Who says you can’t speed up innovation?

After a three-year stint as Operations Manager in a plant in Oregon, I was offered the opportunity to return to the Innovation Group for Armstrong World Industries, a ceiling tile manufacturer.  I was to support a team of scientists and technicians, and help them improve their processes and speed up the time to launch new product ideas.

In my first few weeks, I spent time observing the processes the team used to come up with new ideas and bring them to fruition.  Each scientist, with the help of assigned technicians, would develop their own approved idea, using whatever development technique they chose to use.  Every so often, their manager would meet with them to review status and see if there was any help needed to drive progress.  More often than not, the scientist would not ask for any additional help.  Even less likely was the chance the scientist would go to their manager when they were stuck and needed help.  Things took a long time to complete. 

I also took a look at the innovation spaces and testing centers that supported the Innovation Team.  Disorganized and disconnected, these spaces became available on a first come, first served basis.  Scientists often had to wait for testing assistance, as there was no clear way to prioritize or schedule work in the spaces. 

Pilot Plants

I knew I could bring some value to this group, as long as I had someone to sponsor me.  I was new to this area and had to build credibility.  Luckily, I found a manager who was frustrated with the amount of time things took and was open to trying something new.

The first thing we decided to do was pick a target area in the testing spaces (our Pilot Plant) to organize, with the idea of improving productivity and responsiveness for testing.  We picked a small team and used a 5S (Sort, Set in Order, Shine, Standardize, Sustain) event to improve the area and named an Area Owner.  The owner would reserve the area for the scientists and technicians and ensure work was prioritized properly.  This first owner had to have strong leadership backing and the internal fortitude to stand behind her choices.  Luckily, our first owner had both.

This first 5S effort brought immediate and visible positive results to the Pilot Plant.  Over the next few months (and years), more and more areas became organized using 5S and strong leadership support.  Work flowed through the Pilot Plant in a much quicker way.  Strong Area Owners ensured the highest priority work would be done before lesser value work.  If anyone tried to break the rules, the owners knew they had support for their efforts to control the work flow.

Now that we had simplified and streamlined the testing work, we needed to come up with a way to make the development work more visible.  As I stated earlier, scientists liked to do their own thing and then present their inventions and discoveries in their own time.  Because of that, there was no clear way to assess progress and provide help or support during the process.

With the support of the manager, we approached the Innovation Director with this idea:  Have a weekly meeting of all scientists and technicians to give them the opportunity to discuss their progress and talk about next steps and any help they might need.  The Director was intrigued, but was unsure how the group would react to “structure”.  He told us, “You can’t schedule invention.”  My reply was, “Maybe you can’t, but you can schedule the steps on the way to invention.”  If nothing else, the scientists would have an opportunity to share their discoveries with the group.  He thought it was worth a try and decided to start the following week.

Accelerating Innovation

The first weekly Innovation Group Huddles were unstructured on purpose.  The Innovation Director asked each scientist to talk about what they were working on.  Some of the scientists were willing to do so and would take the time to describe the intimate details of their work.  Others had little to say, and even with prodding didn’t seem willing to share.  Although it was frustrating at the beginning, we realized this was the first time the team had the opportunity to discuss their efforts in this way, and agreed to keep the process going for a while to see what might happen.

About three months after starting the Innovation Huddle, a scientist was talking about his work and admitted he was a bit stuck on how to test one of his ideas.  For the first time, another scientist spoke up and said, “I worked on something similar three years ago and I would be happy to share my data and results with you, if you think that would help.”  All of the sudden, the entire group opened up and realized why they were there.  They could share and learn from each other.  Scientists love to share and learn, and now they knew this was their forum to do so.

Over the years, the Innovation Group Huddle became more visible, more engaging, and focused on helping each scientist and technician in their efforts.  After four years, the time to market, from initial idea to launch was reduced from eighteen to ten months.  The portfolio of new products developed by the Innovation team more than doubled from $150 million to $380 million.

If It Fits It Ships – The Story of the Valenciennes Startup

In 1994, I was responsible for quality control for a ceiling grid joint venture between Armstrong World Industries and Worthington Industries.  At the time, we had two domestic plants, but plans were in place to build a new plant in a town in the northern part of France, Valenciennes.

As an Industrial Engineer, I was very interested in the overall design and layout of the plant, and wanted to help maximize the flow of materials throughout the plant.  I was invited to participate in the early development of design options. 

Working with other staff members at our plant, we came up with what we believed would be the best use of space for the six planned operating lines.  We considered where the raw materials would come into the plant, get stored for the lines, and then after production where they would be stored and then later shipped.  We also considered where the personnel and mobile equipment would interact with the lines and believed we had designed a safe and productive plant for construction.

Compressed and Stressed

We were invited to present our design at an executive review of the top 4 plant design options. I was excited to be included in this critical process.  As the designs were reviewed, it became apparent that the executives liked a design that looked extremely compressed and had conflicting flows of materials and personnel.   As the president of the joint venture was speaking about it, he said that the compressed design allowed the plant to start up three months earlier, as only part of the plant would have to be built to house the operating lines and then the warehouse could be built at a later time.

I knew this design would be unsafe and the plant would be stuck with poor flow for many years to come.  However, the other executives in the room seemed to be in agreement with the president and they were ready to pick this design to build.  I could feel the stress welling up in me and I knew I had to voice my concerns with the decision.  Some of my design team knew I was about to speak up and they looked like they thought it might be my last day working with them.

“Are you willing to risk the future of the plant, just to start up three months early?” I asked them.  The vice president of engineering looked at me and asked me to elaborate.  “If you look at the compressed design, you’ll see that there is no safe way for mobile equipment and personnel to service the lines when they’re all operating.”  I then proceeded to show them how products coming off three of the lines would be in the way of products coming off of the other three lines.  The engineering VP then chimed in and reinforced my point, saying, “That was bothering me too!”  I couldn’t believe that he needed a young engineer to voice this vital concern.  Luckily, I don’t know how to keep my mouth shut.

The conversation in the room changed and the executive team took another look at all of the designs and finally chose our design, with a few modifications.  As we left the meeting, I felt relieved and satisfied that I spoke up. 

Show and Tell Gone Wrong

A number of months later, the plant was getting ready to start production and I was asked to develop quality control drawings and provide training for the technicians who would be checking the products as they were being produced.  I had been to France one other time in my life, but relied on my parents to take me around and deal with any issues.  Now it would be my turn to figure things out.

I was assigned a bi-lingual college student to work with when I got to the plant.  My job was to teach him about how ceiling grid worked, the technical details, and then design a training program for the employees.  The first thing I needed to do was to show him how the grid was supposed to work.

Ceiling grid provides a framework for the ceiling tiles, lights, vents, and other accessories to fit into.  The dimensions must be accurate, or the parts won’t fit.  The company had made some innovations to make the grid stronger, using “stitching”.  Stitching joined the metal together in such a way that it would stay straight and wouldn’t flex when it was being installed.  The stitch also made the metal act as if it was thicker in a way that didn’t get in the way of installation.  There are holes in the grid that allow other grid components to be inserted and connected at ninety-degree angles in order to make the complete framework for a room.

I started at the beginning with my student.  I put a twelve-foot bar of grid on the floor of the plant and told him to imagine it was up in the ceiling.  Then I showed him how the first four-foot bar of grid was designed to go through the hole in the twelve-foot bar.  Next, I told him, “Now, we put the connecting four-foot bar of grid through the hole to meet up with the other four-foot bar like this ….  like this …”  They were both supposed to fit through the same hole and connect to each other, but they didn’t.  What could be wrong?

Fixing a Stitch

I turned one of the four-foot bars around and found that I was able to connect both bars through the hole.  I got more grid and found that 33% of the connections weren’t working.  33% is an unacceptable scrap rate, so we had to figure out what was happening.  It turns out that if the stitch was in just the right (or wrong) place on the ends of two pieces of grid, it made the metal appear to be thicker than the width of the hole, and the grid wouldn’t fit.  We had to figure out how to remove the stitch from the ends of the grid or we wouldn’t be able to sell the grid from our new plant.

It turns out that this was the day the first shipment of grid was to be sent from the facility to their first customer.  There was a celebration in the plant with speeches, cheering, and champagne.  I took the plant manager aside and informed him of what we had found and that we would need to bring the shipment back to the plant in order to assess the situation and protect the customer and the new plant.  He looked unhappy, but understood what he had to do. 

The following day, we determined how to remove the stitch from the ends of the grid and the quality problem was solved.  We delayed the first shipment by two days and the plant was successful for many years following this initial issue.  Being observant and speaking up spared the company from huge losses and damage to its credibility.

The Gift of Kaizen

It was shortly after Thanksgiving, late one afternoon on a cold day in November.  I had just gotten home from what I thought was my last business trip of the year.  I was tired and wrung out from all the travel, not to mention all of the hubbub of gearing up for the holiday season with friends and family, dinners and parties, and you get the idea.  I had just sat down in my favorite comfy chair and put my feet up and closed my eyes when a call came in to the Process Improvement Partners Hotline.  The voice was deep, full of life, and familiar.  “Adam!“ It wasn’t a question, it was a statement.  It was as if he knew me and somehow, I knew him.  I had spoken with him before, but I couldn’t put my finger on when and where it might have been.  “Speaking,” I said.  “This is …aah… Mr. C., we’re having some trouble at our Northern toy factory.  If we don’t get all of our orders out in December, we’re going to have some really disappointed customers.  Can you help us?” he asked.  “Of course, just tell me when you need me, Mr. C.”  He let out a big belly laugh and said, “Right now!” 

When you get an urgent call like that, you do whatever it takes to respond.  So, I packed a bag, my extra socks and my warm hat just in case, booked a flight, called an Uber, and got ready for my adventure in the North.  Twenty minutes later a long red car pulled up with the oddest-looking driver I ever saw.  He had pointy ears, said his name was Brucie, and that he would be taking me directly to the factory.  I told him I had already booked my flight, but he said I wouldn’t need it, he had a way of getting me there sooner.

We started talking and he told me how the workers had been getting behind at the factory due to more issues than they could handle.  As we talked, I felt myself drifting off to sleep.  When I woke up, I was at the North Pole.  “Holy Smokes, the North Pole!  Glad I packed my extra socks and hat, I’m going to need them,” I thought.

Assessing the Situation

Brucie took me to the Big Guy’s office.  We embraced like old friends.  He told me I was on the Naughty List for a few reasons I won’t elaborate on here.  If I could help them resolve their issues, I might wind up back on the Nice List.  I told him I would do my best, but first we would need to take a walk through his factory to see what was going on.

Brucie led the way.  It turns out he was the operations manager, and he wanted to see what I might be able to offer.  As we walked through the factory, I saw piles of work in process inventory.  I could barely see the workers themselves.  They could see me, however.  Every time I passed a worker, I would hear a giggle.  Apparently, I looked a bit out of place in their factory.  My ears weren’t pointy, I didn’t have bells on the ends of my safety shoes, and they seemed to know why I was on the Naughty List.

Brucie told me his workers were making mistakes and when they asked for help, no one could hear them, because all of the piles of inventory muffled their voices.  He also felt he needed a way to see progress during the day and assess whether or not he was on track to meet all of the orders.  The Big Guy looked concerned.  He didn’t want to disappoint any of his customers and he felt that his workers were losing hope that they would be able to complete all their work in time.

I spoke with a number of the workers on the tour.  To a person … no, to an elf, they seemed worried.  They knew they had to complete their work, but didn’t know what to do about it.  They wanted to help, but didn’t know how.  They were working as hard as they could, but just didn’t know if it would be enough to be ready for the big delivery.  There was also something somber about the atmosphere in the plant.  It seemed like elves should be having more fun doing their work, but the energy level and joy was not there.  I was hoping they weren’t considering striking.

After the tour, we sat down for a lunch of milk and cookies to discuss what could be done.  I told Brucie and the Big Guy that I could facilitate a session with 6 of the production workers, Brucie, Kittie from HR, and two maintenance workers that would solve the problem in three days.  They looked skeptical, but were willing to commit the time and resources.  This was way too important to shortcut.  We had to solve the problem.

The Kaizen Begins

The next morning, the Big Guy kicked off the session with inspiring words of encouragement and faith in his team.  He knew his team wouldn’t fail and that I would be able to help them do what needed to be done.  It’s great to have such outstanding leadership and support and also knowing that my sponsor could get me off the Naughty List.

The Big Guy left, and I spent a few hours teaching Lean principles and techniques to the team.  Instead of Power Point slides, I used Flipcharts made of taffy.   Once we finished with a sheet, I’d hand it to the team to munch on.  Elves are little, but they really like the sweet stuff.  And boy can they eat!  Early in the discussion I got some pushback from Kittie, who said, “We’ve been doing things the same way for centuries, what makes you think you can help us solve our problems with this Lean stuff?”  I assured her and the rest of the team they would look at their situation differently using Lean principles and I had confidence in their spirit, enthusiasm, and creativity.  I also told them I believed in them and knew we were going to do the right things to win.  Plus, I had to get off of the Naughty List!

After that they asked many good questions and were able to make a connection to the problems they were facing in the factory.   They realized some of these principles might help and translated some Lean terms into Elfish, so that the others in the factory would understand what we were trying to do.  We then took a walk through the factory to generate ideas to improve the situation.  The team members were really getting into it, even Kittie.  They started to understand how to apply what they learned in the classroom to their situation.  When the team returned to the meeting room, we took a break to have some hot cocoa and peppermint sticks.  I don’t normally eat like this, but it seemed like the right thing to do and it was really yummy!

After our break, the team prioritized all of their ideas into three major categories:

1.       Improve the flow of work

2.       Visual management to assess progress of the production lines

3.       Managing systems to provide help immediately to anyone who needs it

I broke the team into three sub-teams and they got to work in the afternoon.  I have worked with many Kaizen teams in my career, but I have never seen any team get as much work done in a few hours as Team Elf.  It was almost by magic. By late afternoon, each sub-team had put together some really solid work plans and were ready to implement their solutions the next morning. 

That evening, we had a team dinner at the most beautiful and coldest restaurant I had ever been to.  The Big Guy and his wife joined us, along with some of the other staff, including Dancer, Rudolph, and Olive, the other Reindeer.  During dinner we talked about all we had done that day and what we hoped to accomplish by the end of the Kaizen event.   There was much laughing and toasting.  Stories were told about me I had forgotten about from my early childhood.  How did they know about my adventures at the Rolling Stones concert or that my first-grade teacher used to love my piano playing or that her name was Mrs. Simonds? 

I must have gained ten pounds that evening, as nothing I ate could have been healthy.  After dinner, I was shown to my room for the night.  It was cozy and small, but I felt right at home.  It’s very cold at the North Pole, but there was a warm fire in the hearth.  Good thing I packed my favorite footie PJs.  After a cup of the best hot cocoa I ever had, I drifted off to sleep.  That night I dreamt about Lean Toy Delivery, figuring out ways the Big Guy could get down chimneys in a safer, more efficient manner.    

Implementing Solutions

We kicked off the morning of the second day with a few Christmas carols and other elf favorites.  Rudolph came in to see what was going on and used his nose to act as percussion.  You could feel the team’s optimism, energy, and excitement.  I reviewed some Lean concepts then set the team off into their working groups to implement their ideas.  I reminded them that it was helpful to get others’ input and even utilize their help, just in case it would be needed.  Everyone in the factory was a Kaizen team member, they just didn’t know it.   We were going to do everything possible to win.

In the middle of the morning, I noticed the “Improve Flow” team had rearranged the workstations in the factory.  Instead of one elf building hundreds of the same toy assemblies before moving it to the next elf, he or she would build one sub-assembly and pass it on to the next elf to do their part.  This improved flow, identified quality issues more quickly, and reduced the piles of inventory.  Everyone could now see each other, help each other, and hear each other.  They looked so much happier and started singing Elfish songs – the type of songs that stay in your head and can’t escape until another song takes its place.  I’m hearing one now, I kid you not!

The “Visual Management” team put together some large display boards, made out of white chocolate.  These boards showed the hourly production results with targets and actuals listed.  Each line leader was responsible to post his/her team’s results.  If they met the hourly target, they put a green spearmint candy on the board.  If they missed the hourly target, they put a red cinnamon candy on the board.  I noticed that the first time a line hit its hourly target, there was a spontaneous cheer, laughter, and dancing from the workers.  It was contagious, and I found myself dancing with them.  I hope no one filmed it and put it on their social media site, Elfbook.  It would be too embarrassing!

The “Managing Systems” team installed pull cords at all of the work stations.  If someone was falling behind or had a question, they could pull their cord and a yellow Gummy Bear light would flash at their work station.  They would get help immediately to get them back on track or answer their question.  The team also created an hourly, daily, and weekly audit to ensure everyone understood and followed the new process.  The line leader was to do the hourly audit, Brucie was to do the daily audit, and the Big Guy did the weekly audit.   They made the audit fun by giving out random treats to the workers as they walked around the factory.

By the end of the second day, I could see the team was well on their way to solving the problem and making all of their customers happy.   The team was energized and excited about what they were doing.  They had a few more things they wanted to do, but I sent them home for the evening, confident they would get it done on day three.  I went back to my room and tried to relax.  It was happening so fast and there were so many customers to serve.  Would we make it?  Would I get off of the Naughty List?

On day three, the team came in and got right to work.  They put together a training plan for all of the workers in the factory.  Instead of writing work instructions, they wrote songs to sing while the elves were working.  Each song contained the information they needed to make all of the toys in the safest, most efficient, and highest quality manner.  Elves love to sing, so this was a brilliant solution to an age-old problem.  I don’t know if my other Kaizen teams would be willing to use this method in the future, but you never know what might work.  Kittie even admitted she was impressed by the solutions of the team and really believed these improvements would work and save Christmas.

The Report Out

After filling ourselves with snickerdoodle cupcakes and chocolate milk for lunch, the team went out into the factory and presented their efforts to the rest of the elves.  The Big Guy spoke first.  He started by telling everyone what a great job they were doing and how important their efforts were to their customers.  He then gave his support to the team who had worked so hard for these three days and handed the presentation to the team.  The team reviewed and demonstrated all of the changes they had made.  Finally, they sang the songs they had written and invited the other elves to sing along.  There was a joyous sound throughout the factory as everyone started singing and following the musical work instructions.  After the singing was over, the team high-fived, hugged, danced, and clapped for each other.  The Big Guy even gave me a hug.  He could have crushed me, but I felt warm all over.  It was the nicest recognition I ever received. 

I was relieved and exhausted when it was all over and I was ready to go home.  My Uber showed up, with Brucie as driver again.  We talked about all of the great work of the team as he drove me back, and once again I drifted off to sleep.  When I woke up, I was home in my bed.  Was it all just a dream? 

On Christmas morning, I came downstairs to get breakfast and saw a candy cane taped to an envelope with my name on it on the kitchen table.  I ate the candy cane and opened the envelope.  Inside was a note that said, “Adam, thank you for your help at the factory.  We were able to make all of our deliveries this year and think we should be OK for years to come.  Love, the Big Guy.”  This was great news, but I was still wondering about one more thing.  I walked into my office and on my white board was a note that said: “And yes, you’re off the Naughty List … for now!”

Beer is the Answer

In 1991, I was offered a position as a shift supervisor at a ceiling grid plant in Franklin Park Illinois, a suburb of Chicago.  I received supervisor training the prior year and this was my first opportunity to use what I learned in the real world.  From my second-floor office, I was able to see both ends of the plant, including the eleven operating lines and the warehouse.  What immediately struck me was the lack of focus on the quality of the product we were producing.

In my early days as a supervisor, I was extremely interested in helping my crew make improvements to their processes.  It was challenging, as I had very little experience in their industry and they knew that.  I had to find a way to connect with my team and build trust with them.  It turns out that beer was an easy way to make this connection.

High Waste, Low Morale

Ceiling grid is made from coil steel, which is roll-formed into shape and cut into bars of varying lengths.  These bars were then fed into a punch press, which cut the bars to final length and put holes and end details on them.  On some of the lines, it seemed like more bars of grid were going into scrap carts than were going into the boxes to be shipped to our customers.   This scrap material would be sent to a metal recycler, who gave us pennies on the dollar for these precious bars.  We were losing money and I wanted to help stop our losses.

I met with my crew and discussed our high scrap rate.  They said the process was to blame and there was very little they could do about it.  When I talked about the high percentage of scrap we were producing, they seemed unimpressed with the number but said they would try to reduce that percentage as best they could.

A few weeks went by and our scrap losses weren’t getting any better.  I met with my crew again and they said they were doing their best, but didn’t know what they could do to get the scrap rate down.  Frustrated, I took some time to talk with my plant manager to see if he had any ideas I could use.

I found out the scrap rate was quite high during his time there, but in years prior to his arrival the scrap rate was significantly below current levels.  What had changed, I wondered?  I decided to talk to one of our technical resources, who had been a supervisor in the plant for many years before I arrived.

He told me people used to care about quality more when he was a supervisor.  There was stability in the plant for many years, so people worked as a team and were focused on doing their best together.  These days, there was a lot of new people managing the plant (including me) and that made it difficult to build a bond with the crews.

Giving Scrap a Real Value

As I thought about this more, I realized I needed to improve the situation, but didn’t have years to do so.  I had to come up with something meaningful to make a connection with the crew.  One day, as I was shopping with my wife, I noticed the grocery store sold beer along with food.  This was something I hadn’t seen growing up in Maryland.  As I looked at the prices of the beer, I realized I had an opportunity to make a connection with my crew.  I was now ready for my next crew meeting!

I started off the meeting telling my crew I truly didn’t understand why scrap occurs and because of that, I couldn’t help them reduce it.  But, through the inspiration of beer, I now knew how to help them.  “You see,” I started, “a two-foot bar of ceiling grid has the same value as a can of beer.”  They looked at me kind of strange and one of them let out a laugh.  “A four-foot bar of grid is worth two cans of beer, and a twelve-foot bar equals a six-pack.  If we save enough grid from the scrap carts, we could save the company enough money to have an open bar at the next company party!”  The crew loosened up and started talking about ways they could save beer for the company.

The next few days, I reminded the crew how much beer was sitting in the scrap carts on each line.  Instead of percentages, we were now talking about something of value and meaning for them.  I didn’t realize how much it meant until one day, my top setup technician came to my office to tell me he had saved a keg of beer for the company on his last setup.  He was able to get the setup right on the first try.  His scrap cart was almost empty!

Over the next few months, our scrap rate came down dramatically, and settled to 75% below the historical average.  The experienced technical resource was amazed at how low our scrap rate was and even admitted it hadn’t been that low when he was the supervisor.  I told him he had inspired me to come up with something that would get the attention and make a connection with the crew.  In a town like Chicago, beer was the answer!

Fix It and Make a Difference

In 2005, I was working in the central engineering group for Armstrong in Lancaster PA. One day, while I was sitting in my cubicle, the CEO of our division came up to me and told me that he needed my help at our newly acquired cabinet plant in Auburn Nebraska. I asked him what help I could provide. He looked at me and said, “Fix it – you’ll know what I mean when you get there.” I was told I would have a small team travelling with me and our first visit to the plant would be for 2 weeks. During that time, we were to evaluate the things we could improve, make quick improvements, and develop plans for future efforts.

I have been to hundreds of factories in my career, and have seen some well-run factories and some poorly run ones. When we arrived, I saw what was clearly the poorest run facility in my experience. There was no organization or order. Equipment was in disrepair. People looked like they had been beaten down. Many had evidence of prior injuries. It was hard to find a safe walkway in the entire plant. It made me immediately angry that people had to work in these conditions. In fact, one of my team members was so angry, we had to take him outside to calm him down.

“What the hell are they thinking?” he asked, “How can they get away with this?” We talked for a while and eventually came to the conclusion that we couldn’t fix the past, but we could damn sure improve the future for these folks. Luckily, the company had hired a new plant manager, who had arrived at the plant about a week before we did.

We spent some time with him on our first days at the plant and believed he wanted to improve conditions for his people as much as we did. We felt he would support our efforts to make real positive change for the employees at the plant. We knew we needed his support to get critical work done.

Thousands of opportunities

Everywhere we looked, we saw things that could and should be improved. Early on, we reorganized a panel cutting area and made it easier and safer to get the materials needed to be cut. We also created some signage for the area, so finished parts could be easily found. We were also able to get much needed repairs for the equipment that was being used daily. We realized we couldn’t fix everything, even though we wanted to. We had to prioritize and decided to work on things we could immediately fix in order to give the employees hope for a better place to work.

Miles to go

One day I was watching the flow of material to different parts of the factory. I saw a large man take a pallet jack and transport cabinet parts from one area of the plant to another. He had to physically pull the material, which probably weighed 250 pounds, over a quarter of a mile. I followed him to his destination and then watched him pick up another pallet of parts, and manually pull it to another part of the plant. This looked really difficult to me, and I wanted to know more.

