By Bob Emiliani
This article is from the Superfactory Archives, an archive of content from the Superfactory website that existed from 1997 to 2012.
Current state value stream maps reveal much more than just material and information flows. They also inform us of gaps that often exist between what top managers say and what is actually happening in the workplace.
The value stream map is one of many ways that Lean-minded people organize data to yield accurate information about what’s going on in order to initiate actions to improve a process [1]. While we should not over-emphasize value stream maps [2] – they are not the beginning and end of Lean – they do provide a lot of useful information. But they can also provide important information beyond our current understanding of material and information flows.
Within the last three years, the use of value stream maps has been expanded to include: determining value stream profit and loss [3], calculating the amount of greenhouse gas produced by a value stream [4], and as a tool to diagnose and correct deficiencies in leadership performance [5]. So it turns out that value stream maps are useful in other ways. Understanding the broader utility of value stream maps can help managers identify many other desirable improvements.
A fifth way value stream maps can be used is for corporate myth-busting. Simply looking at the current state value stream map for a shop or office process can help us discern the validity of what top managers say. For example:
| What Many Managers Say | What Current State VSMs Reveal |
|---|---|
| “There is a shortage of qualified leaders.” | Not possible. Anyone can create a wasteful current state. |
| “We are totally committed to improvement.” | No. Manager must have some other definition of improvement in mind. |
| “Teamwork is critical to our success.” | In reality there is a lack of teamwork as evidenced by separately positioned processes and poor information flows. |
| “What gets measured gets managed.” | No. Metrics currently in use do not help people improve processes or working conditions. |
| “Executive compensation is tied to performance.” | Performance is poor, therefore executive pay should be low. |
| “Employees are our greatest asset.” | Not if 80% or more of employee’s time is wasted. |
| “We don’t have the resources” or “We are stretched too thin.” | There are an abundance of resources waiting to be deployed effectively. |
| “There is a shortage of skilled workers” or “Business is complex.” | No. Managers have not led efforts to simplify and create standard work. |
| “We are in a mature market.” | It is more likely customers are dissatisfied with your performance and also want things you don’t offer. |
| “Greater scale makes us more competitive” or “Higher volume will lower our costs.” | Eliminating waste, unevenness, and unreasonableness lowers costs and improves competitiveness. |
| “We can’t compete against China.” | Waste, unevenness, and unreasonableness is hurting your ability to compete against anyone. |
| “We listen to what our employees say.” | Improvement suggestions from workers have long been ignored. |
| “Innovation is the key to our success.” | Production process innovation is clearly absent. New product or service processes are probably not too good either. |
| “We are acting with a tremendous sense of urgency.” | You are doing the same wasteful things faster. |
| “We treat our employees with dignity and respect.” | Actually, you’re wasting their lives by having them do activities that add cost but do not add value. |
| “Everyone is working very hard.” | Yes, people do look busy, but that doesn’t mean they are doing any value-added work. |
| “We must execute flawlessly” and “Failure is not an option.” | There will be many flaws, and failure is certain at some point. |
As you can see, current state value stream maps are a Rosetta Stone for deciphering today’s management-speak. Can you think of others?
While the true condition of an organization may not be very pretty, it is important to understand things as they actually are because this is the starting point for meaningful improvement.
Hopefully, this short article will inspire managers to further improve themselves and their areas of responsibility. But how? They can start by dedicating themselves to learn and practice what they were probably not taught to do in college or graduate school:
-
Observe processes
-
Identify problems and gather data
-
Determine root causes (e.g. 5 Why’s, fishbone diagram)
-
Identify countermeasures [6], and
-
Regularly participate in activities to simplify processes and eliminate waste, unevenness, and unreasonableness.
Please remember to also practice non-blaming and non-judgmental behaviors, as these are required for realizing genuine continuous improvement [7,8].
Bob Emiliani is President of The Center for Lean Business Management, LLC and an associate professor in the School of Technology at Central Connecticut State University in New Britain, Conn. Before joining CCSU, Bob worked for 20 years in manufacturing and service industries, and has implemented Lean principles and practices on the manufacturing shop floor, in supply networks, and in higher education. Bob is the principle author of the 2003 Shingo Prize winning book Better Thinking, Better Results, a detailed case study and analysis of The Wiremold Company’s Lean transformation from 1991 to 2001. For more information, please visit http://www.theclbm.com. Copyright © 2006 by The CLBM, LLC.
Notes:
[1] M. Rother and J. Shook, Learning to See, v. 1.3, Lean Enterprise Institute, Brookline, MA, 2003
[2] A. Smalley, “TPS vs. Lean and the Law of Unintended Consequences”, Superfactory.com, January 2006, ../articles/smalley_tps_vs_lean.htm
[3] B. Maskell and B Baggaley, Practical Lean Accounting, Productivity Press, New York, NY, 2003
[4] D. Simons and R. Mason, “Lean and Green: “Doing More with Less,” ECR Journal, Vol. 3, No. 1, Spring 2003, pp. 84-91
[5] M.L. Emiliani and D.J. Stec, "Using Value Stream Maps to Improve Leadership," Leadership and Organizational Development Journal, Vol. 25, No. 8, pp. 622-645, 2004
[6] S. Spear, “Learning to Lead at Toyota,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 82, No. 5, 2004, pp. 78-86
[7] M. Imai, “Kaizen Seminar”, Hartford Graduate Center, Hartford, Conn., May 1988
[8] "The Toyota Way 2001," Toyota Motor Corporation, internal document, Toyota City, Japan, April 2001