Skip navigation
2017

Daniel Burrus, a global innovation expert, leading futurist, and strategic advisor tells his clients that, “whatever problem you’re trying to solve,” it’s probably not the real problem.

 

DDMRP Buffer Schematic

Solving the forecasting problem

If you talk to most supply chain executives, managers, and consultants today, they will tell you the real problem with supply chain management is that forecasts are not yet accurate enough to stabilize the supply network.

 

They will tell you that, if you are ever going to get to real and effective control of your supply chain, you need better (and, probably, more expensive) forecasting tools and processes.

 

Management control, they will tell you, is almost certainly linked directly to the effectiveness of your forecasts.

 

Well, like Daniel Burrus, we are here to tell you that you are trying to solve the wrong problem.

 

Why?

 

Because forecast are always wrong and forecasts that are specific enough to really work for execution will always be wrong.

 

I say “specific enough” because, wise as Daniel Burrus is, he frequently uses a very poor example.

 

He says that someone once said to him, “No one can predict the future.”

 

To this, he retorts: “Well, it’s summer now, and I predict that next it will be fall. And, I’m pretty sure I’ll be right.”

 

He’ll be right.

 

But of what use is such a “prediction” or “forecast.”

 

For a supply chain manager, it’s the equivalent of telling you, “Summer clothes are selling now. Next the demand will be for back-to-school clothes.”

 

That doesn’t tell you what products, colors, or sizes to order and stock. And, it certainly doesn’t tell you which stores will sell the most of which styles, colors or sizes.

 

But, if someone tries to tell you in advance—i.e., forecast—which styles, colors and sizes will sell in what quantities in which stores, I’m betting I’ll be right: They’ll be wrong!

 

Attempting to solve the forecasting problem is a Sisyphean task.

 

Effective control in supply chain management

Eli Schragenheim, in his cogent article entitled “The Managerial Need and the Illusion of Being ‘in Control’”, writes: “Being ‘in control’ means having good enough prediction of the future.” And, he goes on, “In order to be in control, we need a control mechanism.”

 

Of course, this begs the question: “What kind of ‘control mechanism’ will be effective to put us ‘in control’?”

 

Schragenheim obliges us with a very rational response: his definition of a “control mechanism” is this:

 

A reactive mechanism to handle uncertainty by monitoring [relevant] information that points to a threatening situation and [indicates] corrective actions accordingly.

 

The accompanying illustrative schematic of a demand-driven strategic buffer (as articulated by the Demand Driven Institute) is just such a mechanism.

 

An appropriately-sized and dynamically-managed demand-driven buffer is constantly being updated through a system that monitors relevant information, including actual demand, on-hand supplies, inbound supply orders, demand variability, replenishment lead times, unusual demand (demand spikes) and more.

 

And, it is telling supply chain managers and those responsible for execution the one thing they really need to know to protect FLOW in the supply chain: How likely is it that this buffer is going to protect FLOW?

 

If the buffer is in the GREEN ZONE, it is more likely than if it is in the YELLOW ZONE; and if it is in the YELLOW ZONE, it is more likely to adequately protect FLOW than if it is in the RED ZONE.

 

It also makes it very easy for supply chain practitioners to set priorities. All buffers in the RED ZONE demand attention before those in the YELLOW ZONE, for example. Furthermore, the LOWER the remaining buffer (stated as a percent of total buffer size), the higher the priority for action. That is to say, if two buffers are both in the RED ZONE, and one is at 8 percent of total buffer and another is 11 percent of total buffer, the 8 percent buffer should take priority.

 

Solving the real problem

Simply stated, the problem to be solved by supply chain executives and managers is not the theoretical one of improving forecasts.

 

The real problem to be solved is finding an effective way to know if FLOW is being protected in your supply chain and, if it is threatened, how to prioritize actions.

 

That is precisely what truly demand driven supply chains do.

 

If that is not what you are doing, you just may be another Sisyphus. Stop doing that!

 

Your turn

It’s your turn.

 

Tell us about your successes or failures and how you are addressing the issue of management control in your supply chain operations. Leave your comments below, or feel free to contact us directly, if you prefer.

 

 

Follow us on Twitter: @RKLeSolutions and @RDCushing
LIKE us on Facebook: RKL eSolutions and GeeWhiz2ROI

As a consultant, I frequently remind my clients that I cannot possibly know as much about their company, their industry, or their situation as they do. Therefore, like all really good consultants, I am not in their offices to give them the right answers. I am in their offices to help them ask the right questions.Excerpt from a graphic business novel: The Goal

 

I was reminded of that while reviewing a brand new book from North River Press: The Goal - A Business Graphic Novel.

 

It has been some years, now, since I have read The Goal (by Eliyahu Goldratt) through from cover to cover. (Although, I used to know a gentleman who worked selling software to manufacturers and he told me that he read The Goal through every year, just to keep the concepts fresh in his mind.)

 

In this latest release from North River Press, Goldratt’s classic best-seller The Goal has been adapted in graphic novel style by Dwight Jon Zimmerman and Dean Motter.

 

Asking the right questions

It was refreshing to read The Goal – A Business Graphic Novel because it actually helps declutter the background and focuses one’s attention on the crucial points that are so compelling in the original work by “guru to industry” Eli Goldratt.

 

Consider the following dialog:

 

Alex: I’m going to a manufacturers’ association conference because my plant has the most experience with industrial robots.

Jonah: Have your robots increased productivity at your plant? [First question]

Alex: Yes—A 36% improvement in one area.

Jonah: Really..? You’re making 36% more money just from installing some robots? [Second question]

Alex: Well, no-o-o. Only one department had a 36% improvement.

Jonah: Then you didn’t really increase productivity.

Alex: I-I’m not sure I understand.

Jonah: Alex, did you ship even one more product per day as a result of installing the robots? [Third question]

Alex: I-I’d have to check.

Jonah: Did you fire anybody? [Fourth question]

Alex: Because of the robots? No. We shifted workers around.

Jonah: Did your inventories go down? [Fifth question]

Alex: Again, I’d have to check.

Jonah: If your inventories haven’t gone down… and your employee expense is unchanged… and your company isn’t selling more product… then those robots haven’t increased your productivity.

Alex: But my efficiencies went up and my costs went down!

….

Jonah: Alex, it’s clear from your own words, you’re running a very inefficient plant.

Alex: Not according to measurements. Are you saying my people are lying to me?

Jonah: It’s unlikely your people are. But your measurements definitely are.

Alex: Yeah, sometimes we massage the numbers, but….

Jonah: You’re missing the point. You think you’re running an efficient plant… but your thinking is wrong.

 

System thinking

In the preceding dialog, Jonah was focused on one thing: the performance of the plant as a whole—the system. Meanwhile, Alex’s training had clearly taught him to measure local efficiencies. Remember, he said, “Only one department had a 36% improvement.”

 

Jonah cuts to the real questions of system (plant or company-wide) performance with these questions:

  1. Has system Throughput increased? Have you shipped more product per day?
  2. Has system operating expenses decreased? Have you fired anybody?
  3. Has system investment declined? Have inventories gone down?

 

Jonah concludes with two striking points:

  • Your measurements are lying to you, and
  • Your thinking is wrong.

 

We are kept from real improvements and real profits by the things we think we know.

 

Alex thought he knew that he was doing all he could to improve his operations and make his plant more profitable.

 

Read the book: You will see that he had no idea of the simple reality that was obscured by his wrong thinking.

 

Your turn

Are your measurements lying to you? Is your thinking wrong?

 

This simple, fast-reading book could help you make your company and your supply chain more profitable through your application of a few sound principles and a paradigm shift in your thinking.

 

Let us know what you think by leaving your comments below, or by contacting us directly, if you prefer.

