Tom Andel

Buried in boxes--mental and departmental
March 10, 2008

I had an interesting discussion with Jennifer Karlin, assistant professor in the Industrial Engineering Department of the South Dakota School of Mines. We were both sitting in on a meeting of the College Industry Council of Material Handling Education (CICMHE) during the Material Handling Industry of America’s spring meeting in Charlotte, NC.  We were talking about the recent spate of political debates between Obama and Clinton, and about how important this kind of exchange has become in learning about a candidate’s character as well as his/her stand on certain issues. Karlin feels so strongly about the value of debate in the learning process that she uses it as a teaching tool in her business classes.

She told me the best way to learn all aspects of an issue is to make a case for something with which you disagree. By taking the trouble to research the opposite side of your opinion and building a case for it, you’ll either be able to make a stronger case for your side or change over to the other side because you learned something you wouldn’t have learned if you hadn’t taken the trouble to examine both sides of the coin. 

Funny how this theme of knocking down mental boundaries seemed to carry over to other discussions at the MHIA spring meeting—among people who have long since graduated from business school. Karl Manrodt, associate professor of logistics at Georgia Southern University, led one of these discussions. He was a featured speaker on the state of metrics in the supply chain. The problem with this state is that too many people think everything’s fine.

According to a study done with the Warehousing Education and Research Council (WERC), most companies surveyed rated their supply chain partners above average in meeting service performance expectations. The only place where it’s possible for everyone to be above average is Lake Wobegon, if you believe Garrison Keillor. A more likely scenario is that the people taking this survey had different standards of performance. They must be very comfortable in their own little mental boxes.

They’re just like the folks who worked at Welch’s once upon a time—before this $653 million maker of jams, jellies and juice started measuring its internal departments on performance standards. As Manrodt explained, all of a sudden, pumping out a steady flow of juice to meet varying demand didn’t seem like such a good idea. It meant oversupply and waste. A new set of consistent internal standards showed that there were times where it could be profitable NOT to make juice. Deciding on when those times were took interdepartmental communications and shared metrics—attributes that were outside the mental boxes of those people in their own departmental boxes. Escaping those boundaries won Welch’s accolades from its customers.

Debate is good—whether you do it with others or with yourself.

Posted by Tom Andel on March 10, 2008 | Comments (0)