Lean is about making problems visible, and visual management is a core methodology.
You can’t fix what you can’t see!
There are four levels. Here they are in order of increasing power:
Level 1 – Tells only
STOP signs are a good example. In our neighbourhood, people blow by them all the time.
(We call them ‘Hollywood stops’ – the driver slows by 5 miles per hour, takes a perfunctory look around & drives on through. Not exactly, Safety First!)
Level 2 – Something changes, which gets your attention
Traffic lights are a good example. “Hey, the light’s changed to Green. We can drive on.”
Level 2 has more power because, done well, it wakes people up.
Our regular readers may recall that Lean is about wakefulness…. ``Hey, we have a problem here. We should do something!
Sadly, visual management in many organizations gets stuck at Level 1.
In many Health Care organizations, for example, visual management amounts to signage telling people to do, or not do something.
This amounts to blaming the work, as W. Edward Deming observed a generation ago
Doing so, subtly shifts responsibility from senior management to front line workers. “Hey, I told them not to do it…”
A nice trick – “I’ll take the power, privilege and perks of power – but not the responsibility!”
This amounts to a 21st century variation on “Let them eat cake.”
Most of the time, the root cause is in the system - which senior leaders own.
Next time, Level 3 and 4 visual management.
I was happy to be back in Japan last months for 2.5 weeks – my fifth trip back to Japan in the 2.5 years since we moved back to the U.S. And yes, darumas give me happiness too. The first part the trip was a family vacation to bring our children back to see friends […]
The post “Happiness is our purpose” – Ina Foods & Highlights from Japan appeared first on Katie Anderson.
When it comes to fundamentals like Strategy, Management System, Standardized Work, Quality in the Process and the like, it’s easy to become rigid and even doctrinaire.
After all, these are the concepts that underlie TPS, the ‘world’s most powerful production system’. In the circumstances, we’re right to be doctrinaire, aren’t we?
“We have to have four mother A3s – one each for People, Quality, Delivery and Cost! We have to have strategy A3s and dashboards for everything!
Standardized work means Content-Sequence-Timing-Expected Outcome! Quality in the Process means detect the abnormality, stop the process, fix the immediate problem and develop countermeasures for root causes!”
No doubt, you’ve heard this sort of thing too.
In fact, as we apply these timeless ideas in areas further and further from manufacturing, finesse is of the essence, and rigidity, a recipe for failure.
The further from manufacturing we get, the more important it is the we translate the principles, and not insist, “This is how did things at Toyota, or Honeywell, or Proctor & Gamble or…”
This is a major challenge for ‘Lean’ practitioners in these times of tumultuous change. Who cares if your muffler manufacturing factory has the best SMED process in the industry?
Demand for mufflers is going nowhere but down, no? But the principles underlying SMED – separate internal & external work, convert internal work to external work etc. – transcend manufacturing.
SMED principles can readily be applied to shortening changeover times in healthcare, aviation, and software design.
The same applies to any ‘Lean’ principle. Principles are eternal, countermeasures temporary.
And this reflects the deeper challenge facing the Lean movement these days.
Is ‘Lean’ a principles-based profession, or a skilled trade? The distinction is important.
I don’t want to be misunderstood. I respect and admire skilled tradespeople. They’re an honorable and essential element of successful organizations.
But they’re insufficient if you want to transform an organization or an industry. For that you need principles.
Principles are harder to internalize than countermeasures. But principles are eternal, whereas countermeasures are temporary.
Which brings me to the title of this piece, which a wise old gentleman taught me many years ago. The old gentleman is gone, and I am his scarcely adequate proxy.
Neither too rigid, nor too loose, expresses reflects the subtlety and intelligence needed to apply principles in ever more complex situations.
It reflects the need to be humble and learn from quick experiments – because we don’t really know, and can’t really know what’s going on unless we study the situation.
As a colleague likes to say, “If your first hypothesis isn’t embarrassing, you’re not really trying.”
