Category Archives: Continuous Improvement

Improve Sales by focusing on customer/supplier relationships

sales

Continuing with the theme of improving our sales process, it’s important to remind ourselves that satisfied and delighted customers are the lifeblood of any organization.

Providing customers with the highest quality products and services at the best possible price starts with clearly understanding the customers’ needs and requirements and then designing and implementing processes that consistently deliver value.

But there are two types of customers:

  • external customers
  • internal customers

It’s important to recognize that both types of customers are important and have needs that must be met. External customers are the people who pay for our products and services. As Dr. Deming said: “No customers, no orders, no jobs!”

Paying attention to the external customers’ requirements is essential and helps us keep the entire organization focused on doing value added work (i.e., “work the external customer would pay for if they know what we were doing”).

However, to effectively meet the external customers’ needs, we must also work with our internal customers. Understanding and meeting our internal customers’ needs and requirements helps the process of producing our product or service to flow smoothly, be problem-free and deliver the highest quality at the lowest total cost. When we work with our internal customers we are, in fact, “internal suppliers.”

Of course, this customer-supplier relationship extends to our external suppliers as well. From our external customer’s point of view, we are responsible for what they buy from us; and our suppliers are part of the system.

It is increasingly important to build strong customer/supplier partnerships that ensure that we get exactly what we need, in the right quantity, at the right price to be able to meet our external customers’ needs.

Studying Our Work to Improve…

If we’d like to increase sales by improving our “sales” process, we should begin by studying our work. As a first step, identify our top customers’ 3-5 “must-have” requirements. As requirements are identified, it helps to understand their relative importance. What requirements does the customer consider “musts” versus “wants?”

Keep in mind that customer requirements are constantly changing as well, and yesterday’s “wants” may become tomorrow’s “musts.”

Sales Process Improvement: 5 best practices & 20 questions!

sales

While many businesses make efforts to improve production, distribution, and various administrative work processes, it is less common to find organizations that focus on applying the fundamentals of Continuous Improvement to the sales process.

However, our research and experience indicate the selling process is more complex than many people realize. In addition, we have consistently found that the largest waste in most commercial and industrial organizations is lost gross margin that results from sales not made, sub-optimal pricing, and excessive costs in sales-related processes.

So, leaving aside the “selling skills” or “charisma” that is often associated with those perceived as the most successful sellers, when you consider the day-to-day activities required of field-based sales professionals, there are some proven best practices that can help boost field-day efficiency, which include the following five:

  1. Pre-call planning: by planning each sales call in advance, in writing, sales people can position themselves to accomplish more in less time, thus increasing personal productivity as well as accelerating overall cycle-time. Not only will conducting more comprehensive sales calls increase efficiency, but the habit will also make a stronger, more positive impact on customers. Many who have embraced this best-practice report that their customers recognize the difference and, over time, become more willing to schedule meetings, thus enabling them to more easily make more calls each day.
  2. Set a daily call volume goal. This may sound like an unnecessary step, but a surprising number of sales people are unable to quantify the actual average number of sales calls they make each day. As author Jack Falvey has said, “Want more sales? Make more calls.” By setting an average personal goal, (or company requirement) which will vary depending on the nature of each territory, sellers are often able to self-motivate more effectively and make more calls per day.
  3. Geo-plan: by creating a strategic geographic or travel plan each day, outside sales people can minimize drive time and optimize “face” time (Or, in our current situation, “virtual face time.”). The best plans will begin by creating territory quadrants and then mapping the locations of customers and key prospects. The rule-of-thumb is to avoid traveling beyond two quadrants in any given day, so when an appointment is set in one area, try to schedule meetings or plan to visit others in the same general region to enable a maximum number of interactions in a minimum amount of time.
  4. Bookend each day by scheduling an appointment early in the morning and another late in the afternoon. This will promote “staying the course” as opposed to deciding to drive back to the office early to do administrative work. This best-practice might also help to achieve item #2 above.
  5. Try to schedule next steps (i.e., follow-up meetings, conference calls, etc.) “on the spot” before the conclusion of each sales call. This simple best practice can significantly boost efficiency for two reasons. First, it helps sales people more easily populate their calendars for future selling days in the field; and second, it can help shorten selling cycles by securing time with buyers sooner than could be done otherwise.

