Accessible Hoshin Kanri

When Growth Leads to Performance Decline

2011-03-22T15:16:00.000-04:00

As companies grow, often the capability of the original founders does not get designed into the systems they use to manage the business as it grows larger. As a result, the capability responsible for the early stage success doesn’t transfer well to the people they bring in to help expand operations. This occurs for technical reasons. In small, stable companies, close proximity and high levels of interaction create a shared mental model. When a shared mental model is in place and working, much of it goes unnoticed. Why? Much of the model is tucked away at higher order thinking levels operating inside the minds of the participants. Like the tip of an iceberg, the shared mental model is only partially visible. Without visibility, the mental model is not available to be fully shared with new people entering the company.

As a company grows and the growth pulls the originators in different directions, people are brought in to fill the gaps and technical systems are developed and put into place. This is smart. Systems are needed to keep the business moving in the desired direction. As the company deploys the systems, everyone involved counts on them to secure company performance into the future.

As time goes by, it becomes clear that the systemization efforts are failing to maintain performance. Quality problems and rising costs are frequently the first visible signs that the shared mental model is becoming fragmented. Without the shared mental model in place to drive success, poor decision-making creeps in. Corrective actions fail to successfully contain the problem because the root cause of the problem is unrecognized. Waste builds up and profit margins go down.

Unless the shared mental model can be captured and built into the working fabric of the enterprise, performance will continue to decline. In a favorable market, the company may continue to be operational and even profitable but at lower levels of performance and with stunted growth. In an unfavorable market, the company may not survive, or it may be sold to a larger enterprise. In either case, the full potential value of the original company is never realized and has been lost.

Similar discussions of shared mental models can be found in The Fifth Discipline by Peter Senge (Random House).

Relationship Practice and Leadership Influence

2010-12-09T15:05:00.001-05:00

“Who’s coming with me?”—Jerry Maguire

Craig's note: This guest post is written by Brad Duggins, a new, welcome member of Systemental team. Brad has a passion for applying his deep Organizational Development expertise in the service of others.

My daughter is a swimmer in a local club organization, and as I was watching her practice the other day, I began to think the parallels that exist between in swimming and human relationships. I know, you’re thinking Brad really needs to get out more. Humor me and take a look.

Swimming takes place in water. Relationships take place in the world. I cannot change the nature of water and I cannot change human nature. I do not control the path others choose to follow. I can only hope to exert a positive influence through my relationships. It takes time and practice to develop a relationship with the water and it takes time and practice to develop your relationships with others.

It takes a lot of thinking, discovery, practice and repetition to become an excellent swimmer. You try, evaluate, modify, and try again. Each time you get closer to developing the best possible relationship between you and the water. As you study, you learn the unique mechanics that work best for you, to swim faster and find your winning form.

It’s the same with relationships; lot’s of thinking, discovery, practice and repetition through which you develop the best possible relationship between yourself and others. Along the way it’s helpful to remind yourself that you cannot change human nature. You must find the unique mechanics that work best for you. You must study and practice to find your winning form.

My daughter is twelve years old. She studies swimming mechanics and develops her personal form. Now she is winning in the water.

How well developed are your relationship mechanics? Are you studying and developing your personal form? Are you winning in the world?

An Early Stage Lean Transition Shoots Itself in the Foot

2010-10-22T12:53:00.002-04:00

The management of a traditional operation issues a directive to make a transition to “Lean”. The assigned “Lean Team”, a group of professionals with relevant experience, finds itself in a tough spot. Top management sees them as Lean experts. And they are experts, just not early-stage transition experts.

Read the rest of the story here.

Top 10 Reasons Coaching is Effective

2010-09-21T17:33:00.002-04:00

Top 10 Reasons Coaching is Effective

Coaching -

1. adds what is needed, when it is needed

2. increases engagement by synchronizing development with learner readiness

3. works to successfully deliver real-world projects as education takes place

4. eliminates learning waste to deliver higher educational ROI

5. applies different learning approaches to accommodate different learning styles

6. grows capability organically to boost success in a specific environment

7. pays for itself by boosting performance immediately

8. is appreciated by employees, which leads to higher retention and lower recruitment costs

9. is flexible, always focusing on what is most important as circumstances change

10. optimizes the benefits of other forms of training

Coaching doesn’t replace the need for other educational methods; it enhances the results they deliver.

Cross-functional Initiatives: Problem Solving or Problem Resolution?

2010-08-27T16:59:00.000-04:00

The process that drives the success of cross-functional efforts is problem resolution, a special form of problem solving.

You can think of problem resolution as a building approach; it emphasizes building improved performance on top of the “success assets” already present in the environment. (This doesn’t mean nothing will be brought in from the outside.)

