Ohmae's Key success factors LO11811

ANDREW WONG (michwy@pl.jaring.my)
Sat, 11 Jan 1997 22:57:11 +0800

Replying to LO11731 --

I share the view of Mr. Malcolm Jones

"Many of us can come up with the success stories of having improved x by
y00%, but the point for me is that the x is fairly closely defined in most
cases, and we don't know (can't know) the implications for the whole

in my observations and interview of some large corporation improvement
program, as expressed in my article on Improvement Initiatives is more
like Random Walk Theory Manifestation as per my homepage


The previous writer continues ....

"At the end of the day, if the global system or even the micro economic
system is too complex for us to model and make decisions in anything like
a sensible timeframe, maybe all we can do is make improvements at a low
level in the system and then adapt our approach as the system responds to
our efforts. So maybe the consultants continually changing their approach
aren't doing such a bad job, but rather just responding to the effect of
their efforts on a system which they cannot understand and predict from
the outset."

Continuous improvement at a low level in the System without identifying
and measuring the effect / impact on the boundaries with the rest of the
System components can again be a random motion with outcome that cannot be
a purposeful breakthrough, i.e. the essence of my above observations in my
homepage. As a result "continuous improvement" can easily become
"continuous deficiency"


Andrew Wong Organisation Observer / Thinker Office eMail : andreww@petronas.com.my homePage : http://www.geocities.com/Athens/5621

>From Sarawak, Malaysia with Greeting to you all.

Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>