I had a rather obvious realization the other day, about what those of us in the lean “field” can work on.  My notion may seem too simple, and too either/or.  But hear me out. 
If your technical skills are great, work on your people skills.  And if your people skills are great, work on your technical skills.  Seems obvious, doesn’t it?  But I see too many technicians, say, listen poorly when they are facilitating groups.  Likewise, I see great facilitators balk at really understanding takt time or data gathering. 
So, you might ask, how can I be sure which to work on?  Ask your colleagues, your boss, and the people that work for you.  They know what you need to work on, and they will appreciate that you asked. 

Key to any lean effort is removing waste, or more accurately, removing wasteful activities.  As we identify what’s wasteful, we can focus more on what adds value.  Sometimes a “waste walk” will introduce people to waste, as they walk through an area looking for various forms of waste.  Even more illustrative is a "process walk," when those that work and manage a process actually walk the entire length of it -- noting wastes, counting steps, timing activities, and deciding what adds value and what doesn’t.  Of course, process mapping and value-stream mapping can document waste and value visually, helping organizational members see where work stalls, costs mount, and customers wait or suppliers search as a complicated process stretches out longer than it should.

Following Aaron Preston’s post this week wishing there was more A3 thinking on healthcare policy, I thought we could apply the analysis of value-added and non-value-added activity to the healthcare process.  And we could do it from the point of view of healthcare’s customer -- the patient.  If we walk, or map, the flow of a patient during a visit for a routine physical exam, we know that that not every activity adds value.  Clearly the visit with one’s doctor is the anticipated value of a physical -- that and any useful tests that analyze one’s physical health.  

Earlier this year I had a follow-up to a physical exam with my physician, but it really occurred in four stages.  First, I visited an independent laboratory to have blood drawn for lab tests, especially a cholesterol test.  Second, I visited my doctor to discuss my general health and the results from the labs.  Third, I obtained a CT scan that she scheduled for me to follow up on an earlier one.  Fourth and finally, my doctor called me after the CT scan to explain the findings.  [What happened?  My cholesterol is low, the CT scan found nothing, and I am taking more vitamin D.]  

Another major feature of lean organizations is a passion for simple and understandable processes. Lean enterprises know that this is the honest challenge of designing, making, and delivering their products and services. If processes are kept simple and understandable, their processes also become teachable and replicable.

Ironically, thinking through what’s simple, is rarely simple itself. Everyone involved in the supply chain must become devoted to watching out for added complexity and complication. If a designer, at the start of the chain, adds new features to a product, will those features not only impress the customer but be simple to make and understandable to sell? If not, where can the designer, upstream of making and selling, improve not only their design but also their design processes, to assure “simple and understandable” features?

A great test of whether a process is simple and understandable is whether it can be readily taught. Can I easily teach others my designs? Will those making or building my design easily teach others how to make or build it? And will customers “teach” their co-workers, friends, or family about it?

I am delighted to join Lean Project Consulting as a senior associate.  In my first few posts I want to discuss several important features of lean organizations.  And for my first post I want to talk about focusing on How instead of What.  

The best lean organizations pick ambitious, even daunting goals about What they plan to achieve.  But then they spend their time constantly working on How to achieve those goals.  

This is not a trivial distinction.  For employees a persistent focus on How means continuous work improving the way they do their work, including regular collaboration with co-workers to strengthen and simplify work processes.  For managers continuous attention on How means always asking employees about any new methods they are developing, and inquiring How as managers they can provide the right resources to support employee improvements.