Working with Intuition - The 2016 Odyssey Program Exercise

In the first part of my thinking backwards exercise I figured out what will make for a successful TOC Odyssey training. So the next step should be to keep working backwards and highlight the actions that need to be taken for these results to unfold.Logical, right?

Well, yes and no.

If you recall, I left the plan hanging at:

My first inclination was to go backwards to:

Then I got thinking.

It seems trivial. In TOC TP we call such trivialities "Oxygen". Since oxygen is always needed for human activity it is not necessary to state it in the logic diagram. Everybody knows it and it does not add information for our analysis. Oxygen statements should be handled with care. The mere fact something came up as an idea should be an indication that a double-check is in order, as one would rarely consider the need for oxygen under normal circumstances. In other words, the fact we have been thinking of the need for oxygen may point out that the conditions are not standard and this should be accounted for,

OK, so the fact that everybody should be in the room for the session to start could be an oxygen fact. It seems very logical, everybody should know this without me telling them, clearly there will be earlier steps that will take care of attendance. I should skip this step, it is redundant.

Or is it? I was stuck in a loop for some time, pondering this, wondering what is going on - why am I still thinking about this point after I figured it out? 

Well, turns out it was my intuition guiding me to a spot I missed. It is not enough to have a full enrollment. Life happens and we will surely have a few last minute cancellations. I know all our registrants will loath missing the session, but sometimes you just can't help it. So, if I want the session to be a real hit and create real value for all, I need to take care of this point and this is just the right place in my plan to inject a place holder for the results of those actions. Makes sense?

Here is what I came up with - In order to have a good kick of we need:

Which will happen if these prior steps happen (remember, we are in reverse order, the top box will happen after the bottom):

All graphics were done using Flying Logic

Well, I actually reached a task. It is going to be located very far into the future of this "project", of course and I expect to find it has some predecessors, but it is still exiting to move to that practical part. 

Next step will be to keep working from the definition of success back to the tasks that need to be done. I am expecting this will no longer be linear and I will be working on parallel tracks soon. Stay tuned and let me know if you have any ideas for making the Odyssey a hit.

Thinking Backwards - The 2016 Odyssey Program Exercise

So, if you remember my last post I suggested we need to prepare our mental muscles for the hard labour of TP and one of the exercises I suggested was thinking backwards. Now, this is not the TP's transition tree, which is also constructed backwards. It is also not the usual managerial focus of let's plan with the end in mind, which usually ends up being a forward construciton exercise. It's a free formed process that starts at the end and moves forward by imagining a probable route.

Here I will share the results of my recent use of this process. I have volunteered to make the 2016 TOC Odyssey happen. It will be in Jaffa during the first weeks of April, 2016 (Save the dates - April 3-7 for the Freshman session, April 10-13 for the Alumni, dates are currently estimates). It is my wish to make this session a big success - fun, enriching and enlightning for everyone. To make this happen I am starting out with thinking backwards (as suggested in Purple Curve Effect by Jeff Kinsey - see my book review here) to see what I can learn from it,

First of - my goal, the end result:

Can I imagine how reaching this goal would feel? yes, I can, right down to that pleased-embarrased feeling as everybody claps. This is a big issue, a lot of times I start this exercise and realise I have no clue what the end result looks and feels like. Just try this out right now - is there a change you would like to do in your life? lose some weight? go to bed earlier? spend more time with someone? learn something? OK, that's great. Now - can you imagine vividly, in your mind's eyes, the end point scene? what will you wear, say, feel, do?

So, I can see this goal coming to life. Great! Now what? Well, what could have or should have happened before that to make it possible? What was the step before the goal? Here is my answer:

Can I imagine achieving this milestone? again I can, I can even hear Alan Barnard's distinct accent as he tells me how much he enjoyed leading the session. Great! Now ask again - How did that happpen? What could have happened before that? Basically we are looking for possible causes to create the wanted effect.

And so I get on a backward roll:

All graphics were done using Flying Logic

So far, so good. This is where I got a bit sidetracked, as this is the stage where several predessessors converge. It is also where I move from reaping the future results to defining the work that needs to be done in order to make it happen. So this exercise seems to have been quite un-productive so far, doesn't it? Well, that's not true. This part has made it clear that this is a very just cause, quite worthy of my investment. Now I am really motivated to make the 2016 Odyssey one to be remembered! 

Next step - to take the next leg of down the future memory lane - what did I do to make it happen? Check out what happened here!

Dominoes and Root Causes

Have you ever asked yourself how can it be that the small changes TOC calls for can create such a significant reaction, I think I found the answer.

