Give Construction Workers a Break!

When I was a kid growing up in Florida (home of the mighty Gators), I spent every hot, muggy summer working as a roofer for my dad. We tore off old shingle roofs and installed new ones at a frenetic pace. I would often find myself literally running across a roof with a handful of nails or a bundle of shingles. Pretty much on a daily basis I would come close to having a heat stroke (that's what running on a 120+ degree roof will do to you!). I just thought that killing yourself at work was part of the gig. Little did I know that I was experiencing firsthand what Lean thinkers call muri.

Muri is a concept borrowed from the Toyota Production System, and basically means "overburden, unreasonableness, or absurdity" according to Wikipedia. My experiences on those roofs all those years ago were definitely absurd, but not at all rare in the construction industry.

Typical Construction Industry Approach

We routinely ask our installers to perform superhuman feats: working in unbearable heat or in muddy conditions; carrying heavy materials by hand; performing ergonomically unsound installations that contort and strain the body; starting work at sunrise and finishing at sunset; and so on and so forth. This has happened since...well, forever. The excuse usually given is the old "Gotta get the job done come hell or high water!" adage. Or sometimes you get the "When I was young we didn't even take lunch breaks!" diatribe. What they really mean to say is "We have too much waste in our processes, so we make up for it by overburdening our people." or "We don't have faith in continuous improvement as a means for innovation, so we just go with what we've always done." Isn't that sad?

The Lean Approach

How would a lean thinker go about reducing muri on construction sites? As I've stated before, I'm not an expert in the Toyota Production System or Lean Enterprise, but here are some ideas:

• Stand in the Circle...Construction managers should spend almost all their time on the job site, "Standing in the Circle" to deeply observe the work being done. This is different from just "making the rounds" from job site to job site. Being in a single place for an extended period of time exposes the senses to stimuli that we normally ignore, which helps us be more aware of working conditions. Once we are aware of what's happening on a job site, it's harder for us to overlook muri.
• Team-Based Problem Solving...Construction managers should make it part of their everyday job to facilitate team-based problem solving. Make it extremely easy for employees, sub-contractors, inspectors, customers, and anybody else on the job site to make suggestions and have their ideas reviewed. Use a whiteboard posted on the job site to highlight problems that need to be addressed. Support experimentation with new installation techniques or new equipment. If we engage our people, they will tell us about the muri on the job site.
• Manpower Planning...Think long-term when planning for manpower requirements. Scheduling extra manpower to avoid overburdening our people will certainly cost more in the short-term, but will result in tremendous savings over the long-term: reduced injuries leading to reduced WC costs; reduced employee turnover leading to reduced recruiting, hiring, training, and "new-guy" costs; and improved quality leading to reduced re-work costs.
• Safety Planning...In the project safety plan, include provisions for good ergonomics and humane working conditions. Always provide sufficient ramps, scaffolding, ladders, etc. Have established standards for working in adverse weather conditions. Always provide creature comforts close to the job site: drinking water, toilets, hand cleaners, etc. Put a limit on the number of hours per week an installer can perform physical work. Rotate job tasks to avoid repetitive motion injuries.
• Eliminate Waste!!!...Finally, the best way to reduce muri is to eliminate process waste from our work. Waste leads to longer completion times and additional costs, and forces our installers to work harder. If we remove waste, we create a win-win: the project is completed faster and cheaper, and our workers don't have to kill themselves to get the job done. It's obvious, if an installer doesn't have to walk out to the truck every five minutes to grab a tool, he can get the job done easier. If we're not waiting around for an answer from the architect on a change order, we don't have to work nights and weekends to finish the job on-time.

Your thoughts? What's holding us back from doing all that? Old-school thinking? Short-term costs? Tradition? Lack of leadership?

At some point (hopefully sooner rather than later), we need to get past the mentality that work is supposed to be hard. Work should be challenging, but not absurdly so. Work should be engaging (yes, even in the construction industry), not all-consuming. We can get past this historical barrier to operational excellence if we can accept that muri is a problem.

Batch & Queue Construction?

