The deming cycle in brief. How to conduct meetings in the sales department. And now - an example of the cycle "On the case"

Cycles are everywhere. To prove the existence of cyclicity is both simple and difficult: all previous civilizational cycles have ended. If dozens of cycles have ended, then one, ours, not the first and not the last, cannot be an argument against. But there are many people who, even having realized that they are wrong, will still defend the point of view that there are no cycles in one way or another. And for some people, specific people, there really are no cycles, because with the end of civilization, nothing will remain of them. And nobody. There is not even discomfort here - there is a cosmic coldness of non-existence here. And it is useless to argue with these people, because in their coordinate system they are right.

The earth is round, but it seems to be flat. This happens because the rounding radius is so large at each point that the rounding itself is imperceptible. But it is present, although in most human tasks it is not taken into account. For example, it is not at all necessary to know about the round earth when building airplanes - whatever it was, airplanes were built and would fly the same way. In the same way, it makes no sense to take into account historical cycles in solving everyday problems. But the solution of everyday problems would not be accurate if the constant taken from the current cycle was not taken into account; this constant is imperceptible and usually merges with the environment; it may not change over the course of a century, but it does change over the course of centuries, which leads to a misunderstanding of the ideas of a century ago.

On the example of some countries, one can notice the historical linearity; cycles do not seem to exist. These countries, for example, America or Australia, were formed in relatively recent times - and therefore there is no cyclicality in their history. This is where the above situation with the plane and the round earth comes into play; cycles are present in any case, they are just not noticeable yet.

Linear manifestations of history exist - for example, the line represents the accumulation of scientific experience. The difference is seen in the fact that manifestations of activity associated with the biological nature of a person are cyclical, while non-biological ones are usually not. Evolution is linear; the succession of generations is linear. But again, proceeding from the task, humanity will never solve linear evolutionary tasks. This period is too long. But at each point in time, one can find both a proven cycle and a proven straightness. The cycle is usually brighter and more important in solving practical problems.

History in the ups and downs of nations is cyclical. “Still, it spins,” and since this is so, then again, sooner or later, everything comes to its end, at the same time gravitating towards the beginning. There are dozens, if not hundreds, of similar beginnings and endings in human memory. One cannot but agree with this, but one way or another, the mass consciousness does not accept this fact. Experts know this, anyone who is more or less familiar with history knows this, but there is a feeling that the truth, known to each individual, becomes secret knowledge in the mass of initiates. When gathered together, people represent history in a straight line. Or lose sight of the cycle.

Such a state of affairs could not but require a logical explanation. One way or another, one has to approach the fact that in understanding the cyclical nature of history, the psychological factor plays a greater role than scientific data. Psychologically, a person resists cyclicity. And since it is present in a wide variety of people, it cannot be attributed to the influence of education. There are deeper reasons, and the deeper they are, the closer they are to psychology and biology.

There is a subconscious rejection of cyclicality. Up to the point that a person seeks to protect his illusory world, the momentary world, from any such information intrusions. Living on a round earth is not only dangerous, because you can fall off it, but also psychologically uncomfortable. Living in one of the sections of history doomed to completion is likely to be just as unpleasant. And to live in a system of cycles nested in each other, like nesting dolls, is even worse.

The cyclical nature of history, which was a postulate for ancient people, was first described in ancient Egypt. She was feared, all the ancient Indian civilizations brought sacrifices to her. They knew about it in ancient Judea, but, as in modern society, they did not take it seriously. It was discovered for modern civilization by Giambattista Vico during the Italian Renaissance. Then Spengler returned to this topic, then Toynbee, Kondratiev developed it economically, and Gumilyov was the last to write about it. The trend can be traced in the decrease in the “size” of civilization: if the ancients spoke about the whole world, then modern thinkers limited themselves to local civilizations or simply nations. And in general, this is true: if we abstract from human chauvinism, only population-nations evolve, and other groups of evolution are not known.

Cyclicity and forecasting future states with the help of past cycles is a very ancient knowledge. As mentioned earlier, most peoples of antiquity viewed their history as a cycle with a beginning and an end. Accordingly, the first work appeared in the Renaissance - this is the cyclical scheme of the national development of Giambattista Vico. The second, already well-known work - "The Decline of Europe" by Spengler. But these works commented on cycles without revealing their causes. So for 400 years from Vico to Spengler, not a millimeter has advanced in this direction.

Toynbee made the first attempt. The challenge theory is built as a model of changes in the activity of a nation under the influence of changes in natural or social conditions. An initial push is given, the nation, responding to it, responding to this challenge, complicates its structure, and the complicated structure automatically gravitates towards further complication. The complication of the structure of one nation, in turn, is a challenge for other nations, and their development is the result of competition. This is partly true, how can a coincidence be true. There can be too many challenges, and not every challenge a nation is born, and not every challenge a nation survives. It is not explained why some nations can answer the challenge, while others cannot and perish; but after all, the reasons for the answer are the main thing by virtue of proper causality.

The second concept was created by Gumilyov. Although it is already fifty years old, it is still considered alternative in Russia, “fabulous” by historians, and foreign and therefore non-existent in the West. According to his concept, under the influence of unknown cosmic radiations on earth, micromutations occur among peoples living within the affected zone, leading to the appearance of people with the “passionarity” parameter - the opposite of instinct. The activity of these people leads to the primary "push", the first consequence of which is the emergence of nations. Those. in fact, Gumilev replaced Toynbee's "challenge" with the cosmic factor; everything else is pretty much the same.

If Gumilyov had written about the fluctuations of the national quality, he would not have been released from prison, and they would not even have remembered him. Passionarity is an unknown factor that does not exist and cannot exist. So it is not known whether Gumilev operated on an unknown variable, or whether he encrypted his work in this way. No one will know if it was the first or the second. But Gumilyov himself has hints that he used "algebraic solutions for arithmetic problems." Most likely, he also suspected "trigonometric solutions" - with the help of the concept of biological quality fluctuation. Passionarity is replaced by biological quality without changing the concept. And the cycles are based not on arithmetic, not on algebra, but on the trigonometric functions of oscillations. You can try to solve the "Gumilyov problem" in two steps. First of all, the word "passionarity" throughout the text is replaced by "component X". After that, another word is selected that would not violate the outline of the text. Solution: biological quality.

The biological cycle of generational change underlies all life on earth. And from this cycle it is possible to derive the same global law of cyclicity - only this time from below, and not from above, as is the case with civilizations and other large and therefore noticeable systems. Biological principles have not yet been proposed as the main approach in solving questions of the cyclical nature of history.

As a result - not just cycles, but fractal cycles - i.e. in large cycles there are small cycles, small ones generally repeat large ones, and the number of small ones is unknown. It is impossible to set dates for cycles, it is also impossible to predict the length of cycles. One can only know the great cycle and the little cycle in which the nation is at present and in which it has been in the past. You cannot set dates, but it is possible to create forecasts without dates or with approximate dates.

Now we can say: all manifestations of human activity are cyclical. There are cycles in global civilizations that claim to be called "universal", in local civilizations, in nations and in intranational groups. They are especially noticeable in empires that create civilizations.

Not only in history, this has been seen, but in all areas of human and natural activity - the larger and more complex the system, the more predictable it is. The works of Spengler and Gumilyov operate with supranational systems of cycles - but this happened due to the insufficient development of biology in their time.

Cyclicity is based on socio-biological processes. More precisely, biological-social, but it is too difficult to pronounce. Man has not progressed biologically for tens of thousands, if not a million years. Lack of progress inevitably leads to cyclicality in a circle. And only the transfer of knowledge by inheritance leads to cyclicity in a spiral - each time at a slightly higher level.

The state of national systems for most parameters is an average result of the total quality of the members of nations. And the systems themselves interact according to the principle of pendulums - qualitative parameters go up and down, and if it is said that a previously unattainable maximum of development has been reached, then most likely the pendulum is at the top point, from which only a fall is possible. In interactions between peoples, it turns out that high-quality ones advance, while less-quality ones recede.

Cyclicity, in turn, must also be due to something. There must be a primary function on the crest of which civilizations rise and fall. This cyclicality cannot be political, because it existed before the emergence of politics. Just as it cannot be economic, since even primitive communities are subject to it. It can only be biological - since only from biology can such global fluctuations be derived that all aspects of human existence are subject to them.

The cyclical theory will not be refuted, but it will never meet with mass understanding. In any case, understanding Western or Russian civilizations. Not only because civilization within its limits represents itself as a line directed to infinity. Most likely just because of their discomfort.

The normal human mass perception of a situation actually turns out to be the perception of a derivative of this situation. Modern man does not feel the cyclical nature of history. He may even have an idea about it, but he does not feel it psychologically. As a result, any global phenomenon is perceived as going to the absolute, as developing in a straight line. For example, since its inception, the American nation has been developing in a straight line. This just creates the illusion of a straightforward story.

There are cycles, and, therefore, beginnings and ends. Apocalyptic actually established that the end of the world is not very painful; And if it hurts, it doesn't last very long. In addition, there can be many ends of the world. In reality, the end of civilization is a whole era. Spengler and Gumilyov defined its length as 200 years of a nightmare - soldier emperors, useless wars, barbarians and moral and intellectual degeneration. But in biology there is no such cycle - 200 years. There is a period of degeneration - but it can be 5 or 20 generations. It can be predicted with a sufficient degree of accuracy for different peoples. But it cannot be stopped and you have to live in it. To live normally, you need to know the rules of a particular life.

Process Approach: The PDCA Cycle

In accordance with the ISO 9001:2008 standard, the organization must develop, document, implement and maintain a quality management system, constantly improve its effectiveness based on the requirements of the process approach.

The process approach makes it possible, in conditions of limited funds and resources, to achieve the required results at minimal cost.

The idea of ​​a process approach appeared in the late 1980s in the United States. Michael Hammer (Michael Hammer) and James Champy (James Champy), studying the management system of the NATO headquarters, which described its regulations in terms of processes according to the IDEF (Integrated Definition) notation, as well as studying the management system of large companies, found that their management system is characterized by : a complex hierarchy, centralization, as well as the "functionality" of the structures of organizations. M. Hammer and D. Champi in their work "Reengineering of the Corporation" saw the key to optimizing the activities of the enterprise in the creation of new processes "from scratch".

The process approach is based on the theory of variability of Walter Shewhart, who in 1924 pointed out that all processes for the production of products / services in an organization are subject to deviations (variations) from the given values. The reasons for variations can be general (internal to the process) and special (external to the process) reasons. According to W. Shewhart, it was possible to reduce the variations in the production of products according to the necessary criteria by applying the PDCA concept in management (Plan, do (Do), check (Check), act (Act)), proposed in the book “Statistical methods with point of view of quality management "in 1939. E. Deming, developing this concept, proposed a modification of the PDCA cycle - the PDSA cycle ("Study" - to study).

In the Deming-Shewhart PDC(S)A cycle, the effectiveness of processes is provided by control feedback according to the established criterion. Management of activity processes is aimed at the effective achievement of the desired results with a given accuracy.

The main elements of the PDCA cycle are:

• P - setting goals and deciding on the necessary changes (development of a plan);
• D - implementation of changes (implementation of the plan);
• C - measurement and analysis of results (monitoring the implementation of the plan);
• A - taking the necessary actions if the results do not meet the originally planned, or standardizing the actions in case of success (correcting the plan).

The result of the process can be positive or negative. Whatever is the output of the process must be verified before the output is used by the consumer. At the plant, the quality control department checks the products, the manager approves the project, the consumer signs the acceptance certificate for the work, project or audit report. The output product can pass the verification procedure successfully, or it can be rejected and sent for revision or disposal. The owner of the process for making management decisions must receive information about the progress of the process (process indicators), about the results of the process (product indicators) and information from the consumer about the degree of his satisfaction with the product received (customer satisfaction data). To obtain information, the process owner establishes control points in the process at which information about the process is collected, rules for collecting, processing and providing this information.

When a process owner appears in this scheme, the process control loop becomes closed. The meaning of managerial activity lies in the fact that the owner of the process continuously or at regular intervals controls the progress of the process and makes managerial decisions in cases of deviation of the process parameters from the boundaries defined for the normal course of the process. The owner of the process in the course of management plans (Plan) the allocation of resources to achieve the itemized goals of the process with maximum efficiency. During the execution (Do) of the process, the owner checks (Check) the progress of the process based on the information that comes from the control points. The process owner conducts operational management of the process, correcting (actively intervening in the course of the process (Act)), changing the planned distribution of resources, changing plans, deadlines and results of the process in accordance with the changed situation. The activity of the process owner is cyclic in the normal course of the process or aperiodic in cases of problem situations that require immediate intervention.

Table. Description of the PDCA cycle

Planning activities and monitoring its results are the most important components of the management cycle or the so-called "management loop", which is characterized by the presence of a number of periodically following each other components - stages. The control loop reflects the continuity (cyclicality) of the control process.

The use of a process approach in management allows you to track the progress of management at each stage and, as a result, increases its efficiency and effectiveness. According to ISO 9001:2008, the process approach refers to the identification of processes and their management (primarily ensuring their interaction). At the same time, the identification of the main processes is not only their enumeration, but also the definition of the boundaries, the strategic significance of each process, as well as an analysis of the need for their optimization.

The ISO 9000-2005 standard establishes the need to determine the sequence and interaction of these processes.

In terms of the international standard ISO 9000 “Process is a set of interrelated or interacting activities that transforms inputs into outputs”.

It is more correct to write the definition like this:

A process is a set of interrelated and interacting activities that transforms inputs into planned outputs.

The scheme of the process in the form of a “black box” model, in which there is an entrance and an exit, was first proposed by the famous cyberneticist N. Wiener in the middle of the 20th century. However, the black box model, unlike the Shewhart-Deming cycle, did not take into account feedback.

