Eliyahu M. Goldratt Quotes
-
Eli Goldratt passed away at his home in Israel on June 11th, 2011, in the company of his family and close friends.
-
We want to make production a dominant force in getting good sales. Sales which will fit both the client’s needs and the plant’s capabilities like a glove.
-
What my people and I have done is to examine daily the queues in front of the assembly and in front of the bottlenecks— we call them ‘buffers.’ We check just to be sure that everything that’s scheduled to be worked on is there—that there are no ‘holes.’ We thought that if a new bottleneck pops up it would immediately show up as a hole in at least one of these buffers.
-
The most demanding assumption that TPS makes about the production environment is that it is a stable environment. And it demands stability in three different aspects.
-
Putting it precisely, activating a resource and utilizing a resource are not synonymous.
-
The important thing is you’ve just proven that any organization should be viewed as a chain. I can take it from here. Since the strength of the chain is determined by the weakest link, then the first step to improve an organization must be to identify the weakest link. “Or links,” I correct. “Remember, an organization may be comprised of several independent chains.”
-
There is an explanation to these companies’ failure to implement Lean; an explanation that is apparent to any objective observer of a company like Hitachi Tool Engineering. The failure is due to the fundamental difference in the production environments. When Taiichi Ohno developed TPS, he didn’t do it in the abstract; he developed it for his company. It is no wonder that the powerful application that Ohno developed might not work in fundamentally different production environments.
-
Somewhere in the scientific method lies the answer for the needed management techniques. It is obvious.
-
Never let something important become urgent.
-
We had physical constraints that helped us to focus our attention, to zoom in on the real policy constraint. That isn’t the case in the division. Over there we have excess capacity going through our ears. We have excess engineering resources that we succeed so brilliantly in wasting. I’m sure that there is no lack of markets. We simply don’t know how to put our act together to capitalize on what we have.
-
I’ve got the machines. I’ve got the people. I’ve got all the materials I need. I know there’s a market out there, because the competitors’ stuff is selling. So what the hell is it?
-
In order to significantly increase sales we have to increase the perception of value of the market for our products.
-
If synchronized efforts are required and the contribution of one link is strongly dependent on the performance of the other links, we cannot ignore the fact that organizations are not just a pile of different links, they should be regarded as chains.
-
While they go get the others, I figure out the details. The system I’ve set up is intended to "process’’ matches. It does this by moving a quantity of match sticks out of their box, and through each of the bowls in succession. The dice determine how many matches can be moved from one bowl to the next. The dice represent the capacity of each resource, each bowl; the set of bowls are my dependent events, my stages of production. Each has exactly the same capacity as the others, but its actual yield will fluctuate somewhat.
-
When a proto-type—a new initiative—doesn't work, we face two alternatives: one is to bitch about reality and the other is to harvest the gift it just gave us, the knowledge of what has to be corrected.
-
We’re dealing with the fact that we haven’t got any idea of what we’re doing. If we’re just looking for some arbitrary order, and we can choose among so many possibilities, then what’s the point in putting so much effort in collecting so much data? What do we gain from it, except the ability to impress people with some thick reports or to throw the company into another reorganization in order to hide from the fact that we don’t really understand what we’re doing? This avenue of first collecting data, getting familiar with the facts, seems to lead us nowhere. It’s nothing more than an exercise in futility. Come on, we need another way to attack the issue.
-
You forced us to view production as a means to satisfy sales. I want to change the role production is playing in getting sales.
-
I sit there marveling that we’re going to reduce the efficiency of some operations and make the entire plant more productive.
-
I smile and start to count on my fingers: One, people are good. Two, every conflict can be removed. Three, every situation, no matter how complex it initially looks, is exceedingly simple. Four, every situation can be substantially improved; even the sky is not the limit. Five, every person can reach a full life. Six, there is always a win-win solution. Shall I continue to count?
-
But when the nature of the constraint has changed, one would expect to see a major change in the way we operate all non-constraints.
-
What was the nature of the answers, the solutions, that Jonah caused us to develop? They all had one thing in common. They all made common sense, and at the same time, they flew directly in the face of everything I’d ever learned. Would we have had the courage to try to implement them if it weren’t for the fact that we’d had to sweat to construct them? Most probably not. If it weren’t for the conviction that we gained in the struggle—for the ownership that we developed in the process—I don’t think we’d actually have had the guts to put our solutions into practice.
-
I write down the three measurements which Lou and I agreed are central to knowing if the company is making money: net profit, ROI and cash flow.
-
We need financial measurements for sure—but we don’t need them for their own sake. We need them for two different reasons. One is control; knowing to what extent a company is achieving its goal of making money. The other reason is probably even more important; measurements should induce the parts to do what’s good for the organization as a whole.
-
Incidentally, common sense is not so common and is the highest praise we give to a chain of logical conclusions.