Have you ever been in line at a sandwich shop where the "sandwich artist" was making three sandwiches at a time?  You know, he pulls out three loafs of bread, puts the meat & cheese on all three sandwiches, wraps each of them in deli paper, and hands all three to the clerk at the cash register.  It's happened to me, and I was not amused.  Why?  Because I was first in line out of the three, and I had to wait three times as long to get my sandwich.  Not only that, but I had mine toasted and it was darn near cold by the time I sat down to eat it!  Okay, I'm a little demanding of my eateries, but I can't help it; I'm a lean geek.

What does this have to do with Lean?  It's all about batch-and-queue vs. one-piece flow (click here for a good explanation from the Shmula blog).

The Case for One-Piece Flow

In the lean manufacturing world, the debate on batch-and-queue production vs. one-piece flow production has long since ended (batch-and-queue lost).  Anybody who has studied the Toyota Production System understands the superiority of one-piece flow: reduced inventory, early detection of defects, reduced transportation, more scheduling flexibility, and (most importantly) an increased organizational awareness of the need to solve problems preventively due to the lack of buffers in a single-piece flow.

So, where do we stand with respect to these principles in the construction industry?

Batch & Queue Construction

I've had a difficult time explaining my thoughts on this.  My belief is that in the construction industry, we typically exhibit the traits of a classic batch-and-queue operation, even though we're not technically batching buildings together.  Here are some of the similarities:

1. Work is done by specialized groups (concrete finishers, framers, drywallers, plumbers, electricians, etc.) dedicated to performing a narrow scope of work
2. These specialized groups try to optimize their own operations, even if that means a delay in the completion of a building
   
3. Item #2 above means huge amounts of time are spent waiting for the product to transition from one specialized phase to the next
4. Because of the delays between specialized work phases, the cause & effect trail of defects can go cold, resulting in fewer problems getting solved at the root cause
   
5. There is little collaboration between specialized groups, resulting in less innovation

Hey, lean geeks, does this sound familiar at all?

Lean Construction

So, what is the lean approach to construction?  What could be done to move from a batch & queue approach to a one-piece flow approach?  Do the construction folks think it's even necessary to make this transition in order to achieve operational excellence? Your thoughts?  I certainly don't have all the answers, but here are a few pie-in-the-sky ideas:

1. Create multi-functional work groups, consisting of highly-skilled installers capable of performing a wide range of installations
2. Equip your highly-skilled installers with all the equipment (possibly custom-built equipment) necessary to complete a wide range of installations
3. Utilize visual management to encourage participation through shared information
4. Pre-fab as much as you can inside factories on lean assembly lines

I'm sure that experts like Dr. Michael Mullens with the Housing Constructability Lab or Hal Macomber at Reforming Project Management have a lot more to say about this subject than me, but those are my wild fantasies.  Are they feasible?  Your thoughts?

Short Attention Spans

If you want to see people sleep, just put a bunch of construction folks in a classroom.  We can't help it, but we're just more prone to stay awake when we're building something or pounding a few bottles of Shiner Bock (that's a Texas beer, for those of you having the misfortune of not living in the Lone Star State).  We're just not house-cats, if you know what I mean.  That's why I was happy to come across this article from the incredibly, incredibly, incredibly useful Gemba Pante Rei blog:

"One-point Lesson:  One-point Lesson"

Basically, a one-point lesson is just a quick 5-10 minute learning opportunity focusing on a single topic (either basic knowledge, an improvement example, or a problem example).  I think this is an ideal format for developing people in the construction industry.  On construction sites, we're trained to "stay busy" and move from one task to the next.  With this mentality, we need to have an efficient and focused way of training our associates.

P.S. Be sure to check out the free template that is provided in the "One-Point Lesson" link above; it's a good one.

Old-School Vertical Hierarchies

As the saying goes, I wasn't born in Texas, but I ran here as fast as I could. When I arrived, I found that the Lone Star State produces some fine beer, specifically, Shiner beer...

While I could go on all day about the merits of Shiner Hefeweizen compared to the original Shiner Bock, that's not really the point of the above photo.  What I want to discuss is how folks on large-scale construction jobs view the relationships between the prime contractors, secondary contractors, sub-contractors, and so on.  

Typical Construction Industry Approach

In case you haven't figured it out yet, the construction industry typically views sub-contractor relations like the above photo...with each contractor dominating the one below it and being subservient to the one above it.  An old-school rigid, vertical hierarchy.  This is based on standard construction practice, which typically involves a contractor doling out aspects of the work to sub-contractors.  In this arrangement, the contractor is viewed as the customer and the sub-contractor is viewed as the provider of the product or service.  This is an external customer relationship, and it's repeated over and over again at each level of the hierarchy, so you can have dozens of external customer relationships on a job site.  How fun!  A bunch of people showing "respect" for their boss man above them.  Old school mentality.

