posted 06 March 2001 01:26 PM               

1 - First, what is important to you (the warehouse manager)? Have he/she make a list. What is it they are ãin businessä to do? List the primary responsibilities and processes.
2 - Are any of the things important to a Customer, Internal and External (there are likely to be more than one customer in the chain). This should make the list shorter.
3 - Are the items listed, cyclical where measurement is practical? Use statistical methods to determine if the process is in statistical control. The process of using statistics should help to develop better understanding of the process. Other diagnostic methods should be used in conjunction.

Personally, I would narrow it down to a single important measure. The measure should be an indicator of the Relationship and tie to the focus of the organization.

I hope this helps.

Regards,

Kevin

posted 06 March 2001 07:43 PM               

Depending on the scope of responsibility for the warehouse department, which might or might not include inventory, fifo, delivery etc...

Is a measurement needed (internal concerns)or required (customer)?

Can the value added aspect of the measurement be quantified?

posted 07 March 2001 07:57 AM               

"Is a measurement needed (internal concerns)or required (customer)?"

I would say yes. But I sense that Al might be driving towards an important issue that someone in my organization likes to term "immence overkill". Too often, we begin to measure everything because we don't know what to measure. Measuring for the sake of measuring is just added waste. Be selective. Another fine point mentioned is whether this is an internally or customer driven need. Both types of measures are important. Someone here at the cove some time back mentioned finding measures as close to the customer as possible. I think that this is good advice. Where possible, a measure that serves both areas is an ideal choice.

"Can the value added aspect of the measurement be quantified?"

More of the measuring for the sake of measuring I mentioned above. Your measures must serve the purpose. Measures are the feedback of how well you are doing (as a system, process, method for example). But measuring takes time. Time costs money. We should challenge ourselves to find ways to create process controls whereever possible. Here, the measure might be classified as either value added or nonvalue added BUT necessary. Nonvalue added measure is pure waste. We have enough waste in a system that we should add additional waste.

This thread sure has my attention. It is funny how a seemingly simple question can generate expanded thought (at least for me). I am interested in what the group thinks about Measures for Continuous Improvement.

Regards,

Kevin

posted 07 March 2001 03:21 PM               

You interpreted me correctly, I like to make sure that a measurement is going to produce positive results for the company and not just be window dressing.

You wrote:

"Someone here at the cove some time back mentioned finding measures as close to the customer as possible."

I'm guilty and I'm sure many other cove members have the same thought process.

When defining measures close to those used by the customer, my mind set was to use those (ie GM Quad Report) as part of our key measureables reported during management review. They would be drivers for continuous improvement efforts and also cover customer satisfaction requirements. Why re-invent the wheel?

ASD...

[This message has been edited by Al Dyer (edited 07 March 2001).]

posted 07 March 2001 10:03 PM               

Your Quote:

"This thread sure has my attention. It is funny how a seemingly simple question can generate expanded thought (at least for me)."

I can't agree more, in 18+ years I don't know how many times I have been "blindsided" by questions that should have a simple answer, but don't.

I had a mentor that once told me not to give my opinion on specific questions until I reviewed the standards in question. From then on I now ask people to tell me how they propose to do it, and give my opinion as to whether it meets the standard/element in question.

In my own paranoid way, I don't ask a question before I know the expected answer.

posted 08 March 2001 09:35 AM               

Standards create filters. They define the rules and boundaries. This is precisely a Paradigm. They are meant to assist us, but sometimes they do the opposite. This is why we need to be aware that Standards must change, but with careful deliberation.

My paradigm may be different from yours, and probably is. It is easy to respond to a problem or question with our own paradigms, but if it is different from someone elses, the answer might not make any sense. If we think about it, paradigms control our lives.

Life long standards are created by us, none of them exactly alike. We hear about the "busy noise" which clouds communication. Sometimes it is physical, a loud radio. Other times, it is our own set of filters, our perceptions, values and beliefs. They can get in the way and be as effective as a loud jack-hammer.

To be objective, we must understand the influences of paradigms. We must also make an attempt to understand the paradigms that influence others. We need to be aware of the differences so that we treat each other with respect and allow for opportunities for growth. I am constantly influenced by the shared paradigms of the many contributors here at the Cove and elsewhere.

Keep practicing whay you have learned from your mentor. I believe you both are right!

Regards,