Visual Task Board Part 1

In a previous post I discussed a formula for success that prioritizes tasks by the Urgency and Importance of the task. I am typically one that uses a list type of priority system arranging my tasks in order of highest priority to lowest. Occasionally, I will hand write a “To-Do” list but it is often electronic in the computer and on my handheld device. Recent posts on various visual boards like Jon Miller’s agile board or Xavier Quesada Allue’s kanban board have inspired me to try my own visual board.

I modified the Important and Urgent axis of the Covey matrix so that the highest priority and most urgent tasks would be closest to me. Below is a pictorial of this modified board.

I work from the lower left quadrant to the low right quadrant tackling the most timely and most important tasks. Then I can move to less important but urgent tasks.

With my old priority system of listing my tasks some of the lower priority items may stay on the list for awhile never really moving. This new system makes you realize those items fit into the upper right quadrant and that these are tasks that should be avoided.

This is the first version of this board. Like everything in Lean this to will be improved.

So far this does help to manage tasks in a visual manner. Next, I will have to create a standard method to review and update this board. Tasks may change in importance and urgency with time. Right now I am reviewing tasks on Mondays to prepare my week for the most success.

What ways do you manage your activities for success?

Six Strategies for Change Leaders

Lean leaders and those who manage change realize well that change is the only constant. In times of recession like today or times of great performance organizations can still learn a great deal from W. Edwards Deming.

Deming tells us, "Create constancy of purpose toward improvement of product and service, with the aim to become competitive and to stay in business and to provide jobs."

Have you ever wondered what is inside the heads of lean "change masters"? Well Adam Zak, a lean executive talent recruiter, outlines six strategies that lean leaders should use to create a constancy of purpose and a constancy of change.

1. Embrace change, It’s inevitable. Be first, demonstrate personal commitment to serve.
2. Assume nothing and question everything. Challenge status quo, take action, and drive for results.
3. Get down in the trenches. Go to the Gemba, use teamwork, and learn see the whole situation.
4. Show integrity, always. Do the right things and be courageous in the face of challenge
5. Be transparent. Communicate well and get involved.
6. Inspire and recognize leadership in others. Great leaders know their primary role is to develop and motivate people.

Successful organizations require customer-centric purpose and continuous improvement around safety, quality, and innovation. And the catalysts for this are great leaders who understand the mechanism of change well.

Another Example of Employee Engagement

Lean practitioners are looking for new ways to engage employees to freely challenge status quo in a systematic manner to build highly flexible and innovative organizations. A recent article in the Wall Street Journal highlights the story of how The Bank of New Zealand unshackled employees after 148 years.

In most languages, “control” is the first synonym for the word “manage.” Control is about spotting and correcting deviations from pre-defined standards; thus to control one must first constrain. Standards, policies and rules are important—no organization can exist or survive without them.

The problem is that traditionally management’s role is to regulate power. They are often incentivized to increase control to maintain job security. In lean organization we strive to manage at the level closet to the product as possible. The challenge is to provide the information, knowledge, and structure to support this level of decision making and empowerment.

So what started out as a simple conservation between a frustrated employee and a manager planted a seed for change. The manager turned the frustrated rant from an employee around by asking the employee “What they would do different?” That little question established employee empowerment. Once others in the company heard of the successful efforts in this bank the flood gates opened. There were many others who wanted to make improvements but created new challenges for the corporation.

While store managers were moving quickly to exploit their newfound freedom, there were many at head office who were fretting about the loss of control. While many of the objections were more political than practical, some were well-grounded and soon led to policy adjustments. What everyone learned,” says Blair, “is that when you treat people like adults, they act like adults.”

There are two important components to The Bank of New Zealand success. The first is creating team-based incentives linked to performance and customer satisfaction metrics. The second component is availability and access to data which gives a clear picture of their financial performance.

At BNZ, store employees have the incentives, the data, and the freedom that are typical of a small business owner. As a result, most regard themselves as more than mere clock-punchers; they’re folks who have a real stake in a real business—and they run it as if it was their own.

Are employees in your organization empowered to make decisions as if the company was their own? If not consider the incentives and data you use to evoke participation and improvement. Learn to encourage employees who bring opportunities for improvement to your attention to also bring a countermeasure. Then follow-up to ensure the countermeasure is implemented and effective.

Lean Learning at Starbucks

There has been a lot of conversation in the Lean community in recent years about Starbucks’ Lean undertaking. This past week the Wall Street Journal had an article on Latest Starbucks Buzzword: 'Lean' Japanese Techniques.

In my experience it can often be more challenging to transform service segments to Lean thinking. Many times individuals in these areas can’t see they are performing steps within a process. The questioning of those steps as we work to eliminate waste and improve the way things are done can cause a feeling of personal criticism. I often say people are happy to be busy but the truth is “activity does not equal productivity”. This article and the subsequent online discussion in the lean community present a good learning experience and case study in lean transformations in retail and service type businesses.

