Los dos pilares de la TOC

Estos días, navegando, encontré esta partecita de una entrevista a Goldratt en 2006. Ahora la publico y en otro momento la traduzco.
Solo lo fundamental: Hay dos pilares en la TOC. Uno es partir del supuesto fundamental de las ciencias duras: en todos los sistemas de la vida hay una simplicidad inherente. Si podés encontrarla, entonces podes manejar, controlar y mejorar ese sistema. El otro pilar es "la gente no es estúpida".


Gilmore: What are the key concepts behind the Theory of Constraints?
Goldratt: There are two pillars to the Theory of Constraints. One is the starting assumption of all the hard sciences, which is that in all real-life systems there is inherent simplicity. If you can just find that inherent simplicity, you can manage, control and improve the system.
The other pillar is “that people are not stupid.”

Gilmore: (after a pause): I was waiting for some further explanation of that second point (laughter).
Goldratt: Have you ever heard the concept “people resist change?” And that the bigger the change, the more the resistance? Doesn’t this in essence say that people are stupid?
Let’s do a “for instance.” If someone comes up and suggests a change that is good for you, do you automatically resist it?
So, if I say you will resist the change just because it is change, I am actually saying you are not very bright. People certainly do, however, resist change that they have a reason to believe will hurt them.

Gilmore: Yes, or they lack enough information to know.
Goldratt: No – they believe the change is likely to hurt them.
Sometimes they are wrong because of a lack of information, but usually they are right!
Most changes might be right for the company, but are not right for the majority of people from whom they are asking for collaboration. So no wonder there is a lot of resistance.

Gilmore: There is a certain logic there, no question.
Goldratt: Because of that, it means the emphasis of change must be on win-win-win for all of the parties which you need to collaborate.

Gilmore: Well, that sounds great in theory, but for example if you have to do a restructuring…
Goldratt: What you are saying is that you don’t think it’s feasible, and what I have tried to demonstrate in my books and hundreds of projects is that it is always possible – always!
Let’s take your restructuring example, where a lot of people will get hurt. This means the solution is wrong! There must be a better way that will get you what you want, but will be a win-win.

El original, acá