Standardized Worrying

Permalink   |   Post a Comment   |  

          Years ago when Dan Jones and I first visited Toyota in Japan, we
were struck by something that seemed out of keeping with their continuing
success.  They seemed to worry all the time.  We met managers who had just
accomplished remarkable feats of muda removal during kaizen events and yet
they couldn't seem to just relax and enjoy it.  Instead they were busy
analyzing what they had just done and trying to think of ways it could be
even better. Dan and I began to say to ourselves, "Even smiling is muda at

          By contrast, kaizen events in other firms we have visited over the
years have often been marked by celebrations and self-congratulation, no
matter how much was really accomplished or how modest the improvement goal.

          Recently, while reading's Jeff Liker's excellent new book "The
Toyota Way", I came across the section on "hansei" or reflection, which for
Toyota is the third step in their PDCA process for every improvement.  It
helped me put in words what I've been feeling for years about the difference
between kaizen at Toyota and at most other firms.

          Toyota's idea is simply that every time we analyze a situation (the "P" for
"plan" in PDCA) and then try a new way (the "D" for "do"), it's time to
reflect very carefully (hansei) on what we have just done.  (This, of
course, is the "C" for "check".)  In most companies the fact that the new
performance of a system met expectations is the end of the discussion.  And
if it didn't meet expectations, this is only to be expected with some
experiments.  (Remember that controlled experimentation using the scientific
method is what kaizen really is.)

          But for Toyota it seems to be very different.  In their view, if the
performance met expectations, surely they could have done even better.  The
performance objective was too modest.  And if the performance did not meet
expectations, something was wrong with the original plan and it is important
to understand what and why.  Indeed, this is yet another use for the "five
whys", but this time applied to the improvement process itself.

         But note that in either case there is no room for celebrating what has been
achieved even if the results are substantial or for celebrating the conduct
of a noble experiment even if it failed.  The objective must be to either
find out why it didn't work or why it didn't work even better.  In short,
with hansei Toyota has a formula for standardized worrying!

        Surely this seems harsh.  Can't these guys just have some fun?  But the
sobering reality of life, at least for me, is that folks who worry every day
about every thing are very likely to have little to worry about in the long
run.  By contrast, those who grade their kaizen performance on how hard they
tried -- whatever the results -- are likely to be very happy in the short
term but soon may be looking for work.

        So please give some thought to how you approach kaizen.  If no improvement
in performance is ever good enough and if every kaizen failure undergoes
meticulous analysis to understand exactly why it didn't work, you too will
become a standardized worrier.  And, very likely, you will become a leader
in a continuously successful enterprise.

Best regards,

Jim Womack
President and Founder
Lean Enterprise Institute
0 Comments | Post a Comment
Other Jim Womack Related Content



  • Join the Conversation and Stop the Rework
    In the spring of 1997, as I was starting the nonprofit Lean Enterprise Institute, I visited a company that I hoped would be a founding sponsor. I explained to the senior leadership that a lean enterprise was far more than a brilliant production organization, as had they assumed. It was also a brilliant product development organization including a brilliant production process design team.
  • The Gift of Yokoten
    In this article originally published in Planet Lean, after a visit to Goshen, Indiana, Jim Womack shared thoughts on the gift of lean thinking and the obligation that individuals learning this way of thinking feel about sharing what they've learned with others.
  • The Escalator of Issues
    A daily management system with daily performance metrics gives caregivers the sense that managers are really paying attention, that problems really are being addressed, and that over time this will mean stability and a lower level of stress for all staff, says Jim Womack.