The management process is a certain set of management actions aimed at achieving goals by converting resources at the "input" (financial, material and technical and personnel) into the required result of ensuring life at the "output" of the system.

The output of the process (product) has value for the consumer. M. Porter in 1980 introduced the concept of "process orientation", considered the main principle of the organization's activity - the interaction between the links of the chain in which value is created. Thanks to the model of the value chain (Value Chain) by M. Porter, it is customary to subdivide the organization's processes into main (adding value to the consumer) and auxiliary (from the point of view of the consumer, not adding value).

Within the process, the use and processing of material or financial flows, information into other flows or services takes place. At the same time, subdivisions are considered as participants in a chain of interrelated processes aimed at achieving the global goal of ensuring the life of the system. Analysis and improvement are carried out in relation to the process as a whole to achieve the goal in the prevailing conditions.

The process approach is based on the following principles.

1. The activity of the company is considered as a set of processes.
2. The execution of processes is subject to mandatory documentation and formal description.
3. Each process has a consumer (internal or external) that defines the requirements for the process and its results, which form the purpose of the process.
4. Each process has a person responsible for its functioning and result.
5. Each business process is characterized by key indicators that describe its execution, result or impact on the outcome of the organization as a whole.

The basis of the process approach is the principle of regulating the sequence of operations performed. Organization of processes is a tool for controlling the execution of tasks, as well as coordinating the temporal and spatial aspects of their implementation.

A type of activity is not some specific activity (for example, hammering a nail taken in a box into a wall in a room in order to hang a recently donated picture), which has a specific result, but a concept formed by highlighting common features. Based on this, it turns out that a process consisting of activities is not a real activity, but a representation of a real activity, moreover, a representation by generalization. In other words, a process is a model of real activity.

To make sure that we are on the right track, let's try to assume the opposite: a process is a specific activity that yields a specific (tangible) result. A funny situation arises: for example, an enterprise that manufactures nuts. Is the production of one nut a process? Let's say. But then, if the enterprise wants to move to process management, should it allocate as many processes as it produces nuts? Reason, as they say, protests against such a conclusion. Well, maybe then the company needs to allocate as many processes as how many types of nuts are produced? This decision, too, I must say, does not cause delight.

The system approach lies in the fact that we consider the organization as a system, as a set of interrelated elements. As such elements, we can consider subdivisions, i.e. functional-hierarchical management may well be systemic and provide the result we need. However, one day the question will arise: at what cost is the result given to us? What is the effectiveness of our activities? Is there a way to increase it? And the answer will be: there is a way and it consists in revising the constituent parts of our system. Managing subdivision elements is inefficient, it is necessary to move to a different structure of the system: elements - processes.

Note that for an enterprise, from the point of view of its organizational structure, nothing changes when moving to processes: it still remains a set of departments. But from the point of view of management, cardinal changes are taking place: the objects of targeted management are now not departments, but processes. In particular, the conveyor is the process, i.e. the very "set" that "transforms inputs into outputs" and which must be managed as a single whole.

So, from the point of view of the system approach, process management is a change in the point of view on the composition of the elements of the system: instead of the representation “system = a set of departments”, we use the representation “system = a set of processes”.

What are the limitations of the process approach? They can be installed for the following reasons.

The process is, in turn, a system, the constituent parts of which are the very “activities” that were discussed at the beginning. The process, strictly speaking, can be both "end-to-end", i.e. the entrance to it will be the entrance to the organization, and the exit - the exit from the organization, and local, including only a small area of ​​activity.

The advantage of the process approach is based on the fact that all activities aimed at obtaining the final (i.e. delivered to the consumer) result become a single object of management. And this inevitably leads us to the conclusion that the larger the processes (the closer they are to "end-to-end"), the more clearly the advantages of the process approach are manifested. Conversely, the more we fragment processes, the more we nullify the advantages of the method. After all, we remember that our task is to get rid of local optimization.

Thus, it makes sense to apply the process approach, highlighting several (on the strength of a dozen!) Processes that are critical to the organization. And these processes should be "end-to-end". Already even the next level of detail raises doubts about the appropriateness. Of course, the owner of the process (manager of the process) can carry out detailing for himself if he needs to, but the expediency of detailing from the point of view of including the second level in the organization's process system is negligible. For systemic process management at the organizational level, this is not required at all.

It can be stated that:

1) the process approach is a means of increasing the efficiency of activities by eliminating local optimization,
2) the process approach is a change in control objects,
3) processes (objects of control) should be "end-to-end" and in a small amount. The fragmentation of processes contradicts the task of the process approach.

How many processes should a company allocate and on what basis? The answer to this question is already obvious: one process, if we consider only the manufacture of the main product and abstract from other necessary activities. The enterprise needs to eliminate local optimization in the production of products, which can be achieved by isolating the “Production of products” process and managing it as a system.

The purpose of the process approach is to ensure the effectiveness of activities. Management based on the process approach implies the interpretation of process No. 1: it is pointless to increase the efficiency of the activity by managing the production of a single part.

Let's ask ourselves a question: why, for what tasks can we need process models?

There are only two such tasks:

1) regulation of activities and
2) activity analysis.

In the first case, it is necessary to develop a model that would serve as a model, standard, norm - in other words, would describe the system of processes as it should look. Those. the solution of the problem of activity regulation leads us directly to the creation of the “as it should be” model.

And now it is not difficult to guess that the second task is related to the construction of the “As is” model. And indeed: if it is required to analyze an activity, then this activity should be described in some way, displayed as it is actually performed.

Stage 2. Analysis of the model of the organization "as is".
Stage 3. Development of a model of the organization "as it should be."
Stage 4. Development of a plan for the transition from the state of "as is" to the state of "as it should".
Stage 5. Implementing changes and building the organization "the right way."

There is one question for such a plan: what is the “as is” analysis of the model in step 2 for? If the result of this analysis is not the establishment of what is "wrong", then the goals of this analysis are not clear. And if these goals are nevertheless understood correctly, then the establishment of what is “not so” is possible only by comparison. And the comparison should be with how "should be." But, excuse me, what will we compare with at stage 2, if we plan to build the model “as it should” only at stage 3?

It turns out that if we have already planned the analysis of the model “as is”, then it can be performed only after the development of the model “as it should be”, otherwise, what can be compared with the analysis? Those. The sequence should look (at a minimum) like this:

Stage 1. Development of the model of the organization "as is".
Stage 2. Development of a model of the organization "as it should be."
Stage 3. Analysis of the model of the organization "as is".

Let's consider the tasks of modeling "As is" and "As it should be". Technologies for solving these problems are traditionally considered the same. And this is a mistake! And the mistake is costly!

Let's try to figure it out. Let's start with building a "How it should be" model, i.e. solution of the problem of regulation. Where do you usually start building any models? They go to those who perform the activity that needs to be modeled, ask how it is performed, and on the basis of these interviews they try to build a model. Question: is this method suitable for creating a model that should serve as a norm, a standard? Doubtful. And that's why. What should the “How should be” model reflect? How the activity should be carried out. What will reflect the model that we build based on the surveys? How the activity is performed. It turns out that if we assign the status “as it should be” to such a model, then we will thereby make the current way of performing this activity a law (norm). And where is the guarantee that he can be such? This is first. Secondly, we have every right to use the concept of "process quality" as the degree of compliance with its specified requirements. And if there is a normative (reference) construction of the process, then the quality of the real process will be determined by how close it is to the reference one. But what if the exemplary (normative, reference) process is built on the basis of a survey and reflects real practice? Then we will always have 100% quality! Why? Yes, because when we start building the "As is" model, the technology will be the same - a survey, respectively, and the result will be the same. A match is guaranteed regardless of how the process is performed and whether it achieves the goals for which it was intended.

The essence of the “How should be” model is to present the activity in such a way that it should be performed, i.e. some end state. In fact, these are requirements for building a process. And who makes such demands? Supervisor. And from a technical point of view - an expert in this field. And who is our specialist in this area, who can say how the processes necessary for the quality management system should be built? That's right - the quality manager. What is the guiding thread for him? That's right, all that knowledge on building management systems in general and specific (for example, according to the model of the same ISO 9001), in particular. It was the quality manager who was taught how to build a QMS (quality management system) correctly, how processes (system elements) should be built, and it is in this knowledge that its value for the organization lies. There are already specialists of other profiles there.

Thus, the quality manager himself, without asking anyone, develops a normative model "How it should be", based on the system-wide requirements and the requirements of the quality management model chosen by the organization. After all, let's say, no one is surprised that the chief accountant builds accounting processes in the organization and does not consult with anyone. Try to offer him your point of view on how these processes should look like. The reaction is easy to imagine. So, QMS processes are exactly the same diocese of a quality manager! This diocese was given to him to manage and he is the sovereign master here, he establishes the laws of activity within the framework of the QMS.

So what do we have? The quality manager draws a "reference route", but no one guarantees that the organization follows it. To understand how we adhere to the planned “route”, it is necessary to reflect our current path, the actual execution of processes, if we leave the allegory.

And this is where we go to where this activity is done and start asking how it is done and building the "As is" model. And then there will be an analysis of this model, comparing it with the “As it should be” model.

What condition must be met for the analysis to be successful? Answer: the “As it should be” and “As is” models should be comparable, i.e. it is important to allow such a comparison.

The "As is" model and the analysis in question may be needed in the internal audit of the QMS. If the activity is indicated on the “As should be” model, but in practice (in the “As is” model) it is not, then a discrepancy arises. For example, according to the QMS process model, the process owner must analyze and evaluate the effectiveness of the process, but this is not the case in life - management occurs exclusively “by event”.

The “How it should be” model, in fact, is “eternal”, it may need to be changed if the quality manager made a mistake when compiling, or the management chose a different quality management model, or something else in the same vein. But the “lifetime” of the “As is” model is much shorter: they conducted an analysis, made changes to the practice and the model to the archive - it has lost its relevance. Here, by the way, lies the risk that constantly manifests itself in process modeling projects and reduces the efforts of teams to “no”: while they were compiling their model based on surveys, activities have already changed and everything needs to be reviewed.

Boyd's Theory: OODA Cycle

Recently, there have been more and more references to the abbreviation OODA and the name of its author, Colonel John Boyd.

The cycle (loop) of Boyd, presented in 1995, consists of four components: Observe (“observe”), Orient (“orient”), Decide (“decide”) and Act (“act”). There is a simple version and an extended version. Components of the OODA cycle:

• Observation (observation) - the transformation of changes in the external environment into the form of data signals that can be used in the future;
• Orientation (orientation) is a cognitive process of evaluating data in accordance with the context, endowing data with meaning (sensemaking), converting data into information, analyzing and synthesizing data to form the current mental perspective (model);
• Decision (decision) - the choice of alternatives from a number of possible ones, determining the sequence of actions based on the current mental perspective (model);
• Action (action) - the physical execution of the decisions made, the impact on the environment.

The Russian abbreviation for the Boyd cycle is NORD.

Rice. The simplest representation of an OODA loop

Rice. Extended Boyd scheme

Colonel John (Richard) Boyd (1927-1997) US Air Force aviator and military strategist of the late 20th century. His theoretical views had a significant impact on the military and business spheres.

He graduated from the University of Iowa (BA in Economics) and Georgia (BA in Engineering).

From 1945 to 1951 he served as a US Air Force pilot. Considered an ace. He earned the nickname "Forty Second Boyd" because in a dogfight he could defeat any pilot in less than 40 seconds. Died of cancer at the age of 70.

In the early 60s, Boyd, together with civilian mathematician T. Christie, developed the Energy-Maneuverability (E-M Theory) air combat theory. Publications on this topic were closed, and yet they have become a kind of standard in the development of combat aircraft. The E-M theory served as the basis for updating the F-15 project and substantiating the program for creating the FXX light fighter (F-16 and F / A-18).

Participated in several air battles during the Korean War, in all air fights came out the winner.

After retiring from military service in 1975, J. Boyd continued to work as a consultant in the Office of the Deputy Secretary of Defense of the United States in the Systems Analysis Division. Boyd is rumored to have been credited with developing a strategy for attacking Iraq during the first Gulf War. What is certain is that in 1981 he delivered his presentation "Images of Conflict" personally to Dick Cheney. In 1990, due to failing health, Boyd moved to Florida, but Cheney called him back to work on plans for Desert Storm. It was Boyd who came up with the idea of ​​the "backhand" in this campaign. In a letter to the editor of Inside the Pentagon, former Marine Corps Commander General Ch. Krulak wrote: “The Iraqi army was plunged into a moral and intellectual collapse ... John Boyd was the architect of this victory, and it gave the impression that that he, as it were, commanded an aviation wing or a maneuverable division in the desert.

Being a scientist by turn of mind, Boyd engaged in a systematic analysis of the following situation - he was interested in the question of why the MIG-15 fighters used by Korea, which formally surpassed the American F-86 opposing them in most indicators, were inferior to the latter in terms of victories. This aspect of Boyd's activity is the focus of Franz Osing's book Science, Strategy and War. The Strategic Theory of John Boyd ”(Science, Strategy and War. The Strategic Theory of John Boyd), which outlines the biography and all the stages in the formation of Boyd as a scientist. One cannot but be struck by the uncharacteristic for a military man's life path from a fighter pilot to a thinker and philosopher. Before retiring, Boyd relied on military science and his own intuitions in his writings - he did not have a serious education. Realizing this, in his forties, Boyd decided to compensate for the lack of theoretical knowledge and get serious physical and mathematical training. At the university, he mainly dealt with thermodynamics, which led him to study the nature of complex systems. At that moment, he realized that, it turns out, there are theoretical prerequisites for what he had done up to that time, based simply on common sense. He dealt with complex systems in practice, not knowing about the existence of chaos theory, the theory of complex systems and other disciplines that developed in the second half of the last century. From that moment on, he went on a completely independent path. To begin with, the ex-colonel, as a military man should, compiled a reading list for several years and carefully studied it. The result was a combination of military pedantry with high science that still has no analogues.

