Data archival can be done for long term data backups or be legally required for records retention. “Database Archiving” by Jack Olson says “archiving inactive data has two beneficial results. One is that it can compact the data, thus using less space than if it were retained in operational databases. The other is that it can use less expensive disk storage.” However, it is necessary to properly implement policies for data archiving before archiving data.

• Limit the authority to archive data to project administrators, data managers, or project leads. If general users could request data be archived or un-archived, data administrators may be inundated with requests to move data. This also risks data integrity each time data is moved between databases since each data move risks creating errors or breaking data relationships.
• Configure data reports to include archived data if users choose. This allows users to search archived data as well as production data without having to request archived data retrieval to run reports.
• Review projects at least annually for data that can be archived.
• Ensure that archived data is kept in a readable format as the production database is updated.
• Ensure that database administrators have a general administrative account on the archival server or database. This allows any database administrator to view, edit, and retrieve data from the archive. If users permissions are limited to only individuals with accounts when the data is archived, old project data may be inaccessible if no one who worked on that project is any longer available.
• Verify that data can be successfully archived and unarchived on a test system before implementing a database archival process on a production system.
• Keep data archival methods in sync along with data formats. If the software methodology or software processes to archive data change, data may be irretrievable regardless of formatting. 
• When archiving data records, keep the meta-data that describes the data records linked. If the meta-data is lost, the meaning of archive data is lost. This may be done by archiving meta-data along with the data or keeping the meta-data active while the data records themselves are archived.

Data archiving, if done right, can free up resources without losing them. Done wrong, and the data is lost - or worse - made useless until even more time and effort is spent to retrieve it.

All of the Above?
I recently saw a recent “Patient Flow” article published by a major healthcare management journal. I have to admit that I was somewhat surprised. I couldn’t decide if I was more frustrated because: 1) The article seemed “101” (read: basic); 2) Its solutions were unrealistically simplistic; 3) It was published as if it was revolutionary news; or 4) It was published in such an otherwise authoritative journal. I settled on “all of the above.”
 
It’s about more than the basics!
The basic tenet of the article is that “surgical smoothing” is a panacea for all capacity and patient flow issues. The concept is deceptively simple… smooth the elective surgical schedule across the week to eliminate the spikes of inpatient bed demand caused by the concentration of particular surgical case types on specific days, and you eliminate the “peaks and valleys” that result in inpatient capacity constraints, ED boarding, OR case cancellations and other woes. Unfortunately, I have witnessed this solution fail far more times than it succeeds.

Yet, we should not toss out the idea altogether since, when deployed as part of a holistic set of changes impacting the entire system, it can indeed enhance capacity and performance. Because a single solution will not optimize your systems any more than a single hand tool will allow you to build a house, ‘surgical smoothing’ (the author’s singular prescription) might be part of your overall set of solutions (PLURAL!), but not a panacea by itself.

Rather, you should ask yourself: Are your management team and service line directors honing every process in every department to create dynamic, interdependent and variable capacity to match your community’s dynamic, evolving demand patterns? If they are not, my suggestion is that you will need to ramp up your efforts. It takes a dynamic approach and a “systems eye” to achieve the kind of results we need today and tomorrow. 
 
Be BOLD!
My suggestion is to do something more than try a singular, “one off” solution - something dramatic and bold - to simultaneously influence quality, satisfaction, resource utilization, and cost. That “something” will need to be much more sophisticated than simply altering your block schedule to smooth elective admissions. It will involve a myriad of integrated solutions, all leading you to a “dynamic capacity solution” that incorporates communal resources from home to hospice and allows your system to predicatively and effectively flex to the variable demand patterns of your community. This “Next Level” of performance will give you the power to achieve the optimal capacity you need (whether reduced or expanded).

You will only thrive in the future through your willingness to challenge everything and leave nothing to rest. Challenge your thinking. Challenge your staff. Yes, challenge your surgical schedule. But also challenge your CFO and the business model you’ve known for decades.

Have you truly challenged your system to achieve the “next level” of performance or are you satisfied with using old best practices as your standard?

Just-in-time (JIT) has become a standard inventory management model for many companies.

The benefits of just-in-time include:

• Reduced lead time.
• Reduced storage costs.
• Reduced material handling costs because there is less material to be moved to and from storage.

Ways to implement JIT in manufacturing:

• Work with suppliers who are geographically located close by so that international transportation delays do not delay production.
• Have kanban system signals across the organization that tie to the supplier’s ordering system so that it can be ordered from suppliers the moment it is needed.
• Have ordering systems tied to the supplier so that low inventory in your system automatically triggers a priority order with the supplier.

Problems with JIT:

• A choke point in the supply chain can bring the manufacturing process to a halt due to low inventory.
• If transportation networks go down, such as with natural disasters or terrorism, just-in-time becomes too late.

Just-in-time also exists in Information Technology. Examples of just-in-time in IT include:

• On-demand software installations and updates instead of synchronized pushes.
• Hardware upgrades on user request instead of scheduled roll-outs.
• Helpdesk support immediately when users call instead of users inputting tickets and receiving calls when staff are available.

Problems with JIT in IT can be demonstrated with the manufacturing examples of problems of just-in-time manufacturing:

• A choke point in the supply chain can bring the manufacturing process to a halt due to low inventory; in IT, this can be caused by:
  -User demand when a subject matter expert is unavailable.
  -Software licenses kept to a bare minimum to reduce costs but cannot be ramped up when there is a spike in the number of needed applications.
  -A known software vulnerability is found and too many users request a software patch in IT infrastructure that may not be able to handle the demand.
• If transportation networks go down, such as with natural disasters or terrorism, Just in Time becomes too late; in IT, this can be seen with:
  -Denial of Service hack attacks preventing network communications.
  -Power outages shutting down servers.
  -Server hardware failures killing communication networks between computers.

Underlying and paramount to being a leader is the quality of courage. I have had several people ask what you need to do if you feel you are lacking in courage and still aspire to be a leader. How do you go about acquiring this quality? And is it possible to “acquire” it?

Where does courage come from? Is it innate? Are people born with courage? We know that temperament plays a vital role in how we behave. Are you passive or active? Are you sensitive or insensitive? Can you change much of what you appear to be? Are you risk averse or risk prone?

While you may not be able to change your basic makeup, you can certainly learn to modify it. Experience has a profound effect, particularly if you make the effort to learn from it. Our early years are formative and play a big role in shaping us and preparing us for the future. Beyond that, many of us benefit from experiences which challenge us and test our courage. As one young man said to me, “How do I know if I can manage this if I never tried?”

Let’s look at some of the ways you can test your courage quotient. Suppose someone in your office doesn’t fit into the team. Either her behavior is not acceptable to the team or her effort is not up to standard. How does the team treat her? Are snide comments made about her behind her back? Is she ignored at meetings and made to feel like an outcast? As a member of that team, do you go along with the general consensus and join in the subtle and not so subtle harassment of this individual?

If you want to test your courage, you might try standing up to those people who try to enlist you in this endeavor by stating that you are not interested in making this individual’s life a torment. Instead, you state that you would like to try to figure out ways to address the problems presented by this team member so that the individual can contribute in a more positive fashion to the team’s morale and productivity.

Does this take courage? Have you thought about the consequences to you – both personally and professionally - from taking such a stand? It will require a great deal of courage to confront the group mentality that has embarked on this journey. If you decide to do so, you will be able to see if you have the courage required to be a leader.

And what about a more personal example such as standing up to your boss when you feel you are being asked to contribute more that you can possibly do in order to stay afloat both physically and emotionally? Do you keep accepting assignments, put in late hours, because you are afraid to upset him? What are the consequences of standing up to him in a way that best serves your interests, his, and the company’s? Is it courageous or foolhardy to tackle such an issue? And how do you decide what to do and how to do it?

And what about a fellow employee who keeps “forgetting” his wallet when you go for coffee or out to lunch and never pays you back? Do you have the courage to tell him “no” you can’t continue to stake him to these handouts or do you continue to enable his behavior and seethe inwardly at the unfairness of it all?

While the above examples happen every day to most of us, did you ever see them as tests of courage? While we may all have aspirations of greatness, do we ever check our everyday actions to see if we have the qualities which make us strong enough to withstand the winds of leadership?

One of the ways you build the confidence needed to be a leader is to have the courage to face the little daily torments that happen to us or to others. That is the experience needed to override what we think of as our passivity or sensitivity within our genetic inheritance or our early years. If it is difficult to do this alone, then you need to find a strong support system which can help you think through and face the challenges that beset us all. By entering into some of life’s small everyday challenges, you may be surprised to learn how much courage you really have.

Eileen Berman, Ed.D. is a practicing psychologist and consultant in Rhode Island. You may e-mail her at e.berman22@gmail.com with comments or suggestions.

I have often heard the story behind the famous “Hawthorne Effect” misinterpreted. (Before you Google it, think of the versions you’ve heard in the past). Based on the story of an experiment at the Western Electric Hawthorne plant in Cicero, Ill., in the early 1900s, the Hawthorne Effect is commonly used to describe what happens when workers are constantly supervised … their productivity “magically” goes up.

According to the actual story, Western Electric plant managers wanted to better understand worker productivity, and asked for an experiment to be conducted. This started with the impacts of environmental factors, such as lighting and temperature, on productivity. Later, more variables such as length of breaks were tested. Ironically, the study showed that any of the many extraneous variables introduced resulted in higher productivity in the workers studied. Thus, one of the main conclusions of the experiment was that workers were so delighted by attention given them by the examiners that their productivity increased. (This conclusion, however, was called into question as the data was reanalyzed years later.)

Another interpretation of this result suggests that workers knew when they were being watched and analyzed, and thus worked harder to please their omnipresent bosses. Regardless of which version of the story you prefer, a consistent question arises: Which makes workers more productive … constant oversight or an environment conducive to productivity? Perhaps both, but certainly the latter is a requirement.

In healthcare, there are many issues other than the timing of a lunch break that make our work hospitals difficult places to work. Inefficient layouts; excessive travel time and distance between tasks; redundant and wasteful processes; poor prioritization of tasks; and workload and capacity imbalances all work against the productivity of our staff. Sadly, even the newest, brightest facilities can have productivity-draining layouts and inefficient operations that reduce throughput, capacity, and even quality and outcomes. And while oversight and monitoring may be necessary evils to manage staff, poor conditions will inevitably lead to suboptimal results.
 
It shouldn’t take you five years and a page in the annals of industrial engineering to make your staff perform better. So what is your solution(s) to the Hawthorne problem – more oversight, reports and data? Or are you making your hospitals more conducive to productivity by dynamically managing capacity; building optimized space, workflow and workload; and training your staff to focus on clinical outcomes rather than task lists?

The Simple Data Map
Data maps can be simple, covering most data elements. I will define a simple data map as one that can cover 95 percents or more of the data elements, able to pull it from one system and correctly place it in the other. The "stragglers" can then be corrected by database administrators or by software application experts correcting fields if they have access to change the item's metadata. Simple data maps can be created more quickly than complex data maps.

More importantly, the simpler the data map, the less coding is necessary for any data translation tools or data migration set up.

The Complex Data Map
Ideally, 100 percent of the data will get to its destination error free. However, as the number of lifecycle states, data conditions, number of fields, range of acceptable values for data elements, and number of data types increase, the complexity of the data map rises exponentially. In short, the greater the number of variables (fields) or the greater the number of data element values (more variability in data), the more complex the data map becomes.

More complex data maps require time to plan and more code to cover the known variability. For every exception built into the data map, code must be written. For every outlier that the configuration manager decides to automate instead of review and place personally, more code or more system checks are needed.

Causes of Complex Data Maps
Data maps can become complex due to prior software migrations. Data maps may need to define the handling of exceptions from the prior software that were never fixed. Data maps may require defining the handling of old data that was left in its old lifecycle state and must now change to fit the new tool. Data maps may even need to handle increased metadata field values to include obsolete field values and valid field values, determining what the appropriate value should be in the new database.

All of this increases the complexity of the data map. Complex data maps can even result from built in checks and balances of if-then analysis to ensure 99.999999 percent of all conditions are covered, the result of extreme planning for potential conflicts that may never occur.

Causes of Simple Data Maps
Ideally, a simple data map is enough because there is a one to one correlation for old data map to new data map and all data values are the same between applications or data bases. This is especially true if upgrading from one version of an application or database to a newer version. This commonly results in the new system having more data fields available or data selections available to users, but the old data easily translates to the new system. The data complexity will only increase as new database entries utilize the new menu selections or new data fields that were never available before.

But upgrading from old to new may be a simple map to follow. If there is a need for speed in the migration, there isn't time to define all of the exceptions. The decision may be to handle the oddballs after the new system is up and running, and to hope that there is time to fix them as needed. This can result in a direct data map that is actually a shortcut, leaving cut corners that one hopes will not cause injury later.

Data maps can also be unduly simplistic because the person creating the data map doesn't know about the exceptions to be handled, the old data field formats that need to be accounted for, or the rare values that must also be accounted for. Ignorance may make it simple, but it won't create bliss - only a headache.

Recommendations
Make the data map as simple as possible. However, have a map of how to handle the most common or most likely exceptions. And have a way to correct the oddball entries that the data map either couldn't handle or didn't translate correctly. Even a perfect data map that looks like a platter of spaghetti can create a few flawed entries that need correction after nearly-perfect implementation. After all, a Six Sigma quality level data transfer with a few billion entries will require a little clean up.

I just returned from the IHI (Institute for Healthcare Improvement) Annual Conference. It is considered to be one of THE go-to conferences of the year, where the likes of U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius and other noteworthy individuals speak to thousands of healthcare professionals on the future of care delivery and public health.

However, among the 6,000-plus attendees at this year's conference, there were some noticeable behavioral "outliers." During each break, the smoker's areas outside the convention center were busy with attendees puffing away while texting and chatting on their phones in the cool Orlando weather. Inside, more than just a few obese attendees regularly helped themselves to the morning buffets of greasy scrambled eggs, bacon, assorted high-calorie muffins and pastries, and afternoon break tables of sugary soft drinks, cookies, and treats. While I’d like to assume that such behavior is merely a vacation binge or a singular event brought about by necessity, I am prone to believe that these behaviors are quite normal among this group.

Am I being harsh? Absolutely! Smoking, obesity and other behaviors and conditions lead to the very illnesses IHI claims to be trying to stop. So, it is ironic to me that the attendees of this conference would dare to exhibit such behavior in the presence of their colleagues. Whatever happened to living by example? Couldn't they just hold off, and pretend to attempt healthy behavior for just three days? Or does public health somehow exclude those in healthcare?

How can we preach to the masses about population health when our ranks include the very behaviors we want to stop? If our hospitals have within their ranks the very outlier lifestyles for which we are trying to solve, how can the general population be expected to behave any differently? A small percentage of "outliers" in our general population, given to the very habits and conditions I saw among the attendees, drive up the cost of care for the entire system. One would think that healthcare professionals could find a way to avoid being in that small minority, and do their part ... both individually and as a group ... to reduce the overall cost of care.

How does your hospital handle these topics? Are you like a CaroMont Health, which promotes healthy eating in its campus food service through menu selection and pricing incentives, or a Memorial Hermann, which won't even interview smokers for new jobs? Do you use carrots and sticks … or just allow bad behavior to proliferate?

A service worker can be measured by the amount of service provided; while customer satisfaction is subjective and self-reported, potentially skewing it toward the negative, the number of customers served and the time per service request processed make service worker productivity measurable using the same methods as are used on the shop floor.

When studying productivity of knowledge workers, the measures become more subjective. What is it that they do that you want to measure? And how do you define productivity when measuring that value? Do you measure a lawyer's productivity based on hours per case, billable hours, or the percentage of the time they win? Is your most productive sales person the one who generates more revenue or more new clients? Is the best financial planner the one who bills the most hours, serves the most clients, or has the fewest ethical complaints?

When it comes to software creation, what to measure becomes more problematic and often contrary to productivity. If a programmer's productivity is based on source lines of code (SLOC) generated, you'll get lots of code - and often an inferior software package. If productivity is based on number of bugs fixed, is software submitted earlier in its development lifecycle so that more bugs can be fixed? Or will programmer time be used up fixing small bugs like typographical errors in arcane reference files so that they can meet productivity measures?

Source Lines of Code
SLOC is a direct count of the number of lines of code in a software package or file. This metric is frequently used because it is a direct numerical value and easy to determine. Modified lines of code or MLOC is sometimes used to account for software changes as work by a programmer. However, this measure of productivity counts against streamlined software creation and code-reuse, two effective software productivity methods.

Decision Points
Rather than measure the lines of code created, decision points measure how many decision trees or input/output points were coded. Programmers who resolve these decision points with less code are not penalized as less productive than those who write pages of script. However, this productivity measure can result in broadly complex decision trees instead of only a few decision points.

Bug Fixes
As Dilbert once pointed out, if you pay a programmer to find bugs, they will find bugs. They may be small issues that take up volumes of time, many spelling corrections or wording improvements best left to technical writers, but the bugs will be found. Another drawback of bug fixes as a measure of productivity is that it implies that the work group with the inferior initial code but fixes them is more productive than the group that puts out nearly perfect software code. The risk also arises that the release of code with so many bugs to be fixed results in bugs potentially getting past the development phase and into production.

Problem Reports
Programmers may work on resolving problem reports submitted by users. If programmers are measured on the number of problem reports they process, they may become caught up in implementing enhancements as part of their job that would be better handled as user suggestions to be reviewed by higher authorities. Problem reports as a measure of productivity can also result in programmers spending time improving built in documentation instead of code because it raises their performance metrics, despite being the less valuable use of their time.

The Solution Curve
When software is released, it will never be 100 percent perfect. Whether the operating system, supporting database software or inputting applications, something will not work perfectly or will stop working when it is upgraded. One measure of software productivity that I have used is to simply track the number of bugs or bug fixes over time. If the curve is on a strong downward slope, programmer productivity can be considered high. They are fixing major problems without introducing new ones or many minor ones while no new issues arise.
 
Summary: Productivity for programmers can be based on code generation, code fixes, or user problem resolution. The metric selected can affect product quality and even productivity. Yet the decision of how best to utilize a programmer’s time and talent must be made based on your product’s initial quality and required quality standards. In theory, perfect code can be created in elegant and compact lines of code that never fails to execute properly. In the real world, there is no such thing as perfection. This is why programming resource allocation and prioritization are necessary. And that is a management decision.

I decided to focus this blog on lifestyle changes for two reasons. First, the holiday season is upon us. This is the time when we are all under a greater amount of stress than usual. Second, many of my clients are struggling with job issues in this very difficult economic climate and are, as a result, under an inordinate amount of stress, which is being compounded by the holidays. Seasonal stress has a way of exacerbating what is already there. So, I think many of you can relate to this blog and may want to take inventory, as you get ready to enter a new year.

Most of my clients report experiencing enormous pressure in their job because of reduced staff and the need to do much more than their job descriptions ask of them. They feel overworked and underpaid. They don’t believe, however, that they can leave their current position as the job market is so bad. As a result, they are anxious, irritable, and many have difficulty sleeping. Drinking to excess is another problem as many find that is the only thing that helps them relax.

In an interview, I usually ask the following questions: When did you last exercise? Do you walk daily? How about your diet? What do you have for breakfast, lunch and dinner? Do you snack a lot? How much coffee do you drink? How much liquor? What are your sleep habits? What do you do for exercise, relaxation  and recreation? When was the last time you took your spouse out on a date? How much time do you spend with your spouse? Your children?

By now you may be wondering what these questions have to do with job and financial anxiety. And my answer to that is … plenty! Stress is compounded by poor nutritional and exercise habits. In other words, your lifestyle plays a major role in how you handle stress. Ask yourself: Do you manage stress or does stress manage you?

A person can only take so much anxiety. Now with the holidays upon us, it may be a good time to take inventory of your lifestyle as we all tend to party a lot and forget about what is “good” for us and what is not so “good.” Given the despairing atmosphere we are living in, moderation can be hard to come by. Time moves more quickly than we realize, and if you are in your 40s or older, you may still think your body can withstand the stressors of a younger person.

Unfortunately, it cannot. And if you travel a great deal, sit in a plane for hours, have irregular meals, you are adding more stress to an already stressed body. This is all the more reason to look at your lifestyle and begin to face reality before reality hits you in the face.

So what do you need to do? First, you must accept the fact that your job problems are not your first priority. Your first priority is your lifestyle. You need to make your body healthy so you can withstand the pressures of your job and be able to think clearly as a result.

A critical look must be at your eating habits and exercise routine. Fruits, vegetables (cooked and uncooked), whole grains, fish, and poultry are the order of the day. Hamburgers, fried foods, and pizzas are not! And, you have to watch your portion size and eat three healthy meals per day. You may need help to determine what “healthy” means in terms of calories and food types. Some things are for certain, however: you cannot indulge in rich desserts, snack on cookies, candy, etc. and drink alcohol excessively.

Next, what do you do for exercise? Do you walk at least 20 minutes at least twice a day? Do you get up from your chair often and walk to the person you were going to e-mail? You also need to determine (with your doctor) an exercise program of stretching each morning, perhaps weights, and walking. If you are overweight or out of shape, you should see your doctor before embarking on any lifestyle changes.

To sum up, you need to begin to face the reality of you and get your priorities in order. When you get your lifestyle under control, then the job and financial problems – and all other problems – can be addressed. And what time of year could be better than now?

Happy New Year!

You can find out more about stress and how to manage it effectively by visiting Dr. Berman's website, rebuildyourcareer.com. You can also contact her directly at e.berman22@gmail.com.

Juran developed the Pareto principle in relation to quality. He stated that 80 percent of all errors or defects are caused by 20 percent of the causes. This is an extension of the 80-20 rule in which Pareto found that 80 percent of the wealth was inevitably owed by about 20 percent of the individuals or families.

Juran developed the total quality management (TQM) system. This TQM system is based on the Juran trilogy of quality planning, quality control and quality improvement. Quality planning involves designing the product and process for quality. Quality control involves collecting metrics on the process output. Quality improvement involves using the metrics on process output to improve the quality.

By designing the product for quality (minimum of defects and defect opportunities), it will be of initial quality. By monitoring the process via quality control, slips in quality can be quickly recognized and rectified. By using the data to improve quality of the existing process, quality of the product and process can be made even greater.

The Juran Quality Trilogy can be applied to any product or process. In information technology or computer software, the quality planning is the act of planning software design to minimize potential problems. This could include the reuse of existing software modules known to meet CMMI standards or to be bug free. It could include minimizing or simplifying software interfaces, reducing the number of places where errors in code could occur. Quality monitoring can be done via error reports or problem reports. Quality improvement involves studying reports of existing problems and then seeking to improve it. Fortunately, software patches may be easier to issue to improve a software application than retooling a production line.

Recientemente leí una pequeña nota que indicaba “qué es mejor”, si el enfoque de las cinco fuerzas de Porter (The five competitive forces that shape strategy, Harvard Business Review, Enero 2008) ó el de las estrategias de océano azul de Kim y Mauborgne (Blue ocean strategy, Harvard Business Review, octubre 2004).

Seguramente varios de ustedes habrán leído sobre ambos enfoques; en lo personal, mis estudios de posgrado en planeación estratégica estuvieron fuertemente (por no decir casi completamente) influenciados por las teorías de Michael Porter. Sin embargo, el enfoque de océano azul no es de ninguna manera despreciable.

Recordemos que Porter sostiene que existen cinco fuerzas que determinan las estrategias de una organización (poder de negociación de proveedores, poder de negociación de compradores, amenaza de nuevos entrantes, amenaza de sustitutos y la estructura y rivalidad en la industria), ante lo cual, las estrategias deben ir soportadas por aquellas fuerzas dominantes, buscando siempre sobresalir en la industria en la cual nos encontramos.

Sin embargo, Kim y Mauborgne sugieren que, en lugar de centrarse en la estructura de la industria (a la que llaman océanos rojos), debemos de salirnos de sus parámetros y generar un nuevo mercado, de tal manera que las cinco fuerzas se hacen irrelevantes, y la estrategia se orienta a crear un nuevo océano donde nosotros podríamos poner las reglas. Este enfoque es definitivamente innovador, al contrastarlo con el de Porter, y definitivamente rompe los paradigmas tradicionales de la competencia y la estrategia. Obviamente, ponerlo en práctica no es tan fácil como parece, y aún al crear un nuevo océano azul, en el mismo se darían, en el corto o mediano plazo, las cinco fuerzas (que dicho sea de paso, también requieren considerarse para crear el nuevo océano, pues quizás el identificar aquella fuerza relevante nos llevaría a romperla precisamente).

Creo que la pregunta de la nota mencionada al inicio de este artículo no es completamente válida: decir que uno es mejor que otro es un enfoque demasiado tajante, y la afirmación a favor de cualquiera de ellos sería un tanto absurda. Para ambas filosofías existen buenos argumentos en pro y en contra.

Yo aún estoy pensando cuál enfoque podría ser más interesante… ¿qué piensan ustedes?

Like many businesses, IIE has a regular cycle for many of its activities. If you know the Institute, you know that our business ramps up for the Annual Conference in the spring, membership tends to rise in the fall (with the start of college classes), fewer training programs occur in the summer, etc. But one part of our business cycle that I wish wasn’t so cyclical is occurring right now: the call for honors and awards.

The “call” usually goes out in September, with a due date in December. The reason I regret the cyclical nature of this activity is that recognizing high accomplishment is something IIE (and everyone else) needs to be doing year-round. There’s nothing magical about the fall that makes people achieve more during these months. And by the time the call goes out, potential nominees whose achievements occurred in February may be forgotten.

So, I want to ask everyone to stop what they’re doing and take a few minutes right now to identify someone who has made a difference in your organization or in your career. Who is helping make your company more productive, effective or profitable by applying industrial engineering techniques? Who mentored you early in your career, or steered you into the field of industrial engineering? Who deserves recognition for their accomplishments?

One of the Institute’s strategic areas of focus is to enhance the image of the profession of industrial engineering. One of the greatest ways IIE can accomplish this is to recognize IEs who have made a difference. Looking back at some of our past award winners, you see a “Who’s Who” of giants in the industrial engineering profession. Just consider who some of the awards are named after: people like Frank and Lillian Gilbreth, David Baker, Albert Holzman, Hamed Eldin and others.

Young professionals are also honored with awards like the Outstanding Young IE, Outstanding Achievement in Management and the Award for Technical Innovation. Students are also recognized with scholarships, technical papers and chapter awards. Diversity is another area where IIE recognizes achievement with the Excellence Award for Minority Advancement.

And then there is one of my favorite awards, the Fellow Award. This award recognizes outstanding leaders who have made significant contributions to industrial engineering. It is IIE’s highest classification of membership. The IIE Fellows are truly an esteemed group.

IIE award winners come from industry, academia and government. Young or old, student or professional, IIE recognizes excellence within the profession of industrial engineering wherever it occurs. But there’s one catch: The Institute can’t recognize people who aren’t nominated! You all know people who have made a difference in your companies, in your profession and in your professional life. So, please help us give them the recognition they deserve. Use the following link to learn more about IIE awards and to make a nomination … TODAY!

If students learned well from television, "tele-courses" via Public Broadcasting Service and other channels would have switched to this medium long ago. Yet television courses have rarely been widespread baring the occasional Driver's Education course. Online courses are becoming popular when their precursor of televised learning did not. Whether a student is living in the Bush in Australia or home-schooled but seeking enrichment, unwilling to go to a dangerous public school or stuck on a train getting to the school where the digital class is held, they can share the same digital classroom.

Anytime, anywhere, anyone and everyone was one of the promises of the Internet. Content would be provided on demand when requested. Digital classrooms can fulfill that promise. Digital classes can be offered by teachers around the world, allowing students around the world to find a class on their schedule, not the local school's schedule. Digital classes can be taught by an expert in one nation and offered to anyone who is interested, allowing students to access classes through digital classrooms that they cannot get locally.

Digital classrooms are already a reality for some students. MIT OpenCourseWare an excellent example of free digital classroom education. Specialized niche markets like Christian home-schoolers in the United States can access digital classrooms for classes that parents themselves cannot teach, such as Liberty Christian School’s high school curriculum.

By sharing the same teacher with the physical classroom and online students, the school reduces its costs per in-person pupil. And students whose parents would otherwise face the problem of teaching high school subjects or the high cost of private high school save by paying a reduced rate of tuition.

The digital classroom brings the world of learning to anyone in the world who wants to get access to it. The only limit is their ability to reach it. Digital classrooms do not solve teacher shortages for those living in parts of the world without reliable Internet connections and those without electricity. Digital classrooms cannot make students want to learn or want the wealth of information that digital classroom presenters what to share. But it is an excellent step in the right direction of connecting students to knowledge if a good teacher is on the other side of the connection.

Cheap. Easy. Affordable. Online learning is a venue that industrial engineers will be increasingly utilizing themselves. We should also research ways of implementing online learning to our user communities and our children.

Recently, I had the privilege of attending the convocation ceremony at the University of Massachusetts Medical School in Worcester, Mass. I was so inspired by what I heard that I wanted to be able to share some of this information with you, my readers. For the sake of brevity, however, I shall discuss a small part of it. It has to do with effecting real change in your organizations … small or large businesses, departments within large corporations, and even within your own family life.

The theme of the morning was "to prevent harm." Physicians have always been taught "to do no harm" and now, in this 21st century, they are being cautioned to "prevent" harm. In order to implement this philosophy in a way that will increase the chances of safety in hospitals, all the speakers stressed the need for "system-wide changes." And these systemic changes have to start at the top.

I thought about how I could get this message across to you in as simple a way as possible. So let's begin with how you define your team or business environment you are now in.

How effective are your teams? How effective is your company given the economic downturn and the resultant smaller staffs? What is your present mission? Has it been redefined given the state of the economy today? Have you begun to rethink the makeup of your teams, given the shrunken workforce? What do you see as the essential qualities needed by your staff in order to be productive in the present environment?

Let's take a look at the make-up of your specific team. Is there an effective leader who keeps herself apprised of everyday happenings? If you are a CEO of a very small company or a very large company, how do you manage to know what’s going on each day? How do you do this? From your desk? Or do you actually make the rounds every morning and talk with your fellow team members to find out what they have done … and what they are going to do in order to complete whatever project the team is working on? Is this a daily undertaking?

Does the team leader have contingency plans in the event that someone on the team falls ill? Are there people on your team who understand the jobs of the other members? In other words, is there a replacement/contingency plan in place in the event that someone cannot be there to contribute to the project? Are all the team members involved in discussing such a contingency?

It is so easy to think that what you are involved in today will be there tomorrow. But things have a way of happening … someone falls sick, a family member is ill and the team member has to stay home and care for the person … someone decides to leave the business … and so on.

When I am consulted by stressed parents, I always ask if and how they have inculcated a sense of responsibility in their children. Have they taught them how to live as a family? This always draws blank stares … what in the world do I mean? I mean that children should be taught to take responsibility … no matter how young … to do things they are capable of doing: Helping with the shopping, cleaning, cooking, meal preparation (setting the table, etc.), planning of meals, making their own lunch, clothes washing, etc. Why? Not only will you be doing these "team members" a favor as they go off in the world to be on their own, but you are supplying insurance against the time when you, the parents, may be incapacitated and not able to do all the things parents are "expected" to do. You have a well-trained "staff" ready to jump in when or if there is an emergency.

This is exactly what has to happen on any team, especially in a small business. So many times, people take on too much, thinking they are doing the business a favor … fewer people on the payroll and fewer people to supervise. They play to their own strengths and think that they have all the bases covered. But do they have a plan in the event someone gets sick or injured and cannot be part of the business for a certain period of time … even a week? A week can make a difference between a monthly profit or loss to a small business. And a longer period of time can be devastating.

How do you go about this? On a small team or in a small business, you need to have people who are flexible in their thinking … who are willing to share their duties with others. And, as was stated at the convocation, this mindset begins at the top! Without senior management signed on to this concept, it will never permeate the nooks and crannies of the organization.

You also need people on a team who are capable of filling in when necessary which really determines your hiring practices. If you find someone who is capable as a computer whiz but is not a good people person, then you need to reject that kind of employee and find someone who is capable of both.

It is always a good idea to switch jobs every so often so that each member of the team is aware of each other's duties and responsibilities. Not only does this exercise promote greater awareness as to the total business requirements, it also helps people bond with each other as they get a "feel" for someone else's problems and ensures coverage in the event of a catastrophe.

You can find out more about stress and how to manage it effectively by visiting Dr. Berman's website, rebuildyourcareer.com. You can also contact her directly at e.berman22@gmail.com.

According to Steve McConnell, CEO of Construx, technical debt is technical work delayed when short cuts are taken. Technical debt can be accidental as a result of insufficient skill to finish the job right or a job done badly.

It can also be intentional with good enough to get it done decisions. He believes that technical debt can be useful, when it helps meet a schedule.

Other technical debt is counterproductive. Mr. McConnell believes technical debt should be managed just as financial debt is managed.

Mr. McConnell states that technical debt can be estimated from the maintenance budget. I believe it can also be estimated based on work backlogs, past due projects, and to do lists. However, it is defined, technical debt is a problem for organizations that have it.

To quote from financial adviser Dave Ramsey, debt is dumb while cash is king. In technical firms, workflow - the ability to perform work - partially substitutes cash flow. Cash flow, of course, is the revenue stream generated from work performed by the organization. The disadvantages of financial debt are clearly defined and known. The interest rate is given in the loan documents and the minimum monthly payments are commonly sent in bills to the organization. What are the disadvantages of technical debt?

• Putting time and effort into catching up can take resources away from investment in growth. Time spent on backlogs cannot be spent on researching and quoting new initiatives.
• Technical debt can increase financial burdens. Bringing in contractors to help catch up on work costs more than if the work had been part of the balanced work flow. Paying for experts to debug inadvertent technical debt from bad code is more expensive than if it had been done right the first time. Paying staff overtime to catch up on technical costs above and beyond their standard paycheck.
• Falling behind on work creates stress. This stress can further impair performance when higher levels of performance are needed to catch up.
• High debt loads hurt personal reputations by creating the image of irresponsibility or poor judgment. High technical debt loads do the same to organizations.
• If technical debt becomes too high, the organization cannot properly service new customers and old customers at the same time. Business and payments are lost. This risks bankruptcy.

Something interesting is taking place at IIE right now. We’ve scheduled a Work Measurement Conference on Sept. 13 and it’s drawing a lot of attendees and even more buzz. Why is that interesting? Let’s talk about that for a minute.

Although IE concepts have been around for centuries, many people identify the early days of the 20th century as the birth of the industrial engineering profession. IE pioneers such as Frederick Taylor, Frank and Lillian Gilbreth, Henry Gantt and many others were actively applying process and productivity improvement techniques in manufacturing and other industries. Penn State University is credited with creating the first continuing curriculum in industrial engineering in 1908.

Much of the work and course instruction in those early days centered on work measurement. Time and motion studies, methods analysis and job evaluation were applications that companies were embracing as ways to become more competitive and productive. The profession began to grow, more universities began granting degrees and companies were anxious to bring this new type of engineer into their plants and businesses.

But along the way, something happened to our profession. It evolved and matured, as it naturally would. Many new and exciting tools and techniques developed. Statistics, operations research, quality control, and other applications emerged. Industrial engineers continued to be sought after for the differences they make and the improvements and innovations they bring.

But somehow, the old work measurement tools began to get a bad name. For example, in the movie, “Desk Set,” Spencer Tracy was brought in as an “efficiency expert” with a stopwatch to improve processes. Well, to no one’s surprise, Katherine Hepburn proved to Tracy and the company that there was more to customer satisfaction than efficiency. “Cheaper by the Dozen,” a biographical book and movie about the Gilbreths, was re-made in 2003, only this time the Gilbreths were nowhere to be found and instead of an engineer, the lead character was a football coach. Some industrial engineering schools even stopped teaching work measurement and time and motion study altogether.

Don’t get me wrong, productivity improvement and process analysis never went out of style. But terms like Toyota production, lean manufacturing and others emerged. We stopped saying that we do time and motion studies or work measurement. And IE graduates stopped carrying stopwatches.

But a funny thing happened. IIE established a presence on LinkedIn to enable members of our profession to network with one another (Sounds pretty current, doesn’t it?). And among other things, they started talking about work measurement! It turns out that lots of companies are practicing process improvement and these practices are being led by IEs! And measuring performance is a core principle for much of this improvement.

Take a look at the topics being covered at the IIE Work Measurement Conference: performance metrics, productivity improvement, labor standards, line balancing, materials requirement planning and others. My old work measurement professor, Cecil Johnson, must be smiling down on us right now. The one I like best is “Methods and Measurement in the 21st Century.” It explains the use of digital video and the Internet in developing more efficient processes. The Gilbreths would have been proud.

So, work measurement professionals, stand tall! It’s cool to carry a stopwatch again (OK, I know that’s a stretch, but hey, I’m making a point here). Time and motion studies belong right alongside simulation, systems analysis, operations research, logistics, distribution center design, and other “cutting edge” IE techniques. Are we back where we started a century ago? Absolutely not! No engineering discipline has evolved more than IE, and work measurement tools and techniques are at the heart of 21st century applications. But one thing hasn’t changed: industrial engineers continue to be the most qualified professionals to lead organizations to success, even when they’re using stopwatches to chart the path.

Se ha comentado mucho sobre la urgente necesidad de formar ingenieros como condición para el desarrollo. El ejemplo de países como Corea y China es frecuentemente mencionado al abordar el tema.

Entiendo que el problema radica en que la dependencia tecnológica tiene un impacto severo en la industria de un país y que los ingenieros tendrían en su momento, la responsabilidad de desarrollar tecnología.

En México más del 50% de la población universitaria cursa programas de ciencias sociales, administrativas y humanidades mientras que aproximadamente el 30% estudia alguna carrera de Ingeniería. De estas, Ingeniería Industrial es la que presenta mayor población.

Desconozco la información de otros países de America Latina, pero imagino que debe ser bastante parecida.

De entrada tenemos un problema cuantitativo pero es importante reconocer que también tenemos un problema cualitativo. Es decir, no basta solo con formar más ingenieros, tenemos que educar mejores ingenieros en disciplinas actualizadas constantemente y con alto rigor académico.

¿Se pueden conciliar ambas posiciones? ¿Aumentar la calidad implica necesariamente un efecto darwiniano en el que muchos estudiantes desertarían o inclusive ni siquiera calificarían para cursar un programa de ingeniería?

Como profesor he compartido con muchos colegas, tanto de universidades públicas como privadas, quejas relativas al bajo nivel académico con que aspirantes ingresan a un programa de Ingeniería: estudiantes que no son capaces de resolver una ecuación simple o calcular porcentajes, incapaces de redactar un párrafo con ideas coherentes y medianamente entendibles.

Por otra parte, también escucho comentarios de directores de empresas que se quejan de que tienen que volver a formar a los egresados pues muchos de ellos no son capaces de resolver problemas prácticos de ingeniería en la empresa.

Cada día que pasa la brecha que nos separa del desarrollo crece más y más. ¿Qué debemos de hacer para enfrentar el reto que exige la formación de ingenieros?

In my book, Building Productivity, I talk about the three faces of stress: the inner face, the outer face and the interpersonal face.

To summarize very briefly, the inner face of stress has to do with your own individual make-up. It determines the way you respond to stress. Another way of putting it is:  the inner face of stress depends on how you are “wired.” That's why we are all different.  We each have our own unique inner face. The need to know your own inner stress limits is vital to your functioning effectively.

The outer face of stress has to do with the impact of the world around us. Is this fast-paced environment – an environment which shouts at us daily with its many options – contributing less stress or more stress to our lives? Sometimes the more choices we have leave us feeling powerless and overwhelmed. Instead of making us more efficient, it does just the opposite. How we deal with the outer face of stress has much to do with our temperament and experiences. The two are intertwined in our everyday functioning.

The interpersonal face is just that … how we deal with people. Our own wiring and the environment in which we find ourselves pretty much define how we deal with the stress of interactions.

If you are a supervisor, it would be to your advantage to be aware not only of your own stress limits but to be cognizant of the limitations of the people who report to you as well.  This would allow a person to be in a position in the company that he or she can manage effectively … from both a knowledge base as well an emotional one. While it is true that the job itself presents its own stressors in terms of its demands on the individual, the outer face of stress which is the impact of the environment, and the uniqueness of the person to stand up to the stressors … his/her inner face of stress … are important considerations in placing a person in a job.

How much they know about the job is a major concern ... but whether they can implement it has a lot to do with their own individual stress limits ... which come from their inner face of stress. To help you understand this in a more dynamic framework, the following interchange helps put this into perspective. I received the following note from a supervisor who was having difficulty managing a very common situation:

"I have a very busy office. I have hired a young receptionist who, I thought, had very good interpersonal skills. The problem is this desk gets very busy during certain times of the day. Sometimes she has to juggle many things at once. At this time, she tends to be snappy and curt.  She also tends to answer the phone rather abruptly. I have talked with her but it doesn't seem to do much good. Any suggestions?"

This is a clear example of knowing your employee's inner stress level ... and understanding the intricacies of the job you have given her (the outer face of stress) as it impacts upon her. Yes, this employee has good interpersonal skills ... when she's not under more stress than she can handle! The question is, given the demands of this job, can she handle the stress that goes with it?

In order to help this employee, it is necessary to confront her with the issues: She does well when it is relatively calm, but when it gets busy, she has problems! What problems? Interpersonal ones! Give her examples of past events and ask her how she thinks she can handle these instances better. This should not be in the form of a reprimand, but as a teaching session in order to improve her performance and lower her stress level as a result. 

