What is the Main Purpose for Combining and Implementing the Theory of Constraints, Lean, and Six Sigma?

Back in May, Bob Sproull and Matt Hutcheson published a book entitled The New Beginning: A Business Novel on How to Successfully Implement the Combination of The Theory of Constraints, Lean, and Six Sigma to Drive Profit Margins. Essentially, this book teaches the reader how to successfully combine and implement the Theory of Constraints, Lean, and Six Sigma to produce results that many companies only dream of having. It covers a variety of different company types including manufacturing and healthcare.

When I spoke with Bob in July, I asked him: "What is the main purpose for combining and implementing the Theory of Constraints, Lean, and Six Sigma?" Here is his full answer:

The main purpose for combining and implementing the Theory of Constraints, Lean, and Six Sigma is quite simply to maximize a company’s profitability.  Each of the three individual components serves a completely different purpose, but it all starts with the Theory of Constraints. The Theory of Constraints provides the needed focus and leverage point, meaning that the primary reason many improvement initiatives fail to deliver hoped-for profit levels is that many times they are focused on the wrong area of the system. It matters not whether the system is a manufacturing or service system, because each type of system has a constraining factor that encumbers the output of the system.  While the Theory of Constraints locates the correct focal point for improvement, Lean works to reduce waste, while Six Sigma reduces and controls variation. Both waste and variation encumber systems and therefore reduce the system output, which translates into less than desired profitability. By combining the Theory of Constraints, Lean, and Six Sigma, maximum profitability will be achieved.

The Theory of Constraints offers so many different tools and techniques that are completely different from many continuous improvement professionals utilize.  In the book The New Beginning, I insert these tools as part of the business novel format.  One of the tools is a different form of accounting known as Throughput Accounting.  It’s not a replacement for traditional Cost Accounting, but it is used throughout The New Beginning, as a way to make better financial decisions.  When I learned this form of accounting, it changed my entire approach to maximizing profitability.  While traditional Cost Accounting emphasizes that the key to profitability is through how much money can be saved, Throughput Accounting teaches the reader that the real key to improving profits is through how much money can be made. The difference between saving money and making money is profoundly different. In The New Beginning, I use numerous examples of how to use Throughput Accounting to drive profit margins upward.

Another valuable addition that can be realized by using the Theory of Constraints is the method used to order parts and raw materials. While most companies use something referred to as the Min/Max System, the Theory of Constraints utilizes something referred to as the TOC Replenishment Method, and the results are dramatically different!  In The New Beginning, I go to great lengths to explain this methodology and the results are dramatically different when compared to the Min/Max System.  By using the TOC Replenishment Method, companies can reduce their inventory by about fifty percent while virtually eliminating stock-outs!  Imagine a company being able to reduce their on-hand inventory by fifty percent and not worrying about stock-outs of needed parts and/or raw materials. Think about what that would do to a company’s profitability!

Another Theory of Constraints tool brought forth in The New Beginning is a logic tool known as The Goal Tree.  The Goal Tree is an important tool that can be used to develop a company’s improvement plan. In The New Beginning, I have provided examples from two distinctly different companies.  One company is a manufacturing company while the other one is oriented in healthcare. That is a series of completely different hospital types. It matters not what type of company attempts to use The Goal Tree, because of the logical method it uses to construct it. The method developed in this book is first, the creation of The Goal Tree which has an overall Goal at the top, followed by critical success factors need to achieve the company’s goal, and finally necessary conditions needed to achieve each of the critical success factors. When the Goal Tree is completed, it can then be used to assess the status of each of the Goal Tree entities. When the assessment is complete, The Goal Tree is then used to develop an improvement plan. As is demonstrated in The New Beginning, The Goal Tree is an important tool used to develop a company’s improvement plan.

The New Beginning was written as a sequel to another business novel I wrote entitled The Secret to Maximizing Profitability and both have been well received by the readers. The good news is, both books are centered on completely different company types, but in both books, I go into great detail on how to combine the three initiatives, namely Theory of Constraint, Lean, and Six Sigma.  It is my hope that both books will be enjoyed by all readers, but not only enjoyed, but also used to maximize your company’s profitability. I co-authored this book with Matt Hutcheson who is such a valuable contributor to the book’s success!

What do you think of Bob's perspective? Have you tried to combine Theory of Constraints, Lean, and Six Sigma in your organization? If so, what results did you expect and what did you receive? 

What Makes a Systemic Approach to Management More Effective and Appropriate for Current Organizations?

“But can you see the big picture?” That might be the most important question currently asked of leaders within organizations. 

An engaging new book that just hit the market, Quality, Involvement, Flow: The Systemic Organization maintains that many organizations are still very much trapped in an outdated paradigm of silos, fragmentation, conflicts, and a zero-sum game, and their leaders end up creating unhealthy corporate cultures through outdated thinking. 

I recently spoke with Domenico Lepore, Angela Montgomery, and Giovanni Siepe -- the authors of this book -- and asked them: What makes a systemic approach to management more effective and appropriate for current organizations? Here is their complete answer: 

When we begin to see that the everyday tasks of business are all connected at a deeper level, then we begin to see the power that those actions can have for a much bigger picture. And for that we need a “Theory of Everything for Management.” 

For decades now, people have been hearing about ideas such as the “butterfly effect” where the notion is that small causes can lead to big effects. This is just one evocative example of what we may call non-linear reality. In other words, we have come to understand the world in a radically different way to how we understood it one hundred years ago. Back then, the kind of mechanistic models that came from Newtonian thinking were applied directly to labor and production. Everything could be safely divided up into separate boxes and commanded from on high through a vertical hierarchy. That is why organizations were created with levels of command and separate departments. They even had to adapt accounting methods to report on this box-like “reality”. 

