Comments on: Two Types of Kaizen http://lssacademy.com/2007/10/28/two-types-of-kaizen/ Lean Manufacturing, Six Sigma, Lean Six Sigma, and Kaizen Thu, 18 Mar 2010 08:32:21 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: KC Harris http://lssacademy.com/2007/10/28/two-types-of-kaizen/comment-page-1/#comment-2763 KC Harris Mon, 01 Dec 2008 22:23:24 +0000 http://lssacademy.com/2007/10/28/two-types-of-kaizen/#comment-2763 Point kaizens and System kaizens are not good or bad. They are just tools for improvment. Great improvement can be made by diving into the root cause of a point kaizen. I could walk out to the production floor, see inventory stacked on the floor, and demand a larger rack be built. This would create activity and improve the rack, but it would skirt the systemic issue. The root cause could be a number of things including late or early delivery, machine downtime, poor planning, not following one-piece flow, etc. It is not enough to create a visual workplace; the visual indicators must be catylsts for action to improve. Point kaizens and System kaizens are not good or bad. They are just tools for improvment. Great improvement can be made by diving into the root cause of a point kaizen. I could walk out to the production floor, see inventory stacked on the floor, and demand a larger rack be built. This would create activity and improve the rack, but it would skirt the systemic issue. The root cause could be a number of things including late or early delivery, machine downtime, poor planning, not following one-piece flow, etc. It is not enough to create a visual workplace; the visual indicators must be catylsts for action to improve.

]]> By: Tim Goodman http://lssacademy.com/2007/10/28/two-types-of-kaizen/comment-page-1/#comment-1849 Tim Goodman Fri, 11 Apr 2008 13:55:03 +0000 http://lssacademy.com/2007/10/28/two-types-of-kaizen/#comment-1849 Greetings. I am a Quality Technician at Acumed, a medical device manufacturer. We have numerous point style Kaizen events, but we seem unable or unwilling to see the larger system. Thus many of our lean gains deteriorate six months later. Thanks for the post. Tim Greetings. I am a Quality Technician at Acumed, a medical device manufacturer. We have numerous point style Kaizen events, but we seem unable or unwilling to see the larger system. Thus many of our lean gains deteriorate six months later. Thanks for the post. Tim

]]> By: Introducing the Kaizen Newspaper | Lean Six Sigma Academy http://lssacademy.com/2007/10/28/two-types-of-kaizen/comment-page-1/#comment-1465 Introducing the Kaizen Newspaper | Lean Six Sigma Academy Thu, 06 Mar 2008 03:37:44 +0000 http://lssacademy.com/2007/10/28/two-types-of-kaizen/#comment-1465 [...] once the future state VSM is complete and the point kaizen events are identified, set aggressive goals.  I have seen tremendous transformations occur in 4 days!  [...] [...] once the future state VSM is complete and the point kaizen events are identified, set aggressive goals.  I have seen tremendous transformations occur in 4 days!  [...]

]]> By: Ron Pereira http://lssacademy.com/2007/10/28/two-types-of-kaizen/comment-page-1/#comment-1420 Ron Pereira Sun, 02 Mar 2008 21:18:47 +0000 http://lssacademy.com/2007/10/28/two-types-of-kaizen/#comment-1420 Thanks for your excellent insight Chris. I really appreciate it. Thanks for your excellent insight Chris. I really appreciate it.

]]> By: Chris Akins http://lssacademy.com/2007/10/28/two-types-of-kaizen/comment-page-1/#comment-1401 Chris Akins Sun, 02 Mar 2008 00:21:06 +0000 http://lssacademy.com/2007/10/28/two-types-of-kaizen/#comment-1401 Ron, I have run across the point kaizen mentality in companies both large and small. Although I believe these add value when run properly and with the larger process in mind, I have often seen these run as a "knee jerk" reaction to a one time issue, or to keep "egg off face" when a senior manager notices a potential problem (or even just asks a genuine question). In some of these instances "fixing" the problem may create more problems in different parts of the process, or may fail to address the root cause of a failure if too focused on any single part of a process. For instance, I was recently asked to do an RCA and conduct a kaizen to address a one time shortage of a critical purchased component that "stopped production." It was clear that although I was asked to conduct the RCA, the bosses had already concluded (without any data) that the buyer responsible for the part failed in some part of his job. There was no consideration given to the larger process, and the roles that finance, engineering, and production played in the shortage. Long story short the direction was to ignore those elements and focus on "fixing" the ordering process. Interestingly enough the RCA showed that the supplier had placed the company on credit hold for past due payments, without informing the buyer. Indeed, finance never informed the buyer that they were paying late. Conducting a point kaizen on the ordering process was both fruitless and waste of time in this instance. (Maybe Ill post a case study on my blog - when UBD finishes the programming - about this...) I am a believer in total systems integration, so I am always a bit wary of point kaizens unless sufficient research is conducted prior to or during the event to truly understand what needs addressing and how potential solutions impact other functions within the organization or processes along the line. Great post. I'm glad you distinguished between the two types. Chris Ron,

I have run across the point kaizen mentality in companies both large and small. Although I believe these add value when run properly and with the larger process in mind, I have often seen these run as a “knee jerk” reaction to a one time issue, or to keep “egg off face” when a senior manager notices a potential problem (or even just asks a genuine question). In some of these instances “fixing” the problem may create more problems in different parts of the process, or may fail to address the root cause of a failure if too focused on any single part of a process.

