transformer Knowledge
Neither hard work nor the best efforts, nor give himself the best of each will, by themselves, sufficient to overcome the crisis and improve the situation of a company. On the contrary, can deepen the hole in which we live. To see the hole in which we need external knowledge to enlighten us, since the hole does not know where we are. But out of the situation in which we need to develop self-knowledge.
emphasize that the magnitude of the main losses caused by erroneous decisions of the leadership, or lack of correct decisions are unknown and unknowable . It is estimated, however, that represent 94 % Of total losses, compared to 6% of losses caused by employee errors. However managers and middle managers are generally convinced that is the best of themselves and do well.
How can know the magnitude of the losses a hotel, restaurant, losing customers because of poor management decisions have been left unfulfilled? How do you know a simple bar to save a few cents for coffee, regular customers stop going to reduce revenue by 1 € / díax300 days per year = 300 € per client, whose number is immeasurable, compared to a saving of 0.05 € for coffee? However, this error is usual and far from helping out of the hole, we delve deeper into it.
But the myth that it is not measurable can not manage is false. It was the most costly and damaging myth of recent business history "only what is measurable can be improved." False. Yes we can manage it, though we can not measure the income statement.
Some things to consider to optimize the management function: 1 .-
think and lead in terms of system: the organization must be seen by their line management as a system, or network element, all interacting with each other (employees, departments, suppliers, customers, shareholders, managers, competitors, etc..). Any decision on a part affects the other parts and so must think when making decisions.
We must consider the purpose of the system (the organization) for the benefit of all its components. Only then will the system should benefit from all contributions.
A system benefits from the individual contributions of each element and the interplay between these contributions: Let Xi
individual contribution of an element (employee, customer, proveedors ,...)
• individual contributions:
X1 + X2 + ... + Xn
• Contributions interrelated :
X1 + X2 + X3 X1 X1 X2 X4 + ...
X4 + X3 + X2 ...
X1 X2 X1 X2 X3 + X4 + X5 + X1 X2 ... => If not, system
CHAOS X1 X3 X3 X1 X4 + X5 + ...
X4 X3 X2 X1 + X2 X1 X3 X5 + ... ...
interacting contributions can have a positive value, zero or negative . In this case the system to some extent overrides individual contributions. The interaction, therefore, can and should strengthen the efforts, but can also be dropped. This depends on the "System" and is the responsibility of management.
The direction of the company should focus its attention to the system, if employees do not by themselves can not improve the quality or sales or system stability. The Management should have sufficient knowledge of the system to understand how different forces interact and how the system affects people. There are the direct causes of inefficiency in an organization.
An example: X1 represents purchases, X2, X3 represents production and sales, and may represent specific individuals.
If purchases (X1) we put annual targets to reduce costs of purchased components, the output (X2) to reach quotas manufacturing and sales (X3) to achieve a minimum turnover. Can the three get their dues and are detrimental to the company?. Answer Yes:
X1 ==> Shopping achieves its goal by buying cheaper components from suppliers less reliable and more expensive production costs, stock and quality.
X2 ==> Production gets larger share of production costs, the worst available supplies, and reducing the final quality. X3
==> Sales achieved revenue share, with false promises and rising warranty costs, but undermining the credibility of the company in future.
X1 + X2 + X3 X2 X1 X3
positive negative
2 .- Understanding Variability : reality is always changing. No two are absolutely identical products and a process always yields the same results. It is simply impossible. Neither the market seems constant, the client also learns to compare.
The manager must be able to distinguish between changes that are intrinsic and common to the "System" (their responsibility) and those who are motivated by special or occasional causes.
The cost of responding to a common variation as if it were a special case is enormous. The same otherwise.
It is therefore important to have statistical controls the process that allow us to predict whether a process is stable or not and whether the results obtained are predictable. If the process is capable of producing within the levels of quality "acceptable."
The improved system should lead to reduced variability engendered the system and improve it. Any variation is a cost. For this, the manager and his staff will test different ideas to improve the results should be studied with a great deal of knowledge about the variability, not to be confused with performance improvement within the scope of permissible variability in the system.
