The Great Supply Chain Disruption - According to New York Times...

Laying out some Background

Last autumn I heard one episode of one of the most popular and interesting podcasts out there: The Daily. On October 15th they release an episode talking about the Great Disruption affecting supply chains. Journalist Peter Goodman described in detail what is affecting supply, ports, containers, deliveries, etc. 

At that time I was in a logistics role, and experiencing variation and shortages from all over the world, was curious about what was causing the shortages of materials. Of course, we all know that pandemics had hit hard multiple manufacturing niches and that has hurt industries around the globe. However, as the Daily is one of the shows I like, was interested in the New York Times take on this. 

Peter went to Gemba, and walked the process at one of the biggest ports in the US; the one in Savanna Georgia. He described the thousands of containers sitting there waiting to be shipped, and even though this massive port was working its best to keep up, it was simply too much. 

One of the contributors to this problem was of course the pandemic. As China shut down Wuhan and many factories as well, American companies closed retail stores and factories, because of the outbreak. Peter claims that companies thought that eventually, a downturn would take place. just like when the financial crisis hit, so, everybody canceled routes, stopped moving materials, and productive capacity shrank. So as people started to work from home, exercise from home, buying tablets and laptops from home, a surge in demand for different products started to increase. So, the problem was, according to Peter, that there weren't enough containers to bring everything from China into the US. Why? Because there is a high demand for EPP to combat Covid, all over the world. 

One part of the problem, he says, is that as we're buying stuff made in China or components from China, needed to assemble products, so, containers that have spread around the world now have to come quickly back to China to pick up materials. As companies have started to be aware of the problems in distribution chains, businesses have started to order large amounts of materials. And then,  when containers arrived at the ports, they are left there and cannot be picked up, cause warehouses are full. 

This is more-less what Peter Goodman explains. As I drive my car, heading to work, zipping my coffee, think to myself, makes sense, somehow this chaos makes some kind of sense. 

The Critique of Just In Time

Then he goes on to explain that there are shortages of truck drivers, causing slow delivery of containers to their owners. And all of the sudden he says:

But there’s also a big picture element that we need to reckon with. And that’s that for, really, four decades publicly traded companies have been under tremendous pressure to go as lean as possible.

Yes, you guessed it. He then goes, as the WSJ has done before, to blame JIT for the shortages and the disruption, supply chains are going through. Peter explains that because now companies rely on the supply chain, instead of having materials stored at a warehouse, companies bring whatever they need from China. Those companies basically decided to avoid having storage and use that money to make share prices go up or pay dividends. 

So, at this point, I am trying to absorb what I just heard. Just in time is the great root cause for this great shortage. I just couldn't believe it. I have always respected journalists and media that inform people. They are an essential part of everybody's life. We make decisions based on the information journalists provide. We judge others and form opinions about topics that seem to be important. But when the information a journalist provides, is not right or isn´t fair, can help to think that there are topics media do not know well, and still, here they are, talking about it, misinforming people.

Then, there is an exchange between Sabrina Tavernise (host for the show that day) who asks:

So Peter, what’s happened is our behavior has changed, and that’s not going away. But also, these are vast, very complicated systems. I guess what I’m wondering is, what happens to this lean model of manufacturing that does leave companies incredibly vulnerable to major global shifts like this?

 Then Peter finalizes with a harsh voice:

Well, that’s a crucial question, and there are all sorts of varying opinions. There’s no question that just in time has been running late. And the mantra of lean is now provoking much discussion of, well, we need more resilience in supply chains, we need to think about backup plans.

 

 Enough...

Clearly, Neither Peter Goodman nor Sabrina Tavernise understands what they are talking about. Just in Time is not the root cause for this chaos we're experiencing in supply chains. Their comments and blaming only reflect and explain why, after so many years, most companies and in general, people in the west, still don't understand Lean. 

To start Just in Time never requires or recommends getting rid of all inventory to rely solely on the supply chain. Lean uses kanbans or buffers strategically located at the resources where it is critical to have inventory. The purpose is precisely to have enough inventory to be able to run efficiently. The idea that to apply Lean or JIT, you need to get rid of all inventory and be "lean" is completely wrong. One of the requirements to start practicing JIT is to have a stable, regular process. To be able to deal with a known variation that, yes you guessed it, does not disrupt the flow in the process, and create shortages. This means that first, a company, a production line, that needs to go Lean, needs to figure out what is causing disruptions in the process and fix the root causes.  Of course, there will be situations where having too much inventory doesn't make sense and might be ok to remove or relocate that inventory where it will protect more to the process and the customer. In Lean, one of the priorities is to protect the customer from disruptions in quality, delivery, and safety at the best possible cost. A disruption so big, like the one we went through in the last 2.5 years due to the pandemic, would be really difficult to contain. What Goodman is suggesting is that every manufacturer would have needed 2.5 years of inventory, at least, to be able to keep the supply chain running. Even though, he briefly spoke about the lack of truck drivers, he jumped right at JIT that forgot to further explain, that in many cases, the lack of drivers, the start of production and Asia and sudden stops, the fact that we have built complex supply chains where it is fine to have suppliers far away from where the products are needed, those are in reality what has caused many products not hitting the shelves, factories, warehouses on time. Lean never states that you must have a supplier as far as possible, just because the product, labor, or raw materials are super cheap. Those are decisions that companies take because they simply believe it is the best they can do to maximize the costs, without compromising the quality and delivery of products. But as stated before, those are decisions made under the belief that it is the best for the companies, aside from Lean or JIT.

Listen to the episode here:

I would like to hear if you agree with The Daily, or if you believe that JIT is not to blame here.