But the sales process extends well-beyond a day in the field, as it encompasses everything from identifying a lead to delivering a solution. Considering this broad spectrum, it is really not surprising that the largest waste within most businesses can be found in the sales area.

The first step toward improvement or to moving from “where we are now to where we’d like to be if everything were right,” is to identify specific areas of sales process waste, and a good way to begin might be to answer the following 20 questions:

  1. What is our current market share?
  2. What are our customers’ requirements?
  3. How well are we meeting these requirements?
  4. What would it take to truly delight our customers?
  5. How long does the sales process take from lead to sale?
  6. What is our lead conversion ratio?
  7. What were the top 3 reasons for lost sales over the past quarter?
  8. How many calls do our sales people make, on average, each day?
  9. How much time do we spend talking with uninterested or unqualified leads?
  10. How do we continually improve our sales team’s skills and habits?
  11. What percentage of prospects contact us first?
  12. How does this percentage (#11) compare with industry data?
  13. Does the sales process take less time to complete for inbound leads? If so, how much less?
  14. What is our response time to customer or prospect inquiries?
  15. How many customer complaints do we receive?
  16. How much time do our sales people spend interceding or responding to complaints?
  17. What is done with the information associated with customer complaints?
  18. How do customer complaints or how does customer dissatisfaction impact our ability to make sales?
  19. How often are discounts extended, and what is the average discount?
  20. Are discounts offered due to competition or in response to dissatisfaction?

Clearly there are many ways to analyze and improve the productivity of an organization’s sales process, but these five best practices and twenty questions are good starting points.

how to lower the cost of disengaged workers

cost die

Continuing with the theme of employee engagement, or the lack thereof, people readily agree that disengaged workers are “expensive.”

For example, recent data shared by Gallup indicates that 74% of actively disengaged workers are actively seeking alternative employment. Along those lines, turnover is much higher among disengaged workers, as is absenteeism.

In addition, if the predominant environment within an organization is one of disengagement, productivity and profitability are lower, there is little or no continuous improvement, and pay tends to be higher.

Clearly it is advantageous to engage our employees or, at least, make a concerted effort to address and lower the costs associated with disengagement.

Here are a few suggestions for driving engagement within a business organization and for lowering the costs of disengagement based on input from CI professionals and leaders:

  • Enhanced recruiting and on-boarding – At an Engagement World Conference, leaders from several organizations explained how they had increased employee engagement and retention beginning at the recruiting stage. The first steps involved the inclusion of the organization’s mission and vision into interviewing conversations, and a more conscious effort to identify and hire people with aligned goals. Adding a mentor program to the on-boarding process helped new hires assimilate faster so they became more productive in less time.

    Enabling people to achieve higher levels of productivity and success early-on not only promotes greater engagement levels, but also reduces first-year attrition rates, which are often among the highest. Early churn tends to demoralize the entire workforce as well, so in addition to reducing rehiring and re-training costs, the costs associated with negativity within the existing workforce are also reduced.
  • Flexibility and work/life balance – Employer/employee relationships, expectations, and engagement criteria have evolved significantly over the course of the pandemic. Depending on the type of organization, scheduling and work-from-home options has become a priority in many workplaces.
  • Consistent performance management and communication – People need to find meaning in their work, and understand how their work aligns with organizational objectives. This point was well made by several speakers in an episode of TED Radio Hour, called The Meaning of Work. If managers communicate a shared purpose or sense of direction, and encourage employees to openly share their perspectives and input, then they can increase employee engagement.

    This type of communication works best when systematized as part of structured, proactive approach to performance management. This methodology includes frequent feedback rather than annual performance appraisals and reviews, ongoing engagement surveys (i.e., e-Net Promoter Score) with real-time feedback loops, and protocols for keeping people aware of how individual work impacts organizational goals and how it aligns with mission and vision.
  • Learning and development – A young, seemingly fast-rising junior executive had been working at a large bank for just over six years. When he was asked about his job and how he felt about it he said, “The job’s OK.” His lack of enthusiasm was evident, and when pressed to say more he added, “Well, I’m not really learning much anymore.” He went on to confirm that he was not truly engaged, and that he did not make much of an extra or discretionary effort, which engaged workers regularly put forward. Only recently has it become clear to forward-thinking business leaders that the path to sustainable employee engagement is to drive productivity, and to do so through ongoing education and empowerment. In support of this perspective, a recent article in Human Resource Executive magazine identified “continuous learning opportunities and personal development” as being two of the four key criteria (scheduling flexibility and social responsibility being the other two) recent graduates value most as they evaluate career options.
  • Recognition and rewards – Recognizing and rewarding employees is not a new concept, but if the goal is to engage workers rather than simply acknowledge milestones (such as length of service), then the approach must be different and must be aligned with what is meaningful to each recipient.