I introduced myself to him and he told me his name was Roy and that he had been doing this type of work for more than 5 years. I asked him if he knew how far he moved material in a day. He told me he was given a pedometer by the health and safety manager and found out he was pulling materials more than 17 miles in a day on average! Seeing how physically difficult this work was, I asked him, “What do you do when you go home at night?” His response was, “Adam, I sit down in my recliner, fall asleep, get up the next morning, and go back to work.” This was no way to live. I knew we had to help him.

I assembled my small team and we talked about what we could do to help Roy. In my mind, if we didn’t help him, he would soon be injured, and probably had been in the past. We did our research and found out there was a battery-operated pallet jack that would allow the operator to ride on when moving materials. We found a used one in the area that cost less than $5000. It was time to convince the plant manager to buy this unit immediately.

Sealing the deal

We asked the plant manager for an opportunity to review our findings and share our plan for further improvements. We had 12 improvement projects we wanted to implement before we left at the end of our 2-week assignment. We told him we thought there was nothing more important than buying the battery powered pallet jack for Roy. When we explained our reasoning, he realized how critical this would be for the health and well-being of one of his employees and also how much it mattered to us. He immediately gave us approval and called in his purchasing manager to help us buy it.

In 3 days, we had our new battery powered pallet jack and gave it to Roy to test out. He did and was so happy, he gave rides to some of his co-workers. The next day, I followed up with Roy and he told me he had some of the best sleep he had in months. We made a real difference for one person, and that made all of our efforts a resounding success!

Simpler is Better

Sometimes we make things more complicated than they have to be. When we remove the complexity, things seem to get better. I have learned this lesson many times, but my trip to Macon Georgia proved it to me and my team.

In the late 1990’s, I was often asked to help factories solve productivity issues. As I was new to the manufacture of ceiling tiles, I had much to learn. One of my ways to learn was to spend as much time as possible on the factory floor, observing and talking with the operators and mechanics.

I was visiting the largest ceiling plant in the world in Macon Georgia and asked the plant manager if I could spend a day on the line, observing operations and talking with his people. He seemed surprised by my request, but was open to it and gave me the green light.

I started at the beginning of the fabrication line, where the formed 4-foot by 8-foot panels were loaded, and introduced myself to Joe, who was “feeding” the line. He asked me what I was doing there. I explained I was trying to learn how the line operated and the issues he was dealing with. He seemed amused by this and showed me how he operated the line. After about an hour of observation and discussion, Joe had given me a thorough overview of his area of the line and the problems from his perspective. I thanked him for taking the time with me and then left him to go visit with the next operator on the line, Ruth.

Ruth was intrigued by an engineer (a Yankee, no less) who wanted to know what issues she had to deal with as well. She showed me what happened when boards traveled through her paint booth. She was making constant adjustments to the line and I asked her why. She explained the equipment that measured viscosity of the paint was broken, so she was doing her best to get a consistent paint coating, using her experience and observations. Ruth let me try my hand at adjusting viscosity of the paint, and I realized how difficult it was. After some time, I thanked Ruth for her insight and moved on to the remaining operators on the line.

After a full day of visiting, observing, and discussing the issues on the line, I believed I had a plan to make some improvements. I returned to the main office and reviewed my findings with the plant manager. I asked him if he was willing to assemble a small team of operators, mechanics, and a supervisor to work on the problems I had observed. He was extremely willing and said he would have them ready to work with me the next day and for the rest of the week (4 days). Now, I had to determine what to do with my new team.

At 7 am the next morning, I met my team: 3 operators, two mechanics, and a supervisor. We had a meeting room in the middle of the factory. After getting to know each other, I reviewed my observations from the prior day. Luckily for me, two of the operators on the team were Ruth and Joe, so they had some experience with me and felt comfortable talking with me and the rest of the team members. After talking about what I had seen and reviewing their ideas, we came up with two areas to work on: Cutting boards squarely and applying paint consistently. We decided to work on each issue as a full team, one issue at a time. Our first issue was cutting boards squarely.

It’s Hip to be Square

We walked out to the line and went to the equalizer station to see what was going on. The equalizer was a large table saw that cut the 4-foot by 8-foot boards into 2-foot by 4-foot ceiling tiles. The board travels into the equalizer, gets cut into 2-foot by 8-foot strips, then gets transferred at 90 degrees to the next series of saw blades. They then cut the 8-foot strips into 4-foot tiles.

As we watched, we saw the boards go through the saw blades at an angle. Why was this happening? It turns out there were three upper “hold down” rolls driving the boards through the first pass of blades. These rolls were adjustable for on either side of the conveyor. Operators would make pressure adjustments to the rolls to help drive the boards through the saws. There was no way to tell if they were applying equal pressure to the rolls. The unequal pressure on the boards was forcing them through the saws at an angle. Sometimes, this would cause the boards to be cut to the incorrect size, causing scrap.

There were two hold down rolls at the entrance to the saws and one on the exit of the saws. It seemed the two rolls at the entrance were fighting each other, so we decided to raise one of the rolls. To our amazement, the boards ran more squarely through the saws.

Now, we had to figure out how to apply equal pressure to each side of the boards as they entered and exited the saw blades. After many ideas, we realized that by giving the operator the ability to adjust each side of the rolls, they were almost guaranteed to force the boards through with unequal pressure, unless they knew the exact pressure on each side of the board. Since we didn’t have any gauges to measure this, we had to come up with a simpler solution to ensure equal pressure.

Gravity was the solution to our problem. If we could just use the mass of the roll (approximately 55 lbs.) to roll over the board as it entered and exited the saws, the roll would put equal pressure across the board. There was only one way to test this. We disconnected the adjusting screws on the rolls and allowed the rolls to “float” over the board as it traveled below them and into and out of the saws. Now the board was going through in a perfectly square manner. We decided to remove the adjusting screws completely, so operators wouldn’t have the opportunity to reverse this improvement. We also made sure we communicated our changes to all shifts, so people would understand what we did and why we did it. We were proud of ourselves. Now it was time to figure out how we could help the painting process.

It all depends on your point of view

Paint viscosity is critical on a ceiling tile. If the paint is too viscous (too thick), it will cover up the holes on the surface of the tile and reduce its acoustical absorption. If the paint is not viscous enough (too thin), it won’t achieve the proper coverage and required color. The instrument that was broken, a Brookfield viscometer, is a mechanical device that measures the resistance of the liquid as a rod or disc rotates through the liquid. It wasn’t working, so the paint technicians were using a Zahn cup to measure viscosity. This cup looks like a cylindrical ladle with a hole in the center. It is dipped into the liquid and the time it takes for the liquid to totally exit is measured in seconds. The longer the time it takes, the thicker the liquid.

The technicians were taught to observe the bottom of the Zahn cup from the outside. When paint was no longer flowing out of the cup, they recorded the time and then compared it to a chart to assess viscosity. The problem was that as the last bit of paint came out, there were drips, and each operator measured the time differently, leading to variations in viscosity measurements and adjustments. This was leading to problems in the paint booth. We had to find a way to consistently measure the time.

After much trial and error, we realized that we were all looking at the cup incorrectly. If we looked inside the cup, we saw the paint exit in the same way. The moment paint had fully exited the cup, there was a hole that appeared in the center of the cup. Using this method, we were able to consistently measure the time from person to person. It was extremely easy to teach, and we could come up with the ideal time to achieve the desired viscosity. From then on, paint coverage was more consistent from operator to operator.

The team had just solved two major problems and was excited to do more, but these changes took most of the week. We decided to focus the rest of our time on training the other shifts and crews, to ensure they understood and properly utilized the changes.

At the end of the week we showcased our efforts to the plant leadership team. They were impressed with the improvements, enthusiasm, and creativity of the team. These changes led to reduced downtime and scrap for the line. I was invited to the plant many times over the next few years to work with teams using the same approach. I am proud to say that we were able to simplify many other processes and improve performance all over the plant.

Never Give Up – How we almost lost 4 team members

In June 2019, Process Improvement Partners was asked to help a leading consumer brands company execute its first Kaizen event in the history of its New Jersey factory. I came to the factory for a site assessment and determined there were many good candidates for their first Kaizen. After further discussions, we identified the first area for Kaizen.

Working with the continuous improvement manager, plant manager, and corporate support, we chartered an event focused on improving the reliability of one of their critical processing areas. We felt it held great opportunity, and positive results in this area would be very visible and help build momentum for the continuous improvement transformation being sought for the plant.

I always ask four key questions when chartering events:

1.       What’s the problem you want to solve?

2.       What are the measurable objectives of the Kaizen?

3.       Who are the team members you believe will be invested in the problem enough to help you solve it?

4.       Who owns the output when the Kaizen is over?

The leadership team thoughtfully answered these four questions and we immediately designed the Kaizen event based on the charter. I advised that as this was their first Kaizen event, most people in the plant wouldn’t have much experience with continuous improvement. Therefore, communication of the event and to the team would be critical. They assured me they would take extra care in communicating to the plant and to the team.

The Kaizen kicked off in mid-July.  I took extra time to train the 13-person team on Lean principles. After training, we took a walk out into the process to see the current situation and identify opportunities to improve conditions in the area Each team member took sticky notes and pens with them and were instructed to write one idea per sticky note for review after our tour.

We spent more than two hours in the process and team members were writing feverishly, as they were seeing things in a new way and uncovering many issues and wastes associated with the process. As a facilitator, I am always pleased to see team members identifying things as waste they had put up with in their normal job. When we came back to the meeting room, all team members except for one had written ideas on their sticky notes. While this isn’t unheard of, it is a signal something is wrong and needs to be dealt with. In total, the team had written more than 130 ideas for review and prioritization. This story isn’t about those ideas, it’s about each of the four team members who had difficulty in their first Kaizen. The names have all been changed for their privacy

The Story of Roy

Roy’s story is the first one because he didn’t write anything down while out in the process. When we came back into the meeting room, the team shared their ideas one at a time and they were posted on a flipchart. Since Roy hadn’t written anything down, I gave him opportunity to write ideas while others were sharing theirs. He still didn’t write anything, so I gave him the opportunity to contribute in a different way. He was asked to post the flip charts of ideas on the wall as they were filled. He seemed content to do this, and he also appeared to be listening to everyone’s ideas.

After all of the ideas were shared, they were prioritized by the team. Everyone got five votes and picked the things they thought would provide the greatest benefit to the people and the process. Roy voted and, in the end, there were three top projects picked. Following the vote, each team member picked the project they personally wanted to work on, and Roy put his name on one of the projects. Following this, the team was broken into sub-teams of 4 or 5 people.  The sub-teams started to work on and conceptualize their solution before the end of the first day. Everything seemed okay with Roy at that point.

On the morning of the second day, Roy wasn’t there when the team reconvened. No one knew where he was. They thought he was in the plant, however. Once the sub-teams got started on their projects, I went to find Roy. It turns out he had gone back to his normal job, thinking it was more important to the plant than the Kaizen event. I spent time explaining how critical his input was to the Kaizen and convinced him to rejoin the team. Once there, he stayed with them for the rest of the week. It turns out that he was in an area that was unfamiliar to him and didn’t realize that his input and perspective were important and valued. At the report out, he was one of the tour guides who proudly showed off the efforts of the team. Other team members remarked they didn’t think Roy would be a presenter, based on the initial issues during the Kaizen week and his quiet nature. Roy shined and everyone was extremely happy for his contributions to the team.

The Story of Hal

Hal is a mechanical supervisor at the New Jersey plant and was picked for the team based on his extensive knowledge, team focus, and ability to get things done in short order. He seemed like a perfect team member for the first Kaizen. On the first day, he had many ideas to share to improve the situation in the process. When the team prioritized their work, however, he seemed unhappy with one of the projects that rose to the top. This project got five out of 13 votes and centered on the air flow in a working space. Although it wasn’t directly associated with the charter objectives, it generated a lot of interest from the production operators who said it impacted their productivity, safety, and the ability to get their work done in an error-free way, which was one of the charter objectives.

At the end of the first day, it became apparent that the production operators couldn’t solve this problem themselves and needed help from Hal, who had the ability to get the air handling system checked out. Hal didn’t agree this was important and worth his time, but was pushed by the team to at least find out if the system could be fixed. At the end of the day, when the team was adjourning, Hal grudgingly got up from the room and said he would have it assessed before the next day. The team thanked him.

