Appreciating Systems

Appreciating Systems for Genuine Efficiency
Home » Posts tagged 'tool'

Du #SWOT au #SOAR : pour une mise en mouvement de l’entreprise vers sa #stratégie

Voici un excellent article qui présente, de manière simple et pratique, le SOAR comme alternative plus complète et plus efficace au SWOT. Une lecture rapide qui pourrait bien permettre aux responsables d’entreprise de lancer, enfin, leur entreprise sur le chemin du changement :

http://turningpoint-leadership.com/user/media/Medium/531/press_file/531-soar_bernard-tollec-turningpoint-2016_en.pdf

Merci Bernard !

 

#Lean and @simonsinek’s Golden Circle : there’s hope for you, yet…

February 24th, 2014 Posted in Lean Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

I had a sort of epiphany this morning during commute.

Lean isn’t, or shouldn’t, be transmitted or taught about improving performance or best to achieve performance.

The recent history of Lean seems to me to have gone through the following steps, which, in my mind, mirror the approaching of the WHY center circle of Simon Sinek.

Whats of Lean were the first to be taught (probably because they were the easiest to spot and understand inside Toyota plants) – and is still probably the main line of teaching Lean. Incidentally, these were those Taiichi Ohno warned us against:

  • Results: is orientated toward increasing performance of the company
  • Teaching of Lean: based mostly on using tools

Hows of Lean saw the beginning of a change in how Lean is transmitted:

  • Results: are sought through people and therefore “Respect” comes again to the fore (which it should never have left anyway)
  • Teaching of Lean: centered on how you achieve results (through people), that solutions come from them, not from the sensei. I think the epitome for this is the great “Toyota Kata” approach to teach Lean from Mike Rother.

Whys of Lean is when executives understand there’s really something more to improving a company, and that “respect for people” really is meant for more than mere words:

  • Results: are about contributing to something bigger than the company
  • Teaching of Lean: Lean is about making people flourish both inside and outside the company

Funnily, the more you advance in how you see Lean (according to the preceding three steps), the less you speak about Lean stuff and more about personal and organizational purpose.

Of course, I can’t end this post without this famous quote from Antoine de Saint-Exupéry:

If you want to build a ship, don’t drum up people to collect wood and don’t assign them tasks and work, but rather teach them to long for the endless immensity of the sea.

Simon, I bow before you…

A proposal for a new #Complexity- and #Strength- based #PDCA (for #Lean or else)

Thinking during commute the other day (should I have to live nearer my work, I’d be much more dumb!) I pondered how a better strength-based Plan Do Check Act loop could look like.

I find the current version of PDCA to be a bit too deficit-based and tainted of Command & Control. All too often we see managers or project managers deciding on a plan in their offices and rolling it over employees, without much consideration about what would work for them (they’re the ones with their two feet in the daily work, so they should know best). Sure, if you’re doing nemawashi, this doesn’t concern you. But not everybody does it, yet.

So, since we’re speaking more and more about complexity (hmmm, Google Trends on complexity is making me a liar it seems – a construction of mine?)… anyway, I came up with the following new version:

  • Connect ideas of different people: who are they? what are their strengths? What ideas do they have? Aspirations? Opportunities they see? Results they expect?
  • Select ideas that you (collectively) would think are the more interesting to try?
  • Effect these ideas: go to the gemba and put them to the test of work. Measure heavily what happens of course (People side: does it enhance the work experience? Quality? Delays? Costs?)
  • Reflect on what happened: what did you learn? What new opportunities do you now see? What hopes does this give you? What else?

PS: well, at least the Cynefin  framework is trending more 😉

How are #SystemsThinking and #Lean related?

March 12th, 2013 Posted in Lean, Systems Thinking Tags: , , , , ,

This is a post I just saw on LinkedIn: how Systems Thinking and Lean are related?

Here’s my answer:

ST and Lean are not related on first sight. Yet, I’m one of the few being convinced that all the Lean paraphernalia (management practices, coaching Katas, Tools, etc.) helps collaborators of an organization build a better systemic view of that organization and its links with suppliers and clients.

Most if not everything done in Lean is multidimensional.

