Operational Velocity

Email for Inquiries

In 1984, a physicist wrote a novel to sell his factory software. It worked too well, but it cost him his company. Eli Goldratt's "The Goal" became one of the most influential business books ever written. By his own account, operations managers that read it got better results than clients who had bought his scheduling software. He refused to pretend otherwise, and his shareholders showed him the door.This episode tells that story, then opens the Theory of Constraints for operators: the five focusing steps, Drum-Buffer-Rope, and why throughput accounting starts fights with finance. We test the evidence: a Marine Corps repair depot, an Air Force C-5 line, a Japanese toolmaker and the case against, including the failure mode Goldratt documented himself: what happens when a business books freed capacity as a headcount saving instead of a growth engine. This is the story about the man, novel, and impact on operations management. This episode pairs well with previous Operational Velocity episodes on John Little, Deming, and Aravind Eye Care, the links are below: 

• John Little 
  • https://open.spotify.com/episode/1ZsSVZSKyYk1Rtn1ZCHkU3
• W. Edwards Deming
  • https://open.spotify.com/show/033vWeYysd1RAQNqG8kqAg
• Aravind Eye Care
  • https://open.spotify.com/episode/7BJeh8XppHXhJ6vO1nGjzG

Sources

• Goldratt & Cox, The Goal (1984; revised 1986, 1992, 2004, 2014)
• Goldratt & Fox, The Race (1986)
• Goldratt, The Haystack Syndrome (1990) · It's Not Luck (1994) · Critical Chain (1997)
• Goldratt, "My Saga to Improve Production" (1996): toc-goldratt.com/content/My-Saga-to-Improve-Production
• Goldratt, "Standing on the Shoulders of Giants," Gestão & Produção (2009): scielo.br/j/gp/a/nw43nPSMWtFFqr4x5jhJkJn
• Watson, Blackstone & Gardiner, "The evolution of a management philosophy: The theory of constraints," Journal of Operations Management (2007)
• Mabin & Balderstone, "The performance of the theory of constraints methodology," IJOPM (2003)
• US Marine Corps, "MCA garners 'Fox' award" (2009): albany.marines.mil
• Srinivasan et al., "Warner Robins Air Logistics Center Streamlines Aircraft Repair and Overhaul," Interfaces (2007)

Operational Velocity is for education and general information only and is not investment, financial, legal, or tax advice, and nothing in it is a recommendation to buy or sell any security. The views expressed are the host's own, the company and figures discussed are drawn from public sources believed reliable but not guaranteed, and you should do your own research and consult a qualified professional before making any decision.

Email for Inquiries

Lifco is a Swedish serial acquirer that owns approximately 275 small niche businesses such as: dental products, demolition robots, crane attachments, recycling machinery and reports EBITA of 129% of capital employed excluding goodwill. In 2019, they mutually parted ways with their longstanding CEO and arguably the architect of their operating model. Since that time, they managed to triple their EBIDTA. In this episode, we unpack Lifco's story and more specifically break down the acquisition screen, the two-person ethics committee, the put/call structure that keeps sellers invested, and the "install a chairman" operating model, and set it against Danaher's business system, Constellation Software's capital discipline, TransDigm's leverage and Nucor's lean head office. 

Sources

• Lifco AB, Interim Report January–June 2026 (14 Jul 2026) — https://mfn.se/a/lifco/interim-report-january-june-2026
• Lifco AB, Annual and Sustainability Report 2025 (30 Mar 2026) — https://storage.mfn.se/14bd9523-71cc-4c40-9476-705e245804f6/annual-and-sustainability-report-2025.pdf
• Lifco.se — History, Business idea and targets, Acquisitions, Organisation and governance, Shareholders (as of 30 Jun 2026)
• 7 Nov 2014, prospectus and IPO price — https://news.cision.com/lifco-ab/r/lifco-publishes-the-prospectus-and-announces-the-price-for-its-ipo-on-nasdaq-stockholm,c9676238
• 21 Nov 2014, trading commences — https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2014/11/21/685204/0/en/LIFCO-COMMENCES-TRADING-ON-NASDAQ-STOCKHOLM-TODAY.html
• 7 Feb 2019, changes in Lifco's management — https://news.cision.com/lifco-ab/r/changes-in-lifco-s-management,c2734259
• 8 Feb 2019, Lifco appoints new CEO — https://news.cision.com/lifco-ab/r/lifco-appoints-new-ceo,c2735252
• Röko AB, 11 Mar 2025, outcome of offering and start of trading
• Oliver Sung, "Is Röko a Lifco all over again?" (3 Jul 2026)

