Continual Improvement Archives - Page 3 of 4

Zero Defects is Not Unreasonable

One of the most often witnessed symptoms of Lean Management that I come across nowadays are whiteboards with performance indicators. These serve as one of the central elements in weekly (or when I’m lucky, daily) huddles that are so fashionable nowadays. Now of course a lot of good things can actually be said about these huddles and indicators when done correctly. However, there are some risks in using these type of representations as well, as for instance Mark Graban rightfully wrote about last August in his blog when discussing the use of charts. You can also read more on correctly interpreting data on charts using Statistical Process Control (SPC) on my own blog, while writing on climate change. But even if applied correctly, I think there is a more structural issue with concentrating too much or even solely on these type of charts. (more…)

Happy Hunting: Malfunctions in Process Control

Isn’t it just fantastic what we people have managed to do in the field of measurement and control technology. The nicest gadgets ensure our production equipment and processes remain in control. Nothing can halt technology, so it seems. And who knows what the Internet of Things (IoT) will have in store for all of us in the future. A future that most probably is nearer than we think.

But let’s stay somewhat closer to home for now. What about all these business processes that aren’t fully mechanized or automated? How do we keep those in control? What can we learn from trying to apply the concepts of measurement and control technology to these type of processes? (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…)

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…)

Lean Evolution: Experiencing the Effects of Lean

Over the last year I have worked with a client on introducing, developing and securing Lean Management on various locations in the Netherlands and abroad. Recently, a more formal evaluation with top management and the management of the involved locations took place. It’s always interesting then, to hear how Lean Management is actually experienced across an organization. Through this blog post I thought it would be nice to share some of these experiences with my readers. Lean Management is sometimes interpreted as only a technique, although I think that in the end it involves a complete turnaround in the way people think and act with consequences for the associates, managers, the mutual relations and collaboration, processes and problem-solving, performance and customers. (more…)

5x Why? It Seems so Simple

Building upon the earlier posts about autonomy en PDSA, I automatically tumble upon a well-known, but often — during the Study phase of PDSA — ineffectively used technique: 5x why? A technique that has to prevent that a team jumps to conclusions too early and that leads to a productive and structural solution to the problem by means of a more thorough problem and root cause analysis. But it takes more than just asking five times “why?” to the team… (more…)

The Broken PDSA Cycle

Continual improvement according to the PDSA cycle brings scientific thinking to the team level. In my earlier blog post I have highlighted the importance of autonomy for continual improvement. Most important conclusion there was that a team should have the right competencies and skill levels to be able to be truly responsible for their work and the improvement thereof. But to be an autonomous team, more comes into play. True autonomy also implies that the PDSA cycle — in most cases — can be fully completed within and by the team. And this is where I see many issues. In many cases, the PDSA cycle seems to be broken… (more…)