This special form of problem solving puts a special twist on the requirements for leadership. A problem resolution leader will:

1. look for the strength to solve the problem in the environment and among the participants

2. evaluate for missing requirements – skills, expertise, experience

3. bring new methods in to close the gaps

4. be open to tailoring tools and methods for the preferences of the group

5. drive for both agreement and the expected results

A cross-functional problem resolver will see the absence of agreement as an element of poor performance. He or she will try to correct the lack of agreement by demonstrating the required behaviors or through personal intervention and negotiating.

Don’t be an Answer-Man Super Hero

2010-08-20T15:40:00.000-04:00

If you are a young, zealous technical person and you think the boss wants you to personally come up with the answers, you might want to know how my first manager set me straight:

I wasn’t supposed to come up with the answer; I was supposed to orchestrate the development of an answer using the best expertise I could find for every aspect of the problem.
Any answer not developed in partnership with the people who do the work was unworthy of his time or attention and would not be adopted.
Start small, with a trial or prototype, to check things out more thoroughly before spreading any changes throughout the operation.
Keep everyone informed and take their input and concerns seriously, no matter what their position, expertise or title. Find a way to show them you have put their best ideas into your plans and actions.
Don’t make changes without the support of the people who will be impacted by them.
Be very thorough in the last phases of implementation to make sure the changes implemented will last. Expand your communications and solicit input from the larger group to make sure you have done everything required to ensure you’ll get the best performance around the improvement you’ve made after the fact.

If you put your mind to it, you can quickly start working this way and begin picking up on the behaviors you will need to be successful. However, for many people, it takes patience and persistence to gain a complete understanding of why it is so important to do technical work in this way. Take the time to develop your skills in this regard and you’ll always be appreciated as a thoughtful, careful, and thorough problem solver.

Excellent Lean Blog Post about Lean Culture

2010-08-06T10:53:00.001-04:00

Check out Mark Graban’s post about how the CEO of Akron Children’s Hospital is building a true culture of continuous improvement. Another Hospital CEO Talks Lean Culture

If you want to learn more about how to establish a company culture genuinely supportive of Lean, I recommend you read the full article appearing in the online periodical Smart Business Akron/Canton | August 2010 William Considine embraces Lean Six Sigma to improve Akron Children’s Hospital

I particularly like the following statement by CEO Considine:

“You’ve got to believe in your people, you’ve got to trust your people, empower them, and you’re going to be blown away when you see what they come back with,” he says. “They’re going to show you improvements that you would never have thought about. They’re going to show you ways to be efficient that the high-stake consultants you could bring in wouldn’t be able to find. You just have to keep celebrating that.”

Excellent!

The Motivational Power of Confident Problem Management

2010-07-20T14:48:00.000-04:00

Executives take on big initiatives and big projects with the expectation of big results. These efforts are typically cross-functional with a lot of different perspectives and mindsets at play, not to mention all of the personalities involved.

When implementation leaders accept the responsibility for guiding this kind of journey to a safe and successful conclusion, they know there are going to be bumps in the road. When an organization develops the capability for skillful management of these types of problems, they gain access to positive employee behaviors that drive competitiveness.

To keep the obstacles and issues that crop-up along the way from demoralizing their teams, expert leaders do the following:

Investigate: by conducting an objective investigation to collect both the facts and the various perspectives on the problem.
Measure: by taking a read on the scale and scope of the issue.
Futurize*: by using their experience to come up with a complete picture of the potential damage the problem could cause and the speed at which it could spread.
Communicate: by selecting what each group needs to know in order to feel as confident as possible that the right people are applying the right approach to the problem.
Solve: by applying problem solving resources and methods with the power to deal with the magnitude and level of difficulty of the problem. And for the biggest problems, with the capability on board right from the start, to squash the problem quickly, even if the worst case scenario is realized.
Update: by keeping those closest to the problem and those who will be most impacted by it the most fully informed. And then selectively managing other communications to:
- minimize wasteful “fretting” behaviors – worrying, speculating, gossiping, spinning
- maximize the image of factual sincerity and clarity
Validate: by verifying the success of the problem resolution from the perspectives of all the groups involved in and impacted by the change effort.

It’s not easy to do all of the above in a way that truly inspires confidence throughout the organization, yet it’s certainly worth the energy and time it takes to develop the right people for the job. When the people within your organization are confident major undertakings can be managed from start to finish, you’ll recognize a fresh willingness to take on accountability and a new level of creativity among the troops.

* “Yes, of course I made that word up. That’s what I love about the English language; people just make up the words they need as they go along.”

Natural Team Motivations

2010-07-09T13:25:00.005-04:00

A VP of a company enjoying a high level of success may find its senior leadership isn’t motivated to aggressively pursue process improvement. Even so, most businesses have a budget for improvement initiatives, even if they’re not particularly forceful about it. An inspired leader can make significant improvement happen by tapping into the natural motivations that drive people within the organization.

For example, a VP can assemble a business process improvement team to cut costs associated with a particular process by 50 percent or more. This kind of breakthrough process improvement doesn’t have to be difficult, and the motivation doesn’t have to come from a forceful push made at the very top.

This can be done by tapping into the motivations team members bring to work every day. These motivations include:

the desire to eliminate hassle from the job
the pressure to learn and gain knowledge to accomplish other objectives – advancement, job security, etc.
the fulfillment gained by making a difference
the good feeling that comes from improving quality for customers
the satisfaction enjoyed by earning increased respect from peers

Tapping into the team's natural motivations generates energy for success and enables significant improvements take place.

Next week: keep motivations high even when problems crop up along the way.

Persuasive Arguments Flow Uphill

2010-07-02T16:32:00.000-04:00

In a healthy working environment, natural behaviors that we all recognize drive how people behave when they interact with each other. Take the case where people of differing perspectives come together to generate ideas, develop plans, and make decisions.

Natural human behaviors that we all recognize drive the dynamics. The energy of the people in the group drives the idea, plan or decision uphill.

Here’s how it works:

A persuasive argument flows uphill, resolving the concerns of slightly dissimilar individuals first. Then, it moves around the room like a circular game of catchball.

Imagine yourself in a circle where players to the left have different perspectives from you and players to the right have a perspective most like your point of view. Now, imagine you are convinced the group should come to a particular decision and you want to persuade them to agree. Your energy will set the persuasive argument in motion. But it is the energy of the other people, some who don’t share your perspective on the decision, who will close the deal for you.

It’s the restatement of the reasons for agreement that persuades the next person in the room along the chain. As the energy progresses around the circle, different perspectives create agreement. Your persuasive argument flows uphill.

Great Lean Thinking in Entrepreneurial Innovation

2010-04-23T17:48:00.001-04:00

The following posts discuss how Lean principles are being applied in creative areas – business startups and product development.

Parallels between “Lean Startups” and “Adaptive Design” by Mark Graban, the Lean Blog

Four myths about the Lean Startup by Eric Ries, Lessons Learned

image above from http://www.wordle.net/

Workaround – Glass Half Full or Glass Half Empty?

2010-01-12T19:16:00.001-05:00

An interesting perspective on workarounds pops into view during a recent discussion of frustrations surrounding an ERP software implementation.

During the conversation mentioned above, a National Account Manager employed by a company serving the construction industry mentioned the term “workaround”. As the discussion continued, it became clear to me that he saw the term workaround as having a completely positive connotation.

When I explained how people like myself, who work with Lean and Six Sigma, usually apply a negative connotation to the term and associate it with “waste”, he looked as if he didn’t believe me, and even responded in an animated, slightly high-pitched voice, “Really! I would have thought you technical people saw it as just the opposite – a creative way to improve on a bad situation!”

Days later, just to make sure he didn’t think I was the only person with a strange negative perception of workarounds, I sent him a link to “Beware the Workaround” (you’ll l have to scroll down to the December 2009 posting). In this humorous blog entry, the improvement specialist author, describes a bathroom workaround which at first glance seems smart, but on further review, just looks like it will lead to more waste.

For an interesting take on how an impending crisis can make a workaround start to look just fine, please also visit Dean Willson’s blog posting Workarounds - Dreaded or Welcome?

Lean is Like my Neighbor’s Beloved Lawn Tractor

2010-01-05T11:35:00.000-05:00

I have a friend who loves his lawn tractor second only to his family. He talks about this grass cutting machine like it’s so much more than I would ever think of it being. He washes it, waxes it, and keeps the blades sharpened, ready to do their best work. Now this guy doesn’t cut grass for a living - he’s an assistant police chief in a large town nearby. So his reverence for the machine isn’t based on the fact it’s providing for his family; it’s based on something else.

When he talks about mowing he will tell you how it feels to sit in the seat, what it’s like to make the turns, the sound of the engine, and finally he will tell you about the great job it does cutting the grass. He talks about the lawn tractor the way other people I know might speak about a car they’ve always wanted and finally were able to buy.

It’s interesting. To me, it seems funny to talk about a lawn tractor in such a personal way but perfectly reasonable to talk about a car in that manner. Is it because we sit inside the car that we see the human perspective as so central to the quality of a driving experience? Could it be that the simple shift from inside the car, to on-top of the tractor, makes us think of the tractor as more of a “tool” and therefore less accountable for delivering a high quality human experience?

How does this relate to technical business improvement? Are methodologies like Lean and Six Sigma more like a tool designed to complete a chore, or should they be accountable for delivering a high quality human experience? And how would you define that kind of experience for each of the groups involved? For example:

the executives who launch the initiatives
the technical leaders who drive them
the managers who oversee the various functional changes
the ground-floor personnel who make them work in the day-to-day business

How would you define a high quality experience for the people in operations, the people in purchasing and supply, the people in product and service delivery, the people in marketing, sales, engineering, IT and HR…?

“Executizing” Academic Sounding Terms – Gaining Social Authority

2009-12-15T09:46:00.001-05:00

A short story inspired by happenings in the real-world.

Brandon is a young engineer working as a technical business improvement leader for a mid-sized business in a service industry. On a recent day, his youthful enthusiasm for learning, and his desire to share new ideas, smashed right into the reality of what seemed to be a harsh executive perspective. Here’s what happened:

In a chance lunchroom conversation, Brandon excitedly mentioned a new term and concept he had learned to an operations executive. The term was “gaining social authority”. When he said it, the executive, who had been relaxed, almost spit out his drink. Next, he looked at Brandon and said in an irritated tone, “I’d throw anyone out of my office who used that kind of academic sounding term. I hate terms like that! They make me think the person using them doesn’t know a thing about getting things done in the real world!”

Later Brandon complained about the incident to his manager. During the back and forth conversation Brandon learned people throughout the company had come to respect this particular executive’s preference for plain speaking, if not his gruff manner. Those who’d been around awhile understood the executive didn’t want technical experts using specialized terminology as a means of separating themselves from the rest of the workforce.

After the conversation with his manager, Brandon thought to himself, “maybe the executive should show more tolerance for different perspectives.” And, in the next moment he thought, “in any case, I’ll make sure I respect the preference for plain speaking, at least until I see some reason not to. And, in the future, I’ll work harder to phrase things in a more common way - heck, maybe it will make my work stronger as a result.”

Months later Brandon was giving an executive overview of the very same concept, “gaining social authority”, to a room full of people. The presentation clearly conveyed his passion for the “social authority” approach, yet his explanation had been completely scrubbed of the specialized term. Instead, Brandon talked about working to “get everyone on board” before “moving ahead” with a suggestion or plan for improvement and other details. His presentation was comprehensive and understandable. … During this session, Brandon noticed the executive who responded so gruffly in the lunchroom. To his pleasant surprise, the executive seemed both engaged and pleased.

Afterwards, Brandon reflected once again on the lunchroom interaction, this time with a smile on his face, and thought, “imagine that, in one fell swoop the gruff old guy taught me a lesson and did me a favor!…Good for him!”

To gain deeper understanding of the social authority concept, please read the following post “Separating Responsibility from Authority” and consider reviewing the following presentation, “Nobody Likes Bad Change”. Both appear elsewhere on this blog.

Lean Management – Why Care?

2009-10-29T19:12:00.001-04:00

Maximizing business results through the application of Lean involves two requirements:

continuous optimization of the value creation process
managing “fair treatment” around change*

Technical Lean methods deliver the first requirement. Lean Management accomplishes the second.

Hoshin Kanri integrates both requirements before, during, and after critical cross-functional improvement initiatives. When all are executed skillfully, Lean drives positive change and delivers benefits to every level of the organization. In other words, everyone experiences “good” change.

*Jim Womack, leader of the Lean Enterprise Institute, recently introduced this idea to the Lean community using the phrase “making everyone whole”. In other words, ensuring no group ends up worse-off after a change initiative.

To learn more about how to apply this idea to your Lean project or initiative, please see our presentation Nobody Likes Bad Change elsewhere on this blog.

In more detail …

A large business organization is a complex system, made up of a collection of interconnected groups. The groups work in a cooperative, structured arrangement which is influenced by the behavior of each of the groups.

In this environment, optimizing business results requires more than a purely technical approach. The human requirements of the system must also be addressed by managing the perception of “fair treatment” throughout the groups.

Why? When the people within the groups perceive they are being treated fairly, they stay focused on executing the value creation process to drive business results. When the perception of “fair treatment” is disrupted, people become distracted and begin to engage in wasteful pursuits that have nothing to do with creating value for the customer.

What does this have to do with Lean?

There are two sides to the complete Lean equation - a technical side and a management side.

The purpose of the technical side of Lean is to continuously optimize the value process to deliver increasingly stronger business results.

The purpose of Lean management is to maintain the perception of fair treatment as the value process is improved. (assuming the “fair treatment” perception is present in the first place)

What does Hoshin Kanri have to do with this?

Hoshin Kanri integrates the two sides of Lean and establishes an important feedback loop. The feedback loop assures participating groups “fair treatment” is being protected or improved, and not damaged, as process improvement takes place. This keeps things operating smoothly, even as process optimization drives change into the system. Participants in Hoshin Kanri managed change efforts experience less stress, accept change more readily, and perform their jobs better after the fact.

In short, Lean management and Hoshin Kanri strategy deployment protect the participating groups, at every level of the organization, from bad change.

Note: As I have done with other posts, I want to thank the Lean Enterprise Institute for their efforts. I am pleased to see they are promoting Lean management as part of the development of a new Lean optimization language platform.

To learn more about this topic and Systemental’s role as a leading Lean service provider, please click here.

If you would like a Lean resource, designed to help Lean professionals and business improvement leaders stay at the head of the pack, you can sign up for Systemental’s periodic newsletter here.

You Can Fix Poor Cross-functional Relationships Fast

2009-10-27T17:18:00.002-04:00

When poor relationships and bad behavior are evident between functional groups, overwhelmingly it’s a symptom of a deeper problem - “broken shared processes”.

When shared processes prove problematic, and no one understands exactly why, relationships sour as different groups blame each other for “not getting their part of the work right”. Luckily, these relationships are easy to repair through process improvement efforts carried-out in the following way:

bring the groups together and help them to see and understand the entire process, including the problems and waste
position them to design and implement a new process - one that works for all involved - complete with all of the supporting elements for keeping it in place: tools, standards, procedures, policies, training, measurement and reporting, auditing
guide them and provide what is needed as they design and replace the broken process with the new one

Why does this approach repair relationships as effectively as it repairs processes?

Most people want to feel respected by their colleagues and most people genuinely want to “get along”. As cross-functional teams work through a process improvement project, the close interaction helps participants of the different groups see “others” as people just like themselves – reasonable people “doing the best they can with the circumstances at-hand”.

Once this enlightened perspective is in place, if the team is positioned so they are confident they have what it takes to do a good job fixing the process, the response is enthusiastic. High engagement, high buy-in, and high cooperation all follow as everyone pitch’s in to get the job done.

Long Lasting, Easily Sustainable Results

A team working with all they need to design and replace the broken process will deliver a very precise, comprehensive, and sustainable result. And, once the new process is in place, they will protect it and voluntarily teach others how it works. As a result, without excessive process problems generating ill-will between the groups, healthy cross-functional relationships can be maintained for years, and even longer if you meet modify the process as circumstances and needs change over-time.

The Boss Coaches Lean Management Behaviors

2009-10-21T12:12:00.004-04:00

Early in my career, after demonstrating success with problem solving and process redesign efforts, my boss promoted me to my first management position. As the new Quality and Engineering Manager I had a small group of engineers and a quality supervisor reporting directly to me.

After moving into my new workspace, (a real office with a door and a window!), I organized myself and started to do the job the best way I knew how. Early on I thought I was off to a satisfactory start until one day my illusion was abruptly interrupted by my boss. He confronted me half way between my office and the manufacturing plant floor where he told me the following in a frustrated voice, “Craig, you don’t understand what I want. I’ve been trying to tell you but you’re not getting it so I am going to put it to you straight. If I catch you out on the floor solving problems again I am going to physically chase you back into your office and I’m going to be angry. I promoted you and now you are a manager – from now on you work through other people to solve problems around here. I know you think your people should be doing some things differently but I refuse to let you step around them. I want you to teach them and coach them to do things the way you want them done. I promoted you because I know you can do this, now I want you to start doing it the way I expect! Do you understand?” I nodded and said yes of course, even though I was a little confused at the time.

Luckily, soon after, my boss and I sat down and documented what in “Lean Management” terms would be my standard work for management. The “standard work” description detailed such activities as daily plant tours, coaching/ reviewing sessions for my direct reports, monthly status reports and so on. Our agreed upon understanding of how tightly I was to adhere to the document can be described as “focused but flexible”, which meant some variation was allowed as long as there was clear discipline and regularity to my work.

I understand now his intention was to establish a baseline for resolving potential problems and discussing potential improvements. We had both types of discussions many times in the productive years that followed and the agreed upon standard work always served as the anchor point of those conversations.

Separating Responsibility from Authority

2009-10-14T11:20:00.002-04:00

This is a powerful idea but I expect it may be a little fuzzy for people wanting to put the idea into use. Many of us may have been exposed to this management tactic but may not have recognized it in these terms. A few of us have been lucky enough to have been trained this way right from the start.

