Jim Womack’s hansei on where lean has failed
Christian HOHMANN
I help companies achieve their Goal. With teams we build a roadmap to achieve goals, identify necessary conditions to success, close gaps, turn plan into actions. French, German, English.
AUGUST 31, 2017 / CHRIS HOHMANN / EDIT
Lean leading figure Jim Womack posted a sincere and critical reflection (hansei) on where Lean has failed and why not to give up. I was impressed when reading it and it reinforced my respect and admiration for the author.
You can read the August 29th, 2017 post on planet lean (https://planet-lean.com/jim-womack-on-where-lean-has-failed-and-why-not-to-give-up)
Jim Womack is someone to take seriously when he expresses himself about Lean, so when he posts an article titled “where lean has failed” it is probably not just a clickbait nor a questionable joke. Indeed, the critical reflection Jim shares is truly about failure from his point of view. And his point of view with regards to Lean is one that really matters.
Where lean has failed
The failure is, in Mr Womack’s opinion, manyfold:
- It is the failure to get big organizations to transform themselves in a Lean way and have, at least, “another Toyota” emerging.
- It is the failure to reverse offshoring, despite the rational proof that companies would be better off keeping operations close instead of trading labor costs for logistics and quality costs.
- It is the failure to see disaffection among the workers and the growing acceptance of things as they are, without attempt to resist or change them in the Lean Community itself.
This hurts.
I am impressed by the courage to analyze and acknowledge that situation of someone who dedicated his life to promote Lean and share the knowledge. After all the enthusiasm, hype, hope and successes, this must be bitter.
Many people in Mr Womack’s position would deny the situation and keep going on, their ego not allowing them to acknowledge failure. Jim Womack not only has the courage to do it, but refuses to give up and want to avoid the “muda of denial about the situation”.
What I see from my narrower and European (mainly in France) perspective is consistent with Mr Womack’s analysis: the number of lean managers and continuous improvement champions soared in the last years but no company advertises or gets attention because of drastic improvement of its performances.
Furthermore, when called for assistance in companies, I am most of the time appalled by the (very) limited competences of the people in charge of Lean or operational excellence, a fact also reported by Karen Martin in a post on the Lean Edge https://www.theleanedge.org/256088-karen-martin-technical-proficiency-and-leadership-acumen-can-you-nail-the-problem-statement-first-time-right/
So yes, “doing Lean” is reduced to running small kaizen workshops here and there without consistency nor link to a strategic intent. It is merely about patching broken processes,solving local problems at best, or opportunistic muda hunting.
This keeps the additional layer of “Lean” bureaucracy busy and living easy with a lot of complacency about local qualitative results. Once a 5S workshop went through the first 3Ss, they’re done and feel “Lean” now. This is how Lean looks like too often.
No wonder the questions about “what’s next” or “is lean dead?” arise.
Considering Lean transformations, like many armchair generals giving strategic advice in hindsight, I would say that Jim Womack and people around him did well addressing the diagonal of the 2×2 change matrix: promoting the “pot of gold”, metaphor for reward and benefits of the change, as well as warning about the “alligator”, symbol of the danger of the status quo. I remember well Jim recommending to have a burning platform or even create a crisis to get the change done.
This was the rationale promoting the change, the Lean transformation.
What could have been underestimated was the other, emotional diagonal of the matrix. Many of the decision makers are in love with their “mermaid”. By definition, a mermaid cannot leave the sea and therefore the decision makers stay put, close to the object of love and happy with the current situation. A happiness, they believe, they can enjoy ONLY in their current situation.
Maybe the decision makers are risk averse and see nothing else than the frightening perspective of the “crutches”, the metaphor for risks and big efforts. Indeed, many decision makers may jeopardize their actual position if they dare going for a disruptive transformation with unforeseeable results. Leading a Lean transformation requires leadership, courage, confidence and the necessary freedom to act.
Why not to give up
Despite this bleak picture, Jim Womack is not ready to give up nor let “the muda of defeatism” get in his way. If no other Toyota is likely to emerge, other success stories can be reported. Successes may be experienced in and with start-ups for example.
Acknowledging the limits of the actual Lean promotion and Lean methods training ways, mainly through workshops and workbooks, Jim calls for “thinking hard about more effective ways to pass lean knowledge along to the next generation”.
The last paragraph of Jim Womack’s post sounds like a firm resolution “to rethink the (Lean community) tactics, stick to its purpose, and better understand the challenges preventing it from staying on course”.
I encourage everyone to read the original post as well as to have a look on the comments.
Personal conclusion
It is a sad read, but I can only agree. I empathize with Jim Womack and again, I am impressed by his courage and humility.
Even if Lean loses its shine, I still measure what it brought – and still brings – to me. I think that true Lean-understanding people, once “infected”, will not get away from Lean Thinking. I will continue to promote and use everything Lean at personal and professional level, wherever and whenever it’s meaningful, which should be pretty often. Fashionable or not.
My personal belief is that Lean (Thinking) will keep lingering in operations, but the emphasis will probably shift upstreams to Product and Process Development. I also think that the irresistible wave of digitalization and all the news techs around smart factories will reshuffle the cards on how to plan, organize, drive and strive. All new opportunities to reinvent business and the philosophy, methods and tools that must come with.
I agree with both Lauren and Mark. It reminds me of ISO standards. They too have been implemented in most organisations, but aside from having the certificate the commitment of many organisations to quality is just not there. Whenever a quality issue rears its ugly head, most organisations bury it in favor of production output. Witness the unthinkable fraud committed by some vehicle manufacturers in an attempt to keep or boost sales. People work the way they are managed - if I come late to work every day and my manager doesn't complain, I will carry on coming late. Lean and ISO all work from the top down, not the bottom up. It takes serious commitment from the top management to drive a 'Toyota' type exercise. Can this only be achieved in a Japanese culture?
Senior Advisor - Agility for Enterprise and Complex Systems - Digital twins and AI strategy
7 年Hi Christian, thanks for commenting the post. I agree with you that it takes a lot of courage to write this. Knowing all that Lean can bring to companies, in terms of efficiency and business benefits, but also to people in well being at work, it is sad to have this statement. Knowing that the biggest problem now is culture and mindset, we should less talk about lean or agile concepts, but really leverage what we know about evidence based approaches to organizational change.
Results driven Operations Leader / Quality Manager / Operations Director / Manufacturing Manager with demonstrated ability to get results and improve operating performance.
7 年I agree and echo your observations. I will also add that what has been missing in lean training and lean deployments is management cultural transformation. The given starting point that leadership is and will be involved in transformation is a fallacy. Before lean transformation can be successful at a "Toyota" level there must first be a "Cultural Cardiology" on the management heart of the organization. Without this, "Lean" is something that is done to manufacturing our production, not a transformative event for an entire organization.
Senior Product Owner and Business Analyst
7 年I totally agree !! And as I read through the article I directly see the similarities with my present situation. Lean has been reduced to applying tools haphazardly instead implementing a standardized global strategy. We often talk about managing change on the shop flow but first and foremost I think change should be done at the head, and that is where lies the true difficulties.