I recently solicited the opinions of lean implementers regarding the progress they have made and the importance of what I felt were key factors when implementing lean culture or management. The individuals who responded were either those who read my own blog, those who participate on the NWLean Yahoo discussion forum, or members of the Lean/Six Sigma LinkedIn forum. It is safe to say that all of these individuals are engaged in the process of implementing lean, either as an internal change agent or an external consultant. A total of 82 individuals completed the survey.
To download the complete report please go to my “Papers, Etc.” page and click on the report to download a PDF file that presents my analysis of the data. You can also download the complete data set if you like.
How can you use this data? All of those who implement lean practices are in the business of influencing, convincing or changing the behavior of both managers and employees. I think this data can be helpful in making the case for changes in behavior and practices that are essential to lean implementation.
Who are the participants in the survey? 63% work in the manufacture of “things”; while 9.3% are in chemical or liquid manufacturing. Only 2 were in healthcare and only one was in sales or marketing. 25% were in service organizations.
All surveys simply report the perceptions of those taking the survey, rather than some absolute measure. The pursuit of “lean” is often described as a journey. I felt it was worthwhile to ask where these practitioners perceived their organizations to be on their journey. It turns out that they have a fairly humble view of their progress. About sixty percent felt that they were no more than 25% of the way on that journey.
One of my own biases is to view the lean journey as containing two parallel tracks: the technical track of modifying factory layout, inventory processes, and other technical aspects of the work; and, the social track – all of the issues around the engagement, motivation and management of people. I asked the participants whether they felt they had made more progress on the technical or social aspects of lean implementation. Thirty one percent reported that they “have made little progress on either.” Twenty seven percent said they had made significant progress on the technical side, but little progress on the culture, while only 12.5% felt that the reverse was true. Almost thirty percent felt that they had made equal progress on both the technical and social sides of lean.
I then asked which would be most important in the coming year or two. Only 7.3% felt that progress on the technical side would be most important. 45% felt that progress on the social side would be most important and 50% said they would be equally important. (Note: I do realize that those percentages don’t exactly add up! But that is the way SurveyMonkey reported them.)
Which Factors Are Most Important?
Factor Importance Execution
Creating a sense of purpose (5) 89 53.4
Managers have instilled a spirit of teamwork (53) 84.4 50
Promoting strong values (7) 83.8 54
Leaders are effective at engaging team members (13) 83.5 49.4
Leaders have created employee empowerment (15) 83.5 47.2
High trust between employees and managers (17) 83.2 44.8
Leaders act with urgency (9) 82.7 52.2
Managers focus on improving the process (31) 80.6 47.2
Which Factors Are Most Deficient in Execution?
Now let’s look at the items that got the lowest scores for how well they were executed or performed in the organization. Again, this is entirely arbitrary, but we will take scores below 45 as a cutoff.
Factor Execution Importance
Managers have defined leader standard work (63) 30.8 67.9
Most manager engage in disciplined problem solving (11) 36.6 72.6
Managers are able to follow a disciplined PS model (61) 38.3 76.6
Every employee is a member of a team (57) 39.9 75.6
Managers can show a visual map of their processes (35) 40 66.6
Managers are competent at motivating employees (21) 41.8 79.7
Feedback from customers to employees (25) 43.4 70.4
Managers are competent at facilitating meetings (59) 43.5 73.7
Each team has defined their customers (27) 44.1 71.6
There is high trust between employees and managers (17) 44.8 83.2
Managers are good at motivating employees (47) 44.9 77.8
One of the more interesting set of factors, in my opinion were the comparison between performance and importance for the two items (19) “Managers are highly competent in the technical work for which they are responsible;” and (21) “Managers are well trained and competent at motivating and developing employees.”
Click on the following images for a better view.
There is a lot more data and analysis in the full report that you will find on the “Papers” page. You are welcome to download this and you may use the data as you wish, and do your own analysis.
For myself, it reinforces the need for managers to “be the change” by practicing the methods of lean culture personally. It also points to serious training needs in regard to problem solving and motivating employees. One of the greatest concerns in this data is the poor rating of trust between managers and employees. However, this may be explained by the other data. If managers are not practicing what they preach, this alone will lead to low trust.
