Appreciating Systems

Appreciating Systems for Genuine Efficiency
Home » Archive by category 'Lean' (Page 8)

#TWI used to make Construction more #Lean a @linkedin discussion

In that LinkedIn discussion, the TWI programs have been used with great results (both bottom line AND, more improtantly to me, with respect to the people side of the work). Furthermore, here are three nice questions Mark Warren provided as a sort of quick coaching process to introduce the J programs. Thanks Mark!

The act of going to the work is a “Learning to See” exercise to get people in the habit of looking for problems. Then asking a few questions.

  1. Do you have a process? (No – map the process and develop a job breakdown sheet to train staff doing the job. Yes – question 2.)
  2. Do you follow the process? (No – use JR to understand why. Is it a personal issue, or are they not following the process because of other reasons? Yes – question 3)
  3. Is the process capable? (No – start with JM, however more complex tools may be necessary to resolve. Yes – what did you overlook?)

via Just completed a mammoth TWI implementation on a large construction project in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. 36% productivity improvement within 6 months. TWI is fantastic in the construction industry. | LinkedIn.

#Lean Five Whys: when do you stop asking? Please answer here:

October 15th, 2012 Posted in Lean Tags: , , , ,

give me five! (CC)Creative Commons License Martin Fisch via Compfight

I have a question to me fellow readers.

On of the most famous Lean tools (or quality tool as well) is the Five Whys. Literature has it that one should ask 5 whys at least and that a further number of whys isn’t a bad thing. Yet, Taiichi Ohno often gives examples where the investigation is stopped at the fifth why despite one could easily have asked some further ones.

Aside from the usual caveats (doing wide whys and forgetting to go deep five levels; assigning blame to other people; etc.), what are your practices regarding five whys, and what’s your criteria for stopping?

Here’s my answer below, but please only read it after you have posted your own in a comment this post (double-click the following paragraph to have it decoded in a pop-up – an alternative way is copy-pasting the text onto www.rot13.com website).

Zl bja pevgrevn sbe fgbccvat nanylfvf vf jura crbcyr raq hc jvgu n pnhfr gung unf abg bgure shegure pnhfr orfvqr “jryy, jr whfg unir gb qb K”.

#TWI en français: des documents publiés sur le site de #ENST (#Lean) !

October 9th, 2012 Posted in Lean Tags: , , , ,

J’ai pu récupérer, grâce à de multiples contacts, des documents, diffusables, du TWI en Français.

Je les ai déposés sur le site du TWI en français de Télécoms ParisTech. Il s’agit de documents des mines domaniales de potasse d’Alsace datés de 1966.

J’en ai aussi profité pour déposer mes informations quant aux pistes que j’ai suivies pour récupérer des informations sur ce qui existait dans le domaine. Allez voir l’adresse ci-dessous.

Et si jamais vous pouvez passer à Roubaix aux Archives nationales du travail, faites moi signe, je vous expliquerai comment faire des copies du Manuel de Formation Pratique des Chefs qui s’y trouve !

Merci à Michel, Franck, le Monsieur du BGRM et à Mark Warren pour leur aide précieuse !

 

Don’t teach #Lean

genchi genbutsu

Now, thinking about it, how long have companies been trying to replicate Toyota? That’s easy fact to find: get the publication date of “The machine that changed the world” from Womack, Jones & Roos: 1991.

2012-1991=21.

It’s been 21 years that people try to teach Lean. And few succeed. Yet the teaching and education business is longer than that. Should we have known a bullet-proof way of teaching, we’d know by then, don’t you think?

So, instead of trying to find the root cause of why Lean teaching fails (besides, it doesn’t really fail: it’s just that knowledge learned that way cannot be put into motion), let’s turn to what works instead. What do successful Lean coaches tell us about turning a company Lean? It simple, and I guess anyone in the Lean business knows it:

現地現物 !

Or, as I read elsewhere:

Go to the real place, look at the process, talk to the people.

