Lean and mean manufacturing

When I started my career in manufacturing lean was what I was at 150 lbs. and just-in-time was when I rolled into the drive as my wife was finishing dinner preparations. But I tried hard to do many of the things that Lean (or the Toyota Production System) systemized later or that just-in-time scheduling has done with automobile assembly. Ever try to order parts to minimize inventory when the lead time is 36 weeks and the production schedule is solid for only two weeks out? Anyway, to me it was just common sense and good management.

Systemized tools such as Lean, Six Sigma and the like have done much toward improving the efficiency, effectiveness (two different things--see Drucker) and profitability of manufacturing. My belief in the principles are what has led to my following the Evolving Excellence blog. Bill and Kevin have many insights on the news from manufacturing.

Perhaps no company epitomized the best principles of manufacturing years ago than Motorola. In the mid- to late- 80s it was doing some really cool stuff. They could also design products well.

Look what's happened to it--it no longer exists. It imploded and has divided into two parts or MOT-->MSI + MMI (Motorola Solutions and Motorola Mobility. Bill Wadell remembers the history of the great manufacturing company and lays the blame firmly where it belongs--poor top management and leadership.

See for example: "Motorola had all of the traditional accounting data that called inventory an asset and classified cycle time compression as a negative, and they had all of the typical labor-centric performance metrics. Bob Galvin simply ignored them, symbolically relegating financial discussion to the end of the staff meetings, rather than the beginning where they had always been. He put quality discussions first. And Mot had a traditional, functional, command and control organizational structure. Again, Galvin ignored it, pushing decision making down and empowering lower level people by the force of his position and personality. Big mistake - he should have changed the systems, metrics and structure. Chris Galvin took over without the benefit of his father's deep institutional knowledge and the force of convictions that such knowledge enables. So from 1993 on, Motorola inevitably and inexorably reverted back to its former self as decision making was driven more and more by the traditional financial inputs and the advice of Galvin's siloed senior staff."

The EE writers are often negative and somewhat cynical about modern manufacturing, but they also can point out people doing it right. Here's a story about a manufacturer of pianos in Estonia that offers great value--not the cheapest price--as the path to success.

"The story has repeated itself many times recently, and will continue to do so over and over. Lean manufacturing is not about cost cutting - it is about eliminating waste - costs that do not create value for customers. The lean producer is not the one who spends the least, but the one with the highest percentage of spending going to value creation. Estonia pianos are cheaper than Steinways, more expensive than Chinese made - they succeed because they are a better value for the price than either."

And here is another positive story from Kevin Meyer. He recently took a trip to Southeast Asia and experienced tremendous service at a low price on Bangkok Airways. Read his account of the service and think of the kind of management that pays careful attention to details and how people work. It scripts and then trains people impeccably. And offers tremendous value for the price. Could you do the same at your company?

"He then pointed out the lounge that every passenger could use. Yes you read that right - they have a nice dedicated lounge, perhaps not as plush as a Red Carpet Club, but still with free drinks, snacks, nice ambiance, and entertainment - for everyone. Keep in mind their prices are half of their competition.

"About a half hour before the flight was to leave we went to the gate expecting to start the boarding process. No plane, quite a few people waiting. Here we go... the reason they're cheap. 25 minutes prior... 20, 15. Aha - the plane! Off come the previous passengers, then the doors open and we're ushered on. Not by section or row - a free for all. We'll be lucky to get out of there in an hour.

But no. In 10 minutes we were all boarded, settled in, and the plane left the gate 5 minutes early. Not just any plane - a fairly new, spotless, brightly-colored, A320."

Bill Waddell points to an article in The Atlantic Monthly about Lean where the writer calls Lean "management by stress." He rebuts the article a little, but I'll add a little. First, to implement Lean in a way that works, there is a trust and implicit (or explicit) agreement that workers helping improve processes will not lose their jobs in that process. Next, I found out early in my career just as managers are discovering every day that involving front line workers in discussions about the best way to do things is a winning formula.

Too many managers and consultants never worked. I've had a drill and saw and whatever else and used to make everything our department manufactured. I worked with the guys (few women in those days, remember I'm old), talked with them, watched them and listened to them. With few exceptions they were always thinking about ways to do things better. When I was a quality manager, I found that almost all workers thought about how to make a quality product that they could have pride in. Involving workers in the improvement process is not management by stress. It's common sense.

Meetings, Lean, Batch products

Got my Droid Incredible today. The first two hours have been great.

I write about what manufacturers do to improve effectiveness and efficiency of manufacturing and production processes. And I write about automation technology suppliers and their products. But sometimes we forget that these latter companies are also manufacturers--and usually quite good. I spent three days in Minneapolis this week that were packed with meetings. Some really smart people shared ideas about technology and automation. Then an inept editor gave a talk to a roomful of PR professionals about editor/PR relations. I appreciated the questions. Hope I shared some useful information.

