# Menicucci Associati | CCPM & Theory of Constraints Consulting
> CCPM and Theory of Constraints consultant for manufacturers and project-driven companies across Europe. 40+ years of experience helping teams finish projects on time.
Public Ghost content for AI and LLM tooling. This file includes a bounded export of public pages first, then recent public posts.
Append `.md` to any post or page URL to get the content in Markdown (for example, `/example-post.md`).
## Pages
### About
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/about/
Last updated: 2026-07-07T08:22:35.000Z
![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2025/09/20210823_161828-EDIT.jpg)

Most consultants advise from the outside. I've spent 40 years on the inside — in factories, warehouses, finance departments, and boardrooms.

I started my working life in a local shoe factory, running finance and accounts. I was twenty years old and had no idea that spending time inside a real production environment — watching how orders flowed, where things got stuck, how cash moved through a business — would shape everything that came after.

A few years later I moved into a small houseware distributor, again on the finance side. Then a COBOL II course convinced me that software was going to change everything, and I joined an IT company installing and supporting ERP systems. For six years I worked inside marble companies, textile mills, woodworking shops, paper factories — shop floors of every kind. I wasn't just installing software: I was learning how businesses actually worked from the inside out. Every implementation meant understanding a different industry, a different set of constraints, a different way that money and materials moved through a system.

From there I made an unexpected turn and co-founded a marketing company. The internet didn't exist yet for most businesses, but bulletin boards did, and we figured out how to use them to gather market intelligence. It was early-stage information services before anyone called it that.

Next came a national IT distributor, where I managed marketing for some large cash-and-carry stores and then helped build an entirely new channel from scratch — a network of independent local stores operating under a national brand.

Later, I moved into general management, joining a paper company as General Manager. We built a brand of A4 paper from scratch — EcoCopia — and got it onto the shelves of Esselunga, Coop Italia, and into HP Europe. Navigating large retail buyers and a multinational like HP teaches you things about throughput and commercial constraints that no textbook comes close to.

I was then involved in a turnaround: an office furniture company held by Banca Intesa, where I joined first as General Manager and then became CEO. Turnarounds are where you learn fast. Every decision has consequences, there's no room for local optimization thinking, and the constraint is rarely where people think it is. The business returned to profitability and was eventually acquired.

My last corporate role was on the board of Italy's most prominent Apple distributor, taking charge of finance. Over three years the company grew from €80M to €210M in revenue. Growing a business that fast puts every process, every person, and every assumption under pressure. You learn things you simply cannot learn any other way.

In 2012, having worked inside businesses of every size and type, I started my own consultancy.

**How I found Theory of Constraints**

By the time I came across Goldratt's work, I'd already seen enough real businesses to recognize immediately what he was describing. The constraint that limits the whole system. The danger of local optimization. The difference between a cost-world mentality and a throughput-world mentality. I hadn't had the language for it before — but I'd been watching it play out since 1981.

That's what I bring to engagements now: not just the methodology, but four decades of having been inside the problem. I work directly with management teams. No decks sent by email, no frameworks applied from a distance. The work is hands-on — mapping the real flow, finding the constraint, designing the fix, and staying long enough to make sure it holds.

**Why I write**

This site — Focus on Profit — is where I think out loud. Some posts are field notes from client work. Some follow a thread of curiosity, like the one connecting Nei Gong to throughput. I write because putting ideas into words is how I understand them better. And because most of what's written online about Theory of Constraints and CCPM is generic and untested. I'd rather add something that comes from actually being inside the room.

**Let's talk**

If you'd like to understand what's really limiting your business — and what to do about it — I'd be happy to have a conversation. **→** [**Get in touch**](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/)

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2026/02/Certbox-2026.png)
### Five Focusing Steps (5FS)
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/five-focusing-steps-5fs/
Last updated: 2026-06-04T10:32:28.000Z
In his book *"What is this thing called Theory of Constraints and how should it be implemented?"*, Eli Goldratt emphasises the importance of listening to our intuition — too often underestimated — and the need to verbalise what we already know. At some level, every business owner knows what the real problems are, and often knows the solution too.

The first step is to recognise that every organisation exists for a purpose, and that every part of the system should be evaluated by its impact on *that* specific goal. Before anything else, we need to clearly define the overall goal of the business and the measures that let us assess how local decisions — made within any sub-system — affect the global outcome.

To improve that global goal, we need to analyse processes through a specific lens: one that identifies, among the thousands of things that could be improved, the one or two that will have a genuinely significant impact.

> *"Not every change is an improvement, but certainly every improvement is a change."* — Dr. Eli Goldratt

The Five Focusing Steps is the process for "treating" a constraint. The steps reflect two distinct time horizons. The first three address the short term:

1. **Identify** the constraint
2. **Exploit** the constraint — decide how to get the most out of it
3. **Subordinate** everything else to that decision

The final two steps look to the medium and long term, creating the conditions for growth without sacrificing stability:

1. **Elevate** the constraint — take action to remove or expand it
2. **Repeat** — go back to step 1, and avoid letting inertia become the new constraint

No additional resources are needed. The 5FS is simply about *focusing* attention on what truly matters for reaching the overall goal.

Want to see how this applies to your business? [Contact us for a free consultation](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/) — we'd be glad to help.
### The Goal Map
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/thegoalmap/
Last updated: 2026-06-04T10:41:05.000Z
A **Goal Tree** (also called a Goal Map) is a visual tool that clarifies the relationships between a system's overall purpose and the conditions required to achieve it. It was developed by Bill Dettmer, a leading Theory of Constraints consultant and founder of Goal Systems International.

The diagram is built on **necessity relationships**: for any element to be achieved, every element connected below it must also be achieved. Each arrow represents that dependency — read as "in order to achieve X, I must first have Y."

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2025/09/image.png)

#### How it works in practice

As you can see in the above picture, at the top sits your **Goal** — the single overarching aim of the system (for example, a profit margin above 15%, or on-time delivery above 95%).

Below the goal you'll have your **Critical Success Factors** — the conditions that must be in place for the goal to be achievable. These are not tasks; they are states that must exist.

At the base are your **Necessary Conditions** — the specific, concrete requirements that underpin each Critical Success Factor.

The power of the Goal Tree is that it makes the logic visible. Once you can see the full chain of necessity, it becomes immediately clear where the real gap is — and therefore where to focus improvement effort.

#### When to use it

A Goal Tree is particularly useful at the start of an improvement initiative, before diving into solutions. It forces a team to agree on what success actually looks like, and to surface the assumptions — often unstated — about what needs to be true for that success to be possible.

It connects naturally to the [Five Focusing Steps](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/five-focusing-steps-5fs/): the Goal Tree tells you *where you want to go*; the 5FS tells you *how to get there* by managing the constraint that's blocking progress.

If you'd like to see how a Goal Tree could bring clarity to your business priorities, [get in touch](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/).
### Migliorare le Performance del Business
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/migliorare-le-performance-del-business/
Last updated: 2024-08-05T14:37:13.000Z
> Non importa che si tratti del business delle auto o di quello della telefonia mobile: essere **più veloci** è **un vantaggio strategico** correlato strettamente con il processo di creazione dei prodotti.  
>  
> *Chris Theodore - Ford Motor Co.*

### L'ambiente iper-competitivo 

Nel 1982 il ciclo di vita di una automobile - dalla progettazione all'immissione sul mercato - era di circa 8 anni; negli ultimi 20 anni questo ciclo si è ridotto a 5 anni, poi a 36 e 24 mesi. Oggi aziende come **GM** ([General Motors](http://www.gm.com/?ref=menicucciassociati.com)) e **Ford** ([Ford Motor Co.](http://corporate.ford.com/?ref=menicucciassociati.com)) sono in grado di progettare e lanciare sul mercato **un nuovo prodotto** in 18 mesi e, addirittura, **Toyota** è capace di farlo in 12 mesi\[^1\].

Naturalmente non si tratta di un fenomeno isolato o circoscritto al mondo delle automobili, anzi: turbolenza ambientale e la "*compressione del tempo*" sono i sintomi del fatto che viviamo in un **ambiente iper competitivo**, colpiscono tutti i settori economici e sono sostanzialmente l'effetto combinato di tre fattori\[^2\]: 

1. la maturità dei mercati
2. l'evoluzione del Cliente
3. la pervasività tecnologia

### L'Eccellenza Operativa

Quali sono le conseguenze di questa situazione? Semplice: 

le organizzazioni sono ***obbligate*** a fare **di più** (meglio) **in meno tempo** e **con risorse uguali o inferiori**.

Questo significa che i modelli tradizionali non sono più in grado di creare vantaggi strategici duraturi e che per affrontare il livello di qualità richiesto dal mercato è molto più elevato di quanto non fosse in passato: oggi nessuna azienda può permettersi di avere un livello di qualità che non sia prossimo al 100%! E, oltre a questo, nessuno può esimersi dal cercare l'eccellenza - il risultato migliore, in meno tempo e con meno risorse - nei propri processi interni (progettazione, produzione, distribuzione, post-vendita). 

### Raggiungere l'eccellenza combinando Teoria dei Vincoli, Lean e Six Sigma 

Quale che sia il processo interno, noi possiamo aiutarvi nella scelta della soluzione migliore e aiutarvi nell'implementazione. Le metodologie offerte 

- da [ToC](https://sites.google.com/d/1cPVYZG8JbetxwF-U8BbyB-e7uOpINbSp/p/1u390ZSLggCF4ES4Ox6y1vw-l4UhkrOkx/edit?ref=menicucciassociati.com) permettono di identificare **dove** (e **come**)intervenire
- da Lean aiutano a **ridurre e/o eliminare gli sprechi** e ottimizzare tempi e spazi

da Six Sigma permettono di **ridurre e/o controllare la variabilità** dei processi
### Critical Chain Project Management
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-project-management/
Last updated: 2025-09-22T14:17:54.000Z
A quick [Google search for "Project Management"](https://www.google.com/search?safe=active&ei=sHFVXf%5FlEo6a1fAPsuq3SA&q=%22project+management%22&oq=%22project+management%22&gs%5Fl=psy-ab.3..0i67l10.11640.12630..13655...0.0..0.111.202.1j1......0....1..gws-wiz.......0i71j35i39j0i7i30.3wDvCs8dwY0&ved=0ahUKEwj%5F%5FYGwkIXkAhUOTRUIHTL1DQkQ4dUDCAo&uact=5&ref=menicucciassociati.com) will give you tons of results. This shows that the topic is well-known but also highly debated.

Why? Because for about half a century—ever since [PERT (Program Evaluation and Review Technique)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Program%5Fevaluation%5Fand%5Freview%5Ftechnique?ref=menicucciassociati.com) was developed—the problems that cause project failures have been more or less the same.

**Critical Chain Project Management (CCPM)** is a [planning and control method](https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical%5FChain%5FProject%5FManagement?ref=menicucciassociati.com) that helps you complete projects on time, sync resource capacity even in multi-project environments, and stay within budget.

**Lynx CCPM**, a software from our partner [A-Dato](https://www.a-dato.com/?ref=menicucciassociati.com), lets you:

- Eliminate conflicts and manage priorities across all your projects.
- Sync information system-wide.
- Create a positive environment and, most importantly, get results!

Click [here](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfOI9GX2wH8yMATJuHnNaod2avYia7w2hUlhEms21nKmLQY8g/viewform?ref=menicucciassociati.com) to request a demo or, to learn more, download my paper, "[Creating Successful Projects with Critical Chain Project Management](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSd5HhQEEp5gcF1Uce1uNk0MCMlYWvmELb-GGpwiyngCnMfGVQ/viewform?ref=menicucciassociati.com)".

[CreareProgettidiSuccessoconCriticalChainProjectManagementCreareProgettidiSuccessoconCriticalChainProjectManagement.pdf753 KBdownload-circle](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/files/2024/08/CreareProgettidiSuccessoconCriticalChainProjectManagement.pdf "Download")

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/cover-ebook.png)
### Contact us
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/
Last updated: 2026-07-06T16:42:48.000Z
![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/piotr-miazga-zYGtxp8H5sY-unsplash.jpg) 

## Call, drop a line, 

****or just join us for a coffee**

We're available Monday to Friday, 9:00 to 18:00

Tel.: +39 (0)584-635087 | Mobile: +39 345 2246446 | [info@menicucciassociati.com](mailto:info@menicucciassociati.com)

### Prefer to just grab a slot?

Book a free 30-minute call directly:
### Throughput Accounting
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/throughput-accounting/
Last updated: 2026-06-04T10:28:36.000Z
### The Purpose of Management-Accounting Systems

The main goal of a management-accounting system is to provide guidance for daily decision-making. It stands to reason that if the assumptions the system is based on are correct, it will provide "good" information. But if those assumptions are wrong or no longer valid, managers will be forced to rely on nothing but their gut feelings or luck.

Unfortunately, over the last 30 years, globalization, pervasive technologies, and increasingly demanding customers have made our business environment more complex and competitive. This required an evolution that traditional systems—which were developed in the 1920s—failed to make. This paved the way for more modern systems like Activity-Based Costing, Lean Accounting, and Throughput Accounting.

### The Throughput Accounting Approach

Constraint Management argues that an organization can be fully controlled day-to-day using three simple metrics:

- **Throughput:** The gross contribution margin, which is the difference between net sales and their variable costs.
- **Investments:** The value a company has "tied up" in anything it can resell, including raw materials, goods, and products, as well as plants, machinery, or land.
- **Operating Expenses:** The sum of everything spent to produce the throughput.

Using these three indicators, managers can evaluate all decisions—both "local" (related to a project, department, or single production line) and "global" (related to the organization as a whole system). This finally allows them to contribute meaningfully to the company's overall goal.

Throughput Accounting is one of the lenses I use in every client engagement. It changes the decisions you make — and the results you get. [Get in touch](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/) if you'd like to explore what it would mean for your business.
### Theory of Constraints
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/toc/
Last updated: 2026-06-04T10:34:23.000Z
The world is constantly changing—there's no doubt about it. To keep growing and developing, organizations have to change, too. In fact, they need to commit to **continuous improvement**, and to do this effectively, they must **balance** decisions that drive short-term growth with those that will produce long-term benefits.

The [Theory of Constraints](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory%5Fof%5Fconstraints?ref=menicucciassociati.com) is a management philosophy that views a company as a complex, dynamic system. It provides the tools and methods needed to create a structured path for continuous improvement, known as the ***Process of Ongoing Improvement* (POOGI)**.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/kaizen-events-e1534908130234.png)

Continuous Improvement Cycle

To approach improvement from a "systems" perspective, you need to answer four simple questions:

- **Why change?**
- **What to change?**
- **What to change to?** (What solution should you choose?)
- **How to change?** (How do you make it happen?)

The gap between what you have and what you want—between your current results and your expected ones—becomes the reason for the change. This answers the question, **"Why change?"** A good way to start here is by developing a [Goal Tree](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/la-mappa-degli-obiettivi/).

The second step, **"What to change?"**, is crucial for figuring out where to intervene so you don't waste energy and can maximize your results.

Once you've identified what to change, you'll need to decide on the best solution among all the possible options to achieve that improvement.

The final step is defining what you'll do to create a lasting change. This means involving all relevant parties and, most importantly, evaluating the impact of the chosen solution—just in case *the remedy is worse than the disease*!

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/U-Shape-1.png)

The U-Shape is a concept from [Oded Cohen](https://www.tocico.org/page/oded%5Fcohen?ref=menicucciassociati.com)

These four questions — why change, what to change, what to change to, and how to change — are the foundation of every engagement I take on. They sound simple. In practice, most organisations skip straight to "how to change" without ever properly answering the first two, which is why so many improvement efforts fail to stick.

If you'd like to explore how the Theory of Constraints applies to your specific situation — whether in manufacturing, supply chain, or project management — [let's have a conversation](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/).
### Lynx CCPM
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/lynx-ccpm/
Last updated: 2026-07-07T10:47:50.000Z
![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/ccpm-1.png) 

## HOW TO SUCCEED IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT

[LYNX by A-Dato](https://www.a-dato.com/?ref=menicucciassociati.com) helps you eliminate conflicts and manage priorities across all your projects. It allows you to handle priorities and keep information in sync at a system-wide level, creating a positive environment and, most importantly, getting results!

[Download Trial](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfOI9GX2wH8yMATJuHnNaod2avYia7w2hUlhEms21nKmLQY8g/viewform?ref=menicucciassociati.com) 

According to a [2023 PMI report](https://www.pmi.org/-/media/pmi/documents/public/pdf/learning/thought-leadership/pmi-pulse-of-the-profession-2023-report.pdf?v=7933da8f-304b-4fe3-a655-78dace54174a&rev=427949fcdb684485a020cc72ea219f32&ref=menicucciassociati.com), projects are negatively impacted by many factors that can stop them from succeeding. However, when companies prioritize the development of **"power skills,"** 72% of their projects are completed successfully and meet business requirements. Conversely, for companies that pay little attention to these skills, the success rate drops to 65%.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/08/Screenshot-2024-08-07-at-15.59.21.png)

I quattro "Power Skills" definiti da PMI - fonte: [Pulse of the Profession ® Pulse of the Profession 2023](https://www.pmi.org/-/media/pmi/documents/public/pdf/learning/thought-leadership/pmi-pulse-of-the-profession-2023-report.pdf?v=7933da8f-304b-4fe3-a655-78dace54174a&rev=427949fcdb684485a020cc72ea219f32&ref=menicucciassociati.com)

### Project Problems

Even in the best-case scenario, ***nearly one in three projects can be considered a failure***. So, what are the common problems projects face? They can basically be broken down into two categories:

- **Planning problems**
- **Execution problems**

### Planning Problems

One of the most obvious issues in project management is planning. Projects are almost always planned using "*traditional*" methods based on duration estimates, with set start and end dates for each task.

The problem with this approach is that these estimates almost always include a "*safety margin*". The person estimating the time needed to complete a task tends to pad the estimate to account for potential issues like breakdowns, delays, or changes in priority.

Additionally, using fixed start and end dates for tasks is a planning method that simply can't be followed perfectly. What are the chances that every single task in a project will start and finish exactly on schedule? Very low. And what's the chance that if one task finishes early, the next one will start ahead of schedule? Zero.

As a result, ***any delay will accumulate and affect the project's overall duration***, while finishing early won't.

### Execution Problems

In a single-project environment, it's relatively easy to monitor and control the various tasks. But in a multi-project environment, things get complicated, and it becomes very difficult to figure out where to intervene when needed.

### The CCPM Planning Solution

The planning concept used in **Critical Chain Project Management (CCPM)** is tied to a more "holistic" view of the project. As we mentioned, traditional estimates account for potential problems and delays. That's great, but what's the point of keeping that safety time at the individual task level when our job should be to protect the entire project?

To put it simply, the goal isn't to make sure every task starts and ends on schedule; it's to make sure the **entire project** starts and finishes on time!

So, how do we do that? It's simple. We borrow a concept from "mutual insurance": you ask for a little bit of money from everyone to help those who need it.

In the case of projects, we remove a portion of the estimated time from each individual task and put it into a single project-level container called a **project buffer**. When a delay happens, we can "virtually" take those days from the buffer. Of course, if a task finishes early, the buffer isn't touched at all.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/08/CCPM-planning.png)

Project's Buffer - source: [https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/A-Critical-Look-at-Critical-Chain-Project-Raz-Barnes/665d458d4e7d6918e02589855597b162e1d6ba8e](https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/A-Critical-Look-at-Critical-Chain-Project-Raz-Barnes/665d458d4e7d6918e02589855597b162e1d6ba8e?ref=menicucciassociati.com)

There's definitely less stress involved with having to monitor the start and end of every single task. As we said, the goal is to protect the entire project, and the **buffer** lets you do that by giving you just one indicator to watch instead of many.

### Execution with CCPM Buffers

The buffer is also extremely useful during a project's execution. By monitoring how much of the buffer is used compared to the project's completion percentage, you can analyze the project's progress using a **traffic light indicator**.

By dividing the buffer into three distinct sections, you can quickly see if a deviation from the estimate is normal, acceptable, or abnormal.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/08/Buffer-Analysis.png)

This way, you can immediately tell if a project is doing well (in the green zone) or poorly (in the red zone). If it moves into the yellow zone, you should look into whether the situation is likely to get worse and what you can do to fix it.

By using the buffers from each project, you can also create a useful graph for management or anyone overseeing a portfolio of projects. This **"fever chart"** plots all ongoing projects as individual points, positioned based on their buffer consumption compared to their project completion percentage.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/08/Feverchart-1-1.webp)

By implementing **Critical Chain Project Management (CCPM)**, clients typically achieve:

- **25–40% faster** project completion times
- **On-time delivery rates above 90%** — even in multi-project environments
- Elimination of the "student syndrome" and Parkinson's Law effects
- Reduced resource conflicts without hiring more people

If your projects are consistently late or over budget, there's a systemic reason — and a systemic fix: [contact us](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/) or leave a comment. To get a free trial, fill out the form by clicking the button below

[Download](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfOI9GX2wH8yMATJuHnNaod2avYia7w2hUlhEms21nKmLQY8g/viewform?ref=menicucciassociati.com)
### Categories
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/tags/
Last updated: 2024-08-12T09:41:22.000Z
_No content available._
### CCPM Consulting for Project Management
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/ccpm-consulting-project-management/
Last updated: 2026-07-06T15:38:46.000Z
### Effective Project Management Is Key

97% of organizations state clearly that project management is critical for success. Whether you're launching a new product, building a new facility, or implementing new software, strong project management skills are more important than ever.

However, according to the PMI Pulse of the Profession, fewer than 60% of projects meet their original goals and business intent. Most overruns aren't caused by bad teams — they're caused by a method that was designed for a different era.

### How We Can Help

We can help you by introducing the [*Critical Chain Project Management*](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-project-management/) approach. This is the most significant and revolutionary evolution in project management in years. It's easy to understand, quick to implement and, most importantly, it delivers amazing results. By shortening project durations, you'll improve on-time delivery and customer satisfaction, as well as your bottom line.

By implementing **Critical Chain Project Management (CCPM)**, clients typically achieve:

- **25–40% faster** project completion times
- **On-time delivery rates above 90%** — even in multi-project environments
- Elimination of the "student syndrome" and Parkinson's Law effects
- Reduced resource conflicts without hiring more people

### How We Do It

We usually start with a meeting to get to know each other and understand your business, your client commitments, and the best way to help you improve. How we move forward is a decision we'll make together.

Our services typically include:

- **Training:** We teach you how to effectively implement the Critical Chain approach in your environment.
- **Training and Consulting:** In addition to training, we can provide the support you need to manage your projects from start to finish, including initial risk assessment and reporting.
- **Project Management Software Support:** As an official Italian distributor for[**Lynx CCPM**](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/lynx-ccpm/) (by [A-Dato](https://www.a-dato.com/?ref=menicucciassociati.com) ), we offer end-to-end support: from methodology training to full software implementation. This is rare — most CCPM consultants don't have dedicated software support. It means your teams don't just learn the method: they have the right tool that uses the [Critical Chain](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-project-management/) method to run it day-to-day.

Want to understand why CPM fails and what CCPM does differently? [Read the full article →](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-vs-critical-path/)

If your projects are consistently late or over budget, there's a systemic reason — and a systemic fix: [contact us](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/) 

##
### ToC Consultant (S-DBR) for Manufacturing Companies
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/toc-consultant-manufacturing/
Last updated: 2026-07-06T15:36:20.000Z
### The Hyper-Competitive Environment

Back in 1982, it took about eight years to get a car from the drawing board to the market. Over the last two decades, that time has shrunk dramatically to five, then three, and even two years. Today, companies like GM ([General Motors](http://www.gm.com/?ref=menicucciassociati.com)) and Ford ([Ford Motor Co.](http://corporate.ford.com/?ref=menicucciassociati.com)) can design and launch a new product in just 18 months, and it's said that Toyota can do it in as little as 12 (*source*: [WardsAuto.com](https://www.wardsauto.com/?ref=menicucciassociati.com)).

This isn't an isolated phenomenon limited to the auto industry. Actually, "*environmental turbulence*" and "*time compression*" are expression of a hyper-competitive world. These trends hit every economic sector, especially those dealing with things like mature markets, evolving customer needs, and rapid technology changes. 

> In short, organizations are now forced to **do more** (and do it better) **in less time** and **with fewer resources**. 

This means that traditional models are no longer able to create lasting strategic advantages. The level of quality demanded by the market is much higher than it used to be; today, no company can afford to have a quality level that isn't close to 100%! Beyond that, every business must strive for excellence—the best possible result, in less time, with fewer resources—in all its internal processes, from design and production to distribution and after-sales service.

> Does your shop floor feel chaotic even when you're busy? Are late deliveries becoming the norm, or is WIP piling up between workstations? These are not resource problems — they're **flow problems**. And they're **solvable**.

### How We Can Help

We implement **Simplified Drum-Buffer-Rope (S-DBR)**, a proven TOC-based approach that:

- Cuts manufacturing lead time by 30% or more
- Drives on-time delivery above 95%
- Reduces work-in-progress inventory (freeing tied-up cash)
- Works *with* your existing ERP/MRP — no rip-and-replace

### How We Do It

The best way to start is by scheduling a meeting. This lets us get to know each other, understand your business, your client commitments, and figure out the best solution for you. How we move forward from there is a decision we'll make together.

Our engagements usually include:

- **Training:** We teach you how to effectively implement the SDBR approach in your specific environment.
- **Training and Consulting:** In addition to training, we can provide the support you need for implementation, including  
  - working with your existing ERP/MRP systems,
  - developing material release plans,
  - fine-tuning production priorities, and
  - assisting with ongoing improvement.
- **Timeline example**:
  - **Discovery call** — we understand your flow, your constraints, your market commitments
  - **Diagnostic** — we map your current system and identify the real bottleneck
  - **Training** — your team learns the S-DBR approach
  - **Implementation support** — we stay with you through go-live and tuning
  - **Ongoing improvement** — measuring results, adjusting buffers, sustaining gains

Ready to stop firefighting and start flowing? [**Book a discovery call**](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/)
### ToC Replenishment Consulting for Supply Chain and Retails
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/replenishment-consulting-supplychain-retail/
Last updated: 2026-07-06T15:38:09.000Z
### Having the Right Product, at the Right Time, in the Right Place — at the Right Price, of Course!

But when you look around, you often see the opposite. The flow is frequently interrupted, warehouses are full of slow-moving products, and the most popular items are often out of stock.If you think about it, a supply chain can be seen as a "production process" spread out over a large area. Ideally, the flow of products should be just as lean: inventory where it's needed, quick information exchange, and a focus on the final customer.Having the Right Product, at the Right Time, in the Right Place — at the Right Price, of Course!

The paradox of most supply chains: too much of the wrong product, and not enough of the right one. The result? Stockouts that cost sales, slow-movers that tie up cash, and constant firefighting.

### How We Can Help

We can help you implement the "TOC Replenishment" solution, the most exciting (and least-known) supply chain management model of the last two decades. Developed as part of the [Theory of Constraints](https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teoria%5Fdei%5Fvincoli?ref=menicucciassociati.com), this simple approach delivers surprising results, helping you reduce inventory without losing sales or being thrown off by seasonal demand.

> **TOC Replenishment** works on a fundamentally different logic than traditional MRP or min-max systems. Instead of forecasting demand (which is inherently uncertain), it manages *consumption* in real time — replenishing based on what's actually being sold, not what was predicted.

The results are consistent:

- Inventory reduction of **30–50%**
- Stockout reduction of **40–70%**
- Improved product availability across all locations
- Works for distributors, retailers, and multi-echelon supply chains

### How We Do It

We typically start with a meeting to get to know each other. We'll learn about your business, your client commitments, and figure out the best way to help you improve. How we move forward from there is a decision we'll make together.

Our services include:

- **Training:** We'll teach you how to effectively implement the **TOC Replenishment** approach in your business.
- **Training and Consulting:** In addition to training, we can provide the necessary support to determine the right stock levels for your different locations. We'll also help you figure out the best frequency and quantities for replenishment, and how to adjust for seasonality or special events like promotions, new product launches, or discontinuing old products.

### This is for you if:

✓ You're a distributor or retailer with multiple SKUs or locations   
✓ You struggle with seasonal variability and promotion spikes   
✓ You've tried improving forecasting but the problem persists   
✓ You want to free up cash locked in slow-moving inventory

Let's talk about what's slowing your supply chain down*.* [**Schedule a conversation**](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/)
### Resources
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/resources/
Last updated: 2026-06-04T11:45:34.000Z
A curated collection of papers, tools, and references on Theory of Constraints, Critical Chain Project Management, and systemic thinking. No filler — only things worth reading.

