A Strength Based Approach to Lean

A Strength Based Approach to Lean

Introduction

Never before has there been such a strong call for a culture of continuous improvement in the private and public sectors across the global economy. In these challenging times the appetite to discover how to do this better has never been greater.

Process improvement has been developed over the last 100 years and as a result, we know more about the challenges of implementing and sustaining a culture of continuous improvement across organisations than ever before.

These challenges are particularly apparent when trying to expand continuous improvement initiatives or projects to a complete culture across organisations so that continuous improvement becomes the ‘way work is done’. While Lean projects or short-term interventions can be very successful in the short run, sustaining the improvements gained and instilling the values, ethos and culture of Lean Thinking is elusive and easy to miss.

Traditional Perspective

The traditional view is that the best method for improving the way processes in our organisations work is to understand in great detail what does not work well at present. The next step is to find a solution to the problem or its root cause, and finally to implement it.

We were also taught to develop a vision about a desired future state (typically based on ‘best practices’) for our processes – followed by a focus on bridging the gaps between the ‘as is’ and the desired ‘to be’ states. Both approaches create a continuous focus on the gaps, inadequacies and weaknesses of our processes, systems and people.

Admittedly, these approaches to organisational change and improvement have served us fairly well over many decades by driving significantly greater efficiency and quality in manufacturing and other processes. However, there are well-documented examples of failures in driving improvement culture. For example, even the Toyota Motor Company, the source of the Toyota Production System (TPS) which laid the foundations to many of the principles and tools in the Lean toolbox, has experienced several highly-publicized challenges in recent years that exposed weaknesses and inconsistencies in the way its TPS philosophy was implemented.

These included a well-publicized slow response to the discovery of defective car parts installed in millions of cars around the world, as well as other glitches in its supply chain and customer service. These experiences exposed difficulties in truly responding to customer demand on time, in contradiction to the well-known principle of ‘Just in Time’.  This example is given not in order to pick at Toyota specifically (it is still an inspiring example of success) but rather to demonstrate how challenging it can be to instil a true and sustainable culture of continuous improvement.

Strength-Based Lean: A Different Way

Most applications of Lean Thinking begin with an assumption that there is a theoretical ‘perfect state’ for each organisational process, and that the current state deviates from the ‘perfect state’ due to inefficiencies and waste.

This starting point means that, in order to improve our processes, we have to focus on the identification of gaps between the current state and the desired/perfect state (this is called ‘deficit focus’). Finding root causes for these gaps and fixing them follows next. At best, this approach takes you back to a state of status quo (‘good’) where expectations are met but rarely exceeded. It is unlikely to help us exceed customers’ expectations (‘great’)

The strength-based approach to Lean has a different focus. Instead of focusing on what is broken and inefficient, it teaches how to identify what is already working efficiently and generates value in existing processes and systems (this is called ‘strength focus’.) Next, we define ways to expand those parts and implement good practices elsewhere. This focus on the search for and growth of existing efficiency enables new ideas to emerge and supports implementation of process improvements by raising confidence, pride and energy levels.

The strength-based approach to Lean is more natural to work with and more sustainable in the long term. The focus of traditional Lean tends to weaken the system – even when it is successful – because it instils doubt and despair by giving unbalanced attention to waste and by amplifying inefficiencies.

In every organisation, there is a wealth of knowledge and practical experience about efficient and value-adding ways to work. The strength-based approach relies on existing good practices and internal knowledge rather than introducing ‘solutions from elsewhere’ thus making improvement easier. Visualise your teams as they discover the (often ignored) resources in their processes. As they do so, they find creative and energising ways to improve, truly moving from ‘good’ to ‘great’.

Strength-based Lean combines the rigour of Lean with the innovation and energy of Appreciative Inquiry and other strength-based approaches to organisational change, creating a more successful, inclusive and sustainable result.

Why Change Now?

We live in a world that is moving at great speed. The rate of change and innovation is faster than ever. There is simply no time to collect data, analyse it, identify root causes and fix them. By the time we have completed this cycle, reality will already have shifted and we are likely to find new problems. In addition, this fast pace also means that we struggle to sustain the improvements we were able to achieve or continuously drive the importance of waste and defect elimination. Motivation and energy – so essential for change – are likely to wane.