What to do when Improvement projects stall or hit the wall

question mark what to do

Our previous post shared ten reasons why improvement projects stall or peter out.

But simply knowing “why” doesn’t help when we’ve hit the wall!

A poll of CI leaders and specialists revealed the following suggestions when a project grinds to a halt:

  • Go back to basics… “be true to the Continuous Improvement process and manage it; review systems, put routines in place, collect additional data, and reaffirm objectives.”
  • Review of CI fundamentals and roles with both participants and sponsors can often result in getting projects back on track. “It’s important for sponsors to fully understand their role; otherwise, when things begin to shutdown they are unable to provide the necessary support.”
  • Encourage project participants by showing or reminding them of “what’s in it for them” (WIIFT) as opposed to how the organization-as-a-whole.
  • Reassign people and tasks to bring about fresh outlooks and give everyone a shot in the arm that helps them get back on track.
  • Communicate! This must involve running effective team meetings and action planning sessions as well as publicizing success, or even the lack of it. “It’s important to celebrate the wins and achievements to help anchor the participants, and also to make the results as well as the activities known throughout the organization.”
  • Root-out naysayers.
  • Conduct more frequent project reviews.
  • Make sure you’re working on the right things; on things that will make a difference.
  • Measure progress and results in a “visual” way.
  • Apply the principles outlined in the “4 Disciplines of Execution”
    • Identify and focus on a Wildly Important Goal (a WIG)
    • Monitor and act on LEAD measures
    • Keep a compelling SCOREBOARD updated by the people doing the work
    • Develop a rhythm of ACCOUNTABILITY.

10 Reasons improvement Efforts hit the wall

failing improvement projects

Regardless of methodology or intention, Continuous Improvement efforts frequently lose their momentum, leaving quality and improvement leaders looking for ways to reenergize teams, reengage with sponsors, and resurrect or redirect their projects.

In a poll of business leaders and quality experts, the following “top 10” reasons for what we have often referenced as “discontinuous” improvement are:

  1. Lack of managerial or sponsor support, or failure on their part to commit the right resources
  2. People believe they have “already eliminated all the waste”
  3. The law of diminishing returns… if projects last too long people lose interest
  4. Absence of quick-wins / results; if teams don’t achieve at least some early results, then their focus and effort tends to drop-off
  5. Disengaged culture in which “naysayers” discourage teams
  6. Too many projects / Scope creep
  7. Changes in top management and organizational goals
  8. CI is viewed only as a cost-cutting tool with short-term or ad-hoc focus
  9. CI is viewed as a “side line” job rather than the cultural “way we do things”
  10. People are “stretched” with day-to-day responsibilities and the prevailing culture is one in which the “don’t have time” for improvement projects

it’s about time!

time_is_money

When we are faced with the task of evaluating and improving a business, we have many metrics to choose from. We can ‘follow the money’ — study the spending: where does it go, how does it compare to previous periods or to competitors; we may look at market share or wallet share; we might measure revenue per employee or benchmark against the competition; or we might measure customer satisfaction or the customer experience.

But one of the most powerful measurements for helping to make breakthrough improvements is also one of the simplest: following where the time goes.

In fact, many agree that time is the most universal and most valuable component of work and work processes! Consider that by determining how much time it takes to complete a cycle of value (i.e., building a widget, closing the books, making a sale, completing a project, etc.) and how much of that is truly adding value, an organization captures information that provides a motivating vision and road map for making improvements.

Key areas to study are delays, over-processing, rework, transportation, and inspection; and using time as a measure to find and focus opportunities for improvement has three big advantages:

  1. time drives important business results
  2. time is universally applicable
  3. it is very simple to do — i.e., something anyone can do!

