Read Online The Goal: A Process of Ongoing Improvement by Eliyahu Goldratt - Free Book Online
Authors: Eliyahu Goldratt
Ads: Link
they’ve bought —and at terrific prices.
No, put it that way, and economical purchasing is definitely not the goal of this plant.
What else do we do? We employ people—by the hundreds here, and by the tens of thousands throughout UniCo. We, the people, are supposed to be UniCo’s "most important asset,’’ as some P.R. flack worded it once in the annual report. Brush off the bull and it is true the company couldn’t function without good people of various skills and professions.
I personally am glad it provides jobs. There is a lot to be said for a steady paycheck. But supplying jobs to people surely isn’t why the plant exists. After all, how many people have we laid off so far?
And anyway, even if UniCo offered lifetime employment like some of the Japanese companies, I still couldn’t say the goal is jobs. A lot of people seem to think and act as if that were the goal (empire-building department managers and politicians just to name two), but the plant wasn’t built for the purpose of paying wages and giving people something to do.
Okay, so why was the plant built in the first place?
It was built to produce products. Why can’t that be the goal? Jonah said it wasn’t. But I don’t see why it isn’t the goal. We’re a manufacturing company. That means we have to manufacture something, doesn’t it? Isn’t that the whole point, to produce products? Why else are we here?
I think about some of the buzzwords I’ve been hearing lately.
What about quality?
Maybe that’s it. If you don’t manufacture a quality product all you’ve got at the end is a bunch of expensive mistakes. You have to meet the customer’s requirements with a quality product, or before long you won’t have a business. UniCo learned its lesson on that point.
But we’ve already learned that lesson. We’ve implemented a major effort to improve quality. Why isn’t the plant’s future secure? And if quality were truly the goal, then how come a company like Rolls Royce very nearly went bankrupt?
Quality alone cannot be the goal. It’s important. But it’s not the goal. Why? Because of costs?
If low-cost production is essential, then efficiency would seem to be the answer. Okay . . . maybe it’s the two of them together: quality and efficiency. They do tend to go hand-inhand. The fewer errors made, the less re-work you have to do, which can lead to lower costs and so on. Maybe that’s what Jonah meant.
Producing a quality product efficiently: that must be the goal. It sure sounds good. "Quality and efficiency.’’ Those are two nice words. Kind of like “Mom and apple pie.”
I sit back and pop the top on another beer. The pizza is now just a fond memory. For a few moments I feel satisfied.
But something isn’t sitting right. And it’s more than just indigestion from lunch. To efficiently produce quality products sounds like a good goal. But can that goal keep the plant working?
I’m bothered by some of the examples that come to mind. If the goal is to produce a quality product efficiently, then how come Volkswagen isn’t still making Bugs? That was a quality product that could be produced at low cost. Or, going back a ways, how come Douglas didn’t keep making DC-3’s? From everything I’ve heard, the DC-3 was a fine aircraft. I’ll bet if they had kept making them, they could turn them out today a lot more efficiently than DC-10’s.
It’s not enough to turn out a quality product on an efficient basis. The goal has to be something else.
But what?
As I drink my beer, I find myself contemplating the smooth finish of the aluminum beer can I hold in my hand. Mass production technology really is something. To think that this can until recently was a rock in the ground. Then we come along with some know-how and some tools and turn the rock into a lightweight, workable metal that you can use over and over again. It’s pretty amazing—
Wait a minute, I’m thinking. That’s it!
Technology: that’s really
No, put it that way, and economical purchasing is definitely not the goal of this plant.
What else do we do? We employ people—by the hundreds here, and by the tens of thousands throughout UniCo. We, the people, are supposed to be UniCo’s "most important asset,’’ as some P.R. flack worded it once in the annual report. Brush off the bull and it is true the company couldn’t function without good people of various skills and professions.
I personally am glad it provides jobs. There is a lot to be said for a steady paycheck. But supplying jobs to people surely isn’t why the plant exists. After all, how many people have we laid off so far?
And anyway, even if UniCo offered lifetime employment like some of the Japanese companies, I still couldn’t say the goal is jobs. A lot of people seem to think and act as if that were the goal (empire-building department managers and politicians just to name two), but the plant wasn’t built for the purpose of paying wages and giving people something to do.
Okay, so why was the plant built in the first place?
It was built to produce products. Why can’t that be the goal? Jonah said it wasn’t. But I don’t see why it isn’t the goal. We’re a manufacturing company. That means we have to manufacture something, doesn’t it? Isn’t that the whole point, to produce products? Why else are we here?
I think about some of the buzzwords I’ve been hearing lately.
What about quality?
Maybe that’s it. If you don’t manufacture a quality product all you’ve got at the end is a bunch of expensive mistakes. You have to meet the customer’s requirements with a quality product, or before long you won’t have a business. UniCo learned its lesson on that point.
But we’ve already learned that lesson. We’ve implemented a major effort to improve quality. Why isn’t the plant’s future secure? And if quality were truly the goal, then how come a company like Rolls Royce very nearly went bankrupt?
Quality alone cannot be the goal. It’s important. But it’s not the goal. Why? Because of costs?
If low-cost production is essential, then efficiency would seem to be the answer. Okay . . . maybe it’s the two of them together: quality and efficiency. They do tend to go hand-inhand. The fewer errors made, the less re-work you have to do, which can lead to lower costs and so on. Maybe that’s what Jonah meant.
Producing a quality product efficiently: that must be the goal. It sure sounds good. "Quality and efficiency.’’ Those are two nice words. Kind of like “Mom and apple pie.”
I sit back and pop the top on another beer. The pizza is now just a fond memory. For a few moments I feel satisfied.
But something isn’t sitting right. And it’s more than just indigestion from lunch. To efficiently produce quality products sounds like a good goal. But can that goal keep the plant working?
I’m bothered by some of the examples that come to mind. If the goal is to produce a quality product efficiently, then how come Volkswagen isn’t still making Bugs? That was a quality product that could be produced at low cost. Or, going back a ways, how come Douglas didn’t keep making DC-3’s? From everything I’ve heard, the DC-3 was a fine aircraft. I’ll bet if they had kept making them, they could turn them out today a lot more efficiently than DC-10’s.
It’s not enough to turn out a quality product on an efficient basis. The goal has to be something else.
But what?
As I drink my beer, I find myself contemplating the smooth finish of the aluminum beer can I hold in my hand. Mass production technology really is something. To think that this can until recently was a rock in the ground. Then we come along with some know-how and some tools and turn the rock into a lightweight, workable metal that you can use over and over again. It’s pretty amazing—
Wait a minute, I’m thinking. That’s it!
Technology: that’s really
Similar Books
