@DataChaz The F1 pit-stop evolution is a pure Theory of Constraints example.
Goal: win the race
Constraint: the pit stop. They relentlessly sped up the bottleneck, then subordinated everything (crew roles, training, equipment, processes) to serve it.
That's the bit people struggle with
@rorysutherland@typesfast The F1 pit-stop evolution is a pure Theory of Constraints example.
Goal: win the race
Constraint: the pit stop. They relentlessly sped up the bottleneck, then subordinated everything (crew roles, training, equipment, processes) to serve it.
That's the bit people can't do.
@DKingTelegraph Incredible the number of journalists who marvel at how good a team can be when they spend £900m more than anyone else. Their record from 2018 is tainted with investment from the past...
If @GuillemBalague had worked in a place that cheated he know that the question “how did City come to believe they weren’t?” (cheating) is nonsense. They knew, they just thought they'd never get caught or pay the price.
I watched the F1 film with Brad Pitt the other day, and there’s a moment where his character asks to add something to the car that isn’t really in the rules. The FIA punishes it, but the team can still race with the earlier car. It made me think.
In F1, the best teams live at the edge of the regulations. Sometimes the FIA allows what they’ve found, and sometimes it says that goes too far. Occasionally the rules are rewritten afterwards.
Now, City. I’m not defending them. A commission found they entered into sham agreements and broke the spending limits. A sham is an arrangement that isn’t what it claims to be, so that’s a different thing from using a gap nobody had spotted.
City deny it and will appeal. But I find it useful to ask/reflect on how people inside the club see it.
From their point of view, PERHAPS they believe they were doing what elite competitors do: looking at the rules, finding the limits, challenging interpretations and moving faster than the regulatory system.
From the outside, you might look at that and say, “That’s cheating.” From inside the organisation, they might say, “We found something nobody had thought of.”
If you believe you’ve found a way to bring money in, more or less within the rules (and the commission said it was not in the rules and it was cheating), you might tell yourself you’re just being a sharp competitor.
We are all asking “did City cheat?”. But I find this question interesting too: “how did City come to believe they weren’t?”
And understanding a mindset, or trying to, isn’t excusing it.
@Michael01414227@oldpicposter Top word "George"? as in Lloyd George, 1909 Chancellor he was trying to get the People's Budget through and was promoting it in summer 09 onwards
@HelenBevan@BMJLeader 1. True everywhere
2. We always add to roles, never take stuff away
3. Make time for 1 & 2
4. Flow management is key to all organisations. Very few very get it. Its counter intuitive
5. Hidden work, hidden factories are all around us
@Lady_FanAccount The original working title for the film was "the body" based on the book by Stephen King. On set Keifer Sutherland was playing Ben E. King's "Stand by Me" River Phoenix loved the melody, and asked to learn it. Rob Reiner witnessed this. A few months later the film came out.