Archive for November, 2007
Featuritis and the Customer Experience
The more I learn and practice ethnography and design-thinking, the more I notice subtle but incredibly frustrating experiences. For example, I had a frustrating experience with a faucet that was in the hospital room where our adopted baby girl, Mylie, was born. This faucet is an automated one — with a sensor. So, whenever an object passes the sensor, the faucet would turn on even if the intention of the human was not to use the faucet.
The more I learn and practice ethnography and design-thinking, the more I notice subtle but incredibly frustrating experiences. For example, I had a frustrating experience with a faucet that was in the hospital room where our adopted baby girl, Mylie, was born. This faucet is an automated one — with a sensor. So, whenever an object passes the sensor, the faucet would turn on even if the intention of the human was not to use the faucet.
Bottlenecks and Fast Food
One of the key lessons in The Theory of Constraints is that the contraint or the bottleneck determines the throughput for the entire system. This means, then, that if we optimize and improve a non-bottleneck, then those efforts have almost zero impact on the overall throughput of the system. It is only when we improve and optimize the contraint that we will see improvement in the throughput of the entire system. Every system has a constraint — that is neither good nor bad — but just a fact of dynamic systems. Once you’ve identified the constraints in your system, then the next step is to manage it.
One of the key lessons in The Theory of Constraints is that the contraint or the bottleneck determines the throughput for the entire system. This means, then, that if we optimize and improve a non-bottleneck, then those efforts have almost zero impact on the overall throughput of the system. It is only when we improve and optimize the contraint that we will see improvement in the throughput of the entire system. Every system has a constraint — that is neither good nor bad — but just a fact of dynamic systems. Once you’ve identified the constraints in your system, then the next step is to manage it.
Ask Mary Poppendieck Anything!
In August 2006, Mary Poppendieck was nice enough to entertain questions from my readers on the topic of Lean for Software. Some great questions were submitted and Mary answered them.
Well, she’s willing to do that again, so please submit your questions for Mary and she will answer some of those questions. I will then post her responses on future posts. Here’s the process:
In August 2006, Mary Poppendieck was nice enough to entertain questions from my readers on the topic of Lean for Software. Some great questions were submitted and Mary answered them.
Well, she’s willing to do that again, so please submit your questions for Mary and she will answer some of those questions. I will then post her responses on future posts. Here’s the process:
We’ve Adopted a Baby Girl
Our little baby girl was born yesterday. Mylie is our 7th child and we brought her into our family through adoption. For long-time shmula readers, you might remember that we just adopted Preston last year. Yup, we did it again 1 year later, and we’re very, very happy.
Our little baby girl was born yesterday. Mylie is our 7th child and we brought her into our family through adoption. For long-time shmula readers, you might remember that we just adopted Preston last year. Yup, we did it again 1 year later, and we’re very, very happy.
Aza Raskin on Cooperation & Fence Throwing
Aza Raskin is the founder of Humanized, the son of Macintosh inventor, Jef Raskin, and an all-around good guy. A few months ago, Aza Raskin agreed to answer several readers’ questions. In today’s post, Aza Raskin tackles a reader’s question about Product Management, cooperations with other groups, throwing stuff over the fence, why large teams generally suck, and political in-fighting and politics.
Aza Raskin is the founder of Humanized, the son of Macintosh inventor, Jef Raskin, and an all-around good guy. A few months ago, Aza Raskin agreed to answer several readers’ questions. In today’s post, Aza Raskin tackles a reader’s question about Product Management, cooperations with other groups, throwing stuff over the fence, why large teams generally suck, and political in-fighting and politics.
Aza Raskin on Google Search Results
In a previous post on Ethnography, I invited Aza Raskin, founder of Humanized and son of Jef Raskin, the inventor of the Macintosh and author of The Humane Interface: New Directions for Designing Interactive Systems
In a previous post on Ethnography, I invited Aza Raskin, founder of Humanized and son of Jef Raskin, the inventor of the Macintosh and author of The Humane Interface: New Directions for Designing Interactive Systems
Raising Dust, Vision, and Business Problems
In the Treatise on Principles Concerning Human Knowledge, published in 1685, George Berkeley said: We have first raised the dust, and then we complain that we cannot see. Berkeley was describing something entirely different, but his comment is, I believe, an accurate indictment of most, or all, business problems that we face.
