Professor Tony Bendell's TOCICO Workshop Slides

2015 TOCICO International Conference
©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

http://www.theanti-fragilityacademy.com/
http://servicesltd.co.uk/
tony@servicesltd.co.uk
tony@theanti-fragilityacademy.co.uk
Anti-Fragility & The Theory of
Constraints
TWO DAY WORKSHOP 10-11 September 2015
Tony
Bendell,
Services
Limited
and

The
An>-‐Fragility
Academy

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.


3
Ques/ons
you
might
ask

1.  Why
should
I
consider
developing
An>-‐Fragility
within
my
organiza>on,

what
does
that
mean
in
prac>ce,
and
why
is
a
focus
on
robust
safeguards

insuﬃcient
protec>on?

2.  What
is
the
rela>onship
between
An>-‐Fragility
and
the
Theory
of

Constraints
(TOC)?

3.  How
and
where
do
I
start
applying
this?

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Learning
Objec/ves

1.  To
extend
the
Theory
of
Constraints
model
and
the
emphasis
on
the

pursuit
of
efficiency
&
effec>veness,
in
order
to
enable
delegates
to

transform
organiza/onal
design
and
management
thinking
and
prac>ce

within
their
organiza>ons
taking
account
of
the
links
between
flow
and

fragility
in
their
systems
and
organiza>ons.

2.  To
enable
delegates
to
undertake
an
organiza>onal
Stocktake
of
current

fragili>es
within
their
organiza>ons,
and
iden>fy
immediate
areas
for

aCen/on.

3. 
To
enable
each
delegate
to
develop
an
Ac/on
Plan
to
transform
their

organiza>on
from
fragile
or
robust
to
An>-‐Fragile.

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.


Book
may
be
ordered
at:

www.gowerpublishing.com/isbn/9781472413888

35%
discount
code
G13iCO35

Or
for
signed
or
dedicated
copies
go
to:

h^p://www.thean>-‐fragilityacademy.com/#!book/c1enr

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Programme
Day
1

am:

Introduc>on
to
An>-‐Fragility

Answering
Ques>on
1

pm:

Guest
Speaker(s)

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Programme
Day
2

am:
Answering
Ques>on
2
-‐
Extending
TOC

Answering
Ques>on
3
-‐
Organisa>onal
stocktake

pm:
Building
Your
Personal
Ac>on
Plan

Review
&
Close


©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Day
1
am

•  Introduc>on
to
An>-‐Fragility

•  Answering
Ques>on
1:

Why
should
I
consider
developing
An4-‐Fragility
within

my
organiza4on,
what
does
that
mean
in
prac4ce,

and
why
is
a
focus
on
robust
safeguards
insuﬃcient

protec4on?

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Anti-Fragility (Nassim Taleb)
•  Fragile
refers
to
systems
and
organisa>ons
that
can
be

easily
damaged
by
changes
or
shocks
in
the
external
or

internal
environment.

•  Robust
refers
to
systems
and
organisa>ons
that
are
able
to

withstand
such
adverse
condi>ons
up
to
a
limit.

•  An0-‐Fragile
refers
to
systems
and
organisa>ons
that,
like

biological
systems,
are
more
than
just
robust
and
within
limits

actually
improve
their
resilience
through
being
stressed.

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Are you anti-fragile?

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

People are fragile

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

People are fragile & anti-fragile
………but sometimes only robust

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.


©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Are
natural
systems
Fragile,
Robust
or
An/-‐
Fragile?

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Are
natural
systems
Fragile,
Robust
or
An/-‐
Fragile?

E.G.
a
Meadow,
a
Person,
a
Community
of
Bees

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Are
natural
systems
Fragile,
Robust
or
An/-‐
Fragile?

E.G.
a
Meadow,
a
Person,
a
Community
of
Bees

•  Incorporate
aspects
of
all
3

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Are
natural
systems
Fragile,
Robust
or
An/-‐
Fragile?

E.G.
a
Meadow,
a
Person,
a
Community
of
Bees

•  Incorporate
aspects
of
all
3

•  Simultaneously,
even
in
the

‘same’
aspect/dimension

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Are
natural
systems
Fragile,
Robust
or
An>-‐
Fragile?

Are
manmade
systems
Fragile,
Robust
or
An/-‐
Fragile?

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Are
manmade
systems
Fragile,
Robust
or
An/-‐
Fragile?

•  Fragile
&
Robust,
possibly
simultaneously
in

‘same-‐ish’
dimensions

•  But
un>l
now
not
focused
on
An>-‐Fragility


©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

What
about
Organisa/ons?

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

What
about
Human
Organisa/ons?

•  Have
characteris>cs
of
both
manmade
&
natural

systems

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Nature Got There First

•  Natural
systems
have
An>-‐Fragile

features

•  Un>l
now,
we
have
only
focused
on

making
human
systems
Robust.

•  But
now
we
know
beCer!

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

The
Fragility
of
Human

Organisa/ons

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Is
it
GeRng
Worse?

•  Professor
Richard
Foster
from
Yale
University
states
that
the
average
lifespan
of
a

company
listed
in
the
Standard
and
Poor’s
500
index
(S&P)
of
leading
US

companies
has
decreased
by
more
than
50
years
in
the
last
century,
from
67
years

in
the
1920s
to
just
15
years
today.

•  Foster
es>mated
that
by
2020,
more
than
three-‐quarters
of
the
S&P
500
will
be

companies
‘that
we
have
not
heard
of
yet’.

•  There
is
no
proof
that
age
makes
a
company
any
more
proﬁtable
than
younger

companies;
If
the
S&P
500
were
made
up
of
only
the
companies
that
were
part
of

the
index
in
1957,
overall
performance
would
be
some
20
per
cent
worse.

•  The
immediate
causes
of
failure
are
numerous;
changing
markets,
simple

insolvency,
corporate
crime,
inability
to
adapt.

The
Fragility
of
Human

Organisa/ons

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

•  Organisa>onal
failures
are
now
commonplace,
including
those
of
iconic

ﬁrms

•  Conven>onal
management
and
management
systems
have
proved

inadequate
to
protect
both
private
and
public
sector
organisa>ons
from

catastrophic
incidents,
adverse
publicity
and
failure

•  Fragility
associated
with:

Ø  Vola>le
Environment

Ø  Weaknesses
in
Systems
&
Processes

Ø  Weaknesses
in
Behaviours
&
Management

Ø  Rush
to
Eﬃciency

Organisational Failures – The Failure of
Management & Management Systems

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

The Problem of Risk Management
•  Numerous
repeated
and
well
publicised
failures
of
Risk
Analysis
and

Management

–  Inherent
Flaw
in
the
Approach:

Much
of
Risk
Analysis
and
Management
as
we

know
it
today
is
part
of
the
problem,
not
of
the
solu4on

•  Reac/ve
Approach
–
Uncertainty
&
Risks
will
occur;
we
need
to
predict
&

reduce/contain
it.

