Happy Birthday, Dr. Deming: How "Profound Knowledge" Influenced Five Disciplines

The late Dr. W. Edwards Deming (October 14, 1900 – December 20, 1993) would have turned 123 years old in October 2023 and has achieved demi-god-like status in at least five disciplines.  Though he was often overlooked throughout his early career, Deming achieved fame relatively late in life. What came to be known as Deming’s “System of Profound Knowledge” influenced the domains of Quality Management, Project Management, IT Service Management (especially ITIL), Data sciences, and Manufacturing.  Far from being outdated, Deming’s “Profound Knowledge” is more relevant than ever in the era of so-called digital transformation.  Read on to learn how Deming’s framework of “thought and action” continues to influence management thinking and organizational change.

1900: Threshold of the Modern Era

The year was 1900.  The world did not, in fact, come to an end as was predicted by one hundred members of the Russian cult Brothers and Sisters of the Red Death, who committed suicide in anticipation of the apocalypse.  Nevertheless, one-year shy of the twentieth century, 1900 was, for many, a year of hope, tempered by vexatious disquietude.  According to the census, U.S. population burgeoned at 70 million compared to a world population of 1.64 billion.  (Indeed, between 1870 and 1900, nearly 12 million immigrants arrived on U.S. shores; though a full third returned back to their countries of origin because they found work conditions in the U.S. too deplorable.)  Although the United States was the most prosperous nation on earth, for many of those in the lower class, increased industrialization meant unsafe labor conditions and ceaseless working hours.

In the business sector, the Amazon of its day, Sears Roebuck and Company, was founded just a few years before in 1893.  In terms of technology, transportation was paramount.  In the 19^th century, the inability to traverse great distances quickly contributed to America’s primarily agricultural economy.  At the turn of the century, new technologies were poised to disrupt society.  Ford invented the first gasoline engine in 1892.  However, believe it or not, a full 25% of all cars sold in 1900 were electric.  Although few people could afford an automobile, many believed that it would only be a matter of time before everybody was driving.  In New York, work on the subway began with construction of a line from City Hall to the Bronx.  In fact, in the same year, the first lines of the Paris metro and London Underground opened.

And, in Sioux City, Iowa, on October 14, 1900, W. Edwards Deming, later to be recognized as the “Father of Quality Management” and the “Father of the third wave of the industrial revolution” was born.

Deming’s Humble Beginnings

If you are reading this article, you probably know at least a little about Deming, and a more complete biography is available at The W. Edwards Deming Institute.  It is not much of a stretch to say that just about anybody working in the fields of Project Management, Quality Assurance and Control, Product Development, and Manufacturing owe their jobs to him.  His work greatly influenced all of these fields and beyond.

W. Edwards Deming

The scope of his accomplishments is all the more amazing given his humble beginnings growing up on his grandfather’s chicken farm in Polk City, Iowa. Although both of his parents were well educated (his father studied Math and Law while his mother was a trained musician), family financial resources were limited, and pursuing higher education was not a foregone conclusion for Deming. Nevertheless, a high school mathematics teacher recognized Deming’s talent and encouraged him to enroll in college. He went on to receive a Bachelor of Science degree in electrical engineering from the University of Wyoming at Laramie (1921), a Master of Science from the University of Colorado (1925), and a PhD in Theoretical Physics from Yale University (1928).

Post-graduation from Yale, he worked for about ten years for the U.S. Department of Agriculture helping to create nitrate fertilizers. He also used to give lectures in statistics to train agricultural engineers. At that time, U.S. agriculture made significant gains in increasing crop yields, which is generally credited to the use of statistics in farming. Later, he transferred to the U.S. Census Bureau in Washington, D.C. His expertise with statistics helped the Census Bureau to develop a survey based on sampling, which was innovative at that time.

During the Second World War, while still living in Washington, D.C., Deming and his friend, Walter Shewhart, organized a series of lectures at Stanford University in the hopes of improving productivity in the U.S. arms industry. Although thousands of engineers and managers traveled to Stanford to attend, the lectures had limited impact since, by and large, executives did not attend.

Made in Japan

Although his accomplishments during the first forty-seven years of his life are meretricious and deserve more praise, Deming and his ideas were largely ignored in his own country. In 1947, Deming went to Japan as an advisor to Allied Forces Headquarters (during Allied occupation of post-war Japan) regarding sampling techniques for the Japanese Census. He found that a number of Japanese managers were already enthusiastic about the management techniques he had been teaching prior to and during the war, and they asked him to replicate the Stanford lecture series in Tokyo.

