Ah, whiskey. I like whiskey. I'm not afraid to say that. I've blogged about whiskey (or whisky) once before: Why Kaizen is an Important Differentiator for Japanese Whisky. I also have a personal Kaizen story that I need to write about from my day volunteering at a Texas bourbon distillery.
On a recent flight, I was reminded of the need to follow standardized work, even in the context of something as simple as ordering a drink.
A passenger seated across from me (yes, it was another passenger, not me), responded to the flight attendant asking him if he wanted a drink.
He asked for a specific drink and was given something that looked like this:
That's whisky with ice in it.
The flight attendant set it on his tray and the passenger said, “No, I asked for whisky, no ice.”
She said (and her tone wasn't as snippy as it might have been), “Oh, I thought you said whisky with ice.”
She proceeded to take the drink away, since it's not proper form to fish out the ice cubes at that point. I presume she was going to pour out the whisky, which seems like a waste of perfectly mediocre blended Scotch.
I wanted to react like this to the waste:
I guess I could have intervened and drank it, but it seemed awkward to speak up to do so (I think she had already brought me a drink).
She came back with a fresh glass of whisky, no ice.
What's the moral of the story?
When we don't follow the standardized work for ordering, Scotch gets wasted.
There's a clearer way to order that's far less likely to be confused.
Whisky with ice = “Whisky on the rocks.”
Whisky without ice = “Whisky neat.”
If he had ordered that way, it would have been far less likely that the flight attendant would have brought the wrong beverage. Simple as that.
Hear Mark read this post — subscribe to Lean Blog Audio
If you're going to partake in a whisky this weekend, keep this mind (I hope thinking about Lean doesn't ruin your fun… and that thinking about Lean doesn't drive you to drink). There's a reason for following standardized work… to reduce confusion and to reduce errors.
And to reduce the amount of Scotch that gets wasted.
What are some similar situations in the workplace? When does verbal communication lead to problems and errors? What can we do to ensure clear, unambiguous communication?
Rule #2 says:
“every connection in the process must be direct and binary (yes/no responses).”
On that flight, there wasn't a direct and binary connection between the passenger and the flight attendant.
What happens when the stakes are higher, such as in a factory or a hospital?
What do you think? Please scroll down (or click) to post a comment. Or please share the post with your thoughts on LinkedIn – and follow me or connect with me there.
Did you like this post? Make sure you don't miss a post or podcast — Subscribe to get notified about posts via email daily or weekly.
Check out my latest book, The Mistakes That Make Us: Cultivating a Culture of Learning and Innovation: