I posted a blog earlier this year on this topic and have decided to post another because Lean is already starting to lose its cachet - particularly in Healthcare - and partly because it has become a vehicle for large consulting fees for little return (and certainly no where near enough knowledge transfer to make the Lean improvements sustainable).
In earlier posts on this thread I have identified the nine key reasons why Lean programmes fail and we are already starting to see that Healthcare experiences are mirroring Manufacturing experiences and that many trusts are moving away from discussing 'Lean' as they realise that it can turn off many in Healthcare who perceive it as a 'Manufacturing Fad' and have also heard the horror stories of those Healthcare organisations who have got it wrong (and sometimes badly got it wrong).
I have always believed that the key to success in the implementation of improvements is not about 'Lean', 'Six Sigma' or 'Agile' but about:
1. A robust structure
2. A focus on knowledge transfer and sustainability
3. Building internal relationships
4. Managing risks as well as managing improvements
5. Doing what is the best for the people and the process and not just what the 'Lean Purists' want
What do you think?
Monday, May 14, 2007
Saturday, May 12, 2007
Bringing People Into Lean
This post details the last of the nine main causes of failure. Since starting this series of posts, further research has been undertaken which changes the weighting of some of these causes of failure and which will be outlined in our other blog here.
As stated at the start of this thread of related posts, the results of the work that led to this series was published by the IOM and can be downloaded here.
However, in finishing this series of posts, I can announce that the last issue that affects the success of Lean projects from the original research is 'On-Boarding' or the art of bringing people into the process, either from internal transfers or external recruitment, who have not been part of the improvement process and do not share the values and understanding held by others in the group and who have not been brought into the way things are done in the 'new way' and who bring with them therefore alternative (and often non-Lean) ways of doing things.
Therefore, in conclusion of this series of posts, I can summarise the results of our original research into the causes of Lean failures as being problems with:
As stated at the start of this thread of related posts, the results of the work that led to this series was published by the IOM and can be downloaded here.
However, in finishing this series of posts, I can announce that the last issue that affects the success of Lean projects from the original research is 'On-Boarding' or the art of bringing people into the process, either from internal transfers or external recruitment, who have not been part of the improvement process and do not share the values and understanding held by others in the group and who have not been brought into the way things are done in the 'new way' and who bring with them therefore alternative (and often non-Lean) ways of doing things.
Therefore, in conclusion of this series of posts, I can summarise the results of our original research into the causes of Lean failures as being problems with:
- Planning
- Reactions
- Ownership
- Training
- Operation
- Communication
- On-Boarding
- Leadership
- Systems
Collectively, this work spells the word PROTOCOLS. However, whilst each of these areas of failure remain valid, later research (gained partly from Manufacturing with some testing in Healthcare) shows that some can be combined, others changed and at least one needs to be added.
To find out more either drop me an email to markeaton(a)amnis-uk.com or read the post on our other blog here.
Wednesday, May 09, 2007
Two for One!
In the style of the retail BOGOF offer (Buy One, Get One Free!) I have covered two topics as to why Lean Improvement Programmes fail in one post. These represent posts 7 and 8 of what will be 9 reasons.
As ever, I would welcome your feedback and comments on the following, so here goes!
Two common reasons for Lean Improvements failing to embed themselves are to do with how people behave when Lean is introduced, namely the reactions they have and whether or not they take ownership for the improvements.
The five most common problems that are experienced in Lean programmes related to reactions and ownership of individuals and teams are proposed as:
1. Not involving people in the design of the Lean process
A very common problem is trying to impose Lean on a group or using only a subset of people to implement improvements without others having the opportunity to comment.
2. Not dealing with genuine concerns of individuals involved
If people involved have a genuine concern that is not addressed or is rail-roaded over, they will not commit to the solution - simple.
3. Blaming Individuals for Success
If people feel they will get 'blamed' for the solution that the team achieves they will attempt to distance themselves from it.
4. Not Creating the Compelling Need
Failing to inspire people as to the reason for Lean will often lead to a failure to understand why it is being imposed and a general lack of enthusiasm.
5. Not Saying 'Thanks'
Very simple to forget but it is essential to thank individuals for their contribution to a project - if you want them to commit to the next that is!
What do you think?
As ever, I would welcome your feedback and comments on the following, so here goes!
Two common reasons for Lean Improvements failing to embed themselves are to do with how people behave when Lean is introduced, namely the reactions they have and whether or not they take ownership for the improvements.
The five most common problems that are experienced in Lean programmes related to reactions and ownership of individuals and teams are proposed as:
1. Not involving people in the design of the Lean process
A very common problem is trying to impose Lean on a group or using only a subset of people to implement improvements without others having the opportunity to comment.
2. Not dealing with genuine concerns of individuals involved
If people involved have a genuine concern that is not addressed or is rail-roaded over, they will not commit to the solution - simple.
3. Blaming Individuals for Success
If people feel they will get 'blamed' for the solution that the team achieves they will attempt to distance themselves from it.
4. Not Creating the Compelling Need
Failing to inspire people as to the reason for Lean will often lead to a failure to understand why it is being imposed and a general lack of enthusiasm.
5. Not Saying 'Thanks'
Very simple to forget but it is essential to thank individuals for their contribution to a project - if you want them to commit to the next that is!
What do you think?
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Systemic Failure
Welcome to the next instalment in our series of posts about why Lean fails and in this short post we explore the way that organisational systems contribute to Lean projects either falling short of expectations or failing completely.
Systems cause failures through three things:
1. Rigid computerised systems that are built to support faulty processes
Many computerised systems are built around 'common' processes and are difficult to customise for specific changes after installation, and anyway the training required to learn how to operate these systems creates problems with resistance to changes and organisational inertia. This is not an easy thing to overcome and after creating a 'Future State' for your organisational processes may need some additional investment to modify the system to make it 'fit for purpose' and able to support the proposed 'Future State'.
2. Faulty operating procedures which degrade improvements
In making changes to an organisation's value streams you will often find procedures, operating conventions and procedures which need to be changed either by changing what is written or changing behaviours. Obviously there is a need to ensure standards of compliance are maintained but many procedures and practices were designed to operate under the 'Current State' and need to be changed to be suitable for the 'Future State'. Failure to address these issues will bring the change programme to a halt with a bump.
3. Measurement and reward systems that are designed for the 'old way' not the 'new way'
The way that processes are measured and people are rewarded/recognised can severely hamper organisational success with Lean. This is a particular problem within larger groups where corporate finance teams impose certain reporting restrictions that force a certain type of behaviour whilst it is not uncommon to find that Lean can be seen as a penalty or a cause of teams finding it harder to achieve key performance measures - something that will kill it stone dead!
Anyway, if the terms 'Current State', 'Blue Sky State' or 'Future State' are new to you - drop me an email to markeaton(a)amnis-uk.com and I will send you some notes on Value Stream Analysis.
Systems cause failures through three things:
1. Rigid computerised systems that are built to support faulty processes
Many computerised systems are built around 'common' processes and are difficult to customise for specific changes after installation, and anyway the training required to learn how to operate these systems creates problems with resistance to changes and organisational inertia. This is not an easy thing to overcome and after creating a 'Future State' for your organisational processes may need some additional investment to modify the system to make it 'fit for purpose' and able to support the proposed 'Future State'.
2. Faulty operating procedures which degrade improvements
In making changes to an organisation's value streams you will often find procedures, operating conventions and procedures which need to be changed either by changing what is written or changing behaviours. Obviously there is a need to ensure standards of compliance are maintained but many procedures and practices were designed to operate under the 'Current State' and need to be changed to be suitable for the 'Future State'. Failure to address these issues will bring the change programme to a halt with a bump.
3. Measurement and reward systems that are designed for the 'old way' not the 'new way'
The way that processes are measured and people are rewarded/recognised can severely hamper organisational success with Lean. This is a particular problem within larger groups where corporate finance teams impose certain reporting restrictions that force a certain type of behaviour whilst it is not uncommon to find that Lean can be seen as a penalty or a cause of teams finding it harder to achieve key performance measures - something that will kill it stone dead!
Anyway, if the terms 'Current State', 'Blue Sky State' or 'Future State' are new to you - drop me an email to markeaton(a)amnis-uk.com and I will send you some notes on Value Stream Analysis.
Sunday, April 01, 2007
Train 2 Fail
In this series of (what will be) nine posts on why Lean fails, we have already explored failures due to the way Lean is operated, planned, led or communicated.
Having explored these four issues, the fifth reason for failure can normally be found in problems to do with how individuals and teams are trained and there can be a number of critical problems with these areas, including:
Insufficient Training
Not giving those involved the skills to enable them to lead Lean improvement programmes is perhaps the primary reason for failure under this category. Sometimes it is caused by inexperienced leaders and trainers thinking Lean is something 'easy in the head and therefore easy in the hand' and sometimes it is down to the speed of implementation, but whatever the cause it can demoralise teams, remove confidence and delay/stall progress.
Over-Training
The complete opposite of the first problem is the application of never ending training and failing to ever move to action.
Incorrect Training
The Japanese Lean Sensei have a saying, 'Be careful who you learn from' - there are a lot of 'Lean Jockeys' who have read a book, been able to see someone at work and done a couple of events and then set up in business as a Lean consultant - check your references for trainers!
Inappropriate Training
Giving people skills in (say) Jidoka when the processes they will be improving need little more than a bit of 5S(+1) and Kanban is both an inappropriate use of time and demoralising to a lot of people. Make the training appropriate and progressive so the higher skills are learnt at the point they are needed.
To counter these sorts of problems, we focus on developing Change Agents who have higher level skills, along with varying levels of skills and awareness of people directly involved or affected by the change process.
We also run a number of open workshops which can be found listed on our website (www.amnis-uk.com) or you can email me for details of the on-site training programmes we run by sending an email to markeaton(a)amnis-uk.com.
One final thing - we are also running a series of workshops with the IOM and you can download the brochure HERE.
Having explored these four issues, the fifth reason for failure can normally be found in problems to do with how individuals and teams are trained and there can be a number of critical problems with these areas, including:
Insufficient Training
Not giving those involved the skills to enable them to lead Lean improvement programmes is perhaps the primary reason for failure under this category. Sometimes it is caused by inexperienced leaders and trainers thinking Lean is something 'easy in the head and therefore easy in the hand' and sometimes it is down to the speed of implementation, but whatever the cause it can demoralise teams, remove confidence and delay/stall progress.
Over-Training
The complete opposite of the first problem is the application of never ending training and failing to ever move to action.
Incorrect Training
The Japanese Lean Sensei have a saying, 'Be careful who you learn from' - there are a lot of 'Lean Jockeys' who have read a book, been able to see someone at work and done a couple of events and then set up in business as a Lean consultant - check your references for trainers!
Inappropriate Training
Giving people skills in (say) Jidoka when the processes they will be improving need little more than a bit of 5S(+1) and Kanban is both an inappropriate use of time and demoralising to a lot of people. Make the training appropriate and progressive so the higher skills are learnt at the point they are needed.
To counter these sorts of problems, we focus on developing Change Agents who have higher level skills, along with varying levels of skills and awareness of people directly involved or affected by the change process.
We also run a number of open workshops which can be found listed on our website (www.amnis-uk.com) or you can email me for details of the on-site training programmes we run by sending an email to markeaton(a)amnis-uk.com.
One final thing - we are also running a series of workshops with the IOM and you can download the brochure HERE.
Saturday, March 24, 2007
Communicate or Die
Wow - I can't believe this is already the fourth of the nine posts about the key reasons why Lean (and other improvement programmes too) fail to deliver the results that organisations want.
So far we have already explored:
1. How the way the improvement is implemented leads to failure
2. Problems with the way improvements are planned
3. Leadership issues
In this post, we will explore the fourth of the nine major reasons for failure - this one concerned with issues surrounding the communication process. As ever, I would welcome your feedback either directly on the blog or via markeaton(a)amnis-uk.com.
Failing to Communicate 'Why?'
The most common communication problem is not clearly presenting the team with the reason for the change, what I would call the 'Compelling Need' (or sometimes the 'Biological Urge' for Change). Without this, the team will not be able to understand why they are being challenged to improve.
Failing to Communicate the Process
Another interesting problem is the failure to communicate the process that will be used (for example - 'We will do a series of Value Stream Maps looking at the X Pathway which will occur during XYZ Months and will lead onto a number of Rapid Improvement Events') Without providing clarity of the process (or without having the clarity) the team will struggle to understand where they are 'in the process' and the benefits achieved will be reduced.
Failing to Communicate 'Across the Pathway'
Here, I am using the term Pathway because it is very common in Lean Healthcare, but for Manufacturing people the term 'Value Stream' is inter-changeable. Specifically, this is concerned with problems about involving people from across an entire value stream (from End to End) as it is only through involving representatives from all the areas affected that you will get a true picture of the impact of the suggested improvements and whether they are going to introduce any upstream or downstream problems.
Communicating Failure
Not every Lean event will be successful and sometimes even successful events will not achieve the results that are expected - and communicating negatively (what you might say is about managers showing they are upset) will demoralise the team affected and, via the grapevine, will spread across the organisation. Always show how happy you are with the success in public and discuss improvements and changes in private.
Communicating Success
It is important to communicate successes of the programme to inspire others - and Lean becomes easier the more successes you have!
Failing to communicate and involve those Affected
This is different to the points above about involving people from across the pathway as even the best Lean project will not be able to involve every single person affected. This is about ensuring that people are not directly involved in the improvement project have the opportunity to discuss the improvements proposed, provide input and most importantly identify suggestions and changes. With no involvement there will be no 'buy in'.
I am sure there are many more reasons for failure but these are, I believe, the top six - if you think I have missed any then I would love to hear from you!
So far we have already explored:
1. How the way the improvement is implemented leads to failure
2. Problems with the way improvements are planned
3. Leadership issues
In this post, we will explore the fourth of the nine major reasons for failure - this one concerned with issues surrounding the communication process. As ever, I would welcome your feedback either directly on the blog or via markeaton(a)amnis-uk.com.
Failing to Communicate 'Why?'
The most common communication problem is not clearly presenting the team with the reason for the change, what I would call the 'Compelling Need' (or sometimes the 'Biological Urge' for Change). Without this, the team will not be able to understand why they are being challenged to improve.
Failing to Communicate the Process
Another interesting problem is the failure to communicate the process that will be used (for example - 'We will do a series of Value Stream Maps looking at the X Pathway which will occur during XYZ Months and will lead onto a number of Rapid Improvement Events') Without providing clarity of the process (or without having the clarity) the team will struggle to understand where they are 'in the process' and the benefits achieved will be reduced.
Failing to Communicate 'Across the Pathway'
Here, I am using the term Pathway because it is very common in Lean Healthcare, but for Manufacturing people the term 'Value Stream' is inter-changeable. Specifically, this is concerned with problems about involving people from across an entire value stream (from End to End) as it is only through involving representatives from all the areas affected that you will get a true picture of the impact of the suggested improvements and whether they are going to introduce any upstream or downstream problems.
Communicating Failure
Not every Lean event will be successful and sometimes even successful events will not achieve the results that are expected - and communicating negatively (what you might say is about managers showing they are upset) will demoralise the team affected and, via the grapevine, will spread across the organisation. Always show how happy you are with the success in public and discuss improvements and changes in private.
Communicating Success
It is important to communicate successes of the programme to inspire others - and Lean becomes easier the more successes you have!
Failing to communicate and involve those Affected
This is different to the points above about involving people from across the pathway as even the best Lean project will not be able to involve every single person affected. This is about ensuring that people are not directly involved in the improvement project have the opportunity to discuss the improvements proposed, provide input and most importantly identify suggestions and changes. With no involvement there will be no 'buy in'.
I am sure there are many more reasons for failure but these are, I believe, the top six - if you think I have missed any then I would love to hear from you!
Saturday, March 10, 2007
Leading Lean Failure
In the third of our series of nine blog posts about the reasons why change programmes based on Lean and Six Sigma fail to achieve the results organisations are looking for.
This post focuses on the top ten ways that leadership action or inaction brings down programmes. I would welcome your thoughts on these points:
1. Failing to engage the organisational leader
If the organisational leader (CEO, MD or other) fails to engage, the process will grind slowly (or quickly at times) to a halt!
