David Dehne, Author at Synchrono

Three Bottlenecks the Modern Marketer Must Overcome

How a manufacturing theory helps Jeff Bezos—and you—focus on what really matters

The Week recently ran a story about Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos making all of his senior managers read, The Goal, by Dr. Eliyahu M. Goldratt and Jeff Cox. So why would Jeff Bezos – widely considered one of the most visionary CEOs today —want his team to buy into a business book’s philosophy that’s mostly concerned with manufacturing effectiveness?

Bezos is one of the most influential marketing minds in the country. When thinking about your marketing strategy, what should you know that he knows about, The Goal?

Theory into Practice

I have been building marketing strategies for software manufacturing companies for many years. I’ve read The Goal and understand its philosophies because I have had to learn about its main topic, the Theory of Constraints (TOC), and how it can change the way manufacturers do business. If you want to know about this aspect of TOC, definitely see our resident guru, Rick Denison’s blog. However, to summarize from my perspective, TOC tells us to look at the limiting factor – or constraint – to understand a system’s output.

In Bezos’ story, writer Pascal Emmanuel Gobry says: “The reason why this is so profound is that most managers spend their time trying to improve every part of the system they oversee, often with very mixed results. But if the output of the whole process — even an improved process — is still limited by the bottleneck, then any effort spent optimizing anything else is basically wasted (and can even be counterproductive).”

If your marketing efforts feel unfocused, find your bottlenecks to get moving again in the right direction. Here are the top three bottlenecks that I have found empowering to overcome:

1) Data Mashup – That’s my term for unsynchronized, or data without any context. You can have the best automation software out there, and the biggest of big data, but if you’re unable to synchronize that data so that it is transformed into meaningful information, what’s the point? When executing on Pull-based, or modern marketing methodologies, you’ll want to identify the specific constraints of the system(s) and/or marketing programs you’re running and whether you’re able to not only measure your desired KPIs, but influence them. Often, this means integrating your marketing automation, CRM and even financial systems to paint a complete picture.

2) Taking Your Eyes off the Prize –Let’s face it—marketers are busy people. We’ve got multiple stakeholders all fighting for our attention. I have found that retaining customer focus is the hardest job of all—but remains the true “prize” in any marketer’s eyes. Find out where and why your teams are taking their eyes off customer needs and get them back on track.

3) Getting Real- At Synchrono, we are all about meeting our customers where they live. We spend a lot of time and effort out there in the production environment, constantly refining our software to make manufacturers more consistently successful. We look for their pain points to find out how we can help. In “Lean speak”, our continuous improvement efforts helps customers with their continuous improvement projects.

What are your marketing pain points and what are you doing about them? If you’ve got problems with your product, with your processes or with your people, don’t sugarcoat them or sweep them under the rug. Get real about the constraints you need to address in order to execute a marketing strategy that positively influences your desired KPIs. Is it your ability to access the right data? Your customer focus? Messaging and content that hits the mark – or something else? It takes courage to be objective and brutally honest, but if I were pressed to tell you one thing you can do to improve everything about your marketing, it would be this—be real about your issues and meet them head-on.

Promote Continuous Improvement

Our synchronized manufacturing software helps identify and manage constraints that inhibit the flow of production. At the same time, our systems provide meaningful information to guide continuous improvement efforts. The same principles hold true for effective marketing – identify issues, make informed adjustments and measure the results. And don’t settle – stay sharp and continuously refine.

Certainly, Jeff Bezos has been pretty fearless in his career. . . I think he’s right on the money about looking for bottlenecks first to gain incredible insight into our business—but more importantly—our customers’ business. Pay attention, it will point you in the right direction!

– Marketing

Big data, the Internet of Things, Industry 4.0, Factory of the Future, the Visual factory – what do you really need to pay attention to and what do these concepts mean to most manufacturers? A sceptic and trend-spotter, Pam’s posts leverage a background in technology marketing to apply these big concepts to the real world – and real work – of demand-driven manufacturers.

