Business Basics
Home Page


Who is Bill Gaw?
And why should we
listen to him?

 

lean manufacturing principles and techniques training

Bill Gaw's 3-Step, World Class
Manufacturing Training Program
World Class Manufacturing

Increase the effectiveness of your
Lean Manufacturing Program

Manufacturing Simulation Game 

Organizational Transformation
Part 1 of 3


privacy policy

Lean Manufacturing, Basics, Principles, Techniques

For my latest
Goggle.Knol article:
Click Here

 To review Bill's training
 programs, click on 
  the links below: 

Lean Manufacturing Solutions

Performance
Management Training

Production Quality

Supply Chain
Management
Training

Lean Six
Sigma Process

Strategic Planning
Training

World Class Manufacturing

Kaizen Training

     Other Options:   

Manufacturing Simulation Game

Thinking Outside the Box

Implementation, Methodology, and Excellence Improvement Training

Balanced Scorecard Training Program

Kaizen Blitz Event

Lean Manufacturing Operations 

Six Sigma Management

Manufacturing Supply Chain Management

Strategic Planning Management

Quality
M
anufacturing

Lean Management
Certification Program

Lean Manufacturing Seminar

Lean Manufacturing Jobs

Process Improvement Training

Best of Gaw Lean Management Articles

ABSTRACT

 

Today's organizations face the need to accomplish change with increas­ing frequency. These changes vary in depth and breadth. Changes of all types require thoughtful planning and dedicated execution. Experi­ence suggests that there are three distinct forms of change, any of which may involve large or small changes. However, these different forms of change do demand different types of planning and different models of participation. Additionally, differing forms of change require that we address a variety of change barriers.

 

Two issues are at the heart of effective change planning. First, we must design into our change efforts real opportunities for effective par­ticipation by critical stakeholders and potential solution contributors. To involve these groups requires attention to goal alignment, focus, and creative problem-solving. Second, we must efficiently deal with the barriers to the change effort, by anticipating them and through well-designed approaches for their disposition.

 

Our conference session on this subject will actively involve partici­pants in a demonstration of these concepts. The intent of this paper, however, is to define and describe the differences between three forms of change and to present the distinctions among them in terms of plan­ning, participation, and likely barriers. Two macro-level planning tools are also presented.

CONVENTIONAL WISDOM AND CHANGE

Today, as never before, maintaining a competitive advantage depends upon an organization's ability to remake itself—on its ability to change. Although widely documented in recent years, a number of change-related challenges and change-management issues continue to confound even the most competitive firms. The reasons for such confounding are both internal and external. External to the enterprise, global com­petition, frequent shifts in the marketplace, and technological advance­ment combine to create new sets of challenges and new levels of per­formance expectations. These external forces create the need for more organizational change. Most will agree, however, that within any orga­nization, there is an upper limit—a threshold level for the rate of inter­nal change. At some point, the rate at which changes are needed bumps up against this upper limit.

First among today's change-creating challenges is the fast-chang­ing competitive environment. Many industries are over capacity, re­sulting in a struggle for market share through innovation, price cutting, and other means. Even in growing industries, the needs and prefer­ences of the customers shift frequently and unpredictably, requiring constant vigilance in product and service design and delivery. Frequent technological advances change the dynamics of the competitive land­scape, enabling alert innovators to rapidly gain momentary advantages.

With these competitive forces, product life cycles continue to grow smaller. As a result, design and prototyping processes must be acceler­ated. Similarly, training must often be accelerated, but the resources avail­able to provide such training may be severely limited. Likewise, invest­ments in tooling and fixturing are evaluated against more stringent crite­ria. And, of course, reduced life cycles and greater product variety imply many changes in materials procurement, production scheduling, setup procedures, and the control of the production process.