 

Bugs, a fundamental part in coding a program?

Today I found an article that discussed the problems Apple has had over the past few weeks with the new updates for IOS11, High Sierra and more. I have to confess that my iPhone seems to have more errors than before. Is slower than ever and in that sense, I agree with this article that states Apple has lost the customers confidence. The problems have been noticeable since I updated to IOS11. Of course, we all know how this issues always seem to get extra attention, especially because Apple is one of the most admired and hated companies on the planet. 

Not to mention the cult its products generate on customers around the world.  However, that is not what stroked me the most about this article. The Author mentioned the following:

“ Bugs are a fundamental part in coding a program”. 

He mentioned, this statement is shocking since.

“Not even the greatest engineers are able to develop software bug free”.

Of course, nobody is perfect. And is true, the Engineers must work within systems that allow them to create defect-free software. This is no easy task. Neither in software development nor in other industries, such as manufacturing. People will make mistakes. But if those same engineers are able to identify those defects and take actions that avoid those same defects or similar ones, are repeated when developing the next program, then eventually, the software can really be Bug-free. But it is also shocking to find that even though, Software development is a very competitive industry, it is believed that Bugs are and will always be present no matter what. 

The Autor also writes the following:

“In big corporations there are exhaustive audits, tests of different kinds to detect, retain and solve errors even before the final version reaches consumers. All this effort to prevent lack of trust from the precious customers. “. 

Audits, inspections as we know, may be necessary under some conditions or situations. Of course, if we cannot get rid of bugs right away, we better have in place a detection system to avoid errors reach the customer. That´s correct. We must protect the customer. 

But living with inspections, audits, and tests all the time is not the way to manage any business. As it has been known for a while, inspections are waste. Waste that adds cost to any product or service. And in the end, affects any company from being more efficient, reach better quality and delight its customers. In the end, isn’t that what's all about?

This reminds me of Dr. Deming when he stated:

“We cannot rely on mass inspection to improve Quality, though there are times where 100% inspection is necessary. As Harold S. Dodge said many years ago. You cannot inspect Quality into a product. The Quality is there or it isn't by the time its inspected“.

Luckily, Scrum and Agile are built on Lean principles and eventually, I’m sure will help to create better systems and conditions for software developers to achieve the goal of a Bug-free software. 

In the end, its true, Bugs might be an essential part of Software development if these Bugs are used to analyze, improve and make better conditions under which Bugs are impossible to live. Otherwise, Bugs are just mistakes that make products more expensive and less reliable. 

Finally, this article is interesting since it points to one fact that we must remember. Engineers coding software are very smart. Especially for a company such as Google or Apple. And they still make mistakes! Please remember this the next time a mistake is detected. In the end, is all about processes and systems that fail or not, and persons willing to learn and make better processes.

Thanks for reading. Please share your thoughts and comment below.

Good people + Bad Systems = poor results

Sometimes I tend to think that it ain´t fair to say that Mexico is far away from developed countries regarding productivity, service, and quality. Especially service, since Mexican people is often recognized worldwide for its warmth and kindness to foreigns.

Of course, having good people in companies is not the same as having superb service. Lately, I have to retract myself from thinking that Mexico is not so far from the US, for example regarding customer service.

Poor Customer service at dealerships.

There are different recent examples, that my Wife and I have experienced to state that Customer Service is almost non-existent in our country. The story goes back to a couple of weeks ago when my car caught fire and it was declared a piece of junk. No repair is possible, so thanks to my family who lend me money I started the process to look for a new car. As look for several options, I decided to go for a previously owned, since we are already paying for my wife´s new car, we didn´t want to spend more, so I thought that going to a dealership for a certified previously owned was the best option.  

Renault Logo     Source: www.renault.com.mx

 

Checked different websites and found three different dealerships with interesting options within my budget. So I filled 3 forms at their websites and received confirmation e mails that a sales representative would communicate with me soon.  I even went to a dealership on Sunday, but unluckily used cars section didn´t open on Sundays. So I left my information: name, phone number, etc.

So, I patiently waited for those representatives to call me. Monday morning received one call very early, it was a rep from the first dealership I saw on the internet, a Suzuki dealership. Very polite, she scheduled my visit to check on the car I was interested in. But a couple of hours later in the day, received another call from the same lady, saying that the car I was going to look for, had been sold. Apparently, cars are sold quicker than updating a web page. So, luckily for me, she texted me the cars they had in inventory and I thought, I´ll give it a try. After all, I intended to go there anyway and probably could find a similar or a better option being there. I have to say that this girl, made her best to make sure I wouldn´t walk away from them, and actually ended up checking and signing for another one. 

Suzuki: A very different approach from the lady who took my request.

I also received a call from that dealership that didn´t open the used cars section on Sunday. It was a Renault dealership. The representative asked me what cars were interesting to me and I indicated two models that were available. Also asked for financing options and he told me that would send me the info to my e mail, and guess what. I´m still waiting! Two similar situations, totally different approaches.
The rest of the dealerships didn´t even call me, and there is no wonder why I decided to go for a Suzuki model. Comparing this 2 reps, I find similarities, in the way that the systems they were working with, were not perfect. Far from it! In the Renault dealership, they didn´t open on Sunday, in Suzuki, the web site can´t keep up with the pace of used cars being sold. Yet, the responses were totally different. Better training at one dealership? Better hiring process? Standards clearly defined at one? Maybe.  One thing is a fact. If processes and systems are not existent, it is managers responsibility to engage workers and let them create the standards, provide the support, and make sure these processes are clear enough for the workers to be understood and be executed.

