Integration & Association

I have been a lot about the close association between Lean, Six Sigma and Risk Management for a number of months. It is interesting that all three approaches to improvement are fundamentally routed in the PDCA (Plan, Do, Check, Act) cycle defined by Deming.

All of them start by understanding the process or organisation (Lean to look at waste, Six Sigma to look at variation and Risk Management to look at Risk), followed by planning and then implementing some improvements, reviewing what has been done and then planning further improvements. This can be seen in the 5 Step Approach to Lean defined by Womack and Jones, in the DMAIC approach used by Six Sigma and the standard approach to risk used by Risk Management specialists.

There is even a lot of overlap in the resulting tools that each approach used - from Process Mapping to Brainstorming and from Risk Assessments to FMEA. The fact that each approach is so closely aligned has enabled the creation of an integrated approach to improvement that combines Lean with Six Sigma and Risk Management (which we have called PROPA).

All of this is available in a new guide that has been written by myself and Malcolm Tullett called 'Introduction to Lean, Six Sigma and Risk Management) which is available by dropping me a line - which can be done via the Amnis Website (www.amnis-uk.com).

I look forward to hearing from you and wish you all a Happy New Year.

Tools & Mechanics

Every year I like to make something for my kids (to mix in with the pile of bought toys) and as I worked on finishing one of them at the weekend I realised that I used a screwdriver, stanley knife, paint brush, cleaning fluid, hammer, nails, multipurpose coating, G-Clamps, glue, saw, sander and drill.

If we take these are the tools of improvement and we gave them to someone completely unaware of how to use the tools do you think they would use them in the right order or in the right way?

Something I have experienced a lot of is people who have been on a training course and learnt (say) 5S and have gone back with this blunt weapon and tried to apply it as they were taught - often in a very mechanistic way and then wonder why the results they achieve do not match the 'Here's one I made earlier' case study used on their training course.

This then leads to a feeling of disillusionment with the tools because 'obviously they do not work here'. In some key sectors, like manufacturing and the healthcare sector, a lot of people have gained some understanding of Lean and quite a few of these have tried to implement the improvements without success. This creates a cultural backlash to improvements, an unneccesary inertia, because of the previous failure to achieve lasting results.

The real trick to it all is to focus not on the blunt use of tools but on how and when to use the tools, in what sequence and using an appropriate amount of force to do so - something that a few days of training can never hope to achieve.

The real art of improvement, just like the old carpenter's apprenticeship, is to practice, make mistakes, learn and reapply your improvement 'art' until it is 'in the muscle' - but sadly, people often give up far too soon for this to happen!

Methodology v Tool Box

I know I have referred to this issue elsewhere, both in my online blogs and in some of the articles that I have written - but I was reminded of this in a discussion yesterday with someone from the NHS (which is currently going through something of a Lean revelation at present).

They were raving about the 'Lean tools' that were most appropriate to the NHS (5S, Value Stream Mapping etc) and I asked them a very simple question - namely, 'Have you thought about when and how to apply these tools?'

There was a stunned silence and then a very hasty reply of, 'During the transformation process of course', which did not explain at what point in the improvement process that the tools should be used.

I have found that a large percentage of people embarking on Lean Programmes focus on the technicalities of the tools rather than the methodology and process of implementation. This is why only around 25% of improvement programmes will be successful because the tools have been applied in the wrong manner, by poorly motivated people, at the wrong time and with inappropriate levels of support.

I would say that choosing an appropriate methodology is much, much more important than the tools - partly because the tools are generally all common sense - but more importantly because it avoids 'Lean Improvement Failure'!

Positives, Neutrals & Negatives

I was reading in the IOD Magazine this month about a piece of research undertaken by a consultancy called Changefirst which states that only 37% of employees will be committed to a change process, 25% will resist it and 38% will accept it but will need further support.

My own expertise of transformational change programmes suggests that there are three groups of people within any change process, namely the 'Positives' (those who adopt the change willingly as they see the benefits), 'Negatives' (those who are against the change process and look for reasons for it to fail) and the 'Neutrals' (those who either don't have enough information to make a decision either way or who have no strong feelings about the activity). Instinctly, based on some hundreds of Lean/Six Sigma events, I would say that the numbers are 20% each for Positives and Negatives and the remaining 60% for Neutrals, but as the change process goes forward (and assuming it is effective) the mix changes to a point where the numbers are closer to 50-60% Positives, 30-40% Neutrals and 5-10% Negatives.

However, the exact mix of which individuals are positives, negatives and neutrals will change - some negatives will become positives, some neutrals will become negatives etc - so it is difficult to predict at the start of the change process who is in which category.

All of this correlates with the work of Changefirst, although the article is not clear at what point in the change cycle the respondents were on, which is probably why there is a dispartity with my own research - what do you think?

Drop me a line to markeatonamnis-uk.com or ring me on +44 (0) 7841 464916.