 

--------------------------------------------

REFERENCE: Goldratt, Eliyahu M., and Jeff Cox, adapted by Dwight Jon Zimmerman and Dean Motter. The Goal - A Business Graphic Novel. Great Barrington, MA: North River Press Publishing, 2017.

--------------------------------------------

 

Follow us on Twitter: @RKLeSolutions and @RDCushing
LIKE us on Facebook: RKL eSolutions and GeeWhiz2ROI

Michelin’s tag line reads: “A better way forward.” And, an internal newsletter leaked to the public suggests that they recently discovered a better way forward for their manufacturing and supply chain efforts. The way is DDMRP (Demand Driven Material Requirements Planning).

 

Ron Watson, of Michelin, is quoted in the newsletter as saying:

 

I am the DDMRP coordinator and responsible for the North America DDMRP pilot. The whole OE (original equipment) perimeter has been operating in DDMRP mode since November 2016, and we are going to extend [our DDMRP operations further] during June 2017.

 

Since [implementing DDMRP], we have noted several improvements. Globally the [demand] signal is more stable and we now have better control over stock… management by adjusting the size of the buffers [and], as a result, the factory feels more empowered. Equally, the short-term planning is more accurate because it better reflects the customer’s needs.

 

Thanks to more accurate demand signals, all the changes in the factory contribute to satisfying customer requirements…, not just to ensure… a certain level of stock. The planners are the ones that have seen the most changes. [DDMRP] enables them to have better visibility and smooth the work throughout the week. They have more flexibility to react quickly….

 

…[T]he entire factory has felt the benefits, with an improvement in its productivity and responsiveness. We reduced the stock of tires by 30,000 in 3 months! So improvements have come quickly. [Emphasis added.]

 

So, was everyone at Michelin’s US1 plant eager to make the switch to DDMRP?

 

Nope.

 

Here’s what Codi Sbardella, a planner at Michelin, had to say:

 

When I found out I would be managing another planning system, DDMRP, I was… not too enthusiastic about the whole thing.

 

I was worried…, [but between] November and December 2016, I devoted myself to fine-tuning the [DDMRP] model, making sure that the buffers were logical and aligned with our needs and that the data were accurate.

 

At the end of the year, I made a comparison with the traditional systems and found that DDMRP was the only system that gave an accurate demand signal. During January, with DDMRP, I could directly see the demand of [our] OE customers, whereas the forecast accuracy of the other systems continued to fluctuate sharply.

 

Today, I really trust the DDMRP demand signal and I am looking forward to deploying the approach for [other markets]. [Emphasis added.]

 

Here’s the thing

Companies large and small, in the U.S. and around the world, are discovering that their traditional planning systems (like traditional MRP) aren’t really working for them.

 

Actually, they probably discovered this a long time ago and (like you!) they have been supplementing their traditional planning systems’ data with home-grown applications in Microsoft Access or Excel for many years.

 

Now, they are coming around to admit the failures of their traditional systems.

 

You can continue to operate your supply chain the way you have been for the last ten, 20 or 30 years, and suffer the consequences. Or, you can join the success being experienced in the DDMRP revolution.

 

Joining the DDMRP revolution means a paradigm shift for your organization. But, if you want to still try for incremental improvements by making incremental adjustments—the same incremental adjustments you have tried again and again over the last decade or longer—you might get incremental improvement.

 

Big improvements come from big changes. That’s just the nature of things most of the time.

 

Let us know what you’re thinking about DDMRP by leaving your comments below, or by contacting us directly, if you prefer.

 

 

Follow us on Twitter: @RKLeSolutions and @RDCushing
LIKE us on Facebook: RKL eSolutions and GeeWhiz2ROI

I apologize if the title of the article sounds too crass. However, my guess is that most of the folks who will read this article are actual working day-to-day in for-profit enterprises. They are called for-profit for a reason.

 

So, here’s my list.

 

Number 1: Demand Driven Performance Using Smart Metrics

The introduction to this book really says it all—if you understand what it means. It opens with a quote from Morpheus, a character in The Matrix (1999, Warner Bros. Pictures):

 

This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill—the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill—you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes.”

