Another huge THANKYOU to all of my followers and readers.....

I want to thank everyone who viewed my blog during the month of May because this month, a record number of page views were achieved.  As I write this, the total number of page views for this month just went over 123,000!!!  Every time that the blog hits a new record, I sincerely have believed that this is the top number I will achieve in a month.  For those of you who haven't read my blog, this meteoric rise in the number of page views since December of last year has been astounding.  Here are the numbers for the past six months:

December     12,000
January         24,700
February       47,400
March           93,000
April             98,000
May            123,000

I am humbled by the number of page views and again, thank you to everyone who has logged on and viewed the pages of my blog.

Bob Sproull

Focus and Leverage Part 350

This past week I received an email from a seemingly avid follower of my blog asking me to write something about what I believe are the major reasons for failing improvement initiatives.  So with this question in mind, today's blog posting will address this subject.

First let me say that I have been involved with process and system improvement for many years and I've seen so many new methodologies (as well as their acronyms) come and go that there couldn't possibly be more.  But it seems as though just when you think you've seen and experienced them all, here comes another one.  So with all of these improvement methods to choose from, how do you decide which one has the most value?  Good question.

For many years I embraced new methods until the next one came along, but then back in the 1990's that all changed.  You see, back then, I was introduced to the Theory of Constraints (a.k.a. Contraints Management) and my view of improvement changed forever.  The major reason for my change in how I attacked improvement is that I was introduced to a very simple concept....focus.  Prior to my epiphany I had always believed that if there was waste and variation within a process, that I had to attack it with a vengeance.  But even though I was relentless in removing waste and variation, I didn't always see the bottom line improve.....at least to the level I had expected or at least hoped for.

Learning about TOC's 5 Focusing Steps was perhaps the greatest learning I have ever achieved in my almost 40 years of my career.  Why was it so important to learn about this?  Because I learned that in order to truly improve a process, especially as it relates to flow, I had to first, identify what was preventing the process from achieving optimal performance.  In other words, I had to complete Step 1 of the 5 Focusing Steps....Identify the System Constraint.  Once I learned that step, I learned that by focusing the tools of the improvement trade (a.k.a. Lean and Six Sigma) on the system constraint, I would achieve much more viable returns.  I learned that by exploiting the constraint, the flow through the process improved at a dramatic rate.

The next step that I learned was the concept of subordination.  Step 3 tells us to subordinate everything to the system constraint.  By doing this, I learned about how to hold work-in-process inventory to a manageable level.  Yes, in doing so, the concept of maximizing efficiency had to be addressed, but I learned that maximizing efficiency only works if you apply it to the constraint.  So with these first 3 steps, Identify, Exploit and Subordinate, I could make immediate improvements to my processes.

And while this was an important lesson for me to learn, looking back, it wasn't necessarily the most important thing I learned to explain failing improvement initiatives.  Don't misunderstand me, learning the Focusing Steps was incredibly important for me, but I want to talk about another thing I learned that had just as significant effect.  I learned that if you truly want to improve processes and sustain the improvements, then the people working in the processes must own them.  So what do I mean by owning them?  The lesson I learned way back when was that the folks working in the processes have all of the solutions to all of the problems you come up against.  I learned that by allowing the work force to develop the solutions, they will own them.  For years I thought I knew better than they did about how to solve their problems, but I was so wrong!  When I turned this responsibility over to my workforce, wonderful things began to happen and they happened quickly and were sustained.

So in answer to the question I started with in this blog, for me the major reason for failing improvement initiatives is the failure of management to release their grasp on the processes they're trying to improve and turn it over to the only true subject matter experts in the company....the people producing your products or delivering your service.  The key lesson I learned along the way was this:  As long as the solution proposed did not violate company policy, contractual obligations or safety policies, my work force has full authority to change the process.  Of course the changes my be done under control and they must be well documented, but change they will.

Bob Sproull

Another milestone!!!

Last night, while I was asleep, the number of page views achieved a milestone that I never dreamed was possible, the 100,000 milestone for the first 26 days in May!  Actually as I write this, the total page views is up over 102,000 for the month.  I want to thank everyone for all of the interest you've shown for reading my blog postings.  My goal in writing this blog has always been to share successes with the world, especially how it relates to integrating Constraints Management with Lean and Six Sigma.  Again, my heartfelt thanks for making my blog such a popular source of information.  With 5 days remaining in May, I'm wondering just how high this number will go.

My best to everyone....
Bob Sproull

Focus and Leverage Part 349

With all of the recent news reports about how poorly the VA Healthcare system is being run, many people have developed some very negative opinions of the VA and the people who work there.  I have been fortunate enough to have spent time working with a VA hospital in the Northeast and I want to give the VA employees a pat on the back.  The VA employees that I have worked with are all very dedicated to the veterans they serve, so please don't blame them for what the VA leadership at the highest levels are doing.  For the most part, the employees care very much about their patients, but in many cases their hands are tied.  I've spent the last two weeks working with a private, religious-based hospital and the employees there are also very dedicated to their patients.  There is so much caring and love in the air at this hospital...a genuine caring for their patients.  So with such dedicated employees, why are many hospitals getting such negative press?

