1 / 63

TOC Tools for Mentors Day 2

TOC Tools for Mentors Day 2. A Workshop for MEC/QCC Faculty and FYP Advisors July 12-14, 2011. Janice F. Cerveny, Ph.D. ( CervenyJ@fau.edu ) 561-297-0052 Florida Atlantic University – College of Business Boca Raton, FL 33431. Plan of Attack. Day 2

dimaia
Download Presentation

TOC Tools for Mentors Day 2

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. TOC Tools for MentorsDay 2 A Workshop for MEC/QCC Faculty and FYP Advisors July 12-14, 2011 Janice F. Cerveny, Ph.D. (CervenyJ@fau.edu) 561-297-0052 Florida Atlantic University – College of Business Boca Raton, FL 33431

  2. Plan of Attack Day 2 • Recap of what was done and learned from Day 1 • Cause-Effect • Trouble shooting problems you encountered • Debrief: Other uses • Conditional Logic: a second powerful tool to critical thinking • “How To”: Conflict Clouds, assumptions and injections TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  3. 45-60 Minutes Day 1 Recap • What did you learn? • Note: relationship between retention and time • What was pretty easy to do vs. what problems did you encounter or questions you now have? TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  4. Be Prepared… • Cause-Effect is initially harder than it seems. • Reading through something that is logically-sound is seductively simple. Constructing it takes work. • Let’s take a more in-depth look at the common mistakes… and what to do about them. TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  5. Troubleshooting some common rookie mistakes with Cause-Effect • Common mistake 1: Not writing entities (UDEs) clearly • Keep statements simple (avoid the use of AND, or OR) • Be sure to not incorporate BOTH a cause and an effect (don’t use the words “because” or “due to”) Examples TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  6. Troubleshooting some common rookie mistakes with Cause-Effect • Common mistake #2: “Transatlantic arrows” (It’s NOT clear as to how or why the cause leads to the effect) and “Insufficiency” or “lack of clarity” – UDE We are losing sales. Examples ?? UDE We currently can’t meet promised shipping dates. Customers get annoyed & leave when we miss promised delivery dates. “There’s gotta be more…” TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  7. Troubleshooting some common rookie mistakes with Cause-Effect • Common mistake #3: Not recognizing the importance of incorporating important “assumptions” and “facts of life” Widely-accepted practice or widely-held belief Commonly-observed behaviors (i.e. reactions or responses) Company loses business Assumption FOL An idle resource is wasteful. Customers don’t like long LTs Customers often stop doing business with companies that do things we don’t like Company has long LTs Assumptions and Facts of Life help explain how causes lead to effects and usually result in additional entities that get linked with the ellipse (the logical AND) TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  8. Sample Cause-Effect diagram showing interdependencies between the UDEs  On Slide 11 “Try to find entering links (causes) to the bottom UDE” UDE We are losing sales. FOL Customers don’t like long LTs Customers get annoyed/ leave when we miss promised delivery dates. Queues (WIP) & backlogs increase LT increases when there’s a lot of WIP/backlog. FOL UDE We currently can’t meet promised shipping dates. FOL We sometimes put newer orders for which we have supplies ahead of ones that are missing supplies). Assumption UDE We only get 2/3 of supplies on-time. (We believe that) an idle resource is wasteful. FOL We cannot produce what is scheduled w/out supplies. ?? TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011 Assumption

