a lean services experiment: introducing lean to the...

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

A Lean Services Experiment: Introducing Lean to the service

operations at 1time airline

A Thesis

presented to

in partial fulfilment

of the requirements for the

Masters of Business Administration Degree

by

Graham Paterson

December 2009

Supervisor: Fatima Hamdulay

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

This thesis is not confidential. It may be used freely by the Graduate School of

Business.

I certify that except as noted above the thesis is my own work and all references used

are accurately reported in footnotes.

Signed:

Graham Paterson

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

ABSTRACT

1time airline recently made the decision to move into a new market segment and

attract corporate travellers who bring in higher revenues than the original market of

leisure travellers. To attract the corporate travellers 1time airline had to improve its

on-time performance and reliability. The main method of achieving this improvement

is the turn-around time of the aircraft. The turn-around time is the time the aircraft is

parked on arrival till it leaves for departure.

This study investigates how the application of lean thinking could assist the

organisation in improving their on-time performance. In particular the study looked at

how the application of lean tools to the airlines operations at OR Tambo International

Airport in Johannesburg could reduce turn-around times.

The research led to not rejecting hypotheses that claimed that Value Stream Mapping

(VSM) could be used to reflect the turn-around around process, and that the use of a

kanban pull signal and standardised procedures could improve turn-around times. A

hypothesis claiming that the application of lean would improve staff performance was

not accepted.

KEYWORDS: Airline Operations, Lean Thinking, Toyota

Production System (TPS), Value Stream Mapping,

5S, Standardisation, Action Research, Aircraft

Turnaround Times, Lean Services.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES 6

LIST OF TABLES 6

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 RESEARCH AREA AND PROBLEM 7

1.2 RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND SCOPE 10

1.3 RESEARCH ASSUMPTIONS 11

1.4 RESEARCH ETHICS 12

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 DISCUSSION 13

2.2 THE ORIGINS OF LEAN 13

2.3 WHAT IS LEAN 14

2.4 THE FIVE PRINCIPLES OF LEAN 15

2.5 THE SEVEN WASTES 16

2.6 LEAN TOOLS 17

2.6.1 VALUE STREAM MAPPING 18

2.6.2 5S 19

2.6.3 STANDARDISATION 21

2.7 LEAN SERVICES 22

2.8 LEAN APPLICATION IN AIRLINES 24

2.9 LEAN AND PEOPLE 27

2.10 LEAN IMPLEMENATION 30

2.11 CONCLUSION 33

3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 RESEARCH APPROACH AND STRATEGY 34

3.2 WHAT IS ACTION RESEARCH 34

3.3 WHEN IS ACTION RESEARCH APPROPRIATE 35

3.4 THE ROLE OF THE RESEARCHER IN ACTION RESEARCH 35

3.5 RESEARCH DESIGN 36

3.6 DATA COLLECTION METHODS 38

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

3.7 SAMPLING 39

3.8 RESEARCH CRITERIA 40

3.9 DATA ANALYSIS METHODS 41

4. RESEARCH FINDINGS, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 RESEARCH FINDINGS 42

4.2 RESEARCH QUESTION 1

4.2.1 HYPOTHESIS TESTING 44

4.2.1.1 CURRENT STATE VSM 44

4.2.1.2 LEAN TOOLS AND PRINCIPLES 53

4.3 RESEARCH QUESTION 2 64

5. LESSONS LEARNED / THEORY BUILDING 66

6. FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS 69

REFERENCES 71

APPENDICIES 75

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

LIST OF FIGURES

1. 1TIME AIRLINE ON-TIME PERFORMANCE MAY 2009 9 2. 1TIME AIRLINE ON-TIME PERFORMANCE JUNE 2009 9 3. ACTION RESEARCH CYCLES 37 4. ORGANISATIONAL CHART 42 5. CURRENT STATE VSM 47 6. CRITICAL PATH VSM 52

LIST OF TABLES

1. LEAN SERVICE CHARECTERISTICS 23 2. TIME FRAME FOR LEAN IMPLEMENTATION 32 3. DATA SET OF PROCESSES 48 4. RESULTS OF EXPERIMENT 1 56 5. EFFECT OF EXPERIMENT 1 AIRCRAFT TURN-AROUND TIMES 57 6. RESULTS OF EXPERIMENT 2 62

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Research Area and problem

1time airline is a low cost carrier founded in 2004 that operates mainly domestic

flights within South Africa. The airline’s headquarters are based in Johannesburg. At

the time of this report 1time operates a fleet of 12 aircraft and conduct just over 1000

flights per month. The airline prides itself on its service standards and reliability and

was selected as the best low cost airline in Africa in the 2009 World Travel Awards(,

Commercial Director).Despite this apparent success, the world airline industry is

going through its toughest times yet.

In June of 2009, Giovanni Basignani, The International Air Transport Association’s

(IATA) Director General and CEO, stated that IATA had revised its airline financial

forecast for 2009 downwards to an expected global loss of US$9 billion, reflecting a

rapidly deteriorating revenue environment (www.iata.org). This was caused by the

wide scale economic meltdown experienced towards the end of 2008 following the

‘sub-prime’ crisis.

Attempting to counter the negative effects of this downturn, 1time Airline changed its

sales and marketing strategy in an attempt to attract corporate customers and business

people to its flights, rather than the traditional low cost carrier market of tourists.

This corporate market is, according to Commercial Director, a far more lucrative

aspect of the business. In order for 1time to benefit from the ‘down buying’ of

business travellers to low-fare airlines however, O’Connor believed that it was

necessary to improve the product in line with the new target market. A large portion

of that improvement revolved around improving on-time performance and reliability,

key features for business travellers (Interview, Desmond O’Connor, 21 August 2009).

On-time performance is a key performance metric in the airline industry and measure

how close to the scheduled departure time a flight actually leaves. Enhanced

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

reliability is about how consistently an airline manages to achieve its stated on-time

performance goals.

Following the decision to target the business traveller with better reliability and on-

time performance, 1time airline established on-time performance targets of 75 percent

of flights departing exactly on-time, and 90 percent of flights departing within 10

minutes of the scheduled departure time. These targets were considerably higher than

their previous targets of 70 percent of flights departing exactly on-time, and 90

percent of flights departing within 15 minutes of the scheduled departure time. These

older targets are the industry benchmarks for measuring on-time performance. It was

also decided that all times should be measured on departure times and not arrival

times as is common in a number of airlines, as this allows problems in the departure

process to be hidden when flights made up time en route.

According to O’Connor, while the average on-time performance was considered

acceptable to the board of the airline and within or close to the targets, the consistency

of that performance was found to be poor. This can be clearly seen from figures 1 and

2 below that show the 0 minute delay – exactly on-time – performance for May and

June of 2009.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Figure 1: 1time Airline on-time performance May 2009 (Source: 1time internal

document)

Figure 2: 1time Airline on-time performance June 2009 (Source: 1time internal

document)

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

One of the most critical aspects of on-time performance is the length of the aircraft

turn-around process according to James Budge, General Manager: Operations at

1time airline (interview, 30 September 2009). The aircraft turn-around process is

measured from the time an aircraft arrives in its parking bay at the airports until it

leaves again for the departure flight. Budge states that this is the only part the airline

has real control over and is a critical aspect in the performance of any airline. See

appendix 1 for the depiction of the current aircraft turnaround process at 1time airline.

The purpose of this research report is firstly, to explore whether this performance can

be improved through the introduction of lean thinking principles at the O.R. Tambo

International Airport in Johannesburg. OR Tambo International Airport would be

considered the ‘hub’ in the 1time Airline operations. Over 80 percent of its flight

either originate or arrive in Johannesburg.

Secondly, the report will look at the effect of the implementation of lean on the

people working for 1time airline in Johannesburg, and will assess their motivation to

perform after being involved in the experiments.

1.2 Research questions and scope

Piercy and Rich (2004) claim that they have empirically demonstrated the validity of

the lean approach in a pure-service environment. They state that this should provide

evidence for the continuing extension of the lean approach in the service sector where

traditional, classical management approaches are failing to deliver the necessary

quality and cost requirements.

The researcher made use of the tools of Lean to verify the above statement and

analyse in particular whether:

1. Can the application of Lean improve on-time departures at 1time airline?

This question will be investigated by proposing the following hypothesis:

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

H1 – Value Stream mapping can be used to reflect the aircraft turn-around process at

1time airline.

H2 – Application of lean tools and principles can improve aircraft turnaround times

and on-time performance.

According to Balle, Beauvallet, Samlley and Sobek (nd), in terms of results, lean and

the Toyota Production System (TPS) involve reducing work-in-progress, raising

productivity and lowering costs. But, they say, “the real aim is to bring out the

capabilities of each individual, and to draw out people’s motivation”.

During the project the researcher made use of debriefing sessions after each

experiment to gain an understanding of how staff felt they had contributed to the

experiment and whether they felt that they were playing a meaningful role. The

feedback from these sessions will be used to answer the question:

2. Does the application of Lean motivate staff to contribute more and perform

at a better standard?

1.3 Research Assumptions

In completing this research project, the researcher assumed that the period under

research was representative of the ‘normal’ operations at 1time airline. Flights chosen

were random, dependent on the progress of the action research cycle. This prevented

any bias in choice of flights that may have suited the research goals.

The researcher also assumed that his role as a senior manager in the organisation will

not affect the outcomes of the experiments, and that people involved will be prepared

to speak honestly about their views of the experiments. This assumption is based on a

company culture that encourages open and honest communication.

This research also assumed that the turn-around time of aircraft significantly affects

the on-time performance at 1time airline as has been stated by the management

involved in the research.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

1.4 Research Ethics

Diener and Crandall (1978) in Bryman and Bell (2007) break down ethical

transgressions into four main areas:

Whether there is harm to participants;

Whether there is lack of informed consent;

Whether there is an invasion of privacy; and

Whether deception is involved.

According to Coughlan and Coghlan (2002) ethics in action research involves

authentic relationships between the action researcher and the members of the client

system as to how they understand the process and take significant action. They go on

to say that the values and norms that flow from such ethical principles typically focus

on how the action researcher works with the members of the organisation.

All participants in this research did so in their roles as employees of 1time Airline and

as such did not perform any tasks that are considered harmful. The usual rules of

Occupational Safety and Health (OHS) and aviation safety were applied throughout

the study.

All participants were informed of the details of the research and also who was

conducting it. This ensured that there is no lack of informed consent, and also that

there is no deception involved. Given that this research was restricted to monitoring

work functions only, there was no invasion of privacy.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Discussion

This research report focuses on the use of lean thinking and the principles and tools

associated with lean thinking and how these can improve operations. These areas

form the main focus of this literature review.

The review considers the applicability of lean thinking, typically used in production,

to service operations, and then in particular, how it has been applied in the operations

of airlines.

Reference will also be made to the role of people in lean thinking and also the effects

of not having complete buy-in from the people in the organisation. The actual

implementation of lean thinking in the organisation is the final part of the literature

viewed.

2.2 The Origins of Lean

Japanese manufacturers rebuilding after the Second World War had little human and

financial resources available to them. Taking these considerations into account they

developed a new, low cost, manufacturing philosophy and practice (Womack et al.

1990, in Emiliani, 1998). They systematically developed a ‘disciplined, process-

focused production system now known as the Toyota Production System or Lean

Production’ (Emiliani, 1998). The objective of this system was to minimise the

consumption of resources that add no value to the product. Jacobs and Chase (2008)

describe it as the ‘most significant management approach of the past 50 Years’.

Hines, Holweg and Rich (2004) state that these innovations that resulted from a

scarcity of resources included the just-in-time (JIT) production system, the kanban

method of pull production, respect for employees and high levels of employee

problem solving/automated mistake proofing.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

The interest in the Toyota Production System (TPS) was limited amongst western

manufacturing businesses until Womack, Jones and Roos published the book The

Machine that Changed the World in 1990. In this book they also coined the phrase

“lean production” (Hines et al. 2004). Following this and the realisation of the out-

performance of traditional manufacturers by the lean producers, many western

manufacturers emulated the shop floor techniques and the structures of lean, but failed

to recognise the importance of the organisational and culture mindset. Hines et al.

(2004) say that in the ‘awareness’ period up till 1990, the main weaknesses of lean

manufacturing were its automotive manufacturing-based view and limited

appreciation of how to handle variability in demand. They contend that

implementation was entirely tool based, and neglected the human aspects.

2.3 What is Lean?

Liker (1997) in Mathaisel and Comm (2000) defines lean as “reducing the time from

customer order to manufacturing and delivering products by eliminating non-value-

added waste”. He goes on to say that the ideal of a lean system is a one-piece flow. A

lean manufacturer is continuously improving towards that ideal.

The philosophy behind lean, according to Canel, Rosen and Anderson (2000), is to

continuously seek ways to make processes more efficient, the ultimate goal being to

produce goods or a service without waste. This is achieved by examining each step in

the process to determine if it adds value or not. If it does not add value the step is

examined to try and find possible alternatives. This allows each step or process to

gradually and continually improve.

While many practitioners would view lean as following these hard steps, or associate

it with cellular manufacturing, kanban card inventory control, fast set up times, and

periodic Kaizen events (Mayeleff, 2006), it has however been pointed out by authors

on the subject that Lean is only successful when the entire company infrastructure is

consistent with the goals of Lean (Mayeleff, 2006; Emiliani, 1998; Womack et al.,

1990; Comm and Mathaisel, 2005). Emiliani (1998) quotes examples of

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

compensation based on global rather than local efficiencies, a system of continuous

improvement, and a culture that supports Lean.

Spear and Bowen (1999) provide a guideline to how the TPS can guide the design,

operation and improvement of production and services in their ‘Four Rules’ of the

TPS:

Rule 1: All work shall be highly specified as to content, sequence, timing and

outcome.

Rule 2: Every customer-supplier connection must be direct, and there must be

an unambiguous yes-or-no way to send requests and receive responses.

Rule 3: The pathway for every product and service must be simple and direct.

Rule 4: Any improvements must be made in accordance with the scientific

method, under the guidance of a teacher, at the lowest possible level in the

organisation.

It is these rules, and not the specific practices that can be observed at the Toyota

plants that Spear and Bowen (1999) believe form the essence of Toyota’s system.

2.4 The Five Principles of Lean

Womack and Jones (1996) developed five key principles that define lean thinking and

enable lean production (Emiliani, 1998; Mayeleff, 2006; Piercy and Rich, 2009):

2.4.1 Specify Value (from the customers perspective)

In Lean, the value of a product is defined solely by the end-use customer. The

product must meet the customers’ needs at both a specific time and price.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

2.4.2 Identify the Value Stream (understand all activities)

Identifying the value in Lean production means to understand all the activities

required to produce a specific product, and then to optimise the whole process

from the view of the end use customer.

2.4.3 Flow (Minimise interruptions during processing)

In contrast to batch and queue manufacturing methods, flow in lean

production means to process parts continuously, from raw materials to

finished goods, one operation or one piece at a time.

2.4.4 Pull (all work is initiated by customer demand)

The concept of pull in Lean manufacturing means to respond to the pull, or

demand, of the customer. Lean manufacturers design their operations to

respond to the ever-changing requirements of the customers. This means that

they will not manufacture according to wasteful and inaccurate forecasts.

2.4.5 Perfection (the goal is zero waste)

If all the above steps are achieved the process will allow people to identify and

eliminate waste more effectively, and focus on activities that add value.

2.5 The Seven Wastes

To fully understand the five principles above, and how they enable the reduction of

waste, it is critical to first understand waste itself. There are seven defined waste

categories in Lean, which Mayeleff (2006) believes are well known amongst

practitioners. He attributes the list to Ohno (1988). These seven waste categories are:

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Defects (including repair or rework);

Inventory (in excess of current needs);

Motion (unnecessary movement during processing);

Transportation (moving parts and material);

Processing inefficiency (extra processing that does not add value);

Waiting (idle time of resources); and

Overproduction (in order to create economies of scale).

2.6 Lean ‘Tools’

Barraza, Smith and Dahlgaard-Park (2009) suggest a range of ‘tools’ collected

from lean literature, which they say can be considered as the basic pillars of

implementing a lean thinking approach in an organisation. They contend that the

journey towards lean can be initiated by implementing a kaizen effort using all or

some of the following tools and techniques:

1. Pull production kanban. A system of cascading production delivery

instructions from downstream to upstream activities in which the

upstream supplier does not produce until the downstream customer

signals a need (kanban system).

2. Streamlined layout. A layout designed according to optimum

operational sequence or flow.

3. Total productive maintenance (TPM). The mechanism needed to

maintain the reliable functioning of the machinery in the workshop.

4. 5S and visual control. Represents the foundations of continuous

improvement while preserving a working atmosphere of order,

cleanliness and safety.

5. Single minute exchange of dies (SMED). The mechanisms necessary

to reduce lead time and which ensure there is a continuous flow in the

process for change over times on machines.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

6. Supplier development. This requires working closely with the suppliers

to develop mutual understanding and trust.

7. One-piece flow. This requires a consistent flow of work processes so

as to avoid scrap and backflows without interruptions.

8. Cell design. Work processes are designed to form work cells that are

located close to each other with the object of cutting down on

unneeded transport and waiting times.

9. Process mapping and value stream mapping. This means to search out

and understand the ways the organisation works from the point of view

of an integrated and inter-related system, for which it is necessary to

analyse and document all the work processes undertaken in the

organisation.

2.6.1 Value Stream Mapping

According to Julien and Tjahjono (2009), once value has been defined in a company,

mapping the process is essential to understanding the value stream. They state that

“..mapping the process creates a deeper understanding of the activities in the process.

The outcome is a map that can be used as a description of activities in the process – a

standard procedure to reduce variation in operations”. According to Rother and Shook

(2003), adopting a value stream perspective means working on the big picture, not

just individual processes, and improving the whole, not just optimising the parts.

Ehrlich (2006) believes that Value Stream Mapping the activities and information

flow of primary and secondary processes across the entire ‘order-to-cash’ cycle is an

essential first step in Lean Servicing. VSM and the subsequent analysis identify

wastes, bottlenecks, delays, excessive inventory, and opportunities to streamline.

Ehrlich further states that VSM is especially important in the intangible area of

transactional service delivery, bringing visibility to hard-to-see processes that often

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

determine whether the customer perceives value in the transaction. Critical

information flows on the VSM often highlight the difficulty in achieving rapid

response to customer demand because of the workarounds required.

VSM also helps identify areas where critical performance metrics are lacking or

nonexistent. Bringing visibility to transactional processes through the use of visible

metrics is perhaps one of the quickest and most effective steps in the lean journey

(Ehrlich, 2006).

Rother and Shook (2003) remind us that ‘mapping’ is just a tool in the Lean process

and that what is important is implementing a value-adding flow. To create this flow

they believe that a ‘vision’ of the flow is required, and VSM provides this vision.

Julien and Tjahjono (2009) identify the following benefits of process mapping when

done by the users of the process:

It helps the user visualise the flow.

Makes it possible to see waste and causes of waste.

Provides a common understanding and language about processes.

Forms the basis of an implementation plan.

Creates buy in from users which will ease implementation and help sustain

the future situation.

2.6.2 5S

Gapp, Fisher and Kobayashi (2008) believe that the 5S practice is either disregarded

or under utilised in the West. They maintain that the 5S practice aims to embed the

values of organisation, neatness, cleaning, standardisation and discipline into the

workplace. Introduced initially in the manufacturing sector it has subsequently been

extended to all industries in Japan.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Julien and Tjahjono (2009) assert that considerable waste is generated when time is

spent searching for missing or misplaced items. A messy manufacturing or service

production site is prone to errors and delays and the first step to improving activities

and preparing for a flow production is to clean up the work place. They claim that 5S

is about just that – “basic housekeeping”.

While different authors use different phrases to describe the Japanese terms of Seiri,

Seiton, Seiso, Seiketsu, and Shitsuke, Julien and Tjahjono (2009) employ the

following to describe the 5S:

1. Sort. Throw out what is not used. Systematically, classify all items based on

how frequently they are used and store, respectively. If never used or in doubt,

red tag it or throw it out. Repeat the sorting stage on a regular basis.

2. Simplify. Locate tools and material not used. This minimises searching and

transport. Reduce the number of items stored at the workplace to the ones

needed. Place items in an ergonomically effective way and reduce excessive

movements.

3. Shine. Clean the workplace regularly and check while cleaning. Look out for

abnormality and identify the root causes. This will help prevent accidents and

malfunctions.

4. Standardise. Standardising is the bottom line of 5S. Only when the workplace

is sorted, simplified and swept does it become possible to create standards for

undertaking the task correctly the first time. This will include giving every

tool a designated place and building in mechanisms for mistake proofing.

5. Sustain. All employees must participate in 5S and it requires self discipline to

sustain a clean work place. All employees must therefore be involved and

participate in the 5S steps. The review of 5S can be undertaken by performing

housekeeping audits and reviewing work standards.

Warwood and Knowles (2004) believe that it is important to choose words that blend

in with the corporate culture, but at the same time, not to lose sight of the meaning

behind the original Japanese words.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Gapp et. al. (2008) believe that once all members within the organisation can fully

understand and implement 5S, organisational readiness towards best practice becomes

more realistic, since one of the outcomes of successful 5S practice is increased morale

and organisational resilience. They further suggest that 5S contributes to the

following important strategic priorities: productivity, quality, costs, delivery, safety

and morale. Warwood and Knowles (2004), stress that an important part of the 5S

process is that people take personal responsibility for tidying up. They believe that it

is evident that 5S is not just about keeping your house in order, but also a matter of

ensuring that it stays that way. They claim that this requires a culture of continuous

improvement with the rigour of applied standardisation.

Gappet.al. (2008) assert that 5S, within a Japanese management context, is intended

to provide a mechanism for improving the workplace with minimal costs and

disruption. There is strong evidence, according to them, that this is achieved through

both high levels of managerial and organisational decision making while maintaining

an environment of total participation. This is achieved by integrating the concepts of

outcomes, planning and participation. Their research identified that Japanese

managers placed a strong emphasis on the involvement of individuals and

workgroups, not only in the operational aspects of the development of 5S, but also in

the strategic and long-term organisational benefits of the application of this system.

Warwood and Knowles (2004) conclude that while the 5S’s in theory are a set of

straightforward steps to continual improvement, they are, in practice, influenced by

human factors and resource limitations that can interfere with the effectiveness of the

technique.

2.6.3 Standardisation

Liker and Morgan (2006) maintain that a well-known principle of kaizen is that

continuous improvement is not possible without standardisation. Ehrlich (2006)

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

concurs when discussing Lean Services. She contends that the reality is that

transactional processes must be standardised: repeatable and consistent inputs,

processes and outputs are required to reduce variability and consistently meet

customer requirements. Standard work of basic core tasks associated with providing

services frees the time and effort required to respond to changing or unusual customer

demands. Ehrlich calls this the ‘have-it-your-way paradox’: strict adherence to

standard work provides the flexibility to deliver exceptional service.

Liker (2004) lists, as one of his fourteen principles of the Toyota way, that

‘Standardised tasks and processes are the foundation for continuous improvement and

employee empowerment’. He carries on to say that you should use stable, repeatable

methods everywhere to maintain the predictability, regular timing, and regular output

of your processes. Liker believes that this is the foundation for flow and pull. Liker

also believes that it is important to capture the accumulated learning about a process

up to a point in time by standardising today’s best practices. He maintains that

creative and individual expression must be allowed to improve upon the standard;

then incorporate it into the new standard so that when a person moves on you can

hand off the learning to the next person.

2.7 Lean Services

A number of authors (Bowen and Youngdahl, 1998; Piercy and Rich, 2009; Mayeleff,

2006; Canel et al., 2000; Comm and Mathaisel, 2005) espouse the value of applying

Lean to a service industry.

Bowen and Youngdahl (1998) expand on three keys ideas in their paper in which they

make the case that manufacturing logic should transfer to service operations:

The manufacturing sector has typically led the service sector in developing

ways to resolve performance tradeoffs amongst low cost, dependability,

quality, and flexibility that were assumed to exist in early manufacturing

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

strategy research. They believe that overall manufacturing tends to be the

locus of performance innovations more so than service.

In the decade up to 1998, a number of service firms entered an era of

industrialisation and adopted the principles of lean manufacturing.

