"10 Process Improvement Lessons for Leaders"

Robert Gardner

Quality Progress

November 2002, pp. 56-61

This article identifies and discusses 10 lessons which will help avoid common pitfalls when launching a process improvement program:

1. You won't get there without the end in mind—"Without purpose there is no framework for establishing priorities, aligning efforts, or judging success;"
2. Improvement competence must be grown organically—"Be skeptical of the well-marketed silver bullets that promise the recipe for success;"
3. Sustained improvement must be self-sustaining—"The ability to sustain improvement programs and their results is directly associated with the ability to understand and enable change;"
4. Local optima do not equal system improvement—"local optima-local improvements-frequently suboptimize the total system;"
5. Activity does not translate into results—"Though you certainly can't grow competency or produce results without activity, don't lose sight of the real performance measure-business results;"
6. It will get worse before it gets better—"The cost of an improvement effort is immediate while the corresponding benefits are delayed;"
7. If all you have is a hammer, that does not mean that everything is a nail—"Methodology selection should be driven by an honest assessment of your improvement needs;"
8. How long depends on how much—"Both duration and scope must be carefully considered when you are planning, supporting and evaluating projects;"
9. Without clear accountabilities, no one is accountable—"Most enterprises are organized vertically by function (by division or department), while processes operate horizontally across enterprise boundaries;" and
10. Crossing the goal line doesn't always score—"Sometimes, teams are so anxious to finish the project or management is so anxious to harvest the benefits, the deployment of solutions is not effectively planned or executed."

The article includes tips for dealing with these issues.

Back to top of page

"Five Challenges to Virtual Team Success: Lessons from Sabre, Inc."

B. Kirkman, B. Rosen, C. Gibson, P. Tesluk, and S. McPherson

Academy of Management Executive

August 2002, pp. 67-79

This article defies virtual teams as "groups of people who work interdependently with shared purpose across space, time, and organizational boundaries using technology to communicate and collaborate."

The authors identified five challenges of virtual teams, based on a comprehensive set of interviews with a subset of team members, team leaders, general managers and executives on 65 virtual teams at Sabre, Inc.—an innovative organization in the travel industry:

Challenge 1: Building trust within virtual teams—The conventional thinking is that building trust is the greatest challenge in creating successful virtual teams. From their interviews, however, the authors conclude that establishing trust in virtual teams is based on performance consistency rather than social bonds;

Challenge 2: Maximizing process gains and minimizing process losses on virtual teams—Conventional wisdom says that gaining synergy among members is difficult on virtual teams, but the authors conclude that pre-launch team building and shared plans and goals can greatly improve synergy;

Challenge 3: Overcoming feelings of isolation and detachment associated with virtual teamwork—Sabre, Inc. found that this problem could be greatly reduced in the following ways: "Psychological testing identifies members with strong social needs, realistic job previews shape expectations of prospective employees, increased client contact and teambuilding meets social needs, and virtual team leaders proactively reach out to far-flung team members;"

Challenge 4: Balancing technical and interpersonal skills among team members—Conventional wisdom says that members should be selected almost exclusively for their technical skills, but the researchers found that it is important to identify virtual team members who have a healthy balance of technical and interpersonal skills; and

Challenge 5: Assessment and recognition of virtual team performance—The researchers found that the way to address this challenge is to (a) establish the appropriate quantitative and qualitative data for accurate assessment of virtual team members, and (b) develop creative approaches for providing feedback, coaching, and support for virtual team members.

Back to top of page

"Cellular Manufacturing for Small Businesses: Key Cultural Factors That Impact the Conversion Process"

Charlene Yauch and Harold Steudel

Journal of Operations Management

2002, 20, pp. 593-617

The authors of this article argue that research on cellular manufacturing has emphasized technical aspects while often ignoring other implementation factors. Eight cultural factors that impact the conversion process are discussed:

1. underorganization—This is the degree to which a company lacks structured systems, policies, and procedures;
2. avoidance—This is defined as the tendency for organizational members to shift responsibility to others and avoid the possibility of being blamed;
3. lack of mutual respect and trust—This situation is said to exist when two groups do not appreciate each other's contributions or believe the others are honest;
4. crisis urgency—This refers to the tendency for organizational members only to hurry when they are facing a crisis; otherwise the pace of work is leisurely and relaxed;
5. complacency—This refers to the extent to which organizational members are satisfied with and accept current methods, practices, and conditions;
6. rigid group boundaries—These exist where organization members have created barriers between distinct groups that make it difficult for people to move between and interact with each other;
7. overemphasis on core activities—This refers to the extent to which organizational members spend their time on necessary routine activities (such as sales, production, shipping, etc.) rather than activities aimed at improving processes or systems; and
8. external customer focus—This describes an organization whose true mission is to satisfy their customers.

The first seven cultural factors have a negative influence on implementation, while the eighth factor has a positive influence.

