NC State of Business

Organizations often seek opportunities to improve their competitive advantage within their respective industries. Many organizations struggle to accomplish this goal without the use of a systematic approach to improve their organizational performance as it relates to quality products or services. Lean and Six Sigma are proven quality techniques that can help improve organizational performance. Although most organizations want to improve quality and cut costs, the deployment and implementation of continuous improvement methodologies is commonly viewed as a daunting undertaking.

For various reasons, some organizations focus their efforts on implementing Lean concepts, while others focus their efforts towards the implementation of Six Sigma methodologies. Lean is considered to be a systematic approach of eliminating waste in all processes of an organization and is based on the Toyota Production System (TPS). The term Six Sigma was coined by engineers at Motorola in the 1980’s which focuses primarily on reducing variation within a manufacturing or business process. Six Sigma improvements are based on a structured problem-solving methodology which requires project management skills.

Many organizations seem to find the appropriate balance of integrating both Lean and Six Sigma within their organizations to achieve optimal improvement performance. The term Lean Six Sigma represents this collaborative approach. By incorporating the tools and concepts of Lean into the structured DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve and Control) framework of Six Sigma, organizations are reaping the benefits of two very powerful and effective quality improvement methodologies.

"It does not happen all at once. There is no instant pudding." – Dr. W. Edwards Deming.

Lately, I’ve had the opportunity to be in a number of conversations with managers and continuous improvement specialists about “lean transformation”. I’ve also been reacquainting myself with Dr. Deming’s 14 Points for Management. This experience has reinforced my belief that Lean implementation is one of the more misunderstood and underestimated activities a leader can undertake, and probably will only be successful if managers follow the spirit and intent of Deming’s 14 Points.

We need to be very honest with ourselves and face the facts that many don’t want to believe. Yes, organizations need to learn and implement Lean tools, but in order to sustain any gains over the long haul, they must also implement Lean thinking.

You cannot develop a Lean culture overnight. As Dr. Deming said, “there is no instant pudding”. It will take a long time and a lot of hard work. It’s a bit like gardening. You till the land, fertilize, and seed. But you can’t sit back and expect your vegetables to grow on their own. You must water, weed, and be vigilant to potential pests and assorted critters (yes, you squirrels – at least in my yard) looking to wreak havoc. It takes involvement (“going to gemba”) and hands-on leadership.

If your organization is considering embarking on a lean journey, or is somewhere along the path already, you need to do an honest assessment of leadership attitudes and actions. It is not enough for management to provide resources, time, and consultants, and then feel as they have made their contribution to the CI or Lean efforts. They must realize that this is not like a technical project to be managed and implemented by a small group of employees. This will take hard work and hands-on involvement by everybody on the corporate ship, including the captain and senior officers. If management is not committed to a long-term cultural shift with heavy involvement on their part, or if leadership is in a state of flux, then the idea of full-blown lean implementation should be very carefully reconsidered and quite possibly postponed until there is organizational stability and the appropriate mindset. Otherwise, Lean will soon be relegated to the list of previous “programs of the year”, most of which started with a roaring fire, then fizzled out and became another unsustained effort.

What do you think? What has been your experience? Please share!

So often in the past, I have seen companies devote huge amounts of cash, personnel, materials, and other valuable resources on initiatives and strategies without putting forth the upfront work to make sure that all of the effort will yield a bountiful harvest. While I am sure the reasons vary and all appear to be justified, I have always been amazed that so much hinged on so little actual sustenance. I am starting to see a change in this type thinking.

My clients have been much more focused on: what type results they should expect, how they will get the results, what commitment level will be required, and so on. I have always gotten these type questions; but, now I see significantly more focus on the details. This may be one of the few pluses of the current slow economy. Maybe now, leadership is more cost conscience? Maybe it is lack of funds? Whatever it is, folks are asking the right questions.

On your core initiatives, make sure you are asking the right questions. Here are a few that I think need answers:

(1). How and to what extent will this help you? Dig down into the weeds here. Do not just accept that you will benefit. Will this benefit your customers? Your company finances? Your associates?

(2). How much will you have to commit? Time, money, materials, organizational involvement, supplier involvement, customer involvement, etc…

(3). Do you have the expertise to execute the initiative? Can you draw help from other sources in your company? Do you need outside assistance?

(4). Do you have time to make this happen? Most changes do not happen in short periods of time. Avoid running out of gas before you get a successful implementation by making sure you are robust in PDCA.

(5). Will your culture support the initiative in both the short and long term? If not, this will have to be addressed or failure is certainly a likely outcome.

I believe you have to have these and other core questions answered in detail as part of your upfront work. If you do not know where to start or what questions to ask, please call us at IES. We know the questions to ask and can provide real examples and data to support your efforts.

If you’ve been involved in lean implementation efforts in your manufacturing plant, healthcare facility, or office, then chances are good that you have used a technique called Value Stream Mapping (VSM). When you map your value stream, you go to where the process is occurring and identify both value-added and non-value-added activities taking place in the product flow or business process flow. The goal is to identify and eliminate waste in your process. But have you ever thought about how your product development cycle also has waste and non-value-added steps? Applying lean principles to product can development can enable you to reduce the cost and/or time to market for your new products, while increasing the effectiveness of your technical resources. Many of the tools used in lean manufacturing (such as VSM, “going to gemba”, visual controls, and dashboards) also work well in the development world.

If you would like to learn more about applying Lean concepts to product development, consider attending the Quick-Start Lean Product Development workshop in Concord on Friday, October 23. The course instructor, Ron Mascitelli, president of Technology Perspectives, is a recognized leader in the development of advanced product development methods.

We all know what walls are, what they look like, and why they exist. That is generally true for walls we can literally see, but it is not necessarily true for those walls we can not see. Walls we can't see; what does that mean?
Well, let's take a moment to both explain and reflect on this concept. In lean discussions, we often use the term "silos" to indicate the presence of walls or barriers to the elimination of waste and improvement of flow in our processes. The fix to these silos often lies in moving the culture of an organization toward a true lean enviornment.
How do we manage the true and effective removal of these barriers to continuous improvement, generate more flow of improvement ideas, and thereby grow a truly lean culture. The first step, right after getting top management committment is the education of the team. People need to know and understand the what's, the why's, and the how's to Lean Tranformation. The level of true understanding at all levels takes time. The light comes on at different rates for different individuals.
Some of the specifics necessary to break down the barriers are as follows:

* Teach and attain a clear understanding of the concept of true value add for the customer at all levels of the organization.
* Make sure everyone understands the true "goal", and that winning teams perform as a cooridinated unit, not as individuals.
* Speak with data, and make the primary focus on improving the process, not on blaming people.
* As managers, understand that coaching and team building is a critical need and a priority of their position. Do not be afraid or reluctant to change the team as required.
* "Listen" to both your associates and your customer. Emphasize the concept of internal as well as external customers.
* Pursue improvement continuously, never get totally satisfied or confortable with the current state.
* Communicate results to all levels, and make sure performance metrics are fair, understandable, pertinent to the goal, and tie to true bottomline performance.

In conclusion, in our world today with businesses that are as diverse as they could possibily be, there is a common thread that runs thru most. They all have "WALLS", which they themselves often recognize. The challenge for all is really how to bring these barriers to Continuous Improvement down. The success of the Transformation is dependent on the results of that effort.