Sponsored by the book "Lean Hospitals" | Free Download of First Chapter


Friday, June 20, 2008

Reader Question: Difficult People

Fire people who think they're entitled to run things - Jacksonville Business Journal:

The linked article and question were sent by a reader who asked, in part:
I discovered your blog and podcast a few months ago and have been following closely. I work in a company recently acquired by a company that's a few years into their lean journey and the parent company has been rolling Lean out in our business unit. I was selected for the implementation team, so I read and listen to everything about Lean that I can get my hands on. Yours is one of my primary resources.

I came across this article and its an issue we've been dealing with and it made me wonder how the "fix" would be handled in the Lean world. Is it something you could blog about?

I'm traveling back home today, so I'll leave the blog in your hands... what are your thoughts on this, from a change management perspective?

From the article:

Imagine you're a newly appointed project leader of an existing management team. How do you know if you're walking into a club of entrenched buddies who want to run the show and will sabotage your efforts? And what can you do about it?

I recently observed a team of a dozen managers with that dynamic. Harry was the newly appointed project leader. His two predecessors, also experienced leaders, had been unable to move the team forward. Both reported problems building team agreement and developing aligned effort.

Sitting in on a team meeting, I saw two people repeatedly cast furtive glances to a third, who signaled displeasure by frowning, eye rolling and head shaking. After each instance, the trio resisted the direction being taken by the rest of the group.

A little investigation on my part revealed the pattern. One person was the queen bee, supported by her attentive court. She thought she should run the whole team because she knew best.

Though she hadn't been able to convince her superiors, she knew the project was going in the wrong direction. In her mind, even worse than her lack of power, was the lack of appreciation to which she felt entitled. Since she knew what was right, she also felt justified in sabotaging everyone else's efforts.

All three of the managers sabotaging Harry were entrenched in the organization. They covered each other's backs. Anyone who disagreed or challenged them with facts was stabbed in the back.

Do you ever see similar patterns in your attempts to help an organization change, or in implementing Lean? What strategies do you use? I'm not sure if there's a "Lean answer" as much as there is a "working with people" answer -- your thoughts??


Subscribe via RSS | Lean Blog Main Page | Podcast | Message Board



Labels:

Wednesday, April 23, 2008

Reader Question: GM and Lean

From Devin, a graduate student, posted with his permission:

"I'm an operations management student who is writing a report on lean manufacturing at GM. However, the more I research, the more I find that there's far more to write about with regard to what GM is not doing than what it is.

I guess my question is, would you agree that GM has simply applied the aspects of lean that most conveniently fit its work culture? I mean, I look for examples of lean at GM, and all my research really pulls up is things like a kanban system at a Saturn plant or the use of the "five whys" for a process improvement of some sort.

It seems to me that these aspects of lean are simple enough to implement that they don't really require the cultural change of something like standardized work, but they're enough for the company to see some moderate improvements that it becomes content with, and as a result, causes the company not to explore any of the other aspects of lean."

Any GM folks care to chime in, even anonymously? Is this a fair question? How would you respond from your experiences?

This is also a classic Lean adoption question that could apply to other companies. Do you try to adopt everything from Toyota or just the pieces that don't challenge your old thinking too much?

Subscribe via RSS | Lean Blog Main Page | Podcast | Message Board


Labels: ,

Tuesday, April 01, 2008

Reader Question: Getting Operators on Board

Lean Board: "Concrete Head Operators"

Got this question on the Lean Board, thought it was worth sharing to the bigger audience here.
Anyone have any success stories on extremely difficult concrete head operators?

I have a couple that just don't get one piece flow in their cell. We have experienced 30% increase in productivty, 20% reduction in defects, 110% increase in value stream inventory turns, and the department self schedules from a finished goods kanban. However, I have a couple of operators who insist we were better the old isolated islands of batch and push. I've coached, presented, listened, etc. I thought once we got their cell going it would be obvious. I just can't convince them even though they are experiencing it every day. We still have a long ways to go and I need these guys to keep improving but I can't get then to move forward improving the workplace within the TPS framework.