Operational Velocity is for education and general information only and is not investment, financial, legal, or tax advice, and nothing in it is a recommendation to buy or sell any security. The views expressed are the host's own, the company and figures discussed are drawn from public sources believed reliable but not guaranteed, and you should do your own research and consult a qualified professional before making any decision.

Email for Inquiries

In 1986, a delegation from a German equipment maker walked into an unremarkable office building in Charlotte, North Carolina. Only twenty-two people worked in it.  There was no executive dining room, no corporate jet, no chief technology officer and no R&D department. The man waiting for them, Ken Iverson, was about to commit roughly the entire net worth of his company to a casting technology that had never been run at commercial scale. A hundred companies' engineers had inspected the same machine. It took eight years for a single competitor to follow him. This episode is about why. Not the technology — the operating system underneath it. Four layers of management between the furnace floor and the chief executive. A weekly operating review of a Fortune 500 manufacturer that fitted on five sheets of paper. A production bonus with no cap that ran 80 to 150 per cent of base wage, paid weekly, on a standard that was never allowed to move. And a pain-sharing rule that cut the chief executive's pay by three times the percentage taken from the man at the furnace. We also do the arithmetic that most Nucor stories skip: what the same three decades did to Bethlehem Steel, and what it cost ninety-five thousand pension participants.Then the uncomfortable third act. In 1999 Nucor's board removed Iverson and, six months later, his successor, over a strategy the board wanted and the founders called heresy. Nucor then spent twenty-five years executing every item on that list, and it worked. 

Sources

• Nucor Corporation, corporate history timeline, nucor.com
• Nucor 10-K, FY2025 (net sales, shipments, mill capacity, West Virginia project)
• Nucor Annual Report to Stockholders, FY2025 (headquarters headcount, decentralised structure)
• Nucor 10-K, FY2022 and FY2009 
• Nucor proxy statements (DEF 14A), FY1998, FY2002, FY2020, FY2025 (Senior Officers Incentive Plans, earnings base history, compensation philosophy)
• Nucor quarterly earnings releases, Q1 2025 through Q2 2026
• Nucor 8-K investor exhibits, 2026 (capital allocation, balance sheet)
• Nucor Corporation (B), Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth, case 2-0016
• Ken Iverson with Tom Varian, Plain Talk: Lessons from a Business Maverick, John Wiley & Sons, 1998
• Jim Collins, Good to Great, 2001

Operational Velocity is for education and general information only and is not investment, financial, legal, or tax advice, and nothing in it is a recommendation to buy or sell any security. The views expressed are the host's own, the company and figures discussed are drawn from public sources believed reliable but not guaranteed, and you should do your own research and consult a qualified professional before making any decision.

Email for Inquiries

An eye surgeon in southern India sits between two operating tables. She finishes one cataract operation, turns ninety degrees, and starts the next on a patient who is already prepped and waiting. Six to eight operations an hour, against a conventional norm closer to one. They did not make the surgery faster. They removed the waiting. That single design choice is the seed of an operating system that now performs three quarters of a million procedures a year, gives away roughly half of them, funds itself without donors, and records infection rates of two per ten thousand cases. In this episode, Gautam examines Aravind Eye Care System: the constraint analysis Dr. G. Venkataswamy ran in 1976, the lens factory they built when a supplier's price capped the mission rather than the margin, the three-tier price list with no means test, the workforce they had to manufacture because the market didn't supply it, and the decision to teach the entire model to their competitors. Plus the question this show keeps returning to: does the operating system survive its architect? Aravind is the one case with twenty years of data on the other side of the founder's death.

