When is it time for lean "lite"?

I'd like to welcome Jamie Flinchbaugh of the Lean Learning Center as a guest author on Evolving Excellence!  You'll be seeing more of him in the future.  - Kevin Meyer
-------------

by Jamie Flinchbaugh, Lean Learning Center

[Some of you may be familiar with my posting at Mark Graban's LeanBlog. I will continue to share ideas through LeanBlog as well as through Evolving Excellence. I hope you as readers continue to support both blogs as contributors to the lean conversation. You can read my LeanBlog posts here.]

Most of us who have been far enough down the path of lean to know how rich and powerful it is when you really get deep despite any shortcuts along the way. We hate the idea of people not pursuing a full lean journey. We reject any idea of of a lean "lite." 

So, when would it make sense to pursue a "lite" version of lean? 

First, let me give you what would be my version of lean lite. True lean transformation ultimately requires masterly of a wide range of skills and tools. Lean lite would only require skillful use of a couple of methods. Lean wouldn't dominate the focus of people's efforts but would be occasional and clearly considered "extra" work because it would not be embedded. None of this is ideal. Why would we want it?

We would want it because sometimes the pursuit of that goal is more realistic than the pursuit of the ideal. If the organization was willing to move forward to something lesser than the ideal, wouldn't that be better than trying to get a commitment to the full vision? 

There are some types of organizations that are naturally going to struggle with going deep on a lean organization. One characteristic is that most of the individuals in the organization spend most of their learning time focusing on learning their chosen profession on the latest knowledge. These professions include teachers, lawyers, and accountants. Every one of these professionals must spend substantial hours learning their trade. It is reasonable to ask how deep they would be able to engage in learning lean, and expect that there may be some limits. 

Another challenge to developing a deep lean culture and skill-set is a high amount of turnover in the management ranks. Of course, this can be changed if you truly pursued it. Many industries suffer from an inherent turnover, such as hospitality. Hotel management is continuously hiring and rotating personnel. So are many retailers. This lack of long-term management creates a major barrier to building a deep and lasting cultural transformation. 

If an organization suffers from these challenges, they can still start a lean journey. It just might have to be lean lite. If you had to scale down lean to a couple of core skills that can be learned and applied without a huge commitment to a giant leap in thinking. What would that look like to you? 

Imagine a hotel that just practiced a solid degree of 5S from supplies to information with a regular practice of 5 Why problem solving. Imagine your local branch bank that did visual management of their work processes and flows combined with standard work for core activities. Imagine your favorite local diner that has a strong and shared customer value focus and a simple waste elimination process. Would you write a book about it? Probably not. But wouldn't it just be great to see an organization that doesn't appear to have any hope of being a real lean enterprise begin practicing some empowering methods. 

I don't intend to suggest lean lite as a means to avoid a true commitment to lean. However, when facing blank stares or a new leader every six months, perhaps lean lite is a reasonable response. 

And the end hope - the enough bite-sized application opens enough eyes to a bigger way of thinking that a real commitment can eventually be reached. 

[You can also follow me on twitter.com/flinchbaugh]

Comments

[Paul Slater]

Isn't lean "lite" really for many organization just the natural behavior reaction to change? I have seen too often that lean transformation is perceived as an "all or nothing" proposition. The reality is, lean engagement more recently is slow and incremental change is an acceptable way of providing the foundation for future "step" change. With workforce shrinkage, turnover has slowed dramatically and employee lean engagement has a stronger tone of employment "risk". Practitioners and experts can certainly argue otherwise but "lite" is an approach that, in this economic climate, has considered company culture and market conditions as the "pacemaker" for lean transformation.

[Jason Morin]

Thank you! Thank you! It's nice to finally hear a lean practitioner actually say lean "lite" is OK. It may not be ideal, but it's better than nothing!

[Jamie Flinchbaugh]

Kevin, thank you for the welcome. It is a pleasure to be aboard.

[Dan Markovitz]

"Perfect" can be the enemy of the good, and "total" lean can be the enemy of lean "lite."

Lean is a journey, not a destination (even for Toyota). Lean lite is a good start. If it leads to a fuller, deeper embrace of lean, great. If it leads to better service, quality, and cost, that's good too.

[Bill Waddell]

Jamie,

I have often railed against 'Lean Lite" but I agree with you. Lean Lite is better than no lean at all - so long as the company adopting knows that it is Lean Lite. My criticism has been against those companies that implement lean on a very limited - lite - basis, then declare lean to be a fraud because they did not get Toyota-like results.

[Glenn Whitfield]

Jamie,

Excellent post, and very fitting for the types of firms you point out (legal, etc.). The problem is many organizations apply these tools in the "lite" model, but think they are doing the "full" model. They then wonder why they don't see true transformation. Unfortunately, some then give up.

The key is to recognize what you are getting in to from the start, and what it will take to realize the vision you set for yourself!

Glenn Whitfield

[Jamie Flinchbaugh]

Thanks all for your comments. In particular to Glenn, you are right. It is important to call it lean 'lite' or whatever you want to call it just to keep people from being confused or limiting themselves.

I don't even have a problem when companies are doing "firefighting" and putting in "band aids" - that's just going to happen. But let's call it what it is. Let's call a band aid and band aid, and let's call lean lite what it is too.

There are no shortcuts to the ideal state.

[Karen Martin]

Jamie - excellent food for thought. I'm with Glenn. The key is making sure the organization knows the likely outcomes, given their chosen path. Setting reasonable expectations is key. It's also important to be honest about how grueling a true Lean journey is. Calling it "Lean Lite" rather than bonefide transformation also honors TPS and keeps it from being bastardized.

[Philip Neukom]

Thank you for a thoughtful posting. I think a lot of failure to implement "lean" is due to trying to do too much too soon. Typically a company lacks the disciple to implement change or lean tools. So "lean lite" makes sense to start the learning of discipline. Without organizational discipline, no one will stick to task or complete tasks. The inability to stick to task becomes the failure that gives lean a bad name.

[Liz Guthridge]

Lean lite, which I believe includes LEAN COMMUNICATIONS, works very well for service organizations and departments. I appreciate you acknowledging that lean lite is better than nothing. For example, takt time doesn't apply in my LEAN COMMUNICATIONS work; however, value creation and waste identification and elimination are critical.