Does jargon–or Japanese terms like ‘Hoshin Kanri'–get in the way of clear communication in your organization?
It reminds me of the classic Saturday Night Live ‘Celebrity Jeopardy!' sketches, where Sean Connery (played hilariously by Darrell Hammond) would completely misread category names to hilarious effect. That inspired me to create this meme about ‘Hoshin Kanri':
See more fun memes on my site LeanMemes.com.
Would it be easier if we just called it ‘Strategy Deployment' or ‘Policy Deployment'? It's the same concept, but with a name that might be easier to digest for everyone.
On a different note, it's funny that we so often use the Japanese word for waste (“muda”), but value is called… value.
Weird, right?
Have you ever seen a Lean term–whether in English or Japanese–get hilariously misunderstood at work? I'd love to hear your stories!
Why I'm Careful About Lean Jargon (and When I Use It Anyway)
I'll be honest: I generally try to limit the Japanese words I use when I'm teaching, writing, or working with organizations.
That's not because the Japanese terms are wrong–or because they aren't authentic to Lean's origins. It's because my goal is clarity, not credentialing. If a concept can be understood more easily in plain language, I'll almost always choose that path.
For example, I'll say “waste” before “muda” any day. Everyone understands the word waste. Using the Japanese term doesn't usually add meaning–it often adds friction. If someone has to stop and translate the word in their head, we've already slowed learning down.
That said, I don't avoid Japanese terms entirely.
I think “kaizen” is a good example of a word that's worth teaching, precisely because it carries a more specific meaning than any single English word does. Kaizen isn't just “improvement.” It's continuous improvement, driven by the people doing the work, grounded in experimentation and learning. Once that meaning is explained clearly, the word can become useful shorthand.
The key distinction for me is this:
Does the term help people think more clearly–or does it create unnecessary distance?
When jargon becomes a badge of expertise instead of a tool for shared understanding, it stops serving the work. Lean was never meant to be a foreign language test. It's a way of thinking about systems, people, and problems.
So when I do use Japanese terms, I try to:
- Explain them plainly
- Use them sparingly
- Switch quickly to everyday language
If a term helps people learn and improve together, I'll use it.
If it gets in the way, I'll translate–or skip it entirely.
Because in the end, Lean isn't about sounding smart.
It's about helping people see problems clearly and work together to solve them.
Lean Language, Psychological Safety, and the Cost of Sounding “Expert”
There's another reason I'm careful about jargon that goes beyond clarity: language choices directly affect our feeling of psychological safety.
When leaders or improvement professionals rely heavily on insider language–especially unexplained Japanese terms–it can unintentionally signal who belongs and who doesn't. People who already know the words feel comfortable speaking up. Those who don't may hesitate, stay quiet, or assume their questions will make them look uninformed.
That's the opposite of what we want.
If Lean is supposed to encourage curiosity, experimentation, and learning from mistakes, then our language should invite participation, not create barriers. Psychological safety means people feel safe saying, “I don't understand,” or “Can you explain that?”–without fear of judgment.
But here's the catch:
If the room is full of acronyms, foreign terms, and jargon that sounds like a private club, people often won't ask. They'll nod along. They'll disengage. And leaders may mistakenly think alignment exists when it really doesn't.
This is why plain language matters so much in improvement work. When we say “waste” instead of “muda,” or “strategy deployment” instead of “hoshin kanri,” we're not dumbing anything down–we're lowering the social risk of participation. We're making it easier for people to think out loud, challenge assumptions, and contribute ideas.
Ironically, Lean jargon is often meant to be precise–but when overused, it can reduce learning instead of accelerating it.
And sometimes, the best way to notice how absurd this gets is to laugh about it.
That's why I occasionally use humor–and even poke fun at ourselves–over in my Lean Comedy posts. Humor can surface uncomfortable truths about jargon, leadership habits, and improvement theater in a way that feels safe, shared, and human. Laughter lowers defenses. It opens the door to better conversations.
At its best, Lean language should do the same.
If our words help people feel safe to speak up, we're on the right track. If they make people feel excluded, confused, or intimidated, then no amount of “correct terminology” will save the culture.
If you’re working to build a culture where people feel safe to speak up, solve problems, and improve every day, I’d be glad to help. Let’s talk about how to strengthen Psychological Safety and Continuous Improvement in your organization.
Hello Mark,
I am currently studying the Lean Six Sigma Process at university and enjoyed reading your article. A question I have is what do you think is the purpose of the jargon? from a student’s perspective, it only seems to make it harder to learn.