Good and Bad Variation
September 14th, 2003 by Hal
This topic has struck a chord. On top of the comments listed on the previous post I've received a handful of emails directing me to materials and people who are interested in the same topic. Before I go on, I need to comment about one aspect that has come up in the comments from others.
There's good variation and bad variation. Serendipity is all about the good variation or uncertainty. Joe bumps into Frank who is doing work for Steve on a matter that Joe knows Claude has done some research. In no time Frank and Claude are speculating on different approaches to addressing Steve's needs. (Y'all follow that?) Good variation includes: discovery, learning, innovation, and making new connections. Any other suggestions?
The bad variation is principally about breakdowns. I'm using the word breakdown in a particular way. We call an event or incident a breakdown when we are interrupted in the midst of going about fulfilling our commitment. If there's no commitment, then there's no breakdown. Here's two examples:
I promised someone on a project that I'd have a task done by a given time. That person relying on my promise goes about making a promise to another person. That might include getting ready to start work anticipating that I will finish as promised. If I don't finish on time, the other person cannot get started as planned putting the second promise in jeopardy. This is a breakdown for the other person.
My son is a new driver. He has a new truck. We live about 1 mile from school. On the way to school he gets a flat tire. I forgot to add him to my AAA plan so he has to change the tire himself. He will be late for his first class. My son has been looking for the opportunity to change a tire. It's a gorgeous autumn day. His truck is in a very safe location. He has no breakdown. He isn't committed to being at school on time.
Variation that interrupts us in the process of carrying out our commitments is bad. Our commitment might be to do the project for a given budget. Some of the usual sources of breakdown are delay, misunderstood conditions for completion, operating to different standards, working carelessly or unsafely, getting sick, and being unprepared for the task at hand. Any other suggestions?
Next up: avoiding breakdowns.
Related Posts
- When Bad Things Happen to Good Projects When Bad Things Happen to Good Projects by Robert Hertzberg.A friend sent along a Quiz: Is Your Project at Risk for Disa...
- Unsettled About Variation My exploration of variation started with a chapter title The Corrupting Influence of Variability in Factory Physics (2nd...
- Avoiding Breakdowns A few faithful readers have offered some rigorous ways for looking at good and bad variation and uncertainty. (Check ou...
- Projects, Like Sailboats Are Rarely on Course It seems I'm writing about the same topic over and over. I sense there's a new way of saying something about projects, ...
- Credible Leaders Take The Time To Listen And Learn I'm sharing this morning's The Listening Leader newsletter with you to go along with my recent postings on (5R) Protocol...
September 15th, 2003 at 4:45 am
And another thing…
Good variation and bad variation.
Opportunity and Risk?
Being open to one and vigilant about the other.
September 15th, 2003 at 6:56 pm
Wonderful topic…other sources sources of breakdowns, or variability, include late delivery of material and equipment, design errors, change orders, scope changes, equipment and tool malfunctions, improper crew utilization, labor strikes, environmental effects (rain, hot, cold, wind, humid), poorly designed production systems, and accidents.
Deming and other Quality movement gurus have warned about two kinds of variation:
1. Common-cause variation (aka as chance variation or chronic variation).- This is an inherently random source of variation. It is a manifestation of the process capability and can’t be avoided unless the process capability is increased, i.e., the whole process/product has to be re-designed - A major change!
2. Special Cause variation (aka assignable variation or sporadic variation). - This is a sign that the existing process is not operating according to its intended/specified/designed capability. It is an unusual but controllable source of variation that requires a correction to bring the process or procedures back to its normal levels. This kind has to be addressed right away but does not require a major change in the existing process but more of a calibration to the existing process.
Deming asserts that �the difference between these is one of the most difficult things to comprehend� and that it is a futile attempt to address quality problems without understanding the two types of variations. Therefore, Deming recommended that special cause variation be addressed first before addressing common cause variation.
Sorry for the length…I got carried away….Best, Tariq