The manufacturing sector led the service sector in the utilization of employee

empowerment initiatives that are more often prescribed for the service sector.

Bowen and Youngdahl go on to provide a table of ‘Lean’ Service characteristics:

Reduction of performance tradeoffs

Operations goals of both internally-focussed efficiency and customer defined flexibility

Flow Production and JIT pull

Minimize set-up times allowing for smoother flow JIT levels of both input and output

Value-chain orientation

Apply service blueprinting and value analysis to eliminate non-value-added activities

Increased customer focus and training

Involve the customer in the design of the service package Train employees in customer service skills and behaviours Train customers in how to contribute to quality service

Employee empowerment

Invest significantly in employees (skills, teambuilding, participation) Empower employees to leverage customers value equation (benefits divided by price

and other ‘costs’)

Table 1: “Lean” Service characteristics. (Source: Bowen and Younghdahl, 1998)

Mayeleff (2006) adjusts the wastes for manufacturing to identify the seven wastes in

services, claiming that the terminology used in service systems would be inconsistent

with that used in manufacturing systems. These seven ‘service’ wastes are:

1. Delays including time wasted either directly in queue or waiting for

information to be transmitted;

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

2. Reviews include activities that inspect completed or partially completed work

for errors or omissions;

3. Mistakes include errors or omissions that, if found internally, cause work to be

redone or, if found by customer, also cause work to be redone but can cause

reputational damage;

4. Duplication including activities that are carried out elsewhere in the system or

can be undertaken more easily in another part of the system;

5. Movement includes the physical transport of information, personnel, or

equipment that is unnecessary;

6. Processing inefficiencies includes the ineffective use of a resource in

performing a specific task;

7. Resource inefficiencies include the management of personnel, equipment,

materials, or capital in ways that are wasteful.

2.8 Lean Application in Airlines

While Lean principles have found their way into airlines, it is generally in the aircraft

maintenance side of the business. Doig, Howard and Ritter (2003) believe that there is

opportunity for the influence of Lean to be extended throughout airline operations:

“Airline operations present a striking dichotomy. Each day, the airlines achieve the

remarkable by safely moving nearly five million people more than 40 million air miles

around the world. Often, however, they fail to deliver the ordinary. Once the aircraft land,

all too many of them taxi to a jetway and wait – perhaps for ground crew to arrive and

open a door or for the end of traffic caused by another plane’s maintenance delay. Even

standout, low-cost performers lose bags, keep valuable employees idle, depart late, and

have billions of dollars in chronically under-utilised aircraft and other hugely expensive

assets.”

They continue to say that airlines have not given their operations factory such as,

industrial-engineering, scrutiny. Great operators in heavy industries have worked

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

through these challenges to deliver low costs, high quality, and satisfied customers. If

airlines apply proven manufacturing practices such as Lean, Doig et al. (2003)

contend that they will be able to reduce costs dramatically by using labour, materials,

and assets more efficiently, to enhance their reliability of service, and to strengthen

flight safety.

Lean approaches appear to be suited to airline’s specific challenges. As the Lean

techniques are applied and eliminate waste, they will also get rid of the non-

standardised work times, variable team structures, and ‘highly asynchronous work

flows’ that may airline executives view as being unavoidable (Doig et al., 2003).

A number of authors, including Bowen and Younghdahl (1998), Abdi, Shavarini and

Hoseini (2006) and Hallowell (1996) contend that South West Airlines (SWA) are in

fact a good example of an airline that has adopted a Lean production line approach to

services. Bowen and Younghdahl (1998) go so far as to maintain that SWA’s success

in the airline industry is as a result of them adopting this Lean approach.

SWA has resolved the performance trade-off between efficiency and other customer

benefits such as flexibility, quality, and variety. Through this they achieved what

Hallowell (1996) describes as the “dual competitive advantage” by realising a

position of both cost advantage and superior service/differentiation.

Underlying lean techniques are four principles: the elimination of waste, control of

variability, flexibility, and the full utilisation of human talent. These principles have

enormous relevance for organisations concerned with safety, customer service, and

unpredictable events such as weather. Companies that embrace lean really begin to

see the difference (Doig et al., 2003).

Despite the strong cost cutting efforts of airlines, there are still many processes and

effort that do not contribute to any value creation; i.e. waste. Waste starts with the

utilisation of aircraft and other kinds of infrastructure, which often falls below 50

percent. Passengers see part of this problem in the form of empty gates, avoidable

tarmac delays, and idle planes (Doig et al., 2003).

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Valuable and highly skilled employees routinely spend a large part of their time on

low-value activities or just plain waiting. The arriving traveller watches in frustration

as a baggage carousel remains empty for 30 minutes because of a lack of handlers.

Dozens of stranded travellers fume while a single check in agent processes them. In

maintenance hangars, technicians spend far more time chasing parts than repairing

aircraft. Moreover, airlines struggle to match the level of staffing or the pace of work

to their service demands effectively – despite the predictability of many of these tasks

(Doig et al., 2003).

Aircraft Turnarounds

SWA’s operations are driven by a value chain orientation and are supported by flow

production and JIT pull. The ‘no frills’ approach has eliminated the waste and cost of

services, such as in-flight meals that are considered to be relatively unimportant to

passengers. To enhance the speed and flow of service delivery, SWA restricts service

to secondary airports that are less congested, concentrates on short flights less than 90

minutes, and uses a standard fleet of Boeing 737’s. All of these operating

characteristics have allowed SWA to reduce the turn-around time on its flights to as

low as 17 minutes, as opposed to the average 45 minutes for similar aircraft types

(Bowen and Younghdahl, 1998).

Doig et al. (2003) claim, that when operations leaders take their newfound lean vision

beyond maintenance, they see additional opportunities. They assert that in ground

operations, aircraft worth $100 million or more, routinely sit idle at gates. Turn-

around times that they measured varied by as much as 30 percent. Lean processes can

cut hours to minutes with a changeover system that mimics those used in aircraft

maintenance checks. The process is disciplined to the standard: one person is

responsible for the job; each function is in place and ready to go before the plane

arrives; passengers are briefed prior to boarding; flight attendants help stow carry-on

baggage to speed seating. They show how turnaround times at two internationally

based carriers were reduced by 20 to 40 percent.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

2.9 Lean and People

According to Balle and Regnier (2007) in Lean, basic stability is absolutely essential

to create the proper learning environment where employees can clearly see the impact

of their actions and then learn through the kaizen activities, not simply make

problems go away. They believe that the aim of the TPS is to turn workers into

problem-solvers, and in doing so in complex environments, such as hospitals in their

research, is about educating people to stop circling around problems, but to fix them

immediately. For workers to able to do this, their working environment must enable

them to see clearly what is a problem and what is not.

Liker (2004) maintains that after all the Lean tools have been implemented, the real

work of Lean has just begun. He believes that, at this stage, the workers will still not

understand the culture behind the TPS and will not be contributing to the continuous

improvement of the system or improving themselves. He states that in the Toyota

Way, it is the people who bring the system to life: working, communicating, resolving

issues, and growing together. From Liker’s study of Japanese companies practicing

lean manufacturing, it was clear that the workers were active in making improvement

decisions.

Balle, Beauvallet, Smalley and Sobek (nd) believe the TPS is about creating an

environment where people have to think, which brings with it wisdom, and this

wisdom brings with it kaizen. They say then, that going lean, is less about “leaning

out” every business process or applying finely tuned tools to achieve a certain lean

aesthetic, and more about improving organisational performance, seeing problems,

solving them the “right” way, and in doing so continually increasing the intellectual

capacity and skill of all members of the organisation.

Liker (2004), includes the following as two of his fourteen principles of the TPS:

1. Grow leaders who thoroughly understand the work, live the philosophy, and

teach it to others.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Do not view a leader’s job as simply accomplishing tasks and having

good people skills. Leaders must be role models of the company’s

philosophy and way of doing things.

2. Develop exceptional people and teams who follow your company’s

philosophy

Create a strong culture where your company’s values and beliefs are

widely shared and lived out over a period of many years.

Train exceptional individuals and teams to work within the corporate

philosophy to achieve exceptional results. Work very hard to reinforce

the culture continually.

Use cross functional teams to improve quality and productivity and

enhance flow by solving difficult technical problems. Empowerment

occurs when people use the company’s tools to improve the company.

Make an ongoing effort to teach individuals to work together as teams

toward common goals.

Balle et. al. (nd) quote Hajime Ohba, head of the Toyota Supplier Support Centre, as

depicting TPS as fundamentally a system of training where everyone solves problems

under the guidance of a mentor. They contend that TPS frames every manager’s job

very strongly as:

Build the performance mindset

Establish the standard method

Track actual performance (making problems visible)

Teach a basic for analysing work

Develop employees through solving problems or improvement tasks.

The goal of the true TPS form is a shop floor where production processes perform at

high levels and also where each worker identifies problems in their routines and

actively works on solving them; where supervisors and team leaders coach their direct

reports in problem-solving according to Balle et. al. (nd). They posit that while

solving the problem at hand is important, it is perhaps more important that learning

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

and skill development takes place. “The broader managerial challenge is to shift from

using TPS principles to produce brilliant products and processes, to applying TPS

frames as a means of developing people.”

Fine, Hansen and Roggenhoffer (2008) refer to this people development section as the

“soft side” of lean. They state that mastering this softer side is difficult because it

forces all employees to commit themselves to new ways of thinking and working.

They believe though, that overlooking this “soft side” drastically lowers any

initiative’s odds of success. They maintain that some companies rush to implement

the tool kit without ensuring that their employees – including managers –are prepared

to work and lead in new and different ways. In such cases, “initiative fatigue” and

even distrust may set in, and efficiency gains fizzle out as the experts move on to

other projects.

Balle et. al. (nd) concludes by stating that:

“In the end TPS is best viewed as a developed practice, not a theoretical philosophy or

set of tools. Lean is not and probably will never be a codified body of knowledge. It’s

the cumulative behaviour and experience of the people that practice the system. And

although its practice is demanding and difficult because it does not come naturally to our

organisations or our mentalities, TPS, the Thinking Production System is also

profoundly empowering. In the words of Michikazu Tanaka, ... “In terms of results, TPS

involves reducing work-in-process, raising productivity and lowering costs. But the real

aim is to bring out the capabilities of each individual. The ultimate aim is to draw out

people’s motivation”.”

2.10 Lean Implementation

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

According to Balle and Regnier (2007), experience has shown that the interpretation

of lean concepts and tools outside of the automotive industry is a critical challenge

and its success largely rests on understanding first that lean is a system, not simply a

toolbox, and second that this system must be constructed by the workers themselves,

rather than the piecemeal application of industrial practices to the operation. When

applied in such a piecemeal fashion, although the tools will deliver local results

almost without fail, these improvements are rarely sustained. Over relatively short

periods of time (six months to a year) early enthusiasm is likely to yield to frustration

and then to cynicism, until people start “looking for the next best thing”.

Balle et. al. (nd) state that if your frame of reference is to “apply lean tools and

principles to every process,” you will certainly gather the low hanging fruit, but the

potential for your lean transformation will remain limited. On the other hand, they

contend that if you frame your lean transformation as “change the thought processes

of every employee to develop kaizen consciousness,” the potential is unbounded. In

the industrial context the framing issue is not just of academic interest as a manner of

explaining why paradigm shifts are so slow and painful, it is of critical importance for

firms investing resources, time and efforts into a lean transformation and who needs

to radically improve their performance if they want to compete with low cost

providers, who, incidentally, are also improving their operations at an incredible pace.

When looking at implementing lean in a hospital, Balle and Regnier (2007) found that

some outstanding results helped them answer a ‘vexing’ question. At the start of their

implementation (in a hospital) the head nurse was unsure of whether she should start

with the entire hospital upfront or start with a local pilot. According to them, the

lesson learned was “better imperfect lean techniques applied systematically rather

than perfect ones applied sporadically”. They attribute much of the success in their

study to the systemic improvements obtained by getting the entire hospital to progress

at the same time.

Liker and Morgan (2006) noticed in their research that large service operations would

focus narrowly on a few lean tools and the process. They say that the typical approach

was as follows:

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

1. Identify a repetitive process to improve.

2. Apply value stream mapping to identify waste and then a future state map with

waste removed.

3. Implement the changes.

4. Celebrate the success.

They maintain that this should just be the start. Once an organisation has been through

this exercise a number of times once can ask a broader set of questions about what has

been accomplished:

1. Are the changes leading to new standardised processes that are the basis for

further waste?

2. Are people throughout the organisation engaged in continuous improvement

and aligned around a common set of objectives?

3. Are all the soft tools and harder technologies being used to support people

improving the delivery of products and services to customers?

Womack and Jones (1996) set out the following time frame for effective lean

implementation:

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Phase Specific Steps Time frame

Get started Find a change agent

Get Lean knowledge

Find a lever

Map Value systems

Begin Kaikaku

Expand your Scope

First six months

Create a new organisation

Reorganise by product family

Create a lean function

Devise a policy for excess people

Devise a growth strategy

Remove anchor draggers

Instil a ‘perfection’ mind-set

Six months through year two

Install business systems

Introduce lean accounting

Relate pay to firm performance

Implement transparency

Initiate policy deployment

Introduce Lean learning

Find right sized tools

Years three and four

Complete the transformation

Apply these steps to your suppliers/ customers

Develop global strategy

Transition from top-down to bottom-up improvement

By the end of year five

Table 2: Time frame for lean implementation (source: Womack and Jones, 1996)

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

2.11 Conclusion

In this review of the literature, lean has been shown as a process-focussed production

system designed to eliminate waste that originated in the Toyota plants in Japan post

World War II.

It has shown how, based on the rules and principles of lean tools have been developed

to help organisations eliminate waste in their production. In particular, the review

showed how the tools of Value Stream Mapping and the 5S could be used. The

review also showed standardisation as being one of the bases of lean implementation.

Strong evidence was presented, particularly by Bowen and Younghdahl (1998), that

the practices of lean production could be transferred into the service sector as well,

creating lean service. They provided a description of lean service characteristics and

Mayeleff (2006) coverts the traditional lean wastes into service wastes.

Even more specifically in terms of this report, Doiget.al. (2003) describe how lean

services can be implemented in the airline service industry, borrowing on the

experiences of their aircraft maintenance counterparts. A number of the authors

quoted (Bowen and Younghdahl, 1998; Abdiet.al., 2006; Hallowell, 1996) showed

how South West Airlines had adopted lean successfully in improving their service and

reducing their aircraft turnaround times.

A number of authors are cited (Balle and Regnier, 2007; Liker, 2004; Balle et. al., nd)

who explain that regardless of the tools and processes used, the success of lean

implementation must have the buy in of the people in the organisation which Liker

describes as ‘bringing the system to life’.

The review concludes by referring to literature (Balle and Regnier, 2007; Balle et. al.,

nd; Liker and Morgan, 2006) that shows that lean implementation must be an

organisation wide project and that the principles must be applied in their entirety and

not used in parts only. Womack and Jones (1996) are cited to show the time frame for

implementation of lean.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Research approach and strategy

The research approach in this study was inductive. The outcome of the study is theory

as to whether Lean tools can be used to improve on-time performance at 1time airline,

and also whether the implementation of lean would lead to improved motivation of

staff. As Bryman and Bell (2007) state

“However, just as deduction entails an element of induction, the inductive process is likely

to entail a modicum of deduction. Once the theoretical reflection on a set of data has been

carried out, the researcher may want to collect further data in order to establish conditions

in which a theory will and will not hold. Such a general strategy is often called iterative: it

involves a weaving back and forth between data and theory”

The research took the form of Action research, which according to Coughlan and

Coghlan (2002) is appropriate when the research “relates to describing and unfolding

series of actions over time in a given group, community or organisation;

understanding as a member of a group how and why their action can change or

improve the working of some aspects of a system; and understanding the proves of

change or improvement in order to learn from it.”

3.2 What is Action Research?

Action research has four broad characteristics (Coughlan and Coghlan, 2002):

Firstly, action research focuses on research in action rather than research

about action. It is about using a scientific approach to study the resolution of

issues together with the people who are part of those issues. Action research

has a four part, cyclical process of planning; taking action and reflecting on

that action, which in turn leads to further action.

Secondly, action research is participative in that the members of the system

being studied participate in the process.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Thirdly, action research is research concurrent with action. It aims to make the

system more efficient while simultaneously building a body of scientific

knowledge.

Finally, action research is both a sequence of events and an approach to

problem solving. As a sequence of events it comprises iterative cycles of

gathering data, feeding them back to those concerned, analysing the data,

planning action, taking action and evaluating, leading to further data gathering

and so on.

3.3 When is Action Research Appropriate?

Dick (2002) thinks of action research as a ‘family’ of research methodologies that

pursue the dual outcomes of action and research. He believes that for this reason it is

particularly suitable for postgraduate students who wish to improve their own work

practice while working towards their qualification. He believes that action research

benefits from the use of a cyclical or spiral process in which the researcher alternates

action with critical reflection. Bartunek et al. (2000) in Coughlan and Coghlan (2002)

concur and claim that action research is increasingly common in the context of

managers participating in academic programmes.

Alricher, Kemmis, Mc Taggart and Zuber-Skerritt (2002) believe that action research

has proven its utility, with a growing recognition of its breadth as a field of research,

as well as its depth as a discourse of theoretical insight. They continue to state that

action research by its very nature seeks to explain the pedagogical assumptions of the

researchers (participants) and their research projects.

3.4 The role of the Researcher in Action Research

Action researchers are outside agents who act as facilitators of the action research

steps of action and reflection within an organisation, according to Coughlan and

Coghlan (2002). Schein (1999) in Coughlan and Coghlan (2002) describes two

models of helping where the action researcher is acting as an external helper in the

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

client system; the doctor patient model, and the process consultation model which will

be relevant in this study. Coughlan and Coghlan describe this as a model in which

helpers work in a facilitative manner to help the clients inquire into their own issues

and create and implement solutions.

This was achieved in this study by having the managers, supervisors and staff

involved in the process under research, giving feedback during structured and

unstructured interviews, and discussions in problem solving groups. Jacobs and Chase

(2008) discuss how British Airways had ‘circles of quality’ that discussed service

improvements before they were implemented. Given the somewhat iterative nature of

action research, similar ‘circles of quality’ were held before and after experiments to

gain both insight and feedback.

3.5 Research design, data collection methods and research

instruments

An action research project is emergent, that is, it emerges through the unfolding of the

series of ‘experiments’ or events that test the designated issue, and looks for methods

of resolution by both the researcher and the members of the organisation, subject to

the study. The cycles in the process, planning, taking action and evaluating, can be

anticipated but cannot be planned in any significant detail. The underlying philosophy

of action research is that the stated aims of the project lead to planning the first action

and the evaluation of that will lead to the second and subsequent actions (Coughlan

and Coghlan, 2002).

Coughlan and Coghlan (2002) propose a three-step cycle to implementing action

research:

1. A pre-step – to understand context and purpose;

2. Six main steps – to gather, feedback and analyse data, and to plan, implement

and evaluate action;

3. A meta-step to monitor.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

They maintain that it is this meta-step that is the focus of the academic dissertation.

Figure 3. Action Research Cycles (Source: Coughlan and Coghlan, 2002)

Coughlan and Coghlan (2002) say that the cycles in the above process must follow

from an understanding of the context and purpose of the research to be carried out.

This, they contend, should be done by asking two questions:

1. What is the rationale for action? and

2. What is the rationale for research?

The research followed Coughlan and Coghlan’s action research cycle as shown above

in the following way:

1. Context and Purpose: Context and purpose was gained through looking at

existing data for aircraft turn-around times (appendix 15) and by having

discussions with the management and teams of the airline concerning the need

for improvement and the understanding of lean (appendix 6).

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

2. Data Gathering, Data Feedback and Data Analysis was completed through

hypothesis 1 and the drawing and recognition of the VSM for the current state

of the aircraft turn-around process.

3. Action Planning, Implementation and Evaluation were achieved in two

cycles of the action research with hypothesis 2 and hypothesis 3, the planning

and implementing of the two experiments and the subsequent discussions

around their effectiveness and possible improvements.

3.6 Data collection methods and research instruments

Qualitative and quantitative data collection tools such as interviews and surveys are

commonly used in action research according to Coughlan and Coghlan (2002). They

believe that what is important in action research is that the planning and use of the

tools is well thought out with the members of the organisation and then clearly

integrated into the Action Research (AR) process. They continue to say that data

collection tools are themselves interventions and can generate data, and as such the

researcher needs to pay attention to any themes that may arise in these tools, or they

may miss significant data which may be critical to the success of the project. Schein

(1999) in Coughlan and Coghlan (2002) suggests that observable behaviour is an

equally important source of data in action research. He suggests that an observation of

the dynamics of groups at work provides the basis for inquiry into the underlying

assumptions and their effects on the work and life of these groups.

Coughlan and Coghlan (2002) refer to two types of data that are collected by

researchers; ‘hard’ data and ‘soft’ data. Hard data refers to the data gathered through

statistics and reports. Soft data is the data that is gathered via observations,

discussions and interviews.

In action research, data generation comes through the active involvement of the

researcher in the day-to-day organisational processes relating to the action research.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

This can be done through participation, observation, problem solving etc., and also

through interventions made to advance the project (Coughlan and Coghlan, 2002).

In this study, data was gathered through interviews, both structured and unstructured,

discussion forums, informal (but recorded) debriefs of the experiments completed,

direct observation by the researcher, and analysis of statistics of the performance of

the processes being researched. Statistics and times recorded are taken from the

organisations documents that are included as appendices 2 to 5. Relevant meeting

minutes, transcripts of conversations and transcripts of the debriefings are included as

appendices.

Journal keeping is a significant mechanism for developing reflective skills according

to Coughlan and Coghlan (2002). They suggest that action researchers note their

observations and experiences in a journal, and that over time they will learn to

differentiate between different experiences and ways of dealing with them.

Maintaining the journal will enable the researchers to integrate information and

experiences which, when understood, help them understand the reasoning processes

and consequent behaviour and so anticipate experiences before embarking on them.

They also believe that ensuring the journal is regularly updated will impose a

discipline and capture the experiences of key events close to when they happen and

before the passage of time changes their perception of them.

A journal was kept with details of all meetings, interviews, debriefs and observation

conducted during this research. The details of the journal provide a level of evidence

of the opinions, feelings and attitudes of the participants to the experiments and also

to their involvement in the process. Relevant extracts of the journal are included as

appendices in support of some findings and claims.

3.7 Sampling

The study sampled random flights in order to experiment new operational techniques.

The random samples avoided the possible bias of using flights with preferential

conditions, e.g. lower load factors, which would skew the sample. In discussion with

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

the participants it was decided to conduct the experiment across the board with all

staff and not limit the experiments to certain shifts only. Whilst it may have been

tempting to experiment on one shift only and use the alternate shift as a ‘control’

group, to conduct the research in this way would be against the ‘spirit’ of lean.

Participants were selected to participate in the experiments based on their functional

departments and how they played a role in the task being used as an experiment.

Rather than selecting specific participants, the function was chosen and people

rostered to perform the task on that day were the participants. All participants were

included in the debriefs held after each experiment. During these debriefs the

researcher asked for their opinions on the process and also how they felt being part of

it, and how their motivation was affected.

3.8 Research criteria (e.g. validity and reliability)

Lincoln and Guba (1985) and Guba and Lincoln’s (1994, in Bryman and Bell 2007)

propose two primary criteria for assessing a qualitative study: trustworthiness and

authenticity.

In particular, the criteria of credibility and transferability (trustworthiness) are

applicable to this report. Lincoln and Guba assert that the establishment of credibility

of findings entails both ensuring that research is carried out according to the cannons

of good practice and submitting research findings to the members of the social world

who were studied for confirmation that the investigator has correctly understood that

social world. In this study, the results of the experiments were submitted to the

participants and the outcomes discussed with them. This ensured that the results

reflected the actual happenings and that their understanding of the success or failure

of the experiment was correctly reflected in the findings.

Geertz (1973) in Bryman and Bell (2007) encourages qualitative researchers to

produce a thick description – rich account of the details of the culture- to provide

others with a database for making judgements about the possible transferability of

findings to other milieu.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Argyris et al. (1985) in Coughlan and Coghlan (2002) state that in order to maintain

validity, action researchers must consciously and deliberately enact the action

research cycles, testing their own assumptions and subjecting their assumptions to

public testing. Coughlan and Coghlan (2002) maintain that the principle threat to the

validity of action research is the lack of impartiality on the part of the researcher.