  9. UDE Lead times are too long. UDE Too much work in process. Queues increase Behavior: Do ‘easy’ tasks first [those w/ data, info, etc. available] Behavior: Do ‘batches’ of same task at same time. Measurement: Efficiencies Measurement: Fewer “set-ups” POLICY: Idle time is bad. An important precept of TOC is that measurements often contribute to “undesirable effects”. The cause-effect tool helps illustrate how and why policies, measures and behaviors are a critical component of determining what to change. People behave according to how they’re measured. Key Assumption:An idle resource is a major waste TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  10. A thought about assumptions… “As we advance deeper into the knowledge economy, the basic assumptions underlying much of what is taught and practiced in the name of management are hopelessly out of date.” “… few policies remain valid for as long as 20 to 30 years. Nor do most assumptions about the economy, about business, about technology remain valid longer than that… Yet most of our assumptions about business, technology and organizations are at least 50 years old…” “They have outlived their time.” Peter Drucker, Fortune Magazine, Oct. 5, 1998 TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  11. Troubleshooting some common rookie mistakes with Cause-Effect • Common mistake #4: Confusing causes and effects (“House on Fire”) Is it really the case where Isn’t it more that… Then Don‘t confuse or think that correlation is the same thing as causation… Attributing “poor communication”, “lack of training” or lazy, unmotivated students as the CAUSE… these are often effects (closer to the TOP of the cause-effect diagram)! There is a house on fire IF I see fire engines TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  12. Cause-Effect Diagrams – – – – – – – – – – – TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  13. Uses of Cause-Effect Break Out into 5 groups • Group 1: COR 100’s Course Objectives, • Group 2: COR 100’s Learning Competencies • Group 3: COR 100’s Content Areas • Group 4: COR 100’s Learning Activities • Group 5: COR 100’s Syllabus Brainstorm examples of how or where cause-effect or negative branches can impact components of each one. Report Out TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  14. Bonus • Let’s look back at the concerns and obstacles we surfaced in Day 1 as well… how many of these are at least partially addressed? TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  15. Plan of Attack Day 2 • Recap of what was done and learned from Day 1 • Cause-Effect • Trouble shooting problems you encountered • Debrief: Other uses • Conditional Logic: a second powerful tool to critical thinking • “How To”: Conflict Clouds, assumptions and injections TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  16. A “primer” on clouds Conflict diagrams (or clouds): a tool that graphically captures two opposing “wants”, the important needs or prerequisites that drive each side’s position and overall, common objective… Tilt the resolution in your favor Strive to have a resolution that is a win for you Successfully resolve conflicts Strive to maintain a good relationship with the other side Tilt the resolution in favor of the other side … a resolution for which can be found by surfacing and challenging logical assumptions at key linkages between the cloud’s entities. TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  17. Types of Conflict Clouds TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  18. The “plan” For EACH type of conflict cloud we will: • Learn the “identifiers” as to when each tool is required • Understand how to properly construct the diagram • Practice surfacing assumptions at the appropriate linkages and developing solutions, and • Learn/role play the communication process that accompanies each. Break Out Groups will “practice” using situations that faculty, advisors and mentors face  creating an initial “reference bank” to serve as a resource of examples and assistance TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  19. Day-to-Day Personal Conflicts Indicators: • There is a “break” in communication • Both parties (if it’s an interpersonal conflict) feel that the other side is stubborn, obnoxious and illogical • Relationships are in jeopardy • There appears to be little room for an acceptable compromise • Should NOT be a “chronic” conflict TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  20. Day-to-Day Personal Conflicts Appropriate Situations: • You (or a few others) want X but one or more others don’t want X • You want to have or do Y but sense that you shouldn’t have or do Y. TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  21. 20 Minutes Exercise 1 • Group Break-Outs: • Brainstorm appropriate, common “conflicts” • Faculty • Advisors/Mentors • Administration • Common Student Situations • Complete the template shown on the next slide. TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  22. Select an Appropriate Conflict ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Write a brief explanation (story) describing it: ________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  23. Step 3 Step 1 Step 5 B What need am I trying to satisfy? D What do I want? A Why do we bother to negotiate? A Why do we want to solve the problem? C What need is s/he trying to satisfy? D' What does theOTHER SIDEwant”? Step 2 Step 4 Day-to-Day Personal Conflicts Construction Common Objective Step 6: Check the logic - and that the conflict is clearly seen in D-D' Actions or Wantsor Prerequisites Important Needs or Requirements TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  24. Some tips/advice • Watch the sequence – answer the questions in the order given. • You might struggle to verbalize the content of entities B and C • Don’t obsess over it – many times the process of attempting to surface assumptions will help you state them more precisely. • When you do the logic check – listen to what is being said and actually CHECK that it is logical… TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  25. Exercise 2: In groups of 2-3: • Select ONE of the scenarios generated before and construct the cloud using the template provided on the following slide. TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  26. 30 Minutes Exercise 2 3. What need are you trying to satisfy? 1. What do YOU want? D B A D' C 5. Why do you both want to solve the problem? 4. What need is s/he trying to satisfy? 2. What does the other side want? TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  27. Day-to-Day Personal Conflicts Surfacing Assumptions and Finding a Solution • HOW: • To surface assumptions: On YOUR side of the cloud (B-D), perform the “logic check” and complete the phrase after adding the word “because”... • Try emphasizing different key words to help stimulate thinking. • To find a solution: THINK of what you can do or change to remove or negate the assumption. TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  28. Some tips/advice • When attempting to surface assumptions: • Try emphasizing different parts of the entities • Try to get at least 3 assumptions • Stay/work on YOUR (B-D) side of the cloud • Review your assumptions: • Sometimes, your list is actually more reasons or justifications for your “want” (D). If this happens, try to synthesize them into a single statement which, in all likelihood is actually your “need” (B). • The same thing may also apply to the C-D′ side. TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  29. 