The main element of Boyd's theory is the OODA cycle. In accordance with the ideas of J. Boyd and his followers, any activity in the military sphere, with a certain degree of approximation, can be represented as a cybernetic model OODA (Observe - observe, Orient - navigate, Decide - decide, Act - act). This model assumes multiple repetition of the action loop, composed of four successive interacting processes: observation, orientation, decision, action. In fact, the situation develops in a spiral, and at each stage of this spiral, interaction with the external environment and the impact on the enemy are carried out. The model is usually classified as cybernetic, since it implements the “feedback” principle, according to which part of the output from the system is again fed to its input in order to clarify, and, if necessary, correct the development of the system at subsequent stages.

In a number of official doctrinal documents of the US Department of Defense, the OODA loop is considered as a single standard decision-making cycle model for command and control systems (C2 systems), both friendly and enemy troops. The articles devoted to Boyd's theory analyze a wide variety of cyclic models of activity and decision-making that are used in various fields of scientific and practical knowledge. Most authors state that the OODA cycle in terms of the composition of functional blocks, model and cognitive capabilities is a kind of “golden mean”.

Table. The most famous cyclic models of activity.

The table also lists some of the most well-known cyclical models used in project management, decision making, quality management, psychology, and the military. Of particular note is the correspondence of Boyd's loop to the general methodology of the scientific method: observation - formation of a hypothesis - testing of a hypothesis - construction of a theory corresponding to observational data. The scientific method serves to test theories against experiments and uses experiments to form new theories or correct existing ones. The similarity between the ideology of the Boyd cycle and the scientific method is, to some extent, confirmation of the interdisciplinary nature of the OODA theory.

Although the Boyd loop was originally born for military applications, this model has subsequently been successfully used to model activity and decision making in business, politics, and sociology. According to Boyd's theory, each person or organization, when solving the problems they face, has its own decision-making and activity loop. Let's take a closer look at each of the four individual elements of this loop.

Observation is the process of collecting information necessary to make a decision in a given case. The necessary information can be obtained from both external and internal sources. Internal sources of information are elements of the loop feedback. Sensors, as well as other channels for obtaining information, are used as external ones.

Orientation is the most responsible and cognitively most difficult stage in the entire OODA cycle. This idea was repeatedly emphasized by J. Boyd in his speeches. The orientation stage consists of two sub-stages: destruction (destruction) and creation (creation). Destruction involves breaking the situation into small elementary parts that are easier to understand. The person or organization making the decision will strive to break down or decompose the problem to such a level that the newly formed components of the problem become close to standard or typical situations for which the decision maker (decision maker) has a solution plan. Familiarization with these elementary typical subtasks is achieved through education, training, experience and instruction. Such familiarization is possible only on the basis of pre-developed doctrinal guidelines and a multitude of plans. The decision maker simply identifies the current situation in relation to those with which he is familiar, and applies a pre-prepared plan of action for this subtask. Then these constituent elementary sub-plans are combined into a common action plan, which corresponds to the "creation" sub-stage. If there are no real plans from which a solution can be chosen, then the process remains at the orientation stage and further decomposition of the problem is carried out. If it is not possible to develop a plan with a realistic chance of success, then subsequent grinding can lead to a cycle stop.

Decision making is the third stage of the OODA cycle. If by this stage the decision maker was able to form only one real plan, then a decision is simply made - to implement this plan or not. If several alternative options for action are formed, then the decision maker at this stage selects the best of them for subsequent implementation. The choice of the best plan can be carried out according to the criterion of efficiency - cost.

Under time constraints, a plan that meets the requirements of speed and reliability is most preferable.

Action (action) - the final stage of the cycle, involving the practical implementation of the chosen course of action or plan. Action involves the issuance of an order or instruction, a physical attack, active defense, movement in space, or control of sensors in order to improve surveillance in the next combat cycle.

In his work, John Boyd emphasized "tempo" - the rapid rhythm of passing through a cycle. He argued that whoever goes through the states of the NORD cycle faster and better will win the war. In Soviet military theory, a similar principle of "Three Y" is known - preempt in detection, preempt in deployment, preempt in fire damage.

The created cycle is not limited to application to the actions of fighter pilots. It is able to describe the operation of any other types of agents. For instance:

Director of company:

• Observes the situation in the market and the dynamics within the organization itself
• Analyzes current trends, looks for opportunities, identifies potential problems
• Makes strategic decisions
• Communicates its decisions to the departments of the company and monitors their implementation

• Enters the room and looks at the dirty places
• Analyzes what and how to wash, and whether it should be done at all
• Forms a quick plan of action in your head
• Sweeps and washes with his own hands

Microcontroller:

• Receives input from the outside world
• Processes signals
• Generates a sequence of output signals
• Sends output signals to the outside world

Because the NORD cycle turned out to be so universal, it quickly spread to other areas. Initially, the US Air Force adopted a similar SHOR/SHOR (Stimulus-Hypothesis-Option-Response) model to describe operations at the strategic command level. Then the model began to be widely used in other branches of the military. Then she came to the paramilitary and commercial areas.

Why is the NORD loop so important for control automation? There are two reasons for this:

Reason 1. When creating control automation systems, people do a lot of analysis. This analysis simplifies and abstracts all the complexities of reality into a small number of well-defined functions. However, when these functions are combined, it often turns out that they do not match each other enough and do not correspond to the existing reality, as well as gaps appear in places where they should not be. To improve the situation, it is necessary to perform a reverse process - synthesis, in order to recreate the system from individual functions and check how it meets expectations. But it's not so easy... The NORD cycle gives us a synthetic model that allows us to combine individual functions into a natural continuous flow in order to bring it closer to reality and remove the gaps that appear.

Reason 2. NORD cycle is highly versatile. It is able to describe the work of any agent at any level of management. Moreover, it does not depend on whether automation is present or not. This allows you to describe the processes, starting with a completely manual level, then gradually increasing the level of automation, but without changing the model itself.

There are several known shortcomings of the classic OODA cycle:

• The OODA cycle processes have never been detailed or formalized.
• The NORD model was developed on the basis of observations of strictly defined agents (fighters)
• Unclear decision boundaries
• NORD loop does not determine whether processes are performed by humans or automated systems
• The NORD model assumes competing interactions between agents. Its use in cooperative interactions has not been confirmed.
• The NORD cycle lacks a comprehensive, meaningful planning process. Emphasis on pace involves the use of pattern thinking
• There is no learning process in the NORD cycle

When substantiating his theoretical views, in particular when forming the theory of the OODA cycle, Boyd sought to reinforce them with philosophical justifications using three main scientific theorems:

1. Godel's incompleteness theorems: any logical model of reality is not complete (and possibly not consistent) and must be continuously improved (adapted) taking into account new observations;
2. Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle: There is a limit to our ability to observe reality with a certain accuracy. Any small observational errors included in the calculations may lead to an increase in the volume of inaccuracies over time;
3. the second law of thermodynamics: the entropy (chaos) of any closed system always tends to increase, therefore, the nature of any given system is constantly changing, even if measures are taken to preserve it in its original state. Moreover, the actions we take to affect any system will have an unintended side effect, which can actually lead to an increase in the rate of change of the system's entropy (and, therefore, to chaos).

It was on the basis of these considerations that Boyd concluded that in order to correspond to reality, it is necessary to carry out actions in a continuous cycle, in interaction with the environment, taking into account its constant changes.

In addition to these theorems, Boyd drew on the evolution of Darwin to substantiate his views. Assuming that natural selection operates not only in the biological environment, but also in the social one (manifested in the survival of people in wars and in business under market competition). Combining these points listed above, John Boyd hypothesized that the OODA cycle of action and decision is the central mechanism of adaptation and that the advantage in the speed of its cycle of action and the accuracy of assessments provides an advantage over the opposing side and leads to the achievement of victory in hostilities.

In his theorizing, Boyd divided war into three elements:

1. moral warfare: the destruction of the will of the enemy to achieve victory by separating him from allies (or potential allies) and internal fragmentation, undermining the common faith and common views;
2. mental warfare: deformation and distortion of the enemy's perception of reality based on disinformation and the creation of misconceptions about the situation;
3. physical warfare: the destruction of the enemy's physical resources (weapons, manpower, infrastructure and supplies).

In fact, three areas of obtaining the effect of military operations were recognized, which subsequently served as the creation of the theory of planning operations based on effects (EBO - Effect Based Operations).

The theory of J. Boyd as a whole meets three main criteria for the most general laws and patterns that are interdisciplinary in nature:

• it is a theory that explains the principles of how things work, recognized by a wide range of scientists;
• it goes beyond the military field in which it originated and is already being used in other areas of science;
• it is suitable for business use.

At present, the OODA loop has become the standard for describing the decision cycle in many fields of knowledge.

Abroad, especially in the United States and other English-speaking countries, the idea of ​​Boyd's noose has become a lifesaver "icon" that many believe in both the military and business. The OODA cycle has become part of the military doctrinal documents of the US, UK and Australian Departments of Defense.

In 2004, Colonel Boyd was posthumously awarded the US National Defense Award (The Thomas D. White National Defense Award). This award is given to citizens who have made the most significant contribution to strengthening the defense. Suffice it to say that aircraft designer Igor Sikorsky and former US Presidents George Bush Sr. and B. Clinton are among those awarded this honorary award in different years.

The OODA Cycle in a Competitive Environment

A distinctive feature of the OODA cycle from other cyclic models is that in any situation it is always assumed that there is an adversary or rival with whom an armed struggle, rivalry or competition is being waged. The adversary, rival or competitor also acts and makes decisions within the same loop.

In a number of cases, when there is no opposing side, its role can be played by a dynamically changing external environment. An example of such a situation is actions and decision-making in the context of catastrophes and natural disasters.

There are two main ways to achieve competitive advantages in the implementation of various types of professional, including military activities. The first way is to quantify your action cycles faster. This will allow you to act as the first number and force your opponent to react to your actions. The second way is to improve the quality of your decisions, that is, to make decisions that are more in line with the situation than those of your opponent. Better decisions can lead to better results than quick but inadequate or ill-calculated actions. Given these considerations, at each step of the process, it is necessary to strive for gradual qualitative and quantitative improvements. Let us consider in more detail these two areas of obtaining competitive advantages.

Speed ​​up the OODA cycle. According to Boyd's theory, it is necessary to "regulate" the process of the opponent's activity from the inside or win due to a faster own loop of actions than that of the opponent. In turn, the acceleration of the decision-making process can lead to two types of effects. The first effect is purely offensive in nature. You can begin to carry out your plan first and thereby bring about a change in the situation before your adversary begins to act. The lag in the speed of action leads to the accumulation of lag time over several cycles and subsequently to a systemic crisis. If your plan requires the participation of the enemy (for example, the enemy must have a certain location), the initiative in actions allows you to achieve certain conditions before starting the implementation of the planned actions. This first-strike advantage is translated into a simple formula that American military analysts almost never forget: you can kill the enemy before he fires.

The second component of the effect of accelerating OODA's own action cycle is defensive. A person or organization with an advantage in the speed of the cycle of actions is able in some cases to avoid the damaging or harmful effects of its adversary. In other words, you can become a "non-cooperative target" by creating a mismatch with the attacker's expectations. The state of non-compliance with the enemy's expectations is observed, for example, when you move from a given point in space, in which the attacking enemy has fixed you, to another position where you should not be according to the enemy's typical plans.

The qualitative improvement of the OODA cycle in this case means that the quality of your decisions will be better than that of your opponent. Considering that bad decisions are generally unacceptable, we ask ourselves the question - how can these decisions be improved?

The assessment of the level of quality of decisions made is not an absolute value, but a relative one, therefore, there are two ways to achieve a competitive advantage in this component: improve your decisions and achieve deterioration in decisions made by the enemy. Improving the quality of one's own decisions can be achieved in various ways, which include the use of modern formal mathematical methods, the improvement of information, analytical and intelligence support, the use of automated control systems, decision support systems, expert and advisory systems, education and training. Teaching and training is the most common way to improve our decision making process. It is in the course of exercises and trainings that the composition of the information that is necessary in specific practical situations is clarified, and confidence is gained in the correctness of the decisions made.

When improving your OODA cycle, you should constantly remember that there are real opportunities to reduce the quality of the enemy’s decision-making cycle and activities by creating interference and counteracting reconnaissance and surveillance systems (at the observe stage), misleading the enemy (at the observe and orient stages), making uncharacteristic and unpredictable decisions, sometimes called surprises (at the orient stage). It is also possible to weaken the effectiveness of enemy actions at the stage of using weapons (at the act stage) by using elements of active protection, for example, dynamic armor, thermal and radar decoys.

Of the four stages of the OODA cycle, three are directly related to information processing and computer technology. The fourth stage (Action - action) is generally "kinematic" in nature and is associated with moving in space, protecting and defeating the enemy based on firepower.

In order to maintain the time frame of the OODA-cycle of actions of friendly forces and ensure a higher pace of battle than that of the enemy, it is necessary to accelerate all four stages of the cycle implemented by the troops (forces). During the twentieth century, all the efforts of the military, scientists and engineers were aimed at improving weapons and technologies in terms of the kinematic part of the OODA loop. The result of these efforts was an increase in the mobility, accuracy and firepower of weapons.

However, at the present stage, the technological limit of the kinematic part of the OODA cycle has come - more powerful types of weapons cause unacceptable collateral damage, and faster and more secure weapon platforms and means of delivering the damaging factor to the target imply exorbitant material costs at the present stage. So far, this is the case in the case of hypersonic aircraft and weapons based on new physical principles.

