Depending on who one talks to, Lean is nearly half a century old, and yet and yet, LEI is still offering courses in Lean basics. Why has Lean not penetrated the Teflon coating of the Friedmanites (you might call them Neoliberals), as Dan suggested, and to which Bob Emiliani has called attention?

Should we delve into the mindsets of the majority of leaders to whom Lean is just another (failed?) initiative? Should we ask ourselves if a Friedmanite can be a good Lean leader as described by Dan? I think not. One can divide leaders into two separate categories: those who believe in their customers and those focused myopically on maximising profits in order to fill their own boots.
The former makes reasonable profits and sustains the organisation in good health by understanding their customers, their workers and the societies in which they live. To them profits are important but are the profits made by providing societies with things (services included) they need?

The latter is obsessed with labour costs and will move operations around the world based on lower labour costs. We now scratch our heads and wonder if exporting jobs to China (one of HBR’s silver bullets) was a good thing. You only have to look at organisations which once straddled the world like Colossi to see the long-term damage Friedmanites do. You can think of your own examples, but you might start in Detroit.

Can the two mindsets exist in one person? I don’t think so.

Then there is the question of education. Lean relies on the trickle-down model: train the leadership and inspire them and that enthusiasm will cascade downhill to the Gemba. How does this work if very few leaders or managers, if any, have had any coaching experience or training? How can this work if the Training & Education budget goes south with declining profits?

By now, if the movement had followed Toyota’s example it would have “democratised” Lean knowledge so that it could be taught to young people aged 16-20. Imagine a 20-year-old entering the world of work with a sound knowledge of A3 and the ability to coach someone with their improvement proposal. I could go on, but I hope you get the picture. The movement could be giving them the knowledge to make better choices about employers: do I go for the highest salary or the guarantee of being encouraged to develop through Life-Long Learning (a much-abused phrase)?

The movement must stop hiding in the bushes when it comes to confronting the Business Schools that churn out mini-Friedmanites by the million each year. MBAs can find an anomaly in a large spreadsheet from outer space, but ask them to encourage learning in their teams and you might as well be speaking academic Zogg.

Finally, I don’t see the movement showing any concern about sustainability. The LEI emails I receive often talk about growth, but is this growth based on age-old extractive practices or much more local and circular economies? Emeritus Prof Doc Hall, in his book, Compression (which I bought at a Lean Conference in Cardiff) talks about Reuse -> Repurpose -> Recycle in that order before gouging out more raw material and then watching the waste flood the oceans. The very poor in countries like India (a.k.a. the BOPs) do this to keep their noses above water. Can we, with humility, learn from them, those with little or no education who are, perhaps, better at avoiding or eliminating OUR waste than even Toyota.

We may have overlooked how readily the messages of ‘eliminate waste’ and ‘reduce cost,’ as well as the term “Lean” itself, fit into neoliberal business philosophy, which the Reagan administration and others had moved into high gear. We probably would not have seen the rapid success in widely spreading Lean without the concomitant neoliberal business mindset on the receiving end.

As the definition of Lean now expands beyond Lean tools and eliminating waste it creates an adoption problem. The problem is that while Lean’s original focus on eliminating waste and cost reduction found interest in thousands of western organizations, there will be far fewer organizations that are readily interested, willing or able to adopt Lean’s expanded form.

One lesson? If your idea catches on quickly then it could be an indication you are operating within an existing paradigm and are engaged in a kind of paradigm confirmation. Conversely, if you have a good idea but it is taking a long time to get traction you may be operating outside of prevailing paradigms and are engaged in trying to change them.

When the prevailing paradigm on the receiving end differs significantly from the sent idea, you are working on a transformative idea. In that situation acceptance may take a long time or perhaps never happen. Consider how long it took for the Theory of Evolution or VanGogh’s art to gain acceptance. It depends on how things unfold in the future, which no one can foresee.

I’m glad to see references here to scientific thinking, which is a content-neutral ‘meta skill’ that can serve humans well no matter where the future goes. Having the workplace serve as the classroom for scientific thinking, with managers as the teachers (coaches), is indeed a transformative idea that is hopefully finding its impedence match. That’s what the Toyota Kata community is working on.

Here’s a little 3-minute video that nicely illustrates it:

–> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEpSMGdbepE

This an excellent article, thank you.

However, there are a few concerns I have about the Lean movement.