Sources

• Aravind Eye Care System, Activity Report April 2024 – March 2025 https://aravind.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/Activity-Report_2024-2025_Final.pdf
• Gupta S, Ravilla RD, Aravind H, Chandrashekharan S, Ravilla TD. "Changing patterns in cataract surgery indications, outcomes, and costs, 2012–2023." Lancet Regional Health Southeast Asia, 2025 https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11787026/
• Narang P, Ravindran R, Ravilla T, et al. "Allied Ophthalmic Personnel: Backbone of Aravind's Eye Care and Social Mission." Eye, 2026 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41433-026-04249-y
• Le HG, Ehrlich JR, Venkatesh R, et al. "A Sustainable Model For Delivering High-Quality, Efficient Cataract Surgery In Southern India." Health Affairs, 2016 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27702949/
• Haripriya A, Chang DF, Ravindran RD. "Endophthalmitis reduction with intracameral moxifloxacin… results from 2 million consecutive cataract surgeries." J Cataract Refract Surg, 2019 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0886335019303153
• Haripriya A, Chang DF, Namburar S, Smita A, Ravindran RD. "Efficacy of intracameral moxifloxacin endophthalmitis prophylaxis at Aravind Eye Hospital." Ophthalmology, 2016 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26522705/
• Ravilla T, Ramasamy D. "Efficient high-volume cataract services: the Aravind model." Community Eye Health, 2014  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4069777/
• Gupta S, Palsule-Desai OD, Gnanasekaran C, Ravilla T. "Spillover Effects of Mission Activities on Revenues in Nonprofit Health Care." Journal of Marketing Research, 2018 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0022243718813347
• Lions Aravind Institute of Community Ophthalmology (LAICO) https://www.laico.org/about-us
• Aurolab https://aravind.org/aurolab/

Operational Velocity is for education and general information only and is not investment, financial, legal, or tax advice, and nothing in it is a recommendation to buy or sell any security. The views expressed are the host's own, the company and figures discussed are drawn from public sources believed reliable but not guaranteed, and you should do your own research and consult a qualified professional before making any decision.

Email for Inquiries

Technology doesn't create value by existing in your business. It creates value when deployed against a specific constraint, with a defined metric, and someone accountable for delivering it. In this episode, Gautam Basu draws a hard line between technology as operational leverage, where it genuinely moves the P&L  and technology as narrative, where it mostly moves the slide deck.

From warehouse robotics delivering 2x productivity gains in weeks, to ERP implementations burning through 50–70% failure rates, to the one question that clears every boardroom fastest. This is the unsentimental, data-grounded case for deploying technology like a wrench, not a vision. The Operational Leverage Test. The three use cases actually moving EBITDA right now. And the four failure modes that have cost PE-backed businesses more money than most sponsors want to admit. If you're about to approve a technology budget, this episode is the conversation to have first.

Show Notes 

The context. We're in a PE environment where multiple expansion is largely gone, leverage is structurally harder, and median hold periods have hit 5.8 years — the longest on record. EBITDA margin expansion through genuine operational improvement is the primary remaining value creation lever. Technology is central to that — when deployed correctly.

The Operational Leverage Test. Four questions that should precede any technology investment decision: What is the constraint? What is the metric? What is the payback period? Who is accountable? If you can't answer all four before the contract is signed, don't sign it yet.

Three use cases genuinely moving the P&L right now. Warehouse automation and fulfilment robotics — including the Staples Canada case where AMR deployment doubled productivity from 42 to 82 units per hour within weeks and cut cycle time by 70%. Inventory visibility and working capital release — the quieter, often higher-return play. And predictive maintenance — where IoT-enabled sensor monitoring has cut unplanned downtime by 60% in 90 days in documented deployments.

