My Professional Strengths

intellogoBelow is a compilation of strengths noted in many of my performance reviews over the years.  These comments crossed multiple jobs during my time at Intel Corporation.  I edited the text to fix some of the choppiness and incomplete sentences that are normally used in a performance review document in order to save space.  I did my best to preserve the messages intended by managers.


  1. [Discipline]  Dave infused a greater level of discipline into the project planning across groups and instilled better organization within the local team.  He built an MBO planning process and an effective, consistent staff meeting that improved communication, individual involvement, and focus on results.
  2. [Customer Orientation]  Dave improved stakeholder management and helped the team flip the emphasis on acting as a victim of our stakeholders to working as direct peers and partners instead.  Stakeholder satisfaction was problematic many times during the year, but as Dave helped Nizhny drive the agenda more, problems were solved more effectively when on equal footing with other organizations.
  3. [Quality]  Dave showed his commitment to quality by leveraging the talents of his team to define what quality coding really is.  The team now has the right focus on what is needed to produce quality projects.  He has also worked tirelessly to improve the communication skills of the team by running communication and leadership workshops that will increase our reputation as a high-quality organization.
  4. [Integrity]  Dave has received regular feedback from stakeholders that he operates with a high level of integrity.  One example included his contribution to the Sales and Marketing Group performance review session.  Dave ensured that fair and accurate results were achieved amongst the numerous and varied departments across the organization.  He also exhibited a strong commitment to running the Russia Marketing Center in a professional, value-oriented manner.
  5. [Quality]  Dave’s work output and communication skills are always of the highest quality.  He is able to articulate the key messages in communications and presentations, provide the right data for the right situation, and collaborate effectively with teams and stakeholders to get the job done effectively.  Dave contributed quality content and clear messages in presentations to the Executive Management Team and to regular Ops Review meetings.  Additionally, he submitted high quality data to the Compensation &Benefits Team in order to improve salary competitiveness in the Russia market.  All these demonstrate his constant commitment to Quality.
  6. [Great Place to Work]  Dave leads with principle and has spread the trait of professionalism and responsibility to the rest of the young and inexperienced Russia Marketing Center team members.  He has challenged his people to move from being a new and untested team to a respected partner with Moscow and EMEA.  He has also inspired people to work hard but have fun.  Examples of this are the Russia Marketing Center hosting a party at the Intel Global Sales and Marketing Conference as well as contributing a video and displays to the CEO’s technical demo.  The positive, energetic spirit of the RMC is a direct product of Dave’s dedication to making it a Great Place to Work.
  7. [Customer Orientation]   Dave constantly demonstrates strong customer orientation.  He was very proactive and constructive during design and planning of the global service request system for the Software Solutions Group.  Dave scheduled a large number of meetings with customers to understand customer requirements and constantly sought customer feedback.  He scheduled meetings to discuss customer satisfaction surveys and proposed possible action items to address issues.
  8. [Quality]  Dave possesses strong written and presentation skills.  Due to this, he acts as the primary messenger for written communications with the customers or within Northwest Engineering Computing.  Dave’s presentations to the Executive Committee were received well throughout the year.
  9. [Customer Orientation]   Dave is the end user advocate for the Northwest Engineering Computing customer base.  Dave excels at ensuring a quality support experience by closely monitoring the NWEC indicators and survey data and following up on customer surveys.  He also regularly meets with customers and has provided extensive indicators for quarterly reviews and for his NWEC peer managers as needed.
  10. [Results Orientation]  Dave is imaginative and not afraid to take risks.  He came into the Security Operations Team (SOT) and the Security Architecture Team knowing little about information security and was able to quickly begin effective management of the SOT.  He is also not afraid to look for new opportunities or ways to simplify or reduce the workload.  He has introduced a new concept of site security certification which is a departure from our current ways of pushing the regions to get their security work completed.  This new concept will hopefully “pull” the regions by instilling a bit of competitiveness into the process in hopes of easing the constant pushback we get when trying to deploy new security solutions.  This is a significant departure from our normal operations method and will be an interesting experiment to improve security within EC.
  11. [Customer Orientation]   Dave is the end user advocate for the NWEC customer base.  Dave excels at ensuring a quality support experience by closely monitoring the NWEC SLA commitments and following up on customer surveys.  He also regularly meets with customers and has provided extensive indicators for quarterly reviews and for his NWEC peer managers as needed.  Dave has especially assisted with an increasingly successful partnership with the motherboard engineering team by providing indicators bi-monthly to ensure follow through on support issues and projects.
  12. [Customer Orientation]   Dave has shown a strong ability to work with the toughest and most unhappy customers and turn them into advocates of the Help Desk and NWEC.
  13. [Quality]   Dave has no qualms asking for help, it’s one of his strengths.  He wants to do the right thing so he’ll ask for opinions, suggestions, and the best way to handle a situation.  He’ll take this feedback and decide the best course of action.  He does a good job keeping the team aware of status on whatever he is working on.
  14. [Customer Orientation]   Dave is skilled at working with cross-site teams, management, and customers to create innovative, high-quality support models.  Dave’s skill in developing processes that benefit all participants has created high customer satisfaction at the Intel Engineering Technology Center and the Columbia Development Center.
  15. [Discipline]   Dave has strong analytical skills which help him in analysis of his business issues and challenges.
  16. [Customer Orientation]   Dave is a fervent advocate of the individual end-user customer.  He regularly calls customers who have submitted surveys, those who have complained about service problems, and those who have simply used the Help Desk.  This way, he stays in touch with the customers’ needs and adapts our processes to better meet those needs in the future.

