The Human Side of Lean

2010-08-21T15:40:00.002-04:00

Does a sustainable Lean Implementation require inventing the wheel again?

The comparison of a Lean implementation with evolution is exactly what I think Lean ‘was’ all about, when Toyota started their Lean journey in the 50th.

Today, everyone is staring at Toyota as role model, but at the same time many seem to be paralyzed like a bunny staring at the snake!

Some companies I consult for want to be a Toyota – at least at the beginning before they understand what it’s really about.

But we need to keep in mind that in respect to successfully implementing Lean, there is a huge difference between

Toyota in the 50th and how Toyota started and evolved over time and
Toyota today and how inexperienced companies want to jump into being the Toyota of today.

For instance, people will - or will not - get the hang of why Toyota is so successful today, after 50+ years working hard on their TPS system or more correctly on their ‘Toyota Way’, how they found the way of single piece flow, documentation, standard work, applying the Asian cultural advantages, respecting people etc. etc. etc. …

But how can Toyota build one plant after the other in the Western world, hiring Western people and still run a TPS system very successfully and [almost] flawless within weeks…???

There is s clear and very important difference between starting a Lean journey from scratch and duplicating a Lean status quo within an organization into a new entity in the same of very similar industry.

What is the difference?

When starting a lean journey from scratch you face the same situation Toyota was facing in the 50th and you have to make your way through evolution, trial and error etc. to move forward and to improve. Yes, not quite because you can take some, but limited experiences and learning from Toyota to speed up your process. If you are an automotive manufacture your implementation will – should - go faster than for companies outside that industry.

When duplicating a well defined model such as TPS into a new entity or industry, everything is based on two aspects:

The ‘EXACT’ knowledge of how to build your product with bulletproofed and very well developed and defined processes and Standard Work Instructions for ‘EVERY!’ process involved including a system with 100% transparency in sharing and communicating this knowledge to everyone in the most effective way – the framework.
An advance hiring and training process to select exactly the right people with the right skills, knowledge, desire and personality profile that are matching the job profile to be filled.
I am not elaboration on the technical infrastructure such as equipment, IT and logistics, since this usually does not make the difference in business performance.

So, it’s about ‘knowing’ the best way to build a car or product PLUS having this ‘documented’ in a way that everyone understands it, without any room for errors or misinterpretation.

This is the case for Toyota, knowing how to build cars and having it documented in a way that the execution is people independent to a high degree.

GM – and some others – know how to build cars but the degree of process optimization and especially bulletproofed documentation of standard processes, not to mention open internal information sharing is far behind the leading companies.

Even if GM - or some others - would fire all their workforce to get around the always stressed Union constraints and benefit burdens and would hire all new employees, they would fail completely since they don’t have the best processes in place nor are they documented as standard in the needed sufficient way.

==> Catch 22 or tough luck, right?

I believe Toyota’s journey was exactly an evolution of trails and errors with a clear goal in mind. The main contents or goal might have been: ‘JIT and no inventory’ and the evolution took place around that guiding principle.

Like a tree that might be guided by the nature of growing, but without a pre-set building plan about where exactly the branches and leaves will be growing – well, I might be on thin biology ice with this comparison …

A better comparison might be to ‘us’ – humans -, born and just equipped with the BIOS chip to get us booted up but without an operating manual and (almost) doomed to fail…if we did not have our parents to start programming some application software into our brains.
I would still call this evolution, even if the experiences of our parents are guiding and biasing their programming, training and teaching.

Now, trying as company to get to today’s Toyota level as sort of benchmark is already doomed to fail, since

It took Toyota 60+ years of evolution to get there, if at all you could benchmark against Toyota’s level in the 60th or 70th and trying to get to that level – but who wants THAT??
No business nor company is comparable in products and culture, hence most of the time it would not even make sense to use Toyota as benchmark

By the way, benchmarking against other companies makes not a lot of sense anyhow, since you limit yourself automatically. The only benchmark acceptable from my perspective would be against ‘perfection’ or ‘excellence’ or something like that.

Now, does this imply, that in order to implement Lean successful we always have to invent the wheel again and need to go through all failures and spend 50+ years to move our companies towards today’s Toyota level…???

If looking at the ONLY real difficulty in implementing Lean sustainable – The Human Side or Cultural Aspects of Lean -, one might come to a conclusion that is pretty close to that….

2009-08-07T10:47:00.014-04:00

Just a quick reminder of our next
Human Side of Lean Conference Call !!!
…and you don’t need to say anything, you can just listen if you like…

Coming Wednesday August 12, 2009 & 7pm.
Call toll free 1-866-469-3239 and enter Pin Code 18874421#.
(see details below)

Here is the suggested topic for our call:

Does Group Size really matter?
You would think engagement is easier with smaller groups than with larger groups …?

Here are some thoughts:
• What impact has the team size on the approach of creating engagement within an improvement initiative.
• How to deal with small groups (up to 6), medium size groups (<20) and larger groups (>20)?
• What are the key-factors to achieve sustainability at different group sizes?
• What impact have different personalities on a group dynamic?
• How to compare our work with a lead actor, star or entertainer on stage?
• And this [********] is the space for your questions!!

Tell us your applications, cases, experiences, and lesions leaned in engaging a bunch of people in order to discuss it on our call and to possibly find THE common denominator for successful engagement.

Andreas Hug has volunteered to summarize the outcome into a one page whitepaper, documenting the major insights and lessons learned from this conference call. – Thanks Andreas !!!

ALL participants will receive a copy!
So, don’t miss this Human Side of Lean Call !!!!

If you haven’t been on the call recently …. you might be astonished…about what is going to happen, or not going to happen…. 

We are looking forward to having you on the call!

Thank you
Regards

Juergen Boenisch
(Co-Chair Human Side of Lean Tech Group)

+++++ Call Details +++++

Human Side of Lean Call
Call toll free 1-866-469-3239 and enter Pin Code 18874421#.
2nd Wednesday of each Month at 7 p.m. Eastern Time EST
Call toll free 1-866-469-3239 and enter Access Code 18874421#.
No advance registration required.
You don’t need to be a SME member, nor do you need a special invitation.
The only condition for you participating on THIS call:
Your sincere interest in Lean Implementation and especially in finding out what makes a Lean Implementation stick or what makes it sustainable.

Co-Chairs - Juergen Boenisch & Chuck Yorke

Juergen Boenisch, Ph.D., CMC, CSCM
Supply Chain Innovation Program SCIP™

JBEELINE CONSULTING
Achieve Measurable Results. Together.
2113 Falling Green Drive
Oakville, ON L6M 5B6
Canada
Phone: (905) 847-9298
Cell: (416) 839-7759
Skype: Juergen.Boenisch
Email: Juergen.Boenisch@jbeeline.ca

(JBEELINE, former Executive Management Consulting EMC)
SME - Society of Manufacturing Engineers
Chair of Human Side of Lean Tech Group
Past Chair & Executive Advisor Toronto Chapter 26

NOTE: This e-mail message, and any attachments, is intended only for the named recipient(s) above and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you have received this message in error, or are not the named recipient(s), please immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail message. Thank you.

2009-05-29T10:39:00.002-04:00

GM: The bailout amounts go up, and up, and … yes, they will go up further!
Not long ago we learned about a $39billion tax write off, out of the blue? – These losses were accumulated and it was well known to GM that this will hit the bottom line. Now we are in the bailout bidding process, and it feels like being on an auction.

The reason lies in the fact that currently no one has any idea about the TRUE situation of GM. But from my perspective we will learn pretty soon about what really happens behind the financial GM scenes.

Pretty soon – probably next week - GM will file for bankruptcy protection and a few days later the public will be told about the true GM situation. We better take a comfortable seat and enjoy the bumpy ride, since these numbers won’t be even funny anymore and my best guess is that they will at least double the currently publicized financial situation of GM.

Filing for Bankruptcy protection is inevitable, and always was!

Around one year ago I was part of a discussion with senior automotive executives, government representatives and other experts. The common view was pretty stunning. Almost all of us clearly expressed the opinion that GM will file for bankruptcy protection no later than within the next 12 months – and here we are right now.