On the morning of the second day, the team was asked to reflect individually on their first day of the first Kaizen in the plant’s history. When it was Hal’s turn, he told us he had nothing to say and everything was okay. It was obvious he didn’t really feel that way. When pushed to say more, he put his two thumbs up, but that’s not what a team needed to hear. So, he was pushed a bit more, and the flood gates opened up. He told the team he thought they were working on the wrong thing and that he didn’t sign up for this event, he was “volun-told” to attend. He thought the team should be working on things they could control and not finger pointing at mechanical issues. After he said his piece, the team thanked him for speaking up and helping them refocus on the things that they could improve during the week.

As the week wore on, Hal was visibly happier and more engaged and by the end of the week, he was extremely proud of all the work the team was able to accomplish. He even mentioned he was happy he had decided to speak up at the beginning of day 2 to get everyone back on track.

The Story of Ed

Ed’s story is one of someone who is unfamiliar with the ebb and flow of a Kaizen. On day one, the team is learning how to be a team and picking simple things to work on. On day 2, after getting through the first projects, the team typically takes on harder work and is getting more into the true issues that hold them back from winning. On day 3, breakthroughs are made. Ed wasn’t willing to wait that long. Early on day 2, Ed came to me and said the team was working on the wrong things. He wanted me to tell the team this. Any good facilitator knows the team must own their solutions and should not try to redirect their efforts, unless there is a safety, policy, or rule violation. After discussing this for a while, I suggested that Ed make his pitch to the team to see if he could influence their decision.

Ed decided that he had enough of the conversation and didn’t want to try to influence the team. He still didn’t think they were working on the right things, but agreed to support them and see what was going to happen. About an hour after the conversation, I went to the production floor to see how things were going. Ed seemed very pleased with the progress of his sub-team and the earlier conversation seemed to be behind him.

On the third day, Ed didn’t show up to the plant. He had called out and I was concerned that he was still bothered by the work the team was doing. I didn’t know if he would make it for the fourth and final day, but he did. He was so impressed by the work of the team that he volunteered to present some of the findings to the leadership team. During his presentation, you could hear and feel his pride in the accomplishments of the team. Following the presentation, I had a chance to follow up with Ed, and he was apologetic for his earlier behavior and now was a believer in Kaizen and the power of teamwork.

The Story of James

James story was the most surprising to me, as he seemed aligned with the efforts of the team throughout the week. On the morning of the third day, James arrived ten minutes before the day’s kickoff and told the team leader and me he didn’t want to be on the team anymore. He felt he hadn’t been communicated with properly prior to the event, was forced to attend, and didn’t agree with any of the team’s efforts. Although he had been relatively quiet earlier in the week, he was participating and contributing ideas and efforts up until this revelation. He told us we weren’t listening to his issues and were working on the wrong things. We tried to reason with him and describe how things work in a Kaizen, but he was steadfast in his objections.

When he said, “I don’t want to be here,” we knew that we shouldn’t press the issue any longer. We thanked him for his contribution, told him we were sorry to see him go, and hoped that the efforts of the team would benefit him in his job at the plant. And then, he left to go back to his normal job.

I decided it was time to have a discussion with the plant manager, let’s call her Sue, and talk about these four team members and how things got the way they did. Sue was shocked to hear all four had different reasons to want to quit the team. From her observations, she thought we were heading in the right direction but was also concerned we wouldn’t make the typical Kaizen breakthroughs she had heard about and read about. This was her first Kaizen experience, and she was willing to let the week play out, based on my advice.

Sue was extremely surprised about James and wanted to try to convince him to return. Although I wasn’t sure if this was a good idea, Sue was the plant manager and had every right to try. Just about an hour later, James returned to the team who welcomed him back with kind words and handshakes.

The team leader decided to take James and some of the other team members down to the factory floor and let them show him their issues. He made a commitment to write work orders for any issue that couldn’t be resolved during the Kaizen.

When the afternoon of the third day arrived, James seemed extremely pleased his voice was being heard. Many work orders were written, and some work had already been completed, much to James’ satisfaction and the satisfaction of other team members.

By the fourth and final day, James was complimenting all of us around our support of him and the rest of the team. Although he didn’t present at the end of the Kaizen, he shared positive feedback to all that asked him about his experience.

After the presentation ended, I held a wrap up meeting with plant leadership. We covered many topics, most notably the things we could do to improve the experience for the next Kaizen team members. Now that the plant had a Kaizen experience, they could explain what would happen during the week. They also vowed to be more visible in their preparations and have one on one conversations with all potential team members, allowing them to ask any questions or raise any personal issues they might have.

This Kaizen week was one of the more exhausting ones for me, as I had to focus my energies on the people more than usual. The results and experience of the team members made it all worthwhile.

Communication is Critical

In 2010, I was helping a team in Hilliard Ohio simplify the method they used for changing over a production line from one product to another.

The team came up with many ideas to simplify things and make things safer and more efficient around the line, and it looked like they were well on their way to reducing the changeover time by more than 50 percent, which was one of the key objectives.

A Special Job for Steve

On the afternoon of the third day, they identified some work that required the help of an electrician who worked at the plant. Not just any electrician, but a specific electrician, let’s call him Steve, who happened to work on the overnight shift, from 11 pm to 7 am. He had special programming skills and the team wanted to have him do some work that evening, so that they could test out the changes the next morning.

The team leader, let’s call him Tom, wanted to write an email to the electrician, so he would know exactly what was being requested of him the moment he came to work that evening. As Tom wrote the email, it became apparent the request was complex and could be interpreted in many ways. In addition, if the electrician had questions, he would have to wait until the next morning to get them answered. This meant that our work request was at risk.

Never one to be shy, or keep my big mouth shut, I volunteered to stay at the plant until the electrician came to work that evening. Because I was the one traveler on the team, and the hotel was less than 3 miles away, I figured I could sacrifice my evening easier than the rest of the team. Besides, how long could this take? We had the email, which appeared to be pretty well written.

Comprehensive Communication

Steve the electrician came to the plant at around 10:15 pm that evening, and I met with him soon after. I told him all about the team and their request and asked him if he would take a look at the email soon. He agreed and said he would find me if he had any questions. I left him as he prepared for his shift.

In less than 15 minutes, Steve found me in the meeting room. He had many questions. Apparently, the email wasn’t as clear as we thought. We started talking about the note and I realized that just discussing the note wasn’t going to be enough to answer his questions. We took a walk to the production floor and reviewed all of the work the team had done so far and the programming request. We had to call for some downtime so we could lock out the equipment and climb up on top of it to look at some specific details and measurements that had been left off of the request.

We dug deeper and kept finding information that had been left off of the note, but was critical to the changes being requested. We did this all over the line until Steve was satisfied he had all of the information he needed to safely and properly make the changes for the team. I was very happy to hear that and as I left the plant, I realized how long a day it had been for me. It was 1:15 am when I arrived at the hotel. Having started the day at the plant at 6:00 am, this was a new Kaizen record for me.

New Record Set, New Lesson Learned

On the morning of the fourth day, the team came in and I told them the story of my meeting with Steve. They quickly realized their information left much to interpretation, and it was critical that I or someone else should meet with Steve the prior night. Then, we verified all of the changes Steve had made for us. Everything worked as we had hoped.

At the end of the Kaizen week, the team was proud to report that they beat all of their safety and productivity goals. In addition, they learned an important lesson: no matter how clear you think you are in your communication, it’s better to review things in person to make sure the person receiving the information truly understands what you are asking of them.

I am proud to say that I have never beaten my personal record of longest day spent on a job site in the years following this event. I am also proud to say that I learned how critical communication is and I now teach all of my teams that same lesson.

Line Up and Do the Right Thing

In 2011, I was asked to facilitate a Kaizen in Pensacola Florida. The problem to be solved was to improve material flow through the plant. Specifically, there were millions of square feet of goods in process, and items were getting lost, damaged, and generally causing confusion and chaos in the plant.

Building 37

After training the team in Lean concepts, we took a walk out into the process to see what was happening. These Gemba walks can be quite eye-opening, and in this case, it made the problem very real to all team members. There were literally hundreds of pallets of material all over the plant, with much of it stored in a building they called 37.

In Building 37, there was no rhyme or reason to the way materials were stored. These materials were stored for various processing lines, but there was no way to know what was being stored and where to find it. It was obvious something drastic had to be done.

The team developed a concept early in the week that made storage and retrieval of the materials more manageable and thought they could organize and store everything in one location, rather than all over the plant. They determined that they could use Building 37 for this purpose, but would need to make the building more visual and create some rules around storage of materials.

Creating Visual Organization

After many different layout suggestions, we came up with a scheme we thought would work. We decided we needed to move everything out of Building 37, in order to reorganize and line out the space in accordance with our new recommendations. We also realized that we would have to clean the floor and paint it to make it as visual as possible and easy for everyone to use and manage. Painting the concrete floor was something the team didn’t want to do. In the past, forklifts tore up the paint and the lines would be lost quickly. Instead, they did some research and found a company out of southern Georgia with a technology to stain concrete, rather than paint it. It seemed like this was a good option, so we placed a call with them to see if they could come and help us.

To our good fortune, they were willing to drop what they were doing and drive more than 4 hours to meet with us and do the work during the Kaizen week. We told them what we intended to do and the size of the building to be stained. They estimated 28 gallons of yellow concrete stain would do the trick.

All Hands on Deck

We spent many hours moving over 1100 pallets (2.3 million square feet) of ceiling tile out of Building 37 into the open air. We crossed our fingers that it wouldn’t rain overnight. After we moved all of the material out, we swept and scrubbed the floors. The whole team pitched in and we were almost finished before the concrete staining company showed up in the late afternoon. They helped us finish up and started going about their work.

Most of the team members had to leave by 6 pm that evening, so I volunteered to stay with the concrete staining company, who was busy doing their work. In the middle of it, they realized that 28 gallons of stain wouldn’t be enough. They placed a call and sent a runner down to the plant with more stain. The runner happened to be the wife of the owner, who had just put dinner on the table. She dropped what she was doing to help us.

Grievance to File

Around 7 pm, I was approached by a very tall and unhappy Pensacola employee, who happened to be in their workers’ union. He wanted to know what was going on. I explained that our Kaizen team was transforming Building 37 in a way that it would be safer and easier to find and retrieve materials for the production lines. He wasn’t happy with my answer. What he really wanted to know was why the union employees weren’t doing this work. I explained that our team decided concrete stain was the best way to line the floors, given the issues with forklift traffic, and since this technology and equipment wasn’t available in the plant, we had to utilize outside contractors. We wanted to keep this work in-house, but that option wasn’t available to us.

Again, he wasn’t happy with my answer, but really didn’t have a valid argument as to how the work could have been completed with existing Pensacola employees. So, he angrily stormed off, vowing to file a grievance. Around 10:30 pm, all the lines were stained into the floor, and the contractors were finished. I was happy to see them leave, as I needed my rest for the next day of the Kaizen.

Good Intentions, Great Results

We lucked out, there was no rain overnight, and we spent the morning putting everything back into Building 37, this time in a logical sequence and order for the materials to be easily found. The lines really helped, and to this day, the plant uses this system to keep materials organized for all of their production lines.

I never found out if the union employee filed a grievance, but even if he did, we had done the right thing for the plant with the best of intentions.

Thomasville’s Frame Nailers – Taking a good idea and expanding its reach

As a young engineer at Thomasville Furniture, I was given project assignments at the discretion of my manager. He gave me ample opportunities to try out different ideas and supported my efforts. I spent many hours in our manufacturing facilities and was fascinated by the complexity of the manufacturing processes. Many of these processes were extremely labor-intensive and required great skill to accomplish. One such task was the assembly of the base frames of case goods, such as night stands, dressers, and other cabinet style products. These frames were the support structure of the furniture and had to be strong and sturdy to hold up to the years of abuse that furniture sees in its lifetime.

The process to put together a base frame starts with the cutting of the four individual frame components to the appropriate length. Then, each end of the component is cut with a miter saw at a very specific angle, 44.5 degrees. I asked a skilled saw operator why he wasn’t cutting a standard 45-degree miter. He informed me that the extra half degree allowed for the special nail, glue, and growth that typically occurs in wood when exposed to moisture.

After cutting the miter, a notch was cut at a perpendicular angle to the miter in the center of the ends of the wood. This allowed for a special joining nail to be applied to both ends of the wood. The placement of this notch was critical as well, as any deviation from the center would make the nail noticeable to the customer. Once these cuts were made, the components were brought to the assembly department. Once there, employees would apply glue to the mitered ends, nail the components together, and remove any excess glue. Then, after all components were dry, they were transferred to another department whose responsibility was to put wood putty into any gaps that might be visible in the joined mitered ends. In all, this process took 6 days from original cuts to final putty and cleanup of the frames. As many as 6 people touched the components during this process. The more I watched this process, the more I thought, “There has to be a better way to do this.”