The Walmart online process

The second example is related to a poor online purchasing experience. Turn´s out my daughter wanted a  big girl´s back pack. She is 9, and is going away from cartoons and stuff like that, she wanted a girls back pack, not a child´s. So my Wife and daughter saw a nice back pack at Walmart´s site and decided to buy that. They waited for the delivery and when the back pack finally arrived, It was the wrong model. So, my Wife had to go through the claims process where she had to physically go to a Walmart store, fill a format, provide information, and to her surprise, nobody in the store knew how to process a claim from a purchase done online. She had to wait, because the person responsible for processing online claims, was new and was getting his badge that day.  In the end, an employee attended my Wife, very polite and processed the claim. 

 

          Back Pack at Walmarts Site.               Source: www.walmart.com.mx

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What was Delivered the first 2 times.

 

A few days later, Walmart delivered the back pack, and guess what... It was the wrong one, again! Fortunately, my Wife checked the product right there and was able to return the back pack right there. In the third delivery, finally, Walmart was able to deliver the right product. In part because one worker, follow up on this issue and managed to get the right product this time. What happened? So many flaws from one big company who has been a symbol for logistics efficiency, and needed three deliveries to get the right product delivered. Where is the issue? Wrong identification on products? products located in the wrong locations? No standards? Insufficient standards? Standards not clear enough or difficult to execute? Those are the questions managers need to ask. 

The good part of the stories is that in both cases, workers saved the day. But, cannot be this way all the time. There will come the moment where they may not be as sharp, as polite or as concentrated as they were in these cases. They are humans after all! That is why systems and processes are so important. 

Good People in Bad Processes can deliver mediocre results. Good processes can make Good People deliver outstanding results.

What is your take on Customer service? Have you experienced situations where poor processes produce mediocre results? Please share your thoughts.

Listen to the Voice of the customer! Please!

I have been luckily exposed over the past years, to concepts such as voice of the customer, critical to quality, customer first and so on. 

All strive to the need and importance of capture what the customer wants, in order to be able to deliver it to retain the customer and build loyalty over time. 

Listening to the voice of the customer is not an easy task. Sometimes we need to traduce the voice of the customer into requirements/characteristics a product or a service must comply. Some other times, we may need to translate those characteristics into specifications for the product or service, that will dictate how the process should perform. And sometimes, finally we also need to define the settings of our process, to ensure the process always performs within specifications, that eventually will meet the characteristics and/or requirements that the customer wants. Being the settings all rules, procedures, instructions, tools that will prevent the process from shifting away from the expected performance. 

This is more less the idea:

The hard part is to translate and capture the voice of the customer to succesfully bring it to your organization and deliver consistently what the customer expects.

There are different methods to capture this, such as surveys, face to face interviews, trends analysis and so on.  This post is not about those techniques, but to outline the importance of correctly capture what the customer wants. 

This came to me as a post, from Christmas. My 2 years old son, wanted a car for Christmas. So, as the tradition in Mexico requires, he and her sister wrote the letters to Santa and left them waiting at our Christmas tree (yes, Waste of Wating is present even in Christmas). So as we were getting close to December 24th, ran to get all the gifts and presents for the holidays, and got a small car, of about 1 feet long, pretty cool. So Imagine that my son would be very, very happy with it. 

To my surprise, my wife took him to visit some friends, and for some reason they ended up going to a Walmart, where my son saw a big massive electrical and expensive car. Those where the kid can actually get in the car and "drive".  Of course he said, "Thats the one I want, the one I asked Santa to bring me for Christmas".  

Of course my wife told me his terrified, since she knew that we already got all the presents. Luckly there was couple of days left and was able to find the right one. 

In the end everything ended up being just right. But this small - huuuge mistake could have brought the holiday down. 

Imagine that instead of my son, that would have been a customer! The expectations and requirements definitely wouldn't´t have been accomplished.  

Has something similar ever happened to you? If so, please share with me, I´d love to read your Christmas or business story. 

And of course, Happy New Year!

True Crime meets Lean.

Its holiday, and I really hope you had a great time this Christmas. I hope Santa brought all your gifts and really hope that companies, as well the economy in general will get better for everybody in the world. 

Tonight I want to talk about podcasts. I´m kind of addicted to podcasts. I have been subscribed to Gemba Academy and Mark Graban´s podcasts for a while now. They are really great, so if you haven´t listen to them, I urge you to do it. You will get insights related to Lean and different other topics, such as Customer Service, leadership, continuous improvement and one of the most important, that I have been able to know other authors, speakers and leaders who work everyday to spread the knowledge and principles around Lean, and also to correct the misconceptions around it.  

Podcast: a program (such as a music or news program) that is like
radio  or television show but that is downloaded over the Internet.

Thanks to that and that I read the New Yorker, I came across with Serial. The famous podcast that during its first season, told the story of Adnan Syed, who was charged on the murder of his ex-girlfriend and locked for the last 17 years. The people who know me on a personal level, knows that I am true crime fan. And also a fan of series. So if you haven´t heard it, and you like the topic, listen to it. It is very good and the quality on the production is something that deserves a try. This is relevant because I found, recently a new podcast; Accused.  This podcast, in the tradition of Serial, tells the story of Elizabeth Andes, who´s case remains unsolved. Well at least that is what the journalist Amber Hunt says about this case. Elevator speech is; Elizabeth Andes was murdered, the police charged the boyfriend as the killer, but two different juries found him not guilty and he walked.

Accused: Podcast about the Elizabeth Andes case. A jumping to
conclusions case that has remained unsolved for 37 years.