Why?

Let’s look at one other player out there: Toyota. While Toyota also lost money the first time in history this year, still Toyota has become the number one in global care production. Both, Toyota and GM are experts in state of the art assembly technology and in implementing Lean Manufacturing process improvement initiatives – one the expert in theory & practice and one the expert in only in theory.

Toyota has developed a unique and extremely successful enterprise philosophy over the last 50+! years. This so called “Toyota Production System TPS” is primarily based on Lean Manufacturing principals but most importantly TPS manages to address the “Human Factor” – we call it the Human Side of Lean - and consequently the company culture in a remarkable way. TPS flawlessly combines business and process improvement with engaging and truly respecting their employees leading to continuous improvement and more importantly to sustainability in every improvement step they take.

As Stephen Hawking ones said:
“Intelligence is the ability to adapt to change.”

It’s all about change and the speed in which companies can mobilize their workforce to adjust to the ever faster changing world, environment and customer demands. The time of economy of scale is coming to an end, small lot sizes, fast response times and highly dynamic and innovative companies will make the race of the future. In short, it’s all about Leadership and Company Culture to sustainable infiltrate the required change in a fast and dynamic enough way.

Unfortunately, GM will not be one of them … because it’s too late now!

A change in GM top AND middle management was avoided for far too long. Under everybody’s eyes, management was allowed to drive GM completely in to the ground which now makes it very difficult to find a shuffle long enough to dig them back out.

GM missed the chance to find a way to re-brand itself in order for their employees to even being willing to mentally join in. GM missed the chance to change its company environment since a culture cannot be changed directly! The culture will follow if the environment in which people work is changed first. The people will make the change to the new culture – if only somebody would have gotten them involved.

The sad part: Nobody listened to all the dedicated and hard working employees at GM and their great ideas and willingness to help. So stop blaming the employees and unions and legacy cost and high health obligations for the GM mess!

These are just consequences and effects of the root cause: Management. It is the fault of management and the fault of the system of how management is brought in and how management’s incentive system is set up (to name only a few). In the 50’s Dr. Edward Deming (you might remember this guy who taught the Japanese quality since nobody in North America wanted to listen to him)brought up “The System of Profound Knowledge” that already at that time highlighted the need to understand psychology and working with your people instead of against them.

Let’s keep one think in mind: Ford that was in a worse financial shape than GM. There is one difference: Alan Mulally, a true leader with his head at the right place. Since he came in as president and CEO things did start to change to the good. As prior executive and president for The Boeing Company, Mulally follows the Toyota Way and he knows how crucial a healthy company culture really is. He started to align and engage the minds and hearts of his team nicely and Ford is the only D-Three automaker at this time not asking for bailout money.

Dr. Juergen Boenisch, Ph.D., CMC
JBeeline Consulting, Toronto Canada

Phone Call 01AUG2006

2006-08-01T21:01:00.000-04:00

Group discussion on dealing with management by expediting.

The notes from the call in map/pdf form are here. The notes in document form are here. If you have MindManager software, the original map is here.

Key topics:

Differences between consulting and managing.

If you would like to join the Human Side of Lean calls in the future, typically every Tuesday evening, the details are here.

Tuesday Phone Call 11JUL2006

2006-07-11T20:49:00.000-04:00

Group discussion on dealing with performance issues on the team.

The notes from the call in map/pdf form are here. If you have MindManager software, the original map is here.

Key topics:

Being a change agent can be frustrating.
Like any management task, helping people see how their behavior is impacting others is difficult. But, this topic resonates with this year's discussion about personality and behavior.

If you would like to join the Human Side of Lean calls in the future, typically every Tuesday evening, the details are here.

Predictive Index - Phone Call 27JUN06

2006-06-28T22:48:00.000-04:00

We were joined by Erik Herman for a discussion and example of the Predictive Index (PI) tool. He was kind enought to let us take the PI questionaire (about a 5 minute exercise) and then discuss the results.

Very interesting discussion as a follow-on to our DISC and MB phone sessions.

The notes from the call in map/pdf form are here. If you have MindManager software, the original map is here.

If you would like to join the Human Side of Lean calls in the future, typically every Tuesday evening, the details are here. Playback instructions for this call are here.

More on DDI

2006-05-23T21:42:00.000-04:00

I've read the Inc. Magazine article on DDI. It is a good profile of the company as well as other competitors in the hiring/consulting field.

Toyota and BMW only get a passing reference. So I wonder if there are actually multiple ways that Toyota screens candidates? Maybe someone can comment.

Adam Hanft wrote the article for the March 2003 issue. It has a number of interesting quotes. The major emphasis seems to be the behavior can be measured/detected and those behaviors are key to hiring success.

If you read the article, check out the do's & don'ts at the end of the piece.

HS Lean Phone Call 23MAY2006

2006-05-23T20:31:00.000-04:00

Short follow on discussion from last week's DISC session. We also looked at possible future topics for the Summer. One to pursue is to find someone to talk about DDI Assessments.

The notes from the call in map/pdf form are here. If you have MindManager software, the original map is here.

If you would like to join the Human Side of Lean calls in the future, typically every Tuesday evening, the details are here. Playback instructions for the call are here.

UPDATE: Andreas found an article in Inc. Magazine during the conference call. It discussed DDI (The consulting firm). It is an interesting, but somewhat lengthy article.

Extended Call 16MAY2006

2006-05-16T21:51:00.000-04:00

Pam Butterfield helped walk the group through a DISC assessment. This was a follow-up to the original discussion on February 21st.

The notes from the call in map/pdf form are here. If you have MindManager software, the original map is here.

Some of the group had taken the assessment. [Thanks for the opportunity, Pam.] So, this was a debriefing of sorts. The information in the notes is interesting, but may appear disjoint at times, since you won't have the detailed assessment reports.

Key take away:

DISC measures behaviors, both natural (at home) and adapted (at work). Communication style and influence varies with each dominant behavior.

If you would like to join the Human Side of Lean calls in the future, typically every Tuesday evening, the details are here.

Phone Call May 9, 2006

2006-05-09T21:30:00.000-04:00

Discussed TPS with a practitioner, Yuri Rodrigues, who is working at the Toyota plant in KY.

The notes from the call in map/pdf form are here. If you have MindManager software, the original map is here.

Key take away:

The discussion focused on leaders coaching their teams to reflect and treat errors/failures as opportunity.

If you would like to join the Human Side of Lean calls in the future, typically every Tuesday evening, the details are here.

Call 25APR2006

2006-04-25T21:22:00.000-04:00

Small group discussion this evening.

The notes from the call in map/pdf form are here. If you have MindManager software, the original map is here.

Key take away:

Rather than have a call next week,
we will join the call for George Scamby's Webinar on Wednesday (May 3rd) 7-8pm ET.

Details and registration for George's talk can be found at www.sme.org/lean. His topic will be "Achieving Lean Engineering Through Employee Involvement."

If you would like to join the Human Side of Lean calls in the future, typically every Tuesday evening, the details are here.

April 18, 2006 Conference Call

2006-04-19T00:00:00.000-04:00

Light turn out this evening, probably Easter Bunny fatigue. Those that were on the call enjoyed a discussion of "Leaders & Followers" with Gene Dixon talking about his research interests.

The notes from the call in map/pdf form are here. If you have MindManager software, the original map is here.

Key take away:

Good leaders display more follower traits, on the whole. and,

The military model provides some lessons of choosing leaders from good followers.

We have a natural or cultural bias against the word "follower." Though those effective followers are far from passive or mindless automotons. We will continue the discussion next week.

If you would like to join these calls in the future, typically every Tuesday evening, the details are here.

IOC Research

2006-04-13T18:08:00.000-04:00

As a follow up to Tuesday's phone call (4/1//2006), Toni Doolen has provided a more detailed presentation. The presentation contains a lot of great information, much more than we captured during the phone call.

A reminder: she is looking for help to identify other potential study participants (i.e. companies that are committed to running Kaizen events). This presentation goes a long way to explain what the study is all about.

So even if you were on the phone call, check it out.