Healthcare is really no different than industries like manufacturing in that the behaviors we see and read about are usually the direct result of the performance metrics that are in place.  Eli Goldratt's famous quote, "You show me how you measure me and I'll show you how I'll behave" really tells the story about what's happening at the VA.  There is a policy at the VA that states that all patients needing care must be seen within 14 days.  So think about the negative behaviors that a metric like this might induce, especially if the systems within the VA healthcare system are broken.....which they are in many cases.  It doesn't surprise me that some of the leaders/managers at the various VA hospitals around the country have created a bogus list of patient wait time that simply isn't factual.  They did it to protect their livelihoods.  That doesn't make it right, but it does help explain why these bogus lists exist.

 

Another behavior that exists in other VA facilities is that, because the metric tells these facilities that they must "see" patients within 14 days, they do just that.  They schedule patients in their allotted time, but the healthcare that they provide is minimal at best.  That is, it's one thing to just "see" their patients, but it's a completely different thing to provide healthcare that diagnoses what's wrong with the patients and then provides an adequate treatment.  By just scheduling and seeing their patients, they have met the requirement of the performance metric.  So what's the solution to this problem?

 

The real problem is the VA's inability to serve the volume of patients seeking treatment for what ails them.  Most VA facilities have a very active and on-going Lean initiative with many employees engaged in removing waste from their processes, but, for me, these same facilities lack the necessary focus on the right part of the various processes.  As I have written about many times on this blog, unless and until improvement efforts are focused on the right part of the process, the throughput of patients through these processes will not improve.  Most places I have observed attempt to remove waste from every step in their processes without identifying the leverage point.  The leverage point is the constraint or bottleneck operation.  The flow or throughput of patients through a healthcare process is dictated by the constraint.  Let's look at an example.

 

Suppose we're looking at improving a surgical process such as the process in the figure below.







Suppose an improvement team is formed and a member of the team has this great idea that will reduce the time to complete Step 1 from 15 minutes to 10 minutes.  Ask yourself, how many more patients can we get through this process as a result of this change?  The answer is zero.  Now suppose there is another idea from a team member that will reduce Step 2's time from 20 minutes to 12 minutes.  Ask you self this same question and you will arrive at the same number, zero.  But you may be saying, we removed time, so why aren't more patients passing through our process.

The late Dr. Eli Goldratt provided us with the answer to this question when he taught us that we must first identify the constraint and then exploit it.  Since Step 3 is the system constraint or bottleneck, only reductions in time at this step will increase the throughput of patients through this process.  It's really that simple.  What if we were able to reduce Step 3 from 90 minutes down to 45 minutes?  The answer is very simple.....we have effectively doubled the capacity of this process.  Instead of one patient every 90 minutes, we can now process patients every 45 minutes.

My suggestion to the VA and private hospitals everywhere is to learn everything they can about the Theory of Constraints and then practice what you've learned.

Bob Sproull

Blog update.....

First, I want to thank everyone for reading my blog.  In the past I reported that the number of page views in December surpassed 12,000; in January approximately 25,000; in February approximately 47,000, in March 93,000; and in April approximately 98,000.  I have been blown away on the number of page views.  I just did a calculation for the number of page views for the first 13 days in May and prorated it to the end of the month and it looks like over 110,000 for May!  I never dreamed that these kind of numbers could be achieved!  So thank you to everyone who have made these numbers possible.

Bob Sproull

Focus and Leverage Part 348

In the past couple of weeks, I have received numerous emails about our sequel to Epiphanized.  People are wanting to know what we're writing about in terms of the subject matter and what industries we're writing about.  I did issue and update the week before last, but apparently that didn't satisfy some of my readers, so let me try this again.

Bruce Nelson and I are writing about two completely different industry segments, but we're using many of the same tools and approaches for each one.  Bruce is writing about a commercial aircraft company who specializes in Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul of the aircraft.  From what I've read so far from Bruce, I think everyone will enjoy the dialogue and the content matter.  I am focusing on the Healthcare industry and more specifically how using Constraints Management ( integrated with Lean and Six Sigma) can dramatically improve the flow of patients through various parts of hospitals.  I think healthcare workers will be particularly interested in what I've written.

One of the central themes that both Bruce and I are writing about is how leadership can "make or break" organizational improvement efforts.  We also are emphasizing how choosing the wrong performance metrics can negatively impact the flow of aircraft or patients through processes and systems.  We haven't decided yet if we will be including an appendix in this sequel, but that decision will be forthcoming.  Based upon numerous comments that Bruce and I received, the appendix in Epiphanized was quite popular, so we may decide to include it in our sequel, or maybe some case studies or maybe even a combination of the two.