Back to top of page

"Strategies for Responsible Restructuring"

Wayne Cascio

Academy of Management Executive

August 2002, pp. 80-91

Research has cast significant doubts over the effectiveness of downsizing as a preferred strategy for restructuring. The author of this article identifies nine suggestions that he recommends as the basis for restructuring responsibly:

1. Carefully consider the rationale behind restructuring;
2. Consider the virtues of stability;
3. Before making any final decisions about restructuring, managers should make their concerns known to employees and seek their input;
4. Don't use downsizing as a "quick fix" to achieve short-term goals in the face of long-term problems;
5. If layoffs are necessary, be sure that employees perceive the process of selecting excess positions as fair, and make decisions in a consistent manner;
6. Communicate regularly and in a variety of ways in order to keep everyone abreast of new developments and information;
7. Give survivors a reason to stay, and prospective new hires a reason to join;
8. Train employees and their managers in the new way of operating; and
9. Examine all HR systems carefully in light of the change of strategy or environment facing the firm.

Back to top of page

Books

Value Stream Management: Eight Steps to Planning, Mapping, and Sustaining Lean Improvements

Don Tapping, Tom Luyster, and Tom Shuker

New York, New York: Productivity, Inc., 2002

The authors of this book have provided a well-written and well-organized book on implementing lean production. They state that "If you hope to create an authentic lean enterprise, rather than a superficial one, you must learn the tools and methods of lean and how to integrate them. What is needed is a complete process that links strategic plans to daily work while at the same time teaching the fundamentals. The eight steps of Value Stream Management, followed sequentially, is that process." Each chapter of the book focuses on one of the eight steps of the Value Stream Management process. The eight steps are:

1. Commit to Lean—The four primary components of doing this are (a) Identify the Value Stream manager/champion and core implementation team members; (b) Kick off the Value Stream Management project; (c) Managers go to the shop floor and observe production first-hand; and (d) Review the proposals of the core implementation team. The book provides a management commitment checklist to identify how the management can show its commitment to lean;
2. Choose the Value Stream—The three common methods to define the Value Streams are (a) the customer defines the value stream; (b) use product-quantity (PQ) analysis; or (c) use product-routing analysis. The authors of the book suggest three rules of thumb on how to select which value stream to work on;
3. Learn About Lean—This chapter discusses the cost reduction principle, the seven deadly wastes, just-in-time production, jidoka, the 5S system, visual workplace, and the three stages of lean application (demand, flow, and leveling);
4. Map the Current State—This chapter explains how to prepare for and execute value stream mapping;
5. Identify Lean Metrics—This chapter provides a list of lean metrics, as well as identifying specific lean metrics in your organization;
6. Map the Future State—This process takes place in three stages: understanding customer demand, implementing continuous flow, and leveling work;
7. Create Kaizen Plans—The authors recommend that one should review the future-state map and create a monthly kaizen plan, determine milestones for each major kaizen activity, complete a Value Stream Management story board, and obtain management approval for kaizen plans through "catchball;"
8. Implement Kaizen Plans—Some suggestions here are (a) communicate, communicate, communicate; (b) address negative behavior early in the implementation; (c) do not let a problem stop the process; (d) consider each kaizen event as an experiment; (e) reward and recognize people's efforts, practice mutual trust and respect, and treat people with honesty and integrity every day; (f) be present; and (g) be flexible.

Back to top of page

New Product Development

From GP Deltapoint

Mike Bresko, Managing Director; and John McNeil, Principal Consultant

New Product Development is widely recognized as a leading source of competitive advantage. Most companies have instituted a process for managing product development, yet this area continues to be a source of frustration, lost opportunities and financial drain. Why?

New Product Development is a complex dance involving almost every function in a business over extended periods of time. And businesses are notoriously poor at managing inter-functional projects, while we humans are notoriously poor at keeping the short term at bay while maintaining a measured focus on the longer term. The answer to these conundrums often lies in the implementation of a structured process founded on a team approach. So far so good: we are all familiar with standardized processes and we can all recite the benefits of teams. So what do we commonly do wrong? Well too often we have found a slavish reliance on a poorly defined process with little room for imagination and a capitulation of individual responsibility to the team process, leaving little room for passion.

A good first step in allowing for imaginative input to the development process is to remove the interferences of rework, late changes and conflicting design components by creating a strong set of structured steps with clear roles, responsibilities and deliverables. We favor the stage-gate process, with checkpoints at significant milestones where the development team reassures themselves, their supervising team (and the organization as a whole) that they are ready and prepared to proceed to the next stage of development. Between three and six stages may be appropriate depending on your circumstances, each broken down into steps; hundreds of which may be defined and even those broken down into sub-steps to allow for project time minimization and concurrency.

A good first step in promoting passion is to define the roles of the product development team clearly in contrast to the roles of the oversight team reviewing the gates. Oversight input is needed early and clearly (read quantitatively) in order to allow the team the freedom to deliver on company and customer needs quickly and effectively. A matching good step is to define the roles of the team members clearly in contrast to their normal duties and obligations. For companies launching a new process, this work will be even more onerous as the team members both change the wheel and drive the car at the same time. The freedom provided by these clear definitions provide the necessary foundation for commitment and enthusiasm.

So as is usual these days, we must strike a careful balance. New Product success relies on managing the paradoxes of imaginative freedom through process structure, and passion through tight role definition.

Back to top of page