Comments on: big day at english cut http://gapingvoid.com/2006/02/20/big-day-at-english-cut/ "cartoons drawn on the back of business cards" Wed, 23 May 2012 20:07:07 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: Ben Rowe's Blog http://gapingvoid.com/2006/02/20/big-day-at-english-cut/#comment-10091 Ben Rowe's Blog Sat, 18 Mar 2006 08:58:11 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=2083#comment-10091 <strong>Passion beats greed</strong> You may have heard about Thomas Mahon, the famous Saville Row Tailor made famous by the famous blogger Hugh Macleod. According to Robert Scoble and Shel Israel’s Naked Conversations, Mahon was selling less than 20 suits in a good year before he s... Passion beats greed

You may have heard about Thomas Mahon, the famous Saville Row Tailor made famous by the famous blogger Hugh Macleod.
According to Robert Scoble and Shel Israel’s Naked Conversations, Mahon was selling less than 20 suits in a good year before he s…

]]> By: Kathleen Fasanella http://gapingvoid.com/2006/02/20/big-day-at-english-cut/#comment-10090 Kathleen Fasanella Thu, 23 Feb 2006 04:14:51 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=2083#comment-10090 If Thomas is making 100 bespoke suits a year, then this is not manufacturing. He's "cutting to order" (given specific order with predefined parameters over which he exercises little to no control). Making 100 suits a year under these conditions amounts to extraordinary output, particularly for one person. Now that said, you'd better believe that Thomas employs the concept of "standard work", lol. When he sets a jetted pocket, he employs the same work method; he doesn't do it differently each time. Regardless of the measure of any given individual, the construction processes Thomas uses vary little. If Thomas is making 100 bespoke suits a year, then this is not manufacturing. He’s “cutting to order” (given specific order with predefined parameters over which he exercises little to no control). Making 100 suits a year under these conditions amounts to extraordinary output, particularly for one person.
Now that said, you’d better believe that Thomas employs the concept of “standard work”, lol. When he sets a jetted pocket, he employs the same work method; he doesn’t do it differently each time. Regardless of the measure of any given individual, the construction processes Thomas uses vary little.

]]> By: Brooks Moses http://gapingvoid.com/2006/02/20/big-day-at-english-cut/#comment-10089 Brooks Moses Wed, 22 Feb 2006 17:20:04 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=2083#comment-10089 I want to amend my above point: there are two ways that a builder can put less effort into creating an item. One of them is by eliminating wasted effort; the other is by eliminating effort that goes into adding value. My above post is ignoring the gains by eliminating things that are inarguably waste; those may well be present (and the gains in production made by eliminating them certainly aren't detrimental to quality), but I doubt there's enough of that to make much of a real difference in Thomas's suit output. The rest of the argument, then, is whether eliminating the amount of design work and adaptation that goes into each individual suit would count as eliminating waste, or as eliminating things of value. My contention is that it would very definitely be the latter. I want to amend my above point: there are two ways that a builder can put less effort into creating an item. One of them is by eliminating wasted effort; the other is by eliminating effort that goes into adding value. My above post is ignoring the gains by eliminating things that are inarguably waste; those may well be present (and the gains in production made by eliminating them certainly aren’t detrimental to quality), but I doubt there’s enough of that to make much of a real difference in Thomas’s suit output.
The rest of the argument, then, is whether eliminating the amount of design work and adaptation that goes into each individual suit would count as eliminating waste, or as eliminating things of value. My contention is that it would very definitely be the latter.

