81,898
edits
Legal operations: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 71: | Line 71: | ||
It is quantification, not evaluation, and along a single dimension: ''[[Cost - waste article|reducing cost]]''. The question is never ''what'' to do, or ''why'' to do it, but ''how cheaply'' to do it. The full beam of analytical, reductive rigour is trained on that single question: ''how can we do all this for less and less money''? Hence, management’s laser-focus on the [[delivery of legal services|''delivery'' of legal services]] over the nature of the services themselves. How they should be delivered, with what tools, out of which segments, at which cost. | It is quantification, not evaluation, and along a single dimension: ''[[Cost - waste article|reducing cost]]''. The question is never ''what'' to do, or ''why'' to do it, but ''how cheaply'' to do it. The full beam of analytical, reductive rigour is trained on that single question: ''how can we do all this for less and less money''? Hence, management’s laser-focus on the [[delivery of legal services|''delivery'' of legal services]] over the nature of the services themselves. How they should be delivered, with what tools, out of which segments, at which cost. | ||
Now management orthodoxy has understood for decades that it isn’t [[Cost - waste article|cost]] by itself, but [[waste|wasteful cost]], that is the problem in a distributed manufacturing process: raw materials ''do'' cost money. You ''do'' have to pay machine operators. You can’t avoid the basic minimum costs of doing something properly. Rather, you rigorously test your processes to check you ''are'' doing it properly — and not ''over''doing it by wasting materials, over-engineering, having your staff standing idle or engaging them in unnecessary activity. This was Toyota’s profound insight: through sheer analytical rigour in [[Toyota Production System|eliminating waste from its manufacturing process]] in the 1950s and 1960s, it beat the American auto-manufacturers to a pulp. | Now management orthodoxy has understood for decades that it isn’t [[Cost - waste article|cost]] by itself, but [[waste|''wasteful'' cost]], that is the problem in a distributed manufacturing process: raw materials ''do'' cost money. You ''do'' have to pay machine operators ''something''. You can’t avoid the basic minimum costs of doing something properly. Rather, you rigorously test your processes to check you ''are'' doing it properly — and not ''over''doing it by wasting materials, over-engineering, having your staff standing idle or engaging them in unnecessary activity. This was Toyota’s profound insight: through sheer analytical rigour in [[Toyota Production System|eliminating waste from its manufacturing process]] in the 1950s and 1960s, it beat the American auto-manufacturers to a pulp. | ||
====Cost and waste==== | ====Cost and waste==== | ||