They say that researchers need to be sure that the ‘story’ they present represents the

situation rather than a biased version of it. The action research cycles were explained

upfront to the participants, as was the emergent nature of the research. The researcher

made it clear that the cycles needed to be followed and insisted that no decisions on

further actions were taken until the full cycle had been completed on the first

experiment.

3.9 Data analysis methods

Coughlan and Coghlan (2002) state that the data analysis tools need to be directly

linked to the purpose of the research and the aim of the interventions. They contend

that the analysis methods should be worked out in collaboration with the organisation

or client.

Times collected through the company documentation were used to generate average

times while exceptions were left out based on the particular set of circumstances

around that flight, e.g. if an aircraft had a long turn-around because it was not

scheduled to depart again immediately after arrival.

Data regarding the opinions of participants were recorded in the appendices and

where a choice was made, it was done by a vote to get a percentage of people

approving of the measure.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

4 RESEARCH FINDINGS, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Research Findings

4.1.1 The Airport Structure

The experiments were carried out at OR Tambo International Airport in

Johannesburg. Chart 4 below is the organisational chart for the department.

Chart 4: Organisational Chart for O R Tambo International Airport,

Johannesburg.

James Budge

General Manager: Operations

Blalrd Nleya

Airport Manager Johannesburg

Duty Managers X 3

Senior Customer Service Agents

Customer Service Agents

Bianca Van Zyl

Customer Relations Manager

Alain Antoinne

National Ramp Manager

Ramp Supervisors

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

James Budge, the General Manager for Operations is based at Head Office and

assumes responsibility for all airports in the country as well as the Operations Control

department who co-ordinate the planning and movement of aircraft for the airline.

Balard Nleya is the manager at the airport and assumes responsibility for all service

procedures inside the airport building. He has a Customer Relations Manager and

three Duty Managers that report to him directly and a staff complement of around 120

people in total.

Alain Antoinne is the National Ramp Manager and is responsible for running the

operations outside of the building, on the tarmac or ‘apron’ of the airport for all

airports nationally. He has a total of 8 ramp supervisors that report to him in

Johannesburg.

4.1.2 The Lean Committee

For the purposes of this research, a team was put together of employees that would

discuss and partake in experiments. The team consisted of the above three people,

Bianca Van Zyl, the Passenger Service Manager, and the functional supervisors (see

appendix 6). By virtue of their position the ramp controllers were extensively part of

the experiments.

4.1.3 Getting Started

An initial and high level meeting was held between the lean committee and the

researcher on 02 September 2009 where the basis of the research was discussed and

the overlying principles and techniques of lean were explained. The team committed

to cooperating and immediately began discussing certain issues that may arise. It is of

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

interest to note that at this early juncture they spoke extensively of ‘standardisation’

being an issue and a number of procedures that were used differently by different

people were discussed. It was clear that it created confusion amongst staff who felt

they now had to learn which managers or supervisors did things in what way, as well

as learning how to complete all their tasks.

On 16 September a meeting was held with a smaller group, consisting of the people

who would be directly involved in the lean implementation, where lean was discussed

in more detail. The main topics included Womack and Jones’ (1996) five principles

of lean, Mayeleff’s (2006) seven ‘service’ wastes, Value Stream Mapping, and other

lean tools. The emergent nature of the research was explained and used as support for

the fact that the team should not make decisions about what tools to use or where the

wastes were at that stage, but should rather wait for the current state Value Stream

Map, and see if it could be used to identify waste. The presentation used in this

training session is included as appendix 9.

4.2 Research Question 1

4.2.1 Hypothesis Testing

4.2.1.1 Current State VSM

H0: Value Stream Mapping can be used to reflect the aircraft turn-around process at

1time airline.

Ha: Value Stream Mapping cannot be used to reflect the aircraft turn-around process

at 1time airline.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Action Research Cycle

stage applicable

Method of verification Source Material

Data gathering and data

feedback

Qualitative: This Hypothesis

will be verified by

qualitative methods. Member

of the lean ‘committee’ will

shown the current state VSM

and asked to confirm that it

reflect their current

processes.

Meeting minutes, see

appendix 10.

To capture the current state VSM the researcher monitored 5 flights along with James

Budge, the General Manager: Operations. Times were taken from 5 flights in total to

obtain full coverage of the process. In line with Rother and Shook’s (1998)

recommendations the process was first viewed from the departure of the aircraft

working backwards. Temptation to refer to standard times was also avoided and all

times were of the actual process observed. As Rother and Shook state, “Numbers on a

file rarely reflect the current reality. File data may reflect times when everything was

running well...”. They continue to say that your ability to envision a future state

depends on personally going to where the action is and understanding and timing

what is happening.

Once the current state VSM was drawn (see figure 5 below) from the observed flights,

the researcher met with the lean committee from the organisation and discussed it

with them. The team agreed that the VSM process reflected the turn-around process

accurately, but expressed some surprise at some of the times taken and the fact that

they appeared considerably different to what the members of the organisation

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

assumed the standard times were (see appendix 10 for abridged transcripts of the

meeting). There appeared to be a very firm belief in standard times for all processes

being accurate. When looking at the data set collected in the data gathering stage of

the research, the times showed wide variation on both the upper and lower ends

around the mean (see table 3 below).In a vote, despite the reservations, 85.7% of the

participants (12 of the 14) agreed that the VSM was indeed a reflection of the turn-

around process.

Thus, H0cannot be rejected: Value Stream Mapping can be used to reflect the aircraft

turn-around process at 1time airline.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Figure 5: Current State VSM

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Process Activities Immediate Precursor procedure

Times

Aircraft Chocks Aircraft arrives at the parking bay

A chock is placed under two wheels

The engineer gives thumbs up for service equipment to approach the aircraft

None

Aerobridge Attached Chute is attached to the aircraft by ramp controller

Aircraft Chocked 2 mins

Passengers disembark

Passengers disembark through front and back stairs

Airbridge Attached Min. – 5 mins

Max. - 13 mins

Ave. – 7 mins

Arrival Bags Offloaded

Baggage offloaded from back of aircraft towards the front of the aircraft

Aircraft Chocked Min. – 4 mins

Max. – 16 mins

Ave. – 9 mins

Cleaning Cleaners embark from the back of the aircraft

Divide into teams that clean galleys, toilets, and prepare seats

Replace headrest covers as required, fold seat belts

Clean visible rubbish only on turn-arounds

Passengers have disembarked

Min. – 10 mins

Max. – 21 mins

Ave – 15 mins

Catering Remove catering trolleys from inbound flight

Load new trolleys for departing flight


Min, - 6 mins

Max. – 19 mins

Ave. – 11 mins

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Arriving crew disembark

Finalise catering purchases

Check cabin for left over items

Disembark for transport beck to Operations


Fuelling Connect hose to fuel hydrant

Earth Equipment

Connect hose to aircraft

Fuel till stopped by engineer

Aircraft is chocked Min. – 10 mins

Max. – 35 mins

Ave. – 20 mins

Departing baggage Loaded

Departing luggage loaded from the rear

Arrival Bags offloaded

Min. – 14 mins

Max. – 52 mins

Ave. – 31 mins

Departing crew board

New crew board

Perform mandatory safety checks

First officer does walk-around to inspect outside of aircraft

Arriving Crew have disembarked

Toilet Serviced Tanks drained

Chemicals and clean water put into tanks

Aircraft chocked

Water Serviced Potable water topped up to specification

Aircraft Chocked

Passenger Boards Hand in boarding pass at gate

Walk to aircraft

Find seats

Stow hand luggage

Sit and wait for departure

Cleaners off Min. – 7 mins

Max. – 23 mins

Ave. – 16 mins

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Holds Closed and Checked

Holds closed by loading supervisor

Checked by ramp controller

Checked again by engineer

Departing baggage loaded

1 min

Loadsheet off Crew complete weight and balance of aircraft

Hand loadsheet to ramp controller for filing

Passengers boarded No timing

Pushback Tug attached

Tug Attached to aircraft

Communication between engineer and crew tested

Brake override pin inserted and shown to crew

Aircraft chocked Not relevant, as long as it is attached before departure time

Doors Closed Passenger doors closed

Inspected inside by crew

Inspected outside by Engineer

Passengers have boarded

2 mins

Stairs Moved Stairs taken away from aircraft and moved to demarcated area

Doors closed 2 mins

Aircraft Pushes Back Chocks removed and aircraft pushed back on instruction from ATC

Stairs Moved

Table 3: Data set of processes involved in the turn-around of an aircraft

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

The conversation in the meeting covered a wide discussion as to how times could

vary so drastically, and focus was placed on the different procedures used by different

supervisors in a number of the processes. These included, how many people were

stationed at the boarding gate to process passengers, whether or not they boarded

families with children first, whether they boarded by row and whether or not the used

both the front and back doors to board passengers. Some of the issues raised included:

Standardised procedures

Visual Control

Supplier integration into the process

Inclusion of the rest of the company in the process

To try and identify areas of waste that would directly affect the turn-around times of

the aircraft, and hence the on-time performance, it was agreed that closer attention

needed to paid to the critical path of the process in the VSM diagram. This section

only is shown below in Figure 6.

From this closer focus the managers in the team identified the long gap (waiting

waste) in between the cleaners getting off the aircraft – the last onboard process, and

the first passengers getting on. This gap, during which, according to the documented

process, nothing happened, was sometimes as high as 16 or 17 minutes for the data

recorded on two days worth of flights. (see appendix 13: Aircraft Ground Times). It

was agreed that reducing this gap would be the subject of the first experiment in the

action research cycle.

In the process shown on the critical path VSM (Figure 6 below) it can be seen that the

value added time is 45 minutes and that the waste (not necessary) time is 17 minutes.

Please note that this is not reflective of a single turn-around but is reflective of the

times for the processes that were observed by the researcher and the General

Manager: Operations.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Figure 6: Critical Path VSM

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

4.2.1.2 Lean tools and principles

H0: Application of lean tools and principles can improve aircraft turnaround times and

on-time performance.

Ha: Application of lean tools and principles cannot improve aircraft turnaround times

and on-time performance.

Action Research Cycle stage applicable


Action planning, Implementation and Evaluation

Quantitative: The improvements in on-time performance will be measured quantitatively. Times for aircraft turn-around and the associated on-time performance are recorded for each experiment.

Appendix 11 (experiment 1) and Appendix 14 (experiment 2)

This hypothesis was tested through two experiments that applied lean tools and

principles to problems identified in the process of compiling the current state VSM.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Experiment 1

Identified Problem Lean tool applied Expected Outcome

There was a gap identified in between the cleaners getting off of an aircraft and the first passengers getting onto the aircraft. Mayeleff (2006) identified ‘delays’ as being one of the seven ‘service’ wastes, saying that these delays could be either waiting in a queue or waiting for information to be transmitted.

Barrazaet.al. (2009) identified the “pull production Kanban” as a lean tool. This would include a system of production delivery instructions from downstream to upstream activities, producing only when the downstream customer signalled a need. In this experiment a ‘kanban pull signal’ was identified as being needed to allow the boarding gates to start sending passengers to the aircraft in time for them to arrive as the cleaners got off the aircraft.

The expected outcome was that the experiment should be able to reduce the turn-around time for the aircraft by eradicating the wasted time in between processes. It was expected that it would be possible to reduce these times by seven minutes.

This experiment was run over a period of two days. The first day was spent gathering

information about the timing of the cleaning process and the second was spent trying

to implement the new ‘kanban pull signal’ process. The data gathering in preparation

entailed two processes:

1. Establish the time it takes for passengers to get from the boarding gates to the

aircraft after being given boarding go-ahead from the ramp controller at the

aircraft; and

2. Take the time established in 1 and work that backwards from when the

cleaners were finished to see at where they were in the process so that if

passengers started boarding then they would almost meet each other in the

doorway of the aircraft.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

From the data gathered, see appendix 15, it showed that there was on average 3

minutes between ‘boarding go-ahead’ and the first passenger reaching the aircraft.

