Never Good Enough
2011; Volume: 30; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês
ISSN
1930-126X
Autores Tópico(s)Operations Management Techniques
ResumoEXECUTIVE SUMMARY | One way for a demand planner to reach the other side of the shore is to always question your process, reporting, and audience needs. Market dynamics are changing and so are the company's needs. The author outlines what the demand planner has to do to succeed in this profession. ''26 years of experience is working against him. He figures anything big enough to sink the ship they're gonna (sic) see in time to turn. The ship's too big with a too small rudder. Everything he knows is wrong. - Brock Lovett, in the 1997 movie Titanic This quote by Bill Paxton's character in the movie Titanic played over and over in my head on my flight home to Chicago last October. Hours earlier, I had finished presenting my company's process at the IBF conference. When I finished, no one queried about my process. They inquired about my knowledge rolling out SAP's Advanced Planning Optimizer (APO) - on which I had made only a three second comment. This bothered me. I realized I could become that captain. I had 17 years of experience with companies like Target and Lands'End working against me. Then, much like that iceberg, an epiphany struck. I realized the process I discussed was the process we use at Hollister, Incorporated, which relied too heavily on my past training. Demand Planners spend their days portraying themselves like Switzerland between two warring factions: The creators of demand (Customers, Sales, and Marketing) and the satisfiers of demand (Procurement, Manufacturing, and Logistics). I rarely struggle with being the neutral country when managing the demand plan. But, I misplaced my sensibility to remain neutral between my internal (sometimes external) customer and the forecasting and demand planning process. I would spend the next five hours of my long journey home in soul searching. I remember my Operations Management professor explaining why Japanese automakers perfected the process while their American counterparts struggled. Sakichi Toyoda developed a technique called The Five Whys. Basically, they would identify a problem like, perhaps, a sudden acceleration issue. Then the engineers would ask the first why: Why are these particular Toyota models accelerating suddenly? The electronic throttle control system failed. Why did the electronic control system fail? And the whys would continue. If no more questions of why could be asked, then it was assumed the engineer arrived at the root cause. I have applied this technique often in my personal life as much as in my professional life. SEEING THE ICEBERG And so it began. I do not recall the exact thought process. However, I noted two consistent patterns multiple times while working through the Five Whys. First, the answers were selfcentered: They all started with I7 not we. Experience overpowered internal customer needs. It created a blind spot to developing communication and reporting, both of which are supportive of effective business interactions. I know my audience. Did my reporting and communication reflect the audience needs? Or am I communicating what I think they need? Clearly the answer was the latter. The telltale symptoms of this communication illness supported my concern: Recent attendance at the Demand Planning SO internal customers have started to reschedule established monthly meetings; and, above all, meetings that used to last 45 minutes to an hour are now down to 30 minutes at most. Second, the simplified process was a reaction to data integrity issues. The data view was high enough that it obscured potential problems. My reaction should have been a wellplanned response. While the forecast accuracy at my company improved at a product line level to 90%, opportunities abounded in other areas, like improving event forecast metrics and developing a SKU level review schedule based on accuracy, bias and variability. So, did I produce accurate and trustworthy forecasts? …
Referência(s)