The first, is the impression given of Lean lurking in the shadows when it comes to challenging what is taught in B-schools to MBA students. This seems to be a combination of the gospels according to Fred Taylor and Milton Friedman. Why hasn’t Lean been able to convince the elite schools (the others will follow) that it is the foundation, not an option under something called Operation, of a good leadership degree?

Does anyone still remember Tennessee Ernie Ford’s global hit in the 50s, Sixteen Tons, a reflection of Taylorism of which Konosuke Matsushita had some trenchant things to say back in 1979? Do MBAs coming off the mass-production lines of the B-schools still believe that the typical worker has a “mind that’s a-weak and a back that’s strong”? When you combine that with the neoliberalism encouraged by Friedman’s edict of maximising shareholder value, can one wonder why Lean is a hard sell? Why are education and training nice-to-haves when profits are not going south?

My second concern is that Lean relies on the learning equivalent of trickle-down economics. This relies on leaders at the top creating a Learning Organisation with world-class coaches inspiring people at the sharp end to tackle around 20 improvements every year. Since when has coaching been recognised as a core ability of any leader? Do MBA courses emphasise this as a fundamental skill? I’m with Aristotle when he said, “Give me the boy when he is seven and I will show you the man”. Lean should be looking at introducing some of its aspects to young people in secondary education, around the ages of 14-16: A3, for example. This will help them take part in a better, more informed dialogue with their supervision. It might also help them make better choices when it comes to the employers they choose.

My final concern is that Lean should raise its sights and look at the changes the sustainability agenda is bringing. I remember Robert (Doc) Hall, once of this Lean parish, giving a lecture at the 2011 Lean Conference in Cardiff. He was promoting his book, Compression, and challenged us Leanies whether we were really engaged in reducing waste in all its forms. (John Bicheno had a knack for inviting speakers who did not preach to the choir.) If we are serious about saving the planet we will have to move from more global and extractive economies to more local and circular ones. He suggests Reuse -> Repurpose -> Recycle before gouging out more raw material. This is what the very poor do in countries like India. They lack good education but their creative solutions (termed “jugaad”) are well known even if some are a bit illegal or very dangerous. This brings me back to a previous point: the need to blow the MBA’s Taylorism out of the water because with the right, Lean leadership anyone can be encouraged to be innovative.

Hi, “Bob”…
Yes, I agree in many aspects of your posting. (January 16, 2023 at 7:27 am)
IE: Quote – “The competitive advantage aspect of Lean seems to no longer be as useful or as relevant argument (selling point) for point.” Lean’s focus on engaging and developing people at all levels via scientific thinking, and associated learning, has likewise had limited appeal.

“The”, answer here, to your major question lies in a very simple exercise of “Question’s”, of Lean the TPS Way and those answers across the entire spectrum of from the “Very Top – Leadership” to the “Very Bottom Common Floor Sweeper”! They, the Company must all answer in the affirmative, to accept & unify the entire Community form the CEO to the Shareholders, even the one with just one share to the… Common Floor Sweeper! This must be in a Strategy to Fully Train & Retrain the Differences between a Lean Company at Lean Level I to Lean Level IV, Level V is unattainable forever, but a very small Job Site can come very close to a… Lean Level V in all aspect of True North Lean!

Without, this 110% Training Commitments; TPS Way of a True Lean Learning thru True Lean Training with a True TPS Way; “Lean Groth Mindset’s” of Strategy & Goals; All Global Business Models & all Lean Building Blocks, will fall apart, like the House of Cards in a light breeze, starting with the most obvious… Structure'(S) / Supplier(‘s) (VS’s) in any Global Corporation / Conglomerate down to the Smallest Worker – Job Shop – or the Share Holder with just one Share of Stock. This fall will start very quickly and repeat on & on up the ladder, until the CEO & CFO are removed, and a New Classical Management System is Installed in Place with a NEW Non-Lean Strategists(‘s) and Direction of Cash Flow… you see now – How Cash Talks & People Listen!
Behold, when cost’s rise & people rise to complain, the people are starting the light wind blowing, that the Global BOD’s hear very loudly! Alas another & another True Lean Company, without TPS True Lean Learning / Knowledge Pre-Training with a (True Lean Groth Mindset) the…”True TPS Way of training, all Lean will come crashing down and only one will be left standing. Yes, now one can see it for what it is. LEAN = “The TPS WAY”..of simple Lean Waste Removal’s, training, the (Lean Groth Lean Mindset) for all team employees as teams working together on a Global Scale in… a Common Linkage of Raw Materials to Finished Zero Defects Products Delivered JIT to the Customer of Demand!
Ron San