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.

"Cornhole" & Lean

Cornhole is big in Ohio. I spent last week in Sabina, so I know firsthand the splendor of playing this game. Some people (Blake Johnson) are natural masters of Cornhole, while others (Greg Brophy) can never quite get the beaner in the basket. Either way, it's a fun time for all.

During my time in the heartland, I also did a little bit of work. The Lean Advocate in Sabina, Dan Bashaw, showed me all around their facilities. I saw some interesting things for sure:

• They have a daily accountability meeting every morning with the team leads and supervisors. They use a large board (pictured below) with a grid to show how many times they hit or miss their production schedules. Nobody gets beat up for the results; the board is just a measurement tool for surfacing problems day-to-day.
  
• They are experimenting with a form of visual management. They have a system in place by which a two-sided sign (one side red, other side green) is placed on the front endwall of each floor. If the floor is ready to roll, the sign is green; if it's not, the sign is red. The status of all the floors on the line is shown on a visual board (pictured below) that they use to get a snapshot of the overall situation.
  




• In each department, they have "idea boards" (pictured below) that are used to VISUALLY manage their employee idea process (TQI). These boards make it so easy for an associate to suggest an idea. The progression from one step to the next is visual and easy to understand.
  

Sabina's approach is to create a Lean management system. By creating transparency through the use of visuals, they will bring problems to the surface. By focusing on solving these problems, a culture of problem-solving will be developed. By creating a problem-solving culture, they will be in a good position to aggressively pursue Lean improvements.

Creating a Lean management system is an effective Lean strategy (as confirmed by Creating a Lean Culture by David Mann), especially when accompanied by rapid process improvement (6S, BWO, etc.). I hope to see Sabina be as aggressive with rapid process improvement as they are with improving their management system. If they can achieve this, they will be way ahead of the game.

Toyota as Educators

Check out this post from the Evolving Excellence blog: "Toyota Training the World...sort of."

They talk about Toyota investing in education and training for potential future employees in India. The term "strengthening the human supply chain" is used, and this makes a lot of sense to me. Having a stable workforce capable of thinking and learning is a HUGE part of having a stable production process. The 4M's (man, machine, material, method) are potential sources of instability, and first among them is "man." You can't really problem-solve the other 3M's without spending time on the first one.

When we went to Toyota Georgetown recently, the company's investment in people was obvious. They have a huge training facility adjacent to the factory. They offer college courses in their training facility. They offer employee day care services. They offer employee pharmacy services. They give away dozens and dozens of cars every year for perfect attendance. They have ping-pong tables and basketball goals right on the production line. The impression one gets is that Toyota really considers their employees to be their most valuable asset, an asset that must be kept in prime condition physically and mentally. An unstable workforce isn't a value-adding continuously improving workforce.

Toyota Up Close

The Toyota Georgetown plant is a sight to see. I had the opportunity to tour this amazing plant today, and I was not disappointed. Certain things about the plant were what I expected, and some things were totally different.

Examples of things that I expected:

• I knew that the facility was large (it covers 1,300 acres of land and 7.5 million square feet of covered space)
• I also knew that it would be clean (I didn't see one single oil spot or even a somewhat messy area)
• Andon cords are everywhere, and are actually used properly
• Work flows from one station to the next without delay via the constantly moving conveyor line
• All travel lanes are clearly marked and safety precautions are upheld
• They have a large section of the plant devoted to employee training. This signals a strong commitment to developing their people.

Examples of things that I didn't expect:

• I didn't anticipate the incredible level of automation. The amount of technology and machinery is mindboggling. Entire car bodies fly overhead courtesy of an overhead conveyor system. Dozens of welding robots work in perfect unison to weld the body together. Engines and other major components are delivered to the line and raised into position automatically by special hoists. Unmanned supply carts travel down aisles, guided only by magnetic signals.
• A few things were way more human than I expected. Some associates actually ride around the plant on 3-wheel bikes with baskets on the back, just like a Florida retiree. Ping-pong tables, fooseball tables, and basketball goals are all located within feet of the main assembly line.
• The plant was much fuller than I had envisioned. For some reason, I had expected to see a pretty open layout with plenty of walking room. Instead, almost every square foot of the plant is occupied by something. No space is wasted.
• The tour was a little confusing. I expected a more logical "flow" to the tour path, but the tour is catered to the average potential customer, not to Lean advocates or manufacturing dudes. I wish I could have been walking instead of riding on the tram, but oh well.

Click here to take a virtual tour. The web site gives you a lot of the same information that you get on the real tour. After seeing Toyota up close, I realize that they're not this mythical entity that they appear to be when you read about them in books or on blogs. They're a manufacturing company.

That being said, they're a pretty darn good manufacturing company. They're also a pretty darn good corporate citizen. They provide their employees with education opportunities, a pharmacy, a daycare for their children, and countless other benefits. They work hand-in-hand with several local charities, educational institutions, environmental groups, and several other entities. They see these activities as investments in their future. Toyota is one heckuva role model.

Can you tell a difference?

Here are some before & after photos sent to us by Don Nelson, our Lean Advocate at the Martinsville Nationwide location:

Before...

And after...

It's looks just a little bit different in there now, huh?

History of Lean

Click here for a timeline of Lean that dates all the way back to the 16th century, courtesy of Superfactory.com. I couldn't believe that they traced manufacturing as far back as they did. Pretty cool.

