A Kaizen Event is designed to support an effective, short-term brainstorming session that focuses on a single challenge and improves an existing process. The term is loosely translated from the Japanese to “change for the good.”
As with many strategies involved in Lean and Six Sigma, the governing idea behind a Kaizen Event is focus and speed. By bringing together the right team to work on an issue, businesses can achieve breakthroughs that quickly lead to process improvements.
A Kaizen Event typically lasts three to five days. While the event itself is short, it’s a strategy that businesses should make a routine part of their long-term process improvement plans.
“Results… are the outcome of a process. What we want are good results from a controlled process because they will be repeatable. Bad results from an uncontrolled process simply mean that we’re not doing our job. Good results from an uncontrolled process…only mean we’re lucky. Today, bad results from a controlled process just says that we’re stupid: We expect different results from doing the same thing over again.”
Safety, quality, delivery, cost, are line leaders’ responsiblity, with assistance from technical staff – who are also experts.
Though it is certainly a culture shock, the leader is teaching by asking questions.
The various character’s reaction to the confrontive authoritative style is predictable. I am uneasy, at this point, with that approach being held up as an example of the best way to get this done. But it is only Chapter 1.
Shows relationship between the tools and the two most important aspects of what makes the Toyota Production System work:
Leaders (and how they lead and what they lead – and it isn’t implementing the tools)
People (leaders engaged with members closely, i.e. shop floor engagement)
“Everybody, everyday solving problems, that’s the only answer to the Pareto dilemma. You’ve got to visualize two flows in the plant. One: the product flow[. . .]. Two: the problem flow to the person who finally solves the problem. [. . .] you shouldn’t funnel all problems to your key technical people. You should protect them to work on the really difficult issues. What you have to organize is the problem solving in the line!”
The importance of the leaders – all of the leaders being present, not just to witness problems, but to ensure they are being solved by the right people, in the right way. Further, they must break down any barriers which impede that flow. And it’s not just the leaders. Ultimately, the entire shop floor is organized so that everyone is immersed in genchi genbutsu every time a task is carried out or work is performed. This becomes the check in PDCA.
Genchi Genbutsu is the Japanese principle of going to and directly observing a location and its conditions in order to understand and solve any problems faster and more effectively. The phrase literally translated means “go and see for yourself” and is a part of the Toyota Way philosophy.
The PDCA/PDSA cycle is a continuous loop of planning, doing, checking (or studying), and acting. It provides a simple and effective approach for solving problems and managing change. The model is useful for testing improvement measures on a small scale before updating procedures and working practices.
It is far, far easier to describe the tools in excruciating detail than it is to confront the leadership and organizational change issues.
The Toyota Production System (TPS) is an integrated socio-technical system, developed by Toyota, that comprises its management philosophy and practices. It is a system that uses the structure of the work, the work environment and the support systems (the technical part) to create an organizational culture of problem solving.
“You need to organize a clear flow of problem solving, explained Jenkinson one more time. “Operators need to have a complete understanding of normal conditions, so that whenever there is a gap, they know it’s a problem. Go and see is not just for the top management, It’s for everybody. This means operators as well, in particular how they learn to see parts and see the equipment they use. How can all operators recognize they have a problem? [emphasis added]
The simple statement, and following question posed sums up a great deal that is left out of lean implementations. I see it everywhere, and will be commenting on it more shortly.
We talk about “go and see” (or “genchi genbutsu“) as something leaders do. I think this is because traditional leaders aren’t naturally out in the work areas, on the shop floor, in the hangars, etc. We don’t think about the workers because they are there all of the time.
Yes, they are. But what do they see? Do they see disruptions and issues as things they are expected to somehow work around and deal with? Or do they see these things as something to call out, and fully participate in solving?
And if they do see a problem, what is the process for engaging it?
Just saying “you are empowered to fix the problem” does not make it so. When are they supposed to do it? Do they have the skills they need? How do you know? Is there a time-based process to escalate to another level if they get stuck? (Or do they just have to give up?)
The importance of having a process that is deliberately designed to engage people.
in the “lean community”) talk about engaging people, but never really work through the deliberate processes to do it. There are explicit processes for everything involving production, administration, etc. but somehow we expect “engaging people” to happen spontaneously just because we believe it is a good thing.
The message in this book is loud and clear. This is about leadership. The tools are important, yes, but only (in my opinion) because they are proven techniques that allow people to become engaged with the process.
But the tools alone do not require people to get engaged.