The first three steps of the OODA cycle are directly related to the processes of collecting information, distributing it, comprehending, analyzing and making decisions based on the information received. The faster the collection, distribution, analysis, perception of information, the faster the decision is made. It is the speed and correctness of decision-making that are most important in real combat operations. Networking is a mechanism for accelerating the observation and orientation phases, as well as increasing efficiency, for the decision phase. In the most general case, the formation of network structures is aimed at reducing the time of the combat cycle and increasing the pace of combat (military) operations at all levels of the military organization.

The effectiveness of network structures is confirmed by Metcalfe's mathematical law, according to which the "usefulness" and "efficiency" of a network is proportional to the square of the number of its nodes. This law, transferred from the field of web trading to the military sphere, provides a kind of maximum possible assessment of the effectiveness of the system of sensors located on the platforms of weapons and military equipment on the assumption that the sensors provide timely and reliable information.

Continuous management

Continuous management is one of the two key principles of goal-oriented management. It is based on the concept of the NORD cycle. This principle states: "The operation of any active element in the control system can be represented as an information processing process that goes through 4 specific states: Observation, Orientation, Decision and Action."

By Active Element (or Controlling Element) we mean an element of the system that is actively involved in the management process. It can be a person, a group of people, a decision support system, a robot, or a simple microcontroller.

The Continuous Control Principle gives us a universal model for considering the operation of any active element:

Observation: The active element receives initial information from the outside world (observable world)

Orientation: Active element interprets information, makes certain conclusions (understood, interpreted world)

Solution: The active element forms a plan of action in accordance with its goals and the situation understood (action plan)

Action: The active element acts according to the plan, performs actions on its own or delegates them to other active elements. Actions lead to changes in the system and environment (obtained results).

Observation: The active element receives new information from the outside world containing changes caused by actions taken or external factors.

Orientation: The active element interprets information, compares it with expectations, draws certain conclusions

Solution: The active element makes adjustments to the action plan, or generates a new plan if the previous one was successful or failed

Action: The active element takes new actions or delegates them to other active elements

The cycle repeats over and over...

The specific work performed by the active element in some state of the OODA cycle is called the "Control Function":

Observation functions: extraction of initial information from the outside world, preliminary verification and consolidation of information obtained from various sources

Orientation (analysis) functions: interpretation of information, comparison with expectations (plans) and development of conclusions

Decision (decision-making) functions: generation or correction of action plans
Action (execution) functions: execution or delegation of actions, potentially with minor adjustments to adapt to a changing situation

It is important to understand that a OODA loop is not a "deterministic finite state machine". Loop states represent stages in the flow of information processing. All states can be active at the same time.

There is another interesting point. Most of you may have heard of the pyramid Data - Information - Knowledge - (Results):

• Data - raw raw information
• Information - processed, interpreted, up-to-date information
• Knowledge - information for execution, action plans
• Results - information that appeared as a result of actions, the effects of the actions performed

This fact is another confirmation that the OODA cycle describes the flow of information processing in any control system, which turns the initial information into actions and results.

Why is the principle of Continuous Management so important?

When people develop automated systems, they do a lot of analysis. By doing this, they isolate control functions and implement them. But when these functions are placed in a single system, they may not quite fit with each other or with the existing reality. As a result, the created ACS are incomplete, contain many gaps and do not fully meet the needs of the business.

To improve the situation, it is necessary to take a step opposite to analysis - synthesis. The Continuous Control Principle uses the OODA cycle as a synthetic model to combine control functions, link them into a natural flow of information processing, recreate the entire system and see how it works as a whole.

The Continuous Control Principle helps close the gaps in the automation of a single Active Element:

• Gaps in information and functionality: presence of required Control Functions and all required information, continuous flow of information through Control Functions
• Gaps in time: Control functions are able to work in parallel, information is processed at different stages (states of the OODA cycle) simultaneously.

The Kolb cycle is one of the learning models based on the gradual formation of mental actions.

It was written by adult learning psychologist David A. Kolb. In his opinion, the learning process is a cycle or a kind of spiral. This is a kind of cycle of accumulation of personal experience, in the future - reflection and reflection, and as a result - action.

The main 4 stages of the Kolb model are:

1) Direct, specific experience (concrete experience) - any person should already have some experience in the field or area that he wants to learn.

2) Observation and reflection or mental observations (observation and reflection) - this stage involves thinking and analyzing a person's experience, knowledge.

3) The formation of abstract concepts and models or abstract conceptualization (forming abstract concepts) - at this stage, a certain model is built that describes the information received, experience. Ideas are generated, relationships are built, new information is added regarding how everything works, is arranged.

4) Active experimentation (testing in new situations) - the last stage involves experimentation and testing the applicability of the created model, concept. The result of this stage is a direct new experience. Then the circle closes.

Stage name	Essence	Result
Experience gained	A person tries to do something from what he learns in practice, and in the way he can now, regardless of whether his skills are sufficient.	Understanding the need for further learning (did not work out or did not work out too well) or the conclusion that everything is fine anyway. Obviously, in the latter case, no further steps are needed.
Reflection	Analysis of the pros and cons of the experience gained, conclusions about what was done successfully and what could have been done better or differently.	Preparedness for the need for change and learning, in some cases - full or partial knowledge of how to act correctly.
Theory	Obtaining theoretical knowledge on how to act correctly in conjunction with the acquired experience and its analysis.	The correct algorithms of actions for the future have been obtained.
Consolidation in practice	Development of the theory, translation of knowledge into skills and abilities, adjustment by the manager.	The necessary skills are fully or partially worked out and consolidated.

The main dangerous moment of the Kolb cycle can be demotivation and a decrease in the self-esteem of the individual in the event that the experience gained is frankly unsuccessful. Therefore, if you decide to use the Kolb cycle in working with employees, be patient and think in advance how you will act in such a situation. When using this method, you will need all your feedback art, knowledge of the rules of criticism.

Kolb (1984) noticed that different people have a clear preference for different behavior - practical actions or theorizing. Then he suggested that most of the time we learn in one of four ways:

• concrete experience (Concrete Experience);
• reflective observation (Reflection);
• abstract modeling (Abstract Conceptualisation);
• active experimentation (Active Experimentation).

English psychologists P. Honey and A. Mumford (P. Honey, A. Mumford) described different learning styles, and also developed a test to identify the preferred learning style (Honey Mumford Preferred Learning Style Test).

We have identified the following four learning styles:

• "activists" - independent trial and error: actively do new and new,
• "thinkers" - come up with your own before doing it: a measured detached analysis of a lot of information,
• "theorists" - logically structure what is happening: the creation of a sequence of goals and algorithms,
• "pragmatists" - try new ideas to solve real problems: quick practical benefits.

Activist loves to learn something new, get new experience, he wants to experience everything himself and participate in everything himself. He likes to be in the center of events and attention, and he prefers to take an active position, rather than remain an outside observer. Problems are solved in a hurry.

Thinker prefers to first observe, reflect, understand the new to the end, and only then act. He tends to re-analyze what he has seen, experienced and experienced. Likes to find his own solution, does not like to be rushed, and prefers to have a margin of time to find a solution in his own time.

Theorist developed logical thinking and methodicalness are inherent, he prefers to move step by step towards solving the problem, asks many questions. He is characterized by a certain detachment and an analytical mindset. He loves tasks that require intellectual effort, distrustful of intuition and non-standard thinking, preferring the construction of models and systems. Step by step approaching the solution of the problem.

pragmatics he does not need a theory, he only needs a solution suitable for the current problem. The pragmatist seeks to find practical solutions, try everything quickly and move on to action. Not inclined to delve into theory. He likes to experiment, look for new ideas that can be immediately tested in real conditions. He acts quickly and confidently, approaches everything in a businesslike manner, down to earth and takes on the solution of emerging problems with passion.

It should be noted that people do not choose on a conscious level from which stage to start. They are hostages of their approach (behavior model).

In order to determine what type a person belongs to, E. Cameron and M. Green propose to answer the following question:

“If you were writing a book about change and wanted to convey as much knowledge as possible to future readers, you would need:

• conduct an experiment (activist);
• a sufficient number of questions for reflection (thinker);
• scrutinize various models (theorists);
• illustrate your thoughts with examples and include useful tools, techniques and applications (pragmatist).

Below is roughly one of the most common interactive lesson structures built according to Kolb's principles:

1. Motivation and announcement of a new topic - 10% of the total lesson duration;
2. Consolidation (repetition) of what has been passed - 20% of the time of the total duration of the lesson;
3. Learning new material - 50% of the time of the total lesson duration;
4. Evaluation - 10% of the total lesson duration;
5. Summing up the lesson (debriefing, reflection) - 10% of the total lesson duration.

The time distribution in this scheme can be considered conditional, the teacher can, at his own discretion and depending on the characteristics of the lesson, extend or shorten certain stages of the lesson, however, it is desirable that all the listed qualitative stages of the lesson be preserved. Let us explain each qualitative stage of the lesson in more detail:

Motivation- the initial stage of the lesson, designed to focus students' attention on the material being studied, to interest them, to show the need or benefit of studying the material. The efficiency of mastering educational material by students largely depends on motivation.

Anchoring- an important stage of the lesson, not only increasing the efficiency of mastering the material as a whole, the interest of students, but also forming in the minds of students a consistent logical structure of knowledge and methods used in this subject, and not a scattered scattering of information.

Study of the main material- the main target stage of the lesson, in which students directly receive new knowledge. At this stage, as mentioned above, the teacher should select tasks, during which students receive the necessary knowledge, skills and abilities. When selecting assignments, it is also advisable for the teacher to remember the Chinese proverb: "I hear and forget, I see and remember, I do and understand."

Evaluation- an important stimulating component of the lesson. Evaluation should be flexible, visible, unbiased and fair. Only in this case it will act as a stimulant, otherwise it can serve as the main reason for rejection of the subject and a drop in interest, so here you need to be especially careful, apply the methods of collective assessment, self-assessment, team assessment, etc. The most common method of assessment in interactive lessons - scoring and team assessment.

Debriefing- Summing up the lesson. The final stage of the lesson, at which the teacher usually asks what was effective in the lesson, what was not, collects wishes, comments, and as a result summarizes what has been covered and encourages further independent and deeper study of the material.

ECONOMIC THEORY

A.M. Zhemchugov

analyst,

LLC "Corporate Management Systems"

M.K. Zhemchugov

cand. tech. Sci., Chief Specialist, Corporate Management Systems LLC

PDCA CYCLE OF DEMING. MODERN DEVELOPMENT

Annotation. Dr. Edwards Deming is deservedly considered one of the creators of the Japanese economic "miracle", the founder of the process of reviving the Japanese economy in the postwar years. He called for an approach to problem solving that became known as the Deming cycle, or the PDCA cycle. Deming's approach has been developed by many authors, but the issue is still far from complete, especially in terms of hierarchical systems. This article is devoted to summarizing the experience of using the Deming cycle and its further development.

Keywords: Deming cycle, PDCA cycle, SDCA cycle, organization, process, process approach, strategy, policies, goal, plan, result, innovation, gemba, development, kaizen, efficiency, system.

A.M. Zhemchugov, LLC «Corporate Management Systems»

M.K. Zhemchugov, LLC «Corporate Management Systems»

PDCA CYCLE DEMING. CURRENT DEVELOPMENT

abstract. Dr. W. Edwards Deming is deservedly considered as one of the founders of the Japanese economic "miracle", of the Japanese economy postwar years revival. He urged to apply a problem-solving approach, which became known as the Deming Cycle, or the cycle of PDCA. This approach has been developed by many authors, but the issue is far from complete, especially in terms of hierarchical systems. This article is dedicated to the summary of Deming cycle studies and its further development.

Keywords: Deming cycle, PDCA cycle, SDCA cycle, organization, process, process approach, strategy, tactics, policy, goal, plan, results, innovation, development, kaizen, gemba, efficiency, system.

Dr. Edwards Deming is deservedly considered one of the creators of the Japanese economic "miracle", the founder of the process of reviving the Japanese economy in the postwar years. In 1946, he gave a series of lectures on statistical quality control methods to a group of top executives in Japanese companies. Deming urged the Japanese to take a systematic approach to problem solving. This approach became known as the Deming Cycle or PDCA (Plan, Do, Check, Action). Further, the Deming approach was developed by many authors, this is kaizen, and 7 quality steps, and the PDCA-SDCA cycle system. However, this question is quite complicated and is still far from complete, especially in terms of hierarchical systems. This article is devoted to summarizing the experience of the development of the Deming cycle and its further development.

1. Shewhart-Deming cycle

All manufactured products, both tangible and intangible, can be described

Introduction

sat - make a specification. It is also possible to describe what is not yet in reality, but what we want to create, what we foresee. It is possible to describe all the required organizational principles and processes, both current and those that we see as more effective in the future. However, firstly, compliance with the specification, as Shewhart said, is very illusory: “Someone could determine what he wants, someone else could take this specification as a guide and make this thing, and the inspector or quality judge could test the product and determine if it meets the specifications. A beautifully simple picture! .

This approach is depicted schematically by Shewhart in Figure 1a. Secondly, in this way it is possible to recreate only some semblance of a specified item, nothing better than something that is defined by a specification cannot be created in this way! Deming simply noted: "From the specification, I cannot understand what I need to know." Only earlier, until the middle of the last century - during the period of the dictatorship of the manufacturer, this was not required. However, since the beginning of the second half of the 20th century, the situation has changed - the dictates of the consumer began to set in. The struggle for the consumer began, the struggle for the quality of products, for its compliance with the needs of the consumer. A new approach emerged from Shewhart, which he depicted in Figure 1b.

