Lessons from Japan: Rapid, Disciplined Problem EscalationNote: Links to all of four Japan factory tour posts and the various lessons from those tours can be found here. One of the most memorable parts of my trip to Japan was watching the Toyota Kyushu manufacturing lines, and especially how the auto assemblers handled problems. If the operator has a problem, he pulls a cord that sounds a chime.
Another person in white gloves comes running. The problem escalation
method is something many of us struggle with, and the Toyota solution
is to create very simple decisions and multiple decision points. The
operator begins with "is there a problem, yes/no". If "yes" he pulls
the cord. The guy in white gloves comes running and has another simple
decision "is it really a problem, yes/no". The two of them have
literally under a minute, one takt, to make that call. If "yes" then
the line stops and the supervisor comes running. He has a simple
decision of "can the problem be fixed within two takts (about two
minutes), yes/no". If "no" then the decision goes one more level to
"shut the factory down". Within three minutes a problem has been
identified, attacked, almost always resolved, but potentially a
decision has been made to shut down an entire factory. How often
does the chime sound? About once a minute throughout the factory.
There is no problem reporting a problem. The intent is to find it and
get it fixed, fast. As in within a minute. How long does it take you
to identify, report, and fix a problem? I know what you're thinking,
I'm embarrassed too. There are about seven parallel assembly
lines, running head-to-toe, to make each vehicle. Each are
synchronized but independent to allow for a three to seven vehicle
buffer, which thereby allows for each individual line to be shut down
for two takts two or three times per shift without shutting down the
entire factory. "Buffer" is probably a misnomer... remember that it
represents about five minutes.
It really was happening literally every minute. The chime, the running around, occasionally the line would stop for a takt, then it moves on. Problem identified, investigated, and resolved in under a couple minutes. Longer than that and a decision is made to shut down a $1 million per hour factory. Pressure? Not really. The decision-making is so defined that it becomes easy. The desire to find problems easily outweighs the potential cost. Shutting down the entire factory is still better than letting a customer receive a quality problem. How many of us get squeamish over a $5,000 problem, or a decision to shut down a line making a few grand an hour? How many of us try to rationalize issues, subjectively decide if they are "acceptable" or "noticeable" or try to "reinterpret specification?" How much time is wasted when a line is "almost ready" to start producing after a changeover? Why do we let that happen? We're all focused on quality and customer value, right? Because we haven't made the decisions easy, and high impact decisions acceptable. Because we are still concerned about cost over quality, not realizing (or accounting for) the fact that the eventual cost of poor quality far exceeds the cost of finding it early. The key aspects of the Toyota system are:
- Very clear and discrete decisions at each level: typically "yes/no"
- Very defined escalation structure from line operator to support guy to line supervisor and above
- Very defined time intervals in which decisions have to be made
- Acceptance and outright desire for problems to be found and action taken, sooner rather than later
- The root cause of problems is investigated and rectified so they don't occur again
That doesn't sound too hard, does it? Top leadership must reinforce and support the identification of problems without repercussions. The escalation criteria must be agreed to, and people held accountable to executing the escalation structure within the criteria and defined time intervals. Top leadership must become part of the escalation structure. Of course not every problem can be solved in under three minutes. But I bet we'd be surprised how many could be.
Stand Up Desk - Update & More ScienceI've now been working at my stand up desk for a few days, a concept I brought back from my trip to Japan, and I'm loving it. Ok, I will admit the first couple days were pretty rough, and had it not been for a good pair of shoes and a hot tub, I might have even re-thought this idea. But today was great. I really do feel more productive and energetic. And the steady stream of employees stopping by to see their "wacky president" has been entertaining. Many of them leave wanting to join the wacky club... perhaps that' s leading by example? I have received a boatload of emails from people who have also taken the wacky plunge, every one of them positive. I've also heard of several companies that have gone or are going stand up company-wide. All positive again. And there have been several emails from people relaying an apparently popular modification of the idea: a treadmill coupled with the stand up desk.
Here's just one example. Shimon Rura pointed me to a few articles on the benefits of standing up. You might also want to check out his own blog post on the treadmill-enhanced stand up desk, including a photo. The New York Times had an article a couple years back on some Mayo Clinic studies on standing versus sitting, which coincidentally convinced one of the study docs to go stand up himself. The heavier ones tended to sit, while the lean ones were more restless
and spent two more hours a day on their feet - standing, pacing around
and fidgeting. The difference translated into 350 calories a day,
enough for the heavy people to take off 30 to 40 pounds a year, if they
would get moving.
30 to 40 pounds a year at just two more hours on your feet. So going stand up for eight hours... hmmm... I should be ready for the beach in a month or so. After which I'll keep my eye on the nearest pizza parlour. Or pub. Or both.
When it comes to this mission, Dr. Levine may be his own best guinea pig. "If anyone in the world is going to do this it's obviously going to be me," he said. At
meetings, he stands instead of sitting. Talking on the telephone, he
paces around. In his office he has a treadmill in place of a desk. He
got it last year when he saw the data from the study comparing lean
people and obese ones.
"He has
installed a second treadmill alongside his own, and he encourages
visitors to hop on and stroll while they talk to him. It takes some
getting used to, but, he says, envious colleagues at Mayo have been
clamoring for treadmill desks.