My first boss, who hired me right out of college to develop and implement a cross-functional process for improving quality, used to say to me, “Craig, don’t wait around for authority to come to you. Go out and earn it.” We both understood the responsibility part of the equation, so it was not discussed. His comments were prompted by his observation that I was sometimes timid when my work carried me into an area overseen by a manager who reacted to my “intrusion” in a territorial manner. Basically he was telling me to work with the manager and the people in the area to convince them of the value of my work so they would support me.

Then, at other times, he would tell me things like, “Craig, you have the authority. Now get it done.” He was teaching me to accelerate my efforts as soon as it was clear I had gained social authority. He understood the connection between authority, trust, and speed. It took me a long time to understand all of these things but I began picking up the behaviors right away.

Later, as I moved up in rank, my boss taught me and coached me to become an effective coach for those who reported to me - I’ll leave that story for another post.

Jim Womack and Lean Management

2009-10-14T09:47:00.003-04:00

Jim Womack and the The Lean Enterprise Institute definitely lead the way in the development of a common language for recognized Lean methods. The live video seminar yesterday, “Jim Womack on Lean Management: A Live Event”, took the Lean language a big step forward. Now those of us diligently working to develop methods for integrating Lean management with the technical side of Lean have recognized terms to help us in our work. I am very grateful for the excellent job the Lean Enterprise Institute does in leading the Lean community.

I am excited about how well Systemental (my company) is positioned to help others quickly find the best approach for transitioning to Lean management. In the video seminar today Mr. Womack described how he hoped methods could be developed to enable Line managers to architect Lean business processes. Systemental has been developing and refining methods dedicated to this purpose for nearly 10 years. Along the way our methods have gotten stronger and more complete, due in large part to the work of the LEI. Publications like Pascal Dennis’s “Getting the Right Things Done” and more recently John Shook’s “Managing to Learn” have helped, and will continue to help, us strengthen our work.

When I look back over the last 10 years, what is most satisfying to me is how the participants of the cross-functional problem solving teams we have partnered with respond so positively and effectively to the approach. Their vast line management knowledge and experience fuels the Lean process architecture engine to keep it running in high gear all of the way to delivery of “brilliant Lean business processes”. Their input, feedback and dedication to testing developing process designs is what leads to a precision result. On these projects, as soon as the participants realize the team is fully prepared to truly incorporate their collaborative input into an evolving process design, and to move forward with group agreement, they have always quickly demonstrated very supportive behaviors. Their understanding and willingness to establish agreement before moving from one design phase to the next, even when compromise is necessary has been extraordinary. Certainly near the front-lines we have found people are hungry for this kind of horizontal problem solving.

Mr. Womack and his colleagues at the Lean Enterprise Institute have just paved the way to spread the benefits of Lean management farther and wider. My colleagues and I couldn’t appreciate their efforts more.

Lean in Healthcare – are New Leadership Methods Required?

2009-09-16T10:15:00.002-04:00

I just read an excellent posting on the Hospital Impact blog titled New Leadership methods could propel patient-/ person-centered care by Anthony Cirillo

The article examines the idea that a shift in the leadership style of healthcare organizations may be needed to create real change in the industry. He describes how engagement and employee involvement may be essential and how getting a genuine form of participation may be difficult. Consider this quote from the posting.

“Fundamental shifts come from self-driven authentic change, driven by people empowered to do so. I think we have created the illusion of some of this in the patient-centered care arena through scripts, training around how to deliver red carpet service, etc. But all of these miss the more systemic issue; people change because they want to change. Leadership has to create that context.”

If you are interested in learning about how to create real change in the healthcare industry I encourage you to read the posting. If you are interested in a real-world example illuminating the difference between authentic employee involvement and simply the appearance of employee involvement, see my posting Healthcare Manager Swallows Bitter Lean Pill and "Likes" It

To understand how a positive view of “resistance to change” can be used to work your way toward a more authentic form of employee involvement, see my presentation “Nobody Likes Bad Change”

Healthcare - Do Passionate Practitioners Sometimes Slow the Spread of Lean?

2009-08-27T10:17:00.003-04:00

There is an excellent blog posting on the Lean Blog linking to video clips of an interview with Dr. John Toussaint, the CEO of Thedacare, a healthcare organization gaining notoriety for its successful application Lean. I will not summarize the content here - Mark Graban, who publishes the Lean Blog, has done an excellent job already – you can read his posting and access the video clips here - Thedacare News Coverage & More from Fox News.