### Published Work:

**Dynamic Inventory Management** Published and peer-reviewed by [TOCICO](https://www.tocico.org/?ref=menicucciassociati.com) — the Theory of Constraints International Certification Organisation. This paper covers the principles of TOC-based replenishment and dynamic buffer management. → [Read on TOCICO website](https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.tocico.org/resource/resmgr/articles/inventories%5Fdynamic%5Fmanageme.pdf?ref=menicucciassociati.com)

### Recognitions:

**Management Consulting Awards 2018** Menicucci & Associati was recognised by CEO Today Magazine in their annual Management Consulting Awards. → [View the award](https://managementconsultingawards.ceotodaymagazine.com/previous-editions/2018/18/?ref=menicucciassociati.com)

### Reference Guide

The following guides are available to subscribers. Signing up is free and takes 30 seconds.

[La gestione dinamica delle scorteLa gestione dinamica delle scorte.pdf678 KBdownload-circle](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/files/2024/08/La-gestione-dinamica-delle-scorte-1.pdf "Download")

[CreareProgettidiSuccessoconCriticalChainProjectManagementCreareProgettidiSuccessoconCriticalChainProjectManagement.pdf753 KBdownload-circle](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/files/2024/08/CreareProgettidiSuccessoconCriticalChainProjectManagement-1.pdf "Download")

[Ripensare la competitivitàRipensare la competitività.pdf282 KBdownload-circle](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/files/2024/08/Ripensare-la-competitivita-.pdf "Download")

[Critical Chain Project Management Critical Chain Project Management .pdf1 MBdownload-circle](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/files/2024/08/Critical-Chain-Project-Management-.pdf "Download")

[il Beyond Budgetingil Beyond Budgeting.pdf1 MBdownload-circle](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/files/2024/08/il-Beyond-Budgeting.pdf "Download")

Looking for something specific, or want to discuss how these ideas apply to your business? [Get in touch](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/).
### FAQs - Frequently Asked Questions
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/faqs-frequently-asked-questions/
Last updated: 2026-07-07T10:46:13.000Z
## Frequently Asked Questions

How do I reset my password? ▼ 

Click 'Forgot Password' on the login page and follow the instructions. You will receive an email with a link to reset your password.

Can I change my username? ▼ 

No, usernames cannot be changed after account creation. Please choose carefully during signup.

How can I contact support? ▼ 

You can contact support via the 'Contact Us' page or by emailing [info@menicucciassociati.com](mailto:info@menicucciassociati.com). We typically respond within 24 hours.

What is Critical Chain Project Management (CCPM)? ▼ 

In 1997, to overcome the problems associated with Project Management using Gantt and CPM methods, Eli Goldratt introduced the concept of Critical Chain Project Management. While the PERT/CPM method allows for the identification of the "critical path," which is the longest path of dependent activities necessary to complete the project, the method proposed by Goldratt allows for the identification of the longest path of dependent activities and resources: this path was defined as the Critical Chain (catena critica) both to distinguish it from the Critical Path and to reinforce (with the term "chain") the concept of interdependence between activities and resources. Resources, in fact, are one of the main differences between the classical methodology and the CCPM method: while in traditional planning the critical path only considers the dependence between activities, in the critical chain, activity planning is done by ensuring that assigned resources do not have to perform multiple activities simultaneously (the multitasking trap). And how could it be otherwise? The completion of a certain activity is a function of the necessary resources being available; quite strangely, in the traditional method, this essential aspect is not properly considered. To schedule a single project with CCPM, one starts from the definition of normal activities and, consequently, from the identification of the critical chain. And here Goldratt's systemic vision comes into play: in fact, one of the pillars of the Theory of Constraints holds that a "localized" improvement does not necessarily reflect an improvement on the entire system; in project management, this means that \*focusing on a single activity does not guarantee that the project will be completed by the deadline\*, especially if the activity in question is not included in the critical chain. In conclusion, our task is not to "protect" the single activity but rather to look at the project in its entirety.
## Posts
### Why Your Factory Is Always Busy But Never Fast Enough — And What S-DBR Does About It
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/s-dbr-manufacturing-toc/
Last updated: 2026-07-20T13:54:12.000Z
While in a moment of relaxation, under the beach umbrella, I was watching a few people preparing a nice aperitif. Some guests were already eager to sit and enjoy the moment — but the team serving them clearly hadn't thought about flow. Which, inevitably, got me thinking about [Theory of Constraints](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/toc/). Factories, indeed, have the same problem-

Walk into almost any manufacturing plant and you'll find the same paradox: machines running, people busy, orders in progress everywhere — and yet deliveries consistently late.

The instinctive response is to look for more capacity. Add a shift. Buy another machine. Hire more people. And sometimes that helps, briefly, until the plant is busy again and the lateness pops up again.

I've been walking into factories for years. The problem is almost never capacity. It is flow. And fixing flow requires a fundamentally different way of thinking about how work moves through a plant.

That approach is called [Simplified Drum-Buffer-Rope](https://www.toc-goldratt.com/en/product/from-dbr-to-simplified-dbr-for-make-to-order-chapter-9-of-the-theory-of-constraints-handbook?ref=menicucciassociati.com) — S-DBR for short.

## The real problem: local efficiency is killing your throughput

Most [manufacturing plants](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/toc-consultant-manufacturing/) are managed by a logic inherited from cost accounting: every workstation should be as productive as possible, every resource as fully utilized as possible, every minute of idle time eliminated.

This logic feels rigorous. In practice, it is one of the main reasons factories miss deliveries.

A manufacturing plant is not a collection of independent workstations. It is a system — a chain of interdependent steps through which work must flow in sequence. In any chain, the weakest link determines the speed of the whole.

If one workstation can process 100 units per day, the plant cannot produce more than 100 units per day, regardless of how fast everything else runs. Feeding work into the system faster than that workstation can handle it doesn't increase throughput. It creates queues. Queues create longer lead times. Longer lead times create late deliveries.

The nasty paradox is that a plant managed for local efficiency — where every workstation is pushed to run at maximum — almost inevitably produces exactly this result. Work floods in, queues build everywhere, and the factory is simultaneously very busy and very late.

This is not a people problem. It is not a planning problem. It is what Theory of Constraints calls the failure of local optimization. And in my experience, it is the norm rather than the exception.

## What traditional scheduling tools miss

Most factories rely on MRP or ERP systems to plan production. These tools are sophisticated and widely trusted. They are also built on an assumption that doesn't hold in real manufacturing: that resources are independent of each other and can be scheduled in isolation.

MRP calculates start and end dates for every operation based on standard lead times and assumed capacity. It doesn't model variability — the machine breakdowns, quality issues, material delays, and rush orders that are simply part of life on any production floor. It assumes the plan will be executed as designed.

In practice, the plan starts diverging from reality the moment the first shift begins. And the system has no way to distinguish between the one workstation that actually limits throughput and the twenty that don't. Every resource looks equally important on the Gantt chart. Every delay looks equally urgent.

The result is a production floor where everything is being expedited simultaneously, the loudest customer gets prioritized, and the schedule is rebuilt every week from scratch.

## From DBR to S-DBR — and why the distinction matters

The original Drum-Buffer-Rope concept was introduced by Eli Goldratt in [*The Goal*](https://www.toc-goldratt.com/en/product/The-Goal-A-Process-of-Ongoing-Improvement?ref=menicucciassociati.com) and developed further in his subsequent work. It was a genuine advance in production scheduling — but it came with a practical complexity that limited how many companies could actually sustain it.

In the original DBR, the drum was always a physical internal resource — a specific machine or workstation whose finite capacity was modeled in detail to build a precise production schedule. In environments with high product mix, variable demand, or frequently shifting constraints, maintaining that drum schedule became a significant overhead in itself.

Eli Schragenheim, one of the most rigorous practitioners and authors in the TOC field, addressed this with [Simplified DBR](https://www.toc-goldratt.com/en/product/from-dbr-to-simplified-dbr-for-make-to-order-chapter-9-of-the-theory-of-constraints-handbook?ref=menicucciassociati.com). His key insight was that in many manufacturing environments, the complexity of building and maintaining a detailed drum schedule is unnecessary. A time buffer at the shipping point, combined with controlled work release, achieves the same protective effect with considerably less planning effort.

The simplification is not just operational — it is also conceptual. S-DBR is easier to explain to a production team, easier to implement, and easier to sustain over time, although [with some caution](https://elischragenheim.com/2015/11/05/the-boundaries-of-dbrsdbr/?ref=menicucciassociati.com) to consider. It preserves the essential logic of the original DBR while removing the complexity that made DBR difficult to maintain in dynamic real-world environments.

There is a deeper insight here that I find particularly compelling — and it is, I should say, my own reading of the connection rather than something you will find stated explicitly in the literature. It connects S-DBR directly to [Critical Chain Project Management](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-vs-critical-path/), and it goes beyond both methods simply using buffers.

Look at the diagram below. It shows a typical CCPM project network — tasks on the critical chain, feeding buffers, project buffer at the end. Now do one thing: replace the word "**task**" with "**work centre**" or "**machine**."

Suddenly it's a production floor.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2026/07/new-s-dbr-image.png)

A CCPM project network — or a production flow. Changing labels doesn't change the logic!

The critical chain is your main production sequence running through the bottleneck. The non-critical paths feeding into it? Think of your painting line that needs to finish before assembly can start. Or the sub-assembly cell that feeds the main line. Or the external supplier whose components need to arrive before anything can move forward. These are feeding buffers — most plants just don't call them that. If you change the labels, the diagram doesn't change: the logic is the same. Which, again, is not a coincidence.

If you are coming to TOC-based production management for the first time, S-DBR is where I would start.

## How S-DBR works

The name reflects three core elements.

**The Drum** sets the pace of production. In environments where an internal resource indeed limits output — a specific machine, a paint line, an assembly cell — that resource is the drum, and its schedule drives everything else. In many modern manufacturing environments, however, the real constraint is market demand: the plant has more capacity than it has orders. In this case, the drum is set by customer delivery commitments, and the goal shifts from maximizing machine utilization to protecting those commitments reliably.

**The Buffer** is time — a planned time allowance placed in front of the constraint and at the shipping point to absorb the variability of the production process. If something goes wrong upstream — a breakdown, a quality rejection, a late delivery from a supplier — the buffer absorbs that disruption before it reaches the constraint or the customer. The buffer is not a pile of inventory. It is a time window that makes the system resilient without requiring everything to go perfectly.

**The Rope** controls when work enters the production system. In traditional scheduling, work is released as soon as it is ready. In S-DBR, release is tied to the constraint's schedule — the rope prevents work from being pushed into the system faster than it can be processed. This single change, in my experience, often produces the most immediate and visible results: WIP drops, queues shrink, and the constraint becomes visible because it is no longer buried under work that arrived too early.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2026/07/simplified-dbr.png)

## Managing by buffer status

Once S-DBR is running, the primary management tool is buffer status — a nearly real-time indicator of how much of the time buffer has been consumed for each order in the system.

Like the [fever chart in CCPM](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-vs-critical-path/), buffer status divides orders into three zones:

- **Green** — the order is progressing normally. No action needed.
- **Amber** — the buffer is being consumed faster than expected. Worth checking where the order is and whether anything needs attention.
- **Red** — the buffer has been significantly consumed. This order is at risk. Act now, starting with the constraint.

This replaces the daily expediting meeting — where everyone argues about which order is most urgent — with a simple, objective priority system. Red orders move first. Amber orders are watched. Green orders are left alone. Production supervisors spend less time in meetings and more time on the floor.

## What results look like in practice

Manufacturers who implement S-DBR seriously typically see the first results within ninety days:

- Lead times drop by 30–50% — often the earliest and most visible change, because WIP falls sharply once work release is controlled
- On-time delivery climbs above 90% — achievable even in environments where 70% was considered acceptable
- WIP reduces by 30–40% — freeing floor space, reducing handling, and releasing cash tied up in inventory
- Throughput increases without capital investment — because the constraint is now properly exploited rather than buried

That last point matters. In most implementations, the capacity to produce more was already there. It was hidden by the noise of local optimization — by the queues, the expediting, the constant rescheduling that consumed both machine time and management attention. Removing that noise reveals capacity that was always there, waiting.

## The uncomfortable truth about utilization

S-DBR asks manufacturing managers to accept something that feels deeply counterintuitive: that some machines should sometimes be idle.

If the constraint processes 100 units per day, a feeder workstation that can process 150 should not run at 150\. It should run at 100 — and then stop. Running faster only creates WIP that cannot move forward.

This conflicts directly with the utilization metrics most plants use to evaluate performance. A supervisor measured on machine utilization has every incentive to keep running. And every S-DBR implementation will eventually hit this wall.

The resolution is a management decision: replace utilization with throughput as the primary measure of production performance. A machine that is idle because the constraint is running smoothly is not a problem. It is the system working as it should.

In my experience, once a production team sees lead times drop and deliveries get stable, the argument for the old metrics loses its force quickly. Results are a more persuasive teacher than any training course.

## A note on ERP

The most common question I get from operations directors is whether S-DBR means replacing the ERP. It doesn't.

S-DBR sits alongside ERP as a production execution layer. The ERP handles purchasing, materials planning, costing, and customer order management. S-DBR handles the sequencing and flow of work on the floor — the part that ERP has always done poorly. The two complement each other.

In practice, this means no major IT project. The constraint is managed directly. Buffer status is tracked with simple tools — sometimes a spreadsheet in the early stages. The ERP continues to do what it does well.

## Where to start

If your plant is running at high utilization but struggling to deliver on time — if your production meetings feel more like firefighting sessions than planning discussions — the question worth asking is not "where do we need more capacity?"

> The right question to ask is: **where is the constraint, and is everything else subordinated to it?**

In most manufacturing environments I have worked in, that question is answerable within a couple of days of looking at the right data. What comes after is a matter of discipline, not complexity.

If you'd like to work through that question together — and see what S-DBR would look like in your specific environment — [get in touch](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/). I've been inside enough factories to know where to look.

Oh, one last thing: the aperitif eventually arrived, making everyone happy. And the bottleneck was obvious to anyone who knew where to look, as it always is.
### How to Implement CCPM in a Multi-Project Environment
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/ccpm-multi-project-environment/
Last updated: 2026-07-07T12:30:47.000Z
Single-project CCPM is relatively straightforward. You identify the critical chain, strip out the individual task buffers, build a project buffer at the end, and manage by exception using the fever chart.

> Most organizations, however, don't run one project at a time.

They run five. Or fifteen. Or fifty. With the same engineers, the same production lines, the same key specialists appearing in project after project — simultaneously. And this is precisely where traditional project management doesn't just underperform. It breaks down entirely.

### The multi-project problem nobody talks about

When resources are shared across multiple concurrent projects, the scheduling assumptions that underpin the Critical Path Method collapse. CPM can model dependencies within a single project. It cannot adequately model the human being who is the critical resource on three projects at once.

What happens instead is well-documented and universally recognized by anyone who has managed projects in a real organization:

The resource gets pulled in multiple directions simultaneously. They context-switch constantly. Each project manager applies pressure for priority. The resource, unable to satisfy everyone, does what rational people do under conflicting demands — they multitask, spreading their attention across everything and completing nothing efficiently.

The result is a phenomenon called **the multitasking trap**: every project appears to be progressing because the shared resource is touching everything. But nothing actually finishes. Projects queue behind each other invisibly, waiting for a resource that is technically "assigned" but practically almost unavailable.

This is not a people problem. It is a system problem. And it requires a systemic solution.

### What changes in a multi-project environment

Single-project [CCPM](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-project-management-ccpm-complete-guide-with-examples/) gives you a critical chain and a project buffer. Multi-project CCPM adds a third concept that is specific to this context: the [**drum resource**](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-thinking-above-the-discipline-from-ticket-queues-to-drum-capacity/).

The drum resource is the capacity constraint of the entire multi-project system — the one resource (or resource type) whose availability determines how fast the organization can move projects through the pipeline. In most organizations this isn't hard to identify: it's 

- the senior engineer who appears in every project plan,
- the specialized technician with unique skills,
- the testing environment everyone shares,
- the external certification body with fixed turnaround times, you name it!

Once identified, the drum resource becomes the anchor around which the entire project portfolio is scheduled. Everything else — start dates, sequencing, resource allocation — **must be** subordinated to protecting and exploiting the drum.

This is the [Theory of Constraints](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/theory-of-constraints/) logic applied at the portfolio level. The drum resource is the constraint. You exploit it by ensuring it is never idle waiting for upstream work. You subordinate everything else to its rhythm. And you protect it with buffers — specifically, **capacity buffers** that absorb variation before it reaches the drum.

### The five implementation steps

#### 1\. Identify the drum resource

Start by mapping all active and planned projects against the resources they require. Look for the resource that appears most frequently, that causes the most scheduling conflicts, and that — when unavailable — brings multiple projects to a halt simultaneously.

In manufacturing environments this is often a specific machine or process. In professional services it tends to be a senior expert or a small team with specialized knowledge. In IT projects it is frequently the testing and QA function.

Now, let's be honest about this: organizations don't like (and hence often resist) naming a constraint because it implies a weakness. In TOC logic, instead, **identifying the constraint is not a failure** — it is the prerequisite for every improvement that follows.

> Identifying the constraint is not a diagnostic exercise — it is a **strategic decision**. Once you name the drum resource, you are committing to organize the entire project portfolio around it. That takes courage, because it makes priorities explicit and removes the comfortable ambiguity that allows everyone to believe their project comes first. But it is precisely that clarity that makes the system work.

#### 2\. Stagger project start dates around the drum

One of the most counterintuitive aspects of multi-project CCPM is that starting fewer projects simultaneously produces better overall throughput than starting everything at once.

The logic is straightforward. If the drum resource can only advance one project at a time at full capacity, launching five projects simultaneously means each project gets one-fifth of the drum's attention. All five move slowly. None finishes quickly.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2026/07/The-illusion-of-progress.png)

the illusion of progress with multitasking

Staggering start dates so that the drum resource completes its work on one project before the next project reaches that stage keeps the drum fully utilized without splitting its attention. The pipeline flows faster. Individual projects finish sooner. And the organization delivers more completed projects per unit of time — which is the only metric that actually matters.

The practical implication: when a new project is proposed, the first question is not "when can we start?" but "when does the drum resource become available for this project's critical chain?" That answer determines the start date.

#### 3\. Build the project network with resource dependencies explicit

In single-project CCPM, the critical chain accounts for both task dependencies and resource dependencies within that project. In multi-project CCPM, resource dependencies span across projects — and must be mapped explicitly.

This means building a consolidated resource plan that shows every project's demand on the drum resource plotted against time. Where conflicts exist — where two projects need the drum simultaneously — one must wait. The sequence is determined by **strategic priority, deadlines, and customer commitments**, not by whoever applies the most pressure in a weekly meeting.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2026/07/ccpm_multiproject_drum_buffer_timeline.png)

This is an uncomfortable process for many companies because it makes conflict visible. Projects that felt urgent and concurrent are suddenly competing for explicit priority. **That visibility is not a problem — it is the point**. Hidden conflicts managed through informal pressure produce chaos. Explicit conflicts managed through clear priority produce flow.

#### 4\. Insert capacity buffers before the drum

In single-project CCPM, feeding buffers protect the critical chain from delays arriving from non-critical paths. In multi-project CCPM, **capacity buffers** serve an analogous function at the portfolio level — they are planned gaps in the drum resource's schedule that absorb variation before it causes ripple effects across multiple projects.

A drum resource scheduled at 100% capacity has no ability to absorb delay. When one project runs late (and some always will), the delay propagates immediately to every downstream project in the queue. A drum resource scheduled at 75-80% capacity has absorption built in — delays are contained rather than cascading.

This feels wasteful to businesses accustomed to measuring resource utilization as a performance metric. It is not wasteful. A drum resource running at 80% with stable throughput delivers more completed projects than the same resource running at 100% with constant context-switching and cascading delays. The capacity buffer is not idle time — it is systemic resilience.

#### 5\. Manage the portfolio by buffer status, not by task completion

The [fever chart logic](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-vs-critical-path/) from single-project CCPM extends directly to the multi-project environment. Each project has its own buffer status — green, amber, or red — based on how much of its project buffer has been consumed relative to how much of the critical chain has been completed.

At the portfolio level, this gives management a single, coherent view of the entire project pipeline: which projects are healthy, which are showing early warning signals, and which require immediate intervention. No more status meetings where every project manager reports progress in percentage complete. No more surprises when a project that was "90% done" misses its deadline by three weeks.

The fever chart portfolio view also makes prioritization decisions explicit. When two projects are simultaneously showing amber, management can make an informed choice about where to direct the drum resource — based on buffer status, strategic importance, and downstream consequences — rather than reacting to whoever shouts loudest.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2026/07/portfolio-fever-chart.png)

### The cultural shift is the hardest part

The mechanics of multi-project CCPM are learnable in a day. The cultural shift takes longer.

Most project-driven companies have developed informal systems for managing resource conflicts: the politics of priority, the relationships between project managers, the unwritten rules about whose projects get the best resources. Multi-project CCPM makes all of this explicit and replaces it with a system-level logic.

This is experienced as a loss by people who were skilled at navigating the informal system. It is experienced as a relief by people who were exhausted by it.

The most important thing senior management can do during implementation is to protect the drum resource from informal pressure. The moment the drum resource is pulled off a scheduled task because a senior stakeholder applied pressure outside the system, the credibility of the whole approach is undermined. The sequencing logic only works if it is respected.

In my experience, this is not a technical challenge. It is a leadership challenge. And it is the one that determines whether CCPM delivers its potential or becomes another initiative that faded after the training course.

### What results should you expect

Organizations that implement multi-project CCPM with genuine management commitment typically see:

- **30-40% reduction** in average project duration
- **Significant increase** in the number of projects completed per year — without adding resources
- **Reduction in work-in-progress** — fewer simultaneous active projects, each moving faster
- **Improved predictability** — management knows earlier which projects are at risk, with enough time to act

The last point is underrated. The value of CCPM in a multi-project environment is not just that projects finish faster: it is that businesses stop being surprised. The fever chart gives visibility weeks or months before a traditional percentage-complete report would flag a problem. That early warning time is where recoveries happen.

### A note on software

Manual implementation of multi-project CCPM is feasible for small portfolios — three to five projects with a clearly identifiable drum resource. Beyond that, the complexity of tracking buffer status across multiple projects, managing drum resource scheduling, and maintaining an up-to-date portfolio view makes dedicated software a practical necessity rather than a luxury.

I work with **Lynx CCPM by A-dato**, which I support in Italy, precisely because it was built for this environment from the ground up. It models the drum resource, manages capacity buffers, tracks fever chart status across the entire portfolio, and surfaces the right information for management decisions — without requiring project managers to maintain the underlying logic manually.

If you are evaluating CCPM software for a multi-project environment, the key question to ask any vendor is not "does it support CCPM?" but "how does it handle resource conflicts across simultaneous projects?" The answer will tell you quickly whether the software was designed for this problem or retrofitted to claim compatibility.

### Where to start

If your organization is running multiple projects with shared resources and experiencing the symptoms described here — constant firefighting, projects stuck near completion, key people permanently overloaded — the starting point is not a software purchase or a methodology training course.

The starting point is an honest answer to one question: **who or what is the drum resource in your project portfolio?**

Everything else follows from there.

If you'd like help working through that question — and what it implies for your project pipeline — [get in touch](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/). I've been inside this problem long enough to know where the surprises usually are.
### Esselunga Through a Theory of Constraints Lens: How Yesterday's Strength Became Today's Weakness
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/esselunga-through-a-theory-of-constraints-lens-how-yesterdays-strength-became-todays-weakness/
Last updated: 2026-07-07T06:07:55.000Z
Between 1997 and 1998 I attended a series of courses on retail, store management and sales promotion at SDA Bocconi. Esselunga was the case study everyone used back then — the "Italian Sainsbury's," the chain nobody could really touch on customer focus. My family has been shopping there since the mid-'70s, when they opened their first store in Lucca, so by the time I sat through those classes I already had twenty years of first-hand experience with the company those slides were describing in such glowing terms.

The produce department was always the proof point. Fruit and vegetables, consistently fresh, turning over fast, backed by a replenishment discipline that felt almost religious: shelves simply did not stay empty. That was the dogma. Fidaty, one of the first loyalty programs in Italy, grew straight out of that same culture — knowing the customer wasn't a marketing line, it was how the business actually ran.

Today that same department tells a different story, and I see it every time I do my weekly shop. Packaged fruit rotting in the tray. Salads labelled "packed today" that you'd be embarrassed to put on your own table, let alone a shelf. A produce range that, in late June, is still stocking cabbages, kale and pumpkins while the summer assortment crawls in. Shelves that go empty and stay empty for hours, not minutes. And aisles half-blocked by the oversized trolleys staged for home-delivery picking, always at the worst possible time of day.

I don't think it's just me. The numbers seem to agree.

## What the numbers say

Altroconsumo's 2026 survey, based on more than 22,000 consumers, still puts Esselunga in the top tier of Italian supermarket chains. But it's no longer alone up there. NaturaSì leads with 79 points out of 100; Ipercoop and Coop&Coop are tied with Esselunga at 77\. And the detail that actually matters: the survey credits Esselunga's strength to store efficiency, tidiness and checkout speed — while crediting Ipercoop and Coop specifically for fresh-produce and private-label quality. That's the one thing Esselunga used to own without question.

The financials tell roughly the same story as the shelf. EBIT margin dropped from 2.6% in 2023 to 1.7% in 2024, at a point when, per Mediobanca's GDO Observatory, the sector average was sitting around 2.9%. A company the trade press used to call "the benchmark" had quietly slipped below it. 2024 was also the year Esselunga paid out around €47.6m in fines and back-pay after a Milan prosecutor's investigation into irregular labor at its logistics hubs — the same hubs that handle fresh produce. Margin bounced back hard in 2025, to 3.1% — but about €48m of that recovery came from a one-off revision of Fidaty loyalty-point benefits. Strip that out and EBIT margin is closer to 2.6%, basically flat versus 2023\. Not the recovery the headline number suggests.

I find that last detail genuinely telling: the loyalty program built on a culture of putting the customer first is now, in part, a lever for protecting the margin.

## Where Theory of Constraints comes in

This is exactly the kind of situation Goldratt was talking about. A company's goal isn't to squeeze the best result out of today, and it isn't to protect some hypothetical future at today's expense either — it's to **keep growing Throughput, now AND in the future**, at the same time. Optimize a local metric — departmental margin, shrink rate, logistics cost per unit handled — without checking what it does to the system's ability to generate Throughput down the road, and you get exactly this: every individual decision defensible on its own, the aggregate result indefensible.

One of the cleaner ToC tools for surfacing this kind of self-inflicted conflict is the [Goal Tree](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/thegoalmap/): start from the Goal at the top, work backward to the Critical Success Factors that are necessary — but not sufficient — for it, then to the Necessary Conditions underneath each CSF. Built generically for a food retailer, it looks like this:

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2026/06/esselunga-goal-tree.svg)

Two Necessary Conditions are pulling against each other: protecting perceived quality on fresh produce, because that's what earns repeat visits, and tightly controlling shrink and labor cost on perishables, because that's what protects the basket's margin. Push too hard on either side and you damage the other. Going by what's on the shelf and what the survey says, the balance right now is tilted toward the cost side, at the quality side's expense. That's not a one-off operational slip — it's a structural conflict sitting inside the Goal Tree, exactly the kind of thing Goldratt would have you surface with an Evaporating Cloud rather than firefight store by store.

My guess is there's a policy constraint behind it too: an unwritten rule, lived out in buying, store operations and supply chain decisions, that today rewards containing the cost of handling fresh produce more than it rewards having it available and good on the shelf. Fixing that doesn't take a big capital project. It takes the will to put the right measurement back at the center, even when that looks "less efficient" on a monthly P&L.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2026/06/esselunga-sector-data.svg)

## The open question

The real risk here isn't one shopper annoyed by June kale. It's the slow erosion of something intangible — the reputation of being the fresh-quality chain — built over decades and, once it cracks, far more expensive to rebuild than it was to lose. ToC makes the point almost bluntly: look at the system as a whole, because the real constraint is rarely sitting where everyone's eyes are fixed on the margin line.

I'd be curious whether other long-time customers are seeing the same thing, or whether I'm just biased by having grown up with the Esselunga that those SDA Bocconi slides used as the benchmark.

If you recognize this pattern in your own organization — a strength quietly turning into a constraint because nobody's measuring the right thing anymore — I'd like to hear about it. I write here regularly about applying [Theory of Constraints](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/toc/) and [CCPM](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-project-management-ccpm-complete-guide-with-examples/) to real operational problems, not the textbook version. Drop a comment, or [get in touch](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/) directly if you want to work through [the Goal Tree](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/thegoalmap/) or the underlying conflict together.

---

*Sources: Esselunga consolidated financial statements, 2023–2025; Altroconsumo 2026 supermarket customer satisfaction survey (22,000+ respondents); Mediobanca GDO Observatory; trade press coverage of Esselunga's 2024–2025 results.*
### Critical Thinking Above the Discipline - From Ticket Queues to Drum Capacity
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-thinking-above-the-discipline-from-ticket-queues-to-drum-capacity/
Last updated: 2026-06-19T12:45:45.000Z
*Why I keep reaching for the same* [*TOC*](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/toc/) *tool in completely different situations — and what that tells you about where Critical Thinking sit relative to any single methodology.*

There's a habit I've developed over the years that I think is worth naming explicitly, because I don't see it discussed often enough: **Critical Thinking should sit above discipline, not inside it.**

What I mean by that is this. [CCPM](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-project-management-ccpm-complete-guide-with-examples/), Lean, Six Sigma, ITIL, whatever framework you're trained in — these are all disciplines, with their own vocabulary, their own tools, their own boundaries. They're useful precisely because they're specific. But the moment you start treating a discipline's tools as the *only* lens available, you lose something important: the ability to recognize when a tool built for one context is actually solving a more general problem, one that shows up in places the discipline's own vocabulary never anticipated.

Buffer Management is the clearest example of this I've personally lived through. I've now applied the same underlying instrument — a buffer, divided into zones, read either by consumption rate or by simple penetration depending on what it's aimed to — to two completely different problems, years apart, in the same company. Neither application followed exactly the discipline, but both worked for the same reason, and that reason is worth pulling out explicitly.

## Why Buffer Management Generalises

According to the TOCICO Dictionary, Buffer Management is

> a control mechanism based on the amount of time — or stock — remaining, used during the execution phase of [TOC](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/toc/) applications across operations, projects, and distribution

Note what that definition does *not* say: it doesn't say "*for projects only*" or "*for manufacturing only*". It's defined at the level of the mechanism, not the domain.

The mechanism itself is almost embarrassingly simple. Take whatever is protecting you against variability — time against a deadline, stock against demand, capacity against load — and divide it into three "*variability*" zones: expected, normal, and abnormal. What differs is how you read it. A project buffer compares consumption against how far along the critical chain actually is — that's a rate. A stock buffer has nothing to compare against; you just look at how deep into it you've gone — that's a level.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2026/06/Buffer.png)

The capacity buffer I'll describe later works the same simple way: no comparison, just how much is left. Same three zones underneath, two ways of reading them. It works as a green/amber/red semaphore because it compresses a hard question ("*are we in trouble?*") into something you can read at a glance.

Nothing in that mechanism is specific to project management, or to any other discipline. It's specific to **anything that unfolds against a deadline, where you need an early warning before the deadline is missed rather than a binary pass/fail at the end.** That's a much larger category than "*projects*".

## First Application: Incident and Service Request Management

I first applied this thinking outside of a formal project context when I was requested to looking at how my organization handled IT incidents and service requests. This was in a strongly regulated pharmaceutical environment, where incident management carries real weight — unplanned issues that could affect product quality or data integrity (and in the end patient safety) need to be caught and resolved before harm occurs, and the regulatory expectation around that is unambiguous.

The operational problem was a familiar one to anyone who's run a ticket queue: every incident management tool has its own algorithm for prioritizing tickets by severity, and every ticket gets a resolution window based on that severity. But severity-based prioritization alone breaks down quickly in practice. You may end up with several high-priority tickets simultaneously, all urgent, all with similar due dates. After a couple of days some have had real progress made against them, others have had none — but severity alone doesn't tell you which ones are actually at risk of breaching their SLA. It's easy, in that situation, to feel overpowered without being able to say precisely *why*, or which ticket needs attention first.

The fix was to treat the time allocated to resolve each ticket as a time buffer. Tickets kept their existing priority label — incident or service request, with whatever severity classification the tool already assigned — but their *urgency to act on right now* was recalculated continuously based on Buffer Consumption Rate: time already elapsed divided by total time allowed: a ticket at 40% buffer consumption with little progress made sits in the amber zone and gets flagged for a mitigation plan before it has any chance of sliding into red. This let management see, across an entire queue of tickets with similar severity and similar due dates, exactly which ones needed attention *today* — not based on a static severity score, but based on how the situation was actually evolving in real time.

That distinction matters. Severity tells you how bad a ticket *would be* if mishandled. Buffer consumption tells you how close it actually *is* to being mishandled, right now. The two are different questions, and only one of them changes day to day.

This piece of work was never something I'd been taught to do as part of an ITIL playbook or a [CCPM](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-project-management-ccpm-complete-guide-with-examples/) course. It came directly from recognizing that "*time remaining against a deadline, monitored as a consumption rate rather than a countdown*" was a [TOC](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/toc/) pattern that happened to fit a ticketing problem perfectly — even though tickets are not projects, and ITIL is not [CCPM](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-project-management-ccpm-complete-guide-with-examples/).

## Second Application: Drum Resource Capacity

These days, years later, working through running a [CCPM](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-project-management-ccpm-complete-guide-with-examples/) portfolio, I found myself reaching for exactly the same underlying instrument — this time applied to a problem that had nothing to do with tickets and everything to do with a single constrained team.

The starting question was about my drum resource: an OT infrastructure team acting as the constraint across a multi-project portfolio. The standard [CCPM](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-project-management-ccpm-complete-guide-with-examples/) approach to this question is to calculate a pooled-hours **Drum Capacity** — available team hours divided by estimated consumption per project — and gate releases against that number. I ran that calculation, and the result didn't survive contact with reality. The team is running far more concurrent projects than the formula said should be possible, and yet the work was visibly getting done.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2026/06/Drum-Capacity-Calculation-1.png)

Drum Capacity Calculation, based on Formula

Digging into the actual historical task duration data eventually surfaced that the real issue wasn't team-level volume at all — it was an uneven *distribution* of load across individuals. Breaking a team-level capacity chart into one chart per person revealed that a few team members were genuinely stretched while others had real headroom, with one additional team member still in onboarding and appropriately unloaded.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2026/06/Real-Capacity.png)

Real Capacity based on Data

That distribution problem is what brought Buffer Management back into the picture, in a form that's directly analogous to what I'd done with the ticket queue years earlier. Once it was clear that the right unit of analysis was the *individual*, not the pool, the natural next step was to ask: what if I'd use a time buffer, for each person's capacity?

The answer is the same mechanism, relabelled. For each individual resource, define total available capacity over a planning horizon, define allocated capacity as the sum of scheduled hours already committed against that person, and the difference is their **remaining capacity buffer** — expressed as a percentage, with the same green/amber/red zones as any other buffer. There's no progress axis here, so this is a penetration read, not a consumption rate: it doesn't ask how fast the buffer is being used relative to some milestone, it simply asks how much of it is left.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2026/06/Individual-Capacity-Buffer.png)

The release decision at a weekly portfolio meeting becomes: does releasing this project push any individual's buffer from green into amber, or amber into red? That's the same three-zone logic as a project buffer, just read the simpler way — how much capacity remains — applied to a person's workload instead of a ticket's countdown or a project's schedule.

It's worth being precise about **what this buffer is actually for**, because it's easy to misread it as a workload-balancing exercise. It isn't. Spreading hours evenly across the team so everyone sits at a similar load is not the goal, and chasing that would be exactly the kind of local optimization [TOC](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/toc/) warns against — a team that looks "balanced" on paper can still be starving the one person whose output the whole portfolio's flow actually depends on. The point of the buffer is to **protect and increase flow through the constraint**: keep the drum resource fed without interruption, catch the moment someone's heading toward overload before it actually delays a critical chain, and free up the headroom that lets you release the next project sooner rather than later. Rebalancing assignments toward whoever has a green buffer is a tool for getting there, not the destination itself. If reassigning work to a less-loaded person doesn't translate into the portfolio moving faster, the rebalancing hasn't actually achieved anything.

> The point of a buffer is to **protect and control**

## Why Time Is the Constraint in Both Cases

Goldratt was explicit that in project environments, the number one constraint is time. Not a machine, not a person, not a budget line — time itself, because a project's value is realised at a single point (completion), and every day lost before that point is value that cannot be recovered by working harder afterward. That's why [CCPM](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-project-management-ccpm-complete-guide-with-examples/)'s entire architecture — critical chain identification, project buffers, feeding buffers, resource buffers — is built around protecting time specifically, rather than protecting cost or protecting any individual task's local schedule.

The drum capacity buffer I described above is, first and foremost, a gate signal: green means the release gate stays open, amber means proceed with attention, red means the gate closes — hold the release, or reassign the work to someone with headroom. That's its job at the weekly portfolio meeting, full stop.

It also happens to sit inside a [CCPM](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-project-management-ccpm-complete-guide-with-examples/) portfolio, which is why a red reading carries the weight it does: it means the constrained resource cannot absorb more demand without delay propagating through the critical chain, putting the project's due date genuinely at risk. That's Goldratt's point about time being the number one constraint in project environments, showing up exactly where it should — as the reason the gate matters, not as the gate itself.

I don't think the incident management case is actually an exception to this. A ticket's value — preventing or resolving harm — is realized at a point in time too, and a lost hour of response isn't recoverable afterward by throwing more people or money at it, any more than a lost day on a project is. Goldratt's reasoning for why time is constraint number one was never really about projects specifically — it was about anything whose value is realized at a fixed point, where a delay can't be bought back after the fact. Both cases qualify. That's also, I think, why the same buffer mechanism works cleanly in both: it isn't a coincidence that a tool built for protecting project due dates turned out to fit a ticket queue just as well. They're both, underneath, the same kind of problem.

## The Actual Point

What connects the ticket queue and the drum capacity buffer isn't that both are "secretly [CCPM](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-project-management-ccpm-complete-guide-with-examples/)." They're not. One is an ITIL-flavoured operational queue; the other sits inside an actual [CCPM](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-project-management-ccpm-complete-guide-with-examples/) portfolio — and even between the two, the read isn't identical: the ticket buffer is a consumption rate against progress, the capacity buffer is a plain penetration read with no progress axis at all. What connects them is that Buffer Management is a very powerful and helpful tool not related to a particular discipline. It asks only: is there something being protected against variability, is there a meaningful zone of "fine" versus "watch this" versus "act now," and is the right read for this situation a rate or a level?

![ok-plan-act.jpg](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2026/06/data-src-image-1100e39b-e7a1-4c12-a777-91cf35ebb7d3.jpeg)

If those conditions hold, the three-zone buffer with consumption-rate monitoring is available to you — regardless of whether your training tells you this is a "project management tool" or an "ITIL tool" or something else entirely. That's what I mean by Critical Thinking sitting above discipline: the discipline gives you vocabulary and a community of practice, which is genuinely valuable. 

But Critical Thinking — actually questioning whether the framework you were trained in is the right lens for the problem in front of you — doesn't belong to any discipline. It's an attitude, not a technique. That actually lines up with a couple of [TOC](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/toc/) pillars. "Never Say I Know": don't assume you've already got this figured out just because it worked last time. And managing "the fear of the unknown": the tendency, especially inside organizations, to respond to anything unfamiliar by tightening control — more process, more approval steps, more rules — rather than sitting with the discomfort of not having it figured out yet.

Noticing that a tool built for tickets also fits a team's capacity isn't some happy accident outside the framework. It's those same mindsets doing their job — just aimed at your own toolbox for once, instead of at the problem.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2026/06/image.png)

The Four Pillars of Theory Of Constraints

I've now seen it show up twice, in the same organization, years apart, in two situations that have almost nothing in common operationally. I'd be surprised if that's the last time.

If you're working through a constraint-management problem that doesn't fit neatly inside whatever framework you were trained in, that's usually a sign you're looking at the right level of the problem, not the wrong one. I work with organizations applying [TOC thinking](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/theory-of-constraints/) — [CCPM](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-project-management-ccpm-complete-guide-with-examples/) and otherwise — to exactly these situations. [Get in touch](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/) if it would help to talk it through.
### Why Your Projects Keep Running Late — And How Critical Chain Fixes It
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-vs-critical-path/
Last updated: 2026-06-09T14:21:26.000Z
Every project manager I've ever met planned to finish on time, most didn't.

After thirty years working inside project-driven organisations — manufacturing plants, retailers, IT rollouts — I've seen the same pattern repeat itself with remarkable consistency. The plan looks reasonable at the start. The team is capable and motivated. And yet, somewhere between kickoff and completion, things slip. Deadlines get pushed. Resources get stretched. The final delivery lands late, over budget, or both.

The tempting explanation is execution failure: the team didn't work hard enough, the estimates were wrong, the risks weren't managed properly. In my experience, that explanation is almost never correct. The problem is structural: it's built into the method most organisations use to plan and manage their projects.

That method is the Critical Path Method. And it has a fundamental flaw.

### What the Critical Path Method Gets Right — and Where It Breaks Down

The Critical Path Method (CPM) was developed in the 1950s and remains the dominant approach to project scheduling today. It identifies **the longest sequence of dependent tasks** in a project — the critical path — and uses that sequence to calculate the minimum project duration.

It's a logical framework. For simple projects with stable resources and predictable tasks, it works reasonably well. The problem is that real projects don't look like that. In practice, CPM has three structural weaknesses that consistently cause projects to run late.

**1\. It assumes unlimited resources**

CPM schedules tasks based on dependencies — task B can start when task A finishes. What it doesn't adequately account for is *who* is doing the work. If the same engineer is needed on three tasks simultaneously, CPM doesn't flag the conflict. The schedule looks fine on paper, whereas reality looks entirely different.

**2\. It encourages padding at the individual task level**

When you ask someone how long a task will take, they don't give you their best estimate. They give you a safe estimate — one that includes a buffer for unexpected problems, interruptions, and uncertainty. This is rational behaviour, but it creates a plan full of hidden safety time distributed across every single task.

And here's the cruel irony: that safety time gets consumed anyway. Not by the unexpected problems it was meant to cover, but by two very human tendencies that Goldratt identified precisely.

- *Student syndrome* — the tendency to start tasks late because the deadline feels distant. Just as students leave essays to the last minute, project team members delay starting work until the buffer has already been eaten.
- *Parkinson's Law* — work expands to fill the time available. If a task has a two-week estimate, it takes two weeks — even if the actual work could be done in eight days.

Underlying both of these is a deeper structural problem: CPM assigns a fixed start date and finish date to every task. This creates a subtle but damaging psychology — the start date becomes permission to wait, and the finish date becomes the real target. The work fills the window between them, regardless of how long it actually needs.

**3\. Multitasking destroys productivity**

CPM allows — and often requires — team members to work on multiple tasks simultaneously. This feels efficient. It isn't. Context switching has a measurable productivity cost, and when people are spread across multiple projects, nothing moves as fast as it should.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2026/06/bad-multitasking.jpg)

harmful multitasking

The result of these three dynamics combined: a project plan full of individual task buffers that get wasted through late starts and scope creep, while the overall project has no protection against the variability that actually matters.

### What Critical Chain Does Differently

[Critical Chain Project Management](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-project-management-ccpm-complete-guide-with-examples/) (CCPM) was developed by Eli Goldratt – the father of [Theory of Constraints](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/tag/theory-of-constraints/), and introduced in his 1997 book *Critical Chain* and it starts from a different premise: the problem isn't the people, it's the system. And it redesigns the system accordingly.

CCPM makes three fundamental changes to how projects are planned and managed.

**1\. It builds the schedule around resources, not just tasks**

The critical chain is defined as the longest sequence of tasks considering *both* task dependencies and resource dependencies. If two tasks on the critical path require the same person, that constraint is built into the schedule from the start. The result is a plan that reflects reality — one that can actually be executed.

On top of that, CCPM breaks totally the "start-finish date" logic. Once a project has been kicked off, tasks have no fixed start date because what we care about most is project's deadline, not tasks. Therefore, work is passed from one person to the next as soon as it's ready — the baton moves the moment a runner finishes their leg. There is no scheduled handoff time, no waiting for the clock to reach a predetermined date. If a task finishes early, the next task starts immediately. That early finish — which CPM would squander through Parkinson's Law — becomes a real gain that protects the project buffer.

This single shift in thinking, from a calendar-driven handoff to a relay race mentality, is one of the most practically powerful changes CCPM introduces.

**2\. It removes individual task buffers and replaces them with shared project buffers**

In a CCPM plan, task estimates are set at approximately 50% probability — aggressive but achievable. When project teams first encounter this, the reaction is often resistance. Cutting estimates in half feels like pressure — like being asked to do the same work in less time, with less margin for error. This is one of the most common points of friction when introducing CCPM to an organisation, and it deserves a direct answer.

> The 50% cut is not about working faster under greater pressure. It is about being honest about where the safety time actually goes.

In a traditional CPM plan, every team member buries their own safety margin inside their individual task estimate. That safety time is invisible, unmanaged, and — as we've already seen through student syndrome and Parkinson's Law — almost entirely wasted. It protects no one, because it disappears before it's needed.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2026/06/CCPM-planning.png)

**CCPM doesn't remove that safety time**. It *moves* it. The time taken out of individual task estimates is pooled together and placed explicitly into shared buffers at strategic points in the plan. Crucially, that pooled time is available to *anyone* who needs it — not locked inside a single task owned by a single person.

This matters more than it might initially appear. If ten tasks each carry a two-day personal buffer, and only three of those tasks actually run into difficulty, the other seven buffers are wasted. Under CCPM, those same twenty days of total safety time sit in a shared project buffer — available in full to whichever tasks actually encounter problems. The team is not exposed to more risk. They are collectively *better protected*, because the safety time is deployed where it's actually needed rather than distributed arbitrarily across every task.

Those buffers are placed at three specific points in the plan:

- **The Project Buffer** sits at the end of the critical chain, protecting the final delivery date from accumulated variation along the critical path.
- **Feeding Buffers** protect the critical chain from delays arriving from non-critical paths — the side chains that feed into the main sequence.
- **Resource Buffers** ensure that key resources are available and ready when the critical chain requires them, eliminating the handoff delays that CPM leaves unmanaged.

The result is a plan that makes uncertainty visible and manageable, rather than hiding it inside individual estimates where it quietly evaporates.

**3\. It lower down harmful multitasking**

CCPM explicitly prioritises tasks. At any point in the project, each team member knows exactly which task is their current priority. Work is completed and handed off — the baton moves, not the juggler. Will people still multitask occasionally? Of course they will. **The goal is not perfection** — it's reducing the structural pressure that makes harmful multitasking feel necessary in the first place.

### The Buffer Fever Chart — Managing by Exception

One of CCPM's most practical tools is the buffer fever chart. It tracks how much of the project buffer has been consumed relative to how much of the critical chain has been completed.

If a project is 50% complete and has consumed 20% of its buffer, things are on track. If it's 30% complete and has already consumed 60% of its buffer, that's a warning signal — action is needed now, not when the deadline is a week away.

This is fundamentally different from traditional progress tracking in tools like Microsoft Project, which measures progress as percentage completion of individual tasks. In practice this creates a well-known and deeply frustrating phenomenon: projects that appear to be progressing smoothly on paper, with tasks reporting 70%, 80%, 90% complete — and then stall. The final 10% somehow takes as long as the first 90%. Percentage completion is a lagging indicator that tells you where you've been, not where you're going. It gives you no warning until the damage is already done.

CCPM's buffer fever chart works differently. It distinguishes between *normal* variation and *abnormal* variation — giving project managers an early warning system rather than a post-mortem. The chart is divided into three zones:

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2026/06/Buffer-Analysis.png)

Variation is measured through buffer analysis

- **Green** — buffer consumption is proportional to progress or better. The project is healthy. No action needed beyond continuing to execute.
- **Amber** — buffer is being consumed faster than progress warrants. This is a warning signal: begin planning corrective actions now, while there is still time to act.
- **Red** — buffer consumption has exceeded the threshold. Immediate intervention is required. The plan needs to change.

The critical difference is *when* these signals arrive. In CPM, you discover a project is in trouble when the deadline is close and the last 10% refuses to close. In CCPM, the amber zone triggers attention weeks or months earlier — when there is still room to recover. The fever chart doesn't just measure progress. It measures *risk in real time*, giving management the information they need to act before a delay becomes irreversible.

### Results — and Who This Is For

The research on CCPM outcomes is consistent. Studies report 25–40% reductions in project duration, on-time delivery rates above 90% in multi-project environments, and significant reductions in work-in-progress — the number of projects running simultaneously without completing.

In my own practice, the pattern I see most often is this: organisations implementing CCPM for the first time are surprised not by how much faster individual tasks complete, but by how much faster projects *finish*. The bottleneck was never the work itself. It was the system around the work.

CCPM works best when:

- Resources are shared across multiple projects simultaneously
- Project timelines are consistently slipping despite competent teams
- The organisation has a culture willing to work with aggressive-but-honest task estimates
- There is management commitment to protecting the critical chain from interruption

It requires more up-front discipline than simply drawing a Gantt chart. The planning process is more rigorous, the conversation about estimates is sometimes uncomfortable, and the cultural shift away from multitasking takes time.

For organisations willing to make that shift, the results are not marginal. They are structural — because the change is structural.

### A Note on Software

CCPM can be implemented manually for simple projects. For multi-project environments — where resource conflicts across simultaneous projects are the primary [constraint](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/five-focusing-steps-5fs/) — dedicated software makes a significant difference. I work with [Lynx CCPM](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/lynx-ccpm/) by A-dato, which I can support you with, because it was built specifically for CCPM rather than retrofitted from a traditional Gantt-based tool. The distinction matters in practice.

### The Real Reason Projects Run Late

It is not the team. It is not the estimates. It is not bad luck.

It is a planning method designed in the 1950s, before we understood the psychology of task estimation, before multi-project environments were the norm, and before Goldratt gave us a better framework.

> Critical Chain doesn't require more effort from your team. It requires a better system for the effort they're already making.

If your projects are consistently finishing late despite good people and reasonable plans, the method is worth examining. I'd be glad to walk through what CCPM would look like in your specific environment — whether you're running engineering projects, IT implementations, or complex operational programmes. The method has been the same since the 1950s. The results don't have to be.

[Get in touch →](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/)
### Beyond Local Optimization: What Néi Gong Taught Me About Throughput
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/beyond-local-optimization-what-nei-gong-taught-me-about-throughput/
Last updated: 2026-02-05T15:10:18.000Z
Yesterday, I took my first step into the world of **Nei Gong**.

The premise is deceptively simple: instead of building outward mass, you cultivate internal strength. You stop trying to "force" the body to grow and start allowing it to integrate. As I listened to the principles of this ancient internal art, my mind immediately jumped to a modern management classic: Eliyahu Goldratt’s [**Theory of Constraints (ToC)**](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/toc/)**.**

It might seem like a stretch to link 12th-century Daoist practices with 20th-century industrial logic, but they both point to the same fundamental truth: **Real power isn't about how much "stuff" you have; it’s about how much "flow" you can sustain.**

### The Trap of the "Cost World"

In the Theory of Constraints, the **Cost World** is a place of diminishing returns. You try to optimize every little piece, cutting pennies here and there. In the physical world, this is the "bodybuilding" mindset. We think that to be stronger, we must be *bigger*. We add more muscle (the cost) and hope it translates into more power.

But there is a hard ceiling to the Cost World. Eventually, the weight of the muscle becomes a tax on the heart, a restriction on the joints, and a drain on your recovery. You’ve optimized the parts, but you’ve burdened the system.

### Entering the "Throughput World"

Goldratt’s **Throughput World** is different. It says: *Don't worry about the cost of the parts; worry about the speed and volume of the output.* This is exactly what **Nei Gong** proposes. It views the body not as a collection of isolated muscles to be "inflated," but as a system of pathways.

- **Throughput is the goal:** In Nei Gong, this is the "Song" (intentional release) and the flow of energy.
- **The Constraint is Tension:** Every knot in your shoulder or tightness in your hip is a "bottleneck" that chokes your throughput.

When you focus on the internal, you aren't spending energy on building a bigger engine; you are spending energy on **removing the friction in the transmission and increase the flow.**

### The Unlimited Ceiling

The most beautiful part of this comparison is the "Limit."

- In the Cost World (Muscles), you hit a wall. Biology says "no more."
- In the Throughput World (Internal Skill), Goldratt argued "*the sky is the limit*" because you can always find a new way to improve flow.

Nei Gong teaches the same. You don't get "too big" to move; you get "too clear" to be stopped. Strength becomes a byproduct of alignment rather than an act of will.

> **Reflecting on the practice:** We spend our lives trying to add more to ourselves—more knowledge, more muscle, more "assets." Maybe the real "Internal Skill" is identifying the constraints that keep us from using the power we already have.

I’m just at the start of this Nei Gong journey. If you’ve practiced internal arts or systems thinking, I’d love to hear your perspective on where these two worlds meet 🤗
### Critical Chain Project Management (CCPM): Complete Guide with Examples
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-project-management-ccpm-complete-guide-with-examples/
Last updated: 2026-08-04T10:50:52.000Z
Project management is a complex set of tasks, resources, and deadlines. For decades, traditional project management methodologies, often rooted in PERT and Critical Path Method (CPM), have been the go-to. However, in the real world, projects frequently run late, go over budget, and fail to deliver on their promises. This is where [Critical Chain Project Management](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/tag/critical-chain-projects-management/) (CCPM) steps in, offering a revolutionary approach designed to address the inherent flaws of traditional methods and deliver projects faster and more reliably.

### What is CCPM?

At its core, [Critical Chain Project Management](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-project-management/) is a methodology developed by Dr. Eliyahu M. Goldratt, the creator of the [Theory of Constraints](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/toc/) (TOC). Unlike traditional approaches that focus on managing individual task durations and their dependencies, CCPM shifts the paradigm to managing the *flow* of the entire project, with a keen eye on resource availability and the inherent uncertainties of project work. It acknowledges that people tend to inflate task estimates (safety time), then procrastinate until the last minute (Student Syndrome), and that variability at one stage can fluctuate through the entire project (Parkinson's Law and the "Bullwhip Effect" – a phenomenon we'll explore in more detail in a separate post).

CCPM aims to protect the project's overall completion date by identifying the "[*critical chain*](https://www.a-dato.com/ccpm/ccpm-explained/?ref=menicucciassociati.com)"—the longest sequence of dependent tasks that also considers resource availability. This critical chain is often different from the critical path because it takes into account potential **resource contention**.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2025/10/Student-Syndrome.png)

Student Syndrome explained

### The Problem: Why Traditional Project Management Fails

Let's face it, traditional project management, while offering a structured framework, often struggles with a few persistent issues:

- **Individual Task Safety:** Project managers and team members, often unconsciously, add "safety time" to their individual task estimates. They want to ensure they finish their tasks on time, so they buffer their estimates. While this seems prudent for an individual task, when aggregated across an entire project, it creates a massive amount of *hidden, unused safety time*.
- **Student Syndrome:** With this hidden safety time, people tend to delay starting a task until the last possible moment, consuming much of the buffer they built in.
- **Parkinson's Law:** "Work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion." If a task is estimated to take five days, it will likely take five days, even if it could have been done in three. The excess time is often filled with non-critical activities or simply becomes wasted.
- **Multitasking and Resource Contention:** In an effort to keep everyone busy, resources are often assigned to multiple projects or tasks simultaneously. This leads to frequent task switching, reduced efficiency, increased lead times, and further delays.
- **Lack of Project-Level Protection:** Traditional methods often don't provide adequate mechanisms to protect the overall project schedule from the inherent uncertainties and variability of individual tasks. Delays in one task frequently cascade and impact subsequent tasks, leading to the entire project slipping.
- **The "Bullwhip Effect" (or variability amplification):** Just as in supply chains, variability at a micro-level (individual task delays) can be significantly amplified as it moves up the project chain, causing larger and larger disruptions further down the line. This effect often means small delays become big project overruns.

These ingrained habits and systemic issues create a culture of missed deadlines and budget overruns. Traditional PM often focuses on "on-time, on-budget" for individual tasks, which can paradoxically lead to the project being late and over budget.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2025/10/The-illusion-of-progress.png)

The illusion of making progresses

### The Solution: CCPM Principles

Critical Chain Project Management offers a refreshing alternative by challenging these deeply ingrained habits and focusing on system-wide optimization. Here are its core principles:

1. **Focus on the Critical Chain:**
  - **Identify the Critical Chain:** This is not just the longest path of tasks (critical path) but the longest sequence of dependent tasks *and* resource dependencies. It's the bottleneck sequence that truly dictates the project's minimum completion time.
  - **Prioritize:** Once identified, all efforts are focused on ensuring the tasks on the critical chain progress without delay.
2. **Aggressive but Realistic Task Estimates (No Individual Safety Time):**
  - **Remove Hidden Buffers:** Team members are asked to provide their "focused duration" estimates – how long a task would take if there were no interruptions, no need for personal safety, and 50% certainty of completion. This eliminates the individual safety time.
  - **Collect and Pool Buffers:** The removed individual safety time isn't discarded; instead, it's aggregated and pooled into strategic project buffers.
3. **Strategic Project Buffers:**
  - **Project Buffer (PB):** Placed at the very end of the critical chain, this buffer protects the overall project completion date from delays originating on the critical chain.
  - **Feeding Buffers (FB):** Placed at the end of non-critical chains that "feed into" the critical chain. These buffers protect the critical chain from delays on feeding paths. If a feeding path runs late, it consumes its feeding buffer, but ideally, it won't impact the critical chain.
  - **Resource Buffers (RB):** These are not time buffers but rather alerts or placeholders positioned just before a critical chain task requires a specific resource. They signal to that resource to be ready and available, preventing delays due to resource unavailability.
  - **Buffer Management:** Buffers are not "extra time" to be used. They are monitored continuously. The rate at which buffers are consumed provides an early warning system. If buffers are depleting too quickly, it signals a problem that needs immediate attention.
4. **Full Kit and Relay Race Mentality:**
  - **Full Kit:** Before a task on the critical chain begins, all necessary inputs, information, and resources must be fully available ("full kit"). This prevents tasks from starting only to stop due to missing components.
  - **Relay Race:** The project is treated like a relay race. The focus is on quickly passing the baton from one task to the next, not on individual task optimization. The goal is to finish the project as quickly as possible, not to finish each task as quickly as possible.
5. **Focus and Elimination of Multitasking:**
  - **Single-Tasking:** Resources assigned to critical chain tasks are encouraged, wherever possible, to work on only one task at a time until it's complete. This reduces setup times, increases focus, and accelerates task completion.
  - **Resource Leveling:** CCPM inherently includes robust resource leveling to avoid overloading critical resources.
6. **Throughput-Oriented Measurement:**
  - **Project Throughput:** The ultimate measure of success is the rate at which projects are completed and generate value. CCPM optimizes for overall project throughput rather than individual task efficiency.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2025/10/The-critical-chain.png)

### Tools & Techniques for CCPM

Implementing CCPM effectively requires specific tools and a shift in project management practices:

- **Critical Chain Software:** Specialized software (e.g., [Lynx by A-Dato](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/lynx-ccpm/), Project Management software with CCPM logic) is invaluable. These tools can identify the critical chain, calculate buffer sizes, track buffer consumption, and manage resource loading. You can have [a good overview of such specialized software here](https://www.a-dato.com/ccpm/ccpm-software-2026/?ref=menicucciassociati.com).
- **Buffer Reporting:** Regular reports showing buffer consumption status (e.g., green, yellow, red zones) are crucial for proactive management.
- **Go/No-Go Checklists (Full Kit):** Formal checklists before starting critical tasks ensure all prerequisites are met.
- **Daily Stand-ups / Buffer Reviews:** Brief, focused meetings to review critical chain progress and buffer status, identifying and resolving impediments quickly.
- **Visual Management Boards:** Whiteboards or digital boards can visually track critical chain tasks, resource assignments, and buffer levels.
- **Training and Cultural Shift:** This is perhaps the most important "tool." Teams need to be trained on the principles of CCPM, understand why individual safety is removed, and embrace the "relay race" mentality. This requires a significant cultural shift from individual task protection to collective project protection.

### Case Example: Implementing CCPM in a Small Italian Manufacturing Company

Let's imagine "Meccanica La Veloce," a made up small, family-owned Italian company specializing in custom-built, high-precision industrial machinery. They have a reputation for quality but often struggle with meeting promised delivery dates, leading to frustrated clients and missed opportunities. Their traditional project management approach, while thorough, was constantly plagued by:

- Engineering designs taking longer than expected.
- Delays in procuring specialized components from suppliers.
- Assembly teams waiting for parts or drawings.
- Testing phases revealing issues that required rework, pushing back final delivery.

Their latest project, a complex pasta-making machine for a niche market, was already showing signs of trouble. The initial estimate was 18 weeks, but the project manager's gut feeling (and historical data) suggested it would be closer to 24.

**Here's how Meccanica La Veloce decided to apply CCPM:**

1. **Task & Resource Analysis:** The project team mapped out all tasks, their dependencies, and the resources required (design engineers, procurement specialists, machinists, assembly technicians, quality control). They identified key bottlenecks, such as the single senior design engineer and the highly specialized XYZ machine.
2. **Aggressive Estimates:** Each team member was asked to provide a 50% probability estimate for their tasks. For instance, the design engineer, who previously estimated a specific module design at 3 weeks (including safety), now estimated it at 1.5 weeks. The cumulative "safety time" removed from individual tasks across the project was significant.
3. **Identifying the Critical Chain:** Using a CCPM-enabled software, they identified the critical chain. It wasn't just the design-build-test sequence, but specifically factored in the limited availability of the senior design engineer and the XYZ machine, which were shared across multiple high-priority tasks.
4. **Inserting Buffers:**
  - **Project Buffer:** A 3-week project buffer was placed at the end of the project, protecting the 18-week target.
  - **Feeding Buffers:** Feeding buffers were added for non-critical paths, such as the procurement of standard components and the calibration of auxiliary sensors. If the sensor calibration ran late, it would consume its feeding buffer but wouldn't immediately impact the critical machine assembly, meanwhile giving early warning in case of issues.
  - **Resource Buffers:** A resource buffer (in the form of an alert and prioritized task queue) was placed before the XYZ machine's critical operations, ensuring the machine operator was ready and materials were available. Another was set for the senior design engineer before a critical design review.
5. **Full Kit & Focus:**
  - For the main assembly phase, a "full kit" check was implemented. Assembly wouldn't start until all custom-machined parts, standard components, and final design drawings were physically present and verified.
  - The lead assembly technician, previously prone to multitasking, was assigned exclusively to the critical chain assembly tasks, minimizing context switching.
6. **Buffer Management & Daily Reviews:**
  - The project manager instituted daily 15-minute stand-up meetings, focusing on critical chain tasks and buffer consumption. "*How much buffer have we consumed as of today?*" became a key question.
  - Early in the project, they noticed the "Design Review" feeding buffer was depleting quickly. This warned about a potential problem with the availability of a specific external consultant. The project manager was able to proactively escalate and secure the consultant's time, preventing a delay to the critical design phase.
  - Later, during the testing phase, an unexpected issue with a custom sensor caused a delay. The project buffer started to turn "*yellow*", prompting the team to quickly reallocate resources to resolve the sensor issue, bringing in an external specialist sooner than planned, thus protecting the final delivery date.

### **Outcome:**

While the project still encountered challenges (as all projects do), Meccanica La Veloce delivered the pasta-making machine in 19 weeks – one week into their 3-week project buffer. This was significantly better than their historical average and the initial pessimistic estimate. The client was delighted, and Meccanica La Veloce gained valuable experience and confidence in CCPM. They realized that by focusing on flow, protecting the overall project, and using buffers as a management tool, they could achieve more **predictable** and **faster** project delivery. This success also laid the groundwork for further process improvements, understanding that "[*5 Common Mistakes in Applying Critical Chain Project Management*](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/5-common-mistakes-in-applying-critical-chain-project-management/)" would need to be addressed as they scaled its use.

For a deeper comparison with the Critical Path Method, [read this →](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-vs-critical-path/)

### Learn More About Our Consulting Approach

Are your projects consistently late, over budget, or struggling with resource contention? Do you want to move beyond the frustration of traditional project management and achieve more reliable, faster project delivery?

At Menicucci & Associati, we specialize in helping organizations like Meccanica La Veloce implement and optimize [Critical Chain Project Management](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-project-management/). Our consulting approach focuses on:

- **Customized Implementation:** Tailoring CCPM principles to your specific industry, project types, and organizational culture.
- **Training & Mentorship:** Equipping your teams with the knowledge and skills to embrace and excel with CCPM.
- **Process Optimization:** Identifying and eliminating bottlenecks, improving flow, and maximizing project throughput.
- **Sustainable Change:** Guiding you through the cultural shift required for long-term CCPM success.

Ready to transform your project delivery and achieve your strategic goals with greater predictability? [Contact us](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/) today for a free consultation and discover how CCPM can revolutionize your project management capabilities. Let's work together to make your projects not just **successful**, but **predictably** and **consistently so**.
### 5 Common Mistakes in Applying Critical Chain Project Management
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/5-common-mistakes-in-applying-critical-chain-project-management/
Last updated: 2026-06-04T10:04:41.000Z
[Critical Chain Project Management](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-project-management/) (**CCPM**), an approach derived from the [Theory of Constraints](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/toc/) (**TOC**), is designed to deliver projects faster and more reliably by focusing on resource availability and managing uncertainty with project buffers. However, its effectiveness hinges on correct application. A five-minute read is all it takes to learn about the most common missteps. Avoid these errors, and you'll significantly increase your CCPM success rate!

### 1\. Failing to Properly Stagger Task Estimates

A cornerstone of CCPM is asking individuals to provide **"focused" or "aggressive but achievable" task duration estimates**—not the typical padded "safe" estimates. The *removed padding* is then aggregated to form the **Project Buffer** and **Feeding Buffers**.

**The Mistake:** Project teams often revert to their old habits and continue to add safety margins to their estimates *even after* being told to provide focused estimates. This effectively doubles the project's protection (original padding plus the new buffers), masking the true critical chain and resulting in unnecessarily long projects.

**The Fix:** Thoroughly train the team on the concept of focused estimates and explain that the centralized buffers will protect the project. Track the actual completion times against the focused estimates to build confidence in the new process.

### 2\. Mismanaging Resource Buffers

CCPM explicitly addresses **resource contention**—the problem of multiple tasks needing the same constrained resource at the same time. **Resource Buffers** are strategically placed "alarm signals" designed to prompt key resources to prepare to start their next critical chain task, ensuring they are available when needed.

**The Mistake:** Treating Resource Buffers as time to "wait" rather than as a proactive alert mechanism. Another common error is failing to clearly identify the **bottleneck resource(s)** in the first place, or assigning them to non-critical tasks.

**The Fix:** Ensure the Resource Buffer trigger initiates a *proactive* check-in and preparation (e.g., getting materials ready, clearing their schedule). The most constrained resource(s)—the **drum** of the project—must be protected and kept fully utilized *only* on the critical chain or tasks immediately feeding it.

### 3\. Ignoring Buffer Management Metrics

CCPM's primary control mechanism is **Buffer Management**, which monitors the consumption of the Project Buffer relative to the percentage of the Critical Chain completed. This provides an early warning system for potential schedule overruns.

**The Mistake:** Failing to regularly monitor the **Buffer Consumption Chart** or, worse, having the team panic and accelerate work the moment *any* buffer is consumed, regardless of the buffer's color zone (Green, Yellow, Red). This leads to rushed work, errors, and an eventual return to task-level padding.

**The Fix:** Use the Buffer Consumption Chart to manage the project, not the individual tasks. The chart’s zones dictate the required action:

- **Green:** No action needed.
- **Yellow:** Prepare a recovery plan.
- **Red:** Execute the recovery plan.

### 4\. Punishing Early Finishes

In a traditional multi-tasking environment, finishing a task early often leads to the resource immediately starting the next task, regardless of whether that task is on the critical path.

**The Mistake:** Creating an environment where people feel they must "hoard" time or delay reporting an early finish for fear of being immediately reassigned or having their future estimates scrutinized. CCPM thrives on the **early finish of individual tasks** because those gains flow directly into the project buffer.

**The Fix:** **Celebrate early finishes!** Emphasize the importance of immediately passing the work to the next resource and *re-sequencing* the resource's subsequent tasks if possible. An early finish means the next person on the Critical Chain gets the work sooner—a true project win.

### 5\. Continuing Task-Level Multi-tasking

CCPM is founded on the principle of single-task focus to reduce the crippling effects of context-switching and task priority conflicts.

**The Mistake:** Even after implementing CCPM, resources (especially managers and functional leads) often continue to juggle multiple non-critical tasks simultaneously, which ultimately delays critical chain tasks. Interruptions are a major cause of buffer depletion.

**The Fix:** Enforce a strict **"Full-Kit, Full-Focus"** rule for Critical Chain tasks. A resource should not start a task unless all necessary prerequisites (the "Full Kit") are available, and once started, they should work on it *until completion* without switching to other projects or tasks ("Full Focus"). This dedicated effort dramatically cuts down task durations and increases quality.

By addressing these five common mistakes, your organization can move past simply adopting the terminology of CCPM and start realizing the immense benefits of faster project delivery and improved predictability. Sounds interesting? [Contact me](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/) for a quick free consultation
### AI in Project Management: A Tool, Not a Replacement for Critical Thinking
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/ai-in-project-management-a-tool-not-a-replacement-for-critical-thinking/
Last updated: 2025-10-15T09:15:43.000Z
The rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has sparked considerable debate across many industries, and project management is no exception. There's a prevailing discussion about AI's impact on how projects are planned, executed, and delivered. While some view AI as a potential disruptor that could replace human project managers, a more pragmatic perspective sees AI as a powerful tool designed to **support** project managers, not supersede them. The key to successful project management in the age of AI lies in integrating these advanced tools with timeless principles like critical thinking and holistic methodologies such as [Critical Chain Project Management ](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-project-management/)(CCPM).

> A more pragmatic perspective sees AI as a powerful tool designed to **support** project managers, not supersede them

### AI as an Enabler, Not a Decider

Imagine AI as an incredibly efficient assistant. It can sift through vast amounts of data, identify patterns, automate repetitive tasks, and even predict potential risks with remarkable accuracy.

- **Data Analysis and Insights:** AI can analyze historical project data to provide insights into realistic timelines, resource allocation, and budget estimations. This can help project managers make more informed decisions during the planning phase.
- **Risk Identification and Mitigation:** AI algorithms can monitor project progress in real-time, flagging potential deviations from the plan and identifying emerging risks long before they become critical. This proactive approach allows project managers to implement mitigation strategies sooner.
- **Automation of Routine Tasks:** From generating status reports to scheduling meetings and managing administrative tasks, AI can free up project managers from mundane duties, allowing them to focus on higher-value activities that require human assessment and interaction.

However, AI's output is based on data and algorithms: it lacks the nuanced understanding of human dynamics, stakeholder emotions, unforeseen external factors, and the ability to truly *reason* in complex, unpredictable situations. This is where critical thinking comes into play.

### The Indispensable Role of Critical Thinking

Even with the most sophisticated AI tools, the project manager remains the ultimate decision-maker. Critical thinking is the human element that brings context, assessment, and adaptability to the project.

- **Questioning Assumptions:** AI provides data-driven recommendations, but a critical-thinking project manager will question the underlying assumptions of that data, consider its limitations, and assess its relevance to the current project's unique circumstances.
- **Navigating Ambiguity:** Projects are inherently complex and often involve navigating ambiguous situations that AI cannot fully grasp. A project manager uses critical thinking to make sense of incomplete information, adapt to changing requirements, and find creative solutions to unforeseen problems.
- **Ethical Considerations and Stakeholder Management:** AI can optimize for efficiency, but it cannot account for ethical implications, navigate office politics, or effectively manage diverse stakeholder expectations and emotions. These are inherently human skills that require empathy, negotiation, and critical judgment.

### Critical Chain Project Management: A Holistic Approach

To truly leverage AI's capabilities while ensuring project success, project managers should adopt a holistic view, and methodologies like [Critical Chain Project Management](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/critical-chain-project-management/) (CCPM) offer a robust framework. CCPM, developed by Dr. Eliyahu Goldratt, focuses on managing project uncertainties by protecting the project's critical chain (the longest sequence of dependent tasks, considering resource availability) with buffers, rather than padding individual tasks.

- **Focus on the Critical Chain:** CCPM identifies the absolute longest path through a project, taking into account resource constraints. This allows AI to optimize resource allocation along the critical chain.
- **Strategic Buffers:** Instead of adding safety time to every task (which often leads to Parkinson's Law – work expanding to fill the time available), CCPM places strategic project buffers at the end of the critical chain and feeding buffers at points where non-critical chains merge into the critical chain. AI can help monitor buffer consumption rates, providing early warnings if the project is falling behind.
- **Resource Leveling:** CCPM emphasises resource leveling to prevent bottlenecks. AI can analyse resource availability and task dependencies to suggest optimal resource assignments and identify potential conflicts before they arise.
- **Holistic View of Dependencies:** CCPM encourages a system-wide view of the project, understanding how different tasks and resources interact. AI can enhance this by visualising complex interdependencies and predicting the ripple effect of changes.

By combining the data-driven power of AI with the strategic, holistic thinking of CCPM, project managers can achieve a synergistic effect. AI can provide the granular data and predictive analytics to inform buffer management and resource allocation within a CCPM framework. The project manager, equipped with critical thinking, can then interpret these insights, make informed decisions, and guide the project to a **successful conclusion**.

In conclusion, AI is not here to replace the project manager but to empower them. It's a sophisticated tool that, when operated by a critically thinking project manager using a holistic methodology like CCPM, can significantly enhance efficiency, reduce risks, and ultimately improve project success rates. The future of project management is not AI ***or*** human intelligence; it's a powerful collaboration between the two.
### Take back control of your projects, now!
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/riprendi-il-controllo-dei-tuoi-progetti-oggi-stesso/
Last updated: 2025-09-30T14:57:24.000Z
**Tired of delays, cost overruns, and missed goals?**  
It’s time to shake up the way you manage projects — together with us.

[Book your demo, now!](https://forms.gle/iAmEUNVZ9FayNxGt5?ref=menicucciassociati.com)

**What We Offer**

- **Proven Experience:** practical tips from real experts
- **Tested Strategies:** a tried-and-true method to run projects smoothly
- **Tailored Solutions:** consulting that fits your specific needs

**Why Choose Us?**

- **Better Efficiency:** streamline your processes and boost productivity
- **Lower Costs:** skip the common mistakes and save money
- **Peace of Mind:** manage your projects with confidence, from start to finish

👉 **Book your demo today!**  
See how Lynx can help you transform your project management approach: unlock your company’s potential and successfully deliver more projects with the same resources.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/08/identify-hidden-bottlenecks.gif) 

#### Lynx Scheduler CCPM

Easily identify your constraint, although hidden

[Book your demo](https://forms.gle/iAmEUNVZ9FayNxGt5?ref=menicucciassociati.com)
### Growing in a Sustainable and Profitable way
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/crescere-in-modo-sostenibile-e-profittevole/
Last updated: 2025-09-30T14:48:38.000Z
What do we mean by ‘sustainable’ and ‘profitable’ growth? Let's first distinguish between the two terms: “sustainability” refers to an organisation's ability to guide and control growth. In my experience, I have often seen organisations grow in an ‘uncontrolled’ manner, thereby creating the conditions for a crisis (insufficient capital, cash or other resources). The term “profitable”, on the other hand, refers to the ability to maintain a level of profit equal to or higher than the starting level: a company might consider significantly increasing its turnover by reducing the price of its products/services, but in this case, the level of profit would be affected, potentially leading to a business crisis.  
Putting the two concepts together, growth is sustainable and profitable when the organisation is able to drive the level of growth while maintaining control over its ability to generate profit.

📌

Putting the two concepts together, growth is sustainable and profitable when the organisation is **able to drive the level of growth* while **maintaining control over its ability to generate profit*

An organisation that wants to grow continuously over time (the red curve in the image below) in a sustainable and profitable manner will have to do so by carefully monitoring its “*stability*” (the green curve), i.e. maintaining control over resources and the ability to keep satisfying customers in terms of relationships, production and delivery.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/sketch1722437240688.png)

To leave a comment, register: it's free and you'll receive all my updates directly by email.
### The cost of missing items
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/il-prezzo-dei-mancanti/
Last updated: 2026-06-04T10:03:48.000Z
It often happens that you go to the supermarket to buy something specific and can't find it. It happens to me all the time... so today I was wondering: ‘How much do “missing” products affect turnover? And what is the impact of “slow-moving” items on margins?’  
Unfortunately, there are no official statistics on this issue: when you think about it, when does a shop assistant or salesperson ever bother to note that a customer has asked for a certain product and not found it? And, especially in large retail spaces (supermarkets, hypermarkets), it is not even certain that the staff will be aware of this: the customer will simply opt for a different product or go and look for it in another shop.

### The Traditional System (MIN/MAX)

However, estimates tell us that, on average, the number of “stockout” products, i.e. missing products, in a company can be calculated in a range between 10% and 25%, while the number of “slow-moving” products is around 30%.

💡

**Obviously, we cannot lump everything together, and clearly talking about the number of products is not the same as talking about value, but based on the percentages given, I think we can safely say that on average (again), considering missing products, a company's actual turnover represents about 80% of its potential turnover.*  
  
**This means that if the company had a turnover of £100 million, it could actually have a turnover of at least £125 million if it managed to eliminate the missing products. And it most likely also means that actual margin represents 80% of the potential margin, due to the proliferation of slow-moving products: if the same company in the example closed its financial statements with a gross margin of 10 million, that margin could potentially be 12.5 million, again assuming that it managed to eliminate slow-moving items.*

Companies tend to solve this problem using methods provided by ERP systems, for example by setting minimum (MIN) and maximum (MAX) quantities for a product, defining the *safety stock quantity*, the minimum order value and the supplier's lead time for delivery.

### The Bullwhip Effect

Unfortunately, the algorithms provided by ERP systems, although valid, are unable to take into account changes in the markets (consumers change their tastes and opinions) and often vendor policies are such that they encourage the accumulation of unsold products: discounts for larger batches, for full loads, canvas, campaigns and so on. Not to mention phenomena such as the “*bullwhip effect*”, masterfully described by Peter Senge in his book “[The Fifth Discipline](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The%5FFifth%5FDiscipline?ref=menicucciassociati.com)”, where a small but unforeseen variation in end-user demand has an exaggerated impact on upstream distribution channels.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/bullwhip.jpeg)

source: [https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/bullwhip-effect-hidden-lever-fmcg-profitability-yaser-mutaher](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/bullwhip-effect-hidden-lever-fmcg-profitability-yaser-mutaher?ref=menicucciassociati.com)

### The Pull System

So, is there a solution? [The answer is yes](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/servizi-per-la-supply-chain/), by changing the supply model and switching from a “push” system to a “pull” system: the “trick”, if you wish to name it so, is to shift the focus from the forecast (which is inherently unreliable) to actual consumption (which is in its nature accurate) and utilise an algorithm that allows you to calculate the ideal stock value, which, in turn, will be managed using a different criterion, subject to frequent recalculations (even daily) to understand:

- whether to reorder
- the reorder quantity
- the urgency of the reorder
- whether and how to change the stock value

For any further information, please use the comments section or [contact me](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/)... and don't forget to subscribe to my blog to receive all the updates directly in your inbox! 😊
### Overcoming inertia, the invisible enemy
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/superare-linerzia-la-nemica-invisibile/
Last updated: 2025-09-25T15:17:35.000Z
> Don't let inertia become your constraint

The last step of the 5FS cycle ([Five Focusing Process](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/five-focusing-steps-5fs/)), the process of continuous improvement of the Theory of Constraints, designed by the Israeli physicist Eli Goldratt, intends to remind us that inertia represents a great enemy: it is in the management of *constraints* (when a constraint is eliminated, in a process, a new constraint will appear elsewhere), but also in the management of **quality**, **computer** security... and also of our lives!

In these days I realized that the last post I wrote dates back to 2021, after which I let myself be "swapped" by inertia. Despite being an entrepreneur, in fact I turned all my attention to the inside, neglecting the market. This made me think that too often we all get caught up in the routine, even giving up *thinking* if there are areas where we can bring an objective improvement.

As a result, for my part I decided to renew the image of my site trying to make it more interactive and less "image site". I also promise to resume the publication of interesting articles (I hope) at least once a month.

And I hope that these few lines are a cue and encouragement for each of you, in the search for an area for improvement. *Don't let inertia become your constraint.*

You can leave a comment, if you want, or write me a few lines by email, even just to say hello: it will be a great pleasure 😉
### I’m going to join @TOCICO on September 29th for a LIVE webinar and Q&A.
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/im-going-to-join-tocico-on-september-29th-for-a-live-webinar-and-q-a/
Last updated: 2024-07-26T15:30:39.000Z
I’m going to join @TOCICO on September 29th for a LIVE webinar and Q&A. This session aims to open a discussion on #TheoryofConstraints knowledge, revisit and present a synthesis and distillation of what they have practiced and known over the years.

Sanjeev Gupta is seeking feedback from TOC Experts. He believes that formalising the ideas of flow-based scheduling is necessary for their wider adoption.

If you want to give your input, register now! #tocot #TOCwebinar [https://www.tocico.org/events/EventDetails.aspx?id=1553709&group=](https://www.tocico.org/events/EventDetails.aspx?id=1553709&group=&ref=menicucciassociati.com)
### Create Successful Projects with the CCPM
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/creare-progetti-di-successo-con-il-ccpm/
Last updated: 2025-09-25T15:53:48.000Z
Number 19 of the SFC magazine ([https://lnkd.in/dFVXUwK](https://lnkd.in/dFVXUwK?ref=macs.mymagic.page)) has been published where you can read my paper "Creating Successful Projects with the CCPM".  
ASFIM is a non-profit organization that brings together specialists in corporate finance and management control.  
CCPM (Critical Chain Project Management) is the innovative method that allows you to conclude **more** projects, respecting the established **time** and the allocated **budget**.  
Good reading!

#theoryofconstraints #criticalchain #projectmanagement
### Continuous Improvement — part #4
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/il-miglioramento-continuo-parte-4/
Last updated: 2025-09-30T14:50:26.000Z
Let's go with a concrete example. In [our goals map](https://blog.menicucci.co/il-miglioramento-continuo-parte-2-1eefd4bb47c0?ref=macs.mymagic.page) we have established that the first goal, the main result we want to achieve is

> Maximize cash availability, today and tomorrow

And to achieve this result, we must necessarily significantly improve our process by "grassing" the intermediate objectives that we have identified:

1. Maximize throughput
2. Minimize stocks
3. Minimize expired
4. Take advantage of the monetary cycle

For those of you who are not familiar with the term "throughput", I remind you that it is a concept developed by Dr. Eli Goldratt is illustrated in the book *The Haystack Syndrome* (1990). **Throughput Accounting** — the accounting for throughput — was born as opposed to the traditional “industrial accounting” which, as explained by many studies, has progressively lost the ability to provide adequate information for the decision-making process, in particular due to:

- Of the allocation of overhead and labor costs to products
- Of the practice of considering warehouse stocks as "profits"

How does it work? Throughput Accounting is based on 3 measurement elements, amply sufficient to make daily business-related decisions. The three measures are: throughput (T), investments (I) and operating expenses (OE); in order we could define them contribution margin (T), investments (T) and operating costs (OE).

Throughput can be defined simply as the difference between sales revenues and ***totally variable*** costs related to what is sold. "I", on the other hand, measures all the money, the cash, as long as it remains invested in the company (raw materials, goods, accessories but also machines, plants, buildings); finally, the operating costs (OE) are all the costs that the company incurs, without distinction between variable and/or fixed, which ***are not*** related to the production and sale of the individual product, and which are necessary to make the company "work".

Having said this (necessary) premise, let's go back to us: at a time like this, when in addition to the problems caused by the market or internal inefficiencies, those due to the COVID-19 emergency overlap, is ***the cash register*** our "constraint"?

According to [Ravi Gilani](https://www.linkedin.com/in/ravigilani/?lipi=urn%3Ali%3Apage%3Ad%5Fflagship3%5Fpulse%5Fread%3Bgc04aeYOTU%2B1TQUwzwVXgQ%3D%3D&licu=urn%3Ali%3Acontrol%3Ad%5Fflagship3%5Fpulse%5Fread-read%5Fprofile&ref=macs.mymagic.page), one of the world's leading Theory of Constraints experts, we are in the presence of a "cash constraint" when the OTIF (On Time In Full) rate is less than 95% and suppliers do not deliver regularly because the company struggles to honor its commitments.

> Poor cash \*does not\* constitute a cash constraint.

A note: OTIF (sometimes also DOTIF or DIFOT) is a performance indicator applicable to virtually all sectors, industry trade or services, and consists of two elements: On Time, which measures the ability to meet the delivery dates requested by its customers, and In Full, which measures the ability to deliver the entire quantity requested. Unfortunately, most companies either do not consider these measures, or "bend" them to their own intentions. It happened to me several times, after explaining this indicator, to ask: so, what is your punctuality rate? Invariably the answer is “excellent”! Or "excellent", only to then discover that when it is not possible to deliver by a certain date, the customer is called to inform him of the new delivery date **that the company itself has determined**!!

