Wednesday, May 30, 2012

Toyota Production System (TPS) - Founding Philosophy

“There is no royal road to success in life. It takes the right process to achieve a great result.”

– The founding philosophy of the Toyota Production System

Thursday, May 24, 2012

Lean Six Sigma Case Study - Lab Systems


Problem		Workplace Efficiency / Productivity
Solution		Leaner Principles & Processes via Lean Six Sigma
Implementation		Direct Implementation at the Workplace and for Manufacturing Practises
Improvements		§ Identifying and eliminating waste over the company value stream § Identifying and developing different departments KPIs § Improving communication on the shopfloor § Running special committees to improve and sustain Safety and 5S. Adopting DMAIC as project methodology to deal with complicated problems § Mistake proofing the process by changing product design § Reducing inventory by implementing Kanban project

“Regular ongoing interaction is key to improving staff performance”

As specialists in creating state-of-the-art laboratories, LabSystems recognised the benefits of designing streamlined systems to improve workplace efficiencies.

Management turned to the expertise of Chase Performance in September 2010 in order to implement leaner principles into its business processes.

Before long productivity soared as 25 staff underwent the Lean Six Sigma program that helped them create better ways to design, manufacture and install laboratory and clean room equipment such as fume cupboards, fans and associated equipment, laboratory fit outs and chemical storage facilities and cabinets.

Why choose Chase Performance?

LabSystems Operations Manager David Mutimer said Chase Performance’s focus on delivering ongoing training every fortnight ensured new skills were incorporated into the workplace sooner.

David said the actual – rather than theoretical improvements to workplace and manufacturing practices made it a real standout from other service providers. He saw staff training as an investment in his team, many of who had been loyal to the company for more than 20 years. In addition, David recognised the value in ongoing training every fortnight to ensure the new skills were incorporated into staff projects in the workplace between sessions.

“We embarked on this program as part of an overall plan of continuous improvement in the business. With an ageing workforce, we felt the need to up-skill and update our approaches to workplace management.”

Improvements across the board

· Increased factory efficiency by 10 per cent
· Redesigned factory layout to streamline operations
· Introducing KPIs to boost staff productivity
· Using latest project management tools and data collection to solve problems
· Significant staff behavioural changes in line with the ‘Lean’ principles and techniques
· Empowered staff courtesy of improved skills and knowledge
· Improved staff input into their work practices
· Improved communications between management and staff
· Installing information dashboards (big noticeboards) in key locations recording KPIs, minutes of meetings and workplace and safety practices

David said his staff had readily embraced many exciting changes that had led to massive improvements in workplace efficiency. He remains committed to rolling out the program to new staff as well as enabling any staff keen to obtain a higher certificate or diploma.

“Our workplace is now like a pit stop for a racing car. As well as a new layout, we have changed the management of our space as well. There is no clutter, everything is in the right place and the work zones are being upgraded.”

Lean Six Sigma

Lean Six Sigma Consulting Services & Training Programs

Melbourne, Adelaide, Perth, Hobart, Brisbane & Sydney

Lean Programs
Lean Mining
Lean Procurement
Lean Manufacturing
Lean Office
Lean Culture
Management Programs
Change Programs
Green Belt and Black Belt training available

www.chaseperformance.com or email focus@chaseperformance.com

Leadership and the "Three Levels of Intelligence"

Because I see leadership as a key area of Lean Six Sigma and as part of my MBA in Leadership and Sustainability with Robert Kennedy College and the University of Cumbria, I discussed my own view on successful leadership by examining the effect of the “three levels of intelligence” on leadership. Please feel free to send me a note if you agree or disagree with parts of the following article.

Intelligence is traditionally measured by the Intelligence Quotient (IQ). Charles Darwin was estimated to have an IQ of 153, Albert Einstein 160 and John F. Kennedy around 120. But IQ is off course only used as an indicative estimate of the ability to reason logically. While IQ is still very much a factor of becoming successful in most areas of business, it is not of sufficient value for corporate success and will not ensure or even guarantee that you will shine above others.

I can personally relate to the fact that a good IQ, or being well read even educated, can help you build a strong foundation but will not make you the bee of all.

Emotional Intelligence Quotient (EQ)

There has been much talk about EQ of late, and it certainly seems to be the flavour of the decade. With the key factor of EQ in my eyes being yourself awareness, made up from confidence, a realist view of one’s self, and not being scared of making fun of you, we can apply the above in various ways to make our daily life easier. Applied in the correct situations these can build great first and lasting impressions, and will make people around you feel at ease. Care has to be taken on when to apply which. I would be very careful about making fun of myself, when in a room filled with people of a strong cultural background that differs significantly from the traditional “Western View”. Although when you ask people in their sixties to eighties, they would argue that the western world has also changed and become a lot more accepting, and as such I would be cautious when surrounded by very Senior leaders with these ideals.

One thing EQ will help you with is to read these situations correctly, so as to apply yourself in a manner acceptable, with the most successful outcomes.

This brings me to the next cornerstone of EQ which is directly related to self-awareness and works well in conjunction with it, self-regulation. Knowing your limits will help you create trustworthiness and integrity. You will be comfortable in even the most ambiguous circumstances, and be open to change. I will go into more detail on this later when discussing the ability to adobt and change. With the combination of the two items above, we are strong enough to build the foundation of our motivation and drive, having an optimistic outlook, yet realistic in approach, and a full commitment to the outcome.

Now this is where we start to tap into leadership. Taking IQ and these first few important parts of EQ, we are building a strong foundation, which displays openness, understanding and energy. However, this is where I believe many leaders fail. They stop there, and feel this is enough for them to succeed, forgetting that there are many more elements to be considered before we can call ourselves a well-balanced successful leader.

Now although I would still include this following part in EQ, we are relating it to the social quotient (SQ).

One area where many leaders, and some very ruthless ones fail, is empathy. This will result in not being able to sustain the great first impressions created, and dragging people with you in your “slip stream” of drive. In this world cross-cultural sensitivity is more important than ever. Living in Melbourne this is displayed on a daily basis, with the many cultures who have found a home in Australia, and kept their values. Without empathy, not only will we fail with our “internal customers” but we will also struggle to service our “external customers”. For me empathy is something that comes naturally, but for many people that have not lived in different environments, and/or have not encountered issues beyond their comprehension it is not natural, and this can often be seen as rude and provocative, although these individuals would not understand it, or even comprehend that this is what they are in fact doing.

If you have ever come across a leader, that is very good at strategy, and running a tight ship, but will not listen to the voices of the customer (both internal and external), you will generally see the frustration that this creates around this person. And although they may have a tick against all of the above, if they fail with empathy, they are most likely doomed as a well-balanced manager, but could still have significant success in other areas.

This brings me to the last point, the ability to adopt to change – or the change quotient (CQ).

I briefly discussed the influence of self-regulation earlier which forms the foundation for the ability to change yourself, therefore enabling change around you. If you cannot change yourself, you would find it very difficult to change others around you, or even recognising that change is actually happening all around you.

Not everyone is comfortable with change, let’s face it, we all get caught up in our every-day lives and routines, and it often takes a lot of strength to do something different. There was a song or ballad around in the 90’s, and one line was, do one thing different every day that scares you. This can be as small a thing as changing the way you get dressed, taking a different way to work, trying different food, wearing clothes that were traditionally seen as not matching. If you can get over this little hurdle on a regular basis, your eyes will widen. I have been practicing this for years now, and although I wouldn’t do it daily, I would relate it to my business world, and try unconventional things.

One area that I have not discussed, and that sport has taught me is that you need to listen to your mind and body. The more you know about your well-being the more you can feel and take care of it, the more likely you are to translate this to the world and people around you. To many this may seem unrelated to business, but your physical state can affect your work, as it does involve how you feel and look which is directly related to confidence in most cases. Your drive and energy can be directly related to listening to your body, as if your energy levels drop, your mind will slow, and you will go through what most people refer to as “burn out”. Therefore I do believe that this is an important factor to be considered as well.

In Conclusion

We are only discussing a very small but integral part of successful leadership here, and I believe there is a lot more to it than just these items. These items do however form the foundation of a successful leader. Depending where this person is in their career, personal life, where in the world geographically, the type of organisation, etc. also play a heavy part in combining the above. You will find that some areas are more relevant in certain cultures than others, and are practiced and applied in different ways.

