Uber moves aren´t LEAN, ISO and how helpful really is & my thoughts on mexican workers.

This time there was so much going on, so wanted to write about 3 different topics cause I think, using Lean thinking, might be less of a problem and more an opportunity.  First there´s Uber and the controversial move that caused many drivers feel uncomfortable with the company. Then we will be discussing a little bit about how helpful really is ISO and finally a few thoughts on Mexican workers and Lean.

First Uber

This week many drivers said they were unhappy with the controversial decision the company took to lower the fare. This past week the company lower the rate in Mexico City (don´t know if they did this in all countries) but at least in Mexico city the minimum fare was reduced from $40.00 mexican pesos to $35.00, about 1.9 usd.  But this is the fare the customer pays for the service, while the commission charged for the drivers remained at 20%. The issue, the drivers say is that their costs are the same and in some cases higher, but as the price is lower and the commission they have to give to Uber is the same, of course the gain for drivers will be less. So they made a demonstration last friday, demanding going back to the same minimum fare of $40.00 to keep attractive being an Uber driver. They also claim that they weren´t consulted, nor told with time about this decision. They received an email, the night before the new fare was available. They also say that communication with Uber is difficult, since they communicate with the company only through e mail, and sometimes the response is too slow. I haven´t been able to see Uber comments on this regard, and they haven't said if they will go back to the $40.00. In the mean time the customer is happy, but customers may start being affected since some drivers, are requesting other drivers to stop working at night, which is the moment were Uber demand is higher, specially on weekends. Some people has said that if drivers do not want to work under those conditions, should leave the company. I believe a true Lean company, listen to the workers. They are engaged and they are part of the solutions and strategies of the company. I also understand that drivers working for Uber, aren't really Uber workers. But they share the problems, they are part of a great solution of transportation in the city and they, drivers, also share the profit that comes from every ride. A lean leader, could have informed a bit earlier to drivers, to let them know, what problem was the company trying to solve, and maybe, asking for some ideas. The communication, without knowing the whole story, is key and is critical. I think that there must be some true in driver´s statements claiming that communication is slow and inefficient. In a Lean environment workers are allowed to speak up, to point problems and provide solutions. Workers know better since they are the ones executing the operations and interacting with problems. In Uber's case they are the one's with instant feedback and interaction with customers, they should know a little about ways to improve. Since we don't have the company's side of the story I'm going to leave it here saying that if this is all true, the way Uber acted is everything but Lean.

How helpful does ISO really is?

This part of the post is also, totally my opinion in a subject that has been questioned, really since I started my professional life, 11 years ago. This last weeks, my company (Is not really my company, but the company I work for) wen´t through an on site audit to certify that it complies to ISO 9001:2008. That made me reflect on the fact that many people do not think ISO is worth it or help to make their jobs easier.

That of course, we know is a symptom with three possible root causes or a combination of the three. The first is that ISO doesn´t really help organisations to ensure a higher operational execution. The second is that the systems companies have are really complicated  and ISO is only exposing how inefficient and bureocratic they are. The third is just a missinterpretation on the requirements the norm demands. I believe is a combination of the three. Which one contributes the most, is hard to say. But I have work long enough in environments where ISO is implemented and where other systems co-exists and I think it is outdated. The key reason for having a system, and we all know it is critical to have the right system in place, is to deliver superior and consistent results. I think ISO main focus of standardisation is right. But as many have said, is not and end, is a mean to a superior vision or goal. Although standardisation is necessary and helps to execute processes in a consistent manner, it should´t be and excuse nor an obstacle for people to work in a standard way. Think about the way ISO looks how to control formats, the codification of formats and how things should be handled if we want to change a procedure or improve a process. The process is often long, involving many steps in order to have everything in conformance with the norm. I think this is because many companies, when going through ISO, create processes that are inefficient and in some cases really long. This has to do more with the company and the coach, interpreting the norm, helping and guiding the implementation. ISO is a norm, and like any other, is subject to personal interpretation at some points. The key for it to be really beneficial, I think is to keep two things in mind: the customer and that if implementing something bugs people, is an excuse or an obstacle to do things safer, easier, better, faster and cheaper, then is not really helpful and in my opinion should never be implemented in the company. If we can balance and practice ISO in an easy smooth manner, the benefits can be high. Specially on the standardisation process and to have written processes so other can learn new tasks and help to train others. 

Finally mexicans workers & Lean.

Many believe that Mexican workers are lazy, and look for ways to work less. As the famous BBC program Top Gear stated a few years ago, when criticised the Mexican Car Mastreta MXT. When talking about Lean, Mexican managers and workers always think:

Lean is Japanese, it´s easy for them, they are very disciplined, we are not. 

I believe that Mexican workers are curious and can be engaged at high levels. They are natural problem solvers and they like the quick, easy, simple solutions. I believe this caracteristics fit very well within a Lean culture. Mexican workers like to solve problems. They are curious and they like to learn new things. A Lean company allows workers to learn new things, allow experimentation and engagement. Mexican workers can speak up loud. This is also essential in a Lean culture. When a problem appears, workers must be encourage to point the problem and look for a solution. Managers must be ready to act quickly and engage workers in the solution, otherwise Mexican workers will loose interest and would be even harder to engage them again. Mexican workers, are like elephants; they never forget. There´s also another thing were workers in Mexico aren´t as good at it: planning and standardisation. We like to take hands on, to solve problems quick. There´s nothing wrong about it, but if solving a problem do not involve planning, the results could be disastrous, and as said before, Mexicans tend to loose interest real quick.

Mexican workers inspecting cars at a VW plant in Mexico.

Also, standardisation doesn´t come natural. For us is difficult to follow a procedure. I said it before, we are curious and like experimentation. While this could be useful in problem solving, may not be as helpful when executing a process. Since variation introduced by the workers will often make it difficult for managers to understand why the process is behaving the way it is. Fortunately, I have found that leadership is the best way to avoid this obstacles and turn this weaknesses into strengths. Simply by talking to workers, asking for their ideas and opinions and respond quickly and objective to their demands. Sounds easy, but it´s harder. Specially if the company doesn´t have a culture of "Respect for People" it becomes really hard to engage workers and having them to understand that they are as important as anybody in the company and that their work is appreciated. Without that, workers just go to work for their pay check, with no other interest. Not very different to workers in other countries right?

Glad you went through this. Please leave a comment or share with someone who might be interested. 

Searching within... Toyota Kata

This time, I`m writing about some of the lessons that I have found within the magnificent book, Toyota Kata by Mike Rother. You can get a direct access here and understand into dept what Toyota Kata is and how you can develop the scientific thinking behind this great book. Today`s post is also related to other great book I`m reading; The Happiness Hypothesis by Jonathan Haidt. I will proceed to explain how this two books relate each other, and why I think they are both right.

Chapter 4 in Toyota Kata is about knowing yourself. It is a chapter in which Mike Rother explains clearly the evolution of one piece flow. Through his research it is explained that the very first company that tried to achieve a flow of one piece at a time: which is a key concept in LEAN, was Ford Motor Company. In this chapter it is explained the evolution from the T model assembly line,  from static bays where all materials and workers walked to the body and started assembling the parts to the idea of one infinite conveyor transporting raw materials all the way until the car was completed. The solution the engineers at that time used was... open holes on the walls of the building to connect all different processes to achieve a better flow. We have to remember that at that time, the T model was assembled in one building with different levels. Where processes took place at different levels and as the processes continued, down the building, final line, located at ground level (you can see a drawing of the building in the book to get the idea of what was like to build a car in the 1910´s). 

Highland Park Michigan.

All this story I`m using is to illustrate the statement done at the end of the previous chapter in that book. There Rother explains the way the cost/benefit analysis is used at Toyota, and concludes that :

We should´t spend much time benchmarking. We are the benchmark.

Is obvious. This statement is clear, if we know that Kata is basically a thinking model of; first, define What our current condition is? Then, Where do we want to be next? and finally What are the obstacles preventing from getting to the desired condition? All this thinking implies analysing ourselves, or our companies. 

Benchmarking ourselves. 

I have written a few about my days at Ford. I remember that during the first months, as the plant was being prepared for the launch of Fiesta, we had to read a lot about Toyota, and then do some training about tools such as FMEA, 8D`s, SPC, etc. The vision, was to create the best manufacturing system on the world, and of course, our model was Toyota. We read the Toyota Way, the Toyota Way Fieldbook, we learned about kitting, one piece flow, standard work and also about the Toyota Way of Lead; Learning to Lead at Toyota  which is a HBR article. This article had a major impact in myself, as also did Toyota Way and all the things I learned there. I also remember that one of the early presentations I saw, was about Toyota Yaris, a B segment Vehicle that at that time was the Best in Class, and as we were preparing ourselves to launch Fiesta, Toyota was the automaker to emulate. During my years there, I was able to participate in many Benchmarks, but in the end, they brought little value, since in order to make a big change in our vehicles, a major development was needed. And often cost/benefit analysis showed major changes didn´t make sense. To my surprise, I didn´t know that it was Ford the very first who tried to achieve the ideal state of flow. The highland park story, mentioned above was unknown to me, and I`m sure it is the same for many of the colleagues working at Ford. The Paradox is that Ford was trying to be like Toyota, studying the Lean methods and principles, and I believe that similar conclusions could be achieved by examining its own story. 

The Happiness Hypothesis

This Book from Jonathan Heidt is written on the idea of testing ancient philosophy with modern science and studies. The main idea the book examines, or at least one of the main ideas the book studies, is the one that says that happiness comes from within and that we are a product of our own mind. One of the conclusions that I remember is that both statements are right. In order to be happy, to find joy, must find purpose and realize that our life has a meaning. But also that our environment has the right conditions to produce happiness in us. The book states that there are certain conditions that help people to feel happier, for example, being married. I think  that is better explained as Jon said to me: 

The secret is... to be embedded, connected.... happiness comes from between.

So, what about it?

Going back to Kata. The conclusion I have for this post is to think about the times we have tried to use a tool or to implement a practice from a competitor or from other industry. Sometimes after conducting some benchmark, we have concluded that the specific solution may not apply to us, because of many constraints in our environment. Does that mean that we should stop doing benchmarks? No. I believe is important to know whats going on with our competitors, or with other great companies. But I believe that in order to be efficient, to improve faster and to become lean, we must identify our current condition, where do we want to be, and then, analyze, what constraints prevent us from getting there. This is key, cause knowing ourselves, will lead to more efficient solutions. Solutions that will work within our environments and will fit our needs. And more important, will be difficult to copy, cause they have been tailored for us. I think this is one of many secrets Toyota has taught us. Do you notice another paradox here?

Thank´s for reading. Would love to read your comments below.  

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. 

Common mistakes when implementing. Mexican government is no exception.

Today I write about the new controversial regulations to control traffic and drivers that Mexico city´s government is trying to implement. I also describe and link this attempt to control traffic and to change driver´s culture in Mexico, to common mistakes done by companies when trying to implement something; a new process, a new tool, a new software, etc. The lessons Mexican government is teaching, I believe, are, invaluable.  

Recently there's been a lot of controversy in Mexico, due to changes done to the traffic regulations. Among the restrictions are that drivers cannot use their cellphones while driving, drivers mustn't invade the crosswalks, the use of the horn, etc. In reality, many of this restrictions have been there forever, but the controversy is on the fines. Some of them have gone insane (from my point of view) considering that Mexico has a deep corruption problem. Some fines are as high as $117.00 Usd. For those reading from the US or Canada or Asia, take those $117.00 and multiply by 17 and will get an idea what a fine feels like in Mexico.

The main problem the government is trying to solve, is the way mexicans drive. Drivers here do not respect pedestrians nor cyclists. We don`t even respect other drivers and because of the way Mexico City is planned, it becomes a chaos driving here. Mobility is a problem. So the government thought that hardening fines would help to modify our behaviour as drivers. Some people think that this is only a way to collect money from citizens. But as this isn't a political blog, won´t go there. Instead will analyze briefly what mistakes has committed the government when implementing changes and increasing the fines.

Lack of communication

Is true that in successful organizations, communication is a top priority. Successful organizations make sure changes are communicated to all members at all levels. To help to understand why the change is needed and how it will be conducted. In our case, the communication from the government has been simple but not yet effective. Since modifications haven´t been explained in detailed and the reason why hardening regulations is ambiguous. The government says it is to avoid accidents and reduce mortality. How ever they haven´t shared any data so we can really see a before - after difference or improvement.

Lack of Clarity

These recent days, drivers have been extra cautious and people resist to adopt the new regulations. In great part because they do not understand what the government wants to solve by improving this regulations, but also, because most of the new regulations aren´t clear to us; the citizens, nor the police men who are supposed to apply the fines. As Karen Martin often explains, lack of clarity will often bring resistance to change. 

Lack of visual management

One of the most controversial regulations, are the speed regulations. It is supposed to fixed the speed according to the type of avenue. Primary avenues, allow a maximum of 80 kmh, while secondary avenues allow only 50 kmh. Small streets, like those in the neighbourhoods, allow a max. of 35 kmh. The problem is that nobody explains what is a primary avenue or a secondary.

In Mexico City is very common to witness images like this
where cars, trucks and cyclists move together in  dangerous
ways. Wrong culture in the streets.

And unfortunately there aren't enough signs or visual aids in the streets so drivers can see clearly what´s the maximum speed allowed. This is a critical missing tool, since it is very common to drive long distances without a single sign on the maximum speed. Other common place are intersections. There are a lot of intersections without crosswalks, or with no clear identification on the street´s directions.  Visual management in industrial environments usually gives feedback to the worker, to see if he/she is falling behind, if there is enough material, if more material is needed, or where scrap or reworks or defects should be placed and when it becomes necessary to take care of them. I have always thought that streets should clearly give feedback to people. Providing information about speed, places where it is correct to cross, walk or drive. 

Common place in Mexico city. The first light is green and
a few meters later is red. Lack of standardisation and visual
management.