So, to summarize: our OTIF serves to evaluate the goodness of the process. If this indicator is less than 95% and is combined with difficulties in honoring supply debts, we can assume that cash represents a constraint. Conversely, the fact that the company may be in a condition of low liquidity, in itself, does not constitute a "cash constraint", although there is a good chance that - if you do not take countermeasures, it becomes one.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-0ovlq0lsxho6nqgxlhx13q-jpeg.jpg)

Ontime — Photo by [Phil Desforges](https://unsplash.com/@storybyphil?utm%5Fsource=unsplash&utm%5Fmedium=referral&utm%5Fcontent=creditCopyText) on [Unsplash](https://unsplash.com/s/photos/ontime?utm%5Fsource=unsplash&utm%5Fmedium=referral&utm%5Fcontent=creditCopyText)

But let's go back to our process: the **first step** is to "identify" our constraint, that is, the factor that most limits the system. In the case in question, assuming that the cash register is not yet a problem, we could intuitively verify that our constraint is **the market**: we have sufficient production capacity, but not enough orders. In this hypothesis, the **second step** \- deciding how to maximize the constraint - becomes obvious: to maximize the cash (our primary objective) you must arrive at an OTIF of 100%! We can't afford to "waste" anything, because the slightest delay would make us lose further opportunities.

The **third step** (subordinating each decision to the previous one) is probably the most difficult, both to understand and to put into practice. In the case in question we identified the market as a constraint and decided that to make the most of this constraint we must not miss a single opportunity, consequently we must also establish what to do with other resources, those that \*do not\* represent a constraint; abandoned to themselves, or not managed correctly, after a while problems could be created. Therefore, the most logical thing is to make sure that these are enslaved to the complete exploitation of the constraint resource. This, just to give a few examples, means that the OTIF must be measured, which \*should not\* be produced more than the constraint can sustain — we are in the presence of low liquidity, remember?, that orders should be processed according to a very precise priority scheme.

Once the process is stabilized (and the OTIF rate is presumably improved) you can think about the **fourth step**, namely how to further improve the performance of our constraint. In this case, for example, you could think of increasing the sales force, or approaching different markets such as, for example, abroad. Our hypothetical entrepreneur should, however, refrain from thinking about solving problems by jumping directly to this step because, think about it: in a situation like the one just described, a further weak link would be added to the chain of business processes, contributing in fact to the deterioration of performance - an effect that may not occur in the very short term, but certainly destined to occur in the long term.

![5 Focusing Steps or Process of On-Going Improvement (POOGI), serve for driving on-going improvement (www.tocinstitute.org)](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-el1vcv8xecfnspeoaf09da-jpeg.jpg)

il Processo 5 Focusing Steps su tocinstitute.org

Let's summarize. Our primary goal is to maximize cash availability and to do this we have identified 4 critical factors: (1) maximize throughput, (2) minimize stocks, (3) minimize expired and (4) take advantage of the monetary cycle. With reference to the critical factor “throughput” — and the process that generates it, we applied the 5 focusing steps (5 Focusing Steps sounds a bit better!):

- Identifying the limiting factor in the market
- Deciding that to exploit this constraint as much as possible it is necessary to maximize the OTIF rate (On Time, In Full)
- Subordinating every other resource to when decided
- Evaluating later (only after having "stabilized" the system) further ways to get even more from our constraint

If you think about it, this process will allow us, in addition to maximizing the thoughput (with the resources currently available), also to contribute to the achievement of the second critical factor (minimizing stocks) and, at least in theory, if customers are satisfied, even expired ones could be reduced. In any case, the amazing effect of a process like this is the ability to lay out all the excess capacity available to a company and this is a really strategically important element, because it will allow — subsequently — also to think about how to meet the critical factor (4), that is, to take advantage of the monetary cycle.

The **last step** is also, in some respects, the most important and suggests *starting over*, because continuous improvement is not an "event" but an infinite process.

As always, for any comments or further information, [we are here to help! Feel free](https://www.menicucci.co/contatti?ref=macs.mymagic.page) to [contact us](https://www.menicucci.co/contatti?ref=macs.mymagic.page) and schedule a preliminary meeting, no strings attached.
### Continuous Improvement  —  part #3
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/il-miglioramento-continuo-parte-3/
Last updated: 2025-09-30T14:52:09.000Z
Brief summary of the previous episodes: using a map of objectives we defined what results we want to pursue, as a company, and using cause-effect correlations we created a map of problems and identified the actual causes that negatively affect our system.

Attention: when we talk about "system" we can refer to the company as a whole, but also to any of the "sub-sets" (processes) that compose it. For example, the sales process can actually be considered a system, as well as the order management process or the logistics process. I say this because obviously the analysis of the symptoms and the relative map of the problems can be referred to the individual process, with the only warning of maintaining an overview referring to the “global” objectives.

It may seem like a contradiction, considering that most companies spend about 1/4 of their fiscal year on [budgeting ](https://blog.menicucci.co/il-budget-%C3%A8-morto-parte-1-af1d68f17490?ref=macs.mymagic.page)with **specific** goals for each department. Unfortunately, contrary to what you might think, maximizing the results of individual departments is not the same as maximizing the business objective.

Strange? Let's think about it and make some considerations; if we accept the fact that a company is made up of interdependent processes, we can imagine it as a chain: a series of links (the processes) that all work together aimed at a common result (the corporate mission). And, as is well known, if we subject a chain to stress (i.e. if we put it under tension) it will give way at a specific point — its weakest link.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-snopnv9fyqvpuyermvmcig.png)

Photo by [Yucel Moran](https://unsplash.com/@yucelmoran?utm%5Fsource=unsplash&utm%5Fmedium=referral&utm%5Fcontent=creditCopyText) on [Unsplash](https://unsplash.com/s/photos/chain?utm%5Fsource=unsplash&utm%5Fmedium=referral&utm%5Fcontent=creditCopyText)

Now it is clear that optimizing the performance of every single ring is a "**non sense**" and that instead we should strive in every way to know which is the weak link of our system, also because this represents the "lever point" thanks to which we can significantly increase performance.

So if the "global" goals are clear, consistent and valid for all processes, and we have identified the causes that afflict the system, now is the time to introduce and use a specific tool to treat the constraint (the weak link) that we have identified. ToC suggests using a process called 5FS or Five Focusing Steps, a process that includes the following five steps:

- Identify the constraint, the factor that limits system performance
- Decide how to maximize, how to make the most of the constraint
- Subject each decision to the previous one
- Raise the constraint
- Start over, preventing inertia from becoming the new constraint

As always, [we are available ](https://www.menicucci.co/contatti?ref=macs.mymagic.page)to help your **people** modify the **processes** to increase the **performance** of your company. To the next episode, with the 5FS cycle!
### Striving for Lost Sustainability
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/alla-ricerca-della-sostenibilit-c3-a0-perduta/
Last updated: 2025-09-30T14:53:08.000Z
Before continuing on the path of Continuous Improvement, I would like to share a reflection on this process; in fact, someone might wonder **how helpful** it can be to talk about continuous improvement in such a messy period.

So let's try to get a picture of the situation, from the point of view of companies, using a "cause-effect" diagram:

Reading this diagram, from bottom to the other with the "if... then" mode, it becomes immediately clear and unequivocal that if a company **does not have a** solid financial foundation, the risk of being unable to restart the activity is very high. How, then, can such a situation be avoided or, at least, mitigated its effects? The answer, of course, lies in

> reconsidering your business model, seriously evaluate competitiveness, focus on improving performance and sustainability.

Technically speaking, sustainability is the characteristic of a process or state that can be maintained at a certain level indefinitely ([Wikipedia](https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sostenibilit%C3%A0?ref=macs.mymagic.page)). Consequently, it can be said that to be **sustainable** a certain process must maintain a certain "*state*" over time.

If we look at this definition from an environmental point of view, the term sustainability therefore refers to the ability to maintain current resources, ensuring that they are not exhausted — which also applies to companies. If, on the other hand, we take into account **business continuity**, a sustainable company is one capable of maintaining its position in the market *over time*. And again, the tool to use is continuous improvement.

Not improving one's position, constantly, even slightly, — in terms of competitiveness, knowledge, ability to innovate, adaptation to changes in the market, means leaving room for competition and giving up market shares. Maybe not right away, but globalization is a pervasive phenomenon and affects all sectors without distinction (Amazon docet).

To close the topic, if there is a good time to talk about continuous improvement and seriously think about taking such a path, it is just this. If you are convinced, head [to my post about the subject](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/il-miglioramento-continuo/) and, by the way, best wishes for a happy Easter to everyone!
### Continuous Improvement — part #2
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/il-miglioramento-continuo-parte-2/
Last updated: 2025-09-30T14:58:52.000Z
In the [previous post ](https://blog.menicucci.co/il-miglioramento-continuo-da0c3652f3c4?ref=macs.mymagic.page)I stated that continuous improvement is *a recurring process aimed at improving the performance of the company*. By further developing this concept, it can be said that to produce an improvement it is necessary to **change** something: the Map of Objectives that I introduced [in the first part ](https://blog.menicucci.co/il-miglioramento-continuo-da0c3652f3c4?ref=macs.mymagic.page)serves, precisely, to define **what to change** and, above all, what **not to change.** It may seem paradoxical but, if you think about it, simply preventing us from doing what should not be done is a "change" that produces improvement effects.

From this point of view, the Goal Map represents an extraordinary strategic tool; in fact, if well built, it allows you to establish (and communicate) with extreme clarity **what** you want to achieve and **what** you need to change (or improve, or introduce) to get it. Just look at the following example:

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2025/09/1_WnCkENNHujKoTXe5jlHp0Q.webp)

Fig. 1 - Mappa degli Obiettivi (un caso reale)

by going through it is immediately clear, for example, that submitting a purchase order because a supplier proposes a special campaign is an operation to be carefully evaluated, as well as keeping obsolete products in stock or producing what is not strictly necessary.

Once the objectives to be pursued *as a company*, i.e. as a single entity, have been clarified, the next logical step becomes to understand what are the obstacles that prevent its completion. In this regard, ToC provides us another tool that is very useful and powerful: the Problem Map.

But first let's take a step back: as generally known, a business company can be considered a [**dynamic and complex system**](https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gino%5FZappa?ref=macs.mymagic.page#Il%5Fsistema%5Fazienda%5Ffra%5Funitariet%C3%A0%5Fsistemica%5Fe%5Fdinamismo). Consequently, we can consider the main assumption of the Theory of Constraints valid, i.e. any system, at a given time, is limited by very few factors (sometimes only one).

Well: the Problem Map (or CRT, [*Current Reality Tree*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current%5Freality%5Ftree%5F%28theory%5Fof%5Fconstraints%29?ref=macs.mymagic.page)) is a powerful tool to verbalise and understand the cause-effect relationships that exist in the system that you want to improve; in practice, it allows those who do the analysis to examine the main "symptoms" that impact the system and, starting from these, based on **sufficiency** logic, highlight the dependencies (in some cases not exactly obvious or immediately perceptible), to come to define the true causes. To use a metaphor, it's a bit like being a doctor who, by collecting information about the patient's symptoms, forms an overall picture that leads him to formulate his diagnosis.

The logic we apply, as mentioned, is a logic of sufficiency in that a certain event, a given entity can derive from one or more causes, which act separately or together. To give an example:

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-huwz2rro0gbshl0ohmdgaq.png)

Fig. 2 — Example of causes able to impact a system separately

As shown in Figure 2, the entity "the margin has decreased significantly" can be caused by any of the 3 causes, regardless of the others. In the case shown in figure 3 below, however, the entity "we often deliver late" is the result of the **combined** action of B and C. To clarify: the fact of often changing the priorities of orders, in itself, does not necessarily produce as a consequence "we often deliver late"; but if we combine with the first cause the fact that "Murphy" (to learn more about the term "Murphy" [click here](https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legge%5Fdi%5FMurphy?ref=macs.mymagic.page)) usually strikes without warning, then the two causes **together** become capable of producing, *inevitably*, the observed effect.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-5xoh_x1-eyxilloxjxpsyq.png)

Fig. 3 — Esempio di cause combinate

Back to the topic, the CRT is a very valuable tool that allows us to understand **where** to act, avoiding us to disperse energy and resources in an attempt to improve our system: we start with a list of ***unwanted effects*** that we will then link together, pushing us deeply towards the few factors that, as mentioned, are responsible for most of the effects. Here is an example, in which you can see, in red, the side effects (UDE) related to each other.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-5lcuybya6pcpswyeryxadw.png)

Fig. 4 — Esempio di CRT (Mappa dei Problemi)

To learn more, do not hesitate to contact us [by clicking here](https://www.menicucci.co/contatti?ref=macs.mymagic.page). And if you want to continue on our path of continuous improvement, keep following us. See you next post!
### The Continuous Improvement
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/il-miglioramento-continuo/
Last updated: 2025-09-30T15:03:44.000Z
As I mentioned in [my previous post](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/indicatori-di-allerta-e-covid-19/), warning indicators are definitely useful, but they’re really just a list of “symptoms.” At this point, it becomes crucial to analyze those symptoms to uncover their real causes and figure out what actions can fix them—or at least reduce their negative impact.

This is where the most important process for a company’s life comes in: **continuous improvement**. So, what exactly is it? The UNI EN ISO 9000:2015 standard (Quality Management Systems — Fundamentals and Vocabulary) defines it as:

> “A recurring activity aimed at increasing the ability to meet requirements”

If we break down this definition, we see that:

1. It’s a **recurring** activity, so it should be done regularly.
2. It’s meant to **increase**, that is, improve something.
3. Specifically, it improves the ability to **meet requirements** — meaning the company’s skill or capacity to respond to the needs of its target market, i.e., its clients.

If this ability is lacking, or reduced due to inefficiencies (internal or compared to competitors), it’s clear the company will suffer, weakening its position in the market and, ultimately, its ability to make profits.

To sum it up, we can say that **continuous improvement is a recurring process aimed at boosting a company’s performance**. Too much? Check out the image below: it shows a goals map where the box **“Making Profits (today and tomorrow)”** is the company’s main objective, while the three boxes below roughly represent the critical success factors for any company in the “profit” sector.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-6xnq7kznzaban80l93iwig.png)

Obiettivo principale dell’impresa e i suoi Fattori Critici di Successo

The **goals map** is the first step in starting a continuous improvement process. As Seneca said, *“There is no favorable wind for the sailor who doesn’t know where to go.”*

So first, let’s think about what we want to achieve and make a list. By reviewing what we’ve written and trying to relate the elements to each other, we’ll eventually define a map — a tool that’s extremely useful. It can help to:

- Communicate objectives clearly
- Set the right priorities
- Give everyone a big-picture view so they understand if — and how much — their work contributes to the “common good”
- Focus attention on what’s been done and what still needs to be done

I encourage you to try drawing your own goals map before we move on to mapping out problems as the next step in our improvement journey.

For more details or to learn more, feel free to [contact us](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/) for a free preliminary consultation.
### Alert indicators and Covid 19
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/indicatori-di-allerta-e-covid-19/
Last updated: 2025-09-30T15:36:55.000Z
How long will the state of emergency we’re experiencing last? And what impact will it have on the health of our companies, especially micro and small-to-medium businesses?

Regarding the first question, in my view, forecasts are a lot like the weather: it’s hard to say what it will be like a month from now, but easier (and more reliable) to predict tomorrow. The best we can do is trust the authorities, follow their models, and stick to the rules to shorten the time it takes to return to normal. That’s really the maximum contribution each of us can make.

When it comes to the health of companies, however, the ball is — so to speak — in our court. Beyond any government support, it’s up to us ***to act*** to prevent our businesses from going into crisis, whenever possible.

So, when can a company be considered “[in crisis](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisi%5Faziendale?ref=menicucciassociati.com)”? If you’ve taken any business course in the last 20 years, you’ve probably heard that the Chinese ideogram for “crisis” combines the meanings of “change” and “opportunity.” Romantic, yes, but not very practical. In the Western world, especially in recent years, the word “**crisis**” for a company usually means one thing: the company **can no longer meet its obligations**.

Crises can arise from many causes, both internal and external, sometimes in combination. That’s why, to detect early warning signs and prevent negative effects, the first step is to set up a **management control system** that allows you to continuously monitor the company’s vital parameters, whether internal or external.

Today, a company’s survival depends heavily on its ability to **“learn continuously”**: to understand its clients and competitors, and to constantly check its ability to meet — or even exceed — customer expectations.

As we said, the company structure must be able to sense and distinguish the symptoms of a potential crisis, first identifying its type: is it caused by inefficiency or overproduction? Symptoms differ depending on the type of problem.

- **Crisis from inefficiency** occurs when a company has lower margins than competitors. It typically affects economic indicators first, which can later influence financial metrics.
- **Crisis from overproduction** shows up as slower inventory turnover, significant stock increases, and/or longer cash cycles. This is especially critical for products subject to obsolescence, like electronics or food. It can be even worse if the company’s products lose appeal compared to market alternatives, for example, imported products.

Researchers have long studied whether financial data can help predict a crisis. Studies dating back to the late 1970s show that insolvency can be detected in advance if you use the right tools. Some key indicators include:

1. **Net tangible assets vs. total assets:** below 5% signals a critical situation; the lower the ratio, the higher the risk of default.
2. **Debt ratio:** net debt to total assets above 85% indicates high financial risk.
3. **Cash flow vs. total debt:** as the saying goes, *cash is king*. Values near zero or negative signal an ongoing crisis.
4. **Interest expenses vs. revenue:** banks monitor this; high ratios indicate worsening financial health.
5. **Revenue growth rate:** too fast (in startups) or sharp losses are warning signs — like oil level or engine temperature in a car.

Even if these aren’t all listed in the “[Corporate Crisis and Insolvency Code](https://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/2019/02/14/19G00007/sg?ref=menicucciassociati.com)”, they’re extremely useful to assess a company’s health. Of course, this assumes financial data is up-to-date (my recommendation is to have the previous month’s data available by the 20th of the current month).

Taking a step back, I mentioned that the first thing to do is set up a monitoring system. To use a metaphor, this phase is like a medical anamnesis — essentially, studying the symptoms.

The next step is setting up a **continuous improvement system**, which I’ll cover in my next post.

To learn more, just [click here](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/).
### Time is the ultimate scarce (and non-renewable) resource
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/il-tempo-c3-a8-la-risorsa-scarsa-e-non-rinnovabile-per-eccellenza-vale-per-le-persone-come-per-le/
Last updated: 2025-09-30T15:36:07.000Z
Time is the ultimate scarce(and **non-renewable**)resource — for both people and organizations. That’s why making the most of the time available is crucial in any continuous improvement strategy. Whether it’s shortening the sales cycle, speeding up production, or compressing design timelines, **speed is key** to boosting profits and gaining a competitive edge.

---

### Completing Projects on Time and Within Budget

According to statistics, **97%** of companies **consider Project Management critical** to their business and success. Yet, according to the Project Management Institute’s 2016 annual survey, **only one in two projects was completed on time and within the planned budget!**

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-husqkk6mxwg_3yhobhal6a.png)

Our service is based on **Critical Chain Project Management (CCPM)**, a project planning and management method developed by Israeli physicist Eliyahu Goldratt. It helps companies **dramatically improve performance**, whether managing a single project or multiple projects at once.

### Completing Orders as Quickly as Possible to Maximize Profit Flow

Companies that produce **make-to-order (MTO)** often struggle to meet delivery dates. Even those producing **make-to-stock (MTS)** face challenges — they frequently deal with stock-outs on one hand and an increase in slow-moving products on the other.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1--qko8unukyifcndqb0wypw.png)

*Fig. 1: sometimes demand exceeds offer*

In a situation like this, companies can benefit from **implementing a production planning and control system that’s different from the current one** — one that uses a **PULL logic instead of PUSH**. This approach treats the market as a key “limiting” factor in the system (see fig. 1) and, as a result, helps **optimize production (or distribution) flow** while minimizing the uncertainty and variability in the process.

For more details, [**click here**](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/)or leave a comment **— no obligation!**
### For many companies, inventory is one area where there’s plenty of room for improvement
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/il-magazzino-rappresenta-per-molte-aziende-unarea-di-notevole-potenziale-miglioramento/
Last updated: 2025-09-30T15:41:05.000Z
For many companies, **inventory** is an area with significant (potential) for improvement. Whether it’s a manufacturing company or a distributor, **increasing product turnover** can have a big impact on the bottom line — both in terms of costs and revenues.

On the cost side, it can help solve space issues, reduce tied-up capital (working capital), and even *lower tax exposure* — since the tax authorities treat inventory as potential income. On the revenue side, it’s clear that **stock-outs** directly lead to missed sales.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-m94qup0a2be20lkzzt5ltq.png)

And the impact can be substantial: moving from an average turnover of 6 times a year to 12 could, depending on revenue and gross margin, result in a very pleasant surprise.

Our methodology involves analyzing the process from a **systemic perspective** (see image), focusing on cause-and-effect relationships, and then identifying the most suitable solution. This approach delivers **immediate results** while laying the foundation for a **continuous improvement process**.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-r5jb988jkqmeq4e0geiqsw.png)

“The rights measure and when” by Henry Fitzhugh Camp — 2017 TOCICO International Conference

Want to learn more and see how your company could benefit? [Click here](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/) — no strings attached
### Early Signs Your Business Might Be in Trouble
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/segnali-precoci-di-crisi-aziendale/
Last updated: 2025-09-30T15:44:18.000Z
Is it possible to predict a business crisis? When is a company actually in crisis Despite the fact that the Chinese character for “crisis” carries both the meanings of *change* and *opportunity*, in the Western world — especially in recent years — the word “crisis” in relation to a company usually has only one meaning: the business is no longer able to meet its obligations.

This situation can arise from many causes, both internal and external, sometimes even combined. That’s why, to detect early warning signs and prevent negative consequences, it’s essential to have a **management control system** in place that allows you to monitor a company’s vital parameters — both internal and external — at all times.

Today, a company’s survival depends heavily on its ability to **learn continuously**: to understand its customers, keep an eye on the competition, and constantly assess its ability to meet — and ideally exceed — customer expectations.

As we mentioned, the company structure must be able to **perceive and distinguish the symptoms of a potential crisis**, starting by identifying its type: is it caused by inefficiency or overproduction? Clearly, the symptoms differ depending on the problem.

- **Inefficiency crisis** occurs when a company’s margins are lower than the competition. This typically impacts economic indicators first, which can later affect financial metrics.
- **Overproduction crisis** shows up as slower inventory turnover, increased stock levels, or longer cash cycles. This can worsen if products are prone to obsolescence. It can be even more severe if the company’s products have lost market appeal, for example in favor of similar products from abroad.

Researchers have studied whether financial data can help anticipate a crisis. Numerous studies, starting in the late 1970s, show that insolvency can be detected in advance using the right tools. Some key indicators include:

1. **Net tangible assets vs. total assets:** below 5% signals a critical situation — the lower the ratio, the higher the risk of default.
2. **Debt ratio:** net debt to total assets above 85% indicates a high probability of financial crisis.
3. **Cash flow vs. total debt:** as the saying goes, *cash is king*. Values near zero or negative signal an ongoing crisis.
4. **Interest expenses vs. revenue:** banks monitor this; high ratios indicate deteriorating financial health.
5. **Revenue growth rate:** too rapid (in young companies or startups) or steep losses are warning signs — like oil level or engine temperature in a car.

Sometimes, it’s enough to pause and rethink your market strategy to get back on track more motivated and effective. Other times, you need a credible **industrial plan** for the future.Per saperne di più
### Why Managing Performance Matters
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/limportanza-di-gestire-le-performance/
Last updated: 2025-09-30T15:46:28.000Z
**Performance Management** — that is, managing performance and results — is important because it:

- keeps you informed about how the business is doing
- supports decision-making
- helps implement strategy by actively involving the entire organization

Every company ultimately has the goal of **making money**, or more precisely, ensuring adequate returns over time for owners and stakeholders. To do this, it must combine **effectiveness and efficiency** — that is, **doing the right things and doing them well**.

- **Doing the right things** means aligning everyone in the company with the vision, mission, and values that guide every activity.
- **Doing things well** means maintaining a **triple balance**: economic, financial, and asset-related.

Naturally, achieving and maintaining this balance is **complex**, relying on a continuous cycle of **planning, execution, monitoring, and adjustment**. Ideally, companies would create an environment where information is **shared and accessible**, creativity and innovation are encouraged, governance is based on **clear objectives, values, and boundaries**, resources are available when and where needed, and control is based on **key market and competitor-driven indicators** rather than internal negotiation.

Clearly, adopting a proper **performance management system** allows constant monitoring of both financial and non-financial goals — such as **customer satisfaction, number of complaints, or the percentage of orders shipped within X hours**.

In short, it’s about **organizing the company to navigate today’s turbulent, hyper-competitive markets** and increase the chances of success. But how many companies do you really know that operate this way?

To learn more, leave a comment or **contact us for a free preliminary consultation**.
### How costs change — and why it matters
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/dinamiche-dei-costi-come-cambiano-e-perch-c3-a9/
Last updated: 2025-09-30T15:49:16.000Z
To survive in today’s **harsh and cutthroat market**, you have to pay attention to everything. One thing often overlooked by business owners and management of small and medium-sized companies is the **shift in the factors that drive business costs**.

If you think about it, you’ll quickly realize that the main **cost driver** today is no longer sales volume. For many years, this was the key factor influencing costs. Nowadays, relying on it alone can be misleading because it **doesn’t account for a crucial factor: complexity**.

Complexity can raise transaction costs in very different ways, even if sales volumes stay the same, affecting overall profitability. For example, consider the cost of raw materials (or goods), the classic variable cost:

- There’s a big difference between sourcing from a single supplier versus multiple suppliers
- Order size can make a difference
- The delivery method and location can improve or worsen purchasing conditions

What’s even more concerning is that **complexity also affects fixed costs**. These costs rise as complexity increases. For example, if your purchasing team has to manage suppliers both in Italy and abroad, you’ll need the **right people and skills**, which clearly raises structural costs.

Complexity has become an integral part of production. Just a few years ago, production was mostly **standardized**, so sales volume was the main cost driver. Today, the trend is towards **more customized products**. Take the automotive industry: Ford once said, *“You can choose any color, as long as it’s black.”* Now, we see nearly unlimited customization, where each model can be almost unique. And since products often come with associated services, **unit costs increasingly reflect customer demands**.

In this context, **accurately determining contribution margin** is essential to evaluate whether a company (or individual product/service) can generate income — and ultimately survive in the long term.

To learn more, leave a comment or [**contact us**](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/)for a free preliminary consultation.
### 5 Key Elements to Profit from Change
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/gli-unici-a-cui-piace-il-cambiamento-sono-i-bambini-che-hanno-fatto-pip-c3-ac/
Last updated: 2025-09-30T15:53:16.000Z
> The only ones who like change are kids on an adventure

Così, più o meno, affermava la straordinaria [Maria Ludovica Lombardi](http://www.varvelli.com/chi-siamo/maria-ludovica-lombardi-varvelli?ref=menicucciassociati.com) said in a training course I attended a few years ago. But since **change is the only constant**, it’s better to know how to handle it than just endure it.

Looking around, you’ll notice that — despite crises — some companies thrive. The ones that succeed are the companies that best understand their customers’ needs. They set a general course — a route — and adjust it over time depending on the market and circumstances.

So, what are the key points behind their success? Here are at least five:

1. **Set a clear direction, but stay flexible:** Successful companies have a clear vision of the future and how they plan to satisfy customers and stakeholders. Clear, shared objectives and values help everyone make the right decisions. At the same time, these companies constantly review results and check if they match the desired future.
2. **Step into the customer’s shoes:** Understand how customers use your products, why they buy them, and talk to them often. Never lose touch with reality!
3. **Develop alternatives:** More and more companies experiment with multiple options at once to see what works. Small tests with different approaches help identify the best way to tackle a problem.
4. **Use technology to boost collaboration:** Whether it’s teamwork among colleagues or engaging customers via focus groups, surveys, or other tools, technology now allows companies to speed up processes and achieve significant cost savings with reasonable investment.
5. **Set up a management control system:** Staying on course requires two things: knowing where you are and having the right tools. This is particularly strategic because it lets you **see the company as a system** and continuously monitor its “vital signs.”

For more details, don’t hesitate to [**contact us**](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/contact-us/)by phone or email, or leave a comment.
### Il budget è morto? (parte 2)
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/il-budget-c3-a8-morto-parte-2/
Last updated: 2025-09-12T14:27:35.000Z
Nel mio precedente post “[Il budget è morto? (parte 1)](https://blog.menicucci.co/il-budget-%C3%A8-morto-parte-1-af1d68f17490?ref=menicucciassociati.com#.oe0jfy5ya)” ho evidenziato come il budget, lo strumento di pianificazione principale della stragrande maggioranza delle aziende, abbia perso di efficacia rispetto a mercati sempre più globalizzati e iper competitivi, arrivando addirittura a costituire una barriera alla crescita, alla coltivazione della relazione di lungo termine con i Clienti e un limite alla creatività e iniziativa personale.

Abbiamo visto, però, che un gruppo di aziende, diverse fra loro per dimensione, localizzazione geografica e settore di mercato, hanno iniziato a “sistematizzare” un certo *modus operandi* ([**beyond budgeting**](http://bbrt.org/?ref=menicucciassociati.com)**)** che più che la ricerca di efficienza, privilegia la gestione della complessità attraverso 12 principi, finalizzati a una *deregulation*, cioè al trasferimento delle decisioni dal centro alla periferia e alla ricerca di una maggiore flessibilità aziendale.