February 25, 2015

How TOC Can Move Your World – and World View

Archimedes once said, “Give me a lever long enough,
a fulcrum, and a place to stand, and I shall move the world.”

Learn how production professionals use Constraints Management to meet negativity head – on to manage meaningful change

Here’s the last part of our three-part series about the Theory of Constraints (TOC). In the next couple of postings I’m going to dig right in to looking at what actually happens when I’ve used TOC at client companies. But there’s more gold to be mined from this topic—and I wanted to make sure I included in this series some common “fulcrums” –or common organizational assumptions that might sound familiar to you.

I also want to clear up some of what you might think. A common notion about constraints as they are viewed as a “negative.” However, constraints are neither good nor bad; they are just part of any organization. To clarify, try and picture an organization that has no constraints. What would you expect to see from this type of organization? The organization would produce with unlimited growth. In nature and in business, there aren’t any systems that produce at unlimited capacity and exhibit unlimited growth. So if there are no systems that produce at unlimited growth, then all systems have constraints.

As people working in systems, we can either acknowledge or deny that constraints exist. Regardless of the choice, constraints will have an effect upon the organization. If we want to grow our organization, then we might as well pay attention, right?

Too Many Places at Once

In my last blog posting, (Which Systems is More Complex?) I discussed the complex view of organizations, with the belief that change is incremental. Many changes will equal organizational improvement.

For contrast, I also discussed that with TOC in that there is only one or very few true constraints within any system. Improve the constraint, and you will make a significant impact upon the system.

What if you do not have a method to find the weakest link? Random chance allows that every once in a while, one of these actions will touch an organizational constraint and generate an impressive single-event, a growth-oriented action. The opposite might also happen: The same random choice may damage a constraint and produce a single, one-time negative result. If you think about the last 20 years of organizational history, I’m sure you can find a few such cases of one or the other, but more likely the latter. These events will be on the scale of urban legends within the organization. Like New Coke in the 1980’s, a disastrous merger like Daimler/Chrysler, or spinning off acquisitions to conserve cash.

The Cost Conundrum

Traditionally, most improvements are efforts to save cost. People think that if cost is removed from the delivery of a product or a service, it will result in higher profits. The vast majority of the U.S. Economy believes this to be true, and that, in conjunction with the high affinity for innovation, creates a compelling mix. But when we compare TOC with other improvement methods, its speed and accuracy bring about significant change – faster. We find our constraints and then we can react.

The TOC View of Problems

Traditional view: “A problem is something I don’t like”, or “Something that bothers me”, or the classic “Something that keeps me up at night.”

TOC view: “A problem is a conflict that prevents a system from reaching its desired objective.” With this definition, there is a second fundamental belief in physics that “There are no conflicts in reality.” There are only invalid assumptions about the conflict.

Assume Control

TOC translates conflicts as follows: If there is a conflict, then there must be an underlying assumption about that system that created the conflict. The solution comes from identifying the assumptions about the conflict, validating the existence of the assumptions, and eliminating the negative assumption about the conflict so that a solution can be built that will allow the system to reach its desired objective.

In every organization, managers face many issues on a daily basis. Typically, most of these issues stem from a single core problem (conflict) that the organization hasn’t been able to previously identify. Many managers are aware that these conflicts exist, however, these type of conflicts are very difficult to solve as most have conflicting objectives that result in compromises.

Does this sound like you?

The existence of conflict can be validated by looking back in time for periodic shifts in organizational philosophy. As an example, if in the past, your organization was emphasizing centralized management and now it is emphasizing profit-center autonomy, then these switches indicate the existence of an unresolved core problem. Efficiency is another example of an unresolved core problem. If at the beginning of any reporting period, organizational efficiency is emphasized, and then at the end of the month, all the rules are broken (forgotten) to achieve shipments and revenue targets. This again is a sure sign of an unresolved core problem.

TOC has a number of system tools that tackle the “new normal” head on. Next time, we’ll look at these tools as they applied to an automotive manufacturer—we’ll uncover their core assumptions and watch how their teams took control with TOC.