In order to move forward, ask her to keep track of the busy times … to step back and monitor herself in how she is handling things. Also, ask her if she feels she can handle the job well when it gets busy. If not, why not. How can you help her deal with this? Ask her for suggestions before you give up on her. Sometimes we can educate people to handle stress more effectively. But if her inner stress level is very low ... all the training in the world won't help. If this is so, try putting her in a less demanding situation. She has skills that can be used elsewhere.

If you are an employee being promoted to a new job, first find out what the requirements are: the responsibilities, workload, and skills. Assess whether you have the resources – both professional and personal – to handle it. If you don't, can you acquire them? How long will it take? If you are supervising someone who has come into a new job, then the understanding that that employee is going to take some time to learn the job ... supporting and training that employee in the new structure and allowing time for adjustment ... will put less stress on you and on your employee. Thus more efficient functioning is possible as the demands of the environment are lessened.

You can find out more about stress and how to manage it effectively by visiting Dr. Berman’s website, rebuildyourcareer.com. You can also contact her directly at e.berman22@gmail.com.

Process discipline
It can be a simple matter for an industrial engineer to design a nearly perfect process. That process, however, becomes increasingly irrelevant as process discipline slides.

Process discipline is how closely the process is followed. Process discipline problems can be deliberate or inadvertent. Lack of process discipline can include users skipping steps that are too difficult or seen to lack value or deliberately taking short cuts while performing the actual step.

Process discipline can also be inadvertent, such as users repeatedly missing a process note and thus failing to perform that action.

Maintaining process discipline
Whips are neither necessary nor legal in most jurisdictions. Process discipline, however, can be maintained using many standard IE tools.

For example, data collection and process measurements can be enforced by requiring values to be entered before users can move on to the next operation. Quality control can be drafted to check the work done midway instead of only inspecting after the final assembly or test steps. Process users can be involved in discussions on challenges they face or difficulties in completing the process; this can lead to a simpler process that is better than the nearly perfect one because it has user buy in and is actually followed.

Shop floor management via time on the floor can find those who deliberately take shortcuts to decrease cycle time to make metrics or increase completion rates.

Attention management
A short attention span, a lack of attention to detail, and disrupted attention for those forced to multi-task are known risk factors for defects. Whatever the reason, lack of full attention can create problems and lead to defects even if process discipline is intact.

Solutions for this can include fewer distractions on the shop floor. For example, stopping to change a radio or iTunes selection so that one can listen to a different song can interrupt someone's attention span; they may return to performing the process per standard procedure but lose their place because their attention went elsewhere. Extraneous discussions, endless streams of visitors, pop-up notices and informational windows can all take our attention away.

Even a split second interruption can interfere with the attention to detail required to follow the process. Attention interruptions can be managed by reducing interruptions in the environment. The defects caused by attention interruptions can be mitigated by poke-yoke principles.

Improving process attention and discipline in the workplace can improve process adherence and product quality. In the end, that is the battle IEs fight every day.

Hace unos días, justo cuando estudiantes y maestros del Instituto Tecnológico de Cd. Madero nos preparábamos para cerrar cursos e iniciar vacaciones, un estudiante me preguntó sobre algunas recomendaciones para leer durante el verano.

Si bien mi primera reacción fue sobre literatura general, esa noche mi mente dio vueltas y vueltas pensando cual sería el mínimo acervo bibliográfico que un Ingeniero Industrial debería poseer en su biblioteca y obviamente ¡haber leído!.

Naturalmente que "en gustos se rompen géneros" y algunos libros les gustarán más que otros, pero creo que en la historia de la Ingeniería Industrial existen algunos puntos de inflexión claramente marcados por la aparición de determinados libros.

En los siguientes párrafos compartiré con ustedes mi Top 5 con la intención de provocar respuestas e ideas de ustedes lectores, aprovechando este magnífico espacio que nos ofrece el IIE. El orden de presentación es estrictamente cronológico, el ranking de importancia lo dejo nuevamente al criterio de los lectores.

Iniciemos con el autor que provocó todo, Frederick W. Taylor. Ubicado en el contexto de los primeros años del Siglo XX y formado como Ingeniero Mecánico, Taylor vislumbró la necesidad del método como vía natural para la eficiencia. Su enfoque sobre la "mejor manera" sigue tan vigente hoy como hace cien años.

Aunque algunos académicos debaten sobre su mejor obra, yo me inclino por "Principios de la Administración Científica". Este libro debe ser leído y releído por todo estudiante y profesional de la Ingeniería Industrial, pues es una joya que vista a la luz del paso de los años cobra aun más grandeza por su impacto y trascendencia.

En este libro Taylor sentó las bases de una nueva rama de la Ingeniería, que pese a sus innegables lazos con el "Management" supo abrirse camino por cuenta propia.

Mi segunda selección es "El lado humano de las empresas" de Douglas McGregor. Este libro es el justo contrapeso de la balanza contra el enfoque de la eficiencia a toda costa con que muchos desvirtuaron el pensamiento original de Taylor.

A través de las teorías X y Y, McGregor introduce en el pensamiento del Ingeniero Industrial una profunda reflexión sobre la naturaleza del trabajo y la relación del factor humano con la eficiencia y productividad.

Mi tercera selección es "La calidad es gratis" de Philip Crosby. El mérito de este libro y su compañero "Calidad sin lagrimas" es su enfoque práctico y la popularización de conceptos como "cumplir con los requerimientos" "hacerlo bien a la primera vez" y "cero defectos".

Sin meterse en muchas complicaciones, Crosby fue capaz de llevar el tema de calidad a la conversación del hombre común y por supuesto a las empresas.

Aunque otros enfoques más técnicos pudieran haber tenido mayor impacto en la industria, es justo reconocer y leer a Crosby. En mi opinión debe compartir el pedestal de Gurú junto con Juran, Deming, Ishikawa y Shingo.

Gracias a sus aportaciones en el terreno de la calidad, Japón marcó la segunda mitad del Siglo XX, pero aún faltaban cosas por venir y he aquí que aparece mi cuarta selección: "La máquina que cambió el mundo" de James Womack.

Este es el libro que mostró al mundo el Toyota Production System y le puso nombre "Lean". Producto de una profunda investigación en el MIT, este libro puso en evidencia el declive de la producción en masa contra la producción "Lean".

Después de este libro, el panorama de la Ingeniería Industrial cambio drásticamente. Es una pena que tan pocos ingenieros conozcan este gran libro.

Para cerrar, mi última selección es "El mundo es plano" de Thomas Friedman. Este es un libro de interés general que refleja los grandes cambios y las profundas transformaciones que ha tenido el mundo en los últimos años y que han afectado el entorno de la Ingeniería Industrial.

Este libro nos muestra en sus páginas una realidad que ya vivíamos pero no alcanzábamos a vislumbrar en su vasta complejidad. El mundo tal como lo conocíamos no existe más, las distancias se han acortado o eliminado y el trabajo se ha redistribuido.

Un Ingeniero Industrial ahora debe tratar con nuevas locaciones de planta y proveedores en países que nunca había considerado en un mercado repleto de nuevos competidores.

Aquí radica la importancia de este libro, en llevar al lector a entender que no se puede jugar en un mundo plano con las viejas reglas. Ojalá que profesionales y profesores entiendan y transmitan esto a los nuevos ingenieros.

Concluyo esta aportación con una invitación. Aún en esta época de comunicaciones instantáneas en la que Internet, Blackberry, iPhone, iPad y demás artilugios son objeto de reverencia digna de un culto, el libro permanece como el gran divulgador del conocimiento. Lean, amigos míos, lean con pasión y desenfreno. Compren libros con la misma emoción con que un adolescente compra cervezas; lean libros de Ingeniería, de negocios y clásicos de la literatura. Tengan libros en su recamara, en su sala y en su baño. Lean, lean y lean más.

Al final de todo, descubrirán que pese a la fama de los perros, el mejor amigo del hombre es un libro.

I work for the Institute of Industrial Engineers. Whenever someone asks me what my company does, I almost always start out my explanation with the statement, “IIE is the professional association for industrial engineers; we are a membership organization…” For 62 years, IIE has been a membership organization. Needless to say, we do serve the profession. And we certainly provide services to non-members. But at its heart, IIE is a membership organization.

Often, I’m asked a follow-up question: “So what does a member of IIE receive?” Sounds like a simple question, doesn’t it? In most business transactions, when you pay for something, you know what you’re buying. But here’s where it gets tricky. When you pay for IIE membership, what you receive in return can vary greatly. But there’s good news, there. Let me explain…

On the surface, members of IIE receive a subscription to our acclaimed monthly magazine, Industrial Engineer, along with lots of opportunities. It is these opportunities that determine the answer to that tricky question, “What does a member of IIE receive?”

IIE has many members who have remained with the association for decades. In almost every case, when asked how to get the most value from IIE membership, they state, “The more you put into it, the more you get out of it.” That simple phrase is such good advice. Whether you’re talking about your marriage, your friendships, your church, your job or your membership in IIE, the more you put into it, the more you get out of it. That’s the good news. The value you receive is under your control.

And that’s where I get passionate about IIE. IIE can help you in so many ways!

• Do you need to stay informed about the latest news, trends or advancements in our profession? Read the magazine every month or take a look at the many topical blogs on our website (like that thought-provoking, “Greene Piece,” for example).
• Need to improve your technical skills? Take advantage of member discounts and attend a public or online seminar.
• Is your company falling behind the competition? Schedule tailored corporate training at your location.
• Are you looking for employment opportunities? Use IIE’s Career Center.
• Do you need professional contacts? Attend chapter or regional meetings, come to a conference, use the Member Directory, or simply sign up for IIE’s social networking groups.
• Does your career need a boost? Get certified in any of several different specialty areas through IIE.
• Looking for peers in your industry to share good ideas with? Join a society or division or join a technical group within IIE’s LinkedIn and Facebook communities.
• Do you want to see what the leading companies in your industry are doing? Participate in one of the many webinars that IIE provides or read the case studies on IIE’s website.
• Do you want to publish or speak about your own research activities, or learn about the latest research in your area of expertise? Attend the IE Research Conference or subscribe to IIE Transactions.
• Are you struggling as a new manager or an experienced manager who has to manage a changing work force? Read Industrial Management.

These are just a few of so many ways that IIE helps you be better, every day. Years ago, IIE had a bumper sticker that read, “Engineers make things. Industrial engineers make things better.” I never really liked that statement because, as we all know, IEs make things, too. But to paraphrase that statement in describing what our association does, IIE makes you better. 

It always frustrates me when we lose a member. When we dig deeper to learn why someone has dropped their membership, they often say things like, “The economy is tight right now and I just can’t afford it,” or “All I get is the magazine and it’s just not worth the cost.”  These are the times when you can’t afford NOT to maintain your membership! And if all you get is a magazine, you’re missing so much!

Like I said, I get passionate when it comes to membership. Please, take advantage of the many things IIE can do for you. And if you aren’t sure of how to maximize your benefits from your membership, call us and let us help you. But remember, to get more out of it, maybe, just maybe, you need to put more into it.

Hace unos días, en una universidad me pidieron un consejo sobre un posible proyecto de consultoría. El cliente es una compañía de autobuses que transporta pasajeros y mensajería en la zona central de México, en servicios económicos y de lujo.

Esta compañía cuenta con equipos instalados en todos sus autobuses que registra ciertos datos específicos durante los recorridos (velocidad, revoluciones por minuto del motor, kilometraje recorrido, ruta del viaje, presión de aceite, etc.) y quieren saber, basándose en dichos datos, cuál es el costo promedio por kilómetro, pero en especial, desean saber cómo influyen dichos factores en el costo. Pues bien, existe la posibilidad de realizar dicho estudio para la empresa, y las personas a cargo pensaron que la simulación podría ser el método apropiado para este análisis. Sin embargo, al platicar con las personas a cargo, me di cuenta de la mala conceptualización de la simulación en este proyecto, puesto que pensaron que el proyecto podría “simular” diferentes condiciones del viaje (replicando los datos que se registran en el equipo del autobús) y así saber cuál es el menor costo y cuáles son los factores que afectan al mismo.

En particular, este tipo de análisis más bien se pueden resolver mediante un diseño de experimentos, en el cual se  cuentan con varios factores y sus diferentes niveles, y buscamos saber cuáles factores están afectando la respuesta. Una vez con esta información, podríamos resolver la problemática del cliente, pero no directamente mediante un modelo de simulación.

Con esta experiencia me viene a la mente la dificultad que enfrento normalmente al impartir la materia de simulación cuando los alumnos buscan definir los experimentos a simular en sus proyectos. El diseño de experimentos es una herramienta idónea para poder definir aquellos factores y escenarios a simularse, más que simplemente dejarse llevar por la intuición de qué escenarios probar, o peor aún, por definir escenarios que parezcan más sencillos. Lamentablemente, es común que las diferentes técnicas y materias que se estudian en la universidad se relacionen de manera práctica con otras, con lo cual perdemos la oportunidad de enriquecer el conocimiento y, en última instancia, a llevar a cabo aplicaciones erróneas de la simulación en la práctica profesional. En particular, recordemos que la simulación es un experimento estadístico, y el diseño de experimentos es un área de esta ciencia.

¿Tienen alguna experiencia similar que compartir?

Is "culture" a nice word for…

Stubborn? Arrogant? Afraid? Unsupportive? Or maybe skeptical. Blind. Uncreative. Bitter. Stale. Or perhaps even … self-centered. Cocky. Hostile. Foolish. Or just plain ol’ lazy.

I rarely hear a hospital’s "culture" described as a compliment. It normally isn’t associated with adjectives like "visionary," "passionate," or "quality-obsessed." Culture is, at least in my little world, more commonly associated more with what cannot be done rather than what can. It refers to what people will refuse to do rather than what they’ll be willing to try. And it sometimes means that patients are the last concern, well behind a whole litany of more "personal" concerns that keep positive change from taking place.

True, in some institutions there is a culture of "change," "of safety," "of patient-centeredness," etc. But these are far less common than the culture of "that change ain’t happening here!" And that creates a frustrating and potentially dangerous environment in which to receive care, let alone give it!

What does "culture" mean in your facility? If culture is a politically-correct code word for a poisonous work environment where change is impossible because attitudes are toxic, perhaps you should consider calling it what it really is! At least you’ll be honest!

En un reciente proyecto de consultoría tuve la oportunidad de ver claramente cómo en ocasiones la estrategia de una compañía puede no alinear correctamente los sistemas de información y por ende, perder oportunidades de mejoras en la operación.

Recordé un reciente artículo de Harvard Business Review, donde se mencionaba que es vital para la estrategia sostenible de una empresa el poder identificar de manera continua, nichos de mercado, pero que para ello se necesita que las inversiones en sistemas de información sean empleadas de una manera inteligente, de tal manera que provean información en tiempo real y que la misma pueda ser compartida en diferentes niveles de la organización, para de esa manera, complementar su análisis. Pero además, también hace mención de la importancia de complementar esos datos y análisis con observación directa en campo, para no quedarse con la información generada por los sistemas.

En el proyecto que comento, los directivos de la compañía nos indicaron la “importancia estratégica” de buscar alternativas de mejora en el primer eslabón de su red de distribución, la cual comprendía el suministro de partes de su centro nacional de suministros hacia sus centros de distribución en México. Su argumento se basaba en que era el principal centro de costos de transporte, y que más del 40% de sus partes salían desde dicho de suministros (el restante provenía directamente de proveedores hacia los centros de distribución).

El análisis de los datos, realizado con personal de distribución y del departamento de tecnologías de información, nos arrojó datos tan alejados de la afirmación de los directivos, que hubo necesidad de validarlo en campo, puesto que al parecer, únicamente el 17% de las partes provenían de dicho centro nacional de suministros, y que el costo de transporte de este primer eslabón representaba únicamente el 6% del transporte total. Mientras tanto, los esfuerzos y la estrategia de la organización se estaban orientando a dicho eslabón, y deseaban que el proyecto de consultoría se enfocase fuertemente a esta área (análisis posteriores indicaron que las opciones de mejora, con resultados realmente tangibles, debieron enfocarse a otras áreas).

Al discutir el tema con los directivos y el personal de T.I., resultó que toda la inversión realizada en sistemas y software se estaba quedando estancada con la generación de reportes y actualizaciones continuas de información hacia la dirección de distribución, y los responsables tenían una idea basada en la experiencia previa de hace más de dos años, que además se basaba en los primeros estudios “de campo”, previos al software. Los directivos actuales, además de no estar al pendiente de solicitar información actualizada a T.I., no habían vuelto a realizar observación de campo, y tampoco lo habían exigido a su personal a cargo.

¿Con qué frecuencia confiamos ciegamente en la información generada por las computadoras, sin saber si es verídica, confiable y actualizada? ¿Dejamos en realidad de ver lo que pasa en la realidad por confiar en reportes, no en ir a ver lo que ocurre? ¿Qué opinan de esto? Seguramente todos tenemos ejemplos de ello en nuestra práctica cotidiana.

There have been a number of recent IIE blogs on LinkedIn about a professor who told a student that IE was a dying profession. Of course, the response was negative (as we would expect from a reading group made up largely of IEs), but there were a number of very good points about maintaining "professional health" and managing one’s career. I’ll also add some of my own thoughts:

1. If we don’t define ourselves – someone else will. Little is known about IEs in many industries – particularly the process industries. It falls to us to find areas where the need in our businesses overlaps our own skills – and become the "best" in those areas. Those skills will define IE for the businesses where they are used. In my own company, I’ve met people who thought IEs were the professionals who do some subset of economic analysis, simulation modeling, work measurement, lean analysis and operations research.
2. Early technical career paths typically go "deep" in a technology. Mid- and late-career jobs tend to broaden in both technology and responsibility. It’s important early on to be thought of as someone who does "good work." With that kind of reputation will come opportunities broader than traditional IE – but still opportunities to apply IE skills.
3. Who says you need to be professionally identified as an IE? Two of the longest serving DuPont CEOs during my career, were educated as IEs. They started work as IEs, but quickly moved on. Their professional identities were as astute managers, not IEs.
4. Factory jobs in the U.S. are disappearing and so are "factory IEs." It’s critical that we educate the public (and more importantly management) that we are not just "industrial" engineers – but engineers who design and improve "systems" of all types. (Obviously, I think IIE members dropped the ball when we failed to approve a name change! I also think it’s worth taking another run at a name change sometime in the future.)

Joe Tye, author and lecturer, has written that there is a profound difference between accountability and ownership. Managers, he says, create "accountability." Leaders, on the other hand, create "ownership." And ownership, wherein an employee reaches a new level of concern for their role and the work they do, should be the goal of every organization.

But how does one create ownership, or even merely accountability, for issues like patient safety, throughput, cost, or productivity, in a huge system like a hospital? If an employee only "touches" a small piece of the larger puzzle, how does that employ "own" the entire system?

One important first step is the understanding of the system as a system, the role each employee plays in it, and the interdependencies of the many component pieces. From the transporter to the front-line nursing staff, each must fully understand their role in the "grander scheme of things" in order to take ownership of their, perhaps small, part of the larger system as well as the system itself. Each must grasp their role in each of the organization’s key metrics and objectives, no matter how large or small that role might be. This, according to Tye (and others), is the key to achieving dramatic change. Without this, even going beyond accountability to ownership for a small part of the system may lose impact for the system and the organization. One must own the system as well as the portion one influences by day-to-day activities. And this requires an intimate knowledge of both the process level and the systems level.

Using data, systems engineering approaches and tools such as simulation can help leaders create an understanding of the system, its goals and objectives, and how each part "rolls up" to create a system and systemic impacts. By relating the part to the whole, employees can become aware of how important their roles might be to the larger whole. This, in turn, allows the employee to achieve ownership of as much of the system as possible, hopefully all of it. This also helps the employee to understand how fellow employees in disparate departments and processes influence them and the system in which they all work.

This "systems thinking" can aid enable easier change acceptance and management, spur creativity by front-line staff, and create a deeper sense of loyalty to the organizational goals and objectives. If used properly, technology, coupled with good leadership and governance, helps organization develop the willpower and energy to make dramatic change happen, and stick.

There’s been such a fuss lately over President Obama’s "lack of emotion" that I began to wonder if the pundits are running out of things to write about. In fact, I cannot believe that I am addressing this issue today. However, since this has escalated into a full-blown debate, I thought I would weigh in as I see this as an issue that could become a problem in the workplace.

Is the perception of "lack of emotion" indicative of someone not caring? Or not empathizing? Or not understanding the emotional gravity of a situation? And does that perception help or hinder a person vested with leadership responsibilities?

Let’s translate this to your working environment. Would you want your boss to show anger, sorrow, etc. every time there is a crisis in the office? Interestingly enough, these are qualities that have been attributed to women and pejoratively so. "Why Can’t A Woman Be Like A Man?" was sung in "My Fair Lady" by the male lead as he was driven to distraction by the emotions of a woman!

So where does this lead us? And what are we to make of the criticisms of Mr. Obama? Are they a legitimate cause of concern or are they mere distractions? Should we be concerned about a leader’s ability to "feel" if he remains cool and collected on the job? Is it something we should see as a weakness rather than a strength? Does it engender or endanger confidence in leadership? Is this something we should ponder – our own behavior in a professional setting?

After listening to this over and over again for the past few weeks, I asked myself is this something that should engage the country in a time of crisis … or, for that matter, at any time? Frankly, from my own standpoint, I consider a leader who doesn’t show his feelings as having a great strength, not a weakness. Think about it:  if your boss would show anger when you approached him with a problem, would you be inclined to discuss with him anything that might throw him overboard? If he cried every time a sad story was presented to him, would you feel comfortable? Yes, he is showing his feelings … but is that good for the people reporting to him?

Does this expression lead to confidence that there is a strong leader in charge, able to think through problems and keep the ship afloat and steady in times of crisis? Or does it indicate otherwise, leading to a feeling of unsteadiness and uncertainty in the ranks? And does this promote trust?

Feelings can be understood … empathy can be communicated … without the person showing his emotions. The message can be sent through words and deeds … without an explosive manifestation of emotion. If he or she melts down with the rest of the crew, I really don’t know how anyone can have confidence in and view that person as a "leader." Part of being a leader is to keep calm and strong in the face of crises so that you convey to others the strength and confidence to make and carry out decisions necessary to solve the problem.

So, when you are on your job, please be aware of the need to maintain your own composure, no matter what the situation. And please take all the discussion about Obama’s lack of the showing of his emotion and, therefore, as being indicative of his inability to his feeling your pain as so much ado about nothing. Because he doesn’t show it does not mean he doesn’t feel it. Would you want him to rant and rave when he’s angry about something and cry when he’s sad? I wonder how that would go over with the public … and his critics.

And getting back to the workplace, your domain, what kind of person would you choose to be your "boss?" And, if you are the boss, how do you think your behavior impacts the productivity of your direct reports? With all the stress in the workplace today, I would suggest that you figure out the best route to take to keep everyone as stress free as possible so that productivity can be maintained in your company. Hint: Being emotional is not one of them!

You can visit Dr. Berman on her website, rebuildyourcareer.com, or contact her by e-mail at drberman@rebuildyourcareer.com.

I recently returned from attending IIE's Annual Conference. While I was there, I had the pleasure of listening to Rob Savage, chief operating officer for Taco Bell, deliver one of the keynote addresses. Rob’s presentation was excellent, and it was especially inspirational in one particular way: Rob is yet another example of what an excellent foundation for success an industrial engineering education is.

Rob is an IE graduate from The Ohio State University. He shared with me that he was a bit surprised to be invited to deliver the keynote address at the annual meeting of the Institute of Industrial Engineers because, as he put it, he is hardly "your typical IE." That got me to thinking … just what is a "typical IE," anyway? How do you define industrial engineering? How many of you have wrestled with this question at parties, high school reunions, family get-togethers, or other settings when responding to the question, "So, what do you do for a living?"

The Institute’s own Industrial Engineering Terminology handbook contains a very long definition of our profession, replete with words and phrases such as design, improvement, integrated systems, specialized knowledge, principles, methods, analysis, and lots more. While the definition is undoubtedly accurate, if I used it to try and explain to people what I do, they would walk away from me with a dazed and confused look on their faces and probably avoid me for the rest of the day.

The truth is, there may be no such thing as a "typical IE." There is no better evidence of this than IIE’s Annual Conference. Glancing through our roster, I see that the event was attended by a compliance specialist at Chevron, an innovation leader at Raytheon, a performance improvement manager at a hospital, a research engineer at Georgia Tech, a marketing manager in the power generation business, an international services director for an environmental consulting firm, a director of relationships at a university (now that could be an interesting job), an end game analysis chief for the U.S. Army, a learning consultant for IBM, and various deans, CEOs, quality directors, professors, engineers (of all things!), and many, many others.

Thirty-seven different nations were represented on that roster of attendees. Companies, universities and governments around the globe recognize the value that industrial engineers bring to their organizations. And that, I believe, is what makes industrial engineers among the most sought after professionals in the world. Their efforts bring about change and yield successful results.

In his keynote address, Rob Savage frequently referred to Taco Bell’s tag line, "Think Outside the Bun." Rob explained that this is more than a marketing slogan at Taco Bell, it is an operating philosophy that drives how they do business. I believe it is also an accurate illustration of how IEs behave … constantly seeking new and improved ways of doing business. Industrial engineers thrive in practically all traditional and nontraditional settings, in conventional as well as unconventional jobs, but no matter where they work or what they’re called, IEs make a difference.

Lean Six Sigma strives for minimal waste and maximum efficiency. Lean Six Sigma certifications can be divided into white belt, yellow belt, green belt, black belt, master black belt and champion. The lower level certifications are white belt, yellow belt, and green belt. The higher lean Six Sigma certifications are black belt, master black belt and champion.

Lower levels of lean Six Sigma training
The lowest lean Six Sigma certifications are white belt, yellow belt, and green belt. This level of training is given to employees who will apply lean Six Sigma principles to their jobs or work areas. For example, a quality assurance technician who receives yellow belt training will continue to work as a quality assurance technician.

Lower belt training time and topics
White belt training for lean Six Sigma is an overview of lean concepts. The training takes several hours. Yellow belt lean Six Sigma training takes one to two days. It includes an overview of lean Six Sigma and how to collect data for lean sigma projects. Lean Six Sigma green belt training takes two to four days. It trains employees to work under lean Six Sigma black belts. Lean Six Sigma green belts can also manage small lean Six Sigma improvement projects.

Lean Six Sigma experts' training
A lean Six Sigma black belt works full time in lean Six Sigma implementations. This certification requires four week of coursework and a completed project. Lean Six Sigma master black belts take two weeks of courses focused primarily on managing lean Six Sigma projects and other black belts. They also mentor and manage lean Six Sigma black belts. They also train all lower level lean Six Sigma certifications.

Lean Six Sigma management training
Lean Six Sigma champions are managers who direct the goals and allocate resources for lean Six Sigma projects. These managers can be trained in several days in addition to their management credentials. Or they may be master black belts who are promoted to a higher level of responsibility.

Continuando con el blog anterior, donde comenté el uso de variables en los modelos de simulación, actualmente estoy colaborando en un proyecto de simulación para un análisis a nivel estratégico y agregado de la red de distribución de una conocida compañía con operaciones y puntos de venta en todo México, así como en algunos países de Centro y Sudamérica. Sin entrar en demasiados detalles, estamos analizando los centros de distribución de la empresa, con las regiones que atienden cada uno y la intensidad de la demanda en cada región. El modelo integra igualmente el transporte para el envío de las piezas, y los niveles de inventario en CEDIS, subalmacenes y puntos de venta (todo de manera agregada).

En este caso, la manera más sencilla (y digo relativamente sencilla, dado que el modelo en sí es bastante complejo e interesante) consiste no en considerar las piezas movidas y almacenadas a través del modelo como entidades en sí mismas, sino en tomar un enfoque de variables y eventos, de manera que cada semana tenemos una única entidad de control, que va fluyendo a través de los eventos que van ocurriendo en la lógica del modelo (revisión de inventarios en CEDIS y regiones, solicitudes de piezas, envíos, cálculos de costos, envíos emergentes, etc.).

De esta manera, hemos podido simplificar el modelo, pero al mismo tiempo, darle la suficiente flexibilidad para integrar algunos puntos que ocurren en la red del cliente. Además, y esto puede parecer intangible, hemos podido también reducir la carga computacional y el tiempo de proceso del modelo de simulación, puesto que el uso de variables nos requiere tener en un momento dado del modelo solamente una entidad, y todas las operaciones matemáticas y las condicionales existentes, se realizan a través de variables.
 
Igualmente, el manejo de diversas regiones en el modelo implica varios cálculos y variables similares con la diferencia única de a qué región pertenecen; esto lo simplificamos mediante el uso de variables tipo vectores (array), con lo cual podemos diseñar un modelo genérico que nos permite modelar diversos centros de distribución, cambiando únicamente los datos de entrada al mismo.

En este caso en particular, si bien sería posible manejar cada entidad como piezas, o como un múltiplo de “n” piezas, el manejo de los inventarios no se justifica, además de que el modelo podría complicarse a nivel operativo.

Yo en lo personal manejo mucho este enfoque de simular por variables, pues me parece más cómodo y poderoso… ¿Algún comentario sobre este enfoque?

Classical problem solving is used to solve problems, be it on the shop floor or in the board room. Six Sigma is a modern process improvement methodology used to improve the quality of manufacturing and service operations. There is often confusion as to whether Six Sigma is considered a form of classical problem solving or if one methodology has evolved from the other.

Classical problem solving has the following steps.

1. Identify the problem – What is the burning platform? What is it that needs to be fixed?
2. Define the problem – Define the problem as a specific single problem to be resolved.
3. Investigate the problem – Collect metrics on the current as-is state.
4. Analyze the problem – What are the root causes of the problem?
5. Solve the problem – Change the process to resolve the problem.
6. Confirm or validate the results – Measure the new system state and confirm with hard data that the fix has actually fixed the problem.

Six Sigma uses DMAIC methodology. DMAIC stands for define, measure, analyze, improve and control. The DMAIC steps are:

1. Define – What is the burning platform?
2. Measure – What is the current state of the system?
3. Analyze – What should be improved?
4. Improve – Implement the plan to improve the system.
5. Control – Measure the new system state, implement system controls to ensure the new system state is maintained.

When solving a problem, the question often arises as to what is different between these two problem solving processes. Problem solving meetings may have the label Six Sigma project slapped on because that is the current management goal. A "tiger team" to solve a problem may try using Six Sigma methodology for what actually requires a classical problem solving approach.

What are the differences between these two problem solving methods?

• Six Sigma is different from classical problem solving in both goals and the final step. Six Sigma sets a specific numerical goal – 3.4 defects per million opportunities or products. Classical problem solving can solve any problem, whether it is quality based or not. Classical problem solving can be aimed at improving a system to any statistical criteria.
• The "control" step of Six Sigma also differs from the "confirm or validate" step of the classical problem solving method. The control step of Six Sigma includes both confirmation of the fix and implementation of controls to keep the process changes in place. In classical problem solving, there is only validation of the fix; there is not a specific methodology and plan to ensure that the changed system stays changed.

There is an old adage: "The customer is always right." But are they? This adage requires both caveats and analysis.

1. When do the needs of one customer outweigh the needs of the many customers?
   If a business has only a few customers, then one unhappy customer could constitute an unacceptable loss. However, if there are many customers, the time spent meeting the greater demands or extensive change meet the desires of one customer may cost other customers. Imagine an ice cream stand with a long line of customers, with a server making a custom mish mash for one customer instead of whipping out cone after cone. Making that one customer "right" makes dozens of others wait in the heat, likely losing many as they go for lemonade or snow cones instead. Balance the time and financial cost of making that customer happy against the possibility of other lost sales.
2. When is the cost of the demand profitable?
   Is the cost of $500 of custom upgrades on a car worth making a $25,000 sale? Probably. Is the cost of a $50 custom alteration of a $120 dress worth it to make the sale? Probably not. Do not go the extra dollar to make the customer happy if it results in no profit, or worse, a loss.
3. What is the hope of return on investment for the cost of meeting this demand?
   Assume the business is willing to consider spend the money to make that customer happy. Will it result in repeat sales from this customer, as a car buyer comes back for another one in a few years? Will it result in new sales, such as when the happy customer sends their spouse and children and neighbors over to buy items? Or is the expense of this one upgrade, to make a single customer happy, actually going to result in more business? If the cost of making the customer happy doesn’t result in more sales, then it is neither justifiable as a marketing expense through word of mouth or as an investment in repeat business. In this case, the cost of meeting the demand is likely too high in terms of opportunity costs.
4. When are the demands reasonable? 
   There are always those who will find fault with anything. Place an imaginary typical customer in the current customer’s situation. If the food isn’t right no matter what is done, if everything in the establishment is far below any expectations, if the quality standards are never met, it may be the fault of the customer for finding fault with all that is provided. Whether it is an impossibly high set of expectations or someone seeking to complain illegitimately with the intent of getting quality product for a reduced or no price, it is possible that the customer's demands are best left unmet.

When is the customer wrong? When doing what is right for that customer is bad for other customers or for the business as a whole. The adage should be updated: "The customer is USUALLY right."

*If a customer's request must be declined for business reasons, offer discounts on other products or services or referrals to those who can probably meet their request. Sending someone away with a "no" may lead to negative word of mouth reviews.

Normalmente, las aplicaciones y la enseñanza de la simulación se orientan demasiado a un enfoque de entidades y de manufactura, donde el enfoque principal es "mover" a través de un proceso "algo" que se procesa y termina. Incluso, diversos libros de simulación discreta, incluyendo aquellos co-editados con las empresas que producen sus paquetes de simulación, hacen énfasis en esta manera de modelar.

Sin embargo, considero, en mi experiencia práctica y académica, que las aplicaciones de la simulación pueden enriquecerse (y en ocasiones incluso simplificarse) mediante el uso de los paquetes o lenguajes discretos de simulación en un enfoque a eventos y mediante el uso de variables estadísticas, donde las entidades juegan simplemente un papel de control o como un disparador para una serie de eventos que se realizan siempre en una frecuencia fija de tiempo.

Este enfoque de simulación lo considero muy útil, además de que ofrece una mayor flexibilidad para los modelos. He tenido además la oportunidad de poder realizar diversos modelos de simulación reales en proyectos de consultoría y en diversas compañías, y su aplicación me ha permitido realizar con sencillez y confiabilidad diversos casos reales, en particular en áreas de finanzas y toma de decisiones.

Considero que los ingenieros industriales en ocasiones dejamos a un lado las técnicas de finanzas y de valuación de proyectos a favor de otras herramientas más "duras". Sin embargo, el modelo de valor presente neto (basado en variables económicas donde la entidad solamente dispara los flujos de efectivo mensuales, por ejemplo), ha probado ser muy útil para la definición de alguna empresa o, llevándolo a un terreno académico, incluso para que los alumnos vean la ventaja de estas técnicas para un caso de la compra a crédito de un automóvil (lo cual, dicho sea de paso, ayuda a atraer más su atención).

En fin, este enfoque de variables y no de entidades tiene igualmente la ventaja de reducir sustancialmente la carga computacional del software, así como de acelerar el modelo, y en última instancia, puede inclusive ser más fácilmente entendible por el usuario final o alguien no ligado directamente al desarrollo del modelo.

Igualmente, este enfoque permite que, a nivel académico y durante la enseñanza de esta materia a nivel licenciatura o posgrado, puedan desarrollarse proyectos semestrales de una mayor complejidad que normalmente no podrían ejecutarse a nivel de entidades en versiones estudiantiles o académicas de diversos paquetes de simulación.

En el siguiente blog comentaré un caso en el cual estoy colaborando actualmente de un modelo de simulación con un enfoque de red de distribución e inventarios para una compañía en México.

When a field has no known value or has lost its information through data transfer and data translation, the need may arise to fill in a dummy value. This may include manufacturing dates, assembly dates, or test dates. Should a long past date be used? Should a future date be used? In what circumstances can a dummy and non-existent date be used as a placeholder?

Using a past date:

Pros:

1. The dummy date set in the distant past will almost universally be recognized automatically by software as not requiring effectiveness and standards integration.
2. A long past date is logically and immediately understood by users as a place holder, such as 01/01/1900.
3. Long past placeholder dates will not interfere with projected work load software.

Cons:

1. The dummy date may adversely affect historical reports and age calculations.
2. A past date will always place the dummy value on the report, though it may show up as the oldest when the actual age is not known. This may result in the need to add filters to exclude the dummy date.

Using a future date...

Pros:

1. Parts with a future build date do not show on prior work done or historical reports.
2. Parts with a future date are recognized by humans as either requiring correction or as placeholders.
3. Parts with future dates are unlikely to be interpreted as a Y2K bug that was missed.

Cons:

1. Future dates used in manufactured date fields will result in these assemblies being caught in effectivity input as "now and forever" or "this and all future" assemblies.
2. The future is coming. A future placeholder date set too soon in the future will come and pass, making the future date part of the past and then be incorrect.
3. A future build date may be interpreted as a required work assignment in manufacturing management system.
4. Parts with a future date may not show in the current inventory at all.

Using a non-existent date, such as 03/33/2003 or 02/29/2003...

Pros:

1. Parts with a non-existent placeholder date can be integrated into the appropriate effectivity scheme.
2. Parts with a non-existent placeholder date will be recognized in most historical reports.
3. Non-existent dates may be selected and input to not skew averages and tailored to necessary data parameters.
4. A non-existent placeholder date, if made obvious, can be easily recognized as a placeholder requiring correction.

Cons:

1. A non-existent placeholder date may not be allowed by the software.
2. A non-existent placeholder date may cause errors among data transfers or carry over correctly to other software applications.

In the Eidelman Health Engagement study, approximately 60 percent of those surveyed either partially or highly agreed that employers should be actively involved in maintaining or improving the health of their employers. What if we set aside the privacy concerns and ethical risks of an employer assuming ownership of people by seeking to manage the details of their body (and, by default, lifestyle that affects the body)? Then, if we dare to think employers not only could but should manage employees' life and health, how could information technology used to accomplish this?

Assuming this is not a negative to human resource, industrial engineering and management professionals, how far could such information integration go to impacting the workplace?

1. A firm has access to such information on job candidates, whether new hires or promotions or for training. The decision on two equal candidates favors the one with better health indicators, since they are fitter.
2. If the employer has access to health information, managers could take such decisions into discussion at performance reviews. "Yes, you saved us $500,000 dollars this year, but you gained 0.2 points on your BMI despite repeated warnings - so your raise is only 2 percent this year instead of the standard 3 percent."
3. Weight loss teams are optional today. However, with smoking becoming demonized due to its impact on health, they could become mandatory for employees as a condition of employment. Fail to lose the desired weight, and perhaps you lose your job as well.

What else could happen? The potential for abuse is only limited by human imagination. And to quote Albert Einstein, "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."

Al momento de realizar un modelo de simulación, existen aquellas personas quienes están a favor de utilizar un software de simulación (simulador) y quienes prefieren la utilización de un lenguaje de simulación.

La elección de uno u otro seguramente van ligadas a las preferencias; sin embargo, más allá de las preferencias, el tipo de modelo a realizar, así como sus características intrínsecas y su complejidad, deben dirigir con más imparcialidad la elección de un lenguaje de simulación o de un software de simulación.

Definitivamente que el uso de un software o simulador facilitan la creación de un modelo, debido principalmente a su interfaz gráfica basada en bloques que se enlazan a través de ramas en una secuencia lógica. Existen diferentes paquetes disponibles en el mercado, y si a su facilidad de uso le agregamos que son bastante vistosos, que en la mayoría ofrecen diferentes plantillas con bloques especializados y a sus reportes de resultados asequibles, no es sencillo encontrarles "peros" o "desventajas", y la elección en su favor podría parecer obvia.

Sin embargo, dichas bondades pueden verse un tanto afectadas en algunos modelos particulares, donde la complejidad de su lógica, además de la necesidad de utilizar ciclos, subrutinas o condicionales compuestas, pueden poner al analista en algunos aprietos. En general, los simuladores emplean condicionales para poder realizar ciclos, y las condiciones compuestas implican distintos niveles de bloques de condiciones, que en ciertas ocasiones y modelos, pueden generar una red bastante enmarañada, la cual puede perder un poco su eficacia y su facilidad de presentación e interpretación.

Además, existen ocasiones en que los modelos pueden requerir ciertas funcionalidades matemáticas, y las funciones mismas pueden estar un tanto limitadas en los simuladores. Y no digamos el intentar manejar una entidad directamente en un simulador, se puede volver complejo el mover una entidad de una línea de espera a otra, o sacarla de una línea de espera hacia la salida de manera directa.

La ventaja de usar un lenguaje de simulación es principalmente la flexibilidad obtenida para modelar las operaciones y la lógica. Si bien es cierto que esto implica la dificultad de aprender el lenguaje y generar un código, existen modelos en los cuales las bondades del lenguaje se ponen de manifiesto. La posibilidad de poder integrar directamente al código condicionales del tipo IF-THEN-ELSE o de  ciclos tipo FOR-NEXT simplifica en demasía una red; la posibilidad de manejar directamente entidades y poderlas mover o destruir en cualquier momento, así como actualizar la recolección de estadísticas dentro de ciclos o condiciones, permite simplificar en demasía la lógica de modelos complejos.

