How to get a process improvement project approved

I just posted this on LinkedIn in response to someone asking how to get a process improvement project justified and approved.  Hope it helps...

One of the challenges senior executives face is trying to chose where to deploy limited resources ($) in order to maximize the return to the stakeholders.  And it is not an easy task when every project proposal promises spectacular "results."  Your first step in trying to differentiate yourself from all of your peers who are competing for the same funding is to put yourself in the shoes of the person making the decision.  And the best way to do that is to ask them "what results are you looking for and how will you measure them?"  I will use a labor example as they typically involve the hardest decisions.  Your Decision Maker may tell you "our labor costs are too high for this process.  I want you to find ways to improve our efficiency." 

Once you understand what result they are looking for your next visit needs to be to Finance to have them show you exactly the line item(s) on the P&L that correspond to the labor your Decision Maker is talking about.  And you need them to fully explain to you what makes up the labor cost.  That is you need to know specifically who is being charged to that account, how much they earn (salary or hourly rate), and how many hours they work.  And you need to understand all other costs that go into the rate such as overtime, benefits, and so on.  In many cases the people in Finance will have trouble figuring this out for you because they are used to dealing with totals.  Most organizations leave the detailed labor calculations to complicated computer systems.  But you must persevere until you can exactly match the weekly payroll using your own spreadsheet model.  You would be amazed at how many opportunities for improvement you will find just by making sure everything is being charged to the right account.  I have found individuals still being charged to an account years after they moved on to other areas in the company.  Ideally you want to go back 3 - 5 years by month when collecting this information.

The next question you have to understand are any changes in workload for your process.  Again you want to look at 3 - 5 years history where you compare "total units produced" (wigits, POs, quality audits, employee evaluations, projects, earned hours, quotes, etc.).  And you want to find out from your Decision Maker whether or not they expect volumes to go up, go down, or stay the same.  Often when they complain about costs being too high it is because volumes have gone down but they are still paying the same wages for a particular process.

After you understand the volumes and the hours you are now ready to calculate the efficiency of your process.  Using the information above you want to graph out 3 - 5 years of historical "units/paid hour" as well as the "labor rate per hour."  Here again if you are not dealing with a traditional production environment you will be amazed at the opportunity that will present itself.  I once did this analysis for a computer data center where I looked at "transactions per paid hour."  My reasoning was that the gross number of transactions in and out of the data center more or less drove the level of work inside the data center.  The more transactions you have the more equipment you need.  The more equipment you have the more technical resources you need to maintain and upgrade the equipment. And so on.  I calculated that they averaged 99 transactions per paid hour.  But their efficiency spiked in the summer at 145 transactions per paid hour.  And dipped as low as 60 transactions per paid hour in the winter.  No factory manager in the world would accept that kind of process variability and neither should someone managing resources working in an office.

What you will more than likely see are huge (30 - 50%) fluctuations in efficiency.  Again the further away from Production you get the less likely the resources will be managed against volumes.  In fact it is always amazing to me how efficient departments get in the summer months when people take vacation.  Again these variations are huge opportunities to look for process improvements.  Start to ask yourself "how do they manage to get the work done in the summer with 20% fewer people?"  hmmm....

The last step is to try and figure out how people spend their time.  This is where the real process improvement comes in.  In the case of a Procurement department for example if their Key Volume Indicator is a Purchase Order you may calculate that it takes on average 4 paid hours per PO (or more).  As part of your project proposal you want to identify ways to reduce non value added time from that 4 hours.  You include some estimates for how many hours you plan to eliminate and when you plan to have them eliminated.  Then you back-calculate using your Decision Maker's forecast how many people will be eliminated and use that as your Measure for Success in your proposal.

Of course this is not as easy as it sounds.  Whether you are an internal or an external consultant you still have the challenge of getting the area manager on board.  And if they are dealing with a 'broken' process and all the associated issues they will likely not welcome the idea of downsizing staff.  How well you engineer the situation to ultimately generate results for your company or client will determine where you fall on the continuum between Report Writer and Implementation Expert.  I've often said that process improvement projects are 10% technical and 90% tactical.

Best of luck.

Part 2: Don't Just Clear The Snow...Make It Not Snow In The First Place

Ok so we talked a little bit about Value.  And in particular the Value that this group of snowplow maintenance workers provides.  Namely fixing snowplows and performing preventive maintenance on snowplows.  And we also conducted a survey with one of your customers to find out just how much Value she thought you provided, which wasn't very much.  So tell me, what do you think so far?

"I think it's a bunch of crap.  What does she think?  The plows just fix themselves?"

general grumbling in agreement

"I'm not sure, but she did seem to understand a surprising amount for someone her age.  Anyone else?"

"So according to you nothing we do here is of any Value?"

"No, according to one of your customers.  Anyone else?"

"So I guess we all just go home then.  Let's see how happy Mrs. Smith is next winter when none of the plows are working."

"Ok let's continue.  The first step in Lean Manufacturing is to understand the Value you provide from your customer's perspective.  I think we've covered that.  The next thing we need to do is talk about our Value Map.  Does anyone know what that is?"

"It's our process."

"That's right.  So what's a process?"

"It's what we do.  The steps we go through."

"Yes that's right.  Has anyone here ever seen a process?"

"Yeah every year or so they bring in some guy like you to draw it out for us.  It's supposed to make us more efficient.  Funny thing is none of you ever pick up a wrench while you're here."

general chuckling and nodding of heads

"Trust me even if I knew what a wrench looked like you wouldn't want me to pick one up, much less try and use it.  You'd end up with a lot more snowplows to fix.  But I'm glad you are familiar with processes. 

So since you're all such experts can someone quickly tell me what your process is here?"

"Anyone?"

"They drive 'em, they break 'em, and we fix 'em"


lots of chuckles.  one or two high-fives

"Wow, that's probably the best description of a process I've ever heard.  Well done.  Thank you for that.  If you don't mind I'm going to write that out on the board here...

1) They Drive 'em
2) They Brake 'em
3) We Fix 'em

"Did I get that right?"

heads nodding

"Good.  But wait a minute.  I see 'We fix'em' on there.  But where is the preventive maintenance?  How does that fit in?"

"That's a separate process."

"Is it?  Let me make a suggestion.  What if I used a Decision Point and re-wrote the process like this:"

1) We Perform preventive maintenance
2) They Drive snowplows
     ??? Decision: If broken then...3), If not broken then 1)
3) We Fix snowplows

"Do you see what I've done?  I've reflected the fact that you perform preventive maintenance in order to reduce the number of snowplows that break.  Does that make sense?"

a few people leaning forward and nodding

"Ok I think we're getting somewhere.  We've talked about Value with our customer.  And we've drawn our Value Map.  The next thing Lean Manufacturing tells us to do is identify our Value Added activities and our Non-Value Added activities or Waste.  Anyone want to take a shot?  Or do I need to give Mrs. Smith a call?"

no response, not really liking where this is going

"Ok let's start with what we know.  Step 1); according to our customer that's "Waste."  Step 3); again according to our customer more "Waste."  So that just leaves Step 2).  Any guesses?

"Value Added?"

"Are you asking me or telling me?"

"Value Added"

"You're sure?  Is that what Mrs. Smith would say?"

nodding of heads

"I think so too.  No need to bother her again.  Let me re-write our process including Value Added steps and Waste:

1) We Perform preventive maintenance (Waste)
2) They Drive snowplows (Value Added)

     ???Decision: If broken then...4), If not broken then 1)

3) We Fix snowplows (Waste)

"Before we talk about how to improve our process I can tell that the label 'Waste' isn't sitting too well with some of you.  Is that fair?"

nodding of heads

"Ok let's think back for a second.  Who told us it was Waste?"

"Mrs. Smith did.  But she doesn't understand our process."

"Maybe not.  But do you think she understands the Value that having snowplows and drivers to drive them provides to her?"

nodding of heads

"Ok let's look at it another way.  Would you agree that to improve a process you want to spend more time doing Value Added tasks and less time (or no time) doing Waste?"

nodding of heads

"And since you feel that what you do here should be considered Value Added let me ask you this?  Should you be doing more preventive maintenance?"

"Of course.  We never have enough time to go through everything, especially in the winter.  That's half the reason why we end up fixing these things over and over again.  That and the fact that those guys somehow think a blade can magically go through a curb without getting bent all to ....."

chuckling and nodding of heads

"How long does it take to do the preventive maintenance on a typical snowplow?"

"It depends.  Maybe 3 days to do it right.  More if you find problems to fix."

"Why don't you take longer?"

"What do you mean longer?"

"Why don't you completely strip the machine down and inspect each and every tiny part under a microscope to look for signs of wear.  Then give everything a fresh coat of paint and lovingly re-assemble it.  Wouldn't that help reduce the number of breakdowns?"

"That's stupid.  That would be a waste of ...."

"Go on."

"You only need so much inspection to find the most common problems."

"Oh I see.  So someone sat down and figured out the fastest way to perform preventive maintenance without taking too much time.  Is that it?"

slight nodding of heads, not liking where this is going again.

"So tell me.  We all agreed that we wanted to spend as much time as possible doing Value Added tasks.  And as little time as possible doing Non Value Added tasks.  Kind of sounds to me like you are trying to do as little preventive maintenance as possible but still finding the major problems.  Is that right?"

no response

"Kind of sounds like something you would do to address Waste in a process, not Value Add. 

Look, one way to decide if a task is Value Add or Waste is to ask your customer like we did earlier with Mrs. Smith.  Another test you can do is ask yourself 'should we be doing this as much as possible?'  In the case of driving snowplows I think it's pretty easy to agree that if it's snowing your customers would want you Driving Snowplows as much as possible.  That passes the test for Value Add. 

But in the case of fixing snowplows, or even performing preventive maintenance, the less time you can spend the better.  In fact I might go so far as to suggest that if there were such a thing as magical snowplows that never broke down don't you think the taxpayers would all be in favor of buying those instead?"

no response

"So now what do we do?"

Even computer programmers can get Lean...just don't tell them that's what they're doing

I recently posted the following response to a question on LinkedIn regarding how to implement Lean principles in an IT organization.

This was my advice...

If you are asking about examples of applying Lean principles in an IT environment I have done that for a client in the past. My client was a well-known international software developer. They were working on developing and implementing a database application for a government agency in the Healthcare sector.

When I was asked to join the project as a Release Manager it was a very tricky situation. Individuals on all sides were very frustrated. The challenge put to me by my client was as follows:

They needed to code, test and deploy 15 months worth of functionality and fixes through 8 environments including 2 production environments in just 6 months.

They had determined that they needed 15 months because up until that point they had been developing, testing. approving and deploying quarterly Releases bundled into 3 month packages.  For those of you not familiar with IT terminology (as I wasn't before I started this particular project) a "Release" is simply a new version of a program.  It this case it contained combinations of new functionality (neat stuff) as well as fixes (solutions to stuff that didn't work properly).

My first challenge was the fact that my client's perception was that Lean Manufacturing was a concept suited only for car makers in particular and factories in general.  It was certainly not applicable in the highly technical and complicated world of software development. So I had to be careful not to talk about things like "Value," "Value Maps," "Flow" and "Backlogs."

Not being familiar with best-in-class methods for Application Development at the time I started to do some research. I quickly discovered that for the IT world they refer to something called "ITIL" as the standard process for effectively developing, testing, approving and deploying software. Note that "ITIL" does stand for something, but like most IT acronyms almost no one knows what it is.  I did some more research and decided to use the ITIL process as my Value Map. Of course I was careful to use proper ITIL terminology when I reviewed my approach with my client.

Once I had my Value Map I set up a series of meetings with the various managers along the ITIL process (Scope, Development, Testing, Change Management, Deployment, etc.) to review how they were doing things versus what was prescribed in ITIL. While they had a lot of "excuses" for why they were not following ITIL they all agreed "that they should be."

With this support I then needed to gently approach the subject of moving from a "Batch and Queue" approach (3 month release packages containing many many new features and fixes) to smaller packages. As luck would have it I was able to use a well-timed critical Change Request (very urgent and needed "right away") from the client as a good excuse to try out the smaller Release idea. 

I created a Project Plan (Value Stream) based on ITIL methodology (Value) that was specifically designed for the small (Flow) yet critical Change Request. After all the Value Added steps were listed, including reviews and sign-offs at each critical milestone, the complete process had a duration of just over one week. This was a far cry from the 3 month Release Process that was currently in place.

Long story short we made it through the Critical Change Request with very little difficulty. In fact most agreed that it had gone "significantly better than the normal Releases." This was mostly due to the fact that such a small change package was very easy to develop, test, approve and deploy as opposed to the massive Quarterly Releases they had been doing. 

Building on that success I tactfully suggested that we could do the same thing with another small package of slightly less critical Change Requests that the client also wanted deployed as quickly as possible. My software developer client was still skeptical. But their client, however, after experiencing the drastically reduced cycle-time of the first Lean prototype gave me all the support I needed. Still not fully appreciating the significant of what was happening everyone agreed and I was able to get approval for this next little package to go through the Value Stream.

From then on I basically kept using the "new" ITIL process to work through the "15 month backlog" of functionality and changes one little piece at a time.  And ultimately my client was able to meet their six-month deadline. By the time things stabilized we were doing four week Release cycles which seemed to be the right balance between "flow" and "batch" in this particular situation.  To this day I have told very few people involved with that project that they owe most of their success to Taiichi Ohna and others.





Good luck and I hope this helps.

Part 1: Don't Just Clear The Snow...Make It Not Snow In The First Place

A presentation given to a group of city maintenance workers responsible for maintaining a fleet of snow plows;

Good afternoon and thank you for joining me today for my presentation.  Today I am going to introduce you to the concept of Lean Manufacturing.  We will start by talking about what is meant by "Value."  Followed by a discussion on a "Value Map."  And finally we will talk about ways to improve your process.  But before we do that can anyone tell me what is meant by "Lean Manufacturing?"  Yes, you with your hand up.

"Lean Manufacturing has something to do with building cars with higher quality.  I think Toyota or Honda invented it."

