Table des matières - Performances Group

Semaine 44 – du 01 au 07 novembre 2010
N°146
Table des matières
ISO 9001 V2012...Pour ou Contre ?
2
Apport et Limite du Knowledge Management
4
Collaboration Is A Heuristic That May Work … Or Not
7
How To Articulate The Bottom-Line Financial Benefits Of Lean To Your CEO
10
Productivity, advance planning keys to comeback, survey shows
12
Performances Veille
© 2010 Performances MC - www.performancesconsulting.com - Tous droits réservés
1
ISO 9001 V2012...Pour ou Contre ?
La norme ISO 9001 devrait évoluer en 2012. Le comité technique de l’ISO souhaite
faire évoluer de manière significative cette norme pour l’ajuster , améliorer sa pertinence au regard des besoins des utilisateurs et du contexte économique.
Une grande enquête en 11 langues va être d’ ailleurs lancée pour recueillir l’avis
et les besoins des utilisateurs et experts
On annonce d’ores et déjà 20 axes de réflexions;
1.
Inclusion de l’approche management du risque qualité
2.
Développement des notions de résultat, d’amélioration et d’efficacité
3.
Adéquation plus forte entre les exigences de l’ISO 9001 et les 8 principes de
la qualité
4.
Inclusion de la notion de management du cycle de vie du produit
5.
Renforcement de la notion de conformité produit
6.
Introduction claire de la gestion des ressources financières dans le management des ressources
7.
Accentuation des exigences liées à la maintenance des infrastructures
8.
Alignement du texte avec les pratiques générales de management
9.
Meilleure description du principe de management des processus
10.
Evaluation du principe de la transmission de savoir sur la conformité produit
11.
Clarification des notions de compétences, habilitation, qualification et formation
12.
Développement de la chaîne d’approvisionnement
13.
Prise de décision sur l’inclusion explicite ou non, de l’utilisation d’outils
(AMDEC par exemple)
14.
Différenciation
accrue
entre
les
principes
de
communication
d’information
Performances Veille
© 2010 Performances MC - www.performancesconsulting.com - Tous droits réservés
2
et
15.
Introduction des concepts d’innovation et d’amélioration
16.
Structuration avec les autres normes de management (14001, 18001…)
17.
Inclusion de l’impact de la technologie dans le management de
l’information
18.
Développement et affirmation de l’implication du top management dans
le SMQ
19.
Elargissement du concept de client (final, utilisateur, externe…)
20.
Introduction des notions d’adaptabilité de l’organisme face aux changements
Cela m’interpelle un peu .. Si certains axes de réflexion me semblent pertinents : ( le
renforcement de la notion de conformité de produit, de la transmission du savoir,
l’inclusion au management des risques., ) d’autres me semblent encore trop peu
évoqués ( analyse qualitative des besoins clients., déclinaison et suivi des objectifs.,
maitrise de la qualité en production ) ,je m’inquiète aussi de l’inflation d’ exigences qui risque de rendre le modèle indigeste et rebuter les directions frileuses..
Trop c’est trop ! pensons un peu aux petites entreprises qui se lancent dans la démarche. sans équipe qualité étoffée.. Ne faudrait il pas revenir à des fondamentaux
et s’assurer du bon fonctionnement de ces basiques et de leur pertinence ?
Soyons honnêtes…. De nombreuses entreprises certifiées ISO 9001 V2008 aujourd’hui n’ont pas aujourd’hui de systèmes qualité si robustes que ca … (c'est-àdire garantissant réellement la satisfaction des clients du premier coup à tous les
coups au moindre coup…..) Elles ont développé un système global peut être trop
global qui oublie parfois les réalités terrain
Je « milite » pour une norme ISO 9001 revue à la fois plus simple et plus explicite,
plus opérationnelle autour des processus de production. Je « milite »
aussi pour
des audits de certification parfois plus rigoureux qui donneraient un réel sens à la
délivrance du certificat.. Enfin je serais assez pour différents niveaux d’exigences,
ISO 9001 niv 1, niv 2 , niv 3 .. pour motiver les entreprises à rechercher plus de maturité mais de manière progressive ..
Par GILLET GOINARD FLORENCE
Performances Veille
© 2010 Performances MC - www.performancesconsulting.com - Tous droits réservés
3
Apport et Limite du Knowledge Management
Quels sont les apports du Knowledge Management ?
