In Lieu of Money, Toyota Donates Efficiency to New York Charity

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/07/27/nyregion/in-lieu-of-money-toyota-donates-efficiency-to-new-york-charity.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&

by kmfrk • 13 years ago

274 97 13 years ago

mobile.nytimes.com

mathattack2• 13 years ago

Giving expertise can be much more valuable than tossing money at a problem.

bargl• 13 years ago

I've volunteered a lot of places and money is easy to give, but to invest time is frequently more valuable and makes more of a difference. It's also a lot harder to give up a Saturday (or in this case a few productive engineers) in order to really help out. It puts the problem on your radar in a completely different way.

mathattack2• 13 years ago

I think there is a value to know when to do which. Some charities have more money than expertise. Some have more expertise than money. By giving a little time, you can see what's needed. For better or worse, the average person running a charitable organization has more good intentions than managerial or technical training.

eksith2• 13 years ago

Especially since expertise is usually one of the first things bought with donated money.

rix0r• 13 years ago

I can't tell if this is sarcasm.

People are usually unaware of their own incompetence (I don't mean the term harshly), so I would expect hiring outside expertise seems would usually take a back seat to just buying supplies.

grimtrigger• 13 years ago

Kudos to Mr. Foriest for taking Toyota up on their offer. When someone comes along and says "Hey, we can show you how to do your job better", most people take it as a threat. Thats my guess as to why programs like this aren't more popular. No one wants to look incompetent (though I certainly wouldn't look at it that way).

saraid216• 13 years ago

That's because it is a threat. Disruption to your current process has a cost, and there is no assurance that such a cost will be paid back anytime soon, if ever.

Dylan168073• 13 years ago

That is not what the word threat means.

Amadou• 13 years ago

I thought it was pretty poor reporting for the article not to mention that what Toyota donated was industrial engineering expertise.

In college we called the guys in the IE program "imaginary engineers" but in real life the discipline is responsible for making assembly lines and other manufacturing processes work as efficiently as possible. All modern manufacturers of any scale live and die by their IE departments.

apalmer4• 13 years ago

I studied Operation Research & Industrial Engineering in college. The rest of the engineering students called ORIE, 'Oh Really It's Engineering?'

hencq2• 13 years ago

Ha, same here. They called it a course instead of a degree here. Then again we had dismissive nicknames for practically any field I think.

philip1209• 13 years ago

I did "systems engineering", which was OR and control theory. While it was somewhat soft engineering for the first years, the final year was intense optimization once a proper mathematical and computational background was established.

neutronicus• 13 years ago

People said this at my undergrad, too. "Instead Of Engineering", but same deal.

Mainly, they had a reputation for a light workload, which people naturally extrapolated into a judgment of the discipline.

When this came up I always proposed the alternate explanation that Electrical Engineers' higher workload might, just might, be due to a sadomasochistically-macho department culture, and Industrial and Operations Engineers' lighter workload might be due to a curriculum designed by efficiency experts.

kmfrk2• 13 years ago

Can you recommend any good books? Aside from "Competing Against Time".

RyanMcGreal• 13 years ago

Of course, at one time corporations paid enough in taxes to fund social security programs that meant people didn't need to go to soup kitchens to get a meal.

venomsnake2• 13 years ago

At one time there were also semi regular human visits to the moon and USA launched stuff into space that is almost outside the solar system now and still working :)

The social fabric is a valuable resource ... too bad that it is near depletion in the world.

abtinf3• 13 years ago

Of course, at one time, people spent a moment of critical reflection before speaking. But I suppose trolls aren't people.

Here is some real data from a left-center think tank:

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Doc...

Please show me the drop in corporate income tax collections. I don't see it. What I see is that corporate tax revenues have dramatically outpaced inflation, meaning we collect more real revenue from corporations than at any other point in history.

For example, in 1960, corporate tax revenue was ~$22B. A dollar from 1960 is worth $7.76 today [1]. To keep pace with inflation, today's revenue would would have to be ~$170B. 2012 corporate tax collections was $240B, or significantly greater than inflation.

And the further back in history you go, the more dramatic the effect.

[1] http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm

potatolicious• 13 years ago

Wouldn't it be more useful to measure corporate tax collection per capita? Keeping pace with inflation is only meaningful if the population is static.

From your numbers and the 1960 census, it looks like we were collecting $944/pp (2013 dollars). Accounting for today's population, we're now collecting $771/pp.

Assuming you buy the idea at all that corporate taxes have an obligation to feed the poor, it certainly does look like the supporting-power of said taxes have decreased over time.