I welcome any different interpretations or suggestions for future surveys of lean practitioners.
I just read the report summary of your survey and noted where you wrote that surveys are based on perception. That being the case, it is still interesting to see that many (>93% ?) think that social progress will play a large part in their lean effort. In the book “Secrets of Industry” by Lewis Ord (1944), the author cites an example where two very similar plants (nothing is identical) exchanged plant managers and a significant change in output (>10%) was observed. He states that, everything else remaining the same, there can be up to a 20% change in output based only on leadership. He goes on to say that a large factor in that leadership is knowing the employees, gaining their trust, and motivating them. This book was written by a Britain, who worked extensively in USA & Canada and who compares US & British manufacturing. It reads like a Lean primer.
Don, I have no doubt that that is true. There have been numerous studies relating leadership behavior to productivity and quality of plant performance.
But, it is really nothing new, is it? Children of parents who read more books do better in school and read more books. Children of parents who drink, smoke and swear are more likely to grow up drinking, smoking and swearing. It’s pretty simple. And, it is no different in the social family of organizations. When leaders demonstrate teamwork they tend to promote teamwork below. When leaders demonstrate improvement and study of their own processes, it is more likely that this same will occur below them. This is what leadership is about.
Sorry to be so cynical, but this reminds me of so many attempts by management to get more productivity out of the people that actually do the work. I look at it as “The Catchphrase Du Jour.”
Corporate management is seduced by glossy flyers or eye-catching websites with graphs (must have graphs!) without having a clue what the whole thing is all about, or the willingness to spend the time and effort to find out. It all reminds me of a line in Phil Crosby’s “Quality is Free” where after one of his management seminars someone asked: “now how do I get the workers to implement this?” Thereby of course, missing the whole point of the seminar.
I have seen countless ideas like these, come and fade: Starting with W. E. Deming’s idea of complete and total workers’ empowerment. Then came the idea of Concurrent Engineering and Product Teams: The single most misused and misapplied concept in America. All these only show corporate management’s failure to grasp the basic concept behind these ideas.
I do have some idea as to the root cause of this failure: Corporate management’s (forced?) preoccupation with the current quarter’s bottom line, driven by Wall Street’s obsession with quarterly reports. This pretty much keeps management from taking a long term view, like the Japanese dynamic five and ten-year plans. How many American companies have one of those?
So what we wind up with is “The Catchphrase Du Jour” being forced down the throat of the employees, nothing will change until management’s attitudes change and the (mostly classical military) hierarchical management structure changes.
Hans, you are right. That is cynical.
One small correction. Management fads, theories, methods did not begin with Dr. Deming. There were many before we heard of Dr. Deming.
Let me offer a couple other ways to look at it. Progress, in any field, is not a straight line. It is not linear. I can tell you this, having begun my consulting work in the earlier 1970’s and working in Southern textile mills, including the J.P Stevens Rocky Mt., NC plant where the Norma Rae movie story took place, we have made huge progress over the past forty years. The world of management today is entirely different than it was forty years ago. Teamwork and engaging people at every level is now normal. The degree to which companies are “customer focused” has progressed enormously. The treatment of women and minorities has moved light years ahead of where we were in the past.
Management gurus and book, like those of Blanchard, Covey, Peters, and all the quality gurus like Dr. Deming, have instilled a different set of norms.
And, if you don’t think that “lean” or the Toyota Production System is real than you don’t understand why every parking lot in America now contains more Hondas and Toyotas than Fords and Chevys. The methods introduced by Toyota and other Japanese manufacturers are just as different as Henry Ford’s mass production model was from craft shop manufacturing of the 1800’s.
I certainly agree that the short term focus of quarterly numbers is a problem. There are still many problems. But, we must move forward. Giving up, standing still, or simply being cynical leads to nowhere but defeat. So… get to work and implement the best management practices you can find from any source, any company, any country. You will find many of those best practices in lean plants and organizations.
Cheers,
Larry Miller