Readers — thoughts? Agree or Disagree? What is your story?
In the Treatise on Principles Concerning Human Knowledge, published in 1685, George Berkeley said: We have first raised the dust, and then we complain that we cannot see. Berkeley was describing something entirely different, but his comment is, I believe, an accurate indictment of most, or all, business problems that we face.
Readers — thoughts? Agree or Disagree? What is your story?
Root Cause, Genchi Genbutsu, & Design Thinking
One Pillar of the Toyota Production System is "Respect for the Human" or, more commonly known outside of Toyota as "Respect for People." That Pillar has given rise to an approach to improvement that is uniquely Toyota’s and is starkly different than the Taylorist approach proposed by Frederick Winslow Taylor, which fails to see the individual and under-appreciates the physical and psychological differences in people and in how people prefer to work. The Toyota Production System, I argue, appreciates the individual and empowers the individual to improve her work within the System; by doing so, a firm can increase its ratio of problem-solvers to problem-finders. But, this article is not about Taylorism versus The Toyota Production System — ignoring my propensity towards tangents for a moment — this article is about Root Cause Analysis, Genchi Genbutsu, and Human-Centered Design — all elements I found in the book Better: A Surgeon’s Notes on Performance, by Atul Gawande.
One Pillar of the Toyota Production System is "Respect for the Human" or, more commonly known outside of Toyota as "Respect for People." That Pillar has given rise to an approach to improvement that is uniquely Toyota’s and is starkly different than the Taylorist approach proposed by Frederick Winslow Taylor, which fails to see the individual and under-appreciates the physical and psychological differences in people and in how people prefer to work. The Toyota Production System, I argue, appreciates the individual and empowers the individual to improve her work within the System; by doing so, a firm can increase its ratio of problem-solvers to problem-finders. But, this article is not about Taylorism versus The Toyota Production System — ignoring my propensity towards tangents for a moment — this article is about Root Cause Analysis, Genchi Genbutsu, and Human-Centered Design — all elements I found in the book Better: A Surgeon’s Notes on Performance, by Atul Gawande.
The Variability Tree
All processes are subject to some variability. More common explanations of variability describes variability as either Common-Cause or Special-Cause. The former is easiest explained as expected variation within a process that is produced by the process itself. The latter, on the hand, is variation that is produced by the process by is assignable to some outside force. From a Queueing Theory perspective, another way to think of variation is by stratifying variation based on predictable and unpredictable. But, before we go there, let’s revisit what Queueing is all about.
All processes are subject to some variability. More common explanations of variability describes variability as either Common-Cause or Special-Cause. The former is easiest explained as expected variation within a process that is produced by the process itself. The latter, on the hand, is variation that is produced by the process by is assignable to some outside force. From a Queueing Theory perspective, another way to think of variation is by stratifying variation based on predictable and unpredictable. But, before we go there, let’s revisit what Queueing is all about.
Halloween 2007
Tradition in our family is that daddy (me) takes the kids out to trick-or-treat. This year was so fun. I’m so proud of my kids. Below are some pictures that make me really smile.
Here are the 3 younger boys — my superheroes — Batman, Superman, and Spiderman:
Here are all the kids:
From left-to-right: Hannah Montana, a Soccer Player, a Rockstar holding Superman, Batman, and Spiderman.
Tradition in our family is that daddy (me) takes the kids out to trick-or-treat. This year was so fun. I’m so proud of my kids. Below are some pictures that make me really smile.
Here are the 3 younger boys — my superheroes — Batman, Superman, and Spiderman:
Here are all the kids:
From left-to-right: Hannah Montana, a Soccer Player, a Rockstar holding Superman, Batman, and Spiderman.
