Creating an Information Factory

Creating an Information Factory

"Q: How many interpretations of systems development are there?

A: How many analysts and programmers have you got?"

- Bryce's Law

INTRODUCTION

Back in the early 1980's, Japan's MITI (Ministry of International

Trade & Industry) coordinated a handful of Japanese computer

manufacturers in establishing a special environment for producing

system software, such as operating systems and compilers. This

effort came to be known as Japanese "Software Factories" which

captured the imagination of the industry. Although the experiment

ended with mixed results, they discovered organization and discipline

could dramatically improve productivity.

Why the experiment? Primarily because the Japanese recognized

there are fundamentally two approaches to manufacturing

anything: "one at a time" or mass production. Both are consistent

approaches that can produce a high quality product. The difference

resides in the fact mass production offers increased volume at

lower costs. In addition, workers can be easily trained and put into

production. On the other hand, the "one at a time" approach is

slower and usually has higher costs. It requires workers to be

intimate with all aspects of the product. Which is the most appropriate

approach for a development organization to take? That depends on the

organization's perspective of systems development.

ART VERSUS SCIENCE

There are those who believe systems development to be some sort

of art-form requiring peculiar knowledge and skills to perform. There

are significant differences between an "art" and a "science." An "art"

depends on an individual's intuitive instincts about a particular subject. Such

intuition is difficult to teach and apply in a consistent manner. An art-form,

by definition, implies non-conformity and represents an expression of

personal style and taste. In contrast, a "science" is based on proven

principles and, as such, can be taught and applied in a uniform manner by

many people.

In order for systems development to move from an art to a science, a body

of knowledge has to be defined in terms of proven concepts and standard

terminology. Unfortunately, this is where the industry has been

wallowing for the last 30 years. The Japanese example reveals it

is not necessary to invent any new theories of management, but rather

to re-use existing management principles that have already been proven

over time. By doing so, they are attempting to move the industry

from an art to a science.

FIVE BASIC ELEMENTS OF MASS PRODUCTION

Assuming we want to establish an environment of mass production to

develop our information resources, it is necessary to understand

its fundamental nature. As any introductory text book on manufacturing

can explain, there are five basic elements of mass production:

1. Division of Labor - to break the production process into

separate tasks performed by specialists or craftsmen. Such division

specifies the type of skills required to perform the work.

2. Assembly Line - describing the units of work along with the

dependencies between the steps thereby defining the progression

and synchronization of product development.

3. Precision Tooling - for mechanical leverage in developing products.

4. Standardization of Parts - for interchangeability of parts between

products, thereby lowering costs and shortening development time, and

allowing assembly by unskilled and semi-skilled workers.

5. Mass Demand - this represents the impetus for mass production;

customers demanding standardized and reliable products at lower

costs. In the IRM world this is represented by end-users who require

standard and reliable systems at lower costs to support their

information needs.

The rationale behind mass production is improved productivity;

producing more quality products at less cost. Most people fallaciously

equate productivity with efficiency, which simply gauges how fast we can

perform a given task. Effectiveness, on the other hand, validates the

necessity of the task itself. There is nothing more unproductive than to

do something efficiently that should not have been done at all. An

industrial robot, for example, can efficiently perform tasks such as

welding. However, if it welds the wrong thing or at the wrong time,

then it is counterproductive. It therefore becomes important in the

production of any product to define WHO is to perform WHAT work, WHEN,

WHERE, WHY, and HOW (we refer to this as "5W+H").

We therefore have long touted the following formula:

Productivity = Effectiveness X Efficiency

It is our belief improved productivity can be instituted by

implementing the five elements of mass production and devising a

manufacturing facility whereby are found:

Assembly Lines - increments of work sequenced in such a way to

develop products. Along the assembly line, a series of tools and

techniques will be deployed, some implemented by the human being,

others through automated assistance, such as robots.

Materials Management - the business function concerned with

standardizing parts so they may be shared and re-used in various

product assemblies. Further, it is concerned with collecting,

storing and retrieving parts (inventorying) in the most efficient

means possible (e.g., JIT - "Just In Time").

Production Control - oversees the assembly lines and

materials management, looking for unanticipated delays or

accelerations of production schedules. Consequently, corrective

action can be taken as required to resolve problems.

These three components establish a "checks and balances" in

manufacturing and can also be utilized to develop an "Information

Factory" to develop an organization's information resources,

whereby are found:

Methodologies (Assembly Lines) - defines the work environment

(5W), thereby synchronizing the flow of work. Within the phases

of the methodology, a variety of tools and techniques may be

deployed defining HOW the work is to be performed.

