as a simpler and faster way to invent simple yet powerful solutions in any field include the change matrix cloud, planning vs. execution conflict, 4 Methods for resolving any conflict, and 3 types of 'Yes, buts' to improve. The presentation also includes case studies showing the application of these 4 innovations to the private sector, public sector and with individuals. In THE GOAL, Dr. Eliyahu M. Goldratt suggested we could all be outstanding scientist as it involved only two simple steps. The first step is to have the courage to face (important) inconsistencies between the expected or desired state and our actual reality. Step 2 is to (have the courage) to challenge the basic assumptions related to this inconsistency or gap. This paper provides an overview of new developments within the application of these two simple steps to the ongoing challenge of finding the right (most consequential) problems to solve and a simple and fast way to solve these with powerful win: win solutions. The five focusing steps developed by Dr. Goldratt in the early 1980's, provided a practical way to achieve Step #1 – finding the most important inconsistencies or problems to solve. The Conflict Cloud developed by Dr. Goldratt in the late 1980's, provided a practical way to achieve Step #2 – challenging basic assumptions to resolve inconsistencies that will improve system performance in win: win way. The 'Buy-in' process that included the four aspects of change developed by Dr. Goldratt in the late 1990's, provided a practical way to prepare better for getting the buy-in from stakeholders for any new changes, especially if these new changes are real breakthroughs, likely to be met with resistance to change. This paper will present 4 new innovations, building on Goldratt's inventions of the Five Focusing Steps, the Conflict Cloud and Change Matrix and Buy-in Process to provide a potentially simpler and faster to invent breakthroughs within any field or subject matter. These four innovations include:1. How to combine the Conflict Cloud and Change Matrix into the new Change Matrix Cloud (CMC) that offers the positives of both methods without their major negatives. 2. How to define and resolve both the Planning (Systematic) and Execution (Symptomatic) Conflict from a single Undesirable effect and its associated Gap Analysis (to validate the system wide importance of removing the Undesirable Effect) 3. The 4 methods to resolve any Change Matrix Cloud (Change++, Not Change++, Change + Not Change, Another Change) 4. The 3 types of 'Yes, buts' to all stakeholders to challenge and contribute to improving any proposed change. The Full analysis of these 4 innovations will be presented, together with case studies showing their application within the private sector (Daiwa House Japan), public sector (Utah State Government) and with individuals (Odyssey Program) in the 'Standing on the Shoulders of Giants' framework proposed by Dr. Goldratt for presenting new knowledge. 1 hour 30 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
174 Conference Proceedings Barnard, Alan Introduction to strategy and tactic the TOC way basics workshop 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The introduction by Dr. Eli Goldratt in 2002 (Goldratt 2002) of a 'new' TOC-based thinking processes (TP) called a 'strategic & tactics' tree (S&T) is being viewed by more and more executives and managers, as one of the most important breakthroughs in ensuring that holistic business or organization strategies are defined, properly validated, communicated and implemented to achieve harmony within organizations. The S&T can for the first time provide us with a practical process and logical structure for defining and communicating all the necessary and sufficient changes as well as the sequence of implementation of these changes to achieve more goal units for the organization. It not only answers the question WHAT and HOW, but as importantly the WHY. This basics workshop provides attendees with an introduction to strategy & tactic trees, how to create and use these to communicate changes within an organization and also how organizations can use these to address the common engines of disharmony within organizations that waste their scarcest resource – management attention. The workshop includes a real-life example and new developments to significantly simplify the process to create and validate S&Ts. 1 hour 40 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
175 Conference Proceedings Introduction to strategy and tactic the TOC way basics workshop 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The introduction by Dr. Eli Goldratt in 2002 (Goldratt 2002) of a 'new' TOC-based thinking processes (TP) called a 'strategic & tactics' tree (S&T) is being viewed by more and more executives and managers, as one of the most important breakthroughs in ensuring that holistic business or organization strategies are defined, properly validated, communicated and implemented to achieve harmony within organizations. The S&T can for the first time provide us with a practical process and logical structure for defining and communicating all the necessary and sufficient changes as well as the sequence of implementation of these changes to achieve more goal units for the organization. It not only answers the question WHAT and HOW, but as importantly the WHY. This basics workshop provides attendees with an introduction to strategy & tactic trees, how to create and use these to communicate changes within an organization and also how organizations can use these to address the common engines of disharmony within organizations that waste their scarcest resource – management attention. The workshop includes a real-life example and new developments to significantly simplify the process to create and validate S&Ts. 1 hour 40 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
176 Online Multimedia Choi, Wonjoon Using TOC thinking tools to write a logical argumentative composition 2010 While there are numerous applications of TOC thinking processes (TP) in the business sector and other non-business sectors such as the education field, it is very hard to locate the application of TOC TP in writing a rigorous composition. It is not the technical skill of expression but the thinking capacity that is the most important ingredient for writing a good logical argumentative composition. Explicit analysis of the issue should be made thoroughly and the foundation for the argument should be provided to communicate the idea to the others effectively. In order to write a good argumentative composition, the framework of the logical development based on the critical thinking should be designed first. In this presentation, it will be shown how the TOC TP can be effectively used to build up the framework of the logical argumentation. The process of using the TOC TP for writing an argumentative composition will be introduced along with a standard template of the use of the TOC TP. Experiences with this template and its extensions will be shared in this presentation. 1 hour 19 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2010OnlineMultimedia
177 Online Multimedia Using TOC thinking tools to write a logical argumentative composition 2010 While there are numerous applications of TOC thinking processes (TP) in the business sector and other non-business sectors such as the education field, it is very hard to locate the application of TOC TP in writing a rigorous composition. It is not the technical skill of expression but the thinking capacity that is the most important ingredient for writing a good logical argumentative composition. Explicit analysis of the issue should be made thoroughly and the foundation for the argument should be provided to communicate the idea to the others effectively. In order to write a good argumentative composition, the framework of the logical development based on the critical thinking should be designed first. In this presentation, it will be shown how the TOC TP can be effectively used to build up the framework of the logical argumentation. The process of using the TOC TP for writing an argumentative composition will be introduced along with a standard template of the use of the TOC TP. Experiences with this template and its extensions will be shared in this presentation. 1 hour 19 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2010OnlineMultimedia
178 Online Multimedia Using TOC thinking tools to write a logical argumentative composition 2010 While there are numerous applications of TOC thinking processes (TP) in the business sector and other non-business sectors such as the education field, it is very hard to locate the application of TOC TP in writing a rigorous composition. It is not the technical skill of expression but the thinking capacity that is the most important ingredient for writing a good logical argumentative composition. Explicit analysis of the issue should be made thoroughly and the foundation for the argument should be provided to communicate the idea to the others effectively. In order to write a good argumentative composition, the framework of the logical development based on the critical thinking should be designed first. In this presentation, it will be shown how the TOC TP can be effectively used to build up the framework of the logical argumentation. The process of using the TOC TP for writing an argumentative composition will be introduced along with a standard template of the use of the TOC TP. Experiences with this template and its extensions will be shared in this presentation. 1 hour 19 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2010OnlineMultimedia
179 Conference Proceedings Belpaire, Eric Strategy & tactics tree of a local non-profit organization promoting TOC 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany ToC France is a non-profit organization aiming to promote the TOC body of knowledge in French-speaking countries. It proposes to discuss the S&T tree used to align its members' energies. It was set up on July 26th, 2012 by 8 founding members. ToC France aims to accept new members in the spring of 2013. In order to align its members' energies and to clearly understand the actions and resources needed to put the organization into action, a few founding members decided to write an S&T tree to guide the startup activities. The presenters propose to discuss this S&T tree during a workshop for the following reasons : - the content of this S&T tree can serve as blueprint for the setup of local (non-profit) TOC promoting organizations in other countries, - the discussion, scrutiny and feedback of other TOC practitioners engaged in similar activities will be mutually beneficial, - potential founders of local TOC promoting organizations can benefit from the shared knowledge and experience. Detail main challenges, obstacles in writing and gaining consensus on the S&T tree. - The fact that some members were not familiar with the questions / framework for each node resulted in a slow startup of the tree review. - The fact that some members were not interested in the exercise but wanted quick results made them unaware of the answers embedded in the tree. - The approach seemed too conceptual for some members who were asking for a more concrete way of managing this startup project. Detail main benefits experienced from the S&T tree building exercise: - The building of the S&T tree allowed to clarify the founding members' thinking and put it together in an organized whole. ToC France is a non-profit organization aiming to promote the TOC body of knowledge in French speaking countries. - The founding members who did not participate in writing the S&T tree are currently reviewing it. As a result, it's too early to comment on this review phase. 3 Learning objectives: - Understand that the S&T tree can be applied also to a non-profit situation. - Explore and challenge 'soft skills' approaches to building, capitalizing and maintaining the capabilities of an 'ever flourishing' non-profit organization. - Understand that writing a S&T tree is better done in a small group. 3 questions somebody would ask at the end of the workshop to elaborate on the subject and improve understanding and transfer of ideas; - What do you recommend to a new local TOC promoting organization? Write its own S&T tree? Start from this S&T tree and adapt it to the local situation? - How much time did it take to write this S&T tree? - How many people were involved? - What did you gain from the exercise of writing this S&T tree? 35 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
180 Conference Proceedings Schraeder, Jeffrey Strategy & tactics tree of a local non-profit organization promoting TOC 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany ToC France is a non-profit organization aiming to promote the TOC body of knowledge in French-speaking countries. It proposes to discuss the S&T tree used to align its members' energies. It was set up on July 26th, 2012 by 8 founding members. ToC France aims to accept new members in the spring of 2013. In order to align its members' energies and to clearly understand the actions and resources needed to put the organization into action, a few founding members decided to write an S&T tree to guide the startup activities. The presenters propose to discuss this S&T tree during a workshop for the following reasons : - the content of this S&T tree can serve as blueprint for the setup of local (non-profit) TOC promoting organizations in other countries, - the discussion, scrutiny and feedback of other TOC practitioners engaged in similar activities will be mutually beneficial, - potential founders of local TOC promoting organizations can benefit from the shared knowledge and experience. Detail main challenges, obstacles in writing and gaining consensus on the S&T tree. - The fact that some members were not familiar with the questions / framework for each node resulted in a slow startup of the tree review. - The fact that some members were not interested in the exercise but wanted quick results made them unaware of the answers embedded in the tree. - The approach seemed too conceptual for some members who were asking for a more concrete way of managing this startup project. Detail main benefits experienced from the S&T tree building exercise: - The building of the S&T tree allowed to clarify the founding members' thinking and put it together in an organized whole. ToC France is a non-profit organization aiming to promote the TOC body of knowledge in French speaking countries. - The founding members who did not participate in writing the S&T tree are currently reviewing it. As a result, it's too early to comment on this review phase. 3 Learning objectives: - Understand that the S&T tree can be applied also to a non-profit situation. - Explore and challenge 'soft skills' approaches to building, capitalizing and maintaining the capabilities of an 'ever flourishing' non-profit organization. - Understand that writing a S&T tree is better done in a small group. 3 questions somebody would ask at the end of the workshop to elaborate on the subject and improve understanding and transfer of ideas; - What do you recommend to a new local TOC promoting organization? Write its own S&T tree? Start from this S&T tree and adapt it to the local situation? - How much time did it take to write this S&T tree? - How many people were involved? - What did you gain from the exercise of writing this S&T tree? 35 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
181 Conference Proceedings Strategy & tactics tree of a local non-profit organization promoting TOC 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany ToC France is a non-profit organization aiming to promote the TOC body of knowledge in French-speaking countries. It proposes to discuss the S&T tree used to align its members' energies. It was set up on July 26th, 2012 by 8 founding members. ToC France aims to accept new members in the spring of 2013. In order to align its members' energies and to clearly understand the actions and resources needed to put the organization into action, a few founding members decided to write an S&T tree to guide the startup activities. The presenters propose to discuss this S&T tree during a workshop for the following reasons : - the content of this S&T tree can serve as blueprint for the setup of local (non-profit) TOC promoting organizations in other countries, - the discussion, scrutiny and feedback of other TOC practitioners engaged in similar activities will be mutually beneficial, - potential founders of local TOC promoting organizations can benefit from the shared knowledge and experience. Detail main challenges, obstacles in writing and gaining consensus on the S&T tree. - The fact that some members were not familiar with the questions / framework for each node resulted in a slow startup of the tree review. - The fact that some members were not interested in the exercise but wanted quick results made them unaware of the answers embedded in the tree. - The approach seemed too conceptual for some members who were asking for a more concrete way of managing this startup project. Detail main benefits experienced from the S&T tree building exercise: - The building of the S&T tree allowed to clarify the founding members' thinking and put it together in an organized whole. ToC France is a non-profit organization aiming to promote the TOC body of knowledge in French speaking countries. - The founding members who did not participate in writing the S&T tree are currently reviewing it. As a result, it's too early to comment on this review phase. 3 Learning objectives: - Understand that the S&T tree can be applied also to a non-profit situation. - Explore and challenge 'soft skills' approaches to building, capitalizing and maintaining the capabilities of an 'ever flourishing' non-profit organization. - Understand that writing a S&T tree is better done in a small group. 3 questions somebody would ask at the end of the workshop to elaborate on the subject and improve understanding and transfer of ideas; - What do you recommend to a new local TOC promoting organization? Write its own S&T tree? Start from this S&T tree and adapt it to the local situation? - How much time did it take to write this S&T tree? - How many people were involved? - What did you gain from the exercise of writing this S&T tree? 35 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
182 Conference Proceedings Bolton, Robert Mine to market - Throughput focused mining 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Theory of Constraints (TOC) is a management philosophy developed and articulated by Dr Eli Goldratt and many others within the TOCICO community. In the logistics area, it has evolved from solving management problems at an operational level to a set of proven logistical solutions. The core idea with TOC is that every real system such as a profit-making enterprise must have at least one constraint. It assumes that the goal for a profit-making organization is to make money now and in the future. This relationship of a profit-making goal and one or a few constraints helps organizations determine where to focus their management attention to improve operations and hence business flow. The mining and resource processing environments are complex and variable. Operational changes and improvements can take a number of different forms. There are multiple resource types and numbers that perform specific operational process tasks. Understanding and mapping these resources relationships can be a difficult task. It is like swimming is a pool of ping pong balls. Which one can and do you grab first?' This is the challenge faced by all resource operational leaders. But the one rule they all obey is the: law of the weakest link. At any point in time, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. The mining and process industries within the resources sector are examples of complex systems where the above law can be applied. This presentation explores the 'Mine to Market' change interventions in a major mineral sands company based in Western Australia. This presentation describes a major throughput increase and an increase in asset utilization at the Iluka Resources (ASX:ILU) South West operation. It explores the phases from the TOC introduction to the TOC holistic approach, to the operation due diligence review. It focuses on what worked, and what did not. Key management elements such as the meeting structure and operational site wide logistics are considered. Other mining and process projects and other TOC case studies within Australia are also referenced. 3 Learning Objectives: 1. Characteristics of a Mining & Processing operation. (i.e. many interlinked processes that transform the product – high variable product? Different operational types based on commodity market characteristics? 2. Business and operational of resource based business leaders 3. Using 5 focusing / steps to plan within the operational systems resonance (Move from Monthly with individual targets to weekly goals with 12 week view of customer shipments). Use existing management systems & tools to upgrade operational flow (both volume and through-put revenue). 3 questions that someone would / could ask at end of the presentation? 1. Is TOC principles applicable to any mining & resource operation? Yes. The key is to understand which tool to use when. Key to mining executives thinking is operational safety and meeting regulatory requirements. The operational constraints can be in usual places. 2. Has TOC been adopted in other mining & resource operational environments? Yes. Aware of operational projects in Australia, South Africa & India. 3. What new TOC based thinking can be applied to Resource Operational chains? The effect of Buffer level determinations and Buffer Management technology has progressed a great deal since Argyle Diamonds (1993) put it into its systems. This technology can be now to applied at an individual process step to maximize overall process flow. It is our view that this is not yet happening due to historical practices within the mining space. 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
183 Conference Proceedings Mine to market - Throughput focused mining 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Theory of Constraints (TOC) is a management philosophy developed and articulated by Dr Eli Goldratt and many others within the TOCICO community. In the logistics area, it has evolved from solving management problems at an operational level to a set of proven logistical solutions. The core idea with TOC is that every real system such as a profit-making enterprise must have at least one constraint. It assumes that the goal for a profit-making organization is to make money now and in the future. This relationship of a profit-making goal and one or a few constraints helps organizations determine where to focus their management attention to improve operations and hence business flow. The mining and resource processing environments are complex and variable. Operational changes and improvements can take a number of different forms. There are multiple resource types and numbers that perform specific operational process tasks. Understanding and mapping these resources relationships can be a difficult task. It is like swimming is a pool of ping pong balls. Which one can and do you grab first?' This is the challenge faced by all resource operational leaders. But the one rule they all obey is the: law of the weakest link. At any point in time, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. The mining and process industries within the resources sector are examples of complex systems where the above law can be applied. This presentation explores the 'Mine to Market' change interventions in a major mineral sands company based in Western Australia. This presentation describes a major throughput increase and an increase in asset utilization at the Iluka Resources (ASX:ILU) South West operation. It explores the phases from the TOC introduction to the TOC holistic approach, to the operation due diligence review. It focuses on what worked, and what did not. Key management elements such as the meeting structure and operational site wide logistics are considered. Other mining and process projects and other TOC case studies within Australia are also referenced. 3 Learning Objectives: 1. Characteristics of a Mining & Processing operation. (i.e. many interlinked processes that transform the product – high variable product? Different operational types based on commodity market characteristics? 2. Business and operational of resource based business leaders 3. Using 5 focusing / steps to plan within the operational systems resonance (Move from Monthly with individual targets to weekly goals with 12 week view of customer shipments). Use existing management systems & tools to upgrade operational flow (both volume and through-put revenue). 3 questions that someone would / could ask at end of the presentation? 1. Is TOC principles applicable to any mining & resource operation? Yes. The key is to understand which tool to use when. Key to mining executives thinking is operational safety and meeting regulatory requirements. The operational constraints can be in usual places. 2. Has TOC been adopted in other mining & resource operational environments? Yes. Aware of operational projects in Australia, South Africa & India. 3. What new TOC based thinking can be applied to Resource Operational chains? The effect of Buffer level determinations and Buffer Management technology has progressed a great deal since Argyle Diamonds (1993) put it into its systems. This technology can be now to applied at an individual process step to maximize overall process flow. It is our view that this is not yet happening due to historical practices within the mining space. 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
184 Conference Proceedings Bonatsos, Spyros Milk run replenishment in Cyprus 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The case study refers to the design, application and implementation of the TOC replenishment solution in the biggest Dairy in Cyprus. The two biggest dairies in Cyprus merged their operations under a new operational model in 2008. The merger affected all aspects of the two companies - manufacturing, supply chain/logistics, sales, IT, HR and administration. This case study analyses how the TOC replenishment solution was designed and implemented to support the creation of the new supply chain that would be able to service daily more than 2500 customers through a fleet of 150 vehicles and through 4 depots supported by a central warehouse. The whole project was realized in less than a year and it was a huge undertaking for the company, which created the new future without missing market presence not even for a single day. There are lessons learned and there is room for further improvement. In Cyprus three main dairies were in operation for many years up to 2008 (Producing and distributing fresh pasteurized milk – 4 days shelf life), those were Christis Dairies, Charalambides Dairies and Lanitis. Christis Dairies (where I was managing the Supply Chain at that time) was producing and distributing many other product categories as well along with the pasteurized milk such as Yoghurts, UHT products, Cheeses, imported products and frozen goods. The main volume of that company was pasteurized milk though. The other two were bottling and distributing only pasteurized milk. That year a huge conglomerate from Greece (Vivartia) acquired the two dairies (Christis Dairies and Charalambides Dairies) and merged them into one big dairy called Vivartia (Cyprus) ltd. The new company has 600 employees, 100.000.000 euros turnover, it receives and processes 200 tons of milk daily and serves more than 2500 customers on a daily basis with a fleet of 150 vehicles. Year 2012 the company has changed ownership one more time and changed the name to Charalambides Christis ltd. TOC concepts are completely unknown to Cyprus. From my personal interest I was reading books about TOC for years and I was following the TOC blocks blogs and discussions on the web. I was fascinated with the TOC world! Year 2008 I decided to follow a structured program and dive into the TOC world as deep as possible. I enrolled myself into the METM program at Washington State University which specializes in TOC and I got the Constraint Management certificate after 2 years of study. The two companies were operating differently through their Supply chains before the merge and Vivartia wanted to move quickly with the changes. I knew that if we didn't do something different, something better, current UDEs wouldn't just evaporate on their own – the core problem wouldn't be addressed. Both companies were suffering from the same nature of UDEs. Different face but same nature. At the beginning I could not understand what was the core problem but as I was getting familiar with TOC more and more - the picture was getting sharper. I could see that variation couldn't be managed by forecasts, by hard work and by good will. I just knew that the solution was the Replenishment Solution developed by the TOC body of knowledge. It was a big opportunity for me and for the new company to try and implement the TOC Replenishment Solution to the new Supply Chain platform. I knew that it was the most effective solution in order to eliminate the UDEs which they were governing both dairies. And we applied it!!! In this case study I am intending to describe the merge that took place in the Supply Chain and in the logistics part (of the whole merge) through the TOC lenses. We applied the Replenishment Solution (well, part of it since we did not finish yet). The whole project required investments of more than 10 million Euros (only for the Supply Chain part) and it is not finished yet. The creation of the central warehouse, depots, changes in the fleet and in the operational model – all happened in just one year! Many things worked and many things failed during that year. With all this effort we applied the Replenishment Solution to the purchasing function as well and we had some amazing improvements. I could share a slide with the audience as well. This is the area that my Case Study will be about. Share what parts of TOC were implemented and why, what parts were difficult to implement and what else there is left to be done. I have the approval of the company to share numbers and figures so we will be able to see some real data. The study will cover the following areas: What to Change: 1. Analysis of problems and core conflicts existing at that time (when there were two different logistics platforms). 2. Describe some production patterns and policies that governing the flow. 3. Solutions available and why certain solutions were preferred over others. What to Change to: 4. Description of the FRT that shaped the future of the two companies. 5. Description of the Replenishment Solution and how it was planned to operate.6. The creation of a central w/h and the merge of 9 distribution centres (depots) to four, serving 150 distribution vans. The creation of a common schedule of two different factories to one – it will cover also the effort of 300 people (no of people involved in to the operation of the new supply Chain and who how they were influenced by my decisions). 7. It will cover the change that took place in the fleet and why. 8. Description to some changes in the production part and how that affected flow and throughput. How the change took place: 9. I will describe how the implementation took place and how far it went. 10. I will also give data how the whole transformation affected T, I and OE. Lessons Learned: 11. Describe what went wrong and try to analyze the reason underneath. 12. Indicate future opportunities and areas of improvements. 13. Describe and analyze how the new planning process implementation affected production, what procedures changed and what results that gave back to the supply chain. 3 Learning Objectives: • How the Replenishment Solution was designed in the specific case. • How the Replenishment Solution was applied in the specific Case. • Where to pay special attention in the implementation of such a project. Questions to be asked: 1. What were the biggest challenges that were faced in the implementation? 2. How did you convince management what to do? 3. What would you do different if you could go back in time? 31 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
185 Conference Proceedings Milk run replenishment in Cyprus 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The case study refers to the design, application and implementation of the TOC replenishment solution in the biggest Dairy in Cyprus. The two biggest dairies in Cyprus merged their operations under a new operational model in 2008. The merger affected all aspects of the two companies - manufacturing, supply chain/logistics, sales, IT, HR and administration. This case study analyses how the TOC replenishment solution was designed and implemented to support the creation of the new supply chain that would be able to service daily more than 2500 customers through a fleet of 150 vehicles and through 4 depots supported by a central warehouse. The whole project was realized in less than a year and it was a huge undertaking for the company, which created the new future without missing market presence not even for a single day. There are lessons learned and there is room for further improvement. In Cyprus three main dairies were in operation for many years up to 2008 (Producing and distributing fresh pasteurized milk – 4 days shelf life), those were Christis Dairies, Charalambides Dairies and Lanitis. Christis Dairies (where I was managing the Supply Chain at that time) was producing and distributing many other product categories as well along with the pasteurized milk such as Yoghurts, UHT products, Cheeses, imported products and frozen goods. The main volume of that company was pasteurized milk though. The other two were bottling and distributing only pasteurized milk. That year a huge conglomerate from Greece (Vivartia) acquired the two dairies (Christis Dairies and Charalambides Dairies) and merged them into one big dairy called Vivartia (Cyprus) ltd. The new company has 600 employees, 100.000.000 euros turnover, it receives and processes 200 tons of milk daily and serves more than 2500 customers on a daily basis with a fleet of 150 vehicles. Year 2012 the company has changed ownership one more time and changed the name to Charalambides Christis ltd. TOC concepts are completely unknown to Cyprus. From my personal interest I was reading books about TOC for years and I was following the TOC blocks blogs and discussions on the web. I was fascinated with the TOC world! Year 2008 I decided to follow a structured program and dive into the TOC world as deep as possible. I enrolled myself into the METM program at Washington State University which specializes in TOC and I got the Constraint Management certificate after 2 years of study. The two companies were operating differently through their Supply chains before the merge and Vivartia wanted to move quickly with the changes. I knew that if we didn't do something different, something better, current UDEs wouldn't just evaporate on their own – the core problem wouldn't be addressed. Both companies were suffering from the same nature of UDEs. Different face but same nature. At the beginning I could not understand what was the core problem but as I was getting familiar with TOC more and more - the picture was getting sharper. I could see that variation couldn't be managed by forecasts, by hard work and by good will. I just knew that the solution was the Replenishment Solution developed by the TOC body of knowledge. It was a big opportunity for me and for the new company to try and implement the TOC Replenishment Solution to the new Supply Chain platform. I knew that it was the most effective solution in order to eliminate the UDEs which they were governing both dairies. And we applied it!!! In this case study I am intending to describe the merge that took place in the Supply Chain and in the logistics part (of the whole merge) through the TOC lenses. We applied the Replenishment Solution (well, part of it since we did not finish yet). The whole project required investments of more than 10 million Euros (only for the Supply Chain part) and it is not finished yet. The creation of the central warehouse, depots, changes in the fleet and in the operational model – all happened in just one year! Many things worked and many things failed during that year. With all this effort we applied the Replenishment Solution to the purchasing function as well and we had some amazing improvements. I could share a slide with the audience as well. This is the area that my Case Study will be about. Share what parts of TOC were implemented and why, what parts were difficult to implement and what else there is left to be done. I have the approval of the company to share numbers and figures so we will be able to see some real data. The study will cover the following areas: What to Change: 1. Analysis of problems and core conflicts existing at that time (when there were two different logistics platforms). 2. Describe some production patterns and policies that governing the flow. 3. Solutions available and why certain solutions were preferred over others. What to Change to: 4. Description of the FRT that shaped the future of the two companies. 5. Description of the Replenishment Solution and how it was planned to operate.6. The creation of a central w/h and the merge of 9 distribution centres (depots) to four, serving 150 distribution vans. The creation of a common schedule of two different factories to one – it will cover also the effort of 300 people (no of people involved in to the operation of the new supply Chain and who how they were influenced by my decisions). 7. It will cover the change that took place in the fleet and why. 8. Description to some changes in the production part and how that affected flow and throughput. How the change took place: 9. I will describe how the implementation took place and how far it went. 10. I will also give data how the whole transformation affected T, I and OE. Lessons Learned: 11. Describe what went wrong and try to analyze the reason underneath. 12. Indicate future opportunities and areas of improvements. 13. Describe and analyze how the new planning process implementation affected production, what procedures changed and what results that gave back to the supply chain. 3 Learning Objectives: • How the Replenishment Solution was designed in the specific case. • How the Replenishment Solution was applied in the specific Case. • Where to pay special attention in the implementation of such a project. Questions to be asked: 1. What were the biggest challenges that were faced in the implementation? 2. How did you convince management what to do? 3. What would you do different if you could go back in time? 31 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
186 Conference Proceedings Brasil, Antonio Vasco TOC CCPM: Turning the invisible into visible for decisions 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Timing' in projects is as important as 'time' is. For one single project to be a success, many dimensions need to be in harmony. The multi-project environment, therefore, seems to be much more complex. There are dimensions where things and / or references move continuously. There are dimensions where things and / or references move discretely. Sometimes, dimensions are mixed and the decision process is seen as easier. After decisions are made and implemented, nature shows the effects. Mixed dimensions make it difficult to understand and identify root causes and interrelationship 'routings' governing development systems. When results are not as expected, we cannot expect that the actions taken to correct them or to improve the system are the right ones. Normally there are many hidden conflicts in legacy systems created for the administration of project development systems. During critical chain project management (CCPM) implementation, some of these conflicts arise. Understanding the different dimensions is essential to harmonizing perceptions, decisions, language, solutions, measurements, phases and criteria. Then, the deployment of a process of on-going improvement (POOGI) can be chimerical if CCPM is already implemented or very precise for a new or bigger application or implementation. Harmonizing and the right timing need to be inherently simple but are not necessarily easy. Timing' in projects is as important as 'time' is. For one single project to be a success, many dimensions need to be in harmony. In a multi project environment there are more interrelated variables. Multi project environment, therefore, seems to be much more complex. There are dimensions where things and / or references move continuously (example: Time). There are dimensions where things and / or references move discretely (example: achievements, requirements, workloads, risks, knowledge). Sometimes, dimensions are mixed and the decision process is seen as easier. After decisions are made and implemented, nature shows the effects. Mixed dimensions make difficult to understand and identify root causes and interrelationship 'routings' governing development system. When results are not as expected, we can not expect that the actions taken to correct them or to improve the system are the right ones. In normal environments there are many of these 'dimension mixing'. One single and simple example is the 'milestone': in a road it is just a mark for the position or distance. In projects, 'milestone' has the coupling of position or distance (work done, achievement, delivery) and time. If the project is compared to a trip, is like if we traditionally associate a time for each milestone in addition for distance. In other words: we force the need to be in the right position and at the right time during the complete trip. Normally, the concept of milestone is indiscriminately used. If used where not needed it will not only increase rigidity where it is not necessary, but also cause a loss of focus in the project execution and control, making managerial attention be directed to many internal due dates, most of them not necessary, instead of paying attention to more precise success criteria for deliverables and objectives achievements and effectively focusing at due dates when they are really due and/or useful. Normally there are many hidden conflicts in legacy systems created for administrate projects development systems. During CCPM implementation, some of these conflicts rise. Frequently, there is the misunderstanding that these conflicts are caused by CCPM concepts or CCPM implementation. Understanding the different dimensions is essential to harmonize perceptions, decisions, language, solutions, measurements, phases, criteria and criteria application. The deep understanding of basic CCPM principles allows the conception, implementation, use, stabilization and improvement of a management system with very few measurements and controls to support decision making through the visibility of impacts of decisions before they are taken and implemented. This gives not only better operational results but also comfort for decision makers at all levels. Once harmonized, the deployment of a 'poogi' can be chirurgical if CCPM is already implemented or very precise for a new or bigger application or implementation. Harmonizing and right timing needs to be inherently simple. Not necessarily it will be easy, but can be challenging, effective and motivating for participants. https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