– Rick Denison

Rick is the “Dr. Who” of manufacturing operations and logistics. And while Rick doesn’t travel through time, he is adept at leading change – and saving time – in a diverse range of manufacturing environments through Lean manufacturing, Six Sigma, and TOC techniques. Rick’s posts address how demand-driven matters and draws from his background in process improvement, change management, project management, information systems implementation, and profitability analysis.

February 10, 2015

Top 3 Communications Best Practices for Software Implementations

In a recent business article out of the UK, the author cites trends such as collaboration and connectivity as hallmarks of the “factory of the future.” I would take that one step further, and add “communication” to that list—especially during implementation.

Smart implementation leaders make sure they are listening to the insights of everyone who will be impacted by their new systems and following solid communication practices throughout the life of the project—and beyond. Here’s what you need to know about the three biggest opportunities great communication practices deliver to your project.

#1 Always be Buying (In)

A continuous goal of all communications is gaining buy-in from all project team members and stakeholders. I make it a personal goal to have all attendees, no matter what their role, walk away from meetings –or after reading emails –more in-tune with the overall project objective. Often we create increased sharing and discussion opportunities, so that communications can continue to be a two-way street.

There is a moment during every implementation where l watch the lines of communication open. I can see a new determination among everyone involved to follow through on our goals. Our communication practices had delivered that elusive element—buy-in—and as a result, each person becomes a project champion. Implementations like these sometimes herald the beginning of a culture change that helps the enterprise continuously improve by listening to and learning from each other.

#2 Living Documents Spur the Crucial Conversations

Setting up a communications plan and documenting results from the communications plan activities can help you ensure that you are in lockstep regarding action items, decisions, and project strategy. Documentation begins with a project repository – an accessible space where content and multiple versions of documents can be viewed, edited, and shared. In my last blog, we discussed how a good, solid RACI can help with workflow and accountability during the project. The RACI can stand as some of your first meeting notes and as a core project document to establish both project activities and communication expectations. A project repository “lives” in tools like SharePoint, Atlassian Confluence, or in other similar platforms.

Security and Sign Off

Documentation access and security should be a primary focus before and during a project. I recommend enacting specific security clearance for known project team members before the project begins to save time. You can always continue to manage access and permissions throughout the project lifecycle as both the team size and number of files may grow. The goal is to make sure your documentation is protected throughout the project, while having a transition plan for making the information viewable by a broader audience after deployment. The repository should be kept somewhere so that even many years after the project ends, the space is still accessible. You don’t want to rely on critical project information residing on an individual’s work station (what if it crashes!?!) so select a place that has staying power within the organization. It could be the only way you can conduct a corporate project audit, find original training materials or design documentation.

Push or Pull?

With all of the project content created, it’s important to decipher what makes good “push” versus “pull” information. Many project repository items will be best with a “pull” method, where users know where and how to go pull the information as needed. In other cases, such as project status updates, you will want to enact a “push” system where you distribute information to people so that it’s in front of them. The more you can schedule this regularly, the better. Often, this information supplies management with what they need to know for broader project statuses, such as reporting beyond their specific business or IT division. Information is pushed to them ready-to-use – don’t rely on people clicking links to be able to see and absorb it. You want it front and center!

#3 Understand (and explain) that Communication Delivers a Measureable ROI

People sometimes think that good communications is a “nice to have” add-on rather than a crucial element of the project plan. The folks at the Project Management Institute (PMI) are the masters at communicating well and at compiling solid research to show the ROI of your communications project. Most of their content is out there on the Internet free for the taking. Like this white paper, which has quotes like the one below:

“Among those organizations considered highly effective communicators, 80 percent of projects meet original goals, versus only 52 percent at their minimally effective counterparts, according to PMI’s Pulse of the Profession™ In-Depth Report: The Essential Role of Communications. Highly effective communicators are also more likely to deliver projects on time (71 percent versus 37 percent) and within budget (76 percent versus 48 percent).”

Those are some pretty solid numbers for building your communications business case, aren’t they?

