Search results

This study describes in detail an application of the Theory of Constraints (TOC)-based systems thinking approach towards clear and effective communication in a change management exercise. The same is achieved through the example of a large defence organization that is struggling with a multitude of problems in its stores and purchase departments.

It is demonstrated through the case study how five systems thinking tools – Current Reality Tree (CRT), Evaporating Cloud (EC), Future Reality Tree (FRT), Negative Branch Reservation (NBR) and Prerequisite Tree (PRT) – can be applied in overcoming different layers of resistance and for getting the necessary agreement from the stakeholders for a successful change initiative.

The five logical thinking tools helped answer the three questions – “what to change”, “what to change to” and “how to cause the change” (Goldratt, 1990) – satisfactorily and overcome various layers of resistance to get the desired buy-in from the stakeholders for a successful change management exercise.

The cause-and-effect based method presented in this work is generic enough and can be adopted for getting a buy-in in a variety of change management contexts.

Design Science (DS) is a relatively new paradigm for addressing complex real-world problems through the design and evaluation of artifacts. Its constituent methodologies are currently being discussed and established in numerous related research fields, such as information systems and management (Hevner et al., 2004). However, a DS methodology that describes the “how to” is largely lacking, not only in the field of OM but in general. The Theory of Constraints (TOC) and its underlying thinking processes (TP) have produced several novel artifacts for addressing ill-structured real-world operations problems (Dettmer, 1997; Goldratt, 1994), but they have not been analyzed from a DS research standpoint. The purpose of this research is to demonstrate how TOC’s thinking process methodology can be used for conducting exploratory DS research in Operations and Supply Chain Management (OSCM).

A case study of spare parts replenishment illustrates the use of TOC’s thinking processes in DS to structure an initially unstructured problem context and to facilitate the design of a novel solution.

TOC’s thinking processes are an effective methodology for problem-solving DS research, enabling the development of novel solutions in initially unstructured and wicked problem situations. Combined with structured CIMO design logic TOC’s thinking process offers a systematic method for exploring wicked problems, designing novel solutions, and demonstrating theoretical contributions.

The implication for research is that TOC’s thinking process methodology can provide important elements of the lacking “how to” methodology for DS research, not only for the field of OM but in general for the field of management.

The practical outcome of the research is a novel design for dynamic buffer-based replenishment that extends beyond organizational boundaries.

This work shows how the thinking processes can be used in DS research to develop rigorous design propositions for ill-structured problems.

Different stakeholders frequently disagree on what the true problem is that must be solved and what specific actions must be taken during a change exercise. This article demonstrates a visual method for getting buy-in from stakeholders on the specifics of change using a systems thinking tool known as the current reality tree (CRT).

This study illustrates the use of a systems-thinking methodology to achieve consensus among stakeholders on “what is the real problem?” when envisioning a change. The authors illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach using a real-life case study in the context of contract catering.

The CRT enables diverse stakeholders to visualize the cause-and-effect relationships between various problems in a given system and assists them in identifying the set of actions that can address a large number of problems through the change program.

There is little discussion in the literature on change management of a systematic approach to get agreement from stakeholders regarding what the real problem is. This article demonstrates, by way of a case study, how change agents can not only determine which actions will have the greatest impact, but also garner the support of diverse stakeholders.