187 Conference Proceedings TOC CCPM: Turning the invisible into visible for decisions 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Timing' in projects is as important as 'time' is. For one single project to be a success, many dimensions need to be in harmony. The multi-project environment, therefore, seems to be much more complex. There are dimensions where things and / or references move continuously. There are dimensions where things and / or references move discretely. Sometimes, dimensions are mixed and the decision process is seen as easier. After decisions are made and implemented, nature shows the effects. Mixed dimensions make it difficult to understand and identify root causes and interrelationship 'routings' governing development systems. When results are not as expected, we cannot expect that the actions taken to correct them or to improve the system are the right ones. Normally there are many hidden conflicts in legacy systems created for the administration of project development systems. During critical chain project management (CCPM) implementation, some of these conflicts arise. Understanding the different dimensions is essential to harmonizing perceptions, decisions, language, solutions, measurements, phases and criteria. Then, the deployment of a process of on-going improvement (POOGI) can be chimerical if CCPM is already implemented or very precise for a new or bigger application or implementation. Harmonizing and the right timing need to be inherently simple but are not necessarily easy. Timing' in projects is as important as 'time' is. For one single project to be a success, many dimensions need to be in harmony. In a multi project environment there are more interrelated variables. Multi project environment, therefore, seems to be much more complex. There are dimensions where things and / or references move continuously (example: Time). There are dimensions where things and / or references move discretely (example: achievements, requirements, workloads, risks, knowledge). Sometimes, dimensions are mixed and the decision process is seen as easier. After decisions are made and implemented, nature shows the effects. Mixed dimensions make difficult to understand and identify root causes and interrelationship 'routings' governing development system. When results are not as expected, we can not expect that the actions taken to correct them or to improve the system are the right ones. In normal environments there are many of these 'dimension mixing'. One single and simple example is the 'milestone': in a road it is just a mark for the position or distance. In projects, 'milestone' has the coupling of position or distance (work done, achievement, delivery) and time. If the project is compared to a trip, is like if we traditionally associate a time for each milestone in addition for distance. In other words: we force the need to be in the right position and at the right time during the complete trip. Normally, the concept of milestone is indiscriminately used. If used where not needed it will not only increase rigidity where it is not necessary, but also cause a loss of focus in the project execution and control, making managerial attention be directed to many internal due dates, most of them not necessary, instead of paying attention to more precise success criteria for deliverables and objectives achievements and effectively focusing at due dates when they are really due and/or useful. Normally there are many hidden conflicts in legacy systems created for administrate projects development systems. During CCPM implementation, some of these conflicts rise. Frequently, there is the misunderstanding that these conflicts are caused by CCPM concepts or CCPM implementation. Understanding the different dimensions is essential to harmonize perceptions, decisions, language, solutions, measurements, phases, criteria and criteria application. The deep understanding of basic CCPM principles allows the conception, implementation, use, stabilization and improvement of a management system with very few measurements and controls to support decision making through the visibility of impacts of decisions before they are taken and implemented. This gives not only better operational results but also comfort for decision makers at all levels. Once harmonized, the deployment of a 'poogi' can be chirurgical if CCPM is already implemented or very precise for a new or bigger application or implementation. Harmonizing and right timing needs to be inherently simple. Not necessarily it will be easy, but can be challenging, effective and motivating for participants. https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
188 Conference Proceedings Burkhard, Rudolf Take the risk out of innovation 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Innovation is a risky activity. We don't know whether our idea will work. We don't know whether the market will actually buy our idea or product. Our world stigmatizes failure despite the knowledge that we must be prepared to make mistakes otherwise nothing original will ever result! We have some great tools to help reduce risk and thus make it easier to try new ideas. The trick is to find ways to test our ideas rigorously before we have spent huge amounts of money, reputation and credibility. Tools that will help evaluate new ideas include the 6 questions about technology and the 4 quadrants of resistance to change (pot of gold, crutches, mermaid and crocodile). Eric Ries, in his book ‘The Lean Start-Up' suggests a process for early new product evaluation that I believe integrates very well with TOC tools. I show how the TOC tools and ‘The Lean Start-Up' can integrate synergistically. Successful Innovation 'Technology or innovation can deliver benefits if, and only if, it diminishes a limitation.' E. M. Goldratt 'A technology or innovation that does diminish a limitation does not guarantee it will deliver benefits, nor does it guarantee success in the market.' E.M. Goldratt. Culture Our culture, the way our society works follows us around everywhere we go during our lives. 'We stigmatize mistakes.' 'Mistakes are the worst thing you can make.' 'We are educated out of creativity,' and 'Many highly talented, brilliant, creative people think they're not — because the thing they were good at school wasn't valued, or was actually stigmatized,' and 'the problem continues when we get our first job!' 'We run our companies in the same way.' There is a need to correct this. A business may not be able to fix the education system, but it can instill the following into its people: 'If you're not prepared to be wrong, you'll never come up with anything original.' 6 Questions about Technology: Eli Goldratt's 6 questions are a great guide to test ideas. Before you even start developing the technology it is possible to test your idea with the help of these questions. A danger to avoid is being in love with your great idea. Even with the help of the questions you must make assumptions about the way people deal with a limitation today – is their workaround onerous enough that they are willing to try something new? You see the benefits for you and you see them from your perspective. How will your market for the new technology see the benefits vs. not changing? The Pot of Gold, Crutches, the Mermaid and the Crocodile. When you are evaluating your innovative idea you have the opportunity (and you probably should do this) to evaluate the four outcomes your potential customers may experience with the innovation when it becomes available. The pot of gold is probably easy for you to identify but what about the other 3 quadrants of ‘resistance to change'? What could go wrong for the user should he adopt your idea? What benefit(s) will he have to give up to enjoy the benefits of your innovation? What crocodile will bite him in the ass if he does not? Testing, Testing, Testing. The 6 questions about technology and to look at the 4 quadrants of resistance to change are ways to test your innovation. However no matter how good you are, your conclusions will be colored by personal experience and your strong desire for a successful innovation. It's your baby! TOC has always recommended that you test your thinking with your environment. Test it not only with like-minded people, but also with those likely to by skeptical or even dismissive of your ideas. Eventually an idea needs to be transformed into a product for the market to test. The market (your customers) will almost certainly be unfamiliar with your reasoning for the innovation and how it should be used to ensure the benefits. The new rules that should be applied must not be forgotten in your market tests. Give customers the chance to achieve the benefits. 'The Lean Start Up' We have validated our innovation idea as far as possible and feel pretty confident of probable success. Nevertheless it does not make sense to spend a large quantity of money on something the market will not buy. We need inexpensive fast ways to learn about the market's reaction to our product. Eric Ries recommends a process like the following (I have incorporated the 6 questions about technology and the 4 quadrants of resistance to change): 1. Validate your idea using the 6 questions about technology 2. Understand the possible resistances to change (the 4 quadrants) 3. Build your minimum viable product (MVP) – 'prototypes t test market reaction) a. Fast, inexpensive, low cost 4. 'Sell' the MVP (without forgetting the new rules for successful application) 5. Measure the response (demand, demand growth, repeat buys, loyalty, what clients say about your solution / technology…) 6. Learn 7. Decide whether or not to ‘Pivot' a. To pivot means a change in the direction of the innovation 8. Extend the minimum viable product or back to 1. Use Critical Chain concepts to manage such projects – limit WIP etc. Learning Objectives: 1. How to avoid the mistake of not making mistakes. 2. How to develop a new technology with minimal risk. 3. How to pursue ideas that cost little if they are a mistake. Possible Questions: 1. MVPs are easy with software, but how do we make minimum viable products when we are talking about hardware? 2. To kill a project, even to pivot to a new direction is not easy. How do we make sure the inventor (or the team) remain focused on developing something that will sell well in the market rather than focused on a neat technology but of little market value? 25 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
189 Conference Proceedings Take the risk out of innovation 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Innovation is a risky activity. We don't know whether our idea will work. We don't know whether the market will actually buy our idea or product. Our world stigmatizes failure despite the knowledge that we must be prepared to make mistakes otherwise nothing original will ever result! We have some great tools to help reduce risk and thus make it easier to try new ideas. The trick is to find ways to test our ideas rigorously before we have spent huge amounts of money, reputation and credibility. Tools that will help evaluate new ideas include the 6 questions about technology and the 4 quadrants of resistance to change (pot of gold, crutches, mermaid and crocodile). Eric Ries, in his book ‘The Lean Start-Up' suggests a process for early new product evaluation that I believe integrates very well with TOC tools. I show how the TOC tools and ‘The Lean Start-Up' can integrate synergistically. Successful Innovation 'Technology or innovation can deliver benefits if, and only if, it diminishes a limitation.' E. M. Goldratt 'A technology or innovation that does diminish a limitation does not guarantee it will deliver benefits, nor does it guarantee success in the market.' E.M. Goldratt. Culture Our culture, the way our society works follows us around everywhere we go during our lives. 'We stigmatize mistakes.' 'Mistakes are the worst thing you can make.' 'We are educated out of creativity,' and 'Many highly talented, brilliant, creative people think they're not — because the thing they were good at school wasn't valued, or was actually stigmatized,' and 'the problem continues when we get our first job!' 'We run our companies in the same way.' There is a need to correct this. A business may not be able to fix the education system, but it can instill the following into its people: 'If you're not prepared to be wrong, you'll never come up with anything original.' 6 Questions about Technology: Eli Goldratt's 6 questions are a great guide to test ideas. Before you even start developing the technology it is possible to test your idea with the help of these questions. A danger to avoid is being in love with your great idea. Even with the help of the questions you must make assumptions about the way people deal with a limitation today – is their workaround onerous enough that they are willing to try something new? You see the benefits for you and you see them from your perspective. How will your market for the new technology see the benefits vs. not changing? The Pot of Gold, Crutches, the Mermaid and the Crocodile. When you are evaluating your innovative idea you have the opportunity (and you probably should do this) to evaluate the four outcomes your potential customers may experience with the innovation when it becomes available. The pot of gold is probably easy for you to identify but what about the other 3 quadrants of ‘resistance to change'? What could go wrong for the user should he adopt your idea? What benefit(s) will he have to give up to enjoy the benefits of your innovation? What crocodile will bite him in the ass if he does not? Testing, Testing, Testing. The 6 questions about technology and to look at the 4 quadrants of resistance to change are ways to test your innovation. However no matter how good you are, your conclusions will be colored by personal experience and your strong desire for a successful innovation. It's your baby! TOC has always recommended that you test your thinking with your environment. Test it not only with like-minded people, but also with those likely to by skeptical or even dismissive of your ideas. Eventually an idea needs to be transformed into a product for the market to test. The market (your customers) will almost certainly be unfamiliar with your reasoning for the innovation and how it should be used to ensure the benefits. The new rules that should be applied must not be forgotten in your market tests. Give customers the chance to achieve the benefits. 'The Lean Start Up' We have validated our innovation idea as far as possible and feel pretty confident of probable success. Nevertheless it does not make sense to spend a large quantity of money on something the market will not buy. We need inexpensive fast ways to learn about the market's reaction to our product. Eric Ries recommends a process like the following (I have incorporated the 6 questions about technology and the 4 quadrants of resistance to change): 1. Validate your idea using the 6 questions about technology 2. Understand the possible resistances to change (the 4 quadrants) 3. Build your minimum viable product (MVP) – 'prototypes t test market reaction) a. Fast, inexpensive, low cost 4. 'Sell' the MVP (without forgetting the new rules for successful application) 5. Measure the response (demand, demand growth, repeat buys, loyalty, what clients say about your solution / technology…) 6. Learn 7. Decide whether or not to ‘Pivot' a. To pivot means a change in the direction of the innovation 8. Extend the minimum viable product or back to 1. Use Critical Chain concepts to manage such projects – limit WIP etc. Learning Objectives: 1. How to avoid the mistake of not making mistakes. 2. How to develop a new technology with minimal risk. 3. How to pursue ideas that cost little if they are a mistake. Possible Questions: 1. MVPs are easy with software, but how do we make minimum viable products when we are talking about hardware? 2. To kill a project, even to pivot to a new direction is not easy. How do we make sure the inventor (or the team) remain focused on developing something that will sell well in the market rather than focused on a neat technology but of little market value? 25 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
190 Conference Proceedings Chaudhari, Chandrashekhar Application of TOC in the live animal farming industry 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The five focusing steps, and several TOC solutions / processes are widely used in various industries for improving the performance of a system. However TOC solutions are not implemented / developed widely in the industry that deals with ‘live animal farming'. These environments are much more complex than any other environments as it deals with ‘live animals'. Some of unique characteristics of this environment makes it challenging to manage i.e. inventory of live animals can't be held for too long as it consumes food (truly variable cost (TVC) goes up), mortalities reduces potential throughput, sales price of products vary on a daily basis like other commodity, etc. When the authors could not develop a good solution using the ‘five focusing steps' implementation in ‘live chicken farms', they applied the ‘thinking processes' (TP) to develop TOC-based solutions. Implementation of the solutions in a chicken farm environment delivered good results in very short time. The process was further converted into a standard guideline/process for analyzing other ‘live animals farming' environments. Processes were tested to develop solutions for ‘cow farming', ‘calf growing' and ‘pig farming' environments. With the help of some relevant companies, solutions for ‘cow farming' and ‘calf growing' environments were practically tested. Five Focusing Steps, and several TOC solutions / processes are widely used in various industries for improving the performance of a system as whole. Many organizations achieved substantial improvement in system's performance through TOC applications. However TOC solutions are not implemented / developed widely in the industry that deals with ‘Live Animal Farming'. In many cases, producers of such live animals are small or medium sized farmers who supply their products/output to some large organizations that process this into finished products. Irrespective of complexities of a system, Five Focusing Steps (FFS) provided clear guideline to improve performance of a system. Such FFS were tried in a ‘Live Chicken Farming' business in India. However this process didn't help much as there were multiple constraints in system and several other factors like diseases, rate of consumption of food, quantity and quality of food given to animals, were also governing system's performance. The assumption that ‘it is easy to identify the system's constraint (and there will be only one constraint), and its exploitation, elevation improves the performance of system' didn't stand valid in ‘Live Animals Farming' environment. A detailed thinking processes application was constructed to identify the real constraint of the system and develop solutions+1. Study revealed that even though system has only one non-physical constraint, and there are several interdependencies between constraint and other parameters of farm. Hence standalone actions can't be taken to improve constraint's utilization. Thinking process guided properly to develop solutions which will not harm other performance parameters of the farm. However when other similar environments like ‘Cow Farming (for Milk production) ', ‘Calf Growing' came up for analysis, lot of similarities were found in all ‘Live Animal Farming' environments. It is also important to understand what makes these environments so challenging and special? Why ‘Live Animal Farming' environment is more challenging than any other business? These environments are drastically different from any other business not producing live animals, some of the key differences between these two industries are as follows: • Holding inventories of live animals is not just cost of capital, but also the cost of food that needs to be given to animals. • Holding more live animals too longer, means production capacity is blocked, fresh batch of new animals can't be taken in farm. • Sometime holding live animals too long makes then non-eligible for getting better prices. • Producing more animals in case of sudden rise in demand is NOT AT ALL possible as lead time to produce animals is much longer. • Sales prices of finished products and cost of input materials varies drastically and there no certainty about it. • Risk of diseases always there which impacts the production output from the farm, as well profitability e.g. Just a rumor of ‘a disease on chicken or on pigs, creates panic and farmers starts selling their animals at whatever price they can get, they don't start new batch till such risks are over. These are just few examples and not exhaustive list. Due to these challenges, such environments are even more complex to manage and be profitable for a longer time span. As there are several such companies, industries involved in ‘Live Animal Farming', a need of developing standard process for analysis and solution development was felt. These farms use agricultural produce (corns/maze, Soya bean) as an input, hence less efficient the business, more of agricultural produce is consumed by them. Hence developing a process/solution for such environment looked even more important. Based on several characteristic of these environments, lot of commonalities were found in different ‘Live Animal Farming' environments. This guided to build in a generic process for analyzing any such farming environments. A generic process was developed which is combination of ‘Five Focusing Steps', ‘Thinking Process' and ‘Throughput Accounting'. This developed process was implemented in two businesses i.e. ‘Cow Farming' and ‘Calf Growing' Implemented solutions demonstrated considerable improvement in the performance of individual farms. Validation of process, development and implementation of solutions was supported by Godrej Agrovet Ltd +2, India's one of the major Animal Feed Manufacturing company. The process was also validated by analyzing ‘Pig Farming' environment in China, ‘Chicken Farming and Processing' company in Latin America. The proved its application to greet extent with need of ability to analyze business and develop solutions there as well. This process can now tried for developing TOC based solutions for any environment that deals with any type of ‘Live Animal Farming'. Author himself has set up his own ‘Calf Growing' and ‘Cow Farming' to demonstrate the possible results that can be achieved by proper focus in these businesses. Implementation Challenges in such environments: The solution has to be implemented to hundreds of farmers, getting their buy in for new solutions is difficult task. If some large company is involved in buying products from farmers, task is bit easy, but still difficult. What is the relationship to existing accepted strategy and tactic trees? As the environment and direction of solution is considerably different, the existing S & T Tree doesn't have any major relationship. However if it is a company who is in business of ‘Live Animal Farming', standard S & T Tree provides a guideline for building the tree. Structure of Build, Capitalize, and Sustain remains same, however detailed steps of BUILD and SUSTAIN blocks changes depending on environment. 35 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
191 Conference Proceedings Application of TOC in the live animal farming industry 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The five focusing steps, and several TOC solutions / processes are widely used in various industries for improving the performance of a system. However TOC solutions are not implemented / developed widely in the industry that deals with ‘live animal farming'. These environments are much more complex than any other environments as it deals with ‘live animals'. Some of unique characteristics of this environment makes it challenging to manage i.e. inventory of live animals can't be held for too long as it consumes food (truly variable cost (TVC) goes up), mortalities reduces potential throughput, sales price of products vary on a daily basis like other commodity, etc. When the authors could not develop a good solution using the ‘five focusing steps' implementation in ‘live chicken farms', they applied the ‘thinking processes' (TP) to develop TOC-based solutions. Implementation of the solutions in a chicken farm environment delivered good results in very short time. The process was further converted into a standard guideline/process for analyzing other ‘live animals farming' environments. Processes were tested to develop solutions for ‘cow farming', ‘calf growing' and ‘pig farming' environments. With the help of some relevant companies, solutions for ‘cow farming' and ‘calf growing' environments were practically tested. Five Focusing Steps, and several TOC solutions / processes are widely used in various industries for improving the performance of a system as whole. Many organizations achieved substantial improvement in system's performance through TOC applications. However TOC solutions are not implemented / developed widely in the industry that deals with ‘Live Animal Farming'. In many cases, producers of such live animals are small or medium sized farmers who supply their products/output to some large organizations that process this into finished products. Irrespective of complexities of a system, Five Focusing Steps (FFS) provided clear guideline to improve performance of a system. Such FFS were tried in a ‘Live Chicken Farming' business in India. However this process didn't help much as there were multiple constraints in system and several other factors like diseases, rate of consumption of food, quantity and quality of food given to animals, were also governing system's performance. The assumption that ‘it is easy to identify the system's constraint (and there will be only one constraint), and its exploitation, elevation improves the performance of system' didn't stand valid in ‘Live Animals Farming' environment. A detailed thinking processes application was constructed to identify the real constraint of the system and develop solutions+1. Study revealed that even though system has only one non-physical constraint, and there are several interdependencies between constraint and other parameters of farm. Hence standalone actions can't be taken to improve constraint's utilization. Thinking process guided properly to develop solutions which will not harm other performance parameters of the farm. However when other similar environments like ‘Cow Farming (for Milk production) ', ‘Calf Growing' came up for analysis, lot of similarities were found in all ‘Live Animal Farming' environments. It is also important to understand what makes these environments so challenging and special? Why ‘Live Animal Farming' environment is more challenging than any other business? These environments are drastically different from any other business not producing live animals, some of the key differences between these two industries are as follows: • Holding inventories of live animals is not just cost of capital, but also the cost of food that needs to be given to animals. • Holding more live animals too longer, means production capacity is blocked, fresh batch of new animals can't be taken in farm. • Sometime holding live animals too long makes then non-eligible for getting better prices. • Producing more animals in case of sudden rise in demand is NOT AT ALL possible as lead time to produce animals is much longer. • Sales prices of finished products and cost of input materials varies drastically and there no certainty about it. • Risk of diseases always there which impacts the production output from the farm, as well profitability e.g. Just a rumor of ‘a disease on chicken or on pigs, creates panic and farmers starts selling their animals at whatever price they can get, they don't start new batch till such risks are over. These are just few examples and not exhaustive list. Due to these challenges, such environments are even more complex to manage and be profitable for a longer time span. As there are several such companies, industries involved in ‘Live Animal Farming', a need of developing standard process for analysis and solution development was felt. These farms use agricultural produce (corns/maze, Soya bean) as an input, hence less efficient the business, more of agricultural produce is consumed by them. Hence developing a process/solution for such environment looked even more important. Based on several characteristic of these environments, lot of commonalities were found in different ‘Live Animal Farming' environments. This guided to build in a generic process for analyzing any such farming environments. A generic process was developed which is combination of ‘Five Focusing Steps', ‘Thinking Process' and ‘Throughput Accounting'. This developed process was implemented in two businesses i.e. ‘Cow Farming' and ‘Calf Growing' Implemented solutions demonstrated considerable improvement in the performance of individual farms. Validation of process, development and implementation of solutions was supported by Godrej Agrovet Ltd +2, India's one of the major Animal Feed Manufacturing company. The process was also validated by analyzing ‘Pig Farming' environment in China, ‘Chicken Farming and Processing' company in Latin America. The proved its application to greet extent with need of ability to analyze business and develop solutions there as well. This process can now tried for developing TOC based solutions for any environment that deals with any type of ‘Live Animal Farming'. Author himself has set up his own ‘Calf Growing' and ‘Cow Farming' to demonstrate the possible results that can be achieved by proper focus in these businesses. Implementation Challenges in such environments: The solution has to be implemented to hundreds of farmers, getting their buy in for new solutions is difficult task. If some large company is involved in buying products from farmers, task is bit easy, but still difficult. What is the relationship to existing accepted strategy and tactic trees? As the environment and direction of solution is considerably different, the existing S & T Tree doesn't have any major relationship. However if it is a company who is in business of ‘Live Animal Farming', standard S & T Tree provides a guideline for building the tree. Structure of Build, Capitalize, and Sustain remains same, however detailed steps of BUILD and SUSTAIN blocks changes depending on environment. 35 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
192 Conference Proceedings Chim Wai Kwong, Jim CUSUM chart application in CCPM buffer management 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Buffer management is a vital component in TOC critical chain project management (CCPM). The fever chart is one of the most common tools in managing buffer consumption. One important aspect of the fever chart is that the yellow and red zones are set based on experience and process knowledge. However, there is difficulties in identifying if a task entered the red zone has really significantly consumed more buffers versus other tasks. In this workshop, statistical process control (SPC) of buffers is briefly discussed. Shewhart charts of burn rate and project buffer consumption rate (PBCR) are presented. The relationship between the fever chart, burn rate and PBCR is discussed. Finally, this workshop demonstrate basic principles of the CUSUM chart and also how to construct a CUSUM chart in monitoring buffer consumption to identify a small drift in mean buffer consumption. Buffer management is one of the major components in TOC CCPM. Project buffer is normally divided into three zones (green, yellow and red). When buffer penetrates red zone, remedy actions are taken to bring buffer status back to yellow or green zone. Apart from corrective actions, Process of On-Going Improvement (POOGI) should be implemented by identifying abnormal buffer penetrations. Over the years, Six Sigma has emerged as a popular methodology in process improvements. Many TOC Practitioners are promoting the combinations of TOC and Six Sigma. One key distinct characteristic in Six Sigma process improvement is the use of statistics to identify statistically significant deviations. Deming proposed not to tamper process unnecessary, otherwise more process variations will be introduced. Typical measurements in CCPM such as fever chart, project status, critical chain completed (%) and buffer burn rate do not provide information about statistically significance of a buffer penetration. There are always difficulties or even disputes in confirming if the buffer penetration is significantly deviated from the rest or not when applying those typical tools. Budd and Cerveny mentioned that whenever buffer consumption enters the yellow variability zone, every task overruns its' expected (aggressive) time should be analyzed for the cause. However, there are disagreements in assigning an event as abnormal penetration just because it enters yellow or red zone. It may be the earlier tasks that consumed the safety buffers and forces the latter task into red. Task members will not feel comfortable when Project Manager consider tasks as abnormal by just considering the entering or yellow or red zone as judgment of abnormal buffer penetrations. So a more objective way such as Statistical Process Control (SPC) is needed in identifying abnormal or common cause of buffer penetrations. The fever chart is usually set up based on professional judgment and process knowledge. There is usually no special statistical meaning associated with each zones, so special cause may already happen when project buffer status is still in green zone. In this paper, basic SPC control of %critical chain completion, burn rate and project buffer consumption rate (PBCR) using Shewhart chart will be demonstrated. Moreover, the relationship between fever chart, burn rate control chart and PBCR control chart will be discussed briefly. More emphasis will be given to the demonstration of CUSUM chart in various buffer monitoring. CUSUM chart is one of the common Six Sigma SPC tools and can be used to monitor buffer consumption and to identify any statistically significant deviations in buffer consumption. CUSUM chart, while not as intuitive and simple to operate as Shewhart chart, have been shown to be more efficient in detecting small shift in the mean of the process. In particular analyzing ARL's for CUSUM control chart shows that CUSUM charts are better than Shewhart control chart in detecting shifts in mean that are 2 sigma or less. CUSUM chart is defined by two parameters, h and k or using an alpha and beta approach. So this workshop will demonstrate basic principles of CUSUM chart and also how to construct a CUSUM chart in monitoring buffer consumption to identify small drift in mean buffer consumption. Fever chart, enter red zone when %CC=65% Shewhart chart, no abnormality found V-mask chart with same data, h=4, k=0.5. 39 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
193 Conference Proceedings CUSUM chart application in CCPM buffer management 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Buffer management is a vital component in TOC critical chain project management (CCPM). The fever chart is one of the most common tools in managing buffer consumption. One important aspect of the fever chart is that the yellow and red zones are set based on experience and process knowledge. However, there is difficulties in identifying if a task entered the red zone has really significantly consumed more buffers versus other tasks. In this workshop, statistical process control (SPC) of buffers is briefly discussed. Shewhart charts of burn rate and project buffer consumption rate (PBCR) are presented. The relationship between the fever chart, burn rate and PBCR is discussed. Finally, this workshop demonstrate basic principles of the CUSUM chart and also how to construct a CUSUM chart in monitoring buffer consumption to identify a small drift in mean buffer consumption. Buffer management is one of the major components in TOC CCPM. Project buffer is normally divided into three zones (green, yellow and red). When buffer penetrates red zone, remedy actions are taken to bring buffer status back to yellow or green zone. Apart from corrective actions, Process of On-Going Improvement (POOGI) should be implemented by identifying abnormal buffer penetrations. Over the years, Six Sigma has emerged as a popular methodology in process improvements. Many TOC Practitioners are promoting the combinations of TOC and Six Sigma. One key distinct characteristic in Six Sigma process improvement is the use of statistics to identify statistically significant deviations. Deming proposed not to tamper process unnecessary, otherwise more process variations will be introduced. Typical measurements in CCPM such as fever chart, project status, critical chain completed (%) and buffer burn rate do not provide information about statistically significance of a buffer penetration. There are always difficulties or even disputes in confirming if the buffer penetration is significantly deviated from the rest or not when applying those typical tools. Budd and Cerveny mentioned that whenever buffer consumption enters the yellow variability zone, every task overruns its' expected (aggressive) time should be analyzed for the cause. However, there are disagreements in assigning an event as abnormal penetration just because it enters yellow or red zone. It may be the earlier tasks that consumed the safety buffers and forces the latter task into red. Task members will not feel comfortable when Project Manager consider tasks as abnormal by just considering the entering or yellow or red zone as judgment of abnormal buffer penetrations. So a more objective way such as Statistical Process Control (SPC) is needed in identifying abnormal or common cause of buffer penetrations. The fever chart is usually set up based on professional judgment and process knowledge. There is usually no special statistical meaning associated with each zones, so special cause may already happen when project buffer status is still in green zone. In this paper, basic SPC control of %critical chain completion, burn rate and project buffer consumption rate (PBCR) using Shewhart chart will be demonstrated. Moreover, the relationship between fever chart, burn rate control chart and PBCR control chart will be discussed briefly. More emphasis will be given to the demonstration of CUSUM chart in various buffer monitoring. CUSUM chart is one of the common Six Sigma SPC tools and can be used to monitor buffer consumption and to identify any statistically significant deviations in buffer consumption. CUSUM chart, while not as intuitive and simple to operate as Shewhart chart, have been shown to be more efficient in detecting small shift in the mean of the process. In particular analyzing ARL's for CUSUM control chart shows that CUSUM charts are better than Shewhart control chart in detecting shifts in mean that are 2 sigma or less. CUSUM chart is defined by two parameters, h and k or using an alpha and beta approach. So this workshop will demonstrate basic principles of CUSUM chart and also how to construct a CUSUM chart in monitoring buffer consumption to identify small drift in mean buffer consumption. Fever chart, enter red zone when %CC=65% Shewhart chart, no abnormality found V-mask chart with same data, h=4, k=0.5. 39 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