Setting the Vision

Here's a clip from LEI's newsletter this week (courtesy of Sean Levy):

Respondents to our 2007 opinion survey said “middle management resistance” was the top obstacle to lean transformations. It replaced “backsliding to the old ways of working,” which was named as the number one obstacle in last year’s poll. In the latest survey, which was based on 2,444 responses, backsliding slid back to the number six spot.
What does it mean? A couple of you have speculated in the LEI Forums that the latest results actually reflect badly not on middle management but on senior management, who probably are not changing the metrics or setting the vision to gain support for the transformation among managers.

In my recent travels, I've found this to be true. Setting the vision is the most important thing that an upper-level leader can do to ensure success with Lean.

Nationwide Again

Yesterday, I visited the home base of Nationwide Custom Homes in Martinsville, VA. I saw many of the same things that I saw in the Siler City plant, which makes sense since they adopted the building practices of Martinsville when they converted to a Nationwide plant. Here are some observations from Martinsville:

• When the homes come off the end of the assembly line, they are complete. There is no outside rework area, nor is there a "finish-out" plant like in Siler City. This puts a lot of stress on the line. Whenever a home has a unusual feature (for example, wood interior wall panels instead of drywall), it can delay completion of the home. This means that the line can stop, because the house can't leave the plant unfinished. Since everybody on the line knows that the house can't be worked on outside the plant, there is a sense of urgency to fix these problems to avoid line stoppage.


• They have a components plant located between the two main assembly plants. This component plant produces floor joists, trusses, etc. for the main line. Components are built to order (not stocked) and delivered to the main assembly plants in a just-in-time manner. Siler City does this also, but their component processes are located right next to their internal customers, in the same work space essentially. In Martinsville, the material has to travel a pretty good distance to reach its interal customer.


• One of the assembly plants is a "shotgun" line and the other is a "side-saddle" line (similar to what most of our plants have). The first thing I noticed was the ample space that exists on the shotgun line. This makes it much easier to work safely and to get material closer to the point of use.


• Both Siler City and Martinsville set the roofs earlier on in the production line than most of our plants. Typically, the main structure of the home (floor, walls, roof) is intact at the point on the line where we'd typically be just setting the walls. As an added bonus, much of the shingle work is already done before this point. Having the main structure complete so early allows the secondary structural installations (electrical, drywall, exteriors, etc.) to get started in time to finish before the home reaches the end of the line.

Both our Martinsville and Siler City plants are interesting to observe. They make use of common-sense practices and take extra time to check quality. That being said, they're still not Lean. As stated in my post yesterday, many opportunities still exist to improve the flow of work within all of the Nationwide plants.

Fortunately, the management team at Nationwide seems to have embraced Lean as the best option for drastically improving the productivity and flexibility of their production line. Martinsville has a Lean Advocate, Don Nelson, that has a combination of Lean knowledge (he's a Lean Six Sigma black belt) and manufactured housing savvy (former manager at Crestline). The VP of Operations, Tommy Rakes, is a Lean enthusiast, so I expect any barriers to improvement to be knocked down with zeal. I look forward to seeing their success.

It Ain't Just Racin' Country Anymore!

Siler City, NC is in the middle of nowhere, unless you're a NASCAR reporter looking to interview some hard-core fans. Stuck in this hinterland between Winston-Salem and Raleigh-Durham is a Nationwide factory ran by Andrew Snuggs. According to the stories, this plant used to struggle quite a bit. Then, the facility was converted over to a Nationwide plant.

First, the factory was renovated. Then, Nationwide building practices were implemented. Now, all of the quality checks and common-sense practices that are hallmarks of Nationwide are faithfully executed by Andrew and his team. Siler City has become a positive example of how a modular assembly line should operate. Here are some highlights from what I observed:

• Components (floor joists, trusses, etc.) are cut, notched, bored, etc. right next to where they will be used, and are only produced for specific orders (not for stock).


• Interior walls are framed and the wall panels are installed on the same table by the same people. This eliminates the inventory (waste) that exists in the typical configuration of most of our plants, where the framing and panel installation are done on different tables by different people. This inventory takes up space, necessitates the double-handling of the framed walls, and increases the overall lead time for an interior wall.


• Wall-builders and wall-setters are part of the same work group. If the wall-setters get behind, the wall-builders will help them catch up instead of overproducing walls (waste). This helps deal with the problem of cycle time imbalance that exists on our main assembly lines.


• The homes are low to the ground, which makes them easier and safer to enter and exit. They are also flat and level, which is preferable to the cambered floors that we work on in many plants.


• Shingles are installed in the roof build department, which is safer and more efficient that doing it after the roof is set.


• The house is leveled, measured for squareness, and certified by the QC inspector before the exterior wall sheathing is installed. Also, sheathing is installed on the marriage lines to increase the rigidity of the home, which prevents drywall cracking.


• Drywall is not mudded until the sheathing is installed, to prevent cracking.


• Drywall finishing is done prior to installation of cabinets, appliances, etc. which makes the process more productive.


• Windows and doors are not stocked, but ordered per house. The downside of this is the lead time from the supplier. The upside is reduced inventory levels, smaller space requirements, flexibility in ordering anything the customer wants, and less D&O risk.


• After the home is structurally complete, it moves to a "finish-out" plant where cabinets, appliances, etc. are installed. This area is free of the noise, debris, and distractions that are necessarily present in the main plant. I would think that this environment is more conducive to the finishing work that has to be done to make a house aesthetically pleasing.

All that being said, I still wouldn't classify them as Lean. Some of the work flows looks like spaghetti, some areas of the plant are a little disorganized, and visual control isn't evident throughout. Fortunately, their culture and leadership is quite conducive to a successful implementation of Lean. They have already performed excellent introductory training for ALL associates, and are committed to continuously learning more. Lean homebuilding may not replace NASCAR as the object of obsession for this region, but I think we've got a shot at #2.