I believe Adam Smith's theory was improved by John Forbes Nash, who was awarded the Nobel Prize for Economics in 1994 for his improvement.  Rick Nash is a first class left winger for the Columbus Blue Jackets, but I don't think economics is his strong suit.

Thank you for the comment, and you're absolutely correct.  I must be watching too much sports!  I've emailed quality digest to make the name correction.  Thanks again for bringing it to my attention.  I hope that you enjoyed the article aside from my oversight.

Angelo Lyall

I applaud Angelo for addressing an important element of any organization, but I have to take exception of his analysis of why one orchestra sounds better than another.  He writes: "What is it that one conductor does that makes the performance noticeably better than the other? The answer is simple yet profound... The successful conductor unifies the group..."  

 The answer is too simple!  I have an associates degree in music, and have been playing my instrument in various settings since 1975.   First of all, there can't be "equally" talented musicians - everything has variation.  Secondly, Deming tried to teach us that it's the process!  I'm sure group unity is part of the equation, but that's oversimplifying it, to say the least.  There are many processes in producing a great orchastra - the unity of the group that is shaped/created by the conductor is only one.  And then there are the processes that make one conductor better at unifying than another...  It's the process, don't forget.

    That's my 2 cents, thanks for listening.  Ken B

Ken B,

First, my genuine thanks for taking the time to read and comment on my paper.  Your comments are met with acceptance from myself and my camp here at Kaizen Solutions.  I believe that perhaps there is some failure on my part in my articulation.  I very much agree that the performance of a group such as an orchestra is determined by many things, not simply the leader.  What I do firmly believe, is that the leader's necessary role is to unify the group, in order to generate a cohesive sense of purpose and a unified vision.  While ultimately performance is a result of many factors, the positive influence that the leader can have is strongly connected to his or her ability to unify the group.  Translated to business, leaders must recognize and embrace this role.  Certainly, the Marketing function must perform it's own role well, but in order for it to do so, it must intimately understand the organization's purpose.  Likewise, if contribution is to be gained at the process level for any process, those contributions will lead to the greatest performance improvement when they are guided by that same depth of understanding of purpose.  "This is who we are, this is why we do what we do, this is how we uniquely exercise our business, and this is why customers choose us."  From marketing to the shop floor, a unified sense of purpose that originates with Leadership allows for the performance of the whole.  Demming did teach us about process, but more importantly processes in the context of the system.  I think that we likely do have similar views on this topic, but I seem to have failed in my articulation.  It has been a pleasure to pause for reflection and to share ideas with you.   Again, my sincerest thanks.

Angelo

Angelo Lyall Kaizen Solutions Inc. Corporate Coach & Partner angelo@kaizenimprovement.ca www.kaizenimprovement.ca