Les apports du management de la connaissance sont nombreux, que ce soit pour
l’amélioration du fonctionnement interne de l’entreprise, la satisfaction des salariés
ou la réponse aux besoins des clients.
Cette approche vise en effet à :
• Améliorer le partage des savoirs et savoir-faire
• pour que chacun puisse disposer d’un niveau suffisant d’information, de formation et d’accès à la connaissance.
• pour diminuer le risque de perte de compétence (dans le cas d’un départ
par exemple)
• Enclencher
une
dynamique
d’apprentissage,
donc
d’évolutivité
de
l’entreprise. En cela, il favorise l’innovation.
• Offrir aux salariés la possibilité d’apprendre en continu tout au long de leur
carrière
• Transformer un flot d’informations difficilement exploitables en connaissances
utiles pour les acteurs de l’entreprise et plus généralement aider à donner du
sens aux événements de l’environnement et aux décisions prises en interne.
Les connaissances existantes servent de grille de lecture pour décoder
l’environnement.
L'un des premiers bénéfices à attendre suite à la mise en place du KM est le gain de
temps en formation: les savoirs les plus importants peuvent être transmis aux derniers
arrivés plus rapidement. Un KM efficace a également une influence considérable
sur le devenir de l’entreprise. En lui permettant d’être réactive et grâce à la veille
technologique qui l’accompagne, il peut contribuer à assurer sa survie dans un environnement hautement concurrentiel et ce par sa capacité à :
• Promouvoir l’innovation en encourageant la libre circulation des idées
Performances Veille
© 2010 Performances MC - www.performancesconsulting.com - Tous droits réservés
4
• Augmenter les revenus en mettant rapidement de nouveaux produits sur le
marché
• Diminuer le turnover des meilleurs éléments en reconnaissant la valeur de leur
savoir et en permettant de mieux en apprécier la contrepartie.
• Disposer d'un système d'aide à la décision, reposant sur le passé,
• Capitaliser sur l'expérience d'un groupe ou d'une personne (ingénieurs, commerciaux…)
• Apprendre de son passé, de ses erreurs et réussites
• Conserver l'intelligence de l'entreprise, lors de réorganisations, départs en retraite…
• Réduire les coûts en éliminant les redondances et les processus inutiles.
• Améliorer la compétitivité et la performance de l'entreprise, sa réactivité, sa
capacité d'innovation, et au final la relation avec les clients.
Le défi de ce type de projets est de faire en sorte que l'ensemble des connaissances de la société soit utilisé tout en préservant une marge d'innovation et de
créativité individuelle.
Quelles sont les limites du Knowledge Management ?
Comme toute discipline, le « KM » connaît ses limites, qu’il est d’autant plus important d’avoir en tête que le concept est nouveau, et comme nous avons eu
l’occasion de le souligner, peu clair.Parmi les difficultés que l’on peut rencontrer
dans la mise au point d’une démarche de KM, on peut noter les écueils suivants :
1/ Cas où l’information ou la connaissance est peu formalisable :
Tous les savoirs ne sont pas modélisables et formalisables au même degré. Dans
bon nombre de procédures, l’importance de la pratique gestuelle, des savoirs informels sont considérables. Leur consignation sous forme de procédures fixées et
réutilisables n’est pas forcément possible ni souhaitable. Savoir raboter correctement une planche ne s’apprend pas dans un manuel, ni sur un CD-ROM multimédia, mais dans l’atelier, aux côtés d’un menuisier confirmé. Toute la logique de
Performances Veille
© 2010 Performances MC - www.performancesconsulting.com - Tous droits réservés
5
l’apprentissage repose sur ce postulat. Cette problématique est bien loin d’être
nouvelle.
2/Trop de formalisation paralyse l’innovation :
Apprendre ou connaître, ce n’est pas forcément toujours se glisser dans des schémas pré-établis, mais parfois au contraire se laisser surprendre par des événements
qui suscitent la curiosité, l’interrogation, et le désir de connaissance. L’histoire des
sciences est pleine d’exemples, à commencer par la découverte de la pénicilline.
Si l’organisation fige le transfert des connaissances dans des cadres trop rigides et
des procédures trop formelles, elle interdira à l’individu et au corps social d’explorer
les brèches ouvertes par l’événement inattendu. Les Anglo-saxons ont un mot, pour
désigner cela : la serendipity ou découverte hasardeuse et inattendue. Encore fautil que le contexte organisationnel et culturel permette d’exploiter cette découverte.
