|
|
|
08/05/2011 12:47 PM
|
|
|
I work in a government setting and have witnessed a disconnect with many supervisors and mid-managers after the initial "glow" of kaizen events has passed. Top leadership gets on board and line staff get engaged, but many managers "in the middle" struggle to determine their role.
Many of them are responsible for multiple processes (not just the process going through improvement) and multiple staff (not just the staff on the kaizen team or those involved in that process). Consequently, many have difficulty knowing how to respond to emerging process issues, especially over time. Thoughts and resources would be appreciated.
|
|
|
|
|
08/05/2011 05:14 PM
|
|
|
When you say "struggle with their role" - have you explicitly defined what their role actually is?
What, precisely, do you want them to do?
I would start by reading "Learning to Lead at Toyota" - an HBR article by Steven Spear.
I have some study guides for that article here if you want to use them:
http://theleanthinker.com/marks-lists/resources/
Don't download the "facilitator's guide" until after the team goes through the article and fills in the study guide, otherwise it is a spoiler.
Follow up with "Toyota Kata" by Mike Rother. That gives you a pretty good idea of the culture you are trying to create.
Then, the key point here, is that your "lean leaders" (the people putting together the kaizen events) should focus the vast majority of their time and energy developing the leaders in the area. The event is just an opportunity to do so.
|
|
|
|
|
08/08/2011 04:57 PM
|
|
|
Thank you for sharing both the study guide and facilitators guide. I found them both outstanding and will be using them over the next several months.
|
|
|
|
|
08/08/2011 04:57 PM
|
|
|
Mark,
Your questions, feedback and resources are helpful and appreciated.
Lean was implemented in a project-based fashion in selected parts of our organization and the bulk of the training/selling was focused on leadership. Participants were trained during the actual kaizen events, but mid-managers received minimal training with coaching occurring on an "as-needed" basis. That "middle-gap" has started becoming more evident and problematic as improvements are shifted from a "pilot" phase to a full implementation mode.
We definitely want to be more proactive at engaging all players moving forward. Improvement teams have accomplished a lot, but the adjustment from management-led change to employee-led, leadership-supported change has been more challenging for the folks in the middle than it has been for those at the top.
I will definitely follow-up with more of the recommended reading and appreciate any other input as well.
|
|
|
|
|
08/09/2011 11:40 AM
|
|
|
Hi Clyde
Supervisors and many middle managers, struggle with Lean because they often see empowering people as a threat to their positions. This factor is greatly increased in both government agencies, and in large western style businesses, because of the higher percentage of middle management in them, compared with smaller, and Lean style businesses. Lean as the effect of removing boundaries to communication and action, which has been these people traditional role.
Much like with actual workers, we need to get them on broad by communicating with them, and if the end goal is to lower their numbers, just like with the work force it needs to be done once early on, and then jobs needs to be secured despite improvements. Part of the discussions with them will have to revolve around what their new role will be, and what is expected of them in the future.
In many transformations this middle gets ignored in the rush to make gains, however ignoring them and rushing is one of the leading causes of implementation failure. Additional despite Lean improvement often being bottom up actions, creating the support for those improvements is top down requirement. When you start seeing people in the middle getting lost it clearly means the leadership failed to take the effects on them into account, and thus did not deal with them as yet.
You need to take a couple steps back, first upper management needs to establish the level of middle management required, remember companies such as Toyota have less than half the mid managers and supervisors of traditional operations. It is in part that TPS and Lean are systems that have removed effective barriers and empowered staff at all levels to a higher extent, thus one of the biggest benefits of Lean systems is that it has less overhead costs (fewer supervisors and middle managers salaries, less costs in support those managers and supervisors). Once that level is established it needs to be implemented quickly just like if workers have to be let go, a steady trickle of departs maybe be easier to deal with, but it kills the morale of those that are left, as well those who know they are going to let go tend to actively interfere with improvements.
After the new levels are established upper management and the remaining mid-level staff need to work together and establish the new Lean roles for these mid-level staffers. Once these two issues are dealt with you will find that the remaining mid-level staff will push for Lean implementation after all, those areas that it is not in cause them extra work and effort.
