Why The Obsession With Speed?

Tweet

NOTE:  This blog is moving!  Please read future posts at http://leadingtransformation.wordpress.com 

Many years ago, I remember W. Edwards Deming questioning the obsession businesses had with speed.  I thought it was strange coming from the man who worked so closely with Toyota - the company that invented lean.  Wasn’t one of the main objectives of the Toyota Production System to reduce cycle times and make processes run faster?

I’ve thought about Deming’s question for many years and, after working with a variety of production and improvement systems, I finally came to the conclusion that Deming may have been referring to the idea that rhythm between processes is more critical than the speed of individual processes.

Rhythm vs. Speed

Companies put a lot of effort and focus on the speed and efficiency of processes.  People are measured and rewarded on their ability to speed up the processes with which they work.  As a result of this focus, we often end up with a completely unsynchronized production or service system, thereby increasing inventory and costs, and in most cases, slowing down the company, as a whole.

I have seen many instances where people pushed as much output as possible to the next step in the process in order to meet goals – even when the next step was not ready or able to handle the extra work.  As a result, teamwork breaks down, finger-pointing increases, WIP inventory increases, and quality decreases. A common response to the buildup of WIP in the system includes measures to attack the symptoms (e.g., the increased inventory), rather than the causes (lack of synchronization and poorly focused goals).

There is an optimal speed at which a process should operate in order to meet objectives (i.e., its takt time).  Achieving and sustaining takt time requires that every step in the process operate in rhythm with each other.  Any individual step in the process that produces in excess of takt time has a negative effect on the overall system, which is often as destructive as producing too slowly.  Whether the operation provides a product or service, the key is synchronization at the optimal pace.  Even ignoring the internal cost and cultural problems associated with a lack of synchronization, one has to question the practice of producing faster than customers want.

Although I'll never know, it could be that Deming was referring to the idea that synchronization of processes – and meeting takt time – is far better than increasing the speed of any individual process.  He may have been trying to teach the concept that, without a focus on rhythm, speed means nothing.

Lean: It's More than Kaizen

Tweet

NOTE:  This blog is moving!  Please read future posts at http://leadingtransformation.wordpress.com

I have noticed recently that there is a common misconception about the true meaning of lean.  Even among some improvement consultants, what is often referred to as lean is really nothing more than kaizen.  This is unfortunate because many organizations are missing out on the benefits associated with a true lean deployment.

Lean = Kaizen Plus Production Control

Too often, people learn about value stream mapping or the categories of waste and think they understand lean.  Although true that lean includes identifying and reducing waste, this type of activity is only one component of lean.  Changes to improve a process or system – whether through value stream mapping to reduce waste or an independent project to address a quality issue, is kaizen.

What many people do not seem to understand is that a focus on production control is what differentiates lean from a kaizen or 6-sigma process.  Without an emphasis on production control, companies miss an important component to align improvement efforts with business objectives and, more importantly, transform the organization and gain buy-in at all levels.  In the most basic sense, lean is about production control and kaizen is one way to help gain control over the production process.

Aligning Improvement With Business Results

The purpose of a business is to continually improve the value it provides its customers.  A company’s processes are critical to achieving this purpose.  Whether providing a product, service, or both, there is an optimal pace at which processes need to operate in order to meet objectives and, therefore, the needs of customers.  Lean thinking requires clearly understanding this pace (referred to as takt time) and focusing efforts on eliminating or reducing the effects of anything that interferes with synchronizing the overall system to operate at this pace.

Whenever I visit an operation that claims to be lean (a problem in itself because an operation is never truly lean), I ask questions about takt time.  All to often, I get blank looks or comments that takt time does not apply because the company does not have manufacturing operations or that they produce a highly customized product.  By ignoring takt time, however, these companies are focusing their efforts on general process improvement (e.g., 6-sigma or kaizen) rather than lean.  The problem with deploying a kaizen – rather than a lean – approach is that it becomes more difficult to directly tie improvement to business results, making it tougher to gain (and sustain) buy-in throughout the organization.

Takt Time:  Not Limited to Manufacturing

As written in a previous post, takt time can be calculated for virtually any process.  Whether the process produces invoices, maintenance services, gas wells, or sandwiches, there is an optimal pace at which it must operate to meet objectives.  Understanding and striving to consistently operate at this pace is a vital part of running the business. Note:  it should be inherently obvious that success also requires that the process must provide - and continually improve - its product or service at a level of quality that customers expect.

Although a kaizen or 6-sigma process is commendable (and a valuable component of lean thinking), a company that stops there is missing out on a critical improvement opportunity.  Focusing on takt time makes the connection between improvement and business objectives much clearer.  As a result, it becomes much easier to get people throughout the company to buy into the process.  In fact, once people understand – and are held accountable for – takt time, they will begin to look for ways to reduce the waste that interferes with the throughput of their process.  Improvement efforts become seen as part of, rather than interfering with, meeting objectives.  And when this happens, transformation can truly begin to take place.

