Podcasts about Taiichi Ohno

In this episode I'm helping listeners not be too rigid with their processes through examples from Taiichi Ohno and my own lessons learned as an Emergency Medical Technician, Planning Section Chief, and Project Manager.People: "Let the flow manage the processes, and not let management manage the flow." - Taiichi OhonProcess:Evaluating what done looks likeLetting the team determine the best way to get thereGauging the team's capabilitiesChoosing the right tools from the process toolboxProgress:Helping listeners not be too rigid with their processes so that their teams have autonomy and collaborative outcomes are encouraged

Read the blog post Taiichi Ohno, the father of the Toyota Production System, once said, “Without Standard Work, there is no Kaizen.” That's a pretty bold statement, but when you think about the continuous improvement cycle, it makes a lot of sense. How can you move from the current state to the desired state if the current state is a moving target? Standard Work, which documents the current best practice for performing a task or process, and ensures that everyone is applying it, is a prerequisite for improvement. Here are 15 ways that Standard Work benefits organizations that leverage it.

¿Cuál es la marca que fabrica los mejores coches del Mundo? ¡Ojo! No digo ni los más lujosos ni los más potentes ni siquiera los más caros. Me refiero a los coches con mejor calidad. He probado a hacer esta pregunta y la marca que más veces me han respondido es Lexus. Y la pregunta es, ¿de verdad son los mejores? Voy a decir sí o no en la conclusión que será “la hora de la verdad”, pero antes vale la pena repasar la historia de esta joven marca… porque será importante cuando os conteste esta pregunta, ya lo veréis. Habrá anécdota final. Y de paso, a lo largo del vídeo, os enseñaré un poco de japonés… ¡que siempre viene bien! Mi padre, cuando era niño y adolescente, años 60 y 70, me decía que los mejores coches del Mundo eran los Rolls Royce. Cuando ya cumplí unos añitos y me dediqué a esto, Mercedes-Benz era sin duda la marca de referencia, como contamos en el vídeo titulado “Cuando los Mercedes eran auténticos Mercedes” … en 1989 todo cambio. Eiji Toyoda sobrino del fundador de Toyota quiso crear una marca Premium para Toyota, como lo habían intentado, con éxito dispar, Honda al crear Acura y Nissan al crear Infiniti. Aspiraba a crear una marca con personalidad propia y, sobre todo, con el mejor nivel de calidad del Mundo. Sí, porque pensaba a lo grande: No quería hacer coches que estuviesen entre los mejores, quería hacer “los mejores”, los coches con mejor calidad del Mundo. Y a mediados de los años 80 la primera pregunta que surgió ante este desafío fue: ¿Es capaz Toyota de fabricar los mejores coches del Mundo? ¿Podemos hacerlo? E hizo esta pregunta nada menos que a 1.400 ingenieros y 2.300 técnicos de la marca… y muchos, no todos, dijeron que sí, ¡sí podemos! Y nació el proyecto F1… “Flagship One”, la semilla de Lexus. A primeros de los 80, EE.UU. de Norteamérica era el principal cliente de las marcas japonesas de coches. Y todavía la industria americana del motor era líder por volumen de producción. Siempre se dice, sobre todo se decía, que los japoneses eran los mejores copiando y consiguiendo que la copia superase al original. Así que el espabilado de Eiji Toyoda mandó al ingeniero Taiichi Ohno a los USA, sencillamente, a espiar y a copiar. Al poco de llegar este señor llegó a un supermercado enorme y alucinó por cómo trabajan sin stock… justo lo contrario que hacían los fabricantes de coches. Pero es que puedes almacenar ruedas, motores o tornillos el tiempo que quieras, pero no carne, pescado o fruta. Y desarrolló el sistema “Just-In-Time” o “Justo a tiempo” … El sistema denominado TPS o “Sistema de producción Toyota” se exportó a muchas marcas. En algunos países se llama “Sistema de producción Lean” y por ahí he leído y oído que se puede denominar “Just-In-Time” lo cual es un error, porque el “Just-In-Time”, es parte de este sistema, pero no “el todo” … Junto con el TPS para su nueva marca Eiji Toyoda implantó el sistema, más bien filosofía de trabajo, denominada “Jidoka”, que consiste en detectar problemas y corregir errores en tiempo récords. Y también implantó la filosofía “Heijunka” que básicamente consiste en no sobrecargar a los trabajadores… esto, en Europa suena raro, pero no en un país donde las huelgas consisten en trabajar más… hay que “forzar” a los trabajadores a descansar para evitar fallos en los procesos de fabricación. Y finalmente la filosofía Kaizen que no la inventó ni Eiji ni Toyota, es milenaria y se podría resumir en una frase: “¡Hoy mejor que ayer, mañana mejor que hoy!”. En resumen, que siempre es posible hacer mejor las cosas. Para la nueva fábrica que iba a hacer Toyota para fabricar en exclusiva los nuevos Lexus, no querían a cualquier empleado. Y sobre todo, se necesitaban guardianes de la calidad, los llamados… maestros “Takumi”. Para ser un maestro Takumi (Artesano) para comenzar necesitas tener al menos 25 años de experiencia como trabajador en la fabricación de coches. Se puede decir que la marca independiente LEXUS nace en 1989, que es cuando se presenta el primer Lexus, el LS400 en el Salón de Detroit y se comienza a vender sus coches en los USA. Como os decía antes, en el desarrollo de esta marca y estos modelos, el objetivo principal eran los EE.UU. de Norteamérica, hasta el punto que su nombre proviene de ahí, pues LEXUS es el acrónimo de “Luxury EXport United Estates”. En 1993 todo esto que os he contado lo había leído, me había informado y me despertaba enorme curiosidad. Siempre digo que un periodista debe ser exceptivo y a mí este objetivo me parecía exagerado: Superar a Mercedes, que era el referente, a la primera. ¡Y por fin llegó el LEXUS LS400 a España! Y nos lo dejaron para probar… ventajas de ser el jefe, desde el comienzo dije que ese coche lo iba a probar yo. Recuerdo que cuando llegó el redactor que lo trajo le pregunté: “¿Qué te ha parecido?” Y el tío me respondió: “Como un Mercedes, pero feo”. Cierto que el LS400 no era el coche más bonito del Mundo, aunque feo no era. Pero que me dijese que era como un Mercedes… me pareció un buen principio. Me subí al coche y tuve tres primeras impresiones “impresionantes”: La primera, ver el interior y subir al coche, porque me pareció de una calidad para mí nunca vista. La segunda, cerrar la puerta… ese sonido no lo había oído nunca, ni en un Mercedes ni en un Jaguar ni en un BMW… nunca. Era algo especial y seductor. Luego me enteré que uno de los motivos por el que los “Maestros Takumi” echan coches “para atrás” es por el sonido de cierre de la puertas. La tercera impresión, cuando arranqué el motor V8 de 4.0 litros, 32 válvulas y 250 CV… tuve que mirar el cuenta vueltas para comprobar que estaba arrancado. Arranqué y no lo voy a hacer largo: Me pareció en cuanto a calidad el mejor coche que había probado nunca. Tanto es así que un amigo me pregunto que cuál era el mejor coche del mercado… le dije que éste y… ¡llega el momento de responder a la pregunta inicial!: ¿Son los LEXUS los mejores coches del Mundo? La respuesta es, sencillamente… ¡SÍ!

Is quality simply a matter of two categories: good and bad? But then how do you get to "better"? In this episode, Bill Bellows and Andrew Stotz discuss categories and continuum thinking. TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.4 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz and I'll be your host as we dive deeper into the teachings of Dr. W Edwards Deming. Today I'm continuing my discussion with Bill Bellows who has spent 31 years helping people apply Dr. Deming's ideas to become aware of how their thinking is holding them back from their biggest opportunities. And today is episode six, Category Thinking and Continuum Thinking. Bill, take it away.   0:00:27.9 Bill Bellows: Welcome Andrew great to see you again. All right, so in podcast five, I went back and it was just posted by The Deming Institute. And I just wanna clarify again on the topic of acceptability and desirability. Where we're going tonight is looking at acceptability and desirability in a little bit more detail, a little bit differently, but those are still the prevailing themes. And again, I just wanna reinforce that none of this is to imply that desirability is better than acceptability. What's important is to be aware of when I'm using acceptability thinking. And when I'm using desirability thinking and use the one that makes the most sense in that situation. We were talking earlier about companies whose products we enjoy using and we're loyal to them. And I mentioned that my wife and I have developed a loyalty to Toyota products.   0:01:40.4 BB: Going back to 1989 was our first Toyota product. And I knew I wanted a pickup truck. 'Cause I was borrowing a pickup truck from a number of friends and I thought, I really like a pickup truck. There's a lot you can do with a pickup truck. So, I knew I wanted a pickup truck. And I knew from having worked in my father's gas station, I had reason to believe I wanted a Japanese pickup truck and not an American pickup truck. So, I then it was a question of is it a Mazda, Toyota.   0:02:11.1 AS: Nissan.   0:02:13.2 BB: Sorry Nissan. And I looked at all of them and yeah I just all I knew is I was gonna be one of those. And I think the major reason I went with... My wife and I went with a Toyota... I don't think the prices were that different. But it just had a, it was the styling was a little bit better. But I did not... That's why I bought it.   0:02:46.5 AS: The loyalty wasn't built yet.   0:02:49.0 BB: No I knew to stay away... I knew I had seen plenty of examples of... Well, I had traded in my first car that my father, my parents got me when I was in college was a 1975 Chevy Nova. Four door Chevy Nova. And the reason four doors is important is a... If it was a two door, the door would be longer. But it was a four door. By the time I gave that car to a friend, the engine was running beautifully but the body was falling apart. And, so, by the time I sold it to get the pickup truck, in order to get out of it, I'd have to throw my shoulder into the driver's door. Why? Because the door droop was so great that when you close the door, I mean the door drooped and this is not a four door, this is a two door. So, imagine if it was a two door the door would be even heavier. So, on a four door, the door drooped. And, so, when you closed it, you'd had to lift it and then close it in order to get out you had to... Oh, it's just my wife couldn't drive. It was just a nuisance.   0:04:17.6 AS: And, that in '75 was just about when the Japanese were really starting to go after the US car makers. And but I want to tell you just a quick one. I can't remember if I've told you, but I used to have a 1963 Lincoln Continental here in beautiful Bangkok. And I owned it for 10 years. And then eventually I sold it. But what a beautiful car. And people always ask me the same thing and they said, isn't it hard to take care of? And I said, you gotta remember back in those days, cars were simple.   0:04:49.1 BB: Yeah, yeah. So, the... So, with... So, the experience of 14 years or so, with the '75 Chevy Nova. And the door was like the straw that broke the camel's back. It just done with this, all right. So, we're gonna buy Japanese, bought a Toyota. That was the first one. And I think I've mentioned in the first podcast I mentioned that we had a 1998 Toyota Sienna, which is their first, it was their Toyota third attempt at a minivan. The first one I think was underpowered, the second one... And we knew we wanted a minivan. It was time, the kids were getting a little bit bigger. It was time for minivan. And just as we were ready to go buy it, they had a... I think a competitor came out with dual sliding doors. Dual sliding doors. And, so, instead of Toyota coming out with a one sliding door, they stepped back. I think Chrysler came out with two sliding doors. And they figured we can't come to market with one sliding door. They've got two sliding doors. So, then we waited another year and they finally came out and given all of our delight with the Toyota pickup truck, boom, that's what we wanted. And then the transmission failed, six months later with 10,000 miles in the car.   0:06:18.5 BB: And I have a photo of that. Not only did the transmission fail at 10,000 miles, but it failed on Christmas morning on our way to see friends about an hour away. And this guy, people were going to see, he knew I loved Toyota. And when he drove to pick us up, we transferred everything from that to his Ford F-150. He says to me... So, then we had to have the car towed on a flatbed to his house and the next day to the dealership, what a nuisance headache. But when he showed up, he looks at me knowing that I like Toyota. And he says, how's this data point change your theory about Toyota?   0:07:06.5 AS: I thought he was gonna say, if it was me, I would've said pop in the back.   0:07:12.6 BB: And I was like, yeah, that really hurts. Well when I shared that story with students at Northwestern's Business School, the Kellogg Business School, their advice and these are students that had worked in all different industries from Coke to banking, and a number of 'em have worked in the auto industry. And their advice was, I said, Professor Bellows never buy anyone's first model year, even Toyota. Now I have a friend who he and his wife bought the same model year Toyota Sienna. They did not have a problem.  Oe did. When I met at a Deming conference, a guy who worked in Georgetown, Kentucky which is where the Sienna was made. And, so, I met him at a conference and when he said he worked for Toyota, I said, oh, my wife and I buy nothing but Toyotas. He says, oh. And I said, we have a first model...   0:08:08.6 BB: Year Sienna. And everything was good. And then I'm thinking, I'm gonna ask the guy a question. And I looked straight in his eyes. We were pretty close together. And I'm about to ask him a question. I'm looking straight in his eyes and I said, we got a Toyota Sienna. He says, how do you like it? And I looked right at him and I said, the transmission failed at 10,000 miles. And he rolled his eyes. And I said, so, you know about this. It wasn't a look of shock. It was, yeah, all right. So, I said, all right, all right. Your expression just told me that you know something about this. I said, what's up? He says, we tried. This is so cool. He says, we tried to save a few pennies on a bearing.   0:09:00.8 BB: I said, you did but what you did cost me more than you saved. So, yeah you guys saved a few pennies on a bearing and cost my wife weeks of aggravation to have it towed from where it happened to the place we were going because it Christmas Day, it broke. Everything's shut down on Christmas days. You can't have it right? And, so, we had it towed, had to get a rental car. Then they're complaining about, we had... Who authorized this rental car? We only pay... It was just headache after headache. But we still buy Toyota Andrew. We still buy Toyota. Why? Because I'm afraid to buy from anybody else. Well, part of the reason I wanted to share that with our audience is I buy Toyota products based on value. And I believe that the best value we get in transportation, personal transportation is the money we spend buying a Toyota most often brand new. We've also bought some used, got great use out of them, never had a problem, anything like what I just shared with you. And that's having owned five or six different Toyotas. I mean, right now in our family we have three of them.   0:10:16.7 AS: I think I need to correct you.   0:10:19.1 BB: Go ahead.   0:10:19.9 AS: You buy Toyotas on value and values.   0:10:25.7 BB: Yes!   0:10:28.2 AS: You're aligned with their values and therefore you're willing to look beyond the mistakes and problems that it comes with every product, every service, every company, because you're aligned with their values.   0:10:42.2 BB: Well, what's funny is when we bought the Sienna and we're talking with 'em, doing the driving and signed agree to buy it, that's the color we want. We want these seats, blah, blah, blah. And then you go talk to the closer and the closer's a guy, the gal at the dealership that wants to add on the undercoating and the this and the this and the this and the this. And he wanted to sell us at a premium price, this extended warranty and I dunno what it costs, but I said, I've done a whole lot of research. And he says to me it's so funny. He says, when these things break down, a circuit board breaks and that'll cost you this and this and this, and, so, I'm gonna sign you up for the insurance policy, the extra coverage. And I said, no, and he is going on and on. And I said, look it, I've done a lot of research into how they're made and I said, and the values of that organization. So, I said, the reason we buy Toyota is that I have an understanding, a pretty damn good understanding of how they manage the product, the pieces and how it all comes together. And he's pushing back at me. Finally, I said, I teach university courses on how Toyota operates and their quality system.   0:12:14.8 BB: So, we didn't get the extra coverage. Now it was still covered under warranty, so, it was kind of laughable that. But anyways, the reason I bring that up is that...   0:12:27.3 AS: Before you do that, I want to just say for the listeners and viewers out there, what is the messaging from a corporate strategy perspective? And that is have values that you stand for. Communicate those to the market, stay loyal to them and the customers who align with those values will stick with you through the hard times that you're gonna definitely have. There's a quote by Alexander Hamilton says, "those who stand for nothing, fall for everything." If you do not stand for a clear set of values that the market can perceive, then people are gonna fall away from you as soon as times get tough.   0:13:07.2 BB: Oh yeah. And I...I, I. It's about that and that's why I've read lots about Toyota. How they operate written by people outside of Toyota trying to explain it, people inside of Toyota and their explanations. But part of the reason I bring this up is my fascination, my interest in Dr. Deming's philosophy, is a great deal to do with his system is based on an incredible appreciation of the difference between acceptability and desirability. All other quality management systems, whether it's the quality management within Lean is acceptability based, good parts and bad parts, Operational Excellence, Six Sigma Quality. In fact, there's a quote at the end of chapter 10 in "The New Economics". And chapter 10 was the original last chapter until the third edition came out. In which case there's chapter 11 written in large part by Kelly Allen, a good friend.   0:14:15.1 BB: And when chapter 10 was the end I thought it was pretty cool that at the very end of chapter 10. The last few pages of chapter 10 of “The New Economics” are about Dr. Taguchi's loss function. And this is what turned me on to Dr. Taguchi, was finding “The New Economics" in a brick and mortar bookstore. I knew from ASQ Quality Progress that this was coming out. So, I remember when it came out, this was before Amazon, going to the bookstore. Going through it and saying what does this guy think about Taguchi? Because Taguchi was my, the one I really idolized. And I opened it up and I turned to chapter 10 and it's all about the loss function, the problem and I thought this is way cool. So, the closing quote... The closing... The last sentence in chapter 10 which again was the original last chapter until third edition came out, is the following "Conformance to specifications," that's acceptability, "zero defects," that's acceptability. "Six Sigma quality," which is acceptability "and all other specification-based nostrums all miss the point, ,stated by Donald J. Wheeler."   0:15:42.6 BB: So, then I looked up, but what is a nostrum? And Dr. Deming not Dr. Deming a nostrum is defined as “quack medicine.”  So, "Conformance to specifications, zero defect, Six Sigma quality, and all other specification-based nostrums all miss the point." And, so, I wrote an article about this, gosh, 20 years ago. I said, what's the point? And my explanation, the point is, all of them are about managing parts in isolation. Looking at things in isolation. Again that's acceptability. And as I said earlier, I'm not saying acceptability is bad, I'm just saying acceptability is not desirability. And the other thing I wanna add is, why do I... My wife and I love Toyota products. I've got reason to believe through a lot of research and talking, sharing the ideas that we talk about in these podcasts with people within Toyota. And they have a desirability focus that nobody else... That I'm not aware of anybody else has.   0:16:54.9 BB: And, that's having presented around the world doing classes, at Kellogg Business School, at university. Yeah, the Kellogg Business School Northwestern University. I teach online classes at Cal State Northridge, Southern Utah University. I've lectured at many universities. And I never had anyone come to me working in industry saying, Bill, what you're talking about, we practice where I work. No. And, so, for those that are pursuing the Toyota Production System stuff. My response is, I don't buy Toyota products because they use the Toyota Production System. Now, that may help with getting the car to market faster. But I don't believe the Toyota Production System is why people buy Toyota products. I believe Toyota's quality management system... At least I buy Toyotas because I believe their quality management system, inspired by Dr. Taguchi, inspired by Dr. Deming, is providing something that nobody else has in many industries. All right. So, I wanted to get that out.   0:18:06.7 AS: So, are you saying Toyota Production System is more of a tool that is in their toolbox of quality management system?   0:18:18.4 BB: Um, the Toyota Production System is classic Industrial Engineering.   0:18:26.8 AS: Right.   0:18:27.0 BB: It's how to...   0:18:28.3 AS: It's a natural.   0:18:30.5 BB: How to improve flow, how to improve throughput by minimizing number of steps, by minimizing inventory. It's highly credited to Taiichi Ohno, who was mentored by the founder of the Toyota Motor Company. And it's all about, they don't have a lot of money. So, we need minimal inventory, minimum steps. So, it's like... So, the Toyota Production System is an efficiency based system based on, we don't have a lot of money, we're not gonna buy a lot of inventory. But the quality aspect of the Toyota Production System everywhere, everything I've written, everything I've read by people describing the Toyota Production System it's all explained by acceptability. So, that they may be moving things closer together so people don't walk so far.   0:19:27.8 BB: But what I'm looking at with Dr. Deming's work inspired by Dr. Taguchi is what is it about the quality system that causes those parts to come together so well and the products to perform so well? So, it's not just having the parts when I reach out, the part is there, but those parts integrate better. I've mentioned in the first podcast series that Toyota had 100% snap-fit pickup truck in 1969 at a time when Ford was banging things together using rubber mallets to get the parts together. They took apart and assembled a Toyota pickup truck twice 'cause they didn't believe the results the first time the parts went together without mallets. That's what I'm talking about, that within that system, the ability for the parts to come together to work together cannot be explained by an acceptability based system. And, so, having spoken with people and having the opportunity to share with people within Toyota the ideas we talk about inspired by Dr. Deming, I've learned that they do desirability in a way that nobody... I'm not aware of anyone else having done.   0:20:48.5 BB: All right, so, what I want to get into, add to the discussion tonight, relative to category thinking, is this idea of category thinking, continuum thinking. Category thinking quite simply is putting things in categories. So, in acceptability we have two categories, good or bad, or maybe three categories. It's good or it's scrap or it's rework. So, category thinking is generically putting things into categories. And so, we could look at category... Categories could be... There could be two categories, three categories.   0:21:27.1 BB: It's been a while since I've gone to see a movie, but I believe they still have a rating system of PG, PG-13, R, R-17, maybe X. Those are categories. Fruits and vegetables. Those are two high level categories. Within each of those categories, we have types of, we have apples and oranges, and within them we have types of apples. That's all category thinking. You go into a supermarket and every aisle... There's the cereal aisle. That's a category. There's the canned goods, those are categories. Religions - talk about categories. So, every religion you look at is its own category. And, then within those categories they have subcategories. How about music? How many categories in music are there Andrew?   0:22:18.9 AS: Well, it gets all messed up on my iTunes where I'm like, that's not heavy metal. That's rock.   0:22:28.6 BB: Yeah. And then there's types of rock. In the beginning it was rock and roll, and then there's types of rock and roll.   0:22:34.0 AS: Progressive rock.   0:22:34.0 BB: Progressive rock. And then we have people... So, what category would we put... I think somebody asked Lucinda Williams, we're going to see her in a few weeks. So, what category? Well, she doesn't fit a category. So, that's category thinking. Category thinking is putting things in categories. We could say, where did you go to college? That's a category. These are USC grads, those are Cal State grads. And, part of the point I want to make is that we use category thinking all the time. Putting people in categories is what we do. Such as you and our daughter are Cal State graduates.   0:23:17.6 BB: And, so, what degrees do they have? Those are categories. So, I don't know what we would do if we couldn't put things in the categories. So, I don't think category, putting people in category is not a bad thing. Now, when you start to associate values with the categories, now we're getting into racism or sexism and then, okay. But this idea that putting people in categories is a bad thing, I'd say category thinking is our simple way of organizing everything around us and these little file cabinets. Now added to that is when you put four or five things into a category, then what you're implying is that they're all the same. And that gets into acceptability.   0:24:12.8 BB: So, if this is a good part, that's a good part. That's a bad part. That's a good part. So, all the good parts go into the good part category. Then we say, oh, these are all good. Then we get into the sense of, and they're interchangeable. Well, maybe not. And that has to do with what I call continuum thinking. All right, so before we get to continuum thinking, Andrew, remember the question. What do you call the person who graduates last in their class of medical school?   0:24:43.3 AS: I don't remember that.   0:24:45.2 BB: Okay, so take a wild guess, Andrew, putting the pressure on, what do you call the person that graduates last in his or her class in medical school?   0:24:55.7 AS: Surgeon general.   0:24:56.9 BB: What's cool is that's a question I've been able to ask all around the world. Now, depending on where I go, I can't talk about baseball because they don't understand baseball. Or depending on where I go, I can't say soccer or I have to say football. Then if I say football, I have to say, well, I mean your football, not American football. But what's neat about this question, what do you call the person that graduates last in their class in medical school, that's "doctor." That's also acceptability thinking. From the first in class to the last in class, they all met requirements. Andrew, you know what that is? Acceptability. So, category thinking is a form... Acceptability is a form of category thinking. All right. Now I'm gonna give you three numbers and I'm going to ask you which two of the three are closest to being the same. You ready?   0:25:58.0 AS: Yep.   0:26:01.7 BB: 5.001, 5.999 and 6.001.   0:26:11.1 AS: 5.999 and 6.001.   0:26:17.6 BB: Are close to being the same?   0:26:18.8 AS: Yeah.   0:26:20.2 S3: That's what most people think. Okay. But...   0:26:25.7 AS: One's a six and one's a five. That's a problem.   0:26:29.5 BB: All right. And, so, again, the numbers were 5.001, 5.999 and 6.001. And the question is, which two of the three are close to being the same? And, what most people will say is 5.999 and 6.001, which infers that what does same mean?   0:26:48.5 AS: The integers?   0:26:49.1 BB: If you answered.   0:26:49.9 AS: I looked at the integers at the end rather than the whole number at the beginning.   0:26:56.7 BB: But is it safe to say you chose those numbers by saying they were closest together?   0:27:01.6 AS: Correct. Yes.   0:27:03.2 BB: So, in your case you're saying, if I plot those numbers from zero to infinity. Then those two are really close together. That's one definition of same is proximity. But, same could also be, they begin with five, in which case the first two are close to being the same. 'cause they both begin with five or they're both less than six. Or, I could say 5.001 and 6.001, because they both end in .001. So, it turns out there's three answers to the question. But the answer of the last two and proximity is what category is what continuum thinking is about. On a continuum these two are closest together. All right.   0:27:51.2 AS: And I have to tell you, we're gonna be running out of time, so we gotta wrap this up.   0:27:55.4 BB: All right. So, when I asked you the question, what do you call the person who graduates last in their class of medical school? And you said doctor, that's category thinking. If you used... Well actually the thing is, if I ask, what do you call the person who graduates last in their class at the United States, US Army's Military Academy, known as West Point, one answer is Second Lieutenant. 'cause they're all Second Lieutenants. But West Point uses continuum thinking to define the very last person in their class. So, it's the last person in class is not called second lieutenant. The last person in the class is called goat, as in the animal.   0:28:43.2 BB: And a very famous goat at West Point, who from my reading, was very proud to have graduated last because there's... I think Mike Pompeo, who was Secretary of State under president Trump, was first in his class at West Point, first in his class. A very famous, I wanna be the last person in my graduating class at West Point was George Custer. You've heard of him?   0:29:14.3 AS: Yep.   0:29:15.5 BB: And, he was deliberately lazy, so he wanted to be the very last person in his class. But that's, but the idea is that category thinking says they're all Second Lieutenants, they're all doctors. Continuum thinking is when you say this is the first, this is the second, this is the third. And when you come up, when you start to order them and say, the last one is goat, that's looking at things on a continuum, which is continuum thinking. Well, given that most quality systems, including Boeing's Advanced Quality System, are based on category thinking and category thinking, you have good parts and bad parts. When I ask a question as I brought up in the podcast five. I said I go to audiences and ask, how much time do you spend discussing parts which are good, that arrive on time? And the answer is none. And I say, well why is that? 'Cause in that system they're focusing on taking things from bad to good. And then what? Stopping at good.   0:30:20.0 BB: Well, part of the thing I wanna get across in this episode is the reason we're stuck in that model of stopping at good is because the quality system is based on category thinking of bad and good. And in a world of good and bad, there is no better. In a world of short and tall, there is no taller. And, so, continuum thinking allows us to go beyond that. And, so, going back to Dr. Deming's quote, conformance requirements, which is category thinking, zero defect, Six Sigma quality, those are all category based systems, which means it's good parts and bad parts. But then I come back to how does a system which is based on good parts and bad parts deliver such incredible reliability in the products? And, I believe it's because they're using continuum thinking. Not... And again not continuum thinking everywhere, but I think they have very judiciously figured out where to use continuum thinking and that is their differentiator. In my admiration for Dr. Deming's System of Profound Knowledge is, I've not come across any other type of management theory, which has that level of fidelity to explain that. And, in order to practice continuum thinking, implement it, you have to work together.   0:31:43.9 AS: And I'm gonna wrap this up by... One of the revelations that I come upon when I listen to what you're saying is. That's also what makes Deming's teachings sometimes hard to grasp, because there is no clear category and there is no clear beginning and end. There is no certification and therefore it's just hard for us who are used to being in categories to grasp. And that's my conclusion what I draw from everything you've just said.   0:32:16.6 BB: Well and let me add to that, really appreciate you saying that. Let me add to that,much of what I was doing at Rocketdyne... When I began to appreciate that the reason I was focusing on solving problems, solving problems and the problems we didn't solve were the problems where the customer, NASA said, we're gonna take this work and take it to the company down the street because you guys can't make it happen.  And, that scared the hell out of me that we're gonna lose this work to competitors because... And when I looked at it, was why are we stuck?  And I looked at Dr. Deming's work, the reason we're stuck is we're... 'cause our quality system is based on good parts and bad parts. We're waiting for trouble to happen. And, so, but still what I found is, and when I started to focus on... I went from being 100% Taguchi to more about Dr. Deming's work and trying to come up with everyday examples to make Dr. Deming's work more accessible.   0:33:16.9 BB: So, in Dr. Deming's work, you're not gonna find category thinking, continuum thinking. So many of the concepts we talk about in this series, in the prior series are... I refer to them as InThinking Concepts, just trying to make it easier for people to begin to absorb the brilliance of Dr. Deming's work. Because, I think absent that, when he says quality, what kind of quality is he talking about? Acceptability quality, desirability quality. So, I'm with you, I think the work is brilliant. I'm just hoping through our conversations and these podcasts that we can make his work far more accessible.   0:33:56.4 AS: Yep. Well, I think we're doing that. And Bill, on behalf of everyone at The Deming Institute and the audience, I wanna thank you again for this discussion. For listeners, remember to go to deming.org to continue your journey. Of course, if you wanna keep in touch with Bill, just find him on LinkedIn. This is your host Andrew Stotz. And I'm gonna leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming. "People are entitled to joy in work."

Mark talks with Art Byrne, former Danaher executive and Wiremold CEO, about the early days at Danaher. Learn that it was more than the factory floor that had to change…more importantly, it was the mindset of Danaher's leadership. Art and Mark discuss the history of Jake Brake and Jacobs Chuck, the two early adopters of the Toyota Productions System, as led by the disciples of Taiichi Ohno, Shingijutsu Consulting, LTD. Little did Art know that we would be setting the stage for the adoption of Lean in the United States and beyond.

Tom Baldwin: Agile Under Pressure, Strategies for Effective Organizational Change Read the full Show Notes and search through the world's largest audio library on Scrum directly on the Scrum Master Toolbox Podcast website: http://bit.ly/SMTP_ShowNotes. Tom shares a story about leading organizational change under a tight deadline, leveraging Agile principles to dismantle complexity and align teams with corporate goals. Through collaboration with an organizational design consultant, Tom emphasizes practical steps like optimizing team structures, engaging support functions, and applying throughput accounting to facilitate a transformation focused on simplicity, efficiency, and problem-solving, inspired by insights from Taiichi Ohno on eliminating waste.   [IMAGE HERE] As Scrum Master we work with change continuously! Do you have your own change framework that provides the guidance, and queues you need when working with change? The Lean Change Management framework is a fully defined, lean-startup inspired change framework that can be used as the backbone of any change process! You can buy Lean Change Management the book at Amazon. Also available in French, Spanish, German and Portuguese.   About Tom Baldwin Tom is a Lean-Agile Coach & Scrum Master, who is trying to solve the problem that it has been more than 20 years since the Agile Manifesto, but Business Agility is still not the norm. Tom is currently writing “Production line for the mind: The Practicing Principle”, with the idea of making agility simple to understand & to implement – and not just for software. You can link with Tom Baldwin on LinkedIn.

Dr. Deming developed his philosophy over time and in conversations with others, not in isolation. As learners, we tend to forget that context, but it's important to remember because no one implements Deming in isolation, either. In this conversation, Bill Bellows and host Andrew Stotz discuss how there's no such thing as a purely Deming organization and why that's good. TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.2 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz, and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today, I'm continuing my discussions with Bill Bellows, who has spent 30 years helping people apply Dr. Deming's ideas to become aware of how their thinking is holding them back from their biggest opportunities. Today is episode 20, entitled, System of Profound Wisdom. Bill, take it Away.   0:00:31.6 Bill Bellows: But not just for 30 years. I forgot to say I started when I was 12.   0:00:36.6 AS: Yes. [laughter] Yes. And you've got the hair to prove it.   [laughter]   0:00:43.7 BB: All right. Now, actually, I was thinking the proposal and the title, I thought... I mean, System of Profound Wisdom is cool, System of Profound Questions. Either one of those is good. Let's see which title comes out.   0:00:57.6 AS: Yeah. And I think we'll have to also understand that may some listeners that may not even know what System of Profound Knowledge means, they've been listening. They do. But if today's their first episode, we also gotta break that down, just briefly.   0:01:10.9 BB: Yeah. Okay, let's do that. All right. Well, let me give an opening a quote from Dr. Deming from chapter three, and then we can explain this SoPK, System of Profound Knowledge, thing. But in chapter three of Dr. Deming's last book, The New Economics, the last edition, edition three, came out in 2018. And chapter three, Dr. Deming says, "We saw in the last chapter, we are living under the tyranny of the prevailing style of management. Most people imagine that this style has always existed. It is a fixture. Actually, it is a modern invention a trap that has led us into decline. Transformation is required. Education and government, along with industry, are also in need of transformation. The System of Profound Knowledge to be introduced in the next chapter is a theory for transformation." So you wanna...   0:02:15.4 AS: That's good.   0:02:16.7 BB: So let's say something. Let's just say something about SoPK. How would you explain that?   0:02:23.1 AS: Yeah. Well, actually, I wanna talk very briefly about what you just said, because it's just...   0:02:27.1 BB: Oh, sure.   0:02:29.6 AS: At one point, I thought, "It's a system of knowledge." But he just said it was a system of transformation.   0:02:38.7 BB: It's a theory for transformation.   0:02:40.1 AS: A theory for transformation. Okay, got it. I see. And one of the things that I... I look at Toyota so much just 'cause it's so fascinating and how they've survived all these years, the continuity in the business, the continuity and the profitability of the business, the continued march to become the number one auto producer in the world, and having faced all the ups and downs and survived. And I just think that what they have is a learning organization. No matter what the challenge is, they're trying to apply learning tools, like System of Profound Knowledge, like PDSA, to try to figure out how to solve this problem. And I think that many companies, including at times my companies, [chuckle] we sometimes will scramble and we'll lose knowledge and we won't gain knowledge. And so the System of Profound Knowledge, to me, is all about the idea of how do we build a base of knowledge in our business and then build upon that base of knowledge rather than destroy it when the new management comes in or when a new management idea comes in.   0:04:00.7 AS: And that's something I've just been thinking about a lot. Because I do know a company that I've been doing some work with, and they basically threw away a huge amount of work that they did on System of Profound Knowledge and stuff to go with the prevailing system of management, is like going back. And now, they just produced a loss in the first quarter, and I just think, "Interesting. Interesting."   0:04:27.6 BB: Well, a couple things come to mind based on what you said. One is I would propose that Toyota, I'm in agreement of "Toyota's a learning organization." And that'll come up later. I've got some other thoughts on learning organizations. And we know that they were influenced by Dr. Deming. To what degree, I'm not sure of. Shoichiro Toyoda, who is one of the sons of the founder of the Toyota Motor Car Company, was honored with a Deming prize in 1990. And I believe it came from JUSE, as opposed to the American Society for Quality. One or the other. He was honored with a Deming Prize.   0:05:32.0 AS: Yep.   0:05:33.5 BB: Again, I don't know if it's Deming Prize or Deming Medal. But I know he was honored. What's most important, the point I wanna make is, upon receiving it he said, "There is not a day that goes by that I don't think about the impact of Dr. Deming on Toyota." But, if I was to look at the Toyota Production System website, Toyota's Toyota Production System website, which I've done numerous times, I'd be hard-pressed to find anything on that page that I could say, "You see this word, Andrew? You see this sentence, Andrew? You see this sentiment? That's Deming." Not at all. Not at all. It's Taiichi Ohno. It's Shigeo Shingo. I'm not saying it's not good, but all those ideas predate Deming going to Japan in 1950. Taiichi Ohno joined Toyota right out of college as an industrial engineer in 1933, I believe. The Japanese Army, I mentioned in a previous episode, in 1942, wanted him to move from Toyota's loom works for making cloth to their automobile works for making Jeeps. This comes from a book that I would highly recommend. Last time we were talking about books. I wanted to read a book, I don't know, maybe 10 years ago. I wanted to read a book about Toyota, but not one written by someone at MIT or university. I didn't wanna read a book written by an academic. I've done that.   0:07:15.1 BB: I wanted to read a book by somebody inside Toyota, get that perspective, that viewpoint. And the book, Against All Odds, the... Wait I'll get the complete title. Against All Odds: The Story of the Toyota Motor Corporation and the Family That Changed it. The first author, Yukiyasu Togo, T-O-G-O, and William Wartman. I have a friend who worked there. Worked... Let me back up. [chuckle] Togo, Mr. Togo, born and raised in Japan, worked for Toyota in Japan, came to the States in the '60s and opened the doors to Toyota Motors, USA. So, he was the first person running that operation in Los Angeles. And it was here for years. I think it's now in Texas. My late friend, Bill Cummings, worked there in marketing. And my friend, Bill, was part of the team that was working on a proposal for a Lexus. And he has amazing stories of Togo. He said, "Any executive... " And I don't know how high that... What range, from factory manager, VPs. But he said the executives there had their use, free use, they had a company car. And he said Togo drove a Celica. Not a Celica. He drove a... What's their base model? Not a...   0:08:56.2 AS: A Corolla?   0:08:57.7 BB: Corolla. Yes, yes, yes. Thank you. He drove a Corolla. He didn't drive... And I said, "Why did he drive a Corolla?" Because it was their biggest selling car, and he wanted to know what most people were experiencing. He could have been driving the highest level cars they had at the time. Again, this is before a Lexus. And so in this book, it talks about the history of Toyota, Taiichi Ohno coming in, Shigeo Shingo's contributions, and the influence of Dr. Deming. And there's a really fascinating account how in 1950, a young manager, Shoichiro Toyoda, was confronted with a challenge that they couldn't repair the cars as fast as they could sell them. This is post-war Japan. They found a car with phenomenal market success. Prior to that, they were trying to sell taxicabs, 'cause people could not... I mean, buying a car as a family was not an option. But by 1950, it was beginning to be the case. And the challenge that Shoichiro Toyoda faced was improving the quality, 'cause they couldn't fix them as fast as they could sell them. And yet, so I have no doubt that that young manager, who would go on to become the chairman, whatever the titles are, no doubt he was influenced by Dr. Deming. But I don't know what that means.   0:10:23.4 BB: That does not... The Toyota Production System is not Deming. And that's as evidenced by this talk about eliminating waste. And those are not Deming concepts. But I believe, back to your point, that his work helped create a foundation for learning. But I would also propose, Andrew, that everything I've read and studied quite a bit about the Toyota Production System, Lean, The Machine That Changed The World, nothing in there explains reliability. To me, reliability is how parts come together, work together. 'Cause as we've talked, a bunch of parts that meet print and meet print all over the place could have different levels of reliability, because meeting requirements, as we've talked in earlier episodes, ain't all it's cracked up to be. So I firmly believe... And I also mentioned to you, I sat for 14 hours flying home from Japan with a young engineer who worked for Toyota, and they do manage variation as Dr. Taguchi proposed. That is not revealed. But there's definitely something going on. But I would also say that I think the trouble they ran into was trying to be the number one car maker, and now they're back to the model of, "If we are good at what we do, then that will follow."   0:11:56.8 BB: And I'm gonna talk later about Tom Johnson's book, just to reinforce that, 'cause Tom, a former professor of management at Portland State University, has visited Toyota plants numerous times back before people found out how popular it was. But what I want to get into is... What we've been talking about the last couple episodes is Dr. Deming uses this term, transformation. And as I shared an article last time by John Kotter, the classic leadership professor, former, he's retired, at the University... Oh, sorry, Harvard Business School. And what he's talking about for transformation is, I don't think, [chuckle] maybe a little bit of crossover with what Dr. Deming is talking about. What we talked about last time is, Deming's transformation is a personal thing that we hear the world differently, see the world differently. We ask different questions. And that's not what Kotter is talking about. And it's not to dismiss all that what Kotter is talking about, but just because we're talking about transformation doesn't mean we mean the same thing.   0:13:10.6 BB: And likewise, we can talk about a Deming organization and a non-Deming organization. What teamwork means in both is different. In a Deming organization, we understand performance is caused by the system, not the workers taken individually. And as a result of that, we're not going to see performance appraisals, which are measures of individuals. Whereas in a non-Deming organization, we're going to see performance appraisals, KPIs flow down to individuals. [chuckle] The other thing I had in my notes is, are there really two types of organizations? No, that's just a model. [chuckle] So, really, it's a continuum of organizations. And going back to George Box, all models are wrong, some are useful. But we talked earlier, you mentioned the learning organization. Well, I'm sure, Andrew, that we have both worked in non-Deming organizations, and we have seen, and we have seen people as learners in a non-Deming organization, but what are they learning? [chuckle] It could be learning to tell the boss what they want to hear. They could be learning to hide information that could cause pain. [chuckle] Those organizations are filled with learners, but it's about learning that makes things worse. It's like digging the pit deeper. What Deming is talking about is learning that improves how the organization operates, and as a result, improves profit. In a non-Deming organization, that learning is actually destroying profit.   0:14:51.8 BB: All right. And early, spoke... Russ, Russ and Dr. Deming spoke for about three hours in 1992. It got condensed down to a volume 21 of The Deming Library, for which our viewers, if you're a subscriber to DemingNEXT, you can watch it in its entirety. All the Deming videos produced by Clare Crawford-Mason are in that. You can see excerpts of volume 21, which is... Believe is theory of a system of education, and it's Russ Ackoff and Dr. Deming for a half hour. So you can find excerpts of that on The Deming Institute's YouTube channel.   0:15:37.0 BB: And what I wanted to bring up is in there, Russ explains to Dr. Deming the DIKUW model that we've spoken about in previous episodes, where D is data. That's raw numbers, Russ would say. I is information. When we turn those raw numbers into distances and times and weights, Russ would say that information is what the newspaper writer writes, who did what to whom. Knowledge, the K, could be someone's explanation as to how these things happened. U, understanding. Understanding is when you step back and look at the container. Russ would say that knowledge, knowledge is what you're using in developing to take apart a car or to take apart a washing machine and see how all these things work together. But understanding is needed to explain why the driver sits on the left versus the right, why the car is designed for a family of four, why the washing machine is designed for a factor of four. That's not inside it. That's the understanding looking outward piece that Russ would also refer to as synthesis. And then the W, that's the wisdom piece. What do I do with all this stuff? And what Russ is talking about is part of wisdom is doing the right things right. So, I wanted to touch upon in this episode is why did Dr. Deming refer to his system as the System of Profound Knowledge? Why not the System of Profound Understanding? Why not the System of Profound Wisdom? And I think, had he lived longer, maybe he would have expanded. Maybe he would have had...   0:17:28.4 BB: And I think that's the case. I think it's... 'Cause I just think... And this is what's so interesting, is, if you look at Dr. Deming's work in isolation and not go off and look at other's work, such as Tom Johnson or Russ, you can start asking questions like this.   0:17:45.7 AS: One thing I was going to interject is that I took my first Deming seminar in 1989, I believe, or 1990. And then I took my second one with Dr. Deming in 1992. And then soon after that, I moved to Thailand and kind of went into a different life, teaching finance and then working in the stock market. And then we set up our factory here for coffee business. But it wasn't until another 10 years, maybe 15 years, that I reignited my flame for what Dr. Deming was doing. And that's when I wrote my book about Transform Your Business with Dr. Deming's 14 Points. And what I, so, I was revisiting the material that had impacted me so much. And I found this new topic called System of Profound Knowledge. I never heard of that. And I realized that, it really fully fledged came out in 1993, The New Economics, which I didn't get. I only had Out of the Crisis.   0:18:49.9 BB: '93.   0:18:49.9 AS: Yeah. And so that just was fascinating to go back to what was already, the oldest teacher I ever had in my life at '92, leave it, come back 10, 15 years later and find out, wait a minute, he added on even more in his final book.   0:19:10.4 BB: Well, Joyce Orsini, who was recruited by Fordham University at the encouragement of Dr. Deming, or the suggestion of Dr. Deming to lead their Deming Scholars MBA program in 1990. Professor Marta Mooney, professor of accounting, who I had the great fortune of meeting several times, was very inspired by Dr. Deming's work. And was able to get his permission to have an MBA program in his name called the Deming Scholars MBA program. And when she asked him for a recommendation, "Who should lead this program?" It was Joyce Orsini, who at the time I think was a vice president at a bank in New York. I'm not sure, possibly in human resources, but I know she was in New York as a vice president.   0:20:10.0 BB: And I believe she had finished her PhD under Dr. Deming at NYU by that time. And the reason I bring up Joyce's name, I met her after Dr. Deming had died. Nancy Mann, who is running a company called Quality Enhancement Seminars with, a, at the beginning one product, Dr. Deming's 4-Day seminar, when Dr. Deming died, and I had mentioned, I was at his last seminar in December '93, she continued offering 4-day seminars. And I met her later that year when she was paired with Ron Moen and they were together presenting it, and others were paired presenting it. And at one point, as I got to know Joyce, she said, "His last five years were borrowed time." I said, "What do you mean?" She said, "He started working on the book in 19'" evidently the '87, '88 timeframe, he started to articulate these words, Profound Knowledge.   0:21:11.0 BB: And I know he had, on a regular basis, he had dinner engagements with friends including Claire Crawford-Mason and her husband. And Claire has some amazing stories of Deming coming by with these ideas. And she said, once she said, "What is this?" And he is, she took out a napkin, a discretely, wrote down the, "an understanding of the difference between intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation. Difference between understanding special causes versus common causes." And she just wrote all this stuff down, typed it up. When he showed up the next week, she greeted him at the door and said, and she said, he said, This is Claire. And Claire said, he said, "What's that?" He says, "Well, I took notes last week."   0:21:54.2 BB: And he says, "I can do better." [chuckle] And so week by week by week. And as he interacted with the people around him, he whittled it down. And I'm guessing it put it into some, there's a technique for grouping things, you, where on post-it notes and you come up with four categories and these things all go over here. There's one of the elements of that, one of the 16 had to, or 18 or so, had to do with Dr. Taguchi's loss function. So that could have gone into the, maybe the variation piece, maybe the systems piece. But Joyce said, basically he was frustrated that the 14 Points were essentially kind of a cookbook where you saw things like, "cease dependence on inspection" interpreted as "get rid of the inspectors." And so he knew and I'd say, guided by his own production of a system mindset, he knew that what he was articulating and the feedback were inconsistent.   0:23:01.9 BB: And I've gotta keep trying. And she said, "His last five years on borrowed time as he was dying of cancer, was just trying to get this message out." So I first got exposed to it 19, spring of '90 when I saw him speaking in Connecticut. And I was all about Taguchi expecting him to, I didn't know what to expect, but I knew what I was seeing and hearing from Dr. Taguchi when I heard Dr. Deming talk about Red Beads. I don't know anything about that, common cause and special cause, I didn't know anything about that. And so for me, it was just a bunch of stuff, and I just tucked it away. But when the book came out in '93, then it really made sense. But I just had to see a lot of the prevailing style of management in the role I had as an improvement specialist, become, [chuckle] a firefighter or a fireman helping people out.   0:24:01.5 AS: I noticed as I've gotten older that, I do start to connect the pieces together of various disciplines and various bits of knowledge to realize, so for instance, in my case, I'm teaching a corporate strategy course right now at the university. Tonight's, in fact, the last night of this particular intake. And my area of expertise is in finance, but now I see the connection between strategy and finance, and how a good strategy is going to be reflected in superior financial performance relative to peers. And of course, I know how to measure that very well. So I can synthesize more and more different areas of things that I know things about, that I just couldn't do when I was younger. So I can see, and he was always learning, obviously. So I can see how he, and also I can also see the idea of, I need bigger principles. I need bigger as you said, theory for transformation. I need, I need to be able to put this into a framework that brings all that together. And I'm still feeling frustrated about some of that, where I'm at with some of that, because I'm kind of halfway in my progress on that. But I definitely can see the idea of that coming later in life as I approach the big 6-0.   0:25:37.3 BB: The big 6-0, [chuckle] Well, but a big part, I mean, based on what you're talking about, it ended up... Previously we spoke about Richard Rumelt's work, Good Strategy/Bad Strategy, and I mentioned that I use a lecture by Richard Rumelt, I think it was 2011 or so. It was right after his book, Good Strategy/Bad Strategy came out. He spoke at the London School of Economics, and our listeners can find it if you just did a Google search for Richard Rumelt, that's R-U-M... One M. E-L-T. Good Strategy/Bad Strategy. LSE, London School of Economics. Brilliant, brilliant lecture. And I've seen it numerous times for one of my university courses. And he is like Deming, he doesn't suffer fools. And, it finally dawned on me, Deming organizations, if we can use this simple Deming versus non-Deming or Red Pen versus Blue Pen, and as, George Box would say, all models are wrong, some are useful. If we can use that model, I think it's easy to see that what frustrates Rumelt is you've got all these non-Deming companies coming up with strategies without a method.   0:27:00.0 BB: What Rumelt also talks about is not only do you need a method, but you have to be honest on what's in the way of us achieving this? Again, Dr. Deming would say, if you didn't need a method, why don't you're already achieving the results? And so it just dawned on me thinking the reason he's so frustrated, and I think that's one word you can use to describe him, but if he is talking to senior staff lacking this, an understanding of Deming's work, then he is getting a lot of bad strategies. And organizations that would understand what Dr. Deming's talking about, would greatly benefit from Rumelt's work. And they would be one, they'd have the benefit of having an organization that is beginning or is understanding what a transformation guided by Dr. Deming's work is about. And then you could look up and you're naturally inclined to have good or better strategy than worser strategies.   0:28:02.2 BB: And then you have the benefit of, profit's not the reason, profit is the result of all that. And, but next thing I wanna point out is, and I think we talked about it last time, but I just wanted to make sure it was up here, is I've come across recently and I'm not sure talking with who, but there's this what's in vogue today? Data-driven decisions. And again, whenever I hear the word data, I think backed in Ackoff's DIKUW model, I think data-driven. Well, first Dr. Deming would say, the most important numbers are unknown and unknowable. So if you're doing things on a data-driven way, then you're missing the rest of Dr. Deming's theory of management. But why not knowledge-driven decisions, why not understanding-driven decisions And beyond that, why not, right? How long... [laughter] I guess we can... Part of the reason we're doing these Andrew is that we'd like to believe we're helping people move in the direction from data-driven decisions to wisdom-driven decisions, right?   0:29:13.1 AS: Yeah. In fact, you even had the gall to name this episode the System of Profound Wisdom.   0:29:24.0 BB: And that's the title.   0:29:24.9 AS: There it is.   0:29:28.9 BB: But in terms of, I'll give you a fun story from Rocketdyne years ago, and I was talking with a manager in the quality organization and he says, "you know what the problem is, you know what the problem is?" I said, "what?" He says, "the problem is the executives are not getting the data fast enough." And I said, "what data?" He says "the scrap and rework data, they're just not getting it fast enough." So I said, "no matter how fast they get it, it's already happened."   [laughter]   0:30:00.0 BB: But it was just, and I just couldn't get through to him that, that if we're being reactive and talking about scrap and rework, it's already happened. By the time the... If the executives hear it a second later, it's already happened. It's still old news.   0:30:14.7 AS: And if that executive would've been thinking he would've said, but Bill, I want to be on the cutting edge of history.   0:30:23.1 BB: Yeah, it's like...   0:30:24.6 AS: I don't want information, I don't want old information, really old. I just want it as new as it can be, but still old.   0:30:32.9 BB: Well, it reminds me of an Ackoff quote is, instead of... It's "Change or be changed." Ackoff talked about organizations that instead of them being ready for what happens, they create what's gonna happen, which would be more of a Deming organizational approach. Anyway, we talked about books last time and I thought it'd be neat to share a couple books as one as I've shared the Against All Odds Book about Toyota.   0:31:08.8 AS: Which I'll say is on Amazon, but it's only looks like it's a used book and it's priced at about 70 bucks. So I've just...   0:31:16.2 BB: How much?   0:31:16.8 AS: Got that one down? 70 bucks? Because I think it's, you're buying it from someone who has it as a their own edition or something. I don't know.   0:31:23.8 BB: It's not uncommon. This is a, insider used book thing. It's not uncommon that you'll see books on Amazon for 70, but if you go to ThriftBooks or Abe Books, you can, I have found multi-$100 books elsewhere. I don't know how that happens, but it does. Anyway, another book I wanted to reference in today's episode is Profit Beyond Measure subtitle, Extraordinary Results through Attention to Work and People, published in 2000. You can... I don't know if you can get that new, you definitely get it old or used, written by, H. Thomas Johnson. H is for Howard, he goes by Tom, Tom Johnson. Brilliant, brilliant mind. He visited Rocketdyne a few times.   0:32:17.1 BB: On the inside cover page, Tom wrote, "This book is dedicated to the memory of Dr. W. Edwards Deming, 1900-1993. May the seventh generation after us know a world shaped by his thinking." And in the book, you'll find this quote, and I've used it in a previous episode, but for those who may be hearing it first here and Tom's a deep thinker. He's, and as well as his wife Elaine, they're two very deep thinkers. They've both spoke at Rocketdyne numerous times. But one of my favorite quotes from Tom is, "How the world we perceive works depends on how we think. The world we perceive is the world we bring forth through our thinking." And again, it goes back to, we don't see the world as it is. We see the world as we are. We hear the world as we are. I wrote a blog for The Deming Institute. If our listeners would like to find it, if you just do a search for Deming blog, Bellows and Johnson, you'll find the blog. And the blog is about the book Profit Beyond Measure. And in there, I said, “In keeping with Myron Tribus' observation that what you see depends upon what you thought before you looked, Johnson's background as a cost accountant, guided by seminars and conversations with Dr. Deming, prepared him to see Toyota as a living system,” right? You talk about Toyota.   0:33:53.9 BB: He saw it as a living system, not a value stream of independent parts. And that was, that's me talking. I mean, Tom talked about Toyota's living system. And then I put in there with the Toyota Production System, people talk about value streams. Well, in those value streams, they have a defect, good part, bad part model that the parts are handed off, handed off, handed off. That is ostensibly a value stream of independent parts 'cause the quality model of the Toyota Production System, if you study it anywhere, is not Genichi Taguchi. It's the classic good parts and bad parts. And if we're handing off good parts, they are not interdependent. They are independent. And then I close with, "instead of seeing a focus on the elimination of waste and non-value added efforts, Johnson saw self-organization, interdependence, and diversity, the three, as the three primary principles of his approach, which he called Management By Means." And so what's neat, Andrew, is he, Tom was as a student of Deming's work, attending Dr. Deming seminars, hearing about SoPK, System of Profound Knowledge, and he in parallel developed his own model that he calls Management By Means. But what's neat is if you compare the two, there's three principles. So he says self-organization.   0:35:31.0 BB: Well, that's kind of like psychology and people. So we can self-organize interdependence, the other self-organized, but we're connected with one another. So that's, that's kind of a systems perspective there as well. And the third one, diversity. So when I think of diversity, I think of variation. I can also think in terms of people. So that what I don't see in there explicitly is Theory of Knowledge. But Tom's developing this model in parallel with Dr. Deming's work, probably beginning in the early '80s. And part of what Tom had in mind, I believe, by calling it Management By Means, is juxtaposing it with that other management by, right? You know the other one, Andrew, management by?   0:36:33.8 AS: You mean the bad one or the good one, Management By Objective?   0:36:37.8 BB: Or Management By Results. Or Dr. Deming once said, MBIR, Management by Imposition of Results. But what's neat is, and this is what I cover and with my online courses, Tom is really, it's just such insight. Tom believes that treating the means as the ends in the making. So he's saying that the ends are what happen when we focus on the means, which is like, if you focus on the process, you get the result. But no, MBIR, as we focus on the result, we throw the process out the window. And so when I've asked students in one of my classes is, why does Tom Johnson believe that treating the means as an ends in the making is a much surer route to stable and satisfactory financial performance than to continue as most companies do? You ready, Andrew? To chase targets as if the means do not matter. Does that resonate with you, Andrew?   0:37:44.1 AS: Yes. They're tampering.   0:37:46.8 BB: Yeah. I also want to quote, I met Tom in 1997. I'm not sure if this... Actually, this article is online and I'll try to remember to post a link to it. If I forget, our listeners can contact me on LinkedIn and I'll send you a link to find the paper. This is when I first got exposed to Tom. It just blew me away. I still remember there at a Deming conference in 1997, hearing Tom talk. I thought, wow, this is different. So, Tom's paper that I'm referencing is A Different Perspective on Quality, the subtitle, Bringing Management to Life. Can you imagine? “Bringing Management to Life.” And it was in Washington, DC, the 1997 conference. And then Tom says, this is the opening. And so when Tom and his wife would speak at Rocketdyne or other conferences I organized.   0:38:44.0 BB: Tom read from a lectern. So he needed a box to get up there and he read, whereas Elaine, his wife, is all extemporaneous. Both deeply profound, two different styles. So what Tom wrote here is he says, "despite the impression given by my title, Professor of Quality Management, I do not speak to you as a trained or a certified authority on the subject of quality management. I adopted that title more or less casually after giving a presentation to an audience of Oregon business executives just over six years ago. That presentation described how my thinking had changed in the last five years since I co-authored the 1987 book, Relevance Lost, the Rise and Fall of Management Accounting, and the talk which presaged my 1992 book, Relevance Regained." And this is when he... After he wrote, Relevance Lost, he went on the lecture circuit, he met the likes of Peter Scholtes and Brian Joiner, got pulled into the Deming community.   0:39:45.4 BB: And then he wrote this scathing book called Relevance Regained and the subtitle is... I think our audience will love it, From Top-Down Control to Bottom-Up Empowerment. Then he goes on to say, "in that I told how I had come to believe that management accounting, a subject that I had pursued and practiced for over 30 years." Over 30 years, sounds familiar. Then he says, "could no longer provide useful tools for management. I said in essence that instead of managing by results, instead of driving people with quantitative financial targets, it's time for people in business..." And this is 30 years ago, Andrew. "It's time for people in business to shift their attention to how they organize work and how they relate to each other as human beings. I suggested that if companies organize work and build relationships properly, then the results that accountants keep track of will what? Take care of themselves."   0:40:50.8 AS: It's so true, it's so true.   0:40:54.1 BB: Yeah, it sounds so literally Tom was writing that in 1999, 2000. Well, actually no, that was 1997, that was 1997, but the same sentiment.   0:41:03.4 AS: It just makes me think of the diagram that we see and that Deming had about the flow through a business, it's the same thing as of the flow from activity to result.   0:41:20.6 BB: Yes.   0:41:21.9 AS: And when we focus on the result and work backwards, it's a mess from a long-term perspective, but you can get to the result. It's not to say you can't get to the result, but you're not building a system that can replicate that. But when you start with the beginning of that process of how do we set this up right to get to that result, then you have a repeatable process that can deliver value. In other words, you've invested a large amount in the origination of that process that then can produce for a much longer time. Um, I have to mention that the worst part of this whole time that we talk is when I have to tell you that we're almost out of time 'cause there's so much to talk about. So we do need to wrap it up, but, yeah.   0:42:09.3 BB: All right. I got a couple of closing thoughts from Tom and then we'll pick this up in episode 21.   0:42:21.3 AS: Yep.   0:42:22.9 BB: Let me also say, for those who are really... If you really wanna know... I'd say, before you read The New Economics... I'm sorry, before you read Profit Beyond Measure, one is the article I just referenced, “Bringing Quality to Life” is a good start. I'd also encourage our readers to do a search. I do this routinely. It shouldn't be that hard to find, but look for an article written by Art Kleiner, Art as in Arthur, Kleiner, K-L-E-I-N-E-R. And the article is entitled, Measures... The Measures That Matter. I think it might be What Are The Measures That Matter? And that article brilliantly written by Kleiner who I don't think knows all that much about Deming, but he knows a whole lot about Tom Johnson and Robert Kaplan, who together co-authored "Relevance Lost" and then moved apart. And Tom became more and more Deming and Kaplan became more and more non and finally wrote this article.   0:43:35.6 AS: Is this article coming out in 2002, "What Are The Measures That Matter? A 10-year Debate Between Two Feuding Gurus Shed Some Light on a Vexing Business Question?"   0:43:46.4 BB: That's it.   0:43:47.2 AS: There it is and it's on the...   0:43:47.4 BB: And it is riveting.   0:43:50.8 AS: Okay.   0:43:50.8 BB: Absolutely riveting. Is it put out by...   0:43:54.0 AS: PwC, it looks like and it's under strategy...   0:43:58.5 BB: Pricewaterhouse...   0:43:58.8 AS: Yeah, strategy and business.   0:44:00.2 BB: PricewaterhouseCooper? Yeah.   0:44:01.3 AS: Yeah.   0:44:03.1 BB: And 'cause what's in there is Kleiner explaining that what Tom's talking about might take some time. You can go out tomorrow, Andrew, and slash and burn and cut and show instant results. Now what you're not looking at is what are the consequences? And so... But... And then... But Kleiner I think does a brilliant job of juxtaposing and trying to talk about what makes Kaplan's work, the Balanced Scorecard, so popular. Why is Tom so anti that?   0:44:37.9 BB: And to a degree, it could be for some a leap of faith to go over there, but we'll talk about that later. Let me just close with this and this comes from my blog on The Deming Institute about Profit Beyond Measure and I said, "for those who are willing and able to discern the dramatic differences between the prevailing focus of systems that aim to produce better parts with less waste and reductions to non-value-added efforts," that's my poke at Lean and Six Sigma, "and those systems that capitalize on a systemic connection between parts. Tom's book, Profit Beyond Measure, offers abundant food for thought. The difference also represents a shifting from profit as the sole reason for a business to profit as the result of extraordinary attention to working people, a most fitting subtitle to this book."   0:45:35.9 AS: Well, Bill, on behalf of everyone at The Deming Institute, I want to thank you again for the discussion and for listeners, remember to go to deming.org to continue your journey. If you wanna keep in touch with Bill, just find him on LinkedIn. This is your host, Andrew Stotz, and I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming, "People are entitled to Joy in work" and I hope you are enjoying your work.    

“Wisdom is given equally to everybody. The point is whether one can exercise it.” - Taiichi Ohno, The “Ten Precepts” The supply chain profession has recently run the gauntlet of existential challenges. Is it possible that - given enough time - they could return to the old ways?  There have recently been a number of news stories about retailers returning to just-in-time inventory management. If that is the case, and supply chains are returning to pre-pandemic practices with minimal changes, then we may be setting ourselves up to forget… and fall prey to the same failures once again. In this week's Art of Supply, Kelly Barner starts by looking back at just how ‘out' just-in-time inventory management was: Remembering the supply chain aftershocks of 2020, 2021, and 2022 Looking at the principled roots of just-in-time inventory management that originally allowed it to gain success And thinking seriously about what we need to do to return to just-in-time inventory management, should that be the right answer, in a responsible way Links: Kelly Barner on LinkedIn Art of Supply LinkedIn newsletter  Art of Supply on AOP Subscribe to This Week in Procurement

Unser Gast Georg Kästle ist CIO/ CDO der VOLLMER WERKE Maschinenfabrik GmbH, Lehrbeauftragter der Hochschule Ravensburg-Weingarten im Master Digital Business und Repräsentant des CIO Roundtable Stuttgart und Ulm. Wir diskutieren über die Bedeutung und Anwendung der experimentellen Wissenschaft auf die Organisationsentwicklung, wobei wir auf die Systematik, den Lernfokus und die Formulierung von Forschungsfragen und Hypothesen eingehen. Dabei geht es auch darum, neue Formen des Change Managements zu nutzen in einem geschützten Raum, ergebnisoffen in einer Realität auf Zeit. Georg Kästle schildert danach zwei Umsetzungsbeispiele. Im ersten Experiment ging es um Deep-Working an der Hochschule, wobei Working-Out-Loud mit Experimentierräumen verbunden wurde. Das zweite Beispiel handelt vom Digital-Team bei Vollmer und der Fokussierung auf Verantwortlichkeiten im Tagesgeschäft vs. digitalen Themen. Zu Ende schauen wir auf die jeweiligen Ergebnisse sowie Tipps zur Umsetzung und zur Einbeziehung von Mitarbeitern. Und wir reflektieren die Aussage von Taiichi Ohno aus dem Lean Management: „Der Alltagsverstand irrt immer!“ Georg Kästle hält auch einen Lightning Talk auf dem SAP Training and Adoption Forum 2024 – Link ist in den Shownotes. Mehr wie immer im EducationNewscast Podcast.

The Production Preparation Process (3P) was invented by Chihiro Nakao, who is known as the Father of Moonshine (FOM). Nakao, one of the original disciples of Taiichi Ohno, (Father of the Toyota Production System) taught us at Danaher and GE how to develop processes that will drive your company to industry-wide competitive advantage. Learn from Jon Boucher, a star pupil and disciple of Nakao, how 3P and Moonshine are that part of Lean that few will ever learn, and why your company should adopt this practice.

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: The proper response to mistakes that have harmed others?, published by Ruby on December 31, 2023 on LessWrong. I have a tendency to feel very guilty when I have harmed others, especially when the harm was quite large. And I do think I've been legitimately quite hurtful and harmful to a number of people over the course of my life. Some of my guilt has persisted for years after recognizing the mistake[1]. I think I prefer this to not feeling remorseful at all, but I do also wonder if I'm responding optimally. I suspect that a form of social anxiety might nudge into excessive feelings of guilt. Guilt done right? So here are some musings on how to actually respond when you realize you've harmed another person through your own error. I'm writing this to help myself thinking about it, and sharing it partly to maybe benefit answers, and partly to elicit answers from others. Principal #1: Your guilt and remorse should not make things worse for the person you harmed. If you're now behaving in ways they disprefer, you're only adding more harm to the previous harm. What even? More on this in a moment. Understand and address the causes of your mistake If have harmed someone in a way I regret, then I want model why I did that with sufficient accuracy so that I can change something to avoid repeating that mistake. If it was a skill gap, then put in effort to learn the skill. If I had the skill, but failed to notice to apply it, then train myself into better recognition of applying it. Possibly one ought to apply 5 Why's analysis to their mistake (I haven't done this, but might try it later): Five whys (or 5 whys) is an iterative interrogative technique used to explore the cause-and-effect relationships underlying a particular problem.[1] The primary goal of the technique is to determine the root cause of a defect or problem by repeating the question "Why?" five times. The answer to the fifth why should reveal the root cause of the problem.[2] The technique was described by Taiichi Ohno at Toyota Motor Corporation. Others at Toyota and elsewhere have criticized the five whys technique for various reasons (see § Criticism). An example of a problem is: the vehicle will not start. Why? - The battery is dead. Why? - The alternator is not functioning. Why? - The alternator belt has broken. Why? - The alternator belt was well beyond its useful service life and not replaced. Why? - The vehicle was not maintained according to the recommended service schedule. (A root cause)[ Apologize and make amends If it seems like it would be welcome (and it not always is and can take some modeling to guess where or not it is), I think it's good to acknowledge to a person you harmed that you did so. Express remorse, express understanding of how you harmed them, and if possible, take some action to rectify any damage done. In my ideal world, we'd have established general ways to compensate others for harms we did to them. I don't think this is trivial to make work, but part of me would like a world where you can say "Hey Jared, I realize I was a total ass to you at the Christmas party two years ago and embarrassed you in front of everyone, I've Venmo'd you $300 to apologize." Arguably, you've then succeeded once the harmed party feels indifferent between having been harmed and compensated, and never being harmed. But this is not the world we currently live in. I think some harms will have natural means of making amends, e.g. I forgot your birthday but then I got you an extra nice present, and some will not. Which is tough. Note, I think some apologies are for the other person and some are for yourself (or both). I think in many cases, the other person doesn't owe it to you to hear out your apology, and might not want to, in which case it'd be wrong to push your apology onto them. Cf. Principle #1. And re...

Link to original articleWelcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: The proper response to mistakes that have harmed others?, published by Ruby on December 31, 2023 on LessWrong. I have a tendency to feel very guilty when I have harmed others, especially when the harm was quite large. And I do think I've been legitimately quite hurtful and harmful to a number of people over the course of my life. Some of my guilt has persisted for years after recognizing the mistake[1]. I think I prefer this to not feeling remorseful at all, but I do also wonder if I'm responding optimally. I suspect that a form of social anxiety might nudge into excessive feelings of guilt. Guilt done right? So here are some musings on how to actually respond when you realize you've harmed another person through your own error. I'm writing this to help myself thinking about it, and sharing it partly to maybe benefit answers, and partly to elicit answers from others. Principal #1: Your guilt and remorse should not make things worse for the person you harmed. If you're now behaving in ways they disprefer, you're only adding more harm to the previous harm. What even? More on this in a moment. Understand and address the causes of your mistake If have harmed someone in a way I regret, then I want model why I did that with sufficient accuracy so that I can change something to avoid repeating that mistake. If it was a skill gap, then put in effort to learn the skill. If I had the skill, but failed to notice to apply it, then train myself into better recognition of applying it. Possibly one ought to apply 5 Why's analysis to their mistake (I haven't done this, but might try it later): Five whys (or 5 whys) is an iterative interrogative technique used to explore the cause-and-effect relationships underlying a particular problem.[1] The primary goal of the technique is to determine the root cause of a defect or problem by repeating the question "Why?" five times. The answer to the fifth why should reveal the root cause of the problem.[2] The technique was described by Taiichi Ohno at Toyota Motor Corporation. Others at Toyota and elsewhere have criticized the five whys technique for various reasons (see § Criticism). An example of a problem is: the vehicle will not start. Why? - The battery is dead. Why? - The alternator is not functioning. Why? - The alternator belt has broken. Why? - The alternator belt was well beyond its useful service life and not replaced. Why? - The vehicle was not maintained according to the recommended service schedule. (A root cause)[ Apologize and make amends If it seems like it would be welcome (and it not always is and can take some modeling to guess where or not it is), I think it's good to acknowledge to a person you harmed that you did so. Express remorse, express understanding of how you harmed them, and if possible, take some action to rectify any damage done. In my ideal world, we'd have established general ways to compensate others for harms we did to them. I don't think this is trivial to make work, but part of me would like a world where you can say "Hey Jared, I realize I was a total ass to you at the Christmas party two years ago and embarrassed you in front of everyone, I've Venmo'd you $300 to apologize." Arguably, you've then succeeded once the harmed party feels indifferent between having been harmed and compensated, and never being harmed. But this is not the world we currently live in. I think some harms will have natural means of making amends, e.g. I forgot your birthday but then I got you an extra nice present, and some will not. Which is tough. Note, I think some apologies are for the other person and some are for yourself (or both). I think in many cases, the other person doesn't owe it to you to hear out your apology, and might not want to, in which case it'd be wrong to push your apology onto them. Cf. Principle #1. And re...

Czy twórca Systemu Produkcyjnego Toyoty, Taiichi Ohno, korzystałby dzisiaj z raportowania online z wykorzystaniem mikroprocesorów? Czy nowe technologie mogą pomóc w optymalizacji pracy maszyn? Czy transformacja cyfrowa jest naturalnym etapem w rozwoju produkcji? Jak skutecznie dobierać narzędzia IT wspierające nasz biznes? Na te i inne pytania odpowie Maciej Ryfa - wieloletni praktyk Lean, pasjonat zarządzania produkcją i doskonalenia procesów. Zapraszamy! #Lean #Manufacturing #IoT #Transformacja  #Produkcja #Andon

Slogans and exhortations don't work to motivate people. Targets usually encourage manipulation or cheating. John Dues and Andrew Stotz discuss how these three strategies can hinder improvement, frustrate teachers and students, and even cause nationwide scandals. TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.4 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz. I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W Edwards Deming. Today I'm continuing my discussion with John Dues, who is part of the new generation of educators striving to apply Dr. Deming's principles to unleash student joy in learning. This is episode 16, and we're continuing our discussion about the shift from management myths to principles for the transformation of school systems. And today we're gonna be talking about principle 10 "eliminates slogans, exhortations, and targets." John, take it away.   0:00:37.1 John Dues: Good to be back, Andrew. Yeah, we've been talking about these 14 principles for educational systems transformation for a number of episodes now. I think one, one important thing to point out, and I think we've mentioned this multiple times now, but really the aim in terms of what we're hoping the listeners get out of hearing about all these principles is really about how they all work together, as a system themselves. So, we started with create constancy of purpose. We've talked about a number of other things, like work continually on the system, adopt and institute leadership, drive out fear. Last time we talked about break down barriers. We're gonna talk about eliminating slogans and targets this time, which is principle 10. But really, as you start to listen to 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and now 10, what should start to become clear is how all of these things work together.   0:01:34.5 JD: If you are operating as a leader, for example, within sort of the Deming philosophy, one of the things you are gonna do is eliminate these slogans. So all these principles shouldn't be studied in isolation. We study them together, see how they all work together. But let me just start by just reading principle 10 so you have the full picture. So principle 10 is "eliminate slogans, exhortations and targets for educators and students that ask for perfect performance and new levels of productivity. Such exhortations only create adversarial relationships as the bulk of the causes of low quality and low productivity belong to the system, and thus lie beyond the power of teachers and students." So really what we're talking about is, what's wrong with slogans, exhortations and targets for educators and students, because these things are, pervasive, I think.   0:02:29.5 JD: We've seen them, we've seen the posters on the walls with the various slogans. And, of course targets are everywhere in our educational systems. In my mind the main problem is that they're directed at the wrong people. The basic premise is that teachers and students could sort of simply put in more effort, and in doing so, they could improve quality productivity, anything else that's desirable in our education systems. But the main thing is that, that doesn't take into account that most of the trouble we see within our schools are actually coming from the system. And I think we've talked about this quote is probably one of Deming's most well-known quotes, but he said, "Most troubles and most possibilities for improvement add up to proportion, something like this, 94% belong to the system, which is the responsibility of management, 6% is special." And that's more like, can be sort of tagged or pinned to individual students or individual educators working within the system. So I think that's a really important thing to revisit 'cause it sort of is at the heart of all of these, all of these principles.   0:03:47.7 AS: It's interesting, like, maybe you could give some examples of what type of, slogans or targets or exhortations that you've seen, in your career and what's going on in education these days.   0:04:06.5 JD: Yeah, I mean, I'm gonna give an example here, kind of walk through an example in a second. But there, they're really everywhere, I mean, to varying degrees probably in different places. But, one, that one that sticks out in terms of, a target is when I first started my career in 2001, I was a teacher in Atlanta Public Schools. And No Child Left Behind had just come out. And, basically as they, as the leadership at the school sort of presented what was in this legislation, you know, they would always put up a just chart that basically said, a certain percentage of students are expected to be proficient across the country on state tests. And that, that percentage would increase over time starting in 2001 when the legislation was rolled out. And by the 2013, '14 school year, the way the tables were laid out is that 100% of students would be proficient in reading and math across the country in third through eighth grade. And of course, that didn't come to fruition. There's no chance that that ever would be the case. And it was also the case that there was really no methods attached to that target. So that's a really good example of a target that was sort of pulled out of the sky. And, basically, over the course of a dozen years, it was supposed to sort of, so somehow magically come to be.   0:05:38.2 AS: That's great. The idea of 100%. I mean, like what fool would say that, you would have 100% of anything. I mean, you just can't get anything to that point. But one question I have about that, I suspect that in those types of cases, it just gets swept under the rug and nobody's looking at that number the way that they looked at it back then, but maybe, maybe they do look at it. But my question would be that No Child Left Behind if we were able to objectively measure the improvement that was caused by that, or a devolution, like did, if it was, what was the starting point, for No Child Left Behind?   0:06:26.0 JD: Well, so, it, that would vary by district. If I remember right, I think the, the target early in the 20000s was something like in the 50 or 60%, something like that, right? And then it would...   0:06:40.3 AS: Right, so let's say 50 to 60%. And I wonder at the end of that period of 2013, if we could objectively compare and calculate that number, what would be your estimate of where it would be if it was 50 to 60 originally, where do you think it was at the end of 2013?   0:07:00.0 JD: 50% to 60%.   0:07:02.4 AS: So no improvement?   0:07:02.5 JD: No. I mean...   0:07:02.5 AS: Incredible.   0:07:04.2 JD: That could vary a little bit by time and place, but it's a little bit even hard to pin down because, the way that the test was constructed in 2001 in Georgia, for example, would be different than the way the test was constructed by 2013-14. So even, even the test itself had changed, the standards had changed, a number of things had changed over time. Also, for folks that know much, about what was going on in Atlanta by, by 2013-14, the superintendent, who would've been the superintendent from about 2001 until, I don't know, 2010 or something, she was actually charged under the RICO statute for sort of, yeah, I don't know if that was warranted or not. I think it was unprecedented, that's for sure. But there was a cheating scandal that was systematic from superintendent to principals down to even teachers. That was pretty pervasive because there was a lot of, in Atlanta at least, there was a lot of monetary incentives tied to the test score improvements. And so I know that it did result in a number of people being charged with various crimes, including the superintendent and number of principals.   0:08:18.3 AS: That's incredible.   0:08:20.6 JD: Incredible. Yeah. Yeah.   0:08:22.8 AS: Yeah. And there was a trial, there was a trial, I'm looking here on the internet. The trial began on September, in September of 2014 in Fulton County Superior Court.   0:08:32.3 JD: Yeah. Right around that time.   0:08:33.7 AS: Incredible.   0:08:33.8 JD: And so I was gone from Atlanta by that time. So I don't know all the details, but I have read a little bit about it, and I think, again, because there's these targets, that's certainly not an excuse for systematically cheating on these tests for sure. But, a byproduct of some of these testing regimens and some of the monetary incentive systems that were put in place was, cheating did happen in, in a number of places in the United States. Especially at the height of when the scrutiny was highest on these test results. So again, it's not, that shouldn't be the expectation even in a system where there's a lot of focus, certainly, but it was a byproduct. So you, you would wanna ask the question, why did that, why did that happen?   0:09:20.5 AS: Yeah.   0:09:21.9 JD: I mean, I think, yeah, go ahead.   0:09:25.2 AS: I was just gonna say that I also wanted to talk about, we were talking before we went on about the word "exhortation," which is kind of an, an old word, kind of a, and so I was looking it up on the dictionary. It says, "an address or communication emphatically urging someone to do something," and they use an example of "no amount of exhortation had any effect." And then I thought about, one of the questions I always ask students when I start my class, is "who's responsible?" And I want the listeners and the viewers to think about this answer to this question. Who's responsible for students being on time to class, the student or the teacher? And of course, the majority of students are gonna say the student. And if I ask the teachers, of course they're gonna say, student, it's personal responsibility. And most of the listeners and viewers would probably say the same. And then I want to explain a situation that I do every time I start my class. My class starts at 01:00 PM in this particular semester. And as soon as the door, as soon as 01:00 PM came, I just locked the door and I started teaching.   0:10:39.8 JD: And this is university setting?   0:10:40.7 AS: This is at university.   0:10:44.0 JD: Yeah.   0:10:44.6 AS: And when I did that, the university students, some of them had the, they were outside and kind of knocking on the door or no, wondering if they can come in. And I didn't let them in until after five or 10 minutes of teaching. And then I let, I went out and talked to them a little bit about, being on time and, please, be on time to my class or else I'm gonna lock the door and you're not gonna be able to come back in. And so I did that a couple times until all the students, I have 80 students in that class, and they all were in. And the next time that I, had my class, 100% of the students were on time. They were in there and ready to go. In fact, I had a funny case, John, I was, I was visiting a client of mine, which is north of the city of Bangkok. And I told my client, I gotta get outta here now because if I'm late to my class, my students are gonna lock me out.   0:11:32.7 JD: They're gonna lock you out. Yeah.   [laughter]   0:11:33.0 AS: But the point of the story is for the listeners and the viewers out there, if you said that the students are responsible for being on time, but I've just presented a case where the teacher changed something about the way that the, the class was done. That changed the outcome of the students. Can you still say that it is the students, and in fact, if you were to, to listen, if you went, we went to a, a high school or university and we sat down with all the teachers that would they be saying no amount of exhortation had any effect on the students being on time. These guys are just irresponsible.   0:12:17.4 JD: Yeah. Yeah. It's interesting 'cause I think, David Langford, on one of the episodes he did, talked about the problem of kids being, or students being late to class. And in that particular scenario as a high school, and, when you ask the kids, why were you late? They said, "well, the teacher doesn't start until five or seven minutes into the period anyway, so why, why do I need to come on time?" So, there is some truth to thinking about who, who is creating the system, what is that system? What types of behaviors does that system encourage? That's certainly a good way to sort of analyze each, each situation.   0:12:53.7 AS: Yeah. I mean, it makes you think, and I think what David highlights too is like, what's the priority here? And, where do we want, is it so important that someone's gonna be there at exactly this moment or does it matter if it's five minutes before, five minutes after? And I think that there's, there's an interesting discussion on that.   0:13:13.1 JD: Yeah.   0:13:13.8 AS: And for the listeners and the viewers out there, you're gonna make up your own mind. But I think that the key thing is that what you're saying when you talk about 94% of, the output or the result of something is the result of the system. And that helps us to focus beyond just, putting the pressure on students or administrators or educators or employees.   0:13:36.1 JD: Yeah. Yeah. And I think, one of the tools that I've talked about repeatedly and I'm a very big fan of is, is the process behavior chart or what some people call a control chart. And the reason for that is because when you use that chart, you can then tell what problems are coming from the system itself, and that's the responsibility of management and what problems are coming from other causes and may take some other types of sort of approaches. I think just knowing that is a really important sort of upfront step when you're considering that 94%, 6% problem. You can actually tell what's coming from the system, and then there's one approach and what's coming from special, special causes. And then there's another approach to, to improvement. And I suspect that, you know, when you chart data in this way over time, the vast majority of systems are stable, but unsatisfactory.   0:14:38.5 JD: And I think that's probably where things like, targets, exhortations, these slogans when you have a stable but defective system, that's the point where, these exhortations, et cetera are particularly pernicious, you know? I think, goal setting seems like a good idea, but it's really useless in that type of situation. It's really often an active desperation actually, when you set a goal in a stable but defective system. So I was gonna sort of talk you through a, through an example of how this, perhaps, could show up.   0:15:23.6 AS: Yep.   0:15:26.2 JD: We... This is going back a couple years, but as the pandemic rolled out, and I think we've talked about this data before, but we were really closely charting and paying attention to: are kids engaged in remote learning? And again, this example's from the pandemic, but this can come from any data that that's important to you. And almost all of this data unfolds over time. But we were looking at, how, how engaged are kids in remote learning? And it was really important for us to first define engagement. And so for us, this question always comes up, what do you mean by engagement? For us, this meant, kids did a remote lesson with the teacher and then they had a practice set in math. So what percent of the kids completed that full practice set?   0:16:17.6 JD: And basically when we, when we charted this, what we see, we did this for, about five weeks. We charted the data. So we had about 24 days worth of data. This was eighth grade math. And the first day 62% of the kids were engaged the second day, 67, the third day, 75%, fourth day, 84%, and then down to 77%. And then the next day, 71%, the next day, 58%, the next day 74%. So you can kind of get the picture here that this data was sort of bouncing around. And when we took that out to 24 days, that first day was 67%, the 24 day was 68%. And then sort of, we looked at the average over those 24 days, it was about 67%, a high of, 84%, a low of 49%. But when you put this on a process behavior chart, what you see is it's a stable system.   0:17:17.3 JD: Meaning there are these ups and downs, some are above that 67% average, some are below it. When we look at sort of the natural process limits. So those are sort of the boundaries of the system based on the magnitude of the variability over time, it was sort of suggesting with this system, we could expect a low of 42% engagement, a high of 91% engagement, but mostly it's bouncing around this average. Now if imagine, that you're this eighth grade math teacher and the principal comes and says, this engagement data is not high enough, we're gonna create these posters across the school, we're gonna start this campaign. You can almost picture this in different places, right? And it says these posters say 100%...   0:18:06.3 AS: Graphic design.   0:18:07.0 JD: Yeah, that design, you have this poster and it says "100% engaged. We can achieve it if you believe it." Right? And you can almost imagine these posters going up in a school, and it's just this sort of proclamation. But when you look at the data, it's just a stable system. And what we can expect is this, these data points bouncing around the 67% average. School, the school leadership wants higher engagement rates. They want fewer days with the low rates. But the problem with a poster or a target or exportation is that you're, you're basically asking the teacher to do what they're unable to do. And we do this in all types of settings, all types of, work settings, not just, not just in education. If you look at this particular system, the upper limit's at 91%. So basically the...   0:19:10.0 JD: The system's not capable of achieving 100% remote learning engagement, and so basically the effect is then fear and mistrust towards leadership, and I think, you know, when you look at this remote learning engagement data, that's probably what happened to a lot of people, but if we go back to that No Child Left Behind example, the Federal Government, 'cause that's who is setting the proficiency targets, for No Child Left Behind, its federal legislation, teachers knew, principles knew that in many places, the system that was in place for education was not capable of hitting those targets, it just...   0:19:50.1 JD: It wasn't in the capability of the system, and then so if you are an individual operating within that system, you're trying to navigate that, you're gonna try to hit that target no matter what, and then in some places, they chose to do things that went as far as cheating, because they were trying to hit that target. Now, I'm not absolving those individual educators of responsibility, but it was that system that they were operating in that sort of caused that behavior to then happen. You know the worst case scenario is people did, the adults did cheat. And I'm sure there were other things that were happening in other places that didn't rise to the level of cheating, but I think we've talked about it before, there's really only three options in response to data that's not satisfactory. You can improve the system. That's the ideal. That's what we're talking about here. That's what we're going for here. You can sort of... What do you wanna call it? It's not as far as cheating, but you can sort of...   0:21:02.6 AS: Manipulate or...   0:21:04.4 JD: Manipulate the data in some way, or you can manipulate the system in some way, and that's I think what we were seeing. So the worst case scenario in Atlanta, they manipulated the data. But I think in many places, this idea of manipulating the system is less clear, but what happened in many places, and I think we've actually talked about this, that there was this over-emphasis on reading and math at the expense of other types of academics, and that's a manipulation of the system. That's not cheating necessarily, but it is sort of in my mind, sort of cheating kids out of a well-rounded education, and that was a product of so much emphasis on just reading and math test scores, and again, a lot of this was well-intentioned because people were...   0:21:53.5 AS: It's all well-intentioned. What are you talking about a lot of it?   0:21:56.9 JD: It's all well-intentioned but what actually happens as a result of putting these systems and these testing systems in place, and especially the sanctions or even the incentives on the positive side, the money. What actually happened...   [overlapping conversation]   0:22:10.6 AS: Holding back funding or providing additional funding, if you can hit these targets or that type of thing.   0:22:15.4 JD: Right, right, yep. And so you get all these unintended consequences that are produced as a result of the system, and we talk about these things as side effects, just like with drugs, there's these side-effects, but they're not really side effects, they're things that commonly happen, they're things that you would expect to happen as a result of doing these things, but we sort of put them in this... We've given this language as if they're these small things that happen over here, but really they're the sort of the typical unintended consequences that you could expect when you design a system in that way, whether the side effects of a drug or the side effects of cheating in a very strict, sort of, and regimented testing system, an accountability system in a school district.   0:23:03.6 AS: I couldn't help but laugh 'cause I thought about Robin Williams, and he had this skit he used to do when he was alive, and he talked about the drugs, drugs that people that the companies are marketing. And he said I was going through the side effects and I was like reading these horrific things that they had a list and he's like, I'd call that an effect.   0:23:21.4 JD: [chuckle] Right, right, yeah. Yeah.   0:23:24.0 AS: Let me ask you about this slogan, "We can achieve it if you believe it." Now, some students may respond to that, John, what do you say about the fact that... You know, because every time that you talk about getting rid of targets and getting rid of slogans and stuff, that people say, sometimes it works and it works for some people, and some people are driven that way, and when they hear that, they respond to it. What do you say to that?   0:23:57.5 JD: Well, I would say prove it, I wanna see if you're telling me that was actually successful, sometimes people will sort of dress up an anecdote. So, one, I'd wanna see the evidence that that did have the intended...   0:24:13.2 AS: Okay great answer and that's a lesson for everybody listening and viewing is always go back and say, prove it, 'cause I'm making an assertion.   0:24:21.3 JD: Yep. Yeah.   0:24:22.1 AS: And my assertion is that it helps certain people, actually, the burden of proof, of course, is on me as I make that assertion and you're asking me to prove that, which is a very, very logical and sensible thing to do. What else would you say?   0:24:38.0 JD: Well, well, I would say that, you know, Dr. Deming often talked about this idea, I think he got it from Taiichi Ohno, this idea of the loss function, which is basically like...   0:24:51.9 AS: Taguchi.   0:24:52.0 JD: Taguchi loss function, sorry.   0:24:54.4 AS: Yeah.   0:24:54.9 JD: And basically, think of an inverted parabola inverted U basically... And here is an optimum.   0:25:03.3 AS: Or think of a U. Think of a U.   0:25:03.4 JD: Now either side of it... An inverted U, yep, and the optimum is at the bottom of the U, but there's loss as soon as you start to move away from the U, but that loss comes on both sides. So, you know, the people that are anti-testing versus the people that wanna put strict sanctions and rewards in place, probably the answer is somewhere in between there, because we have to know how our students are doing, so we do need some data, so I would be probably a proponent of kids being given some type of standardized tests and can we sort of know the scores at the aggregate level, perhaps at the school level, by subject and grade level, but there's not sanctions and rewards tied to that in any way, it's just information. So that's one thing that'd be a big difference between, you know, between what we could be doing with this data and what's actually being done.   0:26:06.1 JD: So like taking the eighth grade math engagement data, for example. In terms of what would you do? I mean, I think if I was gonna put a poster up with sort of an explanation of how we're gonna approach the remote learning, maybe the first poster that I'd want staff to see is a list of what we're gonna be doing month by month to sort of deal with the reality of remote learning, maybe that first month, it's just making sure... The strategy is to make sure every kid has a device and access to reliable internet connectivity, right? That's very different than this proclamation, that 100% of kids is gonna be engaged, because as soon as I see that, as a teacher, I know that's not gonna happen. Especially if there's no other sort of methods tied to that. Maybe in month two, after I get all the kids devices and connectivity, that's reliable, we can do some training on, well, how do you even teach? What are the methods that a teacher can employ in a remote learning environment, and maybe all along, I am tracking the data, there's nothing wrong with tracking the data, but I'm putting it on that chart, I'm tracking it over time, and as we implement these various approaches to remote learning, I can see how that's impacting, but I'm doing that with students and teachers, and I'm not just plotting the data and then not giving a set of methods that sort of accompany the sort of march towards continual improvement.   0:27:47.2 JD: And the same thing, the same approach could be used with that test data from Atlanta, you know if the idea was, I'm gonna sort of start charting this data and seeing how we're doing over time, and I'm working with teachers and students to come up with ideas to how to improve this, to march closer to that 100% proficiency goal, I mean that's a noble goal, assuming that the test is well-constructed and that we want obviously more and more kids to be marching towards proficiency for sure, but we don't want all these other side games going on that come about when you sort of just simply have targets without methods, and I think that's the point. And if you take that approach, I think then teachers sort of understand that the leaders, the school leaders or the district leaders, they're taking some of that responsibility for a lack of engagement or low test scores or whatever it is, and they're trying to remove those obstacles systematically, that's a very different, different approach, 'cause I'm not suggesting that people shouldn't have goals. That's not what I'm suggesting. I set goals for myself all the time, I think they're actually helpful and necessary tools for individuals, but I think when you set numerical goals for other people without a set of methods to accomplish those goals, then you get the opposite effect of what was intended and you know, that's what I see happen over and over and over again in the education sector.   0:29:28.2 AS: And what I like to say is that two things about that, which is one is that if, if you're setting a goal, just don't tie compensation or other benefits to the goal or other punishment. Set the goal and then use it as a tool and track the information and discuss it. It's the same thing with compensation, once you start to tie compensation to specific goals, then you start to mess around with the incentive structure. And that's the first thing I also think the other thing I'd like to say is that if the object that you are measuring through your goal or target or whatever knows that it is being measured, look out. Now, I have a ruler right here, and if I measure the height of this glass, the glass doesn't know I'm measuring it, and so there's no change in anything in the glass, but when a human being knows that they're being measured, it causes a change. Just the knowing of that.   0:30:46.9 JD: Okay.   0:30:49.6 AS: So. Okay. So that helps us to understand about slogans, and what you're talking about is the idea of maybe replacing slogans with "How are we improving the system?" And, you know, I've started doing that in my Valuation Masterclass Boot Camp, where I was at the end of each session... At the end of each six week period, I have a survey that I give to students and I asked them for feedback, and how can we improve this? And then what I do is I take all those and I give them to my team and then we have a discussion and we kind of rank them, and then we go back on the final day and we say, by the way, these are the improvements we're making. And these are the improvements we did the last, this current time that you guys didn't realize, and then that way, the students also are kind of involved and interested in what we're doing, that we're asking for their feedback on how to improve the system, and we're telling them.   0:31:44.9 AS: I don't generally announce it beforehand, like put up something about, "Here's all the changes that we're making in this boot camp," 'cause I just want them to have a natural experience, I don't necessarily need them to be thinking like, "Okay, so this is new", and also some of the things that we're trying, we're testing and we're observing how they work and if they work, and so we may abandon that thing, so it may not make sense to just necessarily advertise it, but when we have some big things like this time, we got some excellent feedback in our last one, and now, I decided that when we do the boot camp, we're gonna have, let's say, 30 or 40 people, and we're gonna cover it one industry, we're gonna value companies in one industry, so we're gonna do the automotive industry, and then that allows everybody to work together in the first week, say, "Let's analyze this industry before I tell you which companies each of you are valuing." And so that's a new innovation that we're trying to do this time, and so there's a lot of work on our side to get that prepared.   0:32:46.7 JD: Yeah. And it sounds like there's methods, there's methods attached to the goal of improvement. That's the most important thing, I think.   0:32:58.1 AS: Yeah, I mean I feel like... One of the things I feel like, and I think maybe some of the listeners or viewers may feel like this, sometimes I don't measure it the way I maybe should. What I do is I get feedback from the customer, from the student in this case. And then I bring that feedback to my team and I ask my team to kind of rank what they think about those, and then we identify, let's say three of those recommendations that we think, Okay, this is good. Let's implement it. And then we test it. We don't have an exact measurement that say, "Okay, well, you wanna say, "Did that work at the end of a six-week period?" We just kind of know whether it worked or not, how much trouble it was, how much benefit we thought it got, and then we get some feedback at the end, and maybe the feedback from students at the end is part of the data. But I'm just curious, what are your thoughts about people who are doing things necessarily, they may be doing the right things, but they may not necessarily be measuring it in the way that they could or should, including myself. What are your thoughts on that?   0:34:08.7 JD: Yeah. I mean... Well, I mean, I think there's quantitative data and qualitative data, and it sounds like what you're doing is relying more on qualitative data, including this experience of the students. I mean, I think generally, probably some things lend themselves to more quantitative data, some things lend themselves to more qualitative data. I mean, I think the key here is to set up a system for improvement, identify what's most important to you in terms of... 'Cause you can't focus on everything at once, what are you gonna focus on? Get, you know, get other people involved. So it's not just coming from you, and it sounds like there's a team here working together, you're also doing it repeatedly over time. I don't think there's necessarily a right or wrong answer on this. I think the most important thing is to, for me, I think about looking at this stuff, putting the data on a chart over time, again, that can be quantitative or qualitative data, determine what the sort of capability of the system is, get some baseline data. I think that's really, really important. And then understand, is what you're seeing sort of typical, is it bouncing around an average within some limits, or do you see special causes in your data? I think those are the most important things.   0:35:57.2 JD: And then the other thing, I think if we're talking about a school and if we really wanna make breakthrough improvements, then I do think at the end of the day, that continual improvement sort of approach has to involve students and teachers, I think it has to. And so I think there's different ways to go about doing that, but I think if you do those things, then you're well on your way to improved outcomes.   0:36:25.1 AS: I do have one question I ask them at the end, and that is, I give them a range of value, and I say, now that you've experienced the Valuation Masterclass Boot Camp, how, what would you say is the value that you received? And definitely in the beginning that kept going up because we kept improving and they could feel that value, and I didn't give them any guidance, the rating did never change, but it was moving up. Now it's kind of flattened off, and so I think we've, we've got a challenge if we wanna bring that to another level, but that's one of them. Well, John, without, without any exhortations to the listeners, I would love it if you could just wrap up the main takeaways that you want us to get from this discussion.   0:37:15.7 JD: Yeah, I think you know, maybe putting a fine point on those things, I think what I've come to appreciate is continual improvement is really the combination of plotting data over time and combining it with that Plan Do Study Act cycle, which we've talked about multiple times. So the first recommendation is whatever metrics are most important to you, plot them on a chart in time order, and then... It can be intimidating at first. But the calculations on the process behavior chart, to add in the upper and natural process limits or control limits is really, really valuable, because then you can start to understand the capability of the system And then you start to understand what would it really take, what would we really have to do to actually shift those limits and indicate a pattern of the data that actually indicates that we've brought about improvement. The other reason those limits are really important is because it does help you understand, do you just have this common cause system where there's lots of different cause and effect relationships, but there's not really a single one you can hone in on, and so then you know you're not trying to improve one component, but the entire system systematically. So I think for those reasons, it gets a little technical with the process behavior chart, or the control chart but they are...   0:38:46.7 JD: I think it's the most powerful tool that we have in the continual improvement tool box. So I would highly suggest at least a couple of people on, on your school district team have that sort of skill set, because then you don't waste your time on improvement efforts, and you can also tell when something you tried has actually resulted in improved outcomes for kids or for teachers or for schools.   0:39:13.1 AS: John, on behalf of everyone at the Deming Institute and the listeners and viewers, I wanna thank you again for this discussion. For listeners remember to go to deming.org to continue your journey. You can find John's book, "Win-Win: Dr. W. Edwards Deming, the System of Profound Knowledge, and the Science of Improving Schools" on amazon.com. This is your host Andrew Stotz, and I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming, "People are entitled to joy in work."

(NOTAS Y ENLACES DEL CAPÍTULO AQUÍ: https://www.jaimerodriguezdesantiago.com/kaizen/180-modelos-mentales-20-liderazgo-exploradores-puertas-de-embarque-y-snafu/)Hacía demasiado tiempo que no dedicaba un capítulo al tema de los modelos mentales. Claro que después de diecinueve, tampoco te creas que es fácil, uno se va quedando sin ideas. Pero estos días, preparando el Programa de Desarrollo Directivo y Liderazgo del Instituto Tramontana del que te hablé hace unas semanas, me di cuenta de que habíamos hablado de modelos mentales procedentes de muchas disciplinas y útiles para muchas cosas diferentes, pero que nunca los habíamos vinculado a eso, al liderazgo y a la gestión de personas. Y había que ponerle remedio, porque hay unos cuantos y son muy útiles. Y por el camino se nos cuelan: 

In this episode, Tim talks with podcast guest George Trachilis about recognizing and cultivating leadership in their work as leadership coaches. Both Tim and George share their history of how they found themselves working with organizations to improve their processes and systems and the top takeaways each took regarding the power of leadership. As an expert in Lean Leadership, George provides insightful ideas on workplace culture. Drawing inspiration from leaders in mindset and workplace culture, such as James Clear, Normen Bodek, Shigeo Shingo, and Mike Rother, this episode is a treasure trove of resources for leaders who want to focus on self-improvement. If you consider yourself a leader or someone who has a vision and gets things done, this episode has tons of resources and ideas to help you grow.About George TrachilisAuthor and speaker, George Trachilis, is the Shingo Research Award winning contributor and publisher of the book, Developing Lean Leaders at All Levels. His insight as an entrepreneur and Lean Coach will astound. George is one of the most experienced and knowledgeable people alive in the Lean world today, and his focus has changed from Lean, to operational excellence to leadership excellence. It has always been about leadership and leading by example. Connect with George today to address your leadership needs.Resources discussed in this episode:Kaizen LeadershipNormen Bodek - The Harada MethodTaiichi OhnoShigeo Shingo Atomic HabitsPaul AkersMike Rother - Toyota KataGemba Walk--Contact Tim Sweet | Team Work Excellence: WebsiteLinkedIn: Tim SweetInstagramLinkedin: Team Work ExcellenceContact George Trachilis | Leadership Excellence: WebsiteEmailLinkedinFind It George Website--George 00:00The more you focus on the laggards, the more attention everybody else will want from you, and you'll lose good people. Focus on your superstars. You know, that's the direction you're going people get caught up. Tim 00:12I'd like to ask you some questions. Do you consider yourself the kind of person that gets things done? Are you able to take a vision and transform that into action? Are you able to align others towards that vision and get them moving to create something truly remarkable. If any of these describe you, then you my friend, or a leader, and this show is all about and all for you. Welcome to the Sweet on Leadership Podcast, episode 16. Tim 00:46Thanks again for joining us on sweet on leadership. I'm really pleased today that I have person who I have followed for years joining me. And when I contemplated what we're going to talk about today was the obvious choice for who to reach out to and that's George Trachilis. George, thanks very much for taking the time. George 01:08Oh, thank you. Thank you, Tim. So Tim 01:10today, we spent a little bit of time here before we hit record talking about what we want to cover. And we don't really know where this is gonna go. But I believe it's all around how both of us, our careers have taken us into the area of strategy, leadership development, team development. And we share a common starting point. And that is really moving from operational excellence, and the tools that are involved there all the way into this, this era. So maybe as a start, why don't you tell us a little bit about yourself, what you're working on. And then we can get into how we found ourselves down this path. George 01:53So, my name is George Trachilis. For those of you that don't know me, I started off in Lean In 1994, working for a company called Motorcoach Industries, which was Greyhound Buses. And in those days, I was a young engineer, just coming out of school basically. And I was asked to be on an implementation team for an ERP implementation, which took me to Pembina, North Dakota in the US from Winnipeg, Canada. And we implemented an ERP system, which included total quality management, and what we knew as Lean back then, and Kanban, and all the tools. And we had consultants come in from all Oliver White Consulting. And what they did was they share the tools with us, the leaders of the group, and then they asked us to go train others. And I loved it. What I say is I caught the bug, that was it, I can no longer work in a regular job. It needed to be about change, and looking at the light go on in people's eyes. That's what it was all about. And it hasn't been for 30 years now. The first 10 years was me implementing with a team of people the second 10 years, was owning my own consulting business going to Edmonton Calgary throughout Canada. As a matter of fact, I had an online course that created maybe the first online course, on Lean 101 the Lego Simulation Airplane Game. And the Government of Alberta bought it, which means I was allowed to sell it for them. And they trained 300 companies in Alberta, Canada, which then expanded because in 2011, I just said let's give it away to the world. And I had like in December of that year, something like 300 students on average registered per day. So, it was pretty amazing that everybody in 2011 love this thing called Lean. Okay, Lean is great. But I found I was missing something because I would go into a company, somebody would show me the Toyota way and the 4P model. Okay. I didn't know what all that meant. And then in 2012, I was doing more online courses and I met Jeff Liker, and I met Norman Bodek. Actually in reverse Norman first, Jeff Liker, and met a lot of the Guru's and I went to Japan learned a lot about the Toyota way of doing things, met with a lot of Toyota coaches, especially on Toyota business practices, and learned that and now I coach and develop people using Toyota business practices. But throughout the last 30 years, even though the last 10 is all on leadership development, I still go in, I still do value stream mapping, I still do the tools. So that's not a problem. I love doing that. But I get the benefit there. Not everybody else necessarily. If I can teach that, well, somebody else is getting the benefit. Now I coach and develop companies. And I've got two big clients today where I'm coaching leaders to be leaders. And they're coaching others. So, the mental model I used to have in the first one years was the five principles of Lean. Okay? Define value from the customer's perspective, right? Define the value stream, first flow, then pull, and strive for perfection, great five values, great five principles of Lean. Now, ever since Jeff Liker and I put the book together, called Developing Lean leaders at all levels, the model we share there is, number one, live the core values of the company. Okay, that's number one. Number two, commit to self development, because everybody knows, if you don't develop yourself, you don't have that attitude, you're going nowhere, you're going nowhere, plus, you're causing everybody else, no end of pain, because you're in it for yourself, everybody's got to do something for you. And you're not enough for the customer or the company, or your teamwork, or your team players. Number two coach and develop others, we need everybody to be a coach, as a manager. If you're not coaching and developing somebody, you're just not doing your job as a manager. Number three, support daily Kaizen. And then number four, define your targets and align all of your processes towards those targets for that year. So create vision, and align targets. That's number four. So that mental model today is a model that I refer to as the Lean Leadership Development Model. Jeff, and I created a company called Lean Leadership Institute. And we have an online course that trains that to the masses. But really step one, I always say if you can't improve, if you can't say, I want to improve, there's something wrong. And it's not with a everybody else. It's with you. So, so just just making sure people know and then I usually get the question is like, what happens when you meet somebody like that? Well, don't worry about them, don't focus on them as a leader, the more you focus on the laggards, the more attention everybody else will want from you. And you'll lose good people focus on your superstars, you know, that's the direction you're going people get caught up. So what I'm working on today is remote coaching for several companies, and helping them understand how they should be thinking so that they can teach that mindset to others. Tim 07:33It's a real basis and thought, when we think of just the pure efficiency of playing to your strengths, or supporting, I liked what you said there about focusing on the superstars. Because we're going to improve our reach, we're going to make sure that we have all the right thought going on in the organization, rather than focusing on constraints, it it's a good place to be but with teams, we need to be marshaling everybody into a common goal. And what was that old saying that they used to say? You know, do you want to be the hero with 1000 Helpers? Or do you want to be the leader with 1000? Heroes? You know, really, can we bring that out in people? I'm still floored by just how similar the evolution is between yourself and myself and where we've landed. George 08:26I'm not. I think it's funny, because when we're a Lean thinker, what is it we're looking for? We're looking to help people, okay. And when we see the gap, we kind of say, hey, let's close the gap. And this is the gap for a long time. We just never saw it. And we've been distracted by others, like, let's call them thought leaders that have driven us in a certain thinking process. We've been distracted for about 10 to 20 years. But today, I think we're on top of the real issue, which is our leaders are not leaders, at times, they're not behaving that way. They're thinking about short term results and behaving in a way similar to get those versus the long term game that they could get by staying on course, you know, making sure people understand they're valued at the company. They're the only appreciating asset. You're growing the people that's your job. When I was in Japan, it was funny because Matt Amezaga he was the Vice President of Operations at all of Toyota. He said that Fujio Cho, asked him to go back to Kentucky and get the culture back because they had a leader there. This particular leader didn't do a good job. And in a matter of one year, he destroyed the culture. And it took four years to get it back. But he did it in three, he was very impressed with himself. So, this is the kind of culture that you need. And you, you got to think of the culture as the behaviors. And the behaviors, behaviors of the leadership go furthest. When you see somebody in front of you, and they're the CEO of the company, and they bend down, they pick up a piece of garbage, and they throw it in the garbage can. That's not like for show. That's because they live it. That's because they, they understand that if they don't demonstrate what they want from others, they're not going to get it. Tim 10:30Yeah, I think tied on to that is, if the leaders are behaving in a way, or if the managers or the executives in those that should be in leadership roles are behaving in a way that demonstrates the worst possible things, then that also becomes how we define the culture because you know, that culture is defined by the worst behaviors we're willing to accept. And it can be so debilitating for an organization to have the wrong people getting the attention. It really takes away from the enjoyment and from the fulfillment, that everybody who's fighting the good fight is able to derive from it. And when I think back to some of the experiences that I had, I remember what my first major regional management role was with was with a large commercial bakery, and I had Thunderbay to Vancouver Island. Spent a lot of time in Winnipeg, incidentally. You know, working in that area, I spent two years creating, I was deploying TQM back in the day. So we were doing quality circles and having a bunch of unionized employees wrangling waste, and getting it down and, and really working with the union to help them understand why we were having people work off page and not necessarily working to their their job description, but getting excited for their role. And one organizational shift where they decided to take our regional office out of Calgary and send it back east, and that we were no longer going to play nicey nice with the unions, it dismantled culture overnight, it dismantled all of that positive work we had done, and really made improvement. Not impossible, but a fight again, that didn't have to be. And throughout my career, I think as I evolved, I could design great, elegant processes. I could go in and do the work, I could come up with the answer I could, I could define and measure and analyze and improve till the cows came home and loved doing it, it was a lot of fun. You could get the right answers. And if the leaders weren't on side, you were done. You were dead in the water. And if you manage to get it over the line, the leaders decided that that wasn't what they were interested in anymore. They could dismantle it overnight. I started out as a junior team-building consultant, and then I and then I went in school, I found operations management, and loved it. And then I came full circle. And I realized that really, I could enable other people to do the improvement, teach them the skills and let them go out and, and reengineer the processes. But I needed to focus on hoeing the row for those improvement projects to take place. And getting leadership excited. Yeah, so I mean, that's very similar in terms of where I've ended up because it yes, the other work is very, very important. But it needs to have fertile ground. Otherwise you're, you're throwing good money out. George 13:49Yea, it's interesting, you say fertile ground. And I think immediately about the leader. If the leader doesn't have fertile ground in their brain, we've got a problem. And Gallup, for example, just came out with a statement that 70% of all hiring decisions are wrong, based on you know what a good leader is. And you think, well, what's the characteristics of a good leader? They only have other than the skills, the hard skills, the soft skill, one of the main ones is that they're willing, and they believe in improvement. They believe in Kaizen, it's almost like Kaizen resides in their heart. I believe I can be better tomorrow than I am today. And the day after can be better than tomorrow. And ultimately, if they have that belief system, and they're willing to do the work on themselves, that's like a beacon. It'll just generate light for the rest of the organization. Nobody tests for it. So the fertile ground in my mind is in their brain. And today, I've actually avoided working at mid-level in a company. Avoid 90% failure rate is guaranteed when you're not dealing with the executives, and you're not dealing with the people who actually can, in some ways, demonstrate and expand and proliferate Kaizen and improvement and call it Lean, call it excellence. If they don't do it, nobody else is gonna do it. Tim 15:21That lesson was hard one for me, because often, I'd be entering into the wrong level of an organization. And, you know, it took me losing. Well, we did great work, but the work was… George 15:36It's not sustainable. Okay. Tim 15:41Well, there's priority changes, and the work was just the work was just taken out from under us. And, and it was, it was awful. That, because we knew we knew where we were in the answers we were bringing in, but it was a fickle leader made a snap judgment. And so yeah, I have since for several years now, I only work if I'm starting from the top, because you need to have that conviction. And that willingness, and that space, that space to improve. It's really interesting. Sometimes when you're talking about, you'll run into teams that have capacity challenges and want to improve. And one of the first things that I say is a great reason to go and chase some waste is we have to create enough capacity that we have capacity to improve. And then that is that, I think back to that Covey model, where they talk about the Covey's quadrants, and how that quadrant one is urgent and important. And Quadrant Two is really important but not urgent. If we can get operating in quadrant two, that would where Lean resides in my mind, it's the only quadrant that pays dividends. It's the only one that creates more space to create more space, more efficiency to create more efficiency. Capacity building on top of capacity. If we don't have the support of the leaders to start that process, it's really tough. You have that support lined up top to bottom cascading down through the organization. And it's really easy. That's not only easy, it's fun. And I mean, the work is tough enough, trying to convince leadership trying to work and overcome turbulence in teams. That's tough. Like it's, let's let the work be tough. Let's not let's not make working with people tough. So you'd said something earlier again, before we had hit record here. I want you to share that thought around starting in the students mind. You take care of that a little bit. You're talking about Gemba. And I thought that was fascinating. George 17:54Like a progression for me over the years. But I brought Ritsuo Shingo, bless his heart, he's the late Shingo now. Shingo San, I brought him to Santorini, Greece, along with others, who were leaders in their industry, you know, there's business owners, there's, you know, others like Paul Akers, as an example, I brought him to Santorini, Greece. And we did training there. And we went through a Gemba Walk of Santo Wines, one of the biggest, the biggest winery in Santorini. And we're watching somebody work, we're watching somebody work. And what they're doing is they got a big light facing them, and they got, you know, like three bottles on each end. And they're looking, their eyes are focused on the bottle, and the light is behind it. So, you might be able to see something, you know, in the bottle. And so they're looking for spiders, because the bottle sometimes just, just over. So they do wash the bottles, but sometimes, you know, if there's like a big nest in there, you put that bottle aside and needs extra washing, but this is what this person's job function was. And ritual wouldn't leave. And he's just observing. And I'm thinking, what's he, what could he possibly observe? Like the flow is such that there's such a queue in front of them, and the line is running, and there's no way he's gonna be out of work. Like, he's got a lot of work and the lines running, maybe he's not, maybe they're slack. I don't know if he's trying to calculate how much time he's actually working, versus how many bottles are moved. I don't know what he's doing. And it was so shocking. I said, what do you what are you doing? He says George San, watch his eyes. And I'm watching the workers eyes. And as he lifts the bottles, his eyes are down. I'm going oh, Shingo San I never thought to watch the workers eyes. Like pretend you're in the worker shoes, and think you're the worker, and your job is to do this function. And he says also, there's no standard. I sai, what do you mean no standard. Sometimes he lifts up three bottles, and two, and sometimes two and two, sometimes three and three, there's no standard. And I'm going, Wow, he got all that from what I would just say that's just not important. Okay. So from that, I thought, How does somebody look at improvement? And so for example, I'm coaching somebody now he's a, he's a great coach. His name is Raj Pathak, I'm sure he's he's okay with me using his name. He just went through PDCA excellence training with myself and Dr. Jake Abraham, who is my Toyota coach. And we just finished training. And he did a great A3, now it's time for him to train others. And they've got a big project to do. He's leading the project. And I said, So Raj, tell me what you're thinking, what's the first meeting look like? And why? He says, Well, I want to go right into step one, okay. And I'm trying to understand why he would want to just go right into step one, for everybody of problem-solving, when we got a whole team here, and they're different areas, and he might not have a challenge for each one. So I said, what's your challenge for each individual, and he doesn't have that thought through. So I'm thinking, we need to do some visualization, what this might look like. So that's kind of the biggest thing for me, is if you can't visualize the end, to some degree, getting into it right away, that's the gap. There's a gap between being able to visualize the results, and get everybody else signing up into a charter saying, Here's what we want to do great. That charter, I've seen so many places, I've seen it work, it never works without everybody signing. So that's part of the Nemawashi though the consensus building that you need in Lean today, in order to make it work. So that's why I say you got to think about like, what's in their head? For two reasons. Number one, you want to know if there's any gaps. But number two, what are the gaps between them, and you. You could be the one in the learning seat. And so that's where the teacher sometimes learns more than the student. You know, show me more, tell me how you get that. I did that a couple of times, with students that I'm going, okay, I better pick up that book and read it. Jim 22:37Yeah, in my parlance, over the last few years, fluency has been the big word. And it's, you know, are you fluent in your own beliefs and your own thoughts around what we're about to do? Are you fluent in that and how you conceptualize work and what you value? And how you align to the corporate goals? Or what are your own goals? What's your workstyle? What's your genius? George 23:03We call that a little different. We call that the line of sight. But let me ask you this. What's your long term goal? Tim 23:10Myself? George 23:11Yeah, 10 years. Tim 23:1310 years out? I mean, I think it will be that I've managed to train enough leaders in this, in this practice, that they are self-sufficient, that my own company has a body of work behind it, that allows what can be would you say automated or that can be approached individually is happening and that we are focused in that space where other people can can begin to do some of the heavy lifting, I guess. Whereas for myself, I focus primarily on the teaching, and, and really getting the senior most leaders lined up for the work. The challenge becomes, can you carry that work all the way down to the coalface can it cascade through the organization effectively? And so, I mean, from my own practices, I think that's really important that the company has my clients have the ability to carry this thinking all the way down, internally. And so I'd say for the next 10 years on this, it's really about Systemizing. And in getting that, that together, and I'm on track for that. Whether or not it will materialize in that way. I'm not sure. But I don't exactly know “the how” yet to be frank. George 24:41Yeah. So one of the most amazing things I've come across is some guy on the internet. Norman Bodek, by the way, who's dead again, you know, like he he's gone. Mike, another coach is gone. Norman Bodek said, You need to learn about the people-side of Lean. And I'm going I don't know what that means. So he was talking about the Harada Method, with Kakashi Harada in Japan, teaching people how to be self-reliant. And they come up with their goal. They come up with their tasks, they go and execute and and one of the famous, the famous baseball player in the world today Shohei Ohtani did the 64th chart with Takashi Harada, in Japan. So it's pretty amazing that there is a process for almost every problem. But when you want to be successful, you need a system. You can't just have a process, we can go in with Lean. And we can say, here's a problem describing the problem, which is obviously half solved if you can do that. And we put together some tools and we say let's go through this. And we got a solution. For every problem, there's a solution. But for really successful people, they need a system. And that's why the Harada Method came into into play for me as well. 10 years ago, yeah, Tim 26:09that'll help me answer that, that question. More retrospectively, but yeah, the biggest leaps that I've taken in my business and my coaching practice and, and working with leaders, and again, I specialize in academics, and STEM leaders, people that are they're fairly linear in their thinking or at least linear in their, in the practice. And it really has been. It's funny, because as we talk about where that catastrophic derailment happened due to a that's actually what was the impetus for me taking a step back and looking at everything that I practiced over several decades of doing this work two decades doing this work. And deciding that I wanted to just really box what was working the best and I ended up starting to put my practices into some structures and into some processes. And I'd shied away from that. As the Lean guy, I'd shied away from that instead, you know, opting for more of a artisan approach or job shop approach, because I wanted, I wanted to make sure that I gave everybody a unique path through and I had to get my own mind around the fact that you know what, once I had systemized my approach my first conversation, say with with new coaching clients, suddenly I had a bunch of things going for me one, I didn't have to imagine where I was going next I had a place that I could start. And I knew they were reliable tools I used the most. They're things that I believe in, and that they've always worked. So there, I had linear thinkers I was dealing with, I could show them the path. I remember one point in my career, I had an engineer come up to me and say, Man, that was amazing. You did it was a piece of collaborative contract we're doing. But boy, you sure you sneak up on people. He said to me, I said, What do you mean, he says, We I didn't know what this was all about. And then towards the end of it, I was just like, amazed at how far we come out sure would have been calmer. If I had known where you were gonna take us well, now I can put a roadmap in front of this is what we're about to do, I'm not going to wait and deliver a punch line and, and make a guess at what we're going to do. And then the ability to just really test those theories, as blueprints for people doing well, and prove them out until they can be now I can isolate if I'm going to improve something about them, I can see the whole path. And, you know, it's so funny because I try not to be too hard on myself. But you know, you know these tools, and just the ability to step back and apply them to your own business, something that could seem rather chaotic, has made a big difference. George 29:01The entrepreneur does that. The entrepreneur thinks they must recreate everything for our client for every customer. So look, that's not a bad thing. You just got to recognize that if you want to stay a one person company, you'd better start thinking differently. Entrepreneur not. Because yeah, because there are people out there that like a system. And nowadays two companies are growing. Their reference of the past is not as relevant as it was. So what they're doing is they're experimenting their way towards the future. And understanding how to experiment is critical. So you know, of course Mike Rother is, you know, that Toyota Kata guy, and he used to be a student of Jeff Likers. So, you know, it's coming kind of from the same place. What did we miss with Toyota? What we missed was the soft stuff. We got the hard stuff. You know, 4S, they have at Toyota not 5S, we kind of know how to do that. But we don't have the discipline. And we're always thinking, look at all these tools, what are they there for? They're there to develop the people. And we never thought like that. We were, you know, great people, great products, they kind of bound it in between you got all your tools and systems and results. But it starts with great people. And it ends with a great product. You know, they kind of bound the problem there. And I don't know too many industries that wouldn't start like that, you know, we need great people. And what are those great people? Well, they're the ones that want to improve. And because they're doing it, they can demonstrate to others, in several ways coach and develop them to do it. And what are they striving for? Well, we need to get short term and long term results, you got to do both. So it's kind of like a big challenge in industry, especially everywhere, it doesn't matter. But we got the quarter crunch, the year end, you know, we got to make our numbers all the time, I just remember that the nightmare I was in, when I worked at New Flyer Industries, which ultimately ended up going bankrupt or taken over whatever. But it was a nightmare. We owed all our suppliers, like a lot of our suppliers, tons of money 120 million past 90 days. So it was like crazy, that's the way to run a business is to try to start a bus so you can get a progress payment, and then pay for parts on the buses that are in the yard. So you can actually get them shipped to the customer. So the challenge is applying lean is like an exercise in futility. What we got is great people, and we got to get those results. So we kind of nailed it. And Toyota went bankrupt way back in the 50s. So that's where, you know, they kind of learned their lesson. That's why they have a big bank account. Tim 31:57The big question that's left is you think about your journey through and how your thinking and your and your application. And your focus has evolved. When you think about that leadership experience that you're now focused on the other part of that Gallup poll that I thought was really interesting, or sorry, not Gallup poll, but their their recent publication was, they had said, They figure 10% of the population has the DNA of a leader, the ability to actually, you know, operate in them. And I my hypothesis is, it's actually smaller, because although they may start with 10%, only a fraction of that, I like to say 6% have the opportunity to lead or have not incurred other baggage, or something that will take them out of the mix, or don't have a personal situation that wouldn't allow them to do that, or haven't suffered trauma that wouldn't allow them to do that. So when you look at the leadership experience, and as you watch the leaders that you're working with, really grasp these concepts and then apply them and become higher and higher performing. What do you think the key, in your experience, what are the key mindsets? As I say, you know, you've talked about the five principles, what are some of the watershed moments that you see with leaders where they, you know, a light bulb goes on? And, and it clicks and they really get something? Could you share some thoughts on that? In terms of what are some of those big pivot points? George 33:32Yeah. Okay, I'm not sure they're big pivot points. This is part of the problem. Tim 33:34Sure. George 33:45The problem is we have a lot of little pivot points, which end up making a lot of big change at the end of the day. Tim 33:48Great, perhaps, what are some of the common little pivot points? George 33:50Yeah, so, number one, when I look at leaders getting excited, I think about why are they getting excited? It's because you've pointed out something, whether it's through your book or what have you. It's something that they did not expect. Okay, here's what they expected. And they got something else, there's a gap between what they expected and what they got. That gap is called learning. And as soon as you can increase the learning for that leader, they get hooked. It is the adrenaline, it's the dopamine that you know, gets released in your head. As soon as they do that, they get hooked. So one of one of my students in Germany, she was, I can't remember how we got to this. We were talking about a book called The Power of Habit or something. And I said, Look, a company is made up of habits. So tell me the behavior you would like to see. Tell me what the trigger is and how do you make sure that trigger happens? Because you got to have a trigger. You know, and then you can do the routine was the behavior and you need to kind of reinforce for yourself that that was a good thing to do. And you reinforce it in many ways. So she was, I want to make my bed every morning. I don't know why maybe she heard it and you know, they do it in the army and stuff. Okay, I want to make my bed every morning. So I said, Great. Let's talk a little bit about the trigger. So the trigger is, okay, I'm not gonna have my coffee. I'm gonna get up, I'm gonna put my clothes on, I'm gonna put my slippers on or whatever she's doing. There's a trigger somewhere for her to make her bed. Good. Then she makes the bed. And I said, what's the reward? And she struggled. We have a hard time programming our own thinking to say this is successful. And I said, Okay, I think in the book, they talked a little bit about somebody going on the sheets, just straightening out the sheets. And that felt good. I think it was a  Febreeze thing. I mean, they did that as a reward. And I thought, Okay, why don't you try that. And she says, George, it worked the next day. It worked. I can't believe it. Specifically thinking about the reward. I did this on the bed, and it smoothed out. And I felt good. I smiled. Well, okay, good. The smile is the reward too. So we have a hard time building in new habits that we know we need to have. Because we don't understand that we need a trigger. We need to do the routine because you know, it's important. And we need to create that little reward. And after that becomes a habit, you're done. You're done. Because every time today, when I go into a meeting, I always ask, what's the purpose? And what's the desired outcome of that meeting? I always ask it's a habit for me. And at the end, I always say it's time for Hansha, which is Japanese for reflection. Okay, what went well, during this meeting? What can we do better? How do we build that in for next time, and we improve our meetings each time. So that's just my meeting routines. But the habits make the difference. And so when I start with somebody, what, what we're doing is we're learning. And when we're learning, I'm saying, Are you satisfied with everything? You know, the way life is? Or would you like to improve something? And of course, we bring up the Taiichi Ohno no problem is the biggest problem of all? Yeah, okay, if you're, if you don't have a problem you want to fix then then I'm really no good to you. But let's, let's fix something, let's break it up, let's make sure we have little habits that we put together, maybe that'll create a routine, maybe that falls into a system that we built for you. Okay, so this is excellent when they can see how all this comes together. And they're excited about it, and then they transfer it to others. So I just think it's those little learning bits that make all the sense in the world. Tim 38:00Well, there's one other thing that you said there that I think I like to just stop on. And that's for your students that you talked to make the bed and then smooth out the sheets. And take a moment to reflect that you did this and that you're enjoying it and that the smile is the reward. You had said earlier that it's really important to, you know, go to the Gemba. And that being get into the students mind and understand what they're starting with. Right, this kind of thing. And I think it's a really interesting concept to say, maybe that going to the Gemba is getting into our own mind for a minute. And just stop for a second. And appreciate why you appreciated the reflection again, but saying, hey, you know, understand what you're out for here and understand what you just created for yourself. And take a moment, I used to be a chef. I was so I was a I was a classically trained chef, before I went back to business school. And what's the most important thing that a chef can do throughout that, that experiences if you're not tasting, you're not in control of the process? You have to stop and enjoy. Your own soup for a minute, if you're going to truly understand is it ready to go out? You have to look at it and say is this beautiful? What I just created here? You have to take a moment. And I think that's also part of sort of empathy when we're dealing with other people see it from their perspective. Appreciate it for a moment for what it is take a moment to be there with the person but you know, and this is where I'm like be there for a moment with yourself because I'm I was always really bad at that. I would do something meaningful. And I would steamroll right past it. Right. I wouldn't take praise for it. I wouldn't. Very bad at saying You're welcome. These kinds of things. You have to take a moment and say we just did something for a minute here, let's just put pause and realize, we got to the milestone we thought we were gonna get it because that gives us fuel for the next time we make the push. And the next time we do the next piece of effort, George 40:09That's called celebration, but we have to celebrate. Yeah. And being grateful. Look, that's all preparing your mind. And that's preparing yourself to be a better person, which you can then translate to others. So all of this is all teachings that you can apply to work. The customer, really, we got to turn this into value-added, we've run a business, we can't go home and say, Hey, I did this, I smoothed my bed. And now I want you to pay more for that product. No. So all of this is part of the little steps that it takes for them to say, Hey, I did this at home. Why can I do this at work? What's wrong with doing five paths? In a way, where there's a trigger? Five minutes before the end of the shift? Everybody does a five-minute 5S and we give each other a high five before we leave nothing wrong? Unless you're in COVID times, then maybe it's an elbow bump, you know? Tim 41:16Yeah. Well, it's been really enlightening to hear your perspectives on this stuff. And I hope we can do it again, because I'm having a lot of fun. And I'm learning through this conversation. So thank you very much for that. I want to make sure that people know how they can get involved with your thinking, how you'd like to be contacted, if somebody is inspired to reach out. George 41:38So my name is George Trachilis, they can go to georgetrachilis.com, they can contact me if they want to talk to me, or, you know, book me for a meeting and my calendars right there. That's the best way. Also, there's resources like the Harada Method I mentioned, you can go to finditgeorge.com, which is a great place that I'm building up now. And anybody can type something like A3, and they will have examples of A3s there. But if you type Harada, you'll get the five, five worksheets to use in the Harada Method. If you buy the book, I don't have anything to do with the book. But I promote the book. And those five worksheets are in there. So type Harada and download them for free. Tim 42:32Great, we'll make sure to put those links in the show notes so that everybody has quick access to them. One piece of advice from George Trachilis. George 42:40Yeah, and you know what I put it as a quote on my website, too. I've been where you are Tim, and I thought I've got so much to offer. You know, these executives, they just, sometimes they just don't see what I see. The key is to have an open enough relationship with these people where you can ask a question, and you ask a question to learn. And you can ask a question to teach. And in those situations, you're going to have to ask a question to teach, you're gonna have to figure out what that question is, that will allow you to not be offensive. Because Lord knows we can be offensive in what we're asking, and come across in a way that's very respectful, but gets your point across. But it's a question. They don't have to answer it. So many times. They're thinking short-term. And the question can simply be, are we thinking about the long term and the ramifications of doing this? Six months from now, versus what we get today? So, you know, I my quote was always just ask questions. Sooner or later, you'll become a teacher. Tim 43:56Once again, hey, thank you for for doing this. It was fantastic to spend some time with you. And we'll do it again. I'll talk to you real soon. Thank you so much for listening to Sweet on Leadership. If you found today's podcast valuable, consider visiting our website and signing up for the companion newsletter. You can find the link in the show notes. If like us, you think it's important to bring new ideas and skills into the practice of leadership. Please give us a positive rating and review on Apple podcasts. This helps us spread the word to other committed leaders. And you can spread the word to by sharing this with your friends, teams and colleagues. Thanks again for listening. And be sure to tune in in two weeks time for another episode of Sweet on Leadership. In the meantime, I'm your host, Tim sweet, encouraging you to keep on leading

Join Dots Oyebolu as he talks with Robert Rose, Founder and Chief Troublemaker at The Content Advisory. They explore the pivotal role of content-driven customer experiences and offer invaluable guidance for marketers aiming to direct their campaigns toward success.Key Takeaways:[02:46] Marketing's transformation has led to a nuanced approach.[07:59] Robert emphasizes the pivotal role of content in marketing through his decade-long podcast and book "Killing Marketing."[13:20] Modern marketing prioritizes trust and "spirit share" with consumers over brand boasting.[21:09] Marketing now values storytelling over older advertising methods.[22:37] Content marketing aims to add value, not directly monetize content.[32:14] AI's role in content personalization is uncertain and may add noise.[45:06] A common pitfall in marketing is a lack of defined objectives; it's essential to agree upon goals and measurements to determine success.Resources Mentioned:Robert Rose -https://www.linkedin.com/in/robrose/The Content Advisory | LinkedIn -https://www.linkedin.com/company/thecontentadvisory/The Content Advisory | Website -https://contentadvisory.net/Toyota Production System by: Taiichi Ohno. -https://www.amazon.com/Toyota-Production-System-Beyond-Large-Scale/dp/0915299143Thanks for listening to the Marketing Leadership podcast, brought to you by Dots Loves Marketing. If you enjoyed this episode, leave a review to help get the word out about the show. And be sure to subscribe so you never miss another insightful conversation.#PodcastSEO #PerformanceMarketing #PodcastAds #MarketingStrategy #MarketingIntelligence #PaidMedia

Obwohl Kanban Boards allgemein bekannt sind, wissen viele Menschen nicht, was sich eigentlich hinter dem Begriff "Kanban" verbirgt.Kanban stammt ursprünglich aus Japan und wurde von Taiichi Ohno, einem ehemaligen Produktionsleiter bei Toyota, entwickelt. Es ist eine Methode, die den Arbeitsfluss optimiert und Engpässe vermeidet. Neben dem Kanban Board gibt es sechs weitere Praktiken, die die Effektivität in Unternehmen verbessern können. Michael Stiller hat an der RWTH Aachen am Lehrstuhl für Unternehmenspolitik und Marketing promoviert. Nach Stationen in der Beratung (u.a. Marketing Partners, Simon Kucher) ist er Gründer und Geschäftsführer der Marketing- und Vertriebs-Beratung effektweit und Autor des renommierten Blogs DenkBar. Michael Stiller lebt und arbeitet in Köln.

Taiichi Ohno once said, "No one has more trouble than the person who claims to have no trouble."It is commonplace to accept problems in processes as “how it is”, but this is the biggest danger of all, accepting the current state rather than working towards an ideal state. To solve problems well, you have to know how to identify them. In this episode, I want to teach you how to categorize problems and the common mistakes we see in problem solving.Have a listen and let us know what you think in the reviews! For all my process nerds out there, you're gonna love it, I promise!TIME STAMPS[00:30] What are business operations?[04:48] How to identify problems in your processes?[09:00] 8 types of waste in processes.[20:02] Common mistakes in problem solving.

En este episodio hablo del "Poder de la Observación" para: 1) Conocer, ya que no conocemos todo lo que pensamos 2) Crear Cultura (de Procesos, de Mejora 3) Crear Equipo (bajar, observar, preguntar...) También hablo de Cuándo y Quién debería practicar la observación y algunos consejos fáciles y a la vez muy importantes. Quédate sobretodo con esta frase de Taiichi Ohno: “Cuando vayas a observer al Gemba haz algo para ayudarles. Si lo haces, la gente confiará en que puedes ayudarles y esperarán verte de nuevo en el gemba ".- Taichii Ohno Más info sobre mi: https://linktr.ee/rafalu0 Escucha el episodio completo en la app de iVoox, o descubre todo el catálogo de iVoox Originals

Taiichi Ohno, çalışanlarına hata yaptıkları için çok sert davranan bir Toyota yöneticisine şunları söyledi: TAİCHİ OHNO “Çalışanlarınıza karşı çok katı davranıyorsunuz. Bu hiç iyi değil. Çalışanlarınız yeterince motive olmuşsa, sonuçlar umut verici olmasa bile, denemelerine bir şans vermeye karar verirler. Bu gibi durumlarda, başarısız oldukları için kendilerini suçlu hissettirmemek çok önemlidir. Aksi takdirde, hatalarından korkmaya başlayacak ve yeni fikirler deneme tutkusunu kaybedeceklerdir. Yani onlara yardım eli uzattığınız sürece katı bir lider olabilirsiniz.” Onun şöhreti, zor bir görev ustası olması yönündeydi. Ancak yukarıdaki ifadesi, onun bir görev ustası ile aynı zamanda bir rehber olması arasındaki dengeyi gösteriyor. Blog yazısını okumak isterseniz: https://yalin-dunya.com/2022/03/21/taichi-ohno/

Bu bölümde neden sorusunun gücünü, neden bu sorunun bizi zorladığını ve sorunların kök nedenlerini fark etmek, altta yatan ihtiyaçları görmek için kullanabileceğimiz 5 Neden Tekniğini anlattım. Merakla kalın! -- Destek olmak için-> https://www.patreon.com/meraklistesi Merak bülteni: https://www.getrevue.co/profile/meraklistesi Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/kupelicagri -- Bölüm akışı: (3:10) Taiichi Ohno'nun yarattığı 5 Neden Tekniği (5:00) 5 neden sorusuna örnek (6:50) Arkadaşlıklarda 5 neden sorusuna örnek (8:58) 5 Neden sorusunun faydaları (11:20) Cesaret Kulübü'ne katılmak için tıklayın! https://chat.whatsapp.com/FjtuAxzKkDvJuiaNWhOFb8

Augmented reveals the stories behind the new era of industrial operations, where technology will restore the agility of frontline workers. In this episode of the podcast, the topic is "Augmented Lean Prelaunch." Our guest is Natan Linder (https://www.linkedin.com/in/linder/), in conversation with host, Trond Arne Undheim. In this conversation, we talk about the background of our co-authored book, Augmented Lean (https://www.amazon.com/Augmented-Lean-Human-Centric-Framework-Operations/dp/1119906008), a human-centric framework for managing frontline operations, why we wrote it, what the process has been like, the essence of the Augmented Lean framework, and the main lessons of this book for C-level executives across industry. If you like this show, subscribe at augmentedpodcast.co (https://www.augmentedpodcast.co/). If you like this episode, you might also like Episode 96 on The People Side of Lean with Professor Jeff Liker (https://www.augmentedpodcast.co/96). Augmented is a podcast for industry leaders, process engineers, and shop floor operators, hosted by futurist Trond Arne Undheim (https://trondundheim.com/) and presented by Tulip (https://tulip.co/). Follow the podcast on Twitter (https://twitter.com/AugmentedPod) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/75424477/). Trond's Takeaway: Industrial revolutions are rarely chronicled as they are happening, but this industrial revolution will be. There is an ongoing shift in the way technology and workforce combine to produce industrial change, and it is happening now. We are lucky to be situated in the middle of it. And I personally feel fortunate that I was brought along for the ride. It has been a life-changing experience to realize the power and impact of living through a shifting logic of manufacturing and, perhaps more importantly, to realize that as excited as we can be about automation, an augmented workforce represents the best combination of the most important technology we have which is human workers themselves with the second best machines that humans create. The fact that making humans and machines work together is no trivial task has been pointed out before but documenting what happens when it does go well in the biggest industrial companies on the planet feels like a story that deserves to be told. Transcript: TROND: Welcome to another episode of the Augmented Podcast. Augmented brings industrial conversations that matter, serving up the most relevant conversations on industrial tech. Our vision is a world where technology will restore the agility of frontline workers. In this episode of the podcast, the topic is Augmented Lean Prelaunch. Our guest is Natan Linder, in conversation with myself, Trond Arne Undheim. In this conversation, we talk about the background of our co-authored book, Augmented Lean, a human-centric framework for managing frontline operations, why we wrote it, what the process has been like, the essence of the Augmented Lean framework, and the main lessons of this book for C-level executives across industry. Augmented is a podcast for industrial leaders, for process engineers, and for shop floor operators hosted by futurist Trond Arne Undheim and presented by Tulip. Natan, good to have you in the studio. How are you today? NATAN: I'm great. How are you? It's been a minute. TROND: It's been a little minute for us. It's crazy with book launches. It takes a little out of you. And you are running a company in addition to that, so you had some other things on your plate too. NATAN: Yep, running a company and having a book coming is an, I don't know if an artifact, but definitely, company is a lot about changing the status quo. And the book tries to capture a movement. So I think they go along nicely. TROND: Yeah, Natan. And I wanted to bring us in a little bit and converse about why this book was written. Certainly, that's not my benefit. You brought it up to me. But what were we thinking about when writing this book? So I want to bring it back to way before I came into the picture with the book because it was your idea to write a book. What was on your mind? What were the main reasons that you thought I really want to write a book? NATAN: When I was coming up as an engineer...and my background, I'm not a pure manufacturing production type engineer, but I've been around it my entire career just because of the type of products that I've been involved with whether it's mobile phones, or robots of all sorts, 3D printers. So you get to spend a lot of time in these operational environments, shop floors, machine shops, and the like. And when we started working on Tulip, it was pretty clear pretty quickly that there's a moment that is emerging in operations that no one has captured the story. And this is back even; I don't know, maybe five or six years ago. We are maybe one or two years old, and I'm already starting to think about this post-lean, or classical lean movement that I'm sure is happening. That really is the genesis of the book in the early, early days. And fast forward to when we started talking, I think we got Tulip off the ground. But really, that was a platform to meet all those different people who helped operations transform digitally, whether it's all sorts of consultants, or academics who are researching operations, or business leaders, you know, tons of factory managers and the engineers that work with them, and the executive, so a whole bunch of people. And they're all basically talking about the same thing and the deficiencies in lean, the complexity of technology, and how they're trying to change, and it is so difficult. So I think that's a good description of the landscape before diving in to try and capture what the book attempts to capture. TROND: Yeah, Natan, I remember some of our early discussions. And we were dancing around various concepts because clearly, lean is a very broad perspective in industrial manufacturing focused on reducing waste and many other things. It's a broad concept that people put a lot of different things into. But I remember as you and I were thinking about how to describe this new phenomenon that we do describe in the book, we were thinking a little bit that a lot of these new influences come from the digital sphere. So there's also this term agile. There are some people who say, well, you know, let's just replace lean because it's an outdated paradigm. And I remember you were quite adamantly arguing that that's not the case. And this goes a little bit to the message in our book. We are in no way really saying that lean isn't relevant anymore. NATAN: On the contrary. TROND: Tell me a little bit about that. NATAN: A really simple way I think to frame it is that whether you're practicing lean formally or some variant of it, of lean, or Six Sigma, or some program that formalizes continuous improvement in your operation...and we're talking about frontline operations. We're talking about factories, and labs, and warehouses, and places like that. You are practicing lean because this is how the world..., even if you're not doing it formally; otherwise, you're not competitive. Even if you're in a bank or a hospital, you might be practicing lean. And that's where agile comes to the picture, and it was adopted widely by operations practice in general and pushed into areas that are not pure manufacturing. So, in a way, lean is a reality. Some organizations are more formal about it, some are less, but definitely, they're doing it. Here's the issue, and this is the main thesis of the book. When lean came about...and we know the catalyzing text. We know the teaching of Taiichi Ohno. We know about The Goal. We know about The Machine That Changed the World. And those are seminal texts that everybody reads. And we know about Juran and lots of great thinkers who thought about operations as a data-driven game, some from the school of thought of quality, some from pure operation research, some from how do you put emphasis on classic just-in-time, Kanban, Kaizen, all those continuous improvement things. But at the end of the day, all of that thinking, which still holds true, was not done when digital was top of mind, where data is everywhere, where people need to live in such data ecology. It was done, so to speak, in analog times. And it doesn't mean that the principles are wrong, but it doesn't mean they don't need to get augmented. And this is maybe the first time where this idea of augmentation, which, to me, augmentation is always about...I always think about augmentation from a people's perspective or an org perspective. It's just a collective of people. That's where it starts, and that's where we had something to say. So that's one aspect to think about. The second big one is actually very simple. It's kind of like; we heard ten years of industry 4.0 is going to change everything, and all we got is this lousy OEE graph. And that's kind of like a little tongue-in-cheek on we were promised flying cars, but we only got 140 characters. I mean, come on, stop talking about industry 4.0. It's like, who cares? If the tools and digital techniques and what have you is not adopted by the people actually doing the work, that then collectively, one engineer, another engineer, another operator, a team lead, the quality lead, and so on come together to transform their org, if that's not happening, then that's not sustainable transformation, and it's not very relevant. Again, augmentation. TROND: Right. And I think, Natan, that's where maybe some people are surprised when they get into this book. Because it would be almost tempting to dismiss us as traditionalists in the sense that we are not really going whole hog into describing digital as in and of itself, the core of this principle. So there is a little bit of a critique of agile as an idea that agile or using that as a kind of a description for all digital or digital, right? That digital doesn't change everything. And I guess I wanted to reflect a little bit on that aspect because I know that you, as a business leader now hiring a lot of people, we are spending a lot of energy bringing these two perspectives together, and it's not very obvious. You can't just take a digital person who is completely digital native and say, "Welcome to the factory; just do what you do. And because you do things better than everyone else, we are now going to adapt these factories." How do you think about that? In factories, you could conceive it as the IT versus OT, so operational technologists versus information technologists and the various infrastructures that are quite different when those two things come into play. NATAN: So my frame of reference is the most value...and it's a very engineery frame of reference because I'm an engineer at the end of the day. It's like, the most value gets unleashed when people truly change how they work and adopt a tool, and that's true for operations and manufacturing. But, by the way, it's also true for the greater business perspective. And a lot of people, when I talk to them about Augmented Lean, really take us to the realms of what is the future of work, and I think it's very timely. We're kind of in a post-COVID reality. Working remote has changed many things, working with data. Big ideas like citizen development, you hear them all over the place. And use of advanced platforms like the no-code/low-code that allow people to create software without being software engineers become a reality. So there's a much broader thing here. But if I focus for a second on what you're asking, the way I see it is when people truly change how they work, it means that they believe, and that belief translates into action, that the tool that they're using is the best way to do something. And they become dependent and empowered by it at the same time because they're not willing to go back to a state where they're not thinking and working with data, or back to the clipboard, or back to being dependent on an IT department or a service provider to give them some technical solution. People have become more self-sufficient. And it turns out that if you do that, and sometimes people would refer to that as you let people hack or go nuts in the factory floor or in whatever operational environment, that could be a concern to people, and that's a fair observation for sure. And that's where when you look at the book, when we were kind of constructing the framework we call Leader HG where HG stands for hack and govern... We are used to Silicon Valley startups being like, oh yeah, you all just need to hack. And that's a very glorious thing, and everybody understands that. And they want them to hack when they are a 50,000-person software company. They're still hacking, but they're doing it in a much more structured way, in a much more measured way. So even in hacking, there's governance. And in operational environment, governance is equally important, if not more, because you're making real things. That is something we've observed very empirically. Talking to a lot of people seeing what they do, it's like, yeah, we want the best ideas from people. How do we get it? What do we do? We tried this approach, that approach. And I think we were sometimes very lucky to be observers to this phenomena and just captured it. TROND: Yeah. And I wanted to speak to that a little bit. I want to thank you, actually, for bringing me into this project because you and I met at MIT but from different vantage points. I was working at Startup Exchange working with a bunch of very, very excellent MIT startups in all different domains, and you were an entrepreneur of several companies. But my background is more on the science and technology studies but also a management perspective on this. But I remember one of the things you said early on to me was, "I want to bring you in on this project, but don't just be one of those that stays at the surface of this and just has like a management perspective and writes future of work perspectives but from like a bird's eye view. Come in here and really learn and go into the trenches." And I want to thank you for that because you're right about many things. This one you were very right about. And this clearly, for me, became a true research project in that I have spent two years on this project, a lot of them in venues and factory floors, and discussing with people really at the ground level. And for me, it was really a foundational experience. I've read about many things, but my understanding of manufacturing, frankly, was lacking. And you could have told me as much, but I actually, frankly, didn't realize how little I knew about all of the factors that go into manufacturing. I had completely underestimated the field. What do you say to that? NATAN: It's interesting because I feel like the last two years, everything I think I know [laughs], then I found out that I don't know enough. It just kind of motivates you to do more work to figure out things because it's such a broad field, and it gets very, very specific. Just listening to your reflection on the past couple of years, the reality is that there is a gap in the popular understanding of what operations and manufacturing is all about. People think that stuff comes from some amorphous factory or machine that just makes the things. And they usually don't see, you know, we have those saying, like, you don't want to see how the sausage is made, which is obviously very graphic. But you also don't see how the car is made unless you're a nerd of those things and watch those shows like how things are made, but most people just don't. And they don't appreciate the complexity and what goes into it and how much technology and how much operation process it consumes. And as a society and as a set of collective economies and supply chains, it is so paramount to what's actually happening. Just take things like sustainability or what happens with our planet. If we don't learn to manufacture things better and more efficiently with less people because we don't have enough people in operations, for example, our economies will start to crumble. And if we don't do it in a way that is not just sustainability from the perspective of saving the planet, also that, but if we don't become more efficient in our supply chains, then businesses will crumble because they can't supply their customers with the product that they need. And this thing is never-ending because products have life cycles. Factories have life cycles. And the human species, that's what we do; we take technology, and then we turn it into products, and we mass produce it. That's part of how we survive. What we need is we increase awareness to this. And I think The Machine That Changed the World and Toyota Production System unveiled those concepts that you need to eliminate waste to build better organizations, to build a better product, to have happier customers; there's something really fundamental there that did not change. The only thing that changed is that now we're doing it in a reality where the technology is out there; data is out there. And to wield it is difficult, and there is no escape from putting the people who do the work in the center. And to me, if we are capable of doing that, the impact of this is recharging or rebooting lean in the classic sense for the next three decades. And that's my personal hope for this book and the message we're hoping to bring in. We would love people to join that call and fly that flag. TROND: Yeah. I wanted to take us now, Natan, to this discussion. A lot of people are saying, "Oh, you got to market manufacturing better, and then people will come to this area because there are interesting things to do there." But more broadly, if we think about our book and why people should read that, my first reflection is building on what I said earlier that I didn't realize not just the complexity of manufacturing but how interesting it was. My take after two years of studying this is actually that there's no need to market it better because it is so interesting and fundamental for the economy that the marketing job, I think, essentially has already been done. And it's just there's a lag in the system for new employees, new talent. And society overall realizes how fundamentally it is shifting and reconfiguring our society. But I guess I want to ask you more. What is the reason a C-level executive, whether they work in manufacturing, in some industrial company, or really, if they work in any company that is interested in what technology and manufacturing is doing to their business reality...how they can implement some of those ideas in their business. What would you say to them? I mean, is our book relevant to a business leader in any Fortune 500? Or would you say that our messages are kind of confined to an industrial setting? NATAN: I think it applies to all of them. And the reason is that these types of roles that you're describing, folks will best be served if they learn from other people's experience. And what we tried to do in the book is to bring almost an unfiltered version of the stories of their peers across various industries, from medical devices, to pharmaceuticals, to classic discrete manufacturing, all sorts of industries. And they're all struggling with the same kind of stuff. And so those stories are meaningful and can contextualize the thinking of what those C-levels are actually trying to cope with. What they're really trying to do, everybody, I'd say, is why do people think about and talk about those big terms of digital transformation? It's really because they want to make sure their companies don't stay behind or, in other words, stay competitive. This stuff is an imperative for organizations that have real operations that span digital and physical, and I don't know many that don't. Of course, there are some service industries that don't have anything but still have operations. You can't avoid handling the subject and what it entails. It entails training your people differently. It entails defining technology stacks. It entails connecting using various technologies, protocols, what have you, across organizations and finding value in this data so you can make good decisions on how you run your billing cycles, or how you order your stock to build, or how you ship your end product and everything in between. And I don't think that the book is groundbreaking in the sense that we're the first people who ever thought about it. But I think if we've done anything, is we've observed long and hard. And we've listened very carefully to what people are telling us that they did, and they struggled. And it's a timely book. And maybe in a decade, it's a classic, and, wow, these are good stories. And it's like reading about the first people booting up mainframes or PCs. And if that happens, I'm actually pretty happy. But you know why I would be happy? Trond, let me tell you something, it's because technology, like, the human needs change much slower than how technology evolves and gets deployed, but still, good technological-driven transformation take a long time. TROND: That's exactly what I was going to say is that the future is an interesting concept because what's tomorrow to some people is today for others. So you say we're not writing about something that's so new or unique but to industry overall and to some manufacturers, what we're writing about is the future because they haven't implemented it yet. To some of Tulip customers, to some of the great companies that we have researched in the book, whether they be J&J, Stanley Black & Decker, DMG MORI, a lot of other companies in medical device side, and also smaller and medium-sized companies, even some startups that are implementing some the Augmented Lean principles, to them, this is of course not the future. And maybe, you know, we're not saying that leaders who try to implement Augmented Lean need to change everything around; we're saying common sense things. It's just that; clearly, all of industry is not human-centric, right? There are parts of industry where you adjust 80% to your machines, and you make economic decisions purely based on the infrastructure efficiency improvements you're trying to make. I guess what we're saying is the innovation argument; people are the most innovative, and you have to restructure around your workforce, even if you are making machine and robot investments. NATAN: Yeah, automation would always require strong reasons to automate that, you know, some of them are complexity, safety risk, things like that or throughput to like how much product do you need and that kind of stuff. But even if you have the best automation, you typically have people around it, and nothing is just only machine-driven or only human-driven. The reality is that most stuff gets made through a combination of several manufacturing technologies working in unison with people at the beginning, middle-end doing things from the planning, to running automation setups and machinery, to taking the output, doing assembly, doing tests, audits and checks, and packaging, and logistics, and at the end of the day, human-intensive type of operation in most of the areas we roam, at least. And as such, to think that in this day and age you don't focus on people is to me nuts when all those people carry a supercomputer called a smartphone in their hand and have uber-connected homes with a million CPUs streaming all this data, and we call that media, whatever. And they're so accustomed to interfacing to their world and their businesses through that. And you and I are Gen Xers, and let's just think about the generation that comes after us and after us. These are digital natives par excellence. They expect as much, and organizations that don't do that, whether they choose the Augmented Lean approach or any other approach, they're just not going to have employees. That's a little bit of a problem. TROND: Yeah. But it's important what you're saying in one respect which is there are many reasons to dismiss a book, a management book, a technology book. And one could be like; all these people are just that. And one, I guess, gut reaction when people look at the title or perhaps hear some of the things that you and I are saying is that, oh, these people are Luddites; they're against technology. But I wanted to, certainly on my end, just to state very clearly there's nothing in our book that's against technology. We're simply saying to optimize for the simplest technology, that is, you know, to our great inspiration here, who was a big inspiration, I know, for you and now for me because you brought her into my sphere. Pattie Maes' perspective from MIT on Fluid Interfaces and the importance, you know, no matter what advanced technology you're going to bring into whatever context, if that context of the technology, the use interface is not a fluid interface, you are simply doing yourself a disservice. You could have bought a $1 million CNC machine or maybe a $10 million whatever robot, but it has to work in your own organization, and this is just so important. So we're not against technologies. We're just saying these investments will be made. But you have to think about other things as you're making those investments. So I just wanted to make that point and hear your comment to that. NATAN: Yeah, look, I have a slightly...I guess a complementary angle to this is like when you think about it; I think that technologically democratized organizations in the day and age we living in the future. And what makes, I think, Augmented Lean span beyond the frontline operation perspective is because it tells a story of democratizing operation where fundamentally before lean...and we're talking about the mass production era. Mass production came from a military structure, you know, divisions, and battalions, and commanders, and ranks, and all that kind of stuff. Enters lean, and democratization starts. Forget technology. It starts because suddenly everybody on the Gemba Walk, you know, the walk where they have an equal voice to find problems on the shop floor, and list them up, and think about a solution, everybody has a voice. So these are fundamental things that shifted things like how you manage your warehouse, or how you do just-in-time, or how you are supposed to do continuous improvement. But you have to collect data to prove that this improvement is actually worthwhile doing. And this is exactly what agile took, and this is exactly the transition you saw in, well, because the market moves so fast and the internet is here, and clouds are real, why don't we not spend two years in a bunker doing waterfall software development? And, boom, we're now talking sprints and all that kind of stuff. And no one is even questioning that. And that's a lean approach we call agile, lean approach to how you do software development. And what I'm trying to say is, de facto, when I run a day in a company, like, I talk to my peers, and my leaders, and folks I work with on a daily basis. Everybody talks, yeah, we're on an operation sprint. We are on a marketing sprint. We are on a whatever sprint. What is that? That is a democratized organization with specific leaders owning functions and owning interfaces using tech stacks all over the place: the marketing stack, the sales stack, the HR stack, whatever. And where we roam also, we're part of the operational or OT stack, and that's what they're doing. And all this book is doing is saying, like, hey, it's actually happening. Let's give this a name. Let's put the beacon on this. Let's try and find what's the commonalities. Let's get the best stories that share the successes and the failures. We have plenty of failures there in the book that teach you something at this moment in time and set up the next decade. This next decade to me, is seminal. It's not very different to when technologies reached maturity, like clouds and what have you. 10, 15 years ago, you're talking about this thing, cloud, some people will go like, "What cloud? What are you talking about?" That's done. That's the disappearing edge of technology. Now we say AI and all that kind of stuff. And then the problem gets solved and disappearing, you know, it's like, so that's going to happen. I just think we gave it a good name and a good description at this point in time. TROND: Natan, I love the...personally, I'm a runner. I love the metaphor of a sprint, and for a couple of reasons, not just because I know what a sprint is and what it takes. But I love the fact that a sprint in a management context refers to sprinting partly together because it's a team-based effort. So some people need to sprint a little faster in certain aspects of that team process in order to deliver things that the team needs. But rounding up and thinking about how people can sprint with us, Natan, how should people think about learning more? So, obviously, reading the book. It's available on every bookstore, and Wiley published it, and it should be everywhere. There's even an e-book. But beyond that, what are your thoughts about how people can get in touch, join the movement, join the sprint of thinking about Augmented Lean? Which by the way, there is no one Augmented Lean principle. It's a menu of choices. There are ways that you can engage. There are ways you can implement it. It's not like a one, three-step process that everybody has to do. But there are ways that people can connect. We have this Augmented Podcast. What are your thoughts if people are gelling with this message? NATAN: I can talk about my heart's desire, okay, and my hallucination around this. And this is like, really, kind of living the dream and making sure democratization continues. If we are successful, at the moment, we are starting a movement. And there are millions of people who self-identify as lean Six Sigma quality professionals out there that know exactly what we're talking about viscerally. They spend their days trying to solve problems like that. They pore over data; they train people. They are the people creating the reports and trying to kind of help their organization take another step and another step in the never-ending journey of continuous improvement. We need to work on a much larger manifesto for Augmented Lean, and this is not for you and me; this is for a greater community to come together. So my recommendation is if you dig this and this is something you want to do, you know where to find us; go to augmentedlean.com. There's a contact email, our contact information. And I guess we can share it for that purpose somewhere in Augmented Podcast or our various other channels. And tell us what you think. And just join us. We're not sure exactly...we're starting from the excitement around launching the book with our close network of partners, and friends, and customers, and collaborators, and all our network. And it's a very exciting moment for us. But we're going to open it up, and it's going to be in the book tour, and it's going to be in various conferences. And the first law of creating a movement is show up. So I'm calling everybody to show up if you're okay with lean and the way it's going so far for you and Six Sigma. But if you feel the need to change and observed or experienced some of the stuff we're talking about in Augmented Lean, come tell us about it, and let's shape it up and get people together. The internet is the best tool on the planet to do that, and we'll get it done. Stay safe. TROND: Right. So, on that note, I want to round us off. I think that it should at least be clear from this conversation that both of us strongly feel that there are greater things ahead for industry and that manufacturing is not just a relevant piece of society, but there are things happening here that are coalescing that we are describing in the book, but that will happen independently of us and the very few examples we were able to put into the book. And folks that are interested in exploring what that means for them as individuals, as knowledge workers in the factory floor, or as executives who just want to be inspired the way people were inspired by the Toyota lean movement or other movements, they should come and contact us. Natan, thanks for spending the time today. NATAN: Yeah. Thanks, Trond. Always a pleasure. Will see you very soon. TROND: You have now just listened to another episode of the Augmented Podcast with host Trond Arne Undheim. The topic was Augmented Lean Prelaunch. Our guest was Natan Linder, in conversation with myself, Trond Arne Undheim. In this conversation, we talked about why we wrote a book and why C-level executives should read it. My takeaway is that industrial revolutions are rarely chronicled as they are happening, but this industrial revolution will be. There is an ongoing shift in the way technology and workforce combine to produce industrial change, and it is happening now. We are lucky to be situated in the middle of it. And I personally feel fortunate that I was brought along for the ride. It has been a life-changing experience to realize the power and impact of living through a shifting logic of manufacturing and, perhaps more importantly, to realize that as excited as we can be about automation, an augmented workforce represents the best combination of the most important technology we have which is human workers themselves with the second best machines that humans create. The fact that making humans and machines work together is no trivial task has been pointed out before but documenting what happens when it does go well in the biggest industrial companies on the planet feels like a story that deserves to be told. Thanks for listening. If you liked the show, please subscribe at augmentedpodcast.co. And if you liked this episode, you might also like Episode 96 on The People Side of Lean with Professor Jeff Liker, who wrote the best-selling book, The Toyota Way. Hopefully, you'll find something awesome in these or in other episodes, and if so, do let us know by messaging us because we would love to share your thoughts with other listeners. The Augmented Podcast is created in association with Tulip, the frontline operation platform that connects the people, machines, devices, and systems used in a production and logistics process in a physical location. Tulip is democratizing technology and is empowering those closest to operations to solve problems. You could find Tulip at tulip.co. Augmented — industrial conversations that matter. See you next time. Special Guest: Natan Linder.

As an executive working for other CEOs, Ron Johnson succeeded wildly in redesigning Target stores and building Apple Stores from scratch. But then, as a CEO, Ron Johnson crashed and burned two later companies.Join Dan Dickson, a seasoned retail executive and Harvard Business School grad, and Dan Greening, co-host of Mindful Agility, as we talk about Ron Johnson's first failure, JC Penney.Major shifts in management practice arise in response to crises. Lean Manufacturing helped Toyota and Japan survive, after the Japanese industrial base had been destroyed in World War II. Lean Manufacturing now dominates the auto industry, and failure to adopt its principles bankrupted General Motors and others.Agile management practices arose in response to growingly spectacular software project failures. It is now dominates software teams and is expanding to other creative teams and whole businesses. "Business agility" is emerging as a trend in business management.This is the first of three episodes where we analyze business failures to discover whether agile and mindfulness philosophies could have averted disaster.Three take awaysFailure analysis helps us succeed, sometimes beyond competitorsBusiness success is correlated to business agility and mindfulnessRon Johnson's failures at JC Penney could have been anticipatedReferencesMax Chafkin, "How Failed JC Penney CEO Ron Johnson Is Redeeming Himself With Enjoy," Fast Company (October 26, 2015).Noel Tichy, "J.C. Penney and the terrible costs of hiring an outsider CEO," Fortune (November 13, 2014).Phil Wahba, "Ron Johnson says J.C. Penney should have stuck to his plan ," Fortune (May 16, 2016).Jennifer Reingold, "How to Fail in Business While Really, Really Trying," Fortune (March 20, 2014).Taiichi Ohno, Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production, 1988.CreditsStinger sound Swing beat 120 xylophone side-chained by Casonika licensed under Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).Photo of Ron Johnson by Steve Jennings/Getty Images for TechCrunch, licensed under Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0)

In this podcast, Ken Burgin looks at Toyota's classification of 8 different types of waste, and how we can use this in hospitality to cut costs, increase efficiency and improve the bottom line. Toyota built its world-class success by watching and controlling every step of the manufacturing process, especially waste. It's very useful to apply the discipline of manufacturing to hospitality – we produce things too! This classification of 8 Types of Waste is based on the work of a Japanese engineer Taiichi Ohno, published as Toyota Production System: Beyond Large Scale Production. It is still so relevant today. You can also read a summary of the podcast here Using Toyota's 8 Waste Control Methods in Your Restaurant or Cafe. The types of waste identified are: Transportation Waste Inventory Waste Motion Waist Excessive Wait Times Overproduction Overprocessing Defects Wasted Talent and Creativity You'll find the Show Notes and links for today's episode on the HospoReset.com website. Don't forget to subscribe to the weekly Hospo Reset newsletter, and connect with Ken Burgin on Linkedin and on Twitter.

La Lean Production nasce in Giappone, nelle fabbriche della Toyota. Il suo padre fondatore fu l'ingegnere Taiichi Ohno (1912-1990), che la descrisse nel libro Toyota Production System.Il Giappone in quel periodo era un paese provato dalla sconfitta nella seconda guerra mondiale; era una terra con poche risorse e geograficamente poco estesa.La Lean Production analizza il flusso della produzione e delle informazioni attraverso l'azienda, dall'ordine del cliente fino alla consegna e cerca di identificare quali sono le operazioni che per il cliente aggiungono valore e tutte le operazioni che non aggiungono valore.

Leitura Bimodal - Startup Enxuta - Eric Ries (V 2.0) Resumo do livro “Startup Enxuta” de Eric Ries em Sete Tópicos: - O livro de Ries “Startup Enxuta” é o típico Livro Renascentista 2.0, que resgata antigos valores e os readapta para o novo cenário Pós-Digital. Procura, como renascentista que é, fazer a adaptação de teorias e metodologias administrativas (Taylor e Toyota) e adaptá-las para o desenvolvimento de Startups Disruptivas (de zero a um). Ele diz: “O nome “startup enxuta” vem da revolução promovida pela manufatura enxuta, sistema desenvolvido na Toyota por Taiichi Ohno e Shigeo Shingo.“; - defende algo similar a Silvio Meira no livro “O que é estratégia?“, quando sugere uma Teoria da Mudança (Ries chama de “Salto de Fé”), uma hipótese que inicia todo o projeto de uma Startup Disruptiva; - o Salto de Fé é uma hipótese que deve ser testada/validada (Aprendizagem Validada), através de protótipos (MVPs) e, assim, se avalia se deve ser mantida (perseverar) ou ser alterada (pivotar), criando novas hipóteses (a metodologia de perseverar/pivotar é muito usada na Ciência Forte). Ele detalha o que é o Pivotar: “é um tipo especial de mudança, projetado para testar uma nova hipótese fundamental sobre o produto, o modelo de negócio e o motor de crescimento.” Pivotar é uma mudança filosófica de uma determinada Startup. - Ries aponta diversas várias sugestões, com exemplos relevantes, para que Startups Disruptivas possam se consolidar e crescer; - reforça o pensamento de Saifedean Ammous, do livro “Padrão Bitcoin” ao destacar a importância do pensamento de longo prazo ao do curto; - nesta direção, sugere um novo tipo de bolsa de valores, projetada para negociar as ações de empresas organizadas disruptivas de modo a sustentar o pensamento de longo prazo. Ele diz: “Proponho criarmos uma Bolsa de Valores de Longo Prazo (BVLP), pois boa parte do nosso setor de startups se transformou num sistema de alimentação para gigantescas empresas de mídia e bancos de investimento.” - destaco, por fim, a metodologia dos cinco por quês para se chegar a um erro (ver mais no artigo). https://bit.ly/artigobimodal091221 É isso, que dizes? Quer comprar o último livro feito dentro da escola "Civilização 2.0", é por aqui: https://sun.eduzz.com/347192

Leitura Bimodal - Startup Enxuta - Eric Ries (V 1.0) Resumo do livro "Startup Enxuta" de Eric Ries em Sete Tópicos: 1 -procura fazer a adaptação de teorias e metodologias administrativas (Taylor e Toyota) e adaptá-las para o desenvolvimento de Startups Disruptivas (de zero a um). Ele diz: "O nome “startup enxuta” vem da revolução promovida pela manufatura enxuta, sistema desenvolvido na Toyota por Taiichi Ohno e Shigeo Shingo."; 2 - defende algo similar a Silvio Meira no livro "O que é estratégia?", quando sugere uma Teoria da Mudança (Ries chama de "Salto de Fé"), uma hipótese que inicia todo o projeto de uma Startup Disruptiva; 3 - o Salto de Fé é uma hipótese que deve ser testada/validada (Aprendizagem Validada), através de protótipos (MVPs) e, assim, se deve ser mantida (perseverar) ou ser alterada (pivotar), criando novas hipóteses (a metodologia de perseverar/pivotar é muito usada na Ciência Forte); 4 - tem várias sugestões, com exemplos relevantes, para que Startups Disruptivas possam se consolidar e crescer; reforça o pensamento de Saifedean Ammous, do livro "Padrão Bitcoin" ao destacar a importância do pensamento de longo prazo ao do curto; 5 - nesta direção, sugere um novo tipo de bolsa de valores, projetada para negociar as ações de empresas organizadas de modo a sustentar 6 - o pensamento de longo prazo. Ele diz: "Proponho criarmos uma Bolsa de Valores de Longo Prazo (BVLP), pois boa parte do nosso setor de startups se transformou num sistema de alimentação para gigantescas empresas de mídia e bancos de investimento." 7 - destaco, por fim, a metodologia dos cinco por quês para se chegar a um erro. https://bit.ly/artigobimodal091221 É isso, que dizes? Quer sair de Matrix e não sabe onde comprar a pílula vermelha? Me manda um Zap: 21-996086422 (Nepô, quero sair de Matrix!) Ou: https://sun.eduzz.com/932565 Quer ser um parceiro da Bimodais e ganhar a cada aluno novo indicado? Entre por aqui: https://bit.ly/bimodalparceiro Quer comprar o último livro feito dentro da escola "Civilização 2.0", é por aqui: https://sun.eduzz.com/347192

"Sin estándares, no puede haber kaizen", frase del mítico Taiichi Ohno, padre del Kaizen-TPS (Toyota Production System) Hace poco estuve en una comisión de Operaciones que trataba el siguiente tema: ¿Tenemos estándares? ¿Los cumplimos? Uno de los comentarios de un@ de l@s asistentes me recordó al anuncio del Golf, y que da título a este podcast: -Tenemos “como estándares”, decía… “Tener como estándares es como no tener estándares”. Entra y conocerás mi visión sobre el Ciclo de los Procesos. El Ciclo SDCA Sin Buenos Procesos es complicado tener Buenos Resultados. Escucha el episodio completo en la app de iVoox, o descubre todo el catálogo de iVoox Originals

Back in March, I talked about being successful in Kaizen Teian, one must always be looking to eliminate the eight forms of waste: Moving: Excessive movement of people or machines. It is more common to talk about people movement, as this leads to wasted effort and time. Transportation: Moving a product or material and the costs generated by this process. Waiting: A person or process inaction on the manufacturing line. Overproduction: When there are more parts in production than customers are purchasing. This type of waste spells big trouble for an organization. Excess processing: Products that must be repaired to satisfy customers needs. Inventory: A valuable product or material that is waiting for processing or to be sold. Defects: Scrap or products that require rework. Non-utilized talent: When the management team fails to ensure that all the potential and experience of its people are being used. This is the worst of the eight wastes.   These are also nicknamed the “mudas”, which translates to uselessness or wastefulness.   What I would like for you to think about this week is what these mudas look like in your life. Taiichi Ohno, developed his “Seven Mudas” while creating the Toyota Production System. Let's look at them and see if it can apply to areas in our personal life too:   Wasteful Motion:  Do you have everything you need? Or do you run around spending precious time gathering stuff you already should have with you because of procrastination.    Do you spend a lot of time putting out fires? Managing things we feel that others should know, but they seem to mess things up. It may or not be their fault, but do you have systems, policies, and protocols in place for people to manage themselves? (The way you would like things to go with or without you being there?)

andon is such a strong tool but it has taken Toyota to it's leadership position and six sigma.

1.  What is Waste? In the Toyota Production System, Taiichi Ohno, its developer, identified 7 major wastes:·      Waste of over production (largest waste) – making too much of a product and not being able to sell it.  Idle inventory is a waste. ·      Waste of time on hand (waiting) – of course this would be waste because while a worker is not adding value, he or she is costing the company money.·      Waste of transportation – while products are moving around the factory floor, no value is being added to them and that is a big waste.·      Waste of processing itself – when Taiichi Ohno looked at many of Toyota processes, he found that they were not very efficient in delivering value.  They were wasteful processes.·      Waste of stock at hand – if you have stock in inventory waiting for production.  That is a big waste.  It is the foundation of just in time to deliver material to a work process just before it is needed – “Just in Time – JIT.”·      Waste of movement – whenever you look at a factory and see a worker or a pallet of materials moving around a factory, that is a waste.  People can't add value walking around and material can't have value added to it, if it is moving around the factory. ·      Waste of making defective products – this is almost obvious but it was the foundation of the thinking of Total Quality Management (TQM) a number of years ago.  Phil Crosby and a number of quality gurus became phenomenal successes by focusing their efforts on reducing quality defects.  This has, in turn, led to the current 6-Sigma craze.These are all well and good but…they don't cover all the areas of waste in a business.  They certainly can be guides for how a piece of paper moves through an office.  If it waits at any stage, it is a waste of movement.  If a worker has a pile of work at her desk and the others in the office have no pile of work, maybe there is an imbalance of work in the process.   Listen in to find out how we have broken the process down to make it an enjoyable and profitable process for all involved.  Enjoy.  Best, Len Bertain

Part four of a nine part series on the 2009 book "The High Velocity Edge" by Steven Spear.This episode introduces the two pillars of the first capability: design systems to reveal problems. The first pillar is Taiichi Ohno's "kanban", or pull-based, philosophy on system design. The second pillar is Sakichi Toyoda's "jidoka", or self-regulation, philosophy to identify problems when they happen.Free Resources DevOps Email Course Project to Product Email Course Continuous Improvement Pocket Guide War & Peace & IT Pocket Guide Adam Hawkins' Links Website Twitter LinkedIn Episode Transcript The High Velocity Edge (book) The Story of Sakichi Toyoda Biography of Taiichi Ohno Discovering Your Way to Greatness: How Finding and Fixing Faults is the Path to Perfection (talk) Get InvolvedFollow @smallbatchesfm on Twitter and tweet me with your comments. Want a topic covered on the show? Then call +1-833-933-1912 and leave your request in a voice mail. Preference goes to to listener requests.Support the Show!Tell me about you in the listener survey! Rate this show on iTunes. Share this episode with your friends and colleaagues. Feedback is love, so send some my way.

As the father of the Toyota Production System, Taiichi Ohno knew a thing or two about processes, procedures and strategies to actually take action.    He developed the 5-Whys Method. "The basis of Toyota's scientific approach by repeating why five times the nature of the problem as well as its solution becomes clear."   I had the opportunity to practice this method for the first time at a Mastermind a year and a half ago. The point is to allow ourselves to actually dig deep into the root of the issue/project/task at hand so that we are very clear on the purpose behind our 'why.'    In today's episode, I am going to share the very simple approach with you so that you can take action today and get busy!    Like what you hear? We are honored. Hit that subscribe button and share your thoughts in a review. If you or someone you know may be a fit to be a guest on our show, please reach out to us! Balance. Optimize. Tactics.  Hit that subscribe button so that you don’t miss a day of the added value that I am dedicated to sharing with you weekly.  Let’s Connect!  Facebook  Instagram  Email: ashliewalton555@gmail.com  LinkedIn  Website: www.leowarriors.com

5 whys is the technique which I came to know form the book ‘The Lean Startup,’ and before I talk about this technique, I would highly recommend to must read this book, if you are in IT, it will help you a lot, it doesn’t matter either you are startup owner or working as an employee like me. It has so many tool kits that you can utilize in your job or your startup business. While you will read the 5 whys methodology, I think it is also essential to understand the 5 blames situation. Whereas you will use the 5 whys to find out the root cause of the problem, frustrated teammates might start finding or mentioning to each other that this fault is due to you or him/her. They try to judge that this fault is due to who. With this, you will not get the problem sorted out; instead, you will stuck in the blame game called here 5 blames, which will lead to the failures. The 5 whys’ goal is to help us find out the root cause of the problem, it could be due to wrong process, or practices, however not bad people, and it helps us find a solution to fix it rather than to blame each other. This incredible technique is called Five Whys, originating from the Toyota Production System, and theorizes that behind every supposedly technical problem is a human problem. Sakichi Toyoda, the founder of Toyota Industries, developed the Five Whys procedure in the 1950s and Toyota uses it to solve problems. Taiichi Ohno defines the technique in his book Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production that “the basis of Toyota’s scientific approach . . . by repeating why five times, the nature of the problem as well as its solution becomes clear.” Steps to run five whys method Get the right people/team/stakeholders in the meeting room on zoom Problem Statement Ask & Answer “Why?” Five times to root-cause the problem Brainstorm the solutions Assign the Actions You must have a ‘Five Whys Master’ for the meeting who is the leader to oversea the proceedings and follow with the assign actions.

“Deberíamos trabajar en nuestro proceso, no en el resultado de nuestro proceso”.-W. Edwards Deming “Sin Estándares, no puede haber Mejora (Kaizen)”Taiichi Ohno ¿Qué es más importante? ¿El resultado o el proceso para conseguirlo? Normalmente nos fijamos y revisamos el resultado, si hemos logrado o no el objetivo, pero prestamos menos atención al proceso que nos lleva a conseguirlo. Si sólo nos preocupamos por el resultado, por el objetivo…. ¿Estamos actuando de forma correcta? Escucha el episodio completo en la app de iVoox, o descubre todo el catálogo de iVoox Originals

> Sign Up For Our Newsletter: http://www.firsthuman.com/being-human-newsletter/My guest this week is Julian Wilson, CEO of British engineering firm Matt Black Systems and author of "500%: How Two Pioneers Transformed Productivity". Along with his business partner, through a series of counter-intuitive steps, he experimented his way to a 500% gain in productivity.The change saw his staff triple their income, come alive as human beings, whilst delivering extraordinary returns for him and his co-investors.His is a story of returning to the original translations of Taiichi Ohno's pioneering work at Toyota to apply its essence to a creative, design-led operation.We talk:- Why Lean/Agile transformations fail- Why centralisation does not remove duplication- Business as a social institution- How business culture starts in our families- Self-leadership pushed to its limitsEnjoy!To your humanity,RichardLinks:500%: How two pioneers transformed productivity - The BookMatt Black Systems

> Sign Up For Our Newsletter: http://www.firsthuman.com/being-human-newsletter/My guest this week is Julian Wilson, CEO of British engineering firm Matt Black Systems and author of "500%: How Two Pioneers Transformed Productivity". Along with his business partner, through a series of counter-intuitive steps, he experimented his way to a 500% gain in productivity.The change saw his staff triple their income, come alive as human beings, whilst delivering extraordinary returns for him and his co-investors.His is a story of returning to the original translations of Taiichi Ohno's pioneering work at Toyota to apply its essence to a creative, design-led operation.We talk:- Why Lean/Agile transformations fail- Why centralisation does not remove duplication- Business as a social institution- How business culture starts in our families- Self-leadership pushed to its limitsEnjoy!To your humanity,RichardLinks:500%: How two pioneers transformed productivity - The BookMatt Black Systems

> Sign Up For Our Newsletter: http://www.firsthuman.com/being-human-newsletter/My guest this week is Julian Wilson, CEO of British engineering firm Matt Black Systems and author of "500%: How Two Pioneers Transformed Productivity". Along with his business partner, through a series of counter-intuitive steps, he experimented his way to a 500% gain in productivity.The change saw his staff triple their income, come alive as human beings, whilst delivering extraordinary returns for him and his co-investors.His is a story of returning to the original translations of Taiichi Ohno's pioneering work at Toyota to apply its essence to a creative, design-led operation.We talk:- Why Lean/Agile transformations fail- Why centralisation does not remove duplication- Business as a social institution- How business culture starts in our families- Self-leadership pushed to its limitsEnjoy!To your humanity,RichardLinks:500%: How two pioneers transformed productivity - The BookMatt Black Systems

Introduciamo l'Universo del Lean e la storia di Ford-Taylor per approfondire TPS nelle successive puntate. #agile #lean

Why bother with borders? Because borders create flow—the foundation of operational excellence. Taiichi Ohno (co-architect/Toyota Production System) told us: “Flow where you can. Pull where you must.” Lowly borders are key to that. They are the work horses of your operations. Yet, they are rarely well utilized because they are not well understood. Tune in this week as your host and visual expert Gwendolyn Galsworth walks through the seven core elements in the effective implementation of borders, led by your operators. Learn the dynamic fit between: brain function, i-Driven change, missing answers in the workplace, the smart location of function—and the financial and cultural impact of borders when operators learn to use MOTION as a lever. Across 30+ years of hands-on practice, Galsworth has witnessed the synergy of these six factors produce a seventh: 18 different types of borders, invented and deployed by operators. Wouldn’t you want to bother with that? Let the workplace speak.

Our host, Roland Frasier, has founded, scaled, or sold 24 different 7 to 9 figure businesses, ranging from consumer products to industrial machine manufacturing companies, with adjusted sales ranging from $3 million to $337 million. You don’t manage that kind of success without knowing a thing or two about creativity and innovation. In this episode, Roland draws on his experience and shares his strategies so that you can grow your profits too! If you enjoy this podcast, would you take a moment to subscribe on ApplePodcasts, write a review, and share this episode with your business-minded friends? Ask Better Questions Before we break down Roland’s 5 Steps, he swears that asking better questions IS THE KEY to innovative thinking. If you want to create growth strategies that will propel your business forward, faster than the average, this is critical. If you are always asking questions like, “How can I cut costs by 1/3?” or “How can I hit my three-year goals in 6 months,” then you will turn on both the conscious and unconscious areas of your brain, and the creativity engine will engage.  “If you do what you’ve always done and copy what other people are doing, there won’t be much opportunity for innovation or exponential improvement.” Roland Frasier Listen Today For Roland’s 5 Steps To Grow Your Profits Step #1: Implement a Top-Line Scrape. Follow the “Profit First” philosophy of demanding that your business produce a profit before anything else. You work hard in your business, and it exists to serve you by providing the standard of living that you desire. Carve out your share first and force the company to perform at a level that provides you with your required profit. One of the easiest ways to do this that we employ in our businesses is to implement a Top-Line Scrape (“TLS”). The TLS simply takes your monthly Net Sales figure, Gross Sales less returns, discounts, chargebacks, etc. and then multiplies that figure by a fixed percent that you determine as your profit that you want to earn from the business. So, let’s say you have gross monthly sales this month of $210k with refunds and discounts of $10k, and you want the business to earn you a 15% profit. Simply establish a TLS of 15% of Net Sales, and multiply your Net Sales figure of $200k by 15% to determine that your TLS for this month should be $30k. “This is Step #1 because if you don’t consciously decide and then insist on receiving a specific profit from your business, your business will very frequently find a way to demand every dollar that it produces to operate and grow.” Roland Frasier The next four steps will provide you with additional strategies, tools, and techniques to drive more profit from your business so that it will be easier for you to follow the TLS model. Step #2: Turn Expenses Into Profits When it comes to innovating to increase profitability, “E2P” is one of the most potent strategies. Here’s how it works.  First, take a look at all of your major expenses. Next, rank them from highest to lowest by category. For example, if payroll is your most significant expense, that would be ranked #1, then maybe rent, then cost of goods sold/inventory, etc. Now that you know what your biggest expenses are, brainstorm ways that you might be able to turn those into a profit center. For one of our businesses, we identified that payroll for our content creation team in the Philippines was one of our largest expenses, costing about $50k per month. As we considered what we could do to turn that into a profit center, we decided that if we started offering content as a service to other businesses, we could actually transform this $600k per year expense into a profit center. At the very least, we could provide content creation to other businesses using our excess capacity to create a breakeven situation. Listen for some great examples from Roland! “You are only limited by your own imagination in creating ways to transform expenses into profits.” Roland Frasier Step #3: Identify and eliminate the inefficiencies in your business. One of the best ways to do this is using Taiichi Ohno’s seven “Mudas,” or seven’ wastes,’ which are 1) Transportation, 2) Inventory, 3) Motion, 4) Waiting, 5) Overproduction, 6) Over-processing and 7) Defects. They are often referred to by the acronym “TIM WOOD.” Roland provides three more ‘wastes’ that also need consideration: 1. Waste of talent – not using your people to their full potential. Or not asking them regularly how you can improve processes and eliminate inefficiencies. 2. Waste of Materials: Utilizing off-cuts and by-products as opposed to sending them to the dump. Listen for an awesome example of this that generated $250 million in annual revenue!! 3. Waste of Resources: failing to make efficient use of natural resources like electricity, water, and fuel. “That first step of examining potential inefficiencies is critical because you can’t fix something if you don’t know that it needs fixing in the first place.” Roland Frasier Run through the seven wastes and try to identify where the inefficiencies exist in your business. Step #4: Flag and fix failure points (both existing and potential future failure) in your business. We all have areas of our business where we know that things are going wrong. Maybe it’s something that customers habitually complain about, places where subscriptions or continuity revenue falls off, or a customer experience that you never got around to improving. Additionally, potential future-failure points may pose a threat to your business. To identify the existing failure points, examine your KPIs around Average Order Value, Lifetime Customer Value, Customer Churn, Net Promoter Score, Customer Health Score, C-SAT, and Employee Sentiment scores. To identify the potential failure points, use Inversion Thinking, where you list the things that you DO want to happen in your business, then invert them so that you identify those things that you DO NOT want to happen. Then, find solutions to all the things that you do not want to happen. For more on this, listen to this Episode. “Tell me where I’m going to die, so I can be sure to never go there.” Charlie Munger Step #5: Use First Principles Reasoning and Inversion Thinking  Use First Principles Reasoning (“FPR”) to identify, define, question, and validate or innovate on your current assumptions about your business.  In the “split the truck” example (early in the episode), the assumption would be that you need two separate delivery formats to get your products to your customers, tanker trucks and box trucks. Break the problem down into its fundamental principles. This is where you ask questions about the assumptions you made in the first step. In the “split the truck” example, the first question to ask would be, “Is it possible to deliver our products to customers on a single truck?” Lastly, create new solutions from scratch, just like our “split the truck” innovator did by designing his own half-tanker and half-box truck. Conclusion If you want to make more profit from your business, you absolutely can. You simply have to decide what you want it to be and demand that your business produce it. Follow the 5-step process provided above, and you can make it happen. You will be amazed at how quickly your business begins to perform for you. Click to find us on Apple Podcasts and other podcast players.  Resources In This Episode “The Goal” by Eliyahu Goldratt Book. PROFITS FIRST Book. “Everyone should read it”. Contact & Follow Roland On Facebook  On Instagram  Through his Website  Follow Business Lunch Podcast On Twitter Thanks so much for joining us this week. Want to subscribe to Business Lunch with Roland Frasier? Have some feedback you’d like to share? Connect with us on ApplePodcasts and leave us an honest review! Your feedback will help us improve the show, and connect us with more high flyers like you. Click to find us on Apple Podcasts and other podcast players. 

Why bother with borders? Because borders create flow—the foundation of operational excellence. Taiichi Ohno (co-architect/Toyota Production System) told us: “Flow where you can. Pull where you must.” Lowly borders are key to that. They are the work horses of your operations. Yet, they are rarely well utilized because they are not well understood. Tune in this week as your host and visual expert Gwendolyn Galsworth walks through the seven core elements in the effective implementation of borders, led by your operators. Learn the dynamic fit between: brain function, i-Driven change, missing answers in the workplace, the smart location of function—and the financial and cultural impact of borders when operators learn to use MOTION as a lever. Across 30+ years of hands-on practice, Galsworth has witnessed the synergy of these six factors produce a seventh: 18 different types of borders, invented and deployed by operators. Wouldn’t you want to bother with that? Let the workplace speak.

http://www.leanblog.org/whiskey13In Episode 13 of Lean Whiskey, Mark Graban and Jamie Flinchbaugh reconnect in their first joint episode this year, after a couple weeks of guest hosts. Our last episode together was filled with Grinches, gremlins, and glitches, so it was nice to both be in a proper recording location and be able to focus on the conversation and the whiskey.  Our whiskey selections were on the theme of the Pacific Northwest, a growing region for whiskey. Mark's Westland American Single Malt Whiskey really specializes in using Oregon ingredients, including 5 different malts. Jamie's McCarthy’s Oregon Single Malt Pot Distilled Whiskey seeks a more Scotch-like style, with importing both barley and peat from Scotland.  Our "In the News" segment was more like "From the Archives," as we pulled out an article from 2002 from AME Target Magazine titled Ohno’s Method: Creating a survival work culture by Jinichiro Nakane and Robert W. ("Doc") Hall. This article is filled with nuggets that deserves a thorough read, as it explores the work of Taiichi Ohno, often referred to as the father of the Toyota Production System. We explore lean as a culture, whether a survival culture is necessary, how much lean depends (or not) on the country’s culture, and how fundamentally Ohno created a coaching environment to bring both empowerment and enthusiasm to the workplace.  We take a listener question on how to organize front-line supervision, as this topic connects quite directly to the issues discussed in the Ohno article. We close the episode with another fun question in the “get to know us” category, where we explore career paths not taken.  

After many trips to the library in the early 1980s studying what drives productivity, Norm Bodek began taking American Executives on study missions to Japan. Now, 50 years and more than 80 study missions later, his fascination with Japanese management focused on quality and lean continues even at 87 years of age. In Japan, Norm met then translated and published in English the books of over 100 top Japanese management thinkers including Taiichi Ohno and Dr. Shigeo Shingo, made famous by their creation of the Toyota Production System. Norm's study missions, books and conferences he ran for years under Productivity, Inc. earned him the title of the Godfather of Lean in America as he popularized such methods as Kaizen. With a passion deeply rooted in “respect for people”, one of the teachings American Professor Dr. W. Edwards Deming brought to the Japanese after World War II, Norm believes organizations still have a long way to go in fulfilling the promise that people are the most valuable asset of every organization.   

I had a fantastic opportunity this week to participate in the Lean Executive Leadership Institute through the University of Kentucky College of Engineering. For those of you who aren’t familiar, Lean is an organizational philosophy born out of the Toyota Production System, which was first developed by Taiichi Ohno in the 1950’s. Toyota has earned a reputation for operational excellence and has been transparent about their secret to success for generations. Why Kentucky? Firstly, it’s a whole lot closer than... Read More Read More The post Leadership Lessons from Lean appeared first on Zach on Leadership.

"Profiles in Supply Chain Leadership: Norman Bodek (Part 3)" Supply Chain Now Radio, Episode 243 This episode concludes the series with Norman Bodek. Norman is President of PCS Inc. In 1979, after working for 18 years with Data Processing companies, Norm Bodek started Productivity Inc. - Press by publishing a newsletter called PRODUCTIVITY. At the time, he said he knew virtually nothing about the subject and had spent very little time in manufacturing facilities. But, he quickly became fascinated with the subject and went to Japan to discover the processes that was making Japan the world leaders in quality improvement and productivity growth. Even though on his first visit to Japan he didn't know a single person or speak Japanese, he has since, in the last 31 years, gone to Japan 80 times, visited more than 250 plants and published more than 100 Japanese management books in English, and over 150 other management books. As a fortune cookie once told him, "You have the talent to discover the talent in others." Mr. Bodek said his claim to fame is that he found amazing tools, techniques and new thoughts that have revolutionized the world of manufacturing. He has met Dr. W. Edwards Deming, Dr. Joseph Juran, Phil Crosby, Dr. Kaoru Ishikawa, Dr. Joji Akao, Mr. Taiichi Ohno, Dr. Shigeo Shingo and many other great manufacturing masters and published many of their books in English. Each person he met gave him a new perspective on continuous improvement. Mr. Bodek has lead over 25 study missions to Japan and was one of the first to find and publish books, training materials and run conferences and seminars on TPS, SMED, CEDAC, quality control circles, 5 S, visual factory, TPM, VSM, Kaizen Blitz, cell design, poka-yoke, lean accounting, Andon, Hoshin Kanri, Kanban, and Quick and Easy Kaizen. Mr. Bodek, who was once called "Mr. Productivity" by Industry Week Magazine, and "Mr. Lean" by Quality Progress Magazine, said his most powerful discovery was the way Toyota and other Japanese companies opened the infinite creative potential often lying dormant inside every single worker. Most recently, he worked with Gulfstream Corporation, a private jet company, where 1000 people that went from 16-implemented ideas in February 2005 to close to 40,000 in 2011, and resulting each year in annually savings of over $2 million. Mr. Bodek founded the Shingo Prize for Operational Excellence at Utah State University with Dr. Vern Buehler and is one of the few to be personally awarded the Shingo Prize. He also was inducted into Industry Week's Hall of Fame. Learn more about Bodek’s firm, PSC Inc, here: https://www.pcspress.com/ Upcoming Events & Resources Mentioned in this Episode Subscribe to Supply Chain Now Radio: https://supplychainnowradio.com/subscribe/ SCNR to Broadcast Live at CSCMP Atlanta Roundtable Event: https://tinyurl.com/y43lywrd Reverse Logistics Association Conference & Expo: https://rla.org/event/80 SCNR to Broadcast Live at MODEX 2020: https://www.modexshow.com/ SCNR to Broadcast Live at AME Atlanta 2020 Lean Summit: https://www.ame.org/ame-atlanta-2020-lean-summit 2020 Atlanta Supply Chain Awards: https://www.atlantasupplychainawards.com/ SCNR on YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/scnr-youtube The Latest Issue of the Supply Chain Pulse: https://conta.cc/2YTuebX Check Out News From Our Sponsors The Effective Syndicate: https://www.theeffectivesyndicate.com/blog Spend Management Experts: https://spendmanagementexperts.com/ APICS Atlanta: https://apicsatlanta.org TalentStream: https://talentstreamstaffing.com/ Verusen: https://www.verusen.com/ Georgia Manufacturing Alliance: https://www.georgiamanufacturingalliance.com/ ProPurchaser.com: https://tinyurl.com/y6l2kh7g Supply Chain Real Estate: https://supplychainrealestate.com/ Vector Global Logistics: http://vectorgl.com/ This episode was hosted by Chris Barnes. For more information, please visit our dedicated show page at: www.supplychainnowradio.com/episode-243

"Profiles in Supply Chain Leadership: Norman Bodek (Part 2)" Supply Chain Now Radio, Episode 239 This episode features Norman Bodek. Norman Bodek is President of PCS Inc. In 1979, after working for 18 years with Data Processing companies, Norm Bodek started Productivity Inc. - Press by publishing a newsletter called PRODUCTIVITY. At the time, he said he knew virtually nothing about the subject and had spent very little time in manufacturing facilities. But, he quickly became fascinated with the subject and went to Japan to discover the processes that was making Japan the world leaders in quality improvement and productivity growth. Even though on his first visit to Japan he didn't know a single person or speak Japanese, he has since, in the last 31 years, gone to Japan 80 times, visited more than 250 plants and published more than 100 Japanese management books in English, and over 150 other management books. As a fortune cookie once told him, "You have the talent to discover the talent in others." Mr. Bodek said his claim to fame is that he found amazing tools, techniques and new thoughts that have revolutionized the world of manufacturing. He has met Dr. W. Edwards Deming, Dr. Joseph Juran, Phil Crosby, Dr. Kaoru Ishikawa, Dr. Joji Akao, Mr. Taiichi Ohno, Dr. Shigeo Shingo and many other great manufacturing masters and published many of their books in English. Each person he met gave him a new perspective on continuous improvement. Mr. Bodek has lead over 25 study missions to Japan and was one of the first to find and publish books, training materials and run conferences and seminars on TPS, SMED, CEDAC, quality control circles, 5 S, visual factory, TPM, VSM, Kaizen Blitz, cell design, poka-yoke, lean accounting, Andon, Hoshin Kanri, Kanban, and Quick and Easy Kaizen. Mr. Bodek, who was once called "Mr. Productivity" by Industry Week Magazine, and "Mr. Lean" by Quality Progress Magazine, said his most powerful discovery was the way Toyota and other Japanese companies opened the infinite creative potential often lying dormant inside every single worker. Most recently, he worked with Gulfstream Corporation, a private jet company, where 1000 people that went from 16-implemented ideas in February 2005 to close to 40,000 in 2011, and resulting each year in annually savings of over $2 million. Mr. Bodek founded the Shingo Prize for Operational Excellence at Utah State University with Dr. Vern Buehler and is one of the few to be personally awarded the Shingo Prize. Learn more about Bodek’s firm, PSC Inc, here: https://www.pcspress.com/ Upcoming Events & Resources Mentioned in this Episode Subscribe to Supply Chain Now Radio: https://supplychainnowradio.com/subscribe/ SCNR to Broadcast Live at CSCMP Atlanta Roundtable Event: https://tinyurl.com/y43lywrd Reverse Logistics Association Conference & Expo: https://rla.org/event/80 SCNR to Broadcast Live at MODEX 2020: https://www.modexshow.com/ SCNR to Broadcast Live at AME Atlanta 2020 Lean Summit: https://www.ame.org/ame-atlanta-2020-lean-summit 2020 Atlanta Supply Chain Awards: https://www.atlantasupplychainawards.com/ SCNR on YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/scnr-youtube The Latest Issue of the Supply Chain Pulse: https://conta.cc/2YTuebX Check Out News From Our Sponsors The Effective Syndicate: https://www.theeffectivesyndicate.com/blog Spend Management Experts: https://spendmanagementexperts.com/ APICS Atlanta: https://apicsatlanta.org TalentStream: https://talentstreamstaffing.com/ Verusen: https://www.verusen.com/ Georgia Manufacturing Alliance: https://www.georgiamanufacturingalliance.com/ ProPurchaser.com: https://tinyurl.com/y6l2kh7g Supply Chain Real Estate: https://supplychainrealestate.com/ Vector Global Logistics: http://vectorgl.com/ This episode was hosted by Chris Barnes. For more information, please visit our dedicated show page at: www.supplychainnowradio.com/episode-239

"Profiles in Supply Chain Leadership: Norman Bodek (Part 1)" Supply Chain Now Radio, Episode 237 This episode features Norman Bodek. Norman is President of PCS Inc. In 1979, after working for 18 years with Data Processing companies, Norm Bodek started Productivity Inc. - Press by publishing a newsletter called PRODUCTIVITY. At the time, he said he knew virtually nothing about the subject and had spent very little time in manufacturing facilities. But, he quickly became fascinated with the subject and went to Japan to discover the processes that was making Japan the world leaders in quality improvement and productivity growth. Even though on his first visit to Japan he didn't know a single person or speak Japanese, he has since, in the last 31 years, gone to Japan 80 times, visited more than 250 plants and published more than 100 Japanese management books in English, and over 150 other management books. As a fortune cookie once told him, "You have the talent to discover the talent in others." Mr. Bodek said his claim to fame is that he found amazing tools, techniques and new thoughts that have revolutionized the world of manufacturing. He has met Dr. W. Edwards Deming, Dr. Joseph Juran, Phil Crosby, Dr. Kaoru Ishikawa, Dr. Joji Akao, Mr. Taiichi Ohno, Dr. Shigeo Shingo and many other great manufacturing masters and published many of their books in English. Each person he met gave him a new perspective on continuous improvement. Mr. Bodek has lead over 25 study missions to Japan and was one of the first to find and publish books, training materials and run conferences and seminars on TPS, SMED, CEDAC, quality control circles, 5 S, visual factory, TPM, VSM, Kaizen Blitz, cell design, poka-yoke, lean accounting, Andon, Hoshin Kanri, Kanban, and Quick and Easy Kaizen. Mr. Bodek, who was once called "Mr. Productivity" by Industry Week Magazine, and "Mr. Lean" by Quality Progress Magazine, said his most powerful discovery was the way Toyota and other Japanese companies opened the infinite creative potential often lying dormant inside every single worker. Most recently, he worked with Gulfstream Corporation, a private jet company, where 1000 people that went from 16-implemented ideas in February 2005 to close to 40,000 in 2011, and resulting each year in annually savings of over $2 million. Mr. Bodek founded the Shingo Prize for Operational Excellence at Utah State University with Dr. Vern Buehler and is one of the few to be personally awarded the Shingo Prize. Learn more about Bodek’s firm, PSC Inc, here: https://www.pcspress.com/ Upcoming Events & Resources Mentioned in this Episode: SCNR to Broadcast Live at CSCMP Atlanta Roundtable Event: https://tinyurl.com/y43lywrd Reverse Logistics Association Conference & Expo: https://rla.org/event/80 SCNR to Broadcast Live at MODEX 2020: https://www.modexshow.com/ SCNR to Broadcast Live at AME Atlanta 2020 Lean Summit: https://www.ame.org/ame-atlanta-2020-lean-summit 2020 Atlanta Supply Chain Awards: https://www.atlantasupplychainawards.com/ SCNR on YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/scnr-youtube The Latest Issue of the Supply Chain Pulse: https://conta.cc/2rLkO5Y Check Out News From Our Sponsors: The Effective Syndicate: https://www.theeffectivesyndicate.com/blog Spend Management Experts: https://spendmanagementexperts.com/ APICS Atlanta: https://apicsatlanta.org TalentStream: https://talentstreamstaffing.com/ Verusen: https://www.verusen.com/ Georgia Manufacturing Alliance: https://www.georgiamanufacturingalliance.com/ ProPurchaser.com: https://tinyurl.com/y6l2kh7g Supply Chain Real Estate: https://supplychainrealestate.com/ Vector Global Logistics: http://vectorgl.com/ This episode is hosted by Chris Barnes. For more information, please visit our dedicated show page at: www.supplychainnowradio.com/episode-237

Sometimes we all ask ourselves this very question: is common sense all that common? In this fourth season of the Catching The Next Wave podcast we hope to investigate what common sense really means and whether it is something that should be generally popular. ...or perhaps not really...Important linksNassim Nicholas Taleb “Antifragile: Things that Gain from Disorder”

Godfather of Lean Norman Bodek reveals his first dip into the world of continuous improvement and industry insights he's accumulated from legends such as Taiichi Ohno and Dr. Shigeo Shingo. He discusses the Harada Method's origins from a Japanese high school's track and field coach and its journey into becoming a lean business application. Talk to a kaizen expert today at leanfrontline.com

Chris Summers is Global Director of Food Safety and Compliance for Mission Produce—an avocado company. Companies need people like Chris in them making sure crazy shit doesn’t happen. Some companies use that person better than others. I’ve done some work with Mission and liked what I saw, so today we’re having Chris on to talk about what he does.iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/farm-to-taber/id1418015843?mt=2Soundcloud: https://soundcloud.com/farm-to-taber-podcastRSS subscribe: http://feeds.soundcloud.com/users/soundcloud:users:432549147/sounds.rssPatreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=5610560Donate: https://paypal.me/farmtotaberTwitter: https://twitter.com/farmtotaberpod?lang=enFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/FarmToTaber/Books, people, websites, & more mentioned in this interview:Business research about how treat your people well makes your company work better:Zeynep Ton, The Good Jobs Strategy (https://www.zeynepton.com/book/)Taiichi Ohno, Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production(https://www.amazon.com/Toyota-Production-System-Beyond-Large-Scale/dp/0915299143)Costco’s wacky HR strategies that actually put employees first : https://i-sight.com/resources/employee-relations-best-practices-costco/Credits:Sound design & edits: Nat WeinerTranscript: Tanja DraytonIntro music: Fight ‘Em Down, Flash Fluharty

Agile didn’t work as your silver bullet?  Not a surprise, according to Very’s Dan Fish, Product Manager & Agile Coach, and Gabe Weaver, Chief Product Officer.  Dan and Gabe joined Bob Payne at Lean+Agile DC 2018 to talk Agile methods, holacracy, and the hard work required to solve organizational impediments after adopting Agile. TRANSCRIPT: Bob Payne: [00:00:01] Hi I'm your host Bob Payne, i'm here at Lean+Agile DC. Why don't you guys introduce yourself since.  Dan Fish: [00:00:08] Sure. I'm Dan fish I'm a product manager and agile coach at Very. Gabe Weaver: [00:00:14] And I'm Gabe Weaver I'm the chief product officer at Very  Bob Payne: [00:00:17] Excellent. So you guys are here talking about why agile might not be the silver bullet everybody everybody's been making it out to be. And you also do Holacracy at Very so I'm excited about both of those things. I like to blow stuff up and I love you know experimenting with self managing teams and strategies. So those are a couple of things I'd like to talk about. So what sucks about agile? Gabe Weaver: [00:00:51] I don't think it's necessarily that it sucks. I think companies suck. Dan Fish: [00:00:58] Honestly it's very subtle ,  Gabe. Gabe Weaver: [00:01:00] Yeah. No but but really if you look at some of the some of the data that's coming out stated the agile from today's seventeen's survey is a 4 percent in the company's report that it's not actually enabling them to have more market agility to respond to changing market conditions adapt and really move more quickly in business. So if you start to like peel back the young into why that is it goes pretty deep but I think a lot of it goes back to the construct of how we structure organizations Dan Fish: [00:01:31] Yeah. And I'd say it's sometimes too much of a silver bullet or a you know it's like a salve you can sprinkle and everything will kind of go away. And the work really comes in after you've put some of these processes or or roles in place you know where do you go from there and how do you solve the organizational impediments that are there. That's the hard work and that's the real I think substance behind this sort of movement of responding to change and empowerment and bottom up stuff. How do you how do you actually make that happen particularly at large organizations that are used to top down management or centralized decision making and yearly budgets. Those are the hard problems to solve. Bob Payne: [00:02:10] Yeah. Dan Fish: [00:02:11] Rather than just you know what's you know a sort of a small scope problems that are just affecting one team. I think we've kind of seen them seeing that and solve that in a lot of ways that they are not. Not completely but it's you know how do you change the organization. How do you change the mindset and the culture and culture gets undervalued a lot Bob Payne: [00:02:29] Yeah. So culture gets undervalued. A lot of talk a lot of talk about culture but not a lot of work and culture is fundamentally hard work. You know the old adage that culture eats strategy for lunch so you know if you want to create an agile environment that the current culture in the organization is going to resist resist those changes even if there are changes for the good. So I think the culture gets absolutely undervalued and the agile practices get overvalued. I  Bob Payne: [00:03:12] Absolutely. Bob Payne: [00:03:14] I mean I get a rash when people .. I get a lot of rashes. Dan Fish: [00:03:20] Sounds like a personal problem. Bob Payne: [00:03:20] It really is. I should care less. That would be easier. But you know I see people talking about you know the scrum rituals and like these are their meetings they're not rituals there's nothing. Bob Payne: [00:03:34] You know if if if Taiichi Ohno came back to life and saw that Toyota was using the same processes that they that he and Demming came up with. You know 75 years ago he would freak.. He would freak out, he's like you you do not understand what we were going for there because the practices and processes are subordinate you know to getting stuff done creating value for our customers following work flowing value through the system. I mean the practices are just- they need to change and evolve then people were they put agile in here. They codify it make it a little precious little thing and then they don't change the intake to the three year strategic plan. One year funding competitors come out with new stuff. Well we're on the strategic plan will react to that in three years. Gabe Weaver: [00:04:33] Yeah I don't even ant to get started on scrum and my disdain for it. But I think what's really interesting is that most companies treat is a way to gain efficiency. So but really what it is in the heart of it of where the Agile Manifesto came from was enabling people to work better with people in a more efficient and sane way. Bob Payne: [00:04:56] Right. Gabe Weaver: [00:04:57] That's more stable basically but the opposite is happening whereas companies are valuing processes over people and it's not sustainable and it's not working. Bob Payne: [00:05:09] Yeah. So I won't lay it all out. So I live in that tent so I'm on the inside peeing out rather than the outside peeing in... So I do a lot of scrum training but I always start it with. Here's lean. Gabe Weaver: [00:05:25] Yes. Bob Payne: [00:05:26] Here's- it is OK to start with scrum scrum is not the goal. I really put in some slides recently with Bruce Lee. But. So. So it's discipline. It is continuous improvement in playing the long game. You can start there. But once you get disciplines then you can start to improvise in the system and then at some point when you get really good the systems fall away right. And ultimately you should be tying back to lean and lean eats itself. Yeah it never does it never sleeps it it's the whole goal is to change yeah. Dan Fish: [00:06:11] One thing I like asking Scrum teams that have been doing it for a little while is how a scrum become an impediment. How does how does the framework of scrum and the rigid roles of scrum become an organizational impediment for you. I've seen some really strong mature teams move beyond scrum you know and get into continuous flow and it's so a beautiful thing because they've kind of taken the best elements of it the mindsets and the cultures and and the and less about the rigid rigid ceremonies or you know sort of straight lines of separation Bob Payne: [00:06:43] Even the roles of product owner and development team in the scrum masters the you know the arbiter between those two opposing powers. Well what if they're not opposing and they're both working for the same thing you know like Motley Fool you have these little micro feature teams and there's a few engineers and business folks and they're just building value right there. The distinction is getting a go. Dan Fish: [00:07:16] Yeah the guys at Gilt have a nice way of saying it which is this was in response to the Spotify movement from to you know 10 years ago or so. Bob Payne: [00:07:21] Right.  Dan Fish:[00:07:22] You know tribes and guilds just great stuff. Gilt had a nice paper saying we we think that stuff is cool but you know some of it's an antique pattern you know in particular separating prioritizing of work and doing the work right. Right. How do you separate those two things. Fundamentally it's you know that they really didn't believe in that I think. I think there's there's truth in that. I also think though there is you know a personality there is a you know a right of someone to say yeah I care about the business and where it's going. Up to a point and I just want to focus on doing a great job and I think I think I think there's a balance there.  Bob Payne: [00:07:55] Well everybody has you know their particular proclivities are specializations and that's OK. This idea that we should somehow be you know there should be a level of homogeneity is .. i don't think Generalizing specialist means that, right? And I don't know that that's something that it's not some pure beautiful thing you know some people are going to have a deep interest in the the customer in the business somebody is going to have a deep interest in breaking shit and they're going to be really testers and some people are going to be really interested in building stuff but when they Windu people can have a rich dialogue and make better products make better decisions make faster decisions. I think that's the goal. Scrum can be an enabler. Josh Kerievsky calls it sort of the training wheels foragile in you know you can't always ride with the wheels on forever right. Gabe Weaver: [00:09:00] Yeah. My observation I've noticed is in our projects even trying to get our clients to participate in their own product development. They hire us to build that is how often do business owners or are onsite customers or whoever the sponsors actually participate in regular weekly meetings with the team provide ongoing regular feedback and unlike a predictable cadence and more often than not it doesn't happen they don't they don't see the value of it and it's hard to shift that mindset and think beyond anything else. That's part of the primary reason why scrum why XP why anything will fail and does fails because there isn't that healthy participation from the business with the actual team building the product. Sure that was such a good game because it reminds you of a George Carlin joke about voting where it's like you know you don't get to complain about who's elected. If you don't vote right. Right. And George Carlin's like oh I sat home on Election Day. You know I don't want any part of this. I'd say one of the things I've seen over time consistently is that separation between the sponsor and the team doing the work. I know whether you know I did product development for years at Very, we're consulting for for for companies. But the problem is when you have a sort of proxy product owner right or something better than the team who doesn't have budget authority doesn't have sort of that that level and they're the ones though privatizing the backlog. Also for our ally that separation can be a real a real killer. Dan Fish: [00:10:35] And then you lose empathy right because then the person who has the budgetary responsibility doesn't have the empathy of how hard it is to build software or other organizational challenges and impediments. Bob Payne: [00:10:44] Yeah but also if they if they're making decisions without the information they're flying blind you know as well I mean it just is. You know it always surprises me when they don't care how hard it is to Bill will you'll care when it's late or we've gone over budget Dan Fish: [00:11:02] Or their expectations are wildly off because they haven't engaged right. And that's where they get to sort of sit back and you know kind of sit in judgment of it without actually participating. I think that's frustrating. Gabe Weaver: [00:11:12] Yeah that's one of the interesting things is another survey by Gardner. Basically 51 percent of organizations have no plans to establish refactoring as a core principle and how they build products and software. And they're not. They're not investing in the long term and stability and they want to go faster quicker. And I think that's where even a lot of business owners they don't want to hear that it's going to go slower or they don't care. They want to get to market quickly but they don't realize that by doing that they're actually short circuiting the speed later on and rendering more or less useless. Right. Oh by the way we're running a free platform the whole thing and you can't have new features for eight months. I think the only opposing force there is you know is there some over optimization there. Right. Dan Fish: [00:12:00] Is is is creating in a really sophisticated tooling and some of the you know test driven development stuff you know doing that too early before you know your product market fit. I could see that being an opposing force. But I think once you've gone to market right once you have customers once you know you're going to be around for a while right. You want to be sure that all of the stuff you put in place before you know is at a certain level of maturity. Gabe Weaver: [00:12:25] We disagree a little bit. Bob Payne: [00:12:27] So for the folks that came up test infected the TDD is not only free it go you go faster because it's not a testing it's not a testing activity. It's a thinking activity. But Dan Fish: [00:12:47] Sure I got a different way which is you don't actually need bulletproof Hice high scalable high you know responsive software when you have no customers. Bob Payne: [00:12:54] Right. Dan Fish: [00:12:55] Right now that's all trying to say there. Bob Payne: [00:12:56] There are people that absolutely agree with you and there they are well respected. So Dave Thomas a pragmatic programmer Dave says you know I don't write many tests anymore. I don't know that he does a ton of production code anymore either but Gabe Weaver: [00:13:15] He's also like elevated past level mastery and some some other force of nature that is amazing. Bob Payne: [00:13:22] Me i'm just trying to ..i'm doing the best I can. I need a crutch right. I'm not a free climber. I need to attach my ropes as I get up the walk on the one I'm talking about. But I only see the tests there to help the cycle ocracy. Dan Fish: [00:13:45] That's a good one. Bob Payne: [00:13:46] Yeah. So how's that working for you? Dan Fish: [00:13:50] Peaches and cream Bob Payne: [00:13:50] And you know some people say What if I don't like peaches and cream when the holaocracy revolution comes, You will like peaches and cream. Gabe Weaver: [00:14:03] I will say it's not perfect but it's better than what alternatives there are. They are well documented and easy to adopt an organization. Yeah it's certainly a little bit heavy handed and it feels that way. But once you do it for a while you realize the intent behind the heavy handedness is to protect everyone from waste and it's almost like a kind thing where you have efficient meetings instead of it being nice human you have very human interactions. But when you go to like a tactical meeting which is basically a stand up is very quick fire very rigid about the process because you don't want to have 20 people cross talking in a room Bob Payne: [00:14:41] And when you just starting out like scrum you need rules. Yep yeah I mean I see that those sorts of structures as supportive of instantiating the first first steps. Gabe Weaver: [00:14:55] I think the most important thing about it is there's no rule in the Constitution which is kind of what we adopted. You can't change the constitution. Right. So. So the board of our company ratified the Constitution and basically ceded their authority to governing the organization according to the rules. Right. But it can be updated and changed and evolved over time. And I think that's the whole intent behind it just like it's continuous improvement in software. You apply the same principle as the organization and you can change it to how you need needed change but we're trying not to do that until everybody understands the responsibility of self-management. Bob Payne: [00:15:33] Yeah until you can do it well until you can demonstrate that you can execute it's what qualifies as an I'm not pointing at you guys... You can take a you know what qualifies you to say this way who would be better until you've least tasted what you know the ability you can't deliver. You can't improve your delivery. Right. So but I don't think you need to go too far down the line. You know you don't have to be the perfect scrum team before you start making minor macro level changes to the process that takes you off scrum so be it or it takes you out of the official official ocracy. You know you've got to make contextually appropriate choices and and it's your your team your company. This period of time this competitive landscape and assume that it will evolve in the same way that Toyota evolved and maybe they're at some plateau. But I suspect they'll have disruptive change that they'll want to adopt. I will say it was not perfect.  Gabe Weaver: [00:16:44] We had our our company wide meet up a couple of weeks ago and I reiterated the fact that everybody in the company is considered a partner. Yep and everybody's empowered to make changes and improvements. And it's actually the responsibility of every partner within the organization to do that and that's the evil that is. Bob Payne: [00:17:03] And That's the thing that's sometimes difficult for folks they don't want the responsibility of changing the system. Gabe Weaver: [00:17:09] But we've been pretty good about hiring to let people know what they're coming into. And the interesting thing is we haven't had any voluntary turnover in three years. Gabe Weaver: [00:17:18] And it's not just because of velocity but I think it's more because of the shift in how we're approaching people and putting people first and organization like we made it clear we're happy to ditch it if it doesn't work but only do it if there's something better to go to that keeps the same spirit of putting people first in empowering people and allowing people to become their ideal selves. Dan Fish: [00:17:40] Yeah and I see some of the things that have really resonated with me and with hypocrisy is transparency. Yeah you know that's one of those things put people put on a white board or a slide. It's hard to actually do right. How do you give transparency to organizational strategy and performance and things like that Bob Payne: [00:17:56] And gain alignment in a non-centralized system. Dan Fish: [00:17:58] Absolutely. Particularly if things aren't quite maybe baked right that idea that there's a kernel of an idea that needs to be developed a little bit more and that's when you know if there's too much sort of transparency to it it can die or die quickly before it's ripe and so getting that right balance you know that's not easy either. That's not some idyllic paradise that we're swimming in every day. Right. So that's something we we've been spending a lot of time in the last six months to really figure out OK how do we get enough transparency to things that are happening on decisions in progress or big strategic shifts. And I think that's really important when you want an engaged team and you treat your people as good or better as your customers. I think that's that's an important piece. Bob Payne: [00:18:34] Great. Well I am excited to see companies going down this path we're.. at LitheSpeed we're kind of you know thumpin away and taking maybe more experimental using some techniques from some from Buurtzog and some from Morningstar. But yeah congratulations and it's going to be fun. Gabe Weaver: [00:19:00] I appreciate that Bob Payne: [00:19:01] Will not be peaches and cream. May you live in interesting times.  Gabe Weaver: [00:19:04] Maybe some vanilla ice cream on the side. Bob Payne: [00:19:06] Yeah. Excellent. Thank thank you very much for coming in. Thank you VERY much. Gabe Weaver: [00:19:13] I see what you did there. Dan Fish: [00:19:13] Yeah.Thank you. It's a pleasure.

Episode 38 -  David Allen said that anything with more than 2 steps is a project. But what if they've got 10 steps, 20 or more? We've found a simple solution to help you manage everything from a trip to the shops, to a full blown project. Some of the USEFUL stuff in there is: Planning a party, running a website or a blog, having a family - these are all projects Why projects can be a problem to get hold of Action lists are not the best solution to them 'Spirally' bits How Trello can help Why Piggly Wiggly was different - according to the Smithsonian Projects are messy - Trello keeps it all together with you The great stuff that people do with Trello - have a look at their examples Taiichi Ohno and his visit to Piggly Wiggly in 1956 How he went on to develop Kanban and 'Just In Time' for Toyota Read more from Six Sigma How SIMPLE Trello is Or it can be more sophisticated if you need it If you can fill in a post-it note, you can use Trello What Joel Spolsky says about Trello Go and try it for yourself at - Trello.com As always, we're really grateful for your help in supporting this podcast. To do this you can: Rate or subscribe at i-tunes by going here - i-tunes Contact us on Twitter - we are @sharppodcast here Connect with us on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/sharppodcast/ Share with at us on Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/sharppodcast/ Post comments on the website. This link will take you to home page, and then you can go onto the episode you'd like to comment on here Thanks EVER SO MUCH for listening. If we help you to BE BETTER at what you do, then it's all been worth it!

Hablamos en este episodio con Carlos Sogorb, creador del podcast Venta Ingeligente, y consultor de negocios y ventas con 25 años de trayectoria en las empresas más importantes de España. Es, sencillamente, una de las personas que más sabe de ventas. Es una charla muy "nutritiva" en la que vas a saber, por ejemplo: Cuáles son los 3 pilares básicos de las ventas   Cuáles son las habilidades interpersonales que debe desarrollar un vendedor   Qué característica distingue a los grandes vendedores   Cómo diseñar una experiencia de usuario efectiva   Cómo deslumbrar a tus clientes Lo primero que tienes que hacer si tienes una idea de negocio   Cómo podrías aumentar exponencialmente los resultados de tu startup   Cómo competir con otras empresas que tienen un precio más bajo   ENLACES DE INTERÉS: Libros recomendados:  - Cómo ganar amigos e influir en las personas, de Dale Carnegie: http://amzn.to/2EJTbfX - Cualquier libro de Zig Ziglar, por ejemplo este, Ventas 101: http://amzn.to/2BfOECf -  El sistema de producción Toyota, de Taiichi Ohno: http://amzn.to/2nKXPTy   Dónde encuentras a Carlos: - En su web: http://ventainteligente.com/   En esta página encuentras las notas del episodio de hoy: https://librosparaemprendedores.net/mpe016 ________ Episodio patrocinado por Instituto de Emprendedores: Conoce el Plan Midas, 5 fases y 10 pasos para pasar de no tener ni siquiera una idea de negocio a tener una empresa de éxito, funcionando, generando ingresos y calidad de vida para ti y los tuyos. Enfócate en conseguir tus metas con una empresa que te proporcione los mejores resultados. El Instituto de Emprendedores te da el plan de ruta para alcanzarlo. Contenidos, cursos y coaching grupal con Luis Ramos, de Libros para Emprendedores. Consigue tus metas, ¡AHORA!  ________ ¿Necesitas un hosting de garantías para tu página web? ¿Rápido y con el mejor servicio al cliente? En Libros para Emprendedores utilizamos Siteground, porque nos da flexibilidad, rapidez en el servidor y rapidez en el servicio. Habiendo probado muuuuchas otras opciones, nos quedamos con Siteground, porque por muy poco más, obtienes mucha más calidad y tranquilidad. Haz click aquí para obtener un 60% de descuento al contratar tu servidor Siteground: https://librosparaemprendedores.net/siteground   _______________      Esta es nuestra página oficial de Facebook: https://librosparaemprendedores.net/facebook  Además, recuerda que puedes suscribirte al podcast en: - Nuestra página: https://librosparaemprendedores.net/feed/podcast - iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/mx/podcast/libros-para-emprendedores/id1076142249?l=es - Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/c/LibrosparaemprendedoresNet - Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0qXuVDCYF8HvkEynJwHULb - iVoox: http://www.ivoox.com/ajx-suscribirse_jh_266011_1.html - Spreaker: 

Hablamos en este episodio con Carlos Sogorb, creador del podcast Venta Ingeligente, y consultor de negocios y ventas con 25 años de trayectoria en las empresas más importantes de España. Es, sencillamente, una de las personas que más sabe de ventas. Es una charla muy "nutritiva" en la que vas a saber, por ejemplo: Cuáles son los 3 pilares básicos de las ventas   Cuáles son las habilidades interpersonales que debe desarrollar un vendedor   Qué característica distingue a los grandes vendedores   Cómo diseñar una experiencia de usuario efectiva   Cómo deslumbrar a tus clientes Lo primero que tienes que hacer si tienes una idea de negocio   Cómo podrías aumentar exponencialmente los resultados de tu startup   Cómo competir con otras empresas que tienen un precio más bajo   ENLACES DE INTERÉS: Libros recomendados:  - Cómo ganar amigos e influir en las personas, de Dale Carnegie: http://amzn.to/2EJTbfX - Cualquier libro de Zig Ziglar, por ejemplo este, Ventas 101: http://amzn.to/2BfOECf -  El sistema de producción Toyota, de Taiichi Ohno: http://amzn.to/2nKXPTy   Dónde encuentras a Carlos: - En su web: http://ventainteligente.com/   En esta página encuentras las notas del episodio de hoy: https://librosparaemprendedores.net/mpe016 ________ Episodio patrocinado por Instituto de Emprendedores: Conoce el Plan Midas, 5 fases y 10 pasos para pasar de no tener ni siquiera una idea de negocio a tener una empresa de éxito, funcionando, generando ingresos y calidad de vida para ti y los tuyos. Enfócate en conseguir tus metas con una empresa que te proporcione los mejores resultados. El Instituto de Emprendedores te da el plan de ruta para alcanzarlo. Contenidos, cursos y coaching grupal con Luis Ramos, de Libros para Emprendedores. Consigue tus metas, ¡AHORA!  ________ ¿Necesitas un hosting de garantías para tu página web? ¿Rápido y con el mejor servicio al cliente? En Libros para Emprendedores utilizamos Siteground, porque nos da flexibilidad, rapidez en el servidor y rapidez en el servicio. Habiendo probado muuuuchas otras opciones, nos quedamos con Siteground, porque por muy poco más, obtienes mucha más calidad y tranquilidad. Haz click aquí para obtener un 60% de descuento al contratar tu servidor Siteground: https://librosparaemprendedores.net/siteground   _______________      Esta es nuestra página oficial de Facebook: https://librosparaemprendedores.net/facebook  Además, recuerda que puedes suscribirte al podcast en: - Nuestra página: https://librosparaemprendedores.net/feed/podcast - iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/mx/podcast/libros-para-emprendedores/id1076142249?l=es - Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/c/LibrosparaemprendedoresNet - Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0qXuVDCYF8HvkEynJwHULb - iVoox: http://www.ivoox.com/ajx-suscribirse_jh_266011_1.html - Spreaker: http://www.spreaker.com/user/8567017/episodes/feed - Stitcher: http://www.stitcher.com/s?fid=81214   y seguirnos en Twitter ( https://twitter.com/EmprendeLibros ) y en Facebook ( https://www.facebook.com/EmprendeLibros/ ).  

Our solutions are only as good as our understanding of the problem. There’s a good question we can use to help discover a problem’s roots. And we can turn it into an even better question by employing it liberally — more liberally than most of us naturally do. Legendary Toyota executive Taiichi Ohno wanted employees […]

Taiichi Ohno also said that Kaizen is about changing the way things are. If you assume that things are all right the way they are, you cannot do Kaizen. So, change something. Yes, there is some effort and time involved in implementing Standard Work, but the upside is enormous. If you are not using it, that may be the most important thing to change.

Kanban wurde nach dem 2. Weltkrieg bei Toyota entwickelt, und zwar von Taiichi Ohno (den ich sicher falsch ausspreche). Kanban bedeutet „Karte“ oder „Tafel“ und ist eines der Elemente des Toyota-Produktionssystems. Ohno hatte die Idee wohl beim Einkaufen: „Es müsste doch möglich sein, den Materialfluss in der Produktion nach dem Supermarkt-Prinzip zu organisieren, das heißt, ... [weiterlesen...]

The buzz: Surf's up. The digital modernization of your logistics network–with automated warehouse functions increasin –requires you to have end-to-end, real-time visibility into locations around the world. Why is it worth your while to hurdle obstacles to get there? The digitized logistics world can enable your company to grow faster and more efficiently into markets and channels otherwise not possible before. Ready to learn how? The experts speak. Parminder Singh, Deloitte: “All we are doing is looking at the time line from the moment the customer gives us an order to the point when we collect the cash” (Taiichi Ohno). Matt Miller, Deloitte: “Problems are excellent guides to improvement, but only if the real problem is identified.” (The Toyota Way to Lean Leadership, paraphrased) Mark Averskog, SAP: “In the end, nobody wins unless everybody wins” (Bruce Springsteen). Join us for Riding the Wave: The Digital Modernization of Logistics.

My guest for episode #255 is Mark DeLuzio, author of the recently-released book Turn Waste into Wealth: How to Find Cash in Every Corner of the Company. It's Mark's first book, but he's been well known in the Lean community for a long time. Mark started learning and practicing Lean in 1988 when he worked for Jake Brake, a Danaher company (and Danaher has long been considered a great Lean company). As his bio says, "After studying TPS under Taiichi Ohno's influential Autonomous Study Group, he was instrumental in developing Jake's first zero-defect line for Toyota's Hino Motors. He has spent considerable time in Japan implementing TPS at various world-class companies and has had a successful career in finance." In 2007, Mark was inducted into the Shingo Academy for his contribution to the Lean movement. He is also CEO of the consulting firm Lean Horizons. hixgdxw5

The buzz: Surf's up. The digital modernization of your logistics network–with automated warehouse functions increasin –requires you to have end-to-end, real-time visibility into locations around the world. Why is it worth your while to hurdle obstacles to get there? The digitized logistics world can enable your company to grow faster and more efficiently into markets and channels otherwise not possible before. Ready to learn how? The experts speak. Parminder Singh, Deloitte: “All we are doing is looking at the time line from the moment the customer gives us an order to the point when we collect the cash” (Taiichi Ohno). Matt Miller, Deloitte: “Problems are excellent guides to improvement, but only if the real problem is identified.” (The Toyota Way to Lean Leadership, paraphrased) Mark Averskog, SAP: “In the end, nobody wins unless everybody wins” (Bruce Springsteen). Join us for Riding the Wave: The Digital Modernization of Logistics.

I avsnitt 24 pratar sig Michael och Oliver sig varma om vikten av handlingsplaner och om varför piloter och militärer är ett föredöme inom området. Vidare reder de ut en hel del ”buzzwords” som finns i effektivitets-/försäljningsområdet och så får Mr Taiichi Ono, med all rätt, stort utrymme i dagens avsnitt! Trevligt lyssnande!

http://leanblog.org/audio101 I'm going to be attending the Lean Startup Conference in San Francisco next month, as a "faculty member," a moderator for a session, TBD, and maybe serving as a mentor. The organizers asked me to write a post introducing myself to that audience.Eric Ries, author of the book The Lean Startup: How Today's Entrepreneurs Use Continuous Innovation to Create Radically Successful Businesses, makes it very clear that the Lean Startup methodology has its roots in the Toyota Production System and Lean manufacturing. Ries writes about factory settings and gives credit to giants like Taiichi Ohno (listen to our podcast talking about this). There are some in the Lean Startup circles who seem pretty unaware of the industrial roots of Lean. This often causes confusion. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/lean-blog-audio/support

Originally Aired: May 12, 2015 Length: 1 hour Hosted By: Mark Graban (KaiNexus VP of Customer Success) Presenter: Norman Bodek In this webinar: Lessons from Norman Bodek's 80+ visits to Japan The "9th Waste" of Lean The role of managers in creating a culture of continuous improvement The importance of personal growth plans and self reliance How the "Harada Method" furthers these goals of self reliance and Kaizen Join us for a very special conversation with a Lean legend, Norman Bodek. Norman worked with, translated, and published the books of Taiichi Ohno and Shigeo Shingo, credited as creators of the Toyota Production System.

http://leanblog.org/audio63 I've been intrigued by the "Lean Startup" movement since I first saw Eric Ries speak at MIT back in late 2009. I've read his book The Lean Startup, have attended a bunch of the conferences (speaking at two of them - see video of one). I've interviewed Eric on my podcast series (listen here and here).There's a lot to learn and apply in life and at KaiNexus. I'm by no means an expert in Lean Startup approaches... but at the core, Lean is Lean. Eric gives credit to Taiichi Ohno in his book (and listen to us discuss that here). I'm excited to have been named a "faculty member" to help plan thisyear's Lean Startup Conference, to be held in San Francisco this November. My role is to help identify and recruit speakers to talk about "traditional Lean" -- the universal Lean philosophies and management practices that apply in factories, healthcare, startups, etc. Sort of like what John Shook talked about last year. So, I hope to see you there! --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/lean-blog-audio/support

Episode #141 is a chat with Norman Bodek with his recollections of working with Taiichi Ohno, one of the creators of the Toyota Production System. Norman met and worked with Ohno in Japan and then published the translation of Ohno's classic book "Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production" in 1988. To point others to this, use the simple URL: www.leanblog.org/141. You can find links to posts related to this podcast there, as well. Please leave a comment and join the discussion about the podcast episode. For earlier episodes of the Lean Blog Podcast, visit the main Podcast page at www.leanpodcast.org, which includes information on how to subscribe via RSS or via Apple iTunes. You can also listen to streaming episodes of the podcast via Stitcher: http://landing.stitcher.com/?vurl=leanblog If you have feedback on the podcast, or any questions for me or my guests, you can email me at leanpodcast@gmail.com or you can call and leave a voicemail by calling the "Lean Line" at (817) 776-LEAN (817-776-5326) or contact me via Skype id "mgraban". Please give your location and your first name. Any comments (email or voicemail) might be used in follow ups to the podcast.