So, what do this horrible story has to do with Lean? A lot in my opinion. Police was convinced the boyfriend was guilty, they even got a confession, but still, the boyfriend walked away. In the podcast, the Cincinatti Enquirer digs deep to try to know the truth. And what is noticeable is that despite the amount of evidence, the many suspects that weren´t investigated, the Police is still convinced that they charged the right guy, but they say that:

The justice system, just didn't work. 

This is the main reason why the police hasn't investigated further, and why this case is still unsolved and open, even though the police says they had the right guy. Through the episodes, is clear that police didn't like the fact that someone suggests that they may have Accused the wrong guy. Over and over we hear that they got the right guy, they don´t believe anybody else did it. And made me reflect why it is so hard for humans to accept the possibility of making an error. 

Basically  this story, is about jumping to conclusions before making a proper analysis: the result is that the case has remained unsolved for 37 years. Does that sound familiar? Jumping right away to conclusions? Pointing fingers to someone who was later determined to be innocent? This is very similar to business. I realize that we don´t like to be told that we committed a mistake. I believe it is because we have been taught that being wrong is bad. That we should avoid being wrong and that too often being wrong may bring undesired consequences. We are, basically taught to fear making mistakes. Being wrong is in fact, one of the best ways to learn and develop skills such as resilience, discipline and careful observation. PDSA is  based on trying different solutions, and observe the effect those solutions have on a given problem. Learning from each experiment and re-think the approach to the problem, until the issue is either solve or the solution is improved. Toyota kata are a series of routines that allow controlled experiments to be conducted in order to solver a situation or specific problem and, learn from them. So basically, encouraging, in a controlled way, failure and learning about our the plan, what´s preventing from achieving the results, and what to do next. Which I find powerful, because in the end, we are learning more from the situation we try to modify. 

Toyota Kata Process.
Source: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mrother/Materials_to_Download.html

I think that´s why  babies do a lot of disasters. They throw things, paint walls, and basically create a big mess every time they can. Through this experiments, they learn, and absorb knowledge about the world and the situations around them. If this is a natural manner to learn? Why isn´t failure encouraged? Why taught kids that failing is wrong? Of course, nobody wants to fail. However, if we fail in a controlled way, is actually something really good. Just ask Toyota. 

I guess changing our beliefs, and the things we have been taught since kids, isn´t easy. But we must start at some point. And recognizing that we may have made a mistake, is a very good start. And of course, take actions to either confirm our mistake and take a new route, or be sure that we did it right the first time. In both cases great learning can be found. What have we done correctly to achieve the desired result? and of course, What have we done incorrectly and what needs to be done now in order to achieve the desired results? 

Of course, to do this, we require methods and systems that allow experimentation on a continuous basis. But also, experiment without harming our customers. Here is when Lean can help to create those systems. And at the same time, change the way failure and mistakes are perceived.  It may not be easy, but sure can be done. Probably in the case described in Accused, may not be right away, but  I´m confident that new techniques, technologies and methods will help to bring light to the situation soon. In the mean time, Lean thinkers should take lessons learned, reflect, and at the same time hear our podcasts this holidays. 

Hopefully this new year, won´t commit the same mistakes we did last year. I truly hope that this 2017 would be a better year for all!

Merry Christmas and thanks for reading. I would love to read your thoughts about this topic. Please leave a comment and read you next time. 

Oakland A`s, Boston´s Red Sox & Chicago Cubs too???

The first time I heard about Moneyball was in Summer 2013. I was an engineer working at Ford and at that time I was into Stats. Due to the fact that a couple of years earlier got my 6 sigma Black Belt certificate.

From the moment I saw the movie and the controversy that rose from the fact that stats were being used to improve a team´s performance, I was hooked. Made perfect sense to me, use data and evidence to assess a player´s habilities to help an organization.  Therefore shape better team´s roster in order to maximize their potential and achieve goals. 

I later learned that the Boston Red Sox used similar techniques and methods to break the Bambino´s curse, and win 3 World titles in 2004, 2007 and 2013.  A few days ago, as I was driving home, heard that Cubs general manager was the mind behind those 3 world titles for Boston. And that he was the sponsor for the STATS, pioneered by Bill James and applied successfully by Paul DePodesta, first at the time he worked with Billy Beane at Oakland.

Started to Google about Theo Epstein and after reading a little bit on different websites, found myself reading about DePodesta and Bill James. Read about the Bullying they have suffer through their career. Specially because SABERMETRICS are (I believe) little understood, and because some people believe they are meant to replace the experience and knowledge many “Experts” have regarding sports.

Chicago Cubs: Breaking the goat´s curse.

In a sport that many believe curses are true, but at the same time generates a lot of stats, is funny that data analyzed by people like DePodesta, do not receive the same credit. I´ve heard some criticism about the fact that critics say that this method tries to gather a team, only by looking at stats. And that experience from scouts, should not be neglected or denied. 

This kind of behavior is normal and it happens in sports, government, companies, and even in marriage. We have a hard time accepting that we have done something wrong, or that are opportunities in how we are managing things. It is hard to accept that things could be improved. It´s even harder to accept other methodologies or ways of thinking, because we believe that if those methodologies or techniques haven´t been invented here, won´t work since we are different. 

I have experience that behavior in the steel industry and logistics. Some people believe that if you do not have previous experience in this industry, automatically you do not have the right to talk about problems, because you don´t know what is like here. 

Something similar happened here, with DePodesta and Bill James. 

“He is a security guard”

I´ve read in many sites the quote, previously stated here, about the work of Bill James. This attitude just reveals how disrespectful sometimes people is. Just because Bill James was a security guard, doesn´t mean he didn´t have the intelligence to think about new ways to assist coaches and trainers to understand better the game. Today many wearables provide constant data generated by athletes, so they can improve their performance almost real time.