Discussion 11APR2006

2006-04-11T21:39:00.000-04:00

We were joined by Toni Doolen and Gene Dixon . Welcome and thanks for contributing.

The discussion centered around research Toni is doing as part of an NSF grant. The notes from the call in map/pdf form are here. If you have MindManager software, the original map is here.

Toni provided more detail in the form of a presentation, which can be downloaded here.

Key take away:

What factors contribute to "sustained" process improvements. and,

Are there companies, that we know of, that are using Kaizen events on a regular basis, that would be interested in participating in the study?

Next week we will let Gene Dixon talk about his interests in the area of Leaders & Followers.

If you would like to join these calls in the future, typically every Tuesday evening, the details are here.

UPDATE Links were to March data, fixed. Now 11APR2006.

Phone Call 04APR - More Structogram

2006-04-04T20:46:00.000-04:00

You can click to expand this jpg image or download a pdf of the image here.

We continued the discussion of Structograms with a SWOT analysis of the assessment tool, focusing on the environment of applying it with the team. The meeting notes from tonight's call in map/pdf form are here. If you have MindManager software, the original map is here.

If you would like to join these calls in the future, typically every Tuesday evening, the details are here.

Structograms 21MAR2006

2006-03-21T20:54:00.000-05:00

We were joined by Andreas Hug and had a discussion of Structograms. The meeting notes from tonight's call in map/pdf form are here. If you have MindManager software, the original map is here.

Discussion centered around:

Basic overview on Structogram Assessments.

We also agreed to have a SWOT discussion of Structograms on April 4th, two weeks from now.

If you would like to join these calls in the future, typically every Tuesday evening, the details are here.

Call March 14, 2006

2006-03-14T20:50:00.000-05:00

The meeting notes from tonight's call in map/pdf form are here. If you have MindManager software, the original map is here.

Discussion centered around:

Military procurement and distribution. and
The resistance to change in that culture.

If you would like to join these calls in the future, typically every Tuesday evening, the details are here.

Phone Discussion 07MAR2006

2006-03-07T21:24:00.000-05:00

Phone call was held tonight. The meeting notes in map/pdf form are here. If you have MindManager software, the original map is here.

Discussion centered around:

LEAN in a Supply Chain setting. and
ERP systems and LEAN inventories.

If you would like to join these calls in the future, typically every Tuesday evening, the details are here.

Telephone Conference 28FEB2006

2006-02-28T20:38:00.000-05:00

Phone call was held tonight. The meeting notes in map/pdf form are here. If you have MindManager software, the original map is here.

Discussion centered around:

LEAN in an office setting. and
Wisdom(?) of having upper management at Kaizen events.

If you would like to join these calls in the future, typically every Tuesday evening, the details are here.

Teleconference 21FEB2006

2006-02-21T20:46:00.000-05:00

Phone call was held tonight. The meeting notes in map/pdf form are here. If you have MindManager software, the original map is here.

Discussion centered around:

The DiSC assessment tool. and
Some ways it is used in an organization.

Our thanks to Pam Butterfield for fielding questions and discussing the DiSC assessment tool.

If you would like to join these calls in the future, typically every Tuesday evening, the details are here.

More On Tools

2006-02-20T21:55:00.000-05:00

We occasionally get into a discussion of LEAN and Six Sigma during the phone calls. I was looking for a definition of IDEF when I ran across this site.

The CBPI Framework is more along the lines of system process analysis. Indeed the acronym stands for Continuous Business Process Improvement (CBPI). The above link is their resource center. It has some nice compact descriptions of tools in both the Six Sigma and LEAN space.

And, the descriptions are written in simple understandable language. Particularly the discussion of how Six Sigma and LEAN are complementary.

Phone Call Notes 14FEB2006

2006-02-14T20:18:00.000-05:00

Tonight we used the Arkadin "Datanow" tool to use both the phone and internet for the conference call.

The topic was Myers-Briggs. We shared a desktop application and discussed a SWOT analysis.

Next Tuesday 14FEB06

2006-02-09T23:06:00.000-05:00

Just a reminder that next Tuesday's phone call will use both a web log-in and a conference call. We are going to work with network meeting software.