194 Conference Proceedings Cohen, Oded Developing local operational indicators and money buffers 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany TOC puts extreme importance on measurements as a major influencer on the behavior of people within systems. TOC points out that improper measurements can cause existing systems to perform below their potential. Yet TOC provides just directions for the new measurements. Many companies that implement TOC logistical solutions request more concrete answers to two major questions: One, what measurements should be used in order to motivate management and the workforce to act and behave in line with the company's goal? Two, practically, how to ensure that there is enough budget to finance the actions that management is expected to take as per the TOC solutions. This master class deals with these two practical questions. First, we define Local Operational Indicators (LOI's) for the organization level of department or a function within the organization. These LOI's help to ensure that the local activity supports the good of the company. We will suggest potential LOI's and the way to numerically and visually use them. The second part of the class suggests the development and the use of money buffers for the TOC logistical solutions. The buffers of the logistical solutions provide early warning and prompt management to take corrective actions before it becomes too late and too costly. Yet, these actions usually demand additional expense. The money buffers provides the financial support and control of such actions. The application of money buffers is demonstrated for the different TOC logistical solutions. Background: In 1983 Eli Goldratt openly challenged Cost Accounting by calling it 'public enemy number one of productivity'. Thereafter, he had a road show in which he argued his approach against Kaplan and his ABC solution to management accounting. Yet, Eli did not develop in details the TOC solution for Finance and Measurements. He provided more general guidelines and directions of what should be done rather than developing all the details of what should be done and how it should be done. He claimed that what is provided already should be enough for the financial community to develop the details. Throughout the years we have seen the work of financial directors and their staff aiming at supporting managerial decision making the TOC Way. Usually, their work has been based on T-I-OE. Yet, T-I-OE is not enough. There is a need to cover more aspects of what must be accomplished by functions and department such as work deliverables (such as daily quantities), prerequisites that must be achieved (such as quality) and there are areas that if not monitored may damage the performance of a function (such as machine breakdown, process excellence etc.) and eventually may hurt the global performance of the company. We have seen companies that developed their own KPIs – Key Performance Measurements. However, in many cases we have found that there are many KPIs (in cases more than 50 per department). As it is impossible to focus on too many KPIs management may end up focusing on the less significant (but easy to achieve) KPIs. The Suggested Approach: To develop and use TOC based Local Operational Indicators (LOIs) in order to provide management with the ability to steer their areas of responsibilities in the right direction. The LOIs should be few (no more than 10) per local area. Potential LOIs (partial list): 1. LOI should be a subset of the performance measurements of the logistical solutions of TOC (MTO, MTA, DTA and CCPM) – as presented at the top of the U-shape. 2. We should measure the LOE – Local Operating Expenses that are used in order perform the duties of every department. 3. We can measure the quantifiable level of achieving DE – Desired Effect that replaces a major UDE. For example: UDE: Too much Overtime. The DE: Level of Overtime is planned and controlled. The LOI is the recorded amount of OT versus what was planned. LOIs should be checked against expectations. Here are some guidelines: 1. The number of LOI per department/sections should be reasonable (no more than 10). Too many LOIs can cause defocusing or arbitrary choice of where to focus. 2. There must be a clear hierarchy of the LOIs. Some are more critical than others. 3. Every LOI should have a scale (ideally numerical). The full range of scale should be marked with three major zones – Green (Good), Yellow (Midway) and Red (potentially in danger). Additional zones: Deep Red (Black) should denote bad situations and in some cases another zone - Blue – for outstanding good performance. 4. There should be an overall department score which reflects the weight of the different LOIs. 5. Management is done along the lines of responding to the buffer status. Part Two - Money Buffers (for all logistical applications) Background: The TOC Logistical Solutions – MTO, MTA, DTA and CCPM focus on managing the flow. The top priority is given to the logistical commitment: on time delivery and availability. Yet, the logistical management must consider the financial impact of their decisions. Any activity that deviates from the 'standard' (what has been put in the budget) causes to increase the expense. To reduce the financial clash all TOC solutions give early warning through buffer status. Nevertheless, most corrective actions demand extra money. To handle this issue we suggest adding to the logistical buffers – time and stock, also the Money Buffers for managing flow. The Suggested Approach: The Master Class covers the suggested use of the Money Buffers for each TOC Logistical Solution. The MTO Solutions contains a specific injection that prompts management to take recovery actions to ensure delayed work orders arrive to the dispatch dock on time. We suggest giving Production Management a Money Buffer. This is an amount of money that is allocated to production and allows them to finance the recovery actions. An initial buffer size is set based on historical data. Thereafter, dynamic management is applies to ensure the buffer reflects the real need for financing recovery actions. The recovery of the money buffer is achieved through: • Any positive variation should be credited back to the money buffer. • If the money buffer goes to red – the issue must be escalated to higher management for consideration of 'Topping up' the buffer with one-off sums. Money Buffers for Stock Buffers – MTA/ DTA (Distribute to Availability): Stock buffers are set as a part of the solution. Yet, in reality we can expect to have two types of variations: 1. DBM – Dynamic Buffer Management may call for increase in the buffer size. This will demand additional expenditure for producing the extra volume (RM, and additional OE). This can be offset by the reduction in another SKU stock buffer, but not fully. 2. MTA-Injection 4 – instruct management to take recovery actions. These actions may demand extra money. We suggest one common Money Buffer in the system to covers all stock buffers to address and control these extra costs. Money Buffers for Project Buffers – CCPM: CCPM has several types of Buffers. The major ones are FB and PB even though these are Time Buffers that are inserted in order to protect the on-time delivery of the project, these buffers also contain a money aspect. The time estimation of the task duration, according to CCPM-Injection 2 (….), is 'challenging but achievable'. (Also called the 50/50 time). This means that there is 50% chance that the task will take longer than estimated. If the actual task duration is larger than estimated there is a need to finance the additional days of the task. For that the project should have Money Buffers. The size of Money Buffers should be based on two elements: 1. Money for financing the tasks that need more time than estimated. This part can be estimated by taking 50% of the estimated cost of the CC or the corresponding Feeding Chain 2. Money for financing recovery actions – the estimation can be based on historical data of deviations from project budget (no more than 50%) Money Buffers should be monitored regularly. When the level of money is reduced to the Red level – management should take recovery actions or escalate to top management. Three Learning Points: i. There is a way how to get TOC views for determining what should be performance measurements to motivate people to do what is good for the company, especially, when just using Throughput and Operating Expenses is not enough. ii. The feeling that TOC ignores the control of the money in projects is not correct. Many times financial people object to CCPM using this argument. The concept of Money Buffers gives a good answer to this criticism. It provides a good managerial tool not only to finance the recovery actions but also to ensure that management is self-controlling the budget through the buffers. iii. Middle management can get an answer to a major obstacle they may be concerned about the implementation of TOC logistical solutions: 'will higher management support them in taking the corrective actions'. Three questions participants may ask at the end of the workshop: a) 'We are using today piece incentive (pay per produced piece) – how can the LOIs replace this way of motivating our people?' b) 'We are using Balanced Score Card. Can you use them as LOIs?' c) 'How can we persuade top management and especially the Finance Director to establish the money buffers and to budget money in them?' 1 hour 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
195 Conference Proceedings Developing local operational indicators and money buffers 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany TOC puts extreme importance on measurements as a major influencer on the behavior of people within systems. TOC points out that improper measurements can cause existing systems to perform below their potential. Yet TOC provides just directions for the new measurements. Many companies that implement TOC logistical solutions request more concrete answers to two major questions: One, what measurements should be used in order to motivate management and the workforce to act and behave in line with the company's goal? Two, practically, how to ensure that there is enough budget to finance the actions that management is expected to take as per the TOC solutions. This master class deals with these two practical questions. First, we define Local Operational Indicators (LOI's) for the organization level of department or a function within the organization. These LOI's help to ensure that the local activity supports the good of the company. We will suggest potential LOI's and the way to numerically and visually use them. The second part of the class suggests the development and the use of money buffers for the TOC logistical solutions. The buffers of the logistical solutions provide early warning and prompt management to take corrective actions before it becomes too late and too costly. Yet, these actions usually demand additional expense. The money buffers provides the financial support and control of such actions. The application of money buffers is demonstrated for the different TOC logistical solutions. Background: In 1983 Eli Goldratt openly challenged Cost Accounting by calling it 'public enemy number one of productivity'. Thereafter, he had a road show in which he argued his approach against Kaplan and his ABC solution to management accounting. Yet, Eli did not develop in details the TOC solution for Finance and Measurements. He provided more general guidelines and directions of what should be done rather than developing all the details of what should be done and how it should be done. He claimed that what is provided already should be enough for the financial community to develop the details. Throughout the years we have seen the work of financial directors and their staff aiming at supporting managerial decision making the TOC Way. Usually, their work has been based on T-I-OE. Yet, T-I-OE is not enough. There is a need to cover more aspects of what must be accomplished by functions and department such as work deliverables (such as daily quantities), prerequisites that must be achieved (such as quality) and there are areas that if not monitored may damage the performance of a function (such as machine breakdown, process excellence etc.) and eventually may hurt the global performance of the company. We have seen companies that developed their own KPIs – Key Performance Measurements. However, in many cases we have found that there are many KPIs (in cases more than 50 per department). As it is impossible to focus on too many KPIs management may end up focusing on the less significant (but easy to achieve) KPIs. The Suggested Approach: To develop and use TOC based Local Operational Indicators (LOIs) in order to provide management with the ability to steer their areas of responsibilities in the right direction. The LOIs should be few (no more than 10) per local area. Potential LOIs (partial list): 1. LOI should be a subset of the performance measurements of the logistical solutions of TOC (MTO, MTA, DTA and CCPM) – as presented at the top of the U-shape. 2. We should measure the LOE – Local Operating Expenses that are used in order perform the duties of every department. 3. We can measure the quantifiable level of achieving DE – Desired Effect that replaces a major UDE. For example: UDE: Too much Overtime. The DE: Level of Overtime is planned and controlled. The LOI is the recorded amount of OT versus what was planned. LOIs should be checked against expectations. Here are some guidelines: 1. The number of LOI per department/sections should be reasonable (no more than 10). Too many LOIs can cause defocusing or arbitrary choice of where to focus. 2. There must be a clear hierarchy of the LOIs. Some are more critical than others. 3. Every LOI should have a scale (ideally numerical). The full range of scale should be marked with three major zones – Green (Good), Yellow (Midway) and Red (potentially in danger). Additional zones: Deep Red (Black) should denote bad situations and in some cases another zone - Blue – for outstanding good performance. 4. There should be an overall department score which reflects the weight of the different LOIs. 5. Management is done along the lines of responding to the buffer status. Part Two - Money Buffers (for all logistical applications) Background: The TOC Logistical Solutions – MTO, MTA, DTA and CCPM focus on managing the flow. The top priority is given to the logistical commitment: on time delivery and availability. Yet, the logistical management must consider the financial impact of their decisions. Any activity that deviates from the 'standard' (what has been put in the budget) causes to increase the expense. To reduce the financial clash all TOC solutions give early warning through buffer status. Nevertheless, most corrective actions demand extra money. To handle this issue we suggest adding to the logistical buffers – time and stock, also the Money Buffers for managing flow. The Suggested Approach: The Master Class covers the suggested use of the Money Buffers for each TOC Logistical Solution. The MTO Solutions contains a specific injection that prompts management to take recovery actions to ensure delayed work orders arrive to the dispatch dock on time. We suggest giving Production Management a Money Buffer. This is an amount of money that is allocated to production and allows them to finance the recovery actions. An initial buffer size is set based on historical data. Thereafter, dynamic management is applies to ensure the buffer reflects the real need for financing recovery actions. The recovery of the money buffer is achieved through: • Any positive variation should be credited back to the money buffer. • If the money buffer goes to red – the issue must be escalated to higher management for consideration of 'Topping up' the buffer with one-off sums. Money Buffers for Stock Buffers – MTA/ DTA (Distribute to Availability): Stock buffers are set as a part of the solution. Yet, in reality we can expect to have two types of variations: 1. DBM – Dynamic Buffer Management may call for increase in the buffer size. This will demand additional expenditure for producing the extra volume (RM, and additional OE). This can be offset by the reduction in another SKU stock buffer, but not fully. 2. MTA-Injection 4 – instruct management to take recovery actions. These actions may demand extra money. We suggest one common Money Buffer in the system to covers all stock buffers to address and control these extra costs. Money Buffers for Project Buffers – CCPM: CCPM has several types of Buffers. The major ones are FB and PB even though these are Time Buffers that are inserted in order to protect the on-time delivery of the project, these buffers also contain a money aspect. The time estimation of the task duration, according to CCPM-Injection 2 (….), is 'challenging but achievable'. (Also called the 50/50 time). This means that there is 50% chance that the task will take longer than estimated. If the actual task duration is larger than estimated there is a need to finance the additional days of the task. For that the project should have Money Buffers. The size of Money Buffers should be based on two elements: 1. Money for financing the tasks that need more time than estimated. This part can be estimated by taking 50% of the estimated cost of the CC or the corresponding Feeding Chain 2. Money for financing recovery actions – the estimation can be based on historical data of deviations from project budget (no more than 50%) Money Buffers should be monitored regularly. When the level of money is reduced to the Red level – management should take recovery actions or escalate to top management. Three Learning Points: i. There is a way how to get TOC views for determining what should be performance measurements to motivate people to do what is good for the company, especially, when just using Throughput and Operating Expenses is not enough. ii. The feeling that TOC ignores the control of the money in projects is not correct. Many times financial people object to CCPM using this argument. The concept of Money Buffers gives a good answer to this criticism. It provides a good managerial tool not only to finance the recovery actions but also to ensure that management is self-controlling the budget through the buffers. iii. Middle management can get an answer to a major obstacle they may be concerned about the implementation of TOC logistical solutions: 'will higher management support them in taking the corrective actions'. Three questions participants may ask at the end of the workshop: a) 'We are using today piece incentive (pay per produced piece) – how can the LOIs replace this way of motivating our people?' b) 'We are using Balanced Score Card. Can you use them as LOIs?' c) 'How can we persuade top management and especially the Finance Director to establish the money buffers and to budget money in them?' 1 hour 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
196 Online Multimedia Corthout, Kurt The limitations of thinking 2011 This webinar covers the following four questions: 1. What is thinking and what are the limitations of thinking?  Thinking can be considered as the activity of the brain or a simple explanation through self-observation: experience, knowledge, memory, thought, action, back to experience. 2. Why improve thinking? Examples of what happens if one does not think clearly is discussed.  One can think logically, but not clearly. 3. What are the benefits if one improves one's own thinking?  This can include getting your house in order, self-reliance, responsibility (being able to act responsibly), peace of mind, etc. 4. How to think clearly. There is beauty, compassion, intelligence, love when the self is not. 54 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
197 Online Multimedia The limitations of thinking 2011 This webinar covers the following four questions: 1. What is thinking and what are the limitations of thinking?  Thinking can be considered as the activity of the brain or a simple explanation through self-observation: experience, knowledge, memory, thought, action, back to experience. 2. Why improve thinking? Examples of what happens if one does not think clearly is discussed.  One can think logically, but not clearly. 3. What are the benefits if one improves one's own thinking?  This can include getting your house in order, self-reliance, responsibility (being able to act responsibly), peace of mind, etc. 4. How to think clearly. There is beauty, compassion, intelligence, love when the self is not. 54 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
198 Online Multimedia The limitations of thinking 2011 This webinar covers the following four questions: 1. What is thinking and what are the limitations of thinking?  Thinking can be considered as the activity of the brain or a simple explanation through self-observation: experience, knowledge, memory, thought, action, back to experience. 2. Why improve thinking? Examples of what happens if one does not think clearly is discussed.  One can think logically, but not clearly. 3. What are the benefits if one improves one's own thinking?  This can include getting your house in order, self-reliance, responsibility (being able to act responsibly), peace of mind, etc. 4. How to think clearly. There is beauty, compassion, intelligence, love when the self is not. 54 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
199 Conference Proceedings Cohen, Oded Lessons learned in implementing MTA / DTA (Encore) 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The TOC solution for managing a supply chain contains MTA (Make to Availability) for the manufacturer and DTA (Distribute to Availability) for the downstream chain bringing the goods from the manufacturer all the way to the end user/ consumer. Both MTA and DTA solutions are conceptually simple, practical and technically straight forward. Yet, the change in the flow and in managing the flow is challenging. The logic of moving from MTO/MTS to MTA is that there is potential to grow the manufacturing company by offering availability to the downstream chain. The same logic is relevant for the rest of the supply chain. This presentation is based on manufacturers, some that have their own distribution system while others operate through independent distributors. Operating MTO in an environment that demands availability has created difficulties (limitations) to the system. These difficulties stem from the reality that in order to provide availability in a response time that is shorter than the delivery time of the manufacturer - the supply chain is forced to operate on forecasts. When the manufacturers are strong – they can force the downstream links to operate according to the forecast and to give them concrete orders for them to produce as if they all live in an MTO environment. Operating systems based on forecasts cause the major undesirable effects (UDEs) of shortages and surpluses of SKUs that are expected to be available to be purchased from stock. Therefore, the downstream links suffer from these UDEs. However, the above UDEs cause difficulties also to the manufacturers. 30 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
200 Conference Proceedings Lessons learned in implementing MTA / DTA (Encore) 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The TOC solution for managing a supply chain contains MTA (Make to Availability) for the manufacturer and DTA (Distribute to Availability) for the downstream chain bringing the goods from the manufacturer all the way to the end user/ consumer. Both MTA and DTA solutions are conceptually simple, practical and technically straight forward. Yet, the change in the flow and in managing the flow is challenging. The logic of moving from MTO/MTS to MTA is that there is potential to grow the manufacturing company by offering availability to the downstream chain. The same logic is relevant for the rest of the supply chain. This presentation is based on manufacturers, some that have their own distribution system while others operate through independent distributors. Operating MTO in an environment that demands availability has created difficulties (limitations) to the system. These difficulties stem from the reality that in order to provide availability in a response time that is shorter than the delivery time of the manufacturer - the supply chain is forced to operate on forecasts. When the manufacturers are strong – they can force the downstream links to operate according to the forecast and to give them concrete orders for them to produce as if they all live in an MTO environment. Operating systems based on forecasts cause the major undesirable effects (UDEs) of shortages and surpluses of SKUs that are expected to be available to be purchased from stock. Therefore, the downstream links suffer from these UDEs. However, the above UDEs cause difficulties also to the manufacturers. 30 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
201 Conference Proceedings Cox III, James F. What is the theory of constraints basics workshop 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The TOCICO Dictionary (2012, 2nd Ed. Cox, Boyd, et al., 45) defines the theory of constraints (TOC) as “A holistic management philosophy developed by Dr. Eliyahu M. Goldratt that is based on the principle that complex systems exhibit inherent simplicity, i.e., even a very complex system made up of thousands of people and pieces of equipment can have in any given time only a very, very small number of variables – perhaps only one (known as a constraint) – that actually limits the ability to generate more of the system's goal.” The term, theory of constraints, was coined by Dr. Goldratt in 1986 with his realization that his OPT philosophy applied to more than the management of bottlenecks in production. He realized that his concepts also applied to projects with the ‘bottleneck' being the critical path (better described as a critical chain); hence the new name ‘theory of constraints'. The evolution of TOC started much earlier in the late 1970's with the development of Goldratt's OPT software and later the OPT principles. In 2010, Dr. Goldratt in ‘Chapter 1 What is TOC? My perspective' (of the Theory of Constraints Handbook) wrote that TOC could be described by one word: ‘focus'. In the chapter Goldratt describes redefining the term ‘focus' to solve each new problem blocking achieving the system goal and in each instance of solving the new problem he expands the scope to several organization functions (production, accounting, marketing, sales, distribution, retail, human relations, engineering and projects, business strategy, etc.) and increases the performance of the system significantly. This workshop answers the first two change questions of ‘what to change?' and ‘to what to change to' for organizations and for various organization functions. (1 hour, 43 minutes). What is TOC? A basics workshop. Presentation organization: The change question sequence. BROAD OVERVIEW OF TOC BASED ON THE 3 CHANGE QUESTION SEQUENCE1: What to change? Core problem identification. To what to change? The win-win solution. How to cause the change? The implementation plan. Workshop topics: • TOC origins1 and evolution • 1978 TOC origin1: The chicken house problem • 2010 What is TOC? FOCUS Goldratt goes on to define 'Focus: doing what should be done… Focusing on everything is synonymous with not focusing on anything. We don't have a choice but to define focus more narrowly: do what should be done AND don't do what should not be done.' Organizations / systems 1. Traditional organization focus versus TOC organization focus 2. Organizations 3. Traditional organization focus / rules 4. Organizations 5. TOC organization focus / rules 6. Fundamental assumptions of TOC 1) People are good ... but we all have 'bad' assumptions that block us from seeing and unlocking inherent potential within ourselves, others and the organizations we work in. Goldratt 2) Every conflict can be removed ... if we can find and challenge the erroneous assumption(s) causing the conflict. Newton 3) Every situation (or system), no matter how complex it initially appears to be, is exceedingly simple ... if we can find the one or few high leverage points, the inherent simplicity in any situation or system. Newton 4) Every situation can be substantially improved ... if we can just think clearly in all situations we encounter using these assumptions. Goldratt • Operations • Finance / measures • Projects • Distribution / supply chain • Marketing • Sales • Managing people — Respect • Strategy Summary • Workshop topics • How to cause the change? • Fundamental assumptions of TOC • FOCUS + assumptions = TOC derivatives. 1 hour 44 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
202 Conference Proceedings What is the theory of constraints basics workshop 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The TOCICO Dictionary (2012, 2nd Ed. Cox, Boyd, et al., 45) defines the theory of constraints (TOC) as “A holistic management philosophy developed by Dr. Eliyahu M. Goldratt that is based on the principle that complex systems exhibit inherent simplicity, i.e., even a very complex system made up of thousands of people and pieces of equipment can have in any given time only a very, very small number of variables – perhaps only one (known as a constraint) – that actually limits the ability to generate more of the system's goal.” The term, theory of constraints, was coined by Dr. Goldratt in 1986 with his realization that his OPT philosophy applied to more than the management of bottlenecks in production. He realized that his concepts also applied to projects with the ‘bottleneck' being the critical path (better described as a critical chain); hence the new name ‘theory of constraints'. The evolution of TOC started much earlier in the late 1970's with the development of Goldratt's OPT software and later the OPT principles. In 2010, Dr. Goldratt in ‘Chapter 1 What is TOC? My perspective' (of the Theory of Constraints Handbook) wrote that TOC could be described by one word: ‘focus'. In the chapter Goldratt describes redefining the term ‘focus' to solve each new problem blocking achieving the system goal and in each instance of solving the new problem he expands the scope to several organization functions (production, accounting, marketing, sales, distribution, retail, human relations, engineering and projects, business strategy, etc.) and increases the performance of the system significantly. This workshop answers the first two change questions of ‘what to change?' and ‘to what to change to' for organizations and for various organization functions. (1 hour, 43 minutes). What is TOC? A basics workshop. Presentation organization: The change question sequence. BROAD OVERVIEW OF TOC BASED ON THE 3 CHANGE QUESTION SEQUENCE1: What to change? Core problem identification. To what to change? The win-win solution. How to cause the change? The implementation plan. Workshop topics: • TOC origins1 and evolution • 1978 TOC origin1: The chicken house problem • 2010 What is TOC? FOCUS Goldratt goes on to define 'Focus: doing what should be done… Focusing on everything is synonymous with not focusing on anything. We don't have a choice but to define focus more narrowly: do what should be done AND don't do what should not be done.' Organizations / systems 1. Traditional organization focus versus TOC organization focus 2. Organizations 3. Traditional organization focus / rules 4. Organizations 5. TOC organization focus / rules 6. Fundamental assumptions of TOC 1) People are good ... but we all have 'bad' assumptions that block us from seeing and unlocking inherent potential within ourselves, others and the organizations we work in. Goldratt 2) Every conflict can be removed ... if we can find and challenge the erroneous assumption(s) causing the conflict. Newton 3) Every situation (or system), no matter how complex it initially appears to be, is exceedingly simple ... if we can find the one or few high leverage points, the inherent simplicity in any situation or system. Newton 4) Every situation can be substantially improved ... if we can just think clearly in all situations we encounter using these assumptions. Goldratt • Operations • Finance / measures • Projects • Distribution / supply chain • Marketing • Sales • Managing people — Respect • Strategy Summary • Workshop topics • How to cause the change? • Fundamental assumptions of TOC • FOCUS + assumptions = TOC derivatives. 1 hour 44 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
203 Conference Proceedings Fedurko, Jelena Looking into UDE clouds – How to get them right 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Among the different cloud types, the UDE cloud is most challenging and demanding as it requires the biggest number of skills and has the highest degree of responsibility as it seeks to solve a system, rather than an individual, problem. The major role and contribution of the UDE cloud is to unfold a manager's understanding of their reality and to guide their thinking to allow them to take conscious actions that will significantly improve the performance of their systems. At the same time mistakes in UDE clouds could throw the whole system into actions that can be harmful. The key processes of working with UDE clouds are: • identifying and wording several UDEs; • constructing each individual UDE cloud in such a way that it will manifest its respective UDE and be logically sound; • consolidating UDE clouds to identify a more generic cloud; • revealing assumptions justifying logical connections; • challenging assumptions and finding a solution through designing an injection / set of injections. Every process is a demanding logical work. In this master class we will look into two areas: 1) while building an UDE cloud o difficulties to determine what is in box B, which leads to a common mistake of a mirror reflection between an UDE and boxes B and/or D; o difficulties in wording C as a system's need; 2) while consolidating o difficulties in finding a common aspect among the consolidated entities. Inability to overcome these difficulties in a quick and effective way leads UDE cloud users to become frustrated and discouraged when they feel that they are unable to consolidate, or that building UDE clouds did not add to their understanding of their reality. In the master class we will look into examples of common mistakes, and offer concrete techniques to help with both building a good UDE cloud and the consolidating process. Three learning objectives: 1) for the UDE cloud user to be able to identify and avoid typical mistakes in building an UDE Cloud 2) for the user to recognize the points in the process of their thinking that they should be conscious to check that their thinking should not take an unhelpful route 3) for the user to become aware of the techniques to help the UDE Cloud building and consolidating process and to understand how these techniques work and could be applied in their thinking process. Brief content: Among the different Cloud types, the UDE Cloud is most challenging and demanding as it requires the biggest number of skills and has the highest degree of responsibility as it seeks to solve a system, rather than an individual, problem. The major role and contribution of the UDE Cloud is to unfold a manager's understanding of their reality and to guide their thinking to allow them to take conscious actions that will significantly improve the performance of their systems. At the same time mistakes in UDE Clouds could throw the whole system into actions that can be harmful. The key processes of working with UDE Clouds are: • identifying and wording several UDEs • constructing each individual UDE Cloud in such a way that it will manifest its respective UDE and be logically sound, • consolidating UDE Clouds to identify a more generic Cloud, • revealing assumptions justifying logical connections, • challenging assumptions and finding a solution through designing an Injection/set of Injections. Every process is a demanding logical work. In this master class we will look into two areas: 1) while building an UDE Cloud o difficulties to determine what is in box B, which leads to a common mistake of a mirror reflection between an UDE and boxes B and/or D; o difficulties in wording C as a system's Need; 2) while consolidating o difficulties in finding a common aspect among the consolidated entities. Inability to overcome these difficulties in a quick and effective way leads UDE Cloud users to become frustrated and discouraged when they feel that they are unable to consolidate, or that building UDE Clouds did not add to their understanding of their reality. The UDE Cloud building techniques offer a very clear guidance. On the surface, the task is very simple – a user should just answer the pre-determined questions to fill in the boxes in the guided sequence. It shall be noted that the UDE content and wording are also guided by a set of clear rules that will be presented in the master class for the reference, however, no work on practicing UDE wording will be done due to the limited time. The master class will look into examples of common mistakes while constructing and consolidating UDE Clouds, and will offer concrete techniques to help with the both processes. Working on the techniques, we will first look into examples reflecting the common mistakes of filling in boxes B and D: Example 1: In this example it is obvious that what is put in the box B is just a mirror reflection of the wording of the UDE. Why is it a mistake? This UDE is undesirable because the sales from new customers are low. We may find it undesirable only if the desirable state is 'to have more sales from this specific group – new customers'. Writing this down again in the box B does not add anything to deeper or better understanding of the reality. In example 1 box D adds an aspect of quantities in terms of number of new customers, which gives more clarity of where the system wants the focus of activities of sales people to be – attracting new customers vs., for example, increasing sales/contract size with the new customers. With that, this wording may be acceptable as the content of D for this UDE Cloud, though it is not strong enough and quite vague. Still, the wording in D may serve its role even with the generally unhelpful B, if the user manages to surface meaningful assumptions behind B-D. A similar example will be presented to demonstrate a case when what is put in D is a mirror reflection of an UDE. Example 2: We will also look at the case when all three entities – the UDE, box B and box D – are just variations of the same statement. In addition, we will examine cases that will demonstrate common mistakes of wording C in an attempt to answer the question 'What other important need prevents you from always taking an action in D?'. The purpose of looking into the above mistakes is to identify what causes these mistakes and present the technique to recognize the points in the process of thinking that the user should be conscious to check that their thinking should not take an unhelpful route. In the master class we will also spend some time with the technique to ease and improve the consolidation process through learning how to identify the common aspect in the entities to be consolidated. Three questions that could be asked: 1) What is the value of following the suggested sequence of filling in the boxes in the UDE Cloud – B?D?C?D'?A? 2) While consolidating, how to know at which level to look for the consolidated statement - so that the resulting consolidated cloud will be enough generic but will still reflect the concrete system and its subject-matter, and not simply be of the declarative nature that would fit any system? 3) How much practice should it take one to become proficient with the set of skills required to construct quality clouds? 1 hour 31 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
