In a recent article, I mentioned the concept of Continuous Improvement and want to expand the conversation around that management model.
I am blessed to work with dairy producers who possess a wide range of skills and abilities. Many are excellent managers whose names some of you would recognize with strong track records of success. One of the most common traits that I encounter across the spectrum of my clients’ management abilities and styles is that too many of these owners get so involved in the day-to-day grind that they are unable to maintain a constant drive to find new, innovative (or even incremental) improvements to their businesses. Only a select few have developed a culture of what I can best label as “continuous improvement mixed in with a healthy dose of radical change.”
Continuous Improvement (CI) has been described in various forms since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. CI gained its most significant momentum in the world of automobile manufacturing in the 1950’s. W. Edwards Deming, an American engineer, statistician, professor and most notably, management consultant, is among those largely credited with CI’s immense popularity. Deming described CI as any improvement initiative that increases successes and decreases failures. Variations of CI include Lean Production, Kaizen, Six Sigma and Total Quality Management.
For the purposes of this discussion, I’d like to think of CI in very broad and general terms similar to Deming’s definition. Here are a couple examples:
Several years ago, I was in the middle of a work session with a client to help develop their operating and capital expense budgets for the coming year. As part of the process, I had requested planning diets for the mature and replacement herds and was surprised to see just one diet for lactating animals. The surprise was not so much the one-group TMR, but the combination of the one-group strategy and amount of somewhat costly additives and supplements present in the diet.
When I inquired about this, the nutritionist and producer looked at one another and replied: “We just haven’t gotten around to returning to the normal multi-group strategy after the major expansion earlier this year.” When I pointed out the design elements and the fact that the expansion had been completed several months prior, they did some quick math and realized that they had let the equivalent of $500K in annual feed costs swirl down the drain.
Another long-ago scenario I experienced involved a relatively new client. In an early conversation, he listened intently as I described one of my favorite innovation exercises which, if adopted, would involve the farm’s team of managers, advisors and consultants. I encouraged a two-hour session complete with a formal invitation, agenda and expected follow-up.
Each member of the farm’s Innovation Team would be expected to come to the meeting prepared to outline three suggestions for change/improvement that would provide the farm with its quickest and biggest bang for the buck in improving the efficiency of production and profitability for the farm. Each person would have five minutes to provide a brief description of their three suggestions and the group would then rationalize and prioritize any suggestions that merited adoption. For each project that is adopted, a project manager is assigned to ensure timely implementation and in-depth analysis of its results.
Less than a month after I had introduced the client to the Innovation Team concept, he called to let me know that he had already partially adopted the idea. He had scheduled a one-on-one conference with his nutritionist to probe areas of opportunity in their ration design and nutritional and forage production strategies. That meeting resulted in a completely revitalized and energized consulting relationship between the farm and the nutrition consultant. It also happened to result in an annualized improvement in NFI of nearly $175 per cow – an almost staggering amount of money in total.
So how do these kinds of opportunities sometimes pass by even some of the very best dairy owners and managers? I think the answer is fairly straightforward – we too often aren’t looking for them. A particular word comes to mind when I think about CI, a perfect antonym for CI: complacency. We are all guilty of it to some degree. When our work, our business, and our relationships evolve to the place where they are very familiar and we become at ease with them, it is entirely too easy to let ourselves become complacent in them as well.
The folks who have mastered the CI process are people who I sometimes describe as being “never satisfied.” The analogy I often use to describe CI is to think of your business as a collection of rocks laying out on a table. Each rock represents a process, enterprise, cost center or perhaps an employee. These “never satisfied” owners are constantly identifying the next best rocks to turn over to find new opportunities for growth and improvement. But like all of us, they don’t have time to just constantly turn over all the rocks. They use the knowledge gleaned from the various information systems at their command to guide them to the rocks which are the next best candidates to be turned over and explored. Because of the insights generated by managerial analytics and benchmarking (internal and external) they can more easily identify the rocks that are their next hurdles to greater efficiency and profitability.
You’ve heard me say this before but it’s really not that difficult; the only real exception may be the first step:
I have seen demonstrated, by a couple very comprehensive dairy farm financial databases, that management is a hands-down greater determiner of long term profitability than size. I absolutely believe that the concept of Continuous Improvement is among the most powerful dynamics among dairy farm management styles. Andy Grove, one of the co-founders of Intel is credited with this quote: “Success breeds complacency. Complacency breeds failure. Only the paranoid survive.” How paranoid are you willing to become?