20 Minutes Exercise 3: In your small break-out groups: • Surface at least 2-3 assumptions on each “side” of the conflict (B-D, C-D′ and D-D′). • Identify at least one “injection” of solution that will successfully challenge any assumption on each of those linkages. TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  30. Day-to-Day Personal Conflicts The Communication Process • Present the conflict in reverse order from how you constructed it (always with the OTHER side’s perspective before your own.) • IF the other side makes corrections – have them change what you had written… • Focus attention on the importance of achieving the NEEDS, not the wants and suggest that a way to find a solution is to surface the assumptions. • Surface the assumptions on YOUR side only TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  31. Day-to-Day Personal Conflicts The Communication Process (cont.) • Wait for the other side surface the injections. • IF the other side surfaces an injection that will “break” an assumption, establish any additional needed clarity. • IF the other side does NOT – leave the cloud. Often, the other side will come back with a solution. At the very least - the relationship is not damaged. TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  32. 20 Minutes Exercise 4: In your small break-out groups: • Role play the communication process TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  33. 30-45Minutes Debrief of Day-to-Day Conflict Clouds Tool and Process • What did you learn? • What was pretty easy to do vs. what problems did you encounter or questions you now have? TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  34. Uses of Day-to-Day Conflict Clouds Tool and Process Brainstorm examples of how or where the conflict cloud tool can impact components of each of the following: • Group 1: COR 100’s Course Objectives, • Group 2: COR 100’s Learning Competencies • Group 3: COR 100’s Content Areas • Group 4: COR 100’s Learning Activities • Group 5: COR 100’s Syllabus Let’s look back at the concerns and obstacles we surfaced in Day 1… how many of these are at least partially addressed? TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  35. Chronic Conflicts: A specialized application Chronic Conflicts (whether with others or internally) are ones that have gone on too long, are so deep and/or cause such high emotion or a vicious cycle of negatives that the base ‘conflict cloud’ approach is not enough by itself… To address Chronic Conflicts – the goal is to help individuals identify and evaluate possible solutions until one they feel comfortable pursuing. Thus, what is done to address Chronic Conflicts is also known as an “initiating skills” tool. TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  36. IDENTIFICATION: Indicators that this Tool is Required • Same fight • Many fights – same person • High emotion • Total acquiescence • Feel trapped • Same complaints over and over • Inability to even talk about the issue • “Here we go again” – the script… Effect on the organization? Mistrust, poor morale, absenteeism, turnover, cynicism, inertia… Effect on individuals? Demoralized, absenteeism, turnover, “revolving door”, cynicism, inertia… TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  37. Describe a situation that you think is a chronic conflict _______________________________________ ________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ What is the impact on your quality of life? ________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ Pointer re: Construction TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  38. Practice constructing YOUR OWN chronic conflict 3. WHY do you want D? What NEED are you trying to satisfy? 1. What do you really want? D B A YOUR side OTHER(s) side D' C 5. What do BOTH of you feel might be achieved if you resolved the conflict? 2. What does the other side really want? 4. WHY does the other side resist D? What NEED are they trying to satisfy with D′? TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  39. Practice constructing YOUR OWN chronic conflict 3. WHY do you want D? What NEED are you trying to satisfy? 1. What do you really want? D B Produce grads who can manage effectively Teach in alignment w/ TOC/TP (non- traditional stuff) A Viewed as doing our job as educators D' C Don’t Teach TOC (teach traditional stuff) 5. What do BOTH of you feel might be achieved if you resolved the conflict? Be responsible (teach ‘proven’ material) 2. What does the other side really want? 4. WHY does the other side resist D? What NEED are they trying to satisfy with D′? TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  40. 20 Minutes Breakout Practice Time • Individually or in small break out groups, write out a description of your chronic conflict [use slide 37]. • Construct the cloud [use template on slide 38]. • Check your cloud’s logic with a peer. • Partners: CHECK the logic – don’t just listen to them read it! • Volunteers to share results? TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  41. Developing Solutions – Injections AND Negative Branches! The key to finding the beginning solution to be used to achieve our objective is to focus on the assumptions in the linkage arrows – at B-D. • HOW: • Break B-D arrow via surfacing and choosing an assumption you want/feel you are able to challenge. • Remain focused on the common objective, A. • ACCEPT D′ • Prepare the Negative Branches of your injection that you ALONG WITH the other side can ‘trim’. TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  42. Developing Solutions that achieve the objective of Chronic Conflicts • Break B-D arrow via surfacing and choosing an assumption you want/are able to challenge. • B-D Assumptions: • Our graduates are all ineffective when they finish. • The best way to  effectiveness is the new stuff. • ALL COB faculty must teach in alignment • Everyone must  everything now. Most In order to … INJECTION: B D We must… Produce grads who can manage effectively Teach in alignment w/ TOC/TP (non- traditional stuff) TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  43. A Viewed as doing our job as educators Developing Solutions that achieve the objective of Chronic Conflicts • Remain focused on the common objective. • Use it to help you SELECT, evaluate and tackle the best injection. • I cannot insult my colleagues nor imply they AREN’T doing their job (or that they’re doing a bad job of it). • I might not have enough ‘standing’ (i.e. I might not be viewed as the right person to tell others anything about this or how to accomplish it.) Injection: TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  44. D′ Colleagues DON’T teach in alignment with TOC stuff Developing Solutions that achieve the objective of Chronic Conflicts • Accept D′ Where’s the logic in THAT??? TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  45. WHY you must “accept” D′ 80 I must accept D′ 70 The only possible location to resolve the conflict is to break B-D 40 We must not challenge A, B or C 40 I cannot break C-D′ 60 I cannot ‘break’ D-D′ 10 I have failed to convince the other side to give up D′/yield 30 There is no amicable compromise to the conflict. 20 The objective and needs are basic to our interactions & relationship. TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011 © Avraham Y. Goldratt Institute 1995; used w/ permission