–  We
have
to
be
able
to
conceive
the
risk.

•  Ignores
aspects
of
the
internal
and
external
condi>ons
in
the
system,
including

its
complexity
and
loading,
&
assumes
stability.

•  Assumes
full
/mely
informa/on,
cri/cal

awareness
&
senior
management

aCen/on

•  Assumes
no
“Black
Swans”

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Enterprise Risk Management
–  A
New
Business
School
Discipline

–  Great
Poten>al,
But…

–  In
its
infancy

–  Not
Being
Used,
Not
Being
Used
Well

–  Educa>on
&
Governance
Issues

–  Risk
silos

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

The Desire for Robust Systems
Ø  Whilst
they
exist
to
protect
people,
organisa>ons
and
communi>es,

human
systems
are
naturally
fragile.

Ø They
fail
individual
people
&
stakeholders,
and
some>mes
they
fail

systema>cally
&
some>mes
drama>cally.

Ø Weaknesses
are
caused
by
people,
by
processes
and
by
environment

excess.

Ø We
try
to
make
such
systems
robust,
but
how
can
we
establish
that

they
are
robust
enough
since
a
robust
system
just
waits
for
something

more
powerful
than
it
to
overcome
it?
Like
the
Thames
Barrier
the

robust
is
always
wai>ng
for
a
wave
that
is
bigger
than
it,
that
will

destroy
it.

Ø Robustness
may
imply
Rigidity

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

The Problems with Robustness

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

There
is
no
prac/cal
level
of

robustness
that
is

`Strong
enough`


©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Robust
systems

don’t
themselves

get
beCer

There
is
no
prac/cal
level
of

robustness
that
is

`Strong
enough`


©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Forensic Accounting, Fraud &
Mismanagement
•  Forensic
Accoun>ng
is
a
Safeguard,
But..

•  Can
be
a
bit
late..

•  The
Whole
Governance
Issue

–  Shortcomings
of
Current
Prac>ce

–  Arguable;
Diﬀerent
Perspec>ves
on
Risk
&
‘Skin
in
the
Game’

–  Board
Responsibility,
Understanding,
Educa>on,
Knowledge
&

Access
to
Informa>on

•  The
Tip
of
the
Iceberg?

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Where Fragility Exists
•  At
all
Levels/Layers…

–  Strategy
&
Governance

–  Opera>ons,
Processes
&
Supply
Chain

–  People
&
Culture

–  Informa>on
&
Technology

–  Markets,
Products
&
Services

•  Global
&
Local
Fragility/Macro
&
Micro

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Some Sources of Anti-Fragility
•  Learning

•  Awareness
of
environment
&
internal
condi>ons

•  Informa>on
systems

•  The
ability
to
take
decisions
&
act

•  Flexibility
&
Agility

•  Good
decision
making

•  Shared
&
spread
risk

•  An>-‐Fragility
(or
not)
is
deﬁned
by
the
Organisa/onal
Strategy,

Structure
and
Systems,
its
People,
Rela/onships
and
its
Culture.

We
can
then
Build
An>-‐Fragility
(or
not)
into
our
products
&

services,
use
of
informa>on
and
technology
base.

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

•  Safeguarding
Systems

–  All
organisa>onal
and
system
informa>on
gathering
and
feedback
loops,

that
poten>ally
use
current
performance
as
the
basis
for
control
and/or

change,
represent
An/-‐Fragility
Features.

•  Strategy
Review;
Risk
Management;
Budgetary
Control;
Internal
&
External

Audit;
Quality
Control;
Quality
Assurance;
Developmental
and
Evalua>ve

Performance
Appraisals;
HSE
Assurance;
Con>nuous
Improvement,
Kaizan,
Six

Sigma,
Lean
Improvement,
Agile
Deployment,
&
Organisa>onal
Assessment

against
the
EFQM
or
Baldrige
Excellence
Models.

An/-‐Fragility
Features
of
Organisa/ons
and

Systems

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

•  A
key
part
of
the
An>-‐Fragile
mechanism
in
all
these
cases
is
the
human

role.

•  Risk
Management
is
an
An/-‐Fragility
Feature
of
our
organisa>ons
and

systems.
But,
this
An>-‐Fragility
Feature,
is
itself
oVen
implemented
in
a

Fragile
way.
(Second
Level
Fragility)

•  Lack
of
a
holis4c
approach
to
Fragility
Minimisa0on
and
Management
in

current
prac4ce
in
organisa4onal
or
system
design
and
opera4on.

Anti-Fragility Features of
Organisations and Systems

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

But the limitations are in how these
Safeguarding Systems are implemented
–  Owen
designed
for
Robustness,
not
An>-‐Fragility

–  Incomplete
informa>on
ﬂow

–  Assume
some
stability
&
no
“Black
Swans”

–  OVen
delegated
to
middle
management,
formalised
and
standardised,
so
in
danger
of

becoming

compliance-‐driven
rituals,
with
incomplete
informa>on;
with
most
importance
being

given
to
the
integrity
of
the
paper
trail
for
audi>ng
purposes,
&
inadequate
senior

management
a^en>on.

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Is
an
An/-‐Fragile
Organisa/on
possible?

•  High
Reliability
Organisa>ons
(HROs)

•  Japanese
Shinise

–  more
than
20,000
companies
in
Japan
that
are
more
than
100
years
old

– 
a
handful
that
are
more
than
1,000
years
old

–  small,
mostly
family-‐run

–  focus
on
a
central
belief
or
credo
that
is
not
solely
>ed
to
making
proﬁt

–  focus
primarily
on
the
Japanese
market

–  avoide
the
mergers
and
acquisi>ons

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

A Basic Fragility Test for Your Organisation
(Score out of 100; (0-10 :10=maximum optimisation)
•  How
good
is
our
current
Approach?
(0-‐10)

•  Do
we
include
deliberate
Diversity
of
Approach
and
Deployment?
(0-‐10)

•  How
Aware
are
we
of
our
Environment?
(0-‐10)

•  Do
we
Learn?
(0-‐10)

•  Do
we
Implement
what
we
Learn?
(0-‐10)

•  Do
we
Learn
fast?
(0-‐10)

•  Do
we
have
the
Infrastructure
to
Learn?
(0-‐10)

•  Do
we
Evolve?
(0-‐10)

•  Do
we
have
the
Infrastructure
to
Evolve?
(0-‐10)

•  How
Op>mised
are
Our
Processes?
(0=highly
op>mised)

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Ten Ways An Organisation Can Become More
Anti-Fragile
1.  Don’t
think
you
are
there;
Realise
that
Never
Completely
get
there/never
completely
not

there.