The Lean Approach

From a Lean perspective, I would say a collaborative model would be more effective than a rigid vertical hierarchy.  If you've read Gemba Kaizen, then you know about the inverted pyramid that places management below the gemba (the place where the real work is done) in a support role.  Essentially, the gemba is viewed as the internal customer of management, and I would say that prime contractors should view their sub-contractors as their internal customers.  They should support them, not threaten them with punitive actions.  They should identify and solve problems, not pass the buck just because the contract says they can.

Your thoughts?  I'd be interested in learning if other traditional industries are as "old-school" in their relationships with vendors/suppliers.  How would you rank your industry's level of collaboration on a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being a rigid, vertical arrangement and 10 being a progressive, Gemba Kaizen-like approach?

All I know is that until the construction industry embraces Lean thinking and begins working more collaboratively, we'll be doomed to mindless obedience and endless frustration.  Thank goodness we have beer.

Photos from the '09 International Builders' Show

I posted a whole bunch of photos from the 2009 International Builders' Show over at my other blog.  Check it out:

http://www.thegreeniuses.com/2009/01/pics-from-2009-international-builders.html

Guest Post @ Lean Six Sigma Academy

Ron Pereira over at the Lean Six Sigma Academy was kind enough to ask me to write a guest post for his popular blog.  Being totally stoked by last night's BCS National Championship game that my Florida Gators won, I decided to write about how Urban Meyer is in fact a Lean leader.  Check it out:  "Urban Meyer is a Lean Leader (and Go Gators!)"

From The Greeniuses blog: "Revolution in Consumption"

Here a link to my post over at The Greeniuses blog where I discuss how much I hate waste in all its forms:  "Revolution in Consumption"

A3's are Awesome

Got this A3 from the Lean Enterprise Institute:

I'm a big fan of the A3 methodology.  I loved Pascal Dennis' book "Getting the Right Things Done" and John Shook's new book "Managing to Learn."  If there's a single mistake that sticks out among all the mistakes I've made in attempting to implement Lean at my company, it's that I didn't introduce A3 and Hoshin Planning earlier.  By not having these systems in place, we failed to show how improvement activities were linked in with business results.  This led to our Lean initiative being viewed as an ancillary activity not critical to the mission in times of desperation (like we're facing now in the homebuilding industry).

What about you, you lean genius?  Did you have the knowledge and foresight to introduce the A3 approach early and often?  Was it effective as they portray it in the books?  What would you have done differently?  By the way, I hate you because your were either smarter or more experienced than me (just kidding ya'll).

Book Review: "Creating a Lean Culture"

I just finished reading "Creating a Lean Culture" by David Mann. I thought it was an excellent addition to the Lean library. Here's a quick recap of the highlights:

• Lean processes need Lean management. As technical changes are made to the flow of work, we should concurrently make changes to our management system. A focus on PROCESSES (not just making the numbers) is a must. Changing the management system will eventually change the culture.
• Lean management system consists of four principal elements: 1) leader standard work, 2) visual controls, 3) daily accountability process, and 4) leadership discipline
• Leader standard work is the first element. Leader standard work consists of routine checks of many aspects of work (productivity, cleanliness, safety, quality, etc.). Redundancy is built in between management levels (team leads check on associates, supervisors check on team leads, production manager checks on supervisors, etc.).
• Visual controls are the second element. Visual controls make it easy for front-line leaders to compare expected versus actual. They can be any type of visual communication that allows us to see the status of something at a glance. Visual controls are the link between the leader standard work and a daily accountability process (discussed next). Without visuals, it becomes nearly impossible to anticipate problems ahead of time.
• A daily accountability process is the third element. This process takes the information that is gathered from the routine checks of front-line leaders and displays it in a visual way. Then, the information is assessed by the next level of leadership and any problems are addressed. There are three tiers of meetings: 1) associates w/ team leader, 2) team leaders w/ supervisor, 3) supervisors w/ production manager. Meetings should be brief (less than 15 minutes), held on the shopfloor with everyone standing, and centered around a visual display board. These meetings result in many follow-up assignments, which are tracked until completion. This allows front-line leaders to develop skills as project coordinators.
• A visual improvement suggestion process supports Lean management. Basically, you just create a board with four sections: 1) Ideas, 2) To Do, 3) Doing, and 4) Done. Associates can easily suggest any idea, and then the board pretty much manages the information. As part of their leader standard work, Team Leaders follow-up on suggestions from their associates. This process allows everybody to have a voice, which goes a long way in gaining buy-in for Lean.