Book Review – Toyota Production System

The Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production

By Taiichi Ohno


Amazon Summary:

Taiichi-Ohno-Toyota-Production-SystemIn this classic text, Taiichi Ohno–inventor of the Toyota Production System and Lean manufacturing–shares the genius that sets him apart as one of the most disciplined and creative thinkers of our time. Combining his candid insights with a rigorous analysis of Toyota’s attempts at Lean production, Ohno’s book explains how Lean principles can improve any production endeavor. A historical and philosophical description of just-in-time and Lean manufacturing, this work is a must read for all students of human progress. On a more practical level, it continues to provide inspiration and instruction for those seeking to improve efficiency through the elimination of waste.


Reader Summary:

The Toyota Production System, by Taiichi Ohno, describes the background and evolution of the development of the fundamental building blocks that make up Lean Manufacturing that we know of today.  As these concepts are mostly common parlance, I will focus my review primarily on points made that I found unique or personally relevant.

It is very interesting to understand how Toyota developed the Lean Manufacturing process compared to the Mass Production system developed in the U.S. One may look at the negatives of mass production and decry how U.S. manufacturers made a long-term mistake and that the Japanese were uniquely prescient.  However, history, culture, and political realities explain the reasons much better.

In simple terms, the U.S. enjoyed a long and stable age of prosperity that enabled manufacturers to build products in large quantities… and sell everything they could possibly make. A combination of growing incomes, revolutionary automobile technology, a large population, and a huge land mass allowed factories to open the floodgates in a rush to meet the demand. It was acceptable to make a large number of Model T’s.  People didn’t require unique makes and models yet.  The mass production process was the only way to meet the demand.  As a result, a tight discipline on quality, inventory control, and labor efficiency were not required.  Room for error and waste was possible in this model.

In contrast, Japan started out smaller, less stable, less wealthy… and was completely destroyed in World War II. From the ashes, demand was low and anyone who wanted to manufacture had to build infrastructure from scratch.  The market needed automobiles and trucks, but mostly of different shapes, sizes, and purposes in order to meet the diverse demand to rebuild the Japanese economy.  Out of desperation, manufacturers squeezed everything they could out of their assets and manpower.  From this perspective, it became imperative to manufacture automobiles with these principles in mind:

  1. Build many types of models in small quantities
  2. Eliminate every bit of waste in the process. Stop the line if you find a problem.
  3. Make what’s needed at the time of the customer order
  4. Build labor processes and machinery that can switch from one model to another easily
  5. Establish continuous flow as the basic condition
  6. Base all decisions on whether cost reduction can be achieved
  7. Have the earlier process produce only the amount withdrawn from the later process
  8. Fix the process before relying on technology
  9. Turn movement into working
  10. Saving worker expense

My Analysis:

The book packed a large number of concepts that changed the shape of manufacturing worldwide in a very small space. It is extraordinary that so much was gained from such a simple source.  One could use this book as a useful pocket guide.  Of course, a newer book like The Toyota Way by Jeffrey Liker probably handles the topic more thoroughly, but it is nice to read a book from one of the inventors so that you can see the thinking and perspective from the ground up.

With that, I intend to analyze three major points made in the book that resonated with me. They are:

  1. Use inverse, flexible thinking for better problem solving
  2. Build many types of models in small quantities
  3. Workers should operate more than one machine type

Inverse Thinking

Ohno instructs us to use inverse, flexible thinking to guide our way to better problem solving. For every problem Toyota faced, there was already a mass production method to handle it.  Ohno studied Henry Ford’s production techniques at great length. Yet, Toyota did not do that.  They challenged the status quo and mustered the courage to re-shape an entire line of thinking.

Inverse thinking can help solve day-to-day problems at work. We are all familiar with processes that work reasonably well.  Whole departments, performance reviews, management strategy, etc. are built entirely around these conventional processes.  We all know how it feels when you look at one of these processes and feel in your gut that they just aren’t as good as they can be.