Three failure modes the vendors won't mention. Buying a solution before diagnosing the problem — including McKinsey's documented case of a consumer goods company spending over $150M on a fully automated warehouse built on the wrong demand assumptions. Change management treated as an afterthought — only 21% of mid-market businesses provide adequate technology training to their people (Eurostat 2024). And integration fantasy — where "we have an open API" meets a decade of legacy systems that were never designed to talk to each other.

The operating partner's lens. The pattern where the technology agenda is driven by what the sponsor needs to believe rather than what the business actually needs — and the 90-day diagnostic model that separates the 83% who hit their ROI targets from the majority who don't.

Key data cited in this episode:

• Median PE purchase multiples: 11.8x EBITDA in 2025 (McKinsey Global Private Markets Report 2026)
• Median PE hold periods: 5.8 years, longest on record (PitchBook / BDO 2025 Private Equity Survey)
• ERP implementation failure rate: 50–70% (multiple sources, consistent across RubinBrown, Third Stage Consulting, NetSuite research)
• Among organisations that conducted ROI analysis before implementation: 83% met or exceeded ROI expectations (ERP statistics research, Bluelinker / Jacopo.ee 2025)
• Warehouse automation market: $31.2B globally in 2025, growing at ~17% CAGR (Synkrato 2026)
• Logistics robots sold globally in 2025: 450,000+ vs. 75,000 in 2019 — a 500% increase in six years (The Network Installers / SellersCommerce 2026)
• Staples Canada / Locus Robotics: 42 to 82 UPH, 70% cycle time reduction (Locus Robotics case study, February 2026)
• AMR payback periods: under 24 months in most commercial deployments; under 12 months in high-volume e-commerce (Locus Robotics)
• Unplanned downtime reduction via predictive maintenance: 60% in 90 days (documented case, virtualworkforce.ai 2025)
• ERP training gap: 73% of large EU enterprises provide ICT training; only 21% of SMEs (Eurostat 2024)
• Companies using ERP consultants report 85% success rate vs. 50% overall (RubinBrown / NetSuite)

Referenced frameworks and models:

• The Operational Leverage Test (Constraint → Metric → Payback → Accountable Owner)
• Theory of Constraints (Goldratt) — constraint identification
• Robotics-as-a-Service (RaaS) as a capital structure shift for mid-market automation

Operational Velocity is for education and general information only and is not investment, financial, legal, or tax advice, and nothing in it is a recommendation to buy or sell any security. The views expressed are the host's own, the company and figures discussed are drawn from public sources believed reliable but not guaranteed, and you should do your own research and consult a qualified professional before making any decision.

Email for Inquiries

Tim Cook arrived at Apple in March 1998 and inventory went from about a month to about six days. Almost nobody knows it's in Apple's own 10-K. The company disclosed days of supply in inventory as a line item: 31 days in FY1997, 6 days in FY1998, 2 days in FY1999. Inventory in dollars: $437m, $78m, $20m. This episode reconstructs how, using Apple's filings rather than the folklore and then asks the harder question: what did the doctrine actually build, and what did it cost? We cover the Cook's inheritance of Apple's operations, six moves he made in restructuring it's supply chain, balance sheet implications + cash released from these moves, and how Cook handled the various economic, regulatory, legal, and geopolitical shocks across his decades long tenure at Apple. 

Sources 

• Apple 10-K filings for FY1998, FY1999, FY2000, FY2011, FY2023, FY2024 and FY2025
• Apple Newsroom statements (Nov 2022, July 2025, Aug 2025, April 2026)
• Fortune's 2008 profile of Cook by Adam Lashinsky
• Gartner Supply Chain Top 25

Operational Velocity is for education and general information only and is not investment, financial, legal, or tax advice, and nothing in it is a recommendation to buy or sell any security. The views expressed are the host's own, the company and figures discussed are drawn from public sources believed reliable but not guaranteed, and you should do your own research and consult a qualified professional before making any decision.