Why does teaching Lean doesn’t work?

Trying to teach as systemic a thing as Lean is very difficult. Every single tool or practice is connected to every other one: Just in Time helps with flow, but also raises problems (that the purpose, by the way!), so you can see them, but you’d need visual performance management board as well, which means you need to learn and practice Five Why’s root cause analyses, Pareto, and Ishikawa. So, you’d discover that your training is lame (Job Instruction!), your batches are too big and because your die changeovers are too long, so you must SMED them, and so on.

So, when someone’s trying to teach Lean, they’re mainly trying to have some square pegs forced into round holes. The peg being the Lean material, and the hole being the people’s brain they’re trying to indoctrinate. People will have a hard time making sense of their knowledge with what they have in production. Teaching them is also mostly diverting their mind from where the true work needs to be done: the floor (gemba).

So between using new and non-practical knowledge or continuing to do what they’ve already done (and that they perfectly know how to do from their perspective), what do you think they will do? They will continue to do business as usual of course!

So, what to do about Lean knowledge?

Should we stop teaching Lean? No, of course, otherwise we’d be short of Lean experts someday. But what’s important is that the ones having Lean knowledge don’t try to push it onto people (besides, pushing isn’t the best Lean practice, by the way), but they must try to have people pull knowledge. And not pulling knowledge from the mind of their Lean consultant, but from their own! Which means the Lean consultant must change job and become a Lean coach. The role of a coach being that of a guide that doesn’t give solutions, but helps and encourages on the path to understanding. Of course, the Lean knowledge of the coach is useful: it helps him/her to ask the good questions at the most efficient moment so that the people can discover and learn Leanin the context of their own work.

Here’s one example of what I meant by the diatribe above: http://theleanedge.org/?p=3875. Michael Ballé’s one of the most respected Lean coach on the planet, but it took me quite some years to fully understand what he meant by repeatedly and bluntly telling people (like myself!) to go back to the gemba and work there. But for people like me that are more interested in learning than in producing, that wasn’t pleasant a discourse as I wanted it to be.

Now I know how I can have learning AND teaching at the same time: by going to the gemba and patiently and relentlessly showing the direction of Lean to people, but by coaching them to discover what would work best for them, in their own context. Hopefully, I have different tools in my toolbox to help me along the way, like Appreciative Inquiry to work out with people why do they do what they do, Solution Focus to help them remember what do they do that already works for them from a Lean perspective or Systems Thinking to nudge them into considering the whole system rather than just their silo and have them get out of their own way to truly build that systemic way of the company by 1) going to the real place, 2) looking at the process and 3) talkig to the (other) people.

 

Rigidity is acting like a hardener on Agility – is #Lean concerned?

October 2nd, 2012 Posted in Lean Tags: , ,

Any rigid element inside a system acts as a hardener which solidifies the system’s agility. Indeed, a rigid element forces the rest of the system to organize around itself, for two reasons:

  1. because it won’t change (it’s rigid!)
  2. because others can change (they’re agile!)

So in the end there’s a risk of the system rigidifying in circles around the initial rigid element and coagulating to death (there’s another possibility: that the rigid element gets circumscribed and ejected from the system).

What’s sure is that agile systems need to invest a part of their energy into constantly eradicating rigid elements for otherwise they risk coagulation. And, until the whole society becomes agile, there’s a host of rigidity out there that waits to fall prey on agile systems!

#GTD: the power of paper a @nytimes paper

September 18th, 2012 Posted in GTD, Lean Tags: , , , ,

Here’s a paper on the power of paper over digital (IT) stuff when it comes to getting things done. Obviously, the same goes with Lean Visual Performance Management: when you have it on paper in front of your face all day long, including physically writing your performance (in good: yay! or in bad: yuck!), it makes a huge difference.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/09/jobs/pen-and-paper-still-practical-in-the-office-workstation.html?_r=3

Will speak at LKFR12: Hands-on experience on Strength-based Kanban: a Metaphor and Tool to boost your lean implementation coaching skills #lkfr12 #lean

I will be a speaker there along with David Shaked from Almond Insight.