Le knowledge management, appliqué correctement, devrait permettre la mise en
place d’un esprit de collaboration, favoriser le partage du savoir et dans la foulée
de réduire les coûts en terme de temps et d’argent et même de réaliser des bénéfices. Le problème est que dans de nombreux cas le KM est réduit à son aspect purement technique et débouche sur l’implantation de logiciels coûteux boudés par
des employés dubitatifs et réticents. Rappelons que la technologie n’est qu’une petite étape d’un processus global. Et avant même de l’entamer, il est impératif de
déterminer quels savoirs partager et comment inciter les employés à le faire. Appréhendé du seul point de vue de la technologie le KM est certainement un échec,
pensé tel un aspect de la culture d’entreprise s’inscrivant dans la durée et révolutionnant profondément les manières de penser et d’agir, il ne peut qu’être un formidable levier de croissance.
www.qualiteonline.com
Performances Veille
© 2010 Performances MC - www.performancesconsulting.com - Tous droits réservés
6
Collaboration Is A Heuristic That May Work … Or
Not
Mike Gotta, an influential former analyst with several leading companies, and now
part of Cisco’s community team, recently blogged about ‘The Long Journey’ of collaboration. He posed the following problem:
After 15+ years of deploying more and more tools, we need to ask ourselves – why
haven’t organizations realized the level of breakthrough collaboration necessary for
them to excel – or in some cases, survive? It’s not that the industry has not had any
“wins” with collaboration strategies but success always seems to be stubbornly limited to certain groups or business units. Improving collaboration, it seems, has become an “intractable opportunity”.
I agree with him that we now realize that collaboration as a concept is much more
complicated than we originally thought. While the basic concept has morphed and
evolved in those past 15 years or so, we are still far from crystal clarity on the matter.
Collaboration itself is a menagerie of many models and concepts, and we’re often
unclear on what we mean. Despite this, many are trudging through the trail bravely.
I applaud the effort and think it necessary both in our own organizations and in
others, to build our own experiential expertise in the matter.
Many are also now starting to ingrain this into their organizational framework and
business processes. Over the past year or two, the volume on ‘______________ [social
computing / collaboration / online communities] need to impact business processes’ has gone up considerably, to the point that new terms like social business
are being used to describe how this activity happens. Let’s take a look at that intersection of collaborative computing and business processes closely.
Business processes are based on predictable operation of a sequence of steps in
some workflow. You browse a site to find an item, click on the purchase button, select the quantity, select the payment and delivery opens and get a order number,
then wait until it arrives at the door. It can get more complicated with multiple
choices and branches in the workflow, but we are talking about a fairly predictable
set of choices and outcomes.
Performances Veille
© 2010 Performances MC - www.performancesconsulting.com - Tous droits réservés
7
Collaboration for one relies on interaction between people, whether intentional,
tangential, or incidental, and sometime a combination of any of these. Processes
certainly can involve people as well although typically it is intentional interaction;
we would try to minimize or eliminate undesired incidental or tangential outcomes.
Collaborative actions can have an unknown range of results from interaction. In
some cases, it can be predictable and repeatable; in others, not by any means.
Take the classic example, of asking a community for a solution. In some communities, you may get an answer in a few seconds. In others, you may never get a response. Some say it depends on the maturity, stability and responsiveness of the
community, which I agree to on some level. The point is that it is not predictable,
even in mature communities.
In an organization’s formal support process, ideally you are guaranteed to get a
response, even if it takes a lot of waiting on hold, and routing around. It’s very true
the response you may get is some version of ‘we don’t know how to solve this’, but it
is a response. Within the company the support process may raise an exception that
needs to be handled and other outcomes. Otherwise, there is a failure exception
when a waiting customer does not receive a response.
Knowing this about processes does not make it any less frustrating. For one, we are
starting to realize the consequences of decades of putting people on hold and
using automated in-human interfaces to our customers. Even given that, the expectation is that a process will have some form of outcome, or there’s a failure in the
machinery of the organization somewhere.
These two aspects—having an unknown range of responses, and unknown predictability in getting a response of any kind at all—is what separates a collaborative or
community activity from a process oriented one. So consider now what happens
when you toss these unknowns into fixed, predictable business processes.
