In last month’s article, “ANOVA and the Process Behavior Chart,” we saw how both techniques use the same basic comparison to answer completely d

In global manufacturing, two key goals—intertwined yet distinct—heavily dominate the industry’s agenda: addressing the growing demand for environmentally sustainable practices, and optimizing operational efficiency.

There’s an old saw—cribbed from Plato and popularized by Douglas Adams—that those most interested in leading others are least suited to the task.

The pandemic forced leaders to reconcile with the need for effective hybrid and remote team management strategies, including performance evaluations.

Having a coach these days is almost a given, an essential part of any senior executive’s career portfolio. But while some leaders swear by their coaches, others just can’t seem to find the “right one.” What causes these wildly different experiences?

Wharton management professor Peter Cappelli is routinely asked to predict the future of work.

Paul was sitting in his office staring at production numbers from the past quarter. Despite having a great team, strong customer demand, and state-of-the-art equipment, the factory’s performance wasn’t meeting expectations.

For me, the future is all about learning and teaching. Learning new ideas or disciplines fascinates me. Interconnecting those experiences and disciplines and creating new ideas to share with others through teaching is even more exciting.

We live in a world where problems aren’t just growing—they’re evolving into ever-more complex challenges. During the 20th century, we pushed the boundaries of innovation, creating complicated systems that demanded structured problem-solving approaches.

In the world of operations and quality management, the pressure to act quickly can feel overwhelming. Senior executives are constantly racing against time to meet customer demands, solve problems, and keep shareholders satisfied.