|
|
|
03/15/2012 12:28 PM
|
|
|
Sorry Sam,
I was responding to Todd's comments about how he could not understand how lean applies to customers.
|
|
|
|
|
03/15/2012 12:28 PM
|
|
|
Sam,
sorry I was answering Todd.
I have no disagreement with the basic lean tools and activities. Its more the larger definition of lean and what we promote. Toyota is the focus of lean leaders today, but its much more than that. So to me Lean is incomplete in its definition and that is the problem. Until that changes the real potential of lean will be never be achieved except for consultants and book writers.
Not understanding that the customer is the main focus of lean would be a product of that misunderstanding.
Here is a tidbit of someone who speaks of lean, but is never heard of in the lean community. After you are done reading it, let me know if you think its screams of lean or not.
"The direction of all economic affairs is in the market society a task of the entrepreneurs. Theirs is the control of production. They are at the helm and steer the ship. A superficial observer would believe that they are supreme. But they are not. They are bound to obey unconditionally the captain's orders. The captain is the consumer. Neither the entrepreneurs nor the farmers nor the capitalists determine what has to be produced. The consumers do that. If a business man does not strictly obey the orders of the public as they are conveyed to him by the structure of market prices, he suffers losses, he goes bankrupt, and is thus removed from his eminent position at the helm. Other men who did better in satisfying the demand of the consumers replace him:" Ludwig Von Mises
www.leaneconomics.org
|
|
|
|
|
03/16/2012 12:56 PM
|
|
|
KAIZEN ? ? (Jap) Gai Shan (Chi) Ge Sun (Korean)
When considered as the philosophy it really is, full of influence across 1000' of years from Sun Tzu, Miyamoto Musashi, the iChing, Buddhism, Confucianism and most strongly Taoism (water / Flow), we see it is more accurately translated as;
"On-going 'Goodness' / benefit, no one person gaining at another's expense."
To understand this we have to consider what is 'Good' - for you, me, them, us, now, before, tomorrow - in this way, we must consider things like the social development of individual self-esteem and confidence, parenting, education, politics, leadership and deeper issues like Honesty Respect and Trust (HRT for business) in our conduct.
It is at his level of knowledge / understanding / comprehension people will alter their fundamental beliefs and thus their behaviours when aligned to a 'future state' and a common purpose.
Throwing tools, process, policy and procedure into a mixing pot of 'belief' about conflicting purposes, does very little to change that belief (group-think) over long periods - seeing many change initiatives fail once the consultants / trainers walk away - even after 3 or 5 years of expensive change efforts ... because in our application of principles and practice we fail to understand the 'people process of change'.
Psychology and Neuroscience have enough of the answers to make sense of this but we ignore it in our popularised approach to business today. (Keynesian economic - fiscal metrics based on predictions as primary drivers of actions etc.)
As for 'The Darker side of Lean' by Darius Mehri - excusing and accepting his own self-definition and confirmation bias (the need we all feel to 'Make others wrong, to make ourselves right' - Defence mechanisms et al) which we might wrap up under the banner of 'Blame' - I think what his paper / book highlights most clearly is that social rules will over-ride written rules at every turn - its the implicit, i.e. what's not written down and "proceduralised" that really makes the difference to performance - but in a world dominated by an accounting, technology and logic mentality - who knew? (Well, the truth be known, pretty much everyone outside of a boardroom - forever - actually!)
Similarly Mehri's accounts show the Japanese as 'Human', able and apt to make the same 'psychological' / social mistakes when behaviours are driven by numbers, just as we make in the west.
Given the open degree of segregation through favouritism in Japanese design offices, bullying, copying, etc. that he observed from his own very different western perspective, I'd go so far as to suggest, we, in the West, are years ahead of the East when it comes to making that next step into a 'High performance culture' that's more akin to the original philosophy of Kaizen ? ? .... all we need to do is educate leaders (political / production and parents) to appreciate the conditions required if people (Children and adults alike) are to perform at their best.
|
|
|
|
|
03/16/2012 12:56 PM
|
|
|
Todd,
If Lean is not for customers, then who is it for? Who are you trying to satisfy? If it's not the customer, then you are bound to fail, not only in appliyng Lean principles and concepts, but ultimately as a business.
Ken
|
|
|
|
|
03/16/2012 12:56 PM
|
|
|
John, I agree that customer satisfaction should be one of the key drivers for Lean activities. It surprised me when some time ago I asked in this forum for definitions of Lean. Here are some of the answers I received. Note that there was only one reference to customers. In other words, people apparently believe that Lean applies more to knowing how to do something rather than to determining what should be done to satisfy customers. Here are some of the answers I received to the question, What is Lean? Some people answered by asking a further question.
What is Lean?
1. A process for eliminating waste
2. A process for minimizing the use of resources
3. A process for continuous improvement
4. The means to reduce manufacturing costs and lead times
5. The Toyota Production System
6. A quality improvement process
7. The process of doing things faster and faster
8. A philosophy of manufacturing
9. Something I can't define but will recognize when I see it
10. A process for creating more value for customers with fewer resources
11. A process of walking around to find operations or activities needing improvement
12. A process mapping approach to collect process performance data
13. Is Lean even a procedure or process?
14. Is Lean a culture?
15. Is Lean all of the above, some of the above, or none of the above?
16. Lean is simply anything and everything a company says it is?
Professor Peter Hines of Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, UK, suggests that Lean should be secondary to other activities. He stated, "Sustaining change is more important for organiztion than their first efforts in going Lean or using Lean to increase profits."
He recognized that customer needs, wants, desires, demands, requirements, and expectations change, technology changes and competition changes, all of which makes managing change very important.
Ludig Von Mises's comments seem very approprite. You need a valid reason for applying Lean tools and techniques. Customers provide that reason.
Sam Tomas
|
|
|
|
|
03/16/2012 12:56 PM
|
|
|
John, one other comment. Here is something I found someplace. Unfortunately I didn't keep a reference on where I found it.
It seems there is a lot of truth to this statement. I don't believe there is a clear definition of Lean today oher than it's anything or everything you want it to be.
"It has been shown that it can be dangerous for a new idea, such as Lean, to become fashionable because it then gets pulled in many different directions that changes its focus significantly."
|
|
|
|
|
03/16/2012 02:40 PM
|
|
|
Sam,
without a customer need, there is not reason to produce. That would be waste.
Lean in a market environment, is used to improve reaction to customer needs.
|
|
|
|
|
03/16/2012 05:51 PM
|
|
|
John, I'm in total agreement.
Sam Tomas
|
|
|
|
|
03/16/2012 05:51 PM
|
|
|
Sam
Yes the lean movement has a long way to go, and unfortunately I don't see much effort going on trying to define it more accurately. To me the quote from the professor is a perfect example of how misguided some lean teachers are and how the lean movement has gotten out of control
|
|
|
|
|
03/19/2012 09:49 AM
|
|
|
Sam,
I actually had this conversation with the Directors of Toyota and Volvo the other night. What if we were able to take Toyotas lean system and apply it to Fords 4 day production cycle time of digging dirt and shipping complete product. You would reduce the time to 1 day for example. This would completely revolutionalize the auto industry and cars would be available as soap, like Ford had dreamed. The cost of production would be reduced dramatically. They understood the concept as well.
This world wide supply chain of shipping parts all over the globe based on reducing part prices of individual products is exactly what we should not be doing.
We are going backwards at the moment, not forward in the lean movement.
|
|
|
|
|
03/19/2012 09:49 AM
|
|
|
When Fujio Cho, Toyota's Chairman was the first President of Toyota's Georgetown, KY complex he stated that TPS is applied industrial engineering and common sense. He also made statements that Toyota's philosophy is to support the value adder and that Toyota is as strong as the weakest supplier. Was this unique? No. As a coop engineering student my Department manager at Chevrolet told me we either add value or help those who do. When Richard Dauch, now CEO of American Axle, was the plant manager of the Chevrolet Detroit Gear and Axle Plants he practiced the same focus on the shop floor and insisted that the manufacturing operations are as clean and supported as any office environment. Don Kish, a divisional director of purchasing for G.M. always supported the policy of ensuring suppliers had the full support of G.M. to be successfully in supplying quality products on time at completive prices. He never took advantage of the strong customer position.
Toyota actively supports any community they are part of. I saw this first hand.
Where is the dark side? It is the interpretation and application and ignorance of Lean if is definition is TPS. Toyota has its shortcomings as well as all organizations when they don't understand or follow the basic principles.
Too many discussions are presented for those with insufficient knowledge, understanding and probably the most important element: Experience
Ron Turkett
|
|
|
|
|
03/19/2012 09:49 AM
|
|
|
John, if you look at many of the more popular books that came out between 1988 and 2002 you will find topics that include items such as disruptive technologies, chaos, turbulence, complexity, reengineering, lean thinking, quality, process-centered, values, variation, change, and renewal. These topics recognize that we live in an world of accelerating change. Companies that do not change to keep up with what's happenng in this highly competitve business world we live in are courting extinction. Again as Professor Peter Hines stated, "Sustaining change is more important for organizations than their first efforts in going Lean or using Lean to increase profits."
I feel that companies should be more involved in managing change rather than trying to get proficient in many of the Japanese techniques, such as identified by an APICS member recently, Jean Marie BOMY, namely, techniques such as deshi, dojo, gemba, genchi genbutsu, hansei, hoshin kanri, jishuken, sensei, mura, muri, nemawashi, yokoten, and a number of others she didn't include such as kata. I feel that Lean has its place as a tool when it can help a company to restore itself to being a highly innovative and competitive company. But the emphasis should always be on implementing whatever changes are necessary to continuously remain competitive, and not to see how many Japanese techniques a company can get under its belt.
I would be remiss if I didn't include customers in this discussion. Obviously customer satisfaction is of prime importance if a company wishes to become and remain competitive.
Sam Tomas
|
|
|
|
|
03/19/2012 01:00 PM
|
|
|
Sam,
I saw this video the other day that reminded me of lean, and how we need to look at things differently
Its called the Story of Stuff and how lean should be used to eliminate waste in our entire process of digging dirt to waste management of our vital resources. In regards to the factory process and change management its only a small part of the entire production chain of making stuff and managing all parts of the process.
Lean is a great way of looking at the entire value stream.
This is what I think about in my free non-working time. After factory lean. We need to look outwards. Whats the point of 5S when the worlds water suppliers are being destroyed.
I want my son to have clean water, and clean air. Lean seems short sided to me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLBE5QAYXp8
|
|
|
|
|
03/19/2012 01:00 PM
|
|
|
Interesting responses.
None of your counter arguments have convinced me that Lean is customer driven. Mixing up economics with LEAN is straying away from what LEAN is and does. The acid test is quite simple. "Can you achieve similar results utilizing other techniques other than LEAN ?" If so then it is not LEAN driven.
Sam
I agree LEAN can resolve customer issues with delivery times if the production and delivery process are the reason for those lagging delivery times. A push system can and has in the past also satisfied lagging delivery times. Therefore LEAN is not the primary cure for this example, it can satisfy the identified issue in an efficient manner but it is not necessarily the only driver that will resolve the customers issue.
"The basic answer is that Lean tools and techniques can be used to change company and supply chain processes to the degree that will then result in customer satisfaction."
Agreed "can be" but LEAN is not the only tool to achieve customer satisfaction, therefore I stand by my previous post that LEAN's primary function is process driven. As opposed to customer driven which is an end result. But an end result that still can be achieved without LEAN.
For example: You buy a toaster, purchase was on the shelf, no supply issues, amazing warranty service, etc. No customer complaints or other issues identified. Which for our example here lets assume this company is still utilizing the classic push manufacturing system. LEAN is still a very effective and efficient tool to streamline the production process. Which does not change the design of the toaster, does not require changing a market establish price point, or satisfy a non-supply issue. But LEAN will reduce the size of the manufacturing plant, reduce WIP, reduce rework and warranty costs. LEAN is not customer driven. In this example all the benefits are corporate and the customer would not see any direct benefit from the employment of the LEAN process. The company would enjoy increase in their ROI. If the market or economy tanks, they would be the most likely company to weather the storm.
Johnpod
"All your lean activities are so that you can provide service faster and cheaper at improved quality and response time and keep your profit margins and your cost structure ahead of your competition."
If you don't understand that you have no idea of what lean is."
I agree! Thank you for supporting my point. Not one mention of the customer. Not that the customer should be forgotten but they are not a requirement.
"I have no disagreement with the basic lean tools and activities."
"Its more the larger definition of lean and what we promote."
This is definitely were we differ in perspective. I see LEAN in its pure sense as originally promoted. I do not agree with building a larger definition, nor do I see any value in doing so. As this thread shows the move to a "larger definition" is mudding the waters and primary purpose of LEAN. It is also moving towards ideological perspectives that I believe are ultimately destructive to the advancement of LEAN principles.
"After you are done reading it, let me know if you think its screams of lean or not."
Definitely not, as for reasons I have noted previously. But it is a very good example of a market driven philosophy. Which works with or with out LEAN principles applied to it. For example, a communist country can apply and see positive results from applying LEAN. Therefore LEAN is not a by product of a free market economy. But this is marcoeconomics and another completely different discussion.