“Made in Japan” was not exactly a proud slogan in 1947. Quite to the contrary, Japanese manufacturing earned a reputation for inconsistency and low quality. Thus, in 1950, when Deming gave his first lecture in Japan, his audience was more than receptive to the messages he brought. Chief amongst these were:

• Get it right the first time – Inspection, whether at the end of the build process or on the assembly line, only catches mistakes and quality errors after they have been committed. It is better to build quality into every step of the design and build process to prevent rework associated with quality defects.
  

  Frederick Taylor, “Father of Scientific Management”

• 94% of Failure is the responsibility of management – Deming’s actual statements regarding this are a bit more nuanced. However, to summarize, prior to Deming’s observation it was commonly assumed that low quality was the result of poor execution on the part of the individual worker, a hang-over philosophy from the second wave industrial era of Frederick Taylor. Deming railed against the “blame the worker” mentality and pointed out that lack of leadership, managers focusing on the wrong things, and inadequate management systems and approaches lead to most of the problems. Deming encouraged the view that the organization is more than just the culmination of individual successes and failures; instead, the organization should be seen as a system with interactions between processes and people. The good news is that the opposite is likewise true . . . management has a leading responsibility to identify improvement opportunities and focus their teams on executing them.
• Statistical Product Quality Administration Improves Quality – These days we use the phrase “statistical process control,” but Deming was talking about essentially the same thing. We need to be able to measure quality in order to learn where quality breaks down and how to fix it. Although Deming realized that we cannot measure everything (nor is it necessary), his emphasis on statistics was, if not revolutionary, nevertheless something that needed to be reiterated to management at that time. Of course, he also observed that while it is relatively easy to measure the cost of rework of a defective product, the bigger impact is the hit to customer satisfaction upon receiving a shoddy product.

The Ford Transmission Study

Within about a decade following Deming’s first Japanese lecture, the improvements to Japan’s manufacturing culture started to show. Indeed, evidence for this can be found in the famous “Ford Transmission Study” conducted in the 1980s. Ford Motor Company had been manufacturing a certain model of car with some of the transmissions made in Japan and others in the United States. Not long after hitting the market, Ford noticed that customers were requesting the model with the Japanese transmission over the USA-made transmission. Moreover, customers were willing to wait for the Japanese transmission. What could explain this newfound and dramatic preference for the Japanese transmission over its American cousin?

Both Japanese and American transmissions were made to the same specifications, but there was a perception that the Japanese transmission was higher quality and had fewer defects. Ford decided to dissect both transmissions to understand whether the perceived differences were fact or fiction. Although, the American transmissions fell within specified tolerance levels, from transmission to transmission, the parts were not identical to each other. Conversely, parts for the Japanese transmissions were almost identical to each other and exhibited less variation. All of this meant a smoother Japanese transmission and fewer breakdowns for customers.

The results of the Ford transmission study are proof of Deming’s philosophy in action since, by this point in time, his teachings (and those of his contemporaries, such as Kaoru Ishikawa, Taichi Ohno, Joseph Juran, and others) were well entrenched in several of Japan’s leading industries. Indeed, the Japanese were so enamored with Deming that the  Japanese Union of Scientists and Engineers named their highest quality award after Deming. Now, the “Deming Award” is the longest running total quality management award in the world.

“If Japan Can . . . Why Can’t We?” Deming Returns to the U.S.A.

Though Deming garnered great renown in Japan (included being awarded the Japanese Order of the Sacred Treasure by the emperor), he was something of a “prophet unknown in his own land” in the United States. This all changed in 1980 when NBC broadcast a television program called “If Japan Can . . . Why Can’t We?” In the program, Deming introduces the quality theories he applied in Japan – particularly Japan’s success in the electronics and automotive industries –

to a United States audience. At this time, Japan was widely considered to be a manufacturing giant while the United States lagged. Clare Crawford-Mason, the producer of the program, went on to collaborate with Deming on a fourteen-hour documentary that further elaborated on his teachings.

Finally earning recognition in the United States, numerous companies, including Ford, AT&T, The New York Times, Procter & Gamble, and Xerox hired Deming as a consultant. Thus, Deming is also credited with helping to turn around American manufacturing, especially in the automotive industry.