Si a esto le agregamos la facilidad de uso de una biblioteca de funciones matemáticas adicionales, podemos también simplificar algunos cálculos, y de esta manera, reducir también la complejidad de nuestra red gráfica, lo cual en última instancia acelera los resultados del modelo.

En lo personal, yo prefiero en la medida de lo posible el uso de los lenguajes de simulación; quizás se deba a que soy un poco de la "vieja guardia" que aprendimos a programar desde los lenguajes bajados en MS-DOS, y quizás valga la pena que en otra edición de este blog pueda referirme a un ejemplo concreto realizado con un lenguaje.

Imagine that you just moved into a brand new house today. It's twice as big than your last one, with a "bold, new design" in your huge new gourmet kitchen. Now, on your first night, try to make a gourmet dinner for 10 guests. Think it would be easy to find everything, move around, and cook efficiency? Hardly!

New space breaks old process. It's a rule as real as gravity, especially in healthcare. If only due to the distances walked, new technologies implemented, and locations of important supplies and equipment, processes invariably change in a new physical environment. Failing to take this into account before moving in can be devastating to your efficiency, productivity, and patient satisfaction scores. Yet, hospitals routinely fail to do a sufficient amount of the right kind of preliminary analysis to ensure optimal capacity, efficiency, and resource utilization in their new space.

To prevent process breakdown, hospitals have adopted creative ways to let the staff "see" the facility before they move into it. Architects often use 3-D visualization to let the staff do a "virtual walk-through" of their new space. Elaborate physical "mock-ups" are built from Styrofoam and plywood to let the staff walk around and see how the space will look.

Yet, while helpful as a visual representation, these fail to allow staff to actually work in the environment over long periods of time, and under a variety of circumstances, to understand how the new space impacts familiar processes. Failing to realize the important connections between new space and optimal workflow results in facilities that quickly become sub-optimal. Furthermore, all too often, we fail to step outside our traditional comfort zones and challenge the decades-old thinking that make up our current operational models, and thus miss opportunities to let the "form" support and enhance a new, more optimized "function."

Recently I had the opportunity to review the preliminary drawings of a new ED. While bigger than the Hill-Burton-era facility it would replace, the new design was strikingly outdated. None of the modern, more aggressive operational models, such as "No Wait" flow, had been effectively supported by the new spatial design. Though larger, it was essentially "a bigger you." Meaning, despite how far process improvement has brought us, it was a larger version of the old, as has been designed for many years to support "traditional" ED flow.

If hospitals are going to spend hundreds of millions of dollars, and take the "one shot in a lifetime" opportunity to build a shiny new facility, it makes sense to step back and completely re-examine how care is delivered, how processes can be rebuilt, and how space can enhance new, more robust and efficient operational models. Such analysis requires more than process maps, some Styrofoam, and staff interviews.

Tools like discrete-event simulation can replicate the patient and staff flow in a very realistic way, such that travel distances, processes, staffing patterns and a variety of patient arrival patterns can be studied within the context of the new layout. This not only helps redesign a more modern and optimal operation, but can save building costs by optimizing capacity in a smaller space, and allowing staff to work more efficiently within the new layout.

Analyzing process before designs are completed allows for old processes to be studied and re-assessed, new operations tested, and a more effective and optimized system achieved before any physical constraint are created. A new, modern "form" should thus enhance a new, modern "function."

Sally, a young woman in her 30s, loved her job! However, she came to see me because, as a member of her team, she was feeling miserable and needed help to sort this out. One of her teammates was making her life so difficult for her that Sally didn’t want to go to work. What was happening? 

"She criticizes me no matter what I do. Even when I think I've done a good job, she keeps hounding me about something that she doesn’t think is right. And she does this is in front of everyone on the team."

Although Sally felt harassed, she claimed there was really nothing she could do about it. She worked for a small company with no HR department and felt that if she should put in a complaint, it would turn the team against her. She said she wanted to continue working for the company as she likes what she does, and the company itself … with the exception of this one person … is very good to her.

When I asked if she had tried talking with her teammate, Sally said that when she had done so she was told by her that she is too sensitive. Nothing changed as a result of those confrontations, however, and Sally is now getting physically sick over it.

What are this employee's options? A small company, a fellow worker harassing her, and nowhere to turn. Does she leave the company and look for work elsewhere?

Had she talked with other members of her team about this? Yes, she did, and they all said they noticed how unkind this woman was being to her but if she wouldn't answer, they felt it would soon stop.

Were they willing to take a stand and confront this woman for her poor behavior? Not at all. Everyone was looking out for himself and was afraid of losing his job if he spoke up.

Is this the answer to harassment in the workplace? Everyone out for himself and let the bullying continue? I wonder what happened to authority … to leadership? Does anyone feel he/she has the imperative to stop a situation which is certainly counterproductive and can and will affect the morale of the company? The idea of a "team" is that everyone works together in harmony to reach its stated goal.

What, then, should Sally do? She is getting sick over this and no one is rising to her defense or attempting to change what appears to be a very dangerous situation. Why dangerous? Because this type of behavior has the potential of affecting the morale of the workforce which, in a small organization, particularly, depends on "family type" feelings of loyalty and company identification which impacts worker productivity. Once morale goes, so does productivity. One of the big reasons for team building is to try to avoid situations like this.

Sally doesn't want to leave her job. What are her choices? How can she change the situation? What is the responsibility of management? Of her teammates? Let's hear some comments from you as to what you would do if you were in Sally's position.

You can visit Dr. Berman on her website, rebuildyourcareer.com, or contact her by e-mail at drberman@rebuildyourcareer.com.

But a lot of time, energy and manpower is put into providing conference attendees with a high-quality experience surrounding education and networking. Members of the IIE staff contribute several hours a week throughout the year preparing for the next annual conference. And just as attendees find reward in taking part in the IIE Annual Conference and Expo, IIE staff members also find reward in their own efforts.

“In the months leading up to the Annual Conference, I focus on honors and awards, student competitions, BOT and CIE schedules. Some of the biggest challenges in conference preparation are the BOT schedules, obtaining information and photos from honorees, organizing the banquet, preparing the Honors & Awards script and PowerPoint presentation.

I’m most looking forward to the Honors & Awards Banquet and working with the students at the various competitions. They are always so excited so they are a joy to be around. I also enjoy working registration and getting to chat with our members and possibly new members.” – Bonnie Cameron, IIE headquarters operations administrator

“My responsibilities are doing everything in my power to see that as many members and potential members know about the conference as we possibly can reach, to communicate the benefits of attending, the low cost associated with airfare, hotel rooms and food in Cancún versus other locations and to look for promotional opportunities with exhibitors and others who might help us reach a larger audience.

As a marketing director, by the time the conference arrives, I am finished with my primary duties and have moved on to the next conference. But I look at each conference as a learning experience being new to IIE. It gives me an opportunity to interact with the attendees and get a feel from them on a more personal basis which allows me more incite in how to communicate with them more effectively in coming years.

Making new friends is always fun too. Most of the people I work with are just voices on the phone. Meeting them makes the experience of working with them in the coming year a lot more enjoyable.” – Greg Griffith, director of marketing

“Envision a giant 3D scatter chart … so many dots all representing people working to put on a remarkable learning experience for IIE members and customers. My fun job is to connect the dots, look at all the variables, look for similarities, and make sure all the proper operations are in order to assist staff and volunteers in reaching the ‘big picture,’ in determining what kind of relationship is there that will allow them to work successfully together for the benefit of each other and the profession.

Focusing on all the ‘pieces’ of the conference and how they are related is challenging, always interesting, and what I do for months leading up to the Annual Conference. I will say that for the almost 16 years I have been ‘pulling the pieces together,’ the most fun part of the preparation is focusing on the end product and finally coming together with all the attendees. It’s like seeing my very best friends again and catching up on what has happened since the time we met at the last Annual Conference.” – Donna Calvert, corporate operations manager

“Meetings, meetings and more meetings. The IIE Annual Conference is where most of IIE's volunteer leaders meet face-to-face to plan for the coming year, meet with their constituents and just generally get together to network. Coordinating meetings and helping leaders communicate keeps me busy!

Seeing it all come together and hear the excitement from IIE’s members onsite is the great reward behind preparing for such an event. And Cancún represents all IIE plans to accomplish in Latin America. Getting our Latin America members together to plan for the future of IIE in this region is what I'm looking forward to this year.” – Heather Bradley, director of membership

“We recently completed signing the hotel contract for the 2013 IIE Annual Conference and will soon start thinking about 2014. For this year’s conference, we started in 2007 with the initial site visit. More immediate planning began at the 2009 conference in Miami. The 2009 and 2010 IERC and Applied Solutions Committees met to discuss planning for the 2010 conference.

In July, a site visit is conducted to the hotel – to review what we have contracted, and to see what adjustments need to be made. Meetings are held with hotel personnel and other potential vendors, such as, exhibit company, AV company, transportation company, etc. Meeting room assignments are made, based on previous needs.

Fall brings in more abstract reviews by committees as well as increased traffic in abstract submissions. Also, reviewing quotes from vendors. Early winter, abstracts are selected and presenters notified. Winter also brings final slotting of meeting space, including sub-groups who have their meeting at the conference. Final selection of vendors for the conference is also competed.

Spring brings a final site visit – to meet with all vendors and review the aspects of the conference.  Final slotting of speakers is complete – papers and presentations are submitted.  Final printing and planning is complete and it’s conference time!

For me, being onsite is the best part of the process. You get to meet all of the volunteers face-to-face. It’s great to be able to thank all of those who have put in countless hours to put together an outstanding educational experience! And before you know it, it’s over! And time to get ready for Reno (host city in 2011).” – Bill Gibbs, conference manager

"Help Wanted" … a phrase that we’re all familiar with. For most people, it means that a company or individual is looking to fill a job. In the past 18 months, this has been a phrase that has been heard all too rarely, as companies have suffered through one of the worst recessions we’ve seen in decades. Even as we’ve begun to see signs of recovery, employment trends have been slow to turn.

This is on my mind right now because I’ve been speaking with several of our student members. It’s graduation season and many of them are seeking employment. No doubt, many of our graduating IE students, as well as others in our profession, are finding it very challenging to identify opportunities. I graduated quite a while ago (Has it really been 30 years?). In 1980, our country was also in a state of recession, although milder than the current one. As my fellow graduates and I searched for jobs, I know I felt very fortunate to receive offers from Proctor & Gamble and Scientific-Atlanta. I sympathize with the many IEs and IE graduates struggling right now.

If you believe recently released studies, IEs have it better than most. Various publications and other surveying organizations rank industrial engineering near the top in terms of available jobs, opportunities and salaries. But let’s face it, practically all professions and industries are feeling the pinch of these economic times right now. Being at (or near) the top "ain’t what it used to be," especially if you’re the one looking for a job.

But let’s focus a minute on a broader meaning of the phrase, "Help Wanted," and why IEs are, in fact, in a better position than most. At its most basic level, "help wanted" simply means that someone or something needs help. Companies or organizations that are seeking to hire new employees want to find someone who can help them. Particularly in today’s economy, companies are struggling. They’re seeking help in becoming more effective, more efficient, more productive, more innovative or more quality-focused. I don’t know about you, but these phrases scream industrial engineering to me.

Today, IEs are making a difference in practically every industry and country. Traditional IE environments such as manufacturing and distribution as well as industries like healthcare and logistics continue to seek out industrial engineers to "help" their organizations. I truly believe that no profession is better qualified to lead the economic turnaround than industrial engineering. Many people and organizations agree with me. Industrial engineers are in demand because of what they can do for these organizations. They can help them. Efficiency, productivity, lean, quality, effectiveness … these are more than buzzwords or catchphrases to an industrial engineer. They are our lifeblood and our passion.

They are also solutions to many of the problems facing companies in the United States and the world. So if you’re an IE looking for a job, take heart. Even during these tough times, you’ve got a "leg up" on the competition. You’re truly able to provide the leadership companies are seeking, and more likely to successfully answer the "Help Wanted" call. Good luck!

In the Eidelman Health Engagement study, approximately 60 percent of those surveyed either partially or highly agreed that employers should be actively involved in maintaining or improving the health of their employers. What if we set aside the privacy concerns and ethical risks of an employer assuming ownership of people by seeking to manage the details of their body (and, by default, lifestyle that affects the body)? Then, if we dare to think employers not only could but should manage employees' life and health, how could information technology used to accomplish this?

1. Work scheduling schemes could instantly linked to medical schedules, automatically reassigning tasks or preventing meeting scheduling when an employee schedules a medical appointment.
2. Weight, blood pressure and other health measures could be tracked in electronic medical records. Human resources staff could be trained to have discussions with employees who health indicators are trending in negative directions or have reached a risky level.
3. Drug testing by the employer could be connected to medical records of the health insurer/health benefits provider. If illegal drugs showed up in the drug test, it could lead to an immediate scheduling of a session of drug treatment counselors. If prescription drugs for which the person not prescribed showed up in the test or if prescribed drugs were absent in the test, that information could be brought to the attention of the primary care physician for review.
4. Ergonomic reviews could be incorporated into medical records, which by correlation could flag any pain treatment, muscle strain or chiropractic visits. The information of prior medical treatment could be fed in an easy transfer to the Workers' Compensation System for injured employees.
   Conversely, repeat treatment of symptoms that correlate to a serious injury could be brought to the company's HR or Safety division to investigate as a possible workplace injury.
5. Accident reports from the employer could be made available to doctors so that they can incorporate that information into treatment plans and recommendations of how to safely return to work. This information could also be used by doctors to develop a list of other symptoms to check for at a later time, such as whether later symptoms of concussion appear at follow up medical visits.
6. Any prescription issued to an employee that could have an adverse effect on work, such as "do not operate heavy machinery while using", could be forwarded to the HR or even work scheduler so that employees can immediately be shifted to work that is safe to perform while on that prescription.

Normalmente se suele relacionar la Ingeniería Industrial con procesos de producción de bienes en los que el Ingeniero Industrial aplica sus conocimientos para lograr procesos eficientes y productos de calidad. Esa visión aun es vigente y ocupa a miles de ingenieros cada día pero el panorama de aplicación de la Ingeniería Industrial es todavía más vasto.

En este artículo, me quiero referir a la gran necesidad que existe en América Latina y en el mundo entero de aplicar las técnicas propias de la Ingeniería Industrial para lograr un impacto positivo en la sociedad.

Uno de los mejores ejemplos que podemos tomar para ilustrar este punto se encuentra en la India, en el sistema de hospitales Aravind, que ha logrado niveles de eficiencia y productividad sobresalientes.

El sistema de hospitales Aravind nació gracias a la visión de un hombre, el Dr. Govindappa Venkataswamy, mejor conocido como Dr. V.

Después de una visita a la Universidad de la Hamburguesa de McDonalds en Oak Brook, Illinois, Dr. V empezó a cuestionarse si la estandarización y el modelo de línea de producción de hamburguesas sería aplicable a la cirugía de cataratas.

Con esta idea en mente, inició actividades en 1976 con una clínica de 11 camas. Ahora es un sistema hospitalario con cinco instalaciones que ha salvado de la ceguera a millones de personas gracias a un modelo de operación bastante peculiar.

Uno de los principios básicos de operación de Aravind es la eliminación de todas aquellas partes del proceso que no aportan valor en términos del cliente. Además, previamente se controlan las entradas al proceso, -en este caso los pacientes que van a ser operados,- de modo que las cirugías se realicen sin interrupciones. Asimismo, el quirófano se convirtió en una estación de trabajo, donde las camillas se ubican en torno al cirujano que opera a los pacientes en un flujo continuo. ¿Suena familiar?

Esta descripción que bien podría aplicarse a cualquier planta de Toyota, es una muestra de lo que se puede hacer en beneficio de la gente con un poco de Ingeniería Industrial.

Los resultados hablan por si mismos. Gracias a su sistema de atención médica, Aravind ha logrado ser la organización más grande y más productiva en su tipo en el mundo entero:

• Desde su fundación hasta marzo del 2009, el sistema Aravind había realizado 3 millones 400 mil cirugías, de las cuales el 60% fueron totalmente gratuitas.
• Un doctor en el sistema Aravind realiza dos mil operaciones al año, casi 10 veces el promedio nacional en la India.
• Tan sólo en el periodo 2008 a 2009, en todos los hospitales Aravind, se ofrecieron dos millones setecientos cincuenta mil consultas externas y se realizaron trescientas nueve mil cirugías láser.
• Con el objetivo de bajar el costo de los insumos requeridos para la cirugía de cataratas, Aravind creó las instalaciones de producción Aurolab. El costo de un lente intraocular en el mercado internacional era de $100 dólares; en Aurolab el costo de cada lente se pudo reducir a sólo $2 dólares.
• Hoy, los lentes intraoculares hechos en Aurolab son usados en 120 países y cuentan con el 7% del mercado global.
• Casi dos terceras partes de los pacientes de Aravind reciben atención gratuitamente. Toda la operación del sistema es autofinanciable y soportada por el tercio de pacientes que si pueden pagar por el tratamiento.
• En el año 2008, Aravind recibió el prestigioso premio de la fundación Bill y Melinda Gates por sus contribuciones a la salud global.

Cuando supe de Aravind me entusiasmó reconocer técnicas y procesos bien conocidos por cualquier estudiante o profesional de la Ingeniería Industrial pero más tarde mi inquietud fue ¿por qué no empezamos a hacer lo mismo? ¿Qué nos frena para poder aplicarnos a hacer más eficientes y productivos tantos y tantos sistemas bien conocidos por su terrible ineficacia? El tema es todo un reto en sí mismo.

Los invito a visitar las ligas relacionadas a este artículo y a plasmar sus comentarios para enriquecer esta humilde aportación.

Ligas:
Página web del sistema de hospitales Aravind.
http://www.aravind.org/

Video TED : How low-cost eye care can be world-class.
http://www.ted.com/talks/thulasiraj_ravilla_how_low_cost_eye_care_can_be_world_class.html

Video Aravind Eye Hospital.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cjnNPua7Ag

Why the stress on stress and what exactly is stress so that we need to confront it? Stress goes by many different names, anxiety being the most common form. Anxiety encompasses the past, present and future. Stress in the workplace is a common occurrence, whether it occurred last week, today, or you anticipate its happening tomorrow.

As a supervisor or the lowest person on the totem pole, how many stressful events do you experience during the day? Where does it come from … your manager … your direct reports … or your own expectations for yourself? Does it come from having difficulty with your "boss" and your disinclination to talk with him/her about it? Does it come from having too many things on your plate and your inability to step back and discover why you are being overwhelmed?

Issues in the workplace – whether you are a supervisor or a staff member, an officer of the company, or someone who aspires to become a manager – all have common threads. And the threads have to do with your ability to manage yourself in the face of stress. What is under your control and what isn’t? You can’t be responsible for other people’s feelings but you need to be able to control your own.

If you are experiencing a lot of stress, the biggest problem is you are not handling it: you feel that your life is out of control and feel helpless to change it. Unfortunately, that is what keeps the stress on stress.

Central to reducing your stress is the issue of control … having the feeling that you are in charge of you. To begin the process, make a list of all the things you feel you are responsible for and then separate the myth from the reality. What are those things you alone can change and what are not? Many of the things that “bug” you may not be able to be controlled by you. Those that you have direct control of should be noted as to what you are doing to maintain control. The important point to remember in regaining your equilibrium is to control the areas of your life which you realistically can. Once you learn how to put back some control in your life, you will take the stress off stress!

What are some of your stressors? If it would help you to write about them, use the comment box to start a dialogue with me so that you can begin to put into perspective some of the anxieties you face in the workplace.

You can visit Dr. Berman on her website, rebuildyourcareer.com, or contact her by e-mail at drberman@rebuildyourcareer.com.

A few months ago Charlie Sozcek of DuPont presented a webinar about “Safety in the Process Industries.” Charlie stated that while respect and concern for human life and health must always drive our safety programs, there is definitely a strong economic incentive for vigilance. Charlie expressed that economic incentive as the…

“Zeroth Law of Asset Productivity”

The productivity of any facility drops immediately to zero if it:

• Blows up
• Burns down, or is
• Shut down for violating regulations

IEs can contribute to the preventing the catastrophic events that the “Zeroth Law” addresses. Typically there are multiple safeguards in place to address the very serious safety problems that could take down our plants. Multiple safeguards are required because, in certain circumstances any given safeguard may have a small “hole”: operator error, interlock malfunction, hazardous environment due to other problems, etc. Now imagine stacking slices of Swiss cheese from different cheese blocks. Even with three or four slices, the odds are high that somewhere in the stack there is a hole going through.  Our safety systems have fewer and smaller holes than Swiss cheese, but the risk remains – even though our odds improve.

IEs have the tools: practical knowledge of how the plant really operates, human factors expertise, probability/statistics knowledge, and especially systems thinking – that can help evaluate the safety. Because of the “Zeroth Law” it should be our concern – but even more, it really ought to be our concern because it’s the right thing to do.

Have a safe week!

In the last PID blog, we looked at Willie Sutton’s example of "going where the money is" and thought a little about IE/Lean tools for finding out where in our plants and supply chains there was most likely to be money to "liberate."

This blog is going to talk about choosing tools to help us "liberate" that money.

IEs are typically known by the tools we use. Particularly in the Process Industries (where industrial engineering is not as well established), an IE may become known as the person who introduced or regularly uses a particular tool. Careers have been boosted by successfully introducing "new" tools (often used elsewhere) for solving Process Industry problems. At the same time, most of us know of grandiose plans which introduced tools that became "the program of the year," and were gone by the next year.

In decades past we’ve seen a variety of "movements" and tools: Lean, Six Sigma, systems dynamics, ERP, MRPII, MRP, advanced optimization methods … All of them areas where IEs have a great deal to contribute! There are other tools however, that are more forgettable. How can we recognize applicable technology and reap the benefits of early adoption while avoiding "bleeding edge technology" – or merely chasing the next fad?

First of all, it’s important to understand the core methods and assumptions for any technology we want to implement. For instance MRP is a very useful tool for determining material needs. However, some early MRP scheduling systems made the assumption of available (essentially infinite) capacity. These early MRP scheduling systems were soon followed by tools labeled "finite capacity scheduling" systems. (Does anyone have an infinite capacity production system?)

Second, professional organizations like IIE can offer real help in alerting technology professionals to emerging tools and understanding how those tools function in real life applications via journal articles, webinars and meeting presentations. Further, professionals from similar work environments to yours, like the Process Industries Division, can often provide insight on whether certain tools are "right" for applications in your industry. How can we take advantage of this expertise? Participate, network, work on committees, attend conferences – be a part of your technical organization – and then listen to what others are doing and their opinions of the technologies available (new and old). Find out what tools are really useful to help you successfully “get the money.”

Recientemente leí, quizás por tercera o cuarta ocasión, el artículo de C.K. Prahalad y A. Hammond titulado “Serving the World’s poor, profitably” (publicado en Harvard Business Review en su edición de septiembre del 2002).

Si bien no es un artículo reciente, es un hecho que la filosofía de la Base de la Pirámide sigue vigente, en particular en países donde existe una considerable pobreza; y México puede ser campo fértil para analizar con detalle sobre cómo atender a los pobres de manera rentable.

Para quienes vivimos en México, un ejemplo puede ser observado fácilmente: las farmacias que venden medicamentos genéricos en lugar de vender medicamentos de patente.

¿Han notado cómo se han incrementado estas farmacias, independientemente de su marca comercial? ¿A qué se debe este fenómeno? ¿Son buen negocio?

En relación a la primera pregunta, es interesante cómo estas farmacias pululan en las ciudades, y más aún en las zonas rurales o suburbanas; inclusive proliferan en ciudades de alto poder adquisitivo (si bien en menor número), pero es una realidad estas farmacias las encontramos ya “casi en cada esquina”. Además, hay numerosas ocasiones en las cuales
se encuentran colocadas a una corta distancia de farmacias que venden medicamentos de patente (es más, a veces están colocadas puerta con puerta).

Ahora bien, ¿por qué el fenómeno? Ante la crisis económica que se arrastra desde finales del año 2008, es indudable que el presupuesto destinado a medicamentos, aún entre personas de no bajos ingresos, se ha visto reducido, y la tentación de comprar medicamentos genéricos es muy grande, más tratándose de la diferencia de precios contra el medicamento de laboratorio. No es exagerado decir que el costo de un medicamento genérico es una fracción del costo del medicamento de laboratorio, a veces significando una reducción de precio de un 75%.

Si nos enfocamos más a la población que podría considerarse como parte de la base de la pirámide, sería prohibitivo acceder a un medicamento de patente, y dado el servicio en ocasiones deficiente de los sistemas públicos de salud, o a la escasez de medicamentos en los mismos, este tipo de farmacias genéricas significa quizás la única opción viable de conseguir los medicamentos que requieren. No entraremos en detalles sobre la efectividad de estos medicamentos genéricos, pues se crearía una controversia alterna que no es materia de este blog.

¿Son negocio? Ante el reducido costo que manejan en sus productos, podríamos suponer que el margen de ganancia es muy bajo, y me atrevo a afirmar dicha suposición. Sin embargo, tomemos en cuenta que la falacia de un alto margen, tal como lo menciona Prahalad, debe desecharse. El volumen es en este caso el driver para este tipo de farmacias, pues el alto número de personas que acuden a las mismas compensa el bajo margen de sus productos.

Podríamos comentar más sobre este tema, pero quizás necesitaríamos un análisis detallado y tener acceso a ciertos números para afirmar (o rechazar) los supuestos mencionados anteriormente. Sin embargo, cualquier comentario sobre este blog es bienvenido.

Después de reflexionar sobre los efectos de la globalización, es tiempo de pensar en las actitudes y aptitudes que exige la nueva realidad internacional respecto al quehacer del estudiante y profesional de la Ingeniería Industrial.

Este set de requerimientos, es por mucho diferente de la formación tradicional que prevaleció en la academia durante los últimos veinte años y exige una dinámica de cambio para todos los actores que intervienen en la formación y el ejercicio de ingenieros industriales.

En primer lugar, quiero enfatizar la imperiosa necesidad del dominio de lenguas extranjeras. En estos tiempos, sencillamente NO es posible ser un profesional competitivo si no se posee la habilidad de comunicarse en otros idiomas diferentes a la lengua materna.

El idioma inglés puede ser un buen inicio y tal vez hasta un "commodity" del conocimiento. Un ingeniero industrial visionario debe pensar también en aprender chino mandarín, alemán, japonés o francés.

Paralelamente, es de vital importancia conocer la cultura de otros países. Dos excelentes alternativas para este fin, son participar en los programas de intercambio que muchas universidades ofrecen para sus estudiantes y estudiar posgrados en países del extranjero.

Asimismo, en el campo profesional de la Ingeniería, pueden buscar estancias mediante misiones comerciales ofrecidas por cámaras empresariales y representaciones diplomáticas.

Dos buenos ejemplos de la necesidad de comprender otras culturas son China y Japón.

Intentar hacer negocios en China sin entender a profundidad el concepto "Guanxi" es casi una garantía de fracaso. En este país oriental es muy importante cultivar una red de relaciones clave (Guanxi) que sean capaces de aportar valor a un proceso, cosa que a muchos occidentales puede parecernos una pérdida de tiempo.

A su vez en Japón, dos aspectos relevantes de su cultura de negocios son "ringi" o toma de decisiones por consenso y "meishi" que significa sencillamente, tarjeta de negocios.

Para el japonés, una tarjeta de presentación (Meishi) representa un protocolo de negocios en el que el respeto es fundamental. Por eso, siempre se debe presentar la tarjeta orientada hacia nuestro interlocutor y sosteniéndola con nuestras dos manos, por más incomodo y poco práctico que parezca.

Por último, quiero llamar la atención sobre el gran potencial que tiene el uso de las tecnologías de información para trabajar en un mundo plano.

La India ha logrado una posición competitiva gracias a varios factores entre los que destacan su conocimiento del inglés y su posición geográfica. Es por esto que gran cantidad de call centers y firmas de servicio tienen su sede en India.

Cuando las empresas en el continente americano están finalizando su jornada laboral, el día apenas inicia en la India. Gracias a la tecnología es posible que un equipo de ingenieros en la India continúe el trabajo de su contraparte en el continente americano, cumpliendo el sueño de una jornada de trabajo continua.

La tecnología de información puede ayudar a integrar equipos con miembros en diferentes países sin incurrir en gastos de viaje, optimizando el tiempo y logrando la máxima eficiencia.

El uso de Internet con todas sus variantes, como programas de telefonía, portales, correo electrónico y redes sociales, entre otras aplicaciones, es una magnífica vía para poder colaborar internacionalmente.

Concluyendo, es importante pensar en las condiciones que requiere la competividad en un entorno globalizado. Para ello, es conveniente considerar los tres factores planteados en este artículo:

• Dominar varios idiomas.
• Comprender la cultura de otros países.
• Usar la tecnología para colaborar internacionalmente.

Para finalizar, quiero hacer notar que participar activamente en una organización como es el IIE es también una buena manera de enfrentar la globalización. En el IIE podemos compartir experiencias con estudiantes y profesionales de todo el mundo y aprender las más novedosas aplicaciones de la Ingeniería Industrial gracias al uso de la tecnología de información.

¡Bienvenida la globalización! ¿Esta usted preparado?

Every business has cycles. At IIE, we follow an annual cycle of conferences, Board meetings, elections and other actions. Right now, our association is at a peak of activity. Our elections were recently completed. New leaders are assuming office. Two conferences just occurred. Our new fiscal year begins April 1. And last, but certainly not least, we are in the throes of preparing for the IIE Annual Conference and Expo.

I’ve been in association management for 26 years and have attended too many conferences to count. But I’ve got to say, I’m looking forward to IIE’s 2010 Annual Conference with an anticipation and enthusiasm unlike any I’ve felt in a long time. I know some of you are thinking, “Of course you are, who wouldn’t be looking forward to a trip to Cancún?” And while I’ll admit the event is in a great place, it’s much more than a chance to visit such an attractive destination.

This will be IIE’s first major, association-wide conference to be held outside the United States or Canada. There have been IIE regional events, chapter meetings and student conferences held around the world. But the Institute has never sponsored one of its primary events in a location where English isn’t the primary language (OK, I guess that Montreal may be an exception).

A few years ago, IIE defined one of its objectives to be to transition from a U.S.-centric association with international members to a global association with members in the U.S. and elsewhere. We’re accomplishing this goal in a variety of ways. IIE has members in 74 different countries. Twenty-two percent of our members reside outside the U.S. or Canada. We are now holding webinars in Spanish. Our monthly member newsletter, “IIE Focus,” is published in multiple languages. Through our Qualified Training Provider program, IIE is providing seminars in other countries that are led by natives of that region in their own language. In 2010, IIE will be working with Latin American members to provide a number of certificate programs that will enhance the qualifications of industrial engineers in those regions. Two of IIE’s primary social networking platforms, Facebook and LinkedIn, are often populated by discussions in Spanish.

But for IIE to hold its Annual Conference in Mexico speaks volumes about the organization’s commitment to international service. The profession of industrial engineering is growing around the globe. Countries like India, Turkey, China, Ireland, and many more are seeing dramatic demands for IEs, combined with rapid expansion of industrial engineering education. But Mexico combines a high level of growth in the profession, a well-respected university system, a strong IIE presence among students, traditional industrial engineering industries, and geographic proximity. It’s the perfect opportunity for the Institute to venture into new territory (no pun intended).

And don’t forget, in addition to the excellent training and networking that occurs at this conference, Cancún’s not a bad place to visit. So don’t miss this chance to help IIE debut on a global stage. This won’t be our last venture out there, but it is our first. I hope to see you there.

When a scientific paper is published in an obscure language, word of the discoveries or technologies is hindered by lack of communication and dispersal of ideas. For example, many Icelandic advances in geothermal engineering were unknown to the rest of the world due to their published papers and publications being in their own language, cut off from the general flow of ideas and technological exchange. Yet the problem of dead languages dead-ending technical development do not occur only in engineering. The same dead end is hit when dead programming languages are used.

1. When a dead software language is used to develop an application, any project developing the next generation is slim to nil. After all, there is a greater cost-benefit to use programming languages in general circulation due to cheaper talent to develop further iterations, to say nothing of troubleshooting.
2. This inability to quickly respond to users needs via new releases means that an application may become obsolete the moment the users need to upgrade to meet security requirements – regardless of its superior function.
3. Using a dead software language limits if not destroys interoperability with other software applications.
4. Not only is the application difficult to alter or improve, the method of handling data may make the information stored within it unavailable without significant formatting or translation. Thus backing up of the information or even its retrieval becomes inordinately difficult. The only thing worse than a financial software you cannot upgrade to meet Sarnes-Oxbane rules is one that you cannot pull data out to send to the IRS or restore in another database format after a computer crash.

Avoid using dead or dying software languages when developing any application, be it home grown or intended for wide distribution. Using a dying language may kill your software project’s hopes before they went live.

When can you use a dying software language:

1. To perform patches on a sun-setting software tool to keep it running until its planned replacement is installed.
2. To fix immediate problems caused by Operating System upgrades and changes that will not be supported by the vendor. This is a stop-gap measure but done when the application no longer works in the modified desktop or server environment and the replacement tool is not yet ready.
3. To change or update code in order to meet security requirements or legal requirements within a necessary timeframe when installing a replacement software program cannot be done in time.

En relación al anterior blog, tuvimos que tomar acciones para poder hacer ver al cliente que el trabajo realizado hasta el momento para el proyecto de simulación, si bien no es tangible, es valioso y proveerá de resultados y beneficios, en particular, en el aspecto económico.

Para ello realizamos diversas actividades:

• Una sesión del tipo académico para explicar el concepto de simulación, incluyendo enfoque, ventajas, desventajas, diferencia contra optimización, aplicaciones, etc. Dado que el grupo de consultoría cuenta con experiencia impartiendo la materia de simulación a nivel de licenciatura, maestría y doctorado, esto fue relativamente fácil, si bien hubo que hacer algunas adecuaciones para simplificar el lenguaje de la sesión, dado el nivel académico del grupo de personas por parte del cliente.
• En otra sesión, se explicó la naturaleza del modelo de simulación propuesto para ellos, empleando un diagrama de flujo, así como un documento que detallaba (si bien con lenguaje simplificado), la lógica del proceso a simular. Esto les ayudó a entender qué se haría, dado que ellos conocen aún mejor que nosotros como consultores sus procesos.
• Se les mostró el modelo de simulación preliminar en vivo, y cada una de las tareas realizadas (que a su juicio no aportaban mucho valor) se fueron señalando dentro del modelo, de manera que pudieron observar dónde encajaban los datos y análisis que hasta el momento se habían realizado.
• Finalmente, el modelo se corrió para que vieran cuánto tardaba en desarrollarse y qué resultados se obtenían, para posteriormente discutir con ellos los primeros números obtenidos, a la vez que se les explicó la necesidad de realizar un análisis estadístico de los resultados, para tener una mayor certeza de los mismos.

Con estas acciones, el valor inicial de las fases de análisis y desarrollo preliminar del modelo de simulación fue aceptado, y el cliente quedó en una posición más abierta ante las siguientes actividades del proyecto completo. En particular, como integramos en la última sesión una discusión de las primeras propuestas de mejora y cómo encajarían las mismas en el mismo modelo de simulación, entendieron con mayor claridad lo relativo a los diseños de escenarios y cómo el modelo se va enriqueciendo y ofreciendo la manera de evaluar las posibles alternativas que lleven a una mejora real para ellos.

Recently, I purchased a MacBook Pro and have been struggling with the changeover from my PC which I have used for umpteen years. I bought the One to One plan which is available upon purchase and gives me access to a techie at the Apple store who can help me with the transition. This plan is what probably has saved me from tossing the computer out the window or – worse still – a nervous breakdown!

These kids are fabulous! They know the computer like the back of their hand and are able to teach as effectively as well. However, during the last two weeks I changed my location and my e-mail was not functioning properly. I could receive messages but not send. You can imagine my frustration. Worse still, I blamed it on this dang machine thinking, "What next?"
Fortunately, there is an Apple store about five minutes from my house, so I drove over there ready to give them my Mac back!

When I walked in, I asked for the manager who, after listening patiently (and admirably) to my harangue, he said, "I’m going to get a genius to help you." With that, I looked at him and laughed; I thought he was being funny. But, lo and behold, Apple has designated their top tier techies to the "genius" category to deal with problems that appear insoluble to mere mortals!

After a brief wait, the "genius" appeared: A young man probably either in his late teens or early 20s! He didn’t say much but he listened intently and then told me about the problem: It was my carrier in Rhode Island which is regional and not able to perform outside of that region. I could receive messages but not send!

I had a couple of options, but we both decided (with his input weighing very heavily...if not exclusively … on my decision), that the "genius" would set up another account on Google and do it in such a way that messages could go through my old network but I would access them with my new carrier. I would also have a new e-mail address but the way he configured it I had a choice whether I wanted to change it or not, depending on how much time I wanted to spend doing so.

Genius, indeed! I was impressed … and let him know that! How long did it take him to reach this level of knowledge? "Years," he humbly replied.

Yes, he really was a genius … able to do things I never thought possible! But Apple, in their wisdom, elevated him … and others like him … to a position of prominence. (He proudly wore a name tag around his neck with large letters, G-E-N-I-U-S.)

I decided to write this up for two reasons. First, I wanted to show how frustrated and irate customers can be appeased by a company’s having in place a system to handle difficult problems. There are so many "widgets" with idiosyncratic properties that it really does take a "genius" to figure some of them out!

Second, to have the managers who read my blog to understand the need to perhaps do things a bit differently in today’s marketplace. For a company to survive in this world of technology, it would be advisable to devise a system which hires and recognizes talent by "rewarding" them in ways that feed their self-esteem as well as their pocketbook. This, in itself, is a "genius" idea!

You can visit Dr. Berman on her website, rebuildyourcareer.com, or contact her by e-mail at drberman@rebuildyourcareer.com. 

I think most of us are familiar with the reply that old time bank robber Willie Sutton gave when asked why he robbed banks: "because that’s where they keep the money." Willie’s "wisdom" has application for IEs. Are we working on the projects "where the money is?" Maybe a more applicable (or at least more professional) phrase for IEs is "doing the right things rather than merely doing things right."

One of our biggest concerns should be in taking a long and broad enough view of our organizations to see where our talents (and those of our colleagues) can be most profitably employed. "Going where the money is" can be viewed in at least two parts: The projects we work on and the tools we use once those projects are identified. This blog will look at the projects we work on. Another blog will think about finding specialized tools to use.

First, although engineers sometimes refer to our accountant colleagues as "bean counters," they can be our best friends when we want to know what the financials REALLY mean. Second, there are a number of traditional I.E./Lean tools that can help us understand how our plants and supply chains work and where we’re most likely to find opportunities to increase earnings. Typically the analysis is progressive and can go something like this:

1. Spreadsheet Analysis. We always start with the numbers. Sometimes just having dollar figures, sales/production figures, and flow/capacity numbers in juxtaposition can tell us a lot. Where are we spending money? Where are we short on capacity? It’s important to give considerable thought to the structure of our spreadsheets, to make sure we "see" as much as possible from the analysis.
2. Value Stream Mapping/Supply Chain Mapping. James Womack and others taught us that we can gain tremendous insight by putting the numbers together with diagrams that describe the process or supply chain flow. Where is inventory piling up? Where is the product spending time with no value being added? Where is the bottleneck(s)? However, making maps is only the first step. Studying them with a variety of people to get different perspectives is important. Digging into the details to verify and expand on the data is critical.
3. Simulation. Occasionally we determine that because of the "dynamics" of the overall system, mapping doesn’t help us understand everything we need to understand. Are there shared resources, especially those that interact with bottlenecks? Is randomness important (and unavoidable)? Do system rules or conditions change, moving through time? Simulation’s most important work is not to give us "set piece" answers, but to help us understand how our systems work, and how they can work better.

Next we’ll think about how to identify "specialized tools" to help us "get the money."

In an exciting time for the Institute’s history, IIE is continuing to prepare for its first annual conference in Mexico – a country swelling with industrial engineering professionals and students in this new age of globalization. The event will signal the ever-growing role of industrial engineering in not only Mexico but also Latin America, which now competes strongly with the U.S. in the number of college graduates in IE.

This international growth has not only brought about diversity in membership, but also diversity in ideas. And as the global association of productivity and efficiency professionals, we want to encourage a greater exchange of experience that applies to all IEs no matter what language they speak.

In February, IIE Blogs debuted the first two topical blogs written in Spanish by IIE members from Latin America – “Tiempos Modernos - Innovación y Cambio” (“Modern Times – Innovation and Change”) by Jorge Gálvez and “Simulación y Planeación Estratégica” (“Simulaiton and Planning Strategies”) by Homero Contreras. These regular features are just a small part of future plans to incorporate the Spanish language into IIE’s education opportunities and resources.

In March, a webinar in lean manufacturing scheduled for March 19 will be presented in Spanish. Several presentations and activities also will be presented in Spanish during the IIE Annual Conference and Expo. And the Lean Six Sigma Solutions Conference this fall will take place in Monterrey, Mexico.

This multilingual, multicultural direction has been a longtime coming for IIE, and we aim to extend similar reaches over time to our members in Asia, the Middle East and other parts of the world where tongues and dialects may differ, but IEs speak the same language.

And while IIE will do its best to open gates along the language barrier, we hope you will make the effort to translate or learn for yourselves the words of your international colleagues. You may be surprised to find out just how much you have in common, no matter where you are in the world.