A strong and successful leader will know how and when to apply his or her different levels of intelligence for the best outcome. I don’t believe there is one uniform way, or one glove fits all situations, as we are all different. This is the beauty about our world, as when we combine these differences, and listen to the other voices and are able to adopt, we become stronger by the day, resulting in better leadership at all levels.

Best regards
Roland

Monday, May 21, 2012

5 Ways Process Is Killing Your Productivity

Yes, Process Improvement is what we promote, but within reason and the guidelines of a lean business. Below is an article that shows how taking things out of context or trying to put your own spin on it, can actually be detrimental to a business. We specialise in lean six sigma, and compare your business to world's best practice. Based on the audit results, we tailor our programs to best suit your business, as there is no one glove fits all solution. Take the first step to improving your business, it doesn't cost you anything, but the outcomes will be substantial in process improvement, culture, staff retention and your bottom line! Visit us at www.chaseperformance.com or call us on 1300 880 338. You can email me direct at roland.weber@chaseperformance.com for more information.

Best regards and enjoy the re-produced article below

Roland Weber

Expert Perspective

5 Ways Process Is Killing Your Productivity

BY LISA BODELL | 05-15-2012 | 10:40 AM

This article is written by a member of our expert contributor community.

If your team spends its days asking for permission before executing, taking an hour to complete expense reports or time sheets, attending redundant meetings, or answering irrelevant emails, you’ve got a problem.

Processes are supposed to help organizations scale up, improve efficiency for new hires and existing employees, and so on--but they can quickly get out of control.

In a study of U.S. and European companies, The Boston Consulting Group found that “over the past fifteen years, the amount of procedures, vertical layers, interface structures, coordination bodies, and decision approvals needed...has increased by anywhere from 50 percent to 350 percent.” What’s more, in the most complicated organizations, “managers spend 40 percent of their time writing reports and 30 percent to 60 percent of it in coordination meetings.” No wonder people feel like they can never get any real work done.

Why do we love process so much? It offers a way to measure progress and productivity, which makes people feel more efficient and accountable. When used correctly, processes should standardize and simplify the necessary tasks that keep business running smoothly. They should enable organizations to undertake complex work, particularly as an organization grows. Expense reporting, for example, should have a process that every single employee follows every single time--that’s just common sense. Smart processes encapsulate bundles of organizational knowledge. And that’s a good thing.

But it’s not a good thing when there are so many processes in place that they restrain the people they’re supposed to help. If your team spends its days asking for permission before executing, taking an hour to complete expense reports or time sheets, attending redundant meetings, or answering irrelevant emails, you’ve got a problem. Exactly when are employees supposed to find the time to innovate when every task or topic is labeled “urgent” and every deadline is ASAP? Something will eventually give, and that something is going to be the part of the job they can keep pushing off until later.

Here are five ways process can kill production:

Empowering with permission--but without action:It’s not empowering when people are given more responsibility, yet must still obtain an unreasonable number of approvals and sign-offs to get anything done. This signals a lack of trust.
Leaders focused on process instead of people: In an effort to standardize and sanitize everything we do, nothing at work is personal anymore. Leaders look to processes, not people, to solve problems--and it doesn’t work. Where’s the inspiration, the vision? This signals a lack of humanity.
Overdependence on meetings: “Collaborative” and “inclusive” are corporate buzzwords, but productive teamwork does not require meetings for every single action or decision. People become overwhelmed and ineffective when they are always stuck in meetings. This signals that politics have taken precedence over productivity.
Lack of (clear) vision: Great companies need a grand vision and important goals. Too often, companies have vision or mission statements laden with jargon but devoid of meaning. This signals a lack of purpose.
Management acts as judge, not jury: If the purpose of a meeting is to think, create, or build, management has to stop tearing people down when they propose new ideas or question the status quo. This signals a lack of perspective and openness.