Chaos? Efficiency? We don’t know. It is neither fish nor fowl.
Rather, many collaborative activities can be heuristic. In other words: as a rule of
thumb we know it can lead to this kind of outcome. BUT—and there is a big ‘but’
there—the small print says that in some cases it just doesn’t do anything, or can
Performances Veille
© 2010 Performances MC - www.performancesconsulting.com - Tous droits réservés
8
even fail catastrophically. This is where strongly process-oriented organizational cultures may say ‘Stop right there.’
Unfortunately, that’s where they loose an opportunity. Heuristics are still quite useful.
Take the anti-virus software on your computer: the software by itself does come
preprogrammed with some but not all answers. Instead, sometimes it uses heuristics
to test out different scenarios of viral attack, until it decides on a course of action. It
works because the software can go through many hundreds or thousands of scenarios in a fairly short amount of time. More than that, those regular or irregular updates over the Internet adds new scenarios to your anti-virus library.
Heuristics can work. They often exist in new territories that have not been completely
explored. In time, we will be able to tell some clear predictable methods, from the
less predictable ones, and yet others ones that may always remain a heuristic. To
get there, we need some degree of formalism so we can recognize a common, oftrepeated scenario where we know what to do, and what the outcomes are or may
be. Like the virus software, the better we are at recognizing the scenario, the better
we are in determining a course of action.
In fact, we probably hear about these scenarios cast in the light of ‘best practices’.
The term is used too loosely, sometimes for practices that haven’t even been tried
more than once. They may be a candidate for a best practice, but the practice
needs to be tried over in different iterations, tuned and solidified before it becomes
a ‘best’ practice.
The kinds of social tasks that groups of people are good at tend to be the same
thing that processes are often bad at. [Yes, that too is a heuristic]. Before we all start
talking about putting social collaborative practices into a process, we need to first
admit that we are really talking about heuristics; that they may work often, but sometimes will fail, with some level of unpredictability as to when.
We need to reconsider what is a best practice until we have tried it a few times and
validated its applicability by other parties. Conferences, customer meetings, seminars and meetups are full them. I’m just as guilty of creating some. We need to take
a practice, find similar situations to try it out again, and then compile and compare
the results between the different iterations. Then, we can say with some degree of
confidence that it is a best practice.
Performances Veille
© 2010 Performances MC - www.performancesconsulting.com - Tous droits réservés
9
[PS: I'll be at the IBM Information On Demand Conference most of next week held
at the Mandalay Bay Hotel in Las Vegas, and may miss a day or two of posting.
Come by and see me at the Business Partner Cafe to talk about social business, social media and collaboration. ]
How To Articulate The Bottom-Line Financial Benefits Of Lean To Your CEO
Have you ever noticed that the two most common career backgrounds for CEOs
are in either finance or sales? During economic growth, CEOs will typically have a
background in sales. On the other hand, CEOs who are brought into a company
during a recession will tend to have a background in finance. Regardless of a
booming or struggling economy, we as lean supply chain leaders must be able to
effectively articulate the benefits of implementing lean to the CEO in a language
that is easy for him or her to understand.
We’ve all been in meetings and said something that we thought would cause the
CEO to do back flips. Accomplishments such as: ”Great news, we were on time 98%
last month!” Unfortunately, the reply instead was a shrug of the shoulders and a
look of “so what?” Now what do you think would happen if you told the CEO that if
the company were able to improve sales by only 0.25% while reducing expenses,
assets, and accounts receivables by just 1%, the net effect would be a 23.6% improvement in return on assets? Do you think he or she would listen and want to learn
more? I think the answer would be: “Yes, please tell me more!”
As lean supply chain leaders, we need to get into the habit of correlating the impacts of our jobs to the bottom-line performance for the company. This can be accomplished by beginning to analyze two financial documents; the income statement and the balance sheet. Below is a visual representation for the above mentioned example:
Performances Veille
© 2010 Performances MC - www.performancesconsulting.com - Tous droits réservés
10
Income Statement & Balance Sheet
Explaining to your CEO how to reduce expenses and assets can be a straightforward conversation. Below are some points to cover:
1. Emphasize that implementing an inventory strategy focused on customer consumption greatly reduces the amount of overproduction waste.
