August 1997 • Volume 7 • Number 8
Dear APICS
|
|
August 1997 • Volume 7 • Number 8 Dear APICS |
|
|
The Proliferation Of Profundity By George Johnson, CFPIM
Shop Feedback: The March column dealt with the topic of procedure manuals, cited references thereto, and invited readers to share their experiences on the subject. Two readers' comments were summarized in the June column. An additional reply has been received from Russell Klement of AlliedSignal. Mr. Klement indicated that he and a colleague will be co-presenting the topic of "Business Process Mapping Techniques for ISO 9001 and 14001 Certifications," at the APICS International Conference in October. This subject relates directly to improving procedure documentation. In the meantime, or if you will not be attending the conference, Mr. Klement pointed out that the reengineering of his company's procedure process is described in the article, "Procedure Preparation for ISO 9000 Certification," in the 1995 APICS International Conference Proceedings, pp. 469-472. He also noted that the book, "Fundamentals of Procedure Writing," Second Edition, by Carolyn Zimmerman and John Campbell, ISBN 0-87683-942-1, has been used by some of his associates. Thank you, Russell! More Shop Feedback: I received a thoughtful letter from Robert L. VanDeMark suggesting that our profession/Society may have a problem which causes confusion and slows the deployment of useful systems and techniques. He playfully labeled the problem "proliferation of profundity." To wit: "The question you answered in your April column could well be broadened to cover a wealth of new phrases. It would seem that most of the definitions developed by APICS pioneers are now being replaced with more exotic terms. You discussed the relationship between 'manufacturing execution system' with the more familiar 'shop floor control' or, even older, 'production control.' In turn you could compare the new 'supply chain management' with the more familiar 'material control,' which seems to cover the same set of control areas: inventory control, stores, purchasing, material control and master scheduling. "Many other attempts at redefinition could be reviewed. For example, the April issue offers a new definition of setup cost. "My question: Shouldn't the old definitions be researched when new definitions are offered, before accepting the redefinition? It would seem that the responsibility of the authorities (APICS) should be to protect the authenticity and simplicity of the basic language. "In the other sciences, such as mathematics, when a new concept is offered it must pass rigorous tests for originality and application before being accepted and published for all to use. "Production and inventory control went through an
extensive period of conception and definition from the '50s
into the '80s. During that period, original principles and
procedures were developed mainly with manual application.
Since that time we have been in a period of translation and
application. The manual principles and procedures are being
translated into computer applications. We are not in need of
new words and phrases for translation. Such activity serves
only to cause confusion and generally to slow the
application process. Second, the issue he raises is real. Proliferation of terminology, especially when there is overlap of meaning, does tend to slow progress while "noise" is detected and filtered out and value is determined. From a Deming perspective, lowering the "noise level" in terminology reduces variability in communication and thus supports constancy of purpose. This, in turn, enhances learning and progress. In our interaction with the field, from the Inquiry Service, we constantly encounter the issue of proliferation. It is a great hindrance to understanding people's real questions and the efficient classifying, storing and retrieving of information which can be mapped appropriately to the questions. This is especially common with acronyms, a topic which has appeared in this column before. Usually, proliferation of terminology is motivated by the need for personal distinction or market differentiation — accepted marketing practices which can interfere with the standardization sought for other reasons. However, sometimes new terminology is required in order to make progress. This occurs when existing concepts are insufficient to represent the phenomena encountered — a conceptual breakthrough is needed. The "annual storewide inventory" or "annual physical count" convey a different message than does the phrase "cycle counting," for example. It would seem there are opposing forces at play here. Efficient communication is better served by parsimony — using a minimal but sufficient and standardized set of terms to convey an intended procedure or meaning. Effective differentiation is better served by variety — creating and/or emphasizing differences. Mr. VanDeMark's point about practices in the sciences is valid. It is common in scientific research to utilize "operational definitions" to assure repeatability. A method or procedure which is defined operationally (i.e., as a set of precise, measurable operations) is exactly repeatable by anyone who wishes to perform the same experiment or derivation. A different set of operations constitutes a different definition. And indeed, "new" experiments, derivations and their results are carefully scrutinized by the relevant community of scholars before being widely accepted. The scientific method assures that "reality" eventually wins, but that can take a long time. Not everyone wants to wait. Not everyone is knowledgeable of scientific methodology, and some who are don't practice it. And then there are such matters as: art vs. science; who decides where the authority for oversight resides?; diversity of world views; etc. With this as background, how does APICS stack up in the area of proliferation of profundity? As a professional educational society, APICS develops and strives to standardize, disseminate and "protect" a professional body of knowledge (BOK). The Society's Dictionary and its certification programs are vehicles for accomplishing standardization, dissemination and protection. Development of the BOK is well disciplined in some areas and more open in others. Material which is published in the Journal of Operations Management and in the quarterly Production and Inventory Management Journal, for example, is carefully scrutinized (i.e., refereed) for value and originality before it sees the light of print. Proceedings presentations and articles, on the other hand, usually are screened on the basis of an abstract. Somewhere between these poles lies the scrutiny process utilized by certification committees who are charged with maintaining the BOK. In my experience they are quite conscientious both about protecting what is and about evolving the BOK for continuous improvement. To its credit, APICS utilizes Chauncey, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Educational Testing Service(ETS), to facilitate the procedure which is executed by volunteers. This assures a disciplined process. APICS—The Performance Advantage can be a voice for anyone who convinces the editor they have something worthwhile to say — in the form of an article, special report or even a letter to the editor (which is a feedback/correction mechanism in the whole discussion process). The feature section of the monthly is designed to serve as a forum for sharing information and ideas. So on the development end of the mission, new ideas, experiences, terminology, etc., are continually introduced to the literature and discussion of the field in a variety of ways, some more disciplined than others. The ones that survive are assimilated into an evolving, professional body of knowledge maintained by APICS. My own opinion is that APICS does as good a job at this part of the mission as any professional society with a similar audience, scope of activity and subject matter. Does it achieve the signal-to-noise ratio of the pure sciences? No, and I don't think any professional society can. There is too wide a variety of application contexts involved and a constant creative need for companies to differentiate themselves in the marketplace in order to achieve success. This invariably entails "positioning" their products, services and software through the creative use of terminology as well as by emphasizing performance differences. |