Tutto questo, sostanzialmente, si basa su:

- **Rolling forecast**, per sviluppare piani di previsione continui, ad esempio basati su 3–4 periodi consuntivi e 8–9 periodi previsionali
- [**Balanced scorecard**](http://www.blackstarconsulting.it/2013/08/la-balanced-scorecard/?ref=menicucciassociati.com), che permette di mappare gli obiettivi strategici, supportandone il coordinamento e il raggiungimento
- **Activity Based Costing**, per fornire una valutazione delle attività effettivamente svolte ed evidenziare costi “nascosti” all’interno dei processi aziendali

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-h9dujimmldotodkvho8u-q.png)

Fra le aziende pioniere di questo nuovo corso vi è la **Svenska Handelsbanken** (SHB), che rappresenta un vero caso di successo: l’obiettivo strategico principale di SHB è di ottenere un *Return On Equity* superiore a quello ottenuto dalle media di banche comparabili in Europa e Scandinavia, obiettivo raggiunto grazie a:

1. Decentramento
2. Relazione con i Cienti
3. Costi più bassi della concorrenza

Da oltre 30 anni SHB rappresenta un modello di eccellenza, fra le banche europee, ottenendo le migliori performance su tutti gli indicatori economici e non (ROE, Utili per azione, rapporto costi/ricavi, soddisfazione dei Clienti).

L’implementazione dei principi del **beyond budgeting** hanno permesso, dunque, la creazione di un circolo virtuoso (fattore comune a tutte le aziende che usano tale metodica) dove:

- SHB è la prima scelta per i laureati svedesi: un’azienda dove il turnover impiegatizio è il più basso del settore, dove l’ambiente è stimolante e le persone sono incentivate ad assumersi personalmente le responsabilità grazie alla libertà di gestire la propria attività/reparto.
- SHB è una delle aziende preferite dai Clienti, grazie a:
- **Qualità della relazione coi clienti**: eccellenza, di anno in anno, nel livello di soddisfazione della clientela; numero bassissimo di reclami; monitoraggio costante dei clienti acquisiti/persi
- **Eccellenza operativa**: SHB ha i costi più bassi di qualsiasi altra banca europea; il tasso più basso di crediti inesigibili;
- **Innovazione**: SHB è stata votata come miglior banca internet nel 2000; ogni prodotto della concorrenza viene analizzato attentamente dagli uffici locali e il relativo feedback inviato al reparto sviluppo prodotti
- SHB è considerato uno dei migliori investimenti: ogni anno batte la concorrenza con un Return On Equity più alto e un rapporto costi/ricavi migliore delle concorrenti
- SHB è un punto di riferimento in termini di etica e di standard sociali, grazie al perseguimento di obiettivi di lungo termine sia per l’azionariato che per l’ambiente sociale.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-whmyv3poerirf-3oulikyw.png)

Casi come questo dimostrano come, dal punto di vista della leadership, le relazioni centro-periferia cambiano in modo radicale. Infatti in questo secondo caso:

- L’impresa è realmente orientata cliente, soprattutto grazie alla responsabilizzazione della “prima linea” operativa e attraverso l’empowerment del personale;
- La sede centrale diventa un *fornitore di servizi* che, anziché impartire comandi a cascata, supporta i centri di profitto. Molti processi decisionali sono sviluppati in periferia, che rappresenta il punto di maggiore conoscenza delle esigenze di un mercato globale e instabile;
- La Direzione aziendale fornisce linee di governance, valori chiari e suggerimenti in ambito di strategie generali;
- la mission e la vision aziendale sono note e condivise da tutto il personale.

Attraverso l’implementazione di questa metodica organizzativa, le aziende hanno modificato gli schemi per la gestione dei processi, apportando cambiamenti significativi finalizzati a:

- Definire obiettivi variabili, permettendo così l’eliminazione del budget e del relativo processo di definizione di target “rigidi”; questo permette una maggiore agilità nonché l’eliminazione del processo, spesso rischioso, di negoziazione di target legati all’incentivazione personale; nella logica **Beyond Budgeting**, i premi sono legati a un successo di gruppo e, di solito, remunerati attraverso la partecipazione azionaria, che fornisce una spinta motivazionale notevole al miglioramento delle prestazioni;
- Coordinare al meglio le risorse, permettendo a tutti i reparti di disporre delle risorse (tangibili ed intangibili) necessarie ad affrontare il mercato.

In conclusione il modello **Beyond Budgeting** intende fornire un modello economico-organizzativo innovativo che permetta di gestire la crescente complessità del mercato attuale. Si tratta di un approccio basato su semplicità e flessibilità come strumenti strategici/operativi utili per reagire agli stimoli incostanti del mercato.

In Italia questo metodo ha ancora bisogno di essere fatto conoscere, e di essere applicato, alla luce delle esperienze di successo in ambito internazionale: si tratta di una metodica applicabile, senza particolari criticità, anche nel mondo delle Piccole e Medie Imprese, dove il modello **Beyond Budgeting** potrebbe portare notevoli benefici.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-nuwuprimeirgtke5fn688q.png)

Nella vostra azienda com’è il processo di Budget? Pensate che sia ancora utile? Lasciate il vostro commento o per saperne di più non esitate a contattarci, richiedendo subito una [consulenza gratuita](http://www.menicucci.co/contatti?ref=menicucciassociati.com).
### Il Budget è morto? (parte 1)
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/il-budget-c3-a8-morto-parte-1/
Last updated: 2025-09-12T14:28:52.000Z
Jack Welch, uno dei manager più famosi del mondo, a capo della *General Electric* per lungo tempo, nel suo libro “Winning” ha scritto:

> “Fa perdere tempo, porta via energie e il piacere di lavorare. Nasconde le opportunità e impedisce la crescita. Tira fuori il peggio dell’azienda, ne nasconde le capacità e le livella nella mediocrità.”

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-tpdnkdk8-gszs4eouoybeg.png)

Stiamo parlando del processo di **budget**. Questo odiatissimo esercizio di definizione dei target, di assegnazione delle risorse e di incentivazione del personale, rappresenta il pilastro su cui la quasi totalità degli imprenditori e dei manager di PMI poggia l’operatività aziendale. Da un po’ di tempo, però, alcune aziende, guidate da *Steve Player*, al tempo direttore del [**Beyond Budgeting Round Table**](http://www.bbrt.org/?ref=menicucciassociati.com) (un network di aziende che conta oltre 50 associati, fra i quali Google, Unilever e Toyota), hanno cominciato a parlare di eliminare il budget dai processi aziendali.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-2b9jglb5ghgstxsod00kjw.png)

10 ragioni per eliminare il Budget!

Perché? Le ragioni sono numerose;

intanto perché, rispetto al processo di budget, è difficile ottenere risposte rapide: tipicamente, se bisogna apportare qualche modifica, è necessario coinvolgere diverse persone, magari di reparti diversi, in svariate riunioni. Poi perché il budget, misurando le persone su target prefissati, toglie spazio alla creatività e all’iniziativa personale.

Lo stesso vale se consideriamo la relazione coi Clienti: siccome il budget, tipicamente, ha un orizzonte temporale di breve periodo, c’è il rischio che le persone si concentrino esclusivamente sul risultato da ottenere nell’immediato, perdendo di vista la relazione di lunga durata con i Clienti che, invece, dovrebbe essere il vero obiettivo.

Senza dimenticare che, siccome nel processo di budget le risorsa sono spesso allocate, i responsabili tenderanno a spendere fino all’ultimo centesimo dell’ammontare ricevuto in allocazione, per evitare riduzioni del budget di spesa nel periodo successivo. Inoltre bisogna considerare che il budget nasce, come strumento di pianificazione e di distribuzione delle risorse, in un periodo storico stabile e ben definito; esattamente il contrario di quello che è oggi il panorama economico, caratterizzato da mercati turbolenti e da un deciso cambiamento dei driver del valore: se ieri la creazione di valore era una conseguenza delle economie di scala, oggi i driver del valore sono l’innovazione (sia di prodotto che di processo), il *time to market*, cioè la capacità di arrivare per primi sul mercato, e l’attitudine ad *apprendere* e *adattarsi* rispetto all’ambiente.

Ultimo non ultimo, mentre ieri la crescita era vincolata dalla disponibilità di capitale “tangibile”, oggi le aziende, per crearsi un vantaggio competitivo che duri davvero nel tempo, devono privilegiare e fare affidamento su quelli che si chiamano “*intangibles*” ovvero il capitale umano, la proprietà intellettuale, la capacità di “**fare brand**” e di sfruttare la conoscenza (*knowledge management*), passando quindi a una gestione per “processi”, più che per funzioni.

Ecco che, a partire dalla fine del secolo scorso, per ovviare a questi limiti, sono state messe a punto nuove tecniche di budgeting (*Zero Based Budgeting, Activity Based Budgeting* etc.) le quali hanno contribuito sicuramente a migliorare la situazione, senza però portare a risultati davvero soddisfacenti.

Il ***Beyond Budgeting***, nato nell’ambito degli studi del CAM-I (Consortium for Advanced Manufacturing — International) è un approccio di tipo deduttivo basato sulle esperienze concrete di alcuni pionieri, che nel 1998, a Londra, hanno costituito il **Beyond Budgeting Round Table** (BBRT) il quale ha analizzato il *modus operandi* di 13 aziende che operano completamente (o quasi) senza la stesura di budget.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-gncuvflqodsjt4ivromsww.png)

Da questa osservazione nasce **il modello**, che si basa su 12 principi, suddivisi in due macro-aree: i cambiamenti da apportare alla *leadership* cioè al modo di gestire, e i cambiamenti da apportare in termini di gestione dei processi.

E’ interessante notare come questo modello sia applicato da aziende lontane geograficamente ma anche per settore e per dimensione, a dimostrazione che si tratta di un approccio realmente innovativo e largamente applicabile.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-1-edmmhwnhmparxxy4mihq.png)

Che ne pensate? Nella vostra azienda il budget è fonte di problemi? Lasciate un commento, e non perdete la seconda parte di questo Post!
### L’analisi dei punti di forza e di debolezza (SWOT analysis)
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/lanalisi-dei-punti-di-forza-e-di-debolezza-swot-analysis/
Last updated: 2025-09-12T14:34:53.000Z
L’analisi dei punti di forza e di debolezza è uno strumento di pianificazione strategica attraverso il quale si possono rappresentare le caratteristiche di un’organizzazione (ma anche di uno specifico progetto) e le relazioni conseguenti con l’ambiente nel quale questa si trova. Il nome SWOT deriva dall’acronimo delle parole inglesi ***Strenghts*** (cioè Forze), ***Weaknesses*** (cioè Debolezze), ***Opportunities*** (cioè Opportunità) e ***Threats*** (cioè Minacce).

L’obiettivo di questo “*esercizio* è di identificare sia le variabili **esterne** (cioè quelle che possiamo solo ”monitorare“ e sulle quali, quindi, non abbiamo alcuna influenza) sia le variabili **interne** (cioè che fanno parte del ”sistema” e su cui, invece, abbiamo il controllo e possiamo quindi intervenire). Analizzando il sistema possiamo stabilire se determinati attributi (o eventi) costituiscano rispettivamente punti di forza/debolezza o opportunità/minacce.

Per sviluppare correttamente l’analisi delle forze/debolezze, è opportuno suddividere il lavoro in 5 fasi specifiche:

1. definizione delle forze e delle debolezze che caratterizzano l’Azienda;
2. analisi dell’ambiente per individuare minacce e opportunità;
3. definizione dell’importanza delle singole minacce/opportunità e delle forze/debolezze;
4. verifica della combinazione dei fattori interni con quelli esterni per individuare elementi di criticità;
5. individuazione delle possibili alternative d’intervento;

Da questa analisi otterremo due vantaggi molto importanti: la conoscenza e la consapevolezza relativa alle forze in gioco, derivante dall’esame combinato di variabili interne ed esterne, e la possibilità di fare valutazioni strategiche.

Di solito, forze e debolezze vengono misurate rispetto a due parametri fondamentali. Le forze rispetto a **performance** e **importanza**: la prima è intesa come la capacità dell’azienda rispetto alla variabile osservata mentre la seconda evidenzia quanto il possesso di capacità, rispetto alla variabile in esame, risulti critica per l’acquisizione di un vantaggio competitivo.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-mmr9ydqjxwvhyjuwrtv6ma.png)

Stabiliti i punteggi di performance e importanza (fase n. 3 del processo di analisi) si moltiplicano tra di loro per individuare la priorità di ciascuno. In questo modo la variabile può ricadere in uno dei seguenti quadranti:

1. Alta performance e alta importanza: in questo caso l’azienda ha una forza da valorizzare e mantenere;
2. Alta performance e bassa importanza: l’azienda dispone di un punto di forza che però non è rilevante nell’Area strategica di riferimento;
3. Bassa performance e alta importanza: in tal caso l’azienda ha un punto di debolezza in un ambito importante, che come tale deve essere “limitato” il più possibile
4. Bassa performance e bassa importanza: l’azienda ha una debolezza che però ha scarsa rilevanza;

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-xypxr46mlsnvmvxhs9nuqa-png.jpg)

Per quanto riguarda, invece, le minacce e le opportunità la chiave di lettura si affida alla gravità (la ***performance*** dell’evento) e alla probabilità che l’evento stesso si verifichi; in questo caso abbiamo 3 diverse possibilità:

1. se l’evento è una minaccia e le probabilità che accada sono elevate, si è in presenza di una minaccia da fronteggiare;
2. se l’evento è una opportunità e le probabilità che accada sono elevate, si è in presenza di una opportunità da sfruttare;
3. se abbiamo una minaccia o una opportunità, con scarse probabilità che si verifichi, si tratta di un evento che possiamo monitorare ma che, in linea di principio, non dovrebbe avere ripercussioni sull’azienda;

I punti di forza e le debolezze, come le minacce e le opportunità, sono **dinamici** per definizione. Perciò questo tipo di analisi dovrebbe essere ripetuto con una certa frequenza. Per saperne di più inserisci un commento o [contattaci](https://calendly.com/menicuccisas/30min?ref=menicucciassociati.com), senza impegno.

[© 2014 Brunello Menicucci](http://www.menicucci.co/?ref=menicucciassociati.com)
### Perché si prendono decisioni sbagliate
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/perch-c3-a9-si-prendono-decisioni-sbagliate/
Last updated: 2025-09-15T10:16:55.000Z
I periodi di festività, di solito, portano con sé una maggiore propensione alla riflessione, complice anche l’aria di vacanza che si respira. Perciò, in questo post vorrei fare, appunto, una riflessione su come tutti quanti affrontiamo le nostre sfide quotidiane.

Qualche mese fa, la *Harvard Business Review* ha lanciato un sondaggio dal titolo “[What leads to poor decision making inside your organization?](http://hbr.org/web/comm/zurich/question-of-the-week?ref=menicucciassociati.com)”, che possiamo tradurre in “cosa porta a prendere decisioni *povere*, cioè sbagliate o di **scarsa rilevanza**”.

Il risultato è che le 3 cause più indicate sono rispettivamente la mancata condivisione di informazioni, l’assenza di un processo decisionale formale e la paura dei rischi connessi all’assunzione di una decisione.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-93obn8zl3i-daarxi3qhvw.png)

I risultati del Sondaggio di HBR sul processo decisionale

Rileggendo questi dati ho pensato che il ragionamento può essere ampliato, fino ad abbracciare tutta l’attività delle micro/piccole imprese e, qualche volta, anche delle medie: se analizziamo brevemente questi aspetti, ci accorgiamo che **ciò che porta a prendere decisioni sbagliate è sostanzialmente il nostro atteggiamento**.

Infatti, premesso che i rischi non si possono azzerare, ma solo valutare, gli altri elementi indicati come cause del problema sono riferibili esclusivamente a mancanze “*interne*” all’azienda e potrebbero essere agevolmente superate, solo che lo si voglia.

La mancanza di un processo formale, poi, a mio avviso è la causa vera che porta a prendere decisioni sbagliate. Troppo spesso, tutti noi (chi è senza peccato scagli la prima pietra, me compreso) ci facciamo prendere dai meccanismi quotidiani dimenticandoci che per evitare i rischi connessi alle nostre scelte (o ridurli al minimo), l’unica strada è la *pianificazione*.

Sono certo che se vi obbligassero a dire dove sarà la vostra azienda fra 12 mesi (per non dire fra 18–36) una percentuale molto elevata dovrebbe rispondere “creativamente” , pensando sul momento alla risposta migliore.

Ecco dunque il processo formale di cui si parlava; certo, è più semplice a dirsi che a farsi, ma la velocità con cui cambia il panorama economico, oggi, impone una rapidità di risposta sicuramente più elevata che in passato.

Bisogna tornare a fare un po’ di sana strategia, per poi condividerla (non imporla) con chi dovrà implementarla; definire le modalità con cui si intende raggiungere gli obiettivi definiti e infine, poiché come dice il proverbio “**presto e bene non stanno insieme**”, bisogna prevedere frequenti revisioni per adattarsi alle nuove, sopravvenute, condizioni ambientali. Buone feste e buona strategia!

[© 2014 Brunello Menicucci](http://www.menicucci.co/?ref=menicucciassociati.com)
### Tempo e denaro non sono risorse
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/tempo-e-denaro-non-sono-risorse/
Last updated: 2025-09-15T10:19:03.000Z
Tempo e denaro **non sono risorse**. O, almeno, non nel senso che comunemente si attribuisce a questo termine.

Cercherò di chiarire che cosa intendo con un esempio pratico: avete fissato, da diversi giorni, un appuntamento con un cliente, un fornitore o un collega, impegnando perciò le vostre reciproche agende. Tuttavia, in prossimità dell’evento, il cliente, fornitore o collega vi informa che a causa di improrogabili e sopravvenute eventualità non potrà partecipare.

Oppure supponete di aver sottoposto una proposta per l’acquisto di un certo prodotto/servizio a un vostro cliente: questi vi fa sapere che pur apprezzando l’offerta e la vostra azienda, si vede costretto a rinviare l’acquisto, o addirittura impossibilitato ad effettuarlo a causa della **mancanza di budget**.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-gwvm1zes4taumtmhh3phkg-jpeg.jpg)

Tempo e denaro NON sono risorse!

Ecco: se pensate che il budget sia realmente **esaurito** o che il **tempo sia scarso**, mi spiace darvi una delusione: **non è così**. Nella prima situazione, quella riferita alla riunione/evento, il vostro cliente, fornitore o collega ha **deciso** scientemente di dedicarsi a qualcosa di diverso, qualcosa che **nella sua scala di valori** aveva un livello superiore rispetto all’incontro già fissato.

Così come nella seconda situazione il rinvio dell’acquisto o la decisione di non farne di niente non è dovuta alla mancanza di budget bensì alla **diversa destinazione** di questo.

Per dirla chiaramente: per le cose che reputiamo interessanti **il tempo si trova sempre, così come il denaro**.

Qual’è la conseguenza di questa affermazione? Semplice: che laddove non otteniamo disponibilità di tempo, o quando la nostra proposta economica non ottiene il consenso sperato, il problema è nostro. Evidentemente dobbiamo rivedere il modo di comunicare: perché il nostro cliente, fornitore o collega non ha ritenuto interessante investire tempo? I benefici offerti dal nostro prodotto/servizio *sono chiari*? Creano *reciproco valore* o no?

La prossima volta che vi capita di sentirvi dire “**Non ho tempo**” oppure “**non abbiamo destinato un budget per questo**” provate a fare mente locale: probabilmente vi sarà evidente che tempo e denaro *non sono risorse*, ma **PRIORITÀ**.

Per dire la vostra su questo argomento inserite un commento o [contattateci](http://www.menicucci.co/contatti?ref=menicucciassociati.com).

[© 2014 Brunello Menicucci](http://www.menicucci.co/?ref=menicucciassociati.com)
### Gli indicatori di performance che aumentano le performance
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/gli-indicatori-di-performance-che-aumentano-le-performance/
Last updated: 2025-09-15T10:19:53.000Z
Quando utilizziamo il termine *performance*, di solito, lo facciamo pensando a indicatori di tipo quantitativo, che di solito coincidono con i risultati *economico-finanziari* dell’impresa.

Bisognerebbe invece (anzi bisogna) allargare il **concetto di performance** a qualsiasi risultato ottenuto dall’azienda. Questo significa non limitarsi a monitorare gli aspetti prettamente quantitativi (la quantità prodotta, la marginalità per prodotto o per Cliente, e così via) ma estendere il proprio controllo anche ad aspetti qualitativi, che spesso non sono presi in considerazione.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-ury6r1lsdtbbhphcsdbw4q.png)

Un esempio di dashboard con indicatori di performance (Stephen Few)

Un esempio classico è l’indicatore che esprime la capacità di mantenere, nel tempo, i Clienti: il **customer retention rate** oppure il **tasso di conversione** relativo alle diverse attività marketing che l’azienda mette in atto.

Va da sé che tali indicatori non sono applicabili a tutte le imprese “*tout court*”, ma nella maggior parte dei casi sapere che abbiamo una capacità scarsa di fidelizzare i Clienti permette di approfondire e capire ***cosa e dove*** stiamo sbagliando.

O ancora, verificare che le campagne mail producono un ritorno più basso rispetto a un più tradizionale “*direct mailing*” permette di sfruttare meglio le risorse disponibili.

Uscendo dall’ambito commerciale, un indicatore qualitativo molto interessante in ambito manifatturiero è il **livello di utilizzo delle risorse** e, per converso, la **quantità di tempo sprecata** a causa di manutenzioni, rotture, malattia del personale e così via.

Naturalmente, esistono anche indicatori qualitativi riferibili, ad esempio, al personale. Siete in grado di dire se, e in che misura, il vostro personale **raccomanderebbe l’azienda** nel caso in cui ci fosse bisogno di nuovi collaboratori?

Per quanto possa sembrare bizzarro, il più delle volte è proprio attraverso il monitoraggio di **indicatori come questi** che è possibile aumentare le *performance* (quelle quantitative) dell’azienda, ottenendo risultati migliori sia sotto il profilo economico che finanziario.

E voi, che ne pensate? Fate già uso di indicatori qualitativi? Esistono indicatori specifici e particolari del vostro settore? Per qualsiasi ulteriore informazione, approfondimento o per condividere la vostra esperienza inviateci un mail o inserite un commento.

[© 2014 Brunello Menicucci](http://www.menicucci.co/?ref=menicucciassociati.com)
### Perché serve una “mission” che funzioni
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/perch-c3-a9-serve-una-mission-che-funzioni/
Last updated: 2025-09-15T10:16:01.000Z
Uno degli elementi fondamentali nella *strategia* di un’azienda è la definizione accurata della **mission**. Tutti concordano sul fatto che questo elemento rappresenti la bussola che dovrebbe guidare e ispirare le attività quotidiane di tutto il personale aziendale; purtroppo, nella realtà, molto spesso la *mission* è una espressione fatta di parole altisonanti ma spesso in contrasto con l’agire effettivo dell’azienda e, certamente, non in grado di **coinvolgere emotivamente** il personale, creando vero commitment, cioè la partecipazione attiva al successo dell’azienda.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-3xzwvsw3ws-dp9hxa5cw6w-jpeg.jpg)

Fra le cause di questo problema vi è un *misunderstanding*, un’incomprensione di fondo che, spesso, impedisce di ottenere il risultato voluto: molti imprenditori, spinti dalla propria visione, o dal voler apparire “*visionari*” (nel senso anglosassone del termine) pensano, definiscono e comunicano la propria mission ***come se venissero dal futuro***, raccontando come sarà, come si evolveranno i mercati e in che modo l’azienda sarà trasformata. Ma le persone hanno bisogno di qualcosa di diverso: vogliono sì una visione del futuro, ma che rifletta le loro aspirazioni; vogliono sapere in che modo i loro sogni si possono **avverare** e le loro speranze **diventare realtà**.

Perciò, per quanto possa sembrare assurdo, il modo migliore per creare una **visione condivisa** del futuro è quello di ascoltare attentamente i collaboratori, conoscerne le aspettative e i bisogni (cfr. Kouzes e Posner — *To Lead, Create a Shared Vision* — Harvard Business Review, Gennaio 2009). I collaboratori sono sicuramente disponibili a farsi guidare verso un obiettivo:

> l’importante è che in un mondo così mutevole i leader chiariscano (e comunichino) bene qual’è lo scopo da perseguire, nel rispetto di quali valori aziendali.  
>  
> Un grande capo è colui che quotidianamente dimostra di agire nell’ottica della *mission*, rispettando i valori dell’azienda e diffondendo il messaggio, ispirando così gli altri a fare lo stesso.

Per saperne di più, o richiedere un incontro senza impegno, [contattateci](http://www.menicucci.co/contatti?ref=menicucciassociati.com)!
### L’analisi Dei Competitor Nella Strategia
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/lanalisi-dei-competitor-nella-strategia/
Last updated: 2025-09-16T09:54:14.000Z
M i è capitato spesso di affermare che nel contesto economico e finanziario attuale, caratterizzato da una crisi strutturale del mercato, da processi di internazionalizzazione e da fenomeni di concentrazione nei settori industriali, il cambiamento è la regola e perciò le aziende, per garantire la continuità, devono rivedere e riadattare periodicamente il proprio **modello di business**.

Oggi, tuttavia, non è più sufficiente guardare solo al proprio interno: bisogna invece avere contezza anche delle caratteristiche dei propri competitor, in modo tale da individuare le possibili alternative di sviluppo. Ecco perché l’analisi competitiva, cioè dell’ambiente esterno, del settore specifico e della concorrenza, è diventata una parte fondamentale del processo di pianificazione strategica grazie alla quale diventa possibile:

- conoscere meglio il settore in cui opera;
- individuare opportunità e minacce derivanti dall’ambiente esterno;
- valutare i propri punti di forza e debolezza;
- analizzare le competenze distintive delle imprese concorrenti;

Il modo più semplice per iniziare una analisi competitiva è la raccolta sistematica dei bilanci degli operatori del settore (concorrenti e non), finalizzata a comprendere meglio il contesto operativo e le dinamiche relative. L’analisi dei bilanci permette di verificare, rispetto ai concorrenti, come l’azienda si posiziona in termini di struttura finanziaria, di struttura dei costi, di struttura delle immobilizzazioni e così via. Inoltre analizzare i tassi di crescita della concorrenza permette di orientare la propria strategia di crescita in modo sostenibile, senza creare false aspettative.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/0-blgbijedpot7iphf.png)

Per un efficace confronto, è opportuno definire un insieme di indicatori oggettivi, rappresentativi di un processo critico per l’azienda o di un’area strategica oggetto di potenziale cambiamento. A titolo di esempio, ecco alcuni degli indicatori utilizzati più frequentemente nell’analisi dei competitor:

- valore dei ricavi,
- margine operativo lordo (MOL),
- reddito operativo ,
- capitale circolante netto (CCN),
- patrimonio netto;
- ROI, ROE e ROS;
- indici di liquidità e solidità,
- incidenza degli oneri finanziari sul fatturato,
- EBIT su Oneri Finanziari (vedi [Un Solo Indicatore per Mantenere l’Equilibrio Finanziario](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/un-solo-indicatore-per-mantenere-l-equillibrio-finanziario/))
- indice di autonomia finanziaria,
- ricavi medi per addetto,
- costo del lavoro medio per addetto,
- durata media dei crediti e dei debiti,
- durata media del ciclo monetario.

Perché questo tipo di analisi assuma una **valenza strategica**, innescando un processo di [miglioramento continuo](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/il-miglioramento-continuo-66a3c119c22622001aee6194/), deve diventare un’attività effettuata in modo sistematico, attraverso un processo strutturato e coordinato dalla Direzione aziendale, che deve essere anche disponibile a condividere i risultati ottenuti e al confronto con tutte le risorse coinvolte nel processo.

[© 2014 Brunello Menicucci](http://www.menicucci.co/?ref=menicucciassociati.com)
### Perché è Importante Il Performance Management
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/perch-c3-a9-c3-a8-importante-il-performance-management/
Last updated: 2024-07-26T15:31:02.000Z
Il Performance Management, cioè la gestione delle prestazioni — e quindi dei risultati, è importante perché:

1. informa sull’andamento del business
2. fornisce supporto nel processo decisionale
3. aiuta a implementare la strategia coinvolgendo attivamente tutta la struttura

Ogni azienda ha come obiettivo intrinseco quello di “far soldi”, o meglio di garantire una remunerazione adeguata, nel corso del tempo, sia alla proprietà che ai portatori di interesse (gli *stakeholders*) e, per far ciò, deve essere capace di coniugare efficacia e efficienza, cioè di fare le cose giuste e di farle bene.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-eipcfc8gysv-yp_irln8ha-jpeg-1.jpg)

Fare “le cose giuste” significa, in breve, “riallineare” tutti i collaboratori condividendo i concetti di vision, la mission e i valori che rappresentano le linee guida per ogni attività aziendale. Fare le cose “bene” significa invece assicurare il raggiungimento e il mantenimento di una condizione di equilibrio triplice: economico, finanziario, patrimoniale.