DannoHung• 13 years ago

It takes some real special reasoning to look at a tax burden shifting from 1:1 personal to corporate to 5:1 personal to corporate and say that corporate tax rates haven't fallen off.

consultant235222• 13 years ago

A better estimate would be percentage of GDP.

venomsnake2• 13 years ago

Hmm can anyone match the cost of the "donation" to typical monetary donations for similar causes?

Because deploying engineers is not cheap too. Toyota provided more bang for the buck that is for sure, but were they in the red or black compared to just writing a check?

Xylakant2• 13 years ago

I don't think this is a viable question. The value that the given good (money, expertise) has to the donating entity is of no concern for the people receiving it. For them, the value they can extract is of importance. So the interesting question is "if Toyota had cut a check of the same monetary value as their own costs, would that be of higher value to the charity?" and I'm pretty sure the answer is no. Even if the current savings may be lower than the cost of the engineers, the process changes will hopefully propagate and still bear fruit in a decade. Money would be gone by then.

consultant235222• 13 years ago

I once worked at a company that liked to do charitable team building. They'd take about 40 engineers and IT people out and do things like serve food or unpackage toys for little kids (remove matchbox cars from the package for example). While I enjoyed the day out of the office I think it was a waste of money (our salaries). If 40 people make $80k/yr on average with 240 working days per year that's $333 per person * 40 = $13,333. You could've hired a minimum wage worker full time for the whole year for that kind of money. All for the novelty of "my department did charity work."

bostonvaulter2• 13 years ago

One of the benefits to the charity is that by receiving a donation in expertise, they have a lower operating overhead then receiving money directly and spending it on the same expertise.

*at least as far as I understand.

smackfu• 13 years ago

Efficiency experts coming in to a situation they know nothing about and suggesting things can be done better? That sounds awfully familiar. I'm glad it worked out here, but it's often a recipe for disaster.

Edit: Wow, guess there is a lot of love for efficiency experts.

sp332• 13 years ago

"Kaizen" is a process for improving your process. It enforces a feedback loop where anyone can point out an issue, instead of having policy dictated unilaterally by experts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Production_System#Conti...

saosebastiao2• 13 years ago

Expertise doesn't have to be situational or contextual. Soup kitchen operations can benefit from operations experts, even if they have no experience with the soup kitchen context. They do this using the same tool that programmers use to model the world: abstraction.

mjn2• 13 years ago

Sometimes, yes, but as things get more complex, operations experts do tend to get more specialized. If you took some logistics engineers from Amazon and Exxon and had them swap places, they wouldn't be able to immediately do the same job, though if they're good they should certainly be able to learn the new context.

bernardom• 13 years ago

Having a negative attitude about whether new ideas/people can be helpful? Sounds like a recipe for not improving.

hencq2• 13 years ago

As an industrial engineer I'm quite excited about this. I'm 100% sure there's tons of opportunities for improvements at most charities (heck, at most companies as well). One big aspect of the Toyota Production System is that it encourages everyone to help introduce improvements. The traditional example is allowing conveyor belt workers to stop the belt when they discovered a problem. If they can instill that type of culture at the charities they work with, the benefits could be even bigger. Teaching a man how to fish and all that.

mratzloff• 13 years ago

This is great. A check is easy and visible, but if companies really want to donate to charity, employee time makes a huge difference.

This is one example, but there are dozens. PR and marketing, organizing, programming systems, construction expertise... It happens less often than it should but frequently also more often than we hear about. Toyota just has a good PR team.

It's also a better way for you personally to get involved. Anyone can mop floors or scrape old paint. Very few have the skills you have, so figuring out how to donate your expertise is a better use of your time.

mjs• 13 years ago

The whole article is a PR team's dream: an article in a prominent paper highlighting both their company's charitable work and efficiency expertise! (But a nice story regardless.)

VintageCool• 13 years ago

That was my interpretation too. This may have been motivated as PR for Toyata's efficiency consulting arm.

nathanb2• 13 years ago

One thing that's really cool about being a software developer (and I promise I'll relate this to the article in a sec...) is that you can practice your craft by yourself, with freely-available tools, and then point at something cool that you have done. This is advice that I give to software developers seeking jobs -- spend some time on your job search, but also spend some time contributing to open source projects or creating cool things of your own, which you can then point to as a demonstration of your craft.

This seems like a great opportunity for those in other professions to do the same. Laid off from your Industrial Systems Engineering job and looking for work? Help a homeless shelter optimize their processes. Accountant? Donate some time to a local thrift store to help get their books in order.

I think this could really hit the mutual-benefit sweet spot: it helps you get a job, and it helps an organization trying to benefit the community as well.

ecoffey• 13 years ago

It would also probably help you feel more confident when interviewing for jobs. You know you have valuable skills that can make a difference to an organization

huherto2• 13 years ago

This is one of those little gems that you sometimes find in HN. It is not a world changing idea but it can really make a difference in people that are struggling to find a job.

