Continual Improvement (Kaizen) Archives - Page 2 of 3

The Logic of Root Condition Analysis (1/6)

Problem-solving and particularly the part that focuses on root cause analysis (RCA) has always been one of the topics that has had my special interest. I have coached many problem-solving teams, and besides the sometimes superficial use of problem-solving tools, there have always been two questions that have slumbered in my head, viz. (1) whether you could speak of one root cause, or that you should speak of multiple (root) causes; and (2) whether you should speak of the root cause or rather the root condition. Based upon the way my mentors have trained and coached me in problem-solving, as well as a lot of self-education and practice, I will try to explain how rigorous problem-solving logic (using an example) can help us answer these questions. At the same time, I hope the example and the logic will be of use in your problem-solving efforts or your coaching thereof.
(more…)

Lean’s Many Faces: Top-Down or Bottom-Up?

Lean can present itself in many ways. To some, Lean appears as a grassroots initiative and as bottom-up improvement by everyone, everywhere, anytime. Others experience Lean more as a top-down initiative, driven by management and accompanied by standards, audits and specialists. Indeed, Lean can be seen as a many-faced phenomenon; almost as if Lean has a Multiple Personality Disorder.

So, what is Lean’s true face? How do we explain Lean’s different personalities to the workforce? (more…)

Get Rid of the Suggestion Box

Some time ago, 3M was in the news about the way they used “social networking” internally to generate new ideas. This electronic suggestion box generated an “impressive” 700 suggestions in only 2 weeks, according to news site cio.com. And of course, every suggestion is welcome, but I’d like to put the 3M efforts in a somewhat larger perspective. Then 700 ideas in 2 weeks means about 18,200 ideas per year. Now 3M has some 75,000 employees, so this implies 0.24 ideas per employee per year. So do we still think this is impressive? Furthermore, cio.com mentioned that the ideas were submitted by some 1,200 employees, so by 1.6% of all employees. Cio.com published the article to illustrate a “best practice” in employee involvement. Honestly, I’m not very impressed. Are you? (more…)

Sorry, but Lean is about Cost Reduction

It seems to be popular these last years and more recently to explicitly state that Lean is not (only) about cost reduction or cost cutting. See the recent posts by Mark Graban or Matt Hrivnak. So let me be somewhat controversial in this post (which I think is allowed to spark the discussion) and drop a bombshell: I think Lean is about cost reduction.

Now I can’t of course argue with the interpretations that people may have when they read about cost reductions, and surely, generally it will have negative connotations. But it is interesting, still, to contrast these thoughts with the original ideas about what now is called Lean, by going back to what Toyota, Taiichi Ohno and Shigeo Shingo said and wrote about this topic in the period when the world first started learning about the Toyota Production System. Then when going back to the origins and the intent of the TPS, there clearly is strong focus on cost reduction. So how does this match up, one might wonder. A post trying to close the gap between cost reduction how it is often practiced, and understanding cost reduction as intended in Lean. (more…)

Daily Huddle Disease: the “Report In” Syndrome

Meanwhile many organizations have started with Lean. Especially standing in front of a whiteboard with performance data seems to be the hottest thing in town nowadays. The thing that bothers me in these daily huddles or stand-up meetings is that the data often comes from outside the team. I then tell them there is a reason that is is called “report out”. But what I witness more often resembles a “report in”, whereby the data is supplied by the team lead or some support department. Almost as if someone else will come in during half time, and tell the sports team what the score is. Not really my idea of an autonomous team. As a result, time is often wasted on discussions about definitions, consolidation rules and interpretations instead of focusing on opportunities for improvement. It is time for a change. (more…)

Rid Yourself of the Trade-Off

Not so long ago I came across a few pictures that were posted on LinkedIn that aroused my attention. They touched upon a theme that has been slumbering in my mind for quite a while, namely that off the always returning phenomenon of the trade-off. The pictures that gad around the Internet were about good quality not being possible in combination with speedy service and a very competitive price; you can’t have it all, so it seems. A trade-off indicates an optimization problem; making the best choice considering multiple variables and their interdependence. But unfortunately, optimization assumes certain dependencies instead of challenging the thinking behind these presumed interdependencies. It’s time to get rid of the trade-off! (more…)

Problem Attitude: Having Any Problems?

Throughout the years I have had the opportunity to work for and with many organizations and teams. And all of them had their own way of dealing with problems. Some were not aware of their problems, and also saw no need to change this; others did see their problems, but — like some kind of Pavlov reaction — declared these as just being part of doing business and swept their problems under the carpet. Other organizations certainly are aware of their problems and some see these even as opportunities to improve their business. Finally, in certain organizations, even the absence of problems is seen as a problem. In what kind of organization are you working? (more…)

The 3 As of Structured Problem-Solving

In Lean Thinking, standardization is often seen as a condition for continual improvement. In particularly, standards are seen as the means to be able to detect problems. But that is not the only role standards play. Standards are also important in actually eliminating problems in a structured, methodical way. A role that is often overlooked in popular problem- solving methods typically in use in companies. A short blog post about the 3 As of problem-solving: availability, adherence and adequacy. (more…)

Disentangling Standardization, Harmonization and Improvement

Recently I ran into the same type of discussion with two completely different clients: what is standardization in fact? During the discussions that followed I noticed that there can be many different views on what standardization is. Furthermore, I noticed that standardization can be sometimes misplaced, harmonization inappropriate and actual improvement completely lacking. As a consequence of the often poor comprehension of these concepts, a clear strategy and roadmap for improving business results and processes is frequently missing. Perhaps a good moment to share my views on themes like standardization, harmonization and improvement. (more…)

PDSA: the Plan within the Plan

The good ol’ Plan, Do, Check and Act (PDCA), who hasn’t heard about it? A managerial concept as old as the road to Methusalem it seems. We make a plan, we execute the plan, during the execution we keep a close eye on the ball and of course we take corrective action when things do not go according to the plan. Easy! When teams start improvement initiatives it seems as if immediately we are flooded by action lists, Gantt charts and project meetings. But is it really that easy? In fact, when taking a closer look and with a Lean eye, the plan in fact comprises two plans: the plan as a hypothesis and the plan as the actions to be taken to implement and evaluate the hypothesis; the plan within the plan as it were. “I beg your pardon?” (more…)