Figure 1 - Old and new Shewhart quality management system

Shewhart transformed the line in figure 1a into a closed circle (fig. 1b), which he identified with "the dynamic process of acquiring knowledge." After the first cycle, a lot can be learned from the results, identify deviations and their causes, optimize and improve not only the given item itself (its compliance with the specification), but also the process of its production, improve the specification itself - create new technologies (specifications) and items to meet the growing needs of the consumer. And then improve on each subsequent cycle. As a result, we have a constantly improving product quality, its compliance with the ever-increasing requirements of the consumer, and we have constantly improving performance.

Deming introduced this cycle in Japan in 1950 and called it the Shewhart cycle. However, in Japan, he quickly came into use under the name of the Deming cycle.

Deming himself showed the old and the new way of production in this way (Fig. 2).

b) A new way of production

Figure 2 - Deming's new and old way of quality management

Manufacturers used to think of production as a three-step process, as shown in Figure 2a. Success depended on fortune-telling on the coffee grounds - what goods or services will be bought, how many of them will be produced. In the old circuit, in Figure 2a, the three steps are not connected. Accordingly, the results are low.

With the new method, the administration introduces, usually after studying consumers, the fourth stage (Fig. 2b):

1. Design the product.

2. Make it; test on the production line and in the laboratory.

3. Put it on the market.

4. Test it in operation; find out what the consumer thinks about it, and why someone who did not buy it did not buy it.

Figure 3 - Shewhart-Deming cycle

This cycle is often referred to as the "Deming Wheel". The cyclic continuation of these four steps leads to a spiral of constant customer satisfaction, at ever lower costs. "Repeat the cycle again and again, with continuous quality improvement and ever lower costs".

At the same time, Deming presented the Shewhart cycle in this way (Fig. 3). This cycle is often called

called the Deming Quality Cycle. 2. RBSL Deming cycle

Perhaps the first mention of the RBSL cycle was made by Deming during his seminar in Japan.

Figure 4 - Version presented by Deming during a workshop in Japan

Here the cycle contains four stages (Fig. 4):

Plan for changes or trials to improve.

Try to implement (preferably on a small scale).

Study the results. What have we learned.

Take action.

It differs from Shepard's cycle, in fact, only in that Shepard's "check" stage is explicitly divided into two stages: the check itself (3) and the action on the results of the check (4). This cycle is often referred to as the PDCA (Plan - Do - Control - Act) cycle. Deming preferred to call it the PDSA (Plan-Do-Study-Act) cycle, but that name never caught on.

Figure 5 - Management cycle of 4 stages with the selection of 6 principles

Deming wrote: “The process of production, having begun at some stage, changes form and proceeds to the next. Each stage has a consumer - the next stage. At the final stage - the product or service goes to the final consumer, that is, the one who buys the product or service. At each stage there will be: Production; Constant-

naya Optimization of methods and procedures". With this, Deming clearly showed that in his RBSL cycle, the processes of production and optimization take place simultaneously.

The Deming cycle can be applied in any, and not only in the areas noted, is a process of scientifically based improvements (innovations), and it does not matter in which area.

Ishikawa presented the RBSL cycle in a slightly different way, breaking it down into 6 principles (Fig. 5).

He said that management should be based on these 6 principles, which have proven to be the basis for success. And these six steps of the RBSL cycle are as follows (Table 1):

Table 1 - Six steps of the RBSL cycle

1. Definition of goals and objectives P

2. Determination of methods for achieving goals

3. Conduct education and training B

4. Implementation of activities

5. Checking the effect of doing work C

6. Taking Appropriate Measures L

Let us dwell, briefly, only on Ishikawa Principle 1: “Defining goals and

Here, Ishikawa pointed out that until policy is developed by top management, no goals can be set. And “Management cannot exist at all where there are no policies and goals.”

Once the policy is defined, the goals and plans become clear. However, every department head and every decision-maker should have policies and goals: from general policies and goals, a transition must be made to regular and everyday policies and goals. In other words, policies and goals, management itself, is a hierarchical system.

It can be seen that the First Principle of Ishikawa, also known as the P stage of the RBSL cycle, corresponds to the development of the organization's strategy. James Quinn defined strategy as follows: “A strategy is a pattern or plan that integrates an organization's major goals, policies, and actions into a coherent whole. ... The strategy should contain three essential components: (1) main chains of activity; (2) the most significant policy elements that direct or limit the field of action; and (3) a program of main actions aimed at achieving the set goals and not going beyond the chosen policy. The subsequent stages of the RBSL cycle are the implementation of the strategy. Those. in this case, the development of the strategy, its implementation, and production in accordance with the new strategy are carried out in one single cycle. Deming's RBSL cycle both sets the strategy and implements it.

3. RBSL cycles: gradual and abrupt improvement

Deming noted that in one cycle of RBSL, changes must be made in

"preferably small scale". This is due to the fact that the development and implementation of changes, real activity and its analysis, are carried out here simultaneously in a single cycle, so it is rather difficult to understand: what determines the results achieved - the shortcomings of new standards or the shortcomings of their implementation.

TQM addressing this shortcoming is provided by methods of gradual and abrupt improvements. The gradual ones are PDCAi, 7 steps and kaizen. Sharp (innovation) is the PDCA-SDCA system. Masaaki Isai described the need to divide improvement into two types: “What is improvement? It can be broken down into kaizen and innovation. Kaizen means making small improvements in ongoing work that do not change the status quo. Innovation is a fundamental transformation that changes the status quo and is carried out as a result of large investments in new technology and / or equipment.

Incremental change is the Deming PDCA cycle in which emerging problems are resolved "on a small scale". There are even fewer problems in special cycles of PDCA1, 7 steps and kaizen, focused on "very local solutions", to eliminate the sources of problems one by one.

Drastic changes are the achievement of the goal set by the organization by setting and achieving several interrelated goals, “with special goals subordinate to the general whole” - this is a strategy, and gradual changes are organization and successive achievement of individual goals are tactics. At the same time, upon achieving individual tactical results, the strategy “links the actual private results“ into one independent whole ”and uses it as it seems possible in accordance with the purpose of the organization” . Abrupt changes are proposed to be carried out by the system of two PDCA-SDCA cycles. Here, the functions of standards development (strategically, systemically) and their implementation are divided between the PDCA (standards development) and SDCA (standards implementation, production) cycles. At the same time, the PDCA cycle, as can be seen, is already different from the Deming PDCA cycle (it no longer includes production and analysis of production results).

At the same time, it is impossible to limit ourselves to innovation, or only small improvements (just as one cannot limit oneself to only strategy or only tactics), Imai wrote: “If a company wants to survive and develop, both innovation and kaizen are needed. The reason is that the system created as a result of the introduction of innovation gradually degrades if no efforts are made first to maintain it, and then to improve it.

3.1. Gradual improvement. Kaizen methodology

Kaizen means perfection. Masaaki Isai wrote that the starting point for improvement is the identification of a need. This requires acknowledging that there is a problem. If it is not revealed, then there is no need for improvement.

nii, there is no room for improvement. Therefore, this concept emphasizes the recognition of the problem and gives the key to identifying it. If the problem is known, it needs to be addressed. The kaizen methodology maintains and raises current standards through small, incremental improvements, a slow process that takes small steps.

A successful kaizen strategy unequivocally assumes that the responsibility for maintaining standards rests with the worker, and the improvement of standards is the responsibility of management. At the same time, the worker is also responsible for putting forward proposals for improvement. In addition, the worker and independently can carry out the improvement of their activities, if it does not go beyond the specified standards. The Japanese understanding of management boils down to the following: maintain and raise standards.

If during the RBSL cycle according to the kaizen methodology the proposed solution to the problem was implemented in practice, the next step is to check its effectiveness. In the case when it is found that the solution really improves the situation, it is fixed in the new standard (Fig. 6).

Figure 6 - Kaizen Decision Cycle

Note that the “Do” stage includes not only the implementation of the developed countermeasures, but also the production itself with the implemented countermeasures, otherwise it will simply be impossible to provide the “Check” stage - verification can only be carried out based on the results of real production.

"Kaizen is process oriented because to get better results, you must first improve the process." In kaizen, it is believed that the process is no less important than a very specific intended result - sales! And this is understandable, sales volume does not say anything about how to improve the process. Sales volumes (profits) are the starting point for serious marketing research and innovation and setting new goals.

Let us make a note here about the term “result”, which is used in two meanings: as “the result of the process” (the quality of the process, the volume and quality of products at the output of the process) and as the “result of the organization” (the result of the implementation

products received by the system in which the production process is carried out). This issue is discussed in more detail in Section 6.

3.2. Gradual improvement. Cycles 7 quality steps and PDCA1

In TQM, the PDCA cycle “7 steps” is also known (7 steps of quality control, 7 QC steps, 7 QS). These steps are a standard methodology for improving weak processes. At the same time, the number of steps, in specific cases, can be less than 7 and more than 7, some companies use six or eight steps in their standard reactive problem solving process, and there are discrepancies among the seven standard techniques themselves, this issue is not fundamental.

Similar to kaizen, the 7-step PDCA cycle is used to find and reduce the largest source of controllable probability - one main cause. These steps are shown in Table 2.

Table 2 - 7 Quality Control Steps

1. Select a topic (a specific improvement such as "reduce post-delivery defects seen in product X").

2. Collect and analyze information (decide which types of defects are most common). P

3. Analyze the causes (identify the main cause of the most common defect).

4. Plan and implement a solution (prevent the root cause from recurring). D

5. Evaluate the effect (check new data to make sure the solution worked). C

6. Standardize the solution (constantly replace the old process with the improved one). A

6. Explore other issues as well to see if there are more important issues that require our solution.

We also note that step 4, as in the kaizen cycle, includes not only the implementation of solutions, but also, as Deming noted, the production activities themselves in accordance with the implemented solutions.

At the same time, since changes are carried out in real time, on the job, then: “It is more reliable to plan very local solutions, clearly highlighting the elimination of the key cause, leaving most of the system intact” . After eliminating this cause, the next key cause is identified and eliminated in the next cycle.

Sheba also gave a scheme for conducting the RBSA cycle, which aims to improve the process and its results one by one, eliminating the main shortcomings, which are shown in table 3.

Let us note in conclusion - subsections 3.1 and 3.2 - that the successive non-systemic elimination of individual identified causes (evolutionary changes) leads to the accumulation of contradictions in the system, which can give rise not just to causes, but to a crisis that can only be eliminated by a complex cycle of ROSA-BOSA (revolutionary changes).

rational change).

Table 3 - RBSA1 cycle

P Select the main flaw that introduces deviations in the results, analyze the root causes of the flaw, and plan a series of measures to eliminate it.

D Perform upgrade.

C Check that the improvement was effective.

A Properly standardize improvement and start next.

3.3. Sharp improvement. System of cycles RBSA-8BSA

As Deming himself noted, his PDCA cycle operates "preferably on a small scale." Breakthrough improvements in this Deming cycle are very difficult to make because the development of improvements, their implementation, production, and analysis of the results are all done together. This leads to the fact that if the planned results are not achieved, it is almost impossible to understand what caused it: either the improvement itself is to blame, or the shortcomings of its implementation.

On a large scale, with dramatic improvements, the PDCA-SDCA cycle system is already working, based on the division of the planning and production functions of the classic Deming cycle into two autonomous PDCA and SDCA cycles (Fig. 7). The PDCA cycle here already differs from Deming's PDCA cycle: "PDCA is understood as a process during which new standards appear" . It no longer has production and analysis of production results. The SDCA cycle works, constantly focusing only on production. Having received new standards S from the PDCA cycle (Fig. 7), it introduces these standards into production activities - makes the required changes, then carries out real activities (stage D), controls production results (stage ^ and takes the required corrective actions in case of deviations of the results (stage A). ).

Figure 7 - Alternating SDCA and PDCA cycles

In the PDCA cycle of the PDCA-SDCA cycle system, which develops new standards to be passed to the SDCA cycle, only the following stages remain:

1. P - development (correction) of a plan for creating a new standard.

2. D - the process of creating a new standard.

3. C - checking the results.

4. A - corrective actions, setting a new standard.

The BOCA cycle has the following stages, mostly excluded from Deming's ROSA cycle:

1. B - knowledge of the standard, the introduction of a new standard.

2. B - real production activity in accordance with the standard.

4. A - certain corrective action depending on the results:

Initiation of a cycle of RSOA of sharp improvement (significant deviations of the process and product from the standards are identified, or significant methods for improving the process and product).

As you can see, stage B of the BOCA cycle either confirms the standard, or implements a new received standard. At stage B of the BOSA cycle, the processes of creating new standards are not carried out, only their implementation and production activities are carried out in accordance with the standards. At stage B of the ROSA cycle, only activities are carried out to create new standards, but there is no production activity. And it is clear why these cycles can only work together: "BOSA is used to stabilize and standardize the situation, and ROSA is used to improve it."

Let us note what caused the emergence of the ROSA-BOSA cycle system. Imagine, for example, that a company operating in the Deming ROSA cycle has only released a small batch of its new product to the market “on a small scale”. What will happen? Numerous clones will instantly appear that will flood and take over the market, leaving no room for the company itself. In reality, companies first carry out all the development completely (moreover, in strict secrecy) and only then introduce the development immediately into mass production, and capture the maximum segment of the market. As the famous saying goes: "Measure seven times, then cut." Work through, analyze, model, test seven times, and only then launch it into real life with all your might. At the same time, we simultaneously ensure the confidentiality of innovations, reduce resources and time for practical implementation, and ensure the stability and efficiency of real activities.

The need for such a development of the Deming ROSA cycle into the ROSA-BOSA cycle system is explained by the fact that the first began to develop in the early 50s of the 20th century, when the dictate of the manufacturer was just beginning to be replaced by the dictate of the consumer and competition between companies was just beginning to intensify. And the ROSA-BOSA cycle system appeared later, when competition had already intensified so that innovations in products began to be cloned literally in months, which simply did not allow launching limited batches of new products on the market. And innovations in the organization of activities

The problems have become so complicated that in Deming's RBSL cycles, gradually and "on a small scale", it has already become impossible to implement them without damage to production.