One meeting was at the Emerson Rosemount facility in Chanhassen. Good use of Lean manufacturing--in fact they told me they use Lean thinking for all areas of the operations. They have in-line testing for their measurement products and a cool lab for all sorts of tests. Just a reminder that I can interview companies such as Emerson for manufacturing insights as well as measurement and automation insights.

Meanwhile, Rockwell Automation announced its new PlantPAx Logix Batch and Sequence Manager. The application allows users to configure sequences directly in the controller through a human-machine interface. For system integrators, this feature eliminates the need for engineering-intensive custom code, while OEMs can now design a common process control solution for end customers requiring local sequencing that can easily integrate into a larger plantwide solution. Rockwell notes this product is ideal for stand-alone units like mixers, blenders and reactors that require flexibility in the sequence (procedures) of the process and the formulas (setpoints) for the recipe. It is also well suited for common continuous sequencing applications like process startup/shutdown, grade changes and cleaning skid control.

"Many applications require sequence management capabilities, but the complexity of the process may not be great enough to warrant a server-based batch software package," said Andy Stump, manager, Batch Solutions, Rockwell Automation. "This solution allows the user to start small, but if at any point the requirements grow, users can simply migrate the Logix Batch and Sequence Manager into a comprehensive software solution like FactoryTalk Batch without costly re-engineering and testing."

The application is based on ISA-88 standards, which provide a consistent framework for the application. This consistency helps the end user troubleshoot problems faster, improve the run-time experience, and thus increase throughput and improve quality.

I should note that Rockwell has been showing me a number of software products based on standards. This type of thinking really propels the industry. People are not so afraid to try things, and with an understood conceptual framework, it's easier to implement.

How Far the Mighty Have Fallen

OMG. Just goes to show how hard it is for management to remain focused on the fundamentals that brought them success. Bill Waddell found a news item where Toyota has added extra layers of inspectors in order to improved quality instead of focusing on root causes and empowering everyone in the pursuit of quality.

This stuff isn't new. In 1980 I became a quality assurance manager and started reading Deming among others. We had no inspectors--but not so much quality either. I hired one person for incoming inspection. Even though I'm not a genius, I figured what we needed was a standard for the appropriate quality of each product. Then we publish it, train the operators (the people who actually made the stuff, and who, by the way, generally wanted to make quality products they could be proud of) and empower them to set aside inferior products for evaluation and follow up. But that took commitment from the management team. I'm not that "political" and especially not back when I was a pup.

So what in the world happened to Toyota?

Toyota head apologizes, or does he

I can't find the link to an article I read a few weeks ago about the current head of Toyota, Akio Toyoda--grandson of founder, and how he delayed taking action at the beginning of this crisis. Here is an article in Huffington Post and another from the Chicago Tribune about his apology. I saw a tweet from Automation World's Managing Editor Wes Iversen referring to his beloved Wall Street Journal (its site is behind a paywall--and I don't pay) wondering if Lean manufacturing could be the cause. "Tweets" are ephemeral and designed either for conversations, or more recently, for driving clicks to Websites. So I can't refer you to his tweet. But if Lean is an excuse for poor quality or poor design--it's a weak excuse and a poor adoption of Lean.

Lean doesn't mean "make it cheap," it means "take out waste." In its classic implementation, any worker can stop any process if quality is not up to par. In its classic implementation, leadership accepts responsibility for falling down on the job by not enforcing and promoting high standards, offers sincere apologies promptly, and charts a clear path forward. It certainly appears that Toyoda failed on all three counts (although it appears that the problems began before he was CEO). He'd better get more aggressive about fixing this, or we'll start to think we'll have to buy American for good quality.

Thinking, Lean and Productivity

Here's an article on Slashdot that talks about college students failing because of poor grammar. Do you know what the reason is for the importance of grammar? No, it has nothing to do with the anal retentive among you who do things right because you're supposed to do things right. Grammar is there to help refine thinking. If you think things through, apply logic, apply the rules of grammar for communicating those clear thoughts, then you stand a chance of communicating. Shorthand may work (may...) for texting, but when you're trying to communicate something important, you'd better think it through.

Another article from Evolving Excellence talks about the problem of hiring Lean consultants. They come in, do a crash study and then leave. Then a year later top management wonders why the numbers never improved like they were supposed to. I learned this lesson more than 30 years ago when I saw consultants swoop into the company I worked for, recommend a few things, collect a check and leave. And nothing really changed. The only true change is when you change the culture, really abosorb a continuous Lean way of life that values every person and embed the changes in the company DNA.

A third article I just found "Public Speaking Demands Productivity" talks about the waste of time attending a seminar presented poorly. It is a responsibility of speakers to respect the productivity of the audience.