That's very good.  What else does Lean Manufacturing mean?  Yes, you back there.

"It has to do with cutting jobs."

That is certainly one thing that Lean techniques have been used for.  However we will talk about how any Lean initiative will ultimately fail if that's what it is used for.  Anyone else?

Ok those were some good responses.  I think most people have some sort of idea of what Lean Manufacturing is when they hear the phrase.  And there are as many definitions as there are management consultants.  I like to define Lean Manufacturing as the never-ending pursuit of perfection as defined by your customer.

So where do we start?  Well any Lean Journey must start by understanding what Value your process or organization provides.  So lets start by having some of you explain to me exactly what this group of people do.  Anyone, shout it out.

"We fix heavy equipment."

Good, what else?

"We perform preventive maintenance on the equipment to keep if from breaking down and to help it last longer."

That's sounds impressive.  What else?

Anyone?

"We do tons of things.  Do you want a list of every Standard Operating Procedure that we have?"

Are they all part of fixing equipment and performing Preventive Maintenance?

"Pretty much."

Ok so if I understand you correctly the "Value" you add is in fixing all the big machines that I walked past on my way through the shop and the yard.  And performing routine maintenance and inspections to make sure they don't break down in an unplanned way.  Is that it?

general nodding of heads.

Ok so what Lean Manufacturing tells us is we need to start with our customers in order to verify the Value that we think we add.  A key concept of Lean says we should all be spending as much of our time adding "Value" for our customers, and as little time not adding "Value" for our customers.  Make sense?

somewhat less nodding of heads.

So who are your customers?

restless shuffling mixed with impatient annoyance.

You do have customers don't you?

"This isn't a car factory.  We don't have customers like that.  We work for the city."

Oh ok.  Well let me ask you this.  Who pays for all the work that you do?

more annoyed shuffling.

When you look at your pay stub what name is on it?

"The city pays us.  We all work for the city."

general grumbling and shaking of heads.

Good, now we're getting somewhere.  So who is this "city" person?  Or is it "city" people?  Because if they're paying your salaries then I'm pretty sure we're getting close to figuring out how your customers are.

"Taxpayers."

Taxpayers are the city?

"Taxpayers live in the city.  They pay taxes to the city who pays us."

Aha!  I knew we'd be able to figure all this out.  So are we in agreement then?  The taxpayers are our customers?

more upbeat nodding of heads.

Ok so the taxpayers are our customers.  And we provide Value by fixing equipment and performing preventive maintenance.  And Lean Manufacturing says we need to verify with our customer when we are adding Value and when we are not.  With me so far?

awkward silence.

Did I miss something?

no response.

Moving on.  What I would normally do at this point is bring in a bunch of associates to help me conduct a statistically significant survey of your customers asking them to rate the relative level of Value they get from the two activities or services that you provide.  This would take a few weeks after which we would put together an impressive presentation showing you the results.  But in the interest of time let's walk through this exercise in our minds.  I'll make it easy for you.  When I was a kid I had a paper route - back when kids actually had paper routs.  Anyone in here ever have a paper route?

a few hands go up.  a few knowing smiles are exchanged.

Well on my paper route I had a customer who's name actually was Mrs. Smith.  I'm not making that up.  That was her name.  And any time I provided anything short of 100% Value to Mrs. Smith she would take the time to call the office of The London Free Press to file a complaint.  And the next morning there would be a bright orange "Complaint" slip in my bundle of papers.  And I would read how the previous night's paper had been wet or torn or late or blown away in the wind, or anything other than of 100% Value in the opinion of Mrs Smith.

Let's stop there for a second and try and define "100% Value" to Mrs Smith when it came to her newspaper.  Who wants to take a shot at it?

"She wanted it on time, folded neatly, and not ruined by wind or rain."

That's pretty good.  You sound like a newspaper customer.

a few chuckles.

But you are absolutely right.  I'll throw in one more criterion.  Mrs Smith got very upset if I showed up to collect and I didn't have enough change for her.

So let's summarize; I was adding Value in the mind of my customer if and only if I was doing one of the following tasks:

• Carefully (and quietly) placing a dry, neatly folder newspaper between her screen and front door before 5:00pm
• Carefully (and quietly) closing her screen door making sure it was tightly latched
• Providing the correct change for her and her receipt after she handed me her money

Sounds pretty simple.  Kind of makes you wonder why I had such a hard time of it.  And why I got so many Complaint slips in my newspaper bundles.

snickers around the room.

Oh you think that's funny do you?  A 12 year old kid being harassed by a picky customer?  Well guess what.  Now that 12 year old kid is a grown up management consultant.  And Mrs Smith is now your customer.  Let's see how well you do.  Now what were the services your provide to her?  Oh yes, this whole group does the following:

• Fix heavy equipment, snow plows to be exact.
• Perform preventive maintenance on snow plows

Let's see how well you do.  I just happen to have Mrs Smith on speed dial on my Blackberry.  I'll give her a call and ask her opinion.

takes out Blackberry.  Dials Mrs Smith's number.  Waits for her to pick up.

Hello.  Mrs Smith?  Yes.  Is this Mrs Smith?  Hi it's Kevin Flynn.  Your old paperboy.  How are you tonight Mrs Smith?

Pardon?  No no.  I'm not your new paperboy.  No I think they have grown-ups doing that now.  Yes....that's right.  They drive around in cars and deliver the papers early in the morning.

What's that?  They don't?  Not even close?  Well I appreciate that.  Yes, yes it did take me a while to get it right.

No, no I realize it's not that difficult.  You're right.

Well I appreciate you saying that.  It means a lot to me.  Thank you.

Oh wait!  I almost forgot.  I'm a management consultant now and I'm with a group of city workers doing a workshop of Lean Manufacturing.  Yes that's right - from the Toyota Production System.  Yes, TPS.  I'm impressed that you know that.

No no, I didn't mean it like that.  It's just that...  Listen Mrs Smith could I ask your opinion on a couple of things that these folks are pretty proud of?  As a customer I mean?  I can?  Great.  So I was wondering if you could tell me how Valuable the following two services are to you as a homeowner and taxpayer.  Could you do that for me?

Great.  Ok listen carefully.  The first thing they do is this: they fix the snow plows.

Mrs Smith?  Are you there?  Yes that's right.  They fix the snow plows.  They have a huge shop with lots of equipment.  It's really very impressive.  They have hoists and cranes and ... pardon?  No value?  None at all?

No of course, I realize you don't own a snowplow yourself.  And that's probably true, even if you did these folks probably wouldn't fix it for you.  No, they focus more on the city snow plows.

What's that?  No, no they don't drive the snow plows.  They fix them.  Someone else drives them.

Ok so that's a zero on value for 'fixing snow plows' is that right?

Well maybe the second thing then.  This one is really impressive.  Not a lot of shops do this well.  And believe me it can be very effective.  Are you ready?  They perform preventive maintenance.

Mrs Smith?  ...oh yes.  Good.  No I said "preventive maintenance."  That means they...

Oh you know what it is too, wow.  I am impressed....And no they don't do any on your snow plow....which is because you don't have a snow plow.....and even if you did....yes, yes we already covered that.