DePodesta, during his time at NY Mets.

This same thinking in Baseball, reigns in Industry when some people hears about Lean. Or when a foreign proposes suggestions or solutions seen in other industries. The mentality of “Not Invented Here” is present, and mines companies abilities to innovate and also acquire professionals from other Industries that could contribute in great ways to solve and get a competitive advantage. 

Fortunately there are a few people who do believe experience is important, but it is much more important people´s ability to learn. I remember clearly that when I was interviewed by the final assembly manager, when I was going through the recruitment process to join Ford in early 2009, he asked me if I was able learn by myself. I answered yes I´m able. I believe that, that was the moment when I got the job at that time. Thanks to god that guy didn´t believe that experience was determinant to perform well. Otherwise probably I wouldn´t have worked for Ford and wouldn´t be writing this, since my previous experience was in the paper Industry.

Have you been disrespected by other colleagues for not being native in one area or industry? Please add a comment below. Would love to read your thought´s and experiences.

Lean stories at Nummi & pride at work.

NUMMI & the joy of Work

Recently I was able to find and old NUMMI episode from This American Life, where describes more less why GM wasn´t able to replicate the operational & cultural practices from its peer Toyota. Well, at least, they didn´t replicate that in a quick manner, but until the 2000´s almost 20 years later after the NUMMI plant opened in Fremont Ca, as part of a joint venture with Toyota. If you haven´t listen to this episode, I suggest that you do it. Clic here to go that episode, but please come back as i Have another suggestion on this topic. 

After re-visiting this fascinating story, I was able to find other “New” podcast on this story. “The Bridge” is a podcast from San Francisco, and it mainly is about interest topics or issues that This City experiences. Some episodes explore the bay one street corner at a time, there´s another about Parkinson´s disease, homeless people and so on. The end of the season 1, talks about a familiar story for the Lean community: NUMMI. But explores the side effect of this plant´s closure. It is called the Life after NUMMI. If you haven´t hear it, i suggest you also do it by clicking here. 

New United Motor Manufacturing, in Freemont CA.

The half hour show talks about what happened after the plant was shutdown. It examines the life of a couple of workers, they tell some stories about the jokes, the people they worked with, the struggles of finding another job. Please remember this car factory closed in 2010 when the recession was at its peak, and finding another job like that, was just almost imposible. 

Although the podcast takes a couple of workers, I believe the represent the feeling and what it was like to work at NUMMI. The show opens describing the 5 year reunion from NUMMI employees. Sara Rogers, She was the tour coordinator at the factory, and worked there for 11 years. In the chapter she described the way she used to conduct the tour, and interact with workers as they assembled cars. At the beginning of the explanation she remembers explaining visitors the key values practiced at the factory: Kaizen, Kanban, Jidoka, Muda, Genchi gembutsu, etc. As she used to drive around the plant she named the people working at the worked stations. She remembers, the tour being about the factory and the people working within the factory, as she explains:

“ Here´s a tire, and here is Bob, working with a tire. Here´s an engine, and here´s Jason working with an engine”.

She used to tell stories about the people, she also says:

“ Those where the folks I worked for, you know I worked for those folks”.

The podcast also explains that during the various slumps car demand had through out the years, NUMMI never lay anyone off. When demand was week, one shift took classes about, safety, sexual harassment, history of Toyota and so on. Rogers remembers teaching about that last topic. And at this point, if you are listening, you can still hear the excitement in her voice, remembering all these concepts, stories and the fact that NUMMI never layoff anyone. Until the plant closed, and 

“And the Dream ended”.

April 1st, 2010 a red Corolla was the last car that came out of the plant. She explains that she wanted to be there until 90. She had no plans to retire, and she wanted to be there forever. 

I feel that there have been very few times where I´ve felt this same way. But I don´t remember feeling like that all the time. Typically in my case, there are times where you feel super motivated at job and there are some others, where you feel more like, you gotta do what you gotta do, is your job, and the motivation is pretty low. What place was NUMMI that a worker felt like working there was worth it doing it forever?

Ok, probably you´re thinking at this point; right her job was conducting tours. Is not the same as being assembling parts together every minute, attached to a work station, in a repetitive job. That´s true, but also, being a tour guide, doesn´t really help to change the world right? So, my thought is related about how good, happy environment it was and how was possible that those people would stay motivated to actually love their jobs. Is not that i don´t like my own job, but as I have explained before, at some point motivation isn´t at its peak. 

So, to me the fact that someone like Rogers still remembers her work with such pride, tells me one simple thing, and is the fact that she felt joy at her work. She had a purpose, which as a consequence, Intrinsic Motivation. It is supposed to exist two kinds of motivations, according to the book Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates Us, written by Daniel H. Pink.

Intrinsic motivation and Extrinsic motivation. Extrinsic motivation are all variables such as wage, benefits, the things we buy and would like to posses that come as a consequence of having a job.  They are powerful, but they only do the trick in the short run. Cause as we know, the brain has a feature to adapt quickly to changes in our lives, so If you have a raise, it´s exciting, motivates you super high, but it only lasts for a short period of time. As the brain gets used to having more money on your wallet and accepts that as the norm. Intrinsic motivation is the kind of motivation that busts us in the long run. It requires autonomy, mastery and purpose to keep that kind of motivation driving our behaviour. Rogers describes how she conducted tours, and looks like she had the three  (motivators) at her job. But, speaking from experience, this is not something you can easily have, or achieve or even look for. Must son us, work because we need to cover basic needs: food, home, health, etc. and if along comes some of the intrinsic factors just discussed before, is a bonus. 

If you hear the podcast as the last Red Corolla was coming out of the line, you could hear people cheering  and clapping with joy. I don´t think that was coincidence, and all those guys, weren't also tour guides. So to get to point, I believe is because the management style and system created that allow people not only cover the basic needs “extrinsic motivation”, but also, the deeper needs “intrinsic motivation” that help a worker stay focus, motivated and with joy in the long run, as he works. 

Dr. Edwards Deming

This makes me remember Dr. Deming who put a great amount of responsibility on managers/management.  Pointing that creating good systems is management´s job, allowing people to take pride and joy at work. I´m convinced a true Lean System can do that. I´m convinced that that´s what TPS did at NUMMI, despite what Labor Notes claims, I know Lean works and can be great for everybody. 

Looks like for all the people who worked at NUMMI, things will never be the same. As Mario Mendes explains later in the podcast:

“It´s ok, It´s not the same. You get greasy and dirty. And is not like NUMMI”.

What also caught my eye, is the fact that Tesla Motors, bought the old building, after NUMMI was  closed,  for a really cheap price. Many of the workers from NUMMI, couldn´t make it to the new company. Which is really sad, as they had the skills, the culture, and the habits to help Tesla be more efficient, and perhaps, save some money on the training. Mendes explains it was really hard to get hired at Tesla as they weren't hiring people over 50. Same thing happen when I worked at Ford. When the Cuautitlan plant reopen, and I was hired back in 2009, most of workers where under 30. I believe it was because of budget, culture, and thinking that younger people would fit better than older people. I will go there on a future post, about the similarities Ford tried with Cuautitlan plant and NUMMI.

What do you think? Do you feel motivated with your the job/system you work in? What changes can we make to keep motivated ourselves in our current jobs? 

Would love to hear your thoughts, please leave a comment below. 

Two bad chilies

Today I write about an incident that happened to a famous foods company in Mexico. La Costeña is a foods company with a history of more than 90 years in Mexico. Famous for being one of the first to market chilies in the early 1920´s. 

In the past days has been on the public eye, not for the quality or the taste of its canned chilies, but because a photograph. A couple of temporary associates took a picture unloading trucks. The trucks contained chilies, and in the picture can be seen two associates, one of them seems to be peeing on the products. The picture isn´t explicit as this guy was giving his back and cannot tell wether he was doing it or not. but his pants where down.

The story is that this picture got to the social media, where it went viral and of course, the company was under scrutiny. Obviously the company fired the two workers, but what is worth  to analyse are the responses his president and CEO gave today to a Radio show in the morning. 

Rafael Celorio, president and CEO of the company, gave an interview this morning where he talked about the pictures and provided his points of view on this matter.

He explained that those workers where temporary. This time of the year, he continued explaining, the company hires temporary workers to unload the extraordinary amount of products the plant receives everyday. 

Celorio said that the recruiting process was really good. That they do hire workers based on recommendations given by permanent workers in the plant. And he continued explaining that during this time of the year, they have to hire many workers, and many of them stay in the plant, and others come back the next year.

What bothers me about this, is the fact that the company blames the workers and plays the old game of two bad apples. In a separate declaration the public affairs manager , said that in the plant work 3000 workers, meaning it was impossible to watch everybody at every moment. To my understanding and view, the company lost a precious opportunity to recognize the opportunities within their recruiting process and the root cause as to why, two temporary workers would do something like that. What could have happened that encourage those associates to behave like that. The easy part is to blame the bad apples. The hard one, is to recognize and find why those bad apples got mixed with the good ones.

Companies that hire temporary workers know in advance that hiring temps, is a risk. How can those companies minimize those risks? How can those companies improve the systems where situations like that, simply cannot happened? 

Where was the supervisor? Too many workers to supervise? Was the plant running understaffed? Those are the kind of questions the company should ask themselves. How the system allowed that to happened? Of course, the system, is what should be reviewed. 

Temporary workers deserve the same respect as permanent. They should be trained, coached and empowered too. It is worth to follow the same process to recruit a temporary worker, compared to a permanent one. Since those workers for a given period of time will impact the company the same as a permanent worker. I´m not saying this wasn´t the case. I criticize how hard it is for companies accept there are opportunities to improve. Especially in public. 

Thank´s for reading, would love to read your thoughts.

6 months to get a Rolls Royce?????

Its been a while since I wrote my last post. But today read something that really caught my eye. LikedIn is a source of information like no other. Unfortunately, there is a lot of information that isn´t true and many people claim to have the true about many things. LEAN is no exception.  I wonder why there is that so many people doesn´t get what LEAN is and think they know the TPS, just because they read about it in some magazine or because they have read a book or two about it. Today somebody posted the following quote:

When things do not occur on time, remember that it takes 6 months to build a Rolls Royce and 13 Hours a Toyota.

This quote intended to make a metaphor to promote patience and perseverance. Implicity meaning that a Rolls Royce offered a better quality and just because Toyota is faster when building cars,  that would mean lower quality. 

Anyone who has serious understanding about TPS and Toyota, so called "LEAN", would see this is false. For Toyota to be faster and the greatest manufacturer in the world, took years, in fact, decades to learn, experiment and develop a great management system. Shaped of principles and values that guide the path they follow. Standardisation is one main part of TPS, and anyone involved in standardisation can see, that this is clearly, patience, learning and experimentation. 

My first thought when reading this quote was:

Seriously?? 6 months!!!

I don´t think I could spend that quantity of money and wait 6 months for a car.

Lean & Six Sigma

Later today I found another post arguing that in order to succeed you needed in your processes practice Lean & 6 Sigma. The post stated more less the following:

Lean is useful to achieve speed and reduce waste, Six Sigma is for reducing variation in your processes. You can achieve superior results without Lean or without 6 Sigma.

