New Buzz word: Rightsourcing... Runaway outsourcing hype

[Claes Gefvenberg]

Not in- or outsourcing, but rightsourcing... (Haven't heard that one before)

I don't know about you lot, but around here we've had a runaway outsorcing hype, resulting in numerous more or less anorectic organisations.

Now all of a sudden I get an invitation to a seminar about rightsourcing in my mail. It would seem that someone has decided that outsorcing has gone to far and aim to teach us how to achieve a balance between in- and outsorcing... (Groan).

Naturally, I'll treat this invitation in the same manner as I previously treated invitations to seminars concerning outsorcing in: Like a dead racoon... It goes straight to the bumf basket. Recycled, it may even gain some value.

Rightsourcing my :ca: ... Has anyone seen an invitation to Common Sense Management yet? No..? I thought not...

/Claes

 

[Bill Ryan - 2007]

I don't see any open squares on my Bu11sh1t Bingo card for that entry. Could we make it a "wild card"?


Bill

 

[Claes Gefvenberg]

Absolutley Bill,

Any other new buzz words around?

/Claes

 

[M Greenaway]

Try leftsourcing also, particularly useful in the glove or shoe manufacturing industries !

 

[Craig H.]

Claes:

A "rightsourcing" seminar? Hmmm, think it might be yet another wannabe "guru" trying to sucker in some management types with a few bucks left in the budget?

Maybe I'll start one myself.

Wrongsourcing - ferreting out the weasels, or how to avoid paying for something with a fancy name that you have already learned in business.

Oops, I forgot, that's not a ferret or weasel, but a dead racoon.

Craig

 

[M Greenaway]

Try bullsh!tconsultancysourcing.

An excellent way for lazy fat managers and directors to go on a jolly and get some feeling that there is some science and meaning behind their miserable existance.

 

[Randy Stewart]

Nothing New

I can't believe that this stuff is unique to only the company I work for. It seems that time and time again we'll identify a shortcoming in our system only to find that a process is in place but not followed! We end up developing a "new improved" process, with more restrictions, more paperwork, more requirements, more reports, more checks and balances and more oportunities to fail.
IMO it is due to a substandard (or lack of) problem solving effort. Outsourcing is no different. It has been my experience that as a company grows, it holds the ties to the smaller shops that once supported it. In itself this is not a bad thing. However, when they drop the ball (due to capacity, equipment, etc.) we look the other way and don't report it. Fits into the "old boy" network of thinking. Then a manager is reporting on missed shipments and the root cause is supplier performance and the stuff hits the rotating blades!!! The other cause we've found is that price drives the work placement. It doesn't matter that they're consistently a few days late or we have to do some "touch up" it was cheep. The lost time or rework is loosely tracked for the "scratch my back & I'll scratch yours" payback system. Nobody is keeping a record of how much is owed and the vendor gets their money.
What we have successfully done is lower our incoming quality standards. Instead of raising the bar, as our customer have done, we lower it for our suppliers resulting in more work in-house, compressed timing in-house, etc. We have really just lowered our profit margin.
Isn't that sound business thinking!

 

[Claes Gefvenberg]

Good Grief, Randy...

You know, that really doesn't sound all that great. I have to ask: Is it as bad as it sounds, or did you just need to vent some steam?

/Claes

 

[David Mullins]

Re: Nothing New

Randy Stewart said:

I can't believe that this stuff is unique to only the company I work for. It seems that time and time again we'll identify a shortcoming in our system only to find that a process is in place but not followed! We end up developing a "new improved" process, with more restrictions, more paperwork, more requirements, more reports, more checks and balances and more oportunities to fail.

Randy,

This is known as unlearning quality, and is practiced quite broadly. Usually perpertrated by overbearing bosses who don't give a hoot about anything else (e.g. competing priorities) they just want 'IT' yesterday. Unfortunately these people are then amazed when, 4 weeks later, the 'IT' has not occurred again.

This is prioritisation by noise volume not system.

Commonly used, and always guaranteed to produce temporary results.

 

[Randy Stewart]

It really is

Is it as bad as it sounds, or did you just need to vent some steam?

It really is that bad Claes. Last month I had to investigate a missed shipment and found the cause to be subpar workmanship from the supplier. What wasn't reported by the department NC report was that it cost us more to repair the dies than the amount we contracted with the outsource supplier. The reason for not reporting? "They'll make it up to us in the next job."

I have a meeting today with a group or our suppliers to go over expectation and work agreements. It should be interesting, I know a couple that are upset because we are holding PO's from them. They did work without a PO which they have been told not to do, others have done work without contract amendments and are not being paid. It should be a very interesting meeting to say the least. But something has to be done.

Who knows, after this meeting and my meeting with the company pres, I may be consulting full time!!!!