This translated into the cleaners being at row 3 folding seatbelts and finished with

cleaning the galleys and vacuuming the passenger cabin (the process of folding

seatbelts starts at the back of the aircraft and works forwards).

Introducing the kanban pull signal as the cleaners started on row 3 of the aircraft

would also effectively eliminate any waste in the form of ‘review’, which Mayeleff

(2006) describes as activities that inspect completed or partially completed work for

errors or omissions. This would happen when cabin crew would want to check the

cabin or that the catering was loaded and would stop boarding till that was done.

It was decided that the kanban pull signal would be that the cleaning supervisor would

call the ramp controller using the radio network when the cleaning team started on

row 3 or 4 depending on the requirements for that flight in terms of the experiment.

This would assist as it meant that the ramp controller would then not have to go back

into the aircraft cabin if he was busy somewhere else.

Eight flights were then used for the experiment, with the reduction of the gap in time

between the cleaners getting off and the passengers getting on being as close to zero

as possible, being the ideal outcome. The results are detailed in table 4 below. The

effect of those results on the aircraft turn-around times is detailed in table 5 below.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

No. Flight Cleaners position when

boarding started (Row no.)

Time difference

1 235 3 34 seconds

2 103 3 12 seconds

3 515 3 21 seconds

4 203 4 -16 seconds

5 109 4 -26 seconds

6 247 3 -4 seconds

7 307 3 46 seconds

8 111 3 28 seconds

Table 4: Results of Experiment 1

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

No. Flight Number Turn-around Time Savings (loss) on

standard time

1 103 41 6 minutes

2 331 40 7 minutes

3 203 42 5 minutes

4 109 40 9 minutes

5 247 39 8 minutes

6 111 44 3 minutes

7 503 41 7 minutes

8 205 45 3 minutes

Table 5: Effect of Experiment 1 on Aircraft Turn-around Times

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Results / Findings

It can be seen from the data in table 5 above that there is a reduction of waste by

introducing a kanban pull signal into the process. The average time saved on the

aircraft turn-around process was 5.8 minutes.

Deviations from the expected result

In an informal debrief with the boarding and ramp teams held after the experiment

(see annex 11: extract from research journal), they believed that better communication

would assist in gaining an additional minute saving in the turn-around process. The

team felt that the relay of the message to get a boarding announcement made slowed

the process slightly. As a further development, the team agreed that they would in

future include some time for that message relay to happen.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Experiment 2

Problem identified Lean Principle applied Expected outcome

There were a number of different procedures used, leading to some confusion amongst staff as to what procedure to use depending on which supervisor they were working with. Supervisors had their own procedures that they have developed and used without there being much discussion as to which procedures were best. Amongst the various procedures identified that were not consistent were

- Sending final bags from check in

- Boarding in order of row number

- Boarding through both the front and aft (back) doors of the aircraft

- Removing of excess hand baggage at the aircraft or at the gates

Spear and Bowen (1999) identify as the first of their four ‘rules’ of lean that ‘all work shall be highly specified as to content, sequence, timing and outcome. Furthermore, according to Gappet.al. (2008), one of the 5 S’s in the famed 5S model is seiketsu – or standardisation.

In this experiment one process was chosen and had the standardised procedure applied. The process chosen was the actual boarding process, using the new procedure to board passengers through both doors of the aircraft.

The expected outcome was a saving of approximately 4 minutes on the aircraft turn-around process. By using a standardised procedure made up of the best parts of individual procedures.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

The preparation for this experiment was thorough and took some time. It was started

soon after the first training session with help from the management and supervisors.

Bianca Van Zyl was appointed to draft new standardised procedures, including new

procedures for the issues mentioned above. For the sake of the experiment the

boarding process was chosen, thus Bianca worked on drafting this procedure first.

The rest of the standardised procedures are still being completed in an ongoing

process.

The procedures were developed inclusively by getting feedback from staff at all

levels, i.e. managers, supervisors and customer service agents. This was done first at

short meetings (see appendix 12) and then by getting verbal feedback on the

procedures as they were developed. For the sake of this experiment only the meetings

and discussions relevant to this experiment were considered.

The standard procedure was developed and stated that passengers will board the

aircraft through both doors of the aircraft after being split in the chute or air bridge

into groups that should use the front door and those that should use the back door.

Those passengers directed to the front door stayed in the air bridge, whilst those

directed to the back door exited the bridge, went down the stairs, and were marshalled

past the wing of the aircraft entered the aircraft by climbing the stairs at the back of

the aircraft. The passenger split was made between row 16 and row 17.

The experiment was conducted over 10 flights on 11 November 2009 and was

observed by the researcher and James Budge. All the staff were briefed before shift

(see appendix 13) as to how the procedure was developed and about how it should

work. Some of the concerns raised by the staff were:

- Having enough time to ensure that the split was done properly in the air bridge

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

- Accommodating hand baggage for passengers boarding through the back of

the aircraft

- People that had difficulty climbing stairs were seated at the back of the

aircraft

- Cabin crew checking boarding passes as the passengers enter through the back

of the aircraft.

Most of the issues raised were described in the procedure, but the staff were assured

that as this was not the first time that this procedure had been used and in fact some

supervisors had been using it for some time, and this was confirmed by some staff

members in the team. Most of the issues raised were covered in the written procedure.

The resulting times for the aircraft turn-around process for the flights that had the

standard procedure applied to them is contained in table 6 below.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

No. Flight No. Boarding time Aircraft turn-around

time

1 235 11 minutes 40 minutes










Table 6: Results of experiment 2

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Results / Findings

As can be seen from table 6 above, the average time taken for passengers to board was 12

minutes; this is a 4 minute saving on the average time taken from the initial data gathering

exercise detailed in table 6 above. This translated into an average 3.6 minute saving on the

aircraft turn-around time.

Discussions and further developments

In an informal debrief session (see annex 14: Extract from research journal) held with the

participants following the experiment the general consensus – 82 percent of participants, by a

show of hands, was that the new standard procedure was a better procedure and that it would

be effective in reducing turn-around times. The team discussed improvements on the

procedure and felt that splitting the boarding further, i.e. the front half of the back passengers

and the back half of the front passengers boarding first, would speed up the aircraft turn-

around process considerably but would be logistically very difficult.

Conclusion

By introducing the kanban pull signal to start the boarding, the turn-around process was

reduced by an average of 5. 6 minutes per flight over 8 flights tested. With the introduction of

the standardised boarding procedure the turn-around process was reduced by an average of

3.6 minutes per flight over 10 flights tested.

Thus, H0can not be rejected: Application of lean tools and principles can improve aircraft

turnaround times and on-time performance.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

4.3 Research Question 2

H0-The application of Lean motivates staff to contribute more and perform at a better

standard

Ha - The application of Lean does not motivate staff to contribute more and perform at a

better standard

Action Research Cycle stage applicable


Evaluation Qualitative: The opinion of staff will be gained from the informal debriefing sessions following the experimental run

Extract from Research Journal (Appendix 11)

The researcher used the debriefing sessions held after the application of the two experiments

to gauge the staff’s opinions on how being involved in the experiments made them feel in

terms of motivation and empowerment. This was done by asking questions in the debrief

sessions and encouraging open conversations and questions. The success of this method was

enhanced by the ‘open’ culture of the company where enquiry is welcomed.

40% of the staff said that they felt more empowered in the processes because they had been

part of the discussions from the beginning. They felt more appreciated because their input had

been taken into account and believed that because of this they felt more inclined to go out of

their way to make the experiments work.

20% of the staff were indifferent to the changes, and whilst they agreed that there was an

improvement, and they felt they would like to carry on using the procedures defined in the

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

experiments, they did not believe that they were more motivated to complete these tasks at a

higher standard as opposed to their usual standards.

40% of the staff felt that while the experiments were successful, and believed that the

procedures defined in the experiments were better than the variation of procedures normally

used, they believed that the changes would be short lived and once the project had ended

variations would creep in again. They felt that if the department was left to their own devices,

the lean experiment would fade away. In further discussions in the debrief, a number of the

40% who did not feel motivated conceded that if there was a wider acceptance of lean

throughout the company that their departments would then ‘in all likelihood’ sustain the lean

initiatives.

Thus, as a result of only 40% of the staff involved in the experiment debriefs felt that they

were ‘exceptionally motivated’, HAcannot be rejected - The application of Lean does not

motivate staff to contribute more and perform at a better standard.

REASONS THAT MAY HAVE LED TO THIS CONCLUSION

A number of authors (Mayeleff, 2006; Emiliani, 1998; Womack et. al., 1990; Comm and

Mathaisel, 2005) maintain that Lean will only be successful when the entire company

infrastructure is consistent with the goals of lean.

Balle et. al (nd) state that applying lean tools will guarantee the low hanging fruit in terms of

success but will not help transform the organisation. Balle and Refnier (2007) found that it

was important to apply lean across the organisation in smaller steps rather than in one

department in larger steps.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

It may be that if lean had been applied across all the departments in the organisation that the

belief in its sustainability would have improved the motivation of the staff. The very short

time frame for these experiments may also be a factor. Womack and Jones (1996) suggest

that it will take 6 months ‘just to get started’ on the lean journey, and that a complete

transformation will take up to five years.

5. LESSONS LEARNED / THEORY BUILDING

Coughlan and Coghlan (2002), contend that while action research projects are specific and

thus should not aim to create universal knowledge, it must have some implications beyond

those required for action or knowledge within the project. They state that it is therefore

important to extrapolate to other situations and to identify how the project could inform

similar organisations or comparable issues.

From the application of the above experiments and testing of the hypothesis, the author would

propose the following as significant learning points that may be informative.

PEOPLE

From observing how effective the staff involved in the experiments were in proposing useful

suggestions and writing the standardised procedures, the researcher would suggest that

getting staff involved should be the first and most important step in the lean application in

any organisation.

Balle and Regnier (2007) suggest that the aim of TPS is to turn workers into problem-solvers,

and to educate people to stop going around problems and to fix them now. It was evident

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

from the approach of the staff in these experiments that they were eager for the opportunity to

be involved and the lean process provided the opportunity. Application consistently across the

organisation may convince them that the process would be sustainable.

THE ENTIRE COMPANY MUST BE ALIGNED TO THE LEAN GOALS

The researcher observed some frustration in the implementation of the experiments in this

project that not all departments were involved in the project. This would appear to be

particularly relevant where a number of separate departments and divisions have to interact in

order to provide the service to the customer. Where other departments do have the same focus

and goals as the department being used in the experiment they have no motivation to be part

of the process.

Balle and Regnier (2007) attribute the success of their lean project in a hospital environment

to the systemic improvements obtained by getting the entire hospital to progress at the same

time. They say “better imperfect lean techniques applied systemically rather than perfect ones

applied sporadically”.

Barazza et. al. (2009) suggests that the lean project should actually extend beyond just the

organisation and should also include service providers. This may be very relevant for 1time

as they rely heavily on service providers in their aircraft turn-around process.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

THE TIME FRAME TO IMPLEMENT LEAN

The time frame for the implementation of lean and the planning and application of the

experiments in this project limited the full success of the adoption of lean at 1time airline.

Womack and Jones’ (1996) assertion that it takes six months just to get started shows that the

short time period of this research project was unlikely to have significant success.

Application of lean tools is a simple method to obtain quick successes, but to acquire

sustained improvements and lean adoption will take a considerably longer time.

STANDARDISATION

The participants in this study were very quick to identify standardisation as one of the key

areas for improvement. A number of authors (Liker and Morgan, 2006; Ehrlich, 2006) state

that standardisation is one of the key principles in the adoption of lean. Liker (2004) believes

that standardised tasks and processes are the foundation for continuous improvement and

employee empowerment.

In particular, the researcher noted that the “have-it-your-way paradox” as described by

Ehrlich (2006) was very clearly adopted by the participants of the experiments. Ehrlich

believes that strict adherence to work standards allows staff the flexibility to provide

exceptional service. Once the standard procedure had been explained in experiment two, and

the procedures were applied, there appeared to be less concern about what to do, and more

focus on how to do it. As one participant commented in the debrief session, “you had the

confidence to know that everyone else know what they were doing, and you did not have to

worry about what happened next. It gave you time to do the extra mile things.”

