Having been involved with helping people in organisations implement Lean over a period of 10 years, I have spent a lot of time talking about the 5 Principles of Lean which were popularised by Womack and Jones in their book “Lean Thinking”. I have summarised the 5 principles here.

Value
Ensure we understand “value” from the customer’s perspective and be careful to take the time to actually explore this with our customers, so that we do not fall into the trap of making inaccurate assumptions.

Value Stream
Identify the process steps that create the value identified in the first principle.  It is here that we start to recognise waste or non value added steps in our process.  This principle is achieved using a process known as Value Stream Mapping which is a method used to understand and record all material and information flow required to bring our product or service to the customer.

Flow
This principle uses a variety of continuous improvement tools and techniques to eliminate anything in the process that results in waste and delays.  This principle is about working towards a process that delivers “value” with the most effective use of our resources.

Pull
Once we have improved the way our processes create value and shortened the lead time of those processes, we are then in a position to link our process more closely to actual customer demand.  The objective here is to get a close as we can to producing to demand with little or no inventory in our systems.

Perfection
This principle is about the continuing striving for the perfect process by continually removing successive layers of waste as they are uncovered.

Lately I have had a question in the back of my mind about how well these 5 principles really help people understand how to best adapt the Toyota Production System (TPS) for their own organisations.

The Womack and Jones 5 principles are valuable in that they provide a structure for implementing Lean which starts by ensuring our processes are improved in line with creating the most value for our customers, and therefore providing a profitable future for our company.

But how do we explain what needs to be done to ensure that Lean will be a success, and why is it that so many companies simply end up mimicking Toyota and never manage to “internalise” Lean into their culture?  Why is it that companies usually focus only on the Lean tools, rather than on the thinking that is required to correctly deploy the tools?  Why is it so few companies achieve sustainable results by permanently transforming their organisations using Lean?  Could it be that Womack and Jones’ 5 principles are too much of a simplification?

During my quest to find better ways to help people understand how to be successful with Lean, I have been reading The Hitchhiker’s Guide to Lean by Jamie Flinchbaugh and Andy Carlino.  They open their book with a chapter that sets out their 5 principles of Lean.  Based on the 4 rules by Steven Spears and H. Kent Brown the 5 principles offer another level of insight into the thinking required in our organisations to ensure success with Lean.  The Flinchbaugh and Carlino 5 principles are:

1. Directly observe work as activities, connections, and flows. The language of Lean will be found if we look for ways to structure, operate and improve our activities, connections and flows.  Every product, material and piece of information should flow through simple and specific pathways.  Understanding our current reality will require deep observation and a framework to “digest” and “expose” opportunities.  Value Stream Mapping can be a useful method to better understand our activities, connections and flows.

2. Systematic waste elimination. Often we hear people say that the purpose of Lean is to eliminate waste, however the real goal of Lean is to realise our true profit potential.  So waste elimination is an enabler for Lean and if we are to be successful with Lean we will need to be systematic in our approach to waste elimination.  This will require a good understanding of waste (and value) from the customer’s perspective and then we will need to be relentlessly pursuing systematic waste elimination on a daily basis.  The 7 wastes will be useful, however our focus on waste is not complete unless our processes and practices systematically address waste on a daily basis.

So far, Flinchbauer and Carlino have presented similar thinking to Womack and Jones.  However, the next principle cuts to the heart of the Lean philisophy and is probably where there is the biggest disconnect between current practice and the true intent of Lean.

3. Establish high agreement of the “what” and the “how”. Tools such as 5S and Visual Workplace are designed fundamentally to achieve the principle of high agreement for  the “what” and  the “how”.  Achieving high agreement of the “what” is relatively straight forward as we develop and set goals and objectives, whereas achieving high agreement of the “how” is more difficult.  Having agreement about the standard way of executing a process is the starting point for all continuous improvement.  If we do not have a standard, how can we improve on it?  Standardisation is a continuous process of reaching a deeper and more detailed level of refinement.  Standards will usually be communicated visually, so that we can walk into any process and immediately determine whether the process is operating normally or abnormally.

