Tossing Names

I was in a process management class all week with the representatives from HR, IT, Research, Customer Support and “Eeyore.”  It was as fun as it sounds, by which I mean “not.” Part of this was because the instructor was such a tool. When he wasn’t name-dropping, he waxed on and on and on and on and on with anecdotes about how he ultimately was right:

“At the People In Multiple Processes Soiree in Gotham City [some time period], [Luminary 1] was arguing with [Luminary 2] about [whatever we were just discussing in class]. After I finished the aperitif, I demonstrated my sheer munificence and intervened, convincing them both I was correct. [Luminary 2] was so impressed with [my awesomeness], [he/she/it] offered to pick up the check… until [Lumimary 1] challenged [him/her/it] to battle for the same honor.”

Or, when I started zoning out because I was bored, tired, or thinking about all the things I need to do at the office (which I did after class, leaving me very, very tired):

“When I was having lunch with Cliff last week …”

Or, he was plugging books and additional conslutting services offered by his firm:

“We have a special offering that I think you all need to attend. Since you’re valued customers [and a captive audience for this sales pitch], we will do something we have never done in the history [of the last five minutes] and [extend a 20% discount] if you [commit to signing up for a course a month with our surprisingly restrictive revolving credit terms].”

For me, the tone of the class was set on the morning of the first day when we did a waste visualization exercise. I was feeling pretty good about the direction we’re heading, especially relative to where we were when El Jefe was at the helm. The instructor was nagging us about stuff that currently doesn’t keep me up at night.

For example, suppose we have several monthly construction “cycle” during a seven month delivery cycle. (Seven is a lucky number, down from thirteen last year.) One of our projects is building a new kind of bathtub. There are many features we can provide — single, dual, or tri-water controls; ADA-compliancy; multiple colors — but each costs money to do. Rather than coming out the gate with a de luxe tub that takes eight months of construction time and cost for things our customers don’t really want, we come up with a prototype, shop it around to customers, and have them tell us what additional things are important. The calendar of events looks like this:

• January: build prototype
• February - April: work on something else while we shop the tub around.
• May: add tub features
• June: Test
• July: Ship it!

The instructor’s first beef was the long gap between February and April. Hey, I’m not happy about it either, but it takes some time to find customers willing to install a tub, take several long baths, and then tell us what else they need in a tub. When I get the results back, we learn: ADA-compliance is important, number of controls is semi-important, and nobody cares about colors. This is valuable data. And it’s not like my craftsmen aren’t working on other things.

His second beef, and the one we spent the longest time master-debating, was the time to deliver the actual prototype. Physical labor was two weeks, but we took three calendar weeks due to scheduling of plumber and inspectors. This leaves one week of “unsold inventory,” which in process parlance, is bad. Theoretically, yes. But you know, it’s nowhere near my biggest problem. If I use variable cycle length, I’ll save a few bucks, at the expense of confusing the hell out of the foremen. It’s not worth it. I have more lucrative areas to save.

There were some interesting nuggets in the class, but perhaps the most useful takeaway is we’re doing a lot of things right.