If we show the inputs and outputs of processes in the system of cycles RBSL-BVSL (Fig. 7), we will get a diagram of the process of sharp improvement (Fig. 8).

To code Exit

Figure 8 - Breakthrough Process

4. A system that provides both sharp and gradual improvement

Sharp improvements alone, as noted, cannot be dispensed with. A system that provides both abrupt and incremental improvements is shown in Figure 9.

Figure 9 - A system that provides both abrupt and gradual improvement

Figures 9a and 9b show three cycles. The main cycle is the BBSL cycle that ensures the current production activities, controls and corrects deviations in the quality of processes and products - deviations from existing standards. If a problem arises that requires a change in standards or the development of new standards, one of the RBSL cycles is turned on: gradual (RBSL ^ or sharp (RBSL 2) improvement. A more complete system is shown in Figure 9b. Here, plans coming from above, analysis of the external environment, interaction are taken into account cycles here are practically the same as in Figure 9a.It is noted that the RBSL2 cycle is a strategy - the solution of strategic tasks coming from production (the BBSL cycle) and the external environment.

Only this diagram does not show the input and output of the system. As can be seen (Fig. 9a, 9b), real activity is carried out at stage B of both the BBSL cycle and the RBSL cycle, respectively, production must constantly switch from the BBSL cycle to the RBSL1 cycle and vice versa. Apparently, for this reason, it was not possible to show the input and output of the process in this diagram, and another solution must be sought.

Considering the 7-step cycle, Shiba noted that it has the properties of both the RBSL cycle and the BBSL cycle: "it is an RBSL cycle in which the last few steps are the BSSL cycle (standard, use, check, reaction)". It can be seen that all stages of the RBSL cycles of gradual improvement (except for the P stage) also have the properties of both the RBSL cycle and the BBSL cycle. You can even call them BBSL cycles, noting that its stage L of such a BSBL cycle also provides for the improvement of the standard. Further, this cycle of BSBL will be called the "cycle of BSBL of improvement".

At the same time, the RVSL-BBSL system with the BBSL improvement cycle will function in accordance with Figure 10.

Figure 10 - System of RSVL-BSBL cycles with the BSBL improvement cycle

The BBSL improvement cycle has the following stages:

1. B - standards coming from above: the quality of processes and products, production volumes (plans), the introduction of new and improved standards.

2. B - real production activity in accordance with the standards.

3. C - analysis of the compliance of processes and products with standards.

4. L - a certain corrective action, depending on the results, providing:

Preservation of the standard - no correction is required (the process and products meet the standards, no improvement methods have been identified);

Bringing the process to the standard (deviations of the process from the standard were found);

Improvement of the standard (product deviations from the standard or methods for improving the standard and products (with limited change in standards) were identified);

Data transfer to the RSBL cycle of a sharp improvement (significant deviations of the process and products from the standards were identified, or significant methods

process and product improvement).

The BSBL improvement cycle shown in Figure 10 differs from the classic BSBL cycle only in the presence of the above-mentioned (above in the text and in italics in Figure 10) the possibility of improving the standard at stage (L). All other functions are identical. The correspondence of the BSBL cycle of improvement to the RBSL cycles of gradual improvement is shown in Table 4 using the example of the RBSL cycle according to the kaizen methodology.

Table 4 - Correspondence of the stages of the BSBL and Kaizen cycles

Stage RBSL cycle according to kaizen methodology Stage BSBL improvement cycle

P Definition of the problem A Definition of the problem

P Analysis of the problem A Analysis of the problem

R Establishing causes A Establishing causes

P Planning of countermeasures A Planning of countermeasures: Depending on the results and analysis achieved: Standardization Bringing the process to the standard; Improvement of the standard; Transferring data to the RSBL cycle to launch a separate improvement cycle.

B Implementation of countermeasures 8 Implementation of new and improved standards.

Production B B - production according to standards

С Confirmation of the result С Analysis of the compliance of processes and products with standards.

A Standardization See stage A above

Only the shift of the stages of the BSBL cycle of improvement in relation to the RSBL Kaizen cycle is visible, which is completely unimportant: the correspondence of the cycles is complete. Similarly, it is possible to show the correspondence between the BCBL improvement cycle and other RLSL cycles of gradual changes. However, it is absolutely impossible to compare the RBSL and BBSL cycles of improving the system of RVSL-BBSL cycles in this way.

Another argument for thinking of the well-known incremental improvement cycles as the BBSL improvement cycle is that the goal of both of these cycles is the quality of processes and products and their stage B is the actual production. Cycle management comes from below, from production. The purpose of the RBSL cycle is completely different - the creation of new standards. Its management mainly comes from above, from the goals and strategy of the organization, and only in case of serious problems with production, it comes from below.

The complete process of the organization's activities with the BSBL improvement cycle

is shown in Figure 11. Compare with Figure 9b, which does not even indicate the inputs and outputs of the system.

Vnod Vnod

Figure 11 - The process of the organization's activities, including abrupt and gradual changes with the BBSL improvement cycle

Note that here the RBSL cycle does not rotate constantly, but only during the development of a new standard, the rest of the time, being in the standby mode. At the same time, in the standby mode, the stage P of the RBSL cycle functions and analyzes the information coming from the external environment and the BBSL cycle of improvement (from stage L). As soon as the need for the development of a new standard is identified at stage P, the RBSL cycle is launched (without affecting the BBSL cycle until the development of the standard is completed).

Such an extension of the BBSL cycle does not change the essence of the ongoing processes, but facilitates their description and understanding (compare Figs. 9a and 9b, and 11). The content of the RBSL and BBSL cycles and the RBSL-BBSL system are shown in Table 5.

Table 5 - PDCA and SDCA cycles of improvement, PDCA-SDCA system

PDCA cycle of PDCA-SDCA system BBSL improvement cycle RBSL-BOSL system with BBSL improvement cycle

Purpose Planning. Development of dramatic improvements Production. Stabilization or incremental improvement Planning. Production. Sharp improvement, stabilization or gradual improvement

Strategy/tactics Strategy development Tactics Strategy and tactics

Direction of information flows Top down with possible iterations from the bottom up Bottom up with possible iterations from the top down Planning - from top to bottom, production - from bottom to top (with possible counter iterations)

Approach Orientation to the result of the organization (foreseen goal) Process approach (orientation to the process and the result of the process) Orientation to the result of the organization (foreseeable goal); Process approach

Monitoring of the External Environment Processes and their results External and internal environment

5. System of 8BSA-RBSA cycles in a hierarchical organization 5.1. Hierarchical organization model

Sheba presented the hierarchical system of cycles of the BVSL-RBSL organization in the organization as a system of functional groups (subdivisions) at each level of the hierarchy (Fig. 12).

Figure 12 - Application of a quality improvement cycle within functional groups (here "new. STD" - a new standard)

However, we note that:

Such a model is obvious for an organization with directive authoritarian management, but not for the democratic management peculiar to Japan, where it was developed. Figure 12 shows that the RVSL-BBSL cycles are closed within one unit, there is no coordination between units.

At all the upper levels there is no real production, and there can be no stage B of the BBSL cycle, which works only at the lowest level of specific production operations, and not at the level of managers.

Figure 12 shows only a limited model of functional groups, not the full model shown by Sheeba in Figures 9a and 9b.

Shiba eliminated the first drawback by introducing "interfunctional relationships" (Fig. 13).

Actually, this figure 13 only shows the idea that specific production work, analysis of performance, support of standards (BCSL cycles) should be carried out according to a hierarchical system. And goal-setting, the development of strategies, programs and action plans, the standards of activity themselves (RBSL cycles) - according to a democratic (parallel) system: "Parallel structures that carry out activities in the field of qualitative improvement create new work experience, standards for the hierarchical organization of daily work" . However, these ideas could not be depicted in the form of a complete unified model.

Real activity: management, control, especially policy development and goal setting cannot be carried out by one leader personally: "When developing policy, executive management must always keep the big picture in mind" . Such a general picture can only be formed by the joint activities of the

leader and his subordinates (and possibly with the involvement of other specialists and experts), who always have a better command of the situation in all their areas. At the same time, effective work can be carried out only if the size of the group is limited, preferably no more than 7-9 people. This is just the size of the group leader and his direct reports. The involvement of other lower-level managers also has no effect and may lead to worse results.

Figure 13 - Application of the quality improvement cycle within functional groups

At the highest levels, this is a group of a superior leader and subordinate managers of a lower level of the hierarchy, at the lowest level, a group of a leader and ordinary employees who manage the means of production. Only in force majeure situations can one-man authoritarian management be applied (we note that for this the leader must have authority).

4 Structural element 100

Third party С101

Structural subdivided 110

Structural unit 120

Structural subdivision 1p0

2 2 2 2 2 □ □ □ □ □

Structural element 100

Structural element1p0

Figure 14 - Structural (management) element. a) element scheme, b) symbol, c) recursive union of structural elements

The article noted that the social model should focus not on one leader, but on the primary group of interacting individual leaders (superior and directly subordinate) with their established relationships, their culture, their interests, agreed goals -

for the primary team. The elementary cell of the organization is indivisible in the social sense - a structural element, is shown in Figure 14.

At the highest level, the structural element includes only the owner and head of the organization (with the possible involvement of specialists and experts), at the lowest level - the head of the lower level of the hierarchy and his ordinary employees with the means of production (Fig. 15).

Structural element 100

Structural unit 100 Formal organization Informal organization (subculture)

Employee Employee Employee

Means of production

Means of production

Means of production

Formal organization - Informal organization (organization culture)

production element

Figure 15 - Structural (production) element, a) element diagram, b) element symbol

All linear (vertical) links are bidirectional. The coordination of subordinate structural units in Figures 14 and 15 is marked with a solid line penetrating these units and going beyond the boundaries of the unit, here it is both formal and informal coordination on the principle of “each with each”. Given the bidirectional vertical connections, the principle of "each with each" applies to both the leader and subordinates, the formed subculture and the commonality of interests and goals, the social structural cell is a single whole.

This structural production element (Fig. 15) occupies a special place in the management of Japan, where the level of production is called "gemba", literally meaning "place where work is done" or "place where value is added" . Imai says to go to the gemba, the place where the process takes place, whenever something unusual happens, or if you want to know the current state of affairs, to solve problems. Whether it's a shop floor process or a customer service window, gemba is the source of all information. Note that the information of production processes is mainly tactical information coming from the internal environment, and the processes of customer service and market research are mainly strategic information coming from the external environment. "Gemba service is the main purpose of management, which will not be easy for Russian managers to accept and get used to".

Taking such a structural element as an elementary cell of the system ensures the integrity of the entire system (Fig. 16).

It can be shown that the model shown in Figure 16 fully corresponds to the idea of ​​Sheba shown in Figure 12. We only note that the BBSL cycles of improvement in the model (Figure 16) (in contrast to the Sheba model shown in Figure 16)

12) are present only at the lowest level, at the gemba level. We will discuss this in detail in the following subsections. However, in this case (unlike the one shown in Figure 12), the model is a single and inseparable whole - all elements of this system intersect (if the cycles are depicted as circles, then all of them will also intersect). And this whole unified system follows the achievement of the goal set for it, and does not act chaotically, but in accordance with the developed single strategy: constant promotion of short-term plans of the lower levels and correction of long-term plans of the upper levels, depending on the conditions and progress in achieving actual results at the lower levels. Here we can clearly distinguish the development of this program of activities (the RBSL cycle) - the organization of activities, the practical activity itself with the analysis (the BBSL cycle of improvement) of "the conditions and progress of achieving actual results at the lower levels."

Figure 16 - Complete system model

5.2. RBSL cycle in hierarchical organization

The RBSL cycle according to the hierarchical structure of the organization is carried out recursively, it is described in the article. In each cycle, not one leader takes part, but a group that includes the leader and all his direct subordinates. Cycles unfold from top to bottom, covering the entire organization. Each cycle unfolds as shown in Table 6.

As can be seen from Table 6, each cycle works with all members of each elementary structural cell (Fig. 14 and 15). In each cycle, at first only the leader works, then, when he already has a vision of the issue, the leader considers the issue in more detail with his subordinates, then the leader makes a decision. The main flow of policy directives comes from top to bottom, but it is also met by a flow of possible corrections, from bottom to top.

As can be seen from Figure 14, this development can involve not only the head and his immediate subordinates, but also specialists and experts from other departments and third-party organizations, including external consultants, the need for which, with significant changes in the goals and serious changes required, is quite large. All this provides the required interfunctionality during the RBSL cycle.

This complex recursive cycle is carried out recursively at all levels of the organizational hierarchy, starting at the top. It ends with the fact that at each level

hierarchy, goals, plans, programs, standards are set for each division and the final contractor, the necessary resources are allocated.

Table 6 - RBSL cycle in an elementary structural cell of a hierarchical organization

R Formation of goals and policies by the head based on the goals and policies received from above and analysis of the internal and external environment. Building a leader's vision that ensures the achievement of the goal. Setting private strategic goals for subordinates to achieve the vision, programs and projects for the practical implementation of the vision (production, internal and external environment).

B Coordination with subordinate managers of their strategic goals, programs and projects of the enterprise. coordination between them. Determination of the structure of subordinate units and requirements for their leaders. Development of necessary changes. Clarification of goals and required resources to subordinate units.

C Verification of compliance of the complex of subordinate goals with a given goal.

L Coordination with subordinate leaders of their strategic goals, programs and projects. Preliminary approval of the goals and programs for their achievement by the unit. Possible refinement of the goals of the entire unit (repetition of the cycle).