Any advice?
I'll post my response in the comments. What do you think? I think rather than just blaming people as being difficult (or "concrete heads" as you sometimes hear), it's important to ask "Why are they resisting?" It could be the old "resistance to change," but there could be other issues, fears, or anxieties (real or imagined) under the surface.

This is a question that's relevant to hospitals as well as factories...

Subscribe via RSS | Lean Blog Main Page | Podcast | Message Board


Labels:

Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Kaizen and Theory of Constraints

I got a question from a reader and Theory of Constraints fan:
"One of the topics that I'm struggling with is the relationship between Kaizen and TOC. When Norman Bodek talks about the savings people have gotten through Kaizen, does he actually get measurable increase in throughput?

I'm tempted to implement his ideas, but wonder if they are going to make an impact if they are not addressing the current constraint in the system."
I won't try to answer on Norman's behalf, but these are my thoughts.

I'm sure there have been situations where his "quick and easy kaizen" method have been used to tackle throughput problems.

One thing I always focus on, with Lean, is solving the right problem, not just implementing Lean tools. For example, I'm working with a hospital's radiology department, where MRI throughput and capacity is the most pressing issue. So, almost everything we're working on is in the name of breaking that constraint. We're not calling it TOC, but (in my mind) the influence is there.

So, I think the best answer is that you certainly can try using Norman's methods to engage employees in how to improve throughput. I don't see why there would be any conflict. Now, it throughput increases are going to lead to job loss, then that method won't work. Management has to make the usual Lean commitment to not have Lean lead to layoffs (have to try to grow your way out of that problem).

Do you have thoughts on this? Click "comments" to participate.

Subscribe via RSS | Lean Blog Main Page | Podcast | Message Board


Labels:

Monday, March 10, 2008

Reader Question: Model Lines

I received a question from a reader that was also addressed on the Daily Kaizen blog and Gemba Panta Rei. This question is from a hospital setting, but I think it's a good general Lean question:
One our our struggles has been defining the best process for implementing lean. We are establishing a model line in food services and are looking to begin spreading to other departments. Our model line is still in a very early stage of development and we have only 2 engineers to support the hospital. Our focus has been to begin with a lean management system as a starting point. Some of the questions we have are:
  • How far to we take the model line before moving out?
  • How much training should we do beforehand?
  • If we start with the lean management, how developed does this need to be before it is self sustaining?
  • What should our implementation process look like?
  • And the inevitable question of how much is too much change? (rhetorical)
After initial cop out ("give me more time to think about this... there are no easy answers"), here is what I wrote:

A quick answer (and maybe this will seem evasive) is to go through the PDCA process. Seems like you can pull back? Try it and see if the processes are being sustained. If not, jump back in, identify the root cause of the failure (lack of training, lack of time -- not really an excuse really -- misaligned incentives, etc). I'd make sure the burden of sustaining is NOT on the internal consultants. It needs to be on the shoulders of the leadership chain.

If a VP is not making sure a director's organization is sustaining, you need to coach both the director and the VP. The internal consultants can only coach and advise. That's not an excuse for the consultants to not care about the results, but the burden can't be on them, its not fair and its a workaround if the consultant makes it work for them.

If the consultant is involved daily, pull back gradually and see what happens (communicating this plan and making sure requirements of the line leaders is clear).

You will learn eventually, for your organization and your culture, what normally works. But each dept may be different.

I can usually tell early on which managers will actually sustain. If someone blows off the responsibilities of a lean manager by saying "Oh, I'm a hand's off manager" and they won't change... You might need to replace them. Managers can't always turn around.

I know I didn't touch on every aspect of his question. The reader wrote back and said it was a good answer, and that, basically, it's hard to fight the temptation to look for "best practices" instead of going through the learning journey.

What would you add?

Subscribe via RSS | Lean Blog Main Page | Podcast | Message Board


Labels:

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

Why is "Respect for People" missing so often?

I got a couple of reader emails last week that prompted me to think about Lean and the Toyota Way principle of “respect for people.” Whether it's a supposedly "Lean" environment or not, why is true "respect" so often missing?

