Theory of Constraints Handbook - James Cox Iii [491]
FIGURE 24-17 An example—the negative branch of the account manager with the trimmed negative outcome.
The customer may agree, disagree, or suggest ways to handle such situations. As this is discussed in advance, no harm is done and whatever is agreed with the customer becomes a part of the amended procedure.
In this section, we have seen that the NBR is another managerial tool that enhances the ability of the manager to deal with challenges—especially those that are perceived to be negative.
The issues that are raised while addressing a potential negative outcome as per Layer 4 may make the managers aware of risks that are unknown to them. On the other hand, through applying the process of dealing with NBRs, it may turn out the reservation is not substantiated and the person raising the concern may decide to drop the reservation.
The Intermediate Objective (lO) Map and Implementation Plans
Implementing an Injection—Dealing with an Ambitious Objective
The last tool of daily use of the TOC TP deals with the question of “How to cause the Change?” For daily problems that are solved by using the Cloud method, the solution is implemented mainly by communicating it to the relevant people. When dealing with fire-fighting problems, the implementation contains two stages: buy-in and the actual amendments to the procedures. When we deal with UDEs (single or multiple), the implementation also has two stages: buy-in and the change to the system or to the offering to the customers.
The implementation of an injection is an ambitious target. Therefore, we need a plan to guide us in the implementation.
There are two inputs to the planning process:
Necessary deliverables in the course of the injection implementation to make sure that the injection becomes the reality. These entities are usually obtained by you or other people stating that if you want this injection to work you must do . . . This is when experience or logic suggests clear steps for achieving such changes in reality.
Major obstacles are perceived “show stoppers” that might completely block the ability to implement the injection. This input comes from the “Yes, but . . .” statements that indicate why it is going to be difficult to implement the solution in the area that we discuss. These blockages are handled with the TP that is used for building the Prerequisite Tree (PRT), through determining the IOs that overcome the obstacle.
These inputs are used as the building blocks of the implementation plan.
The Difference between an Obstacle and a Negative Branch
Please note that there is a difference between an obstacle that blocks our way to implement an injection and an NBR that may appear as a side result of implementing the injection. Figure 24-18 illustrates the positioning of the obstacle and the NBR on the time axis of the implementation.
The Process of Addressing Obstacles
The process for addressing obstacles includes:
Step 1: Write the injection as a clear and concise statement.
Step 2: Record all perceived obstacles.
Step 3: Identify the “show stoppers.”
Step 4: Verbalize the deliverables for the obstacles that you know how to overcome.
Step 5: Develop IOs for overcoming “show stoppers.”
Step 6: Group lOs.
Step 7: Create the IO Map for implementation.
FIGURE 24-18 The relationships between NBRs and obstacles.
Step 1: Write the injection as a clear and concise statement.
Example:
An injection: A new Information System for Radiology is operational as a part of the new paperless hospital.
For Steps 2 to 5, we recommend working with a table (a Word document or an Excel file) with the following columns:
Obstacles
Show-stopper
Deliverable/IO Blocking Factor
Step 2: Record all perceived obstacles usually in the format of “we do not have” or “we do not know.”
Example:
Obstacle list (partial):
1. We do not have the scope of the implementation.
2. We do not know the acceptance criteria.
3. How