When and where is necessary to stop and promote flow of people. Other major problem are green and/or red lights, since the city doesn´t have a synchronised network to allow flow. Is really common that in the same avenue, one light is red, and one block before is green. This is basic to protect pedestrians, cyclists and drivers. And also necessary to promote mobility (flow).

No Poka yokes

With a chaotic environment like the one I described before, is clear that streets and avenues need better planning.  If we sum the lack of standardisation and visual management, plus the wrong practices and poor culture when driving, we have as a result a city where is really a nightmare driving. That´s why have streets that do not allow law breakage is fundamental. Consider the factors iIhave described before and will clearly see why it doesn´t just work having lines painted on the floor and call it bikeway (see below´s picture). To really protect citizens, a little bit more infrastructure is required; poka yokes that do not allow cars to trespass the limits. Probably in Norway couple of lines painted on the floor work, but definetely do not work here in México. 

Most of the bikeways do not have anything to protect cyclists against
cars invading the lane. 

No going to gemba.

Finally, this example gives the government the opportunity to go out to the streets and see for themselves if the new regulations are actually protecting people from having accidents while promoting flow. Also the opportunity to learn and adapt rules and laws according to the reality, that we, as citizens, are facing. Of course, as many failed implementations, leaders do not take the opportunity to go to the source and validate their proposals. I have seen many leaders (including myself) thinking that proposals, or ideas, or rules implemented would work perfectly on the real world, when in reality they are not. This is in a way, arrogance, because we, sometimes think that our solutions work perfectly and there´s no need to improve or adapt any aspect of our proposal. Lean is powerful, because allow humility inherent in seeing, learning and experimenting to determined if our solution is the best. 

Hopefully our government would take a step out of the office and see for themselves. Most important, hopefully, by watching and learning, would take appropriate countermeasures to allow moving in this city would be more pleasent and safe.

Thanks for reading, I would love to read your thoughts. Please leave a comment below.

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.

Recognition: necessary at all levels.

I have recently helped an organization to get a certification, because of its performance and practices regarding Lean and Six Sigma. This certification is provided by the corporate office to certify the level each of its facilities held regarding Lean and Six Sigma. I helped this organization coaching and facilitating most of all. But it was the supervisors effort, motivation and the associates interest which made possible to achieve this recognition. They all made a great effort but one supervisor made an extraordinary effort to encourage his people to, not only practice, but to investigate further and teach others, giving the opportunity for them to give small presentations. Allowing the people to grow and learn. 

Recognition to those who deserve it.  

Dr. Eduard Deming.

I made a public display about the situation described above. The supervisor was overwhelmed, and thanked me, for recognising his efforts. I am not his direct supervisor, but i believe that we should give credit to people, when something extraordinary happens or when something outstanding is encouraged.  During the certification the plant manager conducted the gemba walk and when the certification was over, and the award was given, nobody was even close to it, as the manager took it and never let it go. I notice that all VPs and Directors started sending congratulations for the facility and the manager, but also notice that nobody forwarded those notes to the supervisors or the people who actually performed the job every day.  I understood that as well as front line workers, some managers also need recognition. The problem I see, is when they get recognition, but do not share it with the rest of the team. 

I think that recognition is powerful, because through recognition people find purpose. They feel they are contributing to the team. It was Dr. Deming who said:

If someone can make a contribution to the company he feels important.

This is a great thought. Simple, powerful, and yet sometimes we fail to recognize when people does something big, and deserves to be congratulated.  How many times do we congratulate people at job? What about our own family? What about our wife or parents? Of course, there is a reason why we usually focus on negative things, instead of focusing and promote the good things in life. This is true specially in organizations where culture has been hierarchical and do not promote development of people.  But instead promote growth of managers only. Lean approach, is completely different. Lean is about people and about trust in people. Sometimes we tend to prejudge people, thinking they cannot innovate or do things differently, just because their rol isn´t within management. But Dr. Deming also said:

Innovation comes from people who take joy in their work.

To build joy in every workers job, we need to start practicing respect for people. Respect for people involves people at the top too. But we should´t forget front line workers. Respect people´s opinion, challenge them to think, to learn, to experiment, to grow, to improve. That´s respect for people. Listen to their opinions. Have an open mind to accept that managers aren´t always right, and realizing that workers know more about the job, than we can imagine.

Dr. Deming was a great example of this quote. He worked until the last moment of his life. He died at age of 93 and he was still working. This clearly shows that he had a great joy in what he was doing. So, If we want to turn our companies in sources of innovation, if we want to make a contribution and take pride of our work, we better start recognizing people. Don´t know how? How about start with your children, wife or a friend. Lets start identifying those small things we all do everyday, that really make a difference. Soon, recognition will become a habit.

Thank´s for reading. I would love to read your thoughts. Don´t be shy, and leave a comment down here.

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.