Deming’s Major Publications

Although Deming co-authored and published numerous papers throughout his lifetime, his two major books were published after he returned to the United States.

 Out of the Crisis (1982) – In this book, Deming asserts that when management does not plan appropriately for the future, the company starts to lose market share. Eventually, this means jobs are also lost. Evaluating management based on revenue and profit margin alone is not sufficient. Instead, management needs to consider the business an ongoing concern and have a plan to sustain operations, protect investments, and continually improve products and services

Additionally, Deming enumerates several management “diseases” and proposes fourteen points for management, as follows (abbreviated):

1. Create a constancy of purpose for the improvement of services and products
2. Adopt the new philosophy. On all levels, a renewed commitment requires that previously accepted levels of mistakes, defects, poor training, uncommitted management, etc. not be accepted.
3. Cease the dependence on mass inspection. Quality comes from improvement of processes; and not from inspection.
4. The practice of awarding business based on the price tag alone should be ended. In other words, avoid always giving business to the lowest bidder.
5. Continually improve the system of service and production, beginning design stage and continuing downstream.
6. Institute training so management can understand the company, the problems that affect workers’ production, and how to most effectively put people to work.
7. The adoption and installing of leadership, where management must work on improvement sources.
8. Drive out fear. Employees cannot provide their best performance unless they feel secure.
9. Break down barriers between staff and teams.
10. Eliminate slogans and targets for workers. Eliminate programs promoting zero defects and that target new productivity levels. Productivity and quality are results of the system; not individual workers. Eliminate management by objective. Instead, lead.
11. Eliminate quotas placed on the work force and on management. These actually prevent quality improvement.
12. Remove the barriers that diminish workers’ pride of workmanship. People are not commodities.
13. Encourage self-improvement and education for everyone and take action to accomplish the intended transformation.
14. Transformation is a job that belongs to all workers in the organization.

The New Economics (1993)

The follow-on book to Out of the Crisis, published a little over ten years later, is The New Economics, and it was Deming’s final publication (in fact, published in the year he died). Deming essentially picks up where he left off. The Fourteen Points for Management were well-received in 1982. However, while many organizations saw merit in the Points, they were interested in learning how to apply them in a practical way and wanted a lens through which to understand their organizations in a holistically.

Thus, in The New Economics, Deming further detailed the Fourteen Points and introduced a new concept that he called “The System of Profound Knowledge.”

What is Deming’s System of Profound Knowledge?

Technically, Deming introduced the “System of Profound Knowledge” (SoPK) several years earlier than The New Economics in 1987. He referred to the SoPK as a “Map of Theory” to understand an organization. Remember that, from Deming’s perspective, management’s primary concern should be to create an effective system; and one of the biggest failures of management is the inability to see how the various components of the organization relate to each other. In part, management fails because it is part of the system and, to borrow an old aphorism, cannot “see the forest through the trees.” Here is a better metaphor. Just imagine that there are several goldfish swimming around in an aquarium. Now, imagine that these goldfish comprise the management team. In their weekly goldfish management meetings (or are they schools?), it is very unlikely that they would be talking about water. Although it is critical to their existence, it surrounds them and is taken for granted and probably goes unnoticed. Thus, Deming suggested that organizations need to have an outside view to learn how to improve. (Not surprising and a little convenient considering that Deming was a consultant . . . but good advice nonetheless.)

Although some of the concepts seem fairly commonsensical (from the 2023 perspective), the SoPK is called “profound.” In this sense, “profound” means that it encompasses core or foundational knowledge about an organization. It provides one single overall view of the organization by simultaneously considering four key perspectives:

1. Appreciation for System – All systems (in this sense, do not think narrowly of an IT system; instead, think of an ecosystem or structure) have several things in common: they all have an aim or goal; they are comprised of interdependent components; and they are all coherently organized (well, we hope “coherently”). Management often fails to understand how people, process, technology, suppliers, and other elements work together to make an organization successful. Having the best individual components – the most skilled people, the best IT platform, optimized processes, etc. – in and of themselves does not make us successful. They need to work together. Consider this: What if somebody wanted to manufacture a new car by using the best components from various manufacturers? The best transmissions from one company and the best engines from another. The best brakes from one company and the best electronics from another. Put them all together and you have something very far from the best car ever built. Instead, you have a “frankencar” that will not drive at all!