204 Conference Proceedings Looking into UDE clouds – How to get them right 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Among the different cloud types, the UDE cloud is most challenging and demanding as it requires the biggest number of skills and has the highest degree of responsibility as it seeks to solve a system, rather than an individual, problem. The major role and contribution of the UDE cloud is to unfold a manager's understanding of their reality and to guide their thinking to allow them to take conscious actions that will significantly improve the performance of their systems. At the same time mistakes in UDE clouds could throw the whole system into actions that can be harmful. The key processes of working with UDE clouds are: • identifying and wording several UDEs; • constructing each individual UDE cloud in such a way that it will manifest its respective UDE and be logically sound; • consolidating UDE clouds to identify a more generic cloud; • revealing assumptions justifying logical connections; • challenging assumptions and finding a solution through designing an injection / set of injections. Every process is a demanding logical work. In this master class we will look into two areas: 1) while building an UDE cloud o difficulties to determine what is in box B, which leads to a common mistake of a mirror reflection between an UDE and boxes B and/or D; o difficulties in wording C as a system's need; 2) while consolidating o difficulties in finding a common aspect among the consolidated entities. Inability to overcome these difficulties in a quick and effective way leads UDE cloud users to become frustrated and discouraged when they feel that they are unable to consolidate, or that building UDE clouds did not add to their understanding of their reality. In the master class we will look into examples of common mistakes, and offer concrete techniques to help with both building a good UDE cloud and the consolidating process. Three learning objectives: 1) for the UDE cloud user to be able to identify and avoid typical mistakes in building an UDE Cloud 2) for the user to recognize the points in the process of their thinking that they should be conscious to check that their thinking should not take an unhelpful route 3) for the user to become aware of the techniques to help the UDE Cloud building and consolidating process and to understand how these techniques work and could be applied in their thinking process. Brief content: Among the different Cloud types, the UDE Cloud is most challenging and demanding as it requires the biggest number of skills and has the highest degree of responsibility as it seeks to solve a system, rather than an individual, problem. The major role and contribution of the UDE Cloud is to unfold a manager's understanding of their reality and to guide their thinking to allow them to take conscious actions that will significantly improve the performance of their systems. At the same time mistakes in UDE Clouds could throw the whole system into actions that can be harmful. The key processes of working with UDE Clouds are: • identifying and wording several UDEs • constructing each individual UDE Cloud in such a way that it will manifest its respective UDE and be logically sound, • consolidating UDE Clouds to identify a more generic Cloud, • revealing assumptions justifying logical connections, • challenging assumptions and finding a solution through designing an Injection/set of Injections. Every process is a demanding logical work. In this master class we will look into two areas: 1) while building an UDE Cloud o difficulties to determine what is in box B, which leads to a common mistake of a mirror reflection between an UDE and boxes B and/or D; o difficulties in wording C as a system's Need; 2) while consolidating o difficulties in finding a common aspect among the consolidated entities. Inability to overcome these difficulties in a quick and effective way leads UDE Cloud users to become frustrated and discouraged when they feel that they are unable to consolidate, or that building UDE Clouds did not add to their understanding of their reality. The UDE Cloud building techniques offer a very clear guidance. On the surface, the task is very simple – a user should just answer the pre-determined questions to fill in the boxes in the guided sequence. It shall be noted that the UDE content and wording are also guided by a set of clear rules that will be presented in the master class for the reference, however, no work on practicing UDE wording will be done due to the limited time. The master class will look into examples of common mistakes while constructing and consolidating UDE Clouds, and will offer concrete techniques to help with the both processes. Working on the techniques, we will first look into examples reflecting the common mistakes of filling in boxes B and D: Example 1: In this example it is obvious that what is put in the box B is just a mirror reflection of the wording of the UDE. Why is it a mistake? This UDE is undesirable because the sales from new customers are low. We may find it undesirable only if the desirable state is 'to have more sales from this specific group – new customers'. Writing this down again in the box B does not add anything to deeper or better understanding of the reality. In example 1 box D adds an aspect of quantities in terms of number of new customers, which gives more clarity of where the system wants the focus of activities of sales people to be – attracting new customers vs., for example, increasing sales/contract size with the new customers. With that, this wording may be acceptable as the content of D for this UDE Cloud, though it is not strong enough and quite vague. Still, the wording in D may serve its role even with the generally unhelpful B, if the user manages to surface meaningful assumptions behind B-D. A similar example will be presented to demonstrate a case when what is put in D is a mirror reflection of an UDE. Example 2: We will also look at the case when all three entities – the UDE, box B and box D – are just variations of the same statement. In addition, we will examine cases that will demonstrate common mistakes of wording C in an attempt to answer the question 'What other important need prevents you from always taking an action in D?'. The purpose of looking into the above mistakes is to identify what causes these mistakes and present the technique to recognize the points in the process of thinking that the user should be conscious to check that their thinking should not take an unhelpful route. In the master class we will also spend some time with the technique to ease and improve the consolidation process through learning how to identify the common aspect in the entities to be consolidated. Three questions that could be asked: 1) What is the value of following the suggested sequence of filling in the boxes in the UDE Cloud – B?D?C?D'?A? 2) While consolidating, how to know at which level to look for the consolidated statement - so that the resulting consolidated cloud will be enough generic but will still reflect the concrete system and its subject-matter, and not simply be of the declarative nature that would fit any system? 3) How much practice should it take one to become proficient with the set of skills required to construct quality clouds? 1 hour 31 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
205 Conference Proceedings Fondevila, Erica The role of SOPs to secure the Viable Vision change process 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Through this presentation we describe how, utilizing the strategy and tactics (S&T tree) as guidance, we built a TOC SOP (standard operating procedure) IMPLEMENTATION MANUAL as a robust mechanism that helps every individual of the company to get quickly engaged with the process of building, capitalizing and sustaining the decisive competitive edge. We go through every aspect detailed in the manual built with the purpose of focusing management attention by assuring a continuous flow through the implementation process. Objectives: The sales system's purpose using the S&T's logic. Related documents: documents built/used to support the implementation. Detailed processes: every step of the process and related documents needed. Policies involved: to introduce TOC principles on the bureaucracy of the company. Key performance indicators (KPI's): scorecard of internal and external KPI's that measures performance of the system. As we recognize management attention as the main constraint of companies, we developed this tool to simplify and standardize the implementation process making it easier to reach harmony by generating stability and growth at the same time. Once this manual is established as the principal guide for the implementation, it becomes a source for continuous improvement and closes the gaps between the focus on short-term versus long-term horizons. Through this presentation we will describe how, utilizing the S&T as guidance, we built a TOC SOP IMPLEMENTATION MANUAL as a robust mechanism that helps every single individual of the company to get quickly engaged with the process of building, capitalizing and sustaining the decisive competitive edge of the company, this time in the Marketing and Sales System. We will go through every single aspect detailed in the Manual built with the purpose of focusing management attention by assuring a continuous flow through the implementation process: - Objectives: Purpose of the whole Sales System using the S&T's logic. - Related Documents: All the documents built/used needed to support the implementation, starting from the S&T's entities related, followed by managerial reports formats, process flow diagrams, power point presentations, instructives and every single document that is needed or can be helpful for any individual that is part of the TOC Sales System. - Detailed Processes and Procedures: details of every step of the process connected with the corresponding S&T's entity associated and the related document needed. - Policies Involved: Elaboration of the policies needed in order to introduce TOC principles on the bureaucracy of the whole company. - KPI's: Definition of internal and external KPI's and how we built a Scorecard that helps us measure very easily the performance of the system through time. As we recognize that management attention is the main constraint every single company deals with every day, we developed this tool to simplify and standardize the implementation process making it easier to reach harmony by generating stability and growth at the same time. 28 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
206 Conference Proceedings Fiallos, Julio The role of SOPs to secure the Viable Vision change process 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Through this presentation we describe how, utilizing the strategy and tactics (S&T tree) as guidance, we built a TOC SOP (standard operating procedure) IMPLEMENTATION MANUAL as a robust mechanism that helps every individual of the company to get quickly engaged with the process of building, capitalizing and sustaining the decisive competitive edge. We go through every aspect detailed in the manual built with the purpose of focusing management attention by assuring a continuous flow through the implementation process. Objectives: The sales system's purpose using the S&T's logic. Related documents: documents built/used to support the implementation. Detailed processes: every step of the process and related documents needed. Policies involved: to introduce TOC principles on the bureaucracy of the company. Key performance indicators (KPI's): scorecard of internal and external KPI's that measures performance of the system. As we recognize management attention as the main constraint of companies, we developed this tool to simplify and standardize the implementation process making it easier to reach harmony by generating stability and growth at the same time. Once this manual is established as the principal guide for the implementation, it becomes a source for continuous improvement and closes the gaps between the focus on short-term versus long-term horizons. Through this presentation we will describe how, utilizing the S&T as guidance, we built a TOC SOP IMPLEMENTATION MANUAL as a robust mechanism that helps every single individual of the company to get quickly engaged with the process of building, capitalizing and sustaining the decisive competitive edge of the company, this time in the Marketing and Sales System. We will go through every single aspect detailed in the Manual built with the purpose of focusing management attention by assuring a continuous flow through the implementation process: - Objectives: Purpose of the whole Sales System using the S&T's logic. - Related Documents: All the documents built/used needed to support the implementation, starting from the S&T's entities related, followed by managerial reports formats, process flow diagrams, power point presentations, instructives and every single document that is needed or can be helpful for any individual that is part of the TOC Sales System. - Detailed Processes and Procedures: details of every step of the process connected with the corresponding S&T's entity associated and the related document needed. - Policies Involved: Elaboration of the policies needed in order to introduce TOC principles on the bureaucracy of the whole company. - KPI's: Definition of internal and external KPI's and how we built a Scorecard that helps us measure very easily the performance of the system through time. As we recognize that management attention is the main constraint every single company deals with every day, we developed this tool to simplify and standardize the implementation process making it easier to reach harmony by generating stability and growth at the same time. 28 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
207 Conference Proceedings The role of SOPs to secure the Viable Vision change process 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Through this presentation we describe how, utilizing the strategy and tactics (S&T tree) as guidance, we built a TOC SOP (standard operating procedure) IMPLEMENTATION MANUAL as a robust mechanism that helps every individual of the company to get quickly engaged with the process of building, capitalizing and sustaining the decisive competitive edge. We go through every aspect detailed in the manual built with the purpose of focusing management attention by assuring a continuous flow through the implementation process. Objectives: The sales system's purpose using the S&T's logic. Related documents: documents built/used to support the implementation. Detailed processes: every step of the process and related documents needed. Policies involved: to introduce TOC principles on the bureaucracy of the company. Key performance indicators (KPI's): scorecard of internal and external KPI's that measures performance of the system. As we recognize management attention as the main constraint of companies, we developed this tool to simplify and standardize the implementation process making it easier to reach harmony by generating stability and growth at the same time. Once this manual is established as the principal guide for the implementation, it becomes a source for continuous improvement and closes the gaps between the focus on short-term versus long-term horizons. Through this presentation we will describe how, utilizing the S&T as guidance, we built a TOC SOP IMPLEMENTATION MANUAL as a robust mechanism that helps every single individual of the company to get quickly engaged with the process of building, capitalizing and sustaining the decisive competitive edge of the company, this time in the Marketing and Sales System. We will go through every single aspect detailed in the Manual built with the purpose of focusing management attention by assuring a continuous flow through the implementation process: - Objectives: Purpose of the whole Sales System using the S&T's logic. - Related Documents: All the documents built/used needed to support the implementation, starting from the S&T's entities related, followed by managerial reports formats, process flow diagrams, power point presentations, instructives and every single document that is needed or can be helpful for any individual that is part of the TOC Sales System. - Detailed Processes and Procedures: details of every step of the process connected with the corresponding S&T's entity associated and the related document needed. - Policies Involved: Elaboration of the policies needed in order to introduce TOC principles on the bureaucracy of the whole company. - KPI's: Definition of internal and external KPI's and how we built a Scorecard that helps us measure very easily the performance of the system through time. As we recognize that management attention is the main constraint every single company deals with every day, we developed this tool to simplify and standardize the implementation process making it easier to reach harmony by generating stability and growth at the same time. 28 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
208 Conference Proceedings Fox, Kevin Using TOC to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of state government 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The global economic troubles of the past few years have created significant challenges for governments around the world, and highlighted the critical importance of running government operations more effectively and efficiently. While TOC offers tremendous potential for government to make the great strides that are needed, it faces significant challenges in displacing the more common and less effective methods, including: slashing services / programs, re-organization, technology investments, and lean / six sigma, among others. This presentation discusses the unique challenges governments face (vs. for-profit organizations) both generally, and in applying TOC, and explores some novel techniques for launching and sustaining TOC in government organizations. We share examples and illustrations from several US states who have achieved success with TOC and who are now expanding their efforts state-wide. Over the past 3 years the speaker has led highly successful implementations of TOC in three different state governments in the USA. These experiences have resulted in an understanding of the unique challenges government's face in applying TOC, as well as providing an excellent laboratory for testing and validating strategies for leveraging TOC to realize the goals of government. This presentation will share some of those learnings and provide an understanding of a new, simplified application of TOC for generating substantial improvements in government operations, while providing a highly effective platform for continued long term gains. Learning Objectives: 1. Understand some of the unique challenges of applying TOC in a government setting. 2. Discover how a simple, novel approach to applying TOC can generate a large impact. 3. How can one adapt the principles of TOC to apply and appeal to government agencies. Abstract: The global economic troubles of the past few years have created significant challenges for governments around the world, and highlighted the critical importance of running government operations more effectively and efficiently. While TOC offers tremendous potential for government to make the great strides that are needed, it faces significant challenges in displacing the more common and less-effective methods, including: slashing services/ programs, re-organization, technology investments, and Lean/ Six Sigma, among others. This presentation will discuss the unique challenges government's face (vs. for-profit organizations) both generally, and in applying TOC, and explore some novel techniques for launching and sustaining TOC in government organizations. We will share examples and illustrations from several US states who have achieved success with TOC and who are now expanding their efforts state-wide. We'll begin by discussing some of the unique challenges in government including: • Politics and dealing with different political environments • The lack of a clear goal and metrics • The challenge of defining and measuring Throughput • The budget process • Dealing with the wide-array of stake-holders and interest groups • Operating in the transparent, highly visible light of public-scrutiny. These challenges don't change the fundamental validity or power of TOC, they do have significant implications on how TOC is launched, deployed, and spread within government. The presentation will highlight the importance of addressing issues at the operational level, a step below the political/ policy level of government, and why capacity creation is the central need of government today. The presentation will offer a simplified model for applying TOC that has resonated and proven highly effective within a number of state government agencies in the US. Building on the essential TOC principle of focus this model provides government agencies with a simple way of launching TOC and deriving tremendous benefits using little more than the concepts of T,I,OE and the Five Focusing Steps. The speaker will present case studies of this model from the states of Utah, Hawaii and Texas, in the USA, discussing critical issues like defining goals and Throughput, measuring performance, leadership, and engaging staff at all levels of the organization. In these discussions the speaker will present some of the common pitfalls of creating lasting organizational change with TOC and how to institutionalize on-going improvement in government. The presentation will then move to a discussion of strategies for expanding the application of TOC (bringing in more and more of the thinking tools and TOC's proven applications) as part of a long-term process of rolling out TOC widely within a state government. Additional case study material from Utah, Hawaii, and Texas will be used. In conclusion the presentation will relate the challenges and process of changing government back to the four pillars of TOC and illustrate how they can and should be used as the foundation and guideposts for applying TOC to government. 3 Questions that might be asked at the conclusion: 1. How does one generate interest in TOC at a government entity? 2. How are tools like the TP, CCPM and S&T being used in government? 3. How might TOC be incorporated into the process of setting public policy and making law? 1 hour 20 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
209 Conference Proceedings Using TOC to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of state government 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The global economic troubles of the past few years have created significant challenges for governments around the world, and highlighted the critical importance of running government operations more effectively and efficiently. While TOC offers tremendous potential for government to make the great strides that are needed, it faces significant challenges in displacing the more common and less effective methods, including: slashing services / programs, re-organization, technology investments, and lean / six sigma, among others. This presentation discusses the unique challenges governments face (vs. for-profit organizations) both generally, and in applying TOC, and explores some novel techniques for launching and sustaining TOC in government organizations. We share examples and illustrations from several US states who have achieved success with TOC and who are now expanding their efforts state-wide. Over the past 3 years the speaker has led highly successful implementations of TOC in three different state governments in the USA. These experiences have resulted in an understanding of the unique challenges government's face in applying TOC, as well as providing an excellent laboratory for testing and validating strategies for leveraging TOC to realize the goals of government. This presentation will share some of those learnings and provide an understanding of a new, simplified application of TOC for generating substantial improvements in government operations, while providing a highly effective platform for continued long term gains. Learning Objectives: 1. Understand some of the unique challenges of applying TOC in a government setting. 2. Discover how a simple, novel approach to applying TOC can generate a large impact. 3. How can one adapt the principles of TOC to apply and appeal to government agencies. Abstract: The global economic troubles of the past few years have created significant challenges for governments around the world, and highlighted the critical importance of running government operations more effectively and efficiently. While TOC offers tremendous potential for government to make the great strides that are needed, it faces significant challenges in displacing the more common and less-effective methods, including: slashing services/ programs, re-organization, technology investments, and Lean/ Six Sigma, among others. This presentation will discuss the unique challenges government's face (vs. for-profit organizations) both generally, and in applying TOC, and explore some novel techniques for launching and sustaining TOC in government organizations. We will share examples and illustrations from several US states who have achieved success with TOC and who are now expanding their efforts state-wide. We'll begin by discussing some of the unique challenges in government including: • Politics and dealing with different political environments • The lack of a clear goal and metrics • The challenge of defining and measuring Throughput • The budget process • Dealing with the wide-array of stake-holders and interest groups • Operating in the transparent, highly visible light of public-scrutiny. These challenges don't change the fundamental validity or power of TOC, they do have significant implications on how TOC is launched, deployed, and spread within government. The presentation will highlight the importance of addressing issues at the operational level, a step below the political/ policy level of government, and why capacity creation is the central need of government today. The presentation will offer a simplified model for applying TOC that has resonated and proven highly effective within a number of state government agencies in the US. Building on the essential TOC principle of focus this model provides government agencies with a simple way of launching TOC and deriving tremendous benefits using little more than the concepts of T,I,OE and the Five Focusing Steps. The speaker will present case studies of this model from the states of Utah, Hawaii and Texas, in the USA, discussing critical issues like defining goals and Throughput, measuring performance, leadership, and engaging staff at all levels of the organization. In these discussions the speaker will present some of the common pitfalls of creating lasting organizational change with TOC and how to institutionalize on-going improvement in government. The presentation will then move to a discussion of strategies for expanding the application of TOC (bringing in more and more of the thinking tools and TOC's proven applications) as part of a long-term process of rolling out TOC widely within a state government. Additional case study material from Utah, Hawaii, and Texas will be used. In conclusion the presentation will relate the challenges and process of changing government back to the four pillars of TOC and illustrate how they can and should be used as the foundation and guideposts for applying TOC to government. 3 Questions that might be asked at the conclusion: 1. How does one generate interest in TOC at a government entity? 2. How are tools like the TP, CCPM and S&T being used in government? 3. How might TOC be incorporated into the process of setting public policy and making law? 1 hour 20 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
210 Conference Proceedings Gilani, Ravinder Implementing TOC in a cash-constrained organization (Encore) 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany TOC implementation is a huge challenge and it is even more so if the organization has cash as the constraint. However since cash-constrained organizations have their survival at stake, it also offers great opportunity to overcome the first layer of resistance (most difficult layer of disagreement on the problem) as we do not have to convince the decision makers that they need to change. A process has been developed to overcome the cash constraint within 13 weeks based on the implementation experience in the last 12 years in India. 30 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
211 Conference Proceedings Implementing TOC in a cash-constrained organization (Encore) 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany TOC implementation is a huge challenge and it is even more so if the organization has cash as the constraint. However since cash-constrained organizations have their survival at stake, it also offers great opportunity to overcome the first layer of resistance (most difficult layer of disagreement on the problem) as we do not have to convince the decision makers that they need to change. A process has been developed to overcome the cash constraint within 13 weeks based on the implementation experience in the last 12 years in India. 30 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
212 Conference Proceedings Gilani, Ravinder System productivity 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Every organization would like to improve its productivity. However do we have a clear measure of productivity? Are we talking of workers' productivity, supervisors' productivity or managers' productivity? What about the productivity of functional heads or even the CEO? Most organizations do have some measurements for the productivity of workers or for the lower level employees. Many organizations have Key Result Areas (KRAs) for the middle and senior management. While we have many surrogate measurements for performance or productivity of parts, do we have any one measurement for the whole organization? The only purpose of measurements is to help make the right decisions or taking corrective actions for achieving more and more of the goal units of the organization. Hence the system productivity measurement must state unequivocally if the organization is moving forward, stationary, or slipping back. The second criterion for such a measurement is that it should be simple to measure and people can relate to it intuitively. This is an attempt to suggest one measure for the entire organization--System Productivity. I had observed that many organizations are able to increase their sales and profits over many years. So can we say definitely that these organizations have improved? On investigation did observe that these organizations had indeed increased their throughput & profits over the years. Most organizations proudly share their achievements in terms of sales growth, or profit growth. If an organization improves sales, throughput, & profits, is it possible to conclude that the organization has improved also its productivity? What if an organization doubles its sales and profits by replicating the current business? Of course its sales & profits will double. However can we state that it has increased its productivity? Before we answer this, we need to delve into the definition of productivity. As per Oxford dictionary, productivity is defined as the effectiveness of productive efforts or inputs. In very easy to understand language, I would sate that productivity is how much output units we are creating per unit of input resources. Either we can increase output by using more resources or using the current resources better. It is obvious that when an organization is generating more output using the same resources; it can be said to improving its productivity. I have observed that most organizations do not measure any overall organizational productivity measure. Instead they have multitude of parameters for almost every part of the organization. We, the TOC community, do know that measuring every part of the organization is unlikely to inform the overall health of the organization. If we do not even have organizational productivity measures, what are the chances that the organization productivity will improve? What corrective action will we take to improve it? What is the output of an organization? Using TOC terminology it can be the value addition or Throughput (T). What are the inputs every organization requires for generating Throughput? Again using TOC basic measurements? It could Operating Expenses (OE), and Investment (T). Many TOC thinkers & practitioners have been using terms like Operating Productivity & Capital Productivity. These are defined as (T/OE) & (T/I). 34 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
213 Conference Proceedings System productivity 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Every organization would like to improve its productivity. However do we have a clear measure of productivity? Are we talking of workers' productivity, supervisors' productivity or managers' productivity? What about the productivity of functional heads or even the CEO? Most organizations do have some measurements for the productivity of workers or for the lower level employees. Many organizations have Key Result Areas (KRAs) for the middle and senior management. While we have many surrogate measurements for performance or productivity of parts, do we have any one measurement for the whole organization? The only purpose of measurements is to help make the right decisions or taking corrective actions for achieving more and more of the goal units of the organization. Hence the system productivity measurement must state unequivocally if the organization is moving forward, stationary, or slipping back. The second criterion for such a measurement is that it should be simple to measure and people can relate to it intuitively. This is an attempt to suggest one measure for the entire organization--System Productivity. I had observed that many organizations are able to increase their sales and profits over many years. So can we say definitely that these organizations have improved? On investigation did observe that these organizations had indeed increased their throughput & profits over the years. Most organizations proudly share their achievements in terms of sales growth, or profit growth. If an organization improves sales, throughput, & profits, is it possible to conclude that the organization has improved also its productivity? What if an organization doubles its sales and profits by replicating the current business? Of course its sales & profits will double. However can we state that it has increased its productivity? Before we answer this, we need to delve into the definition of productivity. As per Oxford dictionary, productivity is defined as the effectiveness of productive efforts or inputs. In very easy to understand language, I would sate that productivity is how much output units we are creating per unit of input resources. Either we can increase output by using more resources or using the current resources better. It is obvious that when an organization is generating more output using the same resources; it can be said to improving its productivity. I have observed that most organizations do not measure any overall organizational productivity measure. Instead they have multitude of parameters for almost every part of the organization. We, the TOC community, do know that measuring every part of the organization is unlikely to inform the overall health of the organization. If we do not even have organizational productivity measures, what are the chances that the organization productivity will improve? What corrective action will we take to improve it? What is the output of an organization? Using TOC terminology it can be the value addition or Throughput (T). What are the inputs every organization requires for generating Throughput? Again using TOC basic measurements? It could Operating Expenses (OE), and Investment (T). Many TOC thinkers & practitioners have been using terms like Operating Productivity & Capital Productivity. These are defined as (T/OE) & (T/I). 34 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
214 Online Multimedia Covington, John Enterprise Fitness - A TOC book club webinar 2011 This presentation describes: The impact of culture on TOC or any other change initiative - The leader's impact on culture. - What should be the leader's focus? - A suggested leadership model - How would you whip up a batch of culture? 38 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
215 Online Multimedia Enterprise Fitness - A TOC book club webinar 2011 This presentation describes: The impact of culture on TOC or any other change initiative - The leader's impact on culture. - What should be the leader's focus? - A suggested leadership model - How would you whip up a batch of culture? 38 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
216 Online Multimedia Enterprise Fitness - A TOC book club webinar 2011 This presentation describes: The impact of culture on TOC or any other change initiative - The leader's impact on culture. - What should be the leader's focus? - A suggested leadership model - How would you whip up a batch of culture? 38 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2011OnlineMultimedia
217 Conference Proceedings Goldratt, Rami Retail the TOC way: Introduction 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The standard TOC application for retail focuses on demand pull replenishment. How to set inventory targets, how to dynamically manage these inventory targets, how to utilize the power of aggregation and how to determine the frequency of replenishing stock? While these are important aspects of the solution, the elaborated experience in implementing TOC in various retail companies made it clear that the main focus should not be merely on what to replenish, but rather heavy emphasis must be given to what NOT to replenish. In his 90 minute presentation, Rami Goldratt presents highlights of the considerable developments in applying the concepts of flow to the retail environment. Topics include how to manage vast assortments; how to synchronize new product introduction with liquidation of slow moving items; how to dynamically manage the range; how to manage short product-life cycles, and more. The workshop is a preview for the new S&T tree for retail that will be published in the near future. 1 hour 20 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
218 Conference Proceedings Retail the TOC way: Introduction 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The standard TOC application for retail focuses on demand pull replenishment. How to set inventory targets, how to dynamically manage these inventory targets, how to utilize the power of aggregation and how to determine the frequency of replenishing stock? While these are important aspects of the solution, the elaborated experience in implementing TOC in various retail companies made it clear that the main focus should not be merely on what to replenish, but rather heavy emphasis must be given to what NOT to replenish. In his 90 minute presentation, Rami Goldratt presents highlights of the considerable developments in applying the concepts of flow to the retail environment. Topics include how to manage vast assortments; how to synchronize new product introduction with liquidation of slow moving items; how to dynamically manage the range; how to manage short product-life cycles, and more. The workshop is a preview for the new S&T tree for retail that will be published in the near future. 1 hour 20 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
219 Conference Proceedings Hitomi, Mitsuo Technology breakthrough by operational breakthrough (Mazda) 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Many of Japanese companies are facing the dilemma to fulfill corporate social responsibility by securing employment versus to deliver new innovative products by investing more money for new product development. Mazda, the major employer in Hiroshima and often used as a miniature case of Japan's struggle, was facing the following challenges: -Keep employment to fulfill corporate social responsibility in local community -Huge pressure to move out from Japan to cope with intense Yen appreciation -Keep Mazda spirit to deliver innovative cars -Cost reduction without compromising high performance with eco-friendly gas mileage. With four straight years of negative financial performance and a plummeting share price, Mazda had to come up with a way to deliver car innovation without increasing costs while keeping employment stable. Started with bottom-up initiatives and later supported by a top-down commitment, the company utilized TOC's critical chain project management (CCPM) to develop an innovative, new technological advance which it called 'SKYACTIV.' Not only was Mazda able to cut its car development time in half, but it produced a lighter and stronger chassis and, using new technology, the ability to extract a significantly greater amount of energy from its fuel. As a result, the mileage is competitive with hybrid cars without any compromise in performance and far less cost. Among the key performance indicators (KPI's) for Mazda are a huge jump in sales and consequent rise to number one in market share in many global markets, a return to profitability, and increased motivation and collaboration within the company. Moreover, the company has won numerous industry awards for its technological breakthroughs. Above all, nothing more than makes all happy is people's harmony - motivation and collaboration. The company's key learning: There is no limit for technology breakthrough. There is no limit for operational breakthrough. 'Even the sky is not the limit.' https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
220 Conference Proceedings Technology breakthrough by operational breakthrough (Mazda) 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Many of Japanese companies are facing the dilemma to fulfill corporate social responsibility by securing employment versus to deliver new innovative products by investing more money for new product development. Mazda, the major employer in Hiroshima and often used as a miniature case of Japan's struggle, was facing the following challenges: -Keep employment to fulfill corporate social responsibility in local community -Huge pressure to move out from Japan to cope with intense Yen appreciation -Keep Mazda spirit to deliver innovative cars -Cost reduction without compromising high performance with eco-friendly gas mileage. With four straight years of negative financial performance and a plummeting share price, Mazda had to come up with a way to deliver car innovation without increasing costs while keeping employment stable. Started with bottom-up initiatives and later supported by a top-down commitment, the company utilized TOC's critical chain project management (CCPM) to develop an innovative, new technological advance which it called 'SKYACTIV.' Not only was Mazda able to cut its car development time in half, but it produced a lighter and stronger chassis and, using new technology, the ability to extract a significantly greater amount of energy from its fuel. As a result, the mileage is competitive with hybrid cars without any compromise in performance and far less cost. Among the key performance indicators (KPI's) for Mazda are a huge jump in sales and consequent rise to number one in market share in many global markets, a return to profitability, and increased motivation and collaboration within the company. Moreover, the company has won numerous industry awards for its technological breakthroughs. Above all, nothing more than makes all happy is people's harmony - motivation and collaboration. The company's key learning: There is no limit for technology breakthrough. There is no limit for operational breakthrough. 'Even the sky is not the limit.' https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