Again, it comes down to priority. When we shift such a huge amount of an organization’s focus onto standardizing everything, other areas inevitably suffer. According to aBusinessWeek article called “Six Sigma: So Yesterday?,” the program ultimately did more harm than good when it was implemented at Home Depot: “Profitability soared, but worker morale dropped, and so did consumer sentiment. Home Depot fell from first to last among major retailers on the American Customer Satisfaction Index in 2005.”Over the years I’ve encountered organizations, large and small, that have essentially allowed process to becometheir culture. I’ve also seen businesses suffer when they assumed that if a process worked well for one division, it would work well for the company overall. Good processes can turn especially dangerous when they creep from manufacturing lines and finance departments into brainstorms and research labs. Some of the worst offenders have been companies that implemented overarching processes like Six Sigma, a rigidly data-driven quality-management program originally designed to tackle manufacturing problems. Fifty-three percent of the Fortune 500 have deployed it and of the Fortune 100, 82 percent have used it. Despite its manufacturing origins, Six Sigma has been used across many industries and sectors, and proponents claim it saved Fortune 500 corporations nearly a half-trillion dollars since its inception. If so many successful organizations are using it and saving money, what’s the problem, right?

Another oft-cited example of Six Sigma’s negative effects occurred at 3M. When former GE executive James McNerney took the helm in 2001, he instituted a rigorous Six Sigma program, which meant slashing costs, training thousands of employees to become program experts, and requiring extensive reporting on new products in the R&D pipeline. In the short term, especially in the eyes of investors, it seemed to work. Costs were brought under control, production speed increased, and operating margins rose from 17 percent to 23 percent by 2005. But researchers in the labs were stifled by the demands of the new metrics. 3M had a century-long history of innovation, but now R&D had been cut and inventors weren’t given adequate time to tinker with products before having to demonstrate successful commercialization. “We were letting, I think, the process get in the way of doing the actual invention," said Dr. Larry Wendling, staff vice president at 3M's Corporate Research Laboratory.

After McNerney’s departure for Boeing in 2005--just four years after joining the company--3M began to reevaluate Six Sigma. In addition to the friction it caused among staff, its long-term growth potential appeared compromised and there were concerns that 3M had become “a less creative company...a vitally important issue for a company whose very identity is built on innovation.”

In recent years, 3M has significantly changed the way it uses Six Sigma. The company acknowledges that the program adds value in its factories, so it’s still utilized in manufacturing operations. Researchers working in the labs, however, are no longer beholden to the metrics and rubrics of Six Sigma. The shift has been successful--and there are metrics to prove it. One of the best measures of innovation efforts is the percentage of revenue that a company derives from products introduced in the last five years. At 3M, this number had traditionally hovered around 30 percent, but had dropped to 21 percent after Six Sigma’s introduction. In 2010, the number was back up to 30 percent and may soon surpass 35 percent.

I don’t mean to vilify Six Sigma unfairly. It’s just one example in a long list of top-down processes that people mistake as a silver bullet to improve their entire business. TQM, Lean Six Sigma, ISO, etc.--they all entrench organizations in policies and procedures, minimizing the organization’s innovation potential.

Today, managers are especially in a bind. They’re expected to efficiently produce outstanding short-term results, but the innovation they’re supposed to pursue could very likely hurt their careers. A 2011 PricewaterhouseCoopers survey summarizes the quandary:

“Those in middle management... found innovation disruptive to their day-to-day activities and felt it got in the way of running an efficient operation--which is what they were paid to do.”

When people’s jobs depend on meeting metrics and maintaining the status quo, can you fault them for their reluctance to expend any energy toward creation and invention?

[Image: Flickr user Deja Photo]

Monday, May 14, 2012

Making it Lean - Don’t Underestimate Lawyers’ Resistance to Change

Seyfarth Shaw has learned a lot about lawyers and their resistance to change as the firm embraced Lean Six Sigma, a management approach emphasizing process improvement and efficiency in legal work.

Seyfarth Shaw chairman J. Stephen Poor outlines the lessons learned in an article for the New York Times DealBook blog. “Never underestimate the resistance to change from lawyers,” he writes. “Even more likely, never underestimate the ability of lawyers to describe virtual status quo efforts as revolutionary change. Working through a change management process intended to deal with that push-back has been a core element of our challenge for years.”

