On 1 Aug 96 at 19:06, Ben Compton wrote:
> Here's the problem:
>
> We're using a manufacturing model of business, and
> performance/quality metrics to run a continually changing,
> knowledge-based business. It doesn't work well.
It sounds from your description of the manufacturing model that the
manufacturing model is wrongly done...
> * Those on the assembly line have very clearly defined, and often
> repetitious, work processes. The input is constant, and the output
> is constant.
I wonder how accurate that is. One would have to look at the variance
in both, statistically.
> * The product being manufactured is tangible, and therefore the
> quality is easily measured. X number of widgets don't function
> properly -- or X widgets have a problem with their locking
> mechanism, etc.
This is a product centred view, rather than a customer centred view.
>
> * Since the assembly of a product follows such repetitious
> processes, it is easy to predict the capacity of an assembly line: X
> widgets per hour.
Again, probably not. It is an empirical question.
> * Workers have very clear job descriptions. There is very little
> deviation or variance in their work day.
Again, an empirical question.
> Here's how I see technical services:
>
> Thus, in my opinion, the model is all wrong. We need to think
> completely different about knowledge work, and stop trying to
> applying the model that emerged from the industrial revolution to
> the knowledge/information revolution.
The model that you describe is the old factory model, not the approach
presented by Deming, Juran and Crosby. I think the trick is not to focus
on the products produced (whether hey be service or objects, and focus on
the customer. From what you describe, it sounds like this is missing.
I came across an interesting message the other day. It described a company
that could design an automobile part at a quality level such that it would
last longer than most other parts of the car. It was slightly more
expensive, but of several magnitudes better in "quality". It failed
because nobody wanted to pay a few more bucks for something that would
last longer than the life of the car.
The moral of course is that quality is defined by the customer. That's
the starting point, and how one goes about applying an approach to
manufacturing OR service.
Answering x calls per day may seem efficient, but it has little to do with
customer satisfaction in and of itself.
I don't know if any of this is germaine, let me know.
Robert Bacal, CEO, Institute For Cooperative Communication
dbt359@freenet.mb.ca, Located in Winnipeg,Canada.
*For articles on management, change, training,communication, etc,
visit our home page at: http://www.winnipeg.freenet.mb.ca/~dbt359
--"Robert Bacal" <dbt359@freenet.mb.ca>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>