This is my story of how we got here. It isn't right or true, but it is how I think of how we got here. What is different about your story?

Previous to the 20th century we had the industrial revolution. With the advent of power driven machines business consolidated work from the cottage to the factory. Machines were built by craftsmen and operated by specialists. These specialists worked to increase the output of their machines. The Industrial Engineer was born.

Scientific Management, a disciplined approach to increasing utilization of resources gained national sponsorship in the US in 1910 during a dispute between a labor union and the US government. Fredrick Taylor saw that management could create a win-win situation with the labor by helping them make improvements and sharing in the profits. He introduced the ideas of analysis of work into specific tasks, specialization, systematization, and measurement.  Scientific Management seemed to justify coming down hard on workers. Improvement was designed as a scientific inquiry and motivation was discussed by psychologists.

There is lots of conversation among us lean coaches about motivation and inspiration related to people changing. The difference to focus on is where the source is that compels you to action: internally with the case of inspiration and externally in motivation.
Lean requires leadership; a top down approach because people do what their boss needs. People generally work on what they think their boss thinks is important. One for motivation theory.

On the contrary, it is widely known that we really foul things up when we reward people for things that they should be doing anyway. Dan Pink talks on this concisely in his TED presentation and in his new book DRiVE. So, people are inspired.
The conversation could go on and on. Jeff Liker presents 5 motivational theories in The Toyota Way and how Toyota uses all of the above given different circumstances. I bet a blend is appropriate. We need leadership being sincere and learning with the team. And we need people ready to do the right thing.

So, what's keeping the team that you are on from changing?

Thanks to some local friends in the A/E/C industry I'm getting through Steven Spear's new book on organizational design, Chasing the Rabbit. We came up on a powerful remark about learning that I want to share. It is about responsibility and doing your homework to make yourself ready for external help.
Page 259: [The success of improvement] "rests on your willingness, energy, and drive to do your own homework so that you are pushed to the edge of your abilities and are therefore receptive and positioned to benefit from feedback, critique, and coaching."

What I hear on projects is, "we need to get our own house in order before asking others to change."

My high school math teacher, Frank Allen, used to say, “The obvious is usually hard to prove and often wrong.”   What I have learned since then is that what is obvious to me is often not obvious to another observer and vice versa. 

What does this insight have to do with lean?  One of the principles of lean is respect for people.  We no longer assume that the manager or the designated expert always knows the best way to do everything.  Each each observer has a unique and valuable point of view.  We need everyone’s participation to find the solution to a problem or a plan that will work.  It’s good news that you don’t see what I see, because that means I don’t see what you see, and you can save me from my blindness. 

Karen Martin's free webinar on Lean Psychology was great! Her examples and instruction are very proactive; I appreciate that. Following her tips we change agents are sure to avoid pitfalls. Much of the discussion was on resistance (per a lot of requests that she's gotten). I find it interesting what we do when we are resisting. Personally, I work on developing the habit of noticing resistance just to deal with it directly.

My take aways are: Reflection. Being fully present. Be a scientist. Words matter. Experiment. Thanks Karen!

Hello,

I am doing a 2 minute survey on surveymonkey.com to understand better what your questions are. I've been making offers to come to your office for an hour to present and discuss Lean. With your help I would like to better focus and prepare. Please take a minute in the survey HERE (http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/5VFTGWX) to tell me who you are and what questions you have. I'll publish the results here on my blog. All is anonymous. 

Thanks,
Matt

Projects are made up with people thrown together. Establishing the role of a relationship designer in a project based company has many practical purposes. Let's call that person the Social Architect (SA). The Project Managment Body of Knowledge ( PMBOK) does not go into enough detail about the social aspects of project management, yet we assign this role as part of the Project Manager's job description. A better fit would be somewhere above the project level; a support person who provides guidance and training to the staff PMs and superintendents. This person would be someone with knowledge of organizational behavior and culture, as well as team dynamics. They should also be a Lean thinker.

Just as a building architect must account for both the structural limitations and aesthetics of a building, a Social Architect must account for both the technical and interpersonal makeup of the project team. A major root cause of such poor performance on construction projects is our industry's inability to effectively collaborate. Poor collaboration typically leads to the suppression of ideas, decisions being made away from where the work is being done in a top-down fashion, and overall poor trust and one way communication by project participants. A root causes of poor collaboration in our industry is the "boss man" mentality that is embedded in the organizational culture of many construction firms. Eliminating this root cause (the "boss man" mentality) is critical to resolving poor performance on construction projects. Here are some capabilities of the Social Architect do what is needed on modern projects.

Capabilities of the Social Architect

• The Social Architect is a natural facilitator. But one step beyond that is required. Not only adept at creating an enviroment that is conducive to learning and making sure the right people are in the room when needed, the SA must be able to identify when the group needs to come together.
• Just like facilitating, training is a big part of the SA's job. Their audience would typically be other managers. The Social Architect helps managers act in a way that aligns with an empowerment culture. They can coach other facilitators for effective meetings and help managers get accountability and commitments from people rather than demanded responsibility.
• They don't have to be the charasmatic leader, but they need to guide the leader with what the team needs to hear. For example, they need to be the ones that ask why they are focusing on a certian element rather than just going deeper into it. As the cliche goes, they need to be able to see the forest through the trees.
• The workplace of the 21st centuary needs to be a place where people want to come to work at. The Social Architect promotes consensus and demonstrates to managers how to achieve a level of participation with staff that allows them to feel like their voice matters. In addition, they could perform audits of human-related factors to ensure that project team members have a high-quality project experience.
• As a cabinet level position, the SA would track human-related metrics from project to project (stakeholder satisfaction surveys, absenteeism, turnover rate, etc). Company wide, the SA could facilitate an Idea Development System for soliciting and implementing team member ideas. At the start of the projects, the SA would help balance the project manager in selecting the team for a balanced technical and interpersonal compatibility levels.

My parents’ dining room table has a broken leg.  We need to solve the problem before Thanksgiving.  Here are the alternatives we initially see:  

1)      Use the table as is and hope that Thanksgiving dinner does not suddenly slide onto someone’s lap.
2)      Take the table into the basement, repair it there, and bring it back up to the dining room.
3)      Replace the table temporarily with a borrowed table.

We reject alternative 1) since we have invited guests and we don’t want to embarrass ourselves.

I call it the American disease.  The person who has it the worst is always the person driving behind me on the road, except when I’m the one following a driver who is obviously lost and dreaming.

How does impatience affect our approach to learning Lean?  We become immediately discouraged when we find out that it will take more than 5 minutes to implement.  We don’t want to take the time to plan.  Doing is good, talking is bad, planning is talking, therefore, planning is a waste of time.  With this kind of attitude, lean will never happen.

How do you know your heading where you want to be? A big problem with consistent action in the lean transformation is an ill defined goal. If you, the leader really embrace continuous improvement and just want to write about the goal and them improve it over time, fine. That should work. And work great.

A maturity model may be helpful. Here is a blog that is geared toward assessing the maturity of a BIM implementation, but references some work that Greg Howell has done in the lean world. I expect most of this to be highly adaptable to your efforts.

BIM Thinkspace: Episode 12: BIM Performance Measurement