]]> By: Brooks Moses http://gapingvoid.com/2006/02/20/big-day-at-english-cut/#comment-10088 Brooks Moses Wed, 22 Feb 2006 17:05:34 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=2083#comment-10088 Kathleen: "Lean manufacturing" means, essentially, that the builder puts less effort per item into creating the item, yes? While you say that "blends utmost respect for craftsmanship", I'm not sure how it can possibly be consistent with the form of craftsmanship that treats each object created as a unique piece. I see in your blog (which, admittedly, I've only skimmed) the claim that standard work is the cornerstone of lean manufacturing, and an elaboration on what you mean by standard work, which I understand as being the process by which parts of the manufacturing are standardized such that the results are exactly repeatable. Standard work, however, is the opposite of the sort of craftsmanship that Thomas does. You say that "If there's room for interpretation, there's room for error because people never interpret things in precisely the same way" (quoting from your entry on "Standard Work"). Bespoke craftsmanship says that if there's room for interpretation, then there's room for something to be better than it would be if standardized. In a case where the entire foundation -- the choice of fabric, the sizing of the suit, the desired cut and shape -- change from one product to the next, these are both going to be true; there's simply no way that the standard design could be the best design for any given suit, because it has to be optimized for all suits. The higher quality of bespoke comes from the fact that one chooses a builder who is capable of making changes that are improvements rather than errors. So, honestly, I don't see how lean manufacturing can possibly "respect" the form of craftsmanship that includes adapting all portions of the design and assembly to the differing particulars of each object being created, except possibly from afar, if it's based around standardization. Admittedly, I'm probably overselling my point and underselling yours (and I know I'm extrapolating a lot of what I think your point is without having a lot of data, so I'm setting you up a bit as a strawman; my apologies insofar as I've done that) -- there are a few things that can be standardized even when every piece is a new design. The fundamental process can be roughly standardized, and I'm sure that in most cases Thomas makes each suit roughly the same way, as variations within a standard theme. That, presumably, is how he can make 100 suits a year instead of 10, though! Kathleen: “Lean manufacturing” means, essentially, that the builder puts less effort per item into creating the item, yes?
While you say that “blends utmost respect for craftsmanship”, I’m not sure how it can possibly be consistent with the form of craftsmanship that treats each object created as a unique piece. I see in your blog (which, admittedly, I’ve only skimmed) the claim that standard work is the cornerstone of lean manufacturing, and an elaboration on what you mean by standard work, which I understand as being the process by which parts of the manufacturing are standardized such that the results are exactly repeatable.
Standard work, however, is the opposite of the sort of craftsmanship that Thomas does. You say that “If there’s room for interpretation, there’s room for error because people never interpret things in precisely the same way” (quoting from your entry on “Standard Work”). Bespoke craftsmanship says that if there’s room for interpretation, then there’s room for something to be better than it would be if standardized. In a case where the entire foundation — the choice of fabric, the sizing of the suit, the desired cut and shape — change from one product to the next, these are both going to be true; there’s simply no way that the standard design could be the best design for any given suit, because it has to be optimized for all suits. The higher quality of bespoke comes from the fact that one chooses a builder who is capable of making changes that are improvements rather than errors.
So, honestly, I don’t see how lean manufacturing can possibly “respect” the form of craftsmanship that includes adapting all portions of the design and assembly to the differing particulars of each object being created, except possibly from afar, if it’s based around standardization.
Admittedly, I’m probably overselling my point and underselling yours (and I know I’m extrapolating a lot of what I think your point is without having a lot of data, so I’m setting you up a bit as a strawman; my apologies insofar as I’ve done that) — there are a few things that can be standardized even when every piece is a new design. The fundamental process can be roughly standardized, and I’m sure that in most cases Thomas makes each suit roughly the same way, as variations within a standard theme. That, presumably, is how he can make 100 suits a year instead of 10, though!

]]> By: Paul Ambrose http://gapingvoid.com/2006/02/20/big-day-at-english-cut/#comment-10087 Paul Ambrose Wed, 22 Feb 2006 07:58:37 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=2083#comment-10087 Kathleen, I agree with your thoughts about manufacturing, but I can't see how you can view what Thomas does as manufacturing. He may repeat the same process 100 times a year, but the result in each case is more like a one-of-a-kind work of art that is perfect for his customer, but useless to anyone else. If Toyota had to create each vehicle to custom fit each customer, the advantages would evaporate. I have to agree with Hugh, that the only way to sell more without lowering the quality would be to clone Thomas. Not likely. Regardless of his chosen profession, Thomas is more of an artist than anything else. Kathleen, I agree with your thoughts about manufacturing, but I can’t see how you can view what Thomas does as manufacturing. He may repeat the same process 100 times a year, but the result in each case is more like a one-of-a-kind work of art that is perfect for his customer, but useless to anyone else.
If Toyota had to create each vehicle to custom fit each customer, the advantages would evaporate.
I have to agree with Hugh, that the only way to sell more without lowering the quality would be to clone Thomas. Not likely. Regardless of his chosen profession, Thomas is more of an artist than anything else.

