Archive for category Kaizen

Ode to the 3X3 Inch Post-it® Note

Often, people jokingly accuse me of owning stock in 3M. Why? Because I tend to use and coach others to use lots of Post-it® notes. I do have an affinity for the 3X3 inch variety, not because I am a 3M stockholder, but because the ubiquitous notes are such an effective tool for kaizen.

Kaizen is largely about capturing and understanding the current state and the related issues, problems, root causes and opportunities. Kaizen is also about the flow of the kaizeners’ improvement ideas – sharing, communicating, building on them, adjusting, organizing, prioritizing, assigning and executing them. Post-it® notes facilitate all that.

The notes are visual, colorful (colors should mean something), adjustable, movable, scrappable (low cost, easy to create a new one) and tactile things. These characteristics make it easy to get people started – get people writing, talking, moving, sharing, debating, etc.

Post-it® notes do not engender the same fear that often accompanies the more permanent pen or even pencil on a flip chart, plotter/kraft paper, etc. The notes also avoid the hypnotic and less than collaborative effects of the computer around which a bunch of folks try to gather (if you’re lucky it’s an LCD projector) while one person controls the keyboard and mouse.

Here’s a short list of Post-it® note applications:

  • process mapping
  • value stream analysis
  • product family analysis matrix
  • Gantt charts
  • plus/deltas
  • set-up reduction analysis
  • countermeasure prioritization
  • affinity exercises
  • failure modes and effects analysis
  • cause and effect diagrams
  • layout analysis

So, I wrote a really lame ode to the 3X3 Post-it® note…because I could (sort of). Don’t worry, I won’t quit my day job.

____________________________________________

Oh noble 3X3 Post-it® note, I am utterly lost without thee.

You enable team members to think and engage, worry free.

Your portability and stick allow a helpful lack of permanence,

The better to help us storm, “affinitize,” prioritize and make sense.

Your hue can mean “process” or “kaizen burst,” whatever we please,

When a flow chart needs a diamond, we simply spin you 45 degrees.

Our scissors work you into a triangle if a V.S. map has a queue,

When you are side-by-side (continuous flow), truly we love you.

____________________________________________

Yes, the ode is lame…but, you’ve got to love those little 3X3 Post-it® notes.

Related post: Plus Delta – The Kaizen Team’s Sunrise Reflection

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Tags:

Time Observations – without Rigor, It’s Just Industrial Tourism

It happens way too often. Folks who are ostensibly conducting time observations frequently:

          • don’t appreciate the full importance of the exercise,
          • are not properly trained in how to conduct time observation methods (and the the related spaghetti charts, percent load charts and standard ops forms), and/or
          • are  just too lazy to do a thorough job.

The first two conditions are more straightforward in nature, the last, well…that’s a behavioral issue.  In any event, insufficient rigor will hamstring the effort to identify waste within a given process. A prior Gemba Tales post, Time Observations – 10 Common Mistakes, covers a lot of relevant ground here.

Lack of rigor and technical know-how can yield some very bad things – not the least of which are marginally useful time observations. This means that individuals and teams can come up with a stilted understanding of the studied process, miss or incorrectly identify the waste and opportunities, develop a less than least way post-kaizen future state standard work or…even worse, create new standard work that is going to go through tremendous adjustment during the PDCA process because it does not square with reality. Think “rework ” here.

So, what drives me absolutely crazy? Lazy observers! [By the way, here we assume that the time observation is worth doing in the first place (right scope, worthy target,  appropriate tool, etc.)]

We cannot be proponents of industrial tourism. Time observations require hard work and a good dose of stamina.

Hey, stopwatches are much more difficult to operate than one would think and breaking down the target process into the smallest observable elements is a pain in the neck. Observing multiple cycles, so necessary to getting a handle on variation (and thus opportunity), means more time on your feet, more writing and attention firmly directed on a process which may be as exciting as watching paint dry…in perhaps extreme heat, cold, noise, whatever. Following the operator or worker EVERYWHERE can also be a drag. And observing a process that has varied work content based upon different factors (such as warehouse picks from high bay versus low bay locations)  … can make it even more maddening.

My answer? Suck it up! Grind it out! Man-up (not really politically correct, but you know what I mean)!

It’s not that I am without empathy. I have personally conducted countless time observations of cycles that were many hours in duration, sported crazy variation and permutations, etc. It was at times, very, very painful. But, you really can’t get the proper insight into the waste and opportunities within a process without such a personal investment, and without going to the gemba. In fact, genchi genbutsu, “go and see for yourself” …and help facilitate that seeing with the rigorous application of a time observation form.

Don’t be a tourist! You owe an A-plus effort to yourself and most importantly, in the spirit of humility and respect for the individual, you owe it to the other stakeholders – the person(s) that you observe,  teammates, customer, etc. You must pragmatically conduct the best time observations you possibly can.

What do you think? Am I too demanding here?

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Tags:

Of Team Size, Social Loafing and Lack of Direction

Maximilian Ringelmann was a 19th century French agricultural engineer. I’m guessing there’s not too many of those around right now – both from the engineering discipline and  country of origin perspective. Anyway, Ringelmann discovered that as more folks pulled on a rope, more force is exerted. However, the increase on the force is NOT commensurate. Maximilian measured a type of “social loafing” – the individual, per capita effort lessens as people are added.

As we select teams for continuous improvement activity, we must be mindful of the team size. Large teams, more than eight or so, increase the probability of two types of team muda: 1) social loafing, and 2) lack of direction. Social loafing, or the Ringelmann effect, reflects the inclination of participants to slack and hide…because they can.

If you can’t feed a team with two pizzas, the size of the team is too large. – Jeff Bezos, Chairman, CEO and Founder of Amazon.com

Lack of direction can befall team members who outstrip, because of sheer number or perhaps industriousness, the aligning and facilitating capabilities of team leaders and coaches. (Here, we’re not talking about problems that are generated by ineffective team leaders and facilitators.) We know that kaizen activity – the identification of opportunities, the countermeasures identified and assigned, the learnings and adjustments that occur throughout the trystorming process, etc. can make the process a little less than orderly and predictable. Added to that chaos factor, if the team is too large, team members are  more likely to experience the waste of:

  • Waiting. Nothing like hanging around for someone to assign another task for you after you just knocked off a countermeasure.
  • Over-processing and over-production. Virtually all participants want to do value-added work. So, if there is an absence of direction (and alignment), there’s a decent chance they’ll do something, perhaps more than is required (scope creep!!) or do it prematurely – like developing visual controls before the “system” is defined, which can lead to…
  • Defects. Redoing stuff when it’s not part of the normal PDCA cycle is demoralizing. Sometimes it does not require rework, but rather scrapping – like when two people or sub-teams end up doing duplicate work. Not good.
  • Opportunity. Well executed kaizen is an opportunity for folks to improve the business. It’s also equally about improving the worker’s PDCA skill-sets and developing a lean culture. When teams are too large and they suffer the above described dynamics, we end up squandering these transformative opportunities. We then give people a good reason to call into question our competency and credibility as lean leaders.

So, how do we avoid the Ringelmann effect and the lack of direction trap? First, don’t pick a team that is too large… and always employ effective pre-planning (inclusive of clarity in scope, measurable targets, best practice team selection, required pre-work, a solid initial strategy, etc.), proven work strategies (prioritization of countermeasures, assignment, frequent status checks, etc.), promote and enforce proper team behaviors (focus, shared leadership, candor, bias for action, etc.), all while empowering the team members to figure out much of the “how” (as long as it’s consistent with lean principles) and providing them with the necessary encouragement, training and resources.

When a large team is required either by virtue of the scope/work that needs to be done or the need for multi-level and cross-functional representation, then (after you’ve decided that you can’t reduce the scope), consider the opportunities for sub-teams, load up the team with folks who have strong kaizen experience, ensure that you’ve got an ace team leader and facilitator and make sure that you’ve done a heck of a pre-planning job.

I’m sure I missed some things. What do you think?

Related post: Kaizen Event Team Selection – No Yo-Yos Needed

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Tags: , , , ,

Kaizen in the Laundry Room…and My Domestic Shortcomings

Kaizen opportunities are often best identified (and done) by those who do the work. This is critical if you’re trying to create and sustain a kaizen culture. That said, I usually try to avoid much in the way of lean implementation within my house and amongst my family. Not that I really enjoy all of the typical familial chaos and related muda, but, as Clint Eastwood’s Dirty Harry once said, “a man’s got to know his limitations.”

Now, my wife is the predominant laundry person in our house. Yes, I know what you’re thinking and I could lie and say it’s not like that. Sometimes I’ll do some loads, sometimes my three kids…but, that’s an abnormal condition! And, I really don’t want to talk about folding laundry. Really guilty there.

Today, Mother’s Day, my wife mentioned that having the dryer door hung on the left side of the dryer was a pain in the neck. I looked at it, with newly opened eyes, and could instantly understand the waste of motion that the door’s orientation induced. You have to remove the wet laundry from the washing machine and then lift it OVER the dryer door and THEN place it inside the dryer. Meanwhile wet socks are hitting the deck and accumulating dog hair and horse hair (no, there’s no horse inside the house). Wonderful!

I’ve had to endure that same waste, but I just turned my brain off and assumed that doing laundry was a pain the neck, because it was …a pain in the neck. If I was in lean coach or sensei mode, this would have been so obvious! Pretty lame on my part. I’ve become a domestic “concrete head.”

So, I quickly took my wife’s suggestion (no formal suggestion board here) and switched the door. Daily kaizen (at least the first one) in the laundry room! Less than 10 minutes to make it happen. Glad she’s the brains in (and heart and soul of) the family.

Now that I have shared this little story with you, I can’t help but thinking that I may be considered the new Bruce Hamilton of laundry. During Bruce’s hugely popular Toast Kaizen video, specifically the pre-kaizen condition, he’s waiting for the toast to toast, while the dirty dishes just sit there in the sink. The video observers (especially the females) often voice their displeasure with such a blatant display of sloth. Of course, Bruce gets his act together in the post-kaizen condition (here we won’t discuss the hygiene opportunities). I just want you to know – I’m a good dish guy! But, I definitely need to carry more of the load (no pun intended) on the laundry front.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Tags:

Kaizen Principle: Bias for Action

Several days ago, during a health care value stream analysis, I was impressed with the team’s bias for action. Now we know that value stream mapping is typically a “paper” activity, but it was refreshing to see that one of the future state’s kaizen bursts, identified as a “just-do-it,” couldn’t wait. The team completed the just-do-it right before the wrap-up presentation. Outstanding!

Kaizen is founded on certain principles, one of which is a bias for action. This bias for action is largely a behavioral thing, but it can be facilitated by effective coaching, formal training, and the application of lean management systems and related visual controls that should absolutely scream for action.

Of course, it’s worth mentioning my “short list” of kaizen principles (see the Kaizen Event Fieldbook), because I think we need to have a holistic perspective and because together they should drive the right kind of bias for action. I call this my 10 + 1 list. I’m pretty sure that other lean practitioners can make some  great arguments for a few more, but I wanted to keep the list relatively short.

  1. Think PDCA and SDCA, the basic scientific methods.
  2. Go to the gemba; observe and document reality.
  3. Ask “why?” five times to identify root causes.
  4. Be dissatisfied with the status quo.
  5. Kaizen what matters.
  6. Have a bias for action.
  7. Frequent, small incremental improvements drive big, sustainable improvements.
  8. Be like MacGyver; use creativity before capital.
  9. Kaizen is everyone’s job.
  10. No transformation without transformation leadership.

Plus – Do everything with humility and respect for the individual.

The combined dissatisfaction with the status quo (eyes for waste  “see” the current state and the ideal state) and the existence of explicit performance gaps that are targeted for closure (kaizen what matters) should be unbearable enough to drive action. And, our action should be focused on appropriately and economically (MacGyver was a creative cheapskate) addressing the root causes (5 why’s and PDCA thinking) and then sustaining the performance (SDCA).

So, I’ll leave you with another bias for action story, surprisingly also within a value stream analysis backdrop. Tony, the plant manager, was participating in a combined value stream analysis/plant lay-out/3P activity for a brand new line. As we developed pro forma standard work and were doing table top and plant floor simulations applying, among other things continuous flow, he had a eureka moment. Actually, I noticed that he was becoming quite agitated and then…he disappeared. Over an hour later, Tony returned. He informed the team that he couldn’t stand it when he realized that the same principles needed to be applied to existing lines. So, right away, he made sure that the other lines (granted, without standard work at the time) stop their evil batch and queue ways and go to single piece flow. By the next day, the old lines had demonstrated an 18% productivity improvement (and yes, this was sustained). Now, that’s bias for action!

Related posts: Ready! Fire! Aim!…Maybe, We Should Have REALLY Simulated First!?, Kaizen Principle: Be Like MacGyver, Use Creativity before Capital!

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Tags: , , , , ,

Standard Work Is a Verb

Standard work is not a once and done proposition. That would be lean anathema. In fact, the Shingo Prize Model reflects a lean principle (one of ten) called “integration of improvement with work.” We don’t stop working, why would we stop improving?

This dynamic is consistent with the evolution from system-driven kaizen to principle-driven kaizen. System-driven kaizen is represented mostly by kaizen events as pulled by value stream improvement plans. Really good stuff, but it can and should get better.

Principle-driven kaizen is system-driven PLUS the integration of daily kaizen. Daily kaizen, as defined in my Kaizen Event Fieldbook is, “small, process- or point-focused, continuous improvement that is conducted by engaged and enabled employees in their everyday work… Daily kaizen opportunities (problems) are readily identified by workers using simple robust lean management systems and by a pragmatic comparison of the current state with the envisioned ideal state. By applying common sense and learning developed in kaizen events, training classes and direct application, employees, as individuals and within teams, engage in PDCA through the use/execution of actionable, low bureaucracy suggestion systems, mini-kaizen events, kaizen circle activities, ‘just-do-its’ and the like.” OK, it’s a really long-winded definition!

While standard work is often initially developed within the context of a kaizen event, it can’t stop there. As employees adopt PDCA thinking and learn to become experimentalists, they will/should continuously improve the standard work. Truly, when the culture becomes principle-driven, people feel happily compelled to improve their processes and thus the standard work.

So, think of standard work more as a verb and less as a noun. Next time when you’re at the gemba, take note of the revision date of the standard work sheets and standard work combination sheets. If they haven’t been updated and improved over the last quarter or two, then you might have an issue. There’s a good chance that you’ve never left the land of system-driven kaizen.

Related post: There Is No Kaizen Bus Stop!

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Tags: , , , ,

Mark Hamel Interviewed by Business901’s Joe Dager

Joe Dager, an expert in lean marketing and founder of the Business901 blog, was gracious (and perhaps crazy?) enough to interview me last week. The interview is captured in a podcast and covers my SME published book, Kaizen Event Fieldbook: Foundation, Framework, and Standard Work for Effective Events.

Joe asked many excellent questions about how to sustain kaizen event gains…and hopefully, I provided some value-added answers and insight. We covered, among other things, topics like lean management systems and the specifics of leader standard work as well as the multi-phase kaizen event approach.

Please check out the podcast and Business 901’s social media release here.

Related posts: Leader Standard Work – Chock that PDCA Wheel,Kaizen Event Supplies – Basic Stuff for Effective Events, Kaizen Event Team Selection – No Yo-Yos Needed, Leader Standard Work Should Be…Work!, Ready! Fire! Aim!…Maybe, We Should Have REALLY Simulated First!?, The Human Side of the Kaizen Event – 11 Questions for Lean Leaders, The Human Side of the Kaizen Event – Part II

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Tags: , , , ,

CSI Kaizen – When Forensics Supplement Direct Observation

CSI picTaiichi Ohno preferred facts over data, meaning, among other things, that direct observation trumps second hand stuff. How else can you truly grasp the current situation and identify the waste?

Well, the fact of the matter is that direct observation is not always practical. Sometimes it needs to be supplemented with what I call forensic observation. For example, if we need to gain an understanding of the pre-kaizen situation for a REALLY long lead time process, say weeks or months or even years, it’s not very pragmatic to grab some time observation forms, stopwatches, spaghetti charts, etc. and…camp out.

No. Long lead time processes, such as bodily injury insurance claim evaluation or complex business proposal development, often should be subjected to the rigor of  process mapping. These process maps detail the historically and forensically based steps, hand-offs, rework, waiting, etc. as supported by emails, documents, system entries, recorded phone conversations and the like for specific, real-life claims, files, proposals, design projects and so on.

It’s a bit like CSI, but without real blood. It’s a pragmatic proxy for going to the gemba and it can be bolstered with true direct observation for specific steps within the process. For example, we can directly observe how design requirements are identified from the request for proposal (as part of the overall proposal generation process).

Now, this is not a license for dismissing direct observation (and it’s not a replacement for appropriate value stream analysis). But, given the right circumstances, forensic observation can be an appropriate way to apply gemba-based principles to your kaizen activity.

So, how have you applied forensic observation within your lean journey?

Related posts: The Truth Will Set You Free!, Time Observations – 10 Common Mistakes

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Tags: , , ,

Kaizen Event Supplies – Basic Stuff for Effective Events

airdrop picThe kaizen pre-event planning phase is critical to event effectiveness. It includes the obvious – event definition from the perspective of scope and targets, team selection, communication and certain acceptable pre-work, but sometimes the simple stuff gets missed. The simple stuff includes kaizen supplies – well organized, in a 5S way!

It’s definitely muda if a kaizen event team(s) is hamstrung, mid-event, while they’re waiting for a handful of cheap stopwatches to get picked up from the local giant box store or waiting for someone to track down some standard operations forms because they were all consumed during the last event and never replaced. The list of possible annoyances is pretty long.

Kaizen events are finite in length, typically three to five days in duration. If it’s a mini-event, it may be a day or so. Time is of the essence! Lost time means delayed or lost improvements and frustrated team members.

So, while we’re trying to implement lean, doesn’t it make sense that the kaizen event supplies are designated, sized, stored, presented and replenished in a lean manner? Of course it does. It just happens that it’s important, but not urgent. At least until that uh-oh moment, when a team determines that they’re missing a necessary supply item.

Sometimes, the reason for this phenomenon is that the organization is just cheap (penny-wise and pound foolish), there is no KPO to worry about this stuff or the KPO isn’t quite up to speed. The kaizen principle of “bias for action” is not an excuse for sloppiness.

See below for a basic list of kaizen event supplies. (Here, I am not talking about the typical 3P-type supplies – cardboard, PVC, plywood, Creform, etc.) Most should be specified, stored and presented point of use in the team’s break-out room. Some things, like laminators, may be shared amongst multiple teams. The KPO should make use of a kaizen team supply list which specifies the standard quantity of each item, item description, a field for an end-of-event inventory count and a field to reflect the quantity which needs to be replenished before the next event.

Of course, some things are difficult to anticipate that they will be needed for the event. For example, a 3X4′ magnetic dry erase board is usually not inventoried. These non-”supermarket” items will have to be bought-to-order during the event.

