What Continuous Improvement method is Best?

KaizenSensei gets quite a few inquiries about implementing Continuous Improvement programs but lately a lot of companies are looking for some kind of evaluation of what they currently have. It seems that those that have embraced a Six-sigma, belted program are having second thoughts. The administration and size of the program have grown immensely but the returns have not kept place. The culture is mired in mistrust of management and constant regression once a project is completed. The actual value of these projects are hard to verify or quantify; the shop floor people have not been convinced that this isn’t just another ‘flavor-of-the-month’ project.

What companies are asking for is a way to keep what works and change what doesn’t. Seems simple enough! The major problem is that there are so many layers and details to a ‘Six-sigma’ belted program that eliminating or even reduce  the program is difficult. Who goes and who stays and what will be needed if we change and to what will we change? And how long will this take? Will there be a lot of regression while we change direction? If so what can be expected?

The average shop floor worker feels neglected. They see the project being done by engineers and what seems like an ‘elite group’ of management personnel. In many cases they are completely left out of the project and once these projects are completed, the group leaves the area and is never to be seen again! This causes the worker to have little reason to promote someone else’s changes. There is nothing in it for me, is the prevailing attitude.

Let’s take a look at the differences between a typical Toyota Production System implementation and one based on the Six-sigma, belted version.

CONCLUSION

There are two major competing initiatives in the marketplace today for continuous improvement: Lean Manufacturing based on the Toyota Way/Toyota Production System and Lean Six-Sigma; Black Belt, Green Belt programs. This program is more popular today because it’s quantifiable in regards to having many layers of details that can be checked off as being completed.

The Lean Manufacturing or Toyota Production System approach is a culture changing approach to the elimination of waste or non-value-added activities, in an effort to provide highest quality products or services to the customer at the lowest cost and in the shortest lead-time possible. It is much harder to measure culture acceptance and personal commitment thus it is not as easy to check-off on a list as completed when it is never really finished!

When undergoing a lean transformation, as we call using the Toyota approach, we utilize tools like Value Stream Mapping to systematically identify opportunities for improvement then by using kaizen events that are epiphanies making immediate changes for the better.

We then use the time-tested PDCA (Plan Do Check Act) approach to implementing and sustaining solutions. The solutions may be Kaizen events and might include tools like one-piece flow, kanban, 5S, process improvements and other tools.

Lean becomes part of the culture when employees at all levels utilize the concepts of problem solving and the elimination of waste on a regular basis, as part of their regular jobs. They work to personal metrics and are held accountable for continual improvement of the results. It is the adoption of Participative Management where decisions are made at the lowest level where the actual expertise lies. It is thus, “By the People, For the People, With the people, All the People, All the Time”!

Lean produces better results for the organizations that implement it because the Toyota Production System wholly embraces empowering employees to continually explore their workplace and make rapid decisions and process improvements as close as possible to where the work is being done. This takes creativity and flexibility, two things Toyota values but consultants didn't understand or acknowledge. Their implementations and methodologies use a ‘One size fits all’ approach to Lean.

A Lean Six-Sigma program is based on the Six-Sigma DMAIC (Define Measure Analyze Improve Control) approach to solving problems. It is also based on the concept of eliminating defects, which are defined as failures to meet customer requirements.

Projects are typically selected based on the best return on investment, usually a financial benefit. Value Stream Mapping may be used to identify opportunities but usually the DMAIC method is used. Each project may be assigned to a Black Belt (Lean Six-Sigma trained expert) or Green Belt as a leader plus several team members. Using the DMAIC approach, the team attempts to solve the problem at hand, implements solutions, and puts controls in place to sustain the improvement.

The team will typically use Six-sigma tools such as process mapping, data collection, process capability analysis, hypothesis testing, cause and effect analysis, graphical analysis, Design of Experiments (DOE), FMEA, and many others to solve the problem; if the problem lends itself to the lean tools, very often they will be utilized. Typically, it takes much longer for a Lean Six-Sigma program to drive to all levels of employees, and most times it regresses back to the starting point; however, the program itself tends to be more structured on average than a lean program. Each step, process mapping, data collection, process capability analysis, hypothesis testing, cause and effect analysis, graphical analysis, Design of Experiments (DOE), FMEA, must be completed one after the other!

Six-Sigma (Black Belt, project based system) fails because it relies on sending information up to leaders who make decisions usually at each step of the initial data mining portion of the project. The results must be then sent back down to the middle managers and front lines to be implemented.

This procedure is problematic because it takes significantly more time and moves decisions further away from those most familiar with the work; the shop floor worker. There's just too much data available today to send it up to managers for every decision; doing so creates a bottleneck that slows the organization's ability to adapt and adjust to market changes.

The value of Time is not stressed nor does Six-Sigma effect Culture change as the benefactors are the personnel that use a ‘Project’ as a resume enhancement. Typically when the Six-Sigma team moves on, the regression factor takes the ‘improvements’ back to ground zero because there is no ownership of the changes by the affected process or operator.

My advice to those inquiring what can be done to “Save what is worth saving and scrap all that does not”, is to get back to basics. Identify the waste and get rid of it, keeping in mind that Time is the most important element that we can work with. The customer expects no less that 100% quality, has already set the price they are willing to pay but give us free latitude to reduce the time it takes us to deliver product to them.

They control what the quality and price will be but we control how long it will take to deliver. This is where we compete, - on delivery!

Phase out the DMAIC completely as it is not needed. Instead concentrate on what is needed to change the culture of the company, one that concentrates on the importance of the elimination of waste and the realization that Time is the most important tool we have. The only way to get real continuous improvement is to make it a natural cultural part of everyone’s jobs. Everyone!

“By the People, For the People, and With the people, All the People, All the Time”!

At www.KaizenSensei you can see more details of how this is done.