Definitely let me know what you think about my top three—and if you have anything to add to help our readers make sure communication remains a crucial element in their project implementations. Until next time, then, keep communicating!

-Sarah Huhner

Sarah takes a customer-focused and results-driven approach to project management and demand-driven manufacturing systems implementation. With hundreds of projects under her belt, Sarah is fearless when it comes to challenging the status quo and delving into the details to ensure an optimal user experience. As such, her posts reflect tips and best practice advice for managing people and processes through projects – and getting the most out of your systems.

January 27, 2015

Using Big Data to Tell Your Story

Three ways narrative can connect the dots between big data and your brand

In a recent Forbes article, the writer describes Big Data as “a collection of data from traditional and digital sources inside and outside your company that represents a source for ongoing discovery and analysis.” I love this definition because it describes a process of discovery that—once linked with your brand message – allows you to uncover additional opportunities to tell compelling stories in the markets you serve.

I work in the manufacturing space, where our systems manage large amounts of real-time data aggregated from enterprise systems and machines in a client’s plant(s)—and all the way out to suppliers and customers. Manufacturers who harness this data gain insight to improve production flow; focus continuous improvement (CI) initiatives; and drive customer satisfaction via on-time delivery, innovation and increased capacity. This insight – and resulting capabilities – helps them transform into a more flexible, reactive and empowered business partner, creating a powerful story to tell in the marketplace. Sharing your most impactful big data stories will strengthen competitive advantage, profitability and your brand value.

Here are what I believe to be the three most compelling storylines for our manufacturing audience in what I call, “The Big Data Narrative”:

1. Pain Points

As marketers know well, features and benefits must solve specific customer problems. Spend some time brainstorming with your front-line people about the “pain” your customers are in and come up with an engaging narrative to show how your products can provide actionable information to solve these problems. Take care to create a distinction between a pile of data and actionable information that elicits “discovery” or insight into innovation. For example, our client was able to access actionable information to manage their inventory and WIP in a visible way and experience a 50% reduction in operating expenses. This customer’s pain point was ineffective inventory management, but they also had spotty supplier relationships. We helped them use and interpret their new system-generated data to create new synergies with their suppliers—a story worth the telling.

2. Related, Real-life Narratives

After you identify the pain, look at your past and current customers to give your big data solutions weight and depth. You’ll need case studies and testimonials like the one I used above. We often use case studies from our clients to paint a picture of value, particularly from those who use our InSync Services after implementation to jump start continuous improvement actions based on their new system-generated knowledge. We tell our products’ stories by telling these client stories—how they improved flow and continued to build value through their Big-Data-driven CI process. I love sharing the real-life ways that show how manufacturers use us to turn their big data into actionable information – and then into transformational improvements.

We also use stories to differentiate ourselves in the marketplace we serve. Because we have a unique position as a provider incorporating demand-driven manufacturing processes into our systems, we use stories from current clients to validate our value proposition to prospective clients. In turn, these customers use our stories to sell the solution internally to gain adoption.

3. Table the Tables?

Mark Schaefer’s excellent blog post cautions against using too many pies, charts and graphs to tell the story—but let’s face it—70% of us are visual learners and supply-chain managers tend to want these graphics. They’re used to a dashboard approach and it would be a mistake not to give them one. In fact, the factory of the future is a visual environment, where status is easily viewed and actionable information is within reach, accessible to everyone. But don’t lose the people in the process of telling your story. Paint a “people picture” – use the shop foreman’s real first name – and don’t be afraid to use emotion as you translate Big Data into the big stories that create big results for your customers. As Schaefer puts it:

“If we distill the complex and nuanced world into only averages and pie charts, we could be missing the important opportunities presented by context. What’s the story behind the data? What’s there that we didn’t expect to be there? What are the implications of a trend and why is it happening?”

Ask these questions of your Big Data and you can show your audience the exponential value they will experience once they get a handle on their own story.

Let me know your Big Data stories. And thanks for reading mine!