Figure 16 shows the system of RBSL cycles (they are shown by rectangles). Each cycle works with the parent department and all departments subordinate to it. It can be seen that they intersect. Each subordinate cycle, depicted by a black small rectangle, is expanded as a cycle of subordinate subdivisions with subdivisions already subordinate to it (small unfilled rectangles are conventionally not disclosed for simplicity). The lowest level is the workplaces of the final performers (they do not have subordinates, only the means of production), along which intermediate products are promoted from the input of the organization (source materials) to its output (final products). In an organization, the top left filled rectangle is the relationship to the owner. As a result, we have a monolithic single cycle of organization.

When setting goals and activity programs, information in the RBSL cycles goes from top to bottom with possible iterations from bottom to top.

5.3. The 8BSL cycle in a hierarchical organization. Hierarchical system of cycles RVSL^BSL

The BBSL cycle, as noted above, is present only at the lowest level of the organizational hierarchy. It implements the standards developed in the RBSL cycle into production (and then improves them). The basis of the cycle is the control and analysis of the quality of production processes and product quality. This data is immediately sent from the workstations to the masters who control the BBSL cycle. In this cycle, the main interaction is between, for example, the foreman and the workers who operate the production equipment. If deviations are found, which

What can be eliminated by small changes in processes or improvement of standards, this is done in the BBSL improvement cycle. If these deviations are more significant and require elaboration, the RBSL cycle (the ROSL-BOSL system) is launched, in which the same foreman and workers participate. If the deviations are very significant, and they do not have enough competencies and resources to eliminate them, then they must submit an appropriate report to a higher level of the hierarchy (Fig. 17). And this, as Shiba noted, already requires a strategic decision: it requires a correction of goals or allocated resources. If there are not enough competencies and resources at a higher level, the decision is transferred to an even higher level of the hierarchy.

Figure 17 - System of RBSL-BVSL cycles of a hierarchical organization

In general, reports on the achievement of individual (tactical) results (or deviations) during the BBSL cycle climb up the hierarchy (with little or no cross-functional coordination), at each level checking the set indicators and, if necessary, immediately taking corrective actions (or starting a new one). RBSL cycle) from top to bottom. This does not have to be from the highest level of the hierarchy: both corrective actions and the RBSL cycle can be carried out starting only from the level of individual departments. As a result of such a construction of the cycle, the system is "doomed to produce high-quality activities in a short time" . Note that this is already a strategy (analysis of the system of results “with special goals subordinated to a common whole”), which, as noted above, “links the actual partial results“ into one independent whole ”and uses it in a way that seems possible in accordance with for the purpose of the organization. At the same time, the P stage of the RBSL cycle is here

conducts the composition of plans up the hierarchy and checks the control of plans and results at each level of the hierarchy.

Thus, the BBSL cycle functions only at the level of real production - the gemba level. At higher levels, both downwards (decomposition and planning) and upwards (composition, reports, analysis of complex results), the RBSL cycle works. This is clearly seen from Figure 17, the upper levels of the hierarchy are built in a similar way. At the same time, when composing reports, the RBSL cycle does not rotate, only one of its stages P works. The RBSL cycle is launched only when significant deviations of reports (forecasts) from plans are detected (or when there are deviations in the internal environment).

Note that the RBSL cycles actually intersect, since the same leaders are included in both the upper cycle and the lower cycle (Fig. 16), and the lower RBSL-BBSL cycles are mainly performed by the same teams. At the lowest level, each BBSL cycle involves, for example, the foreman and workers who control the means of production. At the second level from the bottom, the same craftsmen and the head of production participate. At the third level from the bottom, the director and his subordinates, the same production manager and heads of other departments, participate. Thus, despite the apparent disconnection of the system, all its elements intersect (Fig. 16). You can compare the circuit shown in Figure 17 with the circuit shown in Figure 12.

Note the lowest level of RBSL cycles. This cycle can set a strategy - the organization of the production site to achieve several interrelated goals, "with special goals subordinate to the general whole", or tactics - the organization and achievement of individual operational goals. For production with a high degree of formalization, this lower level is more tactical, for production with a low degree of formalization, this level is more strategic.

Thus, at the upper levels, from top to bottom, the strategy is developed by RBSL cycles (at the lower levels, RBSL cycles can also develop tactical issues). Then, when all the standards are set for all workplaces, production activities are determined by the BBSL cycles (with the introduction of new standards and the improvement of processes and standards) - tactics. Next comes the upward flow of reports from the bottom up - a strategy that "links the actual partial results" into one independent whole "and uses as much as is possible in accordance with the purpose of the organization" .

6. Process approach and result orientation

One of the main features of the system are links with the environment through the exchange of resources. It is the exchange of resources that makes it possible to ensure the development of the system: “At the input of the system is the flow of materials, labor, capital. The technological process is organized for the processing of raw materials into the final product. The end product, in turn, is sold to the customer" and the organization "uses the profits generated to support development."

The product at the output of the organization as a system is what it produces in the course of processes and offers to the consumer. The result of the organization is what it receives from its activities, from the sale of its products to the consumer. This is a product of the organization-consumer system - these are the resources received by the organization from the consumer: tangible, intangible and, mainly, economic. Obtaining a product of the organization-consumer system is the goal of the organization (the expected result), the goal, the achievement of which ensures the self-preservation and development of the organization. The organization's output, in and of itself, cannot be the purpose of the organization.

Note that the economic result of the organization is not the proceeds from the sale of products to the consumer, it is the output of the net product - an indicator of the volume of production of the enterprise in monetary terms, characterizing the cost of the newly created product. It is defined either as gross output minus material costs and depreciation, or as the sum of wages spent on the creation of products and the profit of the enterprise from the sale of manufactured goods. It is an analog of national income at the enterprise level.

The process approach - this is the maintenance and continuous improvement of processes and products - covers feedback on the result of the process: the quality of processes and products (current and predicted) at the outputs of the processes. It is provided by the BOSA cycles of maintenance and gradual improvement and the system of ROSA-BOSA cycles - at the gemba level.

Result orientation is the analysis of the external environment and the setting of new higher goals for the organization (the goal is the expected result) and the focus on dramatic improvements to achieve these goals. Including new and changed processes (new products, upgraded products, new technologies, etc.). Covers feedback on the result of the organization (current and predicted). The result that gives the organization the sale of the product to the consumer. It is provided by the RBSL (innovation) cycle.

The process approach (orientation to the result of the process) is mainly closed within the organization at the gemba level. Orientation to the result of the organization includes both the consumer of products, and the processes of selling products to the consumer, and monitoring the external environment. It is produced in the organization-consumer system (Fig. 18).

I_____________________________I

Figure 18 - Process Outcome and Organizational Outcome

The difference in the time characteristics of these two feedbacks is obvious: if feedback on the quality of processes and products can be carried out in real time (with fast processes, even per minute), then with feedback

Zyu according to the result, the situation is completely different. So, for example, the profit received can be found out only after a quarter, or even a year.

Accordingly, it is also obvious that both feedbacks are necessary. Moreover, for commercial companies, the quality of processes and products is not a goal, but a means of obtaining a result: if the highest quality (in terms of accepted standards) processes and products do not bring profit to the company, they should be completely revised with a focus on results. In general, any organization that exists in the external environment is focused on the result of the organization (survival and development), on what it receives from the external environment. Quality processes and outputs are the means by which an organization achieves results.

The process approach, when the system is configured to support processes and products to specified standards and improve them in real time (in a temporary separation from the results of implementation), is operational management. And, only when a change in demand is detected (or a sharp drop in the results of processes), feedback on the result of the organization (strategic management) is activated. As Shiba pointed out, it is necessary to find a compromise between the result orientation of the organization and the process orientation (on the result of the process), not only long-term results-oriented goals (organizations), but also "intermediate process-oriented goals" are needed.

Japan has traditionally focused on the process, the United States - on the result. The main shortcomings of the Japanese system are the leveling and slow promotion of young employees, as well as their low wages. However, the system of remuneration and promotion based solely on age and seniority is becoming obsolete in terms of efficiency. Or already outdated. But only in recent years, the Japanese began to modernize it, gradually introducing contracts, internal competition, accounting for personal contribution, a pay system based on results, and other elements of Western management.

Process approach - cycles BBSL and RBSL-BVSL - the lowest level of the hierarchy (gemba). Where the upper RBSL cycles work, there the question is already about goals and resources, and this is already a result orientation. For example, the issues of production planning in terms of volume and nomenclature do not come from the processes, but from the goals of the organization, if necessary, they change the processes. As soon as we climb higher through the RBSL cycles (Fig. 17), the analysis of the external environment becomes more and more important, the result orientation in a dynamic external environment increasingly dominates process management, setting and replacing and changing the processes themselves. The main orientation at the upper levels is on goals and resources (foreseen results), and this is already a result orientation.

7. Orientation to the results of organizational units

Figure 18 shows that only the entire organization as a whole works for the result of the organization, while the divisions work only for the process. Therefore, the result achieved by each unit (what it receives for its activities) is determined by

is divided administratively and subjectively (distribution from above from the “common pot”).

At the same time, each division of the organization (each stage of the process) has its own consumer - the next division (the next stage). At the final stage - the product or service goes to the final consumer. Here, each of the divisions is "a place where value is added". And the result achieved by each division should not just be assigned from above, it should be determined by the value added by that division. To do this, there are various methods, for example, internal cost accounting, budgeting, transfer prices, etc. To introduce these methods, the units must have sufficient independence.

Figure 19 shows an organization with three independent divisions (with processes occurring within them) and with feedback on the result of the divisions.

Monitoring

Wednesday Result 1 subdivision

Environmental monitoring

Department¡Result (process)

Result

2 divisions

Environmental monitoring

Organization! Organization result

Department [Result (process)

Department (process) Result ■ ^ Customer

process ^ (product) 1

Figure 19 - Organization with three independent divisions

In this case (Fig. 19) there is no administrative distribution (Fig. 19 the central leadership is not even conditionally depicted). Revenue from the sale of products goes to the final unit of the organization, however, this is not the result of this unit, but of the entire organization. The final division passes the results of other divisions down the chain from output to input. And the very first division pays for both input materials and components (not shown in Fig. 19). Here, the real result of each division is determined by the added value created by it (after the sale of the final product to the consumer), and each division is focused on obtaining its maximum added value. The process approach here is implemented within departments.

Such an organization with a focus on results is most consistent with the mentality of the West and Russia, but Japan, as noted above, has taken the path of increasing the role of performance-based pay in recent years. At the same time, both in the West and in Russia, the process approach is increasingly being used.

It can be noted that, in the limit, result orientation can be brought to each employee of the organization, only it is required to observe the optimum between payment for an individual result, for a collective result, and for the quality of processes and products.

1. A well-known development of the Deming RBSL cycle is: the system of RBSL-BBSL cycles of abrupt improvement, in which the change development functions (RBSL cycle) and the change implementation functions (BBSL cycle) are divided between these two cycles, and the RBSL cycles of incremental improvement: kaizen, 7 steps , RBSL1. The first allows for sudden changes, the second - gradual.

2. The “SDCA improvement” cycle proposed in the article for the PDCA-SDCA system allows you to solve all the issues of both sharp and gradual improvement without additional cycles, in one system of cycles.

3. The proposed system of PDCA-SDCA cycles provides for all activities of the organization. At the same time, the PDCA cycle is basically a strategic management system, the SDCA cycle is all tactics and all real production.

4. The process approach (process result orientation) is defined by the SDCA cycle and the lower level of the PDCA-SDCA system, while the organization's result orientation (strategic approach) is determined by the higher PDCA cycles.

5. For a hierarchical organization, a system of PDCA-SDCA cycles was built, which forms an inseparable intersecting hierarchy, in which the subject of each elementary cycle is a group that includes at least the leader and his immediate subordinates.

6. In a hierarchical organization, the SDCA cycle functions only at the lowest production level of the hierarchy (gemba), however, the results of the processes are transferred to the PDCA cycles (P stages) up to the highest level of the hierarchy, triggering the required PDCA cycles on deviations.

7. The process approach works at the lowest level of the hierarchy (gemba). At the upper levels, where PDCA cycles work, the orientation is towards goals and resources (foreseen results), and this is already a result orientation.

Bibliography:

1. Shewhart W.A. Statistical method from the viewpoint of quality control. - Washington: The Graduate School, the Department of Agriculture, 1939. - P. 155. Quoted in: Neve Henry R. The Space of Dr. Deming: Principles for Building a Sustainable Business. - M.: Alpina Business Books, 2005. - 370 p.

2. E. Deming. Out of the Crisis: A New Paradigm for Managing People, Systems, and Processes. - M.: Alpina Publisher, 2012. - 419 p.

3. Neve Henry R. The space of Dr. Deming: the principles of building a sustainable business. - M.: Alpina Business Books, 2005. - 370 p.

4. Ishikawa K. What is total quality management?: Japanese way. - M.: TKB Intercertifica, 1998.

5. Quinn J.B. Strategy of change // Mintzberg G., Quinn J.B., Ghoshal S. Strategic process. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2001.

6. Shiba Sh. New American total quality management: textbook / Sh. Shiba, A. Graham, D. Walden. - M.: INFRA-M, 2001. - 348 p.

7. Imai M. Kaizen: the key to the success of Japanese companies. - M.: Alpina Business Books, 2004. - 274 p.

8. Zhemchugov A.M., Zhemchugov M.K. The purpose of the enterprise and the strategy for achieving it. Conceptual foundations // Problems of theory and practice of management. - 2014. - No. 5. - S. 75-80.

9. Bogdanov A. A. Tectology: General organizational science. - M.: Finance, 2003. - 496 p.

10. Zhemchugov A.M. Socio-cybernetic model of organization // Problems of Economics and Management. - 2014. - No. 6 (34). - S. 3-17.