I hope this brief summary satisfies the curiosity of those who have written to Bruce and I and we will keep you updated as we progress.  So far we have completed roughly 16 chapters with our target being 25 chapters, so we're moving right along.

Bob Sproull

Blog Posting Index Through Part 347

I have been asked by one of my readers to post an updated posting index of all of my postings, so here it is.
Bob Sproull

 

Post #                    Subject Discussed

Each of the following postings can be reached by searching for the number designation below.  For example:  1 is Focus and Leverage or 2 is Focus and Leverage Part 2 and so forth.  The link to the first blog posting is:  http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=4654571158555106378#editor/target=post;postID=4464386559619829406

 

 

1. Introduction to TOC – Lean – Six Sigma http://focusandleverage.blogspot.com/2010/08/focus-and-leverage.html

2. Why Improvement Initiatives Fail http://focusandleverage.blogspot.com/2010/08/focus-and-leverage-part-2.html

3. The Basic Concepts of TOC http://focusandleverage.blogspot.com/2010/08/focus-and-leverage-part-3.html

4. Throughput Accounting http://focusandleverage.blogspot.com/2010/08/focus-and-leverage-part-4.html

5. The Process of On-Going Improvement (POOGI)

6. The 3 Cycles of Improvement

7. Combining TOC, Lean and Six Sigma Graphically

8. Step 1a Performance Metrics

9. Planning Steps 1b and 1c Reducing Waste and Variation

10. Developing a Constraint’s Improvement Plan

11. This number was skipped

12. Steps 1b and 1c Reducing Waste and Variation plus an intro to DBR

13. Drum-Buffer-Rope

14. The Final Steps of UIC

15. How do I start the UIC?

16. The 10 Prerequisite Beliefs

17. Comparing Lean, Six Sigma and TOC

18. Types of Constraints

19. The Logical Thinking Processes

20. Undesirable Effects (UDE’s)

21. Categories of Legitimate Reservation

22. Current Reality Trees

23. Constructing Current Reality Trees

24. Conflict Diagrams Basic Principles

25. Constructing Conflict Diagrams

26. Intro to Future Reality Trees

27. Constructing Future Reality Trees

28. Prerequisite Trees

29. Constructing Prerequisite Trees

30. Transition Trees

31. Constructing Transition Trees

32. Book Announcement

33. Project Management Failures

34. Project Management Negative Behaviors

35. Critical Path Management (CPM)

36. Critical Chain Project Management (CCPM)

37. Tracking Projects In CCPM

38. Final Posting on CCPM

39. Intro to the TOC Parts Replenishment Model versus the Min/Max System

40. The TOC Parts Replenishment Model

41. Interview with Joe Dager from Business901

42. Deming, Ohno and Goldratt Commonality

43. Dedication to Dr. Eliyahu Goldratt

44. How processing time, cycle time, throughput and WIP are interrelated

45. Little’s Law

46. Batch and queue production system and the fallacy of a balanced line

47. Why an unbalanced line is better.

48. What prevents me from making more money now and more money in the future?

49. More on the 10 Prerequisite Beliefs

50. Motivating a work force to actively participate in improvement initiatives

51. Re-Introducing the Intermediate Objectives Map

52. Introducing Be Fast or Be Gone: Racing the Clock with CCPM

53. Parkinson’s Law, The Student Syndrome, Cherry Picking and Multi-Tasking

54. Overcoming the four negative behaviors in Project Management

55. Intro to combining the Interference Diagram (ID) and the IO Map

56. The Simplified Strategy

57. The Interference Diagram

58. Interference Diagram for Strategy

59. The ID/IO Simplified Strategy

60. Preface Part 1 for Epiphanized©

61. Preface Part 2 for Epiphanized©

62. CHAPTER 1 Part 1 for Epiphanized©

63. CHAPTER 1 Parts 2 and 3 for Epiphanized©

64. CHAPTER 1 Part 4 for Epiphanized©

65. CHAPTER 1 Part 5 for Epiphanized©

66. Focused Operations Management For Health Service Organizations by Boaz Ronen, Joseph Pliskin and Shimeon Pass

67. Marketplace Constraints

68. A Discussion on Variability

69. More Discussion on Variability

70. Still More Discussion on Variability

71. Paper from the International Journal of Integrated Care

72. Value Stream Mapping

73. Paths of Variation

74. Step 3, Subordination

75. The Key to Profitability: Making Money Versus Saving Money

76. My First Experience With TOC

77. TOC in Non-Manufacturing Environments

78. Deborah Smith’s Excellent Chapter in the TOC Handbook (i.e. Chapter 14)

79. More on Performance Metrics

80. Efficiency, Productivity, and Utilization (EPU) ©

81. Productivity as a Performance Metric

82. Utilization as a Performance Metric

83. What the Dog Saw –Malcolm Gladwell