Resistance came not just from lawyers in his firm, Poor says. Most of the firm’s clients are also lawyers, and they also showed reluctance. The firm has learned that it had to build a business case for change, working in collaboration with clients.

Two other lessons learned:

• Law firms do need to change how they manage their businesses, with a focus on client demands for better value. Except for a handful of law firms, “the status quo will not drive long-term success,” he asserts.

• Don’t settle for half steps. "Marketing efforts are lovely; certainly, we all do marketing," he says. “But if one is to truly evolve a business model, the only way to avoid having it become simply a marketing effort is to recognize that it must drive through all parts of the organization."

Re-Engineering the Business of Law

BY J. STEPHEN POOR

J. Stephen Poor is chairman of the international law firm Seyfarth Shaw.

True long-term success requires businesses to improve continually and reimagine how they operate in the face of changing competition and market forces. Yet this innovative urge, which drives so much of the rest of the American economy, is largely absent from large law firms.

Instead, the measures become balancing rate growth versus discounted fees, lawyer productivity measured in tenths of hours, recruiting the partner with a book of business from one firm to another and similar yardsticks.

These address the traditional measures of law firm profitability. The need of the purchasers of legal services — at least from large law firms — continues to change, however. The pressure on in-house counsel to deliver better services using fewer resources has never been more intense. In order to meet business demands, corporate counsel are increasingly looking for firms that deliver greater value. Looking out on a landscape that includes a wider variety of choices than ever before – regional firms, national firms, global firms, virtual firms, legal outsourcing providers and contract firms, among others — their purchasing decisions continue to evolve.

If the recent recession teaches anything for the legal industry, it is this: The changing demands of our clients require the legal services profession to find different paths to deliver value to those who buy our services. Lawyers today should be asking themselves nontraditional questions: how to apply resources more effectively, to shorten cycle time and lower the cost of their work product and other deliverables, while raising the level of service. In the end, your client will reward you by giving you more work across more areas, and your relationship will deepen.

The ground on which we walk has been altered. Traditionally, large law firms fit into largely homogenous business models. Whether we recognize it or not, that has changed and will continue to shift. As we navigate a different world, our experience presents three core lessons:

Be Prepared to Examine and Reimagine the Business Model.

Our firm has been on its own, unique path for years. Over the past seven years, we’ve used a version of Lean Six Sigma borrowed from the manufacturing sector to redesign core elements of how legal work process is measured and deployed. This has resulted in a variety of tools, analyses and process improvement techniques intended to drive efficiency into the delivery of legal services – at all levels of the practice. More important, it aligns a way of thinking with the needs and requirements of corporate purchasers of legal services.

What works for us, however, may not work for every firm. Culture, current firm composition and many other factors should drive the way any firm responds to the market. The point, however, is that — other than for a handful of firms — the status quo will not drive long-term success. Change, particularly one involving lawyers, is a painful, prolonged process. Nevertheless, change, driven from innovation and a consistent focus on client needs, must drive how we look at and manage our businesses. Learning from our colleagues in the industry is important, but adapting that learning and innovating in the delivery of our services is critical.

Don’t Settle for Half-Steps.

Too often, I see firms start down a path only to stop at partial implementation or inconsistent philosophies. At Seyfarth, we realized that trying to drive different behaviors would require us to restructure things like associate evaluation (which we did by putting our compensation and advancement structures into a pure competency model) and re-examine our staffing models (for example, we eliminated a traditional summer program and replaced it with an education-based fellowship program). The global reach of our clients and their need for integrated, efficient service delivery across multiple countries, led us to create the largest multijurisdictional international employment practice, among others.

The point is not that our path is for everyone. The point is that the willingness to change and adapt business models must anticipate and address the variables that drive organizational success.

Marketing efforts are lovely; certainly, we all do marketing. But if one is to truly evolve a business model, the only way to avoid having it become simply a marketing effort is to recognize that it must drive through all parts of the organization. This will result in changes and modifications that were not anticipated but which make sense and should be adopted in order to have the overall change work properly.

Never Underestimate Resistance to Change.

