Conditions for survival in the manufacturing industry in VUCA era
Satoru Murakami
CEO Goal-System consultants Inc.,
Confront "complexity" So far, I have introduced TPS and TOC's approach to "complexity", "Toyota's why why 5 times" and "TOC thinking process". Both approaches deal with complexity by discovering and dealing with the root cause of the problem, but this time let's consider the difference and similarity between the two approaches.
Dr. Goldratt explains that the TOC thinking process and Toyota's why-why five times are basically the same. As mentioned above, TPS is a "kanban method" while reducing variability with a muddy odor improvement approach represented by "automation with Ninben" and "leveling" by making full use of why-why analysis based on the three realism principle, will reduce problems and reduce points to be managed.
On the other hand, TOC thinking process consists of two method systems: analysis using a tree that traces causal relationships to find the root cause of a problem, and expressing the root of the found problem as a conflict. By utilizing this system, it is possible to simultaneously recognize the causal relationship between elements and the "human beliefs" hidden behind the root cause, and centrally solve the problems of complicated systems involving humans.
Doing so, coupled with the DBR that divides the physical flow into a very small number of constraints (bottlenecks) and other non-constraints, allowed us to dramatically reduce the number of elements to manage. In the background that Dr. Goldratt explained why Toyota's thinking process is essentially the same as 5 times, complex things firmly identify the connection between elements, and the root curse.
I think that he took pride in taking over Mr. Ohno's essence of concentrating on the situation and evolving and developing it so that he could analyze not only the problems in the field but also the organizational climate and policy problems that exist behind it.
The root cause of all events is in the field, and with a thorough three realism principle, the Toyota method that goes through why and why, the TOC that smartly traces the causal relationship of events and finds the conflict hidden behind the root cause, these 2 Is there an essential difference between the two approaches? I feel like the difference between "thinking" and "feeling", if any.
Both Mr. Ohno and Dr. Goldratt have the same stance of thoroughly looking at the reality and exploring its essence, but Dr. Goldratt has a stance of thinking through it.
He states in his book "Choice": "The more you can think clearly, the deeper your emotions will be, and the deeper your emotions, the stronger your intuition. The stronger your intuition, the more likely you are to deploy your logic well, and the more likely it will lead to good results. "
On the other hand, Mr. Ohno is said to have been thoroughly particular about the site and taught the importance of "seeing the site until he understands it." "You can tell if the way you work is bad or if something is impossible by standing at the site for a day. So, if there seems to be a problem, keep watching until you are satisfied with the site for an hour or two. That's the basis of Mr. Ohno's teaching.
Another factor that makes the approach different is that Dr. Goldratt was a consultant who did not have a specific site, unlike Mr. Ohno, who was an officer of Toyota Motor Corporation. Due to the nature of the work of a consultant, the method of making improvements step by step over many years is not accepted by many clients.
In many cases, there is a need for a method that produces results as easily and quickly as possible. For this reason, it may have been necessary to use a systematic approach on the desk to some extent, rather than recognizing bottlenecks in the field. Of course, Dr. Goldratt also understands the idea of the actual thing in the field and teaches that when implementing the thinking process, the analysis is based on "complete facts".