Email for Inquiries

Thirty years in the private equity ecosystem, most people accumulate a network in that time. Kit Lisle built a room. Mr. Lisle spent eight years as a US Army Military Intelligence officer, including a posting at the National Military Joint Intelligence Center under the Joint Chiefs. Then he founded  Acclaro Growth Partners and spenr two decades running commercial due diligence for PE firms, investment banks, and portfolio companies. More recently, Kit built TheOperators.pe, a leading collaborative peer community for PE-backed executives and operating partners. This conversation is about what he can see from inside that room that almost nobody else can. In this interview, we cover: 

• What actually transferred from intelligence work to reading a management team and what he had to unlearn
• "Private Equity Culture Shock": the moment a first-time PE-backed CEO realizes their old operating instincts just became liabilities
• What genuinely breaks in the first hundred days and the sponsor best practice that does the most damage
• Why the industry underwrites market risk brilliantly and execution risk badly, and why that hasn't been fixed yey
• What the customer lens surfaces that the data room structurally cannot show
• The widest gap between what sponsors believe creates value and what operators actually experience
• Handing over the firm he built for two decades and what doing it to himself taught him that advising on it never did
• Whether operating partners are now being asked to solve problems the role was never designed for

Operational Velocity is for education and general information only and is not investment, financial, legal, or tax advice, and nothing in it is a recommendation to buy or sell any security. The views expressed are the host's own, the company and figures discussed are drawn from public sources believed reliable but not guaranteed, and you should do your own research and consult a qualified professional before making any decision.

Email for Inquiries

In 1961, a young professor published a five-page proof of a formula everyone used but no one had verified: L = λW. The number of things in a system equals the rate they arrive times the time they spend inside. It looked like a footnote. It turned out to be the physics of money. This episode follows that little law out of a Cleveland classroom and into the real world through three companies, across three eras, that stopped competing on products and started competing on time. One drained its inventory to survive scarcity and accidentally built the most studied production system in history. One inverted its cash cycle until its suppliers were financing its growth, collecting money from customers weeks before paying for the parts. And one compounded a negative cash cycle into an empire built, to a remarkable degree, on other people's timelines. Speed is motion. Velocity is motion toward cash. This is the difference.

Sources

• John D. C. Little, "A Proof for the Queuing Formula: L = λW," Operations Research, Vol. 9, No. 3 (1961), pp. 383–387
• John D. C. Little, "Little's Law as Viewed on Its 50th Anniversary," Operations Research (2011)
• MIT News, "Institute Professor Emeritus John Little, a founder of operations research and marketing science, dies at 96" (October 2024)
• INFORMS, History of O.R. Excellence — John D. C. Little biography and memorial tribute, OR/MS Today (2025)
• Taiichi Ohno, Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production (English ed., 1988)
• Harvard Business School, "Dell's Working Capital" case ecosystem; contemporaneous financial commentary on Dell's negative cash conversion cycle (2004)
• NYU Shanghai Center for Business Education and Research, "Amazon's Business Model" — analysis of trade credit financing Amazon's early growth

Operational Velocity is for education and general information only and is not investment, financial, legal, or tax advice, and nothing in it is a recommendation to buy or sell any security. The views expressed are the host's own, the company and figures discussed are drawn from public sources believed reliable but not guaranteed, and you should do your own research and consult a qualified professional before making any decision.

Email for Inquiries

In 1950, an unknown American told 21 Japanese company presidents they’d take over world markets in five years. He was wrong, they did it in four. His name was W. Edwards Deming.  During the Second World War, the United States trained more than 31,000 people in quality methods. It was the largest quality training programme ever built. After the war ended, America was the only major economy left with its factories standing and quality stopped being a differentiator. The control charts came off the walls. Thirty years later, Detroit lost four billion dollars in a single year and the US government had to negotiate a cap on Japanese car imports. This episode covers the whole arc. The wartime programme America built and abandoned, then Deming's work teaching Japanese engineers, the red bead experiment, Toyota’s 1965 Deming Prize, 1983 Ford - Mazda automatic transmission manufacturing comparison, and we finish at Boeing's 2026 quality issues for the 737 Max and how they leveraged Deming's systems approach to address the quality failures. This is the story of one of the most influential individuals in the history of modern operations. 