However, I thought the first comment after Mark’s post, submitted by Michael Balle, asked an interesting question, “Why isn’t Lean spreading more quickly.” I’m not a Healthcare industry expert, but, for the sake of discussion, let’s assume Lean could be moving more quickly to improve Healthcare as well as other industries.

I recently made a presentation to a small group interested in learning about the application of Lean to Healthcare. The following discussion regarding the perception of Lean making a negative impact on Healthcare may shed some light on the subject.

Craig:

I see two major concerns about Lean from the Healthcare community:

1. it will have a negative impact on the patient experience

2. it will have a negative impact on service providers by making things worse for the physicians, the nurses, the technicians, and so on … (they understand eventually this comes back around to impact the patient in a negative way)

I think people are seriously and legitimately concerned that Lean will have a negative impact on health care; that it will make it more difficult for the providers to do their job in the best way. They are saying, “Lean might reduce cost but at what expense?”

Audience member question:

You said the concerns are legitimate - I’m not so sure. Aren’t those concerns just “resistance to change”?

Craig:

I don’t see it that way. I don’t believe healthcare providers have anything against reducing waste and lowering costs; they understand Lean is a way to accomplish those objectives and they know Lean has worked well in other industries. They just see the Healthcare industry as different. They are concerned applying Lean to Healthcare will make some things worse as it makes other things better. They are particularly worried it might make things worse for the patient.

To gain a better understanding, it is important to note how healthcare providers see their industry as different. They see Healthcare as more concerned about the “human experience” than other businesses. …I use the word human in this instance to make sure we don’t miss the fact that there is an important special perspective involved here.

Let me explain further- if you are making a car there is the perspective of the car. In the auto industry, efforts to improve production and quality often take on the perspective of the car and ask, “What is it that leads to the production of the best car?” But a car is not human. A car is a car.

In healthcare the product is a healthy human being, or better quality of life for humans, or affecting a cure for a human disease. The fact that we are talking about human beings makes it different – human beings and inanimate objects are different. If service providers know of Lean mostly as successful in industries dealing with inanimate products and services, and now it is being applied to an industry dealing with human beings – well I can certainly see a legitimate concern.

Audience Member

I understand what you are saying but I am not sure I agree. Making cars isn’t just about cars. People buy cars for a reason - so in the end it’s about what cars do for people – it’s about the impact on people. So there really is no difference.

Craig:

Excellent point! What that reflects - and you are correct – is your deeper understanding of Lean. You realize producing cars is not just about cars – it’s about transportation; it’s about transportation for people.

Audience Member

…and status and other things.

Craig:

Right again - and I’m glad you bring it up - cars are about all the other things they do for people as well. Again, I think your points reflect your deeper understanding of Lean. What I want to point out here is that when people from the healthcare industry are first introduced to Lean, it looks pretty obvious to them – working on humans is different than working on cars. And that makes the healthcare industry different. To a healthcare worker being introduced to Lean, the difference is justifiably very important. In fact, I think it is so obviously important, it will likely be pointed out again and again. If a Lean practitioner dismisses this important difference, or communicates a superior attitude by explaining the deeper understanding of Lean, before they recognize the valid concern and acknowledge its importance, they will not win many friends of Lean in the healthcare industry.

Audience Member

I can see what you are saying. It makes sense.

Summarizing A3 Management on Last Minute Notice

2009-08-27T09:37:00.001-04:00

A friend asked me to help him prepare for a last minute interview by summarizing what I know about A3 management. I thought others might find my response useful. The summary follows:

Bruce, (not his real name)

A3 is being promoted heavily by the Lean Enterprise Institute to emphasize the need to apply more than just the technical tools and methods of Lean but the social/ management side of Lean as well. Thoroughly understanding A3 is a big undertaking – but you have an excellent advantage – you understand many of the components already. A3 is structured scientific problem solving to:

· meet company goals

· develop/ coach all employees to be better problem solvers

· develop managers to be effective problem solving coaches and to become creators of more managers with the same capability

Together these goals ensure the organization will continually improve its capability to deploy strategies, meet goals, respond to changes in the marketplace, and to solve performance problems.

The name comes from the paper size (roughly 11 x 17) used by Toyota as the standard for creating and displaying their A3 reports.

The important thing to understand is, “it’s not about the tool”. It is about the points above.

It can get complicated or it can be kept simple. One resource book I have lists 9 different types of A3’s used by Toyota. And, on the other hand, I have worked with companies using only one type.