Once you try to fix these processes, the organization inevitably pushes you into a traditional direction to improve the process.  They may want to add more people, create audit reports, integrate a new technology, or increase enforcement to improve the process.  Yet, that is not what it needs.  It needs to be questioned root-and-branch.  Inverse thinking enables you to ask questions like:

  • Does this process really need to exist?
  • Do these people need to perform the process or can someone else?
  • Why is it so complicated? Why does it take so long? Is it measured? How much does this process cost the company? Why does the process stop in the middle?
  • What does the customer think of the process?
  • Does it produce products or services that the company makes money from?
  • How many people or departments are involved to produce the final output?
  • Does management even know how this process works?

Only inverse thinking can break a company out of the status quo of a mundane, expensive, and unexamined process. The culture must accept regular reviews of the status quo that could make them uncomfortable.  They may need to make sure that the output actually serves the customers’ needs.  They may need to change departmental lines so that the process has more accountability in one group or under one manager.  Somebody who is happy producing their part of the project may lose that responsibility.  Yet, it must be done to improve delivery to the customer.

Recommendation:  Look to see if your process improvement is ready to move to a new level of maturity.  Use CMMI Capability Maturity Models as a guide.

Image result for lean process Maturity Model


Build Many Types of Models in Small Quantities

After World War II, the Japanese economy was in a desperate state where they simply needed to “build many types of models in small quantities”. This seems more relevant than ever today.  Customers are demanding more and more customization in their products; sometimes even made-to-order.  Companies must make something unique, yet still make the products cheaply and efficiently a la mass production.  Production processes must be fit to handle different product characteristics on the same line or in the same office procedure.  There should be very few instances where you are producing the same thing over and over unless you plan to be a low-cost leader for a commodity product.

In IT, Ohno’s philosophy pertains to building infrastructure. You should not have people building the same products over and over.  Anything routine should be automated.  Departments need to embrace automation of commodities and smooth out the process for handling exceptions.  Outside of IT, departments need to learn how to automate themselves. They can either partner with IT or develop skillsets within their group who can create ways to eliminate waste.

Recommendation:  Any department needs to know how to do Business Process Mapping to optimize their processes.  Managers should know intimately how their department contributes to the production system as a whole.  I’ve seen many managers who have no idea what their people or doing or what their product is.  I’ve seen many more who may know the former, but certainly don’t know if they are executing well.


Workers Should Operate More Than One Machine Type

The last cherished point that Ohno makes is his insistence that workers be able to operate different types of machines instead of specializing in one. Inevitably, a worker running one machine will stand there watching it. Ohno designed an L-shaped layout of three different machines that worked in the process order.  He felt strongly that people were perfectly capable of running these three machines. He still got pushback but felt that the concept was far more accepted in Japan than in the U.S.

This brings me to a personal sore point. I agree that specialists are needed for many subject matters. However, this inevitably creates silos in every organization. Specialists lose touch on how to interact with other specialists. Since passing a complex product from one specialty to another is “not their specialty”, huge handoff gaps occur throughout the process.  In many cases, companies need to place expeditors, liaisons, or other operational roles in between these specialty areas just to keep the process moving.  This is a huge waste, yet it is rarely acknowledged as such.  As hiring people becomes more and more difficult, when a hiring does become possible, organizations inevitably seek the specialist since they are rare.  Managers feel more comfortable when they have their own expert that can save them from potential disaster. Yet, they make no consideration for how a process needs to move through the system. Boundaries need to be broken and only a generalist or a multi-skilled operator can do that.  In Ohno’s words, “In the Japanese system, operators acquire a broad spectrum of production skills that I call manufacturing skills and participate in building up a total system in the production plant.  In this way, the individual can find value in working.”¹  In this way, Ohno demonstrates how each worker is part of a whole process and not just one step in the process.  You can still have experts in house, but departments need to sprinkle generalists in the mix, people who have interest in multiple topics, who are willing to cross boundaries and learn new things.

Recommendation:  Eliminate expeditors and middlemen, even abruptly, if possible.  Though not covered in this book, Lean uses a metaphor called lowering the water level to see the rocks.  By eliminating the middlemen, you see very quickly all the obstacles interfering with the process.  It can be quite alarming.  Many cultures are not prepared to do the work necessary to remove those rocks.  However, it is critical to do so.  You must design processes so that no management intervention is required to keep them moving forward.  Identify inputs and outputs between every process step.  Remove the rocks.  Make it flow.  Don’t let it stop!


Conclusion

This is the type of book that I will read over and over. I enjoyed reading the straightforward style and could see how and why Taiichi Ohno created the Lean system.  It enables you to get grounded in the grass roots of the Lean Manufacturing movement.  It gives you an important perspective and enables you to understand its original intent. You will then create the skills to assess the different evolutionary steps of the process and know more pointedly what each step was created for.  It’s always good to go “old school”.


¹ Taiichi Ohno, The Toyota Production System:  Beyond Large-Scale Production (Boca Raton, FL:  CRC Press, 1988), p. 14.