Aug 5 2018
Why I was wrong about 2- second Lean | Dan Markovitz
“It’s time to admit that one of my consulting approaches has failed. I’m a huge fan of Paul Akers’ 2 Second Lean philosophy. It’s simple, easy to understand, and has an intrinsic appeal: “fix what bugs you.” “Figure out how to do your job two seconds faster each day.” Who wouldn’t sign on to a lean program that promotes that mindset?
So off I went to my clients, with Paul’s videos embedded in my PowerPoint presentation, ready to show them how 2 Second Lean is the answer to their productivity problems, their low employee engagement and morale scores, their mediocre customer service, and their too-high defect rates. And I failed.
When I look back at the clients I introduced to Paul’s method, I have to be honest and admit that a more traditional, kaizen event-driven approach would have served them better. 2 Second Lean didn’t hurt them, but they didn’t reap the rewards that they wanted, and that I promised.
I missed the most obvious fact: 2 Second Lean is simple. But it’s not easy. The commitment required of the president is enormous.”
Sourced from Marcovitz Consulting
Michel Baudin‘s comments:
Is the approach simple or simplistic? Perhaps, the mistake is assuming that a single method is all you need, whether it is the “2-second” approach or the oxymoronic “Kaizen event.” It’s the panacea fallacy. To improve a factory, you need a range of different approaches, from tiny improvements an individual can make within his or her area of responsibility without asking anyone’s permission to projects like line redesigns that may occupy dozens of people for months.
And there are also projects that require patient work over a year or more, like standardizing die dimensions for die casting or injection molding, developing a common tooling package in machining, or correcting errors in bills of materials in assembly.
All sorts of projects of different scales are needed, and the content of each project should dictate the way it is organized, not the other way around. If you focus on a project management pattern, you forbid yourself to address the problems for which it doesn’t fit.
I wasn’t familiar with Paul Akers so I checked out his background and a couple of his videos, which tell me he is an inspirational speaker, in the mold of televangelists and purveyors of real estate seminars. He is handsome, full of energy, and dashes onto the stage with a grin and a resounding “Good morning everybody!” This kind of openings pleases some audiences.
Personally, I keep wondering when the speaker will get to the point, and he usually never does. I might use him to get an audience excited but not to get a factory transformation going. For that, you need someone with perhaps less charisma but greater depth.
Paul Akers Japan Study Mission video, for example, doesn’t have much about factories but gives advice on beating jetlag, exchanging business cards, and using chopsticks. It sings the praises of a grocery store, the Shinkansen high-speed trains, and a preschool cafeteria.
The grocery store sells cantaloupes for $70/piece.
While the Shinkansen is a wonderful engineering achievement, it might be worth mentioning that the only profitable segment is the original Tokyo-Osaka line, that the network contains “lines to nowhere” built at the urging of politicians, and that the design choice of wide-gauge tracks has made the Shinkansen unsalable in the world market.
In the preschool, Akers describes the children as saying prayers before eating. There are no prayers in Japanese public schools. And the Japanese school system is hardly a model for anyone to emulate. It’s 12 years of regimented cramming in K-12, leading up to university entrance exams, followed by a few years of letting off steam at universities.
Where there is something for manufacturing professionals to learn in Japan is in factories, and that is what tours should be focused on, and it shouldn’t be with promises to “unlock the SECRET FORMULA to answer every question about how to build excellence into our life and organization.”
#paulakers, #2secondlean, #Lean
August 5, 2018 @ 10:39 am
In 2 seconds, I discovered that 2 Second Lean is mumbo-jumbo.
August 5, 2018 @ 11:05 am
In my opinion, Paul should have called his book “2 Second Kaizen.”
In a way, it’s following the classic Masaaki Imai advice to start with small, if not tiny, improvements.
But, you’re supposed to then build more sophisticated capabilities on top of that over time. What Norm Bodek called “Quick and Easy Kaizen” was supposed to be a starting point, not a cure all.
August 6, 2018 @ 1:12 pm
There is a role for “2 Second Lean.” It’s a wonderful, easy on-ramp for people who are new to the idea of continuous improvement, and for whom lean evokes fear of layoffs and harder work. But it’s an amuse-bouche in preparation for the meal. It’s not the meal itself.
My error was in thinking that this introduction was the right way for all people, in all organizations, to get exposed to lean.
August 7, 2018 @ 6:46 am
Please correct me if I’m getting this wrong, but the definite impression I get from reading about 2-second Lean is that it’s supposed to involve everyone. Daily meetings, 3S, etc. are not activities that can be done with a small subset of employees.
In my experience, activities that engage 100% of the workforce are no “easy on-ramps” when you start at 0%. It’s one of the key reasons for the failure of Lean initiatives that start with 5S.
What I have had more success with is to start by identifying promising segments of the company’s processes and work with the minority of employees who are willing and eager from the get-go, and achieve success with these pilot projects that inspire others to join the movement.
By the time you have, say, 25% of the workforce engaged in improvement in some fashion, with tangible results, you may consider ramping up to activities that require everyone to participate.
August 7, 2018 @ 8:35 am
Well, yes, this is my epiphany: without passionately committed leadership, the 2 Second Lean approach doesn’t work, and the approach you take — working with the minority of employees who are willing and eager from the start — is probably more effective. However, if you have the right kind of leadership (someone like Paul Akers, or Marc Braun at Cambridge Engineering, et al), 2SL gets everyone on board with remarkable speed and effectiveness.
August 7, 2018 @ 10:32 pm
The approach I described does require committed leadership. I didn’t mean to imply in any way that it didn’t.
August 8, 2018 @ 12:12 pm
Dan Markovitz: “Well, yes, this is my epiphany: without passionately committed leadership,…” Why was your epiphany so late in coming? This point — passionately committed leadership — has been well-known for decades. It is a key feature of my writing and that of many, many others. My most recent book and blog post examines why passionately committed leaders are so rare. Get jump on this one!
August 7, 2018 @ 10:14 pm
Paul Akers has been doing it for years in his own manufacturing operation, and has shared countless videos of such small improvements. In his book he shares a wider philosophy about this. But all this is written for practitioners and keeps the whole Lean thing as light and fun as possible. As a consultant I certainly wouldn’t just try to implement that approach…
August 7, 2018 @ 10:36 pm
I have no grounds to doubt that he is a successful businessman and, perhaps, in his business, small improvements, daily meetings, and “3S” are all you need. There are plenty of other businesses where you need more.
I also have trouble believing anything that comes in the form of inspirational happy talk. It sets off my alarm bells.
April 14, 2021 @ 12:58 pm
Hello Mr. Baudin, it certainly appears that 2 second lean is a great concept on paper but is difficult to execute. Through your reading, I have taken away that it is important to not solely focus on one small aspect of the business but rather the whole scope. Do you think 2 second lean will ever be used by itself to achieve continuous improvement?