4. Systematic (and Systemic) problem solving. For this we need an environment where we see every problem as a way to move closer to the ideal state. and any gap between current reality and ideal is seen as a “problem”.  Creating an environment where problems are seen as good opportunities for  experimentation and improvement is easier said than done.  Our traditional culture is one where we see it as a weakness to admit to a problem or make a mistake.  Also people are often rewarded for solving a major problem, when we should be rewarding people for ensuring that the problem is prevented through systemic continuous improvement.

Decision making and problem solving should be pushed to the lowest possible level because this is where it is most likely that we will find the “right” answers.  However, this requires rules and high agreement for the problem solving process and boundaries for our problem solving activities.  This principle has a big overlap with the principle of achieving high agreement.

5 Create a learning organisation. This principle relies heavily on principle number 4, and using  agreed problem solving processes at all levels in the business to work on the systems that should be  preventing problems from happening.  We need to be spending more time reflecting on how the organisation works, thinks and improves and get into the habit of doing this daily.  This reflection should be happening at all levels in the organisation. The more points of reflection we can create the faster, deeper and more sustainable our transformation will be.

Leaders must be learners and teachers, open to changing themselves and involving themselves in the learning and experimentation that results from principles 3 and 4, and setting an example by leading from the front.  Everyone in the organisation can take on a leadership role by becoming change agents.  Everyone is involved with closing the gap between the current reality and the vision or ideal state.  Focusing on how to close the gap is where the leader is learning. Helping others close the gap is where the leader is teaching.

On balance, I think Flinchbauer and Carlino add some further insight into the 5 Principles of Lean and have helped us understand what it takes to internalise some of the Lean fundamentals, in particular the use of  “high agreement” to ensure standardisation and systematic waste elimination and problem solving at all levels of the organisation to help us become a Learning Organisation.

“Lean starts with rules , not tools.”

Jamie Flinchbaugh can be found at www.LeanLearningCenter.com

The Gemba Walk is a powerful way to build standard work into our leadership activities.  It is about getting out of the office and into the process with our people, to help them discover issues and fix them.  It becomes a valuable mechanism for staying in touch with our managers and team leaders, and keeping in touch with the real operational issues in our business.

Why do we need to build Gemba walks into our daily routine?

• We can use the Gemba Walk to reiterate our vision for the organisation and make sure we are doing the “right things - right”.  There is no better way to reinforce our vision than repeated face to face dialogue.

• We can break down the barriers between management and the teams and improve communication channels throughout the operation.  Often, team leaders and team members will be reluctant to raise issues for fear of being “wrong”.

• The Gemba Walk helps us build relationships with our team leaders by getting to know them better and helping them improve their processes.  This is fundamental to improving teamwork and the effectiveness of our teams.

• We can help people discover opportunities for improvement by asking questions and listening to the answers.  In this way we can offer real support, encouragement and praise.

• It becomes a mechanism for “catching” people doing the right things and allows us to recognise people for the good work that they do.  We can use the Gemba Walk to improve morale by actively showing respect for people.

• Our visibility shows that we care about how things are going, and want to support the teams to set targets and improve performance. When we show interest in certain aspects of the operation the teams will usually also take an interest.

How do we do Gemba Walks?

• Make it a daily routine and have a set time. Avoid letting other meetings or issues interfere with this routine if possible.

• Choose your Gemba walk participants carefully.  Have a briefing session before and after the walk to prepare and debrief.

• Ask questions and listen attentively. Avoid the temptation to offer solutions - this is disrespectful to our people because it does not help them solve their own issues for themselves.

• Set the example of how we want our team leaders to behave with their people. We should be encouraging our team leaders to mirror our behaviour with their teams.

• We are looking to increase ownership so be careful that by doing the Gemba Walk we do not erode the ownership.  Use the Gemba Walk as a mechanism to empower people to solve their own problems.  Ultimately we are looking to have teams solving problems of which we are not aware.

• Use the opportunity to reinforce the importance of the appropriate Lean tools such as 7 wastes and VSM.

• Structure your questions so that they draw out ideas for improvement of the process.  It is often useful to have a “standard” set of question to ask.

• Use the Gemba Walk as an opportunity to share what you are learning about the processes.

