Don't forget to sign up for my Gotta Go Lean Blog.

Via RSS

Learn about

the author

of this

Lean Blog,

Jeff Hajek

Using Video to Support the Process Walk

I was talking to a consulting client the other day, and mentioned that it would be helpful to use a video camera to record a secondary process that would affect a kaizen team’s decisions. This other location is quite a long ways away, so it would chew up a lot of time in the car that could be better spent making improvements. The conversation gave me an idea for a blog article on the use of a video camera to support a process walk.

A video of the process is a good option when there are time restrictions, such as in the instance mentioned above, or for a few other reasons.

1. The process is a long one. Watching several cycles can be done more quickly with a fast-forward button.
2. There isn’t a lot of room. Many people can watch a projector screen, but may not be able to crowd around an operator.
3. When the process is inconvenient. If it takes too much time to review a process, and it is not central to the kaizen, a video review is a good alternative.
4. To get a second opinion. Not every kaizen will be led by an expert. When a team needs a little assistance, a quick review by an expert, whether in-house or a consultant (I happen to know of a good one…), can make a big difference to a team.
5. To catch problems. It is far easier to scan through a video for abnormal conditions than to sit in an area watching for days on end.

Now just a few words of warning on the use of video during the process walk.

1. Don’t use video instead of standing and watching a process. The video camera doesn’t replace your own eyes. You need to spend time at gemba watching the process first hand. Cameras don’t provide the insight you can get from turning your head to watch the flow.
2. Get permission. Some people are camera shy, and others won’t trust you. Negotiate with the people you are watching, and follow up on the concessions you make (i.e. destroying the video at the end of the week, limiting who watches it, etc.) If someone has a problem being recorded, follow someone else. I’ve never been refused by everyone on a whole team.
3. Get a good vantage point. Make sure to mount the camera where it can capture what you need it to. I’ve sent a camera up on an aerial work platform (scissor lift) to capture a big process, and I’ve used them for close-ups of detail work.
4. Protect your camera. Manufacturing facilities are hard on cameras. Use common sense on how you keep your camera safe.
5. Record a computer screen. You’d be surprised how many hidden processes are in office work. Capturing screen activity is a good way to highlight them. You can spend a lot of money on software to record a screen, or you can point a camera at it. It won’t be high quality, but the flicker is tolerable while you watch what is happening. Generally, the over-the-shoulder angle is the best. Again-be careful with your camera.
6. Ask for narration. An operator or administrator can talk to the team through the camera. Let them know that they can essentially place notes on the process simply by talking. Make sure that they know you may be fast-forwarding through parts, so there’s no guarantee you’ll hear everything.

I am always looking for new tricks and tips. Do you have any other examples of how you’ve used technology creatively to improve your process walk?

Tags: linkedin

Leading Change: What’s Good for the Goose ISN’T Good for the Gander

I was watching Jon Stewart, where I get all my fake news from, and he had an interesting guest, Atul Gawande, the author of The Checklist Manifesto: How to Get Things Right.

Now, if you’ve spent time looking at my site, you’ll know that I am a fan of checklists. (I’ve even got a free 8-page downloadable PDF on the subject.) Of course, building a process so you don’t need a document to support it is the best option, (i.e. with poka yokes), but checklists are an effective tool.

Mr. Gawande’s book dives into the use of checklists in the medical field. It should come as no surprise to people familiar with the tool that it has proven effective at saving thousands of lives. Basically, the list makes sure that some of the common causes of problems are addressed prior to the start of a procedure.

Despite the success of the checklist, its adoption rate has been abysmal. And this is for a simple, 2-minute checklist that has been proven to save lives. What really surprised me, though, was an interesting statistic. The developers of the checklist did a study, and after 3-months, 80% of the doctors using the checklist liked it. The researchers asked a single follow-up question to the ones who didn’t.

If you were having an operation, would you want your doctor using the checklist? 93% said yes.

What that means is that the physicians who don’t like the list still see the value in it-they just don’t want to use it. So, imagine the challenge of leading change for a team where the stakes are not life and death. If nearly a fifth of well-trained physicians who see the value of doing an extra two minutes of work to save lives refuse to do it, what chance do you think you have of leading change on an assembly line or in a back office, or in a engineering group?

When leading change, Lean managers often fall into the trap of trying to prove the worth of the new method or philosophy, and forget that there are people involved-people with their own ideas of what makes them satisfied in their jobs. During the interview, the author speculated that part of the problem with doctors not wanting to follow the list was that they considered it below their skills. Many went through ten years of training, so they devalue their education and expertise by needing a simple tool like a checklist. Proving the value of the list does nothing to address their real reason for the resistance.

Remember, leading change is part sales. You are selling the new methods. You have to know your customer to close the deal. If you have any tips on how to sell Lean to a resistant team, I’d appreciate you sharing them with my readers. Please add them to the comments section.

By the way, I haven’t yet read this book, but I am adding it to my already lengthy reading list. I’ll let you know when I finish it.

UPDATE: 2/8/10 Mark Graban wrote about this same spot on his LeanBlog.org.

Tags: linkedin

8 Reasons People Resist Change

Improvement, by definition, requires altering behaviors. And since most people show a reluctance to change, it follows that improvement efforts can be an uphill battle.

Let’s start by addressing 8 of the major reasons why people resist change.