]]> By: Kathleen Fasanella http://gapingvoid.com/2006/02/20/big-day-at-english-cut/#comment-10086 Kathleen Fasanella Tue, 21 Feb 2006 23:44:44 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=2083#comment-10086 <i>in order to grow a business, you either sell more OR increase your prices. Selling more in our case lowers the quality, so...?</i> I totally disagree with the (prevalent) meme that "selling more" lowers the quality. That's just not necessarily true. As a proponent of what's known as "lean manufacturing", I can emphatically state that this is not the case (I should also probably mention that most of my 27 years of manufacturing experience is in men's suits). Consider Toyota (who "invented" lean manufacturing). Their cars get better the more they produce. Their cars are less expensive the more they produce. Their models beat any other maker in any category. In addition, they are the most profitable. It does not necessarily follow that greater numbers induce lower quality. I'd urge you and Thomas to explore the concepts of lean manufacturing (see my book and my blog). Of any other philosophy of manufacturing, Lean blends utmost respect for craftsmanship and artisanry with compassion and profits. Iow, you can make things of stellar quality, pay people very well and make a tidy profit. Manufacturing (impo 100 units IS manufacturing) doesn't have to be a dirty word. Quality niche manufacturing is the future. I wish you the best of luck in your new venture. in order to grow a business, you either sell more OR increase your prices. Selling more in our case lowers the quality, so…?
I totally disagree with the (prevalent) meme that “selling more” lowers the quality. That’s just not necessarily true. As a proponent of what’s known as “lean manufacturing”, I can emphatically state that this is not the case (I should also probably mention that most of my 27 years of manufacturing experience is in men’s suits). Consider Toyota (who “invented” lean manufacturing). Their cars get better the more they produce. Their cars are less expensive the more they produce. Their models beat any other maker in any category. In addition, they are the most profitable. It does not necessarily follow that greater numbers induce lower quality. I’d urge you and Thomas to explore the concepts of lean manufacturing (see my book and my blog).
Of any other philosophy of manufacturing, Lean blends utmost respect for craftsmanship and artisanry with compassion and profits. Iow, you can make things of stellar quality, pay people very well and make a tidy profit. Manufacturing (impo 100 units IS manufacturing) doesn’t have to be a dirty word. Quality niche manufacturing is the future. I wish you the best of luck in your new venture.

]]> By: hugh macleod http://gapingvoid.com/2006/02/20/big-day-at-english-cut/#comment-10085 hugh macleod Tue, 21 Feb 2006 19:01:17 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=2083#comment-10085 Well, we're not going to be jacking up our prices to $8000 anytime soon... But I would like the prices to one day be around te same as the other Savile Row tailors are charging, not 20% less. Well, we’re not going to be jacking up our prices to $8000 anytime soon…
But I would like the prices to one day be around te same as the other Savile Row tailors are charging, not 20% less.

]]> By: Dennis Howlett http://gapingvoid.com/2006/02/20/big-day-at-english-cut/#comment-10084 Dennis Howlett Tue, 21 Feb 2006 18:08:00 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=2083#comment-10084 There's something that's forgotten in all this - it's not a viable long term strategy. OK - so Hugh hasn't said anything about whether it is long or short. Final thought - does limiting production actually create additional kudos when there are substitutes? There’s something that’s forgotten in all this — it’s not a viable long term strategy. OK — so Hugh hasn’t said anything about whether it is long or short.
Final thought — does limiting production actually create additional kudos when there are substitutes?

