Chapter 8

Ten Final Thoughts about Lean

Lean has been around for a few years now. However, common perceptions and misperceptions, some accurate and some less so, exist that necessitate some discussion as to their veracity.

8.1 What Lean Is Not

To a large extent, Lean has become the poster child for the postindustrial world. Indeed, it has contributed immensely to the profitability and efficient functioning of many public and private institutions because of its emphasis on satisfying the customer. However, some perceptions and misperceptions exist that can jeopardize the value of Lean, maybe not in the short run, but in the long run, and can have devastating consequences for an organization. Most of these perceptions and misperceptions center on what Lean is not.

Lean is not an excuse to circumvent controls. When Lean emphasizes the need to please the customer, it does not mean a company must loosen or eliminate critical controls, for example, financial or operational, thereby putting a public or private institution at risk with, for example, the government, public, or investors. In many circumstances, controls are necessary and they may, at times, stay in place even if it means creating some waste and, yes, displeasing the customer. In this regard, the customer isn’t always right. Too often, Lean focuses so much on customer satisfaction that it jeopardizes the long-term survivability of the customer or the company. Although a rarity, it has happened. In some cases, approvals are necessary before a process is considered complete. The desire for speed and direction may be what the customer considers more important; for example, the plane breaks up in flight because appropriate controls were eliminated that served a valid purpose in the manufacturing process. Surely under such circumstances, customer satisfaction is sacrificed in the long run. Some waste is necessary under certain circumstances even if it means not pleasing the customer. That is why it is very important for Lean project managers to know the priorities according to what the customer wants and determine whether they are feasible. Project managers should ensure that a charter exists as well as develop a meaningful SOW and requirements matrix, and conduct risk assessments and gate reviews to ensure that controls are not eliminated or weakened, and, if so, make sure an audit trail exists related to decisions made and actions taken.

Lean is not a one-time affair. Many times Lean, as do many other initiatives in companies, becomes the flavor of the month. The topic circumvents just about everything else that is important and, indeed, many events become interpreted, rightly or wrongly, from a Lean perspective. Like a little boy with a hammer, everything becomes a nail. “Leanese” is spoken even when people sometimes do not even know what they are saying. Then, suddenly, the enthusiasm runs out because no more nails exist and interest in Lean declines. In some cases, it dies a slow death. A danger exists for a Lean project in the nature of the project itself. It, like all projects, ends once the goals and objectives have been achieved and the customer is pleased. Oftentimes, after the kudos and celebrations are over, followthrough no longer continues and the results of the Lean project die a slow death and, yes, the customer regresses back to the old way of doing business. Lean projects need followup on their results to avoid this scenario. Otherwise, in time the gains yield to the losses. Good project managers of Lean projects recognize this tendency and, while managing the project, consider what is needed to sustain the results achieved. In other words, they also plan for the future after the Lean project completes. They may not develop a full comprehensive plan but they communicate the need to consider what happens after a project fulfills its goals and objectives. Project managers should raise this concern during requirements analysis and building the WBS.

Lean has value even if it does not result in change. This one is partially true in that it increases people’s awareness and knowledge about an existing process and also provides opportunities for greater communication and coordination. However, stopping at that point is wasteful. Many Lean projects have consumed innumerable people, considerable time, and other resources to come up with recommendations to improve processes that will satisfy customers. This can be very gratifying to a team and a customer. However, and it happens more often than not, the recommendations seem to fall by the wayside if a Lean project concludes at that point. Not implementing recommendations is not only a waste of organizational resources and simply adding to the overhead, it can be very demoralizing to a team that came up with the recommendations but nothing further occurred. It is not too difficult to understand why this circumstance frequently exists, and it goes deeper than believing that people resist change. Reasons include a fear of the consequences of making a change, such as job loss or decrease in managerial or executive power, union resistance, ego protection, politics, and many others. The point is that people, from shareholders to employees, have invested blood, sweat, toil, and tears, as Churchill would say, to improve a process that will satisfy a customer. If this tends to be a trend in an organization, project managers will face considerable morale issues as negativism and game-playing become a higher priority than achieving the vision for the project. Not seeing the fruits of their labor being implemented can prove depressing and, ultimately, demoralizing. Toward the end of their projects, project managers need to emphasize the necessity of pushing for sustainable change, which means addressing the implementation of recommendations. Indeed, they should incorporate in their plans sustaining and operational considerations, planning activities for the next phase. In many cases, Lean projects have responsibility for implementing their recommendations but that is not always the case. In large companies, however, coming up with recommendations may be separate from implementing them.

Lean is the same as re-engineering. This is partially true. Many of the tools and techniques of Lean can be used on re-engineering projects and vice versa. That is, however, about all the similarity that exists. The focus on Lean is the customer; in re-engineering it is on efficiency. Re-engineering projects seek to obliterate an existing process and totally rebuild a new one, often without the participation of the people doing the work. The results are often wholesale slaughter of processes, not to mention jobs and careers. For the most part, Lean emphasizes a more measured approach toward change. The emphasis is on continuous improvement in the pursuit of perfection. It builds upon the past, eliminating in a process anything that does not add value to the customer. Lean emphasizes engagement and relies on the people who do the work to identify improvements and, it is hoped, their implementation. It reduces the fear factor substantially because they have a say about a process. Project managers of Lean projects must stress and encourage stakeholder engagement to avoid the disastrous consequences of re-engineering that had occurred in the past. That is the true value of a plan to manage and lead stakeholders. By ascertaining their degree of interest and power concerning a Lean project by using stakeholder analysis, a project manager can take action accordingly to ensure greater contributions from stakeholders.

Lean is relevant only in manufacturing environments. Lean may have received visibility for success in the manufacturing environment, but, as this book shows, it can be applied in just about any environment, including the office environment. Many office environments still adhere to the old business model by Frederick Taylor, treating everything as if it were a manufacturing line. Or, they may apply Lean in a small way, which is fine but does not capitalize on its power. Many medical environments are prime examples where Lean could prove valuable. The administrative way of doing business in many medical facilities is replete with examples of processes needing Lean. The medical laws, such as HIPAA, can only be blamed so much. In many offices, and not just medical facilities, applying 5S is about the only extent to which Lean is applied, and usually only one or two of the Ss are used: sort and shine. Lean is so much more than 5S and the office environment, more out of rigid adherence to the status quo, often fails to leverage Lean as a way to reduce overhead and become more responsive to customers. Project managers of Lean projects in nonmanufacturing environments should apply the same rigor in applying Lean concepts, tools, and techniques that occurs in manufacturing industries. These concepts, tools, and techniques can be identified in the WBS, schedule, and responsibility assignment matrices.

Lean is a way to reduce headcount. This perception is the gorilla in the room. Yet, that is precisely how many people at the executive levels view Lean. So many times public and private people talk Lean through both sides of their mouths as a popular saying goes. They will often say, “People are our greatest resource,” but, at the same time or just afterward, lay people off while embracing and applying Lean. Lean is an excellent way to reduce overhead but the emphasis is on providing value to the customer. Unfortunately, the leadership of an organization fails often intentionally or inadvertently in communicating that Lean is another convenient way for thinning out the ranks. Naturally, after one or two successful Lean projects and layoffs soon follow, people become skeptical and, rightly or wrongly, perceive Lean simply as a means to chop heads. When this situation occurs Lean’s value shifts from something being embraced to being avoided, sabotaged. Project managers of Lean projects need to be aware of this perception that can arise because it can be a worry for some team members. If team members perceive Lean as contributing to even the potential loss of their jobs their engagement in the project is likely to wane and could result in subtle or overt resistance. Project managers need to have the support of an organization’s leadership to embrace Lean projects by assuring people that they will not lose their jobs due to Lean projects and to demonstrate assurance by rewarding, not punishing, people for doing a great job applying Lean. However, the tone starts at the top and if senior and executive management communicate the wrong message even the best of project managers will face a difficult battle to complete a Lean project.

8.2 What Lean Is

Lean is a way to engage people. Getting people involved in removing waste is essential to increase ownership and reduce resistance to change. People who know part or all of a process will likely have a good idea how best to improve it by eliminating waste and satisfying a customer. They will also feel less threatened than if a group of process engineers simply goes and streamlines a process without any consultation. However, if team members feel they are merely pawns, even if encouraged to participate, they do so perfunctorily. Fear of job loss is a real issue on a Lean project. Just think about it. If a company removes waste and operates more efficiently and effectively with less, why would people want to participate in something that means the destruction of their livelihood? Yet, executive management often ignores this common sense realization by making statements that ignore negative consequences and stress enhancing shareholder value and profitability. Streamlining a critical process and laying off people, at least in the short run, will shoot profits up; frequently, in the long run it will shoot profits down. It behooves project managers, therefore, to get people engaged throughout the life cycle of their Lean project. Many of the tools of PM encourage greater engagement, such as having the people who do the work help build the plans as well as execute them. People on a Lean project should be rewarded, too, to demonstrate that senior management values them as well as their contributions. One way to do that is to assign them to other projects rather than letting them go after the Lean project they supported. Nothing can kill morale faster than laying people off once a Lean project has demonstrated uncontestable value to an organization. Unfortunately, sometimes the business models in some companies result in forcing immediate realization of savings and the easiest way to do that is to cut heads. When that happens, the ripple effects radiate through the ranks elsewhere in an organization and the motto “Lean is mean” becomes the phrase of the day. Engaging people is one way to offset this negative perception; the other way is to reward for performance.

Lean is more than the bottom line. This perception is tied to the previous one. However, it goes one step further. It involves satisfying the customer. That’s right; the focus is on the customer, not simply gutting an organization to reduce costs. The financial bottom line is just one aspect of Lean to consider. It does no good for a company to do everything it can to reduce costs in the short run but in the long run jeopardizes its very existence. Short-term gain can lead to long-term pain. Customers still need reliable, sustainable support beyond a project. Nothing can kill Lean faster than, ironically, a long degradation of services or products delivered to a customer because Lean projects emphasized cost reduction over everything else. The “bean counters” may be happy but the rest of the organization can suffer. True, efficiency is important, but so is effectiveness. Without both, the zeal for Lean can quickly lose favor among the rank and file. Project managers of Lean projects need to emphasize and take a balanced view of Lean on their projects. They need to consider all options and consequences and subscribe to a strategic view of their projects. They not only must think about the immediate requirements of their project, such as cost, schedule, and quality but also the longer-term ones. A good systems perspective, a risk assessment, and requirements prioritization are three solid ways to ensure that Lean projects are more than trimming the bottom line. In some circumstances, as noted earlier in the book, some waste may be necessary and would be of no value in eliminating it, such as legal compliance.