Waste associated with overproduction lends itself to higher asset values and expenses. By having the right inventory strategy, we can reduce the amount of inventory on hand (assets) as well as the high inventory carrying costs (expenses) associated with the excess inventory.
2. Articulate the contributions of lean towards increasing revenue.
Explain to the CEO that by continuously improving our order fill rates and perfect
order execution levels, we are sending the message of how valuable our customers
are to the organization and how this will ultimately lead to increased sales revenue.
3. Explain that we can positively impact the balance sheet by reducing overall lead
times and eliminating non value added waste within the fulfillment stream.
Clarify that by increasing the velocity of the order cycle, the company will reduce
accounts receivable. This increased velocity will ultimately reduce the number of
days in the cash conversion cycle, thereby increasing cash flows.
Always remember, business is about revenue, expenses, and profit.
We must be
able speak the language of the CEO in order to be successful in our lean journey.
Written by Brent Rogers, Lean Deployment Executive at LeanCor
Performances Veille
© 2010 Performances MC - www.performancesconsulting.com - Tous droits réservés
11
Productivity, advance planning keys to comeback, survey shows
At a recent conference, Jeff Mengel cited some of the numbers showing how the
plastics industry has contracted since 2005.
There’s the 15 percent drop in the value of the industry — from $100 billion to $85 billion — an average machine utilization of 36 percent based on a 24-hour, sevenday-a-week schedule, and the closing of an estimated 800 companies.
But those statistics may only scratch the surface, he noted in the discussion at the
Manufacturers Association for Plastics Processors Benchmarking and Best Practices
conference, held Oct. 21-22 in Indianapolis.
The companies taking part in the survey of the industry by Mengel for Plante & Moran PLLC are typically those that are looking for ways to improve and that already
have invested time and effort for answers, rather than those that are barely hanging
on.
“The fact is,” he said, “you’re not even seeing things as bad as it can be.”
To get a better read on how businesses are doing today in the “new normal,”
Plante & Moran polled 116 firms for an idea of how they handled the recession and
what they are doing now to rebuild.
The survey showed that 66 percent of the companies said they have survived or
maintained their business through 2009, although 72 percent of the firms said the
economy will take two or more years to return to normal.
A third of the companies cut their workforce by at least 10 percent, and 31 percent
cut worker numbers by at least 25 percent. However, nearly 27 percent made no
cuts at all.
Companies that were already practicing lean manufacturing focused on it even
more during the recession, and those who had put off lean production finally made
needed cuts and improvements, Mengel said.
“If we didn’t have productivity increases, we saw, then we sure would have been in
a world of hurt,” he said.
Performances Veille
© 2010 Performances MC - www.performancesconsulting.com - Tous droits réservés
12
That continual improvement will remain a central theme as the economy recovers
in an expected series of fits and starts, said Laurie Harbour, president of consulting
group Harbour Results Inc. of Berkley, Mich.
Processors will never be able to control material costs, so they have to look at ways
to lower other production costs in their facilities. That means getting more value out
of workers and machines alike.
“We have to invest in people and we have to invest in equipment,” she said.
Plante & Moran’s studies continue to indicate that the most successful businesses
are those that understand their costs and create new products that customers are
willing to pay for, Mengel said. That means turning away some business, and longterm strategic planning to determine how the company fits in a global marketplace.
“You have to look out 10 years from now, to 2020, and ask yourself where you want
your company to be,” he said.
Harbour said entrepreneurs who had successfully built a comfortable niche are now
facing a future with global and local competition. They need to look at marketing
and sales, put their name out before new customers and create new parts for existing customers.
“There are things that companies have never had to consider before, like sales and
marketing,” she said. “Most people we’ve done assessments on don’t even have a
marketing budget, but the time you want to be out there, getting your name out in
public, is the time when everyone else is pulling back.”
But even if successful companies are now beginning to breathe easy, industry watchers point to economic signs that it may be years before sales return to normal levels — a move that will depend on a lower unemployment rate and consumers regaining enough confidence to begin spending more.
Seventy percent of the U.S. economy is driven by consumer spending, said Kim
Korth, president of consulting group IRN Inc. of Grand Rapids, Mich.
“The degree of predictability in the marketplace of the past 15 or 20 years is gone,”
she said. “You need to expect increased volatility.”
Performances Veille
© 2010 Performances MC - www.performancesconsulting.com - Tous droits réservés
13