The customer is critical for the continuing viability of any corporation. No one has disagreed with that but it is not the primary driving force for LEAN. As too many examples can demonstrate that alternative methods (regardless of their efficiency) can also satisfy customer demand. Which is one of the reasons getting actual corporate buy in for LEAN is so difficult.
|
|
|
|
|
03/19/2012 04:38 PM
|
|
|
Todd, as somebody once said," It has been shown that it can be dangerous for a new idea, such as Lean, to become fashionable because it then gets pulled in many different directions that changes its focus significantly." Combne that statement with what sombody else once said, "Today, Lean is anything you want it to be", and you wind up with concepts that can be described many different ways and defended in just as many different ways based on a person's preferred interpretation.
I don't feel there is anything wrong with companies, for example, having their own interpretations of what Lean is or should be, provided they explain what it is to people they are talking to or working with to make sure everyone understands. Again, as somone else once said (paraphrased), "I don't necessarily agree with your interprentation of Lean, but I will defend to the death your right to interpretate it any way you want."
Sam Tomas
|
|
|
|
|
03/19/2012 04:39 PM
|
|
|
Excellent video. Very well done, enjoyable, and entertaining.
Thanks,
Sam Tomas
|
|
|
|
|
03/19/2012 04:46 PM
|
|
|
Todd,
Originally posted by: ToddMacdonald
For example: You buy a toaster, purchase was on the shelf, no supply issues, amazing warranty service, etc. No customer complaints or other issues identified. Which for our example here lets assume this company is still utilizing the classic push manufacturing system. LEAN is still a very effective and efficient tool to streamline the production process. Which does not change the design of the toaster, does not require changing a market establish price point, or satisfy a non-supply issue. But LEAN will reduce the size of the manufacturing plant, reduce WIP, reduce rework and warranty costs. LEAN is not customer driven. In this example all the benefits are corporate and the customer would not see any direct benefit from the employment of the LEAN process. The company would enjoy increase in their ROI. If the market or economy tanks, they would be the most likely company to weather the storm.
Why are they working? In order to provide product and service to a customer.
Johnpod
"All your lean activities are so that you can provide service faster and cheaper at improved quality and response time and keep your profit margins and your cost structure ahead of your competition."
If you don't understand that you have no idea of what lean is."
I agree! Thank you for supporting my point. Not one mention of the customer. Not that the customer should be forgotten but they are not a requirement.
odd response. It is obvious I am speaking about the customer, even though I did not use the word customer. Is that the best you can do??
"I have no disagreement with the basic lean tools and activities."
"Its more the larger definition of lean and what we promote."
This is definitely were we differ in perspective. I see LEAN in its pure sense as originally promoted. I do not agree with building a larger definition, nor do I see any value in doing so. As this thread shows the move to a "larger definition" is mudding the waters and primary purpose of LEAN. It is also moving towards ideological perspectives that I believe are ultimately destructive to the advancement of LEAN principles.
Please show examples of your idea of originally promoted. You should use actual references here, so that I can respond accordingly. I will use Ford mostly in my response, so you will have to go back before Ford if you want to stick to your theory. However even Ohno admits Ford was the impetus to lean thinking.
You may believe they are ultimately destructive, but you will have to do better than just saying that you believe it, and please give some concrete examples of how it is destructive.
"After you are done reading it, let me know if you think its screams of lean or not."
Definitely not, as for reasons I have noted previously. But it is a very good example of a market driven philosophy. Which works with or with out LEAN principles applied to it. For example, a communist country can apply and see positive results from applying LEAN. Therefore LEAN is not a by product of a free market economy. But this is marcoeconomics and another completely different discussion.
Your reasons are your opinions and as of now you have used no references except that you believe it to be true. Not good enough actually for a reasonable debate. Even Communism as a political ideology promotes its citizens as the customers of its activities.
I do agree that lean is not a by product of a free market economy. By even Womack's definition Lean is free market economics.
Jim Womack touched on this issue in his book "Reflections on Lean: How has lean changed your life?"
Jim states, "In 1979, as a PhD student in political science and public policy at MIT, I was studying how governments and companies work together to create winners in world competition. My course work was not concerned with the secret of value creation - how people, methods, and technologies can be combined to do more with less. Rather it focused on how companies lobbied governments to change the rules of the game - trade barriers, currency values, R&D subsidies, etc.
One day I decided to tour a car assembly plant as a supplement to my education. It was only my second lifetime factory tour. (The first was in fourth grade.) By the end I realized that I was studying the wrong thing. Because I didn't know what I was supposed to see, I saw what was actually there - massive wastes of human effort, material, space, and time. And it occurred to me that successful companies are those spending more time eliminating waste to create more value, and less time lobbying politicians."