Naturalmente, raggiungere e mantenere questo equilibrio è un’attività “complessa”, che si basa su un processo circolare di pianificazione, esecuzione, controllo, aggiustamento. L’ideale, poi, sarebbe di riuscire a creare un ambiente stimolante, dove le informazioni sono condivise e aperte a tutti; dove si promuove la creatività e l’innovazione; dove la **governance** è basata su obiettivi, valori e limiti molto chiari; dove le risorse sono rese disponibili laddove e quando servono; dove il controllo è basato su indicatori chiave definiti rispetto al mercato e alla concorrenza, invece di essere frutto di una negoziazione interna.

E’ chiaro, quindi, che l’adozione di un sistema appropriato di gestione delle performance permette di monitorare costantemente il raggiungimento degli obiettivi definiti, sia di tipo economico-finanziario sia di natura extra-contabile, come ad esempio il livello di soddisfazione dei Clienti, o il numero di reclami ricevuti o ancora la percentuale di ordini spediti entro le “x” ore.

Si tratta, in sostanza, di organizzarsi bene per guidare l’impresa nel mare tumultuoso e ipercompetitivo dei mercati odierni, e avere più chances di arrivare in porto.

Ma quante ne conoscete di aziende così?
### La Marginalità Aumenta Del 20% Usando Indicatori Previsionali
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/la-marginalit-c3-a0-aumenta-del-20-usando-indicatori-previsionali/
Last updated: 2024-07-26T15:31:02.000Z
Secondo [Gartner](http://www.gartner.com/?ref=menicucciassociati.com), noto istituto di ricerca statunitense, le aziende che, nella loro attività, utilizzano indicatori previsionali potranno incrementare la marginalità del 20% entro il 2017\. Durante i *Business Process Management Summits 2014* gli analisti di Gartner hanno spiegato che le aziende dovrebbero far uso di indici di misurazione “***previsionali***” fornendo ai manager la possibilità di attivarsi in anticipo rispetto agli eventi in procinto di accadere.

In effetti, l’uso di indicatori storici per valutare le performance aziendali è “*un retaggio del passato*”, afferma Samantha Searle di Gartner. “*Per avere successo in mercati altamente competitivi, le aziende hanno bisogno di indicatori di tipo previsionale (conosciuti anche come ”Leading indicators“) piuttosto che dati storici (i cosiddetti ”Lagging indicators“)*”.

Se concordate su questa affermazione, il **Performance Management** è quello che fa per voi: il *Performance Management* è definito come l’insieme degli strumenti, delle tecniche e dei sistemi necessari per raggiungere gli obiettivi strategici all’interno di un’organizzazione. Questo significa che, in azienda, abbraccia diverse aree funzionali: dalla strategia al marketing, dalla supply chain all’erogazione del servizio, passando per l’amministrazione.

![Puoi migliorare solo ciò che puoi misurare](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/0-auyfapmxzirw-zuh.png)

Le ragioni, i “*driver*”, che maggiormente motivano all’introduzione del Performance Management nelle organizzazioni, si possono infatti raggruppare in tre settori: 1\. **miglioramento delle performance** (dei risultati) : è ampiamente dimostrato che c’è una relazione stretta fra il Performance Management e il miglioramento di efficienza, l’aumento della produttività, la capacità di prendere decisioni consapevoli e, in definitiva, ***ottenere risultati migliori***. 2\. **allineamento di tutta l’organizzazione rispetto alla strategia**: un sistema efficace di Performance Management è in grado di *allineare* i diversi livelli aziendali rispetto alla strategia generale e ai relativi obiettivi. Uno degli aspetti maggiormente apprezzati, in questo senso, è la capacità di fornire a tutto il personale una ***visione chiara degli obiettivi*** e del modo con cui il singolo può contribuire al raggiungimento. 3\. **l’ambiente competitivo**: la crescente pressione esercitata dalla concorrenza e la complessità sempre maggiore rappresentano una realtà con cui confrontarsi ogni giorno. Rispetto a questo il Performance Management è visto come un elemento per ***la creazione di vantaggi competitivi*** che durino nel tempo.

Naturalmente non sono tutte rose e fiori: dar vita a un processo di Performance Management porta a doversi confrontare e superare alcuni aspetti come, ad esempio, la **resistenza al cambiamento**, la complessità di selezionare e definire gli indicatori necessari (i cosiddetti **KPI**, o *Key Performance Indicator*), i problemi di allineamento tra obiettivi e misure così come la raccolta e la gestione dei dati necessari. Molto spesso questi problemi derivano dalla mancanza di competenze e conoscenze del personale addetto, problema che può essere agilmente superato grazie a consulenti esperti nella materia.

In conclusione, l’uso di indicatori di misura “*previsionali*” aiuterà le aziende ad aumentare, in modo sostanziale, la marginalità nei prossimi 3 anni. L’uso di questi indicatori si concreta, al meglio, nell’ambito di sistemi di Performance Management che prevedono la messa a punto di: — Obiettivi strategici chiari e condivisi; — KPI ben definiti; — Coinvolgimento di tutti i livelli organizzativi della struttura; — L’uso del sistema di Performance Management come uno strumento di apprendimento.

Se volete condividere la vostra esperienza potete inserire un commento; se invece volete approfondire l’argomento cliccate [qui](http://www.menicucci.co/contatti?ref=menicucciassociati.com): saremo lieti di illustrarvi come possiamo aiutarvi.

[© 2014 Brunello Menicucci](http://www.menicucci.co/?ref=menicucciassociati.com)
### Un solo indicatore per mantenere l’ equillibrio finanziario
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/un-solo-indicatore-per-mantenere-l-equillibrio-finanziario/
Last updated: 2024-07-26T15:31:04.000Z
#### Si può monitorare l’equilibrio finanziario dell’azienda con un solo indicatore?

Recentemente, in un post, ho sottolineato la necessità di tenere sotto controllo il flusso di cassa — soprattutto in tempo di crisi, perché ove questo venisse a mancare si creerebbero le condizioni per il *default*.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-2udl_fdztlx4col9zrxq-a-jpeg.jpg)

Un modo molto semplice per tenere sotto controllo l’equilibrio finanziario è di valutare i margini operativi rispetto al valore degli oneri finanziari: il prof. Giulio Tagliavini (Università di Parma) lo definisce “indice di tensione finanziaria” o indice di coverage.

A livello di bilancio, si utilizza quasi sempre il rapporto OF/V cioè il valore degli Oneri Finanziari rispetto al totale Vendite ma bisogna stare attenti perché questo indicatore, occasionalmente, può trarre in inganno. Infatti il rapporto OF/V ci fornisce una indicazione circa il peso degli oneri finanziari rispetto alle vendite, ma non tiene assolutamente in conto la ***redditività*** dell’azienda che, a seconda dei prodotti e del mercato, può variare sensibilmente.

#### Il “Coverage” è un indicatore di equilibrio finanziario

Molto meglio, dunque, utilizzare un indicatore che tenga conto sia della marginalità, sia dell’entità degli oneri finanziari da “coprire”, come il rapporto fra **EBIT** (*Earnings Before Interest and Taxes*) e gli **Oneri Finanziari** (OF). EBIT, in pratica, corrisponde al nostro “Reddito Operativo”, vale a dire la somma disponibile per coprire la gestione finanziaria e, successivamente, pagare le tasse. Se, ad esempio, il rapporto EBIT/OF da un risultato di 3,5 significa che la mia impresa dispone di un margine 3,5 volte il livello degli oneri finanziari (€ 3,5 di margine a fronte di € 1 di oneri finanziari).

In sostanza: se il valore cala, l’azienda sta andando incontro a tensioni finanziare; viceversa, se il valore aumenta l’equilibrio finanziario è al sicuro. Vediamo alcuni esempi di valori: — il **limite inferiore** è senz’altro **1**; infatti sotto questa soglia l’azienda non avrebbe più la capacità di sostenere il carico debitorio, perciò si troverebbe in grave tensione finanziaria; — valori **inferiori a 2** mettono in evidenza un equilibrio finanziario precario, che può derivare da margini in rapido declino, che rendono il debito eccessivamente oneroso, o un monte debiti già molto elevato; — valori **superiori a 5–6** potrebbero indicare che si è in presenza di un potenziale di investimento non utilizzato.

Se otteniamo valori bassi, può essere utile prendere in considerazione altri elementi per valutare se è la redditività operativa che ha subìto un calo o se, invece, è la gestione finanziaria ad essere appesantita. Vediamo come: la formula EBIT / OF può essere riscritta anche inserendo nell’equazione i valori di vendite e debito, cioè come (EBIT / V \* V / D ) / ( OF / D). In questo modo possiamo mettere in relazione l’***indice di coverage*** con il ROS (la parte EBIT/V) che rappresenta la ***redditività delle vendite*** e con il ***costo medio del debito*** (OF/D).

Come dicevamo in apertura, l’indice di coverage è preferibile al rapporto OF/V che, in certi casi, potrebbe fornire informazioni poco accurate. Si osservi questo piccolo esempio:

Anno 1 Anno 2 Anno 3 OF/V 5,0% 5,5% 6,0% EBIT/OF 3,0 3,2 3,4 Guardando l’indicatore OF/V si potrebbe dedurre che la situazione sia andata peggiorando, e che l’azienda sia in tensione finanziaria. L’indicatore EBIT/OF, al contrario, sembra suggerire che l’equilibrio finanziario sia migliorato. Che significa? Significa che, evidentemente, i margini hanno subìto un miglioramento e quindi si è potuto aumentare il debito, senza per questo mettere a repentaglio la sicurezza finanziaria.

In conclusione, l’***indice di coverage*** è estremamente chiaro ed efficace, perché il risultato ottenuto è l’espressione tanto della dimensione patrimoniale quanto di quella economica e, attraverso il monitoraggio costante nel tempo, permette di tenere agevolmente sotto controllo l’equilibrio finanziario in azienda e, per completare, allego la tabella di valutazione dell’equilibrio finanziario secondo il metodo di [Standard & Poor’s](http://www.standardandpoors.com/ratings/italy/en/eu?ref=menicucciassociati.com). Buon controllo!

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-cixqldsrlp1hsp4xlelc2w.png)

[© 2014 Brunello Menicucci](http://www.menicucci.co/contatti?ref=menicucciassociati.com)
### L’eredità divergente di “River Rouge”
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/leredit-c3-a0-divergente-di-river-rouge/
Last updated: 2025-09-15T10:26:27.000Z
### L’eredità divergente di River Rouge

Recentemente ho letto un post, su [un blog che seguo assiduamente](https://squirethegiants.wordpress.com/?ref=menicucciassociati.com), che mi ha colpito molto. Il post descrive uno dei siti produttivi più famosi della storia: lo stabilimento di **River Rouge**, voluto e realizzato da Henry Ford, e di come questo abbia influenzato — in modo divergente — i sistemi produttivi successivi. Di seguito vi propongo un mio “libero adattamento” del post in questione, invitandovi comunque a leggere anche [l’originale](https://squiretothegiants.wordpress.com/2016/07/28/the-river-rouge-a-divergent-legacy/?ref=menicucciassociati.com):

#### La linea di produzione della “Modello T”

Ford voleva produrre un’automobile per le masse, di basso costo, per “*rendere democratica l’auto*”. La Ford Modello T era appunto un’auto disegnata per essere facile da guidare e da manutenere, caratterizzata da un numero elevato di parti intercambiabili standardizzate. L’aspetto più interessante, tuttavia, non è come fosse disegnata l’autovettura, bensì come fosse disegnato il “*ciclo*” di produzione.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/0-fjmpfh04pode-pga.jpg)

Source: [The Roaring 20's](http://dylanpandjoeya.weebly.com/heroes-of-the-1920s.html?ref=menicucciassociati.com)

Nel 1906 gli ingegneri di Ford iniziarono a fare qualcosa di diverso: cominciarono a sperimentare nuovi layout fisici del sistema produttivo. Invece di seguire il classico (fino ad allora) criterio di organizzazione degli strumenti e macchinari secondo la tipologia, provarono a organizzare i vari macchinari in una sequenza di fasi operative. Detta oggi sembra una banalità assurda (del senno di poi, diceva mia nonna, son piene le fosse!), ma il risultato di questa scelta fece aumentare considerevolmente i livelli di produttività. Fu un’ottima innovazione che permise di creare un flusso ordinato nella sequenza di operazioni, ma in quella particolare fase della storia di Ford ogni passaggio veniva ancora svolto su banchi di lavoro e stand.

Nel 1913 gli ingegneri apportarono una ulteriore, dirompente, modifica: iniziarono a sperimentare piccole “catene di montaggio” in alcune parti del processo: con qualche aggiustamento, questa innovazione permise addirittura di **quadruplicare** la produttività, perciò gli ingegneri iniziarono a diffondere questo metodo lungo tutto il percorso produttivo (il *manufacturing value stream*). Ford continuò a ridurre i costi, non attraverso tagli ma grazie a un focus estremo sulla capacità di creare flusso. Un obiettivo che raggiunse con una combinazione di miglioramenti continui (incrementali) e innovazioni radicali (*breakthrough*) e che permise di abbassare più volte il prezzo della Modello T; questo fece aumentare la domanda, che arrivò a superare la capacità produttiva, che a sua volta portava alla necessità di continuare a innovare.

Gran parte dell’esperienza derivante dalle sperimentazioni appena descritte fu utilizzata per la costruzione di **Highland Park factory**, uno stabilimento alto 6 piani in cui, nell’atrio centrale (vedi la figura sopra), passava addirittura un binario ferroviario e dove le gru prelevavano i materiali dai carri ferroviari per posizionarli nelle apposite balconate che si affacciavano da entrambi i lati.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-mm72eufwbba03hmw-w5rba.png)

Il Sito di Highland Park

I pezzi principali della Modello T iniziavano a muoversi dal piano più alto e, attraverso nastri trasportatori, tubazioni fra un piano e l’altro e grazie alla forza di gravità, passavano da una fase di assemblaggio all’altra fino a giungere al pian terreno dove l’autovettura completa poteva essere consegnata. Pur essendo un sito fantastico, concentrato di ingegneria, *Highland Park* aveva i suoi limiti, come ad esempio la corsia per la gru che rappresentava un gigantesco collo di bottiglia.

Tuttavia, a questo punto, Henry Ford era pronto per un salto innovativo ulteriore: creò un enorme sito “*orizzontale*” che chiamò **River Rouge**, dove il processo produttivo iniziava con l’estrazione del ferro e si concludeva con le automobili complete in ogni loro parte. Il sito disponeva di attracchi per i battelli, generatori di energia, enormi fornaci e mulini a vento — tutto organizzato per massimizzare il flusso .

> “*Nel 1925 River Rouge Plant produceva circa un veicolo al minuto, per un lead time totale di tre giorni e nove ore, dalla produzione dell’acciaio al veicolo completo*” (fonte: “Today and Tomorrow”, di H. Ford)

> “…as long as it’s black”  
>  
> Conoscerete sicuramente la frase “*potete averla di qualunque colore, purché sia nera*”; a parte l’umorismo, questa battuta conteneva un punto fermo di estrema importanza: il processo produttivo della Ford non era stato disegnato per gestire la *varietà*. Se questo, fino ad allora, non era stato un problema — le persone potevano appena permettersi una automobile! — ben presto con l’aumento della qualità della vita e la nascita delle moderne tecniche di marketing prese vita il “*consumo sofisticato*” e divenne evidente l’esigenza di ampliare l’offerta (colori diversi, scelta del motore, accessori etc.) continuando a mantenere prezzi bassi e, ovviamente, costi da produzione massificata.

E così eccoci al punto di questo post: molte aziende, sia statunitensi che dal resto del mondo, visitarono River Rouge per capire e imparare ma… che cosa “*videro*”? E, di conseguenza, cosa trassero da questa esperienza?

#### Produttori Americani del dopo guerra (Seconda Guerra Mondiale)

Molte imprese americane videro, in River Rouge, la capacità di fare economie di scala. Sfortunatamente, per soddisfare la richiesta di varietà richiesta dai nuovi consumatori, era necessario fermare le linee di produzione per sostituire gli strumenti e produrre le diverse varianti; questo, evidentemente, riduceva pesantemente la velocità. Che fare, dunque?

Ecco cosa escogitarono:

- Lasciare che il flusso si interrompa e raddoppiare le fasi nella linea di produzione, in modo che i diversi processi possano operare indipendentemente disponendo, fra l’uno e l’altro, scorte aggiuntive di materiali
- Costruire ogni processo il più possibile ampio, in modo da produrre grandi lotti per ogni variante di prodotto nel minor tempo possibile, riducendo così il numero degli attrezzaggi;
- Costruire magazzini dove stoccare le scorte, sia di prodotto finito che di semilavorato

Questa modalità modificò profondamente il lavoro, trasformando gli addetti da “*operatori del processo successivo*” a “*produttori di scorte di magazzino*”; adesso il gioco era diventato “*produrre adesso, controllare dopo*”: bloccare una linea di produzione era virtualmente un reato — ma un disastro per la qualità!

Naturalmente, una volta che le fasi principali di un processo erano state duplicate, la *location* in cui queste erano svolte diventava poco importante; dunque, invece di avere linee o siti produttivi *end to end* localizzati in America, la logica poteva diventare:

- Centralizzare alcune fasi di processo in centri di eccellenza in modo da sfruttare maggiormente le economie di scala! Questo significava avere, ad esempio, una lavorazione intensiva di acciaio in una città, enormi centri di assemblaggio intermedio in una seconda città e un centro di assemblaggio finale in una terza ancora.

Questa soluzione alla richiesta di varietà introduceva sprechi enormi in termini di trasporto e spostamento fra i diversi siti, un problema di scorte e di gestione dei trasferimenti da e verso i magazzini, sovrapproduzione e obsolescenza; difetti riconducibili a scarsa qualità, rilavorazioni e così via. Si potrebbe dunque concludere che queste imprese *disimpararono* (distrussero?) ciò che Henry Ford aveva ottenuto prima che si introducesse la “varietà”.

Tutto questo ha portato le aziende americane in un inferno fatto di:

- pianificazione centralizzata, che culmina in mega algoritmi calcolati dai software MRP (*Manufacturing Resource Planning*), che producono risposte teoriche molto distanti dalla realtà, e
- il “*management by results*”, vale a dire l’utilizzo dei dati contabili (costi unitari, tassi di ritorno, targets, budgets….) per dirigere e controllare l’attività.

Tale approccio, benché fosse carico di sprechi, continuò comunque a produrre profitti fino agli anni ’70, cioè fintanto che la domanda interna venne soddisfatta e la globalizzazione aprì i mercati agli altri produttori… a quel punto, l’ambiente si fece improvvisamente *moolto* competitivo.

#### Produttori Giapponesi

I giapponesi, e Toyota in particolare, a River Rouge videro invece il flusso. Taiichi Ohno (Toyota) realizzò che il punto davvero importante era il flusso: “*\[essi\] osservarono come nello stabilimento Ford le risorse venissero “conservate”, attraverso processi correlati in una catena continua e lenti abbastanza per permettere, all’occorrenza, di fermare il processo e rimediare ai problemi.*” (H. Thomas Johnson)

Diversamente dagli Stati Uniti, il Giappone del dopoguerra non disponeva di risorse abbondanti; i produttori non si potevano permettere stabilimenti enormi o il lusso di investire denaro in scorte di magazzino…. perciò dovevano trovare un modo diverso per fare molto con poco. In questo scenario, Taiichi Ohno giunse alla conclusione che varietà e flusso sono strettamente correlati, cioè “*un sistema dove i materiali e il processo produttivo fluiscono continuamente, un ordine alla volta*” (H. Thomas Johnson).

Le “sfide” da raccogliere, in questo contesto, erano estremamente chiare: — piuttosto che accettare “*supinamente*” il fatto che i cambi di attrezzaggio (i setup) richiedevano tempo, Ohno spronò i propri collaboratori a **ridurre continuamente i tempi di attrezzaggio**; e — invece che produrre grandi lotti per ogni variante- Ohno autorizzò ogni lavoratore a “disegnare” e verificare ogni passaggio del processo che questi eseguiva, in modo tale che potessero seguire anche percorsi diversi per ogni unità di prodotto

In poche parole, Ohno propose loro una enorme sfida: *lavorare insieme come un unico sistema in grado di pensare e proporre miglioramenti incrementali, in qualche caso anche rivoluzionari, per gestire la varietà* “***in linea***”. Invece di ricorrere a pianificazioni centralizzate, che prevedevano istruzioni rigide e standardizzate, ai collaboratori venne data l’autorità, e furono incoraggiati, a pensare in autonomia come gestire al meglio il proprio processo, sperimentare e innovare, e condividere ciò che imparavano.

E in effetti, lì sono nate tecniche straordinarie come il “*Single-Minute Exchange of Dies*” (SMED), il sistema “*pull*” con l’uso dei *kanban*, il visual management, il blocco della linea di produzione attraverso l’uso della cordicella “*andon*” e così via. Ma il punto non sta nella creatività e l’intelligenza delle innovazioni stesse, ma nella visione chiara e permanente di poter continuamente “alzare l’asticella”, mettendo in discussione i risultati ottenuti, e nel progresso costante verso il raggiungimento dei nuovi standard.

#### E che dire dei Servizi?

La soluzione che le imprese di servizi Occidentali hanno “visto” è — tristemente — la medesima: economie di scala; vale a dire standardizzare, specializzare, centralizzare e “aumentare i volumi”. A tutt’oggi la sfida di gestire l’eterogeneità dei clienti è enorme: la varietà nelle aziende di servizi è, virtualmente, infinita — ogni cliente richiede servizi diversi e, per ciascun cliente, il servizio può variare in funzione delle circostanze. In questo contesto il “*Toyota tool kit*”, così com’è, non sarebbe di alcun aiuto: i Servizi non sono uguali alla Produzione e di conseguenza le tecniche da utilizzare saranno diverse. Si può certamente imparare da Toyota, ma più che dalle tecniche, l’insegnamento arriva dai valori e dai comportamenti: in sostanza, il messaggio principale è che le organizzazioni di servizi devono “disegnare” i propri sistemi spostando i centri decisionali verso la periferia, dando alla “front line” l’autorità necessaria per fronteggiare la varietà della domanda dei Clienti.

Per saperne di più e verificare come possiamo aiutarvi ad affrontare con successo un cambiamento, [contattateci per richiedere un incontro preliminare, senza impegno](http://www.menicucci.co/contatti/?ref=menicucciassociati.com).
### Solo 1 persona su 8 è veramente “engaged”
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/solo-1-persona-su-8-c3-a8-veramente-engaged/
Last updated: 2024-07-26T15:31:06.000Z
Nel mio post "[*Perché serve una ‘mission’ che funzioni*](https://blog.menicucci.co/perch%C3%A9-serve-una-mission-che-funzioni-89aa9c0ee23?ref=menicucciassociati.com#.mdra49o1f)" ho sostenuto che le aziende, spesso, affermano di **perseguire uno scopo** (la ***mission***) e di **attenersi a determinati valori** mentre, nella realtà dei fatti, agiscono in modo diverso creando così scollamento e disaffezione nel personale.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-qe31xsd3kybv3ob_koejow-jpeg.jpg)

Esagerazioni? Allora sentite qui: poco fa mi è capitato di leggere i [risultati di una ricerca di Gallup](http://www.gallup.com/poll/165269/worldwide-employees-engaged-work.aspx?ref=menicucciassociati.com) che non conoscevo, ma che illustrano perfettamente questo fenomeno; da questo studio su 142 Paesi nel mondo emerge, infatti, che globalmente **solo 1 lavoratore su 8** (il 13% circa) è impegnato attivamente nel sostenere la propria azienda (sono, cioè, "**engaged**"). La maggior parte, invece (il 63%!!), è "**not engaged**" cioè manca di motivazione ed è poco probabile che decida di impegnarsi attivamente nel raggiungimento degli obiettivi aziendali. E poi ci sono gli altri: 1 su 5 è *insoddisfatto, improduttivo* e fortemente orientato a ***diffondere negatività*** in azienda.

Sono numeri spaventosi che dovrebbero far riflettere a fondo. Anche perché nei Paesi dell’Europa occidentale (Italia inclusa, quindi), secondo questa ricerca, il personale attivamente impegnato è **appena il 14%**: meno della metà del **29%** messo asegno da Stati Uniti e Canada!!

Quindi, per recuperare la competitività necessaria, raggiungere gli obiettivi e ottenere risultati migliori, è utile iniziare un processo di cambiamento. Come ha scritto il generale Patton:

> "Le guerre si combattono con le armi ma alla fine sono gli uomini a vincerle”  
>  
> Fateci sapere cosa ne pensate aggiungendo un commento o inviando un mail.
### Ottimizzare il Circolante per aumentare il Cash Flow
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/ottimizzare-il-circolante-per-aumentare-il-cash-flow/
Last updated: 2024-07-26T15:31:06.000Z
M i sono arrivate diverse richieste su un mio post di qualche tempo fa, dal titolo “Migliorare il Cash Flow”; le richieste riguardano soprattutto il **Capitale Circolante Netto**(CCN), l’utilità di ridurlo ai minimi termini e il concetto di “**ciclo del circolante**”.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-fvm-nz4rwaxua78ma7wy8w-jpeg.jpg)

Provo a chiarire meglio i concetti: il Capitale Circolante Netto è dato dalla somma algebrica dei conti riferibili a:

- crediti verso Clienti;
- scorte di materie prime, semilavorati e prodotti finiti;
- debiti verso fornitori.

Questo significa che se il mio CCN è positivo mi troverò nella condizione di avere molti crediti (e/o molte scorte), e pochi debiti; significa anche che la mia **liquidità** si troverà, in qualche modo, immobilizzata in mano ai Clienti o nel magazzino. La conseguenza ovvia, in questo caso, è che mi dovrò **rivolgere alla banca** per finanziare l’attività.

E’ una situazione pericolosa, perché è probabile che l’azienda produca — ***economicamente*** — degli utili ma che finanziariamente non abbia la possibilità di far fronte a debiti e pagamenti, non ha raggiunto, cioè, l’equilibrio finanziario necessario (vedi anche il mio eBook “[Guida al Controllo di Gestione per le PMI](https://itunes.apple.com/it/book/guida-al-controllo-di-gestione/id730098761?mt=11&ref=menicucciassociati.com)”.

La situazione ideale, dunque, sarebbe quella di avere un CCN negativo, cioè che produce cassa di per sé (vale a dire, incassi immediati, magazzino a zero e pagamenti lunghi). Per chiarire bene questo punto facciamo un esempio: supponiamo che ci sia la possibilità di produrre e vendere un prodotto che ci offre un margine di contribuzione di € 100 con pagamento a 90 giorni, oppure di fornire lo stesso prodotto con un margine di contribuzione di € 85 ma con pagamento a 30 giorni. Supponiamo anche che i costi variabili (TVC) riferibili a questo prodotto siano pari a € 40, che abbiamo in banca solo € 80 e che, essendo in presenza di un “vincolo di cassa” si possa produrre un altro prodotto solo nel momento in cui si è monetizzata la vendita precedente.

Vediamo lo sviluppo di questa ipotesi:

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-tjinyjgv80hvec7qjuqerq.png)

Come si può vedere dall’immagine, la soluzione che di partenza offre una minore marginalità si rivela, invece, estremamente conveniente (produce 12 volte il margine dell’altra soluzione!) grazie alla rapidità di rientro del capitale e alla possibilità di reimpiegarlo nel ciclo. **Perciò attenzione: abbiamo appena verificato che la marginalità “*tout court*" può essere fuorviante; una valutazione seria dei profitti (e quindi della sostenibilità) delle vendite deve necessariamente tenere conto anche dei tempi di incasso!**

In conclusione, se l’azienda ha margini di contribuzione importanti, il fabbisogno finanziario potrebbe (il condizionale è d’obbligo) non risentirne più di tanto; ma se i margini sono tirati, la gestione del CCN è davvero fondamentale se si vuole evitare di cedere sotto il peso del debito. Per saperne di più inserisci un commento o [contattaci](https://calendly.com/menicuccisas/30min?ref=menicucciassociati.com), senza impegno.

[© 2014 Brunello Menicucci](http://www.menicucci.co/?ref=menicucciassociati.com)
### Ma dove vai, se una Value Proposition non ce l’hai?
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/ma-dove-vai-se-una-value-proposition-non-ce-l-hai/
Last updated: 2024-07-26T15:31:07.000Z
### Ma dove vai, se la Value Proposition non ce l’hai?