Most of these highlights come from the first half of the book. The second half deals with supporting elements of Lean management (the role of a sensei, gemba walks, leadership qualities, etc.). These are valid ideas as well, but I've often seen the same material in other books. The first half of the book has material that you don't see in too many other Lean books, and this is what makes this book an invaluable part of my reading list.

So, how does this all fit into our Lean initiative? Well, some locations are already implementing certain aspects of Lean management. I've seen a few examples of leader standard work, visual controls, daily accountability, and visual suggestion boards. They're all terrific tools, but only if accompanied by real Lean improvements (specifically improvements that contribute to the stability of our processes). Basic Workplace Organization (BWO) is designed to be an initiative that will create immediate improvement, that doesn't require any Lean expertise, and that will build discipline among our front-line leaders.

The key to BWO is the auditing process, which is a form of leader standard work (an element of Lean management). So, as the book suggests, we make real improvements while simultaneously implementing aspects of a Lean management system. That is the best way to sustain Lean improvements and build a Lean culture. That is what I learned from Mr. Mann's book.

Toyota Way Fieldbook (Part 4)

I need to catch up on some old blogging material. Way back in June, I began posting on the "continuous improvement spiral" from The Toyota Way Fieldbook. Here are the previous posts:

• Overview of the "continuous improvement spiral"
• Description of the "stabilize" phase
• Description of the "create flow" phase

Now, better late than never, is the continuation of the series. This one deals with the 3rd phase of the spiral, "standardize."

Before reading this chapter of the Fieldbook, I had a totally inaccurate perception of standard work. I thought that standard work was for the operator (the installer). I figured that we were supposed to create "job processes" and post them visually in the work area for the installers to use. These charts would essentially be reminders of how to perform the work. Wrong. According to the Fieldbook,

"At Toyota operations, standardized work faces out toward the aisle, where the operator cannot easily see it. It is for the benefit of the team leader and group leader who are responsible for auditing the standard work."

Well that's not what I expected. Turns out that standard work isn't some sort of training substitute for the installers. Training at Toyota is an in-depth process in its own right, and is completely separate from standard work. You can't expect an operator to know how to perform a process simply by looking at a visual. Skilled work requires skills, and skills only come through training and experience.

So, what is the purpose of standardized work? According to the author,

"Quite simply, standardized work and other work standards are the baseline for continuous improvement."

Only by having a starting point can we begin to improve. Standardization provides an official version of how the work should be done. The operator is supposed to find small ways to improve upon the official standard. Then, the improved process becomes the standard. Without standard work, any improvements will be lost as soon as the operator moves to a different position.

Standard work is also a problem-solving tool. If a process is not meeting its production targets or if quality is out of control, we can observe the process and compare it to the standard. This will tell us whether non-compliance is the problem or whether the standard itself needs improvement. Without standard work, the temptation is to immediately blame the person for not getting the job done correctly.

So, what exactly is standard work? Standardization occurs in many forms at Toyota. Examples of different types of standard work include:

• Work Standards: standards for quality, safety, environmental, etc. ("the right way to do things")
• Process Standards: technical information about the process (for us this would be related to our DAPIA or architectural prints)
• Standard Procedures: rules about how the production line should operate (allowed inventory levels, pace of production, agreements between upstream & downstream processes, etc.)

Standard work is fairly complex at Toyota. Initially, we won't be able to standardize our work to the same extent. From what I've seen, work happens sporadically in many different locations in our plants. Our construction methods vary from plant to plant, and from installer to installer. Standardization is minimal.

So, should we assign all of our Lean Advocates to developing job processes? I don't think so. I always go back to the continuous improvement spiral. Before you can create and standardize the work flow, you have to create stability. That's where we're at right now in our initiative. If we can create conditions that are conducive to consistent, reliable work flow, then we can begin to standardize and improve the work.