There is a page on the Manufacturing Practices website that has been there for about five years. It tells the story of a company that called asking for an opinion about interfacing their "Job Management Tool" to an ERP System. Their goal was to use the accounting piece of that system. Here is the link: I'm Sorry But Your Duck Is Dead.
I won't drag out the issues involved, but suffice it to say that
they contracted for remote custom education to help them better understand what
an ERP System is and is not and what the ERP System will do for them and TO
THEM. The effort was a success. The son and the feisty business owner who
thought the proposal was "outrageous since I did not EVEN know their
business" (his words, not mine) signed the note.
During the education, we explained why KPIs were more than Key
Performance Indicators and why we refer to them as “Keeping People Involved®.” Many
benefits were automatic outcomes of that education including, proper
Forecasting, Forecast Error measurements, Cycle Counting efforts, On Time
Shipments, Throughput Improvements, Project Management considerations, and
Leadership requirements during and after the ERP Implementation. You know,
those things that make manufacturing companies competitive in the marketplace
instead of, “oh yes, by the way, we also make things.”
The thank you letter did not come immediately after the class; it
was months after they started using that ERP System that the letter came. By
sending the letter, they were saying that we truly helped make them successful.
I remember my first argument about the role of education; it came
when I was a programmer at Control Data, writing an MRPII System for
mini-computers. The education effort involved having other peers (programmers)
review the LOGIC, produced before the code writing. What a stupid idea, I
rationalized, I’ve been programming for more than 6 years, why should I have to
think about what I am about to do before I do it. The ANSWER came when
management asked us to write a program to put a Bill-of-Materials and put all
the parts in a table arranged by Low-Level-Code.
Half of the group just wrote
code for the request and half the group did it the “new way.” My program was
100+ lines of code long, which was about half way between the upper and lower
number of lines of code for others in the first group. The ‘other group’, as a
team, wrote the program in ten lines of code after creating the proper logic to
deploy to write the code.
The real shocker really came
with our tests. Where our group did not have a “successful” first run attempt
with test data, the other group did. With that, both groups saw the reasoning
behind management’s desire for us to think first, and only after that, act. Our
“ready, fire, aim,” quickly became, “ready.., aim.., fire.” When Manufacturing
Practices, suggests that companies understand what ERP is before they look for,
implement or re-implement an ERP System, we teach them the lesson of “ready..,
aim.., fire.”
Here is a take away. Business owners and C-Suites must constantly monitor the expense of education against an investment in their people. Businesses have no way to measure the accumulative costs of remaining complacent. However, by failing to invest in people, leaders assume absolute business risk and at best, the possible loss of any competitive advantages. As Ralph Waldo Emerson said, "The mind, once stretched by a new idea, never returns to its original dimensions."
Comments
Post has no comments.