In its simpler application, a single A3 form can serve as one stop shopping for learning about a project and how it is going. It may go through the following logical progression:

· At first the A3 describes the problem, goals, objectives - agreement is established between the manager and leader (usually another manager; an engineer or supervisor maybe at lower levels of the organization)

· Next an action plan is developed – those closest to the work help put it together and again agreement is established – this time all of the people who are responsible for the action plan are included in the agreement (this is done to ensure the plan is realistic and doable – people closer to the work are better able to determine how realistic the plan is)

· Actions are taken to carry out the plan and at appropriate intervals the A3 is updated – for example, a department level A3 may be updated every month while a division level A3 may be updated every quarter.

· Lower levels A3’s are collected to support higher level A3’s, to ensure the results are rolling up to successfully meet the goal. It is typically not a straight mathematical rollup – just a general measured push to get the plan completed and meet the goal.

You can find examples here made available through the Lean Enterprise Institute’s website.

You can see it is not very different from methods I know you have used in the past – it just emphasizes some things more:

· clear communication

· reaching common understanding and agreement

· bottom-up action planning - executives say what needs to be done, employees say how it will be done

· maintaining clear evidence that a working plan, based on a scientific process, is in place and working

· ensuring managers are coaching subordinates to apply the process better and better at every level – executives too

Lastly – you should know the term Catchball. You can read a simple explanation here Catchball – Without it You Probably Have the Wrong Plan

Just about anything else I point you too will just confuse you on such short notice. Descriptions for A3 Thinking are all over the map. Thinking of it the way I described above should get you through the interview just fine.

I’ll be around in the morning if you have questions. Good luck!

Craig

Hoshin Kanri Strategy Deployment, Product Development, and Lean Process Improvement Efforts

2009-08-21T14:24:00.003-04:00

I came across the video below while doing some research. Mr. Kelley is “the founder and CEO of IDEO Product Development, America's largest independent product design and development firm. In addition to his work at IDEO Product Development, Kelley is a tenured professor at Stanford University in the school's innovative Product Design program.” (taken from his bio)

The approach he describes is by far the most successful way I have found to carry out the design and implementation of Lean process improvements. The video promotes an iterative development method which begins by putting a basic prototype in the hands of users as soon as possible. The iterative tactic represents what I find to be one of the most powerful aspects of the Hoshin Kanri strategy deployment framework. The approach emphasizes learning your way to the best solution by working in partnership with the end users (consumers). Note how he attaches the characteristic of both “speed” and “best” to the method.

If you found the video interesting you will most likely find the posting below helpful:

Does Hoshin Kanri Rely on a Form of Consumer Opinion?

For a more abstract analogy on an executive perspective of the iterative process as applied to a Lean implementation, please read:

Organic Lean, Natural High Performance – A Racing Analogy Explores Executive Perspective

You may also be interested in reviewing the presentation:

An Intro to Organic Lean – A Natural, Resistance-Free Implementation Approach

Does Hoshin Kanri Rely on a Form of Consumer Opinion?

2009-08-19T12:25:00.002-04:00

Utilizing the Hoshin Kanri strategy deployment framework to manage a breakthrough initiative often involves a process design/ redesign effort. The framework guides the project in many ways similar to a product development effort. In product development, it can be advantageous to put an early working prototype in the hands of the consumer to find out what works and what doesn’t. The valuable consumer feedback obtained from this kind of exercise is used to modify or change the design to achieve a better fit. The exercise is repeated until the consumers become satisfied and the design becomes stable.

Hoshin Kanri guides strategic initiatives in the same way. An early basic version of the design is put in the hands of the consumers to get their feedback. But who are the consumers? In this case the consumers are those who will be most impacted by the changes required to meet the objectives of the initiative. For example, for a Lean material management/ kanban initiative the consumers might include representatives from the front lines of the operation, operations management groups such as those responsible for scheduling, production and\or or service delivery, inventory management, and distribution. The sales group may also be impacted and in many cases customers or suppliers may need to be included as well.

The team working through the process design/ redesign must recognize the Lean concept of “seeing value through the eyes of the customer (consumer)” as important and work diligently to uncover and incorporate the feedback into the evolving design. When the team recognizes they are receiving the “thumbs up” from consumers of the planned changes all along the value stream, the team has done its job well. The Hoshin Kanri/ strategy deployment framework includes all of the technical elements necessary to make this happen.

Hoshin Kanri and the Quality Management of Systems on the Move

2009-08-19T10:00:00.000-04:00

Hoshin Kanri has been described as the application of quality management principles to change management. And it is true, frequent checks are made to ensure the kinds of breakthrough improvement efforts typically managed by Hoshin Kanri are both proceeding as planned and delivering the expected results. Yet there are certain characteristics which make the quality management of breakthrough improvement different from other applications of quality management. Understanding and handling these differences requires experience, good judgment, objectivity and patience.

To read the full article, click here .