I would like to build on the point you are making.
Deming taught us the best way to measure process results was with charts
over time. He then told us the results are to be used to find problems in
the process or system in use by the organization. He told us the results
are indicators of how well our systems are working. Fix the system or
change it depending on the reasons for less than perfect results.
he told us all parts of the system are connected. That is poor performance
in one part of the system will impact other parts of the system and it is
not possible to consider one part with out looking at the whole.
Senge has given us a new tool to discus the total system . Joel Barker is
showing another. Both are building on Deming's point and yours.
At 11:09 PM 10/6/97 -0400, you wrote:
...snip by your host...
>So, if there is an answer to this, then it is that process is totally and
>completely necessary for results, and measuring process is, as Richard
>said, a pretty good way to get a leading indicator on the expected
>results. Measuring only results without measuring process puts one in a
>position where one can fail, but not learn why.
> Rol Fessenden
> LL Bean, Inc
interLinx firstname.lastname@example.org http://www.execpc.com/~ilx
"What you see depends upon what you thought before you looked."
Eugene Taurman <email@example.com>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <firstname.lastname@example.org> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>