Ok listen Mrs Smith it's been really good talking to you.  I appreciate your time.  And you sound great after all these years.  Good luck with the new paper boy?  Bye Bye.

press End key on Blackberry.  Put it back in its case.  Look up at my audience.


silence

I don't know if you caught all of that.  But that's one particular customer who doesn't see much value in pretty much anything that you do here.  Now what do you suppose we should do?

The Journey to Lean-Lean: Part 1 "Houston we have a problem"

Today I begin to share with you my experiences as I embark on what could turn out to be the most terrifying and wonderful experience of my professional career.  After 20+ years spent accompanying my clients through their journeys of organizational improvement I am turning my laptop on myself and my firm.  I do not know why it has taken this long for the idea to occur to me.  It could have been the five millionth article on Lean manufacturing that I read.  It could have been a comment that someone made to me.  Or maybe I just got tired of sounding like every other management consultant out there trying to convince potential clients that I can help them achieve unbelievable success if they just give me the opportunity (a.k.a. "purchase order").

Whatever the case I know exactly when I did realize that I had a problem.  I was driving in my car on my way to a client meeting.  Playing on my CD player was the book "Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and Create Wealth In Your Corporation" by James Womack and Daniel Jones.  Needless to say I was driving alone.

For those of you not familiar with this book what I will tell you is this.  It was in 2005 while reading this book for the first time, sitting in an airplane some 30,000 feet in the air, that I experienced a paradime shift in my professional life.  Everything I had learned and put into practice about improving processes suddenly fell by the wayside.  And I could immediately see as clear as the words on the paper how Lean Principles could be successfully applied in any organization, on any process, by any group of motivated people. 

But enough preaching, this is about me and my problems.

So back to me driving in my car listening for the dozenth time or more how every journey of Lean begins with identifying what it is that your customers Value.  And suddenly I had a terrible thought: "I have no idea what it is that my clients Value." 

Don't get me wrong.  I have completed many successful "improvement" projects in many organizations that have resulted in many satisfied customers.  But that wasn't my problem.  My problem was, even though I told myself and my clients every day that I was "unique and special" and my firm's approach to organizational improvement was "unique and special," the fact was I was doing management consulting basically the same way I had been taught to do it by the first consultants I had ever worked for.  And they in turn were doing it the same way they had been taught, and so on all the way back to Drucker.

To illustrate my point let me give you a brief summary of how to deliver a 'typical' implementation based management consulting project.  This will contrast to what 95% of consultants do which is write reports filled with recommendations, leaving the actual implementation of changes to the clients themselves.  But for the less than 5% of us who actually stick around to work with our clients to implement improvements it goes something like this...

1. Sales Meetings:  Conduct a series of 'sales' meetings with as many people as you can within the client's organization to collect as much information on issues as possible.  Introduce the client to as many impressive, well dressed, and extremely intelligent people from your firm as possible.  The more war stories these people can tell the better.  And if the stories even remotely relate to the potential client's organization, better still.
   
   Try to piece together the actual decision making process and available consulting budget.  Hopefully ultimately identify the one person within the organization with the authority to make the necessary purchasing decision.  Book a meeting with that person and then beg for the opportunity to come in and conduct a targeted organizational review and present a project proposal.
   
   
2. Project Proposal:  Now that you have passes to the building, albeit temporary passes, the next step is to bring in as many consultants from your firm as possible.  You want to bombard the client's organization with every conceivable form of analysis and data chugging imaginable.  And then pull a series of all-nighters (the more the better) so as to put together and present as compelling (and coffee-stained) a proposal as you can. 
   
   The challenge here is to free up people within your firm who are both brilliant and seasoned enough to be able to quickly evaluate a potential client's situation, while at the same time are somehow made available by your Operations group who are busy billing existing clients for every warm body they can put their hands on.  For those of you outside of the consulting industry this particular contradiction has caused internal battles within consulting firms starting from the first time Drucker's lead analyst requested resources from Operations to help sell his firm's second project.
   
   
3. Improvement Project: Assuming your over-worked and over-paid analyst was able to convince the potential client to become a current client the fun really begins.  If the people within the client organization were impressed by the level of study, scrutiny and analysis conducted before the project started, the level of intensity demonstrated by the on-site project team is enough to blow their minds.  Fueled by the ever-present fear of having the project canceled, the project team (proudly) works 20 hour days or longer to prove that they are worth every penny of the huge invoices submitted to the CFO week after week. 
   
   Of course the first thing to do is place the studies completed during the analysis phase aside and start from scratch.  To make matters worse, since there is typically anywhere from a few weeks to a few months between the presentation of the project proposal and the start of the project, chances are high that no one from the project team will have been involved in the proposal phase.  As one colleague of mine appropriately put it ".... it must seem like Groudhog Day for the client."  He is referring of course to Bill Murray's character who wakes up over and over again to the same day only to discover that he is the only one who realizes that it is the same day.  Rent it if you have time. 
   
   And so the project progresses.  Lean principles and many other proven techniques are gradually implemented within the client's organization.  Here the causes for delays tend to rest with the client resources themselves and not the consultants.  In most cases the consultants must compete for Subject Matter Expert's attention along side all the day to day operating issues that come up.  Only in rare cases does the client assign full-time resources to the project.  More often these hardworking individuals end up working long hours to cover off their regular job, in addition to the demands of the consulting project.  This lack of direct involvement also leads to more work for the consultants.  Because they are the only ones conducting the studies and analysis it becomes a major challenge to convince the client as to what improvement should be made.  Fortunately management consultants develop spectacular and truly innovative ways to present complex concepts and ideas.  The purpose of these is to ultimately convince the client, who is too busy dealing with day-to-day issues, that major changes need to be installed.
   
   But in the end at least some of the changes are made, in most cases the results are achieved, and the project is successful.  There are usually a few dinners or nights out to celebrate the end of the project and say 'good-bye' to new friends and colleagues.  Then the printers and power bars are packed up and the project team moves on to their next assignment.
   
   
4. Sustaining the Results: The final step in the consulting process is an odd one.  What makes it odd is that most management consultants will tell you that the sustainability of their results is the single most critical aspect of every engagement.  In fact I challenge you to find company literature for an implementation based firm that does not describe in great detail how sustainable their results are.  And to prove this they will trot out lists of satisfied past clients who will attest to just that. 
   
   However at the same time the reality for most firms is that almost no effort is spent ensuring the sustainability of results once the printers and power bars have been packed up.  Remember everyone involved in the project moves on to their next grueling engagement with 20 hour days trying to convince a new CFO to pay their invoices.  Even if they wanted to there is little or not time or energy left over to ensure sustainability of their past projects.
   
   
   If asked, most consultants will sheepishly admit that they may exchange emails with former clients from time to time.  But the reality is, the more time that passes from the end of a project, the more every one of us shudders at the thought of a prospective client calling up a past client to see "how things are going."
   