A Simple, But Powerful Discovery

A few months later, all of the engineers at Thomasville Furniture traveled to the International Woodworking Show in Atlanta. This was my first time travelling for the company and I welcomed the opportunity to see all of the interesting machines at the show and tour Atlanta a bit. Each engineer was to look for equipment at the show that might help the plant to which he or she was assigned. The exhibition hall was gigantic and the three days we were there wasn’t enough to properly see everything. Most people liked to look at the biggest, shiniest, most complicated machines that were being displayed. I, however, was fascinated by something I saw at a little booth in an out of the way spot in the exhibition hall.

In the booth was a series of small picture frame nailing machines. They were simple little machines that seemed to be quite efficient at their task. The representative showed me how they worked. Basically, you bring two mitered ends of picture frames together in a jig that positioned them precisely, push a foot pedal, and a pressure plate came down to hold the mitered ends tightly together. Then, a corrugated nail came up from a coil below the machine and was driven into the mitered ends. He handed the assembly to me and told me to try to pull it apart. I couldn’t. Then I noticed how tight the joint was on the assembly. There was no gap, which meant that no wood putty would need to be applied.

I asked the representative if he had a machine that was designed for larger mitered components. He didn’t, but said that he thought he could modify and strengthen one of the machines to drive nails into larger pieces of wood. I asked him how soon he could have a prototype machine. He thought he could have one ready in 4 to 6 weeks. That was all the time I needed to convince one of our plants to try out this new approach. Although I saw many other interesting machines, nothing intrigued me as much as these frame nailers, as most Thomasville plants would have a use for a heavier duty model.

Being Open to a New Process

When I returned from Atlanta, I asked my supervisor which plant he recommended we test the prototype frame nailer. My thought was that if we could convince a plant to try it out, they would get an opportunity to provide input to the design and functionality of the new machine. They would also have the fastest opportunity to streamline their operation. We agreed that the case goods plant 3 miles from the corporate center was the best place to start. We called a meeting with the plant management and gained their support for this work.

Approximately 6 weeks later, a larger version of the picture frame nailer that I had seen in Atlanta arrived at the plant. Two days later, the sales technician joined to show us how to use the prototype equipment. Plant management joined us and watched as the technician joined two large mitered parts with little difficulty. It happened so fast that they wanted to see another demonstration. This time the parts didn’t go together as well as expected. It turns out that there wasn’t enough air pressure applied, and when it was quickly corrected, every part came together precisely and tightly. Everyone was amazed how easy it was and also how tight the mitered joint appeared.

A Solution With Many Applications

Soon, they realized the best benefit of all. There would be no need for applying putty to the mitered joints, as they held together so well, with no gap apparent. This was a breakthrough. But, it was also just the beginning. Then, the technician was asked if this equipment could also create a “Butt Joint.” This is an assembly of two pieces of wood that are joined at perpendicular angles, rather than at a 45 degree angle. These “Butt Joints” we used as intermediate assemblies in case goods and were also quite labor intensive. The technician thought it would be possible, but it would probably need a special jig to hold the pieces in place while the nail was delivered.

Because we were in a furniture factory, we were able to quickly create a prototype jig to try it out. Lo and behold, the two pieces of wood were joined together just as tightly as the mitered pieces. This would save more effort, labor, and time. After identifying a few more modifications, we realized that we had something that we could use in the multiple plants at Thomasville Furniture. We quickly ordered a first unit and set about determining how many others we would potentially need.

For the next six months or so, I was able to replace the old-style miter cutting and joining processes all over the company with the new frame nailing technology. I even was able to find a few more uses for the equipment, which led to more sales for the technician.

I learned a valuable lesson from this work. Sometimes you have a problem that needs a solution, other times you have a solution to a problem you don’t realize you have. You just have to be willing to look for that problem and apply the solution.

A Little Dab Will Do Ya

In 1991, I was offered a line supervisor position at Armstrong’s ceiling grid factory in Franklin Park Illinois. I had been working as a staff Industrial Engineer at Thomasville Furniture in Thomasville North Carolina, so the position would be my first operations supervisory role.

I spent my first few months at the plant learning everything I could about the manufacture of ceiling grid and the approach I would take to supervising my small crew of factory workers. The only way I knew to learn was to spend as much time as possible on the factory floor, observing, asking questions, and trying to help where I could.

The factory had eleven separate operating lines and each of them made a variety of products. Each line consisted of an unwind station for coils of steel, roll-formers that bent the coil of steel into the shape of the ceiling grid, and a punch press which stamped out the holes and end details for each piece of grid. Finally, there was a packaging station that assisted the operators as they put the finished pieces in a box.

The lines operated fairly well, with limited downtime, until it was time to change over from one product type to the next. If the shape of the grid was changing, rolls on the roll-former would be switched out. If the size or shape of the product were changing, dies in the press would need to be moved or switched out. The process of changing over was long and drawn out and we never started right up after the changeover. I wanted to know more about this, but typically the highest skilled employees did the changeover and didn’t want to be bothered by my questions.

An Observation In Need of a Solution

After a few months of observing things, I decided that I needed to help somehow. I really wasn’t sure what I could do to help. I decided I would first try to better understand press die setup, as it looked more straight-forward than roll former setup. Spending many hours observing what was happening, I noticed that once the dies were placed in the proper location, they were then tightened using bolts. Then, a bar of grid would be stamped and checked for proper placement of holes, end details, and overall length. Tolerances were tight, so the dies would have to be placed accurately.

Every time this was done, the measurements required that the setup operator make adjustments to the location of the dies. I didn’t understand why this was. Why couldn’t he just find the optimal position, tighten the dies, and be ready to run on the first try? He told me that the dies always moved a bit when tightened and he had to tap them to their final position with a mallet. If things went well, he could do this on one additional attempt. If things went poorly, it could take many attempts which added up to many hours of downtime. I thought to myself, “There must be a way to get the dies set properly on the first try.” I didn’t know what to do. Luckily for me, I was about to take a trip that would change the way I thought about this problem.

I was asked to travel to the new headquarters of our joint venture with Worthington Steel in Malvern Pennsylvania. I like to read bit on airplanes so I looked at the bookshelf in the supervisor’s office and saw a book called, “A Revolution in Manufacturing: The SMED System,” written by Shigeo Shingo. I asked the other supervisor if he had read it and if I could borrow it. He told me that Armstrong bought the book for all of their manufacturing sites in the late 1980’s, but he had never read it. He told me I could take it and keep it if I wanted. So, I took this book with me on the airplane and started reading it.

New Way of Thinking Inspired by Socks

It was like a whole new world had opened up to me. Shigeo Shingo developed a changeover reduction process that is used by companies the world over and even is used during pit-stops at auto races. This was just what I needed. But, where to begin? A story in the book about golf told me what to try first. In the story, Mr. Shingo talks about playing golf and getting blisters on his feet at the end of the day. He loved golf, but didn’t love the blisters that came as a result and decided he must reason out how to eliminate them. He used his problem-solving skills and figured out that the blisters came from the rubbing of his socks on his feet when he was swinging the golf clubs. Why were the socks rubbing on his feet? Because there was less friction between the socks and his sweaty feet than there was between the socks and his shoes, which he had put on quite tightly. How would he resolve this? He figured out that by adding another pair of socks on his feet, he could keep the least friction between the two socks and therefore they would rub against each other, rather than rubbing on his feet. Problem solved; blisters eliminated!

So how does this apply to changeover reduction, you may ask? Now that he saw how reducing friction was beneficial, he decided to apply the same idea to press die setup. He also had a problem with dies moving once they were tightened down. He originally had a bolt and one washer that he used to tighten down dies on a smooth press surface. He noticed that the die would move on the smooth press surface when the bolt was tightened securely. Much like the socks, he decided to add an extra washer to the bolt and put a dab of oil between the two washers, guaranteeing that they would have the least friction of any component in the setup. He tried his idea out and it worked. And now, I had something I could try back at the plant when I returned.

Results Even Skeptics Could Not Ignore

When I got back to my plant, I was excited to share what I had learned with my setup operators. I explained what I had read and they were not impressed. “How do sweaty socks help improve changeover time?” they asked. I said I thought we should try an experiment to see if what I read really did work. One of the operators grudgingly agreed to give it a try. I wanted to make sure that we had real data for our experiment, so I asked him to set up a die in position as he normally would. In this case, we set up dial indicators on two corners of the die. They would be used to show us how much the die moved when tightened to the press. We zeroed out the dial indicators just before he made the final tightening of the bolts on the die. One corner mover .007” and the other moved 010”. That might not seem like a lot of movement, but it is more than we could tolerate and would require him to move the die with a mallet, just as he always had to do.

Now it was time to try the new way. We added a washer to each bolt on the die and put a dab of oil between the two washers on each bolt. We zeroed out the dial indicators just before making the final tightening of the bolts on each die. To our amazement, at the final tightening of each bolt, the washers moved, but the readouts on the dial indicators both read 0! There was no movement of the die. “Let me try that again,” he said, and he did. Once again, there was zero movement of the die. This was a breakthrough. Now the other setup operators wanted to try it for themselves. They couldn’t believe it as one by one each of them saw the dial indicators stay at zero, no matter how hard they tightened the bolts on the dies.

We immediately added washers and oil to the dies waiting to be used on the other lines. Then, we modified the other dies on the production lines after we took them out of the presses following production runs. From then on, every die that was set up in our presses maintained its location, saving valuable time, effort, and reducing frustration. I like to think that I would have figured this out on my own, but I realize that we all get set in our ways and sometimes need a story or two to change our thinking. I don’t play golf, but I now have much greater respect for the game and what can be learned from it.

Kaizen Every Day – The Armstrong Lockout

In all my years doing continuous improvement work, I worked with teams during Kaizen events of short duration, or influencing continuous improvement behavior daily.  Never did I think I would be doing 6 months straight of Kaizen.  That is, until the Armstrong Lockout.

Supporting Operations During a Lockout

In 2011, Armstrong World Industries and their Marietta PA ceiling plant workers were unable to reach a contract agreement by the time the contract expired. Historically, Armstrong would allow the employees to continue working without a contract, until negotiations were completed. There was always a risk that the employees would walk out any time without notice, but that had never happened. New management decided that it wasn’t worth the risk and decided to send a message to the union by locking out the hourly production and maintenance employees until an agreement would be reached.

Armstrong was ready for this contingency and had made an arrangement with a company that supplied replacement workers and security to companies in similar situations. These workers would move to the site and fill in for the employees until a resolution was reached. Many of the Armstrong engineers, retirees, and other technically skilled corporate employees were asked to train and supervise the replacement workers and also run the complex equipment. Some non-union workers came from other plants in the Armstrong system to help too.

I had been helping a project team building a plant in China. When I returned to the United States in July, I was asked to help support the Marietta plant in an operations role, alternating between equipment operations, training, and supervision.

Armstrong employees were required to meet at an off-site parking lot, and then board a blue bus with blacked-out windows that would take us to the plant. We were to work 12-hour shifts, 6 days a week (we could work 7 days a week if we wanted to) and weren’t allowed to leave the plant property unless we had a personal emergency to attend to. Some of us, including me, had pre-shift supervisor meetings, that extended our days to 13 ½ hours. Needless to say, we all wanted the lockout to end quickly. We also wanted to make sure that no customers would feel the impact of reduced service levels due to the lockout, so we were committed to keeping the plant running, 24/7/365.

A Plan to Reduce Downtime

In my first weeks at the plant, I spent much of my time helping to solve downtime issues and coordinate efforts of workers who were unfamiliar with the equipment. It was apparent that the plant wasn’t left in the best of shape by the Armstrong union employees and they were using their experience to compensate for low performing equipment. We didn’t have the experience, so it was clear that something would have to be done to make the equipment more reliable.

I started to assess the factors impacting equipment performance and realized that many of the downtime issues could be solved with some basic line maintenance – conveyer guiding, leveling, and squaring. Lucky for me, this was and is an area of experience and expertise. On a Saturday in August, I was talking with the plant manager, and suggested that I could provide more value at the plant if I were to work with maintenance to solve some of the basic conveying issues I saw in my time at the plant. He was intrigued and asked me to show him what I meant. I took him on a tour of various parts of the line and pointed out the issues I was seeing. Then, I described my plan to solve those issues, one part of the line at a time. More intrigued, he called the maintenance manager and asked him to join us for a tour.