221 Conference Proceedings Holt, James R. Managing complex organizations: A simplified approach 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Large companies have many work flows that go through different elements (departments, functions, etc.) of the company. The different elements of the company depend upon each other. Traditional management tries to 'divide and conquer' the management challenge by asking each element to perform to the best that it can. Local performance measures are often in conflict with each other. Large organizations need to encourage each element of the company to perform/ improve in a way that directly affects the global performance of the company. The TOC supply chain measures of Throughput-Dollar-Days (TDD) and Inventory-Dollar-Days (IDD) can be modified slightly to achieve both local and global effectiveness in large companies. Recording the time a work task is received, the value of the work and the due date makes it easy to calculate and plot TDD and IDD for any element of the company. These measures can be used to quickly evaluate where there are problems and allocate or realign resources for a much improved level of system performance. Large companies (governments and service agencies) depend upon their many elements to 'do their best.' Often, elements manage their own finances (profit and loss statements). And yet, elements are interconnected and frequently depend upon each other's performance. This interdependency in producing coupled with past and future investments makes it difficult to see if actions will 'Generate Throughput' or 'Waste Money.' Elements can easily point fingers at others for preventing better local performance. To deal with linkages between elements in large companies, there must be measures that encourage individual elements to do their best locally, and at the same time, cause the large company to achieve its best global performance. These measures should guide management to make local improvement decisions that will help the large company as a whole. The TOC Measures developed for independent companies in supply chains give suggest a good way to deal with this conflict. Throughput-Dollar-Day (TDD) measures suppliers who might jeopardize the Throughput of a buyer. Inventory-Dollar-Day (IDD) measures the efficiency or effectiveness of the buyer at turning a suppliers investment into a sale of the final product. With just a little modification, TOC supply chain measures can be used to measure the reliability and effectiveness of large companies. Large companies want to: 1. Deliver high quality products according to their promises to their final customer. 2. Do their work in a cost effective manner. These are the same goals as elements within a large company. In large companies, most elements are captive shops. That is, they receive work that is scheduled (or requested) by others and they deliver to another part of the company. Most elements cannot determine their own incoming workload nor establish their own output demand. Captive shops are both buyers and suppliers at the same time. To measure a captive shop correctly, we must use both TDD and IDD. Measuring Throughput-Dollar-Days (TDD) tracks the reliability of their delivery as a supplier over time. Measuring Inventory(or Investment)-Dollar-Days (IDD) gives a snap shot of the effectiveness of the flow or the efficient use of resources. In large companies, the Throughput value of any particular product or task is often hard to define. However, it is pretty easy to know which work tasks are more important than another. Assigning a 'Work Value' to each task is pretty easy. An urgent part could be a 10, a important drawing a 9, writing a proposal an 8, writing a letter a 5, answering an email a 1. Most work tasks come with a 'Due Date,' either explicit or implicit (a length of time the element deems is a suitable response time). A well managed organization delivers to its promises (explicit or implicit). When an element misses its task Due Date, the TDD measure begins. TDD becomes the Work Value * Days Late. Summing TDD over a period of time indicates how reliable an element at keeping it's promise (an ethical measure of performance). If the date of receiving a work task is recorded, it is pretty easy to calculate the value of work and the time that work is within the element's control. Adding together the Work Value * (today-Date Received) for all uncompleted work gives snap shot view of the IDD measure. (Note: a similar measure of Investment-Dollar-Days can compare like operations. Periodic calculations of the investment required for on-time delivery factored by the flow-time is an indicator of effectiveness and efficiency of the process. And, Investment-Dollar-Days is a quick indicator of the impact of changes in level of resources or changes in the speed of delivery.) These two measures can be easily documented on a spreadsheet and the recent history of TDD and IDD plotted. This way, individuals, departments, divisions and easily determine and track both their 'Reliability to promise' and 'Speed of getting things done.' Measuring TDD shows results over a period of time that: Encourages keeping things flowing according to plan. Identifies areas with delivery problems. Identifies areas where investments are needed. Measuring IDD shows a snap shot view of Work-in-progress that: Encourages faster processing. Identifies areas that are over loaded. Identifies areas where improvements are needed. Management can quickly evaluate where there are problems and allocate or realign resources for a much improved level of system performance. These measures give management at all levels the ability to focus improvement efforts and to immediately see the impact of their improvements. TDD an IDD encourage both On-Time delivery of Quality products and Speed in the processing (reducing costs). 35 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
222 Conference Proceedings Managing complex organizations: A simplified approach 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Large companies have many work flows that go through different elements (departments, functions, etc.) of the company. The different elements of the company depend upon each other. Traditional management tries to 'divide and conquer' the management challenge by asking each element to perform to the best that it can. Local performance measures are often in conflict with each other. Large organizations need to encourage each element of the company to perform/ improve in a way that directly affects the global performance of the company. The TOC supply chain measures of Throughput-Dollar-Days (TDD) and Inventory-Dollar-Days (IDD) can be modified slightly to achieve both local and global effectiveness in large companies. Recording the time a work task is received, the value of the work and the due date makes it easy to calculate and plot TDD and IDD for any element of the company. These measures can be used to quickly evaluate where there are problems and allocate or realign resources for a much improved level of system performance. Large companies (governments and service agencies) depend upon their many elements to 'do their best.' Often, elements manage their own finances (profit and loss statements). And yet, elements are interconnected and frequently depend upon each other's performance. This interdependency in producing coupled with past and future investments makes it difficult to see if actions will 'Generate Throughput' or 'Waste Money.' Elements can easily point fingers at others for preventing better local performance. To deal with linkages between elements in large companies, there must be measures that encourage individual elements to do their best locally, and at the same time, cause the large company to achieve its best global performance. These measures should guide management to make local improvement decisions that will help the large company as a whole. The TOC Measures developed for independent companies in supply chains give suggest a good way to deal with this conflict. Throughput-Dollar-Day (TDD) measures suppliers who might jeopardize the Throughput of a buyer. Inventory-Dollar-Day (IDD) measures the efficiency or effectiveness of the buyer at turning a suppliers investment into a sale of the final product. With just a little modification, TOC supply chain measures can be used to measure the reliability and effectiveness of large companies. Large companies want to: 1. Deliver high quality products according to their promises to their final customer. 2. Do their work in a cost effective manner. These are the same goals as elements within a large company. In large companies, most elements are captive shops. That is, they receive work that is scheduled (or requested) by others and they deliver to another part of the company. Most elements cannot determine their own incoming workload nor establish their own output demand. Captive shops are both buyers and suppliers at the same time. To measure a captive shop correctly, we must use both TDD and IDD. Measuring Throughput-Dollar-Days (TDD) tracks the reliability of their delivery as a supplier over time. Measuring Inventory(or Investment)-Dollar-Days (IDD) gives a snap shot of the effectiveness of the flow or the efficient use of resources. In large companies, the Throughput value of any particular product or task is often hard to define. However, it is pretty easy to know which work tasks are more important than another. Assigning a 'Work Value' to each task is pretty easy. An urgent part could be a 10, a important drawing a 9, writing a proposal an 8, writing a letter a 5, answering an email a 1. Most work tasks come with a 'Due Date,' either explicit or implicit (a length of time the element deems is a suitable response time). A well managed organization delivers to its promises (explicit or implicit). When an element misses its task Due Date, the TDD measure begins. TDD becomes the Work Value * Days Late. Summing TDD over a period of time indicates how reliable an element at keeping it's promise (an ethical measure of performance). If the date of receiving a work task is recorded, it is pretty easy to calculate the value of work and the time that work is within the element's control. Adding together the Work Value * (today-Date Received) for all uncompleted work gives snap shot view of the IDD measure. (Note: a similar measure of Investment-Dollar-Days can compare like operations. Periodic calculations of the investment required for on-time delivery factored by the flow-time is an indicator of effectiveness and efficiency of the process. And, Investment-Dollar-Days is a quick indicator of the impact of changes in level of resources or changes in the speed of delivery.) These two measures can be easily documented on a spreadsheet and the recent history of TDD and IDD plotted. This way, individuals, departments, divisions and easily determine and track both their 'Reliability to promise' and 'Speed of getting things done.' Measuring TDD shows results over a period of time that: Encourages keeping things flowing according to plan. Identifies areas with delivery problems. Identifies areas where investments are needed. Measuring IDD shows a snap shot view of Work-in-progress that: Encourages faster processing. Identifies areas that are over loaded. Identifies areas where improvements are needed. Management can quickly evaluate where there are problems and allocate or realign resources for a much improved level of system performance. These measures give management at all levels the ability to focus improvement efforts and to immediately see the impact of their improvements. TDD an IDD encourage both On-Time delivery of Quality products and Speed in the processing (reducing costs). 35 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
223 Conference Proceedings Holt, James R. Project and multi-projects management basics workshop 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany This workshop is an introduction to project management the TOC way. We discuss the nature of projects and the nature of tasks, the impact of interdependency and variability on human behavior and the core conflict of projects. Critical chain project management (CCPM) scheduling and buffer management are introduced for both single and multi-project environments. The workshop is intended to prepare the attendee to take the TOCICO on-line basics critical chain project management exam, in advance of the TOCICO fundamentals exam. 1 hour 16 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
224 Conference Proceedings Project and multi-projects management basics workshop 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany This workshop is an introduction to project management the TOC way. We discuss the nature of projects and the nature of tasks, the impact of interdependency and variability on human behavior and the core conflict of projects. Critical chain project management (CCPM) scheduling and buffer management are introduced for both single and multi-project environments. The workshop is intended to prepare the attendee to take the TOCICO on-line basics critical chain project management exam, in advance of the TOCICO fundamentals exam. 1 hour 16 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
225 Conference Proceedings Holt, James R. Simplified critical chain project management: Visual project management 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany If we are not doing mass production, then we are doing projects. Yet, 90% of organizations doing projects do not use project management tools. Project management tools are just too much trouble for most projects. Visual Project Management is a simplified approach to critical chain project management (CCPM) that relaxes many project management tools, simplifies reporting and tracks projects using buffer management. Simplified critical chain project management (SCCPM) presents individual and multiple projects in such a way that management, workers and customers all agree with needed management actions. By using Visual Project Management, users learn to become better project managers. 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
226 Conference Proceedings Simplified critical chain project management: Visual project management 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany If we are not doing mass production, then we are doing projects. Yet, 90% of organizations doing projects do not use project management tools. Project management tools are just too much trouble for most projects. Visual Project Management is a simplified approach to critical chain project management (CCPM) that relaxes many project management tools, simplifies reporting and tracks projects using buffer management. Simplified critical chain project management (SCCPM) presents individual and multiple projects in such a way that management, workers and customers all agree with needed management actions. By using Visual Project Management, users learn to become better project managers. 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
227 Conference Proceedings Holt, Steven Complex systems, TOC and the search for inherent simplicity (Encore) 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Many improvement methods are in apparent competition and it's difficult to know which one to use in a given situation. The Cynefin Model, by Dave Snowden, can help match the right improvement method to the appropriate domain. The Cynefin Model shows that TOC is especially well qualified for managing complex systems. Further, looking at TOC and the Cynefin Model we can see how the inherent simplicity of TOC's breakthrough solutions are derived. 38 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
228 Conference Proceedings Complex systems, TOC and the search for inherent simplicity (Encore) 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Many improvement methods are in apparent competition and it's difficult to know which one to use in a given situation. The Cynefin Model, by Dave Snowden, can help match the right improvement method to the appropriate domain. The Cynefin Model shows that TOC is especially well qualified for managing complex systems. Further, looking at TOC and the Cynefin Model we can see how the inherent simplicity of TOC's breakthrough solutions are derived. 38 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
229 Conference Proceedings Holt, Steven Fire the consultants to get the green curve and the red curve 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The original red and green curve version 1.0 had the red curve as good. It was growth. The green curve was bad. It did give faster results, but led to stagnation and eventual collapse. Red and green version 3.0 says you need both: green gives you stability and harmony and red builds upon that foundation to give you enhanced growth. I submit that, unfortunately, the conventional consulting model in which a consultant is brought in by senior executives to get results promotes the negative patterns of green curve 1.0 and sets the stage for the often observed case of successful TOC implementations being abandoned. A consultant working for an executive will tend to use coercive means to drive people to change, including real or perceive promises of rewards and threats of punishment. There is little sense of ownership by the employees. When the implementation pays off and the executive is promoted, people see the opportunity to reject 'someone else's idea' and abandon TOC. The alternative is to allow people to drive change themselves using a policy buffer. This results in broad based ownership, change, and sustainable growth. When the Red and Green Curve analogy was initially created it was portrayed as a choice between two paths of action; one leading to faster results but ending in stagnation and collapse (Green) and the other leading to initially slow and then rapidly increasing growth (Red). Version 1.0 gave way to Version 2.0, which embraced both curves as necessary, and then Version 3.0 in which the greater the stability and harmony from Green the greater the potential growth from Red. And, yet, there is a disturbingly common pattern of successful TOC implementations being abandoned despite early successes that follows the pattern of Green Curve 1.0. I will argue that this is not a coincidence and that one cause of it is the conventional way that companies work with consultants. Consultants are usually brought in by one or more senior executives, usually because there is a problem that the company has not been able to deal with and has become a crisis that needs fast action. The consultant is granted much of the authority of the executive to recommend or make changes. Companies like to hire experienced consultants; ones that have a proven track record. This means the consultants have experienced-based confidence that they can quickly analyze the situation, decide on a course of action and implement it—leading to rapid positive results. And that's what they do; we have many TOC success stories to show for it. But, consider what that means. The consultant/executive retains the authority. Changes are made quickly, often without a lot of explanation. The changes are mandatory. And 'sponsorship' and 'support' of senior management often translates as rewards if you do what the consultant says and punishment if you don't. This is a fundamentally coercive style of management. We end up using poor management practices in order to promote TOC, something that is supposed to be good for everyone. This can create disharmony in the company and if/when the executive is promoted or leaves to take on a bigger challenge elsewhere the implementation is often abandoned or rejected by either the new executive or the employees or both. After all, it was never really theirs to begin with. It doesn't have to be that way. There is a fundamental choice to make and it can be explained as Driving People vs. Driving Change. April K. Mills described these as: Driving people: using some coercion (e.g., orders, fear of negative consequences, removal of positive consequences) to externally compel someone to change. Driving change: choosing a change for yourself and clearing the obstacles for others to internally choose the change, too. The conflict appears to be a choice between using a coercive style to promote commonality and rapid results or a more cooperative model that promotes grassroots ownership of the implementation and broad based innovation. The common consultant model follows the Driving People approach. The Driving Change approach would make use of a Policy Buffer, which is a safe-to-fail experimentation zone with set boundaries in which some current policies, procedures, metrics, methods and/or processes would not have to be followed so that new ways can be tried out. This is particularly effective in Complex situations in which 'the one right answer' simply cannot be determined in advance. In those situations, the best approach is to use an evolutionary path based on exploration (innovation and experimentation) and then exploitation (turning the experiments into common methods and solutions that can be adopted more broadly). The Driving Change approach could be sped up using TOC and the Cynefin Framework. As it expanded and matured it would yield increased experimentation and rapid sharing of successful ideas. It would all but eliminate the Not Invented Here reaction and result in increasingly rapid improvement, expansion of knowledge, and growth. Consequently, it would provide both enhanced stability and harmony, the intent of Green Curve 3.0, as well as the expanded growth of Red Curve 3.0. Counterpoint Argument: Simply put, Driving Change and a Policy Buffer sounds like misguided flailing around and management abandoning their responsibilities to the share holders. The management knows they need help and have already done all they can internally. Doing more of the same won't help and, worse yet, relaxing current practices when things are already not going well could seriously damage the company. And, even if it did work, it would take way too long to show any real pay off. Fire The Consultants Conflict Cloud: Story: In the interest of getting quick results in implementing TOC it is common for executives to hire TOC consultants. The consultants use essentially coercive practices to implement TOC without getting real ownership from the non-executives. This cloud leads to a number of UDEs: 1) People don't really develop ownership of the change. 2) If the executive or the consultant leave the implementation flounders and collapses. 3) In hindsight TOC is not seen as the cause of good results; cause is attributed to things like 'top management support' which then reinforces why it is needed the next time. B-D Assumptions: 1) We've tried to fix it and can't, only an outsider knows the answers 2) We can't delay any longer, we need results fast and consultants have them. 3) Consultants are experts and they know and will tell us what we need to do. 4) Consultants don't have to make friends, they can make tough calls and then leave, it doesn't matter if people like them as long as their ideas get results. C-D' Assumptions: 1) People will willingly embrace their own ideas. 2) People often know what should be done and are hampered by internally created policy constraints 3) A skilled and motivated workforce will outperform any consultant 4) It will take a long time to get everyone aligned and motivated. D-D' Assumptions: 1) We have to hire a consultant or not hire a consultant 2) We don't have a lot of time, we have to choose one or the other. The real injection is that we need to do both, so it breaks D to D' and addresses the counter argument. A consultant should help determine where to take action and what sorts of action to take, then they should help craft an implementation approach that focuses on creating a sense of ownership and bias for action on the part of everyone in the company—executives and non-executives alike. 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
230 Conference Proceedings Fire the consultants to get the green curve and the red curve 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The original red and green curve version 1.0 had the red curve as good. It was growth. The green curve was bad. It did give faster results, but led to stagnation and eventual collapse. Red and green version 3.0 says you need both: green gives you stability and harmony and red builds upon that foundation to give you enhanced growth. I submit that, unfortunately, the conventional consulting model in which a consultant is brought in by senior executives to get results promotes the negative patterns of green curve 1.0 and sets the stage for the often observed case of successful TOC implementations being abandoned. A consultant working for an executive will tend to use coercive means to drive people to change, including real or perceive promises of rewards and threats of punishment. There is little sense of ownership by the employees. When the implementation pays off and the executive is promoted, people see the opportunity to reject 'someone else's idea' and abandon TOC. The alternative is to allow people to drive change themselves using a policy buffer. This results in broad based ownership, change, and sustainable growth. When the Red and Green Curve analogy was initially created it was portrayed as a choice between two paths of action; one leading to faster results but ending in stagnation and collapse (Green) and the other leading to initially slow and then rapidly increasing growth (Red). Version 1.0 gave way to Version 2.0, which embraced both curves as necessary, and then Version 3.0 in which the greater the stability and harmony from Green the greater the potential growth from Red. And, yet, there is a disturbingly common pattern of successful TOC implementations being abandoned despite early successes that follows the pattern of Green Curve 1.0. I will argue that this is not a coincidence and that one cause of it is the conventional way that companies work with consultants. Consultants are usually brought in by one or more senior executives, usually because there is a problem that the company has not been able to deal with and has become a crisis that needs fast action. The consultant is granted much of the authority of the executive to recommend or make changes. Companies like to hire experienced consultants; ones that have a proven track record. This means the consultants have experienced-based confidence that they can quickly analyze the situation, decide on a course of action and implement it—leading to rapid positive results. And that's what they do; we have many TOC success stories to show for it. But, consider what that means. The consultant/executive retains the authority. Changes are made quickly, often without a lot of explanation. The changes are mandatory. And 'sponsorship' and 'support' of senior management often translates as rewards if you do what the consultant says and punishment if you don't. This is a fundamentally coercive style of management. We end up using poor management practices in order to promote TOC, something that is supposed to be good for everyone. This can create disharmony in the company and if/when the executive is promoted or leaves to take on a bigger challenge elsewhere the implementation is often abandoned or rejected by either the new executive or the employees or both. After all, it was never really theirs to begin with. It doesn't have to be that way. There is a fundamental choice to make and it can be explained as Driving People vs. Driving Change. April K. Mills described these as: Driving people: using some coercion (e.g., orders, fear of negative consequences, removal of positive consequences) to externally compel someone to change. Driving change: choosing a change for yourself and clearing the obstacles for others to internally choose the change, too. The conflict appears to be a choice between using a coercive style to promote commonality and rapid results or a more cooperative model that promotes grassroots ownership of the implementation and broad based innovation. The common consultant model follows the Driving People approach. The Driving Change approach would make use of a Policy Buffer, which is a safe-to-fail experimentation zone with set boundaries in which some current policies, procedures, metrics, methods and/or processes would not have to be followed so that new ways can be tried out. This is particularly effective in Complex situations in which 'the one right answer' simply cannot be determined in advance. In those situations, the best approach is to use an evolutionary path based on exploration (innovation and experimentation) and then exploitation (turning the experiments into common methods and solutions that can be adopted more broadly). The Driving Change approach could be sped up using TOC and the Cynefin Framework. As it expanded and matured it would yield increased experimentation and rapid sharing of successful ideas. It would all but eliminate the Not Invented Here reaction and result in increasingly rapid improvement, expansion of knowledge, and growth. Consequently, it would provide both enhanced stability and harmony, the intent of Green Curve 3.0, as well as the expanded growth of Red Curve 3.0. Counterpoint Argument: Simply put, Driving Change and a Policy Buffer sounds like misguided flailing around and management abandoning their responsibilities to the share holders. The management knows they need help and have already done all they can internally. Doing more of the same won't help and, worse yet, relaxing current practices when things are already not going well could seriously damage the company. And, even if it did work, it would take way too long to show any real pay off. Fire The Consultants Conflict Cloud: Story: In the interest of getting quick results in implementing TOC it is common for executives to hire TOC consultants. The consultants use essentially coercive practices to implement TOC without getting real ownership from the non-executives. This cloud leads to a number of UDEs: 1) People don't really develop ownership of the change. 2) If the executive or the consultant leave the implementation flounders and collapses. 3) In hindsight TOC is not seen as the cause of good results; cause is attributed to things like 'top management support' which then reinforces why it is needed the next time. B-D Assumptions: 1) We've tried to fix it and can't, only an outsider knows the answers 2) We can't delay any longer, we need results fast and consultants have them. 3) Consultants are experts and they know and will tell us what we need to do. 4) Consultants don't have to make friends, they can make tough calls and then leave, it doesn't matter if people like them as long as their ideas get results. C-D' Assumptions: 1) People will willingly embrace their own ideas. 2) People often know what should be done and are hampered by internally created policy constraints 3) A skilled and motivated workforce will outperform any consultant 4) It will take a long time to get everyone aligned and motivated. D-D' Assumptions: 1) We have to hire a consultant or not hire a consultant 2) We don't have a lot of time, we have to choose one or the other. The real injection is that we need to do both, so it breaks D to D' and addresses the counter argument. A consultant should help determine where to take action and what sorts of action to take, then they should help craft an implementation approach that focuses on creating a sense of ownership and bias for action on the part of everyone in the company—executives and non-executives alike. 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
231 Conference Proceedings Humpert, Don V.I.P. Mortgage, Inc.: A case study 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany This case study covers a three-year period of consulting work with this middle-sized independent mortgage company from the introduction of TOC as a management framework in March 2010 to the present. The environment of a mortgage company cannot be classified as traditional operations (suitable for a DBR solution) nor as a project environment (suitable for a CCPM solution). V.I.P. Mortgage worked with Aligned Consulting Services to develop a TOC solution for the mortgage industry. V.I.P. Mortgage used the classic TOC thinking processes (TP) as the whole system intervention. The company successfully adapted its mortgage automation system to support a buffer-managed, flow-focused operations system. The company developed its performance management system to encourage behaviors that facilitate flow. The TOC-based solution has profoundly influenced every sales, operational, financial, and human resources system in the company. While applying TOC, V.I.P. Mortgage grew from 50 to over 260 employees during a period of turmoil and upheaval in the home mortgage industry, achieving its long-term goal in 2012 of exceeding $1 billion in loan volume. In this context, this case demonstrates that TOC is more than a process of ongoing improvement; it can be framed as an organization theory to grow successful companies. V.I.P. Mortgage, Inc.: A Case Study This case-study covers a three-year period of consulting work with this company, from the introduction of TOC as a management framework in March 2010 to the present. V.I.P. Mortgage, Inc. is a middle-sized independent mortgage company headquartered in Scottsdale, Arizona. The environment of a mortgage company cannot be classified as traditional operations (suitable for a DBR solution) nor as a project environment (suitable for a CCPM solution). An S&T tree has yet to be developed for this type of business. Since no 'off the shelf' TOC solution has been developed for the mortgage industry, I worked with V.I.P. Mortgage to build one. V.I.P. Mortgage finished 2009 having funded $216M in home mortgage loans, and when introduced to TOC they had 57 employees. The company funded $1.061B in 2012, and finished the year with 265 employees. This success and growth took place during a period of turmoil and upheaval in the home mortgage industry; at least 388 mortgage lenders that were in business in late 2006 no longer exist (www.ml-implode.com). In addition to presenting a technical solution for mortgage operations, this case study also illustrates how TOC can provide a guiding framework for a small entrepreneurship as it transitions to a measurement-driven, systems-based company. What to Change? We used the classic TOC Thinking Processes (TP) to identify what to change, what to change to, and how to cause the change. We used a map of key necessary conditions to success (adapted from Dettmer, 2007) to guide the elicitation of undesirable effects (UDEs). These formed the basis for a Current Reality Tree (CRT). Operationally, the loan processing department was identified as the company bottleneck. A core problem was that the company had no production management system to speak of; loans were 'pushed' into operational flow by essentially independent loan officers with no visibility of the system as a whole. Additionally, the completeness and accuracy of loans submitted for processing was often poor. This placed an additional burden on the processing department. What to Change To? The Future Reality Tree (FRT) incorporated several injections, but the most challenging was to implement what we initially called a 'TOC-based production system.' Being essentially an I-shaped plant, we recognized that the processing department would have to serve as the control point for the rest of the company. We would have to apply fundamental principles of operational flow. The company had already invested heavily in a mortgage automation system (Encompass360, Bankers Ed.). This would serve as the information technology backbone for managing flow. How We Caused the Change? We developed an intermediate objectives (I/O) map from the injections in the FRT. Rather than constructing a traditional Transition Tree, however, we converted the I/O map into a CCPM project plan. In implementation, we used the movie version of The Goal to internalize the five focusing steps in employees. The company implemented several changes to exploit the capacity of the processing department, but the greatest challenge was effectively subordinating loan officers to operational flow. Loan officer behaviors had to be changed to improve the accuracy and completeness of loan files entering the flow. Performance scorecards were developed for loan officers that included assessment criteria related to the quality of their files and readiness for processing. The allocation of quarterly sales bonuses was revised, basing it solely upon scorecard performance. Training was designed and conducted to educate loan officers about how their individual efforts fit into the system as a whole. Quality control was implemented prior to processing loans to reduce the number of 'bad' files forwarded for processing. Technologically, the mortgage automation system was also modified. Critically, a queue of files was put in place ahead of each processing team to create a mechanism to 'choke the release' of files to the bottleneck. The processing manager now maintains a balanced 'inventory buffer' of loan files for each processing team from which individual processors pull in priority order and work at their best speed. We incorporated a four-zone buffer management system based on a management due date. In sum, we changed from a 'Push' system driven by individual loan officers to a 'Flow' system accommodating all loans, but driven by company priorities. Lessons Learned and Implications: Subordinating loan officers to the bottleneck in the Processing Department required major changes in the company's culture and systems. The scorecard became the basis for an entirely new performance management system. V.I.P. Mortgage also incorporated a suite of psychological assessments into its selection process to screen prospective loan officers based factors relevant to flow; the importance of loan officer conscientiousness has become a major factor in recruiting and selecting new loan officers. The scorecard has also become the basis for goal-setting, a proven method of employee motivation (Latham, 2007). TOC has profoundly influenced every sales, operational, financial, and human resources system in the company. Most important, V.I.P. Mortgage incorporated the values inherent in TOC into its own vision and philosophy. In this context, this case demonstrates that TOC is more than a process of ongoing improvement; it can be framed as an organization theory to grow successful companies. 30 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
232 Conference Proceedings V.I.P. Mortgage, Inc.: A case study 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany This case study covers a three-year period of consulting work with this middle-sized independent mortgage company from the introduction of TOC as a management framework in March 2010 to the present. The environment of a mortgage company cannot be classified as traditional operations (suitable for a DBR solution) nor as a project environment (suitable for a CCPM solution). V.I.P. Mortgage worked with Aligned Consulting Services to develop a TOC solution for the mortgage industry. V.I.P. Mortgage used the classic TOC thinking processes (TP) as the whole system intervention. The company successfully adapted its mortgage automation system to support a buffer-managed, flow-focused operations system. The company developed its performance management system to encourage behaviors that facilitate flow. The TOC-based solution has profoundly influenced every sales, operational, financial, and human resources system in the company. While applying TOC, V.I.P. Mortgage grew from 50 to over 260 employees during a period of turmoil and upheaval in the home mortgage industry, achieving its long-term goal in 2012 of exceeding $1 billion in loan volume. In this context, this case demonstrates that TOC is more than a process of ongoing improvement; it can be framed as an organization theory to grow successful companies. V.I.P. Mortgage, Inc.: A Case Study This case-study covers a three-year period of consulting work with this company, from the introduction of TOC as a management framework in March 2010 to the present. V.I.P. Mortgage, Inc. is a middle-sized independent mortgage company headquartered in Scottsdale, Arizona. The environment of a mortgage company cannot be classified as traditional operations (suitable for a DBR solution) nor as a project environment (suitable for a CCPM solution). An S&T tree has yet to be developed for this type of business. Since no 'off the shelf' TOC solution has been developed for the mortgage industry, I worked with V.I.P. Mortgage to build one. V.I.P. Mortgage finished 2009 having funded $216M in home mortgage loans, and when introduced to TOC they had 57 employees. The company funded $1.061B in 2012, and finished the year with 265 employees. This success and growth took place during a period of turmoil and upheaval in the home mortgage industry; at least 388 mortgage lenders that were in business in late 2006 no longer exist (www.ml-implode.com). In addition to presenting a technical solution for mortgage operations, this case study also illustrates how TOC can provide a guiding framework for a small entrepreneurship as it transitions to a measurement-driven, systems-based company. What to Change? We used the classic TOC Thinking Processes (TP) to identify what to change, what to change to, and how to cause the change. We used a map of key necessary conditions to success (adapted from Dettmer, 2007) to guide the elicitation of undesirable effects (UDEs). These formed the basis for a Current Reality Tree (CRT). Operationally, the loan processing department was identified as the company bottleneck. A core problem was that the company had no production management system to speak of; loans were 'pushed' into operational flow by essentially independent loan officers with no visibility of the system as a whole. Additionally, the completeness and accuracy of loans submitted for processing was often poor. This placed an additional burden on the processing department. What to Change To? The Future Reality Tree (FRT) incorporated several injections, but the most challenging was to implement what we initially called a 'TOC-based production system.' Being essentially an I-shaped plant, we recognized that the processing department would have to serve as the control point for the rest of the company. We would have to apply fundamental principles of operational flow. The company had already invested heavily in a mortgage automation system (Encompass360, Bankers Ed.). This would serve as the information technology backbone for managing flow. How We Caused the Change? We developed an intermediate objectives (I/O) map from the injections in the FRT. Rather than constructing a traditional Transition Tree, however, we converted the I/O map into a CCPM project plan. In implementation, we used the movie version of The Goal to internalize the five focusing steps in employees. The company implemented several changes to exploit the capacity of the processing department, but the greatest challenge was effectively subordinating loan officers to operational flow. Loan officer behaviors had to be changed to improve the accuracy and completeness of loan files entering the flow. Performance scorecards were developed for loan officers that included assessment criteria related to the quality of their files and readiness for processing. The allocation of quarterly sales bonuses was revised, basing it solely upon scorecard performance. Training was designed and conducted to educate loan officers about how their individual efforts fit into the system as a whole. Quality control was implemented prior to processing loans to reduce the number of 'bad' files forwarded for processing. Technologically, the mortgage automation system was also modified. Critically, a queue of files was put in place ahead of each processing team to create a mechanism to 'choke the release' of files to the bottleneck. The processing manager now maintains a balanced 'inventory buffer' of loan files for each processing team from which individual processors pull in priority order and work at their best speed. We incorporated a four-zone buffer management system based on a management due date. In sum, we changed from a 'Push' system driven by individual loan officers to a 'Flow' system accommodating all loans, but driven by company priorities. Lessons Learned and Implications: Subordinating loan officers to the bottleneck in the Processing Department required major changes in the company's culture and systems. The scorecard became the basis for an entirely new performance management system. V.I.P. Mortgage also incorporated a suite of psychological assessments into its selection process to screen prospective loan officers based factors relevant to flow; the importance of loan officer conscientiousness has become a major factor in recruiting and selecting new loan officers. The scorecard has also become the basis for goal-setting, a proven method of employee motivation (Latham, 2007). TOC has profoundly influenced every sales, operational, financial, and human resources system in the company. Most important, V.I.P. Mortgage incorporated the values inherent in TOC into its own vision and philosophy. In this context, this case demonstrates that TOC is more than a process of ongoing improvement; it can be framed as an organization theory to grow successful companies. 30 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