Good Luck
Robert Drescher
ELSE Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
08/15/2011 01:48 PM
|
|
|
Thanks, Robert
Thought most of the cuts to mid-management have been made, job security in our agency is very low and it is hard for managers to define a "safe" role in the lean envrironment. Going from telling to engaging and asking is a difficult journey!
|
|
|
|
|
08/19/2011 05:28 PM
|
|
|
Thanks for starting a thought-provoking thread, Clyde. It made me tune into a particular observation by Jim Womack in his essay, "The Mind of the Lean Manager" (in the new Gemba Walks) - which addresses how to transition from traditional management roles/thinking to lean management.
"Several years ago I started to talk about the need to move beyond lean tools -- including the very powerful concept of value-stream mapping -- to lean management. At the same time we at LEI began to publish a set of volumes on lean management techniques. THESE CONSIST OF STRATEGY DEPLOYMENT TO SET PRIORITIES FROM THE TOP OF THE ORGANIZATION, A3 ANALYSIS TO DEPLOY NEW INITIATIVES AND SOLVE PROBLEMS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ORGANIZATION, AND STANDARDIZED WORK WITH STANDARDIZED MANAGEMENT AND KAIZEN TO CREATE STABILITY AND SUSTAINABILITY AT THE BOTTOM OF THEORGANIZATION WHRE VALUE IS ACTUALLY CREATED.
Clearly there are key roles for everyone in a lean organization - the concept of "engaging everyone" includes conversations and dialogue and active PDCA-ing with, well, everyone. It would seem to me that the extent to which this is happening depends on the extent to which the top of the organization understands how all levels can contribute.
|
|
|
|
|
08/22/2011 03:14 PM
|
|
|
Clyde -
I think you are tracking to root cause when you say your initial engagement with the middle managers was minimal.
I have seen this a lot - project or event based kaizen leaders bypass the middle management and go straight to the shop floor, and make changes. Then, later on, lament that middle management is not engaged, or not supporting the changes.
But no one has actually engaged them.
They are as human as everyone else, there is no switch that is turned when someone gets promoted into middle management. It is just as important - more important actually - to have a really clear view of what you need them to do, and how you need them to do it.
Middle manager's standard work is crucial, and it revolves around setting targets that are consistent with your True North, and then coaching their direct reports to develop their skills to hit those targets. Your initiative can not succeed without that - the alternative is that your kaizen leaders will forever be substituting their time and effort doing these things in lieu of the line leaders.
It is an easy trap to get into.
The way out is to go back around to those leaders, make it clear to them that you shouldn't have left them out of the loop in the first place (a little humility goes a long way toward getting someone engaged), and then work with them directly on the things that they need to learn to do differently.
Toyota Kata is a great starting point. Rother outlines very clearly what kinds of things people at this level need to striving to do. You will see there is a huge difference between a continuous improvement culture (one-piece-flow for improvements) and a "batch improvement" process (event and project driven)
|
|
|
|
|
08/22/2011 03:14 PM
|
|
|
Hi Clyde
It is going to be really tough to get their active buy in, until they feel safe in their jobs, that is basic human nature. If there is any possibility of further cuts the senior level of management need to handle them asap and then take action to ensure the level of job stability. It may result in a tough situation, but that will go away, as Lean efforts start to produce. Continued job bleeding, unfortunately creates the exact wrong environment for Lean to succeed.
The social and cultural environment needs to be established, if Lean is to be anything other than Mean (fake Lean used by some organizations).
Robert Drescher
ELSE Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
01/15/2013 11:16 AM
|
|
|
Excellent advice from everyone! One key point is what Emily mentioned is that everyone must understand how they contribute to the current strategy. You cannot have individual value when you are not able to contribute to what any organization is striving for. Think of an athlete sitting the bench all the time. So we have to develop them so they do know how to contribute and that they have the skills to contribute. Make them feel part of the organization by doing this.
Also the TWI Institute can provide some great programs and training geared for the Supervisor, especially the Job Relations and the Job Methods programs.
Finally, design the management Gemba walk so that the Supervisors boss is walking with them during the daily Gemba walk. Use what I call STP techniques, Support, Teach, and Promote, being a mentor. It is part of what every leader must be doing, building individual value of the people who report to them.
|
|
|
|
>
Community >
Forums
Send to a Friend