1. Fear. By far the biggest reason for resistance to change, fear creates paralysis. People get worried that the new way won’t work, that they will not do well following the modified process, or that it will mean having to change to another job within the company. Worst of all, they fear layoffs.
2. Comfort. When people have it good, they are reluctant to give that up. This is most common when an improvement effort in one area requires additional work in another area. For example, let’s assume area ‘A’ can save 10 minutes by moving 5 minutes of work to area ‘B’. The employees in area ‘B’ are likely to be less than thrilled by the change, especially if things were humming along smoothly for them.
3. Not perceiving a need. When things are going well, there is often little thought of the challenge or threat down the road. It is hard to rally the troops when there is no crisis.
4. No faith in the process. As powerful as Lean is, if employees have had a bad experience with it, or have no background in it, they will be unlikely to throw their support behind it.
5. Lack of knowledge. People don’t want to feel helpless. If they think that the change will make them a novice again, they won’t want to move in that direction.
6. Lack of trust. Team members have to trust their guides when trying something new. If they don’t have that bond with their leaders, they won’t want to follow their managers forward.
7. Heavy-handedness by leaders. Making changes is difficult. When teams are moving cautiously, leaders can make matters worse by pushing too hard. People have to be led into change, not forced into it.
8. Personal preference. Some people have a personal style that makes it hard for them to accept change. This is basically the ‘other’ category of resistance. Some people just like things the way they are.

So given that there is a lot of variety in why people resist change, it follows that there are many things that leaders must do to prepare their teams for transition.

The first is that leaders should know the people working for them. That means frequently visiting work areas to talk to their employees one-on-one. It is surprising how often key leaders don’t spend time speaking with people beyond their direct reports.

When leaders know how their teams think, they can customize a change management plan that matches the culture of the organization. There are a few universal steps, though, that leaders should always take.

1. Communicate. This means clearly spelling out the need for change, and it means explaining where the organization is going. A word of caution to leaders: Be direct and honest. Not every decision is going to benefit employees as much as other stakeholders. Employees are smart and will see through efforts to repackage unpopular decisions in a favorable light.
2. Train. Give employees the tools to feel comfortable with change. Teams have to be confident that they have the necessary skills as a group to handle any challenges that come up.
3. Demonstrate success. Teams won’t want to make wholesale changes without proof. They need to see some examples of success early on in the transition before they will fully support a new method.
4. Involve teams in decision making. Give teams a voice. When they are heard, they will be more likely to get on board. There is a pitfall here, though, if employees start to see this as mere lip service. Leaders have to use employee suggestions at least some of the time. More of the time is even better.
5. Communicate more. Leaders should find out how the change is going, but more importantly, they should be looking for the hidden, unmet needs of their teams. Often, the stated reasons for resistance to change are not the real ones.

If those steps above don’t work, there is some soul searching ahead. As a last resort, people and companies have to decide if they are a good match for each other. No matter how good a job is, or how talented an individual is, if the cultural match is missing, it is going to be a long bumpy ride.   

Tags: linkedin

Poka Yoke? Or Poka Yuck…

I just got back from doing some Lean training last week. I frequently return with a few pictures from my travels that are at least a little bit interesting. I apologize for the picture quality. Apparently, when the lens of your camera gets grimy, the pictures get worse.

The first is of my rental car keys. I am sure there is a reason for this, but for the life of me, I can’t figure out what it is. They gave me two keys, even though I was the only driver on the contract. What’s more, they were on a crimped key ring, so I could not pull them apart. That way, if I lost them, I’d be sure to lose both keys. Instead of paying for one, I’d have to pay for two. Not quite a poka yoke (mistake proofing device). More of a poka yuck.

A Poka Yuck Guarantees a Mistake

The second image is of the route to the rental car counter from the terminal. It was very clear where I had to go. Got me there without a hitch. Great visual controls.

Hope you all have a great week!

By the way–I just added several new, free Lean forms to my site. Hope you can find a good use for them.

Tags: linkedin

Correlation or Causation? Interceptions and the Playoffs.

SI.com recently ran an article about the ‘interception ladder’. It looked back at playoff games since 1970, and found an interesting statistic. With each interception a team throws (accidentally throwing to the guys in the wrong jersey) the chance that the team won dropped.

Correlation or Causation? Interceptions and the Playoffs

Now, this is a classic case of confusing correlation with causation. If this data truly was a cause and effect relationship, meaning interceptions caused losses, fixing the problem would be simple, and I could one of the best NFL coaches of all time. In fact, you’d never even need to practice for that gameplan.

If you never threw the ball, you could win nearly four out of five times.

Now, anyone who knows much about football will tell you that you can’t win games like that. What that means is that the interception stat is correlated to winning, but may not necessarily cause winning. For example, a better team will often force the other team into mistakes-the interceptions are the effect of the disparity in skill. Or a team that is losing will make riskier throws to try to score quickly.

The Lean lesson is to read into the data and look for the real cause and effect relationships. Remember: Correlation doesn’t necessarily mean causation.

Request from readers: I’m going to put together a football and Lean page. I’ve used it as a backdrop for making Lean points a few times. I’ve noticed a few other Lean bloggers doing the same recently, such as Mark Graban’s post on value-added time in a football game. If you know of any other Lean posts with (American) football as the backdrop, please let me know in the comments section below. Thanks!

Tags: linkedin