Value Engineering – the only problem is the name!
Value Engineering – the only problem is the name!
by Paul J Whitehouse
We become equally weary from the protestations of those folk who tell us with great gusto that they use Value Engineering as from those who tell us “we are accountants, not engineers so it doesn’t apply to us”, ughhhh….
The first group are busy conducting “elementary cost cutting” exercises.
The second group from non engineering environments fail to see the relevance of a methodology so labelled.
We don’t “blame” anyone we just want to make comment on our observations, actually if anyone were to carry blame it is us!
Those who “carry the torch” for the Value Engineering discipline, those, who at some time in their respective lives were drawn to, and fascinated by the methodology and having been “touched” will individually, and to a “man” tell you that they have never thought the same since that “magic” moment.
In some defence we have tried to “remain relevant, but every time we look for a new name, the latest buzz label, a sassy nickname, a sexy handle, the right “branding”, we’ve “re-engineered ourselves, we’ve “re-invented ourselves ad nausea! Continually searching for the Ah ha! Always searching for the “holy grail”!
Do you know what we keep re-discovering? We keep coming back to that same point and as if drawn by some pre-destined influence, we realise once again, that like the three “R’s” Reading, ‘riting and ‘rithmetic.
Value Engineering is a fundamental skill, a basic need for anyone who needs to make improved, better decisions and who doesn’t?
This is further supported by the scope of users we have trained over the years, from the barely literate to the intellectually gifted graduate, from the most elementary operator within the organisation to its most senior strategists.
Like anything simple it is often profound, and like anything simple it is often difficult to portray, to simply explain the methodology is to miss the essence, I take humour seriously and recall a famous comedian was once asked to describe humour, he explained it was rather like dissecting a frog, upon conclusion you may comprehend it, but it is now very dead!
Value Engineering is easily described, the steps represent “the hooks upon which to hang the thinking”, the “road map” explaining the route; however the journey is often as significant, sometimes more so than the arrival.
The journey is represented by the alignment of thinking, the sharing of perceptions, views, dogmas, paradigms, emotions and many other human characteristics.
It may seem trite, but it always surprises us to hear group members having worked together for many years suddenly discovering common likes, dislikes and activities previously unknown to each other.
I don’t think we, the species Homo sapiens, have been communicating long enough to actually get it right all the time, (check with your social partner) however, there is hope, increasing numbers of organisations are declaring the limits and dangers associated with individual, isolated decision thinking & making.
The era where the person at the top was there because they knew the most, has surely (hopefully) past on, consider, that up until the current century, the “life” of a decision could be measured in years, often decades.
In the dynamic changing environment we now encounter the typical life of a decision is measured per project or specific event!
It would appear that group diversity has clearly come of age, the realisation that to have ones strategic, directing, influencing group all thinking in the same way is dangerous.
Value Engineering is a group activity; it works less well in a totally autocratic environment.
More exciting however is the evolving of its ability to manage diversity in all aspects of business management.
We are still somewhat plagued by the label Value Engineering (VE), other labels; Value Analysis (VA) & Value Management (VM), refer to project time application of the process, i.e. VM is conducted as near to concept as possible, VE to process or product design, VA to significantly improve specific existing process or hardware.
Does VM/VE/VA take a long time? Facilitation using the methodology can give clear focus and alignment in as little as four hours.
Training in the methodology is done based on respective modules and boasts SAVE International approval, and timed to suit your situation. (Typically 32hours).
The following metaphor may be useful; Picture a situation where the movement of goods is required from Mountain A to Mountain B.
1. VM is applied to clearly define the situation and decide the best method to move goods, it may be that a fixed bridge is decided upon, having considered, volumes, frequency, mass, environment, etc.
2. VE will then define the best bridge. It may be that a Suspension type construction is decided as being most appropriate, having considered all the other types of bridge design and associated life cycle implications.
3. VA is applied when the bridge is in place and considerations such as maintenance regimes, perhaps advertising the presence of the bridge, improve approach roads, etc. very much Operational elements; maybe we install a toll gate!
Conclusions
Yes, we probably could “re-wrap” the Value Engineering methodology, I could go into a long discourse about the process uniqueness of Functional thinking, but at the end of the day, it is what it is, a powerful, elemental, decision making process, appropriate to ALL aspects of business life, it’s knowledge will empower the young manager and create enhanced confidence in the mature one.
You never know, you may also, “never think the same again”.