84. Speaking at the CPI Symposium – Cal State, Northridge

85. NOVACES– A Great Young Company

86. NOVACES’SystemCPI©

87. Problems With My Publisher

88. The Why? – Why? Diagram

89. Experience With the Integrated Methodology

90. A New Piping Diagram

91. The Healthcare Industry

92. More Bad News From the Publisher

93. A Message from the CPI Symposium

94. Multiple Drum-Buffer-Rope

95. Problem Solving Roadmap

96. Problem Prevention Roadmap

97. Improving Profitability

98. More on Throughput Accounting

99. More on Parts Replenishment

100. TLS

101. Engaging the "Money Makers" in Your Company

102. A Conversation on the Theory of Constraints

103. The Key to Successful Consulting Engagements

104. The Three Basic Questions to Answer

105. A Problem With the Airlines

106. A Better Way to Improve Processes and Systems

107. The Problem With Project Management

108. Critical Path Project Management Revisited

109. Critical Chain Project Management Revisited

110. The Fever Chart

111. Comparing CPM and CCPM

112. Performance Improvement for Healthcare – Leading Change with Lean, Six Sigma and Constraints Management

113. More on Performance Improvement for Healthcare

114. Even more on Performance Improvement for Healthcare

115. Still One More on Performance Improvement for Healthcare

116. The Final One on Performance Improvement for Healthcare

117. The Real Final One on Performance Improvement for Healthcare

118. Focused Operation's Management for Health Services Organizations.

119. Focused Management Methodology

120. The Clogged Drain

121. The “Soft” Tools of Improvement

122. More on TOC’s Distribution/Replenishment solution

123. Still More on TOC’s Distribution/Replenishment solution

124. Amir Schragenheim’s Chapter 11 entry in the TOC Handbook

125. Comparison of Lean, Six Sigma and TOC

126. A Simple Lesson on Applying TLS to Your Processes

127. A Historical Index of Blog Postings

128. Mafia Offer Part 1

129. Mafia Offer Part 2

130. Mafia Offer Part 3

131. Airline Problems

132. A YouTube Interview with Bob Sproull and Mike Hannan

133. Active Listening

134. Viable Vision

135. Throughput Accounting

136.  Performance Metrics

137.  On-the-Line Charting

138.  Comment on Epiphanized from a reader in the US Marines

139.  Active Listening

140.  Healthcare Case Study

141.  Change

142.  Getting buy-in for Change

143.  Aviation Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul Client Part 1

144.  Aviation Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul Client Part 2

145.  Continuous Improvement in Healthcare

146.  Using Your Senses in Continuous Improvement

147.  A Video by Phillip Marris on CI

148.  An article about a Construction Company Using the TOC Thinking Processes

149.  Using TOC in Healthcare Part 1

150.  Using TOC in Healthcare Part 2

151.  Using TOC in Healthcare Part 3 Supply Replenishment

152.  Using TOC in Healthcare Part 4 Supply Replenishment (con’t)

153.  Using TOC in Healthcare Part 5 Supply Replenishment (final)

154.  The Sock Maker

155.  The Negative Effects of Using Efficiency

156.  Cost Accounting Part 1

157.  A Political Voting Story

158.  Cost Accounting Part 2

159.  Cost Accounting Part 3

160.  Using TLS for the Affordable Care Act

161.  The System Constraint in Hospitals Part 1

162.  Wait Times in Hospitals

163.  The Oncology Clinic Case Study Part 1

164.  The Oncology Clinic Case Study Part 2

165.  Article: Emergency Department Throughput, Crowding, and Financial Outcomes for Hospitals

166.  Goldratt’s 5 Focusing Steps in Healthcare

167.  My First Experience With TOC Part 1

168.  My First Experience With TOC Part 2

169.  My First Experience With TOC Part 3

170.  My First Experience With TOC Part 4

171.  My First Experience With TOC Part 5

172.  My First Experience With TOC Part 6

173.  Healthcare Case Study Part 1

174.  Healthcare Case Study Part 2

175.  Healthcare Case Study Part 3

176.  TOC in Healthcare

177.  Healthcare Case Study Part 4

178.  My Transition From Aviation Maintenance to Healthcare

179.  Door to Doc Time Case Study Part 1

180.  Door to Doc Time Case Study Part 2

181.  Door to Doc Time Case Study Part 3

182.  Door to Doc Time Case Study Part 4

183.  My White Paper in Quality Forum Part 1

184.  My White Paper in Quality Forum Part 2

185.  My White Paper in Quality Forum Part 3

186.  A Meeting on Epiphanized at the Pittsburgh Airport

187.  Billing for Immunizations Case Study Part 1

188.  Some Thoughts on Performance Improvement Part 1

189.  Some Thoughts on Performance Improvement Part 2

190.  Case Study on Using TOC in Healthcare

