Management Advice Failures

Topic: Management Improvement

Management Advice: Which 90% is Crap? by Bob Sutton, Stanford University:

At first, I couldn't believe that someone as well-read as Hamel claimed an old idea was new and that he had invented it. But I eventually realized the problem wasn't Gary Hamel, or any other individual making claims of originality. Rather, his column reflected a prevailing practice in the business knowledge business. I asked two former Fortune columnists why "Hamel's Law" and similar claims that old ideas are brand new appear so often in the business press.

Both emphasized that you couldn't blame Hamel - that was just how things were done. Both writers even speculated that some Fortune editor probably had inserted the phrase, "Hamel's Law," to create the impression that the magazine publishes exciting new ideas. After all old news doesn't sell magazines!

I share this frustration with declaring old ideas new: Management Improvement', Better and Different, Quality, SPC and Your Career, Deming and Six Sigma, Management Lessons from Terry Ryan, Everybody Wants It, Toyota's Got It, Fashion-Incubator on Deming's Ideas and on and on.

Why does this matter? Two reasons, most importantly to me is that when we fail to value the best ideas, instead valuing the new ideas, we are not as effective as we could be. We often accept pale copies of good old ideas instead of going to the good old ideas - which will often lead to a much richer source of knowledge. When I compare copyrighted versions of management thinking to ideas from people like Ackoff, Deming, Ohno, Scholtes, McGreggor the depth and richness of those I admire is much greater than the packaged solutions, as I see it (and they are often more concerned with furthering the practice of management than further their brand). Second, it is often dishonest, or at least sloppy thinkers, that don't acknowledge the history of management ideas.

There is a huge body of research that shows they are ineffective, yet no one seems to remember these policies have failed over and over in the past.

Sloppy (or dishonest) thinking feeds this condition. Either people fail to learn (PDSA is a great way to encourage learning - predict the results of the improvement strategy, then measure the results and then study the results) or they just want to accept some easy fix today that they know won't work (which puts off trying to find a real fix until later). It is amazing to me how often we accept non-solutions. If someone objects that we have tried that "solution" and it didn't work they are often shut down with a version of: "don't be negative" or "I don't want to hear we tried that before and it didn't work" (we are different now) or "we need team players" or "if you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem"...

read the acceptance speeches given by Nobel Prize winners. I did this a few years ago. All the winners in economics, for example, carefully went through the ideas they borrowed, listed the scores of people who inspired them, and emphasized that their contribution was a logical extension and blend of existing work. Something is wrong with this picture the gurus claim breakthroughs, but the Nobel laureates do not.

Great point. Dr. Deming was constantly citing the sources of ideas he discussed. Maintaining academic and scientific integrity is not just a sign of honesty but I believe leads to better performance. When one markets that they are the source of new wisdom they have to try and separate themselves from the past and others. Over time they will do so not just in marketing but in their own thoughts. When one is trying to bring together great ideas they can continually learn from the past and present.

via: Required Reading For The Weekend

Some of my thoughts on good sources for management ideas: Management Improvement Leaders,
and Management Improvement Thought Leaders

If Tech Companies Made Sudoku

Topic: Management Improvement

A fun post as we head into the weekend: If Tech Companies Made Sudoku by Kathy Sierra

Frankly, we're a little baffled that your original design was so... simple. I'm sure we all recognize that our target market demands a much more media-rich, interactive, high-action experience. Love the whole grid thing, though.

The graphic on the original post is great. You can also read about an attempt to focus IT differently: The Declaration of Interdependance by Alistair Cockburn:

Lean manufacturing teaches us that having large inventories is inefficient. It also teaches us that the overall efficiency of a process improves as the batch size passed from stage to stage is reduced. Today this has become accepted in most (but not all) manufacturing circles, yet many people may be surprised that it also applies to software development.

• articles on management improvement software development topics: lean programming, agile management...
  
• Management Science for Software Engineering
  
• Innovation in the Software Development Process
  
• Using Quality to Develop an Internet Resource (acrobat format) by John Hunter
  

Tesco: Lean Provision

Topic: Management Improvement - Investing

Lean Provision Is Tesco's Secret Weapon in Battle with Wal-Mart:

Tesco's lean provision system combines point-of-sale data, cross-dock distribution centers, and frequent deliveries to many stores along "milk-runs" to stock the right items in a range of retail formats. These include Tesco Express convenience stores at gas stations and busy intersections; Tesco Metro (small supermarkets in cities); traditional Tesco supermarkets in cities and suburbs; Tesco Extra ("big box" superstores in suburbs); and Tesco.com for web shoppers.