The maintenance manager met us at the line and took a tour with us. He was a bit skeptical, but after about 30 minutes, he was convinced that I might be on to something beneficial. He asked me what I needed to start the work. I told him I could work with a skilled mechanic to start making line improvements. He asked me when I would be ready to start. I was ready any time.

A Team on a Mission

On the following Monday morning, I was assigned a mechanic named Joe. Joe and I took a tour of the lines and I shared my vision of the work we could do to improve performance. He was enthusiastic. We decided we would tackle one line at a time and prioritized the first line to work on. We agreed that we would do work in 1 to 2-hour blocks and try to utilize downtime to get our work done. We also agreed that since the lines were running so poorly, we could make our own downtime blocks, as long as the crew and supervision was aware and agreed to our plan.

At first, no one wanted to give us any downtime to do the work, so we were frustrated and couldn’t plan well for the work. The only way we could make a real difference would be to convince one of the acting supervisors to take a chance and let us shut a line down in a planned way. I was persistent and convincing and finally had the approval of a line supervisor to try out our plan on his line.

Joe and I got to work, leveling, squaring, and improving the guiding on the first line. We worked one section at a time, and after about a week, the line was running noticeably better. After three weeks, we were setting production records and others were noticing. All of the sudden, Joe and I were getting more calls for help than we could manage. So, we asked for more mechanics to help. We started expanding our work and touching all of the lines in the plant. We also taught the techniques to others so that they could solve problems too.

From time to time, I would get calls on the radio from mechanics who wanted my advice and help and they would meet me and take me by maintenance cart to the site of the issue for review. Now we were making a huge difference in the plant performance and the problems of the past were being solved in a sustainable way. Some areas of the plant looked nothing like they had prior to the lockout, as much of the equipment had been stripped of the problems that kept it from running reliably. Although tiring, this work was also exhilarating, and made working long hours fun. We could see improvement happening every day.

The Lockout Ends, But Improvements Remain

In January 2012, the union agreed to contract terms and was scheduled to return in the middle of the month. I was asked to stay on for a while to show the changes we had made to the plant. Many of the lines looked markedly different and were unfamiliar to the union employees. I gave tours of the line and fielded questions from the employees. For the most part they were appreciative of the changes, as they could see how the improvements would help them do their job in a safer, less stressful way.

The union president asked me specifically why I made the changes the way I did. I told him that due to our lack of experience and skills, we had to make the lines easier to run or we would disappoint our customers. We really missed our experts and were extremely glad they were returning. He liked my answer and ended up doing more of this improvement work with my assistance in the following years.

I am very proud of the work I was able to complete for Marietta during the lockout. I was also extremely grateful the lockout ended when it did. I was ready to go back to riding in something other than a blue bus with blacked out windows.

Overcoming Resistance to Change

Process Improvement Partners was brought in to help a consumer goods manufacturer cut their changeover time (the time it takes to switch tooling and equipment over from one product to another) in half.  By doing so, they would be able to reduce inventory and improve process performance. 

The company has five different shifts operating 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.  Each crew believed it had the best approach to changeovers, but the results didn’t show it.  There was major variation between and within shifts and none of the crews were able to start up their lines consistently and effectively coming out of a changeover.

The Path to Improvement

Process Improvement Partners recommended a 4 ½ day changeover reduction event, or SMED (Single Minute Exchange of Die) Kaizen, using representation from each of the crews.  By doing this, we could identify best practices across all of the crews and teach changeover reduction techniques to be shared once the Kaizen was over.  The leadership team agreed, and we began preparations for this critical event.

Our leader, the Operations Manager for the production line, picked a team of “All Stars” to participate in the Kaizen.  He felt their experience, creativity, and enthusiasm would lead us to a win.

This was the first changeover reduction Kaizen in the history of the plant, and the team was skeptical when we stated our objective:  cut the existing changeover time in half, without increasing safety risk to the crew or quality risk to their customers.  The team members assumed this meant they would have to rush around, with intense pressure to meet the new target time.   The truth was using SMED techniques, we would be able to reduce enough waste in the existing changeover process to take significant time out and reduce safety and quality risk.  Then, using the Wheel of Sustainability, we would be able to continue to get great results for years to come.

Turning Skepticism into Excitement

The first day of the Kaizen, we taught the four step SMED methodology (with a little spin from Process Improvement Partners): 

1.       Assess the current changeover and identify steps that must be done while the line is shut down (internal steps) and steps that are done while the line is still running (external steps)

2.       Convert any internal steps to external steps

3.       Streamline any remaining internal steps and then any external steps

4.       Eliminate any adjustments and put in all aspects of the Wheel of Sustainability

For step one, we videotaped the changeover, did some motion analysis, and made numerous observations of waste.  The team was excited to see opportunity they hadn’t realized existed.  They never had stepped back and watched what was happening, as they always had to participate in the changeovers. 

As we entered step two, the team prioritized the steps they thought could be converted from internal to external.   Their creativity helped them invent and build a number of jigs and fixtures that allowed work to be done in preparation for the changeover, while the line was still running.  By the morning of the third day, the team tested their efforts and found the time required to change the line over had already been reduced by 50%.  They weren’t satisfied, there was much more they felt they could do.

For the rest of the third day and part of the fourth day, the team worked on improvements to streamline remaining internal steps, found ways to eliminate adjustments, and created visuals to help all team members do the changeover the same way every time.  Now it was time to give the changes the ultimate test:  let another crew try the new changeover procedure.  

Working Through Opposition

Each team member was assigned a crew member who wasn’t on the team. They were assigned to review and teach them the new method and answer any questions or concerns.  They were sent out onto the factory floor and had approximately 1 ½ hours to teach and discuss the new methods and approach one on one.  After a while, one of the team members came into the meeting room and asked for my help.  Her assigned crew member was not interested in participating in the test of our new changeover procedure.  I came out on the floor to find out if I could help the situation.

The crew member, let’s call him Roy, was visibly upset, so I asked him what was bothering him.  He started yelling at me, saying we hadn’t listened to him or anyone else on his crew, didn’t videotape their changeover, and generally didn’t care what they thought.  I told him the team had representation from every crew and had done their best to use the best practices from each shift as we worked during the week.  He was having none of it.  I let him know that we needed to let someone other than the team try out the new method, so we could get feedback and make improvements to it, before locking in all of our changes.  His anger grew.  I knew I needed to do something extreme, or he would be lost and we wouldn’t learn what was needed to finalize our new procedure.

I asked, “Are you telling me you’re unwilling to try the new procedure?”  Roy realized he was being asked if he was being insubordinate, which is a disciplined offense in most companies.  He answered he was willing to try the new procedure, but just wanted to voice his protest about the lack on inclusion.  I told him I respected his opinion and thanked him for his willingness to try the new approach.

Testing the New System

At 4:30 pm, we gathered all crew members to explain the new procedure, set the expectations for them to follow it to the letter, and would give them the opportunity to provide feedback once the changeover was complete.  We would also pair a team member from the Kaizen team with each crew member, so they could be coached during the changeover, just in case they didn’t remember or understand the new steps or approach.  All crew members affirmed their commitment to try the new procedure, and we started the new changeover at approximately 4:40 pm.

Three minutes into the changeover something didn’t look right.  One of our Kaizen team members, let’s call her Julia, looked extremely uncomfortable.  I took her a few feet away from her assigned crew member and asked her if her assigned crew member wasn’t following the new procedure.  She nodded and I called the Kaizen team leader over, to talk about what was happening.  He wasn’t happy and we agreed to stop the changeover immediately.

We gathered the crew back together, explained what was wrong, why it wasn’t ok to try their own procedure as we wouldn’t learn anything if they did.  We then instructed them to put the line back to its original condition before the changeover.  After that, we would start the changeover again.   There was tension in the air.

At approximately 5:00 pm, we started the changeover for the second time.  In two minutes, one of the Kaizen team members, let’s call him Jack, came over and informed me his assigned crew member wasn’t following the new procedure.  We stopped the changeover again, gathered the crew, and in an impassioned way, did our best to convince them to try it the right way, or we would do this all night.  Would things work out on the third try?

We started out third attempt at 5:10 pm and this time everyone followed the new procedure to the letter.  You could see the tension fade away from the Kaizen team members.  Now, something else was creeping in.  The team had been working since 6:30 am and they were getting tired.  65 minutes later, the changeover was complete.  Now it was time to bring the crew into the meeting room and get their feedback and reaction to the new procedure.  I was wondering how Roy and his crew mates would respond to the new procedure and the two stoppages we imposed on them when they tried to go “rogue”.

A Surprising Conclusion

In the meeting room, I set up a flip chart and gathered all crew members around a table.  I asked each of them to tell us, one at a time, what they thought, identifying out the things they liked and the things we could improve for them.  As they spoke, I would write their comments on a flip chart for everyone to see.

Roy started out the feedback session by telling us he “loved” four very specific improvements the team had made.  He also offered some constructive feedback on some simple things we could improve.  Others had the opportunity to share their feedback, and all of them had positive and constructive things to say.  I have to admit I was a bit shocked at the change in the tone in the room.  I had figured the crew would save up all of their anger for the meeting room.  Instead, they were appreciative for all of the Kaizen team’s efforts.  They had realized our Kaizen team was doing their best for everyone in the crew, and the test proved it to them.

We thanked the crew and the Kaizen team, and sent everyone back to the line or home.  There were many handshakes and high-fives before they left. 

At the report out to leadership, the team remarked how important it was to get everyone’s input and also to test out new ideas with a group that wasn’t involved in the changes.  It illustrated how difficult change can be, as most people tend to expect the worst and hope for the best.  Since then, the line has been able to sustain the reduced changeover time and has many more believers in changeover reduction and Kaizen.

Don’t Shortcut the Process if You Want Results

Process Improvement Partners was asked to develop and deliver a global cost reduction ideation session for a leading consumer products manufacturer. In early phone conversations with the client, we discovered that prior attempts at this effort had less than desirable results. The next logical step was to visit the client and discuss the approach for the session.

The company wanted to develop a number of cost reduction concepts to be implemented in the current and following years. In past sessions, teams brainstormed cost reduction ideas and then handed them to project teams who were to turn those ideas into reality. Many ideas weren’t fully detailed, and the project teams became frustrated as they tried to understand the meaning of the ideas.

In order to get the proper amount of detail for the ideas, we suggested a two-day session. The client anticipated a half- day session, and his sponsors were only willing to commit that amount of time. It was clear we’d have to be prepared to make our case before requesting more time from the sponsor.

Our principle for an effective cost reduction session is that there should be no risk to safety, customer service, or productivity resulting from the ideas generated and implemented. To accomplish this, the team must understand what is most important to the customer, the employees, and the overall marketplace. During our sessions, the team receives Voice of the Customer, operational, and business information as the basis for their work. Then, the team is exposed to other ways of thinking around their current processes. Brainstorming and prioritization come next, and the highest priority ideas are developed into detailed concepts with logical thinking and financial calculations applied to them.

Once the team enters into the concept development phase, they continue to work until time runs out in the session, working from the highest priority/highest value projects to the lowest priority/lowest value projects. Most teams need two days to get enough projects detailed to meet the desired session objectives.

Once this approach was reviewed with the team leader, he agreed two full days were needed for the session. Now, we had to convince his sponsors to commit to a two-day session.

Fortunately, there was a leadership team meeting later that morning, and the team leader was able to get a 30-minute agenda commitment from them. The team leader introduced me to the leadership team and told them I would be describing the process for the session and asking for a two-day commitment.

This opening statement got the room buzzing. They didn’t feel like they needed two full days as they hadn’t had to do this in past sessions. One of the members of the leadership team commented that prior efforts hadn’t been successful, so maybe they should listen and consider a different approach.

This was my opportunity to talk about prior cost reduction sessions and the results they were able to achieve. I emphasized that the key to these sessions was to provide concepts to project teams that had the right amount of detail and logic, so the teams would have a solid foundation from which to build on. I explained that rushing through these sessions wouldn’t allow the teams to think through the logic and provide the necessary detail.

This got their attention, but they were still skeptical. They were willing to allow one day (a half-day increase from their prior commitment), but this still wouldn’t be enough. Knowing that these sessions were designed to save companies millions of dollars, I asked if they thought two days was reasonable for such a high return on their investment. One of the leadership team members asked, “Why wouldn’t we set a savings target and lock the team in a room until they reached this target?” I explained the team would be less likely to provide quality effort and more likely try to hit this target with “false” savings, in an effort to go home that evening. He seemed satisfied with my answer.