-David Brandt
Web managing editor
IIE

Bennett Foster wrote last month about the tension that sometimes exists between lean and Six Sigma philosophies, specifically about the difficulty in justifying capacity improvement projects, which will enhance an operation’s flexibility and agility, if the operation is not sold out and therefore unlikely to experience an immediate tangible monetary benefit. Reading that brought to mind other ways that Lean and Six Sigma can be viewed as being at odds.

First let me say that I believe that lean and Six Sigma are very compatible, very complementary, and should almost always be done together. In my experience, lean improvements are more effective and far more sustainable if done as black belt or green belt projects. I have found that any differences in philosophy or approach can be worked out, if you simply remember what it is that you are trying to accomplish, and behave accordingly.

As an example, the need for highly accurate data is sometimes a point of contention. Six Sigma generally requires very accurate data, and even has a step called “Measurement System Analysis” to validate the quality of the data. This is very appropriate if you are aiming for no more than 3.4 defects per million opportunities, but may be overkill on a typical lean improvement. If a SMED process is being used to try to reduce a changeover from an hour down to 30 minutes, it’s important to know that the baseline time is approximately 60 minutes, but it’s wasteful to spend any effort to try to refine that to 58.6 minutes or whatever it actually is.

Another example is Six Sigma’s project oriented approach to improvement, versus lean’s continuous improvement approach. I’ve found that the Six Sigma project approach can be effectively used even for small incremental improvements if you don’t get carried away with the need to apply all 17 deliverables in their complete form. A more pragmatic reconcile is to consider each deliverable, and consciously choose whether it is appropriate for the improvement challenge at hand. Six Sigma steps should not be ignored, nor avoided by default, but followed or dropped by carefully considering the applicability and need for each to deal with the current problem. In this way, the success of even three-day kaizen events can be enhanced if done as green belt projects.

Peter L. King is the president of Lean Dynamics LLC, a manufacturing improvement consulting firm. Prior to Lean Dynamics, King spent 42 years with the DuPont Co. in a vareity of control systems, manufacturing systems engineering, continuous flow manufacturing and lean manufacturing assignments for a wide array of products. He is Six Sigma green belt and lean manufacturing certified. King is the current president of the Process Industries Division of IIE.

La Conferencia Internacional del IIE en Miami me hizo reflexionar sobre la profundidad de los cambios que el entorno mundial ha experimentado y el impacto que esta dinámica ha provocado en la Ingeniería Industrial.

Al escuchar una gran diversidad de idiomas y ser testigo de la presencia de ingenieros y estudiantes de gran variedad de países, me fue fácil comprender la dimensión internacional de la Ingeniería Industrial y el efecto de aplanamiento del mundo, tan brillantemente descrito por Friedman en “The World is Flat.”

Mejor aún fue la destacada participación de profesionales, académicos y miembros de capítulos estudiantiles, quienes demostraron que la capacidad y el conocimiento ya no es un monopolio concentrado en unas pocas regiones, sino que es posible encontrar talento sobresaliente en prácticamente cualquier rincón del planeta.

Esta reflexión me lleva a concluir que la globalización es una realidad, con la que los profesionales de la Ingeniería tendremos que convivir tarde o temprano, nos guste o no nos guste.

Sólo con ver los productos con los que convivimos y su multiplicidad de orígenes, podremos darnos cuenta que los esquemas tradicionales de producción se han transformado. La visión local se ha quedado corta y es superada por un panorama internacional.

Como botón de muestra de esta nueva distribución industrial, cabe citar algunos ejemplos significativos:

• Después de casi 80 años de estar a la cabeza como el mayor productor de vehículos a nivel mundial, GM cedió la corona a Toyota de acuerdo a reportes de enero 2009.

• En 2008, la empresa Hindú Tata Motors, se convirtió en propietaria de dos de las marcas más representativas de la industria automotriz británica: Jaguar y Land Rover.

• La brasileña Embraer supo recuperarse de una situación cercana a la quiebra en los noventas para colocarse dentro de los cuatro mayores fabricante de aviones a nivel mundial, junto con Boeing, Airbus y Bombardier.

• En 2005, el corporativo chino Lenovo adquirió la División de computo personal de IBM, lo que la colocó en el cuarto lugar del ranking de fabricantes de la industria de la computación.

• En América Latina, otros destacados ejemplos de internacionalización son la vitivinícola chilena Concha y Toro; la cerveza Corona de México y Techint en Argentina.
¡Impresionante! Este panorama global era muy difícil de imaginar hace unas décadas y es prueba fehaciente de una realidad que no espera.

Lejos están los tiempos en que un profesional de la Ingeniería tenía como única perspectiva la industria local de su ciudad o país. Ahora las posibilidades de trabajar para una empresa global, tener jefes o empleados de otros países y de capacitarse o vivir en el extranjero son sorprendentemente abundantes.

Las implicaciones para los estudiantes y profesionales de la Ingeniería Industrial son abrumadoras y requieren de acciones inmediatas que abordaré en la segunda parte de este documento.

Si deseas conocer más de este tema, te recomiendo las siguientes lecturas:

“The World is Flat”, por Thomas Friedman.
“El Siglo de los Mercados Emergentes”, por Antoine Van Agtmael.

Recientemente, durante una junta de avance de un proyecto de consultoría donde se está realizando una simulación asociada a una red de distribución de una reconocida compañía con presencia en todo el país, los responsables de logística de la misma hicieron un cuestionamiento sobre el trabajo realizado:

¿Qué están haciendo ustedes como consultores, si en estas semanas no vemos algo tangible de su trabajo?

Tenemos unas semanas trabajando en la recopilación de su información, análisis de datos y diseño de su sistema; ya tenemos las distribuciones de probabilidad asociadas a los eventos a modelarse, incluso un avance del modelo de simulación genérico, y de todo esto se les ha retroalimentado e informado; sin embargo, si bien es un tanto difícil hacer ver como algo tangible el resultado de las primeras semanas de un proyecto de simulación, en esta ocasión la situación se tornó más complicada por un hecho muy simple, pero delicado:

Los responsables de la logística de la empresa no tienen una preparación académica universitaria, así que no comprenden cabalmente lo que se está realizando y no ven valor en los análisis y el trabajo realizado.

Ante esta situación, ¿en qué fallamos durante la propuesta? ¿Qué faltó en nuestra retroalimentación durante esta fase inicial? ¿Cómo lo solventamos para el resto del proyecto?

No podemos culpar simplemente al cliente bajo el contexto de que nosotros poseemos la formación académica, incluso a nivel de posgrado, y ellos no. Es parte de nuestra tarea como consultores poder lograr aterrizar no sólo los resultados finales de un proyecto (que, dicho sea de paso, deberán aportar beneficios tangibles y económicos al cliente), sino también lograr influir en la percepción del cliente sobre el trabajo que se está realizando continuamente.

En particular, estos clientes están acostumbrados a proyectos más enfocados a los “activos” de la distribución, es decir, cambios en almacenes (donde pueden ver cómo se movieron o redistribuyeron sus racks y sus materiales); o en modelos de transporte (donde ven cómo cubicar sus cajas, el cambio de tipos de unidades de transporte, etc.), así que debemos generar un valor tal que ellos lo perciban, sin ser físico, sino metodológico o intelectual en esta fase.

Así que, a pesar de que creíamos que la propuesta de simulación fue clara, que la misma fue leída, comentada y aceptada, no logramos que realmente entendieran el tipo de trabajo a realizar.

Nuestra tarea ahora es ésa: lograr que la percepción del cliente sobre nuestro trabajo, en el resto del proyecto, sea la apropiada para evitar algún mal entendido que pueda poner en riesgo el desarrollo y conclusión exitosos del modelo. Sobre estas acciones, comentaremos en el siguiente blog.

There are so many miscommunications that we have to sit back and ask ourselves whether the fault lies with the person initiating or the person receiving. It certainly is much easier to gauge this in face-to-face encounters rather than through e-mail.

In my last blog, I talked about the technology disconnect in the use of e-mails that can, and does, occur many times. Without talking directly with someone it is very hard to gauge the “voice” or the “music” – the underlying emotions which give our communication more than a one-dimensional aspect. When we don’t have face to face contact, we are apt to misread the intent of the person communicating. And, on the other side of this equation, if there is a delay in the response of the recipient, this can be misinterpreted by the one who initiated it.

Judgments are made by all of us as to the intent of the person communicating. How much easier it is to understand the intent when you are talking directly with a person than it is through e-mail. It occurred to me the other day that there is a “protocol” for e-mailing that has embedded itself in our culture. For example, there is usually a salutation like “Hi.” What happens if it is missing? Do you feel the communicant is being cold, doesn’t like you, or is difficult to get along with? Many times, I’m in a rush and don’t put that “Hi” in. I wonder what message I have left in terms of “music.”

However, e-mail can be effective in so many situations that not to use it would be foolish and inefficient. I do, believe, however, that there is a need to be discrete in its usage. In order to determine whether or not a face to face contact is necessary, ask yourself the following questions:

1. Is the person available to you directly? If so, would your relationship be improved by face to face contact rather than through e-mail?
2. If you have no alternative but to e-mail, are you careful as to how you word your message so it cannot be misinterpreted as to your intent?
3. Did you re-read the message before you sent it to make sure it says just what you want it to say?
4. When do you expect to get a response to your e-mail? If you wish to get it by a certain time, did you state that in the message?
5. If you were not clear as to when you want to hear back, do you relax and give the recipient a chance to respond or do you tend to read something into the delay that will affect your relationship with the respondent?

Even though you may think you’re wasting time with face-to-face encounters, I think that if you follow these few rules, you will find your relationships improving. As a result, your productivity will be up as your stress level goes down.

You can visit Dr. Berman on her website, rebuildyourcareer.com, or contact her by e-mail at drberman@rebuildyourcareer.com.

In recent years, I have spoken with a number of healthcare leaders, managers and staff about their improvement "methodologies." Whether meeting them through work or at great conferences like the upcoming SHS/ASQ Joint Conference, curiosity drives me to ask "What do you use to improve?" There was a time in the not-too-distant past when the answer was usually something like … "Nothing!" or perhaps, "We’re just starting with [insert buzzword] but haven’t gotten very far." Anecdotally, I have been intrigued by what I am hearing now, versus what I heard back then.

It seems that the most successful healthcare organizations are building "hybrid" methodologies to achieve their goals. Years ago, they might have started with one methodology/philosophy (e.g. lean) but have now gone well past those to include a variety of tools, concepts, systems, and methods. For instance, hospitals which once boldly touted their master black belts now use simulation and 5S to improve the complex and the simple, respectively. Systems that were once "lean shops" now use queuing theory and heavy-duty data analytics as enhancements.

And it isn’t because these successful hospitals were failing at one and chose another. Rather, by whatever means, the most successful systems are creating their own tool belts from the sundry of available tools, pulling what works from everything available in the market and developing what isn’t already there. They are essentially creating their own methodologies from scratch by learning from the experiences of others and their own successes, failures, needs and constraints.

Thus, we might need to toss out the notion that healthcare can simply adopt a single improvement methodology from another industry, make it fit in our world and expect success. The assumption seems to be that because healthcare is "so far behind everybody else," all we need is to adopt what has worked elsewhere, whether it be Toyota or Motorola. Perhaps instead, as our nurses and physicians have told us all for decades, healthcare is different! Given what I have seen (and haven’t seen) from some Lean Six Sigma engagements, and what I see the most successful organizations doing, perhaps we need to create our own, healthcare-specific improvement methodology!

Perhaps we need to accept the fact that hospitals are very dynamic, highly variable systems which don’t fit into the smooth, steady, and easy flow of a widget factory. Perhaps we need additional tools to round out 5S, RCA, control charts, and fishbone diagrams, to allow for the capture and analysis of the variability and complex interdependencies which cause us such pain. Perhaps we need a "systems view" to add to those other methodologies, to ensure that our successful departmental projects have an actual impact on our overall hospital performance metrics. Simply … perhaps our tool belt isn’t currently equipped to finish the job!

Yet, the fact that none of the hybrid systems seem to be the same indicates the need for greater regimen, research, and a more holistic, universally applicable healthcare approach. In my humble opinion, we need to throw open our creative minds and use all the tools at our disposal, develop what we cannot obtain from other industries' methodologies, and invent a new approach to healthcare improvement … one specifically made for healthcare! Forget trying to cram a dynamic system into a static methodology. Let's develop a dynamic methodology for our dynamic systems! The fact that so many relatively successful systems are doing just that, yet doing it quite differently, is testament to a dire need in the market which ME's can fill.

I am not saying that we should scrap Six Sigma and TQM and lean and all the others. There are valuable components to each. Rather, we need to stop trying to adopt everything from somewhere else, stop being so dogmatic about our "favorite flavor," and develop set of solutions to healthcare's very special problems! Heck, maybe we can teach something to the rest of the world about to run a really complex system!

I am quite sure this will "hack off" the dogmatic "leaners" and black belts, as if I'd said the world were round in the 1600s. But if you look at what the successful hospitals are doing, and what current methodologies lack, you'll find there are glaring holes that cannot be filling with today's methodologies alone.

For all of the bally-hoo of computers and software applications being created to take over all the mundane tasks, there are still things that only humans can do – and skilled ones at that.

There are no robot plumbers, and many people would be reluctant to have a robot make a mess doing a plumber’s job out of lack of emotional revile of such a mess. There are no robot electricians, and the risk of the repair causing the robot to fail when it makes a mistake. And what is the level of worry that a robot security repair unit itself will be hacked or compromised when it repairs someone’s security system? These are areas in which people are reluctant to trust artificial intelligence. Thus these trades remain in human hands.

Knowledge workers, too, are still human arenas. Doctors, nurses, childcare, teachers and lawyers are knowledge workers whose expertise is as much based on knowledge as humanity. The methodologies and techniques of these areas may evolve, but they will not fall from the human skill set.

Yet many skilled trades are gaining high technology. Simultaneously, many high tech fields are evolving into skilled trades as software and technology democratize the knowledge set, moving it down from doctorates to bachelor’s degrees to extracurricular skill sets. Examples:

• Machining and robotic programming are now CNC programming.
• Manual illustration is now graphic art and web designers.
• Printing press operators and printers are now desktop publishers.
• Machine programmers are now machine operators.
  

A Dec. 20, 2009, article from Bloomberg.com described the turmoil people and businesses faced as the season’s first storm system moved through many parts of the country. According to the National Weather Service, about 24 inches of snow fell on Bethesda, Md., while 16 inches fell in Washington and more than 23 inches fell at Philadelphia International Airport.

Such conditions can send a business into a frenzy. Aside from the obvious priority of safety for employees and customers, numerous processes can be interrupted or – in some cases – completely shut down. According to the Bloomberg story, the December storm forced Minneapolis-based Target to expand its operation hours to accommodate shoppers who were practically stranded because of snow and ice. On the eve of the Christmas holiday, you can imagine the kind of worry Target managers had about clearing shelves and exceeding revenue goals (Don’t forget … it’s a turbulent economy).

In metro Atlanta, where IIE headquarters sits on its northern side, there is an arguably strange culture surrounding the threat of winter weather in the area. On average, there’s a couple of times each year when roadways are covered in relatively small amounts of ice and/or snow – nowhere near the depths found in most other parts of the U.S. But the accumulation sometimes causes transportation to be dangerous, forcing schools and some businesses to close for a few hours or even up to a full day. There’s an almost humorous paranoia that instinctively makes a lot of Atlanta residents want to buy up all of the bread and milk from area grocers for fear that the weather could take a turn for the worst … and that rarely happens here annually.

Earlier this month, the metro Atlanta area experienced a small dose of winter weather that limited office hours at IIE for one day because of roadway safety concerns for employees. Donna Calvert, corporate operations manager for IIE, says that even when the IIE office has a delayed opening or is closed due to inclement weather, certain critical areas need to remain functional.

"Directors of these activities clearly communicate to their staff what their work attendance requirements are during severe weather," she said. "For example, online registration for conferences, membership renewal, webinars and other critical member communication activities can remain functional when IIE is closed due to inclement weather. Directors of critical activities prepare contingency plans, keep plans updated and communicate the plans to staff.  Flexible at-home work arrangements and at-home access to IIE’s network ensure that 'downtime' is kept to a minimum."

No matter where you live and work, weather can create fluctuations in a day-to-day operation if the circumstances force the company to temporarily take a different approach. And if IEs have to make changes on cue, then IIE wants to follow suit. Hopefully, the remaining months of winter will produce fewer severe weather incidents.

In the meantime, maybe those of us in Atlanta will learn not to treat winter weather as if it were Armageddon.

-David Brandt
Web managing editor
IIE

If the attendance levels are any indication of the excitement around the upcoming SHS/ASQ Joint Conference, it’s going to be awesome! This demonstrates what SHS and ASQ bring to the game of healthcare performance improvement, and the opportunities for learning, engagement and networking this conference represents.

The merging of management engineering with quality improvement is a logical and natural blend. Quality comes from perfected processes - and a focus on quality generates the need for improved operations. Thus mixing these two important elements together makes sense if we are truly going to achieve a “better delivery system.”

To achieve this, a holistic, broad and deep range of topics and discussions awaits this year. Conference Co-chairs Dean Athanassiades and Dave Eitel, M.D., and their team of Track Coordinators and Volunteers have done an outstanding job of bring together perhaps the finest conference program I have ever seen. Systems engineering, patient safety, human factors, Lean Six Sigma and simulation will all be represented throughout three days of presentations. Fellow MEs, quality experts and industry leaders will share their successes, experiences and visions for improvement. Keynote speakers include the CEO of the American College of Physician Executives, a group we’d all like to become more involved with. Plus, two days of hands-on workshops cap off an already great program!

But it’s not just presentations that bring people together. Imagine the learning available from meeting an entirely new group of attendees! Imagine the networking available from seeing fresh faces as well as familiar colleagues and friends!

As Healthcare Reform oozes its way through Congress, it is clear that it has little to do with health or care or reform. This will leave hospitals to fend for themselves (as usual) in the struggle to achieve optimization, though it appears they’ll do it with even less funding. Meanwhile, healthcare systems are discovering that a single methodology or toolset won’t get them where they want to be. Healthcare is simply too complex. Rather, hospitals that are seeing greater success are adopting myriad solutions and tools to aid them in their journey. The SHS/ASQ Joint Conference will have them all on display.

If you haven’t signed up, there are still five weeks left! If you weren’t planning to go, reconsider! You simply won’t find this level of presentations anywhere else at any price!

In this blog, I shall be dealing with personnel issues in order to help lessen your stress and increase your productivity. I hope to deal with the many topics surrounding interpersonal relationships in the business world.

I’ve called this first entry “Face To Face” as there is no doubt that relationships are the key to change. They are also the cause of much of our stress. Learning to communicate in non-threatening ways – whether you are a staff person or a manager – will make your life much easier as your relationships with your co-workers improve.

People in charge of projects must be keenly aware of their interpersonal relationships if they wish to operate effectively. And since so much of our work today is done via some technological instrument, so many opportunities for discussion are missed. Herein lie many of our problems as there is nothing more effective than face-to-face communication.

From my vantage point, I believe that is missing in today’s tech world. I have had clients e-mail the person who sits next to them!  When I ask why, the answer is usually, “It takes less time.”

This begs the question: Which is more important – time or relationships? If you choose the former over the latter, I think you will find yourself less productive in the long run. While you may finish a project faster, I doubt that you will have improved your standing with your co-workers. Why? Because so much is missed or misinterpreted in an e-mail. Your tone of voice, your feelings, how you express yourself – can send a message that you are not really sending!

In other words, how the person who is receiving this message interprets the "music" which underlies the words will determine the relationship you will have with the recipient in the future. And that interchange will determine how productive you will be in dealing with this person in the future. So, the next time you want to send an e-mail, pause and think about what you are conveying in terms of tone.

I shall continue this discussion in my next blog.

Eileen L. Berman, Ed.D. a former columnist for Industrial Management magazine on productivity issues related to the relational aspects of job performance, will now discuss these issues in her blog, Personnel Perspectives. Berman is a consulting psychologist and the author of two books, Dealing Effectively with Job Loss and Building Productivity. Her comments will continue to address issues in the workplace seen through the lens of people skills and how to improve upon them.

I recently attended a SCOR (supply chain) metrics workshop where we were discussing the value of responsiveness and upside flexibility for supply chains. It occurred to me that an organization’s continuing lean efforts to reduce waste can often provide the “excess” capacity to provide the production capability “margin” that enables responsive and flexible production systems. With the highly variable demand that many producers are facing – coupled with customer expectations for ever higher standards of service – upside flexibility and responsiveness are becoming “qualifiers” to compete in the market.

But I wonder: If I were evaluating production time loss reduction projects using my Six Sigma background – would I recognize any dollar value, unless the business were already short of capacity (“oversold”)? Likewise, when someone has an idea for saving operator time, would I recognize any value in that effort, unless they find a way to actually decrease staffing costs?

So much of what I’ve learned as an engineer and Six Sigma consultant, says “show me the money.” By this kind of reasoning, if we’re not oversold, I implicitly assign zero value to projects that don’t yield a direct, quantifiable monetary outcome, even though they eliminate waste and incrementally increase capacity.

Yet those kinds of waste reduction - lean - projects can provide the extra capacity needed to get us through a busy (and profitable!) month. They can also make the difference in capacity to allow us to ship on time, when a shipment is due soon and something breaks.

Wearing my Six Sigma hat, I’m afraid that if I recognize value in projects that don’t produce quantifiable monetary value, I could start the organization on the road to “undisciplined, touchy-feely evaluation perdition.” But wearing my lean hat, I know in my bones that waste elimination is good and that if we do enough of it in the right places (particularly bottlenecks or “almost bottlenecks”) – it will pay off.

Bennett Foster, P.E., CPIM, CSCP is a Six Sigma Lean Senior Consultant in DuPont’s Lean Technology & Operations Modeling Group. The views expressed are his own and not necessarily those of the DuPont Co.

Healthcare legislation has passed both houses of the United States Congress and the debate rages on. Differences in the bills, government’s role, escalating costs, and many other factors are being discussed throughout the U.S. and the world. But one issue about which there can be no debate is the industrial engineer’s critical role in healthcare.

Increasing healthcare costs and eroding margins have increased the urgent need for rapid performance improvement in the healthcare delivery market. The IE profession can and should play a key role in developing and implementing these improvements. The majority of U.S. hospitals and other healthcare delivery providers do not have robust and effective continuous improvement systems in place at a time when they need it most.

The pending legislation provides our profession with a tremendous opportunity. Hospitals and other healthcare providers will be required to improve the safety and quality of care, and do it efficiently and cost-effectively in order to survive. Most healthcare leaders believe that modern continuous improvement practices, which have worked well in virtually all businesses, will work in healthcare. Unfortunately, many healthcare leaders don’t believe they have the knowledge, skills and talent needed to successfully deploy such strategies.

IEs working in healthcare must step up to this challenge and lead. This climate of reform provides the opportunity for those charged with performance improvement responsibilities in healthcare delivery to make a real difference. IIE’s Society for Health Systems (SHS) has worked for decades to impact healthcare systems. SHS continues to improve healthcare delivery through the application of industrial engineering principles. You don’t have to be an IE to benefit from engaging with SHS. If you’re responsible for improving the quality, effectiveness or processes of healthcare services, SHS can help you. SHS is making healthcare systems better. The society’s annual conference is only a few weeks away. You should take advantage of this opportunity to improve your skills and to become better prepared to excel.

The U.S. and the world are addressing healthcare needs. It is a topic of urgency. Healthcare is front-page news. Don’t let this opportunity pass our profession by. Make a difference in a way that not only helps your organization, but society at large. High-quality healthcare is too important for us to wait for someone else to do it.

Before Sun Tzu’s treatises on professional generals, most societies simply assigned leadership of the army to the senior most royalty or nobleman. With the definition of a general as its own profession came the refinement of the profession and distillation of the wisdom to a set of textbooks. Sun Tzu’s call for a specific profession of generals was based upon the realization that specialists alone have the skills and expertise for certain situations, due to the fact that they have the time to study and refine their specialized skills.

Sun Tzu’s The Art of War contains many precepts specific to resource allocation for military forces. However, it also has ideas on management of soldiers, loyalty building, intelligence gathering and personal realization.

There are now books based upon Sun Tzu’s concepts on everything from modern warfare to marketing, from martial arts to computer games. His specialized advice has been broadly applied to many areas. It has been democratized as it has been distributed.

Does this mean that the profession of the general is no longer needed? No.

We still need the specialists. Why?

Only the specialists have the time to refine techniques and the redefine the methodologies of the specialized knowledge. Only the specialists can update time tested knowledge to changing circumstances and knowledge. Furthermore, only specialists have the continuous and in depth experience within the expertise to apply the concepts of the profession to a wide range of circumstances. Thus the distribution and democratization of concepts within Sun Tzu has revitalized many areas, but it has not eliminated the need for the specialists within The Art of War.

The same concept applies to industrial engineering, Six Sigma, lean sigma and other IE principles. While the distribution of these concepts has allowed many lay people to apply those principles to their workplaces, it has not eliminated the need for specialists. While a human resource professional may apply lean sigma to their hiring process for contractors, their focus and continued learning will overwhelming be within human resources, not lean process improvement. Six Sigma training of line operators can lead to brainstorming sessions with hundreds of solutions to decrease defects or cycle time; however, the complex implementation or cost-benefit analysis may not be in their skill set. Only the specialists have the specific expertise in the art of industrial engineering to apply the methodology to any circumstance.

The democratization of industrial engineering concepts has served to raise awareness of the profession and its expertise. However, as The Art of War has not eliminated the need for generals, application of six sigma and Deming’s quality standards have not eliminated the need for the specialists in The Art of Industrial Engineering. 

• Once again, IIE has redesigned its Web site after listening to member input and reviewing our online communication methods. We aim to stay one step ahead of other organizations in providing improved access to valuable resources. We’re always examining new ways to present IIE products, services and news, so that you can find articles easily and share them with your colleagues and students. And like all things continuously improved, be on the lookout for more features and other changes to come in 2010.
• IIE has been a hit in social media. In just a few months, IIE has drawn thousands of members and nonmembers alike to our Facebook and LinkedIn group pages as well as our Twitter feed. As of mid-December, we have more than 270 Twitter followers, nearly 2,500 Facebook group members and almost 4,000 LinkedIn group members. If you haven’t already joined or started following IIE on the Web, then take the time to check us out on these three sites where we post regular tweets and updates about the latest IIE conferences, training courses, news articles and upcoming events.
• Online polls are now open to elect the newest members of the IIE Board of Trustees. Candidates for president-elect and several vice president posts need your vote. If you are an IIE member and are eligible to vote, then click here and vote for your choice today.
• Two major conferences will be taking place in the next few months guaranteed to be valuable to many IEs. The SHS/ASQ Conference and Expo 2010 will take place Feb. 25-28 in Atlanta. This event promises to provide high quality education sessions, workshops and an opportunity to network with well-respected and knowledgeable process and quality improvement experts. Then on March 22-25, the Applied Ergonomics Conference 2010 will draw ergonomics professionals to San Antonio, where they will learn the latest in applied ergonomics solutions.
  And if the winter blues have got you down, then don’t miss the chance to save on early-bird rates by registering now for the IIE Annual Conference and Expo 2010, June 5-9 in Cancún, Mexico.
• Like most of your companies and businesses, the staff at IIE headquarters have been celebrating the holiday season. On Dec. 11, staff members enjoyed a pleasant lunch followed by a “White Elephant” gift exchange – an annual tradition among the staff always filled with laughter and good cheer. While we know this year has been tough on many businesses and industries across the board, it’s with good fortune that the IIE staff was able to celebrate both the holidays and a year of hard work in helping IE professionals and students receive education, training and networking opportunities. These are goals IIE will continue in the new year as we foresee great possibilities for all IEs in 2010.

Thanks for checking in with us and for your involvement with IIE, and we hope you’ll have a happy new year.

-David Brandt
Web managing editor
IIE

1. If the model is too complex to explain to others, it is too complex to verify or your documentation is in dire need of improvement or the logic of the model needs to be captured so that it is understood.
2. Value added data is of no value at all.
3. If the results are not replicable by others using the same data and methods, the original conclusion is in doubt.
4. If the same methods and computations result in different answers, the methodology of both the original computation and the new one must be examined, since either could be the source of the error.
5. If the trend line is drastically different for a slight change in date range, the trend line itself may be wrong.
6. If one must use different trend lines for different time periods, the entire data trend may require revising.
7. Too small of a data set often results in incorrect results (the most important tree in the world, the one data point that yielded the hockey stick temperature chart).
8. If later data shows a change in trend, do not dispute the new data - admit the environmental variables may have changed, so the model does too!
9. Anyone who becomes emotionally vested in a model may ignore real world data that indicates that the model - and they - are wrong. Do not become emotionally invested in models; they are simulations based on best guesses and assumptions, both of which can be wrong.
10. Excluding data sets can result in incorrect results.
11. The title of academic does not guarantee honesty. Hwang Woo-Suk of South Korea was found guilty of falsifying data to become the “first” person to clone humans. Dr. Scott S. Reuben deliberately submitted wrong data over 12 years on human anesthesia research. Eric T. Poehlman’s fraudulent data on menopause and women’s health led to health scares. Then there is the recent finding of California Air Resources Board members falsifying data to further environmental agendas. Whether out of political ideology, desire for glory, or simply the financial gain of continuing to receive research grants, we must admit that there are those who will lie and cheat. For industrial engineers, this may mean questioning data that is far from what we expect. We could be receiving incorrect data sheets or data collection submitted with the results the submitter wants us to see, in hopes of meeting quotes or corporate goals. As a professional community and as citizens, we need to realize that anyone who refuses to provide their data, modeling assumptions, or mathematical models may be guilty of fraud.
12. There is always room for improvement, in models, in analysis methodology, and in peer review processes.

I get a bee in my proverbial bonnet when I see a problem to be fixed which isn’t even impacted by the provided solution. That bee becomes particularly troubling when those creating the solution seem to care more about politics or other unrelated issues rather than the problem to be addressed. This, seemingly, could only happen in government! And this seems to be the case with the current debate on U.S. healthcare reform.

As a community, ME/PI’s have the skills, knowledge and experience to help fix the ailing healthcare system. Through industrial engineering concepts and tools, we can go a long way towards eliminating waste, creating new care patterns and workflows, and redeploying resources to their optimal functions. We can reduce cost, increase productivity, and impact quality in dramatic ways. Yet, the words “engineering” aren’t even being uttered in the historic discussions on healthcare reform currently going on in D.C. Simply put … we are not being heard!

To change this, the Society for Health Systems has agreed to form a Public Policy Education Committee, through which legislators and public officials at the local, state and federal levels might become educated on the resources and impacts we have to offer. This committee will begin functioning shortly, and I will - for the moment - be in charge of kicking it off and heading it up. However, it will be up to the members of the ME/PI community to rally around our profession and preach our message to our representatives throughout the country, especially in D.C.

This committee will develop information to be shared with policy leaders as well as other industry colleagues. This might include educational materials on topics such as:

• What is management engineering and how can it reduce costs?
• How can IIE/SHS members benefit the healthcare system?
• What methodologies, approaches and tools are available to increase efficiencies and improve quality and performance?
• How healthcare process redesign improves quality.

Since this is SHS/IIE related, and since we have a 501-3c tax status, we cannot and will not advocate for one side of a position or the other. For instance, we cannot advocate for or against current legislation.  However, we can and will educate legislators on how the ME/PI community can solve the problems near and dear to their constituents.

As this committee is being formed, I encourage those of you with similar passions to get engaged. We hope that everyone else sharing the ME/PI community’s goals and visions will use the information the committee provides to our mutual advantage. Feel free to contact me if you are interested in getting involved!

Get involved … and be heard!

As system complexity and diversity increase, we are testing the limits of testing. For example:

• The greater range of operating systems, both freeware (Linux, Ubuntu) and legacy editions of existing common operating systems (all versions of Windows), result in the need to test applications for a wide audience on even more operating systems.
• If the application runs on an Internet browser, the same range of browsers must be tested. And this must be done within a wide range of operating systems.
• Supporting software, such as Oracle and Java, continue to evolve, necessitating testing of applications that rely upon them across many point releases of Oracle and Java as well as a variety of operating systems.
• If the application is client based, all installation methods need to be testing. For example, across FTP, intranets and VPN connections as well as downloads from the provider’s Web site or SCCM from a central intranet server.

Automation of a software test has become a common means of resolving the complex and time consuming demands of software testing. If the decision, however, is made to automate testing, then the automation itself must be tested.

When a test script is written, there is the possibility of errors occurring that are outside the test script. A human witnessing the automated testing could see errors occur that are not recorded because they are outside the range of test parameters.

For example, the file uploads but the browser mentions other errors in the menu bar, something the automated test software will not record or present in an error report.

Until we reduce the complexity and diversity of the software, hardware and operating system environment, we will continue to test the limits of our ability to effectively test software.

I rarely have the opportunity to learn from the mistakes of others, since I’m usually too busy teaching others from my own goofs and errors. But traveling, as I often do, gives me the opportunity to learn from service stumbles in the travel industry and relate them to my own business.

Just about everyone who has flown has an airline service nightmare story. Usually, it’s the occasional and infrequent travelers who have the worst experiences, since the “frequent flyers” know the system well enough to manage and control it. Which seems to be service mistake No. 1:

• Treating good customers very well and everyone else poorly. Put another way, don’t offer mediocrity to some because others can buy your excellence. It’s one thing to treat your best customers special while treating your “occasional customer” very well. (Some airlines actually do this!) But it’s entirely another to treat your best customers special and everyone else as an unwelcomed hassle. (Unfortunately, many airlines are guilty.) It’s hard to treat everyone with a consistent 100 percent effort … but that’s what makes a quality, customer-focused organization. (If you’re in healthcare … think about how do the poor and indigent feel in your ED!)

This brings up service mistake No. 2:

• Forgetting that service providers don’t define excellence. Rather, your customers do. Worse, your competitors will happily do it, especially if you lapse. Even in the relatively competition-restricted markets of airlines and healthcare facilities, your service quality is constantly compared with that of others. People might still come to you even if they don’t like you, because they have no option … until there’s an option.

Airlines seem to be selling more and offering less as “standard.” Everything from food to baggage service to “preferred” seats are no longer part of your ticket price. While I appreciate the concept of selling first-class seats and services at a premium price, let’s not take that to extreme. So:

• Don’t sell what is expected and claim it to be special. The most egregious example I’ve encountered was flying Virgin America, which charges $100 for an exit-row seat! On a six-hour flight from Boston to San Francisco, Virgin flight attendants actually policed an empty exit row and repeatedly removed people from five empty (unsold) seats. (Traditionally, empty seats are open for the taking once all passengers are on board) Instead, why not offer those unsold “special revenue” seats freely to very tall passengers, or a few folks in the middle seats, or to the woman in row 36 who had to sit next to a screaming child for six hours? Service goes from coldly “revenue-focused” to uniquely client-focused without a penny of lost income.

To which I would add a related faux pas:

• Don’t offer mediocrity when excellent can be had. Do you offer different levels of service in different areas of your facility? Perhaps you are like some hotels and airlines, where excellent service feels like winning the lottery rather than the expected performance standard. Those of you working in multi-facility healthcare systems might ask: Is the service at my boutique specialty clinic or shiny new imaging center the same as in my main ED or my creaky old county hospital?

And for Pete’s sake, don’t ignore the issues your customers face or lie to cover your mistakes! Don’t get me started on the airline’s habit of blaming “government regulations” for everything, or failing to offer simple flight status information during long delays! As my father used to say, “Shoot straight, even if the gun is pointing at you.”

Lastly, in case you are in the business of improving airline service quality … can SOMEBODY design an airplane thermostat that keeps the plane somewhere between freezing and sweltering? That would make for some real service excellence!

Lean Sigma is the focus on using less time, energy, cycles, and/or material.

What is the definition of waste?

• correction - things to fix, rework
• overproduction - creating stuff people don't want
• movement of stuff - transport of stuff that isn't necessary
• motion of people - transport of people that isn't necessary
• waiting - delays
• inventory - maintaining and storing resources
• process inefficient - processing steps that are unnecessary

What do your customers see you do that is not directly or indirectly helping them?

These are targets for lean endeavors. Non-value added functions are not always eliminate-able. For example, audits, redundant backups and the double-checking of data are not always value added, but may be mandated by procedure, policy or law.

Lean Six Sigma encourages quick fixes - see a problem, then fix it. It uses the improve phase of the Six Sigma circle endlessly. It cuts to the fix-it phase while cutting out the fat.

Six Sigma tackles more complex issues and takes longer to complete. It requires complex evaluation both before and after fixes are made. Lean Six Sigma may be part of an overall Six Sigma project, but can be done independent of it. Eliminate the waste, and you are doing Lean Sigma. Have a system-wide improvement and evaluation methodology, and you have Six Sigma.

In a recent HME LinkedIn group discussion, the question was asked: "Can the government run the healthcare system?" Thanks for the segue and blog topic, folks!

In short, no, but not for the reasons we often hear. Simply put, politics will prevent politicians from creating anything more than a politically correct, easy and expedient solution. As it often does, politics will get in the way of good policy.

As has been written in this blog in the past, the current reform proposals fail to deal with the true sources of more than 70 percent of the actual costs of healthcare. Rather than doing what is politically painful yet necessary and actually changing the payment system, eliminating waste, demanding personal responsibility, etc., legislators are opting to spread the ever-growing cost across more people through coverage mandates, higher and hidden taxation, and other “levies.” Forgetting that for the first time in our nation’s history the government may require the purchase and use of a specific service in order to maintain legal citizenship, these mandates are simply a means to force more people to pay for a broken and out-of-control reimbursement system. Thus the real argument is about who pays for the system rather than how to fix it.

Seemingly easy savings won’t be addressed, such as caps on excessive malpractice litigation. There is an estimated $200 billion in annual potential savings through the elimination of “defensive medicine,” yet reasonable  approaches are blocked by political loyalties (on both sides of the aisle) to an affluent and politically powerful trial lawyers association (aka the American Association for Justice).

Certainly, there is no visible focus on efficiencies and performance improvement, despite the great work of thousands of PI and QI professionals around the country and across the globe. This is frustrating, at best, and speaks to the lack of a deep understanding of the system some legislators insist upon changing. PI and QI don’t seem to be “quantifiable” or “sexy” enough to warrant serious consideration, despite the degree of waste in healthcare.

Even addressing the well-known issue of reimbursement fraud fails to gain legislative traction. Some point to the elimination of Medicare/Medicaid fraud and abuse as a means to pay for the inevitable cost of insuring everyone. By their own estimates, CMS pays more than 95 percent of claims without question, thus losing tens of billions annually to fraud and abuse by opportunists gaming the reimbursement system. The politically problematic issue here is that in order to prevent fraud, CMS will have to develop and follow rules for what is and is not a legitimate claim. This means CMS will be forced into the business of actually screening claims and denying some coverage rather than simply writing checks and asking questions later. Thus CMS would have to do what insurance companies and European [socialized] healthcare systems are now being pilloried for: denying claims. The government would inevitably have to get into the business of screening good from bad, legit from illegit, yielding the inevitable horror stories of denials and coverage gaps which come out from the insurance industry, the NHS and the Canadian system. That forbidden word, “rationing,” will suddenly become an ugly political reality.

Thus the passion to change the system surpasses the willingness to tackle its real problems. Though there are plenty of flaws in the current system, politics will prevent a better solution from being developed. Rather than forcing more Americans to pay for a broken system, it would be better to dramatically change the debate, make difficult choices, and release the innovative spirit by taking politics out of the healthcare and insurance systems. Perhaps then we might have true reform.

I was fortunate to be in England for five days back in July. I saw the “gemba” at five hospitals in three days and attended the Lean Enterprise Academy Lean Healthcare Transformation Summit on Friday.

One thing I was taking pictures of in my travels were all of the warning signs – the "cautions" and "be carefuls." I love England and London, so I'm not trying to make fun ... but it sure seemed like there were a ton of warning signs everywhere. Is this due to an extremely litigious society (you'd think the U.S. was bad) or general British politeness and helpfulness? One sign at a rail station cautioned: "Do not run on stairs." Good advice.

Some of the warnings do seem to be a bit much, though, including these two different warning signs for hot water taps:

And a second separate faucet:

Signs like these are often an issue in hospitals, where warnings and cautions to the employees and physicians are posted everywhere.

These signs, like the "Warning: Very Hot Water" seem like poor examples of problem solving. If the water is that dangerously hot – why not adjust the plumbing so it is cooler? Isn't that easier than making and posting a sign? I can't for the life of me remember a similar sign in a U.S. bathroom. Have you?

I've got quite a collection of hospital warning signs, including:

On some pharmacy robotics: "Danger: Do not reach inside machine when running."

Why is the automation designed that you could even reach inside and hurt yourself? Where is the interlock that prevents the door from opening or shuts the machine down if the door is opened? Is "be careful" right right approach?

A sign on a piece of laboratory equipment read: "Do not spill."

The sign was warning the technologists to not spill patient specimens into the machine when loading them. Why? Because there was a bare circuit board exposed underneath the loading area. Why rely on people to not spill? Why not design the machine so the board is protected against the inevitable spill?

I think people probably also tune out the warning signs and start ignoring them if there are too many. Visual clutter means people don't pay attention to what's posted, I think.

Here's a common sense warning in a Tube car:

Here's a door in an Underground station – how many warnings can they pack on that single door?