Great stuff. In fact I would add Tesco to our marketocracy portfolio created as a result of our 10 stock for 10 years post. Why would, (not did)? Martketocracy won't process purchase request for Tesco. You can view Tesco on Google Finance but you can't add it to your portfolio.

Tesco is a retailer based in England that is expanding internationally - rapidly. They are moving into the United States in 2007. Warren Buffett picked up over $300 million worth of Tesco stock in March.

The quote above is taken from a Lean Enterprise institute news release. Why do companies repeatedly send out news releases and fail to (or delay) post them to their own web site? I am amazed how often this happens. It wasn't posted on LEI's site when I first saw the release but they have posted in now with additional details - good for them, what they have added it valuable. It would be better if they included a web page to link to, including the extra info (not just an adobe acrobat document, including the acrobat document is fine they just should have a web page to link to - now I have to just link to their main news page, which will work but not ideal).

• Curious Cat Investment Books
• Curious Cat Investment Dictionary
• Curious Cat Investment Library


• articles on lean thinking in management
  
• What Innovation Means to Tesco

Tags: management, lean thinking, investing, Tesco

Microsoft CMMI

Topic: Management Improvement

Microsoft webcast on Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI is the process developed by the Software Engineering Institute that was heavily influenced by Quality Management) and the approach taken for continuous improvement - mapping to concepts like Six Sigma and Kaizen. Each webcast with David Anderson, is an hour long.

Program information: presentation to CMMI appraisers on the Microsoft Solutions Framework for CMMI Process Improvement.

• Previous David Anderson CMMI Webcast
  
• Stretching Agile to fit CMMI Level 3:
  
  At Microsoft, we've adopted the teachings of W. Edwards Deming and stretched our MSF for Agile Software Development method to fit the requirements for CMMI Level 3. The resultant MSF for CMMI Process Improvement is a highly iterative, adaptive planning method, light on documentation, and heavily automated through tooling.
  
  
• Lean and Theory of Constraints
  
• Improving Communication
  

Tag: software development - process improvement

Lean Beyond the Factory Floor

Topic: Management Improvement

Spreading the lean tonic:

One problem, says Michele Bonfiglioli, chief executive of Italian manufacturing consultancy firm Bonfiglioli Consulting, is that many manufacturers have a 'blind spot' when it comes to understanding just how non-lean and inefficient their administrative functions are. "Manufacturing is full of metrics: takt times, OEE and a host of others - but no one measures what goes on in the offices," he observes.

The focus on the whole organization is increasing moving to the forefront of discussions. While there are still huge gains to be made using lean manufacturing, the success of many efforts is leading to expanding the scope beyond the more limited early efforts. To me this is a consistent pattern.

Experts (in TQM, Deming's idea's, Six Sigma, BPR, Lean...) always stress the importance of involving not just others (when talking to management) but your (managers) work too. But pretty consistently management adopts new management ideas much more for others than they do themselves. And over time the talk of going beyond "factory floor" improvements becomes more common.

Fast Cycle Change in Knowledge-Based Organizations by Ian Hau and Ford Calhoun, Jun 1997 is a good example of lean thinking, eliminating waste... outside the factory floor. This is also an example of the reports I mentioned in the comments on the Kaizen research post from the Center for Quality and Productivity Improvement at the University of Wisconsin, Madison.

Tags: lean thinking, process improvement, management

Kaizen Event Research Project

Topic: Management Improvement

NSF Funded Kaizen Event Research Project

First, this research seeks to identify the most important factors influencing successful outcomes (both technical and social)...

The second objective investigates the sustainability of Kaizen events over time.
The research team has visited numerous organizations utilizing Kaizen events across
multiple areas. Leaders in some organizations acknowledge that some areas will quickly (within 6 months to one year) revert back to the pre-Kaizen performance levels. Yet other organizations appear successful in sustaining results, even improving them further over time. Thus, this research will seek to identify the most important factors influencing sustainability of outcomes.

There is an opportunity to have your organization studied - see the article for contact details. Companies involved in textile manufacturing, food processing, or other continuous manufacturing process industries are of special interest.


Description on NSF web site.

The NSF Innovation and Organizational Change (IOC) program supports scientific research directed at advancing understanding of how individuals, groups and/or institutional arrangements contribute to functioning, effectiveness and innovation in organizations.

Lean, Mean, Six Sigma Machines

Topic: Management Improvement

Lean, mean, Six Sigma machines by Tam Harbert:

Without exception, each company is healthier now than it was five years ago. Three of them have turned profitable, and the fourth - Celestica - is close to turning the corner... The question is how much credit for their progress goes to Lean Six [Sigma].

Yes that is indeed a good question. What management claims as the reason for results is not necessarily actually the reason (and this is true not just if they say forced ranking is good [which I disagree with] or lean thinking is good [which I agree with]).