In one case, a major manufacturing company (one that touts their Lean and Six Sigma efforts) did the following to machinists in one division:

  • Management announced some parts/components were going to be produced in Mexico, instead of the U.S.
  • The factory sent some machinists to train their replacements and help set up the new shop.
  • The machinists now spend time “reworking 50% of what comes from the Mexico factory” before final assembly is done in the U.S, factory.
  • The machinists assume that eventually ALL production will be moved to Mexico.

In what ways (and how many ways) do those actions violate the Toyota “respect for people” principle? Would you even consider a company that does these sorts of things to be working on “Lean” or can we call it “Half Lean” because they’re not focused on respect for people? I don’t know if we can even call it “Half Lean” since I’m not sure if they’re even reducing waste, overall (and eliminating waste is the other pillar of the Toyota Way).

In the second example, a hospital reader says they are starting to work on Lean, but the environment is full of fear. People are afraid of autocratic, snap decisions from administrative and medical leaders. The CEO, when walking through the idea, barks orders and makes snap decisions based on a quick observation. They are afraid that changes they are making will be "undone" by an autocratic leader. The team is trying to use data and analysis, but leaders aren't setting that example for them.

In what ways do those practices violate the “respect for people” principle? Seems like the hospital leadership needs Lean training, not just the “workers” right?


Subscribe via RSS | Lean Blog Main Page | Podcast | Message Board


Labels: ,

Sunday, December 16, 2007

Reader Question on Poor Performers

Here is another reader question I received this week:

I was wondering how you deal with removing people from the company who resist change while maintaining the culture where people are not afraid to be laid off due to improvements. Aren’t there some sceptics who see the anchor draggers get fired and think it’s due to improvements, and how do you deal with this?

That's a great question. I think, often times, people know who the "anchor draggers" are anyway and can see the difference between mass firings and performance-based firings. It's tough, from an HR standpoint, as you can't necessarily tell the rest of the employees "we fired so-and-so because of their bad performance," but people usually can tell. While we don't want to use efficiency improvements, via Lean, to drive headcount reduction, morale can often be improved by getting rid of a person who is dragging down the rest of the team. The employees might thank you for "finally" taking action that they wish had been taken long ago.

Before resorting to firing, I think we do have an obligation, as leaders, to coach people to the best of our ability. The main question often becomes "is that person worth the time investment that may or may not pay off?"

How have you, the Lean Blog readers, dealt with this situation in your environment?


Subscribe via RSS | Lean Blog Main Page | Podcast | Message Board

Labels:

Saturday, December 15, 2007

A Simple Question with No Simple Answer

We spend a lot of time here talking about how to prevent Lean failures and what some of the root causes are. I received a question from a reader that I thought I'd open to the group:
What are the biggest risks to successfully implementing a lean transformation in an organization, and what actions would you recommend to mitigate those risks?
Anyone have any recent or first-hand stories to share?


Subscribe via RSS | Lean Blog Main Page | Podcast | Message Board


Labels: ,

Saturday, November 17, 2007

Reader Question: Lean and Talent Development

Here is a question from a Lean Blog reader:

I am an OE Consultant and I am currently working with an organization to help them improve and “upgrade” their current leadership development processes. Currently this organization is using Lean Sigma for only selected projects and functions that are interested, basically it is a grass-root effort vs. a top down mandate. I would love to identify any best practices where companies, like Toyota, have incorporated Lean Sigma in their HR/OD processes.

I recommended that she check out the book Toyota Talent and to check this earlier post from Jamie Flinchbaugh on Lean and HR.

Does anyone have experiences or thoughts to share? Click "comments" to have your say.

Subscribe via RSS | Lean Blog Main Page | Podcast | Message Board


Labels:

Monday, October 29, 2007

Reader Question: Managing Suggestions

Here is a question from a Lean Blog reader, posted with permission. Here's something to chew on with your Monday morning coffee. I'll post some thoughts later, but what do you think?

