Here you will find my latest thoughts on Lean leadership and Lean management.
The posts answer questions from Lean practitioners, as well as my own desire to continue to learn and improve my understanding of Lean. I am certain they will help you improve your understanding and daily practice of Lean management.
I post a new article twice a month, so check back here often. Sign up to receive my Lean Leadership News via e-mail.
15 February 2012
Relative Success, Absolute Failure
Like me, I am sure you have heard or experienced examples of organizations claiming success with Lean management. However, if get into the details, you find out what is really going on, and it goes something like this: Continuous improvement becomes bureaucratized and people play games to give the appearance of success. While there are many improvements, they are usually isolated from one another and flow is never achieved. And, senior management is clueless about or indifferent to the "Respect for People" principle.
Such organizations have accomplished nothing special. They have done what legions of others have done before them: Fake Lean. In relative terms, Lean has been a big success, and that is what outsiders typically see. But when viewed in absolute terms, we see that their efforts have largely failed. And we know why; management did not lead, and people fear Lean. Here are ten comments from people whose organizations are highly regarded by knowledgeable outside observers for their Lean success (edited for clarity and brevity; italics added):
1) "When we have a kaizen, we don't focus on the activity, but rather the outcome. The improvements being made are outcome oriented because everyone is focused on reaching the goals of the organization. We do kaizen is to improve the metrics. After a kaizen, managers never fully allow the changes made to take effect."
2) "In our firm, kaizen is an event. We have remote islands of improvement. The company tends to promote itself, not the customer and thinks kaizens should be results oriented, not process oriented. The same is true of quality. There is a tendency for profit first, not quality first. Our balanced scorecards tend to be balanced towards profits, not the customer. There is also a tendency to replace suppliers rather than do kaizens to help them improve things. Where there are large issues there is a tendency to seek home runs rather than incremental improvement."
3) "My company largely ignores the respect for people principle. There are strained relations between employees and managers. There is a mentality where managers always win and employees lose. Managers feel that employees are there to serve them. Strategy deployment is driven by the top with no involvement from lower levels. It's all about the metrics. This atmosphere causes people to live down to expectations. Managers do not have confidence in employees. One of the greatest areas of disrespect is towards suppliers. They are asked to do great things, yet we cannot do these things ourselves. They insist on top performance when the things they designed are very difficult to produce. These behaviors create confusion, strife, defensiveness, and poor communication, making relationships ineffective. There is a lack of mutual respect."
4) "My senior managers have little comprehension of what kaizen is and how to apply it. Their knowledge is mostly theoretical and most have never actually been involved in kaizen. Kazien is conducted much like a focused improvement group which are assembled only when an issue arises. Kaizen is reactionary to address known problems, not used to prevent problems. It appears that managers have picked what they deem to be the most important aspects of Lean and forgotten the rest of the system."
5) "The respect for people principle is not understood at my company. The greatest failure of the principle comes in the form of layoffs and outsourcing. Once a kaizened process achieves a certain level of quality and reliability, it becomes a candidate for outsourcing. The fact that management does not have respect for people severely stifles the continuous improvement processes. CI is seen as a major negative force at work. I don't believe that upper level management is fully committed to it and/or they don't really understand it."
6) "Kaizen events happen sporadically to address larger areas of concern. They are not used as part of a continuous improvement process. We were forced to participate in X number of kaizens to obtain certifications. They only use the tools selectively. The politics at work are a strong force. One thing is for sure, they don't really buy into the whole Lean philosophy, only the parts they want to."
7) "Most of the decision-making is centered on quarterly financial results which by its nature will undercut any momentum towards behaviors that promote trustworthy relationships between managers and employees. Lean tools/processes have been force-fit into the traditional management framework. It is more of a burden than a new way of managing to free-up employee creativity."
8) "It is the understanding of senior management that kaizen is to be delegated down to their subordinates. This is quite obvious because I have been involved in many kaizens and never have I witnessed a senior manager become involved."
9) "Where I work, respect for people is an afterthought at best. Management often looks at workers like numbers. If they could find a way to completely outsource the work, they would."
10) "I never hear about them [top managers] doing anything to improve their processes. I guess when you get to the top you don't have to work as hard to try and improve because you already reached the ceiling."
Repeat: These organizations are highly regarded by knowledgeable outside observers for their Lean success.
This is what success typically looks like in relative terms – particularly in organizations that are strongly controlled by finance. The colorful charts that track continuous improvement, cost savings, and levels of Lean achievement in these organizations prove success and give the appearance to outsiders of dedicated and skilled work. Yet holding these organizations up as examples of success teaches that it is acceptable for senior managers to misunderstand Lean and practice it the wrong way.
This comment exemplifies incorrect understanding and practice of Lean management: "My company has a database for all of the projects, and it actually lets you declare how many jobs could be eliminated." Managers who inadvertently or purposefully ignore the "Respect for People" principle are saying to employees: "We don't actually want you to think, try new things, or experiment. We really don't care about teamwork, we don't care about flow, and we certainly don't care about you."
I do not see dedicated and skilled work here. What I see is casual and sloppy work, leading to absolute failure. Senior managers have made numerous beginners errors that immediately resulted in the creation of Fake Lean. Worse yet, they never even try to correct their beginner's errors. That is severely at odds with most executives' ego and desire for world-class performance. Errors left uncorrected doom one mediocrity. That is what happens when you think you are done learning.
To be educated means to be well-read. Then comes daily practice, to learn.