In un mondo sempre più competitivo, sia a livello degli affari che a livello personale, diventa fondamentale avere delle certezze, pur consapevoli che queste non durano in eterno e che periodicamente è necessario rivedere le proprie posizioni.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-6adgreoyhefz6seqtucktq-jpeg.jpg)

Nel mondo del business, dove tutto è fluido, si può fare chiarezza — e di conseguenza avere delle certezze, in alcune aree specifiche: fra queste vi è sicuramente **la nostra offerta**, cioè la ***Value Proposition*** (VP). La VP rappresenta l’anello di congiunzione fra i prodotti e/o servizi che offriamo e i bisogni, le esigenze dei nostri Clienti.

Di solito le aziende tendono a “offrire” i propri prodotti e servizi senza troppe riflessioni, nella convinzione di non voler limitare il proprio raggio di azione. **Mossa sbagliata**! Vediamo perché:

Prima di tutto chiariamo che non è possibile accontentare tutti. Se accettiamo questo presupposto, la logica conseguenza è che bisogna definire **quali Clienti** vogliamo servire, o quali mercati o quali segmenti; perciò prima di tutto bisogna definire chi è il nostro Cliente.

Una volta che avremo definito i diversi segmenti di mercato che intendiamo servire, per ciascuno di essi dobbiamo **identificare in che modo il nostro prodotto o servizio genera valore**. Ricordiamoci che prodotti e servizi non hanno un valore intrinseco: la percezione del valore è soggettiva e che quello che qualcuno percepisce come vantaggio, per un altro potrebbe rappresentare un problema.

Ciascuno di noi attribuisce valore sulla base di ciò che “*riceve*” e di ciò che, in cambio, deve “*dare*”. Ma attenzione; non si parla sempre e solo di denaro, anzi: come si dice, **il prezzo è solo una componente dell’offerta**. Infatti, se guardiamo i vantaggi (ciò che riceviamo) questi possono essere:

- di tipo funzionale (risolvono problemi);
- di tipo psicologico (permettono di sentirsi meglio);
- di tipo sociale (i famosi “status symbol”);
- di tipo “esperienziale” (evoca valori e significati)

a fronte di questi, ciò che daremo in cambio sono oneri monetari o non monetari, ad esempio:

- costi psicologici e di apprendimento;
- costi di esercizio e di manutenzione;
- costi di conversione/trasformazione;
- costi di obsolescenza e di dismissione

non bisogna mai dimenticare che l’acquisto di un prodotto o servizio ***non rappresenta il fine***, ***ma il mezzo*** per soddisfare un bisogno o un’aspettativa. L’ideale, dunque, è di massimizzare la percezione dei vantaggi, riducendo al contempo i costi.

Alex Osterwalder e il suo team, insieme al canvas del modello di business[\[1\]](#fn:1), hanno messo a punto anche strumenti “visivi”, utili a mappare i bisogni del Cliente e creare, di conseguenza, la nostra proposizione. Rispetto al modello di Osterwalder, io preferisco la variante disegnata da [Peter Thompson](http://www.peterjthompson.com/?ref=menicucciassociati.com) che, oltre alle caratteristiche e ai benefici di un prodotto, pone l’accento sugli aspetti ***emozionali*** del come il prodotto farà **sentire** il Cliente, cioè quale esperienza può trasmettere, che poi è il ***nucleo*** attraverso il quale definire il posizionamento marketing e l’essenza del brand, che solitamente si costruisce con la value proposition.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-qr-ifqzfuvk4a6apzsr96q-jpeg.jpg)

In conclusione, la VP è un elemento portante della strategia d’impresa, una delle “certezze” di cui dicevamo in apertura, che non può essere trascurata.

E tu, hai definito la tua Value Proposition? Sai quali mercati servire, con quali prodotti/servizi e come questi rispondono alle esigenze dei tuoi Clienti? Puoi [richiedere il nostro aiuto](mailto:info@menicucci.co) o iniziare da subito a definire la tua **Value Proposition** cliccando [qui](https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B2udXiX40x9dTEdzenpJLVdFYlU&ref=menicucciassociati.com) per scaricare la versione PDF della mappa.

[© 2014 Brunello Menicucci](http://www.blackstarconsulting.it/?ref=menicucciassociati.com)

---

1. Creare modelli di business — Osterwalder, A. e Pigneur, Y. — Edizioni FAG 2012 [↩](#fnref:1)
### Il Miglioramento Continuo
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/il-miglioramento-continuo-66a3c119c22622001aee6194/
Last updated: 2024-07-26T15:31:08.000Z
> “Il cambiamento, con tutti i rischi che comporta, è la legge dell’esistenza”. Robert F. Kennedy

#### L’impegno a migliorare continuamente

Il mondo cambia in continuazione. Nessun dubbio. Di conseguenza anche le organizzazioni, per continuare a crescere e svilupparsi, devono cambiare. Anzi, devono assumersi l’impegno a **migliorare** costantemente, e per far questo c’è bisogno di combinare efficacemente le decisioni orientate alla crescita sia nel breve che nel lungo termine.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-sntfgiyhmcbgtre0zuaarg-jpeg.jpg)

#### Da dove partiamo?

Il punto di partenza, per affrontare il cambiamento, non è sempre lo stesso; di volta in volta l’impresa può trovarsi in una delle seguenti fasi:

- piena crescita, al di sopra della media del settore
- fase di stagnazione, cioè *non cresce* o non lo fa alla velocità desiderata
- fase di decrescita, c’è bisogno di un rilancio per tornare a prosperare

quello che conta è, in un’ottica di sistema, capire **DOVE** intervenire per non disperdere energie.

#### Massimizzare il risultato

inoltre, per massimizzare i risultati, di solito non serve aumentare l’intensità di quello che si fa: bisogna, invece, scegliere dove orientare le energie per iniziare a produrre risultati. Noi lo facciamo aiutandovi ad impostare *un processo di miglioramento continuo*, basato su:

- una visione sistemica dell’organizzazione,
- una chiara strategia aziendale,
- il miglioramento dei processi “core”
- l’allineamento delle persone rispetto agli obiettivi

[**Contattateci**!](http://www.menicucci.co/contatti?ref=menicucciassociati.com) Coinvolgendoci avrete sempre a disposizione un facilitatore capace di fornire lucidità mentale e azione coerente!
### Theory of Constraints
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/theory-of-constraints/
Last updated: 2025-09-12T12:30:44.000Z
> Focus and Simplicity… can move mountains. (Steve Jobs)

### Focus e Semplicità

Le imprese, in quanto insieme di elementi interdipendenti orientati a un obiettivo comune, sono sostanzialmente dei “sistemi complessi”\[^n\]: questo è universalmente accettato. Ciò nonostante le organizzazioni odierne, con qualche rara eccezione, sono strutturate in modo tale che ogni funzione (reparto, centro di costo o di profitto) sia responsabile dei propri risultati, e gestita come se fosse un’entità indipendente, nella convinzione che il risultato finale sia **uguale alla somma dei singoli**. Di conseguenza ognuno ha il proprio “conto economico”, le proprie procedure e indicatori di performance, la maggior parte dei quali creata senza tener conto dell’impatto sul resto della struttura.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-uysd0emsluxbg3thr-5csa.png)

### La Teoria dei Vincoli

La [*Theory Of Constraints*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory%5Fof%5Fconstraints?ref=menicucciassociati.com) (“ToC”), è una “filosofia sistemica”, sviluppata intorno alla metà degli anni ’80 dal fisico israeliano Eliyahu Goldratt, relativa al modo di gestire le organizzazioni che si basa su una logica stringente di causa-effetto. Quali sono i pilastri di questa metodologia? L’assunto di base è che le organizzazioni, in quanto sistemi, in un dato momento hanno almeno un elemento (vincolo) che ne limita le performance.

La “prova” logica di questa affermazione sta nel suo contrario: se un sistema (o una organizzazione) non avesse nessun limite, le sue performance sarebbero **infinite**. Di conseguenza, poiché questo tipicamente non è vero, il sistema deve avere almeno un limite.

Il fatto che in un dato sistema i limiti, o vincoli, siano un numero limitato, era già stato dimostrato da Pareto con la regola 80/20, secondo la quale il 20% degli elementi produce l’80% del risultato. Questa regola, però, come lo stesso Pareto evidenziava, vale solo nei sistemi dove **non ci sono interdipendenze**; invece, quanto maggiore è il numero di dipendenze, tanto più elevata sarà la variabilità al punto che si può osservare che lo 0,1% del sistema è responsabile del 99,9% dei risultati!

### Vincoli e non vincoli

Che cos’è un vincolo? Come abbiamo visto è una risorsa che condiziona le performance di un sistema. In un’impresa possono essere fisici (un macchinario, un centro di lavoro, il mercato, un fornitore…) oppure di «politica» aziendale. I vincoli fisici, che rappresentano talvolta l’oggettivo impedimento dell’impresa a migliorarsi per mancanza di possibilità di investimento (ad esempio macchinari nuovi, centri di lavoro obsoleti, ecc.), devono portare ad un processo di sfruttamento massimo se non di rimozione, una volta che siano stati individuati.

La conseguenza logica che deriva dal comprendere e accettare queste affermazioni, è la necessità di distinguere fra che ciò che limita le performance del nostro sistema (il “vincolo”) e ciò che invece non crea problemi (non è “vincolo”): intervenire su un fattore che non rappresenti un limite, infatti, non solo si rivelerà infruttifero — vale a dire non produrrà alcun miglioramento *globale* — ma potrebbe addirittura diventare **controproducente**!

La filosofia del “tanto più, tanto meglio” è valida esclusivamente per quei fattori (reparti, macchinari, impianti, risorse) che costituiscono un vincolo alla crescita dell’organizzazione. Come abbiamo appena visto, applicare la stessa regola a ciò che non rappresenta un vincolo, è utile solo fino a un certo punto, oltre il quale si potrebbero produrre addirittura danni all’intero sistema.

### Fare Focus

Che significa focalizzare la propria attenzione? Tutti noi sappiamo che cercare di rivolgere la propria attenzione verso **qualsiasi elemento** del sistema equivale a disperdere la propria attenzione. Inoltre, istintivamente, sappiamo che fare focus significa “fare ciò che deve essere fatto” ma, alla luce di quanto evidenziato, possiamo dire che al termine *focus* si possa attribuire un significato ben preciso: “FARE ciò che deve essere fatto e NON FARE ciò che non deve essere fatto”.

### Allineare i sistemi di misura

La Teoria dei Vincoli
### La Visione Sistemica
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/la-visione-sistemica/
Last updated: 2024-07-26T15:31:10.000Z
> Ogni miglioramento deriva da un cambiamento, ma non tutti i cambiamenti producono miglioramenti.  
> (Dr. Eliyahu Goldratt)

### I Sistemi Complessi

Tutti i **sistemi complessi** sono costituiti da un insieme di attività *interdipendenti* fra loro, una delle quali, in un determinato momento, costituisce **un limite alle prestazioni** del sistema stesso.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-tkngrnht_mmfwtdnyagqfq-jpeg.jpg)

Qualche esempio? Prendete *un’organizzazione* qualsiasi, *un processo gestionale* o *un progetto*: sono tutti esempi validi di sistema complesso e, in quanto tali, ognuno di essi ha un “***anello debole***”, una parte del processo, una funzione, un’attività critica capace di limitare appunto il sistema.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-amty2mtbmv80zv5406jn_g-jpeg.jpg)

### Il Processo di Miglioramento Continuo

Dunque, utilizzando il *linguaggio* del Sistema, chi intende ottenere un miglioramento, dovrà seguire un processo che vede le seguenti fasi:

\- decidere *perché cambiare*  
\- identificare *cosa cambiare*  
\- definire *quale soluzione adottare*  
\- stabilire *come dar vita al cambiamento*

La fase di identificazione del *cosa cambiare*, in particolare, è **critica**. Prendiamo, ad esempio, la catena nella figura a lato: che beneficio si otterrebbe dal rafforzare l’anello **verde** o — peggio ancora — quello **blu**? Assolutamente nessuno!

### La Visione Sistemica

Perciò è fondamentale **una visione sistemica**, ad esempio utilizzando gli strumenti messi a disposizione dalla [***Theory Of Constraints***](http://www.tocico.org/?page=toc&ref=menicucciassociati.com), che permetta di capire dove intervenire, valutando *l’impatto* dell’eventuale cambiamento sull’intero sistema per evitare il rischio di dar vita a progetti di cambiamento che, oltre a non produrre miglioramenti, potrebbero addirittura **causare detrimento al sistema**.
### Persone
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/persone/
Last updated: 2024-07-26T15:31:10.000Z
> Appena trentenni, pochi di loro saranno sulla strada giusta; gli altri trascorrono il tempo in attesa del weekend. Hanno perso l’impegno, il senso della missione e l’entusiasmo degli inizi della loro carriera.  
> *Peter Senge, The Fifth Discipline*

Un aspetto fondamentale per lo sviluppo e la crescita sostenibile dell’organizzazione è l’allineamento delle persone rispetto alla strategia: senza il cosiddetto “*engagement*”, oggettivamente, si va poco lontano!

Il termine inglese ***Change management*** fa riferimento a un approccio strutturato al cambiamento nell’organizzazione che rende possibile la transizione da un assetto **corrente** ad un assetto (futuro) **desiderato**.

Affinché in una qualsiasi organizzazione si possa realizzare una vera trasformazione è necessaria una strategia chiara e, soprattutto, una forte partecipazione (nonché motivazione) delle persone coinvolte. Noi vi forniamo la consulenza necessaria a modellare e rinnovare l’organizzazione aziendale attraverso le seguenti fasi:

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-4mo-kaif_csi1x3yc_naxw-jpeg.jpg)

- Analisi del sistema organizzativo, della cultura e dei valori di impresa
- Definizione del nuovo modello organizzativo e progettazione della struttura
- Formazione e coaching per il management intermedio
- Sviluppo e realizzazione del processo di cambiamento
### Come va la tua azienda?
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/come-va-la-tua-azienda/
Last updated: 2024-07-26T15:31:11.000Z
Gli elementi di valutazione di un’azienda sono molteplici; il controllo di gestione è una scienza e un’arte, però i manager devono tener presente che i numerosi KPI che tengono sotto controllo non rispondono, di solito, all’esigenza di informazione dell’imprenditore al quale, di norma, interessano solo le risposte ad poche semplici domande:

1. Quanto abbiamo fatturato rispetto all’anno precedente?
2. Generiamo cassa o la “mangiamo”?
3. Qual’è il livello di indebitamento?
4. Quanto circolante stiamo utilizzando?

Questi semplici indicatori sono funzionali e sufficienti a far capire lo stato di salute dell’impresa, sono relativamente semplici da ottenere e da illustrare in un “tableau de bord” o dashboard.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-4_6rmmkmz8ugmyugyfvbia.png)

Per saperne di più chiamate +39 0584 1716126 o scrivete a [info@menicucci.co](http://info@menicucci.co/?ref=menicucciassociati.com)
### Collegare l’Europa con reti più stabili, sicure e veloci
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/collegare-leuropa-con-reti-pi-c3-b9-stabili-sicure-e-veloci/
Last updated: 2024-07-26T15:31:12.000Z
### **Vorresti connessioni internet più stabili, sicure e veloci in Europa?**

S e la risposta è SI, allora [firma anche tu](http://ec.europa.eu/commission%5F2010-2014/kallas/connecting-europe-facility/index%5Fen.htm?ref=menicucciassociati.com) per supportare Connecting Europe Facility.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-nc8i2nxuxg5ijlmu1xauha-jpeg.jpg)

I negoziati sul bilancio dell’Unione Europea stanno entrando in una fase cruciale: prossimamente (il 22 Novembre) i capi di Stato e di governo si riuniranno a Bruxelles in un vertice straordinario per discutere e decidere le allocazioni di spesa per il periodo 2014–2020.

C’è molto in gioco, comprese le proposte per assegnare € 50 miliardi per creare un nuovo “Connecting Europe Facility” cioè un meccanismo di connessione fra i Paesi europei, che porti investimenti in aree chiave come i trasporti, energia e reti digitali indispensabili per la crescita.

Mentre ci avviciniamo al vertice di novembre, 17 amministratori delegati delle imprese leader in Europa hanno firmato una dichiarazione che sottolinea la necessità per l’Europa di “collegare per competere” e ​​ha invitato i capi di Stato e di governo a sostegno del meccanismo per collegare l’Europa.

[Sign the Declaration in support of the Connecting Europe FacilityConnecting Europe Facility means Connecting Europe for growth! EU budget negotiations are entering a crucial phase. In…![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/0-mlivsuqyaggr9ysu.jpg)](http://goo.gl/eGsPB?ref=menicucciassociati.com)
### Reporting in excel
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/reporting-in-excel/
Last updated: 2024-07-26T15:31:12.000Z
### Fare Reporting con Excel

Negli anni abbiamo maturato una lunga esperienza nella gestione dei dati con Excel, grazie alla quale siamo in grado di mettere a punto un Tableau de Bord, **personalizzato per le vostre esigenze**, in tempi rapidi! Se vuoi contattarci subito clicca [qui](mailto:info@menicucci.co), oppure prosegui nella lettura.

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-udbveyeawceoainm45kxrw-jpeg.jpg)

Il sistema di reporting, infatti, è uno strumento indispensabile per guidare e controllare l’andamento dell’azienda rispetto a quanto pianificato. Un buon sistema dovrebbe essere facilmente accessibile a tutti coloro che ne possano beneficiare e contenere le informazioni, necessarie ai diversi livelli, raccolte attraverso un’attività di rilevazione e di misurazione dei risultati dell’impresa (sia globali che per area funzionale).

Certamente l’affidabilità rappresenta il requisito primario: il reporting è il punto di riferimento per la veicolazione di dati, sia finanziari che quantitativi, all’interno o all’esterno: banche, fornitori, organismi di controllo.

Le informazioni contenute devono essere precise e certe e, nello stesso tempo, il più oggettive possibili, per evitare distorsioni interpretative o la messa in discussione delle valutazioni delle performance.

Infine non bisogna perdere di vista la semplicità di analisi e di lettura delle informazioni e la flessibilità di gestione delle stesse; la semplicità favorirà la lettura dei dati, garantendo quindi la possibilità di fare valutazioni rapide rispetto al continuo mutamento del contesto competitivo in cui si trova l’impresa.

Per iniziare a fare Reporting con Excel, chiedi [subito](http://www.menicucci.co/consulenza-di-direzione-preliminare/?ref=menicucciassociati.com) un incontro senza impegno!
### Perché le imprese falliscono?
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/perch-c3-a9-le-imprese-falliscono/
Last updated: 2016-12-21T19:02:49.000Z
Tra i Fattori Critici di Successo delle aziende, uno dei più “trascurati” (almeno in termini preventivi) è certamente l’**equilibrio finanziario** che, insieme all’**equilibrio economico**, costituisce un pilastro imprescindibile per mantenere l’azienda sul mercato. Brutalmente, quando l’impresa non ha più la liquidità necessaria per far fronte ai propri debiti, *fallisce*. Perciò è importante, anzi *vitale*, procurarsi le risorse finanziarie necessarie a sostenere l’attività dell’azienda **prima** che il bisogno finanziario si evidenzi in tutta la sua impellenza. Per far questo è necessario, prima di tutto, prendere consapevolezza della propria situazione economico finanziaria attraverso l’analisi del bilancio e del cosiddetto “andamentale” (esposizione in centrale dei rischi, qualità del portafoglio etc.). In secondo luogo sarà opportuno identificare le aree di miglioramento su cui intervenire, avendo ben presente quali siano gli elementi (e relativi valori) che possono aiutarci a ottenere più credito.

Il resto alla prossima puntata! ;)
### Il Controllo-di-gestione-fra-tradizione-e-evoluzione
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/il-controllo-di-gestione-fra-tradizione-e-evoluzione/
Last updated: 2024-07-26T15:31:13.000Z
### Un seminario gratuito di CNA e APCO sul Controllo di Gestione

> *It is not necessary to change. Survival is not mandatory.* (W. Edwards Deming)  
>  
> L’impresa, lo sappiamo, è un insieme di risorse (*umane, tecnologiche, finanziarie*) organizzate allo scopo di raggiungere un obiettivo.

Il [**Controllo di Gestione**](http://www.menicucci.co/il-controllo-di-gestione/?ref=menicucciassociati.com), quindi, è un processo fondamentale dell’attività d’impresa e dovrebbe consentire, in ogni momento, di **valutare le performance** ottenute rispetto al desiderata. Qual è l’imprenditore che rinuncerebbe alla possibilità di prendere decisioni velocemente, avendo a disposizione informazioni solide e coerenti con la strategia aziendale? Personalmente non ne conosco….

Tuttavia, come si dice, la domanda sorge spontanea: in tempi di **complessità crescente**, come quelli che stiamo vivendo, i metodi tradizionali di controllo sono ancora capaci di fornire il supporto decisionale che ci si aspetta? E se così non fosse, quali sono le alternative a disposizione delle aziende?

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-5bbiz6_m5sy6h4h18wfsxq-jpeg.jpg)

Ne parleremo giovedì 25 febbraio 2015, dalle 17 in poi, presso la sede della CNA di Lucca. L’incontro è organizzato dalla[**CNA**](http://www.cnalucca.it/?ref=menicucciassociati.com) **di Lucca** in collaborazione con la **delegazione toscana di** [**APCO**](http://www.apcoitalia.it/it?ref=menicucciassociati.com) (*Associazione Professionale Italiana Consulenti di Management*) in maniera informale: in apertura, ascolterete il punto di vista degli esperti cui seguirà il dibattito e la possibilità di fare “*matching*” fra imprese e consulenti.

Per ulteriori informazioni e iscrizioni [scrivetemi un mail](mailto:info@menicucci.co) andate su [http://convegnocontrollogestione.eventbrite.it/](http://convegnocontrollogestione.eventbrite.it/?ref=menicucciassociati.com)

[Scarica la locandina dell’incontro](https://goo.gl/7452AB?ref=menicucciassociati.com)
### Conseguire gli obiettivi strategici superando il Budget (Beyond Budgeting)
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/conseguire-gli-obiettivi-strategici-superando-il-budget-beyond-budgeting/
Last updated: 2024-07-26T15:31:13.000Z
Sono sempre più numerose le aziende che manifestano un senso di insoddisfazione e di critica verso il processo di Budget tradizionale.

Le ragioni che spingono un’azienda a pianificare il proprio futuro utilizzando il Budget tradizionale si riconducono, solitamente,alla necessità di:

- definire obiettivi (*target*) in linea con la strategia;
- sviluppare previsioni (*forecast*) economico finanziarie e di cassa;
- allocare le risorse

Tuttavia esistono diversi studi e ricerche utili a dimostrare che:

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-nuwuprimeirgtke5fn688q-1.png)

Confronto fra il modello tradizionale e il modello “adattativo”

---

1. la durata media del periodo di pianificazione è di **4 mesi e mezzo** (oltre un terzo dell’anno fiscale!!)
2. circa il 90% dei CFO è **insoddisfatto** rispetto al processo di Budget
3. il 60% dei CFO sostiene che **non esiste un legame** fra Budget e obiettivi strategici

e in effetti posso dire che, anche nella mia esperienza da manager, non ho amato particolarmente il budget, e molto spesso l’ho vissuto solo come un momento di “*negoziazione*”, finalizzato ad abbassare le richieste della Direzione e, contemporaneamente, a massimizzare l’incentivo.

Per fortuna oggi le aziende hanno la possibilità di superare questo processo, implementando i principi del [**Beyond Budgeting**](http://bbrt.org/what-are-the-benefits/?ref=menicucciassociati.com). Quali benefici se ne possono ricavare? Moltissimi, ma fra tutti credo che valga la pena di segnalare:

- ***la velocità di risposta***, cioè la capacità di reagire ai cambiamenti dell’ambiente circostante, siano essi opportunità o minacce.
- ***la migliore allocazione delle risorse:*** se un reparto (o una funzione) ha a disposizione 100K euro di budget, si può esser certi che saranno spesi tutti — pena la mancata allocazione l’anno successivo. I principi del Beyond Budgeting prevedono, invece, che le richieste di spesa siano inoltrate e valutate periodicamente, permettendo così di ottimizzare le risorse a disposizione;
- ***miglioramento delle performance***, l’esperienza delle aziende che utilizzano Beyond Budgeting dimostra che l’implementazione dei cambiamenti nei processi e nella leadership porta a ottenere risultati migliori, previsioni finanziarie più accurate e un miglior uso generale delle risorse.

Il tutto con uno sforzo inferiore!
### Un solo indicatore per mantenere l’equilibrio finanziario dell’azienda
URL: https://www.menicucciassociati.com/un-solo-indicatore-per-mantenere-l-equilibrio-finanziario-dell-azienda/
Last updated: 2024-07-26T15:31:14.000Z
In tempo di crisi è necessario tenere sotto controllo il **flusso di cassa** perché ove questo venisse a mancare, si creerebbero le condizioni per il *default*. Un modo molto semplice per tenere sotto controllo l’equilibrio finanziario è di valutare i margini operativi rispetto al valore degli oneri finanziari: il prof. Giulio Tagliavini (Università di Parma) lo definisce “***indice di tensione finanziaria***” o indice di coverage.

A livello di bilancio, si utilizza quasi sempre il rapporto OF/V cioè il valore degli Oneri Finanziari rispetto al totale Vendite ma bisogna stare attenti perché questo indicatore, occasionalmente, può trarre in inganno. Infatti il rapporto OF/V ci fornisce una indicazione circa il peso degli oneri finanziari rispetto alle vendite, ma non tiene assolutamente in conto la **redditività** dell’azienda che, a seconda dei prodotti e del mercato, può variare sensibilmente.

Molto meglio, dunque, utilizzare un indicatore che tenga conto sia della marginalità, sia dell’entità degli oneri finanziari da “coprire”, come il rapporto fra **EBIT** (Earnings Before Interest and Taxes) e gli **Oneri Finanziari** (OF). EBIT, in pratica, corrisponde al nostro “Reddito Operativo”, vale a dire la somma disponibile per coprire la gestione finanziaria e, successivamente, pagare le tasse. Se, ad esempio, il rapporto EBIT/OF da un risultato di 3,5 significa che la mia impresa dispone di un margine 3,5 volte il livello degli oneri finanziari (€ 3,5 di margine a fronte di € 1 di oneri finanziari).

In sostanza: se il valore cala, l’azienda sta andando incontro a tensioni finanziare; viceversa, se il valore aumenta l’equilibrio finanziario è al sicuro. Vediamo alcuni esempi di valori: — il **limite inferiore** è senz’altro **1**; infatti sotto questa soglia l’azienda non avrebbe più la capacità di sostenere il carico debitorio, perciò si troverebbe in grave tensione finanziaria;

\- valori **inferiori a 2** mettono in evidenza un equilibrio finanziario precario, che può derivare da margini in rapido declino, che rendono il debito eccessivamente oneroso, o un monte debiti già molto elevato;

\- valori **superiori a 5–6** potrebbero indicare che si è in presenza di un potenziale di investimento non utilizzato.

Se otteniamo valori bassi, può essere utile prendere in considerazione altri elementi per valutare se è la redditività operativa che ha subìto un calo o se, invece, è la gestione finanziaria ad essere appesantita. Vediamo come: la formula EBIT / OF può essere riscritta anche inserendo nell’equazione i valori di vendite e debito, cioè come (EBIT / V \* V / D ) / ( OF / D). In questo modo possiamo mettere in relazione l’**indice di coverage** con il ROS (la parte EBIT/V) che rappresenta la **redditività delle vendite** e con il **costo medio del debito** (OF/D).

Come dicevamo in apertura, l’indice di coverage è preferibile al rapporto OF/V che, in certi casi, potrebbe fornire informazioni poco accurate. Si osservi questo piccolo esempio:

![](https://www.menicucciassociati.com/content/images/2024/07/1-btn8axd-tswqyxvu0v9epw.png)

Guardando l’indicatore OF/V si potrebbe dedurre che la situazione sia andata peggiorando, e che l’azienda sia in tensione finanziaria. L’indicatore EBIT/OF, al contrario, sembra suggerire che l’equilibrio finanziario sia migliorato. Che significa? Significa che, evidentemente, i margini hanno subìto un miglioramento e quindi si è potuto aumentare il debito, senza per questo mettere a repentaglio la sicurezza finanziaria.

In conclusione, l’**indice di coverage** è estremamente chiaro ed efficace, perché il risultato ottenuto è l’espressione tanto della dimensione patrimoniale quanto di quella economica e, attraverso il monitoraggio costante nel tempo, permette di tenere agevolmente sotto controllo l’equilibrio finanziario in azienda.

© [2014 Brunello Menicucci](http://www.menicucci.co/?ref=menicucciassociati.com)