"First, let's clarify to ourselves the essence of throughput." Pointing to the chain on the screen, Johnny explains: "One link is purchasing, another starts production, another finishes production, another assembles, still another ships to clients, et cetera.
If one link, just one link, drops the ball, what happens to the throughput of the company?"
"Drops," many answer.
"When we deal with throughput, it is not just the links that are important; the linkages are just as important."
Rick finds himself nodding in agreement.
"What is the equivalent of throughput in our physical chain? What is determined not just by the links, but by the fact that they interact with each other? It's not weight. If we remove all interaction, all linkages, and we are left with just a pile of links, the weight is still the same. So what property typifies a chain? It is the strength of the chain. If one link breaks, just one link,
the chain is broken; the strength of the chain drops to zero.
.
"Now, I have some seemingly trivial, but very important questions for you. What determines the strength of a chain?"
"The weakest link," somebody in the front answers loudly.
"And how many weakest links do we have in a chain?" Johnny stresses the word 'weakest.' "
"One."
Rick doesn't like Johnny's style. He would never stress such trivialities. But he must admit that it's effective. Johnny now has everybody's attention.
"Now," Johnny says, in an invigorating voice, "now, let's see what that implies. You are still the president in charge of the entire chain. I'm still in charge of just one department. Since there is only one weakest link, let's take the more general case, the case where I'm in charge of a department that is not the weakest link. And… and once again you tell me to improve. To improve the strength this time. And once again I come back and report to you that with ingenuity and time and money I improved. I strengthened my link. I made it three times stronger. Give me a medal."
.
He pauses and smiles. "Remember, you are not really interested in my link. You are interested in the chain. My link wasn't the weakest. If I made my link stronger, how much did I improve the strength of your chain? Nothing. Absolutely nothing."
.
Jim looks at Rick. "I told you." Rick doesn't respond. His mind is racing.
"Don't you see what we are facing now?" Johnny starts to pace again. His strides are full of energy. "Most of the local improvements do not contribute to the global!" he almost shouts. "And we do want the global, we do want the organization as a whole to improve. Now we know that since any improvement requires attention and time and money, the way to improve the total organization is definitely not through inducing many local improvements, the more the better. That's not the way."
.
Estão a ver a importância de ser claro quanto ao problema? A importância de focarmos a nossa atenção onde realmente interessa?
.
O nosso ego pode ficar satisfeito com a muita actividade que desenvolvemos mas no fim, o que conta são os resultados do todo.
.
Por isto é que por vezes fica mais barato a uma empresa ter uma máquina e um operador parado do que ocupados a produzir para o monte do work-in-progress.
.
Trecho extraído da minha actual leitura: "Critical Chain" de Eliyahu Goldratt
.
Nota: Há 2 anos um aluno brasileiro de uma pós-graduação, disse-me que no Brasil todo o estudante de engenharia tem de ler este livro e fazer um trabalho sobre o mesmo.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário