O elo mais fraco

Porque não acredito nos modelos da qualidade para a excelência.

"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.

Para reflexão

""In the same report," I don't give up, "it's indicated that they chose the cheap vendors over the more reliable ones. How much do you think they saved?"
"How do I know? Maybe five percent. Can't be much more."
"You can also see," I continue, "that delays in getting the machines from those vendors was the prime reason for the delay in completing the project."
"I see what you mean." He picks up Fred's report again and looks at it intently. Finally, he says, "So they saved about five percent on the machines, which is, probably, less than three percent of the total investment in the project." Very slowly he continues, "And this savings caused them to turn a three-year payback project into…" He stops.
"Saving a miserable three percent caused them to turn a very good project into a loser," I summarize.
"Rick, calm down. We have made a lot of assumptions. It's not so simple."
I don't know what he is talking about. The effect is clear. Companies are so immersed in the mentality of saving money that they forget that the whole intention of a project is not to save money nut to make money.
Out loud I say, "It's a simple fact that they try to cut the budget by a few percent and cause the payback period to double."
.
Para reflexão séria.
.
BTW, acham mesmo que um Observatório vai melhorar a qualidade dos projectos de obras públicas?
.
Trecho retirado de "Critical Chain" de Eliyahu Goldratt