Theory of Constraints Handbook - James Cox Iii [433]
Outline of the Chapter
In this chapter, we first provide a brief description of the nature, development, and use of the TP before examining how they relate to one another and to other typical approaches to problem structuring and problem solving. In order to make this comparison, we use extant conceptual taxonomies, not only to examine how the TP contribute to different phases of problem-solving activity, but also to examine the implicit assumptions and underlying philosophical frameworks that characterize TOC and other approaches. This allows us to better understand TOC as a methodological set, its strengths, and its potential for development, using TOC TP tools and methods on their own, in concert with one another, or with other decision-making methods. In doing so, we provide an alternative route or means by which to validate and enhance the TP.
The investigation and identification of TOC as a methodology or meta-methodology also allows us to see TOC as more than just a set of problem-solving logic tools: TOC fits well with a philosophy of continuous improvement, as well as prompting dramatic change; it fits with other systems mapping methods and problem-solving approaches such as Operations Research/Management Science (OR/MS—both hard and soft OR). The examination of TOC’s philosophical underpinnings and the comparison with other methodologies provides a basis for TOC to be viewed as a legitimate field for academic enquiry, not just as a problem-solving methodology. When used as problem-solving methods and tools, the TP allow managers to draw on the relationships between causes and effects, between end goals and their necessary conditions, to build pictures of their realities, capturing complexity, viewing conflicts, yet still being able to discern a way forward. The tools handle complexity and systemic interactions without losing sight of the key factors: the core problems and thorny dilemmas that need resolving to make true progress.
The Nature, Development, and Use of the TOC TP
In this section, we provide a brief overview of the TP, and of their historical development from their early published forms to the current day. We comment on their underpinning logics, and describe the TP in order to discuss the categorization of the TP literature that highlight the use of the TP, and then in the following section, to explore the philosophical and methodological characteristics of the TP. Such categorization then facilitates a deeper understanding of why the TP are considered to be systemic in nature, and why the TP have been termed a “complete package” by Dettmer (Chapter 19, this volume) or a comprehensive methodology or meta-methodology by Davies et al., (2005).
Overview of TP and Their History and Development
Watson et al. (2007) provided a “Silver Anniversary” review of the evolution of TOC concepts and practices, reviewing TOC’s accomplishments and deficiencies. The development of the TOC approach began with a manufacturing scheduling algorithm in 1979, which tripled plant output in a short time, and was reported at a 1980 APICS conference. Its development continued as an effective methodology for production applications (Cox and Spencer, 1998), and by the mid-1990s, the approach was in worldwide use by companies of all sizes (Hrisak, 1995). Goldratt (1994) then developed a suite of logic tools to help managers address business problems in general. These have become known collectively as the TOC Thinking Processes,