ABSTRACT
Innovation and rapid change are normal features of organizational life and usually associated with the goal of improving performance. There are many parties interested in developing specifi c initiatives, models, and sets of ideas designed to assist in realizing objectives: academics, consultants, government agencies, and industry and professional associations to list but a few. It would be pointless to speculate when people became interested in improving performance, but interest has accelerated since the “industrial revolution,” and a popular perception is that the speed of development is now at its height. Victorian pioneers of new technology, Taylor, the Gilbreths, Shewhart, the “quality gurus” popularized in the 1950s, the Japanese Manufacturing debate of the 1970s and 1980s, TQM, BPR, “Lean” “Six Sigma,” the list is endless, but the intention is the same-improving competitiveness through improving performance. Many of the approaches share similar characteristics and are implemented in similar ways. They all involve close examination of processes, suggest involving the people closest in devising better ways of working, and infer that any improvement is likely not to impact performance if not linked to what the end recipient values, namely what the customer wants. The approach itself is heralded as “new,” a fl urry of activity ensues while the range of techniques is learned and implemented-and typically fi zzles out after about a year.
