Lean Six Sigma: The Emperor’s New Clothes? Why Sustainable Change Demands a New Way of Thinking

Lean Six Sigma: The Emperor’s New Clothes? Why Sustainable Change Demands a New Way of Thinking


In manufacturing, “Lean” is often marketed as a magic bullet for operational excellence and profitability. But despite the buzzwords, World Class Manufacturing, TOC, Lean, Six Sigma, Agile, and a substantial 'Bandwagon' many have willing jumped on, why do so many businesses still struggle to achieve lasting results?

I contend, the issue lies deeper than tools, techniques, or strategies. It’s rooted in the intersection of psychology, culture, and imprinted beliefs, e.g.in concepts like traditional accounting practices, which undermine real change.

After decades of implementing Lean practices across industries, a clear pattern has emerged:

most change initiatives fail to sustain results.

This short article delves into why, challenging leaders to rethink their approach and recognise that sustainable change is not just about systems and processes. It’s about people, emotions, and ultimately, how we are "being" as humans in an organisational context.


The Bovis Cycle (BTFA) balances the knowledge we have around Process and Systems (incl. Technology) with knowledge around People, detailing the needs of the evolved human brain


The Problem with a “Logic-Only” Approach

Traditional Lean implementations have leaned heavily on a logic-only / what has been thought of (simplistically / inaccurately) as 'left-brain' approach, focusing on tools and techniques like 5S, PDCA, Kanban, and Kaizen events. While these methods have proven valuable, they often overlook a critical element: the human factor. Western management practices, driven by accounting practices and efficiency metrics, most often fail to address the emotional and psychological needs of the people expected to drive and engage with change.

The result? A “blame culture” where defensive behaviors, fear, and resistance thrive. This psychological resistance is not just a byproduct of poor management; it’s embedded in how we measure performance and drive action based on more generic assumptions, approved of at a social / institutional level.

The Disconnect Between Accounting and Reality

One of the core issues is the disconnect between standard accounting practices and real-time operations. Traditional accounting drives decision-making based on forecasts, budget allocations, and cost recovery models, often pushing actions that are detached from actual value-adding activities. This “push” mentality, where decisions are based on assumptions made months or years in advance, puts pressure on teams to hit targets that are very often misaligned with the business’s true needs.

One example, saw the belief in meeting 'volume throughput' targets drive a production team to prioritise easily producible, low-value products over high-margin items. The irony? The approach satisfied accounting targets but led to financial losses, despite the production facility “making the numbers.”

This example comes from a company who were adding to a £1.2M static stockyard, by producing 70mm thick product, worth £200/tonne. This product was cut to make the Metre-cubed throughput targets, while the market was crying out for the same raw material, cut into 40mm thick product, worth £750/tonne. Redundancies were made.

Such disconnects between predicted number requirements and opportunities to improve profit, demoralise employees who see their hard work devalued and their knowledge ignored.

Lean and Psychology: Why People Matter More Than Processes

At the heart of Lean is the idea that responsibility and control should rest with those closest to the value-adding operations. Yet, traditional measures, driven by beliefs promoted through accounting practice, all-so-often strip away that control, leading to a culture of disempowerment and negativity. People respond best when they have a sense of control and ownership (in line with self-determination theory), yet standard practices have advocated replacing this with top-down mandates and fear-driven management for decades.

In a truly Lean environment, responsibility is about more than just metrics; it’s about enabling employees to exercise judgment and creativity in real-time. When leadership focuses on “giving control to gain control,” it fosters a culture where honesty, respect, and trust (HRT for business ;-)) become the norm. This culture shift requires leaders to let go of centralised control and embrace a mindset that prioritises relationships, communication, and psychological well-being.


Be careful what you believe...

Throw away statements, like the one in the image above, often encourage the reader to accept the dopamine hit, by making a quick link to feeling right / justified & good about self.

However, such statements (tough at the top / nice guys finish last etc.) often inform a 'Type A' behaviour model that favours only the most aggressive, competitive and resilient personality types in society, while ignoring the opportunity to create the conditions in which the metaphorical 'eggs' and 'potatoes' can both thrive. With the onset of neuroscience, and the ability to clearly detail what brains need to work at their best, creating a better environment is now a very real possibility, where emotional engagement is celebrated as root cause of higher performance, rather than dismissed as irrelevant and only for the weak!

The BTFA Cycle: A New Way of Thinking

To bridge the gap between traditional Lean practices and the psychological needs of employees, it’s crucial to embrace a new cycle: Believe, Think, Feel, Act - BTFA?. This model recognises that change is not just a process but a reflection of how we are being, toward ourselves, our teams, and the systems we interact with. Leaders who understand this can create environments where positive emotions drive high performance, rather than the negativity often instilled by beliefs in things like accounting practice and the resulting measures that determine action ...

'What gets measured gets done' is another unfortunate saying, because it also means, what we fail to measure, is often ignored, at great cost to people and society, but all the time our attention is taken by the numbers being reported, the damage this can do goes unnoticed.

Challenging Assumptions and Rethinking Change

To achieve truly sustainable change, leaders must challenge the assumptions that underlie traditional management practices. It’s time to question the outdated belief that “batch and push” production models, driven by accounting beliefs and practices, are inherently “good.” Instead, we need to embrace approaches that align with the realities of today’s dynamic markets, focusing on real-time data, value-stream-driven decisions, and practices that genuinely empower employees.

Sustainability and the Future of Lean

Today, more organisations are seeking “sustainable change,” but many still cling to flawed accounting beliefs that prioritise short-term gains over long-term stability. To break this cycle, we need to go beyond implementing the latest tools or techniques and address the cultural and psychological barriers that have held back the philosophy behind Lean for decades. Sustainable change requires a shift in belief systems, from the boardroom to the shop floor, aligning measures with what truly drives value.

Conclusion: Beyond Lean – Toward Meaningful Change

Lean & Six Sigma have had a profound impact on manufacturing, but it’s time to go beyond tools and techniques. Real change isn’t about what you do; it’s about how you are being when you do it. Leaders must focus on creating environments that promote trust, respect, and empowerment, recognising that change is a constant. Like energy, it is not about creation or destruction, but transformation. The question is: will your organisation transform change into something “good” or simply repeat the same mistakes under a different brand?


Full disclosure

The above, is the summary of a much longer piece I wrote ... 20 years ago!

That's right, 20 years on, and the same message remains just as pertinent as it was then. It seems the world of 'Change' ... hasn't changed it's approach. The only metric to increase significantly appears to be employee disengagement, underpinning new terms, like 'Burnout'... to accompany a 200 year national productivity low point (as reported by the ONS).

To find out more about BTFA for your team, and what it really takes to lead significant and sustainable change for improved productivity, performance & profit, contact us via the website, or send us a message here: [email protected]

Mark Greenhouse MEng

Factory Performance Diagnostic Reports discover what your factory CAN achieve / Developing Manufacturing Leaders with Coaching & Mentoring / Lean Manufacturing Solutions / Posts about Daily Challenges in Factories / EFC

3 个月

'Batch and push', the old economies of scale model debunked by Sony in the 1950s. Economy of Scale is really the "Economising of Wasted Time". Bus-y-ness = productive is another belief. You know a business is beginning to understand and challenge when it turns a work station off because it doesn't need the output right now.

Sid Joynson

Helper, Sid Joynson Partnership

3 个月

David, I have always enjoyed being the little boy in the 'Emperor's New Clothes Story." When I do, I always remember the words of William, Gandhi and Martin. "Wrong is wrong, even if everybody is for it; and right is right, even if everybody is against it". William Penn - Quaker.?--- "On moral issues you are your own majority". Gandhi.?--- “Here I stand, I can do no other, God help me.” Martin Luther. When told he would be burnt at the stake if he didn’t recant. Great mind-set words.

Levent Türk (??Mr.BTFA??)

?? Believe-Think-Feel-Act Master??

3 个月

So true. Sustainable change is not about tools and systems. It is about people and their beliefs

Cliff Williams CAMP CMRP MMP CRL AUTHOR

Principal Advisor - Asset Management, Maintenance and Reliability

3 个月

‘What gets measured gets done’ must be the most misleading and obstructive thow away phrase that too many people use. Let’s be clear - what gets measured - gets measured! The doing is often forgotten or the inability to understand your measures drives the wrong doing. In line with this article’s theme, if you ask those who are responsible for delivering what’s being measured they will often point out what measure truly reflects the effectiveness or efficiency of what they do. Unfortunately the measures are chosen/ created by the group that is only interested in ‘what’ and not ‘why’

要查看或添加评论,请登录

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了