2. Knowledge of Variation – As previously discussed, variation is something that should be expected in every organization and in every process. However, Deming identified two types of variation: Common Cause Variation and Special Cause Variation. Common cause variation is the normal variation we would expect with a mostly stable process (e.g., sometimes my morning train is a minute early or late based on how quickly passengers get on and off at each stop). Special Cause Variation happens when somebody makes a change to the process or something unpredictable happens (e.g., my train is delayed for four hours because it ran into several deer on the tracks). Deming encourages organizations to reduce variation and focuses on special cause variation. Managers are often tasked with making process improvements, and this can be a good thing. However, due to incomplete understanding of the end-to-end process, they sometimes instigate changes that make processes worse and in fact increase variation. For example, not long ago, a well-known educational program made changes to the student registration and faculty hiring processes. Though the changes were meant to improve efficiency, leaders failed to examine the impact of the changes they were making on downstream activities. Ultimately, due to safety and compliance issues caused by process changes, the program was forced to cancel its main annual program and refund registrations. This resulted in millions of dollars in lost revenue, widespread layoffs, and major loss of reputation. Variation matters!

3. Theory of Knowledge – How does your organization gain new knowledge? Evaluate existing knowledge? Make decisions based on knowledge? Deming said that without theory there is no knowledge and cautioned organizations to learn to distinguish between knowledge and experience. What is the difference? Knowledge is predictive. It is based on observations and tested by hypothesis and experimentation. Managers can use the “Plan-Do-Study-Act” cycle to test theories. (Deming borrowed this concept from Walter Shewhart. In the ITIL world we call this “Plan-Do-Check-Act.) In some cases, over time, knowledge becomes best practice.

On the other hand, experience is intuitive. It is based on “gut feelings,” hunches, and best guesses based on previous experiences of individuals. The only problem is that individuals often misinterpret their experiences and confuse correlation with causation. Moreover, when it comes to experience, it is difficult for the individual to gain perspective, and emotion often clouds reason. Theory of knowledge not only covers how organizations make decisions, it also relates to how organizations approach continual learning. This means that organizations must learn from data and best practices and experiences. It also means that organizations must find ways to ensure employees are continually “leveling up” with skills.

4. Psychology – No matter how good your plans, it ultimately takes individuals – your employees – to execute on them. As it turns out, people are not (yet) robots. Managers would do well to understand the mindset of those working on the team. What motivates them? What are they afraid of doing? Who will embrace change? Who is likely to resist change and how can this be overcome? For all his focus on reducing variation and improving efficiency, more than anything else, Deming advocated strongly for the people in the “people, process, technology” mantra. This suggests two things: 1) Managers should be concerned about individual employees – what makes them “tick,” what training they need, how they actually work (compared to how managers think they work) and 2) On a larger scale, the need for healthy organizational change management (OCM) practices.

The SoPK is broadly applicable to any industry and type of organization. In fact, it has been applied not only in the Automobile Industry and Manufacturing, but also in U.S. Public Education, the Pharmaceutical Industry, and Retail. More than that, the SoPK specifically – and Deming’s concepts generally – have contributed to several bodies of knowledge including: Quality Management, Project Management, IT Service Management (ITIL), Data Sciences, and Manufacturing.  Let us discuss the highlights of each.

What is Deming’s Impact on the Quality Management Domain?

Many people consider Deming the Father of Quality Management (although there are several gurus that can arm wrestle for this moniker). Deming borrowed much of his knowledge about Quality Management from other influential thinkers of the day (namely, Juran and Crosby), though he shifted the emphasis from people to process and argued against some of the prevailing ideas. For example, he railed against the “zero defects notion” of contemporary and fellow quality pioneer, Philip Crosby. Crosby believed that that definition of quality is “conformance to customer requirements” and that people should pay more attention to minimizing – in fact, eliminating – defects.

Although Deming would likely agree with Crosby’s notion of “do it right the first time,” he also understood that defects are a natural part of doing business.  In The New Economics, Deming went so far to say, “No defects, no jobs. Absence of defects does not necessarily build business… Something more is required.” What is considered quality today might tomorrow be considered “defective” if we are applying continual improvement. Thus, the focus on perfection and the notion that encouraging workers (who are not fully in control of quality) to eliminate defects is nonsensical to Deming. Moreover, simply meeting customer requirements does not guarantee that the customer is happy with the outcome or that the product or service helps the customer to achieve their objectives. Fun fact – along these lines, Deming was also not a big fan of ISO 9000. He said, “ISO 9000 shows a lack of brains.”