Sources

• W. Edwards Deming, Out of the Crisis (MIT Press) — the 14 Points, the Seven Deadly Diseases, the red bead experiment, and the 94/6 estimate
• W. Edwards Deming, The New Economics for Industry, Government, Education (MIT Press, 1993) — the System of Profound Knowledge and Taguchi’s loss function
• W. Edwards Deming Institute 
  • Biographical timeline — https://deming.org/timeline/
  • The 14 Points for Management, in full — https://deming.org/explore/fourteen-points/
  • History of the Deming Prize https://www.juse.or.jp/deming_en/award/01.html
• Toyota Motor Corporation 
  • Toyota Awarded the Deming Prize (the 1965 ceremony, and Shoichiro Toyoda’s remarks) — https://www.toyota-global.com/company/history_of_toyota/75years/text/entering_the_automotive_business/chapter1/section1/item7.html
  • Total Quality Management: SQC introduced 1949, Deming Application Prize 1965 — https://www.toyota-global.com/company/history_of_toyota/75years/data/company_information/management_and_finances/management/tqm/change.html

Operational Velocity is for education and general information only and is not investment, financial, legal, or tax advice, and nothing in it is a recommendation to buy or sell any security. The views expressed are the host's own, the company and figures discussed are drawn from public sources believed reliable but not guaranteed, and you should do your own research and consult a qualified professional before making any decision.

Email for Inquiries

Nick Howley founded TransDigm in 1993 with $25 million of equity and four aerospace parts units nobody wanted. Over the next 28 years, the firm compounded at roughly 33- 37% a year, almost identically under private equity ownership and under public-market scrutiny. Today the company runs 54% EBITDA margins on manufactured hardware. The operating system was three items long, finished in 24 months, and never revised: price, cost, new business. But the drivers only explain half of it which very few people analyze:  the aerospace supply chain  (OEM, Tier 1, Tier 2/3), and service parts economics, the AOG clock that makes price elasticity functionally zero, the exponential relationship between service level and safety stock, cycle service level versus fill rate, the central-versus-forward positioning trade-off, and why airline parts pooling is disarmed by the same fragmentation that builds the moat. Inventory for Transdigm isn't a working-capital drag, it's the product. 

Sources

• TransDigm FY2025 Form 10-K and FY2026 Q2 results
• TransDigm Forms 8-K on the FY2024 and FY2025 special dividends, and the Stein/Lisman succession
• TransDigm Forms 10-Q (aftermarket "recurring revenues... many times the size of the original OEM purchases" language)
• DoD Office of Inspector General, Report DODIG-2019-060 (Feb 2019) and the follow-on report (Dec 2021)
• House Committee on Oversight and Reform hearing records, 15 May 2019 and 19 Jan 2022
• GAO-25-107468, on data rights and vendor lock (Sep 2025)
• GAO-21-388, on sole-source spare parts contracts and cost/pricing-data delays
• GAO-06-839, on technical data needs (C-130J)
• FAA Parts Manufacturer Approval guidance and FAA Order 8110.42D
• Nick Howley in conversation with Will Thorndike, 50X Podcast (Jul 2022)
• Morningstar equity research on TransDigm's moat and PMA economics
• CNBC on engine aftermarket economics (Sep 2024)
• Oliver Wyman MRO market size and global fleet-age data (2025–26)
• Aviation Week Network commercial aftermarket forecast (Feb 2026)
• Standard service-parts inventory theory (service-level Z-factors; cycle service level vs. fill rate)

Operational Velocity is for education and general information only and is not investment, financial, legal, or tax advice, and nothing in it is a recommendation to buy or sell any security. The views expressed are the host's own, the company and figures discussed are drawn from public sources believed reliable but not guaranteed, and you should do your own research and consult a qualified professional before making any decision.