]]> By: Johnnie Moore http://gapingvoid.com/2006/02/20/big-day-at-english-cut/#comment-10083 Johnnie Moore Tue, 21 Feb 2006 17:44:21 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=2083#comment-10083 Hey, seems to me Thomas should be free to produce exactly the number of suits he likes. That's not "creating scarcity", at least not in a way the deserves censure. Scarcity is a collaborative effort of markets; if there's scarcity in suit it's a result of all the other suppliers not making up the difference, to say nothing of the part buyers play. So I say fair play to you. I've long thought to myself the smartest thing to do is put your prices up. I look forward to the day I can afford to splash out on one. Hey, seems to me Thomas should be free to produce exactly the number of suits he likes.
That’s not “creating scarcity”, at least not in a way the deserves censure. Scarcity is a collaborative effort of markets; if there’s scarcity in suit it’s a result of all the other suppliers not making up the difference, to say nothing of the part buyers play.
So I say fair play to you. I’ve long thought to myself the smartest thing to do is put your prices up. I look forward to the day I can afford to splash out on one.

]]> By: David Terrar http://gapingvoid.com/2006/02/20/big-day-at-english-cut/#comment-10082 David Terrar Tue, 21 Feb 2006 14:03:56 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=2083#comment-10082 Having just read the way Thomas has presented the concept to his customers it doesn't sound tacky (or artificial) in the slightest. Just a sensible recognition of an artisan's current production capacity. I hope the reaction is positive and the concept is a success. Having just read the way Thomas has presented the concept to his customers it doesn’t sound tacky (or artificial) in the slightest. Just a sensible recognition of an artisan’s current production capacity. I hope the reaction is positive and the concept is a success.

]]> By: Dennis Howlett http://gapingvoid.com/2006/02/20/big-day-at-english-cut/#comment-10081 Dennis Howlett Tue, 21 Feb 2006 10:26:29 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=2083#comment-10081 So you're accepting a lower margin on overall suits, compensated by additional projected margin from shirts? Made me think about something else... So you’re accepting a lower margin on overall suits, compensated by additional projected margin from shirts? Made me think about something else…

]]> By: Nia http://gapingvoid.com/2006/02/20/big-day-at-english-cut/#comment-10080 Nia Tue, 21 Feb 2006 05:45:45 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=2083#comment-10080 I think you said this ages and ages ago, but it makes even more sense now. Isn't the next, even urgent, step, to find someone Thomas can train? You're selling quality but you're also selling a tradition and a reputation, which depends on belonging to a community, which depends on the next generation. I think you said this ages and ages ago, but it makes even more sense now.
Isn’t the next, even urgent, step, to find someone Thomas can train? You’re selling quality but you’re also selling a tradition and a reputation, which depends on belonging to a community, which depends on the next generation.

]]> By: hugh macleod http://gapingvoid.com/2006/02/20/big-day-at-english-cut/#comment-10079 hugh macleod Tue, 21 Feb 2006 05:26:26 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=2083#comment-10079 P.S. Our suits currently sell for P.S. Our suits currently sell for

]]> By: hugh macleod http://gapingvoid.com/2006/02/20/big-day-at-english-cut/#comment-10078 hugh macleod Tue, 21 Feb 2006 05:23:47 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=2083#comment-10078 Paul, in order to grow a business, you either sell more OR increase your prices. Selling more in our case lowers the quality, so...? Yeah, $8,000 suits would be good. Paul, in order to grow a business, you either sell more OR increase your prices. Selling more in our case lowers the quality, so…?
Yeah, $8,000 suits would be good.

]]> By: Paul Ambrose http://gapingvoid.com/2006/02/20/big-day-at-english-cut/#comment-10077 Paul Ambrose Tue, 21 Feb 2006 05:00:15 +0000 http://gapingvoid.com/?p=2083#comment-10077 Hugh, when Yousuf Karsch, the famed portrait photographer of Ottawa turned 65, he complained that he was working too much and wanted to slow down. Friends suggested doubling his rates, thus cutting his work load in half. He did double his rates, and people seeking his services also doubled. You may be heading towards an $8,000 suit. Hugh, when Yousuf Karsch, the famed portrait photographer of Ottawa turned 65, he complained that he was working too much and wanted to slow down. Friends suggested doubling his rates, thus cutting his work load in half. He did double his rates, and people seeking his services also doubled. You may be heading towards an $8,000 suit.

]]>