233 Conference Proceedings Hurtado, Andres Increasing flow into customer´s world 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Managers constantly are learning more and more how to PUSH. Discounts, incentives and rewards based on volume, minimum order quantity or sales based on fixed quota. These mechanisms create a lose-lose environment due to surpluses and shortages it contributes to create a long supply chain. Today we know that using the TOC distribution solution we (for sure) are able to reduce the replenishment lead time and also to synchronize and accelerate the flow along the system. However new additional challenges will appear: how to decide the transition period to progressively introduce products? How to persuade suppliers to become part of the game?, What kind of changes should be implemented in the communication with the customer in order to ensure that results are validated and fully recognized as a consequence of the new operational model? In other words, how to ensure a smooth transition from the conventional wisdom and practices to this new environment? This time we will be sharing the experience from having the management attention focused on finding answers to these kinds of questions. This is a sequel of Grupo Berlin (BOSCH representative in Ecuador) case presented in Chicago 2012. This time we will be covering the Marketing and Sales perspective of S&T Viable Vision implementation. We will be highlighting the way this management team is currently synchronizing (more and more) all company functions (Operations, Logistics, Purchasing, Marketing, Sales, IT…) around to Capitalize and Sustain their Decisive Competitive Edge which is based on Inventory Turns. From Marketing and Sales perspective, moving from conventional paradigm of local optima (PUSH) to global optima (PULL) is not trivial at all. As Eli said 'elaborated and sophisticated systems have been developed to waste and distort management attention'. Managers constantly are learning more and more how to PUSH. Often they have developed sophisticated systems to ensure the inventory is moving, (often as much as they can), from their side to the next links. For instance: Discounts, incentives and rewards based on volume, minimum order quantity or sales based on fixed quota. These mechanisms create a loose-loose environment due to surpluses and shortages it contributes to create along the supply chain. On the other hand, we already know that PULL systems, based on TOC Distribution Solution create a new win-win dimension for commercial relationships along supply chains. If we strategically allocate buffers, increase the frequency of order as well as the supply and implement the dynamic buffer management on each stock location along the supply chain, we (for sure) will reduce the replenishment lead time and will be able to synchronize and accelerate the flow along the system. But when we have thousands of SKUs (some produced, some purchased to be sold), how to decide the transition period to progressively include products? how to persuade suppliers to become part of the game?, What kind of changes should be implemented in the interaction and communication with the customer in order to ensure that results are validated and fully recognized as a consequence of the new operational model? What kind of considerations we need to do when need to go further downstream into the supply chain entities? In other words, how to ensure a smooth transition from the conventional wisdom and practices to this new environment? How to ensure that Marketing and Sales people takes full responsibility on it? This time we will be sharing the experience from having the management attention focused on finding answers to these kinds of questions. Today, customers operating under replenishment to consumption model are growing (in sales) twice than the conventional market. This is happening during more than one year. This time participants will see the processes and developments Tecnova managers have implemented to ensure the effectiveness of the solution. Building new value based relationship with customers (and providers) moving from conventional big volume - lower price to the world of increase customer`s ROI. 1. Elements to build the flow inside the company. 2. Elements to build the flow between the company and the customer. 3. Elements to build the flow upwards with providers. All those are necessary conditions to support the new operational model. Material covered: Company situation before implementation, the process they have been covered as well as the obstacles, learning points, results, next challenges and conclusions. Attendee benefits: Check, analyze and criticize: 1. The characteristics of the new win-win commercial dimension to build relationships base on the Inventory Turns Decisive Competitive Edge a. Managerial report currently used in the implementation to: 1)Validate the results generation as a direct consequence of Inventory Turns Offer implementation (more availability with less inventory), 2) Check and validate cash releasing and 3) Decide how to increase the portfolio. 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
234 Conference Proceedings Increasing flow into customer´s world 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Managers constantly are learning more and more how to PUSH. Discounts, incentives and rewards based on volume, minimum order quantity or sales based on fixed quota. These mechanisms create a lose-lose environment due to surpluses and shortages it contributes to create a long supply chain. Today we know that using the TOC distribution solution we (for sure) are able to reduce the replenishment lead time and also to synchronize and accelerate the flow along the system. However new additional challenges will appear: how to decide the transition period to progressively introduce products? How to persuade suppliers to become part of the game?, What kind of changes should be implemented in the communication with the customer in order to ensure that results are validated and fully recognized as a consequence of the new operational model? In other words, how to ensure a smooth transition from the conventional wisdom and practices to this new environment? This time we will be sharing the experience from having the management attention focused on finding answers to these kinds of questions. This is a sequel of Grupo Berlin (BOSCH representative in Ecuador) case presented in Chicago 2012. This time we will be covering the Marketing and Sales perspective of S&T Viable Vision implementation. We will be highlighting the way this management team is currently synchronizing (more and more) all company functions (Operations, Logistics, Purchasing, Marketing, Sales, IT…) around to Capitalize and Sustain their Decisive Competitive Edge which is based on Inventory Turns. From Marketing and Sales perspective, moving from conventional paradigm of local optima (PUSH) to global optima (PULL) is not trivial at all. As Eli said 'elaborated and sophisticated systems have been developed to waste and distort management attention'. Managers constantly are learning more and more how to PUSH. Often they have developed sophisticated systems to ensure the inventory is moving, (often as much as they can), from their side to the next links. For instance: Discounts, incentives and rewards based on volume, minimum order quantity or sales based on fixed quota. These mechanisms create a loose-loose environment due to surpluses and shortages it contributes to create along the supply chain. On the other hand, we already know that PULL systems, based on TOC Distribution Solution create a new win-win dimension for commercial relationships along supply chains. If we strategically allocate buffers, increase the frequency of order as well as the supply and implement the dynamic buffer management on each stock location along the supply chain, we (for sure) will reduce the replenishment lead time and will be able to synchronize and accelerate the flow along the system. But when we have thousands of SKUs (some produced, some purchased to be sold), how to decide the transition period to progressively include products? how to persuade suppliers to become part of the game?, What kind of changes should be implemented in the interaction and communication with the customer in order to ensure that results are validated and fully recognized as a consequence of the new operational model? What kind of considerations we need to do when need to go further downstream into the supply chain entities? In other words, how to ensure a smooth transition from the conventional wisdom and practices to this new environment? How to ensure that Marketing and Sales people takes full responsibility on it? This time we will be sharing the experience from having the management attention focused on finding answers to these kinds of questions. Today, customers operating under replenishment to consumption model are growing (in sales) twice than the conventional market. This is happening during more than one year. This time participants will see the processes and developments Tecnova managers have implemented to ensure the effectiveness of the solution. Building new value based relationship with customers (and providers) moving from conventional big volume - lower price to the world of increase customer`s ROI. 1. Elements to build the flow inside the company. 2. Elements to build the flow between the company and the customer. 3. Elements to build the flow upwards with providers. All those are necessary conditions to support the new operational model. Material covered: Company situation before implementation, the process they have been covered as well as the obstacles, learning points, results, next challenges and conclusions. Attendee benefits: Check, analyze and criticize: 1. The characteristics of the new win-win commercial dimension to build relationships base on the Inventory Turns Decisive Competitive Edge a. Managerial report currently used in the implementation to: 1)Validate the results generation as a direct consequence of Inventory Turns Offer implementation (more availability with less inventory), 2) Check and validate cash releasing and 3) Decide how to increase the portfolio. 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
235 Conference Proceedings Jacob, Dee Turning buffer management on its ear -- Why our project buffers are providing the wrong signals 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Buffer management has been at the core of the production-based, replenishment-based, and project management-based solutions. In project management, organizations use these signals to decide to take action or not to take action assuming this gauge is reliable. This session provides an understanding of when current buffer management methods may be providing erroneous signals and how to change it to provide a more reliable gauge. This session also provides: 1) The derivation of critical chain buffer management 2) The circumstances where current buffer management signal could be in error 3) The change needed to provide better signals. When Critical Chain was introduced in 1990 at the Jonah Upgrade Workshop in Jerusalem, the focus was on how it took the same scheduling principles as DBR but modified them for projects. As the solution set evolved, Buffer Management was incorporated simply utilizing static buffers. The amount of time needed to protect the Critical Chain was set at the beginning and then divided into thirds. As the project progressed, the buffer zones did not change. This led to questions of whether red was really red. The question was answered by looking at the Critical Chain work accomplished. 'Fever charts' were invented that plotted how much buffer had been used versus how much Critical Chain work had been accomplished. The chart was mapped so that that the zones grew proportionately smaller as more and more of the Critical Chain was accomplished. However, this was much like looking at a gas gauge and determining whether to fill up based on how much gas you had used based on how far you had driven. The next foray into Critical Chain buffer management change the focused from looking at buffer used versus critical chain accomplished into looking proactively at buffer remaining versus critical chain remaining. This resulted in a ratio oriented buffer management of either buffer remaining over critical chain remaining or vice versa; mapping the status was based on where you were for these ratios. This derivation moved buffer management to a more proactive basis, but still contained an erroneous assumption – that is that the buffer needed for the critical chain over time was proportional through out. Analyzing the key differences between project and production environments led to a break through in thinking about buffer management. Production environments best served by DBR involved small activity variation, larger queuing issues. Project environments best served by Critical Chain involved larger variation associated with tasks, less queuing. The key difference was variation. If one characterized the variation of tasks of the critical chain, then one could begin to map how much buffer would be needed for the variation remaining and assess the current status to the needs for the tasks remaining. This technique could also incorporate both task and iteration variability – providing the true gauge of whether action was needed or not. The difference in the latter case is that buffer needed and buffer zones would decrement as tasks are accomplished. As critical chain work was accomplished on highly variable tasks, buffer needs for the remaining work would step down in not linearly, but in relationship to the previous variation needing to be covered and the new remaining variation needing to be covered. This enables the ultimate view of real red, yellow and green buffer zones appropriate for the actual status of the project. 34 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
236 Conference Proceedings Turning buffer management on its ear -- Why our project buffers are providing the wrong signals 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Buffer management has been at the core of the production-based, replenishment-based, and project management-based solutions. In project management, organizations use these signals to decide to take action or not to take action assuming this gauge is reliable. This session provides an understanding of when current buffer management methods may be providing erroneous signals and how to change it to provide a more reliable gauge. This session also provides: 1) The derivation of critical chain buffer management 2) The circumstances where current buffer management signal could be in error 3) The change needed to provide better signals. When Critical Chain was introduced in 1990 at the Jonah Upgrade Workshop in Jerusalem, the focus was on how it took the same scheduling principles as DBR but modified them for projects. As the solution set evolved, Buffer Management was incorporated simply utilizing static buffers. The amount of time needed to protect the Critical Chain was set at the beginning and then divided into thirds. As the project progressed, the buffer zones did not change. This led to questions of whether red was really red. The question was answered by looking at the Critical Chain work accomplished. 'Fever charts' were invented that plotted how much buffer had been used versus how much Critical Chain work had been accomplished. The chart was mapped so that that the zones grew proportionately smaller as more and more of the Critical Chain was accomplished. However, this was much like looking at a gas gauge and determining whether to fill up based on how much gas you had used based on how far you had driven. The next foray into Critical Chain buffer management change the focused from looking at buffer used versus critical chain accomplished into looking proactively at buffer remaining versus critical chain remaining. This resulted in a ratio oriented buffer management of either buffer remaining over critical chain remaining or vice versa; mapping the status was based on where you were for these ratios. This derivation moved buffer management to a more proactive basis, but still contained an erroneous assumption – that is that the buffer needed for the critical chain over time was proportional through out. Analyzing the key differences between project and production environments led to a break through in thinking about buffer management. Production environments best served by DBR involved small activity variation, larger queuing issues. Project environments best served by Critical Chain involved larger variation associated with tasks, less queuing. The key difference was variation. If one characterized the variation of tasks of the critical chain, then one could begin to map how much buffer would be needed for the variation remaining and assess the current status to the needs for the tasks remaining. This technique could also incorporate both task and iteration variability – providing the true gauge of whether action was needed or not. The difference in the latter case is that buffer needed and buffer zones would decrement as tasks are accomplished. As critical chain work was accomplished on highly variable tasks, buffer needs for the remaining work would step down in not linearly, but in relationship to the previous variation needing to be covered and the new remaining variation needing to be covered. This enables the ultimate view of real red, yellow and green buffer zones appropriate for the actual status of the project. 34 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
237 Conference Proceedings Jaeck, Pierre Throughput accounting, transfer pricing, and the international fiscal environment 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The goal of the presentation is to focus on the issues generated by transfer pricing policies when implementing a management accounting system based on throughput accounting in a multinational company operating in 53 countries around the world. An international transfer pricing system has to be documented and justified to the local tax authorities. The objective of the session is first to review the main transfer pricing rules available and then to present the simplified solution we finally implemented. We need to change the subsidiaries and the branches of the company in order to transform a cost center to a profit center in France because we have to reimburse French investment funds. Since throughput accounting prevents cost allocation, it becomes very difficult to design a transfer pricing solution based on a 'cost plus' methodology. The evaporating cloud of the dilemma is provided. To overcome this dilemma, we defined a simplified transfer pricing solution. Learning Objectives: I would like to present the 'state-of-the-art' on transfer pricing. I would also like to point out the huge impact the international tax system has on transfer pricing policies. I would like to point out some difficulties we faced with Throughput Accounting in the case of a multinational company under LBO (Leveraged Buy Out). Questions: Would the situation be different if not under LBO? Is it possible to do it another way in order to avoid cost allocation? If Throughput Accounting is implemented, does it mean 2 management accounting systems? Abstract: When the company I work for decided to implement a new accounting system, there were discussions on which management accounting methods and tools. Many people from Finance department defended the Cost World (ABC and Standard accounting) while I and others from Finance defended the Throughput World since we already implemented an Operation Management System based on TOC. Figure 1 - Evaporating Cloud We agreed on a solution based on Throughput Accounting. But we faced some problems when we decided to tackle the transfer price policies in order to organize the revenue collection. Revenue collection from 53 countries was necessary due to the fact the company was under a LBO. It means that Geoservices (French company) needed to reimburse the investment fund without any revenues in France. In fact, almost 99% of the business is made abroad. So it was necessary to transform a cost center to a profit center taking into account the international fiscal environment. Actually, the transfer pricing policies have to be justified and documented worldwide to the tax authorities. Figure 2 - Example of transfers The aim of the session is to present the issues we faced at the time and how we resolved them. We defined a simplified 'cost plus' method aligned with Throughput Accounting. It is certainly interesting to share experiences on this topic with others! 29 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
238 Conference Proceedings Throughput accounting, transfer pricing, and the international fiscal environment 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The goal of the presentation is to focus on the issues generated by transfer pricing policies when implementing a management accounting system based on throughput accounting in a multinational company operating in 53 countries around the world. An international transfer pricing system has to be documented and justified to the local tax authorities. The objective of the session is first to review the main transfer pricing rules available and then to present the simplified solution we finally implemented. We need to change the subsidiaries and the branches of the company in order to transform a cost center to a profit center in France because we have to reimburse French investment funds. Since throughput accounting prevents cost allocation, it becomes very difficult to design a transfer pricing solution based on a 'cost plus' methodology. The evaporating cloud of the dilemma is provided. To overcome this dilemma, we defined a simplified transfer pricing solution. Learning Objectives: I would like to present the 'state-of-the-art' on transfer pricing. I would also like to point out the huge impact the international tax system has on transfer pricing policies. I would like to point out some difficulties we faced with Throughput Accounting in the case of a multinational company under LBO (Leveraged Buy Out). Questions: Would the situation be different if not under LBO? Is it possible to do it another way in order to avoid cost allocation? If Throughput Accounting is implemented, does it mean 2 management accounting systems? Abstract: When the company I work for decided to implement a new accounting system, there were discussions on which management accounting methods and tools. Many people from Finance department defended the Cost World (ABC and Standard accounting) while I and others from Finance defended the Throughput World since we already implemented an Operation Management System based on TOC. Figure 1 - Evaporating Cloud We agreed on a solution based on Throughput Accounting. But we faced some problems when we decided to tackle the transfer price policies in order to organize the revenue collection. Revenue collection from 53 countries was necessary due to the fact the company was under a LBO. It means that Geoservices (French company) needed to reimburse the investment fund without any revenues in France. In fact, almost 99% of the business is made abroad. So it was necessary to transform a cost center to a profit center taking into account the international fiscal environment. Actually, the transfer pricing policies have to be justified and documented worldwide to the tax authorities. Figure 2 - Example of transfers The aim of the session is to present the issues we faced at the time and how we resolved them. We defined a simplified 'cost plus' method aligned with Throughput Accounting. It is certainly interesting to share experiences on this topic with others! 29 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
239 Conference Proceedings Jasinavicius, Nerius Our quest on making TOC the main way of managing the country (opening plenary session) 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany This presentation describes the quest of Nerius from being introduced to theory of constraints (TOC) to making it a significant factor in the Lithuanian government. Narius's introduction to TOC was forced by an ultimatum by his father, the Minister of Industry: Read The Goal or leave home. Later as a joke, he and some friends started a blog (common sense) describing mistakes made in business and in government. Today it is the largest blog in Lithuania. Some history of Lithuania is provided: 3 million population, regained independence in 1990, part of European Union. In 2009 the Lithuanian President wanted a country vision; in response and as a joke Nerius and his friends described as the goal of the country: To be happy people. To achieve this goal they wanted improvements and measurements in three areas: the economy, education and healthcare. Measures were put in place for each of the three areas. For example for the economy, how many jobs exist today and what is the added value per job. The presentation then describes a couple TOC projects: Guarantee Funds success story (reported in last year's TOCICO conference; lead times to pay business employees when their employers went bankrupt was reduced from 18 months to 2.1 months during a doubling of demand and with no increase in government investment or operating expense) and a TOC project in healthcare. One past and two future TOC conferences are described. 56 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
240 Conference Proceedings Our quest on making TOC the main way of managing the country (opening plenary session) 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany This presentation describes the quest of Nerius from being introduced to theory of constraints (TOC) to making it a significant factor in the Lithuanian government. Narius's introduction to TOC was forced by an ultimatum by his father, the Minister of Industry: Read The Goal or leave home. Later as a joke, he and some friends started a blog (common sense) describing mistakes made in business and in government. Today it is the largest blog in Lithuania. Some history of Lithuania is provided: 3 million population, regained independence in 1990, part of European Union. In 2009 the Lithuanian President wanted a country vision; in response and as a joke Nerius and his friends described as the goal of the country: To be happy people. To achieve this goal they wanted improvements and measurements in three areas: the economy, education and healthcare. Measures were put in place for each of the three areas. For example for the economy, how many jobs exist today and what is the added value per job. The presentation then describes a couple TOC projects: Guarantee Funds success story (reported in last year's TOCICO conference; lead times to pay business employees when their employers went bankrupt was reduced from 18 months to 2.1 months during a doubling of demand and with no increase in government investment or operating expense) and a TOC project in healthcare. One past and two future TOC conferences are described. 56 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
241 Conference Proceedings Kasichainula, Ramakrishna Implementation of CCPM in the pharmaceutical industry 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany In this paper, I take you through the journey of the critical chain project management (CCPM) implementation in our company (Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Limited). CCPM is implemented as part of Viable Vision initiative rolled out in 2008 with the help of Goldratt Consulting (GC). During the initial interactions, it was found that • Many projects are under development and there are always some projects on hold due to resources non-availability / changes in business priorities. Some products are under development for years together with diluted efforts. • Many projects are stuck during execution due to logistics / resources / technical issues. • Due date performance and cycle time are not measured wrt original start date and original due date but to continually adjusted revisions. • Throughput is inconsistent and skewed to the end of the financial year. After going through the TOC critical chain workshops with senior members of the organization, the team was convinced to take up the goal. • To implement and instutionalize a procedure for managing the product development. • To significantly improve and sustain the due date performance (DDP), cycle time and productivity performance. GC has customized the project management strategy & tactic (S&T) tree as a guideline for the implementation in Global Generics and PSAI • CCPM implementation is done in a phased manner with the support of a dedicated facilitation team from Dr. Reddy's and GC consultants. Learning of each phase implementation is used in subsequent phase implementation. In this paper, I take you through the journey of CCPM implementation in our company (Dir. Reddy's Laboratories Limited). We are a global pharmaceutical company committed to providing affordable and innovative medicines for healthier lives through our three core businesses: Pharmaceutical Services and Active Ingredients (PSAI), Global Generics and Proprietary Products. CCPM is implemented as part of Viable Vision initiative rolled out in 2008 with the help of Goldratt Consulting (GC). The purpose of this paper is restricted to CCPM implementation only. 1. During the initial interactions, It was found that • Many projects under development and there were always some projects on hold due to resources non availability / change in business priorities. Some products were under development for years together with diluted efforts. • Many Projects were struck during execution of projects due to logistics / resources / technical issues. • Due Date performance and Cycle time were not measured wrt original start date and original due date. • Throughput was inconsistent and skewed to the end of the financial year. 2. After going through the workshops with senior members of the organization, the team was convinced to take up the goal to • To put in place a procedure for managing the product development and institutionalize. • To significantly improve the DDP, Cycle time and Productivity and sustain the performance. 3. Details of the implementation are described below GC presented the solution to the Leadership team using strategy & tactic tree (S&T Tree). Reservations from the team are clarified and buy in is obtained. Various team members for the implementation team were identified and roles were clearly defined. CCPM was implemented in phased manner. Learning of initial phase was used in subsequent phases. Phase 1: Generic Development for NA EU (Product filings and Introduction to market for US, EU and CANADA) Phase 2: Generic Development for Russia and India (Product filings and Introduction to market for India, Russia and rest of the countries) Phase 3: API Product development (Drug master filings for US, EU and Canada) Enablers 1. Dir. Reddy's had formal project management organization and hence CCPM was rolled out very quickly. 2. Top management commitment was demonstrated in ensuring the key stakeholders presence in all meetings, freezing of the projects, accepting staggered dates, task updates, project progress reviews. 3. Facilitation team (FT) was created from resources within the organization and dedicated for the implementation of CCPM. FT helped in creating the templates, project plans, training of project managers, task managers and resource managers. 4. Facilitation Team was trained and mentored by senior members of Goldratt Schools. Close association with GC Project Leader / Goldratt Schools enabled the team to bring in the cultural change quickly and sustain. 5. Quick results obtained immediately after freezing increased the buy-in of the stakeholders. 6. It was an easy task to roll out, train people on using Concerto because of its user friendly interface and good reporting. Challenges: 1. Projects were managed by Product Delivery Teams (PDT). Each team had key resources (development and analytical) reporting to the project manager and the support was provided by other common functions. During Phase 1 implementation, freezing across the teams resulted in 1-2 teams not having any projects. During Phase 2, freezing was done within each PDT and it was found to be more effective than freezing across the projects. 2. We identified the virtual drum as the integration stage and staggered the projects during the initial days. After experiencing the execution for two years, we switched to WIP control in place of staggering as it is found to be simple and effective. A project was released only after completion of integration stage of an existing project. 3. Staggering (TOCICO Dictionary, 163) is defined as: In multi-project critical chain project management, the process of releasing projects based on the availability and capability or capacity of the drum or virtual drum. 4. Usage: Once the drum resource has completed the last task on one project, another comparable project is released to execution. Staggering limits the number of projects being worked on at one time. 5. See project pacing, virtual drum. 6. During the second year of implementation, in one of the portfolios, we had too many projects in the Red due to a number of issues and it was difficult to deal with all of them. Top management had to focus on many projects and following the priorities had become difficult. The following systems were in place to quickly improve the situation. • BU head conducted daily meetings with all project managers for a period of two months to review the issues blocking the progress of the projects and ensure maximum management attention. Issues were assigned to the right people and tracked on daily basis. • Daily meetings of Project Manager with resources and group leaders were held to ensure the tasks are monitored closely and issues are either resolved / escalated. • BU head along with all function heads reviewed projects that were not progressing once in a fortnight during the Flow Meeting. Issue resolution trend is monitored closely. WIP and WIQ in critical stages are monitored to reduce the bunching up. 7. We got very good results initially. After that, there were changes in the portfolio, more products done at partner site, and a complete change in leadership team; these changes posed a huge challenge in sustaining the culture and results. Results: 1. Due date performance (on-time delivery) across all the portfolios is improved to 65% from less than 25%. Cycle time is reduced by 40%. Throughput is improved. 30 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
242 Conference Proceedings Tayeb, Mickey Implementation of CCPM in the pharmaceutical industry 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany In this paper, I take you through the journey of the critical chain project management (CCPM) implementation in our company (Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Limited). CCPM is implemented as part of Viable Vision initiative rolled out in 2008 with the help of Goldratt Consulting (GC). During the initial interactions, it was found that • Many projects are under development and there are always some projects on hold due to resources non-availability / changes in business priorities. Some products are under development for years together with diluted efforts. • Many projects are stuck during execution due to logistics / resources / technical issues. • Due date performance and cycle time are not measured wrt original start date and original due date but to continually adjusted revisions. • Throughput is inconsistent and skewed to the end of the financial year. After going through the TOC critical chain workshops with senior members of the organization, the team was convinced to take up the goal. • To implement and instutionalize a procedure for managing the product development. • To significantly improve and sustain the due date performance (DDP), cycle time and productivity performance. GC has customized the project management strategy & tactic (S&T) tree as a guideline for the implementation in Global Generics and PSAI • CCPM implementation is done in a phased manner with the support of a dedicated facilitation team from Dr. Reddy's and GC consultants. Learning of each phase implementation is used in subsequent phase implementation. In this paper, I take you through the journey of CCPM implementation in our company (Dir. Reddy's Laboratories Limited). We are a global pharmaceutical company committed to providing affordable and innovative medicines for healthier lives through our three core businesses: Pharmaceutical Services and Active Ingredients (PSAI), Global Generics and Proprietary Products. CCPM is implemented as part of Viable Vision initiative rolled out in 2008 with the help of Goldratt Consulting (GC). The purpose of this paper is restricted to CCPM implementation only. 1. During the initial interactions, It was found that • Many projects under development and there were always some projects on hold due to resources non availability / change in business priorities. Some products were under development for years together with diluted efforts. • Many Projects were struck during execution of projects due to logistics / resources / technical issues. • Due Date performance and Cycle time were not measured wrt original start date and original due date. • Throughput was inconsistent and skewed to the end of the financial year. 2. After going through the workshops with senior members of the organization, the team was convinced to take up the goal to • To put in place a procedure for managing the product development and institutionalize. • To significantly improve the DDP, Cycle time and Productivity and sustain the performance. 3. Details of the implementation are described below GC presented the solution to the Leadership team using strategy & tactic tree (S&T Tree). Reservations from the team are clarified and buy in is obtained. Various team members for the implementation team were identified and roles were clearly defined. CCPM was implemented in phased manner. Learning of initial phase was used in subsequent phases. Phase 1: Generic Development for NA EU (Product filings and Introduction to market for US, EU and CANADA) Phase 2: Generic Development for Russia and India (Product filings and Introduction to market for India, Russia and rest of the countries) Phase 3: API Product development (Drug master filings for US, EU and Canada) Enablers 1. Dir. Reddy's had formal project management organization and hence CCPM was rolled out very quickly. 2. Top management commitment was demonstrated in ensuring the key stakeholders presence in all meetings, freezing of the projects, accepting staggered dates, task updates, project progress reviews. 3. Facilitation team (FT) was created from resources within the organization and dedicated for the implementation of CCPM. FT helped in creating the templates, project plans, training of project managers, task managers and resource managers. 4. Facilitation Team was trained and mentored by senior members of Goldratt Schools. Close association with GC Project Leader / Goldratt Schools enabled the team to bring in the cultural change quickly and sustain. 5. Quick results obtained immediately after freezing increased the buy-in of the stakeholders. 6. It was an easy task to roll out, train people on using Concerto because of its user friendly interface and good reporting. Challenges: 1. Projects were managed by Product Delivery Teams (PDT). Each team had key resources (development and analytical) reporting to the project manager and the support was provided by other common functions. During Phase 1 implementation, freezing across the teams resulted in 1-2 teams not having any projects. During Phase 2, freezing was done within each PDT and it was found to be more effective than freezing across the projects. 2. We identified the virtual drum as the integration stage and staggered the projects during the initial days. After experiencing the execution for two years, we switched to WIP control in place of staggering as it is found to be simple and effective. A project was released only after completion of integration stage of an existing project. 3. Staggering (TOCICO Dictionary, 163) is defined as: In multi-project critical chain project management, the process of releasing projects based on the availability and capability or capacity of the drum or virtual drum. 4. Usage: Once the drum resource has completed the last task on one project, another comparable project is released to execution. Staggering limits the number of projects being worked on at one time. 5. See project pacing, virtual drum. 6. During the second year of implementation, in one of the portfolios, we had too many projects in the Red due to a number of issues and it was difficult to deal with all of them. Top management had to focus on many projects and following the priorities had become difficult. The following systems were in place to quickly improve the situation. • BU head conducted daily meetings with all project managers for a period of two months to review the issues blocking the progress of the projects and ensure maximum management attention. Issues were assigned to the right people and tracked on daily basis. • Daily meetings of Project Manager with resources and group leaders were held to ensure the tasks are monitored closely and issues are either resolved / escalated. • BU head along with all function heads reviewed projects that were not progressing once in a fortnight during the Flow Meeting. Issue resolution trend is monitored closely. WIP and WIQ in critical stages are monitored to reduce the bunching up. 7. We got very good results initially. After that, there were changes in the portfolio, more products done at partner site, and a complete change in leadership team; these changes posed a huge challenge in sustaining the culture and results. Results: 1. Due date performance (on-time delivery) across all the portfolios is improved to 65% from less than 25%. Cycle time is reduced by 40%. Throughput is improved. 30 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