   

So there you have the basic process for delivering an implementation based consulting project.  I would love to hear feedback at this point from both clients and management consultants.  Just as a consultant's perspective of the level of opportunity within a particular organization will differ significantly from the perspective of those who work there day after day, so to does the perspective of the degree of opportunity within the consulting process differ between consultants (who do this day after greuling day) and those outside the industry.

This was very well demonstrated after I recently posted the question "What do our clients value?" in a Lean Six Sigma discussion group on LinkedIn.  I was bewildered and bemused at the overwhelming number of responses from highly intelligent (and presumibly successful) management consultants who tried to coach me on how to be a Lean Management Consultant.  It was only a very few who understood my question and attempted to define the Value we provide.

When you consider how these people (and me for that matter) make money it makes sense.  The larger the consulting project the more money you can charge.  As one colleague put it; "why would you want to do a project in less time and for less money?"  Wow.  Can you imagine Toyota (or any firm for that matter) deciding to maximize Revenue by leaving as much Waste in their processes as possible?

I know, right?

So there you have it.  They say the journey of 10,000 miles begins with a single step.  And the first step to solving a problem is admitting that you have a problem.  Houston we have a problem.

Get Off Your Butt And Start To Manage - For Pete's Sake!!!

I colleague of mine recently sent me a link to the following interesting article: Boosting the productivity of knowledge workers available on the McKinsey Quarterly web page.  They sent it because we had a long talk about my recent efforts to do what we have done for so many of our clients - start our own firm down the path towards becoming a LEAN organization. (more on this later...)

We talked in great length about what constitutes Value to our clients and what constitutes Waste or Muda.  If conventional Lean thinking can apply to a management consulting firm them 80% or more of our effort should turn out to be Waste as defined by our clients.  Needless to say this exercise has quickly turned into a monumental struggle of wills and rock solid beliefs  both among my esteemed colleagues and, of more concern, within my own mind. (again, more on this later...)

Back to the article.  For those of you who do not wish to register as a member of this web page let me simply say that the folks at McKinsey have come up with five interesting causes of lost productivity for knowledge workers.  They are as follows:

1. Physical barriers
2. Technical barriers
3. Social and Cultural barriers
4. Contextual barriers
5. The barrier of time

How you can call "time" a barrier to "time" still has me stumped.  However as I mentioned it does make for interesting academic reading - especially if you are looking to impress your fellow managers around the water cooler.

I am actually not writing to help promote McKinsey's web page.  I am writing to share my response to this article which may or may not be published by McKinsey.  For what they may be worth my two cents were as follows:

All these barriers are great and probably true. But what happened to good old fashioned hands on management? We find the higher the 'tech' the more these people are left to fend for themselves. A common phrase among management in these knowledge areas is "I don't have to manage them - they should know what to do."

This attitude, combined with the staggering complexity in which these knowledge workers exist is the Perfect Storm for lost productivity. In one particular example I have seen actual productivity calculated at just over 12%.  This for an office in the Finance sector with more Armani than a TIFF after hours party. 

Why does everyone feel it is perfectly acceptable to tell a factory worker that they have to complete 100 units by the end of their shift. Yet no one dares tell an engineer or a software developer that they need to complete a certain milestone by the end of the day.

One forgets that the purpose for 'managing' employees in this way is to give them the respect of ensuring that they have everything they need. Just as the factory worker has the opportunity to point out that she is starting to run out of packaging material. So to the engineer can point out that he is still waiting for a critical design document from another department. Why should the engineer lose productive time having to chase down missing information instead of getting on with the task at hand? Because they're more educated?

Give me a break. Management needs to stop looking for the 'silver bullet' - as one person noted. And get out of their offices and start doing their job of actively managing resources.

Thank you for reading.  And please tell me I'm wrong.

Grade School Track Meets Could Use Management Consulting

I attended a grade school track meet a few months ago to watch my son and daughter compete in several events. They both did my wife and I and their grandparents very proud. But as I stood out in the hot sun hour after hour watching the organizers get further and further behind schedule my (consulting) mind started to wander.

I noticed that the meet was being organized mostly by high school students with a few teachers lending a hand. I asked a few questions and learned that the students were senior physical education students who organize the event each year as part of their school curriculum.

And then a thought occurred to me. Why wasn't the school business club putting on the event. Or one of the business classes. If anyone should be learning about how to plan things, manage resources, create schedules, respond to off-schedule conditions, evaluate performance and communicating results it should be the students studying to go on to business school and then become business leaders themselves.

A business class would have noticed that communication of schedules was very poor. As was the communication of where competitors were supposed to meet before their events. It would not take even a novice business analyst very long to map out the process of conducting an event:

1) Assemble competitors
2) Give pre-event instructions
3) Line competitors up at the starting point or event location
4) Conduct the event while keeping track of individual performance
5) Compile the results
6) Post the results

I saw absolutely no consideration given to even the basic LEAN manufacturing principles. And the resulting "lost time" or Muda was everywhere.

I realize the jocks probably rule the school as they did in my day. And I can just imagine how difficult it would be for a business teacher trying to suggest to a phys ed teacher or principal that their class should have a chance to organize these events. But this is one parent (customer) who could do with a little less waiting and a little more cheering.

Thoughts?

Send it back (always look the gift horse in the mouth)

A few years ago I was in the midst of implementing Lean Manufacturing principles in a Tool and Die job shop. One of the steps in the process involved taking rough-cut blocks of steel and machining them to various sizes. One of the first opportunities we discovered was that our supplier had a wide variation when it came to how much "extra" steel they would send us on the raw blocks. Even though we only paid for the "required" size, the extra steel meant wasted time on our machines and higher cutter costs.

We invited our supplier in to explain the situation and ask them what they could do to help. The representative agreed to help us by tightening up their tolerances. And he even thanked us for bringing the additional material to his attention. Because we only paid for what we ordered all the extra steel they sent represented additional material and shipping costs to them. He even went so far as to offer to "take back" any block that came in over spec.

Almost immediately we noticed a significant reduction in the time required to machine the raw blocks of steel. A few less millimeters of steel per side, times 6 sides per block, times several hundred of blocks a day made a big difference.

Then one day I was called out to the shop to look at a couple of blocks of steel that had just come in. At first the operators had been confused when they could not match two large blocks of steel to the Bill of Material. Then they figured out that instead of sending us two five-inch blocks of steel, the supplier had mistakenly sent us two 10-inch blocks of steel.

My Purchaser said he had called the supplier who had acknowledged their mistake. He went on to proudly tell me that the supplier had told him that rather than pay to ship the heavy blocks back we could "keep the extra steel free of charge" to use on another job. That worked out to almost $1,000 worth of free steel.

I instructed my Purchaser to "call the supplier and have him please take it back."

Why? Try to think of at least three reasons.

5 Reasons To Get Rid of Surplus/Obsolete Equipment (Junk)

I worked with a medium-sized tool and die shop that had dozens and dozens of machines ranging from stand-up mills and drills to CNC machines, all the way up to massive 1,000 ton presses.  Back in the maintenance area we had a rather large section of the floor dedicated to "obsolete" equipment.  This equipment was either too worn out to provide the tolerances that we needed.  Or it simply was not worth the effort or expense to fix it.  Before I get to the five reasons we should have gotten rid of this equipment let me bring you up to speed on what we were accomplishing in our shop.