• It is useful to have a theme for each walk, so that there is a focus eg safety, 5S or performance measurement.

• Maintain a sense of “pace” during the walk.  This not to be seen as just a casual chat.

• Make sure we take care of problems straight away.  There should be a sense of urgency about our improvement activities.

• Take the opportunity to praise people and give people positive feedback where it is due.

• Be careful about being the management police.  This process is about building trust and relationships.

• Look for what disrupts the workflow with a focus on waste between the process steps.

• Use the walk to help identify where mistakes could be made in the process, and encourage people to implement solutions that prevent mistakes.

• Use the walk to identify all waste streams and rework loops, along with ways to reduce these.

• Use the walk to identify whether the metrics being used are effective measures that help highlight causes of problems.

This week I include an extract from a recent newsletter by Jim Womack as he discusses the role of the Lean manager as a “problem solver” and how the manager should develop a Lean mindset.

At Efficiency Works in our work with management teams of organisations on the Lean journey we are constantly seeking to find the critical ingredients for the successful execution of Lean. There is no doubt that energetic management support is one critical ingredient for success. When management support is missing the Lean initiatives are often seen by the employees as just another “thing” that we are doing to reduce costs.

But is energetic management support enough to create a culture that thrives on “enquiry” and “experimentation”?

Now over to Jim Womack ……

What do I mean by a lean state of mind?

First, the lean manager eagerly embraces the role of problem solver. This means going to see the actual situation, asking about the performance issue, seeking the root cause, and showing respect for lower-level managers and for colleagues at the same organizational level by asking hard questions until good answers emerge. It’s this critical, probing state of mind that permits lean tools to be put to good use as the lean manager applies the right tool for the specific problem and does this in context on the gemba rather than in the abstract in some conference room. Empty ritual is replaced with a rigorous thought process that engages employees and pulls forward their best abilities.

Second, the lean manager realizes that no manager at a higher level can or should solve a problem at a lower level. (And one of the worst abuses of lean tools lies in trying to do just this.) Instead, the higher-level manager can assign responsibility to a manager at a lower level to tackle the problem through a continuing dialogue, both with the higher-level manager and with everyone actually touching the process causing the problem. The lean law of organizational life is that problems can only be solved where they live, in conversation with the people whose current actions are contributing to the problem. But this requires support, encouragement, and, yes, relentless pressure, from the higher-level lean manager.

Third, the lean manager believes that all problem solving is about experimentation by means of Plan Do Check Act. No one can know the answer before experiments are conducted and the many experiments that fail will yield valuable learning that can be applied to the next round of experiments.

Finally, the lean manager knows that no problem is ever solved forever. Indeed, the introduction of a promising countermeasure is sure to create new problems at some other point in the organization. This is not bad. It is good, provided the critical, probing mind of the lean manager keeps on the case in pursuit of perfection.

In short the traditional manager is usually passive, going through rituals and applying standard remedies to unique problems. By contrast, inside the mind of the lean manager lies a restless desire to continually rethink the organization’s problems, probe their root causes, and lead experiments to find the best currently known countermeasures. When this lean mindset is coupled with the proper lean tools amazing things are continually possible.

Next week we will discuss how to use the “Gemba Walk” to help us improve our Lean state of mind as part of our management standard work.

I have a client who is very excited to have achieved 12 months without sustaining a Lost Time Injury (LTI).  This is a record for this particular site and a great achievement.

But does this measure drive the behaviour we  need to achieve long term sustainable continuous improvement in everything we do for our customers?  Sure, having an injury free workplace is something we should be aiming for because it enables us to reliably supply goods and services to our customers.  Additionally, we have a responsibility to our employees to provide a safe working environment, but how should we measure our safety performance?

The number of Lost Time Injuries, often expressed as the number of LTI’s per million hours worked (LTIFR) is a popular measure for safety.  One problem is that this metric is a “lag” indicator that doesn’t necessarily provide a good indication of how our safety performance will track in the future.  Also the longer we go without having an LTI, the more pressure there is to not report an LTI.  In my experience this means that we find ourselves going to great lengths to make sure any injury does not count as an LTI.  Have you ever heard someone say “If we could just get that person back to work quickly on light duties  we could prevent this “becoming” and LTI?”  This is not showing true respect for our employees, and communicates the wrong messages to our workforce.

