Lean Doing and Lean Thinking

A recent article over on the ThomasNet news site, authored by David R. Butcher, confirms what a lot of Lean champions have been declaring for many years -- Behavior profoundly changes an organization, not tools.

Capgemini Consulting recently released a report titled Lean for the Long Haul, which surveyed more than 150 executives responsible for leading Lean initiatives, and concluded that behavioral changes are what sustain an effective Lean transformation. What ultimately derails the Lean journey? Resistance to change and a lack of focus/commitment.

Placing a strong emphasis on the implementation of tools and the deployment of specific techniques does have a galvanizing effect as they do get all associates involved and encourage enthusiasm. In addition, tangible results are immediately revealed through waste-reduction efforts. After a year or so, however, sustainability becomes a major issue if routine "Lean doing" supersedes "Lean thinking." Without behavioral change, the initiative will ultimately wither.

Lean initiatives that survive the in the long term focus on:

• Leadership.
• Recognition.
• Strategic Alignment.
• Performance Management.

Has any readers of this blog ever been involved in a Lean initiative that has hit the "plateau" stage because some of the crucial Lean thinkers failed to create the correct culture and have moved on after instituting only the effective techniques?

The Lean Plateau

According to this article on the Supply Chain Brain forum, which details survey results provided by Capgemini Consulting, "dissatisfaction with lean initiatives is highest one to two years after initial launch." As expected, the initial enthusiasm resulting from practical process improvements of first-time kaizen events and the application of Lean tools soon gives way to stagnation or backsliding because "long-term behavioral changes have not yet become embedded in the organization." In other words, if an organization's culture is not altered or transformed, the Lean initiative will eventually hit a sluggish plateau.

The article contends that the absence of four correctly functioning key factors -- Leadership, Recognition, Strategic Alignment, and Performance Management -- often lead to an initiative's inability to sustain. I have always maintained that there is that crucial disconnect between the application of Lean tools and and true behavioral change when participants are just "applying" but not "understanding." In your experiences, what causes Lean initiatives to stall? Can participants who expressed enthusiasm and optimism for the Lean initiative when it commenced, but are now disheartened at two-year mark, be reinvigorated?