The leadership team members began challenging each other’s thinking and relived many failed attempts at cost reduction. I knew we were getting somewhere, but hadn’t yet gotten agreement to proceed with a two-day session. Finally, the Director of Finance looked at me and said, “What are you going to do that’s different from what we’ve been doing all of these years?” This was my chance. I fired right back, “I don’t really know what you’ve done in the past, but I can tell you what I would do.” From there, I described the full two-day process that had worked for dozens of teams over the years. The team leader supported me during this discussion and by the end of the review, the leadership team agreed on the approach. The Director of Finance even said, “Don’t be so cheap. Let’s give the team two full days for this important effort.”

This was the alignment and agreement we needed. We thanked the leadership team for their support and time and excused ourselves from the meeting.

A month later, we ran our first cost reduction session and the team beat their savings target by more than $10 million. Two more sessions were held in 2018 with similar results. These sessions will now be held annually, following this approach, with a two-day commitment every time.

Shine a Light on the Problem

The Corporate Quality Manager of a suspended ceiling manufacturer had a problem. When he wanted to check for defects on ceiling tiles, he had them shipped from the manufacturing plant and installed in ceiling grid in the corporate testing facility. This 12’ x 24’ ceiling grid configuration was adjacent to a large bank of windows. He then waited for the weather to cooperate. You see, he wanted the proper angle of sunlight to shine across the face of the tiles, and depending on the time of year and weather conditions, he might have to wait weeks to assess the quality of the tiles. The windows were often obstructed with testing materials, which made access and viewing even more difficult.

The ceiling manufacturer was about to introduce a large quantity of new products and the installation setup would not be sufficient to check all the new products’ quality prior to product launch. A change had to be made. As Lean Champion for the company, my help was enlisted to solve the problem. After some initial discussions and a tour of the area, the Quality Manager and I agreed we needed to think differently about the setup and process of quality testing. We decided to use a Kaizen event to optimize the design of the required testing space.

We assembled a team of testing technicians, quality technicians, scientists, and marketing representatives to think through the testing requirements and systems to install. We also identified a space to use for the new quality testing area. After a few weeks of touring various buildings and negotiating for space, we chose two adjoining 20’ x 50’ spaces on the ground floor of the testing facility. These spaces were filled with equipment and materials from many years of testing and development. We were sure we would be able to remove most of it and re-purpose the space for the benefit of the company. Although these spaces were large, they had no windows to the outside, so we would have to figure out another way to provide proper lighting to the face of the ceiling tiles.

On the first day of the Kaizen, we reviewed Lean principles and spent extra time on 5S. Next, we took the team on a walk of the current testing area and then to the identified spaces. Their first reaction was surprise and disappointment. They thought we should use the existing space by the outside window and reorganize materials and tools.

Our goal was to be able to assess tiles for quality at any time, regardless of the weather. This goal forced us to rule out the current location for testing. In the new space, the clutter got in the way of the team’s vision of what was possible. So, we did the first S, “Sort”. During Sort, the team removed 90 percent of what was in the space. Some equipment, which had been purchased to provide critical data in years past, was no longer useful, and was removed. The team contacted as many of the equipment owners as possible, to ensure we wouldn’t throw out anything critical. Everything would be removed from the space, no matter what.

Once we cleared out the space, we developed our concept for testing. The idea was to create a number of testing spaces, or pods, in which to install and check various types of ceiling tiles. These tiles needed to be at least seven feet off of the floor, so that they could be observed from below as well as from the side, using some form of raking light. The light had to go across the painted face of the tile, so defects and inconsistencies would be readily apparent. The team agreed the size of each pod should be 12’ x 12’. This allowed us to create three pods in each 20’ x 50’ space, for a total of six. We now had three times the capacity of the existing testing space. But, how were we going to create the necessary lighting?

The first thing we had to do was to identify the intensity and angle of light we needed. Fortunately, we were able to do so on the second day of the Kaizen, as the sun came out and provided the necessary lighting required in the existing testing space. Using light meters and the experience of the team, we identified the proper number of lumens (intensity) and optimal angle for the light in the pods.

The next step was to build the ceiling grid configurations in the pods. We put together three installations of ceiling grid in one of the two rooms. Each was squared up and then ceiling tiles were installed. We made sure we had enough space on all sides of the installations, so we could view the tiles from any angle, without obstruction.

Now it was time to go shopping. We purchased enough lights for one of the pods, before committing to all six. We bought a number of different fluorescent lighting configurations (and kept the receipts) to allow us to test and identify the optimal configuration.

On the morning of the third day, we performed our first lighting tests in one of the pods. A technician climbed a scaffold and held one of the lights up to the ceiling tile installation. The team wasn’t pleased. They asked him to move the light a little further away and a little higher. Things started to look better. Then, after a slight adjustment in location and height, they felt they were getting the type of lighting required. Using light meters, they verified a consistent result compared with the natural light measured on day two. The team collected several measurements and developed plans to assemble permanent lighting fixtures for all pods.

Later in the day, the first lighting fixture was installed and the team verified their results. Everything was as expected. Then the team realized an opportunity to provide the same lighting at a 90-degree angle to the original light fixture. They would just need to install an additional fixture and connect it at right angles to the original fixture. This gave them additional inspection capability they never had before.

On the fourth day, the first pod was complete and plans were made to install the same lighting in the other five pods and to hard-wire everything to make it as safe and efficient as possible. Now the team had a new problem. With the extreme increase in productivity and complete elimination of wait time to test, everyone would want to use the pods at the same time.

The solution was to designate an owner for the area and a system to ensure the area was well-managed and organized. To reserve the use of a testing pod, a white board was installed to make reservations visible, by pod. If someone used a pod longer than the requested time, the area owner would follow-up and hold them accountable to honor their commitments.

At the report out, the team proudly reported on their results. They were able to take a process that used to take weeks and reduced it down to minutes. They also increased the capacity of the area by a factor of three. Anyone could now use the pods safely and productively and testing would no longer slow down any new product development or testing project. In the next six weeks, all lights and wiring were installed, and the space has been in continuous use for years.

The team learned how to shine a light on the problem and solve it creatively.

The Little Team That Could and Did

Process Improvement Partners (PIP) conducted a site assessment for a small electronic targeting systems company in Glen Rock, PA.

The day started with introductions, with each employee sharing their experiences with continuous improvement and their expectations for the day. Some were excited about the process while others weren’t sure what to expect.

Following introductions, PIP demonstrated various continuous improvement tools and techniques. One technique, 5S, got the attention of the Office Manager. She said she thought everyone could use 5S in their personal workspaces and the various production and testing areas around the facility. After about an hour and a half of discussion in the meeting room, it was time to find out if she was right.

We took a walk of the facility and offices. We could easily see from the start, there were many opportunities to improve safety and productivity. Whenever we walked into a space or an office, there was no indication of the health or status of the area. Most areas were cluttered and disorganized. Using the theme, “How do you know …” we discussed our ability to understand what was happening in each space. The only person who knew what was going on at the time was the person who was using the area or office. In some of the offices, even the person using it wasn’t so sure everything was as it should be. It wasn’t easy to see if anyone needed help to get their work done, so they usually had to fend for themselves.

After the walk, the team brainstormed many ideas they thought would improve their productivity and safety. Sorting through more than 60 ideas, a theme emerged – use 5S to improve safety and productivity in all areas of the facility. But, where should they start? Did they need outside help to use these new tools?

It turns out they didn’t. The next week, they jumped right in and began their continuous improvement journey. With the Office Manager as the leader, they picked the first area to work on, the main production area.

Using what they learned about 5S, they brought order to the area and made it a better place to work for everyone. They were proud of what they had accomplished and knew that this was only the beginning of their efforts. Using available time during the following weeks, they began to spread the use of 5S all over the facility.

They now know what they want to do and how to do it. It turns out you don’t need a bunch of trained facilitators and continuous improvement personnel to make positive change. You just need the willingness to learn and apply some simple tools and techniques to improve your situation. And, if something doesn’t work exactly as planned, learn from it and try again.

Process Improvement Partners is in business to help organizations and people help themselves. Sometimes, all they need is a little support, a little nudge, and a few simple tools to get started.

Speaking Up Takes Courage

In 2011, I was asked to assist a team in Pensacola, Florida who wanted to improve processes in their distribution center. We were given four days to accomplish our task – reduce shipping damage by 50%. This was a tall order, but the team was up for the challenge.

After a half-day of training on Lean tools and techniques, the team took a walk in the distribution center and supplying processes and identified many ideas they thought would improve the situation for everyone who worked there.

All of the ideas were shared and the team prioritized the ideas they wanted to implement first. Breaking the team into smaller sub-teams, we picked the top three projects to work on. Each sub-team developed their solutions and began to implement them. At times during the day, we would come back as a full team and review each sub-team’s progress. Things were getting done, but it wasn’t clear that any of the projects would significantly reduce shipping damage.

On the morning of the third day, I asked the team if they had any feedback or ideas to help us make better progress against our goals. The room was silent. One of the team members, let’s call her Ruth, had an uncomfortable look on her face. I didn’t want to put her on the spot, so I asked each team member, one at a time, to give one suggestion they thought would make the day better for everyone. Most people said things like, “Let’s work better as a team,” or “We should try to get more done.”

When I got to Ruth, she blurted out, “I don’t think we’re working on the right things.” This took me by surprise. I wanted to know more. She then explained we weren’t focusing on the root cause of the shipping damage. She thought we were just working on things that were easy to implement, not directly impacting the causes of shipping damage.

I felt a sense of panic – we were in the third day and would be reporting our results at the end of the fourth day. There was little time to spare, but we had to resolve this issue or else we would fail. We were a team and the members started to share their thoughts with Ruth about the problem we were trying to solve. They realized Ruth was right. We were avoiding the real issues causing shipping damage. We brainstormed again and prioritized efforts based on the right things to do, not the easiest things to do. Relief started to wash over me as I realized the team was determined not to fail.

Once we finished prioritization, the team split into four sub-teams. Each sub-team had a sense of urgency and purpose and worked on their projects with energy and a “refuse to lose” spirit. If they had a question, or got stuck, they went to find help. Nothing got in their way. Almost all team members stayed late and everyone agreed to come in two hours early the next day to ensure their work would be done.

We decided to abandon the standard Power Point presentation of our findings and changes and worked right up to the time of the report out. When the leadership team came to see what we had done, we gave a tour of the changes we implemented to reduce shipping damage. They were impressed and believed we had accomplished our goal of 50% reduction.

I learned a valuable lesson from Ruth, and it’s one I share with all of the teams I work with. Understand the problem you are trying to solve. Once understood, focus on the thing(s) that will solve the problem, no matter how difficult they may seem. If you’re veering off course, have the courage of your conviction to steer people back on course. Never be afraid to speak up.

I now give all of my teams many opportunities to speak up and share their concerns. I also do it as soon as possible in every Kaizen event I lead or facilitate. It’s better to change course than end up in the wrong destination. Thanks to Ruth for being brave enough to steer us back on course.

Little Things Mean A Lot

A global consumer goods manufacturer was experiencing high levels of downtime, jams, and long changeovers on a critical production line. They invited Process Improvement Partners to their plant to observe and discuss the problem and identify opportunities for improvement. After reviewing performance, we took a walk to the line. The line was running, and after a description of line components, it became apparent there were quick opportunities to improve performance of the line. The techniques we would use were quite basic: leveling, squaring, aligning, and centering of products with the process. It seemed so simple, and the customers were skeptical. We suggested a five-day Kaizen to improve line reliability, scheduled for January 2019.

Leading up to the Kaizen event, we had many discussions with line operators, mechanics, and engineers, and we made several confirming observations on the line. During a discussion with the Plant Manager, it became apparent he didn’t buy-in to the approach. He had used a process called “Center Lining” before, and had mixed results. In addition, it took weeks to accomplish. We assured him centering of the process would be completed on the first day of the Kaizen and then we would optimize all parts of the process around the center in the following days. He was still skeptical, but heard enough and saw our confidence, and gave final approval for the Kaizen to proceed.

In most Kaizen events, we provide a structure and approach to the team charged with solving a problem. We very rarely dictate specific actions to the team. In this case, the entire first day was controlled and team members were asked to follow very specific instructions before implementing their ideas.

After receiving training on the approach, the team walked to the production line. We reviewed safety requirements, shut down the line, and locked it out. The next step was to identify the center of the critical packaging process. This was the part of the line where everything comes together – the product and the package. We told the team everything leading up to the packaging process should be located and optimized to the center of the process. They didn’t think it would be very important, but were willing to learn and find the center of the line.

