The Human Side of Lean

Just a test message ...
 

Since we have been working on the cultural and leadership side of lean for a long time, we have already done some of this. We have developed a cultural assessment tool, a roadmap tool, management methods tools. We are also doing some research with a professor in human resource development on some basic supporting HR practices such as profiling for hiring, reward and recognition and internal development. We are going back to a blank slate, truly approaching it from a research standpoint, however, so those HR practices will take some time to develop. Just thought I would share what those of us have done when working down this track. Thanks.
 

In our conference calls, an earlier designed "Mind Map" was mentioned. Could we get this copied/pasted into the blog or at least a reference to it?

Following Jamie's comment and work: Would it be possible to get access to your work, so we might be able to not invent the wheel again?
Thanks

Marry Christmas & and a Good Start of the New Year 2006!

Juergen
 

Comments from Juergen Boenisch:
(based on Mike Shaffner’s proposal below and other thoughts…)


I am referring to Mike Shaffner’s excellent draft “Human Side of Lean: 2006 Planning Session” (original at end of document) and checked previous notes, comments, ideas, etc. I think it is well structured and the list of possible strategies sounds good. Maybe we can get the list of tools into a framework, e.g. in order to prioritize the individual importance.

Also, many of these tools do already exist to a certain degree and might only need to be adapted to our framework.

Over the years much work has been done in numerous “individual” areas supporting Lean implementation and we have access to many experts in our group with lots of experience & expertise. Based on some recent comments, we should not try to invent “the wheel again”, but we also should not “jump to conclusion” just because it seems so obvious (following one Toyota principle).
Since the TPS seems to be the most efficient enterprise philosophy currently available, we should also not loose sight of the principles, or we should even commit ourselves to just use the TPS as our guideline and benchmark for whatever we try to do. I think indirectly we are doing it already, so let’s stick to it.

I think we need to start with the “helicopter view” and to group the subject in a minimum number of groups, not more than 4-5. At this stage the subject itself should not be limited to “Human Side of Lean” since e.g. we might find that the technical Lean tools could be used as vehicle to piggyback the Human Side.
TPS tries to keep everything extremely simple and easy to communicate. It rewards progress not reaching a goal. It honors alternative scenarios not only the best solution. It might be possible to follow the 80/20 rule and to define the vital view, essential points incl. the corresponding ideal goals, but than to go back and look at progress steps, easy to follow.

In the following I tried to draft a grouping with 4 headlines and some comments underneath:

1. Business Strategy: Vision, Mission, Objectives, Values, …
- Everything must start at TOP! Even if it’s only a brief verification
- Assessment or verification of “right” strategic environment/conditions/setup present
to even start Lean journey
- Overall enterprise assessment, if necessary, e.g. SWOT
- Current business culture: Current e.g. assessment tools
- Management methods & style: Current and ideal
- Required logistic for Lean implementation, e.g. program organization, available
resources, time, management support, timeline, program charter, communication
channels
- Hidden agendas, problems, past approaches, critical areas, …
- Other relevant “overall” aspects
- …

2. Business Processes: Operation & Improvement
- Classical application for Lean Six Sigma tools
- Determination and definition of “what are the processes”, e.g. prioritization
- Stable & standardized best-practice processes
- Leveled Production
- Detailed process documentation, best practice
- Discipline & consistency in executing step-by-step improvement approaches
- …

3. People Engagement: Inside & outside of the enterprise
- What makes it fun to work here, e.g. incentive system, goals, communication
rewards & recognition
- Highly motivated and engaged people who do the right things naturally
- Respect for people, teamwork, and production as “only” place were value is added
- Continuous improvement – “Kaizen” and Learning  Don’t think about your job,
but how to improve it
- Methods and techniques to engage people, e.g. directive vs. non-directive, asking vs.
asking, providing the right information
- HR development, training, involvement, empowerment, challenge, no layoffs, …
- Enlarge technical process improvement approach for engaging people?
- Profiling for hiring
- Clear goals, Metrics, measures, incentives, logistic of communication, etc.
- Creation of “right” environment to “pull” new culture into place
- …

