Sal Paradise wrote:
In this country we appear to have an inability to embrace change an example would be the NHS - I was in hospital earlier in the year for an operation - all my notes were still on bits of paper - that's inefficient most commercial businesses would have abandoned that for digital technology.
A little bit confusing. You say as a country we don't embrace change, but then say that most business have indeed embraced change? Ideally of course the NHS would be adopting any technology that would enable it to perform more efficiently (providing they have the funding and expertise available to deliver it). Also, in the commercial world you have competition as a factor driving such decisions, you have the movement of labour between companies taking with it new ideas & ways of thinking.
Regardless, there are extensive transformation projects going on in the NHS currently. Also, there are examples where technology has been embraced. I can book GP appointments online, I can check in at the GP surgery using the tablet they have there, things like that. Certainly room for improvement I accept, but I don't think it's as old fashioned as some might think.
Sal Paradise wrote:
Why was Brailsford thought of so highly - because he used a Kaizen culture of micro improvements (marginal gains) to gain competitive advantage on his rivals. You may not agree with his treatment of people - although Steve Redgrave defended it on 5 live on Sunday - but his methods of better suits, better bikes better training has proved incredibly successful. If this were the norm in the UK nobody would have batted an eyelid. How many companies outside of those owned by the Japanese actually have Kaizen programs or programs of continual improvement.?
I suppose the answer would be how many don't? Most large companies have their own transformation departments that drive an increase in efficiency and reduce cost. There's no doubting Brailsford's methods achieved results, but now easily can this be rolled out en-masse, and what are the negative impacts?
Sal Paradise wrote:
Brexit only happened a year ago - lack of investment has been going on since the crash - that is because its very difficult to borrow money from the bank - they don't want to sell money
It's a bit of both. Bren is right in that there is a fear of what will happen during & post-Brexit and companies are keeping their powder dry to an extent, but there is a reluctance to lend. I have a business that relies predominantly on the ability to secure finance to be able to make further capital investments. A year or so ago (post crash), you're right, it wasn't easy to borrow, but in the past year or so it has gone to the next level. Lenders are being extremely careful, and the level of risk they're willing to take very very low.