You actually may know the facilitator...Dave Nave....he was Deming Scholar at Fordham. I believe he didn't actually attended the classic 4 Day Seminar...maybe he did. I can't remember.
I met Dave at the 2018 AGM in LA. We spoke briefly and exchanged some facilitation tips and techniques, but I bet he won't recall -- too brief a moment. I follow him on LinkedIn - he's as sharp as they come. Big fan.
Great write up Chris. My feeble interpretation of whether this is socialism could be summed up as "Maybe it is, but everybody is winning and continuously improving their situation. Not being dragged back to average." I say feeble because I realise if everyone is winning and improving we are just changing where the average is, I suppose.
Hi Lonnie - I'd contextualize the question to the time it was asked of Deming, ie. as practised by the socialist countries of the time that centralized control, eliminated the individual in favour of the collective, confiscated and outlawed private property, etc. HOWEVER, I think this misses the point, which is meta: the questioner can only "see" what Deming is proposing through their pre-existing lenses as they've not shifted their thinking yet, so they make naive assumptions and comparisons. It's a bit cringe, but totally understandable.
I was involved in a Deming study group back in the early part of this century and the excellent facilitator and leader of the group drew a similar diagram shown in your piece when responding to the same question.
If we really integrated Deming's ideas there would not be as much attraction/repulsion to ideas like Socialism.
But we would probably find something else to have a conflict about....like a Mineshaft gap:
Fascinating! I wonder if that facilitator/leader attended the seminar in question, knew someone who did, or just interpreted that from their own understanding? Thank you for sharing this!
Edit: Oh, and Dr. Strangelove is one of my fave comedies. 😆
Thanks, yeah, you stated it in an earlier posting which somehow I just missed. You said, ".....which is a profound misunderstanding of both Deming's philosophy /and/ socialism." In other words, they are asking a question of something they do not understand (Deming) and comparing it to something else they also do not understand (socialism.)
The first part is admirable, the second part is naive.
Anyway the answer is not "No" it is "Hell no" and they need to read what he says about "we must bring back the individual" as well as brush up on socialism.
There's many misinterpretations of Deming's philosophy of management, and had I not had the experience of being asked the question, then five years later finding a recording of Deming answering the same question, I'd likely not have bothered to write about this one. It points to how we see things predominantly from a particular point of view that leads us to think anything proposing cooperation for mutual benefit must be socialist in nature, which is a profound misunderstanding of both Deming's philosophy /and/ socialism.
However, the big "a-ha" for me was realizing that both the U.S.S.R. and the US of the time were both suffering expensive problems with quality, it's just that one had way more runway than the other and was aimed more toward pleasing customers (for good or ill). So, for me this was less about thinking critically about socialism per se (much has already been written about this topic) and more about "YOU'RE MISSING THE POINT"... 😉
You actually may know the facilitator...Dave Nave....he was Deming Scholar at Fordham. I believe he didn't actually attended the classic 4 Day Seminar...maybe he did. I can't remember.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/davenave/
Dave is a great teacher and a most excellent person.
Glad you are a Dr. Strangelove fan....I find so many views of life through Kubrick films. What a genius.
I met Dave at the 2018 AGM in LA. We spoke briefly and exchanged some facilitation tips and techniques, but I bet he won't recall -- too brief a moment. I follow him on LinkedIn - he's as sharp as they come. Big fan.
What is AGM?
Annual General Meeting
Great write up Chris. My feeble interpretation of whether this is socialism could be summed up as "Maybe it is, but everybody is winning and continuously improving their situation. Not being dragged back to average." I say feeble because I realise if everyone is winning and improving we are just changing where the average is, I suppose.
I find a wide perception among people of just what socialism is.
What is the definition you are using as the basis of your question?
Hi Lonnie - I'd contextualize the question to the time it was asked of Deming, ie. as practised by the socialist countries of the time that centralized control, eliminated the individual in favour of the collective, confiscated and outlawed private property, etc. HOWEVER, I think this misses the point, which is meta: the questioner can only "see" what Deming is proposing through their pre-existing lenses as they've not shifted their thinking yet, so they make naive assumptions and comparisons. It's a bit cringe, but totally understandable.
I was involved in a Deming study group back in the early part of this century and the excellent facilitator and leader of the group drew a similar diagram shown in your piece when responding to the same question.
If we really integrated Deming's ideas there would not be as much attraction/repulsion to ideas like Socialism.
But we would probably find something else to have a conflict about....like a Mineshaft gap:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybSzoLCCX-Y
Fascinating! I wonder if that facilitator/leader attended the seminar in question, knew someone who did, or just interpreted that from their own understanding? Thank you for sharing this!
Edit: Oh, and Dr. Strangelove is one of my fave comedies. 😆
Thanks, yeah, you stated it in an earlier posting which somehow I just missed. You said, ".....which is a profound misunderstanding of both Deming's philosophy /and/ socialism." In other words, they are asking a question of something they do not understand (Deming) and comparing it to something else they also do not understand (socialism.)
The first part is admirable, the second part is naive.
Anyway the answer is not "No" it is "Hell no" and they need to read what he says about "we must bring back the individual" as well as brush up on socialism.
Given the temperature of the current political discourse, are we even allowed to think critically of socialism?
There's many misinterpretations of Deming's philosophy of management, and had I not had the experience of being asked the question, then five years later finding a recording of Deming answering the same question, I'd likely not have bothered to write about this one. It points to how we see things predominantly from a particular point of view that leads us to think anything proposing cooperation for mutual benefit must be socialist in nature, which is a profound misunderstanding of both Deming's philosophy /and/ socialism.
However, the big "a-ha" for me was realizing that both the U.S.S.R. and the US of the time were both suffering expensive problems with quality, it's just that one had way more runway than the other and was aimed more toward pleasing customers (for good or ill). So, for me this was less about thinking critically about socialism per se (much has already been written about this topic) and more about "YOU'RE MISSING THE POINT"... 😉