2.  Be
aware,
scan
the
external
&
internal
environment,
risks,
scenarios
&
possible
black
swans.

3.  Be
joined
up
&
nimble,
keep
learning,
apply.

4.  Avoid
rigidity,
ultra
eﬃciency
&
relying
on
robustness.

5.  Don’t
automate,
engage.

6.  Reduce
the
fragility
of
an>-‐fragile
systems.

7.  Use
diversity.

8.  Apply
precau>onary
principles.

9.  Fail
owen
&
small.

10.  Stress
test.

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Where Can We Start?
•  How
ideal
is
your
world?

•  The
Board.

•  Execu>ve
management.

•  Opera>ons
management.

•  Supply
chain.

•  Front
line.

•  Risk

•  The
Quality
Department-‐
organisa>onal
quality/TQM/excellence

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Getting Started
•  Take
stock.

•  Further
develop
the
vision
&
business
case.

•  Plan
&
Manage
Change.

•  Help
develop
the
inﬂuencers.

•  Constant
review.

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Anti-Fragility as an Holistic Theory
of the Firm
•  No
single
current
Business
School
Discipline
unifies
our

view
of
the
Organisa/on

•  Also
tells
us
that
a
naive
focus
on
Op/mising
Efficiency,
or

even
Effec/veness,
is
Wrong

•  Unifies
and
provides
both
structure
around,
and

safeguards
in
applying,
change,
improvement
&
quality

approaches
such
as
Lean,
Six
Sigma,
EFQM
Excellence

Model,
Benchmarking,
QA
etc.

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

©
The
An>-‐Fragility
Academy
50

Efficiency
Fragility
Robustness
An/-‐Fragility

Process
Throughput
rate,

OEE

No.
Of
breakdowns,

lost
>me

Up>me
Rate
of
decline
in
no.
of

breakdowns
&
lost
>me

People
U>lisa>on,
output

per
head

Absenteeism,
turnover
Aêndance,

reten>on

Rate
of
decline
in

absenteeism,
turnover

Technology
U>lisa>on,

Output

Failure
rate,
non

availability

Availability
Rate
of
decline
in
Failure
rate

&
non
availability

Informa>on
Timely,
reliable,

accurate.

Delay,
inaccuracy.
Timely,
reliable,

accurate.

Rate
of
decline
in
Delay,
&

inaccuracy.

Supply
Chain
Throughput
rate,

OEE.

No.
of
breakdowns
in

supply,
unsa>sfied

demand.

Con>nua>on
of

supply.

Rate
of
decline
in
number
of

breakdowns
in
supply,
&

unsa>sfied
demand.

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Stress or Time in Denominator of Rate
of Decline?
•  Using
>me
enables
us
to
establish
easy
to
measure
metrics,

which
can
be
used
to
monitor
the
an>-‐fragility
of
the

organisa>on

•  Like
“nega>ve
velocity”

•  Stress
may
also
be
useful
in
speciﬁc
“red
ﬂag”
condi>ons.

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Anti-Fragility & the Theory Of Constraints
•  TOC
op>mises
system
throughput

•  Op>mised
throughput…

…

stresses
the
system

&
may
cause
fragility

•  Opportunity
to
extend
the

TOC
Model
to
incorporate
An>-‐Fragility

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Tony
Bendell,
Services
Limited
and
The
An>-‐Fragility
Academy
England

Èvery
day
organisa>ons
fail,
unnecessarily,
with
massive
financial
and
human
cost.
We
need
to
change.

An>-‐Fragility
is
the
most
important
poten>al
breakthrough
in
business
thinking
in
my
career.
It

provides
a
language
and
unifica>on
for
all
of
the

improvement
and
produc>vity
methodologies

I
have
been
assis>ng
companies
with
for
over
20
years.
It
makes
us
realise
that
our
current
op>misa>on

criteria
are
wrong
and
efficiency,
and
even
effec>veness,
are
not
such
a
good
idea.
It
unifies
our
business

model,
giving
a
new
coherence
to
the
disjoint
func>onal
specialisms
in
our
business
schools.

Go
out
and
tell
people,
they
need
to
know
what
you
know
..
and
soon.`

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Exercise
-‐
Ques/on
1:

•  Why
should
I
consider
developing
An4-‐
Fragility
within
my
organiza4on?

•  What
does
that
mean
in
prac4ce?,
and

•  Why
is
a
focus
on
robust
safeguards

insuﬃcient
protec4on?

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Issues
with
Developing
An>-‐Fragility
within
an

Organisa>on

•  Understanding
objec>vely
the
current
state,
complacency
&
lack
of
awareness

•  Overreliance
on
Human
Role
&
Lack
of
Systema>c
Processes
for
An>-‐Fragility

•  Paradigm
issues
with
pursuing
ultra
eﬃciency
&
relying
on
robustness

•  Paradigm
issues
in
using
diversity
within
the
organisa>on,
pursuing
precau>onary

principles,
&
encouraging
broad
stress
tes>ng
&
failure

•  Paradigm
issues
in
challenging
current
governance,
vested
interests

•  Danger
of
introducing
Second
Order
Fragility

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Issues
with
Developing
An>-‐Fragility
within
an

Organisa>on

•  GeRng
Started

•  S>cking
to
it

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Ten
Common
Pi`alls
of
Fragile
Organisa/ons

1.  Not
knowing
that
they
are
fragile.

2.  Not
being
joined
up.

3.  Knowing,
not
doing

4.  Doing
Risk
Management
incorrectly.

5.  Too
much
emphasis
on
money
and
short-‐termism.


©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Ten
Common
Pi`alls
of
Fragile
Organisa/ons

6.
Bureaucracy
and
emphasis
on
control.

7.
Badly
managing
change.

8.
Weak
processes
or
an
emphasis
on
ini>a>ves.

9.
Non-‐transparent
decision
making.

10.
Naive
oﬀshoring
and
ignoring
customers.

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Has Management of Constraints added to
Fragility?
•  Managing
constraints
can
reduce
process
fragility

•  But
TOC
op>mises
system
throughput

•  Op>mised
throughput…

…

stresses
the
system

&
may
cause
fragility

•  Opportunity
to
extend
the
TOC
Model
to
incorporate
An>-‐
Fragility

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Exercise

•  Which,
if
any,
of
the
10
Common
Pi{alls
of
Fragile

Organisa>ons
Apply
to
Our
Organisa>ons?

•  How
Can
We
Get
Around/Manage
These?

•  Where
&
How
Should
We
Start
to
Apply
An>-‐Fragility?

•  How
Does
this
Impact
on
Management
of
Constraints?