Jon Miller talks about the lean buzz at Starbucks discussing their improvements in the process of making coffee while questioning the real intentions of this effort.

Mark Graban takes time for Defense of Lean and of Lean at Starbucks. He writes about the real of meaning of many of the Lean terms and techniques mentioned by the WSJ. Mark also sheds some light on comments online where some fear these Lean efforts go too far in automation saying Lean does not turn people into robots.

As with other articles from the WSJ on Lean they often don’t portray the real efforts well. Maybe it is from a lack of truly understanding Lean thinking. John Shook from the LEI has been working with Starbucks on their Lean transformation for some time. John writes in his management column about A Lean " Teachable Moment": Starbucks in the Wall Street Journal. He describes the truth behind Starbucks Lean initiative as unique transformation that other retailers and service companies may want to model.

As I would expect, many in the Lean community are optimistic about Starbucks’ improvements and willingness to try a new way of thinking while using this opportunity to learn and reflect on their own journey. You should consider the same.

Total Employee Involvement

Lean is not a system of individuals but rather a mindset of engaging all our human resources on customer focused activities. Management is the key to achieving total employee involvement. The Campbell Soup Company is a great example of how engaging your employees can change the orgnaization culture resulting in extraordinary financial performance.

In a recent interview of Campbell's CEO, Douglas Conant he shared his thoughts and strategies on employee engagement.

The strategy isn't complicated. "To win in the marketplace," he has said, "we believe you must first win in the workplace. I'm obsessed with keeping employee engagement front and center and keeping up energy around it."

Conant explained the second pillar of TPS, “Respect for People” well with the Campbell Promise, "Campbell valuing people, people valuing Campbell." He applied the Broken Window Theory by removing the barb wire fence surrounding the facility. They made employee engagement everyone’s first priority and they reward high performers.

Gallup, the polling and research firm, studied the engagement levels of Campbell’s managers in 2002 and found that not only did 62% of them consider themselves not actively engaged in their jobs, a full 12% felt they were actively disengaged. Those numbers, Conant says, were the worst for any Fortune 500 firm ever polled. Today, the story is far different: 68% of all Campbell employees say they are actively engaged, and just 3% say they are actively disengaged. That's an engagement ratio of 23-to-1, and Gallup considers 12 to one to be world-class.

This is an inspiring example of total employee involvement. What is the engagement level of your organization? How do you engage employees?

The Broken Windows Theory and 5S

While performing a 5S audit last week I was reminded of the importance of being mindful of the 'broken windows' theory.

The ‘broken windows’ theory was first enunciated in 1982 by James Wilson and George Kelling in the Atlantic Monthly. The theory suggests that if a window is broken and left unrepaired, people walking by will conclude that no one is in charge and soon more windows will be broken, which could result in the anarchy spreading from the building to the street. The authors propound that a successful strategy to prevent vandalism is to start when the problem is small.

If disorder goes unchecked then a vicious cycle begins. Our offices, production environments, and business processes are all susceptible to this theory. We need to attack disorganized areas and wasteful processes right away, don’t wait for the future. It is easier to sustain 5S (and lean for that matter) if you address the issue when it small and manageable.

I am sure many of you have examples where one piece of “litter” has escalated to a mess. It might be some unfiled papers on a desk that lead to piles of disorganization. Or maybe it is a messy draw or cabinet that causes the rest of the area to be complacent with returning items where they belong. Or perhaps it is a leaky part on machinery that causes a messy workplace.

Attention to the “broken windows” in our work environments will send a message to employees about the quality of their work which will prevent the defects, delays, waste and rework that can devour an organization’s profit margins.

Moral: “We cannot afford to overlook the small wastes in our workplaces and processes.”


It could be said that 5S is the broken windows theory applied to the shop floor.

The 5S Numbers Game

I was recently asked about some fun ways to teach 5S by the management of a plant looking to teach this concept to their team. There are probably a number of ways to do this. The simplest exercise is the 5S Numbers Game. This is a no cost exercise that can be done in any setting for any level within your organization. In this exercise you will experience how a disorganized work place can negatively affect productivity and quality.

If your type the 5S number game into any search engine on the internet you will likely come up with a number of good hits. The folks at SuperTeams, a Lean Six Sigma training firm have put the 5S numbers game on their web site. They have included a simple facilitators guide to make it easy for anyone to start teach this exercise right away.

There are some other exercises I have seen that involve two kits, one kit not organized in 5S methodology and the other kit organized with 5S. The goal is to contrast the time it takes to do a set of tasks in the organized kit versus the disorganized kit. This could be done with Legos where you build an object (house, airplane, or car). The disorganized kit may have difficult instructions to follow, a disorganized layout, and extra parts to contrast a clear, well organized layout and instructions in the other kit. This can also be done with extra tools you find in your facility. Create a disorganized tool box and an organized tool box and then time the team or teams on how long it takes to get specific tools.

What are some of the fun ways you have taught 5S to others?