Once you’ve decided that managing time is an ideal way to reduce costs and increase customer (internal and external) satisfaction, you might try using the following five steps for effective measurement:

  1. Identify the process to study and improve — where it starts and where it ends.
  2. Confirm with the customer (internal or external) the key element of value the process yields. Sometimes this is obvious, but in some cases not so much. An accurate understanding of what the customer considers of real value is key to any improvement effort.
  3. Determine how long the process actually takes today. This number— in minutes, hours, days, or weeks, whichever is best suited to the process — is the TOTAL component of the ratio we will calculate in step 5. Some questions often arise at this step:
    • Should we collect “person hours” or elapsed time? Measure elapsed time. If you study and improve elapsed time, you increase customer satisfaction and quality as well as costs. Person hours spent on the work almost always decline when an organization focuses on elapsed time.
    • How precise do we need to be? It is valuable to get good data about the total time elapsed from start to finish, if only through a modest sample. Of course, there will be variation — and the variation can be quite substantial for some processes. Keep the raw data and calculate the average TOTAL.
  4. Determine which steps actually add value and how much time is spent on those. For a step to be considered to add value, it must:
    • Be directly related to what the customer values and would pay for (if they knew what we were doing)
    • Actually change something of value — the product, database, approval status, whatever, (inspecting something or moving something does not actually change the thing, so does not ‘add value’)
    • Do so for the first and only time. Fixing or reworking something does NOT add value, because it compensates for not being done completely or correctly the first time.
    • Often these steps must be done today, because they compensate for an imperfection somewhere in the process. Correcting those imperfections is what will yield the improvements.
  5. Study the differences between the total time and the value adding time to identify and eliminate the root causes. Then calculate again. To calculate the ratio: if total time today is 55 hours and value adding time is 2 ½ hours, then the ratio would be either:
    • Total-to-Value: 55 divided by 2.5 = 22, which means that the organization spends 22 hours for every 1 hour of value add, or
    • Value-To-Total: 2.5 divided by 55 = 4.5%, which means that 4.5% of total elapsed time is actually spent adding value.

It doesn’t matter which you use, as long as you are consistent.

mistake-proofing with “poka-yokes”

poka-yoke

Are you familiar with the term “poka-yoke?”

If so, then you know that a poka-yoke is a specially-designed feature of a process or a product that either prevents common mistakes or catches them before they cause trouble.

Often referred to as “mistake-proofing,” The term comes from the Japanese, meaning “inadvertent error” and “avoidance” and was popularized by the engineer Shingeo Shingo in his crusade to improve quality by eliminating human errors.

We see and use poka-yokes every day. For example, years ago, a dead car battery due to forgetfulness was a common problem. Since then, a poka-yoke was designed to sound a warning bell if the car lights are left on. A “warning” poka-yoke is a big help, but not fool proof. A more powerful poka-yoke has since been built-into newer cars and turns the lights on and off automatically.

Similarly, you see a wire gate swing out of the front of a school bus to guide children safely across the street; you are asked to double-enter a new password to guard against typos; wires are color-coded; highways have rumble strips.

All of these are features of a product or process that were specially designed to reduce the likelihood of a particular human error.

The best poka-yokes are easy to implement and involve inexpensive changes to the materials, tools, environment, or process. They fit the problem so perfectly they seem obvious once they are deployed. These poka-yokes render the specific human error that was targeted for elimination almost impossible to make.

For example, color-coding, redesigning forms, and other changes to the materials you use may reduce human errors. One company reduced accidents by replacing the white work gloves with neon gloves so that people were more aware of the hand position. One financial services company greatly reduced the number of transactions they had to reject due to customer error by analyzing the data, identifying which mistakes were easiest to make, and then redesigning the form to make required fields hard to overlook.

Yet a simple and powerful poka-yoke is almost never the first solution a team comes up with. The best ideas take creativity, collaboration, and the time to press on past the weaker solutions that come to mind first.

Most often, the first idea is one of the following:

(a) ask people to be more careful,

(b) ask management to send an email telling people to be more careful, or

(c) schedule a training session in which people are instructed to, yes, be more careful!

These solutions might help for a little while, but improvement is fleeting. Instead, we must keep brainstorming ideas until we can find a way to inexpensively make it much easier to do the work right or at least automatically alert a person when he or she has just made the mistake.