Now, don't get me wrong, I know those changes are extremely hard, but how can you call a change that costs no money and can be done in less than a week, such as changing priorities on the shop floor, anything but a small change? All the TOC solutions are based on these small changes - hold inventory at a different point in the supply chain, start doing things at a different time, change the way you plan, measure different things. These are not technology based solutions (as in "Buy this technology and all your problems will be solved", which we all know doesn't work out like that, ever) but solutions that sometimes need technological support. So the solution isn't based on investment, although it might sometimes be required. OK, I think you get my drift.

So how do they do it? Well, TOC talk and the TP talk are all about causality and using this causality to find the root cause of things. this means they are full of chains and chain reactions. This always remind me of dominoes and that's what led me to this clip:

At first I did not see any connection between this and the TOC chain reactions but then I realized this holds a very basic truth - it takes very little effort to start the chain reaction going and once started, each step releases all the energy stored in it, amplifying the effect. The amplification can sum up FAST. It also confirms what we all know, intuitively,that it's much harder to fix the big things at the end of the chain and much easier to fix the small things at the beginning, which is why TP has you looking for the root cause - the smallest domino. The only main difference from this dominoes example is that real life seems to recharge on it's own, at least partially. You do not have to pick up each and every domino in order to start a new chain reaction.

Do you think the physical explanation hold true for real life situations? please share your thoughts.

"Elementary, My Dear Watson" - My First Logical Thinking Class

It's been ages since I've blogged here, I got caught up by a wicked current in the stream of life.... I'm hoping for a smoother sail in the coming future. Still, I had to share this with the people I knew would understand the most, my faithful readers.

I've started teaching a class about the Thinking Processes in my boys' school. It is a democratic school and the children choose which classes to attend. I have around 7 elementary school boys in my class, including my younger son. They are all, it seems to me, in 4th and 5th grades. Last Friday was our 3rd lesson and for the first time I could say it was a good one. Yep, I had a few false starts until I got the feel for my "customers". I have learnt the hard way that with this group I can't, at least at this time, teach them. I have to let them learn. If I stand there and talk to them, explaining my head off, they just get board. Since this is a democratic school they will then choose to stop attending the class, and I wouldn't fault them. Instead I have to create an environment or situation where they generate the learning and enjoy it.

Well, this last lesson was their first introduction to logic. I had planned to use this small section of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's "The Dancing Men" Sherlock Holmes mystery.

Initially I was going to read the section with them and then analyze it. After 2 sessions with the group it was clear to me that a new approach was needed. I created a detective game. I took the facts Holmes presents and created 'clue cards'. Each boy got a clue card and they had to figure out which clue was related to which. I stood at the board and wrote the tree as they figured out the logic. I knew I got it right when they started asking questions, trying to understand where all of this fits into "real life".

I gave them homework to try and find causal (If...Then) relationships in their everyday life.

Check here how things turned out

Beware of the Circular Logic Trap

Theory of constraints is based heavily, if not completely, on the premises of logical thinking. The generic solutions are the result of logical thinking done by thought leaders with regard to wide spread phenomena. The Thinking Process is a toolkit designed to help users apply the same logic to specific cases and to new situations. 

Logical thinking, and specifically sufficient cause thinking which deals with cause and effect situations, contains loops. In sufficient cause logic a cause generates an effect, that effect in turn becomes a cause and generates a new effect. A loop is a situation where the effect of one cause is also the cause of that safe effect, directly or indirectly. OK, that's confusing, so let's put a construct to it. If A causes B and B causes A, that's a loop and a direct loop at that. Most loops I can think of are indirect loops, in which A cases B, B causes C and C causes A. It's important to note that loops exist within a context, meaning there are other things happening in the system creating the results, no just a loop, and that they have a starting point, something that happens first to initiate the loop. 

Loops reinforce or amplify the effects being caused. A loop constructed of undesirable effects will create a negative feedback loop, meaning things will get worse much faster. A loop constructed of desirable effects will create a positive feedback loop, meaning things will keep on improving as if on autopilot. The bigger the loop, that is, the more steps needed before getting back to the starting cause, the stronger the effects of that loop will be.

There is another type of loop. This is a stand alone, closed loop and it lacks vital logic clarity. These loops, called tautologies, are circular logic where the result is used to explain the cause, not fortify it. These loops have no start and no end. Here's a great example of tautology, a circular logic: 

(from the great site http://www.phdcomics.com, if you are in higher education as a student, staff or faculty I think you'll love their stuff)

Looking at it, seems to me that's there is something missing and that's causality. While the initial, intuitive, thought is that A is the reason for B and B is the reason for A, a through, logical consideration shows they are not connected. This is a logic mirage (jeez, I'm heavy into fantasy these days - sirens, mirages, the works).

Now, we all can succumb to tautology unintentionally, so we better be intentional.

If you have good examples of tautology, please share!