Permission to make input is necessary, but not sufficient. If you want people to be engaged, you have to deliberately engage them. Otherwise you are just asking them to become nameless cogs in “the system.”
https://theleanthinker.com/2009/08/21/the-lean-manager-part-1customers-first
A Kaizen Event is designed to support an effective, short-term brainstorming session that focuses on a single challenge and improves an existing process. The term is loosely translated from the Japanese to “change for the good.”
As with many strategies involved in Lean and Six Sigma, the governing idea behind a Kaizen Event is focus and speed. By bringing together the right team to work on an issue, businesses can achieve breakthroughs that quickly lead to process improvements.
A Kaizen Event typically lasts three to five days. While the event itself is short, it’s a strategy that businesses should make a routine part of their long-term process improvement plans.
https://www.sixsigmadaily.com/what-is-a-kaizen-event
“Results… are the outcome of a process. What we want are good results from a controlled process because they will be repeatable. Bad results from an uncontrolled process simply mean that we’re not doing our job. Good results from an uncontrolled process…only mean we’re lucky. Today, bad results from a controlled process just says that we’re stupid: We expect different results from doing the same thing over again.”
Shows relationship between the tools and the two most important aspects of what makes the Toyota Production System work: Leaders (and how they lead and what they lead – and it isn’t implementing the tools) People (leaders engaged with members closely, i.e. shop floor engagement)
“Everybody, everyday solving problems, that’s the only answer to the Pareto dilemma. You’ve got to visualize two flows in the plant. One: the product flow[. . .]. Two: the problem flow to the person who finally solves the problem. [. . .] you shouldn’t funnel all problems to your key technical people. You should protect them to work on the really difficult issues. What you have to organize is the problem solving in the line!”
The importance of the leaders – all of the leaders being present, not just to witness problems, but to ensure they are being solved by the right people, in the right way. Further, they must break down any barriers which impede that flow. And it’s not just the leaders. Ultimately, the entire shop floor is organized so that everyone is immersed in genchi genbutsu every time a task is carried out or work is performed. This becomes the check in PDCA.
Genchi Genbutsu is the Japanese principle of going to and directly observing a location and its conditions in order to understand and solve any problems faster and more effectively. The phrase literally translated means “go and see for yourself” and is a part of the Toyota Way philosophy.
The PDCA/PDSA cycle is a continuous loop of planning, doing, checking (or studying), and acting. It provides a simple and effective approach for solving problems and managing change. The model is useful for testing improvement measures on a small scale before updating procedures and working practices.
It is far, far easier to describe the tools in excruciating detail than it is to confront the leadership and organizational change issues.
The Toyota Production System (TPS) is an integrated socio-technical system, developed by Toyota, that comprises its management philosophy and practices. It is a system that uses the structure of the work, the work environment and the support systems (the technical part) to create an organizational culture of problem solving.
“You need to organize a clear flow of problem solving, explained Jenkinson one more time. “Operators need to have a complete understanding of normal conditions, so that whenever there is a gap, they know it’s a problem. Go and see is not just for the top management, It’s for everybody. This means operators as well, in particular how they learn to see parts and see the equipment they use. How can all operators recognize they have a problem? [emphasis added]
The simple statement, and following question posed sums up a great deal that is left out of lean implementations. I see it everywhere, and will be commenting on it more shortly.
We talk about “go and see” (or “genchi genbutsu“) as something leaders do. I think this is because traditional leaders aren’t naturally out in the work areas, on the shop floor, in the hangars, etc. We don’t think about the workers because they are there all of the time.
Yes, they are. But what do they see? Do they see disruptions and issues as things they are expected to somehow work around and deal with? Or do they see these things as something to call out, and fully participate in solving?
And if they do see a problem, what is the process for engaging it?
Just saying “you are empowered to fix the problem” does not make it so. When are they supposed to do it? Do they have the skills they need? How do you know? Is there a time-based process to escalate to another level if they get stuck? (Or do they just have to give up?)
The importance of having a process that is deliberately designed to engage people.
in the “lean community”) talk about engaging people, but never really work through the deliberate processes to do it. There are explicit processes for everything involving production, administration, etc. but somehow we expect “engaging people” to happen spontaneously just because we believe it is a good thing.
The message in this book is loud and clear. This is about leadership. The tools are important, yes, but only (in my opinion) because they are proven techniques that allow people to become engaged with the process.
But the tools alone do not require people to get engaged.
Permission to make input is necessary, but not sufficient. If you want people to be engaged, you have to deliberately engage them. Otherwise you are just asking them to become nameless cogs in “the system.”