It would be very interesting to see a list of things that people have built or done just to learn and show up their work in different professions.

nknighthb6• 13 years ago

I've actually tried to do stuff like this before. Offers of skilled assistance from individuals seem to be refused or ignored. You're welcome to fill some soup bowls, though!

tbrownaw• 13 years ago

Do you know if this is because they don't know how to handle that, or because it would step on people's toes (giving volunteers power over presumably-paid staff), or because they're afraid of legal issues (suppose the volunteer bookkeeper gets something wrong), or some other reason?

throwawaycan• 13 years ago

Well you have to understand the structure of those organizations. They might not know anything about IT and have someone they don't know offering to "fix it", they might think you are there to remove virus from their PCs. Lots of org wouldn't know the benefits of getting a proper IT management system before they see it. Sometimes you have to get started volunteering at that organization, see what they really need, and then propose to develop some IT projects that would help them fix real world problems that they have. Before they see what problem you could solve, you are just a volunteer that doesn't fit with their core activities and they wouldn't know what to do with you. Anyway, there are so many NGO out there that even if you get refused somewhere, find another one, there's no shortage.

josh2600• 13 years ago

You can't really just walk in and say "I wanna optimize your shit yo!".

The way I would approach it would be to attend a board meeting or email the Managing Director of the charity directly. Folks at the retail level of soup kitchens are really busy and deal with difficult people all day long. I think if you use a top-down sales technique to donate your experience you'll fare better. Yes, I believe you do, in fact, need to sell your donated time. Less sales really, and more positioning.

Source: I'm a marketer and I've failed at helping non-profits by starting too low on the totem pole. Conversely, I've also succeeded by starting at the top.

slantyyz• 13 years ago

Part of the challenge are the mindsets within a food bank.

The first is that the food bank's mission is philanthropic, so any suggestion that "you should consider operating like a well-run restaurant to be more efficient" is usually dismissed.

Secondly, most food banks are under-resourced, so they're always "stuck in the weeds" by just trying to get everyone served, and that prevents them from taking a step back and thinking about how to make things better.

The third is simply human nature, people who have been doing things for a long time are resistant to change and perceive advice from outsiders as a threat. This is usually illustrated quite well in those "restaurant makeover" types of shows, when the celebrity chef and/or restaurant consultants try to talk sense into the struggling restauranteurs.

tobtoh• 13 years ago

In Australia, there is am organisation called Good Company (http://www.goodcompany.com.au/) which coordinates charity organisations requiring assistance with professional people willing to donate skills.

I'm sure there must be similar organisations around the world - they are probably your best bet if you're looking to contribute your talents/time to assist a charity/non-profit.

ebun• 13 years ago

VolunteerMatch.com is a great site to use for seeking Opportunities. Orgs with tech needs often post there seeking help.

moneyrich2• 13 years ago

This is right on point, what we should do is ask them to make videos of what and how they did, and get them to other soup kitchens, why help only one when they could easily help hundreds with a few youtube videos. I would even be interested in watching them

drinkzima• 13 years ago

The Taproot Foundation is exactly that mission, donation of pro bono work: http://www.taprootfoundation.org/

knowaveragejoe• 13 years ago

It's interesting the direction that corporate giving is taking. Here's a neat interactive from the Chronicle of Philanthropy showing the shift away from cash donations to products and volunteerism:

http://philanthropy.com/article/How-America-s-Biggest/140269...

rescripting• 13 years ago

I love this idea, and I'd love to see more of it. However, I don't think companies are properly incentivised to offer employee time/expertise over money. You can get tax breaks for donating cash, leading a lot of companies to donate not only for the good PR, but also the kickback of a tax deduction.

A tax break for companies that also donate time/expertise would be great, although I have no idea how you'd structure it.

kmfrk2• 13 years ago

In San Francisco, not well. I can't submit both BuzzFeed and the Gawker network's stories, because pg blocks them, but you can google "Twitter + Charity + tax cut" and see the stories.

dpe82• 13 years ago

They should be able to declare an in-kind contribution at some reasonable hourly rate for the engineers' time.

jaggederest• 13 years ago

Usually doesn't work that way, unfortunately. I can't donate my time through LLC and get a tax break, at least.

huherto2• 13 years ago

I am not an accountant. But the labor cost would be payed by the company and handled as a regular expense, indirectly reducing profits and taxes.

caycep2• 13 years ago

In the country of Henry Ford, it's sad that it took Toyota to do this.

snambi• 13 years ago

Toyota is the Ford of the world lately.