The phrase clearly stated that both methodologies were needed. And surprisingly the quote had more than 100 "likes" and comments approving and supporting the quote. 

I wonder why ideas like this get so popular and people believe they are right. Clearly LEAN looks for stability, quality, flow, and respect for people. Is sad that people do not take time to really understand, analyse, learn what LEAN is and the benefits it can bring. 

Just for the record, I looked in JD powers 2015 Initial Quality Study (IQS) for the best car in the in the Large Premium Segment, and guess who got the best rank? 

Of course Lexus (Toyota Luxury brand) beating Porsche, Audi, BMW, and Mercedes. Toyota do not use 6 Sigma. And of course, I do not imply that 6 sigma is useless. I believe 6 Sigma is powerful, but I don't think is the only way to get superior results. Both can live together, as long as we understand when to use each and not to be obsessed about DMAIC and try to force it for every problem. 

I would love to read what you have to say, please leave a comment. Thanks for reading.  

Elevator in the bakery... Lean bakery?

Happy new year.

2016 has started and is exciting to see, what new challenges brings. 

This is a warm up post. Today I take a simple example from a local bakery to write about the importance of providing the right conditions so workers are able to perform better. An elevator inside a bakery, receives my attention and makes me remember a warehouse that needs to look at this small bakery. 

Is great to have you reading this. I'm sure many of you still have days off so probably have extra time to surf the web and read interesting stuff. For guys like me, everything starts again tomorrow. But before my routine starts again, wanted to post a reflection about a bakery I visited today. Just a small post to warm up, the year ahead. 

Local Bakery. 

It was my son's birthday and wanted to buy a nice chocolate cake. I was able to find one at good price and when I was heading to pay, I noticed a big industrial elevator right behind the cashier. Well, it wasn't behind, it was in an angle with enough space to be used. I noticed all kinds of visual aids, as well as safety rules to operate the elevator. This elevator, was obviously an industrial one. It didn't look cheap. Certainly was expensive, but immediately remember one warehouse I know that needs to have one of those. Remember that management, at that warehouse didn't consider a priority to install an elevator or any lifting device to help the workers to place or pick parts from upper levels. Of course an elevator would have helped to move things easier, safer, better, and faster. But as the budget  didn't allow, this suggestion wasn't even considered. 

So, the fact that a bakery considered installing one at this store tells me a lot about management. Obvioulsy, a bakery needs to move a lot of raw materials to prepare bread, cakes, etc. every day. So, for me, considering an elevator means that management understands the hard work it takes to move all materials to the upper level, or bring them down stairs. Of course, ergonomic issues start appearing when you continuously have to move things around to get things done. So, it is sad that a warehouse, in other industry, doesn't consider providing the right conditions for the workers a priority. Having the right conditions often means fewer risks (safer environment), the opportunity to do things better, faster and without stress for people. Besides, we should consider that in the case of the bakery, the core business is to make cakes, not to carry heavy sacks upstairs. 

Industrial elevator.

By this, I do not mean that the warehouse I´m referring to, needs to invest a huge amount of money installing an elevator. There are other options that can be considered, to help the people move materials from or to the upper levels. Providing the right conditions, doesn´t have to be expensive. But even if it is expensive, the pay off will be unmeasurable. Because people will realize that management really cares about them. And the ROI can be easily calculated considering delays, damages to parts, and the impact on productivity.

I don´t know if this bakery, really think the way I do, about providing the right conditions for people, or if they even know lean or kaizen. I don´t know if this thinking extends to other practices or processes they handle. But I would like to think they do. After all is just the third day of the new year, and this year seems promising. 

Hopefully that warehouse gets better conditions so people can perform better. 

Thanks for reading. Stay tuned. 

Humility, lean leadership & Deming.

Last weekend saw the great documentary from NBC about Japanese industry and how Japan was able, after WWII , to overcome obstacles and become one of the most productive nations in the world. The documentary If Japan Can, why can't we introduced in the 80's to Dr. Edwards Deming to US where he was almost unknown. He was one of some who helped the Japanese to rebuild their industry. His ideas and teachings were revolutionary at that time, and they still are. But one thing caught my eye, while I was watching the documentary and notice that even though he is recognized as the man who helped the Japanese to rebuild the industry, he never talks about him. Instead he gives credit to the japanese, who have learned and embrased his methods and teachings. The only time where he refers to himself is at 01:03:19 when he gives credit to the Japanese, stating:

I think that I was the only man in 1950 to believe that the Japanese could invade the market of the world and would, within 4 years. 

This is an exceptional quote. Instead of saying, I was the man who taught them how to analyze their processes and improve. He could have said that, cause he really played a key roll for the worlds Economy working in Japan.  But I believe, that even though, he could be arrogant, he was not. This is an underlying lesson for all people working and believing that there´s always a way to do things better. 

And for those who don´t have an idea who Deming was. Humility, is something we all should learn and practice.

Christmas time: arrogant chats.

This is December, and I have been involved in several diners, parties, to celebrate one more year. Unfortunately, I have been involved on discussions with people who is so eager to talk about themselves and the things they have achieved and done and ... is really exhausting to hear. And my reflection this time, is to be humble at first. I guess one effective way to engage and connect with people is to be humble. Show respect for people. Lean, claims that people is the most important element in improvement. No wonder why Toyota is replacing robots with humans. If you watch this great documentary, you can see Deming talking about Japanese with great respect. He talks about the workforce and the management. Those 2 elements, plus his methods, gave a tremendous competitive advantage and they quickly became a synonym of quality and productivity, and still today, they are really committed to quality and improvements: Think Sony´s quality. 