What is Deming’s Legacy in the world of Project Management?

The Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBoK) encompasses several areas that Deming influenced such as Quality, Plan-Do-Check-Act, and data driven decision making. Often forgotten is that project management has gained much from his customer-centric focus. Good project managers engage with customers and other stakeholders early on during a project, especially during the Initiation and Planning Phases to set expectations and gather requirements. Great project managers keep their customers “front and center” throughout the duration of their projects. Indeed, customer-centricity is key to the agile approach to project management and product development.

Deming’s Influence on IT Service Management and ITIL

The ITIL 7 Step Continual Improvement Model

As a “framework of frameworks,” ITIL relies heavily on the accumulated knowledge of other best practices, so it comes as no surprise that Deming’s philosophies influence ITIL, and more broadly, IT Service Management.

Perhaps the largest contribution – one which all ITIL proponents are familiar with – is the Seven Step Continual Improvement Model. Based on Plan-Do-Check-Act, the Seven Step Continual Improvement Model provides a loose structure for managing improvement initiatives. It encourages leaders to understand the “big picture” of the organization by starting with the vision (Plan). Then, through some form of assessment, the organization takes stock of its current state (Plan) and determines what a successful future state looks like (Plan). Next, it is time to plan improvement initiatives (Plan). Now, the organization executes on the plans (Do) through process improvements, projects, and other initiatives. After the initiatives are complete (and if we are using Agile approaches, at defined points during an improvement initiative), the organization measures success by evaluating key performance indicators and metrics (Check). Ultimately, leaders and teams determine whether existing plans need to be adjusted or reprioritized or whether new goals need to be put in place (Act).

From a consultant’s perspective, a lot of organizations “do”; fewer “plan” before “doing”; even fewer “check.”  The very best organizations “keep the momentum going” by embedding continual improvement into the “business as usual” culture.

What is Deming’s Impact on Data Sciences?

Deming was a pioneer in the application of statistical methods for quality control and process improvement. He emphasized the importance of collecting and analyzing data to understand variation in processes. Statistical techniques like control charts, sampling, and hypothesis testing, which he championed, are foundational to data sciences.

Deming stressed the need to collect data systematically and rigorously. He emphasized the role of data in understanding processes, identifying sources of variation, and making informed decisions. Today’s data scientists use similar principles when collecting and analyzing data to gain insights and make evidence-based recommendations.

How Did Deming’s Concepts Improve Manufacturing?

While there are many theorists who have contributed greatly to Manufacturing (e.g., Ishikawa, Ohno, Juran, Imai, Toyoda, to name a few) Deming’s major accomplishments come to fruition in this industry – first in Japan, later in the United States and around the world. For example, one of the core principles of lean manufacturing is the elimination of waste in all forms, including excess inventory, overproduction, waiting, unnecessary transportation, and more. Deming’s thoughts on process improvement and reduction of unnecessary variations aligns with lean’s waste reduction goals.

Famous Deming Quotes and Infamous Misquotes

One of the things I find most fascinating about Deming’s legacy is how often he is quoted, misquoted, and taken out of context. Perhaps nobody since Thomas Jefferson has been invoked so often to lend credence to contradictory arguments. Everybody wants Deming’s blessing – even if they do not always understand what he is really saying.

Let us explore a few of my top seven favorite quotes and misquotes.

7. Innovation comes from the producer—not from the customer.

This one may be a bit controversial these days. In the era of digital transformation, we often talk about putting the customer first and even use customer-centric approaches like design thinking that observes how customers actually use products and services and adjusts development accordingly. Deming is not saying that we should not focus on the customer. He is saying that the customer is not always able to articulate the solution. It is still a good idea to understand the customer’s problems and figure out how we can best solve them or at least make them better.  A contemporary example of this is the Jobs-To-Be-Done product framework that suggests a customer will “hire” (i.e., buy) a product if it helps them to get a job done. We could also qualify Deming’s concept with ITIL 4’s concept of value co-creation. But if we are being honest – with but a few notable suggestions, the solution is ultimately created by the service provider. To quote another Manufacturing great, Henry Ford said, “If I asked customers what they want they would have said a faster horse.”

