Questions at a High School about Systems Thinking
- October 19th, 2010
- Posted in Systems Thinking and Education . Systems Thinking and Management . Systems Thinking and Measures
- Write comment
I was asked to speak at a high school today and presented a historical
timeline of management thinking. The teacher wanted to be sure that I put something in about the future in jobs, which I did. The picture I painted was probably more optimistic than I actually feel as jobs are outsourced or shipped over seas.
I gave them the usual timeline of Frederick Taylor and scientific management theory that led to the functional separation of work with incentives. I added in the bit about Schmidt, Taylor’s worker that could increase his wage from $1.15 perday to $1.85 per day by increasing productivity. This is the model American management still runs at great peril.
I told them about A.P. Sloan ad “management by the numbers” and the use of targets. Sloan separated management and worker and lived by manager’s manage and worker’s work. Management caught in the work or not making their numbers were frowned upon or fired. Hasn’t changed much here in the US, other than now you can get fired for making your financial targets because someone up the ladder didn’t make theirs.
I told them about Shewhart, Deming and the Japanese Industrial Miracle. How we didn’t pay attention to what Deming taught us and we continue our decline that started in 1968.
We talked about bad service that we get in companies like Sprint, AT&T, Verizon and McDonalds ( hard to get no onions . . . this is important to a high school senior). This led to a discussion on why companies give bad service, when it osts them more money and loses them customers. I explained this is what happens when you manage by the financial cost, costs increase . . . always.
The hope is that these Seniors will be smarter than our generation and that fads like Lean and Six Sigma will die away in favor of better thinking. There is great opportunity to change management thinking and redesign the work to serve customers. The work is more interesting and the culture improves.
One student asked about an “aggressive customer” that might take advantage of the company if you do what the customer says. Those people exist, but they are the exception. The problem is that we design our systems as if they are the norm (common causes of variation), when they are not. Rules, procedures and inspection follow at great cost.
The teacher asked what is the one thing that a student should know. I replied Statistical Process Control (SPC) should be required study for any student in high school. Just the basics would be a huge differentiator.
I can only hope that an education system wraught with command and control thinking can see the way to better thinking . . . we can only hope.
Leave me a comment. . . share your opinion! Click on comments below.
Make the new decade a profitable and rewarding one, start a new path here. Download free from www.newsystemsthinking.com “Understanding Your Organization as a System” and gain knowledge of systems thinking or contact us about how to get started at [email protected]. Reach him on Twitter at www.twitter.com/TriBabbittor LinkedIn at www.linkedin.com/in/trippbabbitt.
Tripp Babbitt is a columnist (Quality Digest and IQPC), speaker, and consultant to private and public service industry.
“The problem is that we design our systems as if they [aggressive customers?] are the norm (common causes of variation), when they are not. Rules, procedures and inspection follow at great cost.”
Are you saying the systems are loaded with safeguards against troublesome customers, making the response much greater than the risk? How about an example?
I agree that Lean and Six Sigma can be replaced with better thinking – but hey, whatever works. I wouldn’t try to teach calculus to a 6 year old.
Hi Ralph-
The student was speaking hypothetically. I didn’t attempt to explain the differences between common and special causes of variation. I do believe high school students should leave understanding these basics, it is not calculus to understand the fundamentals and most software packages do the work for you now.
The aggressive customer scenario is a “what if” where there is rarely little evidence to support it. Management often points to procedures and rules in place because “one time about ten years ago” something like this happened never happened since and they use this as evidence to keep costly procedures. If lives are at stake, OK . . . go ahead and put in all the rules, but the bureaucracy associated with most “what ifs” is costly.
A couple of examples I have seen:
A bank didn’t allow a contact center rep to give money back to a customer and there are several escalations involved. I asked the bank if any are denied and the answer was they had never seen one denied. The customer waits and the hierarchy takes precedent over the work and worker.
Medicaid in Indiana spends over $10 million dollars annually to prevent fraud in eligibility. The have a $2 million stolen in the last decade.