At this company we were in the process of going through a very successful LEAN Manufacturing program.  As a result of these efforts our employees had completely transformed the Milling, Drilling and Sub-Assembly areas of the shop.  In doing so they had managed to set up areas that processed the same amount or more material using a fraction of our machines and floor space.  In fact many of the "obsolete" machines had been identified through our LEAN efforts.

As with any successful LEAN initiative the more waste we eliminated the more waste we found.  And just like peeling back the layers of an onion, with every re-design of our equipment layout and manufacturing methods, the more the true Value-Adding process would emerge.  As I described in a previous article we had managed to reduce our processing time from "an hour to mill and an hour to drill" down to less than 25 minutes to mill and drill each block.

While we were eliminating all forms of waste in the Shop we should not have used the Maintenance area as a dumping ground for at least some of this waste.  I find the world is made up of two kinds of people.  The first think "if it's broken, get rid of it and buy a new one."  The second type of person thinks "someday I'll find a use for that."  And a lot of us fell into the second category.  Even though for all the reasons stated above these machines were no longer usable in their current state, there was a sense that at one point these had been very expensive and extremely capable and valuable.  And since they "weren't hurting anyone back here" we should hold onto them "just in case."

So why get rid of the obsolete equipment?

1) It sends the message to employees that "waste is ok"

LEAN is all about getting rid of Waste.  When these machines were decommissioned there was no doubt in anyone's mind that they represented Waste and should therefore be removed from the shop floor.  However by deciding to keep them around in the Maintenance area we were saying that "it's ok to have Waste in our Maintenance process."  And this message is completely inconsistent for any organization on the journey of LEAN.

2) It sends a message to customers that "waste is ok"

For the same reasons listed above this obsolete equipment graveyard must have also been sending the same message to our customers.  We were so proud of our new LEAN processes, and rightly so.   When touring our facility our customers could not believe how simple and elegant our manufacturing process had become compared to our old "batch and queue" layout.  So why then would be simply move the "clutter" from one area and store it in another?

3) It gets in the way of "Value-Adding" assets

As we peeled back the layers of non-value-adding assets that smothered our processes we found more and more waste hidden from sight.  This ranged from obvious physical obstructions, to excess set-ups and material handling.  By storing our obsolete equipment in the Maintenance area who knows what other waste was being kept from sight.  Maybe we could have discovered a better way to manage our spare parts inventory.  Perhapse we could have better arranged the work stations to make it easier (and more efficient) for employees to perform tasks.

Anyone who has finally gotten around to cleaning out a garage or shed or basement (or office) knows what it feels like to finally have room to move.  How much efficiency was hiding in and around all those machines taking up space in our building?  We'll never know.

4) It Ties Up Capital

Everyone has heard the expression "one man's junk is another man's treasure."  Just because this equipment was no longer of use to our company did not mean someone else couldn't have used it.  Keep in mind that the tolerances required to make automotive stamping dies are quite high.  But for another shop this equipment might have been more than adequate.  For that matter we might have been able to sell it at a drastically discounted rate to one of our employees for use in a home shop.  And if all else failed we could have simply sold it for scrap.  However you look at it this "waste" represented some opportunity to raise capital and reduce our borrowing costs.

5) It Represents Other Lost Opportunities

Similar to point number four, if someone else could have made good use of this equipment then our company was passing up on the opportunity to realize some Goodwill if nothing else.  We may have been able to donate this equipment to a local high school or technical college for use in their training facility.  Or simply have given it to an employee willing to take a particular onion peel off or our hands.

Need Inspiration? Go Find It

As I sit and write this I have my laptop set up in a basement cafe located deep inside Casa Loma (www.casaloma.org).  For those of you who don’t know, this magnificent mansion is “...the former estate of Sir Henry Mill Pellatt, a prominent Toronto financier, industrialist and military man.”  Or as I like to think of it, Casa Loma is an outrageous example of making your dreams come true.

Ever since my parents started bringing my brother and I here at Christmas time to see all the decorations and tour the magnificent rooms, this ‘house’ has had a spell over me.  Which is why I decided to take advantage of a rare afternoon off to come back and see the old place.  After getting off at the Dupont subway stop and walking up the steep road followed by even steeper stairs here I am.

And it has been well worth the effort.

In addition to creating this current addition to my blog, I have also drafted out the agenda for my upcoming corporate strategy planning session, achieved clarity and perspective on a brilliant solution for a client of mine, worked through a plan of action for helping out a colleague dealing with a challenging tactical situation, and remembered just how fortunate I am to live in Southern Ontario in particular, and in Canada in general.  The last realization drifted over me as I sat and listened to and watched people from all over the world enjoying this tourist attraction almost as much as I do.

To sum up, in just a few hours my batteries are completely recharged, my creative juices are flowing, and I feel ready to take on the world.  In fact I even looked into booking a meeting room here to host my corporate strategy planning session.  If my associates get half the creative boost out of this place as I do we’ll be able to “fix” the world....or should I say "we'll be ready to accompany the world on its journey of Change."

No practical, real-world solution or insight into a complex business problem from me today.  Plenty more where those come from.  Just a friendly suggestion for any of you who may have forgotten where you last saw your inspiration.  Go back to your ‘castle’ and have a look in the basement.

Part 2: Products & Services: Who's right and who's wrong?

As soon as we had our list of Attributes the discussions about who was right and who was wrong immediately started. That is not to say there were heated exchanges in the hallways and out on the shop floor. More like self-satisfied smirks from the Engineers, "I told you so's" from Sales, and "You never listen's" from just about everyone else.

So the next step was to figure out who was right. But before we did that we needed to create and test a methodology to quantify everyone's perceptions. Enter The Survey. At this point most people within the company, other than perhaps those in Sales, had not yet figured out who the "who" was in "who was right." ~ My apologies to my high school English teachers and my academic parents for not knowing whether, when or where to use the word "whom."

The Survey was designed to allow everyone to personally evaluate each of the product Attributes. For practical purposes the list was again distilled down to a total of 25 descriptors. And respondents from all areas of the company were asked to rate each Attribute against the following two scales:

A) Importance: 

1. = very low
2. = low
3. = neutral
4. = important
5. = very important

B) Performance vs 'Best in Class'  

1. = very poor
2. = poor
3. = neutral
4. = better
5. = much better

When the results were collected they were presented on a 2-axes chart. The X-axes or bottom axes measured Performance. So the further to the right the better the "perceived" Performance vs 'Best in Class.' And the Y-axes or vertical axes measured "perceived" Importance. So the higher up the Attribute the greater the "perceived" Importance and so on.

Taken a step further, Attributes close to the top right were "perceived" to be very Important and our company was "perceived" to be much better than our 'Best in Class' competitor. Likewise for Attributes that appeared in the bottom left of the chart we "perceived" that we did not perform very well compared to our 'Best in Class' competitors, however we also did not "perceive" that these were very Important.

Part 1: Products & Services: The Disconnect

When it comes to disconnects I do not think a larger one exists than the one between a company and its customers when it comes to perceptions regarding products and services. Of course there are many spectacular exceptions to this rule. Disney is an example that immediately springs to mind. Apple is another. But more on that later.

