If, as I believe, the value of a Lean training program is seen in the long term, then how do you evaluate the effectiveness of the program in the short term?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Frank Michaels on June 23, 2008 at 6:14pm

Where did you find your trainer? You should go through a source that you trust specifically because it is difficult to measure the effects in the short-term.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Molly on June 29, 2008 at 8:52am

In the short term, the training is to instill the concept of Lean. The trainees could apply it immediately to their workplace. They tend to have a different perspective when reviewing the production line. Things that used to look 'normal' in the past could be adjusted for higher efficiency. E.g., they could move the toolboxes for easier access, to get the rear covers assembled first while waiting for the front covers, etc. Just some minor changes would bring out better results. When people are more 'lean conscious", they organize more efficiently and also contribute more to the Lean projects. It may be a big Lean project, which lasts 1 year for a high return, or a small production line to improve in several weeks.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Paul Gimbel on August 26, 2008 at 10:01pm

Does anyone else have concerns with the misuse of the term "Lean"? A lean training program has to be part of an initiative, nay, a dedicated movement of an entire organization to adopt a new philosophy on the world at large. If you want to look around to see how you can work faster, that's called process improvement.

We saw this happen with "Reengineering." When Hammer and Champy coined the term, it referred to a particular technique of nuking a company's processes and starting anew to develop new, more relevant, more intelligent processes. But in no time, people were using it to mean everything from layoffs to modifications in the org chart to rearranging your pens and pencils.

While doing a brief overview of Lean can certainly give you some random pointers to shave a percent here and there from your processes, you can't expect short term returns by sending a few folks to a 3-day seminar. That's like sending two people to a swim class so that you can improve your 8-person synchronized swim team.

Does this concern anyone else?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Paul Patterson on August 27, 2008 at 6:22am

Paul,

I understand and appreciate your points. That being said, we also live in the realities of our businesses. In this case, I am dealing with an organization that the Lean initiative is being mandated from the top with little buy in from the middle management.

It is a tight position when the top levels have insisted on training, but the Director level folks who have to sign off on spend are looking for justifications on that spend beyond the "management is insisting we all do the training". Hence the question.

It brings up a bigger question of how do you get the belief in Lean to permeate an organization. I agree with you that it needs to be a dedicated movement, but sometimes that is easier said then done. Do you have any suggestions on that front? This engagement is done for me, but I have run into it before and I am sure I will hit it again.

Thanks,

Paul P

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Paul Jones on August 31, 2008 at 5:08pm

Paul P. We have a misunderstanding as I am talking reality, everyday, every hour and every minute of fence riders, stand-bys, and those that buy-in and really try to make a difference.

Let's talk "trainers" as opposed to "practitioners".

Trainers, are like teachers in classrooms, much is espoused, lots of charts, philosophy, and principles, but little in the way of actual implementation.

The class leaves and everyone goes back to work with little or no change in how they do work or the environment that they work in.

Basically the "trainers" can have mutliple learning sessions, but little comes from the training as again the source of the problem is not addressed.

The source of the problem is the "management attitude". Their lack of knowledge in how to dig themselves out of the hole they are in. So they grab at "Lean Manufacturing Training" as a life preserver. The "fix all".

However no amount of training without a change in the culture will have little more than medicore success.

Practitioners on the other hand know how to "train" in the principles, tools and philosophy of "Lean Manufacturing and Lean Thinking.

Practitioners know how to create and plant seeds for culture change, for managers to be transformed into leaders and know how to engage the workers for buy-in and committment to implementation.

Practitioners know how to put together systematic implementation with metrics and accountabilty. They lead the company in a transformation into "Lean". This happens from the bottom up and the top down. This is reality today if companies want to survive.

Nothing says it is easy. It takes a lot of perserverance and guts. The process that one uses has to be taylored to the company and its current culture. The model I use has worked extremely well, but it takes a whole lot more than this note to resolve.

Paulj

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Paul Jones on August 29, 2008 at 9:58pm

Paul, "Lean" cannot be the flavor of the month. Unfortunately many corporations want to pick and choose what they implement, reap mediocore results and then try something else next month. "Lean" is a strategy and philsophy of continous improvement and really has no end as you are trying to reach perfection. Now having said this, it is not pie in the sky! Experiences have shown that implementation begins with a company wide buy-in and engagement of all workers and managers as all in the company will either enable the process or put up obsticles. This happens anyway as people are slow to change. Implementing Lean requires a systematic approach and cannot be obtained in 1 or even 10 training sessions if there is not a plan for implementation. With 'Lean" there not a short or long term, there is only continous improvement from the very beginning from the first day you start. Gemba Kaizen is defined as continous improvement in the "work place". This process achieves immediate results, utilizing existing resources, and existing capital with minimum expenses. This begins the "lean process" and requires implementation of other "lean" tools for sustained removal of waste. Short term you go after the low hanging fruit with "Gemba Kaisen". Near and long term you continue to implement the other facets of "Lean" as buy-in and support grows from within.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by chicago-industrial on August 31, 2008 at 9:28am

Paul,
How about metrics?

Used to take X amount of time to deal with this issue, now it is Y.

Metrics are valuable when you have to take an argument to a numbers guy.
That's my recommendation.

▶ Reply to This