The discussion topic will be the Myers-Briggs assessment tool. We will dicuss the strengths and weaknesses of MB as a tool that helps lead to a sustained implementation. The framework for the discussion is this map (link is a pdf copy of the map).

We hope you can review the MB description this week-end and join us for Tuesday night's discussion.

Teleconference 31JAN2006

2006-01-31T20:32:00.000-05:00

Phone call was held tonight. The meeting notes in map/pdf form are here. If you have MindManager software, the original map is here.

Discussion centered around:

Do workers like or dislike assessments? and
Why do they focus on numbers for org assessments?

If you would like to join these calls in the future, typically every Tuesday evening, the details are here.

On February 14th we are going to use a web meeting tool, along with the conference call. We will be discussing the S-W-O-T points of the Myers-Briggs tool.

TPS House

2006-01-30T22:31:00.000-05:00

I'm probably not as up on LEAN as other people on the call. Since Juergen has been referring to the Toyota Production System (TPS) House, I figured I should find a reference. Plenty of those available.

I created a composit from multiple references. Some of those were:

EMS Consulting Group
Gemba Group
A research report on LEAN Ship building
and, Juergen had a presentation last November.

List of Tools

2006-01-24T23:00:00.000-05:00

During the call we started to list various "tools" for LEAN. I had mentioned that I had started to surf the web looking for various lists and descriptions. My current very incomplete list can be found here.

I will be adding to it in the future.

Assessment Tools

2006-01-24T21:55:00.000-05:00

Toward the end of the call we began to compile a list of tools for assessment.

This is not a complete list, but is a start. Feel free to add your favorite assessment tool information in the comments.

Myers-Briggs
DISC
Toyota Hiring Assessment DDI
Denison Organizational Culture Survey DOCS
McKinsey 7-S Framework
MIT VALUE self-assessment
Structogram
AutoZone modified version of a Ford vendor assessment

I couldn't find a good description of Structograms. Most of the sites were either non-English, or programming sites. Structograms are used for software design.

I did find an interesting site of on-line personality tests like Myers-Briggs assessments.

Update: It appears to me that we may be mixing apples and oranges. Some of these tools are targeting individuals, i.e. potential team members with Myers-Briggs. A few of the tools are more meaningful to assess organizational readiness, AutoZone's supplier assessment probably falls into this category.

Update II: Chuck Yorke sent us a link (I've added a comment) but wanted the reader to know about "Denison" as a cultural assessment tool.

Update III: David Csokasy sent along a better description for the Myers-Briggs Tool. The link has been updated (31JAN06).

Conference Call 24JAN2006

2006-01-24T21:49:00.000-05:00

Phone call was held tonight. The meeting notes in map/pdf form are here. If you have MindManager software, the original map is here.

Discussion centered around:

What tools are in the LEAN toolbox? and
How does AutoZone do their assessments?

If you would like to join these calls in the future, typically every Tuesday evening, the details are here.

Culture Assessment Tools

2006-01-24T20:37:00.000-05:00

In today’s conference call (Jan. 24, 06), we had an interesting discussion about how the “Human Side” could be addressed in a practical way. Jim Garrick described how his company is “engaging” suppliers and employees and how to possibly assess the cultural status quo.

A cultural assessment might consist of a “questionnaire approach” plus a “Genchi-Genbutsu” (go and see for yourself) approach where you just observe people and situations. Additionally top management is seeking close contact to the Gemba (place were action takes place).

Earlier we learned that Toyota is using a very advanced recruiting methodology that might take up to two (2) years – form first contact of hiring. A significant part of this assessment is most likely the personality evaluation of a candidate.

I wonder if Toyota is using any cultural assessment tools (questionnaire or observation) in their daily operation or during their periodical employee evaluation.

I would very much welcome any comment that might help clarifying this issue.

Thank you,
Regards,

Juergen Boenisch

Discussion Topic

2006-01-22T14:37:00.000-05:00

On last week's call, part of the discussion was about an assessment tool. This got me thinking about measurements in general.

What has your experience been with Dashboards and Metrics?

