<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Valid or reliable &#8211; trying to break the tradeoff</title>
	<atom:link href="http://jamieflinchbaugh.com/2010/07/valid-or-reliable-trying-to-break-the-tradeoff/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://jamieflinchbaugh.com/2010/07/valid-or-reliable-trying-to-break-the-tradeoff/</link>
	<description>on lean culture, transformational leadership, and entrepreneurial   excellence</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 17:05:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Kevin</title>
		<link>http://jamieflinchbaugh.com/2010/07/valid-or-reliable-trying-to-break-the-tradeoff/comment-page-1/#comment-1831</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 13:33:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jamieflinchbaugh.com/2010/07/valid-or-reliable-trying-to-break-the-tradeoff/#comment-1831</guid>
		<description>Good post - this is why ROS (return on sales) has become my most important financial metric.  What has been surprising is how hard it has been to convince others - including senior finance people - that it is valid, even though it is nearly synonymous with basic profitability.  It&#039;s almost as if it is TOO simple and therefore cannot be valid, even though those guys work in a world of ratios - just fancier sounding ones!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good post &#8211; this is why ROS (return on sales) has become my most important financial metric.  What has been surprising is how hard it has been to convince others &#8211; including senior finance people &#8211; that it is valid, even though it is nearly synonymous with basic profitability.  It&#8217;s almost as if it is TOO simple and therefore cannot be valid, even though those guys work in a world of ratios &#8211; just fancier sounding ones!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: leansimulations</title>
		<link>http://jamieflinchbaugh.com/2010/07/valid-or-reliable-trying-to-break-the-tradeoff/comment-page-1/#comment-1830</link>
		<dc:creator>leansimulations</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 13:32:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jamieflinchbaugh.com/2010/07/valid-or-reliable-trying-to-break-the-tradeoff/#comment-1830</guid>
		<description>Too often I have seen management look at a particular increase in defects and jump to conclusions. However, when you look more closely at the rate, it falls within statistical variance. I guess it must be psychological. We feel that more is bad, and something needs to be done, even though the ratio is the same!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Too often I have seen management look at a particular increase in defects and jump to conclusions. However, when you look more closely at the rate, it falls within statistical variance. I guess it must be psychological. We feel that more is bad, and something needs to be done, even though the ratio is the same!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