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

64
Change
includes:

•  Developmental:
correc>ng
exis>ng
aspects
of
an

organisa>on

•  Transi4onal:
to
achieve
a
known
desired
state
that
is

diﬀerent
from
the
exis>ng
one:

•  unfreezing

•  moving
and

•  refreezing

•  Transforma4onal:
radical,
may
result
in
a
diﬀerent

organisa>on

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

65
Resistance
to
Change

•  Fear:

•  Personal
standing

•  Loss
of
job

•  Increases
in
workload

•  Change
is
being
‘imposed:’

•  Not
chosen

•  Lack
of
faith
in
those
making
the
change:

•  Limited
respect

•  Something
has
been
overlooked:

•  Own
insight
or
area
of
exper>se

•  Habit:

•  ‘we
have
always
done
it
this
way’

•  Economic
implica>ons:

•  Pay
and
condi>ons
of
service

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

66
An
Approach
for
Managing
Change
-‐
Force
Field

Analysis

•  Based
on
the
concept
of
‘forces’

•  driving
forces

•  restraining
forces

•  Three
fundamentals

•  Increasing
driving
forces
can
result
in
an
increase
in

restraining
forces

•  Reducing
resis>ng
forces
is
preferable

•  Group
norms
are
an
important
force

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

D
R
I
V
I
N
G
F
O
R
C
E
S
R
E
S
I
S
T
I
N
G
F
O
R
C
E
S
MANAGERIAL
PRESSURE
NEW PEOPLE
NEW TECHNOLOGY
FEAR
COMPLACENCY
ESTABLISHED WORK
PATTERNS
SKILLS DEFICIT
V29
67
COMPETITION
CURRENT
STATE
DESIRED
STATE

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

DISPOSITION RESPONSE TO CHANGE
Commitment Want change to happen, will work to this goal, create whatever structures,
systems and frameworks
Enrolment Want change to happen, will devote time & energy within given frameworks.
Genuine compliance See virtue in what is proposed, do what is asked of them, act within the letter of
the framework
Formal compliance Can describe the benefits of what is proposed and not hostile to them. Do what
they are asked but no more
Grudging compliance Do not accept benefits, do not go along with it, voice opposition, hope for failure
Non-compliance Do not accept benefits, have nothing to lose by opposing the proposition, will not
do what is asked of them
Apathy Neither in support nor in opposition, just serving time.
V29
68

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

CURRENT
STATE
DESIRED
STATE
1. Creating a sense of urgency
2. Put together a guiding team
3. Create vision and strategy
4. Communicate the changing vision
5. Empowerment
6. Short-term ‘wins’
7.Consolidation
V29
69
8. Culture

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

70
Kotter’s Recipe for Successfully Managing Change
§ Establish a sense of urgency: changes necessitate motivation
§ Create a guiding team: forming a powerful group of enthusiasts
§ Create vision and strategy: create a vision that will help to direct and
guide the change
§ Communicate for buy-in: use every medium and vehicle possible to
constantly communicate the new vision and strategies
§ Empower people: removing the obstacles, appropriate support and
resources

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

71
Kotter’s Recipe for Successfully Managing Change
§ Short-term wins: creating short-term organisational and personal wins
§ Consolidating achievements: build momentum through consolidating
gains
§ Implant the new approaches into the organisational culture: unless part of
culture long-lasting results may not be achieved

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

72
Exercise: Successfully Managing Change Towards Anti-Fragility
§ How will you manage change towards Anti-Fragility, what are the
challenges for you? Use a SWOT analysis to help
§ Identify the Driving and Resisting forces to change for Anti-Fragility and
construct a Force Field Analysis
§ What responses to change do you expect and who is crucial to
managing change for Anti-Fragility?
§ What strategies will you use to overcome resisting forces and people?

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Day
1
pm

Guest
Speaker(s)

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Day
2
am
(&
pm)

•  Answering
Ques>on
2
-‐
Extending
TOC

What
is
the
rela4onship
between
An4-‐Fragility
and
the

Theory
of
Constraints
(TOC)?

•  Answering
Ques>on
3
-‐
Organisa>onal
stocktake

How
and
where
do
I
start
applying
this?


©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

75
Theory
of
Constraints

•  All
systems
have
constraints
that
constrain/control
ﬂow

•  In
a
process
there
are
only
a
few
capacity
constraint
resources

•  We
put
buﬀers
in
front
of
these
to
keep
them
working

•  Types
of
constraints

-‐
physical

-‐
policy

-‐
paradigm

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

76
-23-
‘BUFFER MANAGEMENT – CARDIFF & VALE NHS TRUST
Split the patients journey to discharge into 3 zones: green, amber, red
Actively manage patients in the amber buffer zone. Patients n the
Red buffer zone to be ‘expedited’ (advance) through their journey to
prevent breaching into Black buffer zone
Green
Amber
Red
Black

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

77
CARDIFF & VALE NHS TRUST
Buﬀer
Mee>ngs

•  Weekly
mul>disciplinary
ward
mee>ng

•  Top
5
delayed
pa>ents
or
pa>ents
who
are
predica>vely

delayed
–
project
plan/escalate

•  Monthly
mee>ng
to
address
system
constraints

•  Monthly
health
community
execu>ve
mee>ng
–

commissioning
&
policy
issues
&
top
pa>ents
to
test
new

ideas/ways
of
working

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

78
An
underlying
premise
of
TOC
is
that
organiza/ons
can
be

measured
and
controlled
by
varia/ons
on
three
measures:

THROUGHPUT
-‐

The
rate
at
which
the
system
generates
money
through
fulﬁlling
customer

requirements

INVENTORY
-‐

Everything
that
the
system
invests
in
that
it
intends
to
use
to
fulﬁl
customer

requirements

OPERATING
EXPENSE
-‐

All
the
money
the
system
spends
in
turning
inventory
into
throughput

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Managing
Constraints
Allows
Us
to
Increase

Throughput

BUT,
are
these:

•  The
Wrong
Set
of
Constraints?,
or

•  The
Wrong
Way
of
Looking
At
Them?

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Managing
Constraints
Allows
Us
to
Increase

Throughput

BUT,
are
these:

•  The
Wrong
Set
of
Constraints?,
or

•  The
Wrong
Way
of
Looking
At
Them?

IS
TOC
TOO
ONE
DIMENSIONAL?

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

83
Spreading troops means high inventory. Closely packed troops means lower
inventory.
INPUTS JOBS COMPLETED
Classical
TOC

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

84
Put the slowest soldiers at the front and the strongest ones in the rear.
In other words, restructure operations so that the most loaded operations (the
primary capacity constraints) are at the first operations and have the operations
with large excess capacity downstream
1

Classical
TOC

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

85
Put a drummer at the front to set the pace
Have the sergeants constantly urge the soldiers to close any gaps
e.g. in manufacturing, the sergeant is the expeditor and the drummer is the
computerised material management system.
2

Classical
TOC

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

86
Policy
&
Paradigm
Constraints

Typically
the
drum
beats
according
to

unrealis>c
assump>ons….

Like:

• 

Fixed,
constant
batch
sizes

• 

Predetermined
lead
>mes

• 

Inﬁnite
capacity

Classical
TOC

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

87
3
Classical
TOC

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

88
Synchronized
Opera/ons

Assembly
Lines
and
Kanbans

Predetermined
inventory
buffers
(limited
by
space,
number
of
cards

etc.)
regulate
the
rate
of
processing
for
opera>ons
and
Kanban

systems.

