Theory of Constraints Handbook - James Cox Iii [517]
Notice that your thinking is taking you to increasingly granular levels of detail. Each level of the S&T provides more detail to the level above it. Figure 25-35 illustrates this, and provides the themes of some of the steps that you would find on a typical S&T associated with a Viable Vision implementation.
FIGURE 25-35 The S&T cascading levels of detail.
How do we know when a layer should be added? Albert Einstein defined insanity as “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” Given that what we do is the result of what we think, we can also define insanity as, “thinking the same way over and over again and expecting different results.” The purpose of the initiative is to elevate the organization’s performance. We have already established that this involves making changes not only to the tasks that people perform, but to the way people think about their tasks and the relationship between what they do and the purpose of the initiative. Therefore, we must consider the potential for inertia—the tendency to think the way we’ve always thought when determining or communicating the changes that must be made to achieve and sustain the intended results of the initiative.
A layer is added only when there is a good chance that inertia will prevent the right actions from being taken. Another way to say this is that if we don’t pay attention to the sufficiency assumption, then the chances of implementing the tactic correctly or achieving the strategy are dramatically reduced. The Sufficiency Assumption is the verbalization of the specific reason for concern. In Table 25-7, you see that the Sufficiency Assumption that guides the next level of the S&T is, “The constraint is management attention. The company must operate based on robust procedures, otherwise the constraint is wasted.”
S&T Elements
Once we have defined of the goal of the initiative as the first S&T step, we have established the single reason for anybody to be asked to make a change to the way they work or think: If they don’t make the change, the organization would be blocked from achieving the goal of the initiative.
As you see in Fig. 25-38, each entity in an S&T is referred to as a Step. From Level 2 downwards, each Step contains several elements:
The Necessary Assumption—The “Why” of the Step
The reason that the higher-level S&T step cannot be implemented unless a change is made.
In other words, it describes the necessity for an action to be taken.
The Strategy—The “What” of the Step
The objective—the intended outcome—of the S&T step.
When the strategy is achieved, the need described by the necessary assumption is met.
The Parallel Assumptions—The “Why” of the Tactic
The conditions which exist in reality leading us to a specific course of action that would achieve the strategy; they form the logical connection between the tactic and the strategy, explaining why the tactic is the course of action that leads to attainment of the strategy.
The Tactic—The “How” of the Step
What needs to be done in order to achieve the strategy. In a well-written S&T step, the tactic is obvious once the parallel assumptions are read.
The Sufficiency Assumption23—The “Why” of the Next Level
Explains the need to provide another level of detail to the step; if we don’t pay attention to it, the likelihood of taking the right actions is significantly diminished.
Figure 25-36 illustrates the necessary and sufficient logical relationships between the various steps in an S&T and their higher and lower levels. In the illustration, both