6. Eighty-five percent of the reasons for failure are deficiencies in the systems and process rather than the employee. The role of management is to change the process rather than badgering individuals to do better.

As previously mentioned, Deming is making a strong claim against the approach popularized by Frederick Taylor which blames individual employees for ineffectiveness and inefficiency. For Deming, individuals are only as good as the process or management system within which they worked. As creators and controllers of systems and processes, managers have the opportunity to improve processes or make them worse. When process reengineering makes things worse, instead of blaming employees, managers should first learn how to optimize the process.

5. If someone can make a contribution to the company he feels important.

This goes hand-in-glove with the previous quote. In fact, it goes even further. More than simply not blaming individuals when things go wrong, praising them and giving them meaningful work encourages employees to go above and beyond. Deming recognizes that when employees realize they are making a valuable contribution to the company, quality also increases. At Beyond20, we take this to heart. One of the primary reasons the best-of-the-best come to work with us is that we always do our best to provide meaningful work and to make work life better.

4. Managing by results only makes things worse.

This seems to be in direct contradiction to what many aspiring managers are taught. From Deming’s perspective, making a decision or taking a course of action based on an outcome of a previous action is not acting on the causes of the outcome. Take a minute to let it sink in a bit more.

When we attempt to solve a problem, we often focus on the end result rather than carefully investigating the cause(s) of it. This results in a sort of circular logic that aims to change the result by blaming failure on the result itself or in missing the point entirely. It is like saying that it is not sunny outside because it is raining.  Brilliant!

Let us consider an example. It is not uncommon for leadership to cite high operating cost as a problem. Thus, they go about trying to resolve the supposed problem by aggressively finding ways to cut costs. The end result is often that after the cost cutting initiative, costs often increase even more; or quality has been sacrificed by cost reductions and customers are no longer interested in buying the product or service. In this case, costs are not the cause of the problem; but rather the symptom. It is more likely that costs have increased due to inadequate quality processes which ultimately lead to expensive rework and extra steps.

In IT, a similar issue arises when it comes to resolving incidents. Management is concerned that it is taking too long to resolve a certain type of recurring incident. So, they put pressure on staff to resolve the incident more quickly using temporary workarounds instead of investing the time to understand the underlying cause(s) of the incident through the Problem Management practice. This, in turn, leads to the accumulation of technical debt and has the medium and long-term effect of making the organization less efficient.

3. Best efforts are essential. Unfortunately, best efforts, people charging this way and that way without guidance of principles, can do a lot of damage. Think of the chaos that would come if everyone did his best, not knowing what to do.

The phrase that comes to mind is “work smarter; not harder.” We always want our teams to put their best foot forward. If they didn’t, we’d really be in trouble. But busy work – even well intentioned toil – is wasteful and demoralizing if we are solving the wrong problems in the wrong way without a clear path or vision. It is the obligation of leadership to set this direction and to establish the guidelines that help make this achievable. A good place to start is by taking a look at the advice woven into ITIL 4’s seven guiding principles.

2. If you can’t describe what you are doing as a process, you don’t know what you are doing.

A process is a series of steps that transforms an input into an output. Without standardized and repeatable steps to accomplish something, you will still likely get something done. Whether it is the right thing is another question. In fact, without process, you are likely to suffer from inconsistent results. If you recall, one of the primary ways Deming improved quality in manufacturing was by identifying causes of variation. He could only do this by identifying processes within manufacturing and isolating process steps that were suboptimal.

Although process can become its own silo; these days we can apply the same Deming concepts to cross-team, end-to-end value streams.

1. If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it.

This is my favorite Deming quote of all time because, in fact, he did not actually say it. It is one of the most pernicious misquotes (and I confess, early on, I misquoted this as well). What Deming actually said in The New Economics is: “It is wrong to suppose that if you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it – a costly myth.”   

Thus, Deming’s meaning is exactly the opposite of what many people think he said and which is conveyed in the abbreviated quote.  Although Deming strongly emphasized data and measurement, he also recognized that sometimes it is too costly, too difficult, or not practical to measure certain things. Nevertheless, we still need to forge ahead and manage them in the absence of data. In this, Deming recognizes the limits of science and the need for action in the face of uncertainty. Doing something is more important than waiting for the elusive perfect solution.

Indeed, this advice may be the most profound knowledge of all.