  46. Developing Solutions that achieve the objective of Chronic Conflicts • Prepare the Negative Branches of your injection that you ALONG WITH the other side can ‘trim’. INJECTION:Get a few significant players from each department to  to TOC stuff. • Positive Outcomes: • Persuading a few has a greater likelihood of success. • THEY can then help me. • I can stay on good terms with “the stubborn ones”. • Possible Negatives Outcomes: • Most b-school faculty are unaware of TOC & its applications • They don’t convince others. • We all get labeled fad-following charlatans. TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  47. Developing Solutions that achieve the objective of Chronic Conflicts • Prepare the Negative Branches of your injection that you ALONG WITH the other side can ‘trim’. • Start the NBR with the D′ and your injection as the entry points. We all get labeled fad-following charlatans. Inertia sets in They don’t convince others. Get a few significant players from each department to  to TOC stuff. Colleagues don’t teach TOC stuff. TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  48. About your negative branch The NBR enables you to clearly see all the issues you face and how they are connected. • IF you see too much about the injection that appears insurmountable– discard it and try another injection-NBR until you find one that is more palatable. • IF you ‘run out’ of injections, • Recognize that you are not ready to sort it out (or that you are blocked by your own paradigm). Thus, LEAVE THE CONFLICT for awhile. Your Goal: FIND one acceptable injection with a clean negative branch built for it. TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  49. 30Minutes Debrief of Chronic Conflict Cloud + NBR Tool and Process • What did you learn? • What was pretty easy to do vs. what problems did you encounter or questions you now have? TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

  50. Uses of Chronic Conflict Cloud + NBR Tool and Process Brainstorm examples of how or where the tools and process can impact components of each of the following: • Group 1: COR 100’s Course Objectives, • Group 2: COR 100’s Learning Competencies • Group 3: COR 100’s Content Areas • Group 4: COR 100’s Learning Activities • Group 5: COR 100’s Syllabus Let’s look back at the concerns and obstacles we surfaced in Day 1… how many of these are at least partially addressed? TOC Tools for Mentors Workshop, July 12-14, 2011

More Related