Good advice in a world where Value is often a vague shadowy thing, and changing with every new technological miracle.
I continue to be amazed by the fact that executives who are genuinely interested in figuring out “lean” have spectacular results with it, while those who want to use lean to fix performance problems in their processes fail within two […]
- “We can’t possibly customize our service for every customer. There are too many of them!”
- “I can’t ask my team for 100% accuracy. It’s demotivating and they can’t do it.
- “I can’t work more efficiently. I know the way I do this is the best way.”
- Coaching people to use my simple, disciplined, practical approach to PDCA so that anyone, at any level of the organization, can generate creative ideas to overcome those “I can’ts."
- How to then turn those creative ideas into more effective and efficient ways to work by adapting Lean principles such as flow, leveling, and standard work in services.
Big Company Disease has many causes.
One of the most subtle is our inability to ‘wrap our arms around’ the PDCA cycle.
Myriad improvement cycles begin – but they become fragmented:
- Group A develops the Plan,
- Group B deploys,
- Group C checks the Plan, and
- Group D adjusts it.
I call this Scatter, with a deep bow to the late, great Al Ward – friend, colleague & profound Lean thinker.
Al described this syndrome to me over lunch a decade ago, and then again in his splendid book Lean Product & Process Design.
Improvement, whether a Kaizen Workshop, Problem Solving cycle or Strategy A3, requires complete PDCA cycles
One person (or team) needs to wrap her arms around the cycle, and thereby develop the profound, sympathetic knowledge central to breakthrough.
Thereby, our entire brains start firing – Left, Right, prefrontal cortex etc.
The countermeasures we select are usually simple and clear.
There’s usually a sense of release. “Of course! Why didn’t we see it before!”
As opposed to the ponderous, countermeasure-by-committee stuff that blights so many report outs.
So how to reduce Scatter?
Lean fundamentals like visual management and Leader standard work are a good start.
Veteran Lean companies like Toyota have developed the Chief Engineer role in Design, and Key Thinker (aka Deployment Leader or Pacemaker) role in Strategy Deployment.
Their job is to oversee & manage broad PDCA cycles – and to record & share the learning.
There are all a good place to start in your never-ending battle with Scatter.
To paraphrase Kurt Vonnegut, "any scientist who can't explain to an eight-year-old what he's doing is a charlatan." This principle is especially true in strategy, perhaps our most human management activity.
Artificial Intelligence & Robotics can eventually handle many jobs, but can they make & deploy strategy? Can they motivate a team to be better than it's parts, to rise together in some great endeavor?
"How will you win? What is the logic?" I`m a proverbial broken record in strategy sessions. It's remarkable how difficult we find these questions. We've been taught that complexity is profound. In fact, it's a crude state. Simplicity, by contrast, marks the end of a process of refining.
The late great physicist, Richard Feynman looked and talked like a New York City cabbie. His Caltech freshmen lectures in Physics, and all his books are classics for their simplicity & humor.
How did Feynman achieve that level of clarity? Through slow, patient reflection, by turning a problem over and over in his mind until a 'simple' explanation suggested itself.
And that's where the shoe pinches in our time-starved era. Who has time to turn a problem over and over in their mind these days? Who has the time, as Einstein did, to imagine himself riding a light beam - so as to makes sense of time and gravity and light?
Which invokes the second great law of strategy: less is more.
Knowing we'll be time-starved, please let's not over-fill our strategy plates, like teenagers at a buffet. "First we'll do this, then this and this and that over there. Oh, and then we'll..."
One of the many benefits of Lean Start-up and Design Thinking is that they force you to simplify and clarify your offering. We test our 'Minimum Viable Product', on the way to our 'Minimum Viable Company'.
Similarly, in strategy, we want to deploy our 'minimum viable plan', watching carefully what happens, and ever ready to adjust to the inevitable 'known, and unknown, unknowns' that confront us.
Breakthrough entails walking up the stairs in the fog, continually making & easy quick experiments, most of them yielding a negative result.