leveraging the toyota kata to re-energize your lean sigma initiative

Bringing theToyota Kata to

Lean Sigma Deployments

by Ben Sagalovsky 2015. Based on original drawing and concepts by Mike Rother

Understandthe Directionor Challenge

Grasp theCurrent

Condition

Establish theNext TargetCondition

CC

TC

IterateToward the

Target Condition

PlanningPhase

ExecutingPhase

D

M

A I

C I

BringingKata Principles and Practices

into existing Lean Sigma Deployments

This publication may be reproduced, as a whole or in part, remixed or transformed, provided that acknowledgement of the source is made. Notification of such would be appreciated.

Benjamin Sagalovsky

Version 2.0 October 2015

Integrating Kata Principles and Practices into Existing Lean Sigma Deployments

Why considering it:Many organizations have already developed structures for process improvement, often based on a variation of Lean Sigma.

Incorporating the Improvement and Coaching Kata routines can significantly raise workplace involvement and increase the pace and energy of performance improvement. Moreover, it can bring immediate benefits by increasing project success rates and aligning projects more directly with management priorities.

Intended audience:Managers, deployment leaders and Lean Sigma (LS) experts who are engaged in existing LS deployments in their organization and want to integrate the Improvement and Coaching Kata (IK/CK) components of Toyota Kata into managerial and supervisory routines, without disregarding the progress achieved through LS in gaining a process view of work, developing a drive towards performance improvement and growing a cadre of process improvement practitioners.

These notes are inspired and borrow heavily from Mike Rother’s Toyota Kata book and the materials in the Toyota Kata Website, with both of which the reader is assumed to be familiar.

3by Ben Sagalovsky 2015

http://www.mhprofessional.com/product.php?isbn=0071635238

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mrother/Homepage.html

The Improvement Kata Path

4

The following slides propose three Target Conditions to consider in the initial stages of integrating the IK/CK into LS initiatives: making changes in the improvement Process(DMAIIC), in the identification and selection of Projects, and in the composition of the teams and the supporting organizational structure (People).

Grasp the

CurrentCondition

EstablishYour NextTarget

Condition

Understandthe

Challenge

ExperimentToward the Target Condition

TC TC

1

2

3

4

Having the IK/CK embedded in the organization

The existing Lean Sigma program Setting an appropriate

Target Condition in the direction of the Challenge

To bring the IK/CK into an organization, nothing could be more fitting than following the IK/CK process itself:

Aiming for the Challenge of embedding the IK/CK dynamics in the organization, and considering the Current Condition of an existing Lean Sigma deployment, set an appropriate Target Condition (TC) on the way to the Challenge. Experiment in quick PDSA cycles until that TC is reached, and then set a new one.

by Ben Sagalovsky 2015. Based on original drawing and concepts by Mike Rother

The Current Condition, and Three Target Conditions to Consider

by Ben Sagalovsky 2015 5

Some specific characteristics of traditional LS deployments stand out when considering the Challenge of incorporating the IK/CK …

… and suggest possible Target Conditions to pursue:

OtherGeneric

Characteristics

Selected Facilitators, Extensive Training

Emphasis onuse of

statistical methods

Lean tools used to enhanceSix Sigma toolbox

OtherLocal

Deployment Characteristics

Execution Roadmap(DMAIIC)

Governance and Teams

(different from Line

organization)

Lean Sigma

Project Selection

(cost/benefit on Current Condition)

TC: ProcessRoadmap

acknowledges uncertainty and

embeds iteration and coaching

TC: ProjectsIdentified by theunfolding of keyorganizational

challenges

TC: PeopleStructure and Teamsaligned to processes

and tovalue aggregation

The phases in the Lean Sigma (and Six Sigma) roadmap are denoted as DMAIC or alternatively, as we prefer in what follows, DMAIIC:

Define > Measure > Analyze > Improve > Implement > Control

DMAIIC assumes certainty: that if the DMAI piece is thoroughly carried out, and the prescribed actions are taken, then the expected results shall be forthcoming.

But this doesn’t make the Uncertainty Zone disappear – it is still there, beyond the limit of the team’s current knowledge and understanding. Ignoring it promotes inconsistency in the results attained by DMAIIC projects and programs, as shown below:

Grasping the Current Condition: Roadmap

6by Ben Sagalovsky 2015. Based on original drawing and concepts by Mike Rother

The Grey, Uncertain Zone ProjectGoal

KnowledgeThreshold

Current Condition

“Certainty”Zone


KnowledgeThreshold

Current Condition

“Certainty”Zone

The Grey, Uncertain Zone

KnowledgeThreshold

Current Condition

“Certainty”Zone

ProjectGoal

Success! Failure. Loss of morale, and of trust in the methodology

Limiting risk and ambition to ensure success. Minimal learning, “gaming the system”

Perseverance: Initial “failure”, and then success achieved through experimenting in the Control phase


KnowledgeThreshold

Current Condition

“Certainty”Zone

Execution Roadmap

(Project-based, DMAIC/DMAIIC)

Understandthe Directionor Challenge

Grasp theCurrent

Condition

Establish theNext TargetCondition

CC

TC

1 2 3 4Iterate

Toward the Target Condition

PlanningPhase

ExecutingPhase

D M A I C I

TC: ProcessRoadmap



by Ben Sagalovsky 2015. Based on original drawing and concepts by Mike Rother 7

Include in DMAIIC a clear expectation for iteration, by spelling it out as:Define > Measure > Analyze > Innovate> Iterate > Control

In the Define phase, align on driving the process towards a clear, agreed future Direction or Challenge, and not just on addressing a problem within the current process.

