Parte I.
"You’ll never get past the tendency to leap to solutions. But there are ways to fight the tendency, to promote deep analytical thinking instead of Jumping. Here’s a four-step process to help you activate your inner Analyst and keep you from jumping to ill-informed solutions.
.
1. Go and SeeIt’s easy to jump to conclusions — and lousy solutions — when you don’t have a clear picture of what’s actually happening. And you can’t have a clear picture if you don’t leave your desk, your office, or your conference room. [Moi ici: Isto pôs-me a pensar seriamente... sobre as auditorias remotas ou e-audits] Unfortunately, that’s where most leaders live.
.
Taiichi Ohno was the father of the Toyota Production System, or what is now known as ‘lean’. As described in The Birth of Lean,
[Ohno] never rendered judgment simply on the basis of hearing about something. He always insisted on going to the place in question and having a look.
.
Ohno said, “Data is of course important in manufacturing, but I place the greatest emphasis on facts.” Gathering facts comes from close observation of people, of objects, of spaces. By contrast, spreadsheets, reports, and anecdotal accounts are not facts. They’re data. They’re two-dimensional representations of reality, which makes it easy to jump to conclusions.
.
Data tells you how often a machine breaks down on an assembly line. Facts — direct observation—show you that the machine is dirty, covered in oil, and hasn’t been cleaned and maintained in a long time."
This is how organizations, normally, see the world:
A place full of unexpected results conspiring against its existence and success.
But, if we digg a little deeper...
We always find an invisble system with its own agenda. Worst, we find nests of invisible cycles conspiring against the oficial agenda.
And what is interesting is ... like in that Alien movies: The evil (the xenomorph) was inside Ripley all the time.
As a rule of thumb always think on this:
Always look for short-term gains that deliver long-term costs.
Results are a natural outcome of how organizations work and manage. Some times it is just a rule, just a small practice, that derails the entire system.
Can you imagem the power of that bonus?
Delivering above target savings is something desirable and very tangible. Seeing that the management behind that delivers:
- Raw materials that arrive to late and have to bypass quality control;
- Raw materials that don't pass quality control;
- Raw materials that don't arrive.
Takes a deeper and analytic look. Takes not Jumping into the simple, obvious and wrong.
"...
2. Frame It ProperlyFraming the problem properly is the first step on the road towards finding the right solution. Problem statements are deceptively difficult to get right. For one thing, it’s easy to mistake the symptoms for the underlying problem. The Jumper inside you gravitates towards symptoms. They’re easy to see and comparatively easy to address. It’s the Analyst inside you that has the cognitive power to find the root cause of those symptoms, and to really fix the problem. [Moi ici: Recordo estar em Abril de 2019 a olhar para as reclamações recebidas por uma empresa e, constatar que em apenas 3 meses já tinham tido 8 reclamações com o mesmo motivo. Olhando para o tratamento de cada reclamação, percebi que cada uma tinha dado origem a uma acção correctiva. No entanto, já iam em 8 reclamações em três meses. Quando pesquisei o conteúdo de cada acção correctiva descobri que a acção era sempre a mesma, porque a causa identificada era sempre a mesma: erro humano. Erro humano não é causa nenhuma. As causas-raiz costumam estar bem escondidas. Daí que uma investigação para as encontrar não seja fácil. Daí que eu não proponha que se desenvolvam acções correctivas por tudo e por nada, para que quando faça sentido se use a artilharia como deve ser.]
.
How many times have you heard something like this (or said it yourself)? ‘The problem is that we don’t have enough time to do….’ Or, ‘The problem is that we need more money so that we can….’ Or, ‘The problem is that we don’t have enough people for….’
.
These sound like legitimate problems, right? Not really. The truth is you never have enough time. You never have enough money. And you never have enough people.
...
A well-framed problem statement opens up avenues of discussion and options. A bad problem statement closes down alternatives and quickly sends you into a cul-de-sac of facile thinking. [Moi ici: Erro humano...] Consider these two problem statements:
- Our sales team needs more administrative support.
- Our sales team spends six hours per week on low-value administrative tasks.
Although you hear this kind of framing often, notice that the first statement isn’t really a problem at all. It’s a solution.
.
The only possible response to needing more administrative support is to hire more administrative support. What’s the solution to the second problem statement? It’s unclear — which is good! The second problem statement pushes us to think analytically. The observable fact (six hours) rather than the implicit judgment (we need more admins) raises other questions that help us develop better solutions: why do they have six hours of administrative tasks in the first place? How can we make the tasks faster? Can we use a computer? Can we use checklists and templates to reduce the burden? Are they actually necessary? Can we eliminate some of them entirely? If you see that your problem statement has only one solution, rethink it. Reframing the problem can help you avoid conclusion-jumping."
Trechos retirados de "Four Tools for Better Decisions" publicado na revista Rotman Management Spring 2020:
