The Use Of Lean Visual Controls In Retail

OK, I confess. I’m one of “those” people. You know, one of “those” Apple people. If you didn’t know this before, know that I love my iMac, MacBook, and 2 iPhones. But this is not a blog about how pleased I am with Apple products and their customer service. Rather, it is a blog about Lean Sigma visual controls in the retail industry.

The other day my MacBook would not start up. I was left standing there in front of my class of graduate students with the day’s entire lecture on my beloved MacBook, staring at a black screen. After calling technical support and speaking to a real person almost immediately, I quickly learned that the issue was hardware related.

The next day, I found myself walking into the local Apple Store so my computer could be physically tested. Moments after I walked in, I asked a store employee in a blue t-shirt if I needed to check in for my appointment. He said “Yes, see that guy in the orange t-shirt, check in with him.” No other description was necessary. Simple but effective, just as lean is supposed to be.

I later asked and learned that the Apple Store uses the following color code for their employees, the sales people are in turquoise, the technical people are in blue, and the concierges are in orange. Need to talk to a sales person, simply find someone in a turquoise t-shirt. It is elegant in its simplicity and effectiveness. Kudos to Apple for being a role model in the use of visual controls to identify different job functions in a retail environment.

A special thank you to the Apple Store employees for allowing me to take and use this photo as an example of visual controls.

Please leave your comments or email me directly at royce.williard@gmail.com

Learn more about the author by checking my LinkedIn profile at http://www.linkedin.com/in/roycewilliard

Post Author: Royce Williard

Copyright 2009, The Williard Group

A Lean Six Sigma look at the Infant Mortality Rate in the U.S.

In my last post, I analyzed the performance of the U.S. health care system based on a statistical review of the information contained in the World Health Organization’s database. Since that article was published, I have been asked numerous questions regarding health care within each state. In response to those questions, I recently completed a deeper statistical review of the Infant Mortality Rate (IMR) in the U.S.. The facts and conclusions are detailed below.

The U.S. has the highest per capita spend on health care in the world and had an IMR of 6.86 per 1000 live births for period 2002 -2004. In 2006, based on World Health Organization data, the U.S. was tied for 39^th for the lowest IMR with countries such as Lithuania, Serbia, Slovakia, and Thailand.

Even more shocking, the 2006 mean IMR for the 30 countries with the highest per capita health care spend, was 3.9 per 1,000 live births. Simply put, if the U.S. simply were to achieve the mean IMR for the 30 total spending countries, there would have been over 12,000 more live births!

Location	Live Births 2004	U.S. IMR	Mean IMR of 40 highest spending countries	Delta	Additional Live Births
United States	4,112,052	6.86	3.9	2.96	12,172

Next came the question, does every state in the U.S. have approximately the same IMR? Or do some states actually have higher levels? If so, how high?

To answer these questions, I obtained the report detailing the IMR by state and the District of Columbia and conducted another analysis. The data is from 2002 – 2004.

Armed with the IMR rates on all 50 states plus the District of Columbia, I constructed a histogram to graphically summarize and display all the data. From the graph below, we can see that:

• The largest number of states has an IMR of between 6.00 and 6.99 per 1000 live births.
• Four states produced exceptionally good IMR statistics of between 4.00 and 4.99.
• The poorest performing areas posted IMRs above 9.00 per 1000 live births.

Additionally, the median IMR rate of the 50 states plus the District of Columbia was 6.94. As previous stated the U.S., as a whole, recorded an IMR of 6.86 for this period.

More specifically, the four states with the highest IMR are as follows:

1. District of Columbia 11.42

2. Mississippi 10.32

3. Louisiana 9.95

4. Tennessee 9.05

This data was shocking. Imagine my surprise to learn that an infant born in Bulgaria, Malaysia, or Russia actually has a higher probability of survival than does an infant born in Washington DC!

The four states with the lowest IMR are as follows:

1. Vermont 4.68

2. Massachusetts 4.80

3. Minnesota 4.85

4. New Hampshire 4.93

For a complete look at all 50 states plus the District of Columbia, please refer to the following control chart.

So now that we know which of the 50 states and the District of Columbia have the highest and lowest IMRs, the question yet to be answered is why? To explore that question, I obtained data from the U.S. Census Bureau on income.

After reviewing that data and comparing it to the IMR information, I was able to determine that a high correlation exists between IMR and the percent of the population living at or below 125% of the poverty level. In fact, these two variables have a correlation coefficient of 0.645.

Simply put, all this means is as the percent of individuals living at or below 125% of poverty increases, so does the IMR. This data may be viewed on the following scatter plot.

So why are our government officials not outraged over the IMR in this country? Most likely because it doesn’t happen in their neighborhoods, but that fact may be changing. Based on U.S. Census Bureau data, the 46 million uninsured have an income distribution as follows:·

• 14,561,000 (24.4%) of those making less than $25,000 annually are uninsured
• 14,977,000 (20.6%) of those making between $25,000 and $49,999 annually are uninsured
• 8,300,000 (14.1%) of the making between $50,000 and $74,999 annually are uninsured
• 8,740.000 (8.5%) of those making $75,000 and more are uninsured.

The following histogram details the number of uninsured by income level based on the U.S. Census Bureau’s report “Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2005”.

Clearly some number of individuals opt out of health insurance. But, when considering the income distribution, I believe the high cost of insurance excludes some number of those who are self-employed or covered by employer plans.

Furthermore, the U.S. has long been a champion of human rights. In fact, in 1966, the U.S. signed the United Nations’ International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. This document contains the following provision:

Article 12

1. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health.

2. The steps to be taken by the States Parties to the present Covenant to achieve the full realization of this right shall include those necessary for:

(a) The provision for the reduction of the stillbirth-rate and of infant mortality and for the healthy development of the child;

(b) The improvement of all aspects of environmental and industrial hygiene;

(c) The prevention, treatment and control of epidemic, endemic, occupational and other diseases;

(d) The creation of conditions, which would assure to all medical service and medical attention in the event of sickness.

Since that time, our health care system has evolved into the most expensive in the world, costing a staggering 15.3% of the GDP. Yet, this country is tied for 39^th in the world on IMR and results in an estimated loss of 12,000 lives annually.

We can do better. As an expert in lean six sigma enterprise and a father of two children who died shortly after birth, I assure you, we can achieve so much more in saving the lives of our future. Unless immediate, corrective action is taken, health care and the right to life will become a privilege reserved only for the wealthy.

Learn more about the author by checking my LinkedIn profile at http://www.linkedin.com/in/roycewilliard

Reference

Martin, J. A., Kung, H. C., Mathews, T. J., Hoyert, D. L., Strobino, D. M., Guyer, B., & Sutton, S. R., (2008). Annual summary of vital statistics: 2006. Pediatrics, 121(4), Retrieved from http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/121/4/788 doi:10.1542/peds.2007-3753

Post Author: Royce Williard

Copyright 2009, The Williard Group

Searching for Your Organization’s Susan Boyle

Before she sang, Susan Boyle, the 47 year old, unemployed, Scottish woman, and current Internet phenomenon, was asked why her dream of becoming a professional singer “had not worked before?”  To which she replied, “I have never been given the chance before.”  Moments later, she delivered an amazing rendition of “I Dreamed The Dream.”  Now ponder this, how many employees in organizations across the world could say they never had a chance to shine?  Here is one such story that I observed first hand.

 

Facing a significant financial and quality challenge, the leadership of an organization realized radical change was necessary.  They understood, as Albert Einstein once said, “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.” To avoid corporate insanity, their only option was to embark on a Lean Six Sigma journey.  Their first decision was to seek out the “informal” leaders in the organization.  Next they approached those key individuals with the ability to influence their peers; to make them aware of the issues and the plan to implement Lean Six Sigma.

 

One of the key influencers in the informal network was a long time employee who had the reputation of being negative and critical of management.  Reaching out to him, the leadership outlined the reasons for the changes and the new course of direction.  He was told that his opinion mattered and that his input was required to make the organization successful.  He began to share his very insightful thoughts and ideas.

 

After being recognized for a particularly thoughtful observation, the employee replied that he was now being praised for the same thing that would have landed him in trouble with previous management.  In retrospect, this employee was his organization’s Susan Boyle.  He was an amazing talent who had never been given a chance.