Does your organization abuse warning and caution signs? When I present about this to healthcare audiences, I typically challenge the audience to keep their eyes open today ... how many warnings, cautions and "be carefuls" can you find? For each, is there an opportunity to use some error proofing methods to prevent the error instead?

Yes, the headline typo above is intentional. However, we have all seen such mistakes. In professional correspondence, it detracts from our message. In public Web sites and papers, it detracts from our credibility. In IT, it can introduce critical errors into our functions and require costly review and correction.

Examples:

• One database states "O," and another states "A." If that was a letter in a word, it is a misspelling. In a medical database, that is a life and death decision as to which entry is correct… and a lawsuit if the correction is wrong and the patient gets the wrong medicine.
• Residence on A Street and residence on A Drive. They might be the same location, but they may not be. When people do not get their packages, the discretion data collection staff had on entering addresses becomes a customer service failure.
• Spell checking and grammar checking are built into many software systems to reduce user errors. Unless they are used sloppily and correct individuals' names and addresses.

As a Wilhite, I have been reduced to a "White" in more than one system. Sometimes it is the error of the person listening. Sometimes it has been blamed on spell check correcting fields.  Such errors can be devastating in real life.

It is due to instances like this that poke-yoke, or mistake-proofing, has been demonstrated to be so critical in data entry. How can that be done?

1. Do not allow illegal characters, such as # or ', if it can interfere with the code that runs the software. This reduces errors due to misunderstood output. After all, reading "name&s Joe" is more difficult from reading "name's Joe."
2. Select drop down menus wherever possible. The less often individuals can enter in manually at their own discretion, the fewer mistakes they can make.
3. There will always be outliers. Allow for flagging of exceptions, so that outlier information is not forced to conform and become incorrect in the process.
4. Use corrective routines with discretion. That strangely spelled street may actually be what is on the street sign.
5. Do not assume all records of similar names or addresses are the same. Combining records out of the desire to clean up can create tangled messes that are difficult to undo.
6. And minimize data entry where possible with data imports and exports. However, do build in corrective review flagging options with the ability to enter in notes or reports. When someone finds incorrect information, the corrections need to be communicated as quickly as possible to the originating database.

Every cost is being analyzed these days as more and more congressional leaders, taxpayers and providers seek to squeeze cost out of the health care system. With the recent debacles on Wall Street and the stories of outrageous, seemingly undeserved bonuses, an ever-present cost issue is executive compensation. Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) and other congressional leaders have pushed hard for restrictions on and oversight of not-for-profit (NFP) health care executive pay. They and others complain that executive salaries and comp plans can be too lucrative, given the tax status and “charitable” nature of the organizations they lead. Indeed, just last week, the Massachusetts Attorney General’s office announced an investigation and possible crackdown on NFP health care executive pay in that state.

Call me crazy, but I want the best and brightest people in health care leadership positions. In a world where true talent is ever harder to find, skills cost money. We still (for the moment, anyway) live in a largely capitalist economy wherein higher salaries and compensation go the most able and talented people (your current boss excluded, perhaps!). Therefore, it stands to reason that we would want the health care industry to be able to attract the best and the brightest with whatever compensation is necessary. Yet, we seem to be caught between pressing for “reasonable” compensation for executives in NFP systems at the very time when the best, and perhaps the most expensive, talent is needed.

Frankly, some of the pay scales seem somewhat out of balance. I would prefer to see our health care leaders making trial lawyer paychecks and some lawyers working for not-for-profit salaries (better yet, unemployed!). It would be nice to see some empty law school classrooms and long waiting lists of the best students for MHA and MIE degrees. And it would be great to see the kind of innovative minds that have flooded Silicon Valley fill the halls and offices of our hospitals and clinics.

That said, I know these folks aren’t exactly starving! Most C-suite execs make good money, as can be seen every year in the annual compensation issue of Modern Healthcare (just recently published). Median CEO incomes for $1 billion-plus health systems is $1.4 million. The average compensation for all hospital CEOs is over $500,000 … not bad! Some, in fact, seem overpaid given the performance of their systems! But relative to the size and importance of the systems they control, many seem underpaid when compared to organizations in the “corporate” world.

Rather than focus merely on the dollars paid, I would hope we would focus on attracting the best talent possible to take on the monumental tasks of “self-reform.” I wouldn’t count on Washington solving the really tough issues facing our health care system, given the reports coming from the congressional committees. We need the best minds America has to offer, and that requires offering the kind of compensation plans that will attract that talent. This applies not just to the CEO, but to all our leaders, from CNOs to department managers. We may need new compensation models in order to attract the kind of entrepreneurial spirits that have made other industries shine. Certainly, a higher demand for those additional compensation dollars will make for a more competitive marketplace and, hopefully, a better health care system.

Those who rail against “excessive” health care executive pay should re-examine the models under which we attract and pay senior management, knowing the challenges that lay ahead and what will be required of tomorrow’s leaders. We need the best and the brightest, and we shouldn't shy away from paying for the best talent America has to offer.

There is always a tug of war between keeping proprietary information proprietary and marketing the technical details of your product. In the end, the magazine told him not to sign either agreement until they figured out whether legal or marketing would win the argument.

When someone is given two competing requirements, it is not always impossible to meet both requirements - but you can be guaranteed that you won't like the results.

Sincerely,
Tamara Wilhite
Six Sigma green belt and industrial engineer

I attended an excellent health care quality conference last week.  Some of the lectures added interesting perspectives to the current debates over health care (or, as I have come to know them, the debates about everything but health care).

Notable were two presentations. One from a physician leader within CMS, who spoke on utilization, cost and the government as a purchaser of quality. The other was a physician from Kaiser Permanente, who spoke eloquently about the current [misguided] focus of the health care debate.

Several important pieces of information came together from the two… I hope you’ll find them useful when framing your own opinions:

1) CMS, by its own admission, is largely responsible for the so-called “out of control” health care costs due to the way it pays for services. CMS (again, according to CMS itself) encourages higher if not over-utilization by paying for services and procedures rather than outcomes and quality. Paying for services rendered simply encourages more rendered services. Thus, the current system promotes utilization and eliminates the need for financial restraint. High utilization might actually be acceptable, except that…

2) According to CMS, the agency pays 95-plus percent of all claims for approved procedures (RAC extractions excluded, I’m sure!). According to CMS, if the procedure is on the CMS list, a check is written. I won’t argue the legitimacy of that claim or the requirements for actually collecting those dollars, but let’s assume for the moment that it’s true… this means that money flows without regard for legitimacy of claims, necessity, quality, or outcome. While there are provisions in the current bills to experiment further with “bundled payments” to physicians and hospitals for a given illness, these are not being pushed hard, perhaps due to the political sensitivities of such concepts.

Furthermore, according to government estimates, some $80 billion per year in Medicare expenditures is wasted to fraud (Medicaid also sees tremendous fraud, yet roughly half of the states don’t report fraud statistics, so there’s no way to accurately tell). This is driven, in part, by a system through which payments are generated which makes fraud easier to achieve.

Given CMS’ position as the largest payor, these two points help explain high utilization, opportunities for corruption and fraud, and even the payment habits of private insurers.

3) The Health Care Hockey Stick. Recall the now-debunked Al Gore world temperature hockey stick.  Now, we have a more legitimate and even scarier Health Care Hockey Stick. It looks like this:

Some of the public policy textbooks teach that 65 percent of the costs are used by 15 percent of the population. Sen. Tom Coburn’s office puts the numbers this way: “75 percent of all health care costs are tied up in five chronic disease categories.”  The above chart shows an even more dramatic cost focus. Under this analysis, a mere 1 percent of the population creates some 30 percent of total cost. We could debate the nuances of the numbers for hours, but the direction of the data is clear… a small percentage of the population who have a small number of chronic diseases make up the bulk of health care spending.

This small population is made up of patients with chronic diseases including obesity, COPD, and depression (presumably inclusive of end-of-life care for these diseases). Unfortunately, few if any of these diseases occur in isolation… almost all patients with severe chronic diseases have multiple co-morbidities. More frustrating, many of the patients in this 1 percent are those who have not and do not respond well to efforts to promote wellness and preventative care. As a physician friend of mine puts it, the high costs in the system are not due to “the typical middle-income family of four, but rather the 300-pound diabetic smoker who won’t take her meds.”

The point here is both speakers agreed that little, if anything, in the current health care reform packages currently being debated would solve for the aforementioned Hockey Stick and the costs of chronic disease. And if we are not going to address those costs… the cost of health care cannot, in any great way, be addressed. More importantly, who pays doesn’t really matter unless we address what we are paying for… the 1 percent! Therefore, according the logical conclusions of these two presentations, the current debate is largely misguided, and the proposed solutions will not solve the cost issues at hand.
 
Thus, here’s the conundrum:

• CMS is responsible for a payment system which promotes the escalation of the total health care tab.
• CMS (or some similar government entity) will take on a much larger share of the payor market under certain options currently on the table.
• CMS (and most insurers) must necessarily replace the payment system in order to eliminate excess utilization and abuse. Yet payment solutions are politically unpalatable, thus…
• There is little in the current debate to address a wholesale, systematic change in the way payments are distributed.

Add to that…

• The vast majority of systemic costs are generated by a very small percentage of the population.
• That small minority of patients may not be the ones who respond to efforts to promote wellness and preventative care, and thus will likely remain a very high-cost group.  (I would add that “the bun’s in the oven” for the next generation of 1 percenters. That is, current levels of obesity and poor health amongst our young will almost guarantee that this 1 percent will remain part of our overall population).
• Little in the current debate deals with the issue of the 1 percenters, so the costs in the system are likely to remain, no matter who pays for it.

Therefore, in order to address cost, we have several tough choices:

• Address the relatively healthy 70 percent of the population which incurs a relatively minor amount of the total cost (20 percent).
• Focus on the 1 percent and restructure the payment systems to offer the right incentives and disincentives to both patients and providers.

The first is politically easier and less painful, and perhaps what will likely come of the current debate. The latter is more effective, yet requires far more creativity, effort and politically painful choices. Ironically, our legislators seem to be focused on neither, worrying only about who pays for the inevitable escalating demand rather than focusing on getting the actual costs out of the system.

The engineers who read this know well the tools of root-cause and Pareto analytics. I think what we need is a tight focus and ranking of the root causes of cost; the patients who generate that cost; and ways to reduce those costs without denying care and quality using appropriate incentives and disincentives to achieve better health among a small minority of patients.

I don’t propose a long list of solutions here (hey, I only get 1,000 words for this blog!), but apparently our reps in D.C. aren’t even focused on the right problem! I would suggest, at least, that CMS focus on righting its own financial ship before taking control of the management of one single additional patient’s care and insurance.

Let’s hope cooler heads will prevail in the heat of the D.C. summer.

I'm always fascinated by Starbucks. For one, I'm a regular customer and Starbucks has a reputation for hiring pretty educated people as baristas given their health benefits and all. So it seems like a huge opportunity to engage those employees in each and every Starbucks location (how many?) in kaizen, sharing those improvements across locations.

Ordering a drink for my wife and myself, I handed my "Gold Card" to the woman running the register. She ran the card, then a few seconds later says, "Oops, I need to swipe it again for payment." Some, but not all Gold Cards are used as stored value cards, some are just used for the discount and people pay cash or credit. There was a "defect" in the process (she almost forgot to take my money and it required more effort on her part).

She says to me, unprompted, "You should only have to swipe the card once. It would be nice if the computer could determine, on that single swipe if it's stored value and, if it is, just take the money off."

Now that's not a Norman Bodek "Quick and Easy Kaizen"-style idea. In his approach, the idea should be something the employee can take action on, such as moving where the lids for cups are stored to reduce walking.

But the employee has a valid idea – it's an idea that has to flow up. It's similar to a scenario where a nurse has an idea about the electronic medical record system that would make her job easier. She can't fix it, but there needs to be an avenue for the idea to be heard.

I asked the barista, "That sounds like a good idea you have. So, what happens to the idea? Does it just go poof into the air?"

I was checking to see if she would find it worth the time to tell her shift leader or store manager.

She smiled and said, "I dunno. There's probably a good tech reason why they can't do that, but they haven't told us."

So, if she did go to her store manager with that idea, the least she should deserve would be an answer back explaining why it wasn't possible (of course, it is possible – it's just software), or why it's not possible right now. Or is that a POS (point of sale) register feature that they plan on implementing at some point? She can't be the only one who has made that suggestion.

It would be a shame if the idea just went "poof." I wonder how often she makes that same mistake. Do we blame her or the system? Is there a better process that they can put in place for the existing POS to make it harder to forget to swipe the Gold Card twice? Would that be a good short-term fix?

Oversight. It can mean watching over something carefully to its completion. It can also mean overlooking something, thus missing it. When designing software implementations, all assumptions result in some oversight.

1. Assumption: Users are idiots.

Results:

• User controls and options are severely limited, causing frustration.
• User controls and limitations mean that users can rarely make mistakes.
• System support will get many complaints of inability to perform actions.
• Tight controls will lead to many requests to alter controls.

Prudent course of action when implementing systems designed under such assumptions:

A. Determine a set of super-users or power-users that do have authority. Communicate to general users who these higher level authority users are.

B. Have a clearly defined approval path for how users can have their system permissions upgraded to a higher level and procedures to follow when action by someone with super-user authority is needed.

C. Have a thoroughly trained helpdesk staff to assist users when they have made an error, runs into barriers, or when super-users require assistance.

D. When existing system workflows or controls need to be changed, have a pre-determined means for approving such changes as well as implementing them.

2. Assumption: Users are experts. 

Results:

• Users have the authority to complete a wide variety of transactions.
• Fewer user complaints that they cannot complete actions.
• User controls and options are relaxed, risking severe mistakes that are difficult to undo, if at all.

Prudent course of action when implementing systems designed under such assumptions:

A. Have through training for users for what is and isn’t acceptable procedure.

B. Have detailed system logs so that errors can be traced easily.

C. Have a thoroughly trained helpdesk staff to troubleshoot the more complex errors that can arise from these system design assumptions. 

3. Assumption: Classes of users will meet the users’ needs.

Results:

• Some users have the authority to complete many transactions while the majority do not.
• Severe mistakes can occur, but only by a few, known users.
• Multiple classes of users require more complex system design.
• Greater complexity of workflows and access control limits can increase system support requirements.

Prudent course of action when implementing systems designed under such assumptions:

A. Have through training for higher-level users for what is and isn’t acceptable procedure.

B. Have detailed system logs so that errors can be traced easily by super-users.

C. The more user classes there are, the more questions that arise on what an individual is able to do.  Have a means of determining the access control limit of objects and transactions to be able to state that does or does not have authority to do something to an object.

D. Maintain control on the number of user levels. Such authority levels proliferate when a job class or role is found to not quite meet a group’s needs.

E. Have clearly defined user roles to user function to avoid incorrect assignment of user permissions. 

Maintain oversight of the assumptions behind your system design. To do otherwise is to risk an oversight and failing to meet user needs, contrary to the popular assumption that software will solve everything.

One of the most sensitive decisions to be made when setting up a database is the unique identifiers for databases.

When it comes to financial transactions, it is often best to let the computer assign its own sequential unique identifier. For people, Social Security numbers – the unique identifiers assigned by our government – are enough. For other systems, be it medical records or student records, it may not be practical or even legal to use SSNs.

Some systems base the unique identifier as someone’s name. However, given that there are more than 6 billion people in the world, that system is a guarantee of identifiers being unique. We’ve all heard of debt collectors making demands of the wrong person by the same name, but sometimes the errors are far more complex.

The most frightening incident was when I received a call stating that my daughter was at the hospital and having surgery. After several confusing minutes (they'd picked up the child from daycare, mine is in school), the nurse stated, "Don't worry, Cindy, she'll be fine."

"I'm not Cindy," I replied.

"Are you the mother of Renee Wilhite?"

"Yes."

I asked for birth date of the injured child. Both children had the same name but different birth dates. They had queued records off the child's name, and ended up calling the wrong mother.

This can have less traumatic but more fiscally challenging results on the shop floor. For many manufacturing systems, unique identifiers – often called UIDs – are assigned by team members. Whether tracked on paper, in Excel, or in Oracle, there is still the matter of tracking them upon creation. When two people assign the same 12345X at the same time, the result may not be caught until after the part number is engraved on the part. Now a database record must be corrected and a polisher paid for the name plate changed. Woe be to the configuration manager who ships the duplicate not caught before the other 12345X has been completed and identified as a duplicate unique identifier!

The unique identifier problem can be reduced by several methods:

• When the computer assigns the transaction a unique identifier, have this occur when the record is first opened instead of when it is saved. This can lead to information being stored for accidentally created records, but it also prevent database fixes later when two users save their new records at the same time.
• Have unique identifiers assigned to parts at their original creation, not upon completion. It is a trade off between records for items that end up as scrap as compared to risk of duplicate identifiers at the end of assembly. Given the cost of correction, it is better to have all items identified uniquely at the start of the assembly.
• If your unique identifier is by part number and serial number combination, keep your serial number ranges widely staggered. For example, your part ABC-1 should be range 1 through 1000. Then ABC-2 should start at 5000 or later. Then when you upgrade ABC-1 to ABC-2, they can keep the same serial number (cheaper in labeling) while still being unique.
• Keep your part numbering system consistent. If users can input a part 012345 and a part 12345, there is the possibility of an MSN 101 for both parts because the tracking software does not recognize the two part numbers as being the same.
• Ensure that your unique identifier is something that will always be unique. As with the records tied to the patient name instead of Social Security number, if the identifier is unique, there will be mix-ups.

I had an epiphany the other day. It was one of those moments where I was pretty ashamed and was ready to turn in my lean credentials.

I spent too much time each day deleting the same e-mails from companies that I don't read.

• Delete. Delete. Delete. I cringe to think about adding the time spent deleting e-mails from the Yahoo account that I've had and used as my primary e-mail for 12 years. I'm not talking about "spam" (or unsolicited) e-mails. I'm talking about the e-mails that come from news sources or companies I've done business with and not unchecked the "please contact me" box with.
  • Golf.com (I don't even golf, how did this start getting into my inbox?)
  • Realsimple magazine (How did I get on this list?)
  • Gourmet magazine (I love food and cooking, but I never open these.)

I was embarrassed because I was practicing classic "workaround" behaviors, as seen in many workplaces and industries (including health care, where it's a major barrier to quality improvement, the willingness of employees to continually work around the same problems every day).

An example of a health care workaround:
1. There aren't enough blood pressure meters/cuffs in the nursing unit.
2. Nurses run around searching for meters.
3. Nurses sometimes hide them or claim them as "theirs," preventing others from doing their patient care work in a timely way.
4. Working around the problem (not enough meters) does nothing to prevent step 1 from occurring the next day.

Instead of spending all of that time every day, the lean mindset leads the nurses to solve the root cause of the problem. Why are there only three meter/cuff sets when they are supposed to have seven? Where did they all go? Find them and bring them back to the unit.

But, finding and bringing them back is another sort of workaround if the nurses don't stop and ask, "Why did they disappear in the first place?" We have to investigate and find out if other units don't have enough equipment (leading them to "borrow" from another unit). Maybe the hospital as a whole has a shortage and we have to buy a few more.

The ultimate non-workaround solution would replace everyday searching with the implementation of a PROCESS and a SYSTEM that makes sure the needed equipment stays where it's used and needed.

Considering this is what I preach and what I help others practice, I decided "enough." For a week, instead of just deleting the e-mails (which "is" faster and expedient, after all), I would invest the time in clicking on the "click here to unsubscribe" links that you find in these e-mails.

Some sites make it easy – one click and you're unsubscribed. Some less scrupulous sites make it difficult, requiring more clicks or making the process confusing (maybe intentionally so).

One site had the default box checked saying "I do want to receive...," so if you hit "submit" you are basically saying "Yes, keep sending these to me" which is ludicrous considering I only got to that web page because I had clicked unsubscribe for a reason...

My assumption is that this one-time investment of "unsubscribe me" time will pay off day after day, week after week. My inbox will be less cluttered and I'll waste less time deleting e-mails I don't read.

Of course, the San Jose Mercury News’ "Good Morning Silicon Valley" daily e-mail newsletter (which I read voraciously in 1999 and 2000) STILL keeps coming even though I have unsubscribed a few times. I guess that's a different kind of unscrupulous... a different form of waste.

Recently, the World Health Organization (WHO) officially declared the H1N1 virus to be a pandemic, after a significant rise in cases and deaths. Greeted with a yawn by the American media (which apparently had grown tired of the story, at least until some Michael Crichton-esque infection wipes out a small town in Kansas overnight), the pandemic specter remains as a nagging issue for the American health care system. How will your local facility(s) respond?

I was blessed some years ago to work on a fascinating simulation project with a group from the Washington Hospital Center in Washington, D.C. Called Project ER One, the effort was under the visionary direction of Dr. Mark Smith, with assistance from the ever-brilliant Dr. Craig Feied and a small group of outstanding architects and designers. The goal was to develop a state-of-the-art facility and operational model capable of managing the influx of patients in disaster scenarios, such as terrorist attacks or pandemics. The results were ultimately presented to a Senate sub-committee, and a request for Federal funding of the construction of the design was submitted.

Some of the more salient design ideas which emerged included wall-mounted portable beds, which could expand the capacity of the ED three-fold in minutes; an ambulance bay which could be quickly converted into a large-volume decontamination center; and a maze-like front-end with offsetting corridor entrances that prevented external blasts from penetrating the internal ED structure.

Equally fascinating were the process flows which were required and developed. Old assumptions about the process times for patient decontamination were quickly tossed aside in the face of the reality of little old ladies trying to undress under duress. Care for the “worried well” and the rapid and efficient sorting of patients based on a mere glance had to be re-thought. Assumptions about the use of non-ED personnel, such as OR staff, in crisis situations were questioned as the “Law of Daily Routine” was developed as a concept. And the essential requirements of cross-functional operations training for emergency scenarios became a critical element to continuous functionality.

The reality is that a lot more could get care if there were proper facilities, operations, and training. Unfortunately, most EDs have a tough time developing “realistic” disaster plans, since they cannot envision what that disaster would look like. After all, disasters can come in a variety of types.  Common “disaster planning” often consists of volunteers lying about on the lawn of the local hospital while staff pretend to care for them. Yet these can be costly exercises rather than creative and enlightening planning events.

As we looked towards potential pandemic scenarios, we found it very helpful to take a few key steps, which are actually reflected in our common PI methodologies:

• Walk the disaster process (or, I suppose, go to the “ihen gemba”, if you’re a leaner!). Walk through it with the patient’s viewpoint in mind (and a panicky, fear-stricken patient at that!). Think about what they will see, experience, and demand. Lines and long waits will not be welcomed!
• Walk multiple disaster scenarios. Not all disasters are created equal! Are your patients going to be burn victims or contagious? Are your patients going to require decontamination or vaccines? Will your “worried well” be few or overwhelming? How will you sort them?
• Prepare to throw out the rule books in favor of rapid care. That would include HIPAA, EMTALA, and a few other rules and regs which will matter little when there are tens or hundreds outside your doors demanding to get in.
• Be prepared to destroy old notions and ideas of processes, operations, staffing, and spatial utilization (“How could we use that parking garage??”)
• Critique your current facilities. I have seen EDs with “decontamination rooms” that are capable of no more than one patient at a time, and which are accessible only from inside the ED. And don’t count on the local football stadium as a health care venue… it might be a lot less realistic than you think!
• Remember, your staff will be panicked too!
• Ask lots of questions.  Just asking the right questions can often spur ideas for management. 
• Create and create and create!

Lastly, and importantly, as you examine your disaster scenarios and the operational response, look at how much faster you can process patients without the constraints of rules, regs, and your current operational norms, if forced to do so! Necessity is the mother of invention, so perhaps new ideas might be spurred if you create the necessity via an imagined crisis. You might then be motivated to question the “normal” process flows and develop new ones based on what you find from your disaster planning (think: a new way to rapidly triage patients, or rapid admission based on a thirty second assessment).

Happy Imagineering!

Doing its part, IBM has just released its corporate responsibility report for 2008, much of which is dedicated to its supply chain. Here are a few highlights from page 32 "Supply Chain Responsibility: A commitment to collaboration":

-During 2008, IBM continued to implement its Supply Chain Social Responsibility initiative across its global network of suppliers. By the end of 2008, we had completed a cumulative total of 553 initial audits; including expansion into three additional growth market countries (36 initial audits):
Argentina, Malaysia and Vietnam.

-In 2008, IBM spent $1.5 billion inside the U.S. and $745 million internationally with first-tier diverse suppliers.

-In 2008, IBM’s operations worldwide processed 42,302 metric tons of end-of-life products and product waste. These operations reused or recycled 96.9 percent of the total amount processed and sent only 0.6 percent to landfills or to incineration facilities for treatment, versus IBM’s corporate goal of minimizing its combined landfill and incineration rate to no more than 3 percent.

While the surveys that IBM has conducted with its suppliers prove that more work needs to be done, I couldn't imagine having a supply chain that didn't take on this challenge. Having $38 billion in spend, as IBM does, gives a company a lot of purchasing power to encourage suppliers to adopt standards and practices that in many established countries are taken for granted. But again it's not just because IBM wants to be a "good-doer" as stated in the report, these efforts will "result in higher quality goods and services for our customers."

Most of you who read this blog know that I am a proponent of “personal responsibility” as a means by which to help “save” the health care system. Without it, we cannot hope to gain control of the conditions that can lead to some of the higher and often unnecessary costs in the system. Remember that 65% of the costs of the system are incurred by just 15% of the patient population, many with chronic conditions which might have been prevented. Thus any means to eliminate these expensive, chronic diseases would seem worthwhile. 

However, Americans seems to have taken the concept of “moral hazard” to its extreme. We demand our health care be…
1) The very best available using the latest medical technology
2) Flawlessly and courteously delivered (and if not we have gaggles of trial lawyers!)
3) Conveniently provided, when and where we want it
4) Free, or very close to it.

Importantly, many of us would also prefer to eat, smoke, sniff, snort, and drink anything and everything we want, regardless of the implications for our health. Combine these incongruous demands, and you have a recipe for a crisis of moral hazard.

The recent legislative efforts to pass “reform” have touched on this issue, but in a very negative way. The Dodd-Kennedy bill, for example, not only fails to promote personal responsibility but it actually prohibits demanding it! Under this plan, insurers won’t be able to charge higher rates for “irresponsible behavior” like smoking or obesity, or for current conditions and negative lifestyle choices. As an analogy, imagine a legislated requirement for life insurers to offer the same cost of coverage to skydivers who refuse to use parachutes as to everyone else. In every other form of insurance, there are carrots and sticks for good and bad behavior. Not so with these proposals. 

One might say that positive incentives, such as the availability of free preventative care, work as well if not better. Auto insurance discounts for ticket-free driving comes to mind. But these carrots are almost always combined with appropriate sticks. Let’s face it, which gives you more incentive to obey the speed limit: A $50 discount on your car insurance at the end of the year, or the knowledge of a State Trooper with a radar gun waiting around the next bend? The negative stick is often better motivation than the positive carrot. At the very least, they are best combined for fuller effect.

This Dodd-Kennedy kind of restrictive legislation will lead to a continuing lack of proper “sticks” to go with the economic carrots of low-cost insurance, such that bad behavior is left unchecked and thus even encouraged. Furthermore, the bad behavior encouraged (or not discouraged) is the very kind of behavior that leads to the 65% of medical costs. Thus these policies will inevitably cause higher bills down the road in an already expensive system. And though a quick death is always the cheapest option (well, it is!!), this isn’t the world of “Logan’s Run”. Therefore, a more holistic approach to preventing expensive disease would be an effective way to better control costs.

There are ways to fix health care. They involve advances in systems engineering and capacity management, good ol’ fashioned performance improvement (by whatever methodology), resource and supply chain management, better/more competition in the insurance markets, and lots and lots of personal responsibility. Sadly, none of these options are currently being discussed inside the beltway with much enthusiasm. Thus, don’t expect the so-called cost-savings to generate as much as they might, if any at all.

Read more Healing Health Care blogs

It's become almost an annual ritual, similar to the Fortune 500, the top billionaires and the AMR Top 25 Supply Chain report. No joking, what AMR has done with the top 25 over the years has done plenty in getting supply chains the recognition it deserves. Here are some of the highs and lows from my view.

Putting on my IBM hat, it's great to see we are still in the top 5. This year we climbed a spot to #4. I am particularly glad to see the reference to IBM's "people supply chain", which is just as complex as a hardware supply chain.

One company I am glad to not see in the list this year is Zara, the Spanish clothing retailer. While they are second to none in getting clothes from the catwalk to the shop floor, they suffer in quality and anyone that shops at Zara would back me up here.

Apple continues to hold the #1 spot. I still have bitter memories of all the T-Mobile shops in Austria running out of iPhones on the launch day, so I'm not sure how you can be best in class when that happens.

Toyota is also curious at #10. This article in MarineLog reported that "Toyota had to rent a boat in Sweden to store 2,500 extra cars from inventory."

But overall I tip my hat to AMR and look forward to the next top 25 in 2010.

Read more Supply Chains are Cool blogs.

Bonnell's Fine Texas Cuisine is an outstanding local restaurant in Fort Worth, Texas, that focuses on local food and wild game.  Chef Jon Bonnell is highly rated and is written up in many publications.

One article posted on the restaurant wall listed this tidbit:

Worst business decision
"Too many times, I've gone with the lowest bidder."

It seems that the chef has learned, on his own, a lesson that Dr. Deming used to preach all the time: don't choose a supplier based on price alone. It's often true that you get what you pay for and the cheapest might provide such poor quality that it harms your business or ends up raising overall costs.

Let's say that you buy cheap produce, but the quality is so poor that you have to spend time sorting the produce (taking up time and increasing costs) and throwing away half of it -- this increases the effective "cost per good strawberry" for example.

It's better to consider value and quality -- not just the unit cost of an item, whether you're buying food ingredients for a restaurant, hiring subcontactors for a business, or purchasing airplane components.

Is this a lesson you've learned the hard way in your own business or in your personal life?

Read more Everyday Lean blogs

Read more Lean Believer blogs

The 1990s and early 2000s saw a boom in worker productivity that far exceeded the typical productivity gains attributed to manufacturing mechanization. The root cause was the explosion of productivity software moving into the work place. Yet all software can be touted as something critical to improve productivity (games excepted). What, then, is productivity software?

It is any software that makes someone far more productive with it than without it. The first generation of productivity software moved us from paper to the digital world. Examples of this include:

• Word processing software - with using the same template and copy and paste instead of retyping the same thing over and over
• Email - far faster than written correspondence
• Spreadsheets - making everyone capable of rapid calculations and charting, and the ability to create and edit them far faster than humanly possible
• Financial tracking software - such as Quicken and Quickbooks, bringing everyone's checkbook into the computer. Faster entry, instant correlation with bank statements, backups of data, and the ability to see an instant chart of where your money went simplified budgeting for many people.
• Drafting software - bye-bye paper, hello to prints that can be e-mailed and printed at whim

The second generation of productivity software includes tools that are more business oriented than the first examples. These are tools that can benefit individual users but are of far greater use in the commercial field. Examples include:

• Collaboration software - all those documents and spreadsheets used by the organization stored in one place digitally, eliminating redundancy of file creation and simplifying data management
• Online meetings - this replaces travel for the ability to meet, and the graphical interfaces that let everyone see a presentation are far superior to teleconferences
• Online backups - backing up the organization's computers via the network provided backups that were independent of the user, such as backups that only happened when the user inserted and copied to a floppy disk. It then allowed backups to be periodically scheduled on the administrator's demand, reducing the risk of catastrophe if a system is lost.
• Virtual servers - allowing one system to act as a server for multiple systems (like web pages, email, and user program management / distribution), and being virtual allowed that functionality to be backed up, mirrored and copied almost immediately to other systems, vastly simplifying secondary options for support
• Three-D modeling - 2D prints available on demand, in any way, shape and form as needed, with easy portability of data to compatible manufacturing software. From digital model to digital data to machine data model to machined product - no paper changing hands and minimal risk of human error.

If there is a task, someone, somewhere has written a software application to try to make it faster, easier, simpler, or otherwise just plain better. Where then is there room for further improvement?

1. Data standards across application families need to be set and standardized. Then existing software must be updated to be capable of sharing data.
   
   Example: The medical data records industry is fragmented, with dozens of vendors and formats. If I send an e-mail to someone, I know that regardless of mail application used, they can read my message. If medical records are sent between medical records applications (if data is sharable at all), they are not always cross-compatible. And if medical records are needed, the last thing the receiver needs is gibberish, unreadable data.
   
   Why this is a problem in preventing a greater productivity revolution? The finer detail lost, potential for errors, and actual confusion of data transfer has resulted in a whole industry in IT focused on data transfer / data translation / data migration. Those are IT staff who could be fighting viruses, performing system maintenance, or cleaning up existing systems instead laboring to translate data formats. Thus the lack of standards has created a wholly unnecessary and redundant waste of talent.
   
2. Evolution of tool interfaces have been disparate and led to wide variety in the human to machine interface.
   
   Spreadsheets and word processors are now nearly standardized. Whether Microsoft or OpenOffice, the view and the ways of doing all basic transactions are the same. Thus once learned, the methods are transferable. For many second wave productivity tools, this same standardization has not taken place. Whether it is modeling software or Manufacturing Planning Requirements (MRP) software, even if the data is cross-compatible, the human methods aren't always such.
   
   Why this is a problem in preventing a greater productivity revolution?
   
   These differences make moving from software to software difficult for many users and often inhibit potential users from changing to software that is a drastic improvement from their current software applications. 

Standardization is often described as a straightjacket, constraining what can be done. Yet wild creativity in spelling creates confusion to readers who simply want to understand the message you want to convey. And in the IT world, the lack of standards for data formats and in graphical interfaces/software user screens is preventing the second wave of productivity software from unleashing the potential of its promise.

Read more IE in IT blogs.

She was heavy-set, but not what I could call obese.  She was dressed modestly though properly, as if having just left an office herself.  She had a cart full of groceries, likely from a weekly or bi-weekly shopping trip.  What immediately caught my attention were her two, simple wooden canes, one in each hand.  She used them somewhat like a polio patient might use crutches, though they were without the forearm braces common to a more sophisticated appliance.  Clearly, she was disabled to some degree, and in pain as she walked.

Slowly and methodically, she bumped the cart along in front of her with her mid-section as she moved towards her vehicle.  The canes swung with a robotic motion, reaching out to brace against her as she moved forward.  From my vantage point just a few cars away, I could see her every movement…the way she swung each stiffened leg to make it move forward; the way she moved her cumbersome frame over seemingly weakened joints and frail bones; and the unnatural motions of her slow, difficult gait.

I was captivated by watching her determination.  Luckily my client call had ended, since I was more fascinated with her effort than with my client’s picks for the Final Four.  Though seemingly painfully disabled, she was fixed on getting her groceries to her car where they needed to be.   I could not stop watching her as she unloaded her cart into her car which was, thankfully, parked close the building in a handicapped spot.  I found myself wanting to help, yet instinctively knew she would be insulted by such an offer.  I hated to stare but could not turn away…I had to see her finish her project.

As she closed her trunk after putting her groceries in, I noticed her license plate.  It read “Phooey”.  I laughed aloud to myself, as my mind ran through all the reasons she might have that on her plate.  It made me all the more fascinated by this person who had just made what seemed to be such an heroic effort.  And just then, she did something quite remarkable to help me understand. 

She turned around, and with her empty cart, began a slow plod back towards the store.  “She must’ve forgotten something”, I thought to myself.  She bumped her cart along in the same slow, determined way that she had brought it out.  But she didn’t head towards the store’s front door as if to purchase a forgotten item.  Instead, she headed to the area where shopping carts were kept outside the store’s entrance.  I was almost stunned to see that instead of simply leaving her cart beside her car or near the parking lot curb for someone else to collect, as several other patrons had recently done, she was returning her cart to its proper place.

Just then, she became forever etched in my memory, but not for such a selfless act.  I immediately thought, “This is the kind of person who can help save the health care system!”.  Phooey had said “phooey” to the ailment that kept her in pain and relatively immobile.  Phooey, despite her ailments, remained a caring and selfless person, determined to avoid becoming a drain on anyone’s time and effort.  She’d said “Phooey!” and she’d meant it!  Had I looking into her shopping bags, I’ll bet there were veggies and skinless chicken breasts rather than double-topping frozen pizzas and ice cream! 
Phooey was probably the kind of patient who took care of her herself as best she could, worked with her clinicians to reduce and manage her needs, and worked diligently to keep her frail body in as good a shape as she could.  Phooey was likely the kind of patient that will help us save the system…one responsible for her own care and in charge of her own recovery.  One who, to the best of her abilities, refused to let someone else carry her burden.

No amount of money, no billions of IT dollars can ever supersede the importance of that kind of personal responsibility in health care.  Spend all you want…it will be people like Phooey who will ultimately make the system sustainable and functional. 

Phooey made an impact on me that evening.  My only regret was not approaching her to learn more.  Even without knowing her, this selfless, motivated, determined woman gave me inspiration that at least some patients can and will take charge of their own well-being, and do what is necessary, without accolades or fanfare….just because it is the right thing to do.

Read more Healing Health Care blogs.

Which brings me to the topic of my post. After failing to ship my Mini Cooper over two years ago I'm at it again, but this time with much lighter cargo. About 5 years ago I found this great 1960's era metal desk that I have treasured and it would really complement my new flat here. So working with Planes International, the same 3PL I tried to use for shipping my car, I am shipping my desk, a carpet, my bike and some framed wall art. At first it was a little frustrating. Planes sent me the dimensions of the crate that I would use, but for me it was hard to visualize a 80 x 80 x 20 crate so I asked for a photo, which wasn't available. Long story short, I found a photo of a similar crate online and gave it the green light. In total it should take 30 days from my parents house on Long Island, NY to my flat here in Switzerland.

Above is the photo of the truck,  inside which you can see the empty crate.

Read more Supply Chains are Cool blogs

Many of us can recall our previous exposure to Root Cause Analysis (RCA) (admittedly, it’s probably not the first experience that comes to mind).  We at least vaguely remember a time when we sat down with a team to systematically document a problem’s underlying causes. 

My memory has been refreshed in the past few weeks.  Groups throughout my organization are retooling our efforts to optimize chronic disease management in the local population.  My department recently joined the collaboration by directing attention towards early readmission rates among patients with heart failure.  As we expose the multiple factors which contribute to early readmissions, we realize that some of the root causes reside outside the boundaries of our traditional health care system.

Sound familiar?  The dilemma is no doubt faced by many QI practitioners as we strive to improve complex health care systems.  Too often many underlying reasons for ineffective chronic care management seem to be beyond our current scope of influence.  A traditional course in RCA might teach us to table root causes like patient income, home life, cultural norms and bias, attitudes and motivations in favor of more actionable factors.

While it may be most prudent and realistic to aim our initial efforts at the low-hanging fruit, I argue that sustainable improvement requires us to address problems beyond the traditional boundaries of health care.  For many organizations, it requires a broader realization about what activities are mission-critical, a change that may not be feasible in our current economic environment.  Nevertheless, we need to learn from the message in our root causes, and realize the affect on patient health is greater outside the walls of our facilities than it is inside.  Building valuable interventions in this extended environment brings about new challenges, such as aligning community and organization activities, addressing new sources of system waste, allocating resources and justifying related expenses, but as members of this Society we have the tools necessary for success.

Read more Healing Health Care blogs

I like to think of myself as a MacGyver type…the kind of person who can turn a hat-pin into a radio transmitter and send signals into deep space, if necessary. The truth is, I’m actually just a pack-rat who refuses to throw away anything which might somehow, someday, someway become useful for something. Blame my parents’ old-school working class “reuse that Ziploc baggie again” mentality, but I can find a legitimate use for just about anything…nothing hits the dumpster before a thorough vetting of all reasonable (and unreasonable) possibilities!

Unfortunately, ideas often face a far worse fate. I am often struck with how quickly ideas can be tossed out like bad fish. In speaking with colleagues just this week, I was struck by the enthusiasm and tenacity with which a couple of fine and bright engineers came up with reasons why a new and radical idea wouldn’t work. Not only did they discount the idea and its value nearly immediately, they seemed nearly proud as they successfully beat it to a messy pulp. Having convinced themselves, as if in a race to a pre-determined finish, that the idea was in part and in whole unsuitable, they claimed a sort of intellectual victory over a thoroughly defeated, imperfect foe, unceremoniously burying it with so many other vanquished would-be solutions. That crazy little idea is now that oddly-shaped piece of Styrofoam that came in the UPS box which wasn’t given a second thought…it’s trash.

Admittedly, the idea was a little far-fetched and likely untenable (and thankfully, not mine!). But so are all new ideas in their infancy. Sadly, we missed a chance to glean something…anything…from that little idea in our haste to destroy it before it somehow infected us with its evil imperfections. I hesitate, however, to blame the victors for that quick and one-sided fight-to-the-death. They simply saw the imperfections which clearly would have made the idea, in its existing form, ill-suited to the task. Perhaps our training as engineers makes us look for flaws in the pursuit of perfection.  But do we do so even at risk of throwing out an entire concept without at least trying to glean something…anything…valuable? Do we toss into the trash that which might be valuable if only reconsidered in a different way, for a different use, in a different time?