------------------

The company president recently commanded that we will have a staff suggestion box on our Intranet. As a 3rd tier manager, I thought this was a good idea but needed a little more thought: How would we handle suggestions after they were submitted? What if no one put in a suggestion? Who would handle the avalanche if we received a dozen a week? No one spoke up so it was installed. Since it was opened, only a few ideas have trickled in.

I recently attended a meeting where a suggestion was discussed. An employee from the procurement division made a suggestion about improving the procurement services. But the senior managers were puzzled. Why didn't he just speak to his boss? Later, this was brought up with the procurement line manager and he shook his head in embarrassment,"Yes, I don't understand it either!"

I don't think managers were expecting the suggestion box to be used in this way and this confusion led to a diagnoses of failure in the manager-employee relationship. Given the mission of continuous improvement, how should a suggestion box and the "management pyramid" co-exist?
----------------

Click "comments" if you have a response...

Subscribe via RSS | Lean Blog Main Page | Podcast | Message Board


Labels: ,

Thursday, October 25, 2007

Updated Lean Line Question -- Cost Planning

Updated: Check out the comments for a lengthy reply (link) from Jim Huntzinger of the Lean Accounting Summit.

I finally got my first two "Lean Line" calls recently. Long-time Lean Blog reader, Bryan, left a message with a question about how Toyota does annual cost planning or budgeting cycles. It is that time of year for most everybody. You can use the player, below, to listen to his question.



I don't have a good answer for that question. If you have a question, either use the "comments" feature below, or feel free to leave an audio answer by calling the Lean Line at 817-776-LEAN.

Likewise, if you have a question, feel free to call and leave a message. The line is my "Skype" number, so it is going to roll right into voice mail. My Skype ID is "mgraban."


Subscribe via RSS Lean Blog Main Page Podcast Message Board


Labels: , ,

Wednesday, October 17, 2007

Updated: Reader Question on Metrics

Here is the second of my "Lean Line" calls that came in last week. Here, a Lean Blog reader calls with a question about how a support organization (such as lean group) can measure their contribution to the organization beyond typical cost or quality metrics. You can use the player, below, to listen to his question.


If you have a question, either use the "comments" feature below, or feel free to leave an audio answer by calling the Lean Line at 817-776-LEAN. Likewise, if you have a question, feel free to call and leave a message. The line is my "Skype" number, so it is going to roll right into voice mail. My Skype ID is "mgraban."

Here is my attempt at a response:



Labels: , ,

Sunday, September 16, 2007

Reader Question on VSM

Here's a question from Gerry, a blog reader:

Once you do a 2 or 3 day Value Stream Mapping event, would you do another event on the same process to refine it even more? One of our CI / Lean coordinator suggests that you would “spin” or do another VSM up to 6 times before you have all the waste removed. This coordinator is not a seasoned lean facilitator and I believe he focus on work scope reduction to much.
I wrote back to him and said:

Well, it depends. I would never have a set goal for the # of Value Stream Mapping or Kaizen events needed in an area. For example, why would you keep working in an area that was no longer your biggest business problem? If I had limited support resources, I'd focus them on my biggest opportunity for improving quality, customer service, etc. When I work in an area, I'd try to teach them tools to keep kaizening their process in an ongoing basis.

Thinking about this some more, I would also caution against an over reliance on VSM or Kaizen Events for driving improvement. VSM's are certainly a helpful tool and Kaizen Events can help, but those can't be your only improvement mechanism. As I started to say in the last paragraph, you have to get ALL of your employees engaged in continuous improvement and daily kaizen activities. That activity should NEVER stop, since you'll always have waste and have to push toward continuous improvement.

But, at some point, your formal VSM/Kaizen activity should move onto a new area or an area that is a bigger problem for the business.

Does anyone else have a response for or advice for Gerry and his organization?

Subscribe via RSS | Lean Blog Main Page | Podcast | Message Board


Labels: ,

Sunday, July 29, 2007

Reader Question: Role of a Company President?

Since we've been talking about leadership and Lean, it's coincidence that I got this email from a reader. I'll let the blog readers answer this

Posted with permission:

I am [name withheld], 25yrs old, working for a small manufacturing firm of over 70 employees in (Saitama Ken) Japan.

