Friday, February 25, 2011

Brian Joiner's Book on John Seddon's Bookshelf - Time to Start Giving Credit to Him

As I've said before, John Seddon "nicked" the work of Brian Joiner, as it was Joiner and his "Fourth Generation Management" book that pioneered the idea that you first do "Check" as part of the PDCA cycle.

But Seddon claims HE invented the idea. He NEVER cites Joiner in his work.

The most recent video on their Systems Thinking Review site clearly shows Joiner's book the shelf above Seddon's right shoulder.

Time to start giving Joiner due credit, "Professor" Seddon.

John Seddon owns Brian Joiner's book


  1. What's worse is how John Seddon implies in the video that he invented systems thinking and he's the only one who knows how to teach it properly. He is a pretender. He's doing his same old lean stuff under a different name.

  2. Though i enjoy critique of method more than anyone, I do prefer rational debate rather than the mud slinging i see on both sides here. Between 'seddon watch' and 'trip' it feels like something akin to nursery.

    Please start with understanding the efficacy of 'lean', systems thinking, 'vanguard' etc. this is where the critique should start and end.

    For my part lean is not thorough enough, the vanguard approach goes further and has a practical edge (in the hands of the right people) to allow practitioners to make sustainable change on a 'monday morning'. BUT when dealing with wider more complicated issues in terms of renewal and innovation it can be found lacking, this I feel is due to the approach beginning and ending with the 'customer' this is all well and good, but sometimes you need to go beyond to get true systemic change.

    Also all remember that if you think differently the only difference between you and someone who doesn't is experience and exposure - our job is to help and support people not throw rocks...please all grow up !

  3. How can an approach based on Joiners CPD and the use of control and run charts effect systemic change? Rarely is data normally distributed particular within a service environment. The use of statistical based methods within a service environment is nuts especially as the same process activity steps will always have a different work content. As for variety does vanguard really understand the law of requisite variety and the role of variety attenuators, variety amplifiers and the complexity drivers. I doubt it