4. Infrastructure or Hardware: IT, equipment, equipment, building, surrounding…
Business Culture (I don’t know where else to put this…)
- Assessment of current culture necessary? If yes, how?
- Long-Term enterprise philosophy, incl. Genchi Genbutsu,
- Thinking beyond individual concerns to the long-term Good of the company
- Relentless reflection – “Hansei” -> There is always a way to do things better
- Decision made slowly and by consensus, thoroughly considering alternatives and
than rapidly implementation
- etc. etc.



Some thoughts about the proposal:
Regarding Mission:

I like Jack Welch’s definition of a Mission:
It is the answer to the question: How do we intend to win in this business?
Or may be more appropriate for the SME Human Side of Lean:
How do we intend to successful support our customers/members?

I would like to see the mission extended to cover the technical tools, at least to a certain degree. The reason as mentioned above: The technical tools might turn out to be a useful vehicle to piggyback the Human Side.

What about the
Mission:
To effectively support our customers in implementing a sustaining Lean Enterprise by providing knowledge and practical expertise on Lean Six Sigma tools and on the Human Side.

Regarding the customer definition, I wonder if we should broaden it to include “interested in”, e.g.
Our Customers:
Anyone who is interested or has chosen to champion or implement a Lean Enterprise.

Strategies:
To 1: To develop tools and/or a road map …
As mentioned above, the strategies sound good. It might be of help to group them into a framework in order to prioritize and start working on them.
One question: Will it be possible to develop one tool to change the environment to “pull” the new culture into place? Or could it be a combination of the well know technical Lean Six Sigma Tools and a certain People Engagement approach?

To 2: To create a rapid response team
I like the idea of a “The SME Support Team for Companies in serious Trouble” or “Rapid Response Team” (do we need a SME Helicopter and what about flying in from Canada ). We do have so much expertise in our rows to being able to do this, just by getting our head together and being able to “openly” discuss the issues. I think it is worthwhile a try, but we need to establish a certain infrastructure first. For instance, we probably need to have a “Response Committee” evaluation the case to see if it might qualify. When in comes to discussion and real project work we should agree on a standard web-video conferencing platform in order to more effectively exchange information. Actually we should start using it in our weekly convergence calls, too. It’s even more fun than we have already now….!
The enumeration for this service needs probably some additional thoughts. I think we as members of the group need to offer our service free of charge (beside expenses). SME however could charge interested members for it and could use the money for certain application, e.g. for charities or other directly related chapter support.

To 3: To present at conference or write article
Based on several comments, I think it is our duty as SME group to bring something on paper. So let’s agree on a systematic approach.
Let’s clarify our mission and our strategy, categorize by a limited number of “headlines” and let’s group the approaches by headline. Than we can prioritize based on importance & relevance before we collect all the existing related work, data, and results.
 

At the risk of being labeled a "troll" or "scold," I'd like to suggest a couple things.

All these comments are interesting and useful. On the other hand, the summary or meat of the argument would make an excellent post and then the details could be a link. So doing, a reader of the blog can get the gist of the discussion. The really interested reader can get to the detailed expositions by drilling down via the link.

Don't get me wrong, the comments section provides an excellent running commentary on the original topic. It also can drift off into some great off topic stuff, but... , the casual or first time reader usually scans the blog, not the comments. That casual reader would miss the impact of your detailed comments.

Karen has structured it so most of the tech group can "post" AND "comment."

[Sermon ON]This makes a blog a different structure and more flexible than a discussion thread. The game is to link. Links are the equivalent of attachments to emails. The difference is that your server may fire up an html page or download the pdf/doc. The page visitor can decide how much detail they need.

When you "post" it provides both an abstract and a hook to get the reader to look further.[Sermon OFF]

BTW; My blogger ID is Piquero, most of your know me as Igor, and officially I'm Bob Rowen.