I have been working for eight months in the current company, staring from the scratch with educating the employees through, Learning by doing - Muda, Mura, Muri, 5S, PDCA, Autonomous maintenance, drawing the Current state map, via lectures and group activities lead by a Kaizen leader (Shop floor worker-only ).

I have had my share of employee resistance and management resistance. But the most persistent of all is that from the president who is 41 years old and refuses of go to (Gemba) shop floor.

As a company, we take 30 minutes (Kaizen Time) everyday for Kaizen activities and during the Kaizen time, the president does come to the shop floor. Subject to being present in the company during the Kaizen time. But, he does not agree on going to the shop floor on regular basis – during the actual working hours. He thinks that it is not his job to go to Gemba (shop floor) and observe. But the top managers and Floor managers job and he takes decisions based on the data in files and information from the top managers and floor managers, who in the past did not observe the gemba them selves. But have now started going to gemba regularly for the last one week, due to my repeated reminder.

I would like to request for your thoughts, if possible of the blog readers and contributors about, what is the role of the President in a firm, which wants to or is implementing Lean ?

What do you think? Click comments to answer...

I think this is an interesting example that shows "not all Japanese companies are Lean." Also maybe think about how a 25 year old can influence senior leadership. That's quite a challenge my reader has.

Subscribe via RSS | Lean Blog Main Page |Podcast | Message Board

Labels: , ,

Wednesday, August 30, 2006

From a Blog Reader

By Tom Bloomer, Austin TX

(Mark's note: This is a submission from a blog reader, thought I would try an experiment here. If you have an essay or story to submit, please email me using the link on the left hand side of the page).

For any organization to function efficiently and to continue to show optimum growth, the organization must implement and maintain some type of continuous improvement program, some type of organizational standard and a true quality management initiative.

For years we have heard of and practiced the different philosophies. The TQM's, the ISO's, lean manufacturing, TPS, six sigma, the list can go on and on. The objective is the same. To continually improve your product, service, work environment, and ultimately, your bottom line, while reducing the costs it takes to produce. This sounds like common sense to most people. How an organization gets there is a matter of debate that can go on for hours.

I have worked in a few different organizations that have embarked on these tasks. I have been there from day 1 and worked through the troubles, went to the training seminars, classes and meetings that go along with it. Most of the time it seems to be the same hurdles that end up popping up and often stop an initiative in its tracks. (The main hurdle being the lack of management support, even though management swears they are contributing)

I will write about my vision of a true system, through my experiences. I will mention a lot of things like 5S, Lean, Six Sigma, Procedures, and Data Collection. I will not go into how to do these things as that would be a complete book by itself. It is best to get training on each one of these tasks individually.

First of all, the organization almost always starts off with a bang (before they fizzle out after a few months). They get everyone pumped up and motivated with the kickoff meeting (most of the time it is but it should always be off site to minimize interruptions). A President, Chairman, or some VP holds the meeting, and promises everyone that top management is behind the group. All and any resources needed to be successful are promised. It is stressed that this newest initiative is IT, and we are going to do IT, and nothing else will take precedent over IT.

This is very important. There has to be a kick off meeting, it has to be offsite. The group must include your most open minded, intelligent, and persuasive team members. During this meeting, the chair or the person holding the meeting must spell out every detail of the organizations plan. It will be his / her goal to get these team members on board and buy in to this new way of thinking, this culture change.

During this meeting, roll out the game plan. Answer these questions. How will we get organized? Hopefully through a 5S program. I have found 5S to be very beneficial in getting an entity organized.