Lean requires an investment in time, money, and effort. As most people know today, quality is not free. For many years that was not necessarily the perception. Times have changed, of course, and quality, of which Lean is a subset and some people would say the other way around, has costs associated with it. These costs are really investments to ensure that a quality product or service is delivered to a customer. However, as with all investments, a breakeven point exists where the gains start to decline. As an investment, Lean projects require a considerable application of time, money, and effort to achieve success. Time, money, and other resources, especially labor, are needed to train people. Time, money, and other resources are needed to enhance understanding of what exactly the customer wants and improving a process accordingly. This common sense, of course, is anything but common. What often happens is that the pressure is so intense many Lean projects are done on the cheap: little time, money, and effort are invested. For many reasons, many senior managers and executives see Lean as important and, despite the huge potential returns, financial or otherwise, scrimp on the investment. Not surprisingly, many Lean projects end up working with shoestring budgets and the recommendations and actual improvements are less than stellar. Confidence in Lean in general and in these projects in particular wanes. In time, Lean no longer becomes the flavor of the month and recommendations for improvement are no longer considered seriously. Project managers of Lean projects need to exercise assertiveness in this regard. They must perform realistic planning. When confronted with a series of directions that will only lead a Lean project to disaster, they must provide alternatives and, in some cases, state that a project is not doable under the current conditions. This is not as easy as one would think when project managers have senior executives hovering over them and they have a weak project sponsor. Many Lean projects are so lean, ironically, their fate is predictable and, yet, many project managers sit idle in the face of such circumstances. They often settle for projects that are akin to having a champagne taste but having only a dime to spend.

Lean is a never-ending journey. Even though a project is by nature short lived, the reality is a Lean one is not. Lean requires continuous application of its concepts, tools, and techniques to improve processes as an organization seeks to satisfy the customer. Both circumstances and the needs of the customer are going to change over time. Nothing in a work environment is static. People leave, profits decline, demand goes unexpectedly up, and new tools and techniques come into existence and upset existing ways of doing business. These situations require continually keeping tabs on processes. With change often comes the need for improvement. Just because a Lean project ends, it does not mean additional future improvements for a process are unnecessary. It is important, therefore, that project managers of Lean projects never lose sight of this fact. They need to plan not for the end of their projects but also for future Lean ones that may capitalize on the output of the former. Taken from a different angle, project managers of Lean projects need to recognize that implications of their projects continue long after completing the current ones. They need to instill that thought into the minds of the stakeholders and plan for the potential repeatability of their projects. A good project closing is important at the end of each phase, whether using the PDCA or DMAIC life cycles. Performing archiving and conducting lessons learned sessions are just two of the many ways to prepare for potential future projects that may address the same process.

Lean combined with project management is an exercise in Lean. For many people, PM is the antithesis of Lean. They see PM as layers of bureaucracy and control that quite simply adds to the overhead of an organization. They view PM as merely a roadblock preventing people from getting the real work done. Hence, the popularity of the term PM lite and no one really knows exactly what that means other than less PM. PM lite is often viewed by some as an excuse to apply what is euphemistically referred to as “seat of your pants” PM. Although a minimal degree of PM may be warranted for certain projects the lack of any PM as defined in this book is a surefire prescription for disaster. It is true that Lean requires speed and flexibility to develop and implement recommendations to improve processes that please the customer, but it is also true that no PM, and no project leadership, can also result in slowing a project and hamstringing adaptability. The best perspective is to view PM as a backbone to manage and lead a Lean project. Not all backbones are the same for each person because people vary in height, weight, and so on. A six-foot backbone will not serve a five-foot person very well and vice versa. The backbone needs to be appropriate for the size and shape of the body. The same concept applies to PM on Lean projects. The breadth and depth of project management concepts, tools, and techniques being applied must be conducive to the context in which a Lean project finds itself. Project managers of Lean projects must demonstrate this wisdom about PM to show PM is an exercise in Lean. They can communicate and work closely with key stakeholders, for example, to determine the degree of PM to apply and talk to other project managers who are, or were, responsible for other Lean projects of a similar nature. They can also establish metrics to determine how well their processes are furthering or hindering project performance, such as progressing through its life cycle.

8.3 Project Management and Lean: One Final Thought

Lean continues to pick up momentum across many industries. When an organization decides to do a Lean project, it usually means that the business case demonstrates an improvement in many areas, financial or otherwise. In the end, a Lean project should demonstrate improvements in efficiency and effectiveness. PM is the most efficient and effective way to achieve such results. Otherwise, a Lean project will go down an endless trail, never ending, like the wheels on a bus going round and round.