A great difficulty in evaluating management concepts is that the complexity (including interaction) makes it very difficult to determine the results of specific management decisions (separating out the effects of one or several decisions from the hundreds that were made and outside influences, etc.). How much of the success of Google is due to the 20% "engineer time." Can you calculate the return? I don't think so. But you can make a judgment that it is a benefit.

A great quote from Out of the Crisis by W. Edwards Deming, page 121, states:

the most important figures that one needs for management are unknown or unknowable (Lloyd S. Nelson, director of statistical methods for the Nashua corporation), but successful management must nevertheless take account of them.

Another inconvenient truth the article mentions is that attempting to test management concepts across organizations is not easy. The repeatable conditions desired for testing a hypothesis are difficult to find between two organizations.

With their own jargon and complex frameworks, each methodology alone is hard to understand... Put them together and add each company's own unique recipe, and identifying the exact ingredients is next to impossible.

Successful management concepts are not "cookie cutter" implementations. There are general concepts that apply everywhere. And there are tools that can be used everywhere. But exactly what form the management system takes, if successful, depends on the organization. And the system of management will not be the same even if they have the same named program whether it be: TQM, Six Sigma, learning organization, BPR, MBO...

Exploring the ideas raised by this article is worthwhile. Just remember "the most important figures that one needs for management are unknown or unknowable, but successful management must nevertheless take account of them." And, just because you cannot accurately measure something does not mean you cannot manage it (or learn from it to help you improve your management).

• Secrets of the World's Best Companies
  
• The Quick Fix
  
• Dangers of forgetting proxy nature of data
  
• More Six Sigma Information
  

Tags: management improvement - lean six sigma

Signs You Have a Great Job ... or Not

Signs you have a great job ... or not by Jeanne Sahadi

This article, while presenting an overly simplistic view in my opinion, actually provides some good reminders. The article focuses on 12 questions that seem to be the focus of a recent business book. And some of those questions provide good reminders to managers of things they should pay attention to, such as:

• Do I know what's expected of me at work?
  
  
• At work, do I have the opportunity to do what I do best every day?
  
  
• In the last 7 days, have I received recognition or praise for doing good work?
  
  
• Is there someone at work who encourages my development?
  
  
• Does the mission/purpose of my company make me feel my job is important?
  

For me, this list is more valuable than most of these types of things you see in "pop management" articles. Maybe my mood (I played some good basketball today, which always puts me a good mood) is causing me to be overly positive, but I actually think this article is worth a few minutes to read and then some reflection.

I believe managers need to look to provide opportunities for the people that work with you. They need to make time for doing so (because it is something that often is neglected). If someone doesn't want new opportunities, that is fine, but don't accept that as a permanent state. Make sure you continue to offer opportunities, what people want can change. It is easy to focus on meeting goals (which you should be trying to eliminate from your management system but...) and fire fighting. Don't forget to help people grow.

This also relates to the question "do I have the opportunity to do what I do best every day." A manager must balance what people would like to do (and other long term system factors) and what is best for the company today. Sometimes the organization may need someone to work in an area where they are less skilled. That is fine. In that the manager is optimizing the system by sub-optimizing their performance: just don't forget that is what is being done.

And don't forgot for most people this can be stressful. So try to adjust the system so you don't over burden people for too long. When someone is learning a new skill they will often need to spend time developing (which mean they won't be doing what they do best). Again this is expected but managers, by and large, don't do enough to support development in my opinion.

Ok, moving past the potentially basketball induced rose colored view; while I find this article worth reading I still find the follow statement meaningless at best:

I asked Coffman what percentage of companies he thinks actually pass the 12-question test. His estimate: No more than 15 percent. But within a company, he said, individual departments may meet the test, even if the company overall doesn't.

This and other such statement seem to drive so much reporting. And, to me, they do nothing but provide vastly oversimplified views that provide no real value to managers trying to improve.

I also am extremely skeptical of statement like:

"We were searching for those special questions where the most engaged employees ... answered positively, and everyone else .... answered neutrally or negatively,"

I find that such statement seem to be made for every claimed new management strategy. And most of those strategies seem to offer very little of value. You will get all sorts of correlation in data if you look at enough data: the conclusions people draw from such correlations are often useless.

An example I remember is from Statistics for Experimenters (by George Box, William Hunter (my father) and Stu Hunter (not related): page 8 shows a graph of the number of storks and the population of Oldenburg. As the book says: "Although in this example few would be led to hypothesize that the increase in the number of storks caused the observed increase in population, investigators are sometimes guilty of this mistake in other contexts."

• Respect for People
  
• People: Team Members or Costs
  
• Performance Without Appraisal