Harmony
I just read the book WA: Transformation Management by Harmony by Yuji Kishira. It’s about critical chain, but from a Japanese perspective. It has some pretty wacky stuff, but that’s ok: I found it very interesting and entertaining.
For me, the most important idea it contains is in the title: relating the concept of Wa (harmony) to implementations of critical chain (CC) and more broadly — and only by inference – to theory of constraints (TOC). If you think in terms of a vision and a message needed to promote (sell!) an implementation internally, it’s hard to find a simple concept that everyone can grab onto and say, “yes, that helps me, I want it.” An implementation of anything does best long-term if there is value created that everyone can relate to. A major effect of a properly done implementation is a reduction in conflicts and chaos: increased harmony. Therefore “harmony” can be such a value and can form a core part of a vision.
It seems to be effective in Japan. I’m here at the TOC International Certification Organization conference in Japan (I presented on the topic of making CC stick). I talked with Yuji and heard the Japanese Director-General of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport speak. The concept of Harmony is a big part of the culture here, and it’s the main emphasis when Japanese people talk about success stories.
Will it play in Peoria? Maybe, if we measure it and talk about it. It’s worth thinking about.
A second interesting point in the book is equating safety time with responsibility. For example: I feel responsible for finishing my task in the time I committed to, so I add safety time. Moving the safety time to the buffers spreads responsibility to the entire project team. You’re not alone, you don’t have to shoulder the on-time burden yourself, you have a team to help. Harmony again.
Want a flavor? Try this:
A Safety Bug Story Episode 1
Episode 2
Episode 3
Pssssht. Happy, happy ending.
December 12th, 2009 at 2:28 pm
This is an age-old human balancing act: I am an individual vs. I am part of a social group.
It is interesting to see in history both the positive and negative issues arise from maintaining individuality vs. accomplishing things as a group. The balance is necessary for all individuals, but every individual is different. Some tend towards greater individuality, some towards greater sacrifice and contribution to the group. And, perhaps because of Mendel’s Law, people with greater tendencies towards contributing to the group flock together, as do people with greater tendencies to maintain their individuality.
I think in the west, and especially in the US, the concept of the individual is stronger than the group. In the east, and especially Asian countries, individuality is more often sacrificed for the sake of the group. I’ve read about this, but have now experienced it first-hand having spent quite some time with my fiancee in Hong Kong! Buildings there have such names as “Serenity” and TV commercials emphasize the bringing together of the group through a product or service. Quite different than the old rugged individualistic “Marlboro” man commercials I grew up with!
It is a major challenge for companies to maintain the balance of allowing individuals to be themselves and do things “their own way” with “contributing to the group”.
CCPM can, as I know you, Rob, have experienced at ProChain in your implementations, do a great deal to create that “harmony” and resolve long-standing conflicts between functional organizations within the larger company. We have seen people resolve sometimes decade-old conflicts and begin working together in a far more productive way. But I can also remember in presentations working with groups to ensure some level of “individuality”.
The balanced must be maintained or else 1) the individual will not get their needs met and become unsatisfied and/or 2) the group will not make the needed progress for success.
I can very easily see the idea of harmony being a great selling/marketing point in Japan, as it would in other Asian countries.