Juran vs. Deming - Your Thoughts?

#11
ddhartma said:
Could this be a difference attributable to someone that was left-brain oriented (Juran) -Vs- someone more right-brain oriented (Deming).
. . .
Of course there are many other factors that could explain this, but it was fun to postulate anyway.
;)
Deming would have loved your theory, Dave, because it takes individual variation into account!:applause:
 

WALLACE

Quite Involved in Discussions
#12
ddhartma said:
Could this be a difference attributable to someone that was left-brain oriented (Juran) -Vs- someone more right-brain oriented (Deming). Someone that was more left-brain dominate would have a tendency to value and understand the mechanics of a process or system, where as a right-brain dominate person would visualize and value the theory/philosophy behind the process/system.
Dave,
Again you've said it in a way that forces clarity.
I agree, when you imply, the need for the left and right brain oriented thinkers. A system needs that balance of the dreamers and the realists.
Wallace.
 

Jen Kirley

Quality and Auditing Expert
Staff member
Admin
#13
WALLACE said:
Dave,
Again you've said it in a way that forces clarity.
I agree, when you imply, the need for the left and right brain oriented thinkers. A system needs that balance of the dreamers and the realists.
Wallace.
Yesterday I was fortunate in having a sit-down with an esteemed colleague, Dennis Anderson. He deeply appreciated the analogy I shamelessly borrowed from Wes, who remembered Kermit's saying "It's not easy being green."

Dennis also remarked that I have come some distance from the black-and-white view I had on quality systems when I worked at a particular machine shop of our mutual acquaintance until a few years ago. Now, I realize (especially outside of manufacturing) that I cannot reasonably expect right brain thinking--even though my premises are based on mathematic, profit-oriented results. I know now I must walk and talk more slowly for them and be patient. I must learn to strike a balance, and to keep looking at events through a long-range, wide-angle lens.

I am not a patient person, so this is challenging. It's hard to keep coming back for silliness when the answers seem so clear. Nonetheless, we are dealing with the same seven human vices that have been in play since before Plato.

So, I agree that I must strive for an appropriate mix between the dreamer and the realist, somehow without becoming a fatalist! :agree1:

Jennifer
 

WALLACE

Quite Involved in Discussions
#14
Striking the right balance

How can the right balance be applied?
Is it possible to get to the point where, we have all the right numbers in place being viewed as a big picture?
I've been in many brainstorming sessions where my visual communications skills have been employed. I 've sat back and listened to all of the very skilled statisticians, I've taken notes and formed a big picture as a visual representation.
The screaming stops and I often hear that lone statistician voice say, "That's what I was trying to @#$%^&* say". The team leader turns and say's, let's use this format as a default within these meetings.
Yeah, I'm the big picture member of the team, the dreamer. I remember going through a few Sick sigma courses some years ago and, I had the same issues.
It seems to me, the problem with infusing statistics or numbers in general is that, they are linear by nature while, systems thinking is mostly non-linear by nature.
Wallace.
 

Jen Kirley

Quality and Auditing Expert
Staff member
Admin
#15
WALLACE said:
How can the right balance be applied?
Is it possible to get to the point where, we have all the right numbers in place being viewed as a big picture?
I've been in many brainstorming sessions where my visual communications skills have been employed. I 've sat back and listened to all of the very skilled statisticians, I've taken notes and formed a big picture as a visual representation...Yeah, I'm the big picture member of the team, the dreamer. I remember going through a few Sick sigma courses some years ago and, I had the same issues.
It seems to me, the problem with infusing statistics or numbers in general is that, they are linear by nature while, systems thinking is mostly non-linear by nature.
Here, I think, is the meaning of being "green" and finding that out is surely difficult. For me, it's a life journey. You and I (and so many of our associates) share this abilty to see real-life, 3-dimensional manifestations and events based on mathematic projections, quality costs for example. I can imagine company costs as though they are the spinning number wheels of an old-fashioned pinball machine. They whirl around, dinging frantically... (oddly enough, I'm not good at math)

But truly, most people are not being trained to think this way. Even in business, where finance projections rely heavily on formulae and math-based decisions, managers are, I assert, not being taught to at once see the forest and the trees.

I was struck with a (page 52-53) passage from Peter Drucker (the famed business management guru) in his book "Managing in the Next Society": The problem with service-business accounting is simple. Whether it’s a department store or a university or a hospital, we know how much money comes in and how much money goes out. We even know where it goes. But we cannot relate expenditures to results. Nobody knows how.

What? Lots of us know how. But the fact that Peter Drucker says "nobody" knows how (to know if we have done the right thing) speaks volumes. It means to me there is still a gap between how we (in our field) think and how "the real world" thinks. This is the place where paths must somehow meet.

How and where they will meet is yet to be determined, and I expect this will be a zen-like question for each organization to answer. But answer it they must, for I observe the competitive friction is increasing, not decreasing. For businesses to compete with each other on costs (and inevitably product pricing), they must contend with forces that may be unequal; some will reduce operating costs through offshoring labor, while others will seek to reduce expensive errors and keep their more expensive American employees.

This is the part we can play, and I think it's becoming more of an advisory role. "This is what it would cost to do things this way, and that is the option you have." For corporate leaders to decide their paths among the industry siren songs of gimmicks and inadequately planned contracts with cheap offshore labor, such advice may be their last links to reality.

Their choice, of course, ends up being out of our control. Every horse can reserve the right to die of thirst.
 
#16
Jennifer Kirley said:
But truly, most people are not being trained to think this way. Even in business, where finance projections rely heavily on formulae and math-based decisions, managers are, I assert, not being taught to at once see the forest and the trees.