 

Demand Driven Performance is the red pill.

 

Sure, you can take the blue pill—like most of your competitors will be doing. They will wake up in their beds continuing to believe whatever they want to believe—the same things all their also-ran competitors believe. But, why would you do it?

 

If you want to start on the path to making more money, you need to read this book to continually improve your manufacturing and supply chain operations.

 

Number 2: Demand Driven Material Requirements Planning

You’ve probably been hearing a lot about “demand driven” supply chains lately. And, it seems, there are dozens of definitions of what it means to become “demand driven” being cast about.

 

However, if you want to read the authoritative work on this rapidly emerging methodology—if you want to understand what it really means to become  demand driven—then you need to read this book. This book explains clearly and concisely just why conventional and traditional methods for planning fail to deliver satisfactory results in today’s business environment and global economy.

 

With over 300 figures to help you plainly understand the principles at work, it can help you position your supply chain and your enterprise to make more money now and in the future.

 

Number 3: Demand-Driven Supply Chain Management

Want an increased dose of “the red pill” (see reference above)? Read this book now! If you don’t one of your competitors will, and you will lose ground.

 

This book is both powerful and practical. It is already helping demand-driven principles gain ground by strengthening the argument for a paradigm shift in supply chain methodologies from the worn-out traditional methods to the new demand-driven approach.

 

Additionally, this book has garnered international acclaim, with supply chain leaders from the U.S., France, Columbia and more singing its praises.

 

I mean it: get it today.

 

Number 4: The Missing Links – A Demand Driven Supply Chain Detective Novel

This business novel should be read by anyone with a genuine interest in how to run a business enterprise with the goal of making more money. It is especially useful for those new to the challenges one faces in improving supply chain performance.

 

The book is full of practical, relevant advice enveloped in a captivating detective story. While the story is fictional, the reader can take the insights gained straight into their own workplace and into their supply chains.

 

This is a quick read and you will be more profitable if you also apply the insights it provides.

 

Number 5: The Machine – A Radical Approach to the Design of the Sales Function

This is a bit different from the rest of the books I’ve mentioned here. This book is about a radically new and dramatically effective approach to sales process re-engineering. This brief excerpt from the introduction helps us understand the importance of this work:

 

The sales environment in a typical organization—in most every organization, in fact—is seriously dysfunctional. But rather than focusing on the obvious dysfunction, management is busy with incremental improvement initiatives: sales training, sales force automation…, or bolt-on lead-generation activities…. Because none of these initiatives address the root cause of the dysfunction, they amount to nothing more than arranging chairs on the deck of the sinking Titanic.

 

And make no mistake—the Titanic is sinking!

 

It’s not that sales is getting worse: The issue is that the rest of the organization is getting so much better while sales clings to the same structure, the same management approach, and the same practices that have been in place for the last fifty years.

 

Don’t let your sales organization stay the same while the rest of your company and supply chain is improving. Find out what you can do about it by reading this book.

 

 

So, let us know if you decide to read one or more of these books. Let us know what you learned, and how you are now making more money than you were before. Leave your comments here, or feel free to contact us directly, if you prefer.

 

Follow us on Twitter: @RKLeSolutions and @RDCushing
LIKE us on Facebook: RKL eSolutions and GeeWhiz2ROI

Reasonably successful business enterprises usually start off with relatively high rates of growth. In part this is the natural effect of a mathematical truth: it may be easier to achieve a 50 percent growth rate when you’re moving from $200,000 to $300,000, than it is to achieve a 50 percent growth rate when you need to move from $20 million to $30 million.

 

Nevertheless, the disheartening thing that far too many enterprises experience is the flattening of the profit growth curve even if they are able to sustain significant growth in revenues.

 

Management oscillation

Abraham Lincoln is remembered as having famously said, “A house divided against itself cannot stand” (even though he was actually quoting the Bible from Mark 3:25).

 

Well, actually, that house might stand for a while. But, ultimately, it is doomed.

