The situation today
The management profession is one of the most difficult and time of greater responsibility, because its decisions affect the whole society.
The current management is faced with challenges and in a situation, the result of an environment, teaching and paradigms, which influence the effectiveness of their decisions. The future of your organization depends on its degree of success, but to succeed and do the right thing, not just individual effort is not enough that the manager give the best of yourself, you need to have the "knowledge" adequate.
The recent crisis is a clear indication that something is not done correctly, for reasons apart from financial and industry, is the set of decisions taken in the executive offices that seem to lack a proper scientific and technical base. High responsibility lies they require robust tools. Today
is generally assumed that the way they are managed enterprise organizations need a new approach. In a study by IBM "Capitalizing on Complexity" in 2010, which interviewed 1,541 senior executives, concludes that as the complexity of the different forms of interaction within and outside the organization, increases managers must acquire new skills and knowledge.
W. Edwards Deming, arguably the most influential thinker on Management and has been translating these and other findings in his book "Out of the Crisis." Furthermore, errors and problems of Management continue today to be the same as listed in his work. Timeliness and relevance are evident as it was the only thinker of Management, I record, which anticipated the current crisis based on "... the failure of senior management in its mission to manage [1].
remember some of the errors mentioned chronic W. Edwards Deming: emphasis on short-term gains, cost reduction policies, see the company only through the economic data, evaluate employees and inconstancy.
The purpose of any organization is getting results, they represent its purpose and the common purpose of its members. In a business organization [2] for this purpose is, among other benefits, but also its continuity.
Some paradigms
A common mistake is to assume that an organization can be managed on the basis of economic performance. No, it is. On the contrary it is the false conclusion of a concept economist and simplifying paradoxically involved serious adverse economic consequences. The results, in this case the benefits, costs and revenues can not be the sole basis on which management bases since they are the consequence of a particular way of doing, not the cause. His attempt to manage them wrongly to what some believe, is to modify the compass that points north, to change the patient's thermometer, or as Deming would say, to drive looking in the mirror.
As Deming said, "We want good results, but managing for results is not the way to obtain [3].
When using the cost reduction as a way to balance the drop in income and thus compensate for loss of profits, you are just thinking in formulating accounting (profit = revenue-costs), but is gaining the result address its causes, which distorts reality . We are pushing the finger pointing to the problem, not this.
Certainly some bad decisions can be successful in the short term and therefore believe that they are accurate. This is not an advantage, is the root and the drama that makes a message appears tireless.
Peter Senge, explains in one of the 8 Laws, the reason that the understanding of organizations as systems is so little intuitive: "Cause and effect are not easily related in space or time" [4]. W. Edwards Deming in turn predicted that it would take decades to accept and implement the counter-intuitive solutions he proposed for the transformation to Sopko, "System of Profound Knowledge" [5].
we get good results over a period of time, reducing costs involved, but later, will reduce quality, increase the costs of inefficiency and consequently will reduce earnings. But the manager who only uses glasses accounting numbers, seeing the harmful effects of even the allocated cut its decision, thus solving the reduced revenues and increased costs to reduce costs, cycle back deeper into the problem. The end is the closure of the company. Lacking a better analysis tool.
The systematic study of organizations lets us know that the interrelationship among all its components cause small "solutions" have a major impact today morning. Peter Senge [6], Director of the Center for Organizational Learning at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) study on organizational systems concludes with a series of laws to comply fully in organizations, including: "Things always better before worse "or" Today's problems are yesterday's solutions. " Thinking about these findings to analyze the socio-economic perspective shakes today.
Decisions based on a "linear thinking", considering the situation as too simple, one economist, without seeing the interrelationships, or side effects or long-term consequences of today's decisions will lead us to a disastrous situation if a change is made rationally and effectively.
This conclusion finally reached more than 75% of senior managers, as reflected in the report "Capitalizing on Complexity" IBM, giving reason to what they said and Management thinkers like W. Edwards Deming, Russell L. Ackoff and Peter Segen. Of managers of the report, 30% admit their inability to face the future with the tools they know.
systemic approach
understanding needed to use a "system" of organizational behavior that allows us to understand the cause-effect relationships but are set aside at the time. When analyzing organizations as systems is analyzed taking into account all its members and departments, but not as isolated parts, but in their interrelations and relations of cause and effect.
Its equivalent the human body would be seen as a system. An organ is useless if there is perfect harmony in the whole. The vital purpose of a living organism is to survive and for that no body should be the protagonist. The heart rate should encompass the needs of the body, cell replacement should respond to the necessary balance. As enterprise systems, curing the symptoms of fever may mask causes a particular medicine will have side effects though at first allow an improvement in the long run may be detrimental to all. The doctor, like the manager, has the difficult task of analyzing all possible relationships in the light of knowledge, before making a decision. This is your mission.
A causes, therefore we should direct our attention.
We must focus our efforts on the continued improvement of the system. W. explained Edwards Deming's "chain reaction" that increasing the quality of the organizational system and the product or service on an ongoing basis and achieve constant loyal customers whom we will increase revenues and in turn reduce the costs of inefficiency. This cost reduction as the case can turn into profits or devote a part to improve the price with the resulting improvement in market share.
is the principle of continuous improvement. Most of the improvement opportunities included in the system and it is the responsibility of management at all levels. This one is for improvement and care as the doctor to his patient.
This requires fostering a culture of continuous improvement and quality improvement in all activities of the company to which we understand as "System." This implies that any improvement must benefit the common purpose of the organization and never to a department, unit or individual. The process improvement is not enough, must be set.
is clear that we must encourage collaboration versus competition and transparency to opacity within of the organization.
