Jidoka or fault tolerance is a concept to take care of unexpected events where they occur. By organizing the work so that problems can be solved where they occur, can be increased tempo of operations. A fault tolerant system must have the resilience and recovery capacity for virtually all types of events that occur. Many events are nonrecurring.
Pulse meetings are short, daily standing meetings where a team plans their work with the help of a Pulse board. Pulse meetings are more interesting and more effective than standard meetings.
Pulse Meetings for Planning and Managing
Pulse meetings are a way to plan, organize and manage an organization. Instead of following traditional management philosophies, by holding Pulse meetings it’s possible to utilize the variety and uncertainty that exist in an organization. Pulse meetings are based on the lean principles of visual planning and fault tolerance (from the concept of jidoka). A Pulse board is required to hold a Pulse meeting.
Traditional planning never makes it past the planning stage in many cases and creates a lot of administrative work but doesn’t add much or any value, since you can’t predict the future. In stark contrast to traditional planning, visual management entails a dynamic planning by a team in the situation they are currently facing. When working with knowledge an activity window is used where post-its visualize the flow of “to do – in progress – done.”
Fault tolerance (jidoka) entails the inclusion of methods that enable the team to handle unexpected effects that the “butterfly effect” might cause and establish resilience and revitalization. Not making use of fault tolerance may lead to regrets about decisions, stress, conflicts and, most commonly, long lead times.
At Pulse we use goals and plans but they are open, meaning they are accessible through the network of Pulse meetings. Since the flow of decisions through the network of Pulse meetings is constant, contradictions and unexpected problems can be resolved within a few hours to a couple of days.
For strategy and development the management team, product management, resource management, task management and development projects use Pulse meetings (see example here). Pulse meetings may also be used for other areas such as sales, commission, delivery and acquisitions.
Pulse Meetings Replace Other Meetings
Pulse meetings replace many other meetings. A Pulse meeting is held standing in front of a board with visualized information and is rarely longer than 15 minutes. Despite the fact that meetings are frequent, total time spent at meetings will actually decrease dramatically.
Finally, most participants are very pleased with Pulse meetings.
Visual management is a decentralized way of working in which team and project participants plan and manage their own work. Participation is necessary but can take place in different ways.
Visualization is a powerful tool that when used correctly can coordinate the work of both a team as well as the whole operation. Visualization requires some rules for cooperation between groups to work: updating the project status should be easy, highlighting problems must be simple to do and there can’t be any delays that would cause information to become old and unreliable. Also, it’s important to be able to see when the last update was made and this information must be available to everyone involved.
The Pulse Board
By following the requirements stated above, physical boards, Pulse boards, become superior to an IT-based system. By writing down the meeting times on every board everyone can see when the information was last updated. If the group holds daily Pulse meetings at 8:45 am, the board was updated during the last Pulse meeting. Events that have taken place since then can probably not be seen on the board. By using post-its that are moved in an activity window we can see what is being worked on and what has been recently completed. You also get an understanding of how quickly the group attains results and if the group, or a person, takes on too many tasks at the same time. The board shows which activities the group’s members need to deal with next, which is necessary when assigning work. You can also see if the group has any problems that need to be dealt with. With an overarching plan you can also see their progress so far and if it’s in line with previous aims and goals of the schedule. All of this is kept updated with very little administration and is easily visible to everyone simultaneously.
Furthermore, if all Pulse boards are gathered in one Pulse room you then in just a few minutes you can get a complete picture of the organization and its current challenges. However, this assumes that everyone works under the same roof. How does Pulse work when work is spread out over several locations?
Visual Management of Multiple Development Units
It’s common nowadays that product development takes place in many locations around the world and there is a need to coordinate efforts in projects and strategy work. This is also true for many businesses that utilize the Pulse guide. I’ve noted that the better the visualization and interaction works in one location the easier it is to coordinate with other locations. The internal interaction furthers a common understanding of plans, problems, expectations and opportunities. This is of great use when coordinating work with other development units. This leads to the conclusion that cooperation between development units works better when more units use the Pulse method.