I recall in the 80's that Quality Circles and measurement charts were the rage. I'm not unique in observing that a number of the measurements were easy to measure but not particularly significant.

How do you pick a metric to post and track?

(Here is a chance to use the comments.)

Similar post on the LEAN Tool & Die Making blog.

Teleconference 17JAN2006

2006-01-17T20:34:00.000-05:00

Phone call was held tonight. The meeting notes in map/pdf form are here. If you have MindManager software, the original map is here.

Discussion centered around:
"How can two similar companies, same basic classroom session,
have two drastically different results?"

If you would like to join these calls in the future, typically every Tuesday evening, the details are here.

Comments About Comments

2006-01-13T03:06:00.000-05:00

I added a comment on the 2006 Planning Session, but decided to pratice what I preach. If I'm right, you should hit this link, now. I'll be here when you get back.

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 visitor/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.

Continued Idea

2006-01-12T22:13:00.000-05:00

After last night's post I started doodling about what a SWOT would look like on a Mind Map. A simple format could have the branches contain pre-agreed categories under the major topics (S-W-O-T). Something like this:(click on it to enlarge)

The discussion would consist of assigning a value to relevant categories, the same as setting priorities in an action list. The discussion would be structured, fast, and somewhat consistent from one tool to the next. The resulting map would look something like this:(click to enlarge)

A more robust discussion would brainstorm categories or be more expansive about categories. The capability of capturing the discussion that explains "why" we reached a conclusion or value could also be captured.

The "tool list" could then be augmented with a link to the completed map.

Comments about the "pre-built" categories would be useful.

Some Phone Call Ideas

2006-01-11T22:39:00.000-05:00

A thought occured to me last night as I went through my notes from the Tuesday conference call.

One proposal involved categorizing tools in terms of failure modes and importance of human interaction. I didn't ask at the time; is there a commonly recognized list of tools (and techniques)?

If so, then we might do the following:

Post the list
Pick a tool and find a good web description of it
Announce in advance the link and the night we will discuss it
Provide enough lead time for people to read the description/article
On the appointed evening, spend time doing a SWOT-like assessment of the tool. But emphasize the human dimensions of the tool.
Publish the discussion here for additional comment

This wouldn't have to take the full phone call. A structured 20-25 minute discussion would suffice. And it probably could be every 2 or 3 weeks. We may have to write the article or description first (though I assume we can excerpt some of the literature if it isn't already electronic).

Tech Group Strategy - focusing questions

2006-01-06T08:56:00.000-05:00

Regarding the definition of the tech group's strategy, I have some questions for you to consider to help you focus. You have identified your customer: Anyone who has chosen to champion or implement "Lean” techniques.

Now brainstorm on the following questions. Do not draw conclusions yet. It's best not to refer to the strategy statement for this exercise. It is OK for the same answer to appear under more than one question.

Knowledge

What does the customer want to know? Examples: How to participate in tech group; how to deal with resistance to lean?

What do you want the customer to know? Examples: "Respect for people" is an all-important element of lean; How to participate in tech group.

Action

What does the customer want to do? Examples: Meet experts; Confront the boss.

What do you want the customer to do? Examples: Go to conference; join the conference call.

This refers to what the customer "wants to know/do" rather than "needs to know/do" because we have a natural tendency to think of "need" as something the person should do, in our opinion. You want to think of the person's own motivations and emotions that drive their behavior.

You don't have to do formal research right now, although you could plan some for the future. You know this customer, you work right next to him/her, or he/she manages your company, or you met this person at a function, and so on. You may be this person yourself.

When you get to the "we want the customer to know/do" you are in the realm of the "should" and the project or product you want to develop.

Once you get some answers to the questions, I can take you through a prioritization process.

2005-12-26T11:01:00.000-05:00

The GM Debacle and what to learn from Toyota

If you open any newspaper today, you most likely will find an article about General Motors GM, explaining – or at least trying to explain – in detail why GM is currently in such desolate situation. To make it even more interesting, some of these articles compare GM & Ford with Japanese car manufacturers - mainly with Toyota - and they try to explain the differences: Why is it that GM and Ford are losing market share in breathtaking speed and Toyota gains double digit market shares at the same time?

