The Efficiency Paradox | Niklas Modig | TEDxUmeå

Подписаться 41 млн

Просмотров 165 тыс.

50% 1

During this lecture I will talk about something that I think is extremely interesting: What is efficiency? It is a term that everyone uses, but very few understand. I would argue that 98% of all organizations have an incorrect understanding of what “true” efficiency really is. We tend to over focus on individual and functional performance. We think that efficient “islands" is a good thing. The more we deliver the better! The problem is that research shows the exact opposite! The more we try to squeeze out from the different islands within our organization, the more inefficient the organization will be! So what is the conclusion? Being “busy” is BAD! We call this the efficiency paradox! During this lecture I will describe why this phenomena occurs and how we have to redefine our view on efficiency in order to deliver true customer satisfaction!
I am an inspirational speaker, researcher and author. Since I was a kid I have always been striving to understand what excellence really is. What is the key behind high-performing individuals, teams or organizations? In 2006, I got an opportunity that no other researcher had been given before. I got full access to study the most efficient and productive organization in the world. I spent more than 2,000 hours inside the company studying their work patterns, routines and attitudes. Since then I have been travelling around the world speaking about my findings. I have been invited to speak in 29 different counties, and all in total I have given more than 800 lectures. My first book - This is Lean - just passed 200,000 copies sold, making it one of the most sold Lean books of all time.
This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at ted.com/tedx

Опубликовано:

2 июн 2016

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 41

@janefromcanada6943 4 года назад

Excellent points made. I totally agree. The intangibles never get measured even though they are what organizations say is their mission statement

@manjoocooperative5004 2 года назад

ANTHONY OBO-CLAUDIUS OGOSU, NIGERIA.This is Awesome and Acknowledged.

@M44z3 4 года назад

Sjukt bra! Vilken inspiration Niklas, och du är från umeå dessutom! Björkarna tackar dig! Vilken ögonöppnare att tänka i dina banor, så kul att sånt är mer aktuellt i Sverige, där vi verkligen har den vanan att jobbar på olika öar. Guld värd! Tack.

@carome6284 Год назад

⁰⁰0⁰0⁰000000000000

@keifere 7 лет назад

Greatness! Thank you very much.

@John2find 4 года назад

Note for later: Go for flow efficiency, resource efficiency makes islands and makes king and queen over there who says don't interfere in my domain as we are performing way good! Put the camera on customer's shoulder!

@felixsegebrecht8497 2 года назад

one of the best talks if it becomes to the in-efficency of waterfall processes. but one of the worst, if it becomes to the question of how to deal with extra-ordinary-intelligent kids. In this case you have to cange the environemt, or better said, the eduction system. Not trying to "heal" them. Maybe they find a way to "heal" us., or our system. But beside of that... one of the most important talks ever! 🙏🏼

@henrygleditschkleive1299 3 года назад

Very good! Thanks for your inspiration :)

@OrangeBlossom-iy9mw 4 месяца назад

Interesting take. Most organizations struggle with technologies like Gen AI that tends to alter the flow.

@TimPedersen 3 года назад

This is a great video, thanks

@bradelhart6262 Год назад

This is literally the fundamental concept of value stream mapping, which has been used effectively in manufacturing and supply chains for decades. Typically it is a product or an order (for a customer) moving through the value stream. The example of an ADHD patient does a nice job of humanizing the customer.

@sharelius 2 года назад

There is also a queue before you get here. Also a huge challenge to even get to the queue.

@rml7373 Год назад

Like the approach! It is wonderful for those children that started the process. But how about the other 15 kids? I think there's inevitable longer waiting time for them to start the process, given that 5 kids are handled at a time..

@eduardobarros4109 Год назад

Excellent

@ramalingamarulmozhi654 3 года назад

Great..

@jamesbrown99991 4 года назад

So.. 2880 hours in a month. That's why my company is so inefficient; the employees just need to work 24 hours each day, including weekends.

@mikeyronen2952 4 года назад

Isn't this what cocaine's for?

@doyoureallycare5225 8 лет назад

Zara the clothing line company is text book example of flow efficiency. the customer in this video I.e patient and hospital(the org) has agreed to change the process and adopted for a strategic drift. and it's described here - how to reach for star. but it doesn't mean only flow efficiency works.( I am not able to understand 😶 ) how can flow efficiency works for low cost production or servicing industry. I still can not develop this thought

@PetulaGuimaraes 3 года назад

401 notes: true customer centricity = flows efficiency.

@OfficialXotiicX 4 года назад

He is not the owner murder mystery 2

@sophier5508 4 года назад

The message is good, but it took like 12 minutes to get to the point. And also, being so excited does not make the message more powerful. I would have preferred more poise and composure along the talk. But it was still a good message !

@rebeckarydberg 3 года назад

I also agree he had almost a aggressive tone of voice that was a little distracting, but I realize he is just burning for the subject.

@MetalDetectingNYC 4 года назад

Psychoeducational analysis is an exhaustive process alone. Stamina? IMAGINE doing all the steps in ONE DAY! The poor child will get an inaccurate diagnosis.