The alternative approach of bridging gaps does not offer a solution either. Focusing attention on external best practices, and on current gaps against those best practices, distracts staff attention and does not encourage engagement across the organisation or sustainability of existing good practices.

Strength Based Approach Benefits

A strength-based approach to Lean Thinking creates a committed and focused team working on an improvement initiative with a keen search for possibilities rather than problems. Observing any process with this different ‘lens’ invites them to start looking for the strengths and opportunities of the process, and to use this information to achieve the desired improvements confidently. Focusing on what works raises energy and motivation. Creativity is higher than that generated by following traditional improvement methods, and innovation is easier to achieve. The ideas for improvements generated through this approach are strong, as well as based on reality and knowledge from within the organisation.

Because the process of improvement is no longer accompanied by the negative feelings associated with waste and defects (even if this association is only implicit, it is always present with classic Lean Thinking), there is a higher degree of participant engagement and sustained energy towards improvement.

Leveraging current or past knowledge as well as accessing experiences and successes from within the system are a great resource for the next generation of improvement initiatives. They also provide motivation to everyone towards the challenges and opportunities ahead.

Teaching improvement teams and all members of the organisation how to find what is value-generating for customers drives them to consciously or unconsciously seek ways to deliver even more value to customers – isn’t that what we’re all about?

4 Comments 

Comment on this Article 

Homepage Forums A Strength Based Approach to Lean

This topic contains 4 replies, has 3 voices, and was last updated by  Robert Kovari 4 months ago.

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #6673

    Robert Kovari
    • Total Posts 3

    Dear David,

    thank you for your answer and the details of your approach. I think I found another article that describes something similar: an article about effective and efficient and the difference between them. It says “Effectiveness is doing the right thing. Efficiency is doing things right.” It is possible, that if we talk about the strength based approach we describe how to be effective, how to do the right things (things customers need)?
    I work sometimes with experts who create customer journeys and think about this strength based approach: e.g. we create a journey without waiting because we aim to have a positive customer experience not because waiting is a waste to avoid or to eliminate.
    We try to understand customer demand first, we try to be effective. Later we take this journey and create (internal) business processes that support this journey. We can do it with strength based thinking, we don’t really need to know and use the waste categories. We should ask ourselves “what works here” (if we don’t know we should go and see and ask) and “what could work even better easier and faster” (again we should go and ask, we should involve people who know the answer).
    May be we all should learn the 4D as well: discover-dream-design-deliver 😀
    Robert

    #6632

    David Shaked
    • Total Posts 3

    Dear Robert,

    Thanks for commenting on my article and for sharing the article about learning from success (which is excellent and very much aligned). My apologies, I only now spotted your comment. Firstly, let me reassure you that I do not advocate not analysing data (of either failures or successes) – we can still do it and there is value in it although the sort of analytical skills I gained from the strengths-based approaches is distinctly different from the analytical skills I learned from Lean or six Sigma. They focus more on the narrative and the lived experience of the success that occurred and less on quantifying root causes of the case. Either way, analysis is useful. In my article, I tried to highlight the speed at which positive change happens when we approach a situation from a strengths-based approach. If we pay the same level of curiosity and interest into our highest moments of performance and our best examples of internal practice as we do to our lowest performance and failures, we gain incredibly useful insights into “what works here”. This makes extrapolating “what could work even better” easier and faster. When we analyse the root causes of our failures, we only know what we shouldn’t be doing but we’re still in the dark about what we should be doing instead. We then have to spend time guessing, experimenting or studying other external best practice and find ways to bring new insights – all can take quite a while.