243 Conference Proceedings Implementation of CCPM in the pharmaceutical industry 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany In this paper, I take you through the journey of the critical chain project management (CCPM) implementation in our company (Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Limited). CCPM is implemented as part of Viable Vision initiative rolled out in 2008 with the help of Goldratt Consulting (GC). During the initial interactions, it was found that • Many projects are under development and there are always some projects on hold due to resources non-availability / changes in business priorities. Some products are under development for years together with diluted efforts. • Many projects are stuck during execution due to logistics / resources / technical issues. • Due date performance and cycle time are not measured wrt original start date and original due date but to continually adjusted revisions. • Throughput is inconsistent and skewed to the end of the financial year. After going through the TOC critical chain workshops with senior members of the organization, the team was convinced to take up the goal. • To implement and instutionalize a procedure for managing the product development. • To significantly improve and sustain the due date performance (DDP), cycle time and productivity performance. GC has customized the project management strategy & tactic (S&T) tree as a guideline for the implementation in Global Generics and PSAI • CCPM implementation is done in a phased manner with the support of a dedicated facilitation team from Dr. Reddy's and GC consultants. Learning of each phase implementation is used in subsequent phase implementation. In this paper, I take you through the journey of CCPM implementation in our company (Dir. Reddy's Laboratories Limited). We are a global pharmaceutical company committed to providing affordable and innovative medicines for healthier lives through our three core businesses: Pharmaceutical Services and Active Ingredients (PSAI), Global Generics and Proprietary Products. CCPM is implemented as part of Viable Vision initiative rolled out in 2008 with the help of Goldratt Consulting (GC). The purpose of this paper is restricted to CCPM implementation only. 1. During the initial interactions, It was found that • Many projects under development and there were always some projects on hold due to resources non availability / change in business priorities. Some products were under development for years together with diluted efforts. • Many Projects were struck during execution of projects due to logistics / resources / technical issues. • Due Date performance and Cycle time were not measured wrt original start date and original due date. • Throughput was inconsistent and skewed to the end of the financial year. 2. After going through the workshops with senior members of the organization, the team was convinced to take up the goal to • To put in place a procedure for managing the product development and institutionalize. • To significantly improve the DDP, Cycle time and Productivity and sustain the performance. 3. Details of the implementation are described below GC presented the solution to the Leadership team using strategy & tactic tree (S&T Tree). Reservations from the team are clarified and buy in is obtained. Various team members for the implementation team were identified and roles were clearly defined. CCPM was implemented in phased manner. Learning of initial phase was used in subsequent phases. Phase 1: Generic Development for NA EU (Product filings and Introduction to market for US, EU and CANADA) Phase 2: Generic Development for Russia and India (Product filings and Introduction to market for India, Russia and rest of the countries) Phase 3: API Product development (Drug master filings for US, EU and Canada) Enablers 1. Dir. Reddy's had formal project management organization and hence CCPM was rolled out very quickly. 2. Top management commitment was demonstrated in ensuring the key stakeholders presence in all meetings, freezing of the projects, accepting staggered dates, task updates, project progress reviews. 3. Facilitation team (FT) was created from resources within the organization and dedicated for the implementation of CCPM. FT helped in creating the templates, project plans, training of project managers, task managers and resource managers. 4. Facilitation Team was trained and mentored by senior members of Goldratt Schools. Close association with GC Project Leader / Goldratt Schools enabled the team to bring in the cultural change quickly and sustain. 5. Quick results obtained immediately after freezing increased the buy-in of the stakeholders. 6. It was an easy task to roll out, train people on using Concerto because of its user friendly interface and good reporting. Challenges: 1. Projects were managed by Product Delivery Teams (PDT). Each team had key resources (development and analytical) reporting to the project manager and the support was provided by other common functions. During Phase 1 implementation, freezing across the teams resulted in 1-2 teams not having any projects. During Phase 2, freezing was done within each PDT and it was found to be more effective than freezing across the projects. 2. We identified the virtual drum as the integration stage and staggered the projects during the initial days. After experiencing the execution for two years, we switched to WIP control in place of staggering as it is found to be simple and effective. A project was released only after completion of integration stage of an existing project. 3. Staggering (TOCICO Dictionary, 163) is defined as: In multi-project critical chain project management, the process of releasing projects based on the availability and capability or capacity of the drum or virtual drum. 4. Usage: Once the drum resource has completed the last task on one project, another comparable project is released to execution. Staggering limits the number of projects being worked on at one time. 5. See project pacing, virtual drum. 6. During the second year of implementation, in one of the portfolios, we had too many projects in the Red due to a number of issues and it was difficult to deal with all of them. Top management had to focus on many projects and following the priorities had become difficult. The following systems were in place to quickly improve the situation. • BU head conducted daily meetings with all project managers for a period of two months to review the issues blocking the progress of the projects and ensure maximum management attention. Issues were assigned to the right people and tracked on daily basis. • Daily meetings of Project Manager with resources and group leaders were held to ensure the tasks are monitored closely and issues are either resolved / escalated. • BU head along with all function heads reviewed projects that were not progressing once in a fortnight during the Flow Meeting. Issue resolution trend is monitored closely. WIP and WIQ in critical stages are monitored to reduce the bunching up. 7. We got very good results initially. After that, there were changes in the portfolio, more products done at partner site, and a complete change in leadership team; these changes posed a huge challenge in sustaining the culture and results. Results: 1. Due date performance (on-time delivery) across all the portfolios is improved to 65% from less than 25%. Cycle time is reduced by 40%. Throughput is improved. 30 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
244 Conference Proceedings Keith, Mark Using TOC-TP to convert operational risk assessment into competitive advantage for financial services firms 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany This presentation demonstrates the use of an operational risk assessment and the change matrix conflict cloud to identify the focal point (root cause) of a financial services firm's risk profile, identifying and challenging an underlying erroneous assumption. The process followed is presented, and a case study examined. Participants learn how to use an operational risk assessment and the change matrix conflict cloud to identify the focal point (root cause) of the firm's risk profile. Participants examine and explore the reasons that the problems / risks exist, determine the convergence to a core problem, and the effect of 'raising the goal.' Also, participants learn how to align the resolution of the core conflict with the firm's value proposition to the market and how to run small batch / fast cycle times to test the value assumptions. LEARNING OBJECTIVES: 1. Participants will learn how to use an operational risk assessment and the Change Matrix Conflict Cloud to identify the focal point (root cause) of the firm's risk profile. 2. Participants will examine and explore the reasons that the problems / risks exist, determine the convergence to a core problem, and the effect of 'Raising the Goal.' 3. Participants will learn how to align the resolution of the core conflict with the firm's value proposition to the market and how to run small batch / fast cycle times to test the value assumptions. QUESTIONS FOR ELABORATION: 1. Were there risks that existed but were not identified in the assessment phase? How did they manifest? What were the implications? 2. How were the tests for assessing the value proposition determined? Were there any significant surprises (unanticipated outcomes)? 3. Were there any significant unanticipated benefits (returns outside the noise)? ABSTRACT: It is not unusual for Financial Services Firms to look for solutions within other industries when trying to address problems that cannot be resolved with the solution set available. There have been several occurrences: • Immobilizing Securities – Shipbuilding Industry. • Work Cells – Manufacturing Industry. • Risk Measurement and Management – Insurance Industry. Adoption and application of 'borrowed' solutions has proven to work well within Financial Services over the past 30 or so years. Problems start to manifest when application of the solution is spread into environments that are significantly different than the original. Dr. Eli Goldratt described this problem in his 'Standing on the Shoulders of Giants' paper. These are the circumstances that the Financial Services Industry faces today. They borrowed a portfolio based risk assessment application from the Insurance Industry and have applied it to Operating Risk, with great challenges and, some might say, without much success. The main issue is that the risk assessment identifies many symptoms that are individually addressed, which creates the 'mowing the dandelions' approach to operational risk mitigation. This presentation will demonstrate the use of an operational risk assessment and the Change Matrix Conflict Cloud to identify the focal point (root cause) of the firm's risk profile, identifying and challenging an underlying erroneous assumption. One of the main differentiators in this application is when deciding which assumption to challenge. We select the one that will align the solution with the value proposition of the firm (the market's significant need). The next step is to run small batches with fast feedback loops to assess the market's perception of the value of the solution. This allows a choice to accelerate the delivery of the solution to the market or to pivot and challenge a different assumption. The presentation will close with a discussion from the following case study. Case Study: Under pressure from Federal Bank Examiners, Trust Company ABC undertook a review of its Compliance, Audit, Policy, and Risk control functions. The action taken and next step for each is: Control Function Action Taken Next Step. Compliance Created and initiated execution on a Compliance Monitoring Program Secure outside expertise and consultation for execution and compliance testing. Audit Create a high level Audit Strategy Internal Audit creates and implements a program. Policy Review existing policies to determine adequacy Develop policies and procedures for new controls that will be put in place. Risk Create the Trust Company ABC Risk and Control Assessment Interpret the Risk and Control Assessment. Determine the accuracy of each component: Obtain Board consensus. Determine the course of action. With respect to the control function, Risk, Trust Company ABC is now thrust into the teeth of the conflict. Typically, with a Risk and Control Assessment, the firm can rank its risks and focus on the top risks identifying the controls / control gaps and documenting with measurements. These actions fulfill the necessary condition of Closing Control Gaps. However, Trust Company ABC leadership is seeking change. They currently function as the 'provider of last resort' to the firm's financial advisors. Leadership seeks to become the 'preferred provider' to its financial advisors. Can the firm do the following simultaneously? Necessary Condition Action: B: Be the Preferred Provider D: Increase Risk by taking the Risks necessary to become the preferred provider. C: Close Control Gap D': Decrease Risk. Answer: Yes. Raise the Goal + Focus on Flow (key leverage point) + Tie to the Financial Advisors' Value Proposition. These create the effects of: 1. Being a Preferred Provider. 2. Closing the Control Gaps. This conflict, Increase Risk ?? Decrease Risk, is fundamental to every organization. For Trust Company ABC, the manifestation is illuminated because of the external scrutiny (Examiners) and the conflicting goals of Business Leadership and the enterprise of Risk Control. Implications: The TOC community of practice knows this: The thinking tools and applications of TOC create powerful risk mitigation strategies and tactics. These tools and applications are universally applicable through all industries and all strata within organizations. However, 'risk' is an enterprise unto itself – fully formed and evolving with tremendous inertia (as well as clout). The green field for TOC, a leverage point for proliferating the adoption of TOC, is in the enterprise of RISK. For attendees outside of Financial Services, this presentation will document the strategies, tactics, and outcomes of bringing TOC into a firm through the risk mitigation door, especially in highly regulated industries. 35 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
245 Conference Proceedings Eby, Matt Using TOC-TP to convert operational risk assessment into competitive advantage for financial services firms 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany This presentation demonstrates the use of an operational risk assessment and the change matrix conflict cloud to identify the focal point (root cause) of a financial services firm's risk profile, identifying and challenging an underlying erroneous assumption. The process followed is presented, and a case study examined. Participants learn how to use an operational risk assessment and the change matrix conflict cloud to identify the focal point (root cause) of the firm's risk profile. Participants examine and explore the reasons that the problems / risks exist, determine the convergence to a core problem, and the effect of 'raising the goal.' Also, participants learn how to align the resolution of the core conflict with the firm's value proposition to the market and how to run small batch / fast cycle times to test the value assumptions. LEARNING OBJECTIVES: 1. Participants will learn how to use an operational risk assessment and the Change Matrix Conflict Cloud to identify the focal point (root cause) of the firm's risk profile. 2. Participants will examine and explore the reasons that the problems / risks exist, determine the convergence to a core problem, and the effect of 'Raising the Goal.' 3. Participants will learn how to align the resolution of the core conflict with the firm's value proposition to the market and how to run small batch / fast cycle times to test the value assumptions. QUESTIONS FOR ELABORATION: 1. Were there risks that existed but were not identified in the assessment phase? How did they manifest? What were the implications? 2. How were the tests for assessing the value proposition determined? Were there any significant surprises (unanticipated outcomes)? 3. Were there any significant unanticipated benefits (returns outside the noise)? ABSTRACT: It is not unusual for Financial Services Firms to look for solutions within other industries when trying to address problems that cannot be resolved with the solution set available. There have been several occurrences: • Immobilizing Securities – Shipbuilding Industry. • Work Cells – Manufacturing Industry. • Risk Measurement and Management – Insurance Industry. Adoption and application of 'borrowed' solutions has proven to work well within Financial Services over the past 30 or so years. Problems start to manifest when application of the solution is spread into environments that are significantly different than the original. Dr. Eli Goldratt described this problem in his 'Standing on the Shoulders of Giants' paper. These are the circumstances that the Financial Services Industry faces today. They borrowed a portfolio based risk assessment application from the Insurance Industry and have applied it to Operating Risk, with great challenges and, some might say, without much success. The main issue is that the risk assessment identifies many symptoms that are individually addressed, which creates the 'mowing the dandelions' approach to operational risk mitigation. This presentation will demonstrate the use of an operational risk assessment and the Change Matrix Conflict Cloud to identify the focal point (root cause) of the firm's risk profile, identifying and challenging an underlying erroneous assumption. One of the main differentiators in this application is when deciding which assumption to challenge. We select the one that will align the solution with the value proposition of the firm (the market's significant need). The next step is to run small batches with fast feedback loops to assess the market's perception of the value of the solution. This allows a choice to accelerate the delivery of the solution to the market or to pivot and challenge a different assumption. The presentation will close with a discussion from the following case study. Case Study: Under pressure from Federal Bank Examiners, Trust Company ABC undertook a review of its Compliance, Audit, Policy, and Risk control functions. The action taken and next step for each is: Control Function Action Taken Next Step. Compliance Created and initiated execution on a Compliance Monitoring Program Secure outside expertise and consultation for execution and compliance testing. Audit Create a high level Audit Strategy Internal Audit creates and implements a program. Policy Review existing policies to determine adequacy Develop policies and procedures for new controls that will be put in place. Risk Create the Trust Company ABC Risk and Control Assessment Interpret the Risk and Control Assessment. Determine the accuracy of each component: Obtain Board consensus. Determine the course of action. With respect to the control function, Risk, Trust Company ABC is now thrust into the teeth of the conflict. Typically, with a Risk and Control Assessment, the firm can rank its risks and focus on the top risks identifying the controls / control gaps and documenting with measurements. These actions fulfill the necessary condition of Closing Control Gaps. However, Trust Company ABC leadership is seeking change. They currently function as the 'provider of last resort' to the firm's financial advisors. Leadership seeks to become the 'preferred provider' to its financial advisors. Can the firm do the following simultaneously? Necessary Condition Action: B: Be the Preferred Provider D: Increase Risk by taking the Risks necessary to become the preferred provider. C: Close Control Gap D': Decrease Risk. Answer: Yes. Raise the Goal + Focus on Flow (key leverage point) + Tie to the Financial Advisors' Value Proposition. These create the effects of: 1. Being a Preferred Provider. 2. Closing the Control Gaps. This conflict, Increase Risk ?? Decrease Risk, is fundamental to every organization. For Trust Company ABC, the manifestation is illuminated because of the external scrutiny (Examiners) and the conflicting goals of Business Leadership and the enterprise of Risk Control. Implications: The TOC community of practice knows this: The thinking tools and applications of TOC create powerful risk mitigation strategies and tactics. These tools and applications are universally applicable through all industries and all strata within organizations. However, 'risk' is an enterprise unto itself – fully formed and evolving with tremendous inertia (as well as clout). The green field for TOC, a leverage point for proliferating the adoption of TOC, is in the enterprise of RISK. For attendees outside of Financial Services, this presentation will document the strategies, tactics, and outcomes of bringing TOC into a firm through the risk mitigation door, especially in highly regulated industries. 35 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
246 Conference Proceedings Using TOC-TP to convert operational risk assessment into competitive advantage for financial services firms 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany This presentation demonstrates the use of an operational risk assessment and the change matrix conflict cloud to identify the focal point (root cause) of a financial services firm's risk profile, identifying and challenging an underlying erroneous assumption. The process followed is presented, and a case study examined. Participants learn how to use an operational risk assessment and the change matrix conflict cloud to identify the focal point (root cause) of the firm's risk profile. Participants examine and explore the reasons that the problems / risks exist, determine the convergence to a core problem, and the effect of 'raising the goal.' Also, participants learn how to align the resolution of the core conflict with the firm's value proposition to the market and how to run small batch / fast cycle times to test the value assumptions. LEARNING OBJECTIVES: 1. Participants will learn how to use an operational risk assessment and the Change Matrix Conflict Cloud to identify the focal point (root cause) of the firm's risk profile. 2. Participants will examine and explore the reasons that the problems / risks exist, determine the convergence to a core problem, and the effect of 'Raising the Goal.' 3. Participants will learn how to align the resolution of the core conflict with the firm's value proposition to the market and how to run small batch / fast cycle times to test the value assumptions. QUESTIONS FOR ELABORATION: 1. Were there risks that existed but were not identified in the assessment phase? How did they manifest? What were the implications? 2. How were the tests for assessing the value proposition determined? Were there any significant surprises (unanticipated outcomes)? 3. Were there any significant unanticipated benefits (returns outside the noise)? ABSTRACT: It is not unusual for Financial Services Firms to look for solutions within other industries when trying to address problems that cannot be resolved with the solution set available. There have been several occurrences: • Immobilizing Securities – Shipbuilding Industry. • Work Cells – Manufacturing Industry. • Risk Measurement and Management – Insurance Industry. Adoption and application of 'borrowed' solutions has proven to work well within Financial Services over the past 30 or so years. Problems start to manifest when application of the solution is spread into environments that are significantly different than the original. Dr. Eli Goldratt described this problem in his 'Standing on the Shoulders of Giants' paper. These are the circumstances that the Financial Services Industry faces today. They borrowed a portfolio based risk assessment application from the Insurance Industry and have applied it to Operating Risk, with great challenges and, some might say, without much success. The main issue is that the risk assessment identifies many symptoms that are individually addressed, which creates the 'mowing the dandelions' approach to operational risk mitigation. This presentation will demonstrate the use of an operational risk assessment and the Change Matrix Conflict Cloud to identify the focal point (root cause) of the firm's risk profile, identifying and challenging an underlying erroneous assumption. One of the main differentiators in this application is when deciding which assumption to challenge. We select the one that will align the solution with the value proposition of the firm (the market's significant need). The next step is to run small batches with fast feedback loops to assess the market's perception of the value of the solution. This allows a choice to accelerate the delivery of the solution to the market or to pivot and challenge a different assumption. The presentation will close with a discussion from the following case study. Case Study: Under pressure from Federal Bank Examiners, Trust Company ABC undertook a review of its Compliance, Audit, Policy, and Risk control functions. The action taken and next step for each is: Control Function Action Taken Next Step. Compliance Created and initiated execution on a Compliance Monitoring Program Secure outside expertise and consultation for execution and compliance testing. Audit Create a high level Audit Strategy Internal Audit creates and implements a program. Policy Review existing policies to determine adequacy Develop policies and procedures for new controls that will be put in place. Risk Create the Trust Company ABC Risk and Control Assessment Interpret the Risk and Control Assessment. Determine the accuracy of each component: Obtain Board consensus. Determine the course of action. With respect to the control function, Risk, Trust Company ABC is now thrust into the teeth of the conflict. Typically, with a Risk and Control Assessment, the firm can rank its risks and focus on the top risks identifying the controls / control gaps and documenting with measurements. These actions fulfill the necessary condition of Closing Control Gaps. However, Trust Company ABC leadership is seeking change. They currently function as the 'provider of last resort' to the firm's financial advisors. Leadership seeks to become the 'preferred provider' to its financial advisors. Can the firm do the following simultaneously? Necessary Condition Action: B: Be the Preferred Provider D: Increase Risk by taking the Risks necessary to become the preferred provider. C: Close Control Gap D': Decrease Risk. Answer: Yes. Raise the Goal + Focus on Flow (key leverage point) + Tie to the Financial Advisors' Value Proposition. These create the effects of: 1. Being a Preferred Provider. 2. Closing the Control Gaps. This conflict, Increase Risk ?? Decrease Risk, is fundamental to every organization. For Trust Company ABC, the manifestation is illuminated because of the external scrutiny (Examiners) and the conflicting goals of Business Leadership and the enterprise of Risk Control. Implications: The TOC community of practice knows this: The thinking tools and applications of TOC create powerful risk mitigation strategies and tactics. These tools and applications are universally applicable through all industries and all strata within organizations. However, 'risk' is an enterprise unto itself – fully formed and evolving with tremendous inertia (as well as clout). The green field for TOC, a leverage point for proliferating the adoption of TOC, is in the enterprise of RISK. For attendees outside of Financial Services, this presentation will document the strategies, tactics, and outcomes of bringing TOC into a firm through the risk mitigation door, especially in highly regulated industries. 35 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
247 Conference Proceedings Kishira, Yuji Holistic government transformation management by TOC with proof of concept case study in Miyazaki Prefecture 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany TOC uses a systemic thinking approach for managing organizations. This systemic thinking can be applied to the management of government too. We can ask a question: 'Is Japan as a country effective as a system?' Most Japanese people would answer that today's government management is not necessarily effective as a system. On top of that, constant political / government scandals repeatedly happen, losing the trust of tax payers. The problems are huge enough, barking all the time year after year to get the attention of lots of people, yet we feel it is an unavoidable reality to the extent that we put undesirable meanings to the words 'politics' and 'bureaucracy'. It might be a good-enough enormity of an unaffected area for us to stand on the shoulders of a giant. This presentation shows the following: -The Japanese government officials' constant dilemma of ever-changing political initiatives –The TOC simple injection surfaced by challenging basic assumptions to bring more result / value to tax payers -A case study of the Miyazaki Prefecture showing the TOC process and results after another political scandal (Governor and government executives arrested). –The holistic country management initiative to expand the TOC knowledge throughout Japan with case studies. -Standing on the shoulders of a giant process revealed in this process. TOC uses a systemic thinking approach for managing organizations. This systemic thinking can be applied to government management too. We can ask a question: 'Is Japan as a country effective as system?' Most Japanese people would answer that today's Government Management is not necessarily effective as a system. On top of that, constant political/Government scandals repeatedly happen, losing the trust of tax payers. The problems are huge enough, barking all the time year after year to get the attention of lots of people, yet we feel it is unavoidable reality to the extent that we put undesirable meanings to the words 'politics' and 'bureaucracy'. It might be a good enough enormity of unaffected area for us to stand on the shoulder of a giant. Reality is exceedingly simple. There must be a very simple solution. This presentation will show the following: -Japanese Government officials' constant dilemma in ever-changing political initiatives -TOC simple injection by challenging basic assumptions (sectionalism, budget focus, conservatism, politics and bureaucracy) to bring more result/value to tax payers -A case study of Miyazaki Prefecture showing process and results after political scandal (Governor and Governments executives arrested) -Holistic country management initiative to expand the knowledge throughout Japan with case studies -Standing on the Shoulders of a Giant process revealed in this process. This presentation will be valuable for individuals at any level in their organization, at any level of TOC expertise (novice through advanced). Three benefits: • Gain insights into the possibility to use TOC for government management • Learn a simple process of holistic change management • Gain exposure to various implementations that are achieving unprecedented results in Japan. 31 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
248 Conference Proceedings Holistic government transformation management by TOC with proof of concept case study in Miyazaki Prefecture 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany TOC uses a systemic thinking approach for managing organizations. This systemic thinking can be applied to the management of government too. We can ask a question: 'Is Japan as a country effective as a system?' Most Japanese people would answer that today's government management is not necessarily effective as a system. On top of that, constant political / government scandals repeatedly happen, losing the trust of tax payers. The problems are huge enough, barking all the time year after year to get the attention of lots of people, yet we feel it is an unavoidable reality to the extent that we put undesirable meanings to the words 'politics' and 'bureaucracy'. It might be a good-enough enormity of an unaffected area for us to stand on the shoulders of a giant. This presentation shows the following: -The Japanese government officials' constant dilemma of ever-changing political initiatives –The TOC simple injection surfaced by challenging basic assumptions to bring more result / value to tax payers -A case study of the Miyazaki Prefecture showing the TOC process and results after another political scandal (Governor and government executives arrested). –The holistic country management initiative to expand the TOC knowledge throughout Japan with case studies. -Standing on the shoulders of a giant process revealed in this process. TOC uses a systemic thinking approach for managing organizations. This systemic thinking can be applied to government management too. We can ask a question: 'Is Japan as a country effective as system?' Most Japanese people would answer that today's Government Management is not necessarily effective as a system. On top of that, constant political/Government scandals repeatedly happen, losing the trust of tax payers. The problems are huge enough, barking all the time year after year to get the attention of lots of people, yet we feel it is unavoidable reality to the extent that we put undesirable meanings to the words 'politics' and 'bureaucracy'. It might be a good enough enormity of unaffected area for us to stand on the shoulder of a giant. Reality is exceedingly simple. There must be a very simple solution. This presentation will show the following: -Japanese Government officials' constant dilemma in ever-changing political initiatives -TOC simple injection by challenging basic assumptions (sectionalism, budget focus, conservatism, politics and bureaucracy) to bring more result/value to tax payers -A case study of Miyazaki Prefecture showing process and results after political scandal (Governor and Governments executives arrested) -Holistic country management initiative to expand the knowledge throughout Japan with case studies -Standing on the Shoulders of a Giant process revealed in this process. This presentation will be valuable for individuals at any level in their organization, at any level of TOC expertise (novice through advanced). Three benefits: • Gain insights into the possibility to use TOC for government management • Learn a simple process of holistic change management • Gain exposure to various implementations that are achieving unprecedented results in Japan. 31 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
249 Conference Proceedings Knight, Alex The development of TOC applications for the service sector 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany This presentation highlights some of the core developments over the last thirty years and in particular focuses on areas where modification of the standard applications was not sufficient and a different approach was required (one that remains firmly rooted in the underpinning theory). In each instance Alex Knight demonstrates that the breakthrough has come purely from the derivation of the underlying theory and has never required the addition or integration with other theories. In particular, Alex highlights the following points: 1. There are many examples where the assumptions upon which the generic TOC applications for manufacturing were built are not valid in the service environment. As an example, the concept of choking the release to help identify the constraint is a core first step in all of the operations, project and distribution / supply chain environments and yet this is often simply not a valid option in most services. The implications of this are far reaching and require a rethink in the development and adaptation of the TOC applications for the service sector. 2. The distinction between an operations and project environment are also not always valid in a service environment. Alex exposes a number of examples where ‘both and neither' of the conditions can exist. As a result, this basis of distinction is no longer really very helpful. Alternative criteria for establishing the position and size of buffers are required. 3. The whole concept of developing a schedule for resources to follow is often redundant. Demand emerges alongside frequent and major changes in both mix and volumes in extremely short time scales. Creating sufficient protective capacity at very short notice becomes a key issue. Establishing the processes for this require a different perspective to the traditional applications. Some of the lessons learned in this environment may have implications for changing the way schedules are developed for other environments. 4. It is inferred from standard TOC processes and the transformational strategy and tactics (S&T) trees that initiating the analysis and eradication of underlying causes of delay should be embarked upon once the system is being guided by buffer management. In many of these service environments, it is more appropriate to initiate this analysis and supporting actions before any attempt to introduce buffer management. The process of on-going improvement (POOGI) is more of a driving force than DBR (the TOC production/operations application) or CCPM (the TOC project management application). 5. In many service environments, the un-desirable effect (UDE) of ‘too early' is just as valid as ‘too late'. As a result, there has been a need to invent a new buffer system and associated algorithms. 6. Exposing excess capacity can often happen in a matter of hours, days or weeks. This means that the synchronization of sales efforts to increase sales is very important. With staffing as a major part of the operating expense (OE) of many service industries, it is very tempting to cut OE the moment excess capacity has been revealed. In some industries, the very first steps have to be to plan and start the processes to increase sales even before the decisive competitive edge (DCE) has been achieved. 7. Many service industries have high levels of front-line professional staff who must be bought in to the approach. The number of people who can threaten the implementation's success if they do not believe in it is typically a magnitude of order higher. Many are very skeptical about anything to do with management. This has major implications for the approach and intensity of the buy-in that is required. 8. The customer is often an active participant in the delivery of the service and cannot be treated like a piece of work-in-progress. Also, exploitation of the constraint to maximize throughput per constraint minute may be inappropriate. We cannot reduce the lead time for someone to die to free up capacity. 9. Changing the mind-set of a TOC professional to work in the service industry has often taken significantly longer than starting with new recruits who have no knowledge of TOC. In his business novel ‘The Goal' Dir. Goldratt demonstrated how a seemingly complex manufacturing environment could adopt his process of on-going improvement and achieve a remarkable breakthrough in performance in a very short time scale and continue to exploit these new capabilities to achieve a long running decisive competitive edge. He also demonstrated that such a breakthrough in performance was achieved through the use of three simple measures and the development and implementation of an application derived from the five focusing steps of his Theory of Constraints. I was lucky enough to meet Eli when I was just starting out in my career and to be mentored by him for over half my life. Throughout this period I worked with him in many different relationships including: as a customer, supplier and partner. At times he was my boss but throughout these many years he was always a friend and a mentor. In this last role he helped me develop TOC applications for many new and exciting industries including financial services, insurance, the legal sector, health and social care, universities, travel and tourism and even a number of charities. I know the work in charities was especially important to Eli as he was keen to show how the Theory of Constraints could be successfully applied to any goal oriented environment. Our work with the National Childbirth Trust in the UK was something he was always keen to hear more about. In some instances this work only required a slight modification to the standard applications but time and time again Eli taught me the importance of going back to basics and developing a solution and supporting application from the first principles of TOC. At times this has felt a rather lonely role in the TOC community but Eli always supported me and created forums where I could share the learning guided by him. He helped me and my partners of QFI consulting, Bill West and Helen Gibb build a thriving TOC consultancy that now has over thirty full time consulting staff working in these many different sectors. We also run two Masters programs, the first is a TOC Masters in Health and Social Care for our customers and the second is a TOC Masters in Consulting for our own staff. One of my ambitions is to attract many of the current TOC professionals and more importantly many new people into the TOC community to develop the application of TOC in many more industries across the globe. I think this can be an easy entry point for young and new people into the TOC world and provide them with a meaningful and fulfilling career. This presentation highlights some of the core developments over the last thirty years and in particular focuses on areas where modification of the standard applications was not sufficient and a different approach was required but one that remains firmly rooted in the underpinning theory. In each instance I will try and demonstrate that the breakthrough has come purely from the derivation of the underlying theory and has never required the addition or integration with other theories. In particular I will highlight the following points: 1. There are many examples where the assumptions upon which the generic TOC applications were built are not valid in the service environment. As an example the concept of choking the release to help identify the constraint is a core first step in both the operations, project and supply chain environment and yet this is often simply not a valid option. The implications of this are far reaching and require a rethink in the development and even focus of the new TOC applications developed for the service sector. 2. The distinction between an operations and project environment are also not always valid in a service environment. I will expose a number of examples where ‘both and neither' of the conditions can exist. As a result this basis of distinction is no longer really very helpful. Alternative criteria for establishing the position and size of buffers are required. 3. The whole concept of developing a schedule for resources to follow is often redundant. Demand emerges alongside frequent and major changes in both mix and volumes in extremely short timescales. Creating sufficient protective capacity at very short notice becomes a key issue. Establishing the processes for this require a different perspective to the traditional applications. Some of the lessons learnt in this environment may have implications for changing the way schedules are developed for other environments. 4. It is inferred from standard TOC processes and the S and T trees that initiating the analysis and eradication of underlying causes of delay should be embarked upon once the system is being guided by buffer management. In many of these service environments it is more appropriate to initiate this analysis and supporting actions before any attempt to introduce buffer management. POOGI is more of a driving force than DBR or CCPM. 5. In many service environments the UDE of ‘too early' is just as valid as ‘too late'. As a result there has been a need to invent a new buffer system and associated algorithms. 6. Exposing excess capacity can often happen in a matter of hours, days or weeks. This means that the synchronization of sales efforts to increase sales is very important. With staff as a major part of the OE of many service industries it is very tempting to cut OE the moment excess capacity has been revealed. In some industries the very first steps have to be to plan and start the processes to increase sales even before the DCE has been achieved. 7. Many service industries have high levels of front line professional staff who must be bought in to the approach. The number of people who can threaten the implementations success if they do not believe in it is typically a magnitude of order higher. Many are very skeptical about anything to do with management. This has major implications for the approach and intensity of the buy in that is required. 8. The customer is often an active participant in the delivery of the service and cannot be treated like a piece of work in progress. Also exploitation of the constraint to maximize throughput per constraint minute may be inappropriate. We cannot reduce the lead time for someone to die to free up capacity. 9. Changing the mind-set of a TOC professional to work in the service industry has often taken significantly longer than starting with new recruits who have no knowledge of TOC. 1 hour 22 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