Depending on what paper or magazine you open, commonly used explanations for GM’s current situation include:

Huge pension liabilities dated back to the times when lots of money was made on cards and significant commitments toward the unions were made so everyone could have a happy life
Enormous health cost liabilities to their current and retired workers, totaling up together with the pension liabilities to $2,500 - $3,500 per car
Higher overall costs in North America that cannot compete with Asian costs
Independent dealer network who “does not know how to sell cars…”
Extremely good marketing of Toyota that makes cars increasingly attractive
GM’s “gas guzzlers”, especially the SUV’s in combination with increasing gas prices make consumers more sensible
Toyota is subsidized by the Japanese government with consequential lower total costs per car
Toyotas hybrid cars – that are also subsidized by the Japanese government – take GM’s market away
etc. etc.

Only to make it clear, this is not my opinion!

The current GM situation is surely not easy to handle, since certain actions should have been taken years or decades ago and – to make it even worse – GM’s recovering strategy is still not clear. GM is experiencing – and Ford as well - a situation or better “the effects of causes" that lie much deeper than obvious.

How is this possible?
Well, Toyota - they say the world’s #1 car manufacturer in 2010, but Daniel T. Jones just announced that that already “this year Toyota will almost certainly overtake GM to become the number one in the global car industry” - has developed a unique and extremely successful enterprise philosophy over the last almost 50 years! This so called “Toyota Production System TPS” is primarily based on Lean & Six Sigma principals but most importantly TPS managed to address the “Human Factor” and consequently the company culture in a remarkable way.

Please go to http://www.juergenboenisch.blogspot.com/ to read the whole story. Your comments are welcome!

Respect and trust

2005-12-22T21:30:00.000-05:00

Most people know that I counsel focusing SME's efforts on manufacturing. Yet, it is worth noting that in the recent transit strike in New York, the greatest problem noted by workers was the lack of respect and trust between management and workers. This perception is supported and documented by the unusual number of grievances and disciplinary actions among workers, management and the union. The cost? Millions. How many times is the same equation seen in manufacturing organizations?

Human Side of Lean: 2006 Planning Session

2005-12-21T08:54:00.000-05:00

PRELIMINARY AGREEMENTS

Mission:
The help our customers succeed in implementing a Lean Enterprise by providing them knowledge on the Human Side of Lean.

Our Customer:
Anyone who has chosen to champion or implement Lean” techniques.

Strategies:

To develop tools and/or a road map that Lean implementers can use.
These would be jump started using a previously developed mind map as well as ideas brought up in this session and future sessions.
Some suggested ideas were:
A road map to succeed tool.
A culture categorization tool.
A culture measurement tool.
A tips and tricks tool for implementers.
A management methods tool.
A behavior profile tool. (Or use an existing ie. Myers Briggs, DISC etc.)
A “How to create challenging meaningfull work” tool.
An engage the workforce tool.
An assessment tool for hiring.

To create a rapid response team
The idea was to use the groups knowledge to problem solve stalled implementations.

To present at conferences or write articles
Perhaps based on some of the developed tools.

Lean Implementation: How do we change the culture?

2005-12-08T12:34:00.000-05:00

How do we balance culture change with tool implementation?
Change the culture first? When to introduce Lean tools? Study psychology?

How to Get Management on Board?
Train Management first? Create / Hire top team? How do we keep it from collapsing?

How Do We Make Measurement and Rewards Support New Desired Behaviors?
On the floor? In the office? On the balance sheet?

How Should We Engage & Stimulate Employees? Possible Tools:
Quick & Easy Kaizen, Employees as teachers (e.g. "Training Within Industry"), Reward systems, Employee development & Training

What Would Deming Do?
What are the systems we should be looking at? How do they interact as a whole?

This group intends to create a Lean Implementation Model and/or a Lean Culture Assessment tool. The work may be documented and disseminated through future articles, books, presentations, meetings, and webinars.

Lean is more than a collection of tools. Its heart is people learning and improving together.
The human side of lean is often glossed over, resulting in painful implementations and the lack of sustainability.