191.  IO Map

192.  TOC Thinking Process Tools Part 1

192B.  TOC Thinking Process Tools Part 2

193.  Case Study on How to Use TOC’s Thinking Processes Part 1

194.  Case Study on How to Use TOC’s Thinking Processes Part 2

195.  Case Study on How to Use TOC’s Thinking Processes Part 3

196.  Synchronized and Non-synchronized Production

197.  Competitive Edge Factors

198.  Case Study on How to Use TOC’s Thinking Processes Part 4

199.  Case Study on How to Use TOC’s Thinking Processes Part 5

200.  Case Study on How to Use TOC’s Thinking Processes Part 6

201.  Case Study on How to Use TOC’s Thinking Processes Part 7

202.  Case Study on How to Use TOC’s Thinking Processes Part 8

203.  Case Study on How to Use TOC’s Thinking Processes Part 9

204.  Case Study on How to Use TOC’s Thinking Processes Part 10

205.  Case Study on How to Use TOC’s Thinking Processes Part 11

206.  Case Study on How to Use TOC’s Thinking Processes Part 12

207.  Case Study on How to Use TOC’s Thinking Processes Part 13

208.  Case Study on How to Use TOC’s Thinking Processes Part 14

209.  Case Study on How to Use TOC’s Thinking Processes Part 15

210.  Case Study on How to Use TOC’s Thinking Processes Part 16

211.  The IO Map Revisited Part 1

212.  The IO Map Revisited Part 2

213.  The IO Map Revisited Part 3

214.  The IO Map Revisited Part 4

215.  An Interview About The Ultimate Improvement Cycle by Joe Dager

216.  Healthcare Case Study:  Door to Balloon Time Part 1

217.  More On My First Experience With TOC Part 1

218.  More On My First Experience With TOC Part 2

219.  More On My First Experience With TOC Part 3

220.  More On My First Experience With TOC Part 3

221.  More On My First Experience With TOC Part 4

222.  A Discussion on Constraints Management Part 1

223.  A Discussion on Constraints Management Part 2

224.  A Discussion on Constraints Management Part 3

225.  A Discussion on Constraints Management Part 4

226.  A Discussion on Constraints Management Part 6

227.  How I Present TOC Basics to Students & Teams Part 1 (Most viewed of all posts)

228.  How I Present TOC Basics to Students & Teams Part 2

229.  YouTube Video on Improving Flow Through a Bottleneck

230.  YouTube Video on Throughput Accounting

231.  YouTube Video on What to Change

232.  YouTube Video on What to Change To

233.  YouTube Video on How to Cause the Change to Happen

234.  A Meeting With an Executive of a Larger Corporation

235.  The Missing Link

236.  You Tube Video by Goldratt on Henry Ford and Taichi Ohno

237.  Prevention Versus Detection – The Bug Guy

238.  An Article by Anna Gorman of the LA Times

239.  TOC’s Solution to Supply Chain Problems

240.  The Nun and the Bureaucrat Part 1

241.  The Nun and the Bureaucrat Part 2

242.  The Nun and the Bureaucrat Part 3

243.  The Nun and the Bureaucrat Part 4

244.  The Nun and the Bureaucrat Part 5

245.  The Nun and the Bureaucrat Part 6

246.  A Healthcare Clinic Case Study Part 1

246B.  An Update to Focus and Leverage Part 246

247,  Drum Buffer Rope in Manufacturing

248.  The Sock Maker Revisited Part 1

249.  The Sock Maker Revisited Part 2

250.  Throughput Accounting Part 1

251.  Throughput Accounting Part 2

252.  Throughput Accounting Part 3

253.  How to Use and Integrated TOC, Lean & Six Sigma Methodology Part 1

254.  How to Use and Integrated TOC, Lean & Six Sigma Methodology Part 2

255.  How to Use and Integrated TOC, Lean & Six Sigma Methodology Part 3

256.  How to Use and Integrated TOC, Lean & Six Sigma Methodology Part 4

257.  How to Use and Integrated TOC, Lean & Six Sigma Methodology Part 5

258.  Critical Path Project Management Versus Critical Chain PM Part 1

259.  Critical Path Project Management Versus Critical Chain PM Part 2

260.  Critical Path Project Management Versus Critical Chain PM Part 3

261.  Critical Path Project Management Versus Critical Chain PM Part 4

262.  Critical Path Project Management Versus Critical Chain PM Part 5

263.  Critical Path Project Management Versus Critical Chain PM Part 6

264.  The Cabinet Maker – A TOC Case Study Part 1

265.  The Cabinet Maker – A TOC Case Study Part 2

266.  The Cabinet Maker – A TOC Case Study Part 3

267.  The Cabinet Maker – A TOC Case Study Part 4

268.  How I Run Improvement Events

269.  Using The Goal Tree vs. the Full Thinking Process Analysis Part 1

270.  Using The Goal Tree vs. the Full Thinking Process Analysis Part 2

271.  Using The Goal Tree vs. the Full Thinking Process Analysis Part 3

272.  Using The Goal Tree vs. the Full Thinking Process Analysis Part 4