"Walking at work, first of all
it's addictive," he said. "It's terribly good fun. I actually feel
happier, particularly in the afternoon. You might think you come home
exhausted, but you don't. You come home energized." For him, the treadmill has eliminated the afternoon slump, when a lot of people feel sleepy and crave candy bars or caffeine.
"I've become convinced we really can generate an office environment where people are on the move and are happier," he said.
So energy and happiness are other effects. I like that. Many years ago Fortune described how standing helps the brain work 20% faster and can even ward off Alzheimer's. I like that, too. Bernard Wechsler has an interesting article on the benefits of standing up, with a couple of the points being, Did you know that Benny Franklin and Tommy Jefferson worked all day from their (vertical) Stand-Up desk? I checked and Ben lived to about 92 and Tom 81, both with all their marbles. Get a vertical desk and you'll cut sitting 65%. Now remember, the muscles holding up a 195 pound body burn twice the calories of the same sitting weight. Stand your way to weight loss.
Sitting all working-day affects our immune system and is disease causing. Sitting reduces fat and cholesterol metabolism and produces more of both. Standing and strolling around our desk and office awakens our enzymes
activating good metabolism. Blood vessels to our leg muscles are shut-down after sitting a couple of hours.
I like my marbles. I like energy and happiness and being able to wear a Speedo... not that I'd ever do that for other reasons.
I guess I like being wacky. Who else is joining the wacky stand up club?
Japan Kaikaku Experience - The SummaryI've received several requests to provide all of the links to posts on my recent Japan trip on one page, so here they are. I still have a few more potential "lessons" posts bouncing around in my head, and if they see the light of day I'll add them to this page as well.
Factory Tour Reports
Lessons From Japan
Implementing the Lessons
Trickling Down on DetroitLast month I wrote what I thought would be the last post on bailing out the Detroit Three automakers. I should have known better, especially after last week's election. Once you prime the government trough, it's very hard to turn it off. There's already talk about another "stimulus package" and even, yes, yet another bailout for the Detroit Three. Geesh... I wonder where all that money is going to come from. Oh that's right... the fewer and fewer of us that actually pay taxes. Obama said Friday he would push Congress
to accelerate the delivery of 25 billion dollars in loan guarantees
aimed at helping automakers develop more fuel efficient vehicles ahead
of upcoming regulation. The Big Three asked for another 25
billion in loan guarantees for more general expenses during a meeting
with top lawmakers in Washington Thursday. Even NAM, that industry association that has spent most of the past two years criticizing everything even the slightest bit left-leaning, now weighs in on Obama's side. "Automakers need immediate funding to
stay on track during this difficult time," said National Association of
Manufacturers president John Engler. "We're talking about
close to a million jobs in America -- we're talking about a lasting
impact on our industrial production in the United States. We simply
cannot afford to let the auto industry fail." Presumably Engler means "Detroit automakers" as although they're technically eligible, the foreign companies have turned down the handouts. Maybe it's time to take another look at NAM... it's been a while. Will subsidizing pathetic management really save those jobs long term? Probably not. The miscalculations of the Detroit Three have been pretty phenomenal. But the seeds of the current crisis date
back to the last big oil shock, of 1979, which helped the Japanese gain
a foothold for small, fuel-efficient products. As gas lines
faded from memory, the Asian automakers continued to gain ground by
focusing on quality, something GM, Ford and Chrysler have only recently
come to grips with -- and with varying degrees of success.
Further compounding the situation, Detroit has been consciously slow to
embrace changes in the American automotive marketplace, especially the
shift from big trucks to small, fuel-efficient passenger cars. And even where it has, lamented Consumer Reports' auto analyst David
Champion, it has needed "more models that were exciting for people to
buy." Our friends in the hollowed ivory towers of Wharton recently provided similar comments. I would just add that over the years, probably in the last decade or
so, decade and a half, they made a lot of strategic mistakes. You know,
basically, years ago, they had a very favorable industry structure.
Industry forces were positive. They had power over suppliers. They had
power over buyers. Buyers didn't know much about buying cars. They had
size, they had market share. It was an oligopoly -- three firms. All of
a sudden, the world changes. Competition comes in. The customer gets
much more knowledgeable, because of the Internet. Suppliers become more
powerful. The UAW had a history with GM of bad relationships. And
that's not carrying over positively right now. And so when you put all
of that in perspective, and given what John Paul also said -- that in
fact, you can see some strategic errors, and just inability to manage
their company well.
So why not give them more bucks? A billion here a billion there... apparently it doesn't matter much these days. Let me get this straight: we have to bribe historically pathetic management to save a bunch of jobs that are supposedly protected by unions, while without any prodding Toyota is spending $35 million a month to save U.S. factory jobs when they don't even have unions breathing down their backs? Yes I know Toyota has an incredible cash position. Isn't that a function of leadership? Which form of leadership do you want to ensure survives long term? Who should really get the bribe? And wait a minute... doesn't this latest auto bailout sound a lot like supply side economics? From the same Democrats that complained about Reaganomics? Trickle it down, baby! Dump it on top and hope it helps the common folk. I would have thought the Dems would at least focus on pushing on the balloon from the demand side. Funny how politics works.
Factory Tour of the Week: Pepin Garcia Cigars
This week we'll take a trip down south to see how Pepin Garcia makes some fine cigars. Sort of wants to make you leave the high tech world, doesn't it?! Is one piece flow possible? Should we care in this case? 
|