I once worked for an organisation that had achieved 2 years LTI free, and in doing so had created so much pressure on the employees that no one was prepared to admit they were carrying injuries.  Eventually there was an avalanche of repetitive strain LTI’s that had been “covered” up and remained untreated because nobody wanted to be the one who spoilt the LTI performance measure. The company’s focus on the LTI measure had actually resulted in injuries that were much worse than they might have been had they been reported and treated earlier.

So, what is the answer?

Wherever possible we should be using “lead” indicators that help us identify problem solving opportunities as early as possible in the process.  So for safety, perhaps we should be measuring how many near misses are reported and how quickly corrective actions are implemented to prevent or reduce the risk of their re occurrence.  By focusing our attention on measuring how well we are improving our processes  to prevent near misses from ever happening  we are shifting the emphasis to “prevention” rather than “cure”.  We are also providing a real mechanism for employee involvement that will lead to a more sustainable set of operational outcomes in the longer term.

Lag indicators may sometimes achieve a result faster, but as a general rule for designing any metrics we should always insist on having lead indicators that drive the right behaviour and provide a more sustainable outcome in the long term.

All too often we find companies that are struggling with measures that don’t work.  Sometimes there are way too many measures for the people in the organisation to focus on.  Sometimes the measures are simply poorly designed and result in behaviour which creates waste and inventory.  Sometimes the measures simply don’t make sense to those being measured and are not taken seriously.  Sometimes the measures simply don’t help us focus on the causes of the problem or issue.

Our measures should provide immediate real-time feedback on performance, and create opportunities for improvement every minute of every day.  They should be driving us toward the the Ideal State for the process, and be helping us to eliminate waste and improve the flow through every process in our organisation.  They should be designed to engage and encourage the entire workforce to become actively involved in frequent “experimentation” to improve everything we do.

Our measures should also be designed to encourage us all to go and observe what is actually happening in the process.

The measures should form a balanced and dynamic link between our value streams and our daily problem solving processes.  To achieve “balance” it is useful to ensure we have measures that cover the following set of categories: Quality, Cost, Delivery, Safety and Morale (or Engagement).  The actual measures will depend on the process but should be metrics that are meaningful and “real” for the team who owns them.  To increase the level of ownership and buy-in it is useful to have the team involved with the creation and implementation of the measures, and to have the measures displayed close to the workplace in a format that the team can update easily and frequently.  Also it is important to remember the selected measures need to be metrics that the team can actually influence.

But what should we do if we already have measures in place?  Well here are 3 simple ways to start improving your measurement systems.  These have been written by Stacey Barr.  (Stacey’s contact details are included below.)

#1: Stop Reporting It And See What Happens

Decide, this month, to simply not include all the usual measures and statistics in the performance report that you suspect no-one refers to. You’ll soon work out, by trial and error, which measures really do matter, because they’ll be missed. It will help everyone else work out what really matters, too.

#2: Test Its Alignment To Strategy

Grab a flipchart page, or whiteboard, some pens, your business plan, and a list of all the measures you currently report. Along the top of the page or whiteboard, write each of the business goals. Then one goal at a time, list the measures that really, truly are fabulous evidence of the achievement of that goal. If the measure isn’t fabulous evidence, then flick it.

#3: Have A Single Version Of The Truth

Don’t measure the same thing in 12 different ways. Decide the one true way to calculate and report the measure, and standardise on that. I’ve seen immense amounts of time wasted in measuring something as straightforward as cycle time over a dozen different ways by almost as many different people, simply because no-one drew a line in the sand and said “Here’s how we measure this.”

Stacey Barr is a specialist in organisational performance measurement, helping corporate planners, business analysts and performance measurement officers confidently facilitate their organisation to create and use meaningful performance measures with lots of buy-in. Sign up for Stacey’s free email tips at www.staceybarr.com/facilitators and receive a complimentary copy of her renowned e-book “202 Tips for Performance Measurement”.