Stored within Plastic Storage Bin
  • 6 clipboards
  • 1 set of laminated copies of standard forms (5S audit sheet, time observation form, standard work sheet, etc.)
  • 6 stopwatches
  • 1 pedometer
  • 1 25′ tape measure
  • 1 box of pencils (pre-sharpened)
  • 3 white erasers
  • 1 box of pens
  • 1 box of flip chart markers (multi-colors)
  • 1 box dry erase markers (multi-colors)
  • 1 dry eraser
  • 1 18″ ruler
  • 6 8.5X11″ legal pads
  • 2 calculators
  • 1 stapler
  • 2 rolls of scotch tape in dispenser
  • 2 rolls of masking tape
  • 1 box blank overhead projector sheets (for us dinosaurs)
  • 1 box paper clips
  • 1 box rubber bands
  • 3 pkg of yellow sticky notes 3X3″
  • 3 pkg of orange sticky notes 3X3″
  • 3 pkg of green sticky notes 3X3″
  • 1 scissors
  • 1 pkg 8.5X11″ multi-color paper
  • 1 pkg 11X17″ multi-color paper
  • 1 pkg 8.5X11″ laminating pouches
  • 1 pkg 11X17″ laminating pouches
  • 1 box Sharpies (multi-colored)
  • 1 box push pins
  • 1 adjustable 3-hole punch
Not Stored within Plastic Bin
  • 3 flip chart pads
  • 1 box flip chart markers
Shared among Teams
  • 1 digital camera
  • 1 video camera
  • 1 label maker
  • 1 laminator
  • 1 measuring wheel
  • 1 roll 36″ wide kraft paper or white plotter paper
  • 1 LCD projector (located in presentation room)
  • 1 overhead projector (located in presentation room)
  • 1 color printer (11X17″ capable)

Am I missing anything?

Related post: The Kaizen Promotion Office Does What? 8 Critical Deliverables.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Tags: , , , ,

Kaizen Event Team Selection – No Yo-Yos Needed

Yoyo pictureKaizen event team selection is a critical driver of event effectiveness. Selection criteria includes team representation (to promote diversity, perspective, ownership, and development opportunities), size, chemistry, kaizen experience, and behavioral and technical skills. In short, the team, typically six to eight members, should be picked around the event, not vice versa.

So, every member counts. The expectation is that team members are dedicated during the event. Truth of the matter, the team leader should be an integral part of the pre-event planning, execution and follow-through. Similarly, many team members must also support the follow-through phase of the event.

Team members often have specific roles to play, above and beyond “participant.” There is typically a team leader and co-leader and often there are, officially or unofficially, other roles:

  • “Navigator”  – one or more kaizen event veterans who are competent with the kaizen process, forms, etc.,
  • “Fresh eyes” – those who are not from the target area and are unencumbered by allegiance or intimate exposure to the process. They’re free to ask the “dumb questions,” like “WHY?,”
  • Operator or associate – stakeholders from the target area who have first-hand knowledge of the process and its people and who will (hopefully) help evangelize others and sustain the gains after the event,
  • Builder or technologist – multi-skilled maintenance person, machinist, IT person, analyst, etc. who will help the team safely make, modify, move and test things and/or serve as liaison with other support functions,
  • Compliance officer – typically someone who is product/service knowledgeable and will help the team comply with the various regulatory requirements.

So, where does  the yo-yo concept come into play? Team member commitment must be full time for the kaizen event, with only very rare exceptions. “Yo-yos” are team members who are repeatedly pulled out of the event for “important” meetings and projects by their supervisors. These in-again, out-again folks accomplish little other than to distract and demoralize their fellow members. They must constantly be brought up to speed relative to team progress and direction and do not deliver on their assigned countermeasures  – how can they, they’re never there!?

Yo-yos take a valuable spot on the team roster that would have been better filled by a dedicated member. Furthermore, effective lean leaders don’t tolerate yo-yo’s and don’t pull the string themselves.

Does any of this sound familiar?

Related post:  The Human Side of the Kaizen Event – 11 Questions for Lean Leaders

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Tags: , ,