Thursday, July 5, 2012

We've got to get together......

By now we are comfortable with the concept of micro and macro cosmic views, and we have stretched our focus so that it is relaxed and able to shift in and out.  We'll stay tight to the intended mission of cleanliness and order, and assume the item in question cannot be put away or brought closer to home.

In this instance, the best you can hope for is to consolidate.  If similar items already have a home, you can graft these new pieces into it, and thus return to putting it away.  If no similar items exist, perhaps you can pull focus back to a point where they do.  (All the items in a shop in one pile would be the first level of consolidation.)  The key is to stack up items until the stack itself becomes a separate issue.

A common problem in most shops is the storage of pieces and parts that are in process.  If the process is short enough they may stay at a station until finished, but if not, they may be in the way.   The solution in our shop is the creation of permanent drop zones intended for transient items. In computer parlance, these are Ram.  Ram bays play an important function in our shop by allowing the consolidation of materials and items that may be unrelated except by virtue of their impermanence in relation to the flow of the shop.

It bears mentioning that our list "hinges" on consolidation.  Numbers one and two involve placing things into a physical framework, while numbers four and five involve a more conceptual framework.  Put another way, in the myopic sense of shop order only, 1&2 comprise actionable decisions that can be made by persons regardless of their authority.  4&5 involve decisions that can only be made with more or less authority.

In a larger context, this mirror represents a very real and palpable force for creativity.  New ideas, images and objects are constantly being introduced and by default have no home within our personal mythology.  At the moment of first exposure we are ill equipped to qualify new data, it is a powerful realization that quantification is not only acceptable, but the only thing we can do in such a case.  By continuing to make the best decisions we are able, the outcome becomes unimportant.  We are now free to make decisions without fear of consequence.*

And thus is born the governing principal of design in our shop:

Consistently strive to do the very best
Consciously choose to do the very least.

* There is of course the usual argument: People left to do just what they want will devolve into chaos and anarchy.  This argument is nonsensical to me.  We have evolved to the current state as a species by consistently making decisions toward the path of least resistance while remaining entirely ignorant of the consequences.  

On an unrelated note, I found This snifty site for independent publishing.


  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

  2. Right,

    The point is not always to make the best decision in every case, sometimes making a decision and taking action even if it is a bad one is better than not taking action. This is because those actions will present new opportunities to make much better decisions in slightly worse circumstances based on learned experience.

    One day, for instance, selling a saw mill for capital will be a good decision whereas right now running the saw mill is a better proposition for raising capital in the context of selling p&e to get liquid. The pawns we are sacrificing at this stage of the game are things like buckets of scrap and highly unlikely to be capacity adding assets, like a defunct grinding wheel.