Knowledge is something very complex, which can not be fully expressed in numbers. However, we can approach statistically from a model that is not a concrete action and manage them in the day to day.
The acquired knowledge is a function of many variables, such as a culture, an age, lived experiences, temperaments, attitudes, social class, a nascent / lived relation, degree of instruction, physical and psychological factors, curiosity, necessity, etc.
However, the use of technology can bring us closer to a system that is both fast and efficient.
The Annalise is a methodology to measure, track and achieve results through trainings
Annalise is a special module of Annimar Knowledge Management ( Manages all trainings, applies tests and generates performance reports).
(There are more information on the footer.)
|Graphics and reports|
Do you want know more about methodology ? Fill the form below and we will ontact you
A brief history…
I worked 25 years for a big company where I had the opportunity to live so many situations and problems with processes, products, equipments, security, etc. I passed through several sections and functions, starting as a technician in the maintenance area.
During this period I could feel how much the knowledge was missing to solve problems. I noticed how complex was the qualification of a good professional. Even for a good professional, some knowledges only can be learned with the time. While some more experienced people from the team were capable to solve a problem in minutes, other people that never faced some problem used to take hours. This bothered me, but I didn’t know what to do yet…
Some years later, with more experience and detailed knowledge about the equipments and possible errors (that used to repeat periodically) I started to act as an inspector, with the task to monitor the equipments searching and listing problems, to solve it in a scheduled maintenance happening periodically. In this stage I could handle and understand better my initial annoyance.
I learned some tools that gave me a clear vision and showed me that the problems could be categorized and analysed in groups, and each problem can be treated in different ways, one of these ways are called Ishikawa or cause and effect diagram. Ishikawa show us that the causes can be categorized in 6 big groups: Manpower, Machinery, Materials, Method, Mother-Nature and Measurement. With this separation, it’s more easy to detail the analyze of each cause to some effect. I started to use this tool. Analyzing the effects, was possible to separate the causes and perform the actions according to each situation. When the cause is manpower, we request training, when the cause is machine, we request maintenance in the machine, when the problem was in the method, we met with the engineers team to adequate the processes to the reality together. This tool helps a lot, but sometimes even acting in the right way, some problems already solved kept happening again in a non-acceptable matter of time. This bothered me too. That’s when I came across another very useful and quality tool. The Five Whys. This tool allowed us a deeper investigation on the causes of the problems and the search of the root cause or the fundamental cause, where the problem is in fact. With these deeper analysis I noticed that some initial problems with the machines were being caused by human actions. So I discovered that only one of the 6Ms from Ishikawa was related to human actions (manpower) but the search of the root cause showed me that in most situations, when going more deep, we note that the failures related to Machine, Method, Material, Measure and Mother-Nature can be related to people (since an inadequate or outdated method was defined by people, a bad measured equipment was calculated by people, an inadequate material for the process was defined, choosen or inspected by people, an inadequate or deficient measure instrument was calibrated and released by people). Summarizing, there are much more causes related to people then we could imagine… This bothered me but I still didn’t know what to do.
Some years later, I assumed leadership positions in several areas, between these, maintenance and production. The leadership function require us efficiency and efficacy by the hands of other people. The solution of problems I lived in the practice, was in the hands of my team. The problems were the same, but higher on my responsibility which I couldn’t act directly and efficiently in each one. I knew the disabilities, and I knew even if the problems were solved these will always happen again. This caused me some discomfort… How to guarantee that people will understand the process and will act in the best way? How to indentify the training needs of people and supply these needs in an efficient way so they can act correctly avoiding or minimizing the problems? How to measure the knowledge degree of each one? How to relate an acquired knowledge to an improvement in the result? How to train people in an efficient and effective way?
Well, based on these doubts, and the need to improve people’s efficiency, I started a serie of studies that could help in the search for a simple, easy-to-apply methodology that has a high degree of effectiveness. This study resulted in the Annalise methodology.
Soon I’ll publish an article, describing in details about this method, which will be the subject of my master’s thesis, in progress…
Post graduates in project management (FATEC), Bachelor’s degree in business administration
(UNITAU), Web Designer Technologist (UNITAU), Mechanical technician (CEFET-MG), Multinational company experience (25 years), Businessman in 3d training development and virtual reality / Knowledge Management (10 years), and university professor in administration and 3D modeling (FATEC) (5 years).