About this Presentation
This is a two session presentation. This is session 2. In session 1, we discussed: Dialectic and didactic overview, dialectic arguments and local/local clouds, synthetic example, difficult conversations, where the UDE’s hide, security and satisfaction. In this session 2 I cover: Dialectic and didactic review, didactic arguments and local/global clouds, Machiavelli and the change matrix, synthetic example, security and satisfaction, several general forms, self-interest and common-interest. The B-D side of the cloud deals with the local view while the C-D’ side deals with the global view of the problem. The matrix of the local view is presented showing the benefits of the part and the detriments to the part. The global matrix is presented showing the solution of the whole and the problems of the whole. The similarity relationships between the didactic matrix and the change matrix are discussed. A discussion of a Machiavelli quotation is given related to positives and negatives of change. The ABC versus MRP cloud (local to local cloud) is revisited and structured as a local global cloud with drum buffer rope and throughput accounting on the global side to meet the requirement of increase of throughput. The local to local cloud from session 1 is solved here as a local global cloud here with the implementation of drum buffer rope and throughput accounting. Efrat’s cloud is also revisited in addition to self and common interest as local global clouds.
What Will You Learn
To help you get the most value from this session, we’ve highlighted a few key points. These takeaways capture the main ideas and practical insights from the presentation, making it easier for you to review, reflect, and apply what you’ve learned.
Many conflicts that stall progress are not random disagreements but structured dilemmas, and this session reveals how the TOC “Cloud” exposes the hidden assumptions driving those conflicts. 2.You’ll discover why most organizational conflicts fall into two fundamental cloud structures—systemic conflicts and local dilemmas—and why recognizing the difference changes how solutions emerge.
The presentation explores how mapping both sides of a conflict—intentions, perceived benefits, and feared detriments—helps teams uncover the assumptions that keep problems locked in place.
You’ll see how making these assumptions explicit allows organizations to move beyond debate and find solutions that satisfy the shared objective without sacrificing either side’s legitimate needs.
Instructor(s)
Dr. Kelvyn Youngman
A practitioner and developer of the application of Theory of Constraints. The first person to apply this at scale in Japan, and in the largest machine tool-bit factories in the world. Have consistently raised productivity in the range of 25-50% and have quintupled profitability. Have also applied this approach to large-scale acute hospital care.
Visit my website: www.dbrmfg.co.nz , it is utilized by individuals, corporations, and universities around the world, and has been for more than a decade and a half. You will find explanations, simulators, powerpoints, and much, much, more.
More recently have developed a methodology to systematically capture a range of paradoxical challenges, dilemmas, and technical conflicts. This can be applied seamlessly to Goldratt’s resistance to change and thinking process, Robert Fritz’s path of least resistance, Ury, Fisher and Patton’s Harvard Negotiation Project, Stone, Patton and Heen’s approach to difficult conversations, Gregory Bateson’s logical levels, Brené Browns work on vulnerability, Kegan and Lahey’s work on immunity to change, Bill Torbert’s action logic, and Kahneman and Tversky’s prospect theory.