Here are some categories or types organized in increasing degrees of effective prevention:

  • Job aides are a little less fleeting than exhorting people to be more careful, because these are present at the work site when the work is being done. Examples include: cheat sheets, check lists, laminated guides, photographic work instructions. We’ve all seen and used these. They make it easier to do things right because they aid our memory, if we consult them. Their weakness is that we can forget to consult them especially when we are rushed, tired, or distracted.
  • Situational visual guides are better. When you design a form, design it to draw attention to the key items. If a particular type of transaction or operation requires an extra step that could easily be forgotten, consider using color coding or conditional formatting to highlight the important information. These can be effective and are often very quick and inexpensive to implement.
  • Situational audio alerts can be even better such as alarm bells when you are about to make a mistake. If you were trying to reduce pick and pack errors, you might want to set up a bell that will ring whenever the package weight does not equal the expected weight for the order. This may be a little harder to implement, but in certain environments the audio signal may be much more effective than a visual cue.
  • Automatic guides can reduce mistakes by leading you through the necessary fields or screens of a data transaction, the safest path through the warehouse, or the correct movement under a jigsaw. Automatic guides can often be designed fairly inexpensively, although may require some programming.
  • Automatic controls are the most effective. These are design features that do not allow a certain mistake. For example, a gas cap may be tethered to the car to control against its loss. An automatic shutoff switch will prevent the work from continuing under the wrong conditions. A form requiring a valid entry is used to prevent missing or invalid entries. These generally involve more time and investment to implement, but if the mistakes have serious consequences automatic controls are the best option.

Fortunately there are some proven best-practices for “how to” design the best poka-yokes, and that will be the subject of our next post.

3 Additional causes of CI derailment

derailment

Continuing with the theme of our previous post on “discontinuous improvement,” we have identified three additional causes of Continuous Improvement derailment.

As you’ll see, all three are preventable. But, like many things in life, simple things are not always easy.

For example, removing barriers or obstacles to Continuous Improvement seems a simple and straightforward objective. Yet there are many instances in which the people in charge fail to do so!

One barrier that commonly falls into the ignored category is that of an important individual in the organization who is simply not on board. The individual may feel uncomfortable or threatened by the new way of working and leading; or may simply not agree with one or more key principles of a continuously improving organization, such as the import of what the customer values, or the way to treat employees, or the imperative of constantly improving the work, or using facts and data instead of just opinion. When someone in a position of influence is not on board, he or she creates a misalignment between what people hear and what they see.

If the misalignment is not corrected, the situation has the potential to bring the CI journey to a close.

Similarly, while communication and alignment are essential, they are never really sufficient. People also need the training and skill development to follow the organization’s improvement methodology. Lack of capability or training will prevent people from progressing very far.

But personnel policies or practices can also easily obstruct productivity improvements. Sometimes jobs are defined so narrowly that managers cannot easily move people around to take advantage of productivity improvements. When managers are rewarded financially or in organizational prestige based on the number of people who report to them rather than how efficiently and effectively they operate, managers have powerful disincentives to increase productivity and move their people to where they would add more value.

Often organizations lack an effective mechanism to match up the skills and capability that one department has in excess resources with the needs of another department with a need for resources. To move resources effectively to their point of maximum value, you must develop a system of information about the skills and capabilities of your workforce. A thorough and cross-functional knowledge of people and their skills can enable an organization to move freed up resources to where they can contribute the most value rather than laying off the excess people and snuffing out motivation for further improvements.

No one but the leadership of the organization can remove the barriers to effective continuous improvement. Careful monitoring of progress to identify and remove barriers is essential to achieving a culture of continuous improvement.

Lack of quick success or “quick wins” is another common cause of CI derailments.

Early successes are the nourishment required to keep improvements going. If improvements are too slow, people get discouraged. People begin to adjust the pace of their effort to the slow pace of results.

Third, letting up on the gas after successful improvement initiatives is a more common occurrence than one might think!

In other words, success often carries with it the seeds of failure: the greater the success, the less urgency is felt for further improvements. Without a continued level of urgency, momentum toward improvement will disappear. People will be pleased with the level of performance they have achieved and turn their attention to other things.

To achieve a continuously improving culture, you must never rest. The leaders must continue to reward success, and identify bigger problems or opportunities. They must continue to strengthen the organization in continuous improvement and begin promoting based on skill at improving the work.