We located the center of the line at the midpoint of the conveyor frame on the out-feed side of the equipment and wrapped a string around that point. Then, stretching the string through the equipment, we found the center of the conveyors leading up to the equipment. A trained eye can keep the center precise within 1/32”, so we found what we believed to be center along approximately 100 feet of equipment and conveyor and pulled the string taut. Then, we marked the equipment and conveyor every 4 feet along its length to identify center for the process. Once complete, we noticed all product was coming into the equipment off center. The packaging was tracking off-center as well. That was the first time the skeptical team members saw something they weren’t expecting.

Our next step was to check the levelness of all of the conveyors leading up to and through the equipment. Ideally, all conveyors should be no more than 1/32” out of level at every transition (one section of conveyor to the next section) and side to side. Using a torpedo level and some shims, the team documented levelness of every section of conveyor. They found many of the conveyors were out of level by more than ¼” and some were out as much as ½”. The good news was this condition was easily corrected, and by the end of two hours, all conveyors were leveled throughout the process. The team was losing its skepticism as the products ran more consistently once we started the line back up. The first day ended with the team handing the line back over to the production organization.

The next morning, the team came in energized. They heard from the afternoon shift and overnight shift that the line had run smoothly overnight - much better than anyone had expected. We had four more days to improve things before the end of the Kaizen.

The next step was to optimize the location of the product with reference to the center of the process. Now that we had identified the center and leveled the line, this was easy. The challenge was to determine ways to ensure that our new settings would not change as soon as the Kaizen was over. The team was given the freedom to come up with ways to create and sustain the new settings. Using collars, pins, and labels, the team came up with ways to identify the proper locations for all of the different products running on the line. They also identified the product changeover steps (in the order to be followed) and labeled each part of the line with changeover steps that would need to be accomplished in proper sequence. These labels were made with large, bright green stock, so people wouldn’t miss them and forget a changeover step.

One problem the team identified was that the packaging wasn’t wrapping the product in a consistent manner. Upon further investigation, it was determined a top guiding roller was applying unequal pressure to the corrugated wrapper and the wrapper was shifting from side to side. One of the team members came up with a simple solution - tie all parts of the top guiding roller together to guarantee equal pressure across the wrapper. By doing this, the wrapper consistently met the product every time.

Improvements came fast and furious over the final days of the Kaizen, and by the last day, everyone noticed a significant improvement in line performance. The operators on the line thanked the team for correcting years of problems and even offered suggestions to make things better, which the team was able to incorporate into their work.

At the report out, team members remarked they were surprised how extremely small improvements impacted performance. They also realized these techniques could be taken to any other line in the factory. Once skeptics, they become zealots.

Where Is It?

In 2010, the company I used to work for decided to go Lean. They brought in consultants, who taught tools and techniques to employees all over the world. One tool I learned from them was 3P - Production Preparation Process. This technique maximizes creativity of a team by driving their thinking way beyond their comfort level.

Because I had extensive experience with Lean and had applied it for many years in my work, the consultants recognized my capability to facilitate and lead Kaizen events that were broad in scope and of high complexity. One consultant, who asked me to co-facilitate a 3P Kaizen, explained each step to me before and during the Kaizen. The team accomplished breakthrough results, but I didn’t fully understand how they got there. A few months later, I was asked to facilitate another 3P Kaizen, with a consultant as my co-facilitator. Once again, using the 11-step method of 3P, we were able to attain another breakthrough. Over the next two years, I used 3P a few more times and facilitated teams to breakthrough results. Something was bothering me, however. I still didn’t fully understand the meaning of the steps and why they were so powerful. I wanted to know more.

After some research, I discovered the inventor of the methodology was Chihiro Nakao, who ran a company called Shingijutsu. I also learned Shingijutsu was hosting a 3P seminar in 2013 and knew I had to go. Knowing it wouldn’t be an easy sell (costing over $6,000), I asked a higher-level manager to join me and convince our company there was immense value in attending. We were successful and made plans to attend the seminar in Muscatine, Iowa.

Shingijutsu’s World-wide 3P/Moonshine competition was a real-world problem-solving seminar hosted by Allsteel, a leading manufacturer of office furniture. Three teams of six were challenged to design, develop, and demonstrate a new chair and the process to produce it - all in one week. Each team had Allsteel members, as well as participants from outside companies. At the end of the week, our work would be judged by our “customers” and a winning chair design and manufacturing process would be selected. The prior year’s winning chair was being manufactured for the first time the week of the competition. This was going to be intense!

All of our movements before, during, and after each day’s efforts were controlled by Shingijutsu. We were picked up at the airport by them, taken to the hotel, met for breakfast, taken to the factory, and taken to dinner and back to the hotel at the end of each day. This kept us laser-focused and also provided the opportunity to get to know them during downtime each day.

On the morning of the first day of the competition, we were given an introduction to 3P and our mission for the week. We listened to expectations of the plant and our customers next. After that, we were split into three competing teams. Each team was assigned a Sensei to guide them through the process and a space to do their work. My team, made up of my co-worker, four workers from the plant, and me, was given a space above the factory floor, on a mezzanine. Our Sensei, Mike, was a retired Boeing employee, who had come out of retirement to join Shingijutsu at the behest of their founder, Sensei Nakao.

Mike quickly started the team on Steps 1 and 2 of the 11-step Nakao method, named after the inventor of 3P. In these steps, team members were challenged to understand the requirements of the customer at the deepest level. In my prior experience with 3P, I typically rushed through these steps, as they were difficult to explain to team members. Now, I realized these steps were foundational and there could be no shortcuts. The idea of 3P is to design the most waste-free product and process possible. If you don’t understand the essence of what the customer is asking for, you will design waste into the product and process. I was starting to understand – the struggle is important and teams should not be shortchanged of the experience. The day ended with my team finishing Step 2.

The next morning, we started on Steps 3 through 6. In these steps, we were challenged to think in new ways about how to solve the problem for the customer. Using nature as the model of efficiency, all of us had to come up with multiple ways nature does what we are being asked to do. Then, we were asked to sketch. This activates another part of the mind and brings out creativity. Next, we were asked to go even deeper into ways to solve the problem.

At this point, team members were engaged, enthusiastic, and excited. My team went to a meeting table to discuss how we would solve the problem. We got a bit loud and the discussion went back and forth. In less than 1 ½ minutes, Mike came over to our table and asked us what we were doing. We told him we were discussing the problem. He immediately stopped us and said to go out and find the solution, not discuss it at the table. I had never been shut down like that before, and I didn’t like it. I stood up and said, “We don’t even know what it is!” Mike said to go find it on Gemba (the real place, the place where the work is done). So, I did what any respectful student would do - I stormed off!

I went downstairs to the factory floor and started walking around the production lines. I was not happy. I didn’t know what I was looking for, but if that’s what Mike wanted, that’s what I was going to do. My mind was racing, I wasn’t focused, so I kept walking around without purpose. After about 20 minutes of walking aimlessly around the factory, I stopped at a production cell and decided to watch what they were doing. In three minutes, my mind started to relax and I was able to focus on what was going on. Ten minutes later, the activity in the work cell got me thinking about possible solutions to the problem we were trying to solve. Now I knew what Mike was trying to teach. The answer is not at a meeting table, it’s in Gemba. Open your mind and you will find the answer. Could it be that simple? The answer is yes!

I came back to the mezzanine, rejoined the other team members and was ready to solve the problem with them. My experience in Gemba reinforced how important it was to follow the 3P process fully, and not take shortcuts. The rest of the week took us through all 11 steps of the Nakao method and by the end of the week we had a new chair design and the manufacturing process to produce it at the required rate of customer demand.

Our team didn’t win the competition, but we all felt like winners. For me, it was mission accomplished. I learned 3P from the masters. I now had a better understanding of the meaning and purpose of all 11 steps. I also knew I shouldn’t shortcut any steps, they were all vital to the success of the process. But, most importantly, I learned the value of going to Gemba. All the answers are in Gemba. You just need to be willing to look for them.

Lead from the Front – The Story of the Pink Tools

A large, multi-national company started their Lean journey in 2010. The company brought in consultants, who facilitated and guided Kaizen events and coached leaders at every manufacturing site around the world. One of their plants, in central Ohio, had a strong culture of employee engagement and was expected to lead the other plants in positive outcomes resulting from the Kaizen events. Early on, they weren’t able to identify an internal leader of their continuous improvement journey, so I was asked to act as the interim “Lean Champion” for the plant.

The plant manager, let’s call him Steve, and I had worked together in other roles years before. At one time, I was a direct report of his in the corporate office, so we knew each other very well. Soft spoken and strongly principled, he had the proper mindset to lead a Lean transformation.

Following their initial Value Stream Mapping event, which set the overall Lean strategy for the plant, we agreed the first Kaizen would be a 5S event on their most critical production line. We picked the strongest, most engaged team we could to ensure our first Kaizen would be wildly successful. Top line operators, mechanics, and support staff dedicated five days in order to drive breakthrough safety and productivity of the line.

In the early days of the Lean journey, we were all required to provide a full day of training to the team. Most of the team members weren’t familiar with Lean and the terms used with Lean, so the idea was to make them comfortable by providing extensive training. Most line operators and mechanics don’t have much tolerance for sitting in a classroom all day, so I knew my approach had to be as engaging as possible. Luckily for me, most of the team members had a willingness to learn and a good sense of humor. I infused the training with as much humor as possible, and did my best to entertain them through the long day of training. They hung in there, and when training was complete, we went to the line to see what important improvements we could make.

We walked the line and made many observations. I couldn’t help but notice the extremely dirty condition of the equipment, the floor around it, and the lack of any obvious tools to help the operators and mechanics do their jobs. I asked them what they did when the line went down for repair. The team members took me to their personal toolboxes, which were in various stages of disarray, and explained that if they didn’t have what they needed, they would have to find proper tools elsewhere. They would often lose minutes, if not hours, in search for what they needed. It became apparent having the proper tools was a huge improvement opportunity.

After the tour was over, the team shared their ideas to improve the situation at the line. Many of the ideas had a common theme: having the proper tools where needed, when needed, would greatly improve the safety and productivity of the line. This meant tools would have to be taken out of tool boxes and placed visibly on a board, where anyone could get to them at any time. When the team went to prioritize the ideas to work on, tools availability and visibility became a low priority. I knew there was something they weren’t telling me. Upon further investigation, I discovered trust was the reason tools weren’t picked as a top priority. The team felt their coworkers and contractors working in the plant couldn’t be trusted to return tools when they were finished using them. Even worse, they thought contractors would take tools out of the plant with them intentionally. I knew I had to do something extreme to overcome these trust issues.

“Paint them pink,” I told the team. They looked at me as if I can just come from Mars. “Let me explain,” I said. “If you were to paint all of the tools on the tool board pink, no one would ever wonder where they came from, lose them, or take them out of the plant. Who wants a pink wrench?” Now there was laughter. I wasn’t entirely serious, but I wanted to show them there was an answer and nothing should stand in the way of doing the right thing. Then, I excused myself for a few minutes and let the team mull over my suggestion.

I walked to the plant manager’s office and asked him if he had a few minutes for me. I explained what was going on in the Kaizen event and the mistrust issues the team had. He was aware of tools leaving the plant and wanted to know what he could do to help. This is exactly what is needed from leadership and this was my opportunity to coach Steve. “Steve, we are going to do our best to develop the best system to assure tools never leave the factory and are always available to those who need them. But, we’re new at this, and just like anything else, rules will be broken, so we will need your help. At the report out, we are going to propose this rule: tools are either in use or on the tool board, and no where else ever. We will need you to reinforce this immediately at the end of the report out. Then, the first time someone breaks this rule, you must pound your fist and stomp your feet and make such a fuss that everyone will remember it.” Steve looked at me in a knowing way, but seemed to want a bit more explanation. “How often have you pounded your fist and stomped your feet in front of your employees, Steve? Never! So, do it once and you’ll never have to do it again.” He told me he would consider it. I knew he would do the right thing.

The team sent me to the store to get red paint (not pink) and built a tool board filled with red tools. The rest of the line was cleaner and more organized than it had ever been. During the report out, the team pleaded for everyone to help them maintain the conditions of the line and keep the tools on the new tool board. Steve chimed in to reinforce the importance of this new rule: either in use or on the board, but nothing in between, ever. After much congratulating, the team disbanded, their job well done.

About 2 months later, I was facilitating another Kaizen team in the same plant, when during a process walk, I was called over by an operator, let’s call him Bob, who had been on the original 5S team. Bob showed me the tool board with all the tools in their proper place. I asked him if anyone tried to break the rule. He said it only happened once, and when Steve heard about it, he raised such a fuss it shocked everyone and it never happened again.