For instance, I was recently asked to do an RCA and conduct a kaizen to address a one time shortage of a critical purchased component that “stopped production.” It was clear that although I was asked to conduct the RCA, the bosses had already concluded (without any data) that the buyer responsible for the part failed in some part of his job. There was no consideration given to the larger process, and the roles that finance, engineering, and production played in the shortage. Long story short the direction was to ignore those elements and focus on “fixing” the ordering process. Interestingly enough the RCA showed that the supplier had placed the company on credit hold for past due payments, without informing the buyer. Indeed, finance never informed the buyer that they were paying late. Conducting a point kaizen on the ordering process was both fruitless and waste of time in this instance. (Maybe Ill post a case study on my blog – when UBD finishes the programming – about this…)

I am a believer in total systems integration, so I am always a bit wary of point kaizens unless sufficient research is conducted prior to or during the event to truly understand what needs addressing and how potential solutions impact other functions within the organization or processes along the line.

Great post. I’m glad you distinguished between the two types.

Chris

]]> By: Ron Pereira http://lssacademy.com/2007/10/28/two-types-of-kaizen/comment-page-1/#comment-1397 Ron Pereira Sat, 01 Mar 2008 02:43:42 +0000 http://lssacademy.com/2007/10/28/two-types-of-kaizen/#comment-1397 Sure thing JWDT. Thanks for the idea! Sure thing JWDT. Thanks for the idea!

]]> By: JWDT http://lssacademy.com/2007/10/28/two-types-of-kaizen/comment-page-1/#comment-1396 JWDT Sat, 01 Mar 2008 02:09:11 +0000 http://lssacademy.com/2007/10/28/two-types-of-kaizen/#comment-1396 Ron, Good explanation of kaizen 'blitz' types. I believe a lot of people get 'blitz week' kaizen (whether point or system) confused with the underlying term or larger view of Kaizen (i.e. change for the good). Could you do an article between the difference? JWDT Ron,

Good explanation of kaizen ‘blitz’ types. I believe a lot of people get ‘blitz week’ kaizen (whether point or system) confused with the underlying term or larger view of Kaizen (i.e. change for the good). Could you do an article between the difference?
JWDT

]]> By: Six Sigma :Your Resource for Strategic Management - » Lean Six Sigma Roundup http://lssacademy.com/2007/10/28/two-types-of-kaizen/comment-page-1/#comment-1082 Six Sigma :Your Resource for Strategic Management - » Lean Six Sigma Roundup Thu, 08 Nov 2007 06:25:56 +0000 http://lssacademy.com/2007/10/28/two-types-of-kaizen/#comment-1082 [...] of Lean Six Sigma Academy describes two types of Kaizen: Point Kaizen that looks at only a part and the System Kaizen at the whole. There are good and bad [...] [...] of Lean Six Sigma Academy describes two types of Kaizen: Point Kaizen that looks at only a part and the System Kaizen at the whole. There are good and bad [...]

]]> By: Ron Pereira http://lssacademy.com/2007/10/28/two-types-of-kaizen/comment-page-1/#comment-1080 Ron Pereira Mon, 29 Oct 2007 17:51:45 +0000 http://lssacademy.com/2007/10/28/two-types-of-kaizen/#comment-1080 Well said Rick. Thanks for the comment. Well said Rick. Thanks for the comment.

]]> By: Rick Foreman http://lssacademy.com/2007/10/28/two-types-of-kaizen/comment-page-1/#comment-1079 Rick Foreman Mon, 29 Oct 2007 16:16:02 +0000 http://lssacademy.com/2007/10/28/two-types-of-kaizen/#comment-1079 Ron; Good post. I can really see two sides of the fence on this. My past experience depends upon the particular group you may be working with. Recent experience has shown that without the "point" kaizens on the shop floor, to train and coach the people on what to see, the culture is not changed thoroughly enough for them to identify the system kaizens. With some of the best suggestions coming from the floor, I've seen that the "point" kaizens lead to sustaining a change and then impacting the system. Yet, in our office environment it is somewhat reversed as the mapping exercises definitely open the eyes to the many "point" kaizens that can be approached immediately. At the end of the day, the real question will rest upon how much waste has been kaizened out of the entire organization. Ron;
Good post. I can really see two sides of the fence on this. My past experience depends upon the particular group you may be working with. Recent experience has shown that without the “point” kaizens on the shop floor, to train and coach the people on what to see, the culture is not changed thoroughly enough for them to identify the system kaizens. With some of the best suggestions coming from the floor, I’ve seen that the “point” kaizens lead to sustaining a change and then impacting the system. Yet, in our office environment it is somewhat reversed as the mapping exercises definitely open the eyes to the many “point” kaizens that can be approached immediately. At the end of the day, the real question will rest upon how much waste has been kaizened out of the entire organization.

]]>