The hardest part of continuous improvement

While almost every business puts some amount of effort into Continuous Improvement (CI), making ongoing and meaningful improvements to a business or to work processes is not easy.

discontinuous_improvement

We have also noticed that regardless of the specific methods used for making improvements, almost all of these initiatives aimed at gaining greater efficiency, quality, speed, and/or customer delight have two important things in common:

  1. They generally produce some improvements, and
  2. Then they peter out

So, as it turns out, these well-intended CI plans are, in fact, “discontinuous,” and the hardest part of Continuous Improvement is making it “continuous!”

Based on our research and experience, there are some common reasons why CI efforts tend toward becoming discontinuous.

The most common pitfall that leads to ineffective CI efforts is unclear or delegated leadership. Continuous improvement must be fully embraced by every line manager. Delegating the effort to a Quality Manager, HR leader, strategic planning manager, or other staff person, is very likely to lead the effort to fizzle.

John Kotter, a recognized pioneer in the field of leading change, uses the term ‘guiding coalition’ to describe a powerful and strategic group that works together to bring about the desired changes within an organization. The team must be committed to the achievement of a continuously improving culture. It should include a majority of the most powerful people in the organization and may also include some people who may not be a part of senior management.

The next culprit is insufficient communication. Leadership must continue to communicate at every possible opportunity and every possible way why continuous improvement must become part of the organization’s DNA.

The vision must be clear and simple, and throughout the organization, people in leadership positions should constantly communicate the importance of continuous improvement and the progress to date. Successes must be widely shared, learnings must be plowed back into the organization to accelerate results, and new opportunities to become better at improving should be identified and clearly communicated. New employees must hear the why, the how, the
history, and the vision of what’s next.

Finally, neglecting alignment is a sure way to undermine a comprehensive CI effort. Every one of us has our own personal goals and objectives in addition to the goals and objectives of our organization as a whole and our job in particular. When these get out of alignment, progress will stop.

For example, a natural and intended outcome of most process improvement is the ability to do more with less — often with less people-time. Instantly, we have a conflict between the organization’s goals for cost saving and people’s need for income retention. And processes cannot be effectively improved or improvements effectively sustained without the support of the people doing the work. Not coincidentally, the company with the longest history of a continuously improving culture, Toyota Motors, promises employees a very high level of job security.

The leadership must think several moves ahead to both maintain alignment and to capture financial gains from productivity improvements. The choice of where to focus improvement efforts is probably the most critical.

Among the best areas on which to focus are:

  • Aim improvement methods to address the constraint to sales.
  • Improve productivity in the parts of the organization with too much work, in order to eliminate the need to hire.
  • Improve productivity in an area where people have the skills that, if freed up, could be transferred to departments with too much work or that have had attrition.
  • Improve non-people costs, such as energy, scrap, paper waste (‘if you want to find the waste, find the paper’), and work with suppliers to identify ways to reduce costs.

The Best opportunities?

continuous improvement

Continuing with our previous post’s theme of identifying waste (or the best opportunities for improvement), the process of doing so is one that is often misunderstood.

Case in Point
For example, we were invited to visit a large packaging company which had been “in Continuous Improvement (CI)” mode for many years. They wanted help because their efforts were not having any impact on their profitability.

Their sector of the industry suffers from substantial over-capacity, which has created major challenges for all the major players. We began with an assessment, during which we met a broad cross-section of people so we could gain an understanding of what they had been working on, how they had gone about it and what results they have achieved.

What we found was very interesting…

Conventional wisdom in this industry dictated that the only way to make money is to keep the presses running. Consequently, anything that slows down the presses needed to be “fixed.”

With that principle in mind, the company launched a number of projects aimed at improving uptime; project teams consisting of the crews and technical people were put in place and they developed good ways of measuring performance, getting to root causes and taking corrective action. Several of these projects delivered substantial improvements in up-time.

However, in this industry, cost of raw materials is by far the largest proportion of total cost. It therefore made sense to re-focus the improvement efforts on ways of improving yield, which was defined as the percentage of inputs that end up as saleable product made correctly the first time.

This new focus revealed all kinds of problems leading to yield loss, including:

  • Lack of training
  • Inconsistent procedures
  • Errors in getting correct customer requirements
  • Inconsistent internal information
  • Standard loss factors which may lead to complacency
  • Inconsistent raw materials coming from a sister plant

This is an example of a well-intentioned company with well-intentioned people who did not ask what impact their projects would have on the bottom line. If that question had been asked, a much different direction would likely have been taken.

As Bill Conway often said, at least 50% of Continuous Improvement involves working on the right thing.