You can read about our common presentation (and that of others) on the LKFR Speakers page. We intend to do a highly interactive sessionà la workshop where we hope attendees will get back home with a huge number of ideas that will work for them.

Our intervention will be a “Hands-on experience on Strength-based Kanban: a Metaphor and Tool to boost your lean implementation coaching skills.”

The agenda and list of speakers is incredible, make sure you come exchange with us!

Toyota Kata “Improvement Kata Handbook” to download

August 20th, 2012 Posted in Lean Tags: , , , , , ,

Mike Rother provided with the material to be downloaded, with described procedure (standard?) to assemble it here:

TK Materials to Download.

This is excellent initiative, thanks Mike!

And as all Lean senseïs always told us: we need to grow our own “Production System” and not replicate that of Toyota. So it might, in the end, be the only material we ever need to improve our respective companies.

Let just do it!

 

Reblog: Catherine Chabiron: Can we reduce nemawashi to lobbying ? » The Lean Edge

August 20th, 2012 Posted in Lean Tags: , ,

Hey, Catherine Chabiron, of Faurecia, asked that excellent question about what nemawashi (a favorite Lean concept of mine) is!

I am convinced that nemawashi is the number one concept of Lean that makes it a systems practice method of improving a company. What I mean is that also all of Lean is strictly analytical thinking, the way it is done as a system (ie, all tools and Lean management principles used together and in interaction) helps knit the people and their processes, management and their people and overall, help all employee and management build a right mental model of how the company works as a system.

The question: Catherine Chabiron: Can we reduce nemawashi to lobbying ? » The Lean Edge.

Some of the first answers are from:

  • Jeff Likers
  • Art Smalley
  • Tracey Richardson
  • Daniel Markowitz: “nemawashi is a dialogue, not a monologue” and “By the time nemawashi is done, all parties know what’s at stake and why the proposal is important, so they’re able to implement more quickly, with less discussion, less resistance, and less confusion.” Isn’t this what all Change Management agents are supposed to look for? Well then, look no further!!!
  • Pascal Dennis

Reblog: Dan Jones: Five years into lean » The Lean Edge

August 20th, 2012 Posted in Lean Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Just read the following on a summer blog entry of Dan Jones. This is a rather simple explanation of what’s everybody’s role at all hierarchical levels in a Lean company:

[…] By then I would expect top management to be setting the direction for lean, middle management to be focused on streamlining their value streams and the front line to be deeply engaged in problem solving.

Although this is simply expressed (as is typical of someone’s wise in any field as Mr Jones is in Lean), this has profound implications:

  • top management being able to 1) devise a strategy that is coherent with Lean principles (not black magic, though some strong character is necessary to stick to some consistent True North) 2) deploy it “properly”, using Hoshin Kanri to embark all levels of the organization, and not trump any motivation by unilaterally imposing it
  • middle management being able to 1) identify value streams 2) connect the streams transversally through the organization and most importantly 3) communicate with one another to make improvements possibles. This is what A3 thinking is about I guess…
  • base employees being able to kaizen, kaizen, kaizen all the time so as to make the value streams identified above pull and approach one piece flow as much as possible.

Of course, this works if top management coaches middle management to do that VSM stuff (value stream mapping) and A3 thinking, most importantly with proper nemawashi (going to see all middle management involved, and any necessary stakeholders so as to devise the final solution with them, not without them). And middle management to coaches base employees into doing kaizen all the time and ensuring learning occurs (standards get improved to as not to forget and not to fall back). In the end, employees work so as to produce basic indicators related to Safety, Quality, Delays and Costs that are reviewed by top management to inform the top strategy (feedback)…

Read the rest of the article here: Dan Jones: Five years into lean » The Lean Edge.

Mail List

Join the mailing list

Check your email and confirm the subscription