iSixSigma

Company Uses Lean Incorrectly

Six Sigma – iSixSigma Forums General Forums Implementation Company Uses Lean Incorrectly

This topic contains 9 replies, has 3 voices, and was last updated by  Thomas Whitney 7 years, 3 months ago.

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #54032

    marcy troy

    My company uses Lean incorrectly. Every time they hire a new person, everyone has to shift seats. It’s also been used as a punishment, i.e., sending a poor performer to a bad cude under the guide of lean.

    0
    #193031

    MBBinWI
    Participant

    @matr – OK, so what do you think we can do for you?

    0
    #193035

    marcy troy

    Hello–I had just joined when I posted that question and I was a little confused. Let me try again: I’m a BB in a transaction environment (generally processing claims and legal cases). A few years ago I mentioned the idea of Lean to my fellow managers because they had people sitting every where. They liked the idea of putting people with like skills next to each other, rather than putting them in any vacant cube. However, now it’s like Lean gone mad. It’s even been used to punish poor performers. Here’s an example: Two people have been moved from large window cubes to tiny, privacy-less, dark cubes closer to their managers. Yes, they were poor performers, but both times these people were told it was for “Lean” reasons, and not that the managers wanted to keep a better eye on them. Now every time new person is hired, we move people from cube to cube just to get like with like. There are people who have been moved 5x in 4 years. All done in the name of Lean. To me this is the most INefficient use of time and energy ever. In our environment, most of our transactions are done electronically. How do I now go back and say, “Hey, guys, you’ve got to cool your jets. Not only is this not really Lean, it’s also a giant pain and resource suck.” I’m hoping someone can help me in framing a better argument than the one I just wrote because even I know it’s lame. Thank you.

    0
    #193036

    MBBinWI
    Participant

    @matr – if they’ve been doing this for 4 years or more under the guise of Lean, I’m not sure you’re going to be able to make an argument that it is not.

    0
    #193039

    Chris Seider
    Participant

    I have to remember the Crusades. Just because something is purportedly the justification, it may be misrepresented.

    Lean is not a collection of suggestions but a system to identify and remove waste through actions.

    0
    #193043

    Robert Tripp
    Participant

    Maybe you should consider leaning-out the cube rearrangement process.

    0
    #193044

    gomezadams

    Or at least have them put on some circus music so that when it stops,you can see who is left standing.

    0
    #193045

    gomezadams

    Who is left standing will get the skunky project for the quarter.

    0
    #193052

    Marcy

    Thank you all. I especially like the Crusades comment. I will follow up with some of my peers. It is so silly and I feel somewhat responsible for the farrago because of my off-hand comment years ago.

    0
    #193055

    Thomas Whitney

    @matr Marcy, I can relate to you, I have done the same thing in the insurance business and management by proximity is a hard philosophy to stop once started.

    Maybe this will work:
    In the transactional world remember that most do not think analytically or in process.
    What does need to happen though is that they need to get some clarity on what problem they are trying to solve and what process is best suited to solve this problem.

    Try to have them state the problem in some measurable terms. Get the problem in analytical and measurable terms.
    Help them to map a process that will help improve the problem in measurable terms.

    In insurance claims, I got a small team together with one supportive VP and literally went through hundreds of claim files from the past and began to slowly show that those who resolved claims quickly and to best advantage to the company had a similar process. Those that did not had a wide variation in process. I also found some nasty little cheating issues to the dismay of the claim adjuster involved!

    This is data mining at its hardest. It is slow and tedious but the final results helped several other VPs start to get the message. They still were not so good at understanding how to think analytical or process, but the procedures we were able to put together did help the claims adjusters do a better job.

    0
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.