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

CULTURE OF CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT

The researcher would suggest that for the implementation of lean to be successful that a

culture of continuous improvement be instilled in the organisation. This can be achieved

through the application of the 5S tool, and in particular the ‘sustain’ aspect which Julien and

Tjahjono (2009) suggest should be managed through performing housekeeping audits and

reviewing work standards.

Warwood and Knowles (2004) say that an important part of the 5S is people taking personal

responsibility. They believe that the 5S is also about ensuring that the workplace remains in

order and that this will require a culture of continuous improvement with the rigor of applied

standardisation.

6. FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS

The researcher believes that the success of the implementation of lean at 1time airline was

limited by the time constraints of this research project. Given a longer period for research I

believe that a more significant adoption of lean can be achieved. At the same time, company-

wide adoption of the process will enhance the results for 1time airline.

The researcher believes, based on feedback from the experiment debriefs, that educating

customers, which Bowen and Youngdahl (1998) include as one of their “lean service

characteristics” would assist in speeding up the turn-around process. Research on how to

reduce the time spent waiting (waste) for passengers to store excess handluggage in overhead

bins on the aircraft could be an interesting research direction.

Further to this, customer training, the adoption of self service devices now prominent in

airline travel worldwide would provide for another interesting field of research, investigating

how resources can be better managed when customer complete certain parts of the processes

themselves.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Integration of suppliers into the lean process would provide another rich opportunity for

research. In particular the airline relies heavily on their engineering providers and their

ground handling service providers, and their involvement in particular would be significant.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

REFERENCES

Alricher, H., Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R. and Zuber-Skerrit, O. (2002). The Concept of action

research [Electronic Version].The Learning Organisation, Vol. 9 No. 3, 125-131.

Abdi, F., Shavarini, S.K., and Hoseni, S.M.S., (2006), Glean Services: How to use a Lean

approach in services [Electronic Version].Journal of Services Research, Vol.6, Special

Issue, 191-206.

Balle, M. and Regnier, A. (2007). Lean as a learning system in a hospital ward.[Electronic

Version].Leardership in Health Services.Vol. 20 No. 1. 1751-1879.

Balle, M., Beauvallet, G., Samlley, A. and Sobek, D.K. (nd).The Thinking Production System

[Electronic Version].Reflections, Vol. 7 No. 2. 1-12.

Barraza, M. F. S., Smith, T., and Dahlgaard-Park, S. M. (2009). Lean-Kaizen public service:

an empirical approach in Spanish local governments [Electronic Version]. The TQM

Journal, Vol. 21 No.2, 143-167.

Basignini, G., (2009, June 08) Loss Forecast Increases to US$9 Billion. IATA Press Release.

Retrieved June 24, 2009, from http://www.iata.org/pressroom/pr/2009-06-08-01.htm

Bhasin, S., and Burcher, P. (2006). Lean viewed as a philosophy [Electronic

Version].Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 17 No. 1, 56-72.

Bowen, B. D., and Headley, D.E. (2009). Airline Quality Rating, retrieved on 24 May

2009 from www.aqr.aero

Bowen, B.D., and Younghdahl, W.E. (1998). ‘Lean’ service: in defence of a production-line

approach [Electronic Version]. International Journal of Service Industry Management,

Vol. 9 No. 3, 207-225.

Bryman, A., and Bell, E., (2007), Business Research Methods, Oxford University Press,

Oxford.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Canel, C., Rosen, D. and Anderson, E.A. (2000). Just-in-time is not just for manufacturing: a

service perspective [Electronic Version]. Industrial Management and Data Systems,

100/2, 51-60.

Comm, C.L., and Mathaisel, D.F.X. (2005). A case study in applying lean sustainability

concepts to universities [Electronic Version].International Journal of Sustainability in

Higher Education, Vol. 6, No.2, 134-136.

Coughlan, P. and Coghlan, D. (2002). Action Research for Operations Management

[Electronic Version].International Journal of Operations and Production

Management, Vol. 22 No.2, 220-240.

Dick, B. (2002). Postgraduate programs using action research [Electronic Version].The

Learning Organization, Vol. 9 No. 4, 159-170.

Doig, S.J., Howard, A., and Ritter, R.C. (2003). The hidden value in airline operations

[Electronic Version].The McKinsey Quarterly, No. 4, 104-115.

Emiliani, M.L. (1998). Lean behaviours [Electronic Version].Management Decision, 36/9,

615-631.

Ehrlich. B.H. (2006).Service with a smile [Electronic Version].Industrial Engineer. August

2006, 40-44.

Fine, D., Hansen, M.A. and Roggenhoffer, S.(2008). From lean to lasting: Making

operational improvements stick [Electronic Version]. The McKinsey Quarterly.

November 2008. 2-11.

Gapp, R., Fisher, R. and Kobayashi, K. (2008). Implementing 5S within a Japanese context:

and integrated management system [Electronic Version]. Management Decision, Vol.

46 No. 4. 565-579.

Hallowell, R. (1996). Dual Competitive advantage in services, in Swartz, T.A., Bowen, D.E.,

and Brown, S.W. (Eds), Advances in Services Marketing and Management, 7, JAI

Press, Greenwhich,CT.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Harris, D. (2006). Operational Efficiency in Aviation: The influence of human factors on

operational efficiency [Electronic Version]. Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace

Technology: An International Journal, Vol. 78, No. 1, 20-25.

Hines, P., Matthias, H., and Rich, N. (2004). Learning to evolve: A review of contemporary

lean thinking [Electronic Version]. International Journal of Operations and

Production Management, Vol. 24 No. 10, 994-1011.

Jacobs, F.R. and Chase, R.B. (2008). Operations and Supply Management: The Core,

McGraw-Hill, New York.

Johnston, R. and Clark, G., (2005), Service Operations Management: Improving Service

Delivery, Financial Times/ Prentice Hall, London.

Johnston, R. (1999). Service Operations Management: Return to Roots [Electronic Version].

International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 19, No. 2,

104-124.

Julien, D.M. and Tjahjono, B. (2009). Lean thinking implementation at a safari park

[Electronic Version].Business Process Management Journal.Vol. 15 No.3. 321-

335.

Liker, J.K. and Morgan, J.M. (2006). The Toyota way in services: The case of lean product

development [Electronic Version].Academy of Management Perspectives. May

2006. 5-20.

Liker. J.K. (2004). The Toyota Way: 14 Management Principles from the world’s greatest

manufacturer, McGraw-Hill, Two Pen Plaza, NY.

Mayeleff, J. (2006). Exploration of internal service systems using lean principles [Electronic

Version].Management Decision, Vol. 44, No. 5, 674-689.

Mathaisel, D.F.X, and Comm, C.L. (2000). Developing, implementing and transferring lean

quality initiatives from the aerospace industry to all industries [Electronic

Version].Managing Service Quality, Vol. 10 No. 4, 248-256.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Niehues, A., Hauser, R., Belin, S., Mostajo, M., Hansson, T., and Richter, J. (2001).

Punctuality: How Airlines can Improve On-Time Performance, A Booz-Allen

Hamilton viewpoint paper, retrieved on 20 May 2009 at

http://www.boozallen.com/consulting/industries_article/658320july2001

Piercy, N. and Rich, N. (2009). Lean transformation in the pure service environment: the case

of the call service centre [Electronic Version]. International Journal of Operations

and Production Management, Vol. 29 No.1, 54-76.

Rother, M. & Shook, J., (1999), Learning to See: Value Stream Mapping to Add

Value and Eliminate muda, The Lean Enterprise Institute, Brookline,

Massachusetts.

Reid, R.A., and Cormier, J.R. (2003). Applying the TOC TP: a case study in the service

sector [Electronic Version]. Managing Service Quality, Vol. 13, No. 5, 349-369.

Spear, S., and Bowen, H.K., (1999), Decodong the DNA of the Toyota Production System

[Electronic Version]. Harvard Business Review, September – October, 97-106.

Transport & Logistics consultancy ltd. (nd), Delivering results to bmi. Retrieved August 24,

2009, from http://www.tlconsult.com/projects/pdfs/bmi.case.study.pdf.

Warwood, S.J. and Knowles, G. (2004). An investigation into Japanese 5-S practice in UK

industry [Electronic Version].The TQM Magazine, Vol. 16 No. 5. 347-353.

Womack, J. and Jones, D.T. (1996). Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and Create Wealth for

Your Corporation, Simon and Schuster, New York, NY.

Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: design and methods, Sage Publications Inc.,

California

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

APPENDICES

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Appendix 1: The 1time Airline Johannesburg Minimum turnaround process

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Appendix 2 : Ramp Stats

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Appendix 3: Arrival Stats

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Appendix 4: Check-in Stats

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Appendix 5: Boarding Stats

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Appendix 6: Detailed Organigram

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Appendix 7: Extract of meeting minutes

Meeting OR Tambo Management and senior staff meeting

Venue African Moon Guest House Conference Room

Date 02 September 2009

Attendees Graham Paterson

James Budge

Balard Nleya

Bianca Van Zyl

Alain Antoinne

Lindi Vorster

Yusri Khan

John Masango

Anton Smith

Ezra Masekwaneng

Geoffrey Fields

Kooven Naidoo

Mart Mari Sassenburg

George Masango

Deborah Mathemutsi

Candice Gobey

Renee Fransch

Johan Kloppers

Brenda Buda

Beverly Gasela

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

No Issue Raised Resp. Person

5. Graham explained that he was going to run some trails to try and improve on-time performance as part of his research project for his MBA. The trials would be conducted by using a concept called ‘Lean Thinking’ which originated from the production methods that Toyota in Japan used to get a competitive edge over other vehicle manufacturers in the rest of the world.

The project would start by using a mapping diagram to examine whether that can reflect the operation; it is a process similar to the critical path diagram currently used.

Graham requested that everyone cooperate during the trials and any meetings afterwards to discuss the outcomes. The results of the experiments would be shared with everyone afterwards so that they could understand the outcomes.

Graham indicated that there would be an aspect of the project around how people felt about the project and what it was like to participate in it, and also to see whether they felt that they had contributed.

Geoffrey mentioned that it would be nice to be part of the process and be involved from the beginning. He raised that he was concerned about the fact that there seemed to be different procedures on different shifts. Ezra agreed and said that this caused some frustration for the ramp controllers, as they didn’t know what to expect from the boarding teams.

Bianca said that there were a number of procedures that were different across the shifts and teams.

Balard raised the issue that there was no ‘central control’ area that kept track of progress on turn-around. He felt that this might improve communication.

Alain asked whether Swissport would be part of the experiment. Graham said that he was not sure yet as he would only know what the trials would entail once the project started. He said that a part of Lean was in fact working with suppliers to ensure better standards of delivery so this was a possibility.

Yusri said that we would need to get the crew and cockpit crew involved as well. Graham said that we would run the project on the airport staff only for now. If the project got bigger then we would have to involve the crew.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report


Meeting First project meeting for ‘Lean’ experiments

Venue OR Tambo training room

Date 16 September 2009


James Budge

Balard Nleya

Bianca Van Zyl

Alain Antoinne

Lindi Vorster

Yusri Khan

Ezra Masekwaneng

George Masango

John Masnage

Penny Chonco

Kooven Naidoo

No. Issue Raised Resp.

Person

1 Graham gave a presentation on Lean which will form the basis of his

trials that he will run at OR Tambo Airport to see if it can improve

on-time performance.

The main points were:

The Background of Lean The Principles of Lean Waste Service Wastes Tools (VSM etc)

Graham explained that the team should not consider which tools

should be used now. As part of his research project he would first

look at the Value Stream Map and that would help everyone decide

what tools should be used and which parts of the process we would

run the trials on.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Appendix 9: Lean Presentation

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report


Meeting ‘Lean Meeting’ to discuss the Value Stream Map

Venue OR Tambo International Airport Training Room

Date 03 November 2009


James Budge

Balard Nleya

Bianca Van Zyl

Alain Antoinne

Yusri Khan

John Masango

George Masango

Ezra Masekwaneng

Geoffrey Fields

Johan Kloppers

Renee Fransch

Brenda Buda

Kooven Naidoo

Mart Mari Sassenburg

Candice Gobey

No Issue Raised Resp. Person

1 Graham Presented the Visual Stream Map (VSM) that was completed by James and him. The VSM is a diagrammatic description of the turn-around process. Graham explained that the intention was to get everyone’s opinion on the VSM, to see where they could see waste – gaps in which we would be able to make up some time – and then finally to get consensus on whether the VSM was an accurate reflection of the turn-around process.

