Complicating Continuous Improvement

Does the continuous improvement industry need to practice more of what we preach: do we need to lean out our Lean process and reduce our Six Sigma variations? Humans, by nature, tend to over-process the simple into complexities that are not strictly necessary. We change agents are acutely aware of this as we busily go about “saving organizations from themselves” to paraphrase a colleague of mine, Chris Sanderson of iSigma Group. Alarmingly, I have found that the industry of continuous improvement (CI) does not necessarily utilize CI methodologies in their own back yard. We may be guilty of complicating continuous improvement.

Click Here to see how Frito Lay slayed their C.I. dragons!

There is a rallying cry now to get back to the foundational principles of continuous improvement: to reduce complexity. Also disturbing is the still pervasive tendency to build a mystique and elite infrastructure around different methodologies (Lean and Six Sigma for example), defining them as completely separate strategic initiatives with their own unique processes, resources, and escalation procedures. At the risk of offending about half of my readers: Lean, Six Sigma, and Theory of Constraints (to name a few) are all tools of continuous improvement. The foundational principles of each of these methodologies are so similar that they are obviously from the same intent.

To separate tools into some sort of tribal camp where one can only use one and not the other in order to reach solutions does not make logical sense.

What does make absolute sense is to use the right tool to fit the job: not mold the problem solving process around the tools. And, here my fellow colleagues, we may find the root cause. Deep in our training we learn many techniques to reach a probable solution to solve a problem; usually in some sort of order. Not always taught with the tools is the WHY and the WHEN. We teach tools rigorously and thoroughly, but accurately understanding the why might escape our training regimens focused on obtaining certifications. Without a robust mentoring program, (typically lacking in most organizations due to under-funding) budding CI professionals often do not receive the guidance needed to choose and apply tools effectively.

The outgrowth is a culture of continuous improvement that increasingly uses tools for the tools’ sake and does not always pick the process best suited for the job. When a professional only thoroughly grasps the step by step approach to utilizing tools associated with a given methodology; you can imagine the creative thought process required to become more agile in alternative processes might be a scary place. Who can blame these professionals? We are a product of our learning experiences. We are often taught only to check a box when it comes to structured problem solving.

What we have are change agents over-processing their own process to streamline processes.

We also have change agents that are territorial about their tools! I’m going to say it… Not everyone that is a diehard Six Sigma practitioner wants to play in the same sand box as a Lean guru and vice-versa. The same mentality can be found in the other variations of continuous improvement practices. Most certification processes teach the similarities between different approaches to structured problem solving. Nevertheless, some individual instructors flavor the mix with a tribal mentality often based upon their own biases and early training. Not only is this unprofessional it also stunts the future prospects of the professionals being educated by these mentors and instructors!

Although this can be explained through the natural tendency of humans to be fearful of that which they do not understand and then exhibit that fear in defensive methods, it boils down to one statement: We Have a Problem.

As a Lean Six Sigma professional I am happily uninhibited by any territorial nonsense and I am keenly curious about all forms of continuous improvement methodologies. I firmly believe that one must fit the tool to the problem – not the other way around. After many years in establishing grass roots continuous improvement initiatives in organizations I have learned the hard way: simplify.

If one hopes to gain traction within a company, especially with the leadership that is so badly needed to sustain the gains: complexity is your enemy. Simplify, simplify, simplify. What do you need to do? Pick a tool that works. What do you need to communicate? Pick the most easily understood method.

Please do not complicate your explanations, definitions, and processes if you hope to establish credibility within an organization and truly connect with the people!

There is nothing easy about strategic change initiatives, but you will surely lose your subject matter experts and stakeholders if you fall victim to complicating continuous improvement. At the end of the day you will not be where you need to be, you may lose momentum, people may become discouraged and feel like the process of improving equals adding more work. I utilize project management, leadership, lean, six sigma, and change management tools to create the straightest line between two points and ensure that the concepts are easy to grasp and processes are simple to follow. Continuous improvement is not smoke and mirrors and it is not about mystery and complexity; it is about simplicity. At its beautiful heart – it is all simplicity.

Edited by: Gary Kirsch