250 Conference Proceedings The development of TOC applications for the service sector 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany This presentation highlights some of the core developments over the last thirty years and in particular focuses on areas where modification of the standard applications was not sufficient and a different approach was required (one that remains firmly rooted in the underpinning theory). In each instance Alex Knight demonstrates that the breakthrough has come purely from the derivation of the underlying theory and has never required the addition or integration with other theories. In particular, Alex highlights the following points: 1. There are many examples where the assumptions upon which the generic TOC applications for manufacturing were built are not valid in the service environment. As an example, the concept of choking the release to help identify the constraint is a core first step in all of the operations, project and distribution / supply chain environments and yet this is often simply not a valid option in most services. The implications of this are far reaching and require a rethink in the development and adaptation of the TOC applications for the service sector. 2. The distinction between an operations and project environment are also not always valid in a service environment. Alex exposes a number of examples where ‘both and neither' of the conditions can exist. As a result, this basis of distinction is no longer really very helpful. Alternative criteria for establishing the position and size of buffers are required. 3. The whole concept of developing a schedule for resources to follow is often redundant. Demand emerges alongside frequent and major changes in both mix and volumes in extremely short time scales. Creating sufficient protective capacity at very short notice becomes a key issue. Establishing the processes for this require a different perspective to the traditional applications. Some of the lessons learned in this environment may have implications for changing the way schedules are developed for other environments. 4. It is inferred from standard TOC processes and the transformational strategy and tactics (S&T) trees that initiating the analysis and eradication of underlying causes of delay should be embarked upon once the system is being guided by buffer management. In many of these service environments, it is more appropriate to initiate this analysis and supporting actions before any attempt to introduce buffer management. The process of on-going improvement (POOGI) is more of a driving force than DBR (the TOC production/operations application) or CCPM (the TOC project management application). 5. In many service environments, the un-desirable effect (UDE) of ‘too early' is just as valid as ‘too late'. As a result, there has been a need to invent a new buffer system and associated algorithms. 6. Exposing excess capacity can often happen in a matter of hours, days or weeks. This means that the synchronization of sales efforts to increase sales is very important. With staffing as a major part of the operating expense (OE) of many service industries, it is very tempting to cut OE the moment excess capacity has been revealed. In some industries, the very first steps have to be to plan and start the processes to increase sales even before the decisive competitive edge (DCE) has been achieved. 7. Many service industries have high levels of front-line professional staff who must be bought in to the approach. The number of people who can threaten the implementation's success if they do not believe in it is typically a magnitude of order higher. Many are very skeptical about anything to do with management. This has major implications for the approach and intensity of the buy-in that is required. 8. The customer is often an active participant in the delivery of the service and cannot be treated like a piece of work-in-progress. Also, exploitation of the constraint to maximize throughput per constraint minute may be inappropriate. We cannot reduce the lead time for someone to die to free up capacity. 9. Changing the mind-set of a TOC professional to work in the service industry has often taken significantly longer than starting with new recruits who have no knowledge of TOC. In his business novel ‘The Goal' Dir. Goldratt demonstrated how a seemingly complex manufacturing environment could adopt his process of on-going improvement and achieve a remarkable breakthrough in performance in a very short time scale and continue to exploit these new capabilities to achieve a long running decisive competitive edge. He also demonstrated that such a breakthrough in performance was achieved through the use of three simple measures and the development and implementation of an application derived from the five focusing steps of his Theory of Constraints. I was lucky enough to meet Eli when I was just starting out in my career and to be mentored by him for over half my life. Throughout this period I worked with him in many different relationships including: as a customer, supplier and partner. At times he was my boss but throughout these many years he was always a friend and a mentor. In this last role he helped me develop TOC applications for many new and exciting industries including financial services, insurance, the legal sector, health and social care, universities, travel and tourism and even a number of charities. I know the work in charities was especially important to Eli as he was keen to show how the Theory of Constraints could be successfully applied to any goal oriented environment. Our work with the National Childbirth Trust in the UK was something he was always keen to hear more about. In some instances this work only required a slight modification to the standard applications but time and time again Eli taught me the importance of going back to basics and developing a solution and supporting application from the first principles of TOC. At times this has felt a rather lonely role in the TOC community but Eli always supported me and created forums where I could share the learning guided by him. He helped me and my partners of QFI consulting, Bill West and Helen Gibb build a thriving TOC consultancy that now has over thirty full time consulting staff working in these many different sectors. We also run two Masters programs, the first is a TOC Masters in Health and Social Care for our customers and the second is a TOC Masters in Consulting for our own staff. One of my ambitions is to attract many of the current TOC professionals and more importantly many new people into the TOC community to develop the application of TOC in many more industries across the globe. I think this can be an easy entry point for young and new people into the TOC world and provide them with a meaningful and fulfilling career. This presentation highlights some of the core developments over the last thirty years and in particular focuses on areas where modification of the standard applications was not sufficient and a different approach was required but one that remains firmly rooted in the underpinning theory. In each instance I will try and demonstrate that the breakthrough has come purely from the derivation of the underlying theory and has never required the addition or integration with other theories. In particular I will highlight the following points: 1. There are many examples where the assumptions upon which the generic TOC applications were built are not valid in the service environment. As an example the concept of choking the release to help identify the constraint is a core first step in both the operations, project and supply chain environment and yet this is often simply not a valid option. The implications of this are far reaching and require a rethink in the development and even focus of the new TOC applications developed for the service sector. 2. The distinction between an operations and project environment are also not always valid in a service environment. I will expose a number of examples where ‘both and neither' of the conditions can exist. As a result this basis of distinction is no longer really very helpful. Alternative criteria for establishing the position and size of buffers are required. 3. The whole concept of developing a schedule for resources to follow is often redundant. Demand emerges alongside frequent and major changes in both mix and volumes in extremely short timescales. Creating sufficient protective capacity at very short notice becomes a key issue. Establishing the processes for this require a different perspective to the traditional applications. Some of the lessons learnt in this environment may have implications for changing the way schedules are developed for other environments. 4. It is inferred from standard TOC processes and the S and T trees that initiating the analysis and eradication of underlying causes of delay should be embarked upon once the system is being guided by buffer management. In many of these service environments it is more appropriate to initiate this analysis and supporting actions before any attempt to introduce buffer management. POOGI is more of a driving force than DBR or CCPM. 5. In many service environments the UDE of ‘too early' is just as valid as ‘too late'. As a result there has been a need to invent a new buffer system and associated algorithms. 6. Exposing excess capacity can often happen in a matter of hours, days or weeks. This means that the synchronization of sales efforts to increase sales is very important. With staff as a major part of the OE of many service industries it is very tempting to cut OE the moment excess capacity has been revealed. In some industries the very first steps have to be to plan and start the processes to increase sales even before the DCE has been achieved. 7. Many service industries have high levels of front line professional staff who must be bought in to the approach. The number of people who can threaten the implementations success if they do not believe in it is typically a magnitude of order higher. Many are very skeptical about anything to do with management. This has major implications for the approach and intensity of the buy in that is required. 8. The customer is often an active participant in the delivery of the service and cannot be treated like a piece of work in progress. Also exploitation of the constraint to maximize throughput per constraint minute may be inappropriate. We cannot reduce the lead time for someone to die to free up capacity. 9. Changing the mind-set of a TOC professional to work in the service industry has often taken significantly longer than starting with new recruits who have no knowledge of TOC. 1 hour 22 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
251 Conference Proceedings van der Zel, Kobus TOC demand-pull saves Colovos from liquidation 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Why change? More than 50 banks rejected the company, Colovos, after defaulting on its loan. The existing bank hired a turnaround firm to start liquidating Colovos. What to Change? A shortage of cash to buy products from its Asian vendors drove Colovos' poor performance. Inventory turns dropped as low as 1.5 times. What to change to? A simulation showed that the $3 million in cash that Colovos so desperately needed, was tied up in its inventory. Within 3 months inventory was reduced by 20%, releasing $1 million in cash. This progress secured outside investment of $500 thousand and a partial refinancing loan while the turnaround plan continued. Inventory was then further reduced to more than 50% or $3 million (from $6.1 million), which allowed for full refinancing. How to cause the change? This was the BIG problem: how does one convince a bank to stop liquidation proceedings with a turnaround plan that reduces the bank's main asset and precious collateral (inventory) by more than half? Presentation Objective: To Create Awareness of the Power of using TOC processes in distressed and bankruptcy situations. Why Change: A company facing bankruptcy or liquidation due to a shortage of cash imposed by their Bank has one of the strongest motivations to change. Colovos Company was rejected by more than 50 Banks after breaching their loan covenants and being asked to refinance their loan more than a year before. The existing Bank therefore hired a turnaround firm to start liquidation proceedings. What to Change: The reason for the loan default by Colovos Company was poor financial performance driven by a shortage of cash to buy products from their Asian vendors. Some vendors had stopped shipment at the same time that the Bank started reducing loan availability, causing a vicious cycle of distress. Inventory turns dropped as low as 1.5 times. What to Change to: Global Turnarounds Inc. was introduced to Colovos Company by TOC Equity Partners (One of the 50+ lenders approached by Colovos). An inventory simulation showed that the cash so desperately needed by Colovos was tied up in their own inventory – and that $3 million in cash could be released within one year by adopting the TOC Demand-pull solution. A turnaround contract was signed with fees based on reaching monthly profitability and inventory reduction targets. Within 3 months inventory was reduced by 20%, releasing $1m in cash to be applied to loan payback and vendor payables. This progress was sufficient to secure outside investment of $500k and get a partial refinancing loan in place while the turnaround plan continued. Inventory was then further reduced to more than 50% or $3 million (from $6.1m) within one year which allowed for the full refinancing of the delinquent loan. How to Cause the Change: This was where the big problem was – How do you convince a Bank to stop liquidation proceedings with a turnaround plan that will reduce their asset and precious collateral (inventory) by more than half? Material Covered: This presentation will review the buy-in process used to bridge the large gap between Colovos Company and the Bank, including: • How to turn dysfunctional Bank meetings from shouting matches into constructive sharing of information, • The level of financial detail required in a Bank plan, • Ensuring concessions from all company Stakeholders – not asking the Bank to hold the entire bag, • How to use and present operational inventory reduction knowledge and methodology in a non-threatening way to the Bank's financial experts, • How to take control of cash flow and operations in a distressed situation to maximize cash using TOC Demand-pull, • How to communicate replenishment triggers to vendors and the entire supply chain.33 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
252 Conference Proceedings Levit, Mark TOC demand-pull saves Colovos from liquidation 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Why change? More than 50 banks rejected the company, Colovos, after defaulting on its loan. The existing bank hired a turnaround firm to start liquidating Colovos. What to Change? A shortage of cash to buy products from its Asian vendors drove Colovos' poor performance. Inventory turns dropped as low as 1.5 times. What to change to? A simulation showed that the $3 million in cash that Colovos so desperately needed, was tied up in its inventory. Within 3 months inventory was reduced by 20%, releasing $1 million in cash. This progress secured outside investment of $500 thousand and a partial refinancing loan while the turnaround plan continued. Inventory was then further reduced to more than 50% or $3 million (from $6.1 million), which allowed for full refinancing. How to cause the change? This was the BIG problem: how does one convince a bank to stop liquidation proceedings with a turnaround plan that reduces the bank's main asset and precious collateral (inventory) by more than half? Presentation Objective: To Create Awareness of the Power of using TOC processes in distressed and bankruptcy situations. Why Change: A company facing bankruptcy or liquidation due to a shortage of cash imposed by their Bank has one of the strongest motivations to change. Colovos Company was rejected by more than 50 Banks after breaching their loan covenants and being asked to refinance their loan more than a year before. The existing Bank therefore hired a turnaround firm to start liquidation proceedings. What to Change: The reason for the loan default by Colovos Company was poor financial performance driven by a shortage of cash to buy products from their Asian vendors. Some vendors had stopped shipment at the same time that the Bank started reducing loan availability, causing a vicious cycle of distress. Inventory turns dropped as low as 1.5 times. What to Change to: Global Turnarounds Inc. was introduced to Colovos Company by TOC Equity Partners (One of the 50+ lenders approached by Colovos). An inventory simulation showed that the cash so desperately needed by Colovos was tied up in their own inventory – and that $3 million in cash could be released within one year by adopting the TOC Demand-pull solution. A turnaround contract was signed with fees based on reaching monthly profitability and inventory reduction targets. Within 3 months inventory was reduced by 20%, releasing $1m in cash to be applied to loan payback and vendor payables. This progress was sufficient to secure outside investment of $500k and get a partial refinancing loan in place while the turnaround plan continued. Inventory was then further reduced to more than 50% or $3 million (from $6.1m) within one year which allowed for the full refinancing of the delinquent loan. How to Cause the Change: This was where the big problem was – How do you convince a Bank to stop liquidation proceedings with a turnaround plan that will reduce their asset and precious collateral (inventory) by more than half? Material Covered: This presentation will review the buy-in process used to bridge the large gap between Colovos Company and the Bank, including: • How to turn dysfunctional Bank meetings from shouting matches into constructive sharing of information, • The level of financial detail required in a Bank plan, • Ensuring concessions from all company Stakeholders – not asking the Bank to hold the entire bag, • How to use and present operational inventory reduction knowledge and methodology in a non-threatening way to the Bank's financial experts, • How to take control of cash flow and operations in a distressed situation to maximize cash using TOC Demand-pull, • How to communicate replenishment triggers to vendors and the entire supply chain.33 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
253 Conference Proceedings TOC demand-pull saves Colovos from liquidation 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany Why change? More than 50 banks rejected the company, Colovos, after defaulting on its loan. The existing bank hired a turnaround firm to start liquidating Colovos. What to Change? A shortage of cash to buy products from its Asian vendors drove Colovos' poor performance. Inventory turns dropped as low as 1.5 times. What to change to? A simulation showed that the $3 million in cash that Colovos so desperately needed, was tied up in its inventory. Within 3 months inventory was reduced by 20%, releasing $1 million in cash. This progress secured outside investment of $500 thousand and a partial refinancing loan while the turnaround plan continued. Inventory was then further reduced to more than 50% or $3 million (from $6.1 million), which allowed for full refinancing. How to cause the change? This was the BIG problem: how does one convince a bank to stop liquidation proceedings with a turnaround plan that reduces the bank's main asset and precious collateral (inventory) by more than half? Presentation Objective: To Create Awareness of the Power of using TOC processes in distressed and bankruptcy situations. Why Change: A company facing bankruptcy or liquidation due to a shortage of cash imposed by their Bank has one of the strongest motivations to change. Colovos Company was rejected by more than 50 Banks after breaching their loan covenants and being asked to refinance their loan more than a year before. The existing Bank therefore hired a turnaround firm to start liquidation proceedings. What to Change: The reason for the loan default by Colovos Company was poor financial performance driven by a shortage of cash to buy products from their Asian vendors. Some vendors had stopped shipment at the same time that the Bank started reducing loan availability, causing a vicious cycle of distress. Inventory turns dropped as low as 1.5 times. What to Change to: Global Turnarounds Inc. was introduced to Colovos Company by TOC Equity Partners (One of the 50+ lenders approached by Colovos). An inventory simulation showed that the cash so desperately needed by Colovos was tied up in their own inventory – and that $3 million in cash could be released within one year by adopting the TOC Demand-pull solution. A turnaround contract was signed with fees based on reaching monthly profitability and inventory reduction targets. Within 3 months inventory was reduced by 20%, releasing $1m in cash to be applied to loan payback and vendor payables. This progress was sufficient to secure outside investment of $500k and get a partial refinancing loan in place while the turnaround plan continued. Inventory was then further reduced to more than 50% or $3 million (from $6.1m) within one year which allowed for the full refinancing of the delinquent loan. How to Cause the Change: This was where the big problem was – How do you convince a Bank to stop liquidation proceedings with a turnaround plan that will reduce their asset and precious collateral (inventory) by more than half? Material Covered: This presentation will review the buy-in process used to bridge the large gap between Colovos Company and the Bank, including: • How to turn dysfunctional Bank meetings from shouting matches into constructive sharing of information, • The level of financial detail required in a Bank plan, • Ensuring concessions from all company Stakeholders – not asking the Bank to hold the entire bag, • How to use and present operational inventory reduction knowledge and methodology in a non-threatening way to the Bank's financial experts, • How to take control of cash flow and operations in a distressed situation to maximize cash using TOC Demand-pull, • How to communicate replenishment triggers to vendors and the entire supply chain.33 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
254 Conference Proceedings Walsh, Daniel P. Critical chain: Adding the 3rd dimension upgrade workshop 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The development of project management thinking and new techniques has at times been slow and deliberate. Perhaps, this is in part, due to the fatalistic feeling that the very nature of project environments contributes to the willingness to accept the status quo. The pyramids and sphinx's were certainly projects yet how they were built remains as mysterious as the artifacts themselves. Millenniums would go by before Henry Gantt developed the Gantt technique in the 1920's. In the late 1930's operations research efforts contributed significantly to better understanding the relationship between task dependencies and the impact of constrained resources that led to the concept of critical path. Then in the late 1950's the US Navy in collaboration with Booz & Allen developed the Program Evaluation, & Review Technique (PERT). Starting in the 1960's the emphasis shifted to taking advantage of computers to improve project management. There were many contributors, such as John Fondhal at Stanford University, developing the algorithms that were to become the foundation for the project management software tools that are prevalent today. These tools offered new features to plan, schedule and execute, however, the thinking captured in the algorithms for the most part were not new. It wasn't until 1997 when Eliyahu Goldratt published the Critical Chain introducing the critical chain technique as an alternative to the critical path did we have the next major change in project management thinking. 1 hour 31 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
255 Conference Proceedings Critical chain: Adding the 3rd dimension upgrade workshop 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The development of project management thinking and new techniques has at times been slow and deliberate. Perhaps, this is in part, due to the fatalistic feeling that the very nature of project environments contributes to the willingness to accept the status quo. The pyramids and sphinx's were certainly projects yet how they were built remains as mysterious as the artifacts themselves. Millenniums would go by before Henry Gantt developed the Gantt technique in the 1920's. In the late 1930's operations research efforts contributed significantly to better understanding the relationship between task dependencies and the impact of constrained resources that led to the concept of critical path. Then in the late 1950's the US Navy in collaboration with Booz & Allen developed the Program Evaluation, & Review Technique (PERT). Starting in the 1960's the emphasis shifted to taking advantage of computers to improve project management. There were many contributors, such as John Fondhal at Stanford University, developing the algorithms that were to become the foundation for the project management software tools that are prevalent today. These tools offered new features to plan, schedule and execute, however, the thinking captured in the algorithms for the most part were not new. It wasn't until 1997 when Eliyahu Goldratt published the Critical Chain introducing the critical chain technique as an alternative to the critical path did we have the next major change in project management thinking. 1 hour 31 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
256 Conference Proceedings Winiarek, Maciej TOC tools in early years: How to teach TOC tools to children who cant write 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany We teach TOC thinking processes (TP) to very small children and their parents and teachers at same time. Many adults think that teaching smartness can start only when children can write and read. Also many adults think that children have to be taught by parents or teachers to acquire some wisdom. Having in mind the latest discoveries in the human brain and human ability to learn, we created a package for children in age 5-9 to teach them TOC tools that develop children's natural abilities that lead to smart thinking and wise decisions-- beginning in the kindergarten. 31 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
257 Conference Proceedings TOC tools in early years: How to teach TOC tools to children who cant write 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany We teach TOC thinking processes (TP) to very small children and their parents and teachers at same time. Many adults think that teaching smartness can start only when children can write and read. Also many adults think that children have to be taught by parents or teachers to acquire some wisdom. Having in mind the latest discoveries in the human brain and human ability to learn, we created a package for children in age 5-9 to teach them TOC tools that develop children's natural abilities that lead to smart thinking and wise decisions-- beginning in the kindergarten. 31 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
258 Conference Proceedings Woeppel, Mark TOC tapped to accelerate Gulf of Mexico cleanup (Encore) 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany In June 2010, Pinnacle Strategies was called upon by BP to rapidly improve supply chain availability and decontamination efforts of what may be the worst environmental disaster in the US. Only weeks earlier, BP's Deepwater Horizon platform exploded, taking 11 lives and sending oil gushing for three months into the Gulf of Mexico. Less than 48 hours after the initial inquiry, Pinnacle Strategies (www.pinnacle-strategies.com) began a marathon of visits across North America and Europe that led to an almost instant doubling, tripling, and in one case 10 fold increase, of manufacturing capacity for boom, skimmers, and absorbents. Later, after the well was capped, Pinnacle Strategies led improvement activities at decontamination sites across five states where thousands of boats, ships, and rigs were decontaminated before returning to their normal service. In this presentation, Mark Woeppel describes the theory of constraints steps used to achieve the extraordinary increases in capacity by improving bottlenecks at dozens of factories, ensuring that supply never constrained the fight against the oil spill. He also describes how they accelerated the cleaning of contaminated vessels saving more than $700 million by identifying key measurements and planning the bottleneck into the operation. 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
259 Conference Proceedings TOC tapped to accelerate Gulf of Mexico cleanup (Encore) 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany In June 2010, Pinnacle Strategies was called upon by BP to rapidly improve supply chain availability and decontamination efforts of what may be the worst environmental disaster in the US. Only weeks earlier, BP's Deepwater Horizon platform exploded, taking 11 lives and sending oil gushing for three months into the Gulf of Mexico. Less than 48 hours after the initial inquiry, Pinnacle Strategies (www.pinnacle-strategies.com) began a marathon of visits across North America and Europe that led to an almost instant doubling, tripling, and in one case 10 fold increase, of manufacturing capacity for boom, skimmers, and absorbents. Later, after the well was capped, Pinnacle Strategies led improvement activities at decontamination sites across five states where thousands of boats, ships, and rigs were decontaminated before returning to their normal service. In this presentation, Mark Woeppel describes the theory of constraints steps used to achieve the extraordinary increases in capacity by improving bottlenecks at dozens of factories, ensuring that supply never constrained the fight against the oil spill. He also describes how they accelerated the cleaning of contaminated vessels saving more than $700 million by identifying key measurements and planning the bottleneck into the operation. 32 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
260 Conference Proceedings Zulechner, Kerstin Sourcing – An unresolved issue 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The business-to-business (B2B) business interface remains a difficult proposition for most businesses. Needed collaboration is hampered due to the naturally adversarial situation suppliers and their clients are in. Both parties have the same goal to make as much money as possible. This, sort of, common goal is the source of insufficient collaboration. What business culture needs is a way to collaborate properly without having to relinquish their goal. This paper / presentation proposes a way to not only make the desired collaboration possible (without endangering the goal) but starts participating businesses on a path of increased effectiveness. These businesses should be able to achieve more of their goal than before. The tool uses technology to bring businesses together through shared information. The information clients and suppliers share and the tool itself is structured in such a way to lead businesses to focus on the appropriate direction for supply chain improvement. We know interfaces are the most common sources of problems. Software developers try to minimize interfaces and when they look for bugs, they look there. Managers daily experience problems between their organization and others within the same company. Information or material passing between departments often experiences problems at department interfaces. The type of interface most difficult to deal with is with our customers and our suppliers. I want to focus on the supplier – customer interface from the points of view of our purchasing, our operations and the suppliers. I propose a solution direction using (software) technology to make this difficult interface much more tractable. This software tool needs to be attractive enough to move B2B business partners in the direction of real process improvement. Problems from Clients' Point of View: 1. Quoted (and real) lead times are often longer than our needs. Sourcing either takes too long or costs a great deal to invest in inventory. 2. Even when a supplier promises a due date (and lead-time) we cannot count on his reliability. 3. We have no influence over the delivery of our orders until due dates have passed. (Suppliers understandably object to early follow-up.) 4. Suppliers have no real sense of our priorities or urgency. They seem to cherry pick orders convenient to them. 5. Suppliers respond quickly to whoever shouts loudest. The size of the customer (order) is one key way to measure loudness. 6. The above 5 points apply equally, if slightly modified, to make to stock situations. Problems from Suppliers' Point of View: 1. Customers are unreliable. a. Forecasts they make are frequently changed. b. Items that are urgent are suddenly no longer urgent and vice versa. 2. Clients frequently are not entirely truthful about their requirements. a. We send an item (on time) and then it languishes in their inventory. b. Alternatively they sometimes hoard an item to the extent that this item is not needed at the client but desperately needed at another of our clients. 3. Every client demands priority. Priority is only possible one at a time. 4. The above 3 points apply equally, if slightly modified, to make to stock situations. Problems with Business Culture and Rules The parties on either side of this interface are usually businesses with owners (or shareholders) who expect their managers to maximize profits. Given this expectation proper collaboration is difficult (impossible) to achieve. Even within the same corporation divisions are often measured in ways that generally also make good collaboration a very ambitious target. Problems in Operations. TOC people ‘know' most operations in a supply chain suffer from problems that tend to make them unreliable, take too long (to deliver); cost too much and require too much inventory. As we have seen above a large part of the blame is placed on suppliers and clients. However, many know the following (and more) are very often true: 1. Touch-time in production is usually less than 10% of the lead time (and often much less). 2. Common practices ensure too much WIP in production. 3. Production planning often has know clear vision of the near term load on the factory. They often cannot predict accurately enough when a new order will be delivered. 4. Buffer management as we know it is often non-existent, or not used. 5. Improvement initiatives are (focused) in the wrong places. Consequences: As long as these problems between B2B ‘partners' exist time and materials will be wasted. Solving the problem will reduce waste of resources (the solution would be ‘green'); the entire economy will benefit from lower cost and investment and because a solution shortens lead-times, business cycles become less violent. Bullwhip effects will be significantly smaller. A Proposal: A. Since proper collaboration is so difficult to achieve (both parties compete for $) a useful tool valuable to both parties is needed. It needs to become essential for a successful B2B business. B. The software technology is not enough! It must incite and encourage significant improvements not only at the interface but also within the two partners. Technology is only a tool; it's the processes that must be changed for the better. C. An Internet platform (not a difficult proposition) to provide B2B partners transparent information about all orders. Clients see their suppliers, suppliers their clients. Both see where every order is on the time-line (green, yellow, red and black). Operating rules both might work to: a. Partners expect 90% of all orders to be shipped by the red line. b. Suppliers provide relevant information about orders that have crossed the red line. D. The tool is expanded for both parties so they can actually achieve point a. without resorting to added lead-time or more stock. Buffer management, planned load, continual improvement support and other tools become part of the package. E. Operating companies cannot launch such a platform. The service must be neutral and above all provide significant help to all parties. My target is ambitious. Is the view worth the climb? Can we get initial users big and powerful enough to cause the solution to grow rapidly? 27 minutes https://www.tocico.org/page/2013ConferenceProceedings
261 Conference Proceedings Burkhard, Rudolf Sourcing – An unresolved issue 2013 Bad Nauheim, Germany The business-to-business (B2B) business interface remains a difficult proposition for most businesses. Needed collaboration is hampered due to the naturally adversarial situation suppliers and their clients are in. Both parties have the same goal to make as much money as possible. This, sort of, common goal is the source of insufficient collaboration. What business culture needs is a way to collaborate properly without having to relinquish their goal. This paper / presentation proposes a way to not only make the desired collaboration possible (without endangering the goal) but starts participating businesses on a path of increased effectiveness. These businesses should be able to achieve more of their goal than before. The tool uses technology to bring businesses together through shared information. The information clients and suppliers share and the tool itself is structured in such a way to lead businesses to focus on the appropriate direction for supply chain imp