11. Imai M. Gemba kaizen: a way to reduce costs and improve quality. -M.: Alpina Publisher, 2016. - 345 p.

12. Zhemchugov A.M., Zhemchugov M.K. Development of an effective strategy and structure of an enterprise - a practical step-by-step technique // Problems of Economics and Management. - 2013. - No. 6 (22). - S. 15-21.

13. Economics and law: a reference dictionary / L.P. Kurakov, V.L. Kurakov, A.L. Kurakov. - M.: University and school, 2004.

14. Prasol A. Japan: faces of time. Mentality and traditions in a modern interior. - M.: Natalis, 2008. - 360 p.

15. Kaziev V.M. Introduction to the analysis, synthesis and modeling of systems: a tutorial. - M.: Internet University of Information Technologies: BINOM. Knowledge Laboratory, 2007. - 244 p.

16. Milner B.3. Theory of organization: textbook. - M: INFRA-M, 2000. - 480 p.

The PDCA cycle is a cyclical sequence of actions in the performance of a task, aimed at continuous quality improvement. The PDCA cycle can be deciphered as - Plan-Do-Check-Act (English) planning-action-check-adjustment. This abbreviation was first described by W. Shewhart in the book "Statistical methods from the point of view of quality management" in 1939. In this book, he described how the cyclic performance of enterprise management functions with flexible management, ready to introduce new ideas and get rid of bad experiences, lead to success. Later, Shewhart's student, Edward Deming, gave the PDCA cycle great publicity, as he inspired the Japanese to use it, and they called the PDCA cycle the Deming cycle. At the same time, Deming himself called it in honor of the teacher - the Shewhart cycle.

At the moment, the PDCA cycle has several names, but the essence of this does not change. It should be noted that Edward Deming replaced the “check” stage with “study” (from the English Study), therefore the Deming cycle is sometimes called PDSA. In fact, all of the following terms mean the same thing:

• PDCA cycle
• PDSA cycle
• Deming cycle
• Deming-Shewhart cycle
• Shewhart cycle

Application of the PDCA cycle.

In order to understand how to apply the PDCA cycle in practice, let's first break it down point by point.

Planning.

The planning stage should provide answers to the questions “what to do?” and “how to do?”. You need to do more than just define your goals and desired outcome. But also to understand what resources, including temporary ones, must be used to achieve the goals. At this stage, it is also worth considering force majeure and all possible options for the development of the situation. is of great importance, it is a kind of foundation for a successfully completed task.

Performance.

On the one hand, everything is simple - do what you planned. In fact, how do we encounter the so-called "human factor". Unfortunately, employees do not always adhere to the plan, even if they made it themselves.

Examination.

At the verification stage, it is necessary to compare the result obtained with the planned goals. It is also important to evaluate how many resources have been expended. For objectivity and better measurability of results, it is best to use, the more specific and measurable the goal, the easier it is to evaluate the result.

Adjustment.

At this stage, you need to make adjustments that will help carry out the new planning. It is important for you to understand how, based on your experience with this task, to improve its performance next time.

Meaningful implementation of the PDCA cycle leads to an improvement in the quality of the work performed, and also significantly helps to reduce costs. Although the execution of the cycle itself is inevitable and will be carried out constantly, not everyone understands how much efficiency can be increased by introducing changes and new practices. In times of scientific and technological progress, many tasks can be performed much more efficiently using the latest technology.

The Shewhart-Deming cycle (PDCA cycle) is a well-known model of continuous process improvement, called the Shewhart-Deming cycle or the PDCA cycle, the application of which in a variety of areas of activity allows you to effectively manage this activity on a systematic basis.
The ancestor of this cycle is considered to be William Shewhart.
In 1931 he published a report on the use of control charts and his first book, The Economic Management of Industrial Quality.
In 1939 his second book, Statistical Method from the Point of View of Quality Control, was published.
In these works, Shewhart outlined his views on the statistical method of quality control of production processes and on this basis the quality of manufactured products.

There are three stages in quality management:

1. Development of the Specification (terms of reference, specifications, tolerances) of what is required.
2. Production of Products that meet Specifications.
3. Verification (control) of manufactured products to assess their compliance with the specification.

Shewhart stresses how much this sequence of steps is necessary for use in a world where all processes are subject to variation.

These three stages are interpreted as cycle of four steps:

1. Develop a product;
2. Make it, check it on the production line and in the laboratories;
3. Put it on the market;
4. Check it in work, find out what the consumer, the user thinks about it and why "non-consumers" did not find it.

Then Step 4 leads to a new Step 1: redesign the product and the cycle begins again.

Shewhart argued that it was necessary to constantly improve the quality of products. To do this, he also proposed a process approach not only in quality control, but also in organizing production relations from operation to operation, substantiated the need to organize production not according to functional characteristics, but following the production process.
This horizontal structure of organization and management of the production process is called the Shewhart system.

Development of the concept by Deming.

Shewhart's concept of continuous (process) quality improvement was developed in the works of Edward Deming.

He also introduced into the practice of production management the use of PDCA cycle:

- planning (Plan)
- implementation (Do)
- Check
- action (Action).

There is another version which preferred by Deming - PDSA:

plan– Plan.
Do– Do It. Deming recommends that Step 2 be done on a small scale: large enough to provide useful information, but no larger than necessary in case things don't go well.
Study– Learn.
act– act. “Step 4” may be followed by another round trip, using the knowledge gained, or due to intentionally modified requirements, to learn even more, or, conversely, this may be the last step in the decision to accept or reject the Plan.

The Shewhart-Deming method and cycle, which is more often called the Deming cycle, is usually illustrated by a control scheme for any process of activity, including the quality management process.
Unlike the Taylor system, the use of which often generates conflicts due to the fact that four functions are performed by different groups of people, the Shewhart-Deming system brings all phases of the internal production cycle into a single process, and they become elements of a common teamwork.

Deming's pragmatic axioms.

Deming also formulated a number of "pragmatic axioms":

1. “Any activity can be considered as a technological process and therefore can be improved.” That is, when managing the quality of any activity and the quality of the result of this activity, a process approach is necessary.
2. "Manufacturing should be seen as a system in a stable or unstable state." This means that the result of solving specific problems is dictated by the state of the system, so fundamental changes are needed regarding the system itself.
3. "The top management of the enterprise must in all cases take responsibility for its activities."

Based on these axioms, Deming deduced 14 private principles. These principles are known as ideas from the 14 points of TQM management. 14 Deming Principles :

Paragraph 1: Constancy of Purpose. The company must constantly and purposefully improve the quality of products and services.

Therefore:

• Set a goal and be unfailingly firm and constant in achieving the set goal of continuous improvement of products and services
• Allocate resources to meet long-term goals and needs, not just short-term profitability

This means that you should not bet on short-term and quick profits. It is worth establishing long-term and mutually beneficial relationships with the client through a strategy, the formation of a portfolio of services, which is based on high-quality services that are of value to this customer.

Clause 2. Responsibility for non-conformities, delays, errors and defects should be assumed by the management of the enterprise.

Item 3: P cut dependence on mass inspections.Avoid defects without external control.

Therefore:

• Eliminate the need for mass checks and inspections as a way to achieve quality;
• Quality must be designed and built into processes.
• Prevent defects, don't try to find and fix them after they happen.

Item 4: Stop buying at the lowest price.The price should take into account the quality of the product.

Point 5: Improve every process to improve product quality, improve productivity and reduce costs.

Therefore:

• Improve today and always all processes of planning, production and delivery of services.
• Constantly look for problems in order to improve all activities, increasing quality and productivity, and thereby reducing costs.
• Strive to make an unstable process stable, a stable but inefficient process efficient, an efficient process even more efficient.
• Remember - if you do not find the problem first, the problem will arise by itself.

Item 6: Train all employees. Training and retraining of personnel should be put into practice.

Therefore:

• Train all employees, including supervisors and managers, in order to better use the capabilities of each of them.
• Training is as much a part of the workflow as production.
• The rooting and dissemination of improvements is the result of learning.
• The cost of training is negligible compared to the benefits that result from the fact that this employee does his job correctly and with the best benefit for the company.

Item 7. Use new leadership methods.Management should help employees do their jobs better. The role of a leader is that of a teacher, not a judge or clerk.

Item 8. Cast out fears so that everyone can work calmly and efficiently.

Item 9: Break down barriers.

Therefore:

• Destroy barriers between divisions, services, departments.
• People from different functional departments must work in teams in order to troubleshoot problems that may arise with products or services.

Item 10. Refuse slogans and appeals that are not supported by appropriate actions and means.

Item 11. Eliminate arbitrarily set targets and quantitative norms. The worker performs the work qualitatively as much as he can.

Item 12. Encourage employees to be proud of their work and qualifications.

Item 13. Encourage employees to strive for education and improvement.

Item 14: Top management commitment. Management must be responsible for product quality.

Therefore:

• Top management must lead and energetically lead the entire company in the direction of improving the quality of each activity in the company: provide the necessary support, training, allocation of funds.
• The management of the company should follow in its own practice the same principles that it preaches.
• The management of the company must agree that it must also learn a lot and be ready to learn.

and repeat!

I was introduced to the PDCA methodology, also known as the Deming Cycle, more than 8 years ago when I studied the ISO 9001:2008 standard for developing quality standards for the production of PVC windows. Since then, this cycle has been tried in many areas and it has always given excellent results.

What is the Deming Cycle?

The PDCA methodology or the Deming Cycle is a great catalyst for quality growth in your company.

The abbreviation PDCA itself consists of four English letters and means the following:

P - Plan (planning)

D - Do (action)

C - Check (check)

A - Akt (correction/impact)

The full cycle looks like this:

For ease of remembering, the word adjustment can be replaced by the word impact, and then the formula will sound simpler: plan, act, check, act.

How to use the Deming Cycle?

Now let's look at how this cycle can be applied in practice. Let's set ourselves the following task:

Create and improve a checklist for launching an advertising campaign.

To solve this problem, we will take the Deming cycle as a basis and do each step in order to develop and improve our fictional checklist for launching an advertising campaign:

1. We plan

Setting a Goal

Develop a checklist that will reduce the number of errors and failures after the launch of an advertising campaign.

This goal will serve as a starting point for us to develop a checklist.

We define indicators

To be able to assess how well a goal is being achieved, we need to develop a metric for it.

Let's make a table to make it easier to see the deviations.

Checklist test	Number of mistakes	Reasons for deviations from 0
1st launch of the Republic of Kazakhstan according to the checklist
2nd launch of the Republic of Kazakhstan according to the checklist
n-th launch of RK according to the checklist

We develop a plan for the checklist

To develop a checklist, we will have to do a number of works. To do this, write a plan:

• collect information;
• develop the content of the checklist;
• try out the checklist.

We distribute resources

To accomplish the task, it will take the time of a specialist. Let's say that everything should take us 3 hours of net working time.

We will allocate this time for a specialist, having previously estimated the amount of work.

Now you can proceed directly to the implementation of the task itself.

2. We act

A plan for the implementation of the task has been developed. Now we must begin to act, that is, to carry out the direct development of the checklist.

We carry out preparatory work

In order for our checklist to take into account as many of the necessary parameters as possible, we will carry out work to collect information.

For this we need:

• raise the results of past work;
• recall the mistakes that occurred earlier;
• perhaps to communicate with colleagues;
• try asking Google for help;
• and other options.

All these actions will allow you to collect a fairly complete picture for the development of a checklist.

We execute the plan

After we have collected all the necessary information, we will start developing the document ... After some time spent on grouping the information received, we would have an excellent checklist. Move on.

3. Check

In order for us to complete the cycle, we need to try the checklist in work. To do this, we would have to do several advertising campaigns on it. Preferably 5-10, at least. This is necessary in order to collect error statistics.

We control the result by indicators

Let's say we launched and tested the work of our checklist. Now it's time to check the effectiveness of his work. To do this, we need to understand how many errors occurred after the launch of each advertising campaign and determine the reasons for their occurrence. Let's put the data in the table:

Checklist test	Number of mistakes	Reasons for deviations	Suggestions for making changes to the checklist
1st launch of the Republic of Kazakhstan according to the checklist		Mistake …
2nd launch of the Republic of Kazakhstan according to the checklist
n-th launch of RK according to the checklist

We identify and analyze deviations

After receiving enough data on errors and failures in the checklist, we would have to conclude what changes we need to make to the checklist to make it more efficient.

Checklist test	Number of mistakes	Reasons for deviations	Suggestions for making changes to the checklist
1st launch of the Republic of Kazakhstan according to the checklist			Offer #1 Offer #2 Offer #3
2nd launch of the Republic of Kazakhstan according to the checklist			Offer #1 Offer #2
n-th launch of RK according to the checklist			n. Offer n…

4. We influence

We take measures to eliminate the causes of deviations

We add the resulting list of edits to the checklist, thereby raising its quality. As a result, this will naturally affect the quality of advertising campaigns.

An interesting fact: in the GOST R ISO 9001:2015 standard, quality is defined as the degree of compliance with the totality of the inherent characteristics of an object requirements. That is, it follows from here that the higher the quality of the product you want to achieve, the higher your requirements for it should be.

Making changes to planning and resource allocation

At this stage, there are several options:

The Deming cycle can be terminated if no further corrections are needed.

We continue to improve the checklist. To do this, you will have to repeat the cycle again.

If you still have questions about the Demin Cycle, ask them in the comments, and I will definitely answer them.

What methods do you use in your work?

 

It might be useful to read:

• Internet via mobile phone - All options How to set up Internet using your phone;
• What does the letter r mean on the phone;
• Lamp and chimney - literary magazine - Prose;
• Do we need LTE technology?;
• What makes a good photo?;
• See what "Bret Hart" is in other dictionaries;
• What is LTE (4G) in a smartphone What is the difference between 4g and lte in a smartphone;
• Night unlimited on Tele2 "Night Drive" service from Tele2;