One
of the Theory of Constraints' peculiarities appealing to me is its systemic and clear character - in the sense that it
is not a collection of miscellaneous techniques and methodologies, but a holistic
well-structured system with rationality and aesthetics that perfectly demonstrate its
inherent simplicity and harmony as the fundamental principles of the existing
reality.
It inspired me to try to summarize the main principles and ideas of TOC in a
single table demonstrating not only the provisions of the theory but also how they relate to each other.
The
result of the attempt to systematize key positions of TOC is given in the
table below.
Summary Table of the Key
Positions of the TOC
(click
on the Table to enlarge it)
What
is the use of this table? In my opinion, this systematization can help to
understand and comprehend more clearly the paradigm of TOC as an integrated
system, the elements of which are closely interwoven with each other and form a single body together, and thus to penetrate more deeply into its philosophy and principles.
I'd
like to emphasize that the above given table is in any case not meant to be considered
as the ultimate truth. Moreover, the interrelation between some of its elements
is very relative. The presence
of different variations of some positions of the theory in various sources also
causes some confusion. In fact, there is nothing to worry about. Quite
the contrary - it is indirect evidence that the theory does not stand still but
is actively developing, like a living organism.
The
table contains three basic assumptions of TOC and four obstacles to clear
thinking. When correlating assumptions and obstacles the third basic assumption is
set in correspondence with the third and fourth obstacles, although we must
admit that, frankly speaking, the fourth obstacle here does not completely fit.
In
my opinion, a direct consequence of the fourth obstacle to clear thinking
("Any situation can be substantially improved") could be considered as
the fourth basic assumption of TOC. By that we would recognize that TOC is based not
on three but on four basic assumptions.
There
is certain logic in that: first Goldratt takes Newton’s statement "Nature
is simple and harmonious with itself" and substituting the word
"nature" with "reality" derives his postulate "Reality
is simple and harmonious with itself". This sentence already contains the
idea of the first two basic assumptions ("Convergence" and
"Conflict resolution: contradictions do not exist") and the first two
barriers to clear thinking ("Every situation is simple" and "Any
conflict can be removed"). Further, reinforcing going beyond physics and
recognizing the importance of human psychology and relationships as essential
attributes of reality which should be taken into account, Goldratt introduces
humanitarian component and complements mentioned "physical"
postulates with, let’s say, socio-psychological, concerned with communications
and people’s attitude to changes. It involves the basic assumption about
resistance to change, as well as the third and fourth obstacles to clear
thinking: "There is always a win-win solution; people are good" and
"Any situation can be substantially improved".
Nevertheless
the summary table contains three basic assumptions of TOC because this number
of assumptions is mentioned in the most cited sources.
The
position of Thinking Processes' tools also can entail some reflections and
discussions. Of course, the Strategy and Tactics Tree can hardly help in
overcoming the unverbalized fear of changes - although a clear understanding
and vision of the current situation and prospects of development is quite
capable to reduce this fear, because usually the main source of fear is
uncertainty. Yet the Strategy and Tactics Tree is a good and effective tool for
understanding of how to create and sustain a system focused on the Process of Ongoing
Improvement.
The correspondence between the other elements of the table is also quite nominal and reflects rather the most notable interrelation than strict and fully comprehensive compliance. However, for me personally, even the current edition of the table turned quite demonstrative and useful: it has helped and still helps to see and understand the paradigm of TOC and its components as a single integrated system and to find oneself deeper imbued with its philosophy, as well as to understand better and feel the nature and content of its particular elements and apply its tools more consciously.
The correspondence between the other elements of the table is also quite nominal and reflects rather the most notable interrelation than strict and fully comprehensive compliance. However, for me personally, even the current edition of the table turned quite demonstrative and useful: it has helped and still helps to see and understand the paradigm of TOC and its components as a single integrated system and to find oneself deeper imbued with its philosophy, as well as to understand better and feel the nature and content of its particular elements and apply its tools more consciously.
I would also like to emphasize once again that the table is not finished and has not
been perfected – so constructive criticism and any remarks, comments and
suggestions are accepted and even encouraged. I will not resist attempts to
improve the proposed table, rather the opposite - I aspire to it. Moreover, I
am eager to cooperate and open to communication and interaction. I admit the
obvious fact that I don’t know everything.
At the same time, deep inside I firmly believe - or at least strongly cultivate
the belief - that people are good
and any situation can be substantially
improved. And the sky is not a limit!
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий