Lean Management versus Lean Operations- What's the difference? Why does it matter?
When deploying lean I find it helpful to
separate the activities into two components: lean operating systems and lean management
systems. They both are integral parts of becoming and entity with world class culture and performance. These terms are used interchangeably in various organizations, but the tools techniques, and applications of lean are different for both components.
Your lean operating system will consist of tools and activities related with
improvement like kaizen, value streams, flow, pull, takt time, time
observation, etc. (setting standards and improving standards) Sometimes I find it helpful to think in terms of breakthrough improvement. The lean operating system should be able to consistently deliver double digit improvement in the areas of staff morale and engagement, quality, lead-time, and cost.
Your lean management system will consist of all the things related to managing
and sustaining your lean environment such as visual management, daily huddles,
project management, suggestion systems, daily problem solving, cascading
audits, leadership standard work, measurement tracking, etc. (maintaining
standards). The management system can be used for delivering incremental improvement.
The best way to launch lean would be to deliver the management system first,
then go into lean operations, but this approach would rarely be successful.
Until management sees some results, or potential results from lean improvement
(that come from the lean operating system), no one would be interested in
performing the level of work required to get the lean management system up and
running. Organizations that launch the management system as the primary or singular approach in their improvement efforts rarely see breakthrough improvements.
Make no mistake and don't miss this point. To be successful, you need both systems
in place and running well. Even when launching lean operations first, the
timeline between launching the lean operating system and the lean management
system should be very short, like days apart.
In my opinion, most people fail in long term, sustainable quality improvement (or minimize their
results potential) for three reasons;
First, the lean operating system gets all the popular press yet only accounts
for 20% of the work. The management system requires 80% of the
work and vary rarely gets any press. When is the last time you saw a newsletter
or press release on the lean sustaining system?
Secondly, the skills to run a lean management system are usually best taught by
people who operated in lean management system in a prior job. This skill set is widely lacking world-wide. (even
Toyota says this is one of their biggest risks) There are starting to be a few
more books on the management system, but the approaches are far lacking in
depth and volume from the operating systems tools/literature.
Third, when you are launching the new management system, most organizations
fail to stop the old system. So an eager manager/change agent
is forced to operate two systems. In reality, the longer the old system
operates, the higher the likelihood of failure. It is simply too difficult,
time consuming, and frustrating to operate with two management system (which
are usually philosophically, diametrically opposed to one another). The inertia of the old
system gradually pulls the organization back to status quo. The countermeasure
to prevent this from happening is that senior leadership needs to provide some
prioritization, direction, and top cover for the areas wanting to change. This includes the time and resources to deliver the breakthrough improvements and the time to deliver incremental improvement and sustain.
There is a reason why only 3% of all organizations that start on a quality improvement
journey get to world class. These organizations ensure the efforts of the management system as an equal ingredient in improvement success.
Lean Blessings:
Ron
Ron Bercaw, President and Sensei
www.breakthroughhorizons.com
Comments
Post a Comment