 

The beauty of the Lean Six Sigma processes is it provides for involvement from all levels of the organization.  It allows employees to voice their opinions and experiment with new ideas in try-storming sessions.  It allows their voices to be heard and their input considered.  It shouts you have value!  You are not simply a commodity!  You are a person with a brain!  When implemented correctly, it demonstrates to the employee that their input matters.

 

So what happened to that employee after he became engaged?  He went on to facilitate his plant’s Morning Market and was a leader in the deployment of 5S and Visual Controls.

 

 

I cannot emphasize enough that one of the key jobs of a Lean Six Sigma leader is to find and use the amazing talents of their employees who have been overlooked and/or underutilized by providing a vehicle for them to voice their ideas and shine.  After all, every company’s got talent.  

 

 

 

View Susan Boyle’s remarkable performance here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lp0IWv8QZY

 

Learn more about the author by visiting my LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/roycewilliard

 

Follow the author on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/rwilliard

 

 

Post Author: Royce Williard

Copyright 2009, The Williard Group

Are You Leadership Material?

When many people hear I run a business consulting firm specializing in Lean Six Sigma, they will frequently indicate that they are familiar with these principles and have implemented them into their own organization.  Many will then go on to highlight their accomplishments using staff reductions as evidence. This attitude is a common misconception among individuals who have simply read a book or two on Lean Six Sigma and consider themselves an expert.  My reply is always the same, “Actually, it is about respecting individuals and company resources while enabling them to participate more fully in value added activities.”  Lean Six Sigma is not about the elimination of jobs.  It is about the reduction of waste and improving overall quality while respecting the individual.  A core principle of Lean Six Sigma is respect for the individual.

 

So what does respect for the individual really mean?  In cases of old processes no longer performing adequately because of planned or unplanned staff reductions, respect for the individual can be demonstrated by removing the non-value added activity so that the individuals do not feel overwhelmed. 

 

Many companies today have already cut their labor costs to the bare minimum and beyond.  Unfortunately, as the size of the staffs reduced, the amount of work requiring possessing may not have reduced proportionately. The goal in these organizations is not to eliminate more labor.  The goal is to eliminate the non-value added activity so that the existing staff can perform the work consistently, efficiently, with quality, in a timely manner, and without being overwhelmed.  In this case, respect for the individual is demonstrated by making the jobs easier to perform.    

 

Another common misconception is that respect for the individual is synonymous with employment for life.  Respect for the individual doesn’t mean employment for life.  Respect for the individual refers to how you treat and respond to people.  Treating people with respect basically means following the advice given by parents around the world, treat others, as you would like to be treated.

 

When you’re speaking with someone, you need to make eye contact and listen.  When leaders conduct a Gemba Walk, don’t simply walk around observing and writing on a checklist. Engage people in conversation. Ask questions. Communicate.  Don’t be afraid to ask for input.  The insight provided may surprise you. Communication is not simply taking turns talking and formulating a response while the other person is still speaking.  Communication involves sending and receiving information.

 

Another way to respect the individual is to show interest in their development.  However, this doesn’t mean sending people to every training program imaginable.  This could be something as simple as taking the time on a Gemba Walk to explain why certain decisions were made or why certain things are important to the organization.  Educational moments present themselves all the time, a true leader has trained to take advantage of the opportunity when it presents itself.

 

Developing people provides the individual with additional skills that can be marketed if they need or elect to search for another opportunity. Respect is not employing people forever; respect is providing people with enhanced skills that can be used in the marketplace should the need arise.  I have been fortunate enough in my career to work for several good mentors.  They were good mentors, in part, because they were excellent role models who took an interest in my professional development. 

 

Everyday a leader has the opportunity to be a role model of the Lean Six Sigma principles.  Every leader can be an exceptional role model.  The choice however, belongs to them which type of role model they will be for their staffs. Will they be a positive or negative role model?  The choice is theirs. 

 

The Lean Six Sigma principle of respect for the individual is simply treating others, as you would like to be treated. 

 

Learn more about the author by accessing my LinkedIn profile at http://www.linkedin.com/in/roycewilliard

 

 

Post Author: Royce Williard

Copyright 2009, The Williard Group

4-Year Old Lean Practitioner Identifies Waste!

The beauty of lean enterprise is it’s simplistic.  Most waste is clearly visible if you will only take the time to see it. It has been said that the most dangerous waste that can exist in your business is one you can’t see. The good news is that some wastes are visible enough even a 4-year old can see it and counsel adults not to repeat the non-value added activity.

 

One of the lean wastes is transportation. This waste is defined as any movement that doesn’t add value to the product or service.  In lean manufacturing, this is characterized by unnecessary movement of finished goods or component inventory. In lean enterprise (a non-manufacturing environment), this waste can take the form of unnecessary movement of paper, information, or personnel.

 

Recently, my wife, grandson, and I were driving to a 5K Walk/Run and Easter egg hunt, when I inadvertently had to drive around searching for an open ramp to the highway.  During this drive and prior to discovering that my preferred ramp was closed, my wife and grandson saw a large building with a rounded dome on top. My wife explained to our 4-year old grandson that this structure was the Utah State Capitol. 

 

After driving a short distance further, I discovered that the ramp to the highway that I intended to take was closed due to construction. We had to circle back around and found ourselves driving back toward the Capitol from the opposite direction.  As we neared the highway ramp, our grandson pointed out the window and exclaimed, “Look, the Capitol!”  He then went on to lecture me on my excess transportation by blurting out, “Papa don’t drive in a circle!”

 

In this case, the transportation waste was so visible that even a 4-year old could see it and counsel me not to repeat the non-value added activity.

 

As a Lean Sigma Practitioner (LSP) dedicated to continuous improvement, you have to learn how to see waste.  Once you have seen the waste, you must be willing to raise and discuss the issue.  An organization will not achieve the next level of performance unless everyone communicates his or her thoughts.  In many respects, LSPs must take some of their behavioral cues from an inquisitive 4-year old.  LSPs should question everything and express any concerns over what they observe.

 

Most waste is visible and correctable, assuming we train ourselves to see it and not accept the non-value added activity as the norm. Just because the task has been accomplished by following a particular process for years doesn’t make it the right process for today’s environment.

 

 

Post Author: Royce Williard

Copyright 2009, The Williard Group

When are you done with Continuous Improvement?

 

Recently an individual who just witnessed several lean sigma project reviews asked, “When are you done with continuous improvement”?  The discussion that followed is worth summarizing to reinforce the idea that continuous improvement is just that, continuous.

 

My initial response was that not only must a company change; it must change faster than its competition.  Most everyone would all agree that companies are competitive and all want to be number one in their field.  Assuming that as a fact, the non-field leading companies are striving to improve to over-take the leaders.  Should the up and coming companies change and improve faster than the leaders, they will eventually over-take them. Without change, even companies that are number one in their field will eventually be surpassed. 

 

One person in the discussion likened this to a scene in the 1990 movie “Days of Thunder”, starring Tom Cruise and Robert Duvall.  The individual described one scene in which the pit crew chief (Duvall) was talking via radio to the racecar driver (Cruise).  The pit crew chief was complaining to the driver that he was going too fast and abusing the equipment.  The driver responded that he had not sped up, but everyone else had slowed down. By simply going a little faster than the competition, he finally passed all of those in front of him to become number one; winning the race.

 

Continuous improvement is a marathon and this marathon has no end, simply minor course adjustments as you continue in the race. 

 

We are in a changing and challenging time.  Many companies will be tempted to retrench and cut expenses by blindly cutting costs including eliminating their continuous improvement activities.  This is not the time to be timid, this is the time to aggressively attack waste by pursuing continuous improvement.  Less non-value added waste equals more profit.

 

For a company to be successful, they must have a strong culture that promotes continuous improvement.  They must strive to be better than they were six months ago while realizing that they are not as good as they will be six months from now.

 

I’ll close this post as I closed the discussion, with one of my favorite business quotes. “When the pace of change outside the organization is greater than the pace of change inside the organization, the end is near.”   John R. Walker

 

 

Post Author: Royce Williard

Copyright 2009, The Williard Group

Standard Work, Education, and Lean Enterprise

Recently, the Dean of the college where I teach as an adjunct professor assigned the faculty the task of updating the syllabi and lesson plans.  As I worked on updating the documentation for my current class, it became clear to me how this activity is really nothing more than developing Standard Work for college classes.

 

Standard Work is a core foundational component of Lean Enterprise. If done properly, Standard Work will document the best practices while providing structure, reducing variability, and improving quality.  Simply put, Standard Work is a specific set of work instructions that enable processes to be accomplished in a timely, repeatable, and uniform fashion.  It defines the sequence in which the process activities are performed.

 

The Standard Work syllabus as defined by the Dean, identifies the course length, description, perquisites and objectives. It also defines the grading scale and criteria. More importantly, items such as grading scale, attendance, dress code, professionalism, academic integrity, student services, and IT help desk information become standard across the college.  While the details such as grading and evaluation criteria are unique to each course, the syllabus format is standard.  Even though the course specific detail is unique, all the syllabi for the courses in the institution have the same look and feel.

 

The Standard Work lesson plan as defined by the Dean, identities the course objectives for the week, the specific teaching objectives, and the activities that will be utilized to accomplish the teaching objectives. The Standard Work lesson plan lists each task (process step) in the sequence in which it should be performed and provides a detailed set of instructions for each activity.

 

So why is Standard Work important in education?  The answer is simple, it is important for the same reason it is important in business.  The Standard Work establishes the expectations for the activity while ensuring consistency and removing variability. The course material and expectations are independent of the instructor as the class carries the same syllabus and lesson plans regardless of who is teaching the course.  Employees and students (in the education world) know what to expect and what is expected of them. 

 

Some may try to argue that the use of Standard Work syllabi and lesson plans remove freedom and creativity from the educator. I would argue that this is false.  Properly implemented Standard Work is a foundational component for continuous improvement and as such, should be accompanied by an update process that allows for newly identified best practices to be incorporated into the documents. Therefore, all educators have the ability to introduce their thoughts by submitting revisions.  Once approved, the revised documents are then distributed and all educators and students receive the benefit of the newly identified course best practice.

 

Implementing Standard Work into an educational environment is innovative and challenging, but the results are invaluable.

 

Post Author: Royce Williard

Copyright 2009, The Williard Group

5S, Not Just a Cleaning Program

When I first heard of 5S many years ago, the company leadership positioned this as a cleaning project and keeping the building “tour ready”.  Unfortunately, this misconception is not all that unusual. Many times when a 5S program is launched, business leaders and the implementation team focus exclusively on the first three S’s (Sort, Set in order, and Shine).  Often times the implementation teams tend to overlook Standardize and Sustain, only to see the implementation become a short-lived housekeeping program, rather than laying the foundation for a much broader lean implementation.

 

One thing is certain, by overlooking the final two S’s the company “cleaning” program will quickly fall by the wayside and they will be right back where they started within 3 – 6 months.  To maintain the culture change necessary to make the improvements “stick”, it is necessary to develop and document the new standards for the area. For example, take a photo of the area when in compliance, then post the photo. The more visual controls the better, employees need to be able to quickly and easily see if areas are not in compliance. 

 

In addition, some companies have met with success by not only posting photos of the area while in compliance, but they go so far as to post the photo of the employee responsible to ensure that the area is in compliance.  This practice quickly creates individual ownership and pride for the area.  In larger companies there is a side benefit, enabling employees to “match the faces to the names” of everyone in the organization.

 

Shadow boards are great simplistic examples of a visual control.  For instance, when using a shadow board for tools, simply paint an outline of the tool(s) on the pegboard and hang the tool back in its location when the task is complete.  Doing so will keep employees from wasting time searching for something that should be readily available.

 

Once you have established, documented, and posted the new standards, you will need to create a management system and culture to sustain these improvements.  The leadership should do daily (or more frequent) Gemba walks.  Take the opportunity to educate the staff on what is important to you and why it is important.  For lean to be successful, a company will need a “teach down” approach.  Install measures as and where appropriate.  If an area is out of compliance with the standard, emphasize the importance and obtain a commitment on when the area will be back in compliance.  Lead by example, demonstrate that the standard is important, and follow up to ensure adherence.

 

5S programs can either build a solid foundation for the remainder of your lean implementation or they can be a “flavor of the month” cleaning program, the choice is yours.  Choose wisely.

Learn more about the author by accessing my LinkedIn profile at http://www.linkedin.com/in/roycewilliard 

Post author: Royce Williard

 

Copyright 2009 The Williard Group