This requires uniting the variability criteria as does the generation of ideas.
3 .-
Knowledge transformer Descartes input that knowledge is not information or data. No matter how easy and quick it is today with the new information technologies.
knowledge generation is to have a prediction or hypothesis idea (true or false). We will call a theory . The process of knowledge creation comes from a systematic review of my theory with observation and experience . Neither the experience nor the knowledge given observation in itself. Only when this observation is positive or negative contrasts a previous theory. No previous theory to experience no knowledge.
My theory is that the sun rises because I get up every morning. One day I stay in bed and yet the sun also comes out. I learned that I should check my theory. Theory
==> Experience ==> KNOWLEDGE
(confirms, qualifies or denies the theory)
The work of the executive and middle management has a high degree of "prediction." To test these predictions (theory) generate knowledge for the organization.
practical formula to test the theories is as follows:
THEORY ==> Planning the launch of an experience ==> analyze and learn from the experience ==> Confirm, revise, and improve or negate the theory ==> repeat the cycle many times as necessary until you reach the desired improvement.
The result is continuous improvement and innovation.
4 .- Study of the behavior (psychology): The manager must understand how the "system" affects the behavior of each of the individuals and groups.
objectives by objectives (MBO), by results (MBR) or quota rise to a lack of cooperation between groups.
Results de un informe estarán influenciados por el estilo de dirección. Nadie quiere ser portador de aquellos resultados que la alta dirección no quiere escuchar.
La mejora debe considerar, pues, como afectará el nuevo sistema a los individuos y grupos.
Conclusiones
El directivo debe lograr que la competitividad se transforme en cooperación, y para ello debe ver la organización como la interacción de todas sus partes. Como un sistema con una finalidad común.
Debe saber interpretar la información a la luz de la variabilidad o ruido que el propio sistema induce y saber que una mejora aparente, al igual que un deterioro, puede ser simplemente fruto de la variabilidad natural system itself that directs. Finally
must use formulas to create internal knowledge. But first, you should receive external light that allows you to identify where your organization lives hole.
Neither hard work nor the best efforts, nor give himself the best of each will, by themselves, sufficient to overcome the crisis and improve the situation of a company. On the contrary, can deepen the hole in which we live. To see the hole in which we need external knowledge to enlighten us, since the hole does not know where we are. But out of the situation in which we need to develop self-knowledge.
emphasize that the magnitude of the main losses caused by erroneous decisions of the leadership, or lack of correct decisions are unknown and unknowable . It is estimated, however, that represent 94 % Of total losses, compared to 6% of losses caused by employee errors. However managers and middle managers are generally convinced that is the best of themselves and do well.
How can know the magnitude of the losses a hotel, restaurant, losing customers because of poor management decisions have been left unfulfilled? How do you know a simple bar to save a few cents for coffee, regular customers stop going to reduce revenue by 1 € / díax300 days per year = 300 € per client, whose number is immeasurable, compared to a saving of 0.05 € for coffee? However, this error is usual and far from helping out of the hole, we delve deeper into it.
But the myth that it is not measurable can not manage is false. It was the most costly and damaging myth of recent business history "only what is measurable can be improved." False. Yes we can manage it, though we can not measure the income statement.
Some things to consider to optimize the management function: 1 .-
think and lead in terms of system: the organization must be seen by their line management as a system, or network element, all interacting with each other (employees, departments, suppliers, customers, shareholders, managers, competitors, etc..). Any decision on a part affects the other parts and so must think when making decisions.
We must consider the purpose of the system (the organization) for the benefit of all its components. Only then will the system should benefit from all contributions.
A system benefits from the individual contributions of each element and the interplay between these contributions: Let Xi
individual contribution of an element (employee, customer, proveedors ,...)
• individual contributions:
X1 + X2 + ... + Xn
• Contributions interrelated :
X1 + X2 + X3 X1 X1 X2 X4 + ...
X4 + X3 + X2 ...
X1 X2 X1 X2 X3 + X4 + X5 + X1 X2 ... => If not, system
CHAOS X1 X3 X3 X1 X4 + X5 + ...