Graham showed the critical path VSM which reflected the value adding time and the wasted time in the process, and explained how those times were measured. He also showed a table of all the times that he and James had measured for each of the steps in the

4

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

turnaround process.

Alain was said he could not understand why the times varied so much when there were supposed to be set times that should be standard. Ezra said that there was a lot of variation depending on the circumstances. He said sometimes the cleaners took longer because they were short of a few members on the team, or if they know there was time to spare they would try being a bit more thorough.

Kooven discussed how the boarding process could vary a lot also depending on how many staff they had and also quite obviously how often passengers arrived late at the boarding gates.

Alain said he was also surprised that there was such a big gap between the cleaners getting off and boarding starting. He said that there should be no gap and that boarding should start as the cleaners get off. Graham explained that what was shown was the actual situation that he and James had observed. John said that there was sometimes a delay because the crew were checking catering and double-checking on the cleaners. George said that there was often a delay because the ramp controllers could not get hold of the boarding gates to tell them that they could start boarding, and then there was a further delay when the boarding staff tried to contact the airports company to display the flight on the boarding monitor.

Geoffrey said that the boarding times will also vary depending on how the flight was boarded. If they used both doors and divided passengers to board through the front door if they were seated in the front of the aircraft and vice versa, or if they just boarded by row, starting with passengers at the back of the aircraft first, then boarding would significantly quicker. John agreed and said that if they let mothers and children and elderly people board first then it took longer because they held up the process when they putting all their baggage away in the overhead compartments and also because they took longer to walk to the aircraft.

Graham said that he would like to choose two of things that we had discussed as topics of the trials. He reminded everyone about the lean tools from the presentation he made previously. Alain asked if it was possible to look at the reason it was taking long for passengers to get to the aircraft after the cleaners had gotten off. He believed that there was a good opportunity to improve there as he was still under the impression that there should be almost no gap. James agreed that it would be a good place to start. Graham said that we would make that the topic of the first experiment.

Graham also explained that we would only choose the second experiment once we had finished the first one and met again to

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

discuss the results.

Graham asked whether everyone felt that the VSM accurately reflected the turnaround process.

Alain said that he felt that it did reflect the process but was surprised that the times reflected were so different from the standard times that had previously been set. Ezra said he found it interesting that the times were so different from what he thought they were, but admitted that he never really thought about the times in general, he just always assumed that the times were the same, and also the same as what has been recorded as the standard.

Johan said he felt that it was reflective of the process and that possibly the ramp guys (Alain and Ezra) did not realise the times that things took because they did not always stay in one place for the entire turn-around of the aircraft. John and Mart Mari agreed with Johan. John said the times also seemed longer when you had passengers standing in front of you waiting. Geoffrey said that he felt that the VSM was very accurate.

By a show of hands, 12 out of the 14 people present felt that the VSM was representative of the current aircraft turnaround process.

4.3.1

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Appendix 11: Extract from research Journal

Meeting Debrief on completion of the first experiment

Venue OR Tambo international Airport Training Room



James Budge

Alain Antoinne

Balard Nleya

Bianca Van Zyl

Ezra Masekwaneng

John Masango

George Masango

Kooven Naidoo

Geoffrey Fields

Johan Kloppers

Yusri Khan

No Discussion

1 Graham thanked everyone for his or her participation in the experiment. He said that the average savings per turn-around was 5.8 minutes that showed that the experiment was successful. He asked how everyone felt about that result.

Balard said that he thought the result was positive and showed that processes could be improved despite the fact that they had been done a different way previously.

Ezra said he thought things could improve even more if communication was improved between the ramp controllers and the boarding staff. He said there were still a few flights where they waited for a minute or two to get through to the gate staff. Balard suggested that extra time be allowed for that upfront, before the boarding calls are made. The ramp controllers agreed to this addition and said they would carry on doing that in future.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

George said that there was some frustration with the crew as they were not part of the experiment and hence did not really want to let passengers board until they had checked the cleaning and the catering. He suggested that they should be brought onboard if the lean implementation was continued into the future. Ezra and Alain agreed with this.

Graham asked how everyone felt in doing the trial, did they feel more motivated?

Kooven said that he felt more empowered because he had been part of the process all along; he felt that it was something that he helped create. Geoffrey agreed with Kooven and said it was good to try new things. He believed that just the change was enough to provide a reason to try work harder and be more motivated.

Ezra said that he was not sure if there was a big difference in how he feels about the process now than how he felt about it before. He agreed that the procedure was better and said he would continue using it in the future, but felt that he had always done his best and would continue to perform at that standard.

George said that he thought the procedure was good but did not feel ‘too good’ about it because of the frustrations working with the crew. He said that he sometimes just wanted to give up. Yusri agreed and said that if the experiments were to be successful in the future then the whole company would have to be involved.

Graham asked for a show of hands from those that felt more motivate and got 4 hands. Then he asked who was indifferent like Ezra was and got 2 hands. The remaining 4 people felt similar to Yusri, saying that they didn’t think that lean would work in the company until all departments adopt it.

James did not vote.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Appendix 12: Extracts from meeting minutes

Meeting Planning for standard procedures

Venue Bianca Van Zyl’s office

Date 26 October 2009

Attendees James Budge

Bianca Van Zyl

Yusri Khan

Geoffrey Fields

Kooven Naidoo

Mart Mari Sassenberg

No Issue Resp. Person

1. James opened the meeting and explained that the idea was to start of a series of meetings where standardised procedures would be discussed. He said that these procedures were needed to improve standards and consistency, and also as part of Graham’s research project into lean.

James said that the process would be driven by Bianca but needed to be inclusive as possible, with staff from all levels being involved in the process.

...4 Bianca said that there were a number of different boarding procedures and that there would need to be only one. It was important that the procedure was always used regardless of how many passengers were on the flight. Currently the different approaches were:

Splitting passengers and boarding them through the front and back doors

Boarding by row and starting with the back rows

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Meeting Planning for standard boarding procedure


Date 29 October 2009

Attendees Bianca Van Zyl

Yusri Khan

Geoffrey Fields

Kooven Naidoo


Amanda Myburg

John Masango

first Boarding families and elderly people first and then

everyone else, all through the front door. Just boarding everyone through the front and

getting them to hurry each other along (people would hurry because there was a big queue behind them).

After a lengthy discussion it was decided that the best procedure was to split passengers and board them through both doors, providing that there were enough staff to marshal passengers around the wing of the aircraft.

James said that the procedures should be written assuming that there would be enough staff.

Bianca asked everyone to put their thoughts about how this procedure would work on paper and she would set a further meeting to discuss this with all the boarding supervisors.

All

Bianca

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

No. Issue Resp. Person

1. Bianca read through the proposals of how the boarding procedure should work and thanked everyone for their input.

She said that all the proposals were very similar, except for how many people were needed to marshal passengers at the aircraft.

It was agreed that only one person should be needed and if there was an issue then the ramp controller could help out. Yusri said that this would need to be confirmed with Alain first. Bianca said she would speak to Alain about it.

Bianca asked the boarding supervisors to discuss the procedure with their staff over the next few days and to bring feedback to the next meeting

Bianca

John / Geoffrey /

Amanda

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Meeting Planning for standard boarding procedure



Attendees Bianca Van Zyl

James Budge

Alain Antoinne

Yusri Khan

Geoffrey Fields

Kooven Naidoo


Amanda Myburg

John Masango

No. Issue Resp. Person

1. Bianca asked about any feedback from the boarding staff about the proposed procedure.

Geoffrey said that most staff were very positive about the procedure and a number of them had already been boarding flights in that way already.

John said that he normally boarded that way on his shifts anyway and said that the staff he spoke to did not have any problems.

Alain mentioned that he had no issues with his ramp controllers helping out marshalling passengers if there was a problem. He mentioned though that they may be busy somewhere else and it should not be assumed that they would be available always.

James mentioned that if the rostering was done properly there should be no need for the ramp controller to help out anyway. Everyone agreed with this.

Bianca

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Bianca said that she would document the final procedure and then distribute it to everyone to read. She suggested starting the new procedure in the last week in November. James said he would speak to Graham first to see if he wanted to start it sooner for the trial.

James

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report


Extract from Research Journal

Meeting Briefing on new standardised boarding procedure

Venue OR Tambo International Airport training room



James Budge

Balard Nleya

Alain Antoinne

Bianca Van Zyl

Ezra Masekwaneng

George Masango

Geoffrey Fields

Amanda Myburg

Yusri Khan

Lindi Vorster

Raynard Van Nie Kerk

Lucia Tsitsa

Palesa

Goodwill

Chantelle

Christy

Chantelle

Christy

Lwazi

Kulani

Debs

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Wayne

Amber

Melisha

No Issue

1. Graham welcomed everyone and thanked them for their participation today,

particularly those that had not been part of the process so far. For those who

were new to the trials, Graham explained that he was doing a project on

whether implementing ‘lean’ would help improve turn-around times and thus

improve on-time departures.

Graham told everyone that we were going to use a new procedure today that

was going to be applied as a standard procedure from now on. Bianca

explained the new procedure and asked for any questions.

Wayne asked if there would be people at the door in the airbridge to split

passengers into those that had to board through the front and those that had to

board through the back. Bianca confirmed that this would be in place.

Christy asked what happened if there were some people who could not walk up

and down stairs easily that were seated at the back. Bianca replied that they

should be allowed to board through the front door where there were no stairs.

Debs asked if the crew were aware of this experiment. James confirmed that

they were aware.

Ezra asked where hand baggage that could not fit into the aircraft would be

taken away. Bianca replied that it would be taken at the door in the air bridge

where passengers would be split.

A number of staff said that they had used the procedure before and that it

worked well.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Appendix 14: Extract from Research Journal

Meeting Debriefing on experiment 2

Venue OR Tambo International Airport training room



James Budge

Balard Nleya

Alain Antoinne

Bianca Van Zyl

Ezra Masekwaneng

George Masango

Geoffrey Fields

Amanda Myburg

Yusri Khan

Lindi Vorster

Lucia Tsitsa

Palesa

Chantelle

Christy

Kulani

Debs

Wayne

Amber

No Issue

1. Graham thanked everyone for participating in the experiment on the day. He

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

told everyone that the average saving on the turn-around time was 3.6 minutes

which meant that the experiment was a success.

Geoffrey said that he thought there could be more savings achieved if we

managed to split passengers up even further – boarding the people sitting in the

back of the front half, and those in the front of the back half first, hopefully

doing away with the congestion that happens waiting for people to put their

hand baggage away when boarding. George said that that would help but

would be very difficult to do properly.

Alain mentioned that if we could get passengers to stop carrying so much hand

baggage onto the aircraft it would assist the on-time departures as well.

Graham explained how standardisation was important to the lean process that

had been used for his project. George said that it was nice knowing that

everyone knew the procedure, it meant that he didn’t have to worry about

checking what others were doing and allowed him to deal with his passengers

more by ‘going the extra mile’.

Graham asked how many people thought that the standardised procedure was

better than the various procedures that had been used. 14 of the 17 people

agreed (82%), Graham and James did not vote.

Graham asked if people felt more motivated to perform using this new

procedure than they did before.

Chantelle said that she did, she felt it was good knowing that what you were

doing was the correct thing, Kulani agreed, saying that before it was often

confusing trying to figure out what to do for each different supervisor. Now

you knew what to do before you even got to your post and found out which

procedure to use.

Wayne felt that although he agreed that the procedure was better, he did not

really feel any more motivated to perform. He believed that this would just be

a once off change and that things would go back to normal soon enough.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report

Palesa said that often supervisors wanted to do things their way and not listen

to anyone else.

Graham said that at the previous debriefing they had voted for one of three

things:

1. They felt more motivated 2. They were indifferent to the change 3.They did not feel more motivated

And suggested that this debrief vote in the same way.

7 people said they were more motivated. 4 people said they felt indifferent, and

6 people said they felt no more motivated than before.

Copyright UCT

MBA Research Report Page 0

Appendix 15: Aircraft Ground Times

a lean services experiment: introducing lean to the...

Documents