273.  Using The Goal Tree vs. the Full Thinking Process Analysis Part 5

274.  Using The Goal Tree vs. the Full Thinking Process Analysis Part 6

275.  An Analysis of Focus and Leverage’s Top Page View Postings

276.  An Index of All Focus and Leverage Blog Posts

277.  Using the Thinking Processes in Healthcare Part 1

278.  Using the Thinking Processes in Healthcare Part 2

279.  Using the Thinking Processes in Healthcare Part 3

280.  The Four Disciplines of Execution Part 1

281.  The Four Disciplines of Execution Part 2

282.  The Four Disciplines of Execution Part 3

283.  The Four Disciplines of Execution Part 4

284.  The Four Disciplines of Execution Part 5

285.  The Goal Tree – A New Way to Make it and Use It Part 1

286.  The Goal Tree – A New Way to Make it and Use It Part 2

287.  The Goal Tree – A New Way to Make it and Use It Part 3

288.  Operation Excellence by Jim Covington

289.  The Saw Mill Assessment

290.  How I present the Theory of Constraints to People Not Familiar With it

291.  David and Goliath – Malcolm Gladwell’s Latest Book

292.  The Basics of TOC

293.  TOC’s Replenishment Model Part 1

294.  TOC’s Replenishment Model Part 2

295.  Blog Posting Index

296.  Overcoming Natural Resistance to Change

297.  Integrating TOC, Lean and Six Sigma Part 1

298.  Appendix 1 from Epiphanized Part 1

299.  The Winter Storm in Atlanta

300.  Appendix 1 from Epiphanized Part 2

301.  Appendix 1 from Epiphanized Part 3

302.  Appendix 1 from Epiphanized Part 4 Final

303.  Bill Dettmer videos on TOC’s Thinking Processes

304.  Queuing Theory Part 1

305.  Queuing Theory Part 2

306.  Delta Airlines Lack of Customer Focus

307.  Bill Dettmer’s Book Strategic Navigation

308.  Excerpts from The Ultimate Improvement Cycle – My second book Part 1

309.  Excerpts from The Ultimate Improvement Cycle – My second book Part 2

310.  Excerpts from The Ultimate Improvement Cycle – My second book Part 3

311.  Excerpts from The Ultimate Improvement Cycle – My second book Part 4

312.  Excerpts from The Ultimate Improvement Cycle – My second book Part 5

313.  The Ultimate Improvement Cycle – Step 1:  Identify - My second book Part 6

314.  The Ultimate Improvement Cycle – Step 2:  Define, Measure and Analyze - My second book Part 7

315.  The Ultimate Improvement Cycle – Step 3:  Improve - My second book Part 8

316.  The Ultimate Improvement Cycle – Step 3:  Control - My second book Part 9

317.  Throughput Accounting Part 1

318.  Throughput Accounting Part 2

319.  Throughput Accounting Part 3

320.  Throughput Accounting Part 4

321.  Throughput Accounting Part 5

322.  Throughput Accounting Part 6

323.  Throughput Accounting Part 7 Final

324.  Optimium Health’s Amazing New Software for Healthcare

325.  Personal experiences using Throughput Accounting

326.  MRO Project Management Case Study Part 1

327.  MRO Project Management Case Study Part 2

328.  MRO Project Management Case Study Part 3

329.  MRO Project Management Case Study Part 4

330.  MRO Project Management Case Study Part 5

331.  MRO Project Management Case Study Part 6

332.  MRO Project Management Case Study Part 7 (Finale)

333.  Part’s Replenishment Systems Part 1

334.  Part’s Replenishment Systems Part 2

335.  Part’s Replenishment Systems Part 3

336.  Part’s Replenishment Systems Part 4

337.  Part’s Replenishment Systems Part 5

338.  Part’s Replenishment Systems Part 6 (Finale)

339.  My Most Rewarding Experience

340.  Operation Excellence by Jim Covington

341.  Epiphanized sequel update

342.  The intent of Focus and Leverage Part 1

343.  The intent of Focus and Leverage Part 2

344.  The intent of Focus and Leverage Part 3

345.  The intent of Focus and Leverage Part 4

346.  The intent of Focus and Leverage Part 5

347.  My Most Profound Learning

Focus and Leverage Part 347

I was recently contacted by one of my readers who asked me the question, "What is the most profound thing you have learned during your career that changed the way you approach continuous improvement?"  While this may seem like a simple question to answer, for me it just isn't simple at all.  Why?  Because for me, improvement is like a jigsaw puzzle where all  of the puzzle pieces are arranged in sequence to form a completed "picture."  These jigsaw pieces are there, right in front of you, but sometimes, depending upon how elaborate and complicated the finished picture is, it's difficult to put them together to form the finished product.  My answer to this question was that it wasn't necessarily one thing, but rather a series of "learnings," that changed my view of how improvement should be approached and implemented.