So, I know that it is important self confidence, and to have the belief in yourself. Specially when you`re leading changes in any organization. But there is a difference between arrogance and self confidence. I wonder how those guys, with big watches, tremendous achievements, glorious results, could engage with front line workers? The ironic part, is that most businesses promote this behaviour. And those guys who scream their achievements, are the ones who get promoted. And it´s really sad, because that creates a tremendous dissatisfaction in the workforce. If you ever get to read this post, please be humble and promote the right behaviour at companies.

Thank´s for reading. I would love to read you`re thoughts. Please leave a comment below.

Lean is simple, but it requires structure & discipline

For those like me who like to watch soccer, will find that team FC Barcelona is a team that every soccer fan loves to see. It doesn´t matter if one is fan from that team or not, simple the way Barcelona is playing is fantastic. They, as well as lean manufacturers, share a philosophy and they practice it when they play. Their philosohpy is about creating the game, holding the ball, being patient and create spaces between enemy lines, where they can take advantage with the amazing forwards Barcelona has. When they loose the ball, they try to recover it as fast as they can. They feel comfortable with the ball at their feet.  Soccer looks easy when is played by them. Simple and easy looks lean when properly executed. The workers seem to perform at a smooth pace. The harmony  and flow are present in all operations. As well as team work and as well as engagement from employees. Results are the natural consequences when lean is properly executed. As well as Barcelona´s results.   

Luis Suarez, Neymar and Messi form the fearsome front for
the FC Barcelona

Some people may differ from this perspective that Barcelona´s way of playing is lean or even simple. Since they structure so much every play. Sometimes they need to have the ball, for long periods, before they even suggest a play in the rival area. But when they execute, Soccer seems simple. It is true, that in this comparison, Barcelonas way of play is like lean. Simple, effective but needs a structure, and needs discipline. In both, soccer and business, patience is key. 

Lean needs structure.

Some people say that Lean is simple. But in order for Lean to work in it´s full power, needs a good structure. You cannot just say that will implement a few tools and will become Lean the next morning. It requires training, patience and understanding of the principles leveraged by companies, such as Toyota. When you walk into a Lean organization. The tools are evident, and sometimes easy to use. What we don't see is behind the ropes. Behind the ropes, there is a well organised structure that helps to sustain Lean. Lets say that in order to shine, needs someone to do the dirty job. Materials management departments are the greatest example for this. They allow to move the materials across the organization, so that the worker installing a tail lamp, installs the right lamp, at the exact moment, in the right sequence. In order for the worker to do that, a manufacturing team may have studied carefully the necessary conditions under which humans are more likely to perform better. Those engineers may have studied and formulated the right conditions to be applied in the floor; such as complexity in the work station, the right amount of tools the worker needs to have. Too many tools and the worker may fall behind cycle time, since there is a high possibility that his mind make a mistake and choose the wrong tool, and would loose precious seconds. Too little and may not be able to perform according to the plan, and may produce a defect. Things like this, help a worker to be really be efficient at his job. What we might see, is a well trained worker, performing according to a standard, but what we don`t see is what´s behind the ropes: the design of the work station´s conditions. 

Ford Fiesta at the Cuautitlan Stamping and Assembly
Plant in Mexico.

In the automotive industry there are different teams, with "different" purposes, that sometimes seem to be opposite. For example the manufacturing team typically sets its targets according to productivity, improve cycle time, increase value added content at work stations, make process efficient enough so less workers may be utilised to assemble a car, etc. The torques team may be involved in ensuring all torques are tightened according to spec, make more audits to make sure the bolts are tightened correctly, they may even work with suppliers to get rid of noise in the bolts coming to the factory. The materials management team may be worried about stopping the line, about meeting cycle times, about scanning 100% of materials to ensure they are delivering the right materials at the right workstations. And supervisors may be worried about andon lights, analyze them and understand why certain workstations call for help more often than others. They all strive to provide the best conditions to the workers performing in the line. The worker doesn´t have to worry about not having the right parts available, or the right tools, or the error proofing devices to avoid defects on the line. That way they can fully focus on the process, get deep understanding of it, and put their brains to work thinking about improve the process, how to make more with the same or less, or suggesting subtle changes to sequences to avoid defects or improve productivity.

But Lean is simple right?

Yes, the simplicity in this example I`m giving is that if you provide the right conditions to the worker, the worker will perform according to a plan. For the process to be simple, you have to make it simple. But for the process to achieve simplicity, may require manpower, tools, dedication and constant experimentation. Lets not forget creativity and engagement. The equation is simple, better conditions, will produce the best possible results.

Many people do not understand this, and believe that just implementing a few tools, will turn the company or the process into Toyota. This is far from truth. Sometimes you will need to invest, to use people, to use some resources so they will give you knowledge. The knowledge will be used at your convenience. To take the best decisions and to ultimately make your process better. Typically, the best process, is the simplest process. But in order to achieve simplicity, patience, structure, methodology and a lot of time is required. If you do not agree with me, do you think Toyota became the world´s greatest manufacturer in 10 years?

So, in the end Barcelona is Lean.

I believe they are lean at some degrees. As i mentioned, you may watch Lionel Messi, dribbling against defenders with grace  and speed. But sometimes for Messi to shine the way he does, the team sets the structure and the pace for him to take advantage of it. We may only see Lionel scoring, once, or twice. But the work behind that is what allows him to be the shining star in the best team of the world. I guess the lesson is, if you wan't to be in the best company in the world, you better be prepared to experiment, learn and to get knowledge from your process, so one day, can be simple and lean.

Thanks for reading, I wan't to read if you agree or not. Don't be shy and leave a message.