Theory of Constraints Handbook - James Cox Iii [506]
3. How to Cause the Change? By answering the first question, we have defined the critical few variables in the system that we intend to change in order to improve the situation. We have then designed the future improved scenario, highlighting the changes to make which will create the new reality. Now we need to draw the map and detail the action plan that, when followed, should bring us from the present to the improved future. The three questions of change are pictured in Fig. 25-16.
The TOC TP are the tools used to answer the three questions of change. The Current Reality Tree (CRT) uses cause-and-effect logic to create a map of the existing situation and pinpoint a core problem—the common cause for many undesirable effects—and the answer to the question, “what to change.” With the EC, the problem is verbalized as a conflict, and a direction for a win-win solution is established by uncovering and replacing at least one erroneous assumption of the conflict. The Future Reality Tree (FRT) and NBR provide the process to create the logical model of the future system. They are used to answer the question, “to what to change,” highlighting the cause-and-effect relationships between the changes that will be made and the desired future state that those changes are intended to create. The PRT and Transition Tree (TRT) are the tools that TOC provides in order to logically derive and map what we need to do to close the gap between the current state and the desired future. With these tools, we clarify the obstacles that stand in our way, and what needs to happen in order to overcome them. The newest addition to the TOC TP—the Strategy and Tactic Tree (S&T)—provides for the full synchronization and communication of the implementation of a change. In Table 25-3, we see the purposes and relationships of the TP tools.
FIGURE 25-16 The three questions of change.
I am sure we are all guilty of having what we think is a great idea, and then falling in love with that idea to the extent that we spend our energy justifying, rather than validating, the value of the idea. A great way to not improve a situation is to fool yourself about what the situation really is and implement a solution for a non-problem. There is a term for this in TOC—choopchick. A Yiddish slang word originating in Serbia, a choopchick is generally translated as a triviality. In TOC, it is a dangerous form of triviality—it is a triviality that is believed to be important, and thus a distraction from what the focus of attention should be. By making the decision to take an internally honest, scientific, logical approach to answering the three questions of change, we can help avoid implementing non-solutions and chasing choopchicks.
TABLE 25-3 The Purposes and Relationships of the TP Tools
The effect of choopchiks within the management process can be devastating. Attracting attention to relatively unimportant issues diverts efforts from genuinely significant concerns.
—John Caspari, Handbook of Management Accounting
Reinforcing the Mentality of a Scientist—Jonah’s Approach
It is one thing to get on my soapbox and ask you to be internally honest, scientific, and logical. However, this chapter is about providing you with a practical means to actually do so. Here are four simple steps that can guide you to a good understanding of the present situation, the future you want to create, and the decisions and actions you would need to take to turn the future you want into reality.12
1. Entity Existence. Verify that each entity really does exist in the environment that is being analyzed. If an entity is something that cannot be directly confirmed, physically observed, or numerically verified—use the scientific method. For instance, a person smiling is something that is physically observed. What a person is thinking, or what we assume is a person’s attitude, is not physically observed and can only be directly confirmed by the person. Predict another effect that must exist as a result, and check for it.