Like many other people, along the way, I learned improvement in puzzle pieces.  When I first started on my improvement journey, I was an avid fan of statistics and statistical techniques.  I remember learning about and  implementing Statistical Process Control (SPC), early on in my career and thought it was the best thing since sliced bread.  I mean, here was a tool that I could use to stabilize processes and make them predictable.  I remember going overboard with SPC and using it on virtually every kind of process problem I encountered.  Back then, I was working for Xerox Corporation in a manufacturing plant in Oklahoma and before then, we hadn't been using SPC.  This experience was a very profound one for me.

From Xerox, I moved on to Michelin Tire Corporation as a quality manager responsible for improving the tire-building process.  Not long after joining Michelin, I was introduced to Designed Experiments and, like my experience with SPC, I decided that DOE's were somewhat of a "missing link" in my improvement efforts.  I remember using DOE's in conjunction with SPC with amazing results.  Learning about DOE's was also a very profound experience for me.  It too was a sort of missing link in my improvement journey.  In addition to DOE's, I also learned about hypothesis testing and how these tools could be used effectively to test relationships and correlations and once again, it was a profound experience for me.

My next profound "learning" occurred at a fiber glass company where I learned about Lean and waste reduction.  I was like a kid in a candy store because I saw waste everywhere!  I attacked waste with a vengeance, removing it in every possible place within my processes.  I was amazed that I hadn't learned about this before because it was such a simple concept.  But although waste existed everywhere and I was a zealot about removing it, I learned that not all waste was the same.  I expected to see significant bottom line improvement immediately, but it just didn't come like I thought it should have.  I actually began forming a negative opinion of waste reduction because many times it resulted in people losing their jobs because of a performance metric called "efficiency."   So my profound learning, in this case, was the impact of incorrectly using performance metrics to drive cost reduction.  At the time, I remember thinking to myself, if profitability is based upon how much cost can be removed from a process or system, then there has to be a lower limit.  But in reality, I didn't see an answer to my dilemma.

Eventually I ended up being hired to become the General Manager of a manufacturing plant with roughly 260-270 employees.  The sad truth was, this plant was not functioning very well at all, to the point that the parent company was considering shutting it down.  As I have written about before in earlier postings, not only did this plant not shut down, but rather it became the "model" for the corporation.  Early on in my tenure here, I learned about something called the Theory of Constraints and this ended up being my most profound learning of all.  I learned about TOC's 5 focusing steps and how improvements everywhere would not necessarily result in system-wide improvement.  The concept of "localized improvements" made me realize why, during my Lean learnings, that I didn't see mush bottom line impact.  I learned about identifying the focal point (the constraint) and applying my previous learnings to it because it was my leverage point for profitability.  In addition, I learned about Throughput Accounting and why generating more revenue is the true pathways to improved profitability.

Like the jigsaw puzzled I talked about in my opening, all of the pieces came together for me one piece at a time.  And while it took many years for me to complete my improvement jigsaw puzzle, the lessons I learning along the way were all very profound.  But if I had to select the most profound "thing" as the reader asked me, I would have to say that learning about the Theory of Constraints was it.  It was the glue that tied all of my earlier learnings together and allowed me the opportunity to complete my improvement jigsaw.  But the funny thing is, even after all of these years, I continue learning which makes me believe that my journey has not yet ended.

Bob Sproull

Focus and Leverage Part 346

This is the fourth and final posting in this series on what I intended to write about when I first started this blog in late 2010.  In my last posting, I told you that on this posting I would discuss TOC’s version of a project management method that delivers projects on-time (or earlier), on-scope, and on-budget.  For those of you who work in an organization that delivers projects for their source of income, such as the construction industry, this post should be of interest to you.

In most project environments, resources are clearly working as hard as they can, but unfortunately many times the projects they are working still end up being late, over-budget and the deliverables or scope are often compromised because of these extended lead times and budget over-runs.  Many companies, who rely on project completions as their source of income, are using a method referred to as the Critical Path Method (CPM). Constraints Management uses a drastically different method referred to as Critical Chain Project Management (CCPM) which when implemented typically results in project durations often being 30-50% shorter than CPM's, with on-time completion rates reaching 95% or even greater.  Typically, with CCPM, projects not only finish on-time, but also finish on-scope and on or under budget.  So what’s the difference between these two methods and why does CCPM deliver such superior results?

