Analyzing the UDEs
Fri., February 25, 10:42 PM
What? UDEs – UnDesirable Effects – are a part of Jonah© terminology. (The guys in my department used to call them UnDies, to which I replied that we certainly shouldn’t air them in public.)
Analyzing the UDEs – a method of defining a problem – actually does work better in a group environment. It is especially effective for a group that shares problems, like people from one company or perhaps a bunch of people who have similar jobs. With the emphasis on the process, it is easier to bypass reflex blaming and finger-pointing.
In a more diverse group, participants may start with individual problems and present them to the group for “scrutiny” – that is, examination of the logic. I’m not doing this with a group – which may dilute the efficacy of the process – but that’s okay. This is my life, and I’ve been over this material lots of times before. Another point of the Theory of Constraints is that, once you have resolved a constraint, you must go back and re-examine the problem because you have probably uncovered another constraint.
You begin with a list of UnDesirable Effects. List as many as you like; you never know just what will make the situation clearer. Of course, you are careful to express the problem in words that emphasize objects and circumstances, rather than whose fault it is. A manufacturing group might begin with “customers complain” as a UDE, but listing what they complain about – late shipments, no one answering the phones, a problem with the product, for example – may be very insightful.
Once you have a good-sized list, you start drawing relationships between effects. #1 is caused by #5. Hmm. You may recognize that both #6 and #10 are caused by the same thing, even though that cause was something you haven’t even listed. And you start drawing diagrams, something like this:
Discussion and analysis demonstrates that some causes are the effect of yet another cause:
Eventually you should find a great many effects have the same cause, or root problem. This is the problem you will try to correct. If you simply fix something down the line, you haven’t really done much at all. Sometimes you find that the root problem is a Necessary Condition. And that’s a whole new ball game.
Necessary Conditions are circumstances that you just can’t change. They just exist and – for the time being, at least – you can’t do a thing about them. What you can do is change your reaction to them, make sure you’re not assuming things that aren’t really there (we all do that), and generally back off a little. When you find yourself up against an impassible wall, backing up may reveal a way around the ends.
So what brought this on? I was playing with these ideas, since I really can’t do other, more physical, things. I’m very much aware that I will come out with necessary conditions (because, after all, if it were fixable, I’ve already done it!) Certain necessary conditions solve themselves with just a little patience (like the cold weather), and others can be resolved with a different approach. So I always go back and re-analyze. I came up with what I might call The Bane of My Existence, only to see other people listing theirs. Great minds run in the same channels.
I suppose you think you want to know what it is. Really, you don’t, but I’ll tell you anyhow. It’s a Husband who is ill, who won’t get any better, because he won’t even try. Aren’t you sorry you asked?