 

Most business enterprises are “houses divided.”

 

Why do I say that?

 

Because there are two men at work in these enterprises: economic man and administrative man.

 

Economic man

Economic man believes he perceives the world as it really is, even though his perception is really a dramatically simplified model of the reality around him.

Economic man also diligently tries to consider all of the rational alternatives at his disposal when attempting to meet the challenges before him. But, because his view of the reality that surrounds him is limited and simplified, he often fails to consider alternatives that are presently outside his realm of perception and knowledge.

 

Nevertheless, being the diligent man he is, economic man will attempt to choose wisely from among his (known, perceived) options the “best alternative” for achieving what he also perceives as the most important goal at the time.

 

Administrative man

Administrative man is less idealistic, and more pragmatic, than is economic man counterpart.


Administrative man recognizes that his view of reality is limited and simplified. Therefore, he also knows that, in making decisions, he must take into account only a few of the most relevant factors and facts available to him in the moment the decision must be made.

 

As a result, administrative man will choose, perhaps not the idealistic “best” alternative, but the alternative that is “good enough” to keep things moving forward—hopefully, without doing too much damage in the long-run.

 

The same man

Sometimes administrative man and economic man are found in the same person. Under certain circumstances he acts like administrative man, and at other times, under other circumstances, he acts like economic man.

 

However, even if they are not found in the same man, these two men are virtually always found working side by side in the same organization—sometimes as co-workers, but more frequently in some hierarchical arrangement. Regardless, the results are the same: management oscillation.

 

What it looks like

Economic man says, run larger batches, because we need “efficiencies” and to “minimize costs.” But, administrative man, has no problem overriding batch size decisions when push comes to shove and orders being held up behind a big batch need to get processed and out the door to a customer.

 

Economic man says, we need to hold the line on our prices in order to keep our margins up. But, when cash flows are declining or business is being lost to competition, administrative man says, "Do whatever it takes to get those orders, even if it means offering bigger discounts.”

 

Economic man says, “We need to cut back on overtime. We’re losing money running this way.” Nevertheless, when quarter-end or month-end comes around and shipped orders need to get “booked,” administrative man comes to the fore and says, “Get those orders produced and out the door, even if you have to work the weekend to get it done!”

 

There are similar oscillations going on between economic man and administrative man over other business factors like:

  • How equipment is maintained (as needed, or on a preventive maintenance schedule)
  • How inventory is purchased (as needed, or in bulk to minimize costs)
  • How production is managed (produce to order as much as possible, or produce to stock to be more efficient)
  • How work is allocated (to the most efficient resource, or to any capable resource, even if less efficient)
  • How shipments are handled (to ship partial orders and absorb the freight costs on additional shipments, or ship only complete orders)

 

I am fairly certain you can think of even more examples from your own experience.

 

Cost-world thinking versus FLOW

Consider again the examples above. You will notice that economic man is a cost-world thinker. He believes he understands how “costs” and “profits” work in the real world (even though he doesn’t), and he makes his decisions based on his imperfect perceptions of costs and profits.

 

And, remember how we said administrative man bases his decisions on a “good enough” solution to keep moving forward. Even without being intentional about it, administrative man is a systems and FLOW thinker. He breaks big batch setups to achieve FLOW. He realizes that the FLOW of sales (leading to Throughput) is more important than cost-based calculated unit-by-unit profits (even if his thinking is muddy on the issue). He recognizes that FLOW is essential, and wants to get product moving (even if he is somewhat wrong-headed in allowing policy to create huge variability that hurts flow in other ways).

 

With a little enlightenment, we can help you reconcile the thinking of administrative man and economic man in your organization and supply chain. We can help you stop damaging management oscillation that hurts both profits and morale.

 

Your turn

Tell how you have experienced the battles that go on between economic man and administrative man—whether it’s being tossed to and fro in your own mind and finding yourself saying one thing one day, and the opposite thing another day, or between players in your company or supply chain.