@vespirian 7 лет назад

Simple counter argument: Example making a Lasagna. A camp I volunteer for has a dinner time on Saturday evening. The cooks arrive at 2:00 and begin to fix lasagna. Exactly at 5: 30 they serve the lasagna. Great- seems efficient - workers come in a tight timing - chief resource and reduce cost. Food was already there. Only problem, the lasagna sucked horribly. It was a porridge of grease. The cooks trying to be hyper efficient costs and serve the flow efficiency well - forgot one important thing in the cooking process. Lasagna needs to rest to 20 to 30 minutes to "set up". I would argue that in the analysis of efficiency - one needs to be mindful of a time frame for maximum success. In the example of the video - why not do one case and complete it in a day. Flow efficiency is maximized - the the parents have the answer. Because the mis-diagnosis would dramatically increase as testing shock set in. It would be more relevant for the individual who is the actual target of the case have time to rest and return to normal to avoid testing syndrome.

@tomast1323 7 лет назад

He actually addresses that in the book THIS IS LEAN

@leanonmyself 7 лет назад

vespirian Thanks for your comment. First of all, flow shall (and was not) defined from a resource perspective. To be concrete, they were not trying to maximize "value adding time" from a resource perspective (utilization rate). They were trying to maximize "value receiving time" from the receivers point of view (flow). Hence, "value" was (and should be) defined from the patient's perspective which includes both the "delivery" of direct value (the concrete result, i.e. the investigation) but also indirect value (the experience). 3 weeks was thus the result of a long development process where they tried to balance both direct and indirect value - high quality investigation AND high quality experience from the child and parents perspective. On top of this, 1 day would not be possible since the effective time is 17h for completing an investigation including a lot of information gathering, analysis, dialog, etc. One also has to remember that there are children who are being investigated. Complex, requires time and needs in-depth consideration. Further, even if it could be completed during a day, it would not be a balanced deliver of direct/indirect value. 3 week was that. Direct + indirect value. So maximizing flow in making a lasagna one has to maximize both aspects; direct value (customer perceived quality of the lasagna) and indirect value (customer perceived quality of the experience eating the lasagna). Read our book This is Lean chapter 2 for further explanation.

@erikkanaal 5 лет назад

The 20-30 min resting time is not "waste". It adds value by improving the taste, so it should be part of the value chain.

@nicolassigalo8293 4 года назад

The number of kid you should help in the same time is your WIP limit (Work In Progress). Maybe this is something you can compute or define according to your system, but it's just simpler to set one arbitrary at first, adjust and look for the results...Probably one is not enough, 35 too much, and five is found to be a good compromise. And yes, letting lasagna rest is part of the process, not a waste. Like for baking bread !

@suleimansserwaddakateregga3347 9 месяцев назад

@@nicolassigalo8293 Qs we

@johanfolkesson5170 4 года назад

I'm not a fan of the angry tone. But overall a good message, if you keep in mind that it may be applicable at various degree depending on situation. And in a meta kind of way the problem is highlighted by making the presentation 10 times longer than it needs to be. During the long and seemingly personal rant I was like "Fantastic, I totally feel how awful it is to wait for someone to deliver".

@erick2695 4 года назад

eyou

@Ireneeov 6 лет назад

Much non-value added time for me in this video, because it takes forever before the approach is explained.

@brunobaketaric3993 5 лет назад

It's not an approach at all. It's an explanation about the relation of ressource and flow efficiency, so you are able to choose wisely what approach you can or should use to manage work in your environment. Many (if not most) ppl. out there don't even know that these two kinds of efficiencies exist and the classic/usual/naive approach is to optimize for ressource efficiency - and later on wonder why things take virtually ages to complete. IMHO, it's hard to understand Lean approaches without knowing this difference.

@FireOwl889 4 года назад

What a bunch of b******t. Forgot to add that the time to take care about single open case (pacient) was reduced but be increasing the time that next new case can be served. Your capacity is same, you just moved the "waiting time" from "between processes" to the point where customer needs to wait to start the process at all. It is the zero sum equation.

@adeliahjacobs 4 года назад

Would rather wait 3 weeks to start the process than be trapped inside a process for 4 months

@bradelhart6262 Год назад

Queues and the members in the queues will be processed faster, the whole system will flow better, and waiting is reduced throughout AND to initially enter the process. The last ~1 minute is arguably the most important point: in addition to the patient waiting in the former process there are all kinds of other wastes that waste resource capacity. Meanwhile in the flow system first-in/first-out can be followed reducing the variation in throughout time for ALL patients. In the non-flow system some patients will take 4+ months, some will take less time, with very high variation.

@GoofyTHPS Месяц назад

This talk is just ridden with logical fallacies. The speaker constructed a synthetic example to fit his specific definition of efficiency. For him, efficiency was shortening the wait time for each child. But what if the definition of efficiency was to treat as many children as possible during four months? If the steps are separated onto islands, each island can focus on their specific task and become much faster. This way the children have to wait 4 months for the diagnosis, but the total amount of children diagnosed is much higher. So the flow efficiency is a good approach, but it depends on the bottleneck. What is the limitation? If we have a lot of doctors, we might want to focus on reducing the wait times. If there are not enough doctors or too many patients to diagnose, we might want to optimize the patient throughput. No one size fits all solution, you need to consider your resources and limitation, then make goals and goal specific decisions.

@alexromaines5014 4 года назад

This was painful. Public sector lacks resources hence long waits. You reallocate those resources to the supposedly important task of diagnosing people with ADHD. This is rebranded as 'flow efficiency'. I didn't hear a clear explanation of what that is. Strongly suspect this is utter bs.

@techviking23 3 года назад

wrong.

@PeterKretzman Год назад

It’s odd to characterize resource utilization as resource “efficiency” per se. Hence, his whole argument is based on a skewed terminology. Efficiency is benefit / cost. It’s not whether your doctor works 95% of the possible hours.

@doyoureallycare5225 8 лет назад