2. Failing to appoint a board level sponsor
In some cases this will be the organisational leader, but in larger organisations it will be an operational director who will take on the role of sponsoring the improvement programme - without this board level person the improvement project does not have a voice in the organisation.
3. Not setting an effective scope for the improvement
All improvement programmes have to be scoped effectively to focus the organisation and also ensure that by making one change it does not impact negatively elsewhere in the organisation. It is the role of Leadership Teams to help shape the scope of improvement.
4. Failing to communicate the reasons for change
Simply not communicating the reasons for the change will lead to unexpected resistence from the front-line teams.
5. Penalising failure (or complaining about perceived failure)
Failing to support the team by either demonstrating displeasure with their efforts or penalising mistakes is a sure fire way to disengage the staff.
6. Changing things from on high
If the team have designed a solution, having a leader change it back or to something else without consultation will demoralise the team. If they did not have all the facts then the project was not scoped properly or the wrong team were chosen!
7. Failing to celebrate success
When the team do have a success, the role of leadership is to support them, celebrate it and set them the next goal. Sometimes, leaders fail to even show up for closing briefs - just imagine the impact on the team!
8. Not releasing the resources or setting unrealistic timescales
Massive improvement can happen with minimal budgets but the most important resource in the improvement process is the human resource and failing to allow people the time to make the change will doom the team to failure. Making big improvements requires effective resources to be available!
9. Creating mixed messages
If an organisation commits itself to improvement via (say) Lean or Six Sigma and then chops and changes (for example 'We don't have time to do the Lean project this week' or just imposing change) will send mixed messages to the team and demonstrate a lack of faith from the leaders in the improvement process.
10. Too Fast or Too Slow
Individuals take time to adjust to a changed way of working - don't drive them too fast! They also like to feel a certain amount of tempo and to feel that things are actually changing therefore don't drive it too slow.
Well, these are the top 10 ussues from our experience - what are yours?
This post focuses on the top ten ways that leadership action or inaction brings down programmes. I would welcome your thoughts on these points:
1. Failing to engage the organisational leader
If the organisational leader (CEO, MD or other) fails to engage, the process will grind slowly (or quickly at times) to a halt!
2. Failing to appoint a board level sponsor
In some cases this will be the organisational leader, but in larger organisations it will be an operational director who will take on the role of sponsoring the improvement programme - without this board level person the improvement project does not have a voice in the organisation.
3. Not setting an effective scope for the improvement
All improvement programmes have to be scoped effectively to focus the organisation and also ensure that by making one change it does not impact negatively elsewhere in the organisation. It is the role of Leadership Teams to help shape the scope of improvement.
4. Failing to communicate the reasons for change
Simply not communicating the reasons for the change will lead to unexpected resistence from the front-line teams.
5. Penalising failure (or complaining about perceived failure)
Failing to support the team by either demonstrating displeasure with their efforts or penalising mistakes is a sure fire way to disengage the staff.
6. Changing things from on high
If the team have designed a solution, having a leader change it back or to something else without consultation will demoralise the team. If they did not have all the facts then the project was not scoped properly or the wrong team were chosen!
7. Failing to celebrate success
When the team do have a success, the role of leadership is to support them, celebrate it and set them the next goal. Sometimes, leaders fail to even show up for closing briefs - just imagine the impact on the team!
8. Not releasing the resources or setting unrealistic timescales
Massive improvement can happen with minimal budgets but the most important resource in the improvement process is the human resource and failing to allow people the time to make the change will doom the team to failure. Making big improvements requires effective resources to be available!
9. Creating mixed messages
If an organisation commits itself to improvement via (say) Lean or Six Sigma and then chops and changes (for example 'We don't have time to do the Lean project this week' or just imposing change) will send mixed messages to the team and demonstrate a lack of faith from the leaders in the improvement process.
10. Too Fast or Too Slow
Individuals take time to adjust to a changed way of working - don't drive them too fast! They also like to feel a certain amount of tempo and to feel that things are actually changing therefore don't drive it too slow.
Well, these are the top 10 ussues from our experience - what are yours?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