At the strategic level, many firms are discovering a need to shift their competitive emphasis away from the issues of cost and quality. New strategic directions emphasizing the use of service as a distin­guishing factor and the finer subdivision of the marketplace via "mass customization" both require innovation in the methods by which prod­ucts are designed, produced, and delivered. But achieving the desired levels of manufacturing and logistical agility is an elusive goal due to the perceived complexity and magnitude of the changes required.

Inevitably, the changes occurring in the competitive environment, in the technologies and product designs, and in strategic focus create a literal flood of changes for the lower levels within the organization. The overall lesson is clear: to remain competitive, organizations must become much more adept at change. This demands both efficiency and effectiveness, not only in the way an organization operates, but also in the change process itself. Because changes are more frequent (or con­tinual), the kind and number of resources consumed by the change process must be carefully considered and assessed. This often requires that organizations devise or adopt new change processes, capable of providing the level of organizational agility that the times require.

Unfortunately, organizational change efforts are nonroutine, and our attempts to bring order and efficiency to change efforts are filled with contradictions. For example, while organizations need change processes that feature high levels of employee participation, they also need to be more efficient in the use of the available time and expertise of the company's most valuable assets—its people. Continuous Quality Im­provement (CQI) programs provide a vivid example. In change-oriented companies today, many individuals are on so many teams and task forces that they barely have time to attend the meetings and per­form the duties of their job. Little time is left for actually creating im­provements. In a frenzied attempt to create more change, we often spend more time, but get less for it.

Likewise, management experts have long emphasized the need for extensive communication regarding change efforts. Such communica­tion serves many purposes, including articulating the "case for change," informing participants and stakeholders of the change's future impact, eliciting participation (or sympathy) from bystanders, and generally building awareness and buy-in. But, in many settings, the sheer vol­ume of communication taking place significantly reduces the available time and intellectual energy available for the change effort. We've be­come so well informed and we are so occupied in receiving, digesting, discarding, forwarding, and distributing information that the available time for any real innovation is reduced to an alarmingly small portion of the whole. To illustrate, what portion of your day involves reading/ organizing/deleting and responding to e-mails? How much of that ac­tivity adds value?

Similarly, while we must be strategically focused, we know that the greatest gains come from actions taken on the shop floor. But many organizations are almost totally lacking the integrating mechanisms through which the activities and measurements on the shop floor are meaningfully connected to the measures that guide long-term decision-making. Often, just when we begin to approach real improvements in the factory, top management appears to shift gears. Many partial change efforts remain in that status due to the seeming fickleness of strategic direction.

Let's take a moment to summarize a few critical points:

1.        The marketplace and competitive realities demand that today's organizations become more adept at change, what we'll simply call
"changeable."

2.   In attempting to become "changeable," many organizations respond with time-intensive activities and time-consuming communications that actually inhibit innovation and problem-solving. Countless meetings and endless communications clog the organization's problem-solving pipeline.

3.        Change efforts need to be connected to strategic objectives. Connecting mechanisms are needed to ensure alignment and to avoid suboptimizing behaviors.

4.   The "cycle time" of change efforts must be significantly faster than
the "cycle time" of strategic direction shifts.

To Be Continued


STAY CONNECTED

To stay current on Lean Management Basics and Best Practices, subscribe to our weekly MBBP Bulletin... and we'll send you our PowerPoint presentation, "Introduction to Kaizen Based Lean Manufacturing™." All at no cost of course. 

 

First Name:
Your E-Mail:

 Your personal information will never 
be disclosed to any third party.


privacy policy

Here's what one of our 13,000 plus subscribers
wrote about the MBBP Newsletter:

"Great manufacturing articles. Thanks for the insights. I often share portions of your articles with my staff and they too enjoy them and fine aspects where they can integrate points into their individual areas of responsibilities. Thanks again."

               Kerry B. Stephenson. President. KALCO Lighting, LLC


"Back to Basics" Training for anyone ... anywhere ... anytime

Business Basics, LLC
6003 Dassia Way, Oceanside, CA 92056
West Coast: 760-945-5596 

© 2001-2009 Business Basics, LLC