Today, instead, science has been telling us for some time that reality is non-linear and that we must understand new models based on complexity and that means understanding interdependencies and networks. So what does that mean for business? We need only look at the global crises we have been living through to see that a huge shift is happening and that many failures are due to a lack of understanding of how reality actually works today. It is no longer adequate or appropriate to divide organizations up into functions/silos that have difficulty talking to each other and that squabble over budgets. Not only do we need to see organizations as whole systems, we must work with whole supply chains, and beyond that, to how organizations impact all their stakeholders and their environments. 

 In Quality, Involvement, Flow: The Systemic Organization, we describe a “Theory of Everything for Management” based on the work of W. Edwards Deming and the Theory of Constraints. These combined bodies of knowledge provide all the philosophy, method and tools for managing in our age of complexity. We explain organizations at their most fundamental level, how to see them as systems and how to organize work as a flow through a pattern of all designed interdependencies to satisfy a common goal. When we talk about work in any organization, essentially we are talking about processes and projects. We describe an effective way to design those processes and manage projects successfully in a systemic way with Critical Chain Project Management. 

Change is a challenging process and we dedicate an entire chapter to it. We need to understand the human needs and the cognitive leap it takes to work in an organization fit for the 21st century, with no artificial barriers and that engenders the desire to continuously improve and innovate. Working in a systemic organization means constantly working on the cognitive challenges, overcoming conflicts as they arise and strengthening the emotional intelligence required to live with uncertainty. We provide details on the Thinking Process Tools from the Theory of Constraints that provide the support for the new skills – cognitive, creative, emotional and logical – needed to keep pace with rapidly evolving markets. 

We show how change can be also highly positive for those who work systemically, eradicating unnecessary barriers and tasks, creating opportunities for real empowerment and self-development, and finding more unity between who we are as people and what we do on a day to day basis. Thinking and acting systemically means having a practical way to overcome the zero-sum game that keeps business stuck in the win-lose mindset that has caused so much havoc in the markets and can only lead to more polarization. Working systemically is all about finding win-win solutions upon which we can build sustainable prosperity, for ourselves, our customers, our suppliers and all the stakeholders. 

Everything moves so fast now. Executive heads are rolling for not knowing how to cope in our new digital era. In spite of all the shifts happening, including the digital challenge in particular, most business schools continue to teach pretty much the same things as 50 years ago with a few new programs added on. We dedicate a whole section of the book to outline a program for business schools that is up to date for our era of complexity, from strategy to accounting.

The New Human Resources Model

Last week, I spent some time on the phone with Daniel Bloom discussing his latest book titled Achieving HR Excellence through Six Sigma,and I asked him this question: "In the book Achieving HR Excellence through Six Sigma, you talk about the need to create a new model for the HR function based on a proven business problem solving process. Why is the new model needed at this time?" Here is Daniel’s complete response: 

The Human Resource (HR) function of the 21st century is faced with a real dilemma. In most organizations, they function as the organizational firefighters. They constantly present the message that "here is what we do for the organization." The problem is that this approach does not support the HR function being part of the organizational decision process. They must learn the language of business. 

It is our message that this language of business is the TLS Continuum, which encompasses the principles behind Theory of Constraints (TOC), Lean, and Six Sigma. It is through the Continuum that HR can to migrate to a message of "here is what we deliver to the organization." They are more than just firefighters -- they are the key to strategic initiatives being created that propel the organization forward to a new level of overall alignment. We do this through a focus on the customer, the alignment of the total organization, and the enterprise embedded cultural change to one of constant quality improvement. 

To reach the point of HR excellence, it is critical that the organization implement the power of the problem-solving method by identifying the bottleneck that is slowing down the organization by utilizing TOC and then using the Lean toolbox to remove that single obstacle, which moves the organization along. The Six Sigma toolbox is used to establish the standard of work that dictates what steps are needed going forward to complete the process and create safeguards to ensure that the process we have created is creditable, verifiable, and repeatable. 

In one example from our two-day seminar, one group discovered that in the course of hiring a new person for their team, the job description and requisition are reviewed and approved three times by the same person. While this process had existed for many years, no one recognized that this process obstacle was hindering the talent-management function. While it is important to get the document approved, it is also important that the process runs efficiently. The duplication of process steps is not a sign of efficiency. 

What do you think of Dan's statements? Do any readers strive to achieve HR excellence by risking more than others think safe to change the corporate culture?

Lean and Theory of Constraints

The article titled Lean: One Size Does Not Fit All, authored by Tim Sramcik and recently published on the SearchAutoParts.com site, raises many important points. Sramcik believes there are five crucial myths that often derail leaders at the outset of a Lean implementation in an auto repair shop:

1. There's a single lean model shops can adopt.
2. Lean, by itself, can supply you with answers.
3. The lean journey is predictable and affordable.
4. You can count on your staff to buy in.
5. Lean is the only way.

I was particularly intrigued by his discussion of myth #5 in which he describes some shops using other methodologies such as Theory of Constraints (TOC) to remove bottlenecks and increase productivity. He states that "TOC stands in contrast to Lean because its intent is using existing resources to spur substantial growth. Instead of doing more with less, shops maintain reserve sources... to handle spikes in work, thereby expanding the customer base."

Sramcik goes on to quote John Fagan -- the manager of Smail Collision Centers in Greensberg, Pennsylvania -- "With lean, your capacity is limited. You can only do so many jobs a day, and the only way to grow is to open a new location." Do you agree with this statement? Is Lean really relegated to increasing flow and reducing waste but not for spurring growth and increasing market share? Please post your thoughts.