The
instruc>on
given
to
the
worker
is

“Stop
working
when
the
buffer
is
filled!”

The
work
is
synchronized,
inventory
is
low…
but
any
significant

disrup>on
will
cause
the
en>re
system
to
stop

Classical
TOC

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

89
The drum is held by the excess capacity of the gating operations (strong
soldier in front)
RESULT:
§  Inventory is high
§  Current throughput is protected
§  Future throughput is in danger
§  MUDA!
Inputs
Jobs completed
Just-‐in-‐Case
System
(Tradi/onal)

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

90
The drum is held by customer demand
RESULT:
§  Inventory is low
§  Current throughput is in danger
§  Future throughput is increased
§  FRAGILE!
Inputs Jobs completed

Just-‐in-‐Time
System
(Lean)

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

91
§  To prevent spreading, tie weakest soldier to the front row
§  To protect overall pace, provide some slack in the rope (time buffer)
§  Note that only one soldier is tied to front row
Drum-‐Buﬀer-‐Rope

4

Classical
TOC

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

92
A Rope tying the Gating
operation to the Buffer
Inputs
Jobs completed
Synchronised
Opera/ons/

Major

Capacity

Constraint
Time

buﬀer

Classical
TOC

4

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

93
Time buffer The Capacity Constraint Resource
should dictate the schedule based on
demand and its own potential
The schedule for succeeding operations
should be derived accordingly
The schedule of preceding operations
should support the time buffer and thus
be derived backwards in time from the
C.C.R. schedule
rope
FINAL OPERATION (assembly)
Devising a
DBR System
for
Synchronized
Operations
Classical
TOC

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

94
Assuring High Due-Date Performance
§  All other operation schedules must support
the final operation schedule
§  To avoid harm due to disruptions, they should
support a time buffer in front of any final
operation (assembly) that is based on a CCR
operation
§  Inventory is low, but nevertheless any
disruption that can be overcome within the
buffer time will not affect the throughput of
the plant
rope
rope
rope
Classical
TOC

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

95
In any process there
are few capacity
constraint resources
CUSTOMERS
FINAL OPERATIONS
(ASSEMBLY)
OPERATIONS
Classical
TOC

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

96
•  Iden/fy
the
constraint
of
the
system

•  Exploit
the
constraint

•  Subordinate
everything
else
to
the
above
decisions

•  Elevate
the
constraint

•  Prevent
iner/a,
go
back
to
the
ﬁrst
step

•  Do
not
focus
your
people,
4me
and
money
on
a
NON-‐CONSTRAINT
opera4on

within
the
process.

It
will
only
increase
WIP
prior
to
the
constraint
and
it
will
not

improve
the
cost
eﬀec4veness
of
the
process,
in
fact
it
will
achieve
the
opposite

Classical
TOC

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

97
•  The
view
of
the
organisa/on
as
a
series
of
dependent
links
–
a
chain

•  Only
strengthening
the
weakest
link
improves
the
whole

•  Most
improvements,
in
most
links,
has
no
eﬀect
on
the
whole

•  The
chain
starts
in
the
supply
base
and
ends
with
the
customer

•  Global
management
is
diﬀerent
to
the
sum
of
the
local
management

Classical
TOC

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

98
Iden/fy
the
Constraint

•  What
is
controlling
the
ﬂow?

–  What
is
the
rate
limi>ng
factor?

•  Informa>on?
Resource?
Skill?
Demand?

•  If
external,
select
an
internal
control
point

Classical
TOC

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Extending
TOC

We
don’t
want
them
to
spread,
but
the
faster
a
weak

soldier
goes,
the
more
likely
he
is
to
fall
over
&
the
harder
is
coordina>on..

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

2

Increased
Fragility
due
to
increased
features
&
Complexity

•  Process
failure
(job
not
delivered)
&

•  System
failure
(systema/c
e.g.
system
stops)

Put
a
drummer
at
the
front
to
set
the

pace

Have
the
sergeants
constantly
urge
the

soldiers
to
close
any
gaps.

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

103
A Rope tying the Gating
operation to the Buffer
Inputs
Jobs completed
Synchronised
Opera/ons/

Major

Capacity

Constraint
Time

buﬀer

4

Less
fragile
than
Assembly
line
&
Kanban,
but
s/ll
fragile

due
to
Loading
&
low
inventory.

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Capacity
Constraints

•  Volume
Constraints

Bo^lenecks

Constrain

Flow
&

Throughput

System
Failure&/or
Degrada>on

•  Time
Constraints

The TOC ModelThe
TOC
Model

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Capacity
Constraints

•  Volume
Constraints

Bo^lenecks

Constrain

Flow
&

Throughput

System
Failure&/or
Degrada>on

•  Time
Constraints

The TOC ModelThe
Extended
TOC
Model

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Capacity
Constraints

•  Volume
Constraints

Bo^lenecks

Constrain

Flow
&

Throughput

System
Failure&/or
Degrada>on

•  Time
Constraints

The TOC ModelThe
Extended
TOC
Model

EXAMPLES?

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Capacity
Constraints

•  Volume
Constraints

Bo^lenecks

Constrain

Flow
&

Throughput

System
Failure&/or
Degrada>on

•  Time
Constraints

The TOC Model
Managing
Buﬀers
in
TOC
to
Feed

BoClenecks
&
Increase
Flow

Buﬀer
Stocks

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Capacity
Constraints

•  Volume
Constraints

Bo^lenecks

Constrain

Flow
&

Throughput

System
Failure&/or
Degrada>on

•  Time
Constraints

Increases
Loading

The TOC ModelBUT…..

Buﬀer
Stocks

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Capacity
Constraints

•  Volume
Constraints

Bo^lenecks

Constrain

Flow
&

Throughput

System
Failure&/or
Degrada>on

•  Time
Constraints

The TOC ModelThe
Extended
TOC
Model

Buﬀer
Stocks

Increases
Loading

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Capacity
Constraints

•  Volume
Constraints

Bo^lenecks

Constrain

Flow
&

Throughput

System
Failure&/or
Degrada>on

•  Time
Constraints

The TOC ModelThe
Extended
TOC
Model

Buﬀer
Stocks

Increases
Loading

EXAMPLES?

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Capacity
Constraints

•  Volume
Constraints

Bo^lenecks

Constrain

Flow
&

Throughput

System
Failure&/or
Degrada>on

•  Time
Constraints

The TOC ModelThe
Extended
TOC
Model

BoClenecks
may
protect
the
system

from
failure
&
degrada/on:

A
bo;leneck
has
a
purpose

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Capacity
Constraints

•  Volume
Constraints

Bo^lenecks

Constrain

Flow
&

Throughput

System
Failure&/or
Degrada>on

•  Time
Constraints

The TOC ModelThe
Extended
TOC
Model

BoClenecks
may
protect
the
system

from
failure
&
degrada/on:

A
bo;leneck
has
a
purpose

EXAMPLES?