– Marketing

Big data, the Internet of Things, Industry 4.0, Factory of the Future, the Visual factory – what do you really need to pay attention to and what do these concepts mean to most manufacturers? A sceptic and trend-spotter, Pam’s posts leverage a background in technology marketing to apply these big concepts to the real world – and real work – of demand-driven manufacturers.

The post %%POSTLINK%% appeared first on %%BLOGLINK%%.

December 29, 2014

Which System is More Complex? The Answer is Simpler than You Think

Using the Theory of Constraints to Become More Demand-Driven- Part 1

In my last blog post on How TOC delivers powerful results, I talked about how every manufacturer that I worked for early in my career believed that their environment was completely unique. However, just like doctors are trained not to look for zebras when diagnosing horses, the Theory of Constraints (TOC) allows you to diagnose your environment in the simplest way to get the most immediate results.

The concepts of TOC stem from some very simple, practical principles. These principles were developed by physicist Dr. Eliyahu M. Goldratt and stem from the fundamental differences that physicists apply to complexity and problem-solving.

Although these principles are simple, they are also counter to the prevailing methods people use to manage organizations for achieving results. The main differences fall within three themes:

View of complexity
Effects of constraints on organizations
Core conflicts that govern decisions

Today we will look at the first theme — the view of complexity — and see how Goldratt’s Theory of Constraints methodology was developed to tame environments of every stripe.

Your organization may not be as complex as you think

The prevailing thought is that most organizations are very complex – so complex that it takes a significant effort to describe the organization, how the organization conducts its affairs, and the factors that leadership must consider when making decisions.

Theory of Constraints provides a very different definition of complexity. In order to compare the two definitions, we first need to look at the traditional view of complexity, and second, the TOC view of complexity:

Under Control

Most organizations deal with complexity by breaking the organization down into smaller subsystems in order to facilitate measurement, command and control. These departments, profit centers, cost centers, and divisions each have some degree of autonomy for decision-making. Each has incentives to improve by measurement or by reward. In this type of system, there are many data elements created to describe the structure and control mechanisms of the subsystem. The results of each subsystem are summarized and consolidated at the next level up the structure; this continues until there is one unified summary. Large bureaucracies are necessary to keep track of all the data and rules about the subsystems. These bureaucracies are the modern information systems.

Both tradition and governance rules establish the measurements used to determine the actions each subsystem must take. These decisions are based upon the variables within the control of the managers of the subsystem. In these organizations, many elements need to be touched in order to impact the behavior of the system. If this statement is true, then it becomes more difficult to predict the behavior of the system using this type of approach. In other words, this system has many degrees of freedom.

Since the prevailing strategy is to not look at organizations as a complete system, we have a tendency to believe that organizational improvements are incremental. That making many small improvements will add up to major improvements. TOC shows us that this is far from the reality of organizational behavior.

“That is illogical, Captain”

As a practitioner of Constraints Management, I have spent a great deal of time understanding that systems are linked through effect-cause-effect logic. From a single causality, there can be many resulting effects. This causal relationship is used to describe the current reality of a system. The effect-cause-effect technique allows TOC Thinking Process experts to significantly reduce the number of elements that they must touch to influence the entire system. The degree of freedom in the system is defined as the number of items in the system that need to be touched to effect the overall system. In this way, an interconnected system is much simpler.

By reducing the complexity of the system, this analysis can accurately identify the system’s constraint or core problem(s). Once the core problem(s) is/are defined, positive actions can be implemented which will have a significant effect upon the entire system.

The TOC Thinking Process, and the Five Focusing Steps simplify the structure of the system being analyzed and find the point of maximum leverage. Some situations are easier to describe in this manner than others. However, all systems can be described by this process. Once completed, you’ve uncovered the inherent simplicity of the organization.

When demand-driven manufacturers apply these techniques to their organizations they can see where they need to reduce touch points to decrease complexity. They then digitize the remaining touch points to achieve greater control and command of their production process. Next time, we’ll talk about what happens when manufacturers begin to focus on constraints to create increased flow and efficiency in the supply chain. Until then, if you hear hoof beats, it might be time to stop looking for a zebra.