Peter Drucker (the famed business management guru) in his book "Managing in the Next Society": The problem with service-business accounting is simple. Whether it’s a department store or a university or a hospital, we know how much money comes in and how much money goes out. We even know where it goes. But we cannot relate expenditures to results. Nobody knows how.
some will reduce operating costs through offshoring labor, while others will seek to reduce expensive errors and keep their more expensive American employees.

This is the part we can play, and I think it's becoming more of an advisory role. "This is what it would cost to do things this way, and that is the option you have." For corporate leaders to decide their paths among the industry siren songs of gimmicks and inadequately planned contracts with cheap offshore labor, such advice may be their last links to reality.
Why do you suppose a modern USA business executive says to himself,
"My costs are too high. It must be my labor costs. I can lower my costs by finding someone who can do the same thing, only cheaper."

What is there about the "siren songs" which make them so much more attractive than
reduce expensive errors and keep their more expensive American employees.
I think it is basic greed - the same greed that
  • makes folks listen to and implement Ponzi schemes,
  • convinces folks to make money on the backs of unfortunates who lose their homes in foreclosure (I saw one in my mailbox today - "buy homes for 30% to 50% below market value BEFORE the foreclosure. We tell you how to identify the people in money trouble!")
  • deludes people into spending 10 or 20% of their pay on lottery tickets instead of a sound investment program
I think the saddest thing is that many business "leaders" and executives have the same mindset as addicts in that they need to face their own personal bottoms before they are ready to accept a change in their lives or their businesses. How many times have you heard salespeople (and the folks who "train" them) say,
"Sales is a numbers game; you have to call on 10% more customers to get 10% more sales."

Besides an obvious misunderstanding of statistics, these guys are guilty of failing to examine ALL the aspects of a sale
  • market demand
  • competition,
  • product/service quality
  • quality of the sales pitch,
  • clear identification of prospects,
  • etc.
They engage in mindless superstitions
  • 5 calls before 9:00 am
  • 10 calls after 5:00 pm
  • no lunch until I make a sale
  • never leave a prospect without a referral to another prospect
  • etc.
Are the salespeople any more foolish than the executive who consistently stretches his lunches to two hours (with or without a client in tow) and fires employees or docks their pay when they are ten minutes late?

Ineffective business leaders don't implement change before they lose the company or the job for the same reason many addicts don't kick their habits before they die or go to jail:
because they don't perceive they have a problem, let alone seek a solution.
 
D

David Hartman

#17
Wes Bucey said:
Ineffective business leaders don't implement change before they lose the company or the job for the same reason many addicts don't kick their habits before they die or go to jail:
because they don't perceive they have a problem, let alone seek a solution.
Perhaps this IS where SoPK comes into play:

  • 1. Knowledge of Variation, that is, a knowledge of common cause and special variation.
    2. Knowledge of Systems, that is, understanding that all the parts of a business are related in such a way that if you focus on optimizing one part, other parts may suffer.
    3. Knowledge of Psychology, that is, what motivates people.
    4. Theory of Knowledge, that is, how we learn things.

By understanding what it takes to motivate these managers "that don't get it" [Could it possibly be as simple as greed? I don't think so. I believe that there is more than a little pride involved as well.] Coupled with understanding what it takes for others to learn, having systems vision, and being able to separate common cause from special variation; shouldn't we have the tools for teaching and motivating people towards the proper goals?

I see the stumbling block that many systems-thinking visionary's face as being the same one that Mike S. was alluding to very early in the SoPK thread, that of understanding how to take SoPK and put it into "action" (i.e. How do I take this knowledge and transfer/relay it to others so that it may be of value to the company?). Maybe this is where some of the tools that Juran, Fiegenbaum, Crosby, et al come into play. The hard part is for us to learn how to make the transition from theory to implementation, instead of "blaming" the others for not "seeing the forest".

Perhaps there IS a bit of "I've seen the enemy, and they are us".
:(
 
#18
ddhartma said:
Perhaps this IS where SoPK comes into play:
  • The hard part is for us to learn how to make the transition from theory to implementation, instead of "blaming" the others for not "seeing the forest".
Perhaps there IS a bit of "I've seen the enemy, and they are us".
:(
Walt Kelly's alter ego, Pogo, had a lot of pithy comments. Many other commentators have had similar insights over the years. The reason they are so widely quoted is because they contain an essential kernel of truth that can be instantly recognized and applied to other situations.
One quote I recall
For ye have the poor always with you -Matthew 26:11
seems equally applicable to the named group as well as other groups such as criminals, incompetents, and just plain "clueless."

Dave is correct, our task is to do something to make a change for the better, not just bemoan the status quo.

Another pithy and true quote comes to mind:
"A journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step."
-Unknown
In the language of our 6S brethren, we're probably talking about small "kaizen events" rather than "Kaizen blitzes."

My suggestion is to behave like the boy when he failed to see the emperor's new clothes - speak out. Write those suggestion letters to clueless bosses. Write letters to the editor about political or social issues. Join activist groups. Read those proxy statements you get for stocks you hold - if you don't understand them, find someone to explain them to you. Then when you understand those proxy statements, make the informed decision about whether the executives have done a good enough job in the stewardship of your investment before giving them the keys to the treasury.

Even as venerable an institution as Ann Landers often said
"No one can take advantage of you without your permission."
Stand up and be counted!
 
G

Greg B

#20
Duran vs Deming

Personally , I think Duran would take him in the fifth ... :biglaugh:

Sorry, I had to...It was the first thought that came into my head...Don King promotes Duran vs Deming in the World Title

Greg B
 

Top Bottom