So what do I mean by disconnects? How can two people or groups of people possibly disagree on something as tangible as a product or a service? True marketers will know what I mean. As well as that select group of true entrepreneurs. But for the rest of us who assume that it is Marketing's role just to order brochures and organize trade shows, and who think that successful entrepreneurs just "got lucky," pay attention.

For this discussion I am going to focus on Products although the same would apply to Services. And by the time I am finished hopefully you will see that there is no real difference between the two in terms of what matters most to your customers.

The Definition of a Product:

To start with in order to "understand" your Product it is first necessary to define it. Just as any scientist will tell you any subject from a newly discovered life form to a theory to explain the origin of the universe must be labeled or defined using a common language that everyone understands.

By way of example I will use a product from a now defunct company that used to produce tooling for the automotive industry. Yes this would be the same company I wrote about when describing the evolution of the PODs. For those of you not familiar with this company's product let me review. The company produced stamping dies that are used by automobile manufacturers to produce metal parts ranging from tiny brackets up to entire body panels. The dies are placed into presses ranging in size from small to massive. And flat pieces or coils of metal are fed into the press while the die opens and closes. By forming and trimming the metal in a precise manner the flat metal is "formed" into parts to be used to make cars.

For the tooling company to start to gain market share, focus improvement efforts, and generally deploy its limited resources (manpower, machines, material and money) in the best way possible, it was necessary to start by understanding its Product.

To get the ball rolling various people within the company were asked to come up with 25 Attributes to describe the company's Product. The following are examples of the Attributes that people from Sales & Marketing, Engineering, Design, Purchasing, Operations and Logistics came up with:

1) High quality
2) Tooling expertise
3) 3D design capability
4) Ability to produce any type of die (hand transfer, progressive, etc.)
5) On-site tool try-out capabilities
6) Company owned delivery trucks
7) Large and experienced workforce
8) Low Canadian dollar
9) Ability to respond quickly to engineering changes
10) Best in class tool packaging and distribution capabilities
11) Ability to produce prototype parts
12) Ability to product Checking Fixtures
13) Large 90,000 square foot manufacturing facility
14) Knowledgeable Program Managers assigned to each project
15) Highly experienced tooling engineers.

and so on....

When the data was collected and duplicate Attributes were combined we were left with over 100 distinct descriptors that could be used to describe elements of our Product. Incidentally we added another dozen or so that no one inside the company had even thought of after speaking with our customers.

The Disconnects:

As soon as the list was distributed within the company the disconnects were immediately apparent. Most could agree with the "quality" and "experience" related Attributes. But few in the Engineering department considered the ability of the Program Managers to be a Product Attribute. And no one in the company, except those in Shipping and Receiving, considered how well we packaged the tools before sending them out on trucks to have any relevance at all.

But we were on our way towards understanding exactly what our Product was.

Micromanagement is a good thing. And your good employees deserve it!

As a manager or supervisor have you ever heard or said any of the following?:

"He's my best employee because he never bothers me with anything. He just does his job."

"She's the best employee I have because I never have to talk to her about anything. She just knows what needs to get done."

"I don't know how he does it. But I wish everyone could work the system like he does."

"I'm not really sure what she does. But it must be right because I never hear any complaints."

Sadly this is how many managers feel, especially in "office" or so-called "professional" environments. And as a result it is not uncommon for our firm to see productivity levels range anywhere from 20% down to 10% or less. And believe it or not the more "professional" the staff, the lower the productivity.

How can this be?

We believe the answer lies with the notion shared by many managers that "professional" or "office" people don't need to be "micromanaged." For some reason it is considered perfectly acceptable to tell a worker on an assembly line that they need to produce "x" units per hour. But when it comes to how long it shoud take to create a Purchase Requisition - anything goes.

Before I go any further talking about the office example let's examine what happens in a factory when a supervisor sets a target for an employee of 10 units per hour. Let's suppose the conversation would go something like this...

Supervisor: "Hi Mary, I just want to make sure you have a copy of today's schedule."

Mary: "I sure do. It's right here posted on my board."

Supervisor: "That's great. Do you have everything you need to complete 10 units per hour like it says?"

Mary: "I think so. But I'm going to run out of labels in a couple of hours so you might want to send some over. No rush."

Supervisor: "No problem. I'll take care of it. See you in a couple of hours."

Sounds simple enough. Not too many people would complain about the fact that the employee is being micromanaged. But consider carefully what happened. Or more importantly what didn't happen.

First of all the supervisor confirmed that his employee knew exactly what she needed to do. It wasn't left up to chance or her own "judgment" what hat to get done. She didn't come in and start prioritizing her day on her own with no guidance from management. As a result the supervisor knew for sure that this particular employee was going to spend the next few hours doing exactly what the company needed her to do.

Second of all the supervisor confirmed that she knew how long it should take to do the particular tasks. Presumably at some point during the R&D stage of this product's life-cycle some very smart engineers, designers and marketers had gotten together to figure out exactly how much labour should go into each product. And no doubt some very fancy spreadsheets and PowerPoint presentations had been used to ultimately get approval from Senior Management to "go to market" with this item with the promise of an acceptable return on investment for the company and its shareholders. By confirming that Mary knew exactly how long it should take her to make each unit the supervisor was confirming that the labour component for this product would meet the parameters originally used to get Senior Management approval to launch. Again, makes perfect sense.

Third of all the supervisor confirmed that Mary had everything she needed to create the 10 units per hour. And guess what, Mary informed her micromanaging boss that she was ok for a couple of hours but then she would run out of labels. "So what" you say?

So think about what would happen if this conversation had never taken place. Assuming Mary knew how to read her schedule she would have started producing units at a rate of 10 per hour. But two hours later she would have to stop because she would have run out of labels. Of course the cost of her labour would not stop, just her output.

At this point she would have to call for someone to get her more labels. Or if she was a "good employee" she would likely know where the extra labels were kept and she would go and get some for herself. Either way she would stop creating units at a rate of 10 per hour and the company would stop making the required amount of money for the units. Not because Mary was too slow. But because the process around her had failed. By finding out this information ahead of time the supervisor now has two hours to make sure that Mary gets the labels she needs before she has to stop working and go through the aggravation and frustration of finding more.

Let's take this example one step further. Let's pretend the supervisor came by Mary's work station two hours later to do some more Micromanaging. Suppose the conversation went something like this...

Supervisor: "Hi Mary. Just checking to see how you are doing. According to the schedule we talked about you should have 20 units put together by now. How did you do?"

Mary: "Hi there. Well I would have made 20 no problem but this press has started to act up. It feels like something is coming loose. As a result I only have 15 finished so far."

Supervisor: "hmmm, that's not good. We'll never finish the schedule at this rate. I'm going to get Maintenance over here to have a look at that. In the mean time why don't you switch to this afternoon's schedule. Do you have everything you need to do that?"

Mary: "Let me have a look. Yes I think I can get started on that job for a while at least if that's what you want me to do."