caycep2• 13 years ago

True. But optimization and improvisation was being thought about for the past century; how much lost opportunity from not doing this in the '50's and '60's?

thisjustinm• 13 years ago

I worked alongside industrial engineers at a Kodak manufacturing plant that applied the Toyota Production System to their operation over the course of several years (once you start you're never done, thus continuous improvement, etc) and the results were dramatic (in a good way). I liken it to "industrial UX" as a lot of the observational techniques and ways of getting to the true root cause of issues are not too different than what a UX person would do for a website. Personally, I still use what I learned whether it's laying out my kitchen or my desk at work to maximize my own efficiency.

motters• 13 years ago

This is an example of making a bad system more efficiently bad. So it's great that the process can be made more efficient, but that doesn't address the cause of why people are having to rely upon food banks in the first place or why food banks have been expanding their activities in the last few years. If food banks exist then something is wrong at a more fundamental level and it would be better to direct efforts towards trying to fix that problem.

LockeWatts• 13 years ago

I'm not sure that falls to Toyota to do, though. I would commend them for what they have done, that's a large and direct improvement to the lives of the needy. Just throwing money at the problem rarely results in the same.

echohack• 13 years ago

I don't think anyone here will disagree with you that the large problem of hunger is a problem and should be solved.

But how can you solve it? That's a huge problem!

In engineering, and particularly with software, we seek to answer the small questions until we build a robust system.

Dylan168073• 13 years ago

What's wrong with food banks? Let's look at the options to handle a person without a job or savings.

1. ignore them, of course

2. give them a job

3. give them money

4. give them food

1 is awful, 2 is infeasible, you can't magically find a productive job for everyone, 3 and 4 both seem fine to me. Would you have them all buying food in stores instead? That seems like it'll take more money to get the same amount of people fed.

What would you prefer?

nhaehnle• 13 years ago

I would say that 3 tends to be better than 4. This is because it allows greater agency and self-determination to the people you help, which in turn means a greater improvement to their life.

The only downsides I can see are (1) a soup kitchen may become a place for social networks to be established, which is also a benefit for those helped, and (2) the food-to-money ratio may be greater if a soup kitchen can buy the food in bulk (though then one might think about setting up systems where poor people can buy-in-bulk together).

As for 2, this option is actually feasible and the best of all four you have listed. It may not be possible to find a job of the same productivity as the average currently employed person, but you don't have to. As long as the productivity is positive (no matter how small), you get a benefit to society. And, obviously, the benefit to those you help by giving them a job is many orders of magnitudes higher than if you just gave them money, let alone just giving them food.

twentysix• 13 years ago

This is the video of Toyota Production System being used in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy as mentioned in the article.

legulere• 13 years ago

The problem when you measure one thing and optimize it the things you don't measure often get worse. That's an important thing to keep in mind when optimizing.

gashad• 13 years ago

"... [Toyota engineers] drew a layout identifying spots where there were slowdowns. They reorganized the shelves by food groups and used colored tape to mark the grain, vegetable, fruit and protein sections. The time clients spent in the pantry was reduced nearly by half."

Ikea needs to hire Toyota to cut the time I shop there in half. That place is a maze! Maybe it's by design . . .

goodcanadian• 13 years ago

Definitely by design. They want to keep you in there shopping as long as they can so that hopefully you will buy more.

pgeorgi• 13 years ago

It's by design to provide as much exhibition space as possible.

At least in the Ikea stores in my region they started to provide shortcuts. When using all of them, it's hardly 5 minutes to get through the entire shop from entry to cashier, where it otherwise takes half an hour. (but then you see practically nothing).

vanderZwan• 13 years ago

To quote this little gem from Ghostbusters:

"I've worked in the private sector... they expect results!" - Ray Stantz

NickM• 13 years ago

This is a fascinating approach to solving one of the greatest problems charities face: negative public perception of "overhead". People react extremely negatively when a charity has any significant percentage of donations going to overhead, which makes it very difficult for charities to invest in themselves to improve efficiency and promote growth. By donating "efficiency", Toyota is doing the equivalent of donating money to charities but in a way that allows them to use it for overhead without it actually being labeled as such. Brilliant!

imran• 13 years ago

Wondering what Bill Gates and Warren Buffet could offer to the community (kaizen up!)

dwaltrip• 13 years ago

This is really cool, and I hate to nitpick, but comparing "up to 90 minutes" with a "average wait time of 18 minutes" is misleading, wrong, and annoying. Let's compare average to average, not max to average.

dorian-graph• 13 years ago

It's good that people are doing this, it's often a lot better than throwing money at a problem. An organisation that does similar things in India is Atma (http://atma.org.in/).

In Lieu of Money, Toyota Donates Efficiency to New York Charity

Related Stories