Determining Takt Time

Takt time can be determined for virtually any type of process.  Examples include:

• Number of invoices processed within a given timeframe to keep up with demand;
• Number of gas wells to be drilled over a period of time to meet production objectives;
• Number of bags handled at an airport to keep airplanes and passengers moving;
• The pace of filling prescriptions at a hospital to keep staff from waiting, and assuring patients don’t experience medication delays;
• Making coffee and specialty drinks in order to meet customer preferences while keeping waiting lines relatively short.

With this in mind, a basic process for implementing lean should include:

1. Clarifying business objectives (including clearly understanding the customer’s needs);
2. Determining the optimal pace (takt time) for critical (and eventually, all) processes to meet objectives;
3. Implementing visual measures for throughput (to enable process leaders to understand how well they are keeping up with takt time);
4. Standardizing processes and systems (i.e., the value stream);
5. Continually identifying those things that are preventing the value stream from meeting takt time (which can involve shortening or reducing variation in cycle times).

Improving processes in order to meet takt time is where kaizen or 6-sigma enters the picture.  These approaches provide a framework for improving the throughput of processes in order to meet objectives.  Without creating energy around takt time, however, a 6-sigma implementation can easily lose focus and miss an opportunity to gain full buy-in of the improvement process by leaders.

Introducing takt time gives perspective to people to help them better understand why the organization is pursuing lean.  It provides the business context that is so critical for successful transformation and commitment, and helps reduce debate regarding the importance of spending time on improvement projects.

Gaining Involvement in Improvement Activities

Tweet

NOTE:  This blog is moving!  Please read future posts at http://leadingtransformation.wordpress.com

One of the most common frustrations expressed by those involved in a 6-sigma journey is the inability to get others to participate in improvement activities.  In some cases, energy levels may be high during initial projects only to have a production focus return fairly quickly.  Often there is less accountability for process improvement than meeting production targets, and it becomes a battle to get managers to commit time and resources to improvement projects.

The Wrong Focus

A common reason for a lack of managerial engagement in improvement activities stems from the lack of a natural alignment between improvement objectives and a manager’s normal  work – i.e., meeting production targets (production referring to any type of output for which a team is responsible).  As long as improvement objectives are considered separate from production objectives, there will always be tension between the two; and when this happens, production will virtually always win.

Production is how a company makes its money, and managers are typically measured on their ability to produce.  No matter how logical it may seem so some that focusing on improvement will make meeting production targets easier, others will see it as a distraction and interference to meeting production objectives.

By design, a 6-sigma process is project focused, where people identify improvement opportunities, develop objectives, and form teams to address the issues.  This approach can make the job of creating and sustaining alignment between improvement and production a challenge.

Although some companies have been successful implementing and sustaining project-focused improvement, many have not.  In my experience, the life of a typical 6-sigma deployment is 6 months to one year.  Beyond the initial success, a lot of time and energy is required to keep the process going against the inertia of a production focus.

A Better Approach

A much better way to create a strong and natural alignment between improvement and production is to focus the effort on lean rather than 6-sigma.  Companies that ignore lean and attempt to implement an isolated 6-sigma process are missing out on a perfect opportunity to connect and closely align production control and the improvement process.  With lean, it is takt time that makes the need for continual improvement clear and logical.

Takt time, which can be calculated for virtually any process in any industry, defines the pace at which a process needs to operate in order to meet objectives.  Once the output objectives and resource constraints are understood, the takt time of the process can be calculated with little effort.

Understanding the takt time for a process makes it clear that, in order to meet production targets effectively, improvement efforts must occur.  This approach places the responsibility for initiating improvement projects with the supervisor of a process since he or she is the one accountable for consistently meeting production - or takt time - targets.  In effect, takt time creates pull from those directly involved in the operation.

The PDCA diagram below identifies a basic approach for implementing and sustaining improvement-based on lean thinking.  Once business objectives are understood and processes are standardized, process leaders become responsible for meeting production objectives on a continual basis.  Unless the person responsible for leading a particular process drives improvement within his or her area of responsibility, the odds of meeting takt time consistently become severely hampered.  Continually comparing throughput to takt time naturally drives the identification of improvement projects that enables objectives to be met.

The Improvement Process

To be successful in a lean thinking environment, very little pressure is placed on people for the current performance of the process(es) they lead.  There is significant pressure, however, on leaders to demonstrate how they are reacting to current performance, and the steps they are taking to drive improvement.

Every leader must be held accountable for assuring that the overall system (i.e., production line, location, business unit, etc.) meets its takt time.  Otherwise, improvement efforts may consist of pushing work or inventory to a downstream process, and when this occurs, there is little chance for the organization to meet its objectives.