Like in any bad experience, bad relationship, or bad “anything,” opportunities for learning exist. In every situation, if we take the time to pause to say “no, but,” we may find that a place for that used jelly jar. (I’ll tell you a clever way to use it in your workshop if you wanna know!)  Even the worst of ideas have in them the makings of a better solution, thus we must create opportunities for the pieces and parts to be gleaned and saved, even if the rest is ultimately discarded. Saving that piece, the little “gem,” from destruction might someday reward us with a solution we’d never considered.

We are taught to ask “Why?” at least five times to find the source of a problem. We should also ask “Why not?” as many times to find the value in a crazy idea, before we lose an opportunity that will otherwise end up in our mental dumpsters.

Read more Healing Health Care blogs.

“Don’t leave that out! It could pick up germs or other bad things and get you sick, and then life will be miserable!” I’ve used those words many times with my own children. Yet the same concept applies to our personally identifiable information (PII).

PII, or personally identifiable information, is our social security number in conjunction with our name. This is the data combo that identity thieves are desperately seeking to be able to pretend to be you.

Most people are familiar with the most common precautions. Shred your bills and receipts. Don’t give your social security number to someone over the phone or in an e-mail. Have your social security number removed from your ID cards and driver's license. Yet the largest data thefts have been digital security breaks or based on data loss – not something a paper shredder could prevent. What can you do for your digital data safety?

1. If you are uploading or e-mailing data that includes your social security number, be certain that the website is reputable, the real thing and has secure socket layer security on. SSL on a webpage will be denoted by 'https://' in the URL. Every day cases include filling out Health Saving Account (HSA) or Dependent Care Reimbursement Account (DCRA) forms on line, which are tied to your social security number, or e-filing your taxes.
2. If you use e-mail / fax software, do not use it to fax any medical records that contain your social security number or tax related forms, since these also contain your personally identifiable information.
3. Some companies, including some brokerage houses and benefits providers, use your Social Security Number as your login ID. If someone knows your name and captures your login information to those sites, they will have your name, your password AND your SSN. Contact these companies and have your login ID changed to something other than your social security number. Then any keystroke loggers or spyware will only catch the information to compromise that one account, not your whole life.
4. Have your computer and any digital devices scanned for spyware, adware, viruses and every other form of malware at least monthly. You may have your social security number or other PII in documents on your computer where they could be stolen or copied elsewhere. This includes all insurance records where you have recorded your beneficiary by SSN, medical records referenced by social security number, marriage and death certificates in some states, and personal tax records stored digitally on your computer.

A little diligence on digital data safety can prevent a lot of grief down the line.

Read more IE in IT blogs.

Is it possible to get untrained, uninitiated, unconnected people to participate in your efforts to deliver value? Consider this example that caught me totally by surprise in a very unexpected moment.

In October, I had the chance of a lifetime to take a 12 day vacation in Italy with my three sisters and our spouses. During our trip, we rented a house for a week in the not-too-touristy city of Lucca. Since we wanted breakfast and some other meals at the house, we had to figure out how to shop for groceries in a new city, not speaking any Italian.

Our spouses voted 4-0 that the Ely kids should make the first run to the grocery store. Once there, speaking no Italian, my sisters and I started to find the cereal, fruit, eggs, milk and chocolate...necessities each. In proper sisterly fashion, they dispatched me to find a shopping cart.

I observed other shoppers had carts but I could not see where to get one of my own. Finally, I noticed a covered rack of perfectly ordered carts in the parking lot. I went out to get one. And boy was I surprised by what I found.

The neat row of carts were cleverly linked together. Looking around for some visual clues, I saw some drawings which showed a one Euro coin (about $1.50) as the "key" to release the cart from the one ahead of it. My sister Anne came out looking for me. She fortunately had the right coin and plunked it into the small plastic gizmo mounted on the handle of the cart. She pushed the red coin holder into the housing, the chain dropped and the cart popped loose. We didn't exactly start singing opera but felt a little smarter. We did our shopping, were pleased my oldest sister's credit card was multi-lingual, loaded the groceries into our car and then wondered just what we were supposed to do with the cart. Pushing it back to the still-neat row of carts, I reversed the process, inserting the chain from the next cart into the plastic gizmo. Pop, out came the coin. And I finally realized what was going on. I thought "Wow, what a cool system!" Rather than the messy, spread-out, disorganized pockets of carts we see in most US groceries, this simple system provided an incentive for shoppers to return the cart. And when shoppers do it right, the use of the cart is free. I simply had to "loan" a coin to the store for the time it took me to shop. Interestingly, during the course of the week's stay in Lucca, we made other trips to the store and observed another social dimension of this system. We saw several shoppers accept the help to load their groceries into their car. In return, the helper took the cart back to the rack and pocketed the coin; effectively a tip for the help.

I subsequently learned one discount grocer operating in America has the same system for their Aldi Foods shopping carts.

Why do I mention this? Because well-conceived systems with visual tools and simple economic incentives can eliminate a lot of wasted effort. And if it is possible to do this in a grocery store parking lot, how much more inside our companies?? We have a lot of room for creativity.

Updated: I learned, via a comment, I was wrong in my assumption Aldi was an American-based store. It is owned by a German company. My mistake.

Read more Lean Believer blogs

The outsourcing of logistics is really nothing new. Corporations have been doing it since the 1800s, choosing to use the U.S. Pony Express over their own internal resources to ship parcels. But since the days of cowboys and Indians, we've gotten more global and things often need to be delivered in hours rather than days and weeks. With this, logistics outsourcing has become more complex, which is why it makes more sense now then ever to hand it off to a logistics provider that is going to invest and build up its capabilities instead of maintaining the status quo.

Cementing this reality, earlier this month IBM signed a multi-year contract with the French logistics provider, Geodis, to manage all of IBM's logistics needs globally. So, instead of IBM managing hundreds of logistics providers, Geodis will do it for them.

Helping Geodis to achieve this will be most of the internal IBM logistics professionals who have been doing it for IBM for years. IBM employees from more than 50 countries will transfer to Geodis over the next several months after all local country agreements have been achieved.

Why you might ask? Well like I said earlier, its Geodis' core business. They will grow and make investments in logistics that wouldn't make sense for IBM.

This may sound familiar. IBM signed a similar agreement with Geodis back in 1998. Back then they took over IBM's needs for Europe and acquired its European warehouses. So in a sense, this is the evolution of that effort.

Read more Supply Chains are Cool blogs

My father used to say, “A man’s only as good as his word.” He meant that business could and should be done on a handshake, and that a promise should be as good as gold. He and others in the “Greatest Generation” were raised in a time and ethical environment in which lawyers were largely unnecessary, dishonesty was shunned, and full and complete honesty was an expected and natural behavior. Not that there weren’t always dishonest people,  certainly there were. Nonetheless, those times, it seems, are slipping further and further away.

It’s hard to even imagine such a world now. In working in my own business, I have often been stunned and thoroughly disappointed at the level of dishonesty that pervades our culture. Just this week, a potential supplier backed out of a verbal agreement, creating hassles and re-work. Call me naive, but I long for the day when a man’s word could be trusted without a thirty-page legal document and a down payment to back it up. 

I recall the recent election cycle and one of the Presidential debates. A question was asked about the use of negative campaign ads, and whether or not the “American people” has grown tired of negative ads.

The real answer is, no. We are not tired of negativity, else no one would ever watch “reality TV”, much less the evening news. What we are truly tired of is the lack of honesty. The spin, the deception, the twist of the word, the misuse of the quote, the bold-faced deceptions. Indeed, a few politicians paid a heavy price for the most outlandish lies, but most got away with it, in spades. Not enough did, though, and the behavior persists.  Thus, dishonesty pervades our society. Ironically, we don’t even call it dishonestly anymore. We lie to ourselves when we call dishonesty “spin”…what your grandmother called a “little white lie”, whatever that was. 

Ironically, health care depends on trust. There aren’t enough trees to make all the paper necessary to create the legal contracts that would be ultimately necessary to replace the trust needed to put one’s life and well-being into the hands of others.  One must, in the end, trust. And trust requires an expectation of honesty. Without it, systems quickly break down, and much of our economic and social well-being begin to crumble. Just look at what a lack of trust did to the banking sector in just a few days, when banks couldn’t trust each other to make overnight loans, for fear the other side of the transaction would go under!  The result was a complete collapse of intra-bank lending, and what we now call the “credit crisis”!

Honesty begins with each one of us. It begins at home, at work, with friends and colleagues, allies and even enemies. Without honesty, our health care system will suffer, dominated by expensive legalism rather than a united front joined together to serve the public good. But you don’t have to be a physician speaking to a patient to have integrity. Everyone should strive to have nothing less in their actions and words. So, next time you think about “spinning” a story, think twice. In the end, if we all seek integrity, each will help make the world a little bit better, and easier, place to work and live.

Read more Healing Health Care blogs.

I just got the new book by John Shook, Managing to Learn. I was surprise and pleased by what I found.

The book describes the use of the “A3 Process.” This process is, on the one hand, simple; it uses a piece of 11”x17” paper to tell a story of a problem and how to approach it. 

Yet the book is anything but simple. And is anything but a description of big sheets of paper.

Shook does the Lean community a great service in the book, comparable to his service in writing Learning to See in 1999 describing Value Stream Mapping. Shook delivers this value in two unique ways.

First, he uses the story format, with a young employee learning from a seasoned executive how to produce a good A3. “Oh, no, not another book of forced dialogue,” I thought to myself when I learned this was the format. Rather than trying to be Eli Goldratt, however, Shook tells two stories; one from the perspective of the learner, one through the eyes of the teacher. The stories are side by side, in two different colors, presented simultaneously. The learner can’t understand why his early approaches aren’t good enough; the teacher struggles to know how to help the learner be enthusiastic while correcting his short-sighted efforts. 

I live in both of these roles and Shook’s description was right on the money. Rather than just showing the mechanics of filling out a big sheet of paper, he goes much deeper, to the learning process that allows people to see more, learn better and lead more effectively. 

Second, the pace of the book “walks the talk” of the book. Central to the A3 process is finding the root cause of a problem.  Shook forces the reader to agonize through this process. It does not happen as quickly as I would have liked. I found myself saying “John, get me to the point.” And he didn’t. He forced me, the reader, the learner, to grapple with the difficulty of finding root cause, particularly in strategic, non-mechanical problems. For me, with Lean not a new thing at all, this was the most important lesson. The effort to get to root cause is difficult. And worth it. Shook forces me along that journey, a journey I need to take. Too many Lean books illustrate only the easy cases, the obvious paths to root cause. Shook takes a tougher path and it is worth it.

This book is a significant contribution to the Lean community. I suspect it was long in the making, as the book shows much reflection and a distillation of much knowledge. I recommend it highly.

Read more Lean Believer blogs

Read more IE in IT blogs

Recently on the radio, Jimmy Wales was talking about the Wikipedia movement. A caller who identified himself as a strategist at Amnesty International asked,  "We're going to build a website to promote freedom and democracy and human rights. What software should we use?"

Really.

If you want to do something worth doing, you'll need two things: passion and architecture. The tools will take care of themselves. (Knowledge of tools matters, of course, but it pales in comparison to the other two.)

Sure, picking the wrong tools will really cripple your launch. Picking the wrong software (or the wrong hammer) is a hassle. But nothing great gets built just because you have the right tools.

This hit me at several levels.

How often have I failed in explaining lean because I focus on kanban cards or kaizen events rather on a passion for operational excellence?

How often have I failed by talking about seven wastes rather than the enjoyment of every work day for all workers?

Do I provide an example of a passionate operational leader or a bureaucratic box-checker-offer?

Lean offers tools that the passionate individual and company can use. The passion needs to be for the result, though, not the tools; even though we need to know the tools every bit as well as the finish carpenter knows her miter saw and laser level.

This hits me deeply…I hope it does you as well. Let your passion show.

Read more Lean Believer blogs.

Data are numbers and values. When data are processed, organized and made useful, data becomes information. Making information useful to the real world; that is knowledge. Knowing when information is wrong and making it right; that is wisdom. But wisdom is sorely lacking in our new but not improved data age.

The more relationships we can build between databases, and thus their data, the more likely we are to find useful correlations. Current plans and projects along these lines include:

• The federal government combining student loan databases with tax records, professional licensing databases and employment checks. If you’re late on your student loan, the networked data catches your state tax refund and redirects it to your federal student loan and can put a hold on a renewal of your driver’s license.
• Data collection databases combined to find deadbeat parents (both male and female) who have changed addresses across state lines and thus are not trackable in a state database but are found within a national data search.

Yet inconsistent data structures across many systems multiply the odds failures. Problems include lack of control of unique identifiers, unique identifiers that are not unique, data pulled from many sources that renews indiscriminately, data collection parameters set too wide (with false positives), and failure to verify that incorrect information is actually removed.

Examples of lack of control of unique identifiers:

• Medical records are combined based on non-social security number identifiers, which then get attached to the wrong person when the identifier changes. (One plan member leaves and the ID is rolled to a new person.)
• A criminal is entered into the system as John W. Blow, John Blow, Johnny Blow – and the person ends up with three separate criminal records as a result.

Examples of "unique" identifiers that are not unique:

• Identifier is the person’s name: TSA’s “no fly list” that links a name to everyone with that name, so one Joe B. Smith (and probably an alias, at that) prevents all Joe B. Smith’s from flying, be they toddlers or 20-year military veterans or professional pilots.
• A criminal is entered into the system as John W. Blow, John Blow, Johnny Blow – and anyone with any of those three names shows up as a possible criminal in any data search, because the unique identifier is a personal and family name combination.

Examples of data collection parameters set too wide (with false positives):

• Debt collection data combinations that link based on individual name, so that people who have never heard of a credit card company are harassed for a debt they do not owe.
• The debt collector has records that someone at a specific address owes the debt. So everyone who lives or had ever lived at that address receives a bill. Unfortunately, if you’re the new resident, getting a bill with your name and your address for a bill the prior resident is not part of the planned moving in experience.

Examples of data that is pulled from many sources renewing itself indiscriminately:

• A debt is late, and a credit bureau reports it as such. The debt is then settled and the issue resolved. The credit report now lists the debt as settled. The individual checks their credit report and it shows up as clean. However, some debt collectors’ records still list the item as outstanding. Next reporting cycle, the data picks up from the one incorrect database, and the credit report shows the outstanding debt again.
• Toddler on TSA list is proven not to be a terrorist. Parents write congress-critter and Junior can now fly to Grandma’s house. Unfortunately, the same “suspected terrorist” name is in the FBI database and is reported on the alias list to TSA. Next Christmas, Junior can’t get on the plane because he’s listed as a terrorist again.

Example of failure to verify that incorrect data is actually removed:

• A person calls to have medical records corrected. The staff member answers the phone, writes it down, and makes the correction. However, there was an error in the data entry, and the old incorrect information remains as a protective default. There is no notice to the patient that the medical records were or were not changed. The incorrect data thus remains and the patient only thinks it has been fixed. 

Data only has value when it is useful. With luck, incorrect information is merely inconvenient, but it can become downright dangerous. Implementing process controls, data quality checks and most of all, accountability, are critical. This will be a great challenge for the industrial engineering and information technology professional. However, it will be necessary if our data age is to come of age.

Read more IE in IT blogs.

The topic of the article is an unprecedented physics research endeavor currently taking place in Central Europe. Thousands of scientists and engineers are preparing to literally recreate the state of matter just after the theoretical and proverbial “Big Bang.” They have many noble goals for the research, but one primary goal is to prove or disprove the existence of a single source of all matter’s mass: the Higgs particle, sometimes referred to as the God particle.  According to the article, understanding the Higgs particle is necessary to truly understand all other theories in particle physics. Its discovery would finally reveal how seemingly mass-less particles can come together to form something with tangible substance.

In the health care systems improvement we know and love, what is our “Higgs particle”? That is, what element is an essential component of every successful health care improvement effort? 

I’ve heard it said that a “burning platform for change” is necessary for every process improvement effort. This may be true when the primary goal is to simply change the status quo, but this burning platform is rarely substantial for sustaining those changes after the initial improvement blitz. Since successful process improvement is sustainable, does something else define its foundation?

Most likely, there is no single “Higgs particle” underlying all health care systems improvement. It seems more likely that many factors can lead to successful improvement: supportive and interested leadership, an established and insightful mission, the measurement of key performance indicators, innovative ideas for change, a well thought out and efficient implementation, and the effective communication of results. And fortunately, we don’t need to build “the world’s largest and most powerful particle accelerator” to find these factors; they have been successfully realized in many of today’s health care improvement teams. 

Perhaps our mission is not to discover the essential components of improvement success, but rather to muster the vigilance and foresight necessary to put them all into action.

Read more Healing Health Care blogs.

I just returned from an annual vacation trip to the Napa Valley wine region.  I love wine, but after ten years of tastings and sampling, I am by no means a wine expert.  I go with a small group of friends as much for the fraternity as for the wine. 

At one time, perhaps Napa was just wine growers growing grapes, and wine-makers making wine.  Somewhere along the way, tourists came and wanted to be a part.  Hence, I figure, wineries opened their doors and began offering tastings; a sample of current vintages to entice favor and purchase.  Wineries quickly figured out that if they sell to you directly, they cut out the wine distributor and keep all the money to themselves!  Tastings grew popular with tourists, the profits grew higher for wineries, and thus more and more wineries opened fancy tasting rooms offering everything from wine to clothing to cookbooks and tours…all for a small fee, of course.   This has all had an impact on the “flavor” of wine tasting in Napa.  Unfortunately, in many ways, this trend has already led wineries to become impersonal and commercialized, like some sort of Dionysian Disneyland in which you’re expected to spend lots of money in return for a mediocre experience.  In order to beef up sales in the wineries and enhance the customer experience, some have taken to hiring sommeliers to conduct the tastings.  This is a new and somewhat expensive differentiator, but it can be positive or negative.  The most recent trip brought home a significant and growing difference that now separates many wineries:  Sommelier Service.

A sommelier, or wine steward, is a wine expert…someone with a better nose for smelling; taste buds for tasting; and knowledge for discerning wines than I will ever have.  There are good sommeliers and bad ones…but they all know their stuff pretty well (or, at least they’ve got me fooled!).  What makes the bad ones bad and the good ones great is ultimately in the way they approach the customer.

A sommelier is an educator.  A bad sommelier wants to impress you and differentiate his [presumably greater] knowledge from yours.  A great sommelier is passionate and makes you feel good about being educated, as if he wants you to enjoy everything he knows and tastes.

A sommelier is a sort of visionary.  A bad one envisions the dollars in your pocket…a great one envisions what a wine will become and how much you will enjoy drinking it.

A bad sommelier serves what he’s got behind the bar, regardless of your tastes or preferences.  A great one learns what you like before he starts pouring.

A bad sommelier loves your money and is interested in himself...a great sommelier loves wine and is interested in your experience.

Of course, there are benefits to great service…there always are!  A great sommelier can quickly earn customer loyalty and growing revenues to their winery employers.  Favorable experiences yield references and more wine sales, and more tourists! 

Recognize some similarities to health care?  Of course you do!  Health care workers, in large part, are knowledge workers…they have skills, expertise, experience, and knowledge that the customers [patients] likely never will.  How they approach customers with that knowledge can have a huge impact on the experience of those customers, whether positive or negative.  Physicians are perhaps the ultimate sommelier…they know everything about the human body and what makes it work well.  The proper sharing of that information can be the difference between a bad trip to your hospital and a great trip.  But we, as MEs, can also be great sommeliers.  We “get it” while even the smartest people in our facilities; administrators, physicians, and nurses; don’t.  We, too, must be passionate educators, first learning our craft, then learning our customers’ preferences; and then offering the right solutions to gain satisfaction.

As I say all the time, “It’s not about me.”  It isn’t and never will be.  Strive to make a trip to your hospital a great sommelier experience with great sommelier service.  If your “knowledge workers” share their knowledge with passion and a zeal for the customer experience, your hospital will reap the benefits.

And if you want to exchange references for great wineries to visit, just let me know…I’m happy to share my great sommelier experiences!

Read more Healing Health Care blogs

Is Lean a philosophy or just a collection of tools?  I feel it is the former, yet the distinction remains a bit difficult to grasp.

So, a story to explain a bit how this works.

We’ve recently had a vexing problem of poor yield in one of our process steps.  It has seemed resistant to many of our efforts and many of us were quite frustrated in it.  In a conversation I had with several of our associated who work directly in the process last week, we grappled with the problem further.  They were interested in the scientific and engineering input which had gone into the problem.  Yet, in the discussion, one of them proposed a novel solution, the type of solution to which you hit your head with your palm and wonder why you didn’t think of it.  We immediately began a small experiment to assess it; I’m confident it will work. 

In a classic manufacturing organization, problems go up to technical people who examine, analyze and make changes.  In many cases, this is necessary, especially when specialized technical knowledge is required.  In a Lean setting, however, the direct observations of people working with the product has equal validity with those with advanced degrees.  The Lean manager has to draw out, encourage and help these direct observations to flow and be tested. 

 

Inevitably, I’ve found we can try, test and select these observational solutions at a rate 5 to 10 times faster than more sophisticated proposals.  Lean, as a philosophy, makes this distinction more obvious.  This is a hard distinction for those trained in engineering.  Yet it is essential. 

Try it out yourself this week. 

Read more Lean Believer blogs

"The sky is falling! The sky is falling!" - Chicken Little

The sky isn’t falling, but when it rains, it pours. Are you ready for a downpour or flooding? Literally or figuratively? You should be ready – either way, and both ways.

Whether a rain storm turning into flooding of your server farm or ice storm stranding your support staff at home instead of work, a little planning can prevent downpours (literal or figurative) from becoming disasters.

In theory, contingency plans should follow the Rules of Three.

Examples:

A. Have a plan of what to do if system or network is down. Do you have backup servers if the primary server has a massive hardware failure? Do you have options in place if your main server farm (and main and backup servers) is flooded like those in Iowa? Do you have other computing centers that could take over load if the current site is inoperable? 

B. Have a plan if all staff are out. Ice storms, high water, name a disaster. Can they telecommute and do their jobs remotely? Can alternate sites be set up in a pinch? Can alternate sites (within your organization or without it) take over the work so that your customers are still served?

C. If the power is down, do you have a backup plan? Be it a UPS or alternate generators, do you have a backup of your power backup?

D. Do you have back ups for your backup people when it comes to critical skill sets? If the system guru has a heart attack and the back up person is on vacation that week, do you have a third person who can fill in?

When life goes bad and bad goes to worse, what the back up plan for your back up plan? Your customers will thank you if you have one when you need it. Consider it a best practice for your systems. A survival strategy for your software systems. It just might save your organization.

Read more IE in IT blogs.

I have attended several major health care conferences and seminars in the past year, mostly having to do with “patient flow." Some were large, some small, some “famous,” and some, to me, are now “infamous.” (By the way, having seen many, I can objectively say that the SHS Conference has the best content for the money of anything out there!)

Yet, there are few situations more tortuous for me than sitting in a large conference hall, unable to leave without making a scene, listening to a poor speaker telling me something I heard (or thought of) three years ago as if it’s the “latest greatest.”  I have little patience for a great many things, and that’s one of them.  Unfortunately, I was recently in just such a predicament. With too much caffeine and conference honey-buns and doughnuts coursing through my veins, I was ready to either jump out of my skin, do a “Home Alone” scream as I ran for the door with my arms flailing over my head, or focus on something interesting which would occupy my brain until the pain ended. Here’s all I could come up with…

Spider balloons.  Yup, spider balloons.  You see, some spiders, particularly small spiders weighing less than one milligram, use “ballooning” to travel over relatively long distances. Walt Whitman even wrote a poem about spider ballooning.

Basically, spiders that need or want to move from one place to somewhere relatively far away will fire a string of their silk into the wind.  The wind catches the silk and lifts the spider and carries it away, like an arachnid version of a Ft. Lauderdale parasail ride. This carries the little spiders great distances, which normally might be impossible or impractical if traversed. Indeed, sailors of old were known to find spiders caught in the sails of their ships well out to sea, having been carried there on strong winds. Spiders, it seems, have figured out how to make great leaps without muscle or time. Even more intriguing is that spider ballooning can be deadly. Some perish in the effort, landing places where they shouldn’t or being eaten in mid-air by dragonflies. Yet, this doesn’t stop an instinctive and effective mode of travel, as it’s probably critical to the survival of the species.

How did I come up with that? Well, it actually started with inchworms. You see, the ever-proud VP of St. Wherever-the-heck Medical Center struck me as an inch-worm…inching, ever so slowly, towards a solution to what she perceived as an enormously perplexing problem. She and her facility were plodding along…inch by slow, repetitive inch, towards a distant goal on the horizon. What she really needed was a silk balloon!

Now with inch-worms in need of spider balloons in my head, what else could possibly ever come to mind except Mark Cuban?  Cuban was the fellow who started, among other business successes, Broadcast.com, which netted a tidy $5.9 billion when he sold it to Yahoo! in 1999, making him a dot-com sensation and billionaire (maybe Google will want my little company too someday!). Mark Cuban is no inchworm…nor, I would guess, are any of the other billionaires in the world! In speaking of new ideas, Cuban says [I paraphrase] “If everybody’s already talking about your idea, walk away from it.  It’s old news and you’ll never be successful with it.  Find an idea that no one is talking about.  Then, you’ll have something worthwhile.”

Now, with Mark Cuban, the VP of Inchworming and parasailing spiders in mind, the last component of my daydream came to complete the thought.  Performance Engineers! (or MEs, MEPI’s, IEs, Agent of Remarkable Change…whatever you choose to dub yourself).  You see, to me, no one else in health care is more capable of producing the great “spider balloon” leaps of improvement with Mark Cuban-style ideas than the PEs of health care. I would cynically guess that the inchworming VP either doesn’t have a PE group, or, if she does, has never interacted with them. If she did, perhaps the audience might have heard some new ideas!

What we need in health care are PE’s making silk “idea balloons” to carry us, quickly and effectively, to new places. But no one is better equipped, better trained or in a better position to do so! Inchworms won’t get us where we need to be…we don’t have time, money, or resources for that! Yes, there is potential failure along the way. That’s OK, because enough of our “silk ideas” will survive and ultimately take health care where it needs to go.

The message here is simple: make silk balloons. Lots of them! Fire at will and don’t let failure threaten!  Take your organizations in great leaps, not inches, towards the goals it has set, or the goals you have set for it! You’ll probably have to drag a few along for the ride, and some will be left behind. But survival depends on it!

If you haven’t produced a spider balloon for your organization this week, ask yourself a question at the end of each busy day:  “What I have done…what idea have I produced…what spider balloon have I fired, that will take my organization to a new place? How can I carry my organization over the inchworms of typical improvement concepts and ideas to better performance, better management, and better care?” It is you, the PEs of health care, who have the silk, in the form of ideas, knowledge, and know-how, to take your organizations where they need to go…you just have to decide you don’t like where you are and start firing some silk!

Read more Healing Health Care blogs

Clients of mine always end up saying something like "Lean really gets into your head... it's hard to turn off" - or at least one on every project ends up saying that. That's a good thing... a way of thinking, not just a set of tools.

Lean is in my head, and it's hard to turn off even on a holiday weekend in London. I saw a few instances that made me think of "flow" during our stops along the way.

The "London Eye" is an attraction that is basically a giant Ferris wheel, but with enclosed pods (as shown in a photo I took).



It's quite an engineering marvel (to me, anyway) and a wonderful view of London in the 30 minute journey. The continuous flow aspect of the London Eye is that it never stops. It just rotates very slowly and they load/unload passengers through the door during a window that's like a moving assembly line with a 45-second cycle time. It's better than the herky-jerky load/unload process of a Ferris wheel at your county fair.

Now, it actually DOES stop (for safety reasons) when there is a disabled passenger who needs more time or would be unsteady on the slowly moving pod. Prioritizing safety over all -- good call. Even when the Eye *did* stop, it was very, very smooth. You can tell that was designed in, rather than being a safety afterthought.

We also visited the fascinating Tower of London (which is really a fortress and set of palaces, more than a single tower). One of the highlights is getting to see the Crown Jewels (or least what are purported to be the real thing... one of my colleagues here thinks they are a fake set to avoid theft). No photos, since they're not allowed during your tour.

One problem a museum or attraction might have is moving people along to keep the queue going. The Crown Jewels building is "Disney-like" in it's queuing... one line outside, then lots of queues in different rooms inside, with videos and things showing along the way. As our friend Peter Abilla writes about, this is good queuing practice to help you not focus on the waiting time.

People tend to want to stop and linger and stare at the jewels, they are pretty breathtaking. They used to have "a lady standing there who would poke you if you stood too long... keep it moving" according to a local colleague. Now, they have enforced flow with a moving walkway like you would find at an airport!

In the part of the building with the most valuable jewels, the pace of viewing is dictated by the Queen (in a way) via the pace of the moving walkway. No lingering... just continuous flow of visitors.  Interesting. There are some treasures you can stand and stare at all you want.

I'm not sure if that's "customer focused" other than keeping the line moving and the queue down to a reasonable size.

I bet the walkway runs at a single speed at all times. It would be interesting to see if they could adjust the rate of the walkway to correspond with "takt time?" If there are slow times (and I'm not sure there are), the walkway could run slower and they could speed it up slightly when busy. I didn't see a "suggestion box" so I'll just have to pose that question here.

See how Lean can get stuck in your head? I don't think I'm the only Lean obsessive. To my own credit, I didn't think about Lean when I was on a beach for almost a week back in May.

Read more Everyday Lean blogs

After receiving a warm welcome at the door my girlfriend and I were treated to breakfast.

This was followed by a meeting with my service rep. Before actually taking ownership of my car, BMW lets me take it for a virtual test drive where I get to test how my actual car, with its real world configuration, will drive in snow and rain conditions. In the simulation I can test the brakes and cornering. Cool stuff.

From there I am taken to a landing area that has my car spinning on a platform. And from that point on I am given a tour of the facility and a tour of all of the features of my car. Unfortunately, the manufacturing side of the facility is closed on the weekends, so no shots of manufacturing. But on the logistics front I have a scoop. Prior to prepping my car its sits in a loading dock within BMW Welt that holds roughly 250 cars. The dock is 100% automated, in fact humans can't even go inside because BMW has removed a considerable portion of the air from the room. The reason is simple; to prevent fires. Similar to a large parking garage an automated arm moves the platform, which the cars sit on from station to station where the car gets final tests and cleaned up.

To summarize, the BMW Welt experience, is exactly what customer fulfillment should do, which is fulfill my every wish and desire. And they sure did.

Read more Supply Chains are Cool blogs

Here's an interesting example of "Everyday Lean" that I never knew about. Have you ever been frustrated by pulling on a roll of aluminum foil (or plastic wrap) and having the roll pop out of the container?

The boxes for these are actually designed with a little method for keeping the roll in the box - a physical method more effective than "being careful."

Click on the link above for some further explanation and a few photos. It's not rocket science - that's why I love this example. This is designed into the product, but we can use this to think about opportunities to error proof our processes.

Does saying "be careful" really work? If this were a workplace and the roll popping out of the box were a serious problem, would we post signs, cautions, and exhortations for our employees, or would we error proof it?

Read more Everyday Lean blogs

I once worked at a repair depot for electronics. To indicate priority, they implemented a system of tags. Red was "red alert",or a fast turn around. "Yellow" was medium priority. "Green" was a "when you get around to it" repair.

Customers typically want the fastest turn around possible. When told, "Your product is already given a very high priority," the next question was usually, "How can I get it a higher priority than that?" 

Soon a purple tag "super-hot" appeared, to indicate extra-hot
priorities. Then came neon-pink, "chili-pepper hot, not super-hot but hotter than our `red' hot" tag. Add in "blue" for "calm, don't care so much when done" and our distribution depot came to look like a three-dimensional rainbow.Add in a magenta tag roll someone pulled out when we ran out of red and pink and the confusion of determining which highest priority was truly the highest  priority, and our red alerts started becoming a greater problem than the problematic assemblies themselves.

Sorting through the red alert tags took up valuable processing time, reducing the effectiveness of the system as well as our readiness to handle new and truly urgent work. Like an ER with too many screaming sirens and beeping things, there were too many warnings to sort out from one another.

 I rolled out a stricter set of criteria for urgency work, along with
repair shop improvements that decreased delays for parts and shorter tooling time. Throughput increased about 30% and the urgency matter grew less urgent. With more flow-through, wait time decreased. For a time, anyway, until demand  caught up with supply.
 
While running through a software installation, the sudden array of pop-ups and warnings made my computer screen resemble that repair depot. Multiple warnings and "red alerts." I scrolled through the warning windows. The software installation had encountered RAM and memory limits. Both the memory warning and RAM warning generated two and three serial windows,
whereupon closing one window brought up the next window of the informational message. The software installation, of course, failed, generating its own pop-up window. The greatest problem I could see was that moderate level informational windows had the same "red" and "warning" message box window as the installation failure warnings.  

Through tests of the same software came further design concerns. All informational windows and minor warnings had the same design format as very significant errors. Why is that significant? If all warnings are red alerts, users may not be able to distinguish a true red alert among the array of colors. And warnings that are lost in the noise or colorful array of pop-ups
ruin the ability of users to respond adequately. Save red alerts for the real emergencies, and let the lesser problems be less intrusive on the user.

Read more IE in IT blogs

So BMW is build to order, which is fine, because I'm in no rush. My new car is made in Munich, Germany at BMW Welt and the company actually offers you the option to pick it up at the plant, where you'll get a tour of the manufacturing site and you'll be presented your new car as if you won it on The Price is Right.

Another unique feature is my salesperson can provide me with next to real time updates of the stage of manufacturing. So each week I can find out if its been painted, if the interior is done or if its sitting idle. Which I thought was cool. They could kick it up a notch and offer a live video feed specifically on my car. Either way, I'll be sure to take lots of photos when I pick it up on May 31.

Read more Supply Chains are Cool blogs.

Simpler can make things faster, better, easier, cheaper, sweeter, and add an adverb to the list. Yet simpler often raises the issue – simpler (and assumedly better) for whom?

Making it simpler is sometimes more frustrating to users in the end. For example, Windows updates that result in menu selections that are shorter by default, which users may not know how to set back to automatically extend.

Simpler, as simplified automatic installs, can assist development but break other links. For example, the automatic (usually monthly) Java updates don’t carry over runtime parameters at the next automatic update. This simplifies the automatic installation from the software push side, but it is painful and time consuming to troubleshoot when the runtime parameters are critical elsewhere. Thus making the update process seamless and simple for system administrators is complex to resolve for support staff whose applications rely on the java runtime parameter.

Simpler as in clean slates are not always a good idea for users. Everyone who has received a new and improved computer to find it is lacking their old applications is familiar with this scenario. Fresh start of Internet Explorer settings after hard drive refresh can be useful. With cookies gone and user data persistence (which may be a security vulnerability) cleared, theoretically, the system is better. However, with a new and improved pop up blocker lacking prior safe sites or even phishing filters that prevent redirects that are required for new software installs, the new, simpler clean slate requires work to clean up.

Simpler is usually better, but not always.

Read more IE in IT blogs

My Way News - Airlines slow down flights to save on fuel 

I'm just thrilled anytime I see an example of an airline making a process improvement (a "kaizen" if you will) instead of their usual game plan of whining, slashing employee pay, or cutting corners.

"Drivers have long known that slowing down on the highway means getting more miles to the gallon. Now airlines are trying it, too - adding a few minutes to flights to save millions on fuel.

Southwest Airlines started flying slower about two months ago, and projects it will save $42 million in fuel this year by extending each flight by one to three minutes.

On one Northwest Airlines flight from Paris to Minneapolis earlier this week alone, flying slower saved 162 gallons of fuel, saving the airline $535. It added eight minutes to the flight, extending it to eight hours, 58 minutes.

That meant flying at an average speed of 532 mph, down from the usual 542 mph."
This is a simple kaizen we can ALL apply. Instead of just whining about high gas prices, drive slower, ease up on the "rabbit starts," and keep your tires at the proper air pressure.To learn more about mileage improvement tips, click here.

Read more Everyday Lean Blogs

My CEO copied me on an email today, as she responded to a friend who had written:

[The patient’s wife] would like 10-15 of us to commit to visiting once per week for 30 minute visits, both to give him the company and so that the staff can see that he is frequently visited. I understand if you don't get a lot of visitors, you don't get such great care.

How unfortunate. Or is it unfortunately true?  

I believe many hospitals have had this said about them at least once. Why?  Well, first, Hollywood and the media (and some unions) like to play this tape, and whether accurate or not for any given hospital, any idea that gets such airplay probably has a kernel of truth at its heart. And second, because the title of this blog entry was also the title of book!

November 2007 saw the publication of The Hospital Patient Handbook, by Jari Holland Buck—the author of the aforementioned book. I actually never read 24/7 or Dead, but I suspect a lot or perhaps even all of it inspired this less-argumentatively-titled volume, which I did read. 

Ms. Buck’s husband suffered an unexpected injury that left him comatose. His odyssey through four different hospitals clearly demonstrated much of health care’s dirty laundry: the risks of handoff miscommunications, the arrogance of some doctors and “care”-givers and even organizations, the stresses and incredible daily burdens and burnout facing some health care workers, and the inattention and insensitivity among others. The doctor who could finally explain Mr. Buck’s injury and foster his recovery credited her fearless and ferocious tenacity as the factor most responsible for saving his life.

Did she? I don’t know. I can’t say. I wasn’t there. But she could have made things more complicated. 

Besides her earlier book’s title, Ms. Holland’s primary message can be summed up: 

Unless a family member or close friend takes on the role of ‘lifeguard,’ health care workers—especially in hospitals—shouldn’t be trusted!  You should assume they’re lazy or incompetent or both…

Humans around the world have vast stores of folk-wisdom, proverbs, fables, adages and clichés.  Here are several that apply:

Folk wisdom: Is the glass half-empty or half-full? *
Point/lesson: Perspectives differ. 
Implication: Patients, families and health care workers don’t see the same things the same way.
* Correct IE answer:  “The glass is too large—it would be more efficient to match the size of the glass to the serving…”

Folk wisdom: The squeaky wheel gets the grease…
Point/lesson: Priority often goes to dealing with the most annoying stimulus.
Implication: Goal often becomes “make the noise stop” rather than “fix the wheel”!

Folk wisdom: You can go through life treating everyone like your friend or like an enemy.  Either way, you’re probably right.
Point/lesson: Relationships are based give-and-take. 
Implication: My response/reaction to you is based on how I perceive you treat me: I’ll meet courtesy with courtesy, disrespect with disrespect.  And if you only yell at and criticize me, I will avoid you.

Folk wisdom: You’ll catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.
Point/lesson: People will choose sweet/pleasant experiences over sour/bitter.
Implication: And if you keep it up, I may look for ways to retaliate.

Rather than risk alienating the very folks you might be dependent on, it might be better to at least begin with a positive attitude and expectation. Will this guarantee safety? In and of itself, no. More direct and extreme measures may be warranted. But constant vigilance out of a base of angry distrust is exhaustingly hard work. On the other hand, attempting to develop a partnering relationship with caregivers fosters peace-of-mind.

To maximize safety:

1. Ask questions.  Always, about anything—especially anytime someone wants to put something into or take something out of the patient.
2. Smile and greet workers.  Make sure they’re wearing name badges.  Insist they introduce themselves and explain what they’re doing.
3. Ask to meet the unit manager anytime the patient is moved to a new unit.  If you’ve already met them, you’ll be more comfortable calling them for help if needed.
4. Speak insistently from solid ground, but don’t accuse: “I’m sorry, I didn’t see you wash your hands, and I’m so worried about all the bugs I read about.  Could you please do it again?” is a far more agreeable approach than “You need to wash your hands.  Now.  Or I’ll tell your boss.”
5. Insist on assistance:  Ask for a manager any time, or for the house supervisor or administrator-on-call at night/on weekends.   Call the hospital’s patient advocate or grievance line when needed.
6. Contact the Joint Commission:  1-800-994-6610 or complaint@jointcommission.org.

Read more Healing Health Care blogs.
 

These stories occurred at my first employer out of college. Names and places have been changed to protect the innocent.

I was learning to enter production orders into our MRP system. When I entered a resin processor equipment order with a delivery date of six months out, it processed and came up as 99 1/2 years late. I chalked it up to my own mistake. Then resin orders for almost a year in advance, fall 2000, showed up as 99 years late. I asked one of the purchasing staff what I was doing wrong. 'Mary' said, "Well, I'm ordering equipment and resin stuff for next year, and I'm getting the same mistake."

Ah, so it wasn't just me. So we took it to the manager, who took it to IT.

Welcome to the Y2K nightmare.

Our MRP software wasn't Y2K compliant. Worse yet, our MRP software was no longer supported by IBM. The options were determined to be:

1. Buy big name software.
2. Buy little name software.
3. Make our own.
4. Deal with it.

Being summer 1999, option 1 wasn't an option. All the big name software vendors were too busy to talk to a small-sized manufacturer. Small software vendors were willing to talk to us, if we paid a great up front fee to get them to show up. And given the limited purse strings of the manufacturing firm, paying for a software vendor to grace us with their presence - but not necessarily solve the problem in time - was not an option.

Thus option 3, making their own MRP software, was the option that was selected. A computer science graduate straight out of college was hired to develop a new MRP software. And, amazingly, one was developed by October.