Supervisor: "Well it's not ideal but at least we'll keep you working while they figure out what's wrong with your press. Thanks for letting me know."

Mary: "Anytime. Thanks for your help. See you in a couple of hours."

Now let's think about what just happened, or more importantly didn't happen. First of all without having to stand next to Mary for the entire two hours the supervisor knew immediately that something had gone wrong with her process because she had been unable to meet the standard they had both agreed on at the start of her shift.

Second of all the supervisor found out about the problem just two hours into the day which left plenty of time to make adjustments to the schedule on the fly and keep Mary productive.

What did not happen was the supervisor finding out at the end of the day that the work was not completed. Even if Mary had a valid "excuse" about her equipment not working properly it would still be too late to fix anything. The result might have been a short order, missed shipment, additional overtime, upset customer or worse. But it wasn't all because the supervisor micromanaged his employee.

In this example the three key components to effective micromanaging were the following:

1) Proper standards for completing a task
2) A daily Schedule to clearly communicate what needed to be done
3) Timely follow-up by the supervisor on Schedule Attainment

Next we'll consider a similar scenario in an office environment.

The POD - Part 6

Over the next few days the work progressed as did the method changes. The toolmaker in charge prided himself by coming up with change after change to make The POD better. One of the most significant was his idea not to mill all six sides of each block. Thinking he had come up with a way to “cheat” my new system he asked why it was necessary to machine all six sides if we didn’t have to.

Pointing out that I was not a toolmaker I asked him what he meant. He explained that in most cases the blocks were either going to be further machined in a later operations, or did not require machining because they would not be installed next to another block. Of course he only knew this because he had the designs in front of him. An apprentice working in isolation in the Machining department would have no way of figuring this out. So the Toolmaker came up with a method by which he used a simple magic marker and marked the sides of each block that required machining with an “X.” He then gave instructions to the operators not to waste time on the unmarked sides. And the Minutes/Block dropped further.

By Thursday morning the Toolmaker told me that he would be all finished by noon. While we had made big improvements over the “hour to mill and hour to drill” I was still wondering what I had missed. But trying to focus on the positive I thanked him for his help and asked if would be willing to tell the whole company at Shift Change how the trial had gone.

And that was when the next amazing thing happened.

All of a sudden the Toolmaker said “wait a minute. It usually takes five to six weeks to get all the blocks milled and drilled for a job. I’ve just managed to mill and drill all the blocks for two jobs in just three and a half days.”

And there it was. The dramatic improvement I had been looking for. At the Shift Change meeting the toolmaker went on and on explaining to the group all the wonderful things he had done in order to get all his blocks completed in less than a week. And how he was now “five weeks ahead of schedule” on his next two jobs.

This time there was no yelling. There were no cries about how it was impossible to improve out process. There was just toolmaker after toolmaker lining up to get their jobs scheduled through The POD as well.

And that’s how this 65 year old tool and die shop took its first hesitant steps on the journey of LEAN manufacturing.

The POD - Part 5

Finally we were ready to begin. On the last Friday afternoon we conducted one final check of everything – material, machines and manpower. We had schedules set up for each machine and I had designed a basic Schedule Control to allow us to measure Blocks/Hour at all steps every hour.

At precisely 7:00am on Monday morning we fired up the Vertical Mill and began to 2D machine blocks. It took the anticipated 15 minutes for the first blocks to come off the Vertical mill at which point they were stacked in front of the next two mills in the process. Half an hour in the first blocks were ready to be drilled.
And that’s when it happened. One of the two drills didn’t work.

Word quickly spread that “half the POD was shut down.” I couldn’t believe it. These two drills were specifically selected because they “were the best we had.” Unfortunately no one had bothered to try them out.

I asked my plant manager how it was possible that no one knew this drill did not work. With an “I told you this wouldn’t work” grin on his face he explained that we had “so many extra drills it didn’t make sense to waste time fixing a broken one.”

And that’s when the next amazing thing happened. My maintenance man, who had been to intimately involved in setting up The POD jumped into action. He and a helper quickly pulled the broken drill apart and diagnosed the problem. It took them just under two hours to make the necessary repairs and we were back in business. I heard more than one comment to the effect that no one had “ever seen those maintenance guys more so quickly before.”

When it came time for our 10:00 Schedule Check we found predictably that we were a little behind schedule. However the delay getting the one drill up and running was somewhat compensated by the lower than expected time required to mill each block. While there was no immediate explanation for this, I secretly suspected it was due to a lack of material handling associated with the machines being set up next to each other.

When the first blocks started to emerge milled and drilled I had a look at the Minutes per Block. Even with the equipment problems we were tracking at just under 50 minutes/block. Certainly an improvement over the “hour to mill and hour to drill.” But still not the “70% improvement” I had been promised. However the first day was generally considered to be a success and we shut things down for the night.

The POD - Part 4

With a completion day scheduled I set about deciding how best to try out the POD. I had one particular toolmaker in mind. In addition to being one of the better toolmakers, this individual also had a reputation for speaking his mind (loudly) and not being afraid to let everyone know how he thought about things. It was not unusual for me to be greeted with his shouts of “when are we going to get bolts that are actually the right size!” as I walked out on the shop floor.

I approached this individual carefully. I explained that the POD was almost complete and now I needed someone to try it out. But it couldn’t be just anyone. I needed someone who was very knowledgeable and creative enough to try something different. I added a few more blatant veiled compliments and he was hooked.

As it happened this toolmaker was scheduled to start two brand new jobs. Ordinarily this would involve standing at his work station pouring over his designs while he tried to keep track of several hundred steel blocks as they were ordered, delivered, milled and drilled. For the POD however I told him to take a more active role to make sure that we did not start the experiment until he had every block accounted for and ready to go.

Since he was collecting the blocks ahead of time he spent much more time working with the Designers and then Purchasing to make sure that everything was properly ordered and delivered. This effort in itself uncovered several major method changes in terms of how the Bills of Material were produced and components labeled. With great pride this toolmaker showed me example after example of “mistakes” he had found and fixed because he was “on top of things.”

The POD - Part 3

Over the course of the next three weeks my team worked together to design and then set up the POD. The obstacles they encountered would have shut me down in my tracks on the first day. But because I had Design, Toolmaking and Maintenance driving the project, not to mention the Union fully represented, every glitch was somehow quickly addressed.

While the work was going on there was a great deal of interest and skepticism on the part of the other employees. For starters we moved a vertical milling machine, two drills and two horizontal mills an average of 200 feet from their original locations. Keep in mind these machines had not been moved since being installed before anyone in the shop had been born.

I received many comments as I watched the work progress. Most of it boiled down to this: “you can put the mills and drills on the roof in you want. But it takes an hour to mill and an hour to drill a block.” But armed with my new found faith in LEAN methodology and the promise of “70% or better improvements in productivity” I pressed on.

As we were nearing the completion of the POD I noted that we were coming in nicely under our non-existent budget. The maintenance man even went so far as to pull conduit from unused equipment in other locations to safely make all the electrical connections. It was with great reluctance that they informed me that one of the machines required a special high-voltage breaker that would cost us $250. I happily signed the one and only Purchase Req for the project.