In Innovate, generate a full Target Condition spelling out how the process will operate, and not just a list of improvements. Encourage teams to take risks and set this Target Condition as a real “stretch”, knowing that there will be a chance to flesh out the improvement details during the Iterate phase,.

Iterate by following the process and tools of Step 4 of the IK, with the Green or Black Belt as the Learner, supported by a Coach. In Control, transfer the Learner role to the actual work supervisor, with the Green or Black Belt acting as the Coach with aid from a Second Coach. Track coaching cycle metrics throughout Iterate and Control.

This Target Condition is based on matching, albeit imperfectly, the phases of the DMAIIC roadmap to those of the Improvement Kata:

A Target Condition for the DMAIIC Roadmap Execution Roadmap

(Project-based, DMAIC/DMAIIC)

In Lean Sigma, improvement ideas can arise from different sources.Each opportunity has to stand on its own, and offer a clearly specified expected benefit (most usually financial, the COPQ). Opportunities are weighed based on some agreed criteria, and those that rank highest are pursued as individual projects. Success is assessed individually on each project, based on the benefit it generated.

8

Project Selection


Grasping the Current Condition: Project Selection

by Ben Sagalovsky 2015

etc.

Tool in search of an application

Recurrent problems and irritants (from Management)

Issues and ideas(from line, staff or engineering )

Current State“waste hunts”

(or defect, delay

or variability hunts)

Current State VSM or

process maps

Data analysis

Site visits

Voice of the Customer

Strategic/Tactical Priorities

Individual Projects,

selected on:

Likely Financial Benefit

Cost/Benefit

MulticriteriaSelection

Matrix

Improvement

Effort

Success defined by individual project payback

Plus: The opportunities identified have a degree of urgency and buy-in.

Minus: Improvement work may be seen as “one more thing to do”, unrelated and less important than overall organizational goals.

Plus: Opportunities are worth the effort invested and represent a good use of available resources.

Minus: Improvement efforts drift from process to process and from area to area, making it difficult to get management and personnel commitment to continuous improvement.

Plus: LS program benefits are easy for all to see.

Minus: Risk of “race to the bottom” where LS is “added” to non-LS projects to beef up program benefits.Possible friction between LS program and line management on benefit attribution.


challenges


Project Selection


A Target Condition for Project Identification

and Selection

Management identifies the top-level organizational goals that represent a significant challenge for the organization or that demand a change in how things are currently being done.

These goals are then cascaded down by interviewing management and SMEs, starting at the highest levels and asking at each subsequent level what needs to be done in order to achieve the higher-level goals. At some point this decomposition reaches goals that can be effectively addressed through DMAIIC, and these are set as the projects to undertake.

•Even if the organization is structured along functional lines, goals are best unfolded along value-added processes, rather than along the functional structure. (Additional detail can be found in Organizing for Lean).

•The highest level goals are usually defined as quantitative outcome targets. At the appropriate level these have to be translated into process targets – how work is to be conducted – through either a VSM exercise for identifying a Future State VSM, or a high-level “DMAI” project.

•Project results (expected and actual) can then be “rolled up” to assess how and to what extent those projects support the organizational goals at each level. An individual return for each project, financial or otherwise, may also be determined if needed in order to report progress within the existing LS framework.

9

http://www.slideshare.net/BenjaminSagalovsky/organizing-for-lean-autonomy-recursion-and-cohesion

The Governance and Team Structure for LS is usually set as separate from the formal organizational structure.

The LS governance structure is typically composed of just three levels: an (executive) LS program Sponsor, a (management-level) Champion for each project, and a Belt in charge of each project. It may overlap with the top-level organizational structure if high level managers are tapped as Champions.

• Green or Black Belts lead teams over which they do not usually have organizational authority. Specialists (Master Black Belts and experienced Black Belts) provide coaching; Champions support projects and clear hurdles.

• Each project team is cobbled together from the different functions involved in the process being targeted. Teams disband once the project reaches the Control phase.

10



organization)

Team Team Team Team Team

Champion Champion Champion

Sponsor

Co

ach

ing

Org

an

iza

tio

n (

Sta

ff)

Steering Committee

GreenBelt

BlackBelt

GreenBelt

GreenBelt

• Each project reports individually to the Sponsor (or to a Sponsor-led steering committee).