The training session was by a guy trained by the guy who developed the software, then left to make a fortune in last minute Y2K contracting. I asked so many questions that the 30 minute training session lasted 1 1/2 hours. I took detailed notes, since they had not had a single handout on how to use the software. Many questions I had couldn’t be answered, except with the answer that only the programmer would know and he wasn’t here. Then came recommendations to try the software after I installed it and see if what I thought would work did.

When the training was over, I typed up my notes. Then I e-mailed the notes to the trainer, asking "Is what I wrote correct?"  Two hours later came a mass e-mail. With my notes attached. With a message, "Here's the user guide for the new MRP software." Thus began my technical writing and IT documentation experience.

We implemented the new software. There were minor bugs, but it was Y2K compliant. Orders placed 18 months in advance showed as over a year out. Y2K on our MRP software was thus resolved.

January 2nd was filled with trepidation. Yes, all our computers turned on. Yes, all the equipment turned on. The additive feeders fed additives at the right rate. Level measurers showed correctly. The disaster was averted.

I saw a blinking row of lights on a control panel. The date display on all the equipment controllers was flashing 00/00/00. The one software system no one had bothered to check.

Lessons learned:

1. Figure out all the software that needs to be fixed before you begin trying to fix it.
2. When you’re writing - or rewriting - software, document how to use it.
3. Make sure the trainers are thoroughly trained in the software before they train users. If the trainer cannot answer questions, the questions will filter up to development. And that is not a value added proposition.

Read more IE in IT blogs

A non-health care worker friend of mine recently asked me to read and comment on a book he’d encountered in a graduate business course:  Redefining Health Care: Creating Value-Based Competition on Results, by Michael E. Porter and Elizabeth Olmsted Teisberg.   For those of you who aren’t familiar with him, Porter is a Harvard Business School professor renowned for his ideas and writing about competitive strategy.

The book itself doesn’t share earth-shattering revelations; any graduate of a health administration program, as well as most doctors and other clinicians, have at least a basic understanding of its content.  What is most interesting about this 506 page book is use of the word “competition” in its title.  As the authors demonstrate in the early chapters, competition in health care is exceedingly complex, so confusing that many individual businesses may not even recognize who their competitors are!  It is an industry not only with multiple overlapping service segments, but separate entities from different segments frequently find themselves simultaneously bitter rivals and willing collaborators.

Much of the confusion stems from industry fragmentation and specialization that may no longer be (or never was) logical: the key professionals (doctors) are most often organizationally segregated from critical resources (such as hospitals), while most consumers (patients) have little economic skin-in-the-game because third parties (insurers or the government) hold the purse-strings!  Add to this the usual niche players chasing particular profits.

As engineers, we know that process hand-offs are the weakest links in any production or value chain.  When processes like health care delivery depend on the timely and accurate and complete communication of critical information, it’s no wonder that dangerous errors are more common than we like to admit.

Even more oddly, arcane payment rules create dramatic gulfs in terms of consumer access.  Some programs restrict access to more efficient/less costly care, allowing health to deteriorate dangerously before the consumer can seek help, which then results in expense and discomfort far beyond what would have been incurred.  Others incentivize the exact opposite behaviors:  with little personal financial risk, people seek to use products (often expensive pharmaceuticals) for conditions unheard of ten years ago, or go to the doctor for simple—and untreatable!—cases of the common cold.  And, due to regulations requiring hospitals to assess and care for “all comers”, emergency rooms nationwide are jam-packed with non-emergency patients, sometimes delaying care of critical cases that must be deferred to other facilities.

The current system evolved from good intentions.  But, like the income tax code, the loopholes and incentives have created unintended consequences. Counter to the popular lobbying for “socialized”, government-run health care, Porter and Teisberg advocate restructuring the health care market to eliminate the artificial fragmentation caused by past regulatory models and insurance-related misplaced incentives.   Then, economic forces can drive competition on quality and efficiency, ultimately allowing the US to boast the world’s best health care system. 

Of course, this too would benefit us in different ways:  Anyone else tired of the Viagra junk email?

Read more Healing Health Care blogs

Domino's Pizza has created the Pizza Tracker. Domino's is a US based pizza chain and to help improve customer service they are starting with logistics - ahh the delicious smell of the supply chain.

It works quite simply. Once you place your order the tracker follows your pizza from prep to bake to box to delivery. They aren't using RFID tags or GPS tags on the pizza. I believe they know the average time for each step and simply start the tracking counter once the order is taken. But, it would be very cool if they were using RFID on the box or perhaps on some sort of high tech pizza tray that is always sitting under the pizza tracking it all the way. The RFID reader could also tell you the temperature in the oven. Why you'd want to know that, I'm not sure, but it would be cool. Then obviously, GPS in the delivery truck could take over.

Read more Supply Chains are Cool blogs

Process improvement often focuses on easily measured metrics: time to complete a task, error rates, transactions per measure. Six Sigma projects in IT often focus on easily quantified bottlenecks like bandwidth, uptime, and utilization rate of humans. Yet there is an equally crucial bottleneck that is rarely realized: human attention.

People have a limited amount of attention as they have a limited amount of time on the job. And as with time, there are many things vying for that attention. Some distracters that take away user or computer operator attention can be handled via HR actions.

Noise canceling headphones to reduce noise distractions. Privacy screens to reduce wandering conversations. This gives users more time and attention to put into the software applications they are using. Yet those software applications themselves may be adding to the attention disruptions they suffer.

“Just add a pop up when they should see the error” or “Oh, give them a notice when the transaction is complete” are easy to say. And if the user had only that one application running when the error appeared, it would get the attention it deserved. Now jump into reality. The user has logged on and started bringing up the four to six applications they often use simultaneously. Virus software updates pop up immediately. A couple of IMs shouting for someone to do something appear. Maybe a junk popup from Internet Explorer. Add in periodic login prompts, information only notices, and true error messages, and a high priority pop-up notice gets closed along with 20 other lesser notices. Users respond to the deluge by glancing at – or not even looking at – all the messages before closing them all.

Problems resulting from so many pop ups include:

• Errors not getting noticed, and thus not getting resolved
• Wasted time by users closing informational messages they don’t need
• Distraction from their primary tasks as they attempt to evaluate the actions necessary from so many information sources
• Interruption of their primary tasks from non-value added messages, which in turn increases their error rates

How then can IT deal with these attacks on the efficient use of human attention? There are several ways.

• Don’t use pop-up notices to inform users of completed transactions and other minor informational messages. Use the message bar in the browser instead.
• If the error is important, have the error come up on large text on the application or browser screen. More importantly, don’t let the user complete the transaction until the error is resolved. If the error is a pop-up which can be closed, the odds increase that the pop-up will be ignored or closed without corrective action. If it is a critical error, don’t let them proceed.
• Design the applications so that users cannot close a pop-up in habit and then not understand why they cannot continue to the next step.
• If applications require frequent updating, either schedule the updates for non-user time or push out updates without user notification. They should not have their attention taken away for things they either have no control of or do not care about.
• In mirror images of user stations. Set up pop-up blocker, but include the corporate websites of applications users use among the safe sites by default. This will reduce spam/SPIM junk pop-ups, while reducing the odds that important pop-up windows from valid, corporate approved applications will not be blocked by popup blockers.
  Discourage IM in place of human communication. If it is important, then it shouldn’t be in IM; after all, the full attention such information deserves is reduced under the deluge. If it isn’t important enough to warrant calling or visiting the person, then it probably isn’t worth bothering the person in the first place – and thus a needless distraction.
• Design software from the beginning to minimize the number of pop-ups and notices receive in the first place. Save disruptive notifications for high priority issues so that they get the attention they deserve.

Software applications and environments should factor in that most underappreciated yet so critical bottleneck – human attention.

Read more IE in IT blogs.

How would you complete the following sentence:  “If it weren’t for all the complaints we get, …”

• “…we’d never make any changes.” 
• “…we wouldn’t know what matters to our customers.”
• “…we’d be able to get some work done.”

If you’re like most people, the last choice is what you really thought…c’mon, admit it!

None of us wants to hear complaints, but we need them.  That’s right:  N-E-E-D them.

As the first bullet suggests, motivations range from person-to-person and even minute-to-minute, spanning from the noble (“It’s the right thing to do…”) to the mundane (“It’s a living…”) to the reluctant (“Ow!  Quit hitting me…”).  Complaints are one of the only things that really fit all these situations: Fixing them is the right thing to do, they’re a normal part of everyday life, and when they’re taken care of, nobody bugs us about them.

The second bullet recognizes that complaints convey information—or perhaps more importantly, highlight where information gaps exist. Complaints do not indicate that anyone has done anything wrong or that there is a “real” problem. Complaints tell us only that someone’s expectations aren’t being met—we have to decide if it’s the expectations or our performance that needs to be addressed. 

Dealing with complaints can be fun or stultifying. That is, most people find helping someone get their needs met is psychologically rewarding, but hearing the same complaint over and over with nobody fixing it leads quickly to burn-out. 

IEs can help healthcare organizations tremendously by fixing the complaint process:

1. Set up methods to capture complaints: who, what, when, where, how, and why.
2. Set up accountability structures to ensure problems are fixed.
3. Look for patterns in complaint information—maybe that “little irritant” is really a more frequent headache than we thought, or a symptom of something bigger.
4. Ensure your organization complies with the grievance processes outlined in Medicare’s Conditions of Participation (see especially Appendix A).

The last tip is especially important, for two reasons.  First, Joint Commission standards are derived from Medicare requirements, but the source document is far more specific than anything you’ll find from JC!  And, making it easy for customers to voice their complaints—like knowing who to call about common issues—is a big part of compliance…

Oh, and by the way, don’t come whining to me about it…

Read more Healing Health Care blogs.

What is a wiki? This answer is courtesy of Wikipedia. “A wiki is software that allows users to create, edit, and link web pages easily. Wikis are often used to create collaborative websites and to power community websites. These wiki websites are often also referred to as wikis; for example, Wikipedia is one of the best known wikis. Wikis are being installed by businesses to provide affordable and effective Intranets and for Knowledge Management.”

Wikis are increasingly being rolled out at companies as a value added problem solving tool and information source. There are even discussions of using wikis by internal and external users to replace searchable solution databases. The explosion of entries (and even value of) wikipedia has added to this line of thought. However, IT groups shouldn’t see wiki as the end all and be all of information sources.

Yet there are unmentioned wiki problems. A few of these problems are:

1. Solutions known to some users may not be put in the wiki because they don’t have time, depriving users of the value of this information.
2. Transferring existing knowledge databases into a wiki is time consuming and may not be done uniformly.
3. The effort to supervise and even correct a wiki can be greater than a company’s dedicated IT time for creation and maintenance of its own internal knowledge database.
4. If a user adds erroneous information or even advice contradictory to corporate IT policy, damage could be done as user implement practices and actions that they believe are acceptable – hey, it’s in the IT wiki!
 
There are other issues that can limit the value of a wiki.
 
1. Entries are too long or convoluted to be useful to a user.
2. Information can be redundant, increasing size of the database and increasing the risk that entries diverge and contain erroneous information.
3. Topics in discussions can wander, leading to wasted time in on line arguments, the distraction of extraneous information in such debates, and overly used “I agree” and “Why don’t you look here instead” entries.

But all is not lost. What can you do with wiki to make it value added?

Where can a wiki be of benefit for an IT user group or even IT department?

• If conflicts and problems are discussed over time and by large numbers of users, this can be the first indicator to development that they need to take action to troubleshoot and resolve it.
• Broad user feedback on the product can provide ideas for improvements in the next generation of the application that are much more useful and constructive than user surveys.
• Happy users giving “this is a great feature” can add to the loyalty of the customer base.
• Problem resolution entries by customers and users can provide resolution methods that corporate IT now does not have to discover.

How can proper control of information be balanced with the use of a wiki?

1. The software developer or corporate IT department can add specific topics of software upgrades, known problems, and corporate practices. Then these entries are linked to the IT controlled documents. This practice can allow users searching for a problem in the wiki to be led to the corporate approved and controlled knowledge database answer or direct link to the correct helpdesk.
2. Link the existing tried and true answer database to wiki entries for the error messages. This directs users to the answer of their problem, without requiring double the work of updating solution databases and the wiki.
3. Limit input to true users or approved users. This can reduce input from less knowledgeable users and prevent entries like “Does anyone know where I can get training on this?” or “I think this other product is better”.
4. Solutions recommended by users should be vetted by the software development or helpdesk staff. If valid, post to the solution database and link back to the wiki entries related to the errors the problem caused. If not valid or the resolution recommended in the wiki is contrary to published policy, remove the entry or state that this practice is not recommended. If the latter is done, state why if possible.
 
With the right planning and implementation, wiki can be a great addition to a user community and development group’s assets.

Read more IE in IT blogs.

In the course of my consulting work, I'm sometimes asked something like, "OK, so do you use this stuff at home? Do you 5S your kitchen and your garage?"

Well sure, I've "5S-ed" my kitchen, in the sense that I try to keep items and equipment in the right locations. Last year, we moved the storage location for our knives so it was right in the island where we usually chop (and right near where we grab the cutting boards). So if you consider that 5S, sure we've used some elements of the approach. Do we have tape around everything? No, of course not.

The closest thing we have to a formal lean system is our use of "kanban" to manage some home inventory items. Two items that are managed via kanban are toilet paper and paper towels.

In the garage (the "bulk warehouse") sit two large warehouse club-sized packs of toilet paper and two packs of paper towels. This is a very simple system -- when one warehouse club pack is empty, that's our signal that we have to buy more. The beauty of the "two-bin" system is that we still have a whole pack left (plus what is in the house). We don't have to interrupt our lives to go to the warehouse club NOW. We can wait a week (or even two) and have it on our list to buy when it's convenient.

This kanban system prevents overordering and it helps us avoid running out. Notice that no math went into this kanban system. We're often so focused in the lean world on "getting the calculation right" instead of just having a system that works. Since toilet paper and paper towels are cheap enough, we really aren't worried about the cash tied up in the inventory. These products don't expire, although we do rotate our stock and use the oldest stuff first. If we lived in a small apartment instead of a suburban home, we might have to set this system up differently.

There's a second kanban loop (or loops) for each item - from the garage to the points of use. For paper towels, these are stocked in the kitchen. Here, when a roll is empty, we just get more from the garage. No "two-bin" system, just a simple "need one, get one" replenishment.

For toilet paper, we do keep some inventory in each bathroom. I'll try to keep this discussion polite, but we really want to avoid a total "stockout" in a particular bathroom. So there, we tend to keep a six-pack of rolls in the bathroom. When the last roll is placed on the holder, that's the signal to get more from the garage now instead of waiting for an … ahem … emergency situation.

In the couple of years that my wife and I have been managing our inventory this way, we've avoided emergency trips to the store or emergency trips to bring more rolls to a bathroom. The value of that far outweighs the cost of $20 of inventory in the garage.

I've also applied a simple two-bin system to many of my items like shampoo, hair gel, shaving cream, etc. I always keep two on hand -- when one is empty, I always have a spare ready to use and I can buy a replacement at my convenience.

Does anyone else run their "home inventory" this way? Same thing could apply to kitchen items and food, don't you think?

I like our kanban system because:
• It works.
• It's simple.
• It didn't require math.
• It didn't require a computer system.
Don't you think those same principles could apply to many items in our workplace?

Read more Everyday Lean blogs.

1. The shipper doesn't take credit cards, so I had to wire transfer the funds. With a price of $1300 you would think wiring wouldn't be a problem.

Well Citibank capped the limit on wire transfers at $500 per day. Which means three transfers, which cost $50 a pop, which bumps my budget up another $150. Not a lot, but the start of what was to come.

2. As you know I live in Brno, Czech Republic, but apparently car theft is quite prevalent here, so my plan was to register the car in Vienna, Austria, where I am on the weekends. I met with an insurance company and was given a list of requirements that I would need to get insurance. This list included several documents that included EU certificates that I would need to acquire before the car comes to Austria. But seeing that the car needs to be in Austria to get the certificates posed a bit of a problem. Basically, I had to risk driving the car from Germany to Austria without insurance and without a license plate. Not to mention getting the car tested for the certificates would cost about $300. I could get temp insurance in Germany, but I would need to make an appointment and get all of the certificates for Germany pay the $150, which would then have to be replicated in Austria.

The logistics alternative was to put the car on a train, but that would cost $1500.

3. Point three is the kicker. I was always told that taxes would be around $300 at the port. Well after speaking to the port, taxes are actually much higher. The calculation is simple. Basically the tax is 10% of the value of the car when it was new - so roughly $1700. The formula here is silly. I mean if I ship a priceless 1966 Stingray Corvette, which sold for $8000 new 40 years ago, I would only pay $800 for taxes, when the car is worth $150,000? Huh?

So that brings the cost up to about $4000, not to mention all kinds of paperwork hassles. So plan B is to now try and get BMW/Mini in the US to trade in the car and then sell me a new one in Germany, where I can apply the trade-in amount. I'll keep you posted on how that goes.

In the words of Charlie Brown, "Oh, Good Grief"!

Read more Supply Chains are Cool blogs.

Six Sigma/Process Improvement: Who Reaps the Benefits?

Six Sigma/process improvement is a goal everyone can get behind. The issue sometimes becomes: for whom will the new processes be better?

Most process improvement ideas originate from the problems team members see in their own jobs. Thus most of their project ideas benefit the proposing team members directly, either by decreasing their work load or simplifying the processes that they work with.

What happens when process improvement ideas require cross-functional cooperation or there are competing projects for limited time and financial budgets? Then come the conflicts between groups for resource allocations.

Common resource allocation issues and project group conflicts are:

1. Software development objectives versus any other programming efforts:
Software development staff are required to make system changes, but will put more effort into projects that lighten their own workload. Projects to automate software testing and speed up system deployment are highly beneficial when they free up development resources for customer focused projects. However, development teams may focus on their own projects to the exclusion of others' projects. Sequential projects that take up months of time to decrease demand on development staff are less beneficial in the long run if the development time freed up is not subsequently put into process improvements that help the end user.

2. Development objectives versus documentation/training:
Software complexity is sometimes assumed with a "document it and the user can learn it from there." Technical writers and software trainers would rather make the process simpler, but their recommendations tend to carry less weight during resource allocations discussions. Yet complexity is exactly one of the root of user errors. And poke yoke clearly indicates that decreased complexity for the user would be the ideal. 

3. Support/sustaining versus expert users:
Support and sustaining staff have a key interest in decreasing software complexity to reduce the volume of calls they receive. A common means is to move functions down the support chain, from the helpdesk to general users. However, if too many functions are moved down from system administrator to a general user level, other problems arise. If users are granted new functions that were previously restricted to system admins, they may benefit from not having to wait for the computer gurus to do it. On the other hand, they may not have adequate training in performing new functions, thus leading to more time and effort by support staff to troubleshoot and resolve errors.
 
How can a team resolve these recourse allocation conflicts? Time and money savings are both decision making factors.  However, it is best to keep in mind that improvements need to have the end user in mind as well. If there is a tie between which projects should be done, the voice of the customer may be the deciding factor.

Read more IE in IT blogs.

Automatic software updates – the good

Automatic software updates have a number of advantages, which is why they are so frequently used in the IT world.

1. Ease of use – the user usually doesn’t have to do anything at all during software updates that occur automatically. And ease of use makes it efficient, which is a key consideration for IEs.
2. Effective – viruses change almost hourly, so all protection software updates must occur weekly, sometimes daily. For software like this, the system has to get automatic updates as quickly as possible to be effective. And that is the beauty of automatic software updates; they remain effective via their automatic checks and updates. For security patches, automatic updates are critical.
3. Software point releases become seamless with automatically updating software. This is far easier than asking a distributed user base to install new software on all of their systems.
4. Standard – the code for programming in software updates is standard; check location/server X for updates, download if there is one. Implementing an automatic software update is a standard software feature, and frequently deemed a necessity.

Automatic software updates – the bad

What could be bad about automatic software updates?

1. If the user’s system isn’t on, the update doesn’t happen.
2. If a user’s system is on but not on network, the updates don’t occur.
3. If there are over-rides on the date and time the user can have the checks and downloads occur, they may keep forestalling critical updates. Thus flexibility results in ineffectuality.
4. If users install freeware that then decides to update, the automatic update may include a licensing agreement which the company does not want liability for.
5. The latest and greatest software update may be incompatible with the existing software image, and cause compatibility problems when the update occurs.

Automatic software updates – the ugly

1. If the network security protocols limit the sites that a software program can access, the software cannot update itself. And users usually do not realize this until a virus hits or incompatibility warning comes up.
2. Network security can often set up routines to block unwanted software updates. However, road warriors are often outside the corporate network when their systems check for updates. Lo the lonely road warrior whose laptop has updated and made it incompatible with critical software, exactly when they are the most difficult time and location for IT to support.
3. Phishing filters, pop-up blockers, and spam filters and can all block the software updates if the software spawns secondary windows to run the checks and downloads. Users often do not realize this problem until they try to use something that requires a later version, since the “checking for updates” message appears and then dies. The only difference is that a download hasn’t occurred.
4. Automatic updates may result in software versions being downloaded that are incompatible with other software the user uses. The very act of getting the latest and greatest software update may cause the updating application to get ahead of the other software applications the customer users. Thus automatic software updates can create more headaches than it causes.
5. And for the paranoid (or very aware of what hackers may try), there is always the risk that a software update process gets hijacked at the source and a virus or Trojan put into the update. Thus the automatic updates meant to optimize systems could possibly be the opening to an assault on a user’s system.

Read mre An IE and IT blogs.

Read more Everyday Lean blogs.

When most Americans visit Europe, and especially Italy, one of their first observations is the  traffic.  Cars and mopeds everywhere, often traveling at high speed, without much rhyme or reason.  This seems like pure mayhem and insanity to visitors from the U.S. with our highly disciplined traffic control... until you start to realize something:  Traffic flows continuously, everywhere.

Those of us in the lean manufacturing world recognize what is going on.

So with our [U.S.]  "highly disciplined system" we have slugs (batches...) of traffic starting then stopping at the next traffic control, while in Italy it may move a little slower... but it is always moving.  Very rarely did I come to a full stop.  Those of us in the lean manufacturing would should immediately recognize the consequence of continual versus batch flow... steadier and higher output.

Yes, believe it or not, the chaos is actually safer in addition to creating better overall flow, and the concept of "shared space" is a theory of traffic management that is rapidly gaining acceptance throughout the world.

In fact, the chaos associated with traffic in developing countries is becoming all the rage among a new wave of traffic engineers in mainland Europe and, more recently, in the United Kingdom. It's called "second generation" traffic calming, a combination of traffic engineering and urban design that also draws heavily on the fields of behavioral psychology and -- of all subjects -- evolutionary biology. Rejecting the idea of separating people from vehicular traffic, it's a concept that privileges multiplicity over homogeneity, disorder over order, and intrigue over certainty.

Today's Washington Post tells us of a German town with a traffic problem.

Like countless other communities, this west German town lived for years with a miserable traffic problem. Each day, thousands of cars and big trucks barreled along the two-lane main street, forcing pedestrians and cyclists to scamper for their lives.  The usual remedies -- from safety crossings to speed traps -- did no good.

So they tried something new, which has already been proven to work in countless communities across Europe.

So the citizens of Bohmte decided to take a big risk. Since September, they've been tearing up the sidewalks, removing curbs and erasing street markers as part of a radical plan to abandon nearly all traffic regulations and force people to rely on common sense and courtesy instead. This contrarian approach to traffic management, known as shared space, is gaining a foothold in Europe. Towns in the Netherlands, Denmark, Britain and Belgium have tossed out their traffic lights and stop signs in a bid to reclaim their streets for everyone.

Why does this work?

The assumption is that drivers are accustomed to owning the road and rarely pay attention to speed limits or caution signs anyway. Removing traffic lights and erasing lane markers, the thinking goes, will cause drivers to get nervous and slow down. "Generally speaking, what we want is for people to be confused," said Willi Ladner, a deputy mayor in Bohmte. "When they're confused, they'll be more alert and drive more carefully."

We previously discussed how this concept aligns with the traditional batch versus one piece flow concepts of lean manufacturing. But there are other parallels.  Perhaps you could even use it to explain why the free market trumps over-regulation.  Toyota is famously known for a corporate mentality that is always worried, always searching for a better way.  I definitely wouldn't call it "confused" but it is a culture that drives every employee to be continually on the lookout for an improvement.  But what about the lean concept of standard work?  Although even with disciplined standard work true lean companies drive continuous improvement, when does regimented standardization become too much?  When does a focus on achieving absolute consistency begin to take away from the learning power of chaos?

Many of us drive lean transformations in each organization we work with or for.  We create and operate within hoshin planning structures, lean and balanced scorecard metrics, and A3 reporting discipline.  But coincidentally, and independently, staff members in the last couple of organizations I've worked in have referred to the feel of the organization as "a chaotic furrball moving forward."  When lean gathers momentum and reaches the tipping point it can be a bit tough to control, but it is accelerating in the right direction. 

Chaotic furrballs are why I really enjoy going to work each day.

Read more Paradoxical Production blogs. 

I recently saw Allan, a local manufacturing acquaintance.  Allan runs the heat treat section in his plant.  I asked him how things were going since we had last chatted about 10 months earlier. 

“Much better,” he said, “we’ve really improved our flow and turnaround time.”

I was intrigued.  Heat treat operations pose unique challenges.  They use huge ovens to bake metal parts according to a set recipe to improve their metallurgical characteristics.  A heat treat cycle can take multiple hours, sometimes multiple shifts, to run.  The parameters are locked in, scientifically.  It is a huge capital investment, sometimes the largest single investment in a factory.  It uses a lot of energy.  Senior managers and accountants play close attention to capital efficiency in heat treating. 

When Allan and I had talked previously, he was having trouble keeping his internal customers happy.  Parts sometimes took two weeks to get through his department causing shortages and problems in other parts of the plant.  This time, his demeanor was upbeat, helpful, confident.  I asked what had happened.

“We figured out how to break up the individual heat treat loads.  Our ovens hold three containers each.  For many years, we had assumed all three containers had to be from the same internal department.  Then we figured out how to modify the paperwork.”

Paperwork?

“Yeah.  We figured that there was no reason all three containers had to be from the same department.  We only had to require all three containers need the same recipe.  Now, we don’t have to wait for three containers from a single department to make a run.  As soon as we have three with the same parameters, boom, in they go.”

He went on to describe his turnaround going from two weeks to three days, which let him free up large amounts of space no longer required for containers waiting to process.  Internal customers were very happy. 

This should be a happy ending story, right?  With Allan riding into the sunset on his Lean horse? 

Not quite.

I suggested to Allan cutting batch size almost always gets this type of dramatic result.  Shorter cycle times, decreased WIP, happier customers always comes with smaller batch sizes. 

He looked at me blankly.  He didn’t get the connection.  He didn’t see how the general principle connected with the specific application.  He had no idea how he might apply this principle in other parts of his key department.  He didn’t see how this actually improved the capital efficiency of his high-investment area. 

Whether you understand Lean or not, you can gain by cutting your batch sizes.  But if you don’t understand Lean, you won’t know why. 

Understand.  And keep learning. 

Read more Lean Believer blogs.

Not to sound like a Scrooge here, since I am very much looking forward to Christmas and holiday time with friends and family in the upcoming weeks, but I sometimes think about impact of holiday spending and the spike that it inserts into the economy.

With lean, often have a goal of heijunka or level loading of a process. Heijunka is one of the main foundations of the Toyota Production System (one Toyota publication I have says "Leveled production: You won't be happy without it"). Leveled demand, or leveled production, can reduce the cost of holding inventory and the extra equipment and labor resources required to meet spikes or non-level demand.

The ideal state for many businesses would be to sell the same amount of product each month, week, and day. If we cannot level demand, we have to build ahead of a demand spike, such as the holiday season. Or, if you're a build-to-order company like Dell, you have to be able to produce more when holiday demand is high, which means higher capital and temporary labor costs. Amazon.com has a very busy holiday season, which stresses its warehouse capacity, not to mention its employees. This time of year has to be stressful on Santa and his elves, as well!

I've had trouble finding data on this, but I assume that, with the holiday spending, more than 2/12th of annual consumer spending happens in November and December each year. For many consumer products, does this increase costs for manufacturers? Is this less than efficient for the economy, overall, compared to spending equally throughout the year?

Since our holiday patterns are well ingrained, it's not going to change. I think, though, it's an interesting thought exercise to think about how our businesses would run differently without this holiday spike. For those of you working in consumer product industries, what do you see? Maybe to "level load" consumer demand throughout the year, we need more invented holidays like Administrative Professionals Day? I can't see spending for that coming close to the December holidays. I guess the answer, from companies, might be "spend more throughout the rest of the year" to level load, rather than "spending less at the holidays?"

Read more Everday Lean blogs.

Part 3

Process improvement projects tend to fall into two categories: incremental or seismic.

Incremental projects are the small, minor, and often specifically targeted improvement projects. Seismic projects are those that shift ground, radically changing processes or people interfaces or software - or all three. New ground is broken, or old ground is swept away and new ground laid. Both categories have their disadvantages.

Disadvantages of incremental projects:

• Incremental projects can end up resulting in less value added than the planned project time and effort.
• Incremental projects may be nullified by a seismic process improvement project in the short term, eliminating value of the improvements made.
• Incremental projects may require multiple follow on projects to achieve the goal. This can result in more work for process improvement teams than a single seismic project. 
• Planning an incremental project sometimes leaves out other work groups, departments, and players. The success of the project requires all involved parties making related changes. In smaller projects, stakeholders may not see a need to be involved, and then be unhappy with the project results.
• And, lastly, in a worst case scenario, the incremental projects may not sufficiently change human or machine behavior, resulting in no improvement at all.

Disadvantages of seismic projects:

• Big changes can equal big improvements; not properly planned or supported, it may actually result in downtime, delays, or increased costs.
• There are times that major changes are necessary, such as when new equipment or software is obsolete and being replaced. If the interrelated software, hardware and staff are not given the time and resources to change at the same time, the new system or methods may be a hindrance to all who interact with it

• With buy in by stakeholders, seismic projects can make great leaps forward in one fell swoop. When there is no stakeholder buy in, they may not happen at all. Thus large projects that don't become reality result in no improvement at all.

• When a project is implemented with sweeping process changes, it may not be possible for users or processes to fall back into the "old ways". However, if there is not adequate user training, system test, and documentation and support, users will be left worse off than "the old ways". If users don't know how to use the new system or do things the new way, or have questions and cannot get answers, the improvement in worse than the prior process that needed the improvement.

If both methods have such significant potential problems, what should you do? We’ll look at a hybrid method between these two in my next blog.

Read more IE in IT blogs.

I recently came across the following photos that illustrate how IBM shipped its mainframes to clients in various parts of Italy between 1951-1960.

	Obviously, this was shot in Venice, Italy. I'm not sure what type of mainframes are in the two crates (I am guessing anIBM 650), which weighed nearly 2,000 pounds and rented for $3200 per month. Just a little risky putting two of them on a wooden gòndola, don't ya think? I would have loved to see how they loaded them on and how they planned to take them off.
	Again, not sure what is in the crate or where in Italy this was shot. But I appreciate the fact that its being delivered on a wheelbarrow. I wonder how many wheelbarrow's FedEx, UPS and DHL have in their fleet. You can't make it out in this resolution, but in the middle of the crate it reads "Do not drop." Classic.
	This would make a great poster illustrating really bad supply chain security. TheIBM 7070 was a data processing system that hit the market in 1960 and it cost back then $813,000. So you gotta love the fact that IBM is not only advertising what is inside the trucks, but also where they are going "Banco di Napoli." To their credit, there probably were only a few dozen people in Italy in the 1960s who actually knew what to do with that 7070, but still not something we would ever promote in this day and age. Though, if would be great to live in a world where we could. The logistics carrier is a company called Barghi or Borghi, I can't really tell from the logo, but both come up empty in Google and Yahoo.

Read more Supply Chains are Cool blogs.

As he went through his slide show, he included a photo of a robotic welding operation similar to this photo. While most people, especially those of us with engineering background, respond to such a photo with a slightly breathless response of “Cool,” Tom’s demeanor saddened when he showed this image.

 “My engineers have asked me to remove this photo from the presentation. I’d be in trouble if they saw this,” he said.

I thought it somehow showed some proprietary process they wanted to keep quiet. I was quite wrong.

“See those streaks in the photo?” he asked. “Each of those represents welding slag shooting from the individual welds. And each of those bits of slag represents waste. We hate waste. And our engineers have substantially eliminated that slag. This photo no longer represents what we really do.”

Wow. 

The engineers and associates correctly saw the slag as waste in three ways. First, it could injure an associate. Second, it could land on an otherwise good part and ruin it. Third, it used up welding materials and didn’t add value by going into the weld. 

This group was so serious about waste they pay attention to welding slag. That’s covering the details. 

I had to ask myself what level of waste I was trying to eliminate in my company. Was I anywhere near the equivalent of eliminating welding slag? I wish I was. I hope you are.

Read more Lean Believer blogs.

There was nothing to indicate, as most airports have, which terminal you go to for which airline. I just had to guess. Then, I returned my car (which you could do at either terminal) and walked toward a decision point -- left for Terminal 1 (where I was) or right for a train to Terminal 3. Again, in this big lobby way, absolutely nothing (and I looked, trust me) that said which airlines were in which terminal.

I decided to try the train, and sure enough, after going up the escalator and toward the entrance there was, finally, a sign showing which terminals to go to. I had, by my mental coin flip, made the right choice. I was supposed to be going to Terminal 3.

It shouldn't be up to a mental coin flip. Think of the wasted motion and wasted time that comes from people guessing wrong about which terminal to go to. Maybe, anytime you put up directional signs or signs that label what goes where (even in your factory), it should be a rule that you have an outsider to test and verify if the signs are clear or not.

A Web site for Toronto tourists recognizes the airport is confusing, but offers some lame advice:  Once inside the airport grounds, be sure to follow directions to your terminal. Pearson is a large and busy airport and can be confusing if you are not careful.

As in other cases, quality is not achieved by asking or demand that employees or customers "be careful"!!

Read more Everyday Lean blogs.

My youngest son is a freshman in college this fall. On a recent visit we asked him the obligatory question about food in the cafeteria.

“It’s getting a little predictable, but the ice cream place is always an adventure!”

"How is ice cream an adventure?"

“Well, you never know what will happen. It all depends on who is scooping.”

I was still lost…he recognized the confusion of the dad and continued.

“When you ask for, say, two scoops of pralines and crème, you have no idea just how much you’ll get. One guy gives you giant scoops, the kind that hangs over on all sides as he muscles it out of the tub. You can hardly eat it all. But if different guy is working, you get two little wimpy scoops making you wish you’d asked for three. So, it’s a guessing game.”

Why is standard work important? We can see it in this simple college ice cream serving station.

• The customer expects consistency. Non-standard work eliminates such consistency.
• Standard work enables consistent cost measurement. Not only does this enterprise use different amounts of material per order, it likely takes less time to make a wimpy scoop than a big honkin’ scoop of ice cream.
• We must measure a baseline to know if we are improving. How do you know if you’ve lost weight if you don’t have a scale to measure yourself? How do you know your productivity has improved if you don’t measure the start?

Doing standard work is hard. Yet, without the basic determination to do it, you will never get there. And no improvement can happen without standardization.

And when you do it well, you can always add some whipped cream on top. 

Read more Lean Believer Blogs

Part 2

Process improvement projects tend to fall into two categories: incremental or seismic. 

Incremental projects are the small, minor, and often specifically targeted improvement projects. Seismic projects are those that shift ground, radically changing processes or people interfaces or software - or all three. New ground is broken, or old ground is swept away and new ground laid. Both categories have their advantages.

Advantages of incremental projects: 

• Incremental projects are easier to schedule, plan, and implement.
• Incremental projects can improve a process or approach a desired goal without major changes for users, administrators or system support.
• Being incremental, such projects are more likely to garner buy in by stakeholders, increasing the odds of successful implementation.
• And, lastly, in a worst case scenario, if the project is not successful, the incremental projects can usually be rolled back.

 Advantages of seismic projects:

• Big changes can equal big improvements.
• There are times that major changes are necessary, such as when new equipment or software is obsoleted and being replaced.
• With buy in by stakeholders, seismic projects can make great leaps forward in one fell swoop.
• Planning a large seismic project requires by its nature involvement by all other work groups, departments, and players. The success of the project requires all involved parties, and thus they are involved from the start. This will result in the project reflecting the needs of all parties, as long as they are given a voice in all discussions.
• When a project is implemented with sweeping process changes, it may not be possible for users or processes to fall back into the "old ways."

In my next blog, we'll look at the disadvantages of each approach.

Read more An IE in IT blogs.

If you read my blog regularly you know that I am a "tree hugger" i.e., environmentalist. I personally recycle just about everything, which is why I am proud that the company I work for, IBM, is one of the winners of the 2007 SmartWay Excellence Award.

This award is sponsored by the EPA's SmartWay Transport Partnership, which recognizes partners’ special achievements that significantly reduce the environmental impacts of the freight sector. The SmartWay Excellence Awards honor organizations that integrate innovative strategies and technologies into their business operations, resulting in reduced energy consumption and greenhouse-gas emissions.

The EPA stated the following for awarding IBM "IBM increased their SmartWay carrier participation by 25% this year, and incorporated SmartWay into their contract bidding process for U.S. and global transportation. IBM promoted its participation in SmartWay through a dedicated web page that links directly to SmartWay web site, as well as serving as SmartWay guest speakers at industry events. IBM reports its SmartWay participation in its Environment and Well-Being Progress Report, and Corporate Responsibility Report. IBM is currently reviewing all dock locations globally to ensure consistent truck idling practices, fork-lift power sources, and scheduling practices. In addition, IBM is working with SmartWay in interfacing with environmental agencies in Latin America, particularly Mexico- expanding SmartWay-type programs across North America."

The other winners can be found here. Congratulations to you all.

Read more Supply Chains are Cool blogs.

Over the past couple years we've been doing battle with the false god of the almighty algorithm. This initially stemmed from a conversation with the owner of a small manufacturing company that insisted he needed to implement a complex MRP system in order to be successful. As we demonstrated, after using lean manufacturing methods to dry up inventory and reduce cycle times, running down to Staples to get a visual MRP system... a whiteboard... can be the best solution.  Not convinced?  I can point you to many small companies and even a couple in the $100 million range that use it for all shop floor management.
Well after many months of retreat, and even battling among themselves, the false gods have opened a new front: document and compliance management software.

Many of us have worked in companies with huge documentation and compliance management infrastructures. Whole departments of people doing nothing except processing SOP changes, fixing typos, and revving drawings. Then those documents need to be printed, distributed, and especially in regulated environments the down-rev documents must be collected and destroyed. Some larger companies should probably invest in forests in order to maintain a stable supply of paper. How many times have we had to wait weeks for something like "watter bath" to be corrected to "water bath" and how much time, effort, and reduction of value to the customer was involved?

Then there's the compliance side of things. NCMR's being generated left and right, routed, processed... all "managed" by yet another group living in a cubicle-town. Numbers must be assigned, observations filled out, routed to have corrective action added, then implemented, then verified, and then the document is finally closed. In most cases the corrective action is something along the lines of "re-train the damn operator" so obviously the problem keeps recurring and recurring (now that's a redundant statement in itself!). The same convoluted and excessively managed process is applied to CAPA's, supplier NCMR's, internal and external audit observations, and customer complaints.
What a mass, or morass, of paperwork nirvana!  A whirlwind!  A snow globe!  You know you have a problem when you have titles like "documentation control specialist," "document expeditor," and perhaps even people dedicated to printing and collating.
So what's the solution? Almost invariably it's "we need software." Some massive collection of interlocking modules to manage operating procedures, forms, and all sorts of compliance documentation. All paperless, all seamless, moving concurrently instead of serially. NCMR's could be processed so much faster, documents could hit the shop floor so much quicker. All for probably around a quarter million bucks.

Yeah, right. Just like ERP/MRP implementations are always on budget, on time, providing exactly what was expected. And it will be the same process you'll want to use for the next decade, otherwise "modifications" and "enhancements" will be required.  The false god rears his ugly head again.

Automating the management of a problem is not managing the problem. What would happen if you didn't have NCMR's, customer complaints, and CAPA's? Or if your process documentation was so simple, so visual, that changes were rare?  Impossible? Really? Are you really attacking the root cause of problems, or are you simply perpetually retraining the operator? You'd think after a couple dozen re-trainings you'd realize that there might, just might, be something wrong with the process instead of the operator. Otherwise perhaps you need to look into the root cause of a pathetically poor hiring process.  Don't have time to look into the root cause? Strange... you somehow also have a quarter million to spend.

Instead of dropping a quarter million on yet another massive software system, how about investing in true improvement.  Dedicate some people to true root cause analysis and kaizen.  Create a culture where repeat problems are simply unacceptable, where an operator is empowered to call a root cause emergency, where the swamp is drained of wastewater so the underlying problems can be found.

Then accept the pain of managing the few remaining documents, NCMR's, and such as a good thing. A little pain can be a good reminder. It keeps you on your toes, always trying to find a better way. Just like the ease of a $20 co-pay keeps many people from making the lifestyle changes needed to improve their long-term health, a chunk of beautifully-designed software can keep us from improving the underlying issues in our operations. Identify and attack the problems, keep it visual and simple. You may realize you don't need to worship the false god.  Be strong.

Read more Paradoxical Production blogs

But in the "Seascape" episode they were launching the new version of the restaurant and I noticed some bad industrial engineering (it wasn't really done by an IE). They tried launching the restaurant at full volume. Sure, the food was better, but the restaurant's processes weren't nearly good enough to handle the higher volume. So, things fell apart -- food was delayed, orders were lost, and employees and customers were upset.  Chef Ramsay again screamed at people.