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

113
•  Iden/fy
the
constraint
of
the
system

–  Now,
NOT
just
in
rela/on
to
Flow,
but
also
Fragility

•  Exploit
the
constraint

–  Management
of
Constraints
is
now
seen
as
Two
Dimensional

•  Subordinate
everything
else
to
the
above
decisions

•  Elevate
the
constraint

–  Now,
NOT
just
in
rela/on
to
Flow,
but
also
Fragility

•  Prevent
iner/a,
go
back
to
the
ﬁrst
step

•  Do
not
focus
your
people,
4me
and
money
on
a
NON-‐CONSTRAINT
opera4on

within
the
process
AND
do
not
ignore
Fragility
in
considering
constraints.

Extended
TOC
Model

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

114
•  What
are
the
possible
implica>ons
and
unintended
consequences
of

the
applica>on
of
the
Theory
of
Constraints
within
an
organiza>on?

•  What
changes/
addi>ons
need
to
be
made
in
applying
TOC
within

an
organisa>on
bearing
in
mind
fragility?

•  How
can
we
do
this
in
prac>ce?

EXERCISE

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

115
•  If
An0-‐Fragile
systems
and
organisa>ons,
like
biological
systems,

are
more
than
just
robust
and
within
limits
actually
improve
their

resilience
through
being
stressed,
then
by
using
TOC
to
reduce

stress
on
the
organisa>onal
system
(including
the
human

element),
may
we
be
preven>ng
it
from
developing
to
be
An>-‐
Fragile?

•  Are
any
aspects
of
TOC
An>-‐Fragile?

•  How
do
we
make
the
TOC
approach
itself
more
An>-‐Fragile,
not

just
proof
against
fragility?

Other
thoughts
about
An/-‐Fragility
&
TOC

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Day
2
am
(&
pm)

•  Answering
Ques>on
2
-‐
Extending
TOC

What
is
the
rela4onship
between
An4-‐Fragility
and
the

Theory
of
Constraints
(TOC)?

•  Answering
Ques/on
3
-‐
Organisa/onal
stocktake

How
and
where
do
I
start
applying
this?

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Organisational Stocktake for Your Organisation
•  Score
each
of
the
bullet
points
for
each
of
the
following
out
of
10.

–  Governance,
Strategy
and
Risk

–  People
and
Culture

–  Processes
and
Opera>ons

–  Use
of
Informa>on
and
Technology,
and
the
Impact
of
Innova>on

–  Supply
Chain,
Environment
and
Corporate
Social
Responsibility

–  Markets,
Products
and
Services

•  Note
Areas
of
Strength
&
Areas
for
Improvement.

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Where Are You? - Governance, Strategy and Risk (1)
•  To
progress
towards
an>-‐fragility,
our
organisa>on
needs
to
be
subject
to

stresses
and
progressively
gain
strength
from
these.
Principally,
we
want
to

design
it
and
manage
it
to
progressively
gain
in
strength
from
being
stressed,

rather
than
protect
it
from
stress.

•  In
doing
this,
we
need
to
work
to
ensure
that
the
stresses
are
both

propor>onate
and
relevant
to
the
development
of
strength
for
survival.
Since

these
aspects
are
hard
to
ensure
in
a
world
exposed
to
Black
Swans,
we
also

need
to
apply
precau>onary
principals,
such
as
the
deliberate
crea>on
of

diverse
stresses,
to
provide
some
protec>on.

•  Our
management,
leadership
and
stakeholders
need
to
be
fully
aware
of
the

conceivable
risks
the
organisa>on
is
facing,
and
the
existence
of
as
yet

unknown
Black
Swans,
that
may
impact
on
its
survival.
To
achieve
this,
the

collec>on
and
dissemina>on
of
full,
>mely,
valid
informa>on
is
required,
as
is

the
ability
to
see
the
Big
Picture.

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Where Are You? - Governance, Strategy and Risk (2)
•  The
management
of
risk
should
have
a
genuine
enterprise-‐wide
perspec>ve,
be
the

concern
of
the
leadership
team
and
not
be
delegated
to
middle
or
lower

management,
and
not
be
ritualised
into
a
compliance-‐driven
‘>ck
box’
process.

•  There
are
some
simple
things
that
we
can
do
immediately
to
ensure
the
integrity

and
an>-‐fragility
of
the
organisa>on’s
governance,
including
training
board

members
and
other
key
stakeholders
in
their
responsibili>es.

strategy
needs
to
be
emergent,
but
based
on
planning
and
re-‐
planning.

•  Based
on
empirical
evidence,
as
well
as
theory,
change
strategies
based
on
the

EFQM
Excellence
Model,
or
well-‐founded
equivalents,
appear
to
be
an>-‐fragile.

•  We
will
owen
rely
on
people,
rather
than
systems
and
processes,
to
provide

robustness
and
an>-‐fragility
in
rela>on
to
inherent
weaknesses
in
our
organisa>on,

or
ones
created
by
unforeseen
stress.
We
need
to
develop
their
ability
to
do
this,

support
them
in
the
process,
and
incorporate
longer-‐term
solu>ons
into
systems

and
processes.

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Where
Are
You?
-‐People and Culture (1)

•  People
are
both
a
major
exploitable
source
of
an>-‐fragility,
and
a
major
source
of
fragility
in

themselves.
To
develop
an
an>-‐fragile
organisa>on,
we
need
to
avoid
thinking
based
on
the
Classical

Approach
to
Management
and
Transac>onal
theory,
both
on
the
part
of
the
organisa>on
and
of

individual
employees
and
managers.
This
is
primarily
an
educa>on
issue.

•  In
contrast,
a
number
of
theories
in
the
area,
such
as
the
Con>ngency
Approach
and
Maslow’s

Hierarchy
of
Needs,
have
a
natural
affinity
with
an>-‐fragility
and
can
help
us
in
achieving
it.

•  An
organisa>on’s
posi>on
in
rela>on
to
Hoefstede’s
cultural
dimensions
clearly
relates
to
its
overall

fragility,
robustness
or
an>-‐fragility,
and
could
be
used
to
iden>fy
areas
of
fragility
and

organisa>onal
development
needs.

•  In
general
terms,
the
EFQM
Excellence
Model
criteria
and
sub-‐criteria
on
Leadership,
People
and

People
Results
support
much
of
the
requirements
for
an>-‐fragility,
but
are
more
focused
on

efficiency
and
effec>veness,
and
so
are
deficient
and
need
extension.

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Where
Are
You?
-‐People and Culture (2)

•  Real
management
commitment,
and
the
iden>ﬁca>on
of
a
shared
owned
vision,
are
crucial
to
the

pursuit
of
an>-‐fragility
and
are
owen
not
properly
established.
A
facilitated
approach
to
Forming,

Storming,
Norming
and
Performing
can
be
very
useful
to
achieve
this,
as
can
the
use
of
appropriate

crea>vity
tools.