For instance, pulling processes is:

  • first and foremost in order to make problems visible
  • improves efficiency

Making problems visible helps:

  • seeing them in order to solve them
  • develop people

Developing people will:

  • make them happier at work
  • which makes them more efficient
  • which will further improve the processes (go back to first list above)

Other tools are more dedicated (IMHO) to knitting the systemic view of the company into people’s head and therefore raise their motivation by clarifying the big picture for them, forces everybody to clarify and participate in what this big picture is, and challenge all that may be deviant to it.

For instance: A3 Thinking is about having a description of a problem circulated around that:

  • have the whole of the problem (description, cause hypotheses, solutions ideas, action plans, results) under the eyes: a sort of systemic rich picture in itself
  • the circulation helps everybody build that systemic understanding in his own mind
  • help break down the barriers between organizational silos, which further reinforce the connectivity/relationships among employees, thereby facilitating further improvement initiatives

Nemawashi is the name of that process of circulating A3s during preparation, testing of hypotheses, standardisation of results, and later, Yokoten is the process of proposing the solutions for everybody in the organization to apply and further improve it.

As renown twice Shingo Prized author Michael Ballé said : Lean is systems thinking applied and working.

To make the connection with what @David said: you start by pulling the main production processes, then you pull other supplying processes whose TAKT is that of production. Then you pull administrative processes (HR, finance, etc.)

In the end (10 years from the beginning!), all really is connected and not in silo anymore and the whole organization is really functioning in a systemic, dense network [a system!], as opposed to loosely singly connected silos at the start of the Lean turnover.

#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”.

Clay Shirky: How the Internet will (one day) transform government @TED #video

September 26th, 2012 Posted in Systems Thinking Tags: , , , , ,

I’ve just watched this great video on TED: Clay Shirky: How the Internet will (one day) transform government | Video on TED.com.

What I find interesting is that tools such as GitHub allows for a perfect collaboration among people to build the best possible Systems Thinking view of any issue, by drawing in any stakeholder and have them sharing their own view.

Of course there are other online collaboration tools (like etherpad, Rizzoma or Debategraph for instance), but I have yet to find some that allow for clearly identifying, then reconciling different contributions.

How to concretely achieve this has yet to be thought out, but I promise you to give it a shot.

Are You a Sheet or Shelf Thinker? #Lean and #Vanguard

Here is a nice article from Quality Digest author Tripp Babbitt: Are You a Sheet or Shelf Thinker?

I’m not an expert in the Vanguard method, though I recognize it’s an interesting approach and one that focuses on the real place (gemba).

What Tripp mentions in his article is that people trying to improve  should first go and see the place first before trying to do something. And most of all, not blindcopying tools used elsewhere.

What would be the consequences of using tools? Well, pick in the following list, but chances are that all apply:

  • the tool might not be adapted to the actual situation under consideration (from a systems thinking point of view, we would say it does not have “requisite variety”)
  • the tool didn’t grow out of the people’s mind in the actual place. As a consequence, their mind is not acquainted to it: this is how we tag people as being “change resistant”, when the change agent is in fact “people resistant” (or a tool head)
  • applying the tool steal the thinking and the corresponding learning of their own place of the people whom you’re about to subdue with it. What kind of respect in this?
  • trying to apply a tool to a situation which you’re not an expert of (because this actual situation is as different as the other one where you took the tool from just because people are different, along with the environment, organization, etc. Different variety, that is) will make you look arrogant and pretending you have the requisite variety (false, of course). Moreover, who said you had requisite variety with respect to the place you took the tool from? Where you an expert there anyway? If yes, you’re not an expert here. If no, that doesn’t make you an expert here and now either.

The Lean coach should make his own this quote from Socrates: “I know that I know nothing“.

Do you?

 

What’s your #1 #Lean tool? I vote for #compassion

February 22nd, 2011 Posted in Lean Tags: , , ,

This is not a real Lean tool per se, but I’d say Compassion:

  • compassion from management toward employees to help them get out of these messy processes and improve their work;
  • compassion for the poor customer that have to deal with a malfunctioning product or service;
  • compassion for the top management for themselves that need to cope with a dysfunctional company when it could be made flourishing and have all people, from top management to lower level employees thrive at work…

What about you?

Mail List

Join the mailing list

Check your email and confirm the subscription