> Date: Mon, 2 Oct 1995 17:25:55 +0100
> From: tb@knipp.de (Thomas Bertels)
<<< some stuff deleted here >>>
>=20
> Another inportant point I would like to add is that companies need to
> stick to one change effoert at a time not only that change loses power =
in
> companies if you change too often (from JIT to quality circles to =
KAIZEN
> to KANBAN to TBM to TQM to SIXSIGMA to Learning Organization, every =
effort
Blanco's response:
" I don't know is this is the right question, and the issue of
amount of change might be more of externally determined issue. By this =
I
am saying that organizations may not have a lot of influence into how =
much
to change, which might be more influenced by competitive forces. What
bothers me the most is the fact that the different approaches are =
adopted
or presented as distinct, when they may be very closely related. The
ineterconnection between JIT, KAIZAN, KANBAN, TQM, Reengineering,
Organizational Learning to me is clear. In fact, in some cases one =
seems
to be really an improved (or more advanced) version of another. I
understand what you are saying if the company adopts one model today, =
and
dumps tomorrow to move on to a new one! But, there so many connections
and synergies that can be obtained when they are understood in an
integrative way. An example is something I have been saying for a long
time now is the TQM and Organizational Learning are so closely
interconnected that TQM would fail is OL is not allow to develop.=20
"
My comments:
In the emerging world of agile competition and virtual organizations,
the only absolute is change. Somewhere in Vth Discipline is the comment
(paraphrase here) that the only competitive edge will be rate of
learning. I agree.
To be agile (in the jargon of agility) is to respond well and profitably
to the unexpected. All of the tools and tricks of systems thinking must
be internalized in the the organizational infrastructure. Along with this
organizational "mind" (something like Minsky's model) are other "enabiing
subsystems" which allow and enhance rapid learning as the driver of
change.
Change is not programmatic. It is an internally consonant response to
forces external to the self. In industry, changing customer requirements
(whether in quantities, colors, sizes, explosive content, amplitude, or
delivery, cost, or quality....) must be assumed to be good and desireable.
The only alternative is nonexistence (bit of an exaggeration, but a firm
possibility). So we must internalize the JIT, KAIZAN, KANBAN, TQM,
Reengineering, Organizational Learning and make them tools to help us
change rapidly (looking at the list cited, too me they are all elements of
one thing: an agile enterprise). We must also add to our list as the
customers and markets, technologies and other competitive pressures drive
that change.
-- John Zavacki <jzavacki@epix.net>