•  Change
can
be
undertaken
at
various
levels
and
will
always
create
resistance.
Undermining
this

resistance,
typically
through
providing
support
and
informa>on,
is
owen
be^er
than
just
pushing

harder.

•  To
become
an>-‐fragile
an
organisa>on
also
needs
to
become
a
Learning
Organisa>on.

•  Internal
organisa>onal
poli>cs
cannot
be
avoided
in
considering
organisa>onal
change
towards
an>-‐
fragility.
The
change
agent
needs
to
learn
how
to
be
very
good
at
establishing
and
managing

alliances
with
stakeholders
in
pursuit
of
change
objec>ves.

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Where
Are
You?
-‐
Processes and Operations (1)

•  Operations management and process management typically give limited
attention to fragility issues, and in practice much of the optimisation of these
is concerned with efficiency and effectiveness rather than fragility.
•  Typical
process
fragility
issues
include
more
than
just
the
danger
of
the

process
stopping,
but
also
the
process
opera>ng
with
no
output,
the

process
opera>ng
but
with
no
acceptable
output,
and
the
process

opera>ng
but
with
performance
below
a
specified
acceptable
level
in
terms

of
delay,
volume,
disrup>on
and/or
varia>on.

•  There
may
be
a
U-‐shaped
characteris>c
for
the
rela>onship
between

process
fragility
and
process
efficiency.
This
would
suggest
that
there
is
an

op>mum
process
efficiency
to
deliver
minimum
process
fragility
and
a

possible
flat
area
un>l
we
reach
an
intrinsic
process
efficiency
boundary,

beyond
which
the
increase
in
fragility
may
become
severe.

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

•  QA
is
an
an>-‐fragile
aspect
of
our
organisa>ons
and
systems
but
is
owen
implemented
in
a

fragile
way,
so
that
a
QA
or
ISO9001
system
may
be
fragile
or
an>-‐fragile
in
prac>ce,
dependent

on
how
it
is
implemented.

•  The
Lean
Approach
is
inherently
fragile
but
can
make
a
very
real
contribu>on
to
process,

opera>ons
and
organisa>onal
an>-‐fragility,
depending
on
how
it
is
implemented.
The
difference

between
fragile
Lean
and
an>-‐fragile
Lean
are
subtle
and
complex.

•  A
similar
situa>on
exists
for
Six
Sigma,
which
is
inherently
an>-‐fragile,
but
can
s>ll
be

implemented
in
a
fragile
way.

•  Poka
Yoke
Mistake
Proofing
is
inherently
robust
or
an>-‐fragile.
The
poten>al
to
mistake
proof

every
process
in
an
organisa>on,
u>lising
ongoing
feedback
from
these
processes
in
real
>me,

including
unexpected
shocks,
is
an
aspira>onal
an>-‐fragile
target
opera>ng
model
but
will

depend
on
the
efficacy
of
the
source
inspec>on
approach
and
the
iden>fica>on
and
response
to

Red
Flag
condi>ons.

•  The
EFQM
Excellence
Model
criterion
and
sub-‐criterion
covering
processes
gives
a
good

summary
of
many
of
the
requirements
for
an>-‐fragility,
except
that
the
model
is
more

focused
on
efficiency
and
effec>veness,
and
so
must
be
used
carefully.

Where
Are
You?
-‐
Processes
and
Opera/ons
(2)

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Where
Are
You?
-‐
Use
of
Informa/on
and
Technology,
&
the
Impact
of

Innova/on
(1)

•  Technologies
and
informa>on
systems
that
start
robust,
or
even
an>-‐fragile,
will
over
>me
become

fragile,
as
market
and
technology
developments
and
so
on
occur.
It
follows
that
a
technology’s
an>-‐
fragility
is
at
best
temporary
and
itself
fragile.

•  Currently,
technology
and
systems
are
causing
considerable
organisa>onal
fragility
,
including
hard-‐
wired
use
of
technology
and
large
inflexible
sowware
business
systems
that
represent
major

purchase
decisions.

•  Cloud
compu>ng
is
an
opportunity
to
reduce
this
dependency
on
major
purchase
decisions

associated
with
large
sowware
systems,;
hence
poten>ally
trading
a
decrease
in
local
fragility
for
an

increase
in
global
fragility.

•  The
relevant
EFQM
Excellence
Model
sub-‐criteria
and
the
RADAR
scoring
matrices
again
give

considerable
insight
to
the
requirements
for
organisa>onal
an>-‐fragility,
in
rela>on
to
technology

and
informa>on.
However,
as
previously,
their
emphasis
is
primarily
on
suppor>ng
efficiency
and

effec>veness
rather
than
fragility,
robustness
and
an>-‐fragility.

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Where
Are
You?
-‐
Use
of
Informa/on
and
Technology,
and
the

Impact
of
Innova/on
(2)

•  Properly
conducted
Benchmarking
can
contribute
to
organisa>onal
an>-‐fragility
in
rela>on
to
technology
and

informa>on
systems,
but
with
the
development
of
the
Internet,
there
are
considerable
dangers
in
trus>ng

analyses
based
on
public
domain
data
sources.

•  Measuring
&
comparing
an>-‐fragility
is
inherently
more
difficult
in
comparison
to
measuring
efficiency
or

effec>veness
as
it
requires
measuring
and
comparing
the
system’s
or
organisa>on’s
ability
to
increase
its
own

resilience
over
>me
through
its
experience
of
being
stressed..
However,
it
is
easier
to
compare
fragility,
rather

than
an>-‐fragility,
by
considering
metrics
such
as
lost
>me,
number
of
process
stoppages,
breakdowns
etc.

•  Innova>on,
especially
in
the
context
of
disrup>ve
technologies,
is
a
cause
of
fragility,
and
organisa>ons
need
to

protect
themselves
against
it
and
develop
an>-‐fragile
approaches.
Innova>on
strategy
should
be
incremental

and
firms
should
focus
on
fluidity,
integrity
and
energy.

•  There
is
a
rela>ve
rigidity,
inflexibility
and
lumpiness
in
rela>on
to
technology
and
informa>on
management

decisions.
Accordingly,
we
need
to
consider
the
fragility,
robustness
and
ant-‐fragility
of
our
decision-‐making

processes
themselves.

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Where
Are
You?
-‐Supply Chain, Environment and Corporate
Social Responsibly
(1)

•  Supply Networks and Supply Chains are fragile because they rely on linkages and relationships
which go beyond the boundaries of the organisation, and on the goodwill, rationality and self-
interest of many other organisations. This can go wrong, particularly where the supply chain
crosses multiple national boundaries.
•  Organisa>ons
use
various
mechanisms
to
aêmpt
to
maximise
the
efficiency
and
effec>veness

of
supply
chains,
and
to
minimise
and
control
their
fragility.

