gemba walk” (lean thinking term) to go to the actual place where value is added + “walkabout” (Australian aborigine) a short period of wandering bush life engaged as an occasional interruption of regular work . Mike Stoecklein . mstoecklein@createvalue.org . my employer gave me that e-mail address, but the ideas and opinions below are mine.
——————————————————————————————————————
I came across this from one of my favorite websites: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yanow4fcYg0
It’s worth watching. Here’s a related one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=0zMbtamP8_E
The website I am referencing is: http://blog.deming.org
The topic of slow thinking and fast thinking makes good sense to me and is something I am trying to learn more about. I found this book: Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman (a Nobel Laurette – in economics)
Some excerpts from the book (so far, I’m not done reading it):
I adopt terms originally proposed by the psychologists Keith Stanovich and Richard West, and will refer to two systems in the mind, System 1 and System 2. System 1 operates automatically and quickly, with little or no effort and no sense of voluntary control. System 2 allocates attention to the effortful mental activities that demand it, including complex computations. The operations of System 2 are often associated with the subjective experience of agency, choice, and concentration.
When we think of ourselves, we identify with System 2, the conscious, reasoning self that has beliefs, makes choices, and decides what to think about and what to do. Although System 2 believes itself to be where the action is, the automatic System 1 is the hero of the book. I describe System 1 as effortlessly originating impressions and feelings that are the main sources of the explicit beliefs and deliberate choices of System 2. The automatic operations of System 1 generate surprisingly complex patterns of ideas, but only the slower System 2 can construct thoughts in an orderly series of steps. I also describe circumstances in which System 2 takes over, overruling the freewheeling impulses and associations of System 1. You will be invited to think of the two systems as agents with their individual abilities, limitations, and functions.
In rough order of complexity, here are some examples of the automatic activities that are attributed to System 1: Detect that one object is more distant than another.
Orient to the source of a sudden sound. Complete the phrase “bread and…” Make a “disgust face” when shown a horrible picture. Detect hostility in a voice. Answer to 2 + 2 = ? Read words on large billboards. Drive a car on an empty road. Find a strong move in chess (if you are a chess master). Understand simple sentences. Recognize that a “meek and tidy soul with a passion for detail” resembles an occupational stereotype.
The highly diverse operations of System 2 have one feature in common: they require attention and are disrupted when attention is drawn away. Here are some examples: Brace for the starter gun in a race. Focus attention on the clowns in the circus. Focus on the voice of a particular person in a crowded and noisy room. Look for a woman with white hair. Search memory to identify a surprising sound. Maintain a faster walking speed than is natural for you. Monitor the appropriateness of your behavior in a social situation. Count the occurrences of the letter a in a page of text. Tell someone your phone number. Park in a narrow space (for most people except garage attendants). Compare two washing machines for overall value. Fill out a tax form. Check the validity of a complex logical argument.
In all these situations you must pay attention, and you will perform less well, or not at all, if you are not ready or if your attention is directed inappropriately. System 2 has some ability to change the way System 1 works, by programming the normally automatic functions of attention and memory.
gemba walk” (lean thinking term) to go to the actual place where value is added + “walkabout” (Australian aborigine) a short period of wandering bush life engaged as an occasional interruption of regular work . Mike Stoecklein . mstoecklein@createvalue.org . my employer gave me that e-mail address, but the ideas and opinions below are mine.
——————————————————————————————————————
So, I met this by (by phone) and now I’ve met him on skype. I wrote about him some weeks ago:
This link will also connect you to this “Mentors For Africa” blog: http://mentorsforafrica.blogspot.com/2013/05/my-first-79-days.html?goback=%2Egmp_3880443%2Egde_3880443_member_245123890
He also corrected me on the information I provided about him - he did not sell off all of his possessions … but, pretty darn close.
He’s doing amazing stuff, he’s still “all in” and he could use some help. Any help. What he’d really like is “boots on the ground” (people who have some lean skills and could help him in Tanzania).
But he’ll talk to anyone about any help they can give.
So . contact him. I’m sure he won’t mind if I make a connection for you. So, here’s my contact information. mstoecklein@createvalue.org If you reach out to me, I’ll help you reach out to him.
He’s “all in”. We should all be “all in”. He’s showing us what “all in” looks like.
gemba walk” (lean thinking term) to go to the actual place where value is added + “walkabout” (Australian aborigine) a short period of wandering bush life engaged as an occasional interruption of regular work . Mike Stoecklein . mstoecklein@createvalue.org . my employer gave me that e-mail address, but the ideas and opinions below are mine.
——————————————————————————————————————
My job is to optimize a peer-to-peer learning network. What does that mean?
We have member organizations all over North America. Not everyone can get together all of the time face to face (we do our best once a year with our annual Summit - see last 50+ posts). In order to optimize the experience for all, we design and redesign systems and processes that facilitate learning, sharing and connecting between all of the members.
Here’s an example. Just yesterday, we sponsored a webinar that featured an organization in Indiana and one in New York. They described their approaches to education and training around lean concepts. During the webinar, one of the participants (from Pennsylvania) acknowledged and thanked one of the presenters for some things he and learned. The presenter thanked the Pennsylvania guy in return. As it turns out, the New York folks paid a visit to the Pennsylvania folks. This would not have happened without the systems and processes that support the network.
After the webinar, the two presenters and I exchanged some e-mails. Both presenters mentioned and expressed thanks for what they had learned from each other. This would not have happened without our help (the webinar), and it will lead to future interactions and sharing.
The system works. But what does “optimization” mean? Sometimes, ideas are put forth by members to make things better. We ask for these ideas all of the time and specifically during our advisory council meetings. We try to act on as many of the ideas as we can, but we can’t act on all of them. My job is to optimize the whole, not the parts.
Dr. Deming talked about this a lot. And you can read about it in his books. In The New Economics, he illustrates the concept of optimizing the system as follows:
Dr. Deming proceeds to illustrate with a simple 3-part system (company).
This is a simple (3-part) system. The system I oversee has 50+ members, so the grid would be much bigger.
The table below shows the idea of optimization.
This shows that, without thinking about impact on the overall system (all members), there are some winners, but also losers and the net effect for the system as a whole is a loss.
With some understanding of optimization of the system, the benefits are shared by all, even though (for some), they may not see it as a “win”. By definition, optimization of the whole system means that some of the parts will be suboptimized.
And the process continues with exploration of further ideas - for the benefit of all.
gemba walk” (lean thinking term) to go to the actual place where value is added + “walkabout” (Australian aborigine) a short period of wandering bush life engaged as an occasional interruption of regular work . Mike Stoecklein . mstoecklein@createvalue.org . my employer gave me that e-mail address, but the ideas and opinions below are mine.
gemba walk” (lean thinking term) to go to the actual place where value is added + “walkabout” (Australian aborigine) a short period of wandering bush life engaged as an occasional interruption of regular work . Mike Stoecklein . mstoecklein@createvalue.org . my employer gave me that e-mail address, but the ideas and opinions below are mine.
gemba walk” (lean thinking term) to go to the actual place where value is added + “walkabout” (Australian aborigine) a short period of wandering bush life engaged as an occasional interruption of regular work . Mike Stoecklein . mstoecklein@createvalue.org . my employer gave me that e-mail address, but the ideas and opinions below are mine.
“gemba walk” (lean thinking term) to go to the actual place where value is added + “walkabout” (Australian aborigine) a short period of wandering bush life engaged as an occasional interruption of regular work . Mike Stoecklein . mstoecklein@createvalue.org . my employer gave me that e-mail address, but the ideas and opinions below are mine.
“gemba walk” (lean thinking term) to go to the actual place where value is added + “walkabout” (Australian aborigine) a short period of wandering bush life engaged as an occasional interruption of regular work . Mike Stoecklein . mstoecklein@createvalue.org . my employer gave me that e-mail address, but the ideas and opinions below are mine.
“gemba walk” (lean thinking term) to go to the actual place where value is added + “walkabout” (Australian aborigine) a short period of wandering bush life engaged as an occasional interruption of regular work . Mike Stoecklein . mstoecklein@createvalue.org . my employer gave me that e-mail address, but the ideas and opinions below are mine.
“gemba walk” (lean thinking term) to go to the actual place where value is added + “walkabout” (Australian aborigine) a short period of wandering bush life engaged as an occasional interruption of regular work . Mike Stoecklein . mstoecklein@createvalue.org . my employer gave me that e-mail address, but the ideas and opinions below are mine.
—————————————————————————————————————
Most everyone has a “to do” list. I do. The current list has 158 items on it, up 4 from yesterday. Is that different? Shouldn’t I be concerned? Isn’t that something to react to? Maybe, maybe not. I’ll mention something about that on “T-Minus 1 Day”.
Wait a minute -that’s today.
What about a “to be” list? I was thinking that this is what the 10 guiding principles of the Shingo model are - a list of things to be. It doesn’t have to be the principles from the Shingo model. Other people have proposed their list of principles. Dr. Deming had 14 points (really principles, I think). Jeffrey Liker lists a different set of 14 principles in his book “The Toyota Way”. Womack and Jones described 5 principles in their book “The Machine That Changed The World”. In a recent article (http://bit.ly/12IFR0M) Toussaint and Berry describe 6 principles. There are examples from other authors and thought leaders. I could go on and on. You get the idea.
Here’s the 11th item on the “to be” list using the Shingo model for operational excellence:
Wait a minute - there are only 10 guiding principles in the Shingo Model. What’s this “11th item”?
I think the Shingo model is missing an important item. It is something that was central to Dr. Deming’s teaching, but for some reason, it has been “lost in translation” over the years. Maybe it is implied in the model, but not explicit.
The 11th item is - be a person who understands how to react to variation. Sounds simple, but I see absence of this knowledge every day.
First - the basics: 1 Every process (or system) produces output in variation - variation happens. 2 There are 2 types of variation: from common causes and from special causes. 3 Common cause variation is the random variation that comes from the parts of the system and how they interact. You cannot (and should not) try to find the “root cause” of common cause variation. You won’t find it. Chasing after this is a waste of your time (muda). 4 Special cause variation is something different. Something that deserves study and action. It can be a special cause that produces extra good results or one that produces worse results. 5 Knowing what kind of variation you are dealing with matters. Traditional management thinks action is require and ends up tampering (making matters worse).
6 For those who DID learn this, they most likely think that it applies when you have figures. Duh … that’s why you make control charts right?
7 The most important applications of this knowledge applies when you don’t have figures - in the management of people.
Why do I consider this to be a guiding principle? Because it has these characteristics:
1) It is a universal truth, a self-evident law of nature. 2) It governs consequences. Whether you understand variation and how to react to it or not, you are governed by the consequences. One of the main consequences are the losses (wasted efforts) due to tampering - reacting to random variation as if it requires action.
I’ve recorded some webinars on this topic, so go here to listen and watch: http://bit.ly/12rSbXu
So …. I’ve been keeping track of the items on my “to-do” list every day and putting them on this blog. I actually have been keeping track of it longer in order to make this point on this day.
Here is a control chart of the “number of pending to-do list items” over the last 23 days.
Every day on my blog post I’ve been asking questions - shouldn’t I take action on the last data point? Shouldn’t I do something? Anyone who understands the basics of variation can see that the answer is “no”. It’s random variation. No reason to react differently to the high points or the low points.
This doesn’t mean you do nothing. If you want the process to perform at a different level (and with less variation), you would work on the process and test ideas for improvement using the PDSA cycle. But the point is, you do not react to individual data points or even apparent patterns.
Here’s an example. I was visiting one of our Network member organizations and they are doing some impressive work in a lot of areas. I saw some data for tracking readmission rates that looked like this.
So, if the performance is above the target, it gets a red color. If it is below, it get green. If there are 2 or more periods of red, then management needs to put together an A3 to work on it. I asked how they determined whether two is the right number. They said “it just is”.
Here’s the same data using the same pattern from my “delinquent to-do list”.
Anything above the red line gets a red, anything below is green. But it doesn’t make any sense. It’s all random variation. The result is “tampering” - making matters worse.
More than likely, you won’t. Like I said, I am not hearing a lot about this important concept.
I did hear it in a conversation last week and it gave me encouragement - for a while. I was talking to some people about their lean efforts and they described how they put lots of effort into improving the patient experience and the patient satisfaction data measures actually went down (slightly), not up.
One of the managers said, “I wouldn’t worry about that. It’s just common cause variation.”
“Sweet!”, I thought to myself, “at least one person gets it”. But wait a minute … the person who said that was a physician who attended one of the 3-day courses that I provided more than 10 years ago. Knowledge about variation has not spread that much.