X4 X3 X2 X1 + X2 X1 X3 X5 + ... ...
interacting contributions can have a positive value, zero or negative . In this case the system to some extent overrides individual contributions. The interaction, therefore, can and should strengthen the efforts, but can also be dropped. This depends on the "System" and is the responsibility of management.
The direction of the company should focus its attention to the system, if employees do not by themselves can not improve the quality or sales or system stability. The Management should have sufficient knowledge of the system to understand how different forces interact and how the system affects people. There are the direct causes of inefficiency in an organization.
An example: X1 represents purchases, X2, X3 represents production and sales, and may represent specific individuals.
If purchases (X1) we put annual targets to reduce costs of purchased components, the output (X2) to reach quotas manufacturing and sales (X3) to achieve a minimum turnover. Can the three get their dues and are detrimental to the company?. Answer Yes:
X1 ==> Shopping achieves its goal by buying cheaper components from suppliers less reliable and more expensive production costs, stock and quality.
X2 ==> Production gets larger share of production costs, the worst available supplies, and reducing the final quality. X3
==> Sales achieved revenue share, with false promises and rising warranty costs, but undermining the credibility of the company in future.
X1 + X2 + X3 X2 X1 X3
positive negative
2 .- Understanding Variability : reality is always changing. No two are absolutely identical products and a process always yields the same results. It is simply impossible. Neither the market seems constant, the client also learns to compare.
The manager must be able to distinguish between changes that are intrinsic and common to the "System" (their responsibility) and those who are motivated by special or occasional causes.
The cost of responding to a common variation as if it were a special case is enormous. The same otherwise.
It is therefore important to have statistical controls the process that allow us to predict whether a process is stable or not and whether the results obtained are predictable. If the process is capable of producing within the levels of quality "acceptable."
The improved system should lead to reduced variability engendered the system and improve it. Any variation is a cost. For this, the manager and his staff will test different ideas to improve the results should be studied with a great deal of knowledge about the variability, not to be confused with performance improvement within the scope of permissible variability in the system.
This requires uniting the variability criteria as does the generation of ideas.
3 .-
Knowledge transformer Descartes input that knowledge is not information or data. No matter how easy and quick it is today with the new information technologies.
knowledge generation is to have a prediction or hypothesis idea (true or false). We will call a theory . The process of knowledge creation comes from a systematic review of my theory with observation and experience . Neither the experience nor the knowledge given observation in itself. Only when this observation is positive or negative contrasts a previous theory. No previous theory to experience no knowledge.
My theory is that the sun rises because I get up every morning. One day I stay in bed and yet the sun also comes out. I learned that I should check my theory. Theory
==> Experience ==> KNOWLEDGE
(confirms, qualifies or denies the theory)
The work of the executive and middle management has a high degree of "prediction." To test these predictions (theory) generate knowledge for the organization.
practical formula to test the theories is as follows:
THEORY ==> Planning the launch of an experience ==> analyze and learn from the experience ==> Confirm, revise, and improve or negate the theory ==> repeat the cycle many times as necessary until you reach the desired improvement.
The result is continuous improvement and innovation.
4 .- Study of the behavior (psychology): The manager must understand how the "system" affects the behavior of each of the individuals and groups.
objectives by objectives (MBO), by results (MBR) or quota rise to a lack of cooperation between groups.
Results de un informe estarán influenciados por el estilo de dirección. Nadie quiere ser portador de aquellos resultados que la alta dirección no quiere escuchar.
La mejora debe considerar, pues, como afectará el nuevo sistema a los individuos y grupos.
Conclusiones
El directivo debe lograr que la competitividad se transforme en cooperación, y para ello debe ver la organización como la interacción de todas sus partes. Como un sistema con una finalidad común.
Debe saber interpretar la información a la luz de la variabilidad o ruido que el propio sistema induce y saber que una mejora aparente, al igual que un deterioro, puede ser simplemente fruto de la variabilidad natural system itself that directs. Finally
must use formulas to create internal knowledge. But first, you should receive external light that allows you to identify where your organization lives hole.