Resource Management (Materials Management) - identifies and

classifies information resources, thereby promoting the sharing

and re-using of resources. It also ensures they are collected,

stored and retrieved in a timely manner.

Project Management (Production Control) - used to plan, estimate,

schedule, report, and control project work.

Why an "Information Factory" as opposed to a "Software Factory"? One

of the key failures in the Japanese "Software Factories" experiment

was its limited scope. It failed to address all of the information

resources of an enterprise, especially business processes,

administrative procedures, manual files, printed reports,

human and machine resources, business functions, etc. all of

which are essential to a total systems solution. The term

"Information Factory," therefore, is an admission there is more to

information resources than just software.

THE NEED FOR INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING

The mechanics and infrastructure of an "Information Factory" are

fairly easy to grasp, but it requires a special kind of person to

implement: an Industrial Engineer.

The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (Third Edition)

defines Industrial Engineering as: "The branch of engineering that is

concerned with the efficient production of industrial goods as affected

by elements such as plant and procedural design, the management of

materials and energy, and the integration of workers within the overall

system."

An Industrial Engineer considers the products to be build and

employs work study techniques in order to improve productivity. Such

a group of people is critical to the implementation of any mass

production facility, including an "Information Factory." The

Industrial Engineer has to be one part engineer and one part social

scientist, studying the behavior of people (e.g., why they work in

the manner they do). This is another element missed by the Japanese

"Software Factories."

In an "Information Factory" the Industrial Engineer is responsible

for:

1. Defining the infrastructure of the factory (methodologies to be used,

resource management, and project management). This includes the progression

and synchronization of work, along with the tools and techniques to be

used (5W+H).

2. Establishing the types of people needed to perform the work, along

with the required skill sets (and how to evaluate performance). This

also includes specifying the types of training required to do the job.

3. Reviewing work products (work sampling) in order to evaluate

product quality and production problems, thereby triggering the need

for improvement.

4. Constantly looking for new tools and techniques to improve the process. It

is generally agreed techniques and tools will come and go, and will

evolve over time. As such, the Industrial Engineer is a student of

the industry.

EFFECT ON CORPORATE CULTURE

The mechanics of the "Information Factory" are easy to assimilate and

implement. The real problem lies in changing the behavior and

attitudes of people, specifically, the corporate culture. The goal

of an "Information Factory," as it is with any mass production

facility, is to develop a homogeneous development environment

(as opposed to a heterogeneous environment where everyone is

allowed to develop products as they see fit).

To counter the "Tower of Babel" effect found in most development

organizations, the "Information Factory" seeks consistency and

quality through uniformity and standardization. It is not uncommon

for the concept of a factory-like environment to strike fear in the

hearts of software developers as they may see it as a threat to their

free-spirited individuality. Such an environment need not sacrifice

freedom of expression or creativity. It is simply a means to channel

such creative energies in a uniform manner.

The biggest problem though rests in reorienting people to believe they

are in the business of building products, not just writing code. Acceptance

of the "Information Factory" environment can be achieved if people

understand the overall process, where they fit in it,

what is expected of them, and how their work affects others. We have

found most people prefer organization and discipline as opposed to

chaos. Further, they can achieve superior results when standards

are imposed; such discipline results in uniform and predictable

work products,

CONCLUSION

It is possible to employ the same concepts and techniques as

used in mass production towards the development of information

resources. But creating a "factory"-like development environment

takes more than simply calling yourself one. It is a significant

reorientation effort. Fortunately, it is not without precedent

and the concepts have already been introduced to devise an

"Information Factory" based on other engineering/manufacturing

disciplines.

The benefits of an "Information Factory" are no different

than any other mass production environment: standardization,

improved productivity, reduced costs, better change control, faster

employee start-up and more effective use of human resources. However,

the impact of implementing such an environment should definitely not be

underestimated. It affects people's perceptions regarding

development and ultimately affects the corporate culture.

In order to move from an art to a science, it is necessary to

define and standardize our terminology and concepts for developing

information resources. Only when this happens can we teach it

to others in a uniform manner and gain the legitimacy as a

profession that has long eluded developers.

For more information on our philosophies of Information Resource

Management (IRM), please see the "Introduction" section of "PRIDE"

at:

http://www.phmainstreet.com/mba/pride/intro.htm#irm

Tim Bryce is the Managing Director of M. Bryce & Associates (MBA) of Palm Harbor, Florida and has 30 years of experience in the field. He is available for training and consulting on an international basis. He can be contacted at: timb001@phmainstreet.com

Copyright © 2006 MBA. All rights reserved.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/expert/Tim_Bryce/36306

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/210920

_(By Tim Bryce).