 

Leave your comments below, or feel free to contact us directly, if you prefer. We look forward to hearing from you soon.

 

 

See also: Herbert A. Simon (1947). Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organization. 4th ed. (1997), The Free Press.

 

Follow us on Twitter: @RKLeSolutions and @RDCushing
LIKE us on Facebook: RKL eSolutions and GeeWhiz2ROI

What does it take to qualify as a genius?

 

It’s really quite simple (defining what it takes, that is, not being a real genius).

 

True genius is to look at the same things that everyone else is looking at, but to see something entirely different.

What it takes

True genius is the ability to look at the same things that everyone else is looking at, but seeing something entirely different.

  • Isaac Newton saw gravity where everyone else saw only objects falling to the earth.
  • Henry Ford saw automobiles for the common man where everyone else saw only cars for the wealthy
  • Cornelius Vanderbilt saw railroads—even transcontinental railroads—while others saw only steamboats and short-line railroads
  • Andrew Carnegie saw mass production of steel—enough to support the building of a thousands of miles of railroad tracks and enough locomotives to move goods nationwide—where others saw only a few small mills of limited capacity
  • J.P. Morgan saw the need for electricity and huge capital sums for industry where others saw only conventional power sources (e.g., water power) and small, local industries
  • John D. Rockefeller saw the need for gasoline—and the pipelines to transport it—to power a whole new world of automobiles while others were seeing only horses and carriages

 

Each of these men looked at a changing world, and saw through that change to what could be—indeed, what needed to be in order to allow the world reach its full potential.

 

You might recall—if you’re really quite a few years old—something we used to call carbon paper.

 

Xerox Corporation saw the world that needed to make copies—millions of copies—and found a way to sell copy machines to a whole world that didn’t even know they needed a copy machine. Now, we can’t live without them.

 

Unfortunately, they also invented the world’s first computer mouse, but failed to see the vision for its full value.

 

The genius supply chain manager

What will separate the genius and near genius supply chain managers and executives of today from the rest of the pack? What will make the difference between those supply chains and enterprises that emerge as dominant in their industries—versus the rest of the also-rans?

 

That answer, too, is quite simple.

 

The geniuses among supply chain managers and executives today will be those who see and understand the current situation in the world’s marketplaces as being full of complexities and uncertainties, and fully comprehend that traditional tools like MRP, MRPII, APS, advanced planning and forecasting tools, and even Big Data are incapable of solving the problem. This generation of geniuses will recognize that complexity and uncertainty are growing so fast that being “in control” is little more than a fantasy to be grasped at.

 

These geniuses will recognize that what is needed is not finite answers to the questions

  • How much should we make or buy?
    and
  • When should we make or buy it?

 

Instead, the new supply chain geniuses will see through the fog and realize that precisely wrong answers are not effective.

 

What is needed is “good enough control” to maintain the FLOW of relevant information and relevant materials across the supply chain.

 

Good enough control

The genius supply chain managers will seize upon good enough control, recognizing that the weakest link in their supply chain is not necessarily a given point or resource. The weakest link is any system or methodology that fails to protect and sustain FLOW by mitigating against variability.

 

Good enough control, they will see, comes in the form of BUFFERS that strategically protect and sustain FLOW. They will come to understand the value of building a variety of buffers into their supply chains:

  • Stock buffers
  • Time buffers
  • Capacity buffers

 

And, this new breed of geniuses will recognize that the conditions found in these buffers can help them set unambiguous priorities for action and long-term buffer analytics on buffer performance can help guide their POOGI (process of ongoing improvement).

 

These will be the demand-driven supply chain geniuses that will make a difference in the companies, in their supply chains, and in their industries. And their supply chains and companies will be more profitable for having the wisdom to hire and encourage these geniuses in their pursuit of supply chain excellence.

 

What about you?

Isn’t it time for your supply chain genius to shine through?

 

Let us know your thoughts by leaving them in the comments below, or by contacting us directly, if you prefer.