Wait, this problem was of his making. If he's such an expert businessman shouldn't he have realized that a slow ramp up is preferable? Toyota doesn't make 900 cars a day the first day a new assembly plant is running. Quality would suffer and employees would get hurt.  They start slowly and ramp up volume once processes are worked out and employees are trained and comfortable at lower volumes.

The Seascape, their employees, and their customers deserved better. I'm sure it made for better TV, to have some chaos, but you can do better than that, Chef Ramsay.  Let them come up to speed slowly, even if you have to hang around a bit longer.

On another note, congratulations to fellow Northwestern University graduate Joe Girardi, the new manager of the New York Yankees.  Girardi is probably the first and only Industrial Engineering graduate to serve as a big league manager.  Good luck, Joe (even though I'm a Red Sox fan)

Read more Everyday Lean blogs.

A management mentor of mine once said he most feared the words “Oh, by the way” in conversations. Inevitably, very bad news followed.

In a similar way, the words “Yeah, but…” almost always undermine the continuous improvement so central to a lean transformation. 

“Yeah, but” does two things of concern. The “yeah” part feigns agreement with a proposal or idea for improvement. This tends to inoculate other hearers into thinking agreement is forthcoming. The “but” part, unfortunately, negates this appearance of agreement and sets in contrast the comment that follows. 

“Yeah, we could make the reach for the tool in that workstation more ergonomic but the guy on the night shift is left-handed.” 

“Yeah, we could cut our batch size in half but we bought those big containers last summer and need to use them.”

“Yeah, we could do some training on 5S but that work group doesn’t want to listen to anything.”

“Yeah, that’s a silver lining but there’s probably a dark cloud behind it.”

How do we circumvent the “yeah but” issue?

It is useful to ask directly if the “but” clause is real or imagined.  Ask for some data, for specific examples. Determine if it is a real trend or just an outlying data point. Demand specificity to either support the objection or clarity in not objecting.

Explore the “yeah” side by asking, “What do you think is good about the idea? What could happen by cutting the batch size in half?” This causes the speaker to more clearly identify the upside of the proposal. 

Further, demonstrate respect for the speaker by acknowledging her stated concern and, in so doing, helping the improvement to be even better. 

Listen for the “yeah but” and then use it, judo-like, to further continuous improvement rather than blocking it. 

More Lean Believer blogs.

Part 1

Process improvement projects tend to fall into two categories: incremental or seismic.

Incremental projects are the small, minor, and often targeted improvement projects. Seismic projects are those that shift ground, radically changing processes or people interfaces or software - or all three. New ground is broken, or old ground is swept away and new ground laid.  

When would you do incremental projects? 

• A number of minor process improvements have been identified for the same problem. Implementing one small change at a time allows progress to be made, without implementing all of them. By reassessing the state of the system after each system improvement, stated objectives may be met by several small projects implemented in sequence, without implementing all projects.
• Software and hardware migrate and change over time. Incremental process changes planned with minor software changes are easily accepted by users and customers. Planning process improvement in conjunction with minor software and system changes allows support and sustaining to go hand in hand with process improvement.
• The burning platform has the potential to start a wildfire, but is only smoldering right now. By making incremental process improvements now, the risk of disaster is reduced.
• Major changes are on the horizon, but not set in time and scope. Incremental projects to improve metrics, whether cost or cycle time, can be quickly implemented, for immediate benefit. They allow improvement to improve objective targets, without interfering with any seismic shift that may be coming down the line. Improving profitability now, even if only for a few months or quarters, can be better than waiting for a seismic process improvement. Especially if the seismic process improvement project may not occur.

When would you do seismic projects?

• The software, hardware, or way of doing things is undergoing a radical change. Incremental changes aren't possible. But tying in other drastic process improvements in tied-in systems can assist in buy in by stakeholders. "Yes, the system down time is an inconvenience. Yes, user training will be necessary. However, after this change, we will see decreased cycle time/costs/waste of X."
• Profitability, customer needs, obsolescence or other massive problems have not been resolved by incremental changes. Or if incremental changes have not held,  nullifying the intended objectives of lesser changes.
• Stated objectives cannot be achieved by incremental projects

In my next blog, we'll look at the advantages of each approach.

Read more IE in IT blogs.

Thankfully, there is an error-proofing device (or a poka yoke) built into the process. The gate agent scanned my boarding pass and got a bunch of beeps. I wasn't on that flight. I was actually on the flight that was going to start boarding in five minutes, same door, different plane. Oops!

I'm glad that they caught the error, otherwise I would have been in Jacksonville instead of Savannah. I starting thinking about the times when I board at an airport and they do NOT have a scan (they just tear your boarding pass and let you go). I wonder how often a passenger gets to the wrong city? Quite a defect in the process, eh?

Thinking to the Poka Yoke device, it is an example of DETECTING the defect (me trying to board the wrong flight).  That's a form of error proofing, detecting the error in an automated manner.  In many environments, it is preferable to PREVENT the error from occurring in the first place.

And, no, hanging a sign that says "Hey passengers, please remember to NOT board the wrong flight," would not be effective. But that's how we error-proof many of our processes in the workplace, right? We need real error proofing instead.

I really didn't mean to board the wrong plane. Saying "be careful" wasn't enough to ensure process quality in this case! A common example of error proofing, but one we can learn from, I think! Read more aviation topics....

Read more Everyday Lean blogs. 

Those of us that have gone through a lean transformation or two know that it is hard, very hard. Probably the most difficult aspect is learning what you didn't know... those surprises that throw all the planning out the window. The good news is that you're still on the right track, and poised for success if you can weather the intervening storm.

That storm can be pretty intense, especially in public companies that come under the scrutiny of lean-ignorant analysts. Which is what gun maker Ruger is experiencing. Last year they knew they had to make some changes to remain competitive.

The CEO said that Ruger in 2006 faced challenges in manufacturing, including excess inventory, congested factories and an annual order system that complicated production planning.

Sounds familiar, doesn't it? Many companies would simply give up and outsource, but CEO Michael Fifer's team created a transformation plan based on lean. 

Our transformation plan included eight major components. Altogether, they are intended to change our culture and the way we do business, and we refer to them internally as the Ruger Business System.The key elements are modernizing our manufacturing through adoption of all of the key principles employed by Toyota, creating a strong new product development process, and instilling urgency behind new product introductions. We expect this transformation to take at least three more years, and very likely as many as five years. And it will not always go smoothly or show constant improvement in our operating results.

They knew it would be hard, and they prepared their people... but not the Street analysts. Their first step was to whack inventory, which they knew was hiding problems.

The first major step in transformation of our manufacturing was a deliberate, severe reduction in inventory and elimination of the practices that produced it. We reduced inventory by $28.3 million in the second half of 2006 and $26.6 million in the first half of 2007. Inventory masks problems in the production process. By reducing inventory, challenges from poor machinery and tool reliability, manufacturing issues, long machine changeover times, and vendor supply issues are all brought to the forefront. Because there is not spare inventory to draw upon, these challenges need to be addressed in real time, with a focus on permanent corrective actions that address the root cause problems. That is a very painful process in the short term, fraught with line stoppages and operating within a firefighting environment. It requires expanded engineering resources and training for front line supervisors and perseverance in the face of sometimes seemingly insurmountable obstacles.

I couldn't shorten that quote... Fifer said it perfectly. He knew it would be a challenge, but he also outlined why that pain was necessary to create future improvement. They are already working on the next steps.

The next major steps in the manufacturing transformation include setting up manufacturing cells, which convert materials into finished goods or key subassemblies in one area and which emphasize flow production rather than batch production, and implementing pull systems. Cell manufacturing and pull systems are a major departure from the old-style, batch process centers. Currently we have the initial cells in place for approximately one half of our manufacturing and assembly processes.

Exactly right, and there were similar programs to improve non-manufacturing areas. But then Wall Street got a glimpse of what the intermediate steps of a lean transformation can do to traditional accounting metrics.

Ruger went way off target Thursday after swinging to a quarterly loss. The gun maker's shares closed down 38%.  Ruger, based in Southport, Conn., posted a loss of three cents a share for the third quarter, down from a two-cent profit a year ago.

The share price was also driven by a traditional analyst perspective of traditional accounting.

Jim Barrett is one of the few Wall Street analysts keeping Ruger in his sights. "The sharp reversal was caused by management too quickly moving to introduce lean manufacturing. Once the implementation was underway, management realized it had inadequate machinery, its machine changeover times were too long and it had vendor supply issues. As a result, production problems returned and Sturm Ruger once again faced difficulty getting product out the door," he wrote.

Of course he perceives that as a negative, but those of us in the lean world know it's a positive. If you don't realize you have inadequate machinery, changeover times, and supply chain issues then how can you fix them? Actually, maybe I should give Mr. Barrett more credit.

But as a believer in a "slow but steady improvement toward fixing its manufacturing operations," Barrett said Ruger's weak earnings "will clearly be painful for RGR shareholders in the near term, but we think it is very good news for prospective shareholders." Ruger doesn't get a lot of attention from the Street, so any bargain hunters should draw a bead on Fifer's turnaround plan letter and decide if it's on the mark.

Agreed, although I don't believe it is always necessary to go slow. Ruger appears to be doing things right to focus on being competitive over the long term.  If they can weather the intermediate storm, they could become a great company... and investment.

Read more Paradoxical Production blogs.

We were recently discussing a problem in our employee cafeteria. We didn’t have enough coffee ready each morning for the early shift team. At that point, one of our newer employees sat up straight in her chair, eyes sparkling, bursting with something useful to say.

“Just kanban the coffee!” she exclaimed.

Meeting over…everyone agreed. We added kanban cards to the large tubs of Folgers, with instructions on what to do with the card, just as we do in movement of material within our facility.

Why was this notable? It was notable because we can teach much about lean through very ordinary examples. 

Everyone understands groceries. Everyone understands the need for getting the groceries home in response to the information contained on a grocery list.  Everyone has an intense need for coffee in the morning. By linking this known process to the simple use of kanban, we drive the understanding much deeper.

Our new employee, here only a few months, grasped this at a deeper level when trying to figure out the “coffee problem of the morning.” 

Look for ways to both learn and teach lean with simple illustrations. And feel free to steal this one.

Enjoy your caffeine.

Read more Lean Believer blogs.

Considering that TV signals are magically beamed from just about anywhere through the networks to our homes through cable wires or satellite dishes, it often seems location doesn't matter. At least you would think that you could do a show from anywhere (such as ESPN's College Gameday, a show that is shot at a different college stadium each Saturday morning).

Jimmy Kimmel's ABC late night show is fimed in Los Angeles The week of October18, Kimmel has been guest hosting on "Live with Regis and Kelly" -- problem is that show is done in New York.

So, rather than do his late night show from New York, Kimmel flew cross country twice a day for a week. Yes, he is insane. He did a morning show in NYC, flew to LA, did his show and then took a redeye overnight flight to NYC.

I realize his late show set is physically in LA... but they couldn't ship pieces of it to NYC to recreate enough of the set for his late night show to be recognizable?

All of that flying back and forth can be considered as the "waste of transportation" as we would say in lean circles. That's wasted $$, wasted jet fuel, and extra pollution created by the flights. All of this in the name of entertainment? And I thought Hollywood cared about being "green"?

Read more Everyday Lean blogs.

A few months back I posted about a show on the history channel called Ice Road Truckers. 

If the supply chain were a music genre, these guys would be Led Zeppelin, because they are rock stars.

The premise was simple.  The show followed 5 truckers shipping cargo to diamond minds located just south of the Arctic Circle in Canada. Well after about 20 episodes the season has wrapped up and the final run illustrated some serious logistics in action.  In total, they trucked 10,922 loads in 72 days.  In terms of weight, 622,000,000 pounds.  The driver they called the "polar bear" trucked the most, making
37 trips, which equaled 722 tons.  His cut $58,000.  Doing some quick math, that's about $805 a day. Would you drive a truck with 30,000 pounds of cargo, on 15 inches of ice for 300 miles in below freezing weather?  Whether you would or wouldn't you gotta show respected to these logistics professionals that do.  I hope they bring the show back next year.

I called up a financial firm for information on their 529 plan. After giving them my address so they could mail me the information, they asked for my phone number. I refused to give it, stating that I didn’t want solicitations.

The salesman said, “But, ma’am, I can’t mail you the prospectus until we have your phone number. It’s a required field right here in our database.”
 
“Then you need to rearrange your database to be more reasonable,” I replied.

The lesson to take away from this is that when you design a database input field, make sure that:

• Fields follow the logic of the conversation.
• The mandatory fields are actually mandatory.
• The mandatory information doesn’t act as a turnoff for potential customers.
  

Read more An IE in IT blogs

By Kevin Meyer

Imagine there was a major, global company; a company that used to make virtually all of their subassemblies within twenty miles of the final assembly factory, and workers with incredible depth of knowledge and experience. Problems could be managed by taking a quick drive over to a factory, the time it took to deliver parts was measured in minutes, and the work force could be flexed across multiple nearby facilities.

Then, they decided to improve by laying off tens of thousands of those experienced workers and move subassembly production to third party suppliers around the globe. Behemoth transportation devices were developed just to move large parts, knowledge was transfered to a factory in a country that was on a hyper evolution curve that would make it a major competitor in a decade or two, and a whole new level of coordination was required to oversee a plethora of new parts management systems operating in different languages and different time zones. This additional complexity, coupled with a shortage of a tiny fastener, led to the delayed launch of the company's most critical product by three and then another six months.

What would you do?

How about awarding one of the top purchasing folks "Supply Chain Manager of the Year." No, I'm not kidding. Purchasing magazine just gave Steven Schaffer, Boeing's Vice President and General Manager of Global Partners, that award.

Yes, I know the 787 Dreamliner program is incredibly complex and includes a novel composite technology that required a huge investment. I applaud Boeing for taking that level of risk to change the airliner game, and I truly wish them the best.  Supposedly Boeing could not bear that investment alone, and supposedly spreading the work to companies in various countries helped improve sales to those countries. Whether that was worth transfering technology to potential competitors while laying off a few hundred thousand years of knowledge and experience... well, time will tell.

But let's get back to the article that tries to explain why Schaffer won the award.

"He understands complexities in projects like that and knows what it takes to get things done," says Carolyn Corvi, vice president and general manager of airplane programs at Boeing and one of Schaffer's bosses. "He has the patience to work through things."

Presumably that means that the fastener problem just sort of fell through the cracks while his team was focused on whether entire airframe subassemblies were on time. Or perhaps some of the problems were due to apparently having multiple bosses.
Boeing learned that there was a shortage of fasteners for the new 787 Dreamliner that will delay flight testing for the plane until mid November. But, rather than panic and point fingers, Schaffer, who manages the activities of the 70 supplier/partners developing the 787, emphasized more communication and collaboration with fastener manufacturers to solve the problem.
Uh, the problem wasn't solved. The first Dreamliner had to be asically disassembled after the public unveiling, and the resulting delays helped create an overall program delay.

Critical to the plane has been the work of the 70 companies supplying the systems and components. Schaffer's job since 2005 has been to turn them into partners rather than suppliers providing nothing more than parts.

Yes, partnership is a great thing. The Detroit Three could learn a thing or two about treating suppliers as partners. But in the end, for all the feel-good kumbaya, they still need to supply parts.  On time.

"Outside suppliers have always been an important part of what we do and how we build airplanes, and they are becoming more so," says Mike Bair, who as leader of the team developing the 787 works closely with Schaffer and his team. "For our other airplanes, outside suppliers provide 55% to 60% of procured content with the rest built in-house. For the 787, we are pushing 70%."

And damn proud of it.  Even if it meant laying off a bunch of their own folks and spending a few bazillion to create the DreamLifter.  Not to mention those pesky fasteners... 
Schaffer meets every Monday morning with his leadership team to talk about supplier development and supplier performance for current airplane programs. They use a simple stoplight graphic for "on plan" or "off plan." They discuss suppliers for new programs, new technologies and new entrants to the market. Team members say he is particularly good at articulating a vision for the organization.

I love simple visual indicators. But when the stoplight turns "red" what do they do? Hopefully more than just discuss new programs and new technologies. Hopefully someone around the table says "Hey, what are we going to do about those pesky fasteners?"

When Schaffer first took the job in supply management and procurement, individuals were responsible for managing specific commodities such as airplane structures, systems, propulsion, and the like, but they didn't really have any program focus. In his new post, he created new roles that encourage individuals to work more closely with the airplane programs. His thinking on the move is that the team's success is measured in terms of whether the airplane programs succeed in the marketplace.
Yes, and to succeed the airplane must actually hit the market.  Perhaps someone should still look at certain specific commodities, like...

Schaffer refers to Lean and talks of the importance of having stretch goals and of challenges of finding talented people with the skill sets for new roles in supplier management. He also talks of helping to increase productivity at Boeing and continuing to work to streamline the supply chain, taking efficiencies down to second- and third-tier suppliers.

I could go on, but you get the picture. And I'm intentionally being a little unfair. Schaffer has done many great things... supplier councils, professional development of his team, and a true partnership relationship with his suppliers.  He understands many aspects of Lean, although his company may not quite get the "respect for people" pillar and the importance of shortening cycle times.

But in the end you still have to make the product in order to create value for the customer. And even with incredibly complex products created by incredibly complex (but unnecessary?) supply chains, you still must keep an eye on even the smallest part... like a fastener. Especially when it holds together a mass of metal that somehow carries hundreds of humans through the air.

Read more Paradoxical Production blogs.

Two weeks ago, I attended a two-day, 12-person training class at a customer of ours, the purpose of which was to introduce the staff there to basic principles of process improvement. The exec who organized the class grew to understand lean while employed at a major manufacturer. He and I have hit it off and he asked me to participate in the seminar and provide examples of continuous improvement without using lots of jargon, which he discovered was off-putting in this company.

To help him lead this seminar, he hired this consultant who had a good track record at this company and, thus, some street cred inside the company.  

As in any good process improvement effort, we had an assignment when we left. We had to find one process in our shop and make it better in some tangible way. We understood the consultant would call us in two weeks to “touch base.”

This afternoon, I got my call.

Now, I had already done the assignment. Nothing big really; along with an colleague of mine here, we came up with a substantial improvement in regularly measuring inventory turns at this customer’s warehouse. I described this to the consultant.  She then asked, “So are you thinking about doing something?” I explained again that we had done something and had a plan for it to continue. 

She paused, awkwardly. She wasn’t quite sure what to say next, as my response didn’t quite fit the script, which happens a lot with lean.  It flies in the face of most peoples’ expectations. It defies conventional wisdom. 

When lean happens well, it happens quickly. You can feel the pulse of it. We see an idea, try it, assess it, make it better, try it again.  PDCA-- Plan. Do. Check. Adjust. Time and time again.  Without even thinking, the cycle goes on and on. 

If this speed is not evident in your shop, it tells you that you have room to grow. If this speed seems surprising to you, as it did our consultant, you have room to grow. 

Read more Lean Believer blogs.

Have you ever composed an e-mail, meaning to attach a file, even saying something like "see the attached file..." and then you forget to actually attach the file?

I do this all the time. I could put a post it note on my laptop that says "BE CAREFUL: Do not forget to attach attachments," but warning signs are not effective error-proofing.

Thankfully, there are software methods available for error proofing this, with Outlook or other email clients.

The first link, up top, is a Visual Basic script that you can install on your Outlook software. I've tried it and it works just fine. The second link, from LifeHacker, has other software error-proofing methods as well as some process methods for error proofing, including: Type "attachment" where the @ sign should be in the recipient box. Delete it after you've put the attachment (SsSsS) on.

Process-based error-proofing can work, but you have to be disciplined to follow the process. For me, I'm glad I have the script installed!!

The script has been very effective, after about six months of use. There are some false positives, such as when I am replying to a message that did refer to an attachment. But, clicking "cancel" on the pop-up box isn't that much of a hassle, at least not compared to the hassle that comes from accidentally NOT attaching a file when you meant to.

I think this is a great example of how we can apply and practice lean concepts in our everyday work. This is effective, for me, because it's something that is fixing what had been a real problem for me. I didn't need a boss mandating use of this tool... it was my problem and my kaizen. A solution I found and implemented (at zero cost) on my own.

One other note: Gmail, the Web-based e-mail application, has a similar error0proofing step built in. It popped up when I initially attempted to send this blog post out, via e-mail, for posting here on the site.

Read more Everyday Lean posts.

So where was I? Oh right, so it was of little surprise to me that he signed a book deal with Kaplan Publishing on supply chains. His book which came out last month is based on the premise that companies are no longer only competing based on product or service quality, but that they are also competing on the supply chain level, meaning who can get me the product when I want it and at the price I want to pay. In the book he looks at several examples, including IBM. The premise makes perfect sense particularly when it comes to commodity products. So congratulations to Bob. I'm sure it will make the rounds at the universities this fall.

Chain Reaction is available now at Amazon.com.

Read more Supply Chains are Cool blogs.

Simply by being female, I don’t fit the stereotypical geek mold. Being a wife and mother – albeit married to a shade tree programmer/mechanical engineer – makes people think, “You can’t be that hi-tech.” Then I try to explain that I am technical support for product data management systems, which gets us nowhere. Then they see how we raise our 1.5 children with the intention of them following our footsteps. 

• Forget Winnie the Pooh versus Noah’s Arc in the nursery, we went with fractal patterns. The laminator at Office Max didn’t believe we were putting these cool multi-colored posters up in a baby’s room; they were more appropriate for a math whiz (which, coincidentally, is exactly what we hope to raise). Better yet, fractal patterns are gender neutral and not age specific so we may never have to redecorate the kids’ rooms.
• The corporate reimbursement that didn’t get reimbursed? My two-year-old climbed into my chair and banged on my keyboard. I don’t know how, but the inputs confused the computer into a blue screen of death and the network card died. The company did not reimburse my network card, though it was necessary to work from home.
• Why get one of those fancy Fisher Price laptop toys for the little ones? We gave our toddler a cheap – and already broken – pocket day planner. She can imitate her parents and it didn’t cost us a thing.
  • Other children watch TV -- ours watch the ever-changing screensavers.
• Forget buying pushbutton toys that make noise. A keyboard you ruined by spilling soda on it is just as fun for the kid. Consider it recycling. 
• A toddler with a remote control is dangerous, and more so in a household with electronics that are actually programmed. Only a geek can program a VCR. The VCR, sound system, DVD, and CD play tied into one entertainment center is a geek’s masterpiece. After too many times of spending an hour figuring out what setting was changed by our kids randomly hitting buttons, we found a perfect solution: We bought junk remote controls that still lit up when buttons were pushed. The kid can push buttons to their heart’s delight, and we no longer spent the weekend trying to fix the DVR settings after discovering it didn’t record what we wanted.

Read more An IE in IT blogs

I went along this afternoon to pick up the van and went into the service bay to find out just what had gone wrong. 

“Well, it is the exhaust system,” the service manager said.  Amazed, we quieried how a system with no moving parts could cause such a severe vibration. 

“It’s all in the harmonics,” he continued. “Something happens on these motors and all of a sudden the motor hits the harmonic frequency of the exhaust system around 40 mph. It just shakes like crazy when that happens!”

Yeah, sure does, said our driver. He thought it was going to wreck. So what do we do?

“Well, found a technical service bulletin on this one. I guess it’s been happening on this motor since the early 90s. The solution is to hang a three-pound weight on the exhaust system…that dampens out the harmonics.”

I am not making this up. Seriously. He showed us the technical bulletin. 

"You want us to put a three pound weight on the exhaust?"

“Well, that’s what they say.”

No wonder the U.S. automotive industry is falling behind. To have a known problem for 15 years that shakes the daylights out of a panel van and do nothing but suggest hanging a weight on the exhaust is unfathomable. Yet, there it was in writing.

In a lean setting, we would start asking why. Why does it shake? It shakes because it hits a harmonic frequency. Why does it hit the harmonic frequency? Take it from there.

Crude, brute force fixes, especially when making the customer do the fix, only cement the idea of low value of the product.  Find the problems and do the root cause. Before a three pound weight falls off of the van in front of you. 

Read more Lean Believer blogs

In an op-ed in The New York Times this morning, Thomas Friedman derides Toyota for not supporting tougher mileage standards for autos.

Assisting Detroit’s suicide seems to be contagious. Everyone wants to get in on it, including Toyota. Toyota, which pioneered the industry-leading, 50-miles-per-gallon Prius hybrid, has joined with the Big Three U.S. automakers in lobbying against the tougher mileage standards in the Senate version of the draft energy bill.

Friedman believes that the lack of small, fuel-efficient cars is what is causing the ongoing decline of the "Detroit Three."

Michigan lawmakers year after year shield Detroit from pressure to innovate on higher mileage standards, even though Detroit’s failure to sell more energy-efficient vehicles has clearly contributed to its brush with bankruptcy, its loss of market share to Toyota and Honda — whose fleets beat all U.S. automakers in fuel economy in 2007 — and its loss of jobs. GM today has 73,000 working UAW members, compared with 225,000 a decade ago. Last year, Toyota overtook GM as the world’s biggest automaker.

This fundamentally flawed. GM, Ford, and Chrysler do market fuel-efficient vehicles.  Perhaps not as efficient as a Prius or Civic hybrid, but still very efficient. The differentiator in the consumer purchasing decision is quality, reputation, and value. Value is defined from the perception of the customer, not the government. Value includes price, operating cost, design, features, and even the dealer and purchasing experience. 

Now why would Toyota, which has used the Prius to brand itself as the greenest car company, pull such a stunt? Is it because Toyota wants to slow down innovation in Detroit on more energy efficient vehicles, which Toyota already dominates, while also keeping mileage room to build giant pickup trucks, like the Toyota Tundra, at the gas-guzzler end of the U.S. market?  Deron Lovaas, vehicles expert at the Natural Resources Defense Council said, “Shamefully, Toyota has joined forces with older automakers that are getting their lunch handed to them in the marketplace, in part because they’ve consistently shunned fuel efficiency.”

Toyota, creator of the Prius, obviously hasn't "consistently shunned fuel efficiency." And truck/SUV sales are falling as consumers shift toward more efficient vehicles. As Friedman himself points out, Toyota already has vehicles that can exceed the high end of the proposed standards.

Don’t be fooled. Japan and Europe already have much better mileage standards for their auto fleets than the U.S. They both have many vehicles that could meet the U.S. goal for 2020 today, and they are committed to increasing their fleet standards toward 40 mpg and above in the coming decade. So Toyota, in effect, is lobbying to keep U.S. standards — in 2022 — well behind what Japan’s will be. Representative Edward Markey said to me that Toyota could meet a 35 mpg standard in Japan and Europe today, “but here — even though they bombard Americans with ads about how energy efficient Toyota is — they are fighting the 35 mpg standard for 2020.”

Friedman sees just one side of the equation... the regulatory stick. Toyota sees the other side: the consumer and even (egads!) government-driven carrot. Value from the perception of the customer.  And that's why he can't seem to grasp why statements like the following are true.

Irv Miller, a Toyota vice president, used the company’s corporate blog to refute charges that it is “trying to move America backward on gas mileage.” “Nothing could be further from the truth,” he said, because Toyota also favors improved mileage standards.

Toyota invested in the Prius because they saw customer value.  They didn't need a stick. Europe and Japan have higher standards driven by higher gas prices... so customers see value in efficent cars.  The Detroit Three have been investing in failed (so far) attempts at highly efficient vehicles because they're afraid of the stick. A highly efficient vehicle that is poorly designed and comes with an abusive sales experience holds lower customer value than a highly efficient vehicle that also delivers quality, design, and support.

That lack of focus on customer value is what's killing Detroit, not the battle against increased CAFE standards.    

Read more Paradoxical Production blogs

You’re going to think I only sit around and watch TV, since my first two posts are about lean concepts (or waste) on TV. Bear with me, we’ll talk about lean in the real world, not just the reality TV world.

I've only watched the premiere episode, but I am riveted  (at least temporarily) by the new Fox show "Kitchen Nightmares" with chef Gordon Ramsay. I never tried his earlier show "Hell's Kitchen" where he was trying to train (and/or verbally abuse) chefs in training, but I checked this one out because the first episode was free on Apple iTunes and it gave me something to watch while in the gym.

In this series, Ramsay parachutes into a different restaurant each week, usually a place that's a total disaster. In the pilot, he goes to a family-run Italian restaurant in Long Island, NY. The co-owner is a total out-of-touch mess, having no idea what his employees are struggling with back in the kitchen and he considers the business his personal piggy bank, while it's on the verge of going out of business. I'm sure there are some small family manufacturing businesses out there that are in the same condition.

Ramsay reminded me of the stereotypical Japanese lean "sensei," walking through the kitchen and the walk-in refrigerator, screaming and swearing at the co-owner, Peter, about how embarrassing and ridiculous the place is. Why it requires outside eyes to see all of this is hard to understand (although it's similar to an outsider coming into a factory and seeing waste with fresh eyes). Oh, for the record, it's not my style to yell and swear at people, regardless of how much waste there is...

So, then Ramsay brings Peter through the walk-in, showing him the rotting food, the leaking roof, the generally unsanitary conditions. It's clear that Peter has never walked the "gemba" and has never seen the situation firsthand. Ramsey yells at him and Peter reacts as if it's not his responsibility. As with many bad leaders, he does not take ownership of the situation and he starts yelling at his employees for making him look bad.

Ramsay then tells Peter he needs to work in the kitchen during the next lunch rush. Although his employees had complained about it endlessly, Peter was forced to struggle with the broken ovens, broken cooktops, broken broiler, lack of tools, etc. It didn't help that he knew NOTHING about being in a restaurant kitchen.

Though Peter's employees had complained about bad tools, he chose to buy himself a new suit instead of a new oven. Service was suffering and the kitchen staff were all really frustrated, but, again, Peter was clueless.

I hope none of you are in a similar parallel factory situation today. Watching a show like "Kitchen Nightmares" can help you feel thankful that your workplace isn't that big of a mess. The lean approach teaches us to "walk the gemba" -- to go and see the actual workplace. Even senior leaders have to walk the gemba. You have to make sure your employees have the proper tools they require to do their jobs. You can't just run around the periphery with all of the trappings of being the boss if you're not going to take responsibility. You have to be a leader.

As the show progressed, improvements were made, basically in spite of Peter. Ramsay has the kitchen overhauled and new, properly working equipment is put in place for the kitchen staff.  The restaurant is re-launched with a new menu and, hopefully, a new attitude. Unfortunately, Peter is still being self-absorbed and when Ramsay tries to get Peter in gear, he takes it out on the staff. We also see one of Peter’s “customer service” tricks – after a problem occurs, he basically pays off the customer by comping them wine or a dessert. There certainly isn’t any root cause analysis or good problem solving going on, as a lean thinker would want to see. Of course, Peter isn’t the only company that solves problems this way, but I’ll save that for another post. 

So, finally, Ramsay is pushed to the point where he chews out Peter in front the staff, telling him the restaurant would run better without him. You can tell the staff is amazed to see this, as they all agree, but they’ve never had the guts to stand up to Peter. Considering Peter’s terrible, violent temper, it’s no wonder why they never spoke up. You just have to wonder why they continued to work there!

Peter apparently reflected on this overnight and came back with a new attitude (maybe one that was contrived for TV purposes).  He admitted Ramsay was right and realized that his employees were afraid of him. Peter starts making calls to fix the walk-in refrigerator (the one thing that Ramsay didn’t get fixed) and actually starts carrying food out to customers, apologizing to the waitress, and being generally helpful. 

Peter said, “Instead of trying to be the boss, I’m going to jump in and help out.”

That’s exactly what a lean leader should do.  You need to:

• See first hand, visit the gemba, see what your employees are struggling with
• Make sure they have the proper tools and equipment
• Analyze problems and work on preventing them in the future, rather than just buying back your customer’s goodwill

So, we had a happy ending for the story. I’d be curious to see how things went after the cameras were gone. Would things continue running smoothly?  Would Peter revert to his old wannabe gangster ways?

Read more Everyday Lean blogs.

HBO: Curb Your Enthusiasm - episode 53, season 6
So yes, I do tend to see lean everywhere. This is a post about seeing industrial engineering in the world... albeit the hilariously twisted world of Larry David and his HBO show, Curb Your Enthusiasm. 

Here is a portion of the official HBO episode summary:
Waiting in line at the perfume store, Larry grows anxious and tries to second guess which line will move faster, switching back and forth with another man. But the woman in front of him hold things up when she tries different samples, and the man who'd been behind him moves to the front of the other line and snags the last bottle of Cheryl's favorite perfume.

Larry was very upset and started screaming, in his style, that there should be a single line. If I remember right, he screams something like "It's more efficient! It's more fair to have a single line!!!"

Jogging my memory back to an introductory industrial engineering class (I was an undergrad at Northwestern University).... I thought, ah, queuing theory!

Larry didn't express this in IE terms, of course, but he was talking about his desire for a "single queue, multiple server" system, where the fancy story had a "multiple queue, multiple server" system. In the case of the perfume store, each cashier/salesperson is a "server." Each server had it's own waiting line (queue) and Larry, of course, kept choosing the slower queue (the server with the slowest service rate, in queuing theory terminology).

Remembering back to the class, we were taught (and you can prove this mathematically... although don't ask me to do this today) that a single queue was more efficient than multiple queues, that customers were served faster that way. A Wendy's usually has a single queue, where McDonald's usually has multiple queues, if you want to think about it that way.

Is this the right parallel to draw? Am I remembering my IE education properly? Does anyone else want to elaborate in more mathematical terms?

Read more Everyday Lean blogs

The Logistics of Shipping My Car to Europe Last week I was in New York and in this post I had hoped to enthusiastically share my experience of shipping my 2002 Mini Cooper from New Jersey to Germany. Why ship, instead of sell? Good question. Well I was one of the first 1000 owners of a Mini in the US, so I have a certain bond to my Mini. Also, I lived in New York City, so it only has about 30,000 miles on it, which is really low considering it's 7 years old. Lastly, I installed this really great audio system with iPod connections just before I left. So those are my reasons.

I am working with the folks at Planes Incorporated and according to them it should take about 30 days to go from New Jersey to the port of Bremerhaven in Germany, about 40 minutes from Hamburg. The problem lies with the title of the car. According to the NY State DMV a lien is on the car, when it fact its been paid off for quite some time. I spoke with the folks at Mini Financing and they confirmed, but alas an audio confirmation doesn't work in the world of logistics. So I had to wait for a notarized letter to arrive with the confirmation, which didn't arrive in time - once again foiled by poor logistics planning. Now my Mini is in Queens, NY and I am currently lining up to have a 3rd party take it to NJ. After it arrives in Germany I'll be flying in and driving it back to Vienna - about 900 miles.

Stay tuned.

Read more Supply Chains are Cool blogs.

Software is often seen as a quick fix for any problem, but it can also be the problem.

What is one of the first problems one has when confronting a new software system? The most common solution for a problem is for someone to hand out a manual. Yet many manuals are written by technical gurus for technical experts, and are of little use to confused end users.

This problem led to the introduction of searchable knowledge databases. Effective solution databases grow as more interoperability problems and functions are added, and will be improved based upon user feedback. Training users more effectively to reduce user error is better, but there is always a need for solution databases.

A simple how-to run-thru can make the difference between understanding and not understanding. Yet, we often make the assumption that sitting everyone down in an all-day session is the answer. Developers may need a full day to learn what they need to know, but those who are less technically inclined may be left more confused than ever with this approach.

If possible, work with the trainers to develop specific, targeted sessions. List everyone who needs training. Classify how they will be using the system. Break out the training sections that apply to them. Have the trainer give several extra classes that will cover only what each group needs to know. Those receiving the training get exposed to far less extraneous material. The time spent in training is more productive for those that are there. 
 
The next problem is determining how the new software cog going to fit into your existing corporate machine. Are you going to tailor your existing processes to the new software? Are you going to tailor the software to your existing processes? There are pros and cons to both methods. If you must dovetail your processes to the software, it requires changes to your process flow. On the other hand, changing your work procedures to fit the software provides a perfect opportunity to eliminate unnecessary operations from the process. IS plus manufacturing for full fledged Six Sigma, anyone?

The software’s fit into the new process flow also provides reinforcement for the new process flow. Changing your process to fit the software is too often a round peg in square hole proposition, adding extra steps to what had been an efficient operation before. Tailoring software has its own problems. This increases the cost of the software. It requires debugging and testing. It also requires understanding the user’s needs in order to make a product that doesn’t meeting production needs into something that meets those needs and exceeds expectations.  

Software implementations require customer feedback from requirements definition to training requirements. Their feedback is also necessary from initial solution documentation to keeping that solution set relevant and complete. And any Six Sigma plans to improve either the production itself or the production software should work hand in hand with the other.

Read more An IE in IT blogs.

Talked recently with a senior manager at a company in town who is fiercely competing with low-cost foreign importers for business with his major customer. He thought he was making inroads when the competitor dropped prices further.

“We had to pull out more inventory,” he told me. “That was our only option.”

I asked to know more.

“We have to compete on price and inventory is cash. But more importantly is response time. So, I pulled out more inventory.”

What was the problem?

“We did this 4 years ago. We cut WIP in half. That let us cut space and pull people closer together. That let us cut our lead time.”

And the problem would be?

“After complaining about that move, our folks got used to it.  Now, we are cutting WIP in half again. Pulling them tighter.  Cutting lead time more. And I have more complaining.” 

More complaining than you’d have if you lost the business?

He smiled. “That’s what we all know. And I’m not going to let that happen.”

Leadership in a lean setting means making hard choices.  Communicating them. Dealing with the complaints. And knowing you are doing the right thing. 

Like this manager. Who has saved hundreds of jobs for our community. Decisions like that make len work.

Read more Lean Believer blogs.

In our kaizen event earlier this morning, the team was clicking, creating some visible tools to manage a process that, due to its technical requirements, happens out of sight.  The tools were wonderfully clear and simple, flowing from the team, implementable with electrical tape and magnetic clips.

With one exception.

One of our associates, a quiet woman of small stature, pointed out our initial proposed location of the kanban rack made for a difficult reach for her.  I looked at the rest of our team…she was the only “vertically challenged” member of this particular kaizen team.  Yet, without her comment, we would have plunked the rack 6-10 inches higher than where it ultimately landed.

Is 6-10 inches a big deal? Yes, it is, if it makes it difficult for an associate to do standard work easily or it adds a silly annoyance.  And, had we not had a representative kaizen team, all of us taller members would have missed this.

Small things matter.

Read more Lean Believer blogs.

As many of you know I am living in Europe. Hands down I am loving the experience, but my biggest complaint is that I can't find clothes that fit my style. Sure there is Benetton and Zara, but I didn't shop at these stores in NY, so I am not going to shop at them in Europe.

Months ago I thought the Internet was my savior and I figured that I would pay a little extra to have Banana Republic, J Crew, and Lucky ship over whatever I find on the Web. You would think in the age where I can buy a virtual computer in Second Life, buying a pair of jeans from a U.S. retailer from Europe would be easy. Quite the opposite. Disregarding Lucky for a moment, Banana Republic, owned by the GAP, is the 49th largest retailer in the world yet I can't get their latest moleskin 3/4 top coat shipped to Vienna, Austria. In the shipping section of the Web site it reads very simply, "At this time, we are unable to accept or ship international orders." But WHY? Have they heard of logistics outsourcing? What is stopping them from setting up a warehouse in Rotterdam and having a third party handle orders for Europe? Most of the clothes are made outside the U.S. anyway so it will save them a trip abroad. I know I am not the only American here in Europe. They could easily market themselves on the dozens of ex-pat Web sites.

J Crew isn't much better. Okay, so they ship to Japan, but that doesn't do me much good. And if they can ship to Japan, why not Europe? Lucky Jeans is a much smaller chain with maybe 50 stores in the U.S, but at least they ship to some countries in Europe including France, Germany, Netherlands, and Switzerland, but again doesn't help me in Austria or Czech Republic.

My only option to have items shipped here is to get a third party involved, such as a friend or a mail forwarding provider. My friends can't be trusted, particularly with the latest cool shirts from Lucky, and a mail forwarding provider is certainly an option, but a $30 shirt quickly becomes a $70 shirt, which really is a lot.

Perhaps I could develop a petition. If you would buy from any of the retailers mentioned above if they shipped to your home country outside of the U.S. please post below and maybe if I get a few hundred names I can convince them that a market exists outside the USA.

Read more Supply Chains Are Cool blogs.

All you budding Picasso's, Cezanne's, and Monet's, be warned, you can be outsourced in the new global supply chain. I was recently in Miami and met with friends in the art industry at several galleries. While I am not a big fan of the Miami art scene (too contemporary), I was shocked to hear about how several paintings were actually painted in China on assembly lines, similar to the way a car or a PC is assembled. For example, the "Tuscany" look is very big now and so-called artists in China are cranking out Tuscany-based village scenes by the hundreds. While they look real and arguably should be considered art, I don't think they would be as attractive to collectors if they knew the paintings weren't designed by some depressed, struggling artist living on the streets, but by dozens of assembly line workers. And the prices certainly don't reflect the costs we come to expect out of the Far East, which are in the thousands. The talent in China is certainly there and should not be ignored, but a little disclosure is needed. Perhaps instead of signing the artists name in the corner they should sign it with "Made in China."

Read more Supply Chains Are Cool blogs.