Are our key members trained in management systems and what will do to further their training? Turn your organization into a learning organization. This is another crucial first step. Get members and employees to classes, hold classes onsite, organize reading groups. People naturally feel better about themselves if they are learning new things. They gain the self confidence needed to get out their and pass on the knowledge to others. At one company, we developed an education committee. We offered and encouraged classes to our employees that included work related and non work related topics. We taught everything from blueprint reading to cooking. We taught industrial math to auto mechanics. We started building up these employees that were going to be so important in the coming months and years. This helped us retain employees and showed them we as a company cared about their well being. I remember sitting in a class one day with the operators along with a VP. I think it was a Spanish class. It was being taught by one of our hourly employees. We also built a small library onsite. We subscribed to newspapers and magazines that these employees could read on break and lunch. Computer terminals were setup fro the employees to use during breaks and lunch.
Of course with this, you need to get your people to management systems training. Six Sigma, Lean Manufacturing, ISO, whatever classes, get the people to them and trained.

What steps will we take to achieve our goal? Spell out exactly what you want to accomplish. Reduce costs, write procedures, improve safety, and improve downtime through TPM. Holding Root Cause sessions. Improve the bottom line. Make lots of money. Continually improve your process.

How will we measure our performance?

This is very important. Everything you do needs to be measured. You have to be able to statically track all efforts. I won't go way deep into this as it is better explained through six sigma. A good book for all to have is SIX SIGMA FOR DUMMIES.

How do we get everyone working as a team?

Another very important matter and one that needs to be dealt with aggressively. All players need to be on board. There can be zero negativity. Everyone has to trust each other. We hired a specialist at this at one company I worked at. I remember sitting in a large conference room and discussing personal issues with everyone on our team. I remember us all having to go out dancing together. This involved people from plants in two different states meeting in a central location. We played softball, we went bowling. We stayed in hotels together. We became one. It worked. People who do not want to support the change or who fail do any part, must be dealt with accordingly. Fire them. Again these team building exercises must include the heads of sate, if you will.

Do we have procedures?

If you don't have written procedures or process maps, then get them written. Build quality circles to work on them. Get input from the floor, from the operators. Build the basics through flowcharts then go back and edit them until you have real written procedures for everything from hiring people, to firing people and everything in between. Taking inventory, ordering items, data collection, operation procedures for specific tasks on the floor. Everything needs to be defined, mapped, charted, and put into procedures. The procedures should be written very simple so anyone can understand. Test them by taking an employee from another part of your company, have them complete a task he / she knows nothing about, just by following the procedures.

At the meeting setup sub teams. Maybe your teams could be:
Safety, Maintenance or TPM, Education, Fiscal Responsibility, Procedure Writing Teams. Specific Process Improvement Teams. Hand out action items for the next meeting such as: Collect Data on a specific process in the factory.

After you have your sub teams, setup meetings with them and have them formulate a game plan on what items they are going to attack first. How are they going to measure their success? Statistics remember.

Meet weekly. Meet, Meet. Do not let team members miss meetings. Stay on top of it. Presidents, VP's, Plant Managers need to get involved. ATTEND BY CONFERENCE CALL IF YOU HAVE TO. Keep it going. Keep employees motivated. Keep them trained. Continuous improvement means continuously improving your employees and operators as well as your process.

Remember these:
1: Whatever system your organization chooses to implement, search out and take advantage of any training pertaining to it.
2: Do not let it slip away. When an organization fails on one of these endeavors, the organization will find itself worse off than when they started as employees will lose confidence in management.
3: Become a learning organization. Read Deming, Juran and all the other Gurus. They all have something to offer. They all spent many hours on their philosophies.
4: Start out with 5S. If you can't implement and maintain 5S, you will defienently fail at the others.
5: Procedures for everything.
6: Strive to continuously improve not only your process but your employees as well.
7: Think SYSTEMS. You must have a system. Engage in systems thinking.
8: Give the employees / operators attention, it will pay off.
9: Every one of your key members should have read THE GOAL.
10: Presidents and VP's must actively participate. Show support.
11: Build Teams
12: Stomp out negativity
13: Build leadership. Leadership has greater rewards than managing.
14: Use the 14 leadership traits: Justice, Judgment, Decisiveness, Integrity, Dependability, Tact, Initiative, Enthusiasm, Bearing, Unselfishness, Courage, Knowledge, Loyalty, and Endurance.
15: Measure.

Labels:

For more posts, click here for the LeanBlog Archive

Search the LeanBlog and the rest of the Lean "Blogosphere"