    With regards to your examples of colleagues A and B: Yes I would absolutely inquire into what colleague B is doing. In fact, I would encourage B’s colleagues to inquire together. However, I would also engage with colleague A using different questions… rather than try to understand the root causes of his/her failures and then make assumptions on what could solve these issues, I would ask colleague A to tell me about a time they were able to respond respectfully and attentively to a customer request. I’d get them to focus on that experience – what was happening? How did they respond? What did they do that worked well? Who helped them solve the problem for the customer? How did they know so well what needed to be done etc. etc. by following this sort of inquiry, colleague A could find their own solutions and feel more confident that even though he wasn’t able to perform recently, he too knows how to handle customers well and can do more of what works and adds value.
    In other words, a strengths-based approach can be applied to colleagues who are exemplary as well as colleagues who are not considered so (they too had experienced better performace at some point).

    to summarise – my call to my fellow improvement practitioners is to pay as much attention to our best performance and what is wanted more of rather than what isn’t wanted. We talk about creating value, flow and quality but we pay almost all of our attention on what we do not want to have (waste, bottlenecks and defects) and thus ignore a huge resource of knowledge so easily available to us.

    There is a quote I like which conveys the message well. It is by Martin Seligman (father of Positive Psychology which is a related and fascinating field of research):

    “Beauty is not just the absence of ugliness; bravery is not just the absence of cowardice; well-being is not just the absence of misery. It’s the presence of real things” 🙂

    I hope it makes sense and would be very happy to continue the conversation here or off line.
    David.

    #6271

    Robert Kovari
    • Total Posts 3

    I like this idea. I recommend this
    article, it is a similar approach.

    Some thougths concerning the srength based lean idea:
    “We live in a world that is moving at great speed. The rate of change and innovation is faster than ever.” is true. “There is simply no time to collect data, analyse it, identify root causes and fix them.” is something I don’t really understand. I hope “no time to” does not mean “not to do”. If world is changing fast we need to have faster data collection and evaluation, because I think even if we are working with a strength based approach, we need data and information. I think to be fast shouldn’t be a big challenge nowadays, i think about big data or smart data.

    I am not sure i understand the difference between possibilities and problems. Is it like (very simple example):
    Traditional: I observe that our colleague “A” is not respectful, not polite to the customer. It is a problem, we should find the root cause and solve it.
    Strength based: I observe that our colleague “B” is polite to her customer and they like it, they are satisfied with the service. It is a possibility for other colleagues to follow this behaviour.

    #6245

    Simon Elias
    • Total Posts 29

    A strength-based approach to continuous improvement using Appreciative Inquiry I think has the potential to add a positive dimension to lean, which can suffer from the negatives associated with wastes and problems. It will be also interesting to see if any practitioners can manage to blend this approach with ‘traditional’ lean and also if there are specific contexts where is can be particularly effective.

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

How Should Your Company Consider Customer Lifetime Value?

<strong>How Should Your Company Consider Customer Lifetime Value?</strong>

Preface The concept of lifetime value is well founded in the sales and marketing field, where there has been a growing appreciation that it is cheaper and more profitable to maintain than gain and that a business needs to think over the long term regarding its customer relationships, rather than take...

The Habits of an Improver by Prof Bill Lucas

<strong>The Habits of an Improver</strong> by Prof Bill Lucas

Introduction It can be argued that the effectiveness of lean thinking in the workplace is ultimately due to individual behaviour and motivation – and on the critical habits that people form that are conducive to process thinking and continuous improvement. In this Healthcare Foundation article, Prof Bill Lucas of the...

Featured Article

The Habits of an Improver by Prof Bill Lucas

It can be argued that the effectiveness of lean thinking in the workplace is ultimately due to individual behaviour and motivation – and on the critical habits that people form that are conducive to process thinking and continuous improvement. In the article Prof Bill Lucas of the University of Winchester argues that if we can clearly articulate the range of habits which improvers need to have, and the knowledge and skills which will help them improve services, we can more precisely specify the learning required and the best learning methods, which will enable educators better understand the teaching and learning methods which best develop these habits.  

Read More

Want to Contribute an Article to the Community?

Community members are welcome to post an article on any lean related topic. Complete a Contact form with details or submit to membership@leancompetency.org

Read More

Recent Comments

There are no recent comments for this forum

Contact LCS

Lean Competency Services Ltd
5 Clive Crescent
Penarth
Vale of Glamorgan
CF64 1AT

Key Contacts

enquiries@leancompetency.org
elias@leancompetency.org

Sign-Up To Our Newsletter