I think the best way to describe the difference between these two methods is by discussing the two completely different approaches.  One significant difference is that CCPM takes into account both task and resource dependencies.  CPM, on the other hand, does recognize task dependencies, but does not consider resource dependencies and this is a very significant difference.  As a result, CPM's Critical Path looks much different than CCPM's Critical Chain.  Although this may seem like a small difference, in reality it is a major difference.

Another of the major differences is in the planning and structure of CCPM versus CPM.  Both CPM and CCPM begin their plans by listing each task with a beginning and ending date for each (i.e. task durations).  Typically, when resources are asked how long each task will take to complete, the resource automatically adds in a safety margin of time to protect the task due date (and their own personal credibility).  Often times this “safety” is double the amount time that is actually required to complete the task.  CPM relies on starting and completing these tasks per the planned schedule as a means of attempting to assure that projects will be completed on time.  As you will see, this is a very significant difference between CCPM and CPM.

Unlike CPM, CCPM, does not utilize start and stop dates in its plan.  Instead, CCPM sums the individual tasks times (which are inflated just like CPM’s) and then removes half of the sum of the task times  and places the removed time into a project buffer at the end of the schedule.  The project buffer acts just like a bank account with deposits and withdrawals.  When a task is finished ahead of schedule, time is added into the buffer and when a task completion is later than expected, time is removed (borrowed) from the project buffer.

CPM relies on the stated task start and completions dates to monitor progress.  But even if a task is completed early, the early completion is never passed on.  Rather, the task is held until the scheduled due date and then passed on so to protect the credibility of the resource who estimated it.  The result of holding the completed task is that early finishes are not passed on, but task delays are.  CCPM counters this by using the relay runner ethic, in that as soon as a project task is completed, it is passed on to the next resource to begin their work.  This difference in method positively impacts the speed of completion of CCPM projects.

There are also three behavioral problems that are associated with CPM that simply don’t come into play in a CCPM project environment.  The first behavior problem is Parkinson’s Law, which states that work expands to fill the available time.  If a task is scheduled to take one week, the resource will definitely use the full week.  The reason being that if, in the future a project has a similar task, in the resource's mind, they will be expected to complete it in the same amount of time.   The second behavioral problem is referred to as the Student Syndrome.  Because this extra safety is built into each CPM task, the task start is many times delayed because the estimating resource knows the safety is available.  And when Murphy strikes, delays will definitely occur because the safety has been wasted. The third problem is “bad” multitasking.  This problem occurs when the same resource is assigned to work on multiple projects at the same time.  If this is the case, the resource will split their time between projects by working on one project, then stops to work on another one and then returns to the first one.  Remember, CPM does not consider resource contentions.

CCPM overcomes these three behavioral problems by eliminating excess safety times and adding it to the aforementioned project buffer and removing individual task durations and applying the relay runner work ethic.  That is, the resource notifies the next resource of the estimated completion time of the task and passes it on immediately to the next resource.  The result of this action is that, unlike CPM, early finishes are passed on.  This action eliminates Parkinson's Law and the Student Syndrome.


CCPM eliminates bad multitasking by scheduling resources based upon project requirements.  That is, CCPM will actually delay the start of a new project to accommodate conflicting resource requirements.  To this point, CPM users believe that to complete projects sooner, they must be started sooner, but this is not a valid assumption.  CCPM users believe that in order to complete projects sooner, they must be synchronized which means that sometimes project starts are delayed.

Because of these differences in methods, CCPM has a much superior on time completion rate, often greater than 95%.  In addition, CCPM’s projects are nearly always completed on-budget with the original project scope completed.  In my experiences using CCPM, I have actually observed up to a 70% reduction in the time required to complete projects when compared to CPM.

Before I close, I want to summarize what we’ve said in this series of postings.  Constraint Management operates at many levels when compared to other management methodologies.  It is a tool for global systems optimization rather than local optimization.  Constraints Management (CM) includes a simple 5-step process of on-going improvement and a set of six Thinking Process tools that can be used at the system or process level to identify the true core problem(s) within an organization and then demonstrates how to develop and implement effective solutions.  Constraints Management also offers a simple and easy to use, real time financial accounting system (i.e. Throughput Accounting) that improves managers decision ability.

Substantial benefits of Constraints Management are typically realized much faster and are sustainable, especially when the goal of the organization is to make more money now and in the future.  Improvements in manufacturing lead time are often realized in the 60-70% range with inventory reductions in the neighborhood of 50%.  In project management environments, project completion times often shrink by as much as 40-50% with on-time completion rates of 95% not being uncommon.  In addition, most projects finish on-scope and on or under budget.  Constraints Management also offers a solution for parts replenishment as well, which typically results in a 40-50% reduction in inventory while at the same time virtually avoiding stock-outs.

Finally, when Lean and Six Sigma are combined with Constraints Management, enhanced process optimization is the end result.  My own experience as well as independent studies have demonstrated the superiority of this integrated approach to continuous improvement.

Bob Sproull