•  Good
quality
informa>on
flow
is
an
underlying
requirement
for
an>-‐fragility
in
the
supply

chain;
if
suppliers
do
not
receive
market
informa>on,
or
receive
misinforma>on,
then
there

will
be
errors
and
delays
in
supply
that
will
impact
on
customer
sa>sfac>on
and
organisa>onal

performance.

•  The
relevant
parts
of
the
EFQM
Excellence
Model
criteria,
together
with
the
RADAR

mechanism,
are
once
again
extremely
helpful
in
giving
a
good
summary
of
many
of
the

requirements
for
an>-‐fragility.

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Where
Are
You?
-‐Supply Chain, Environment and Corporate
Social Responsibly
(2)

•  Cost is not a good proxy for fragility measurement as, e.g. a stockout may or
may not kill the organisation depending on environmental circumstances.
•  Human
skills
are
again
crucial
to
developing
an>-‐fragility
within
the

management
of
supply
chains.

•  The
informa>on
(sub)
supply
chain
is
more
problema>cal
than
the
rest
of
the

supply
chain
within
which
it
is
embedded.

•  The
environmental
and
societal/CSR
impacts
of
the
supply
chain
are
related
to

an>-‐fragility
at
a
number
of
levels:
they
impact
on
organisa4onal
fragility,
the

fragility,
robustness
or
an>-‐fragility
of
the
environment
itself,
and/or
of
society,

and
the
organisa4onal
environmental
management
system
itself,
and
its
CSR

equivalent,

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Where
Are
You?
-‐ Markets, Products and Services (1)

•  An>-‐fragility
of
product
and
service
offerings
is
more
appropriately
considered
on
the
basis
of
a

product
or
service
por{olio,
rather
than
in
terms
of
individual
products
and
services.

•  Cash
cows
are
a
source
of
robustness,
Dogs
are
a
source
of
fragility,
Ques4on
marks
could
be

sources
of
either
future
fragility
or
robustness,
and
Stars
are
at
least
temporarily
a
source
of

robustness,
but
may
become
a
source
of
fragility
over
>me.

•  The
EFQM
Excellence
Model
has
an
impressive
coverage
of
key
aspects
needed
for
an>-‐fragility

of
products
and
services,
and
customer
rela>onships.
However,
fragility
perspec>ves
of
the

offerings
are
not
explicitly
addressed,
apart
from
the
physical
lifecycle
management

considera>ons,
and
instead
efficiency
and
effec>veness
are
stressed.
In
addi>on,
there
is
no

explicit
considera>on
of
the
customer’s
view
of
fragility.

•  Fragility
for
public
sector
organisa>ons
has
dis>nct
and
subtle
differences,
e.g.
they
are
more

risk
adverse
,
and
typically
subjected
to
lower
likelihood
and
magnitude
of
risks.

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Where
Are
You?
-‐ Markets, Products and Services (2)

•  Many
large
consumer-‐facing
organisa>ons
display
rigid
fragile
customer
interfaces,
with

disempowered
staff,
restric>ve
technology/systems,
lack
of
holis>c
ownership
of
the
total

customer
experience,
inadequate
access
to
useable
data,
and
a
reliance
on
informa>on
from,

processing
by,
and
a
tendency
to
blame,
the
customer.
Authority
and
the
ability
to
make
ad

hoc
excep>onal
decisions,
or
substan>ally
change
the
system,
in
these
systems

are
owen
high

up,
and
not
easily
accessible
to
the
front
line
or
customers.

•  Different
types
or
classifica>ons
of
service
have
different
an>-‐fragility
issues;
overall

Professional
Services
may
also
be
the
most
fragile
as
they
use
a
lot
of
labour
and
need
a
lot
of

customisa>on,
so
may
be
under
cost
and
>me
pressure.

fragility
has
3
dimensions
corresponding
to
the
service
concept,
the
package
of

service
elements
and
the
service
delivery
system.
To
some
extent
this
is
hierarchical,
with

fragility
in
the
concept
poten>ally
causing
greatest
overall
fragility
to
the
service.

• 
The
Gap
Model
gives
us
with
an
interes>ng
insight
into
the
issue
of
fragility,
robustness
and

an>-‐fragility
of
the
service
provision;
examina>on
of
which
of
the
gaps
are
the

most
major
will
iden>fy
the
most
major
sources
of
fragility.

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Where
are we
now?
“Anti- Fragile
Excellence”
Prioritisation
Tools &
Techniques
Priori/sa/on
of
Improvement
–
You
cannot
improve
everything!

Improving
What
is
Worth
improving

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Your
Personal
Ac>on
Plan

•  A
limited
number
of
“areas
for
ac/on”
should
be
taken
forward.

•  This
may
include
ac/ons
to
build
on
Strengths,
as
well
as

addressing
Areas
for
Improvement

•  This
could
include,
say,
3-‐4
signiﬁcant
Improvement
Projects

•  The
Improvement
Projects
could
be
a
mix
of
“immediate

beneﬁt
driven”
and
“capability
building”
projects

•  Whilst
there
are
a
number
of
“tools”
to
help
priori/sa/on;

“personal
choice”
is
oVen
a
key
factor

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

PARETO 80:20
EFFECT
•  Based on the insight that
there is an built-in imbalance
•  between causes and
results,
•  inputs and outputs, and
•  effort and reward.
•  A minority of causes,
inputs or effort often lead to
•  a majority of results,
•  outputs or
•  rewardsCAUSE

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.


•  Two factors considered –
what will be the impact of
this change and
how easy or difficult will it
be to make this change
•  Analysis, based on these
questions, provides a
calculation to help the
selection and prioritisation
process
Easy
Low Impact
Hard
High Impact

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Strategically
important
Strategically
not important
Urgent

Improvement

ac/on
required

Maintain

high

performance

Improve
to

minimum

acceptable

levels

Poten/al
to

reduce

investment

AFI’s Strengths
Improve
vs.
Maintain
vs.
Reduce

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

We
Can
Apply
RADAR
To
the
Improvement

Projects:

–  Deﬁne
the
Results
You
Want
Them
To
Give

–  Develop
Approaches
For
Them
To
Do
This

–  Deploy
Those
Approaches

–  Assess
&
Reﬁne
Those
Approaches
Within
the

Project
ac>vity

©
2015
TOCICO.
All
Rights
Reserved.

Group
Exercise

•  Agree
Priori>sing
Criteria
For
Areas
For
Ac>on/Projects
For
Your

Organisa>on

–  What
Evidence
Do
You
Have
To
Suggest
That
These
Criteria
Are

Appropriate?

•  Based
On
These
Criteria,
Deﬁne
3
Or
4
Key
Improvement

Projects
That
Your
Organisa>on
Should
Consider

–  Suggest
Objec>ves,
Measures,
Timescales,
Ac>vi>es
and
Risks
for

Each
of
These

Professor Tony Bendell's TOCICO Workshop Slides

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Similar to Professor Tony Bendell's TOCICO Workshop Slides

Recently uploaded

Professor Tony Bendell's TOCICO Workshop Slides