Theory of Constraints Handbook - James Cox Iii [439]
Validation Using CLR TOC’s CLR provide guidelines for communicating any doubts or concerns about the validity of the entities and their connections within TP trees (see Dettmer, 1997). Balderstone (1999) suggested using the CLR for validating System Dynamics (SD) models, while Koljonen and Reid (1999) demonstrate use of SD models to validate TOC logic trees.
Full Thinking Processes Analysis (FTPA) While the TP logic tools or trees and the EC were developed as a suite, the review of the literature conducted by Kim et al. (2008) highlighted the frequent reported use of individual TP and the application of TP for a different purpose from that for which they had been originally designed. The latter uses, however, in no way deny the effectiveness of the TP tools as a suite that contributes to a Full Thinking Processes Analysis (FTPA). In a later section, we suggest why the FTPA may be regarded as a complete “package” or comprehensive methodology. As such, as designed, the FTPA would use all five original TP tools to examine a system in order to identify the core problem, develop solutions, and determine the implementation steps.
Nevertheless, the literature shows that the FTPA is often used and has value in seeking to overcome resistance to change by creating a logic path that can be followed by all stakeholders and participants. Houle and Burton-Houle (1998) lay out five layers of resistance, and correspondingly five phases of buy-in. Foster (2001) discussed nine layers of resistance to change and suggested that TP tools can be used to overcome each layer of resistance. Mabin et al. (2001) relate the layers of resistance to the sources of resistance identified in the change management literature and link the TP tools accordingly. Table 23-2 shows that only 13 papers in the published literature surveyed have contained complete descriptions of use of the FTPA—perhaps because the length of these analyses may prohibit the acceptance of such research in most journals. These papers detail how the FTPA can be applied to specific business situations (Klein and DeBruine, 1995; Boyd et al., 2001; Mabin et al., 2001; Reid et al., 2002; Gupta et al., 2004; Ritson and Waterfield, 2005; Reid and Shoemaker, 2006; Shoemaker and Reid, 2006), with other authors discussing the possibility of multi-methodology in detail (Thompson, 2003; Davies et al., 2005; Schragenheim and Passal, 2005). However, the reports of FTPA use demonstrate its versatility and applicability in relation to different functionality and settings, including establishing management policies, strategic planning, executing a bank merger, and in industry settings as different as the manufacturing industry, the motion picture industry, and the healthcare service sector.
The literature appears to support the views of TP developers, including Goldratt (1994), Scheinkopf (1999), and Dettmer (1997), that each TP tool in the TP set is a potentially valuable tool in its own right, without regard to its contribution in a suite or sequenced use of tools.
Summary of the Literature Review
The development of the TOC body of knowledge has been largely practice-led, manifested not only in the diverse nature of applications areas and in the diverse use of TOC tools, but also in the broader evolution of TOC methodology, methods, and tools. While the TOC TP had their origin and arose from concepts developed primarily in operations management, we note how their contribution to the development