Lean: Someone has Poisoned the Waterhole!
- January 12th, 2010
- Posted in Systems Thinking Concepts
- Write comment
Perusing emails, websites and conversations on Twitter the purported “lean thinking” crowd seems to be a contradiction of terms. I have been in emotional conversations with some of these folks that claim foul when I categorize them as “lean hornets.” Claims of “we really are about the thinking” is the feedback.
So, what is the big deal? Here is the rub. I like to view folks I encounter by what they do or claim to do. Most of these folks are posting to their blog . . . or when I visit their websites . . . or when I visit prospective customers that have worked with lean consultants about how they use tools (value stream maps, takt time, etc.) Someone has poisoned the water hole!
The classic came via email that I received from the Lean Enterprise Institute (LEI). Here is what was written:
“Lean tools are important, but they can’t deliver sustainable results — and often can’t achieve any results — unless we use them with a lean state of mind in an environment that supports problem solving through experimentation by means of Plan-Do-Check-Act.”
Wow! A revelation has taken place, maybe this whole 2012 thing is for real. But wait a minute . . . scroll down further and you see mistake-proofing and value stream mapping workshops for healthcare!!!!?
I appreciate the affirmation that tools don’t deliver. But we need deeds, not words.
I’m sorry my friends, but it was W. Edwards Deming that told us that we have one shot to train people the right way. We have been wrongly led down the tool path by LEI. They may regret the path, but the familiar quack of this duck still rings.
Dr. Deming and Taiichi Ohno taught us a way of thinking and both warned against tools. I find it to be a form of copying. Three questions stand stalwart:
- Who invented the tool?
- What problem were they trying to solve?
- Do I have that problem?
I can taste the poison at this drinking hole . . . can you?
Leave me a comment. . . share your opinion! Click on comments below.
Systems thinking . . . Join us in 2010!
Tripp Babbitt is a speaker, blogger and consultant to service industry (private and public). His organization helps executives find a better way to make the work work. Download free from www.newsystemsthinking.com “Understanding Your Organization as a System” and gain knowledge of systems thinking or contact us about our intervention services at [email protected] Reach him on Twitter at www.twitter.com/TriBabbitt or LinkedIn at www.linkedin.com/in/trippbabbitt.
Your post nicely stated the truth. It is not the tool but the one who is applying the the method that counts. And it is not just about Lean, but all sorts of methodologies, even for systems thinking. Many people are too obsessed with tools and believe that tools are the single most important part of a concept. Maybe it is because tools usually produce tangible outputs (not necessarily results!) and people like to feel that they have done something! Tools are just the realization of thinking and concepts. Without the thinking and concepts and reasoning behind, tools are dead useless or even harmful. Once I worked with a colleague who like to use tools to demonstrate his “expertise”. He even instructed a client to do statistically analysis to find the correlation between the floor size of a shop and the profitability, and then claimed it a causal relationship: size->profitability. But what was the thinking or reasoning or hypothesis behind this was not considered (or left it as intuitive). Size is not important compared to pedestrian traffic, location characteristics, and other factors. Blind application of a tool is worse than wild guessing. For wild guessing, you know it is prone to be wrong; for results from tools, you may rely on it completely. Surely, every tool has its value. We need to know the specific conditions that a tool works, the assumptions or prerequisites that makes the tool work, and be critical enough to question if it is a poison. Again, thanks for the article. Catus Lee http://catuslee.com
All you do is criticize. I find that trait tiresome. You think “mistake proofing” is a tool? You are sorely misguided. It’s a mindset and, gasp, a “way of thinking,” but you have a monopoly on proper thinking, don’t you?
Hello Mark- You have a choice to read or not read. So, if it is tiresome to you . . . door #2 may be a viable option. Anything that promotes the codification of method is dangerous. Poke Yoka ( or if we go back to Ohno’s work Baka Yoka) is a tool for error prevention and mistake proofing. Poka Yoka is great for preventing errors on the production line, but the worker still controls the work. Lean application in service has shown that these decisions are made to force the worker to do something and does not keep them in control. I won’t talk about what happens with variety of demand and this thinking since you don’t like to hear it. Ohno didn’t codify method, someone else did, can you guess who?
It’s “poka yoke.” Ohno’s term “Baka Yoke” fell out of favor, since it means “idiot proofing” – not keeping with the “respect for humanity” principle. You want to call it a “tool,” fine. I disagree. If all of these bad things happen because command-and-control managers in service industries use poka yoke to control workers, why throw that blame at LEI. Yes, it’s all Jim Womack’s fault. Your schtick would be less tiresome (yes, why do I read this?) if you had just ONE positive example of how “systems thinking” has led to benefit to a hospital. I’ve asked a few times and you never provide an example. You just complain about others. How does that help anyone? I guess I’m reading and feel compelled to provide balance to what I think are your wildly overgeneralizing bad characterizations of what you think “lean” is.
Your Systems Thinking Review buddies characterize my comment as “irate.” Funny how you can read tone and emotion into my comments. I guess when John Seddon is angry all the time, others seem angry too? I’m trying to defend your mischaracterizations and overgeneralizations, such as “lean doesn’t work in services” or “all lean people are toolheads.” And you don’t post all of my comments. So much for trying to engage in discussion.
There you go Mark. As I said earlier, I am in the process of moving my blog to WordPress. Comments have taken a back seat. As the defender of all things “lean” you must understand that my poss is based on my experience. If you took a minute and looked around you, you might discover the same things I have found. It does seem strange to me that Steven Spear and even you can criticize lean, but not the systems thinking crowd. This makes us bad people and you have to put on the cape to save the day . . . which is more tiresome to me. I do not believe copying TPS is the way and that manufacturing tools transfer very well. I am thankful that John Seddon opened my eyes to better thinking. BTW, LEI doesn’t always post my comments . . . so much for trying to engage in discussion.
The blog commenting system is a tool to facilitate idea exchange, enhance understanding, and allow interactive intellectual development. But a tool is a tool is a tool… The commenting tool alone is either good or bad. It is the context in which it is used and how people use it that create the outcome. Here, I can see a living proof of what Tripp is trying to say. My experience taught me some great lessons that I would like to share here. We live in our own realities which may not align. What “system”, “lean”, or even “love” mean to me can safely be assumed be different to yours. Why bother to have a heated discussion on different realities? I’ve had very heated debates with people over “reengineering”, ‘TQM”, and even “Systems Thinking”. Then I realized that they are merely words and concepts. These “things” will not stand up and walk to me and do the work. It is we people who make these concepts work. With different interpretation of the concepts (even among gurus), we get different actions and different results. I like to engage in discussions that promote mutual growth. Hope we all gain some insights from the discussion.
I have been given the opportunity to participate in a class for project managers called “Beginning your LSS journey”. What kind of critical thinking should I be applying as I listen?
Ralph-
Beware of tools. Any improvement effort that does not require managers to change thinking is destined for short-term or long-term failure. Improvement comes from a change in thinking about the design and management of work. Look back on Deming’s 14 points or System of Profound Knowledge.
Regards, Tripp
Tripp, you are playing the victim here.
LEI has a policy about removing posts that are blatantly self-promotional. I think that’s what you ran into.
You’re free to come to http://www.lean.org/FuseTalk/Forum/ and say whatever you like, as long as it isn’t simply “Come read my whitepaper.”
Give it a try… you won’t be censored.
Mark-
You mean . . . like . . . being self-promotional writing a link to the forum I am a senior advisor for?
The problem with your standard is that you allow white papers, pictures of clean hospital rooms (which is hilarious), links, games . . . except for me. Now that is a standard we can believe in.
No wonder the nurses are walking out.