Never underestimate the resistance to change from lawyers. Even more likely, never underestimate the ability of lawyers to describe virtual status quo efforts as revolutionary change. Working through a change management process intended to deal with that push-back has been a core element of our challenge for years. We consciously developed methodologies that linked to the history and culture of our firm or used client voices to support and build the business case for change. As we were able to demonstrate success on smaller scales, we were able to build agents for change that effectively permeated the firm.

What we did not anticipate was the resistance from other crucial stakeholders – especially clients. Much of what we’ve done is most effective when deployed in a collaborative change process with clients. What we overlooked at the outset is that, by and large, our clients are lawyers, too, and many of them are the products of the culture of their own business. Understanding the various viewpoints and building the business case to involve this crucial constituency was something we learned along the way. The nature of the process requires a continuous, but slow march toward improvement and adaptation. Some things we tried worked and some did not. Nevertheless, the continuous move forward takes persistence and, perhaps, a bit of stubbornness.

Hospital wins award through planning (process improvement)

This article explains how simple process improvement activities resulted in great results. To find out more about how we can assist you health organisation through cost neutral solutions in the same way please contact us at focus@chaseperformance.com or call us on 1300 880 338. Alternatively you can also visit our web site: www.chaseperformance.com

Planning at Waikato Hospital wins award

A Waikato Hospital project looking at delivery and capacity planning within the hospital, has been deemed so effective, it has won an award at tonight's Waikato District Health Board Best of Health Awards.

By far the biggest category, there were 14 entries in the process improvement category claimed by Waikato Hospital, which looks at recognising how planned improvement activities - both clinical and non-clinical - led to significant improvements in patient care or process improvement.

Process improvement activities aim to improve customer and staff satisfaction; and at reducing or eliminating process waste such as resources and time.

A brief description of the project

Waikato Hospital historically provided a set number of beds over the year with closures allocated primarily to known low elective periods, such as Christmas.

The associated nursing staff rosters were driven by budgeted matrix, which did not necessarily align with planned or acute demand.

There was minimal knowledge of seasonal demand, which regularly resulted in high elective surgical cancellations, large numbers of patients nursed outside of their specialty areas, high nursing costs associated with misaligned rosters with workload, and scheduled theatre sessions poorly utilised.

As a result of this project, there has been a focus on improved planning to place patients in the right place, in the right beds, at the right time. There has been an increase in surgical throughput and a decrease in cancelled surgeries.

This has therefore improved patient access to elective services and patients are spending less time waiting in ED for a ward bed.

Judges comments

"This project is using an off the shelf programme to the max; when it was obtained it was used DHB wide and implemented thoroughly. From the patient's perspective, this has had a monstrous impact.

"It is amazing in a hospital the size of Waikato, to embed something this large so quickly and get staff confidence in its use."

Other projects that received honourable mentions at the awards were:

Community pharmacy anticoagulation management service from Pharmacy 547

The Waihi Project (family violence) from Population Health, Waikato DHB

Waikato virtual lesion clinic from Waikato DHB's Dermatology Department; and

Working together to reach the health target of 90% of two-year-olds being fully immunised by June 2011 from Toiora Primary Health Organisation

For more information about the Best of Health Awards, other entries and the awards evening, visit www.waikatodhb.health.nz/bestofhealth

Thursday, May 10, 2012

The Six Enemies of Greatness (and Happiness)

Here's an article from Forbes that makes some good reading. Reflect on it and compare it to your own life and situation. Where are you at?

By Jessica Hagy
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jessicahagy/2012/02/28/the-six-enemies-of-greatness-and-happiness/

The Six Enemies of Greatness (and Happiness)

The Six Enemies of Greatness (and Happiness)These six factors can erode the grandest of plans and the noblest of intentions. They can turn visionaries into paper-pushers and wide-eyed dreamers into shivering, weeping balls of regret. Beware!

1) Availability

We often settle for what’s available, and what’s available isn’t always great. “Because it was there,” is an okay reason to climb a mountain, but not a very good reason to take a job or a free sample at the supermarket.

2) Ignorance

If we don’t know how to make something great, we simply won’t. If we don’t know that greatness is possible, we won’t bother attempting it. All too often, we literally do not know any better than good enough.