The evaluation of employees for their performance, regardless of whether the measurements have no scientific basis to be credible, generate competitiveness, demoralized, reduce creativity and focus their attention on concrete measures rather than on improving all aspects of your scope. The foundation of an organization is to promote the common purpose against specific targets or groups. Must therefore be eradicated assessments and fees for further collaboration.
All company employees, managers or not, should understand what and how is their contribution to the common purpose, what impact their activities on others and how you can help that this impact is positive. Classic organizational bring no added value, just confusion. What is important is the analysis of activities from the client as a driver, to suppliers from throughout the organization as a continuous flow of inter ..
Attention is, therefore, that focused on quality of interrelated activities.
often appreciate no measurable improvement opportunities and action against a client can lose or gain future opportunities incalculable. However it is important to know how to identify and improve the quality of these activities depend on future results. Other business functions such as research or training are also difficult to measure and we must not fail to manage.
A common error that should not fall is obsessed only measurable things, then giving them an importance they do not, Russell L. Ackoff put it plainly: "Managers who do not know how to measure what they want, just wanting what they can measure" [7]. Interpret
measurements: systemic and operational errors
measurable functions in important how to interpret the statistical significance of the figures obtained. To W. Edwards Deming measurements are only useful if the information provided us helps improve the process for the benefit of the system as a whole, this is a distinction between the systemic causes and causes operational error.
The statistician Walter A. Shewhart, W. teacher and mentor Edwards Deming developed simple methods through graphics to distinguish between random causes (systemic) and the special or assignable causes (operational).
Some use these tools to control processes. Well it is if they are useful, but Deming wanted to improve the system.
Deming explained that while the systemic causes are the system, and thus management can only act on them, operators can occasional belong to different causes, including employees or specific changes in operating conditions. The systems represent over 90% and operating, less than 10%.
The Management, therefore, should adopt a transparent measurement system that allows you to obtain information from the entire organization for analysis. A good scorecard, flexible and tailored to each situation can help, as measurements of specific processes.
Based on this information the manager must have a methodology for acquiring knowledge to help you make changes to produce enhancements.
A good manager, supported by his team must be able to sense potential improvements, whether based on figures from a dashboard or on the day to day operations. The exercise of decision making has a high degree of predictability, which involves taking risks.
The PDSA method
W. Edwards Deming taught us that reality is too complex to try to improve with decisions containing all possible variables to consider, therefore, to get hit in the decisions of minimizing the risk improvement, PDSA used the scientific method [8]: Planning , design, consider and decide.
The manager may assume that taking the decision [X] el resultado será la mejora [Y]. Lo cierto es que raramente será tan sencillo.
Muy probablemente la acción [X] en el momento inicial t0 causará efectos en el momento t+1 ==> {x1, x2, x3, ... , xn} y en un tiempo posterior t+2 los efectos sean ==> {y1,y2, y3, ... .ym}. Llamemos y1 el más relacionado con la mejora deseada [Y] y el resto efectos colaterales, deseados o no.
Teoría de dirección: [X] ==> [Y]
Realidad en un sistema complejo:
Aplicación en t0 ==> [X]
Efecto en t+1 ==> {x1, x2, x3,…, xn}
Efecto en t+2 ==> {Y1, y2, y3,. ., M} other than [Y]
easy way to solve this complication Deming's proposal was to perform rigorous experiments to check whether the decision [X] will produce improvement [Y].
Method:
P: Plan an essay or test to improve
D: Make the test (small scale if possible)
S: Study results. What have you learned?
What went wrong?
A: Decide, options: Adopt
change
abandons the idea
Repeat the test with variations
Whatever the result, we acquired knowledge to bring our theory or supposition to the test improves. In cases of complex experiments, Taguchi [9] provides a method for reducing the number of experiments needed to draw conclusions. Size
to consider - Sopko [10]
is essential that proposals and experiments arising consider the four key dimensions to be used as a dynamic and interchangeable lenses to appreciate and understand by an organization.
should be a perfect interface between these four dimensions and the cycle for the creation of knowledge.
Systems Thinking: See the organization as a system with a common purpose and cause and effect interrelationships between its parts.
variability: the information as a way to identify causes of error by way of variation. This has allowed us to identify the systemic causes compared to operational reasons.
Creating Knowledge: Knowledge is acquired internally with the PDSA cycle will always be the basis for all decisions for improvement.
psychology and behavior: To understand people and their potential reactions to the changes.
™ All Rights Reserved -----------------------------------------
---------------------------------------
[1] "Out of The Crisis", 1982, W. Edwards Deming,
[2] Other organizations have other equally valid social purposes for the purpose of this document for clarification purposes only will use the example of business organizations.
[3] W. Edwards Deming, "The New Economics for Industry, Government, Education", 1994, ch. 2 -
p.33 [4] Peter Senge, The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization ", 1990
[5] W. Edwards Deming, "The New Economics for Industry, Government, Education", 1994,
[6] Peter Senge, The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization ", 1990
[7] Russell L. Ackoff with J. Herbert Addison and Sally Bibb, "A Little Book of f-LAWS", 2006
[8] W. Edwards Deming, "The New Economics for Industry, Government and Education, 1994. Deming refers to it in his book as the Shewhart cycle for learning and improvement. Similar to most common Deming PDCA similarly used in Japan.
[9] Gen'ichi Taguchi, Japanese Statistical heavily influenced by Deming, who recommends his methods.
[10] W. Edwards Deming, "The New Economics for Industry, Government and Education, 1994. Sopko - "System of Profound Knowledge" has its origin in Deming 80 but not documented until the release of his latest book.
0 comments:
Post a Comment