– Top level managers thus have to track and steer efforts that take place much lower in the organization, and for which they may not have much context, nor sometimes much of an interest either. Tracking thus frequently involves only aggregate program figures and financial impact (AFB).

– Some supervisors and managers may feel left out or “bypassed” by the LS structure.

Grasping the Current Condition: Structure




A cascading set of Steering Teams is established for all value streams and key value stream chunks; they identify, set up and track performance improvement teams and projects at their level. Higher level Steering Teams coordinate efforts and if necessary promote additional, integrative projects.

Both steering and project teams include personnel from the support functions that directly assist the corresponding value-adding area. No specific Steering Teams are created for functional activities.

Each Steering Team meets regularly to coordinate the improvements at their respective level, using the Coaching Kata questions to review the rolled-up progress and provide feedback.

Steering Teams are led by existing managers and (formal or informal) leaders, to ensure their involvement and buy-in.

Project and steering teams are kept intact for at least a year at a time. They work in a sequence of projects aiming at achieving successive TCs for the process under their responsibility, focused on the Challenges set up by Steering Teams higher up in the organization.

11



organization)

A Target Condition for the

Improvement Structure


Each of these Target Conditions requires a different level of organizational buy-in, and thus a different level of maturity in the acceptance and implementation of

IK/CK practices:

TC Process: Roadmap acknowledges uncertainty and embeds iteration and coaching It can be pursued at the individual team and project level, and thus it can be

attempted even by the individual GB or BB without further approval or support.

Alternatively, this TC can be pursued by a MBB at a business unit or organization-wide level by embedding the revised roadmap in training and coaching GBs and BBs.

TC Projects: Identified by the unfolding of key organizational challenges It needs to be driven by an organization’s Deployment Leader or senior MBB, as they

usually define the process to use in the identification and selection of LS projects.

TC People: Structure and Teams aligned to processes and to value aggregation It may generate some level of resistance, since it involves new roles and new time

commitments for managers and supervisors. It also demands growing a group of second coaches to support them.

In most cases it will be necessary to gain buy-in and experience with the IK/CK routines and with goal decomposition before this TC can be successfully pursued.

It may be worth considering a “slice by slice” effort, as proposed by Mike Rother, starting with the organizational slices where this can be more favorably received.

12

Organizational Buy-in Needed to Pursue each TC


Embeds the iterative aspect of the IK/CK, develops Coaching Kata abilities in Belts and supervisors, and acknowledges the existence of the Uncertainty Zone.

Helps increase the success ratio of LS projects and the staying power of the improvements, and spells out when and how to transfer ownership to line supervisors. This enhanced success and clarity should help further the acceptance of the IK/CK practices.

Makes “Understanding Direction” a key piece of project selectionand scoping, shifting the organization away from looking at What can we improve, and into What do we need to improveto reach the organization’s vision and goals (as per Mike Rother)

Focuses improvements on the key value-added areas and theirvalue streams, and makes them more visible to the organization.

Supports the success and sustainability of LS by aligning projects with the key challenges of the organization and the goals that managers need to meet, making the improvement efforts effectively relevant to all supervisors and not “something else” to be addressed.

Starts involving all leaders in the IK/CK, and creating the recursive coaching structure envisioned in the CK.

Promotes the continuity of steering and project teams across time, allowing for the IK/CK routines to take hold and for the continuous, ongoing improvement of processes throughout the organization. This starts shifting the organization from Improving some processes sometimes towards Improving every process all the time (as per Mike Rother).

For function-oriented organiza-tions, the Improvement Structure can help prefigure a value-driven organization and pull existing structures in that direction.

TC: ProcessRoadmap




challenges



How these TCs Help Embed the IK/CK

by Ben Sagalovsky 2015 13

• The preceding discussion deals only with the definition of possible Target Conditions –of course that the hard work is that of iterating and learning as we pursue them!

• There is some sequencing of difficulty and of the level of engagement needed in the order in which the TCs were presented – still, they are there just as possible ways forward, and not as a staged “recipe for implementation”. It is the learning acquired in the pursuit of each TC that should dictate what may be possible for the next TC.

• Besides the specifics of each TC, it is important to assess whether a given TC should aim directly towards establishing new processes across the whole organization, or just within a piece of the organization or a set of projects, in order to learn from the experience before extending it onwards.

• Working towards and even reaching these specific TCs does not exhaust the benefits that the IK/CK can bring to the organization. They aim at providing some ideas for a good start, not at signaling the end of the road.

I would greatly appreciate learning about the thoughts that may have come up for you as you went through the presentation, particularly if you are currently engaged in a LS deployment. Please share those thoughts, along with any comments, questions and experience, in the Comments section below or directly via email at

Thanks!

Iterating Towards Getting the IK/CKEmbedded in the Organization

14by Ben Sagalovsky 2015

leveraging the toyota kata to re-energize your lean sigma initiative

Leadership & Management