" Simply, lean means creating more value for customers with less resources" Womack
The customer is critical for the continuing viability of any corporation. No one has disagreed with that but it is not the primary driving force for LEAN. As too many examples can demonstrate that alternative methods (regardless of their efficiency) can also satisfy customer demand. Which is one of the reasons getting actual corporate buy in for LEAN is so difficult.
You will have to do much better than that. Quotes references would be nice, otherwise its just your opinion, and as we all konw everyone has an opinion, but you have to back it up with some facts. So far none.
www.leaneconomics.org
References, charts, quotes.
Edited: 03/19/2012 at 04:45 PM by Lean Moderator
|
|
|
|
|
03/20/2012 04:12 PM
|
|
|
Is Lean's primary purpose to serve customers? Is Lean customer driven? Here's one explanation of where and how Lean fits into a company. There are other interpretations, obviously.
How an Average Company Operates
First, it performs a yearly analysis of the company
1. Conduct a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) analysis, and a postmortem on last year's analysis.
2. Determines company's current competitive position and growth potentials in selected markets.
Second, it selects company survival and performance goals
1. Select specific survival goals such as correcting weaknesses or countering threats, etc.
2. Set specific performance goals such as company growth rate in terms of profitability or improved earnings. These are typical company goals. There are others obviously. May require that survival goals be met first.
Third, assuming growth is their main goal, which it is for many public corporations, companies then decide what they must do to grow.
1. Determine customers' product and services expectations. Sell more existing and more enhanced products and services to current customers.
2. Acquire new customers.
3. Develop new products and services to meet customers' demands.
4. Compete more effectively against products and services offered by competitors by developing sustaining competitive advantages with the company's enhanced products and services and with totally new products and services. Also improve product's price, delivery and quality competitive advantages.
Fourth, company selects strategies for growth that will assure meeting the performance goals it set for itself.
1. Evaluate customers' needs, wants, desires, demands, requirements and expectations by customers or customer groups.
2. Evaluate competitor's products in terms of how well they are satisfying the competitor's customers.
3. Determine what changes and improvements to the company's existing products and services and what totally new products and services will be required to both satisfy customers and to stay ahead of competition. Innovation capabilities and rapid PD&D (Product design and development) capabilities are crucial at this stage.
4. Determine which company and supply chain processes improvements should be made to increase the sales of existing products and to develop sustaining competitive advantages. .
Fifth, implement the strategies utilizing Lean tools and techniques and Six Sigma, where appropriate. Here is where Lean and Six Sigma enter the picture.
1. Set specific objectives for improving the company's product design and development (PD&D) capabilities in terms of features, capabilities, performance, cost, etc.
2. Set time, cost, and quality improvement objectives for improving the efficiencies of pertinent company and supply chain processes that relate to meeting customer needs, wants, desires, demands, requirements and expectations.
3. Set objectives for improving the company's agility and flexibility capabilities.
4. Provide training where necessary on the use of the Lean and Six Sigma tools & techniques to analyze processes variabilities and inefficiencies and to develop and implement solutions.
Initiate and monitor the improvement activities.
Sam Tomas
|
|
|
|
|
03/21/2012 11:12 AM
|
|
|
Nice work Sam
|
|
|
|
|
03/21/2012 11:12 AM
|
|
|
I think Lean is doing fine, and what it is set out to do, make more profit for the organization. It is not about creating a better society.
The people who own Ford continue to make more money, Prices do not go down, they remain at a level of which the market is willing to pay for a certain product, and at a price that the company is willing to sell for, to accept a certain margin of profit.
Ford also may have realized that making cars slightly cheaper actually sells more and gues what makes even more money as it makes all the parts much cheaper because you can purchase more units, so less change overs for manaufacturers etc. etc.
Lean was never intended to improve society only what we do at work. If you think about it work is completely the opposite of our social life. Our social life dictates we have freedom of speach and freedom of choice, our work life is the complete opposite of that if we want to keep our jobs, its a dictatorship with underlying premise that we can influence change if done in the right way.
I like the idea that maybe one day lean thinking could help society but i am not sure how close we are in the general population understanding the power of the concept let alone organizations truly applying lean principles properly. I sure when Ford built there plant, all the specialist were not local people that lived within a twenty mile radius and got picked up by a gas driven bus! They were specialists in the field and probably had to catch flights from all over the world, not very lean that one. !
Organizations can apply lean concepts because they have that dictatorial element if and when required. Society on the other hand cant dictate anythign to anyone, as we are all stakholders and can vote out anyone we choose.
So this leads me to one conclusion lean would work in society if we had a lean obsessed dictatorship! Not about to happen any time soon.
Interesting thought though. Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
>
Community >
Forums
Send to a Friend