– Rick Denison

Rick is the “Dr. Who” of manufacturing operations and logistics. And while Rick doesn’t travel through time, he is adept at leading change – and saving time – in a diverse range of manufacturing environments through Lean manufacturing, Six Sigma, and TOC techniques. Rick’s posts address how demand-driven matters and draws from his background in process improvement, change management, project management, information systems implementation, and profitability analysis.

December 16, 2014

Rockin’ Relationships: Documents Drive the Details

In the second part of our three part series on successful implementation strategies, we discuss one of the most important project setup strategies – the RACI.

Part Two- The RACI

As I’ve mentioned before, implementation projects end up being mostly about the people involved. Project success hinges upon how effective the project team is in harnessing their own particular talents and in placing the right eyes over the right set of project deliverables to ensure quality down the line.

Last time, we talked about how to build a solid logistical framework for implementation. Next time, we’ll discuss effective communications protocol. Today, we’ll discuss the way to get the right people doing the right things using a RACI.

Don’t Race Through Your RACI

As you may know, a RACI is a responsibility assignment matrix that defines who is responsible for all aspects of the project. (RACI stands for Responsible, Accountable, Consult, and Inform). Based on an organizational matrix from the contractor and customer companies, it tells you which people do what to deliver all aspects of a project. So what do these four types of “project people” look like?

Responsible individuals are the people that will actually perform the work to complete a particular task or deliverable. These individuals coordinate all other team members who will have input or involvement on the task. This can include coordinating draft reviews, meetings, and sign-off to drive a task to completion. They are also responsible for communicating and reporting on the task progress. A good “R” assignee doesn’t necessarily have all of the information required to do the task up front. However, they should be on a logical team for the task, as well as in a project role that’s a good fit for knowing the task scope and how it’s going to get it completed. Note that a project manager is not a common “R” assignment within a RACI. The only exception is for project tasks that are strictly project management in nature. A great example of this is the RACI itself!
Accountable individuals have a role in signing off on a particular task and considering it complete to the highest quality. To be the “A” for a task means that person is signing off on the “R” person’s work. All content and language must be sound and clear, which is also what the “A” must enforce. If referring back to any designs that turn out to be incorrect or late deliverables, the Accountable person is the team member on the hook for explaining what happened. Having Accountable team members involved throughout a deliverable’s development is key to effective project work items. Final sign-off should not be the first time an “A” is reading content, but rather an affirmation of the already reviewed material. A proper Accountable assignment is one that has enough knowledge of the deliverable and project scope to know if something meets content quality expectations. If an individual is at too high of a management level, they may not have enough information to know if it’s been done to the proper standard.
Consulted – These individuals may be considered the Subject Matter Expert (SME) for a particular task or knowledge area. They are engaged by the Responsible team member to provide input and review deliverables for accuracy. A Consulted person’s expertise should absolutely be included before a task can be considered complete. It is important to identify the individuals specifically and communicate timelines and time estimates of when they will be needed. This makes sure they are available when required in order to avoid any project plan delays. For example, an architecture guru might need weeks to promise you attendance at a crucial meeting—make sure they’re on board from the very start.
Inform – These individuals will be provided status updates on a particular task or deliverable. They also may be just a user of the end product when the task is complete. An Informed individual does not typically provide feedback back to the Responsible team member – consider this role more of a “carbon copy” or “FYI” role that is copied on particular updates throughout the process.

The act of creating a RACI demystifies project responsibilities which will help a project be a well-oiled machine down the road. It allows people to manage their own time and workload within a project timeline since they know when and for what they are needed. I have found that the activity of doing a RACI is just as helpful as the resulting artifact. Make sure you have the crucial conversations about true responsibility and accountability to clear up potential confusion later in the project.

I’d love to hear about your experiences with planning RACIs. And I can’t wait to talk about good communications with you in my next post. But until then, keep your RACIs –and project relationships—rockin’.

– Sarah Huhner