 

 

Follow us on Twitter: @RKLeSolutions and @RDCushing
LIKE us on Facebook: RKL eSolutions and GeeWhiz2ROI

Why is it so hard for manufacturing [and supply chain] executives to capture more of “the gold” from their operations?

That is the question that Dan Eckermann, former president of LeTourneau Technologies Inc., asks and answers in the forward to an excellent book: Demand Driven Performance – Using Smart Metrics.

 

What is Eckermann’s short answer?

 

The short answer is that they often do not see “the gold”!  Even when they do see it, they may not believe that it can be captured; and, when they do see it, and believe that it can be captured, they often do not know how.

 

Eckermann offers an explanation, as well—at least a partial one.

 

This is partially explained in that company logistics [and supply chains] can be complex, and that our natural behavior does not always lead us to doing the right thing, the right way in such complex situations.  In fact, our natural behavior can easily make a complex… situation worse….

 

Continuing his explanation, Eckermann says:

 

[There] is further explanation for not capturing “the gold” that relates to how and where management typically focuses. For example, it is completely natural for a[n]… executive to achieve an effective selling function, as he or she seems to always understand how important this function is to the company’s success. Similarly, the same management mind-set normally understands the functional importance of engineering, production, accounting, HR and IT; and therefore focuses here with expectations. To the contrary, the management of logistics [and supply chains] by the same executives is often expected to somehow “happen” without deliberate focus.

 

The management mind-set

Why do executives and managers seem to think that some functions are somehow automatically performing with the best possible results? Do they believe that some functions—like buying, positioning and moving inventories—are so inherently simple that it really doesn’t take focus or thinking to get them right? Do they believe that limiting factors like always incorrect forecasts are so pervasive that nothing can be done about the situation?

 

Here are Eckermann’s thoughts:

 

[M]anagement… frequently looks to the functions of purchasing, production control and similarly titled functions to inherently perform their supply chain management, and often believes that these functions are producing the best results possible [all factors considered].  After all, these functions are likely achieving results comparable to those of the past; and, with an acceptance of past norms being good-enough, this management mind-set fails to see that these seemingly hard working employees almost never achieve the results that may be possible. Bottom line: This mind-set in management does not expect, nor demands the achievement of real, break-thru improvements in their respective supply chains. [Emphasis added.]

 

Note that management may expect incremental improvements, but breakthrough improvements are generally neither expected, nor demanded. Eckermann continues:

 

Even when and where the achievement of real, break-thru improvements are expected in a company’s supply chain management, it is rare to find leadership that is capable of applying well-thought methods through-out the organization, beginning with the top.  Pause here for a moment and ponder these basic questions.

 

So, where is your CEO on the matter?

Dan Eckermann asks a piercing question on this front.

 

Where is your CEO on this matter?  Is this person visibly involved, leading the charge? We know that this person cares about improving your company results, but have you informed him or her of what is realistically possible?  Have you informed this person of how much “gold” is there to be had? And, have you informed this person of how much of “the gold” is not currently being captured?

 

Doing “the right thing, the right way” in supply chain management clearly requires breaking from convention and tradition. Through managing difficult challenges in an unusually complex case, I know that there are better ways to manage company logistics than what many companies are practicing today.  From this experience, I also know with solid confidence that many companies can improve their bottom line by first seeing “the gold”, and then by knowing how to capture “the same gold” with right actions.

 

What is Eckermann talking about?

Eckermann is talking about what kept him from achieving breakthrough performance at LeTourneau Technologies (later sold through Rowan Companies to Joy Global), and the book (Demand Driven Performance) outlines the methodologies and processes that allowed Eckermann’s management team to achieve huge gains in performance before the sale to Joy Global.

 

Now it’s your turn to go for the gold

 

So, read the book. It’s your turn to go for the gold, don’t you think?

 

Let us know your thoughts by leaving a comment below or contacting us directly, if you prefer.

 

 

Follow us on Twitter: @RKLeSolutions and @RDCushing
LIKE us on Facebook: RKL eSolutions and GeeWhiz2ROI