If a company’s suppliers and clients also use Pulse it’s even better. If so it’s possible to easily coordinate in the same way with the as between development units.
A good video-link (meaning a clear picture and a minimal time-delay between image and sound) eases communication between units. Remember that it’s more important to film the participants of the meetings rather than the Pulse board. The information shown on the board and the one that groups wish to share between locations already exists digitally since it’s part of overarching shared plans and not small details on post-its.
As I mentioned previously, each group member will not participate in every Pulse meeting. However, since the meetings are frequent (daily to weekly) it’s not that important if a meeting or two is missed. It’s quick and easy to be updated on what happened in the last meeting by studying the Pulse board. Since the teams are self-organized the meetings will be held even if the project leader or chairperson is absent.
To sum it up, visualized management between several development units is easy with Pulse.
Lean is a method of working that relies on decentralized and self-organized teams. Sociotechnology and lean are closely related.
A lot of criticism has been levied at lean for causing stress and contributing to a negative working environment. Some Swedish researchers link lean with a reborn form of Taylorism. One reason for this criticism is that a lot of what is marketed under the label lean in reality comes from Taylorism and bureaucratic traditions. The result of this is documented in the book Lean i Arbetslivet (translation: Lean At Work).
Lean is Daily Management and Decentralization
As I wrote in previous entries, lean consists of two principles: visual management and “deal with problems as they appear” (fault tolerance).
Visual governance means the use of visual signals to coordinate work rather than forecasts and plans. These signals create a real-time management that is based on the current situation and plan for the next couple of hours. There is considerable less uncertainty in visual governance when compared to traditional large-scale planning. Less uncertainty at work means less interruptions, which leads to higher productivity.
Fault tolerance refers to the implementation of mechanisms to catch and deal with problems and troubles that appear without pausing operations. The problems should be taken care of by the people closest to them. In production the people closest are the operators and within projects it’s project participants. When problem-solving is distributed within the organization, decision-making is given greater “bandwidth” regardless of whether decision-making and problem-solving is done by management, project leaders or experts.
Visual governance and fault tolerance are principles that need to be converted into appropriate methods that suit the organization with implemented together with lean.
Misconceptions About Lean
There are many misconceptions about lean and one reason for this is because the uncertainty that’s present in long-term forecasts only becomes apparent many years later. One common misconception is that lean requires the invention of standardized processes in production and constant improvements. However, this has been known since the 18th century. Some people also believe that standardized processes are vital for lean to work but that isn’t true. On the contrary, a rigid thought process in a social organization creates large problems, as demonstrated by sociotechnology research.
Sociotechnology was born at the Tavlstock Institute following World War II. In sociotechnological system theory, the organization is divided into two systems: technical and social. The technical system consists of equipment, machines, tools and methods. The social system consists of people, interactions and knowledge. The technical structure affects the social organization.
Research conducted by the Tavlstock Institute demonstrated the negative consequences of Taylorist solutions, including problems with unclear work duties, individually designed tasks, top-down management, constricted thinking with clearly defined roles and standardized working methods.
Sociotechnology proposes self-organized teams where tasks and responsibility are determined by the work that is accomplished. Research shows that sociotechnology leads to higher productivity compared to Taylorist solutions and the explanation for this is found within the human equation: people working in teams were more motivated.
Today, thanks to complexity theory and systemized thinking, we have a slightly different explanation. Taylorist solutions don’t lead to high productivity as was thought; on the contrary they lead to inefficiency. The reason for this is that in a social system, standardized processes with little room for freedom lead to chaos. In order to create order in whole systems and keep up high productivity, a large degree of freedom at the individual level is necessary. That is one needs a multidimensional system for both management and workers.
This means that a certain lack of order at the individual level leads to order within the organization as a whole. This is far from intuitive but the results of complexity theory are convincing and backed up by empirical organization research.
The problem with the sociotechnological system school is the lack of suitable methods. This is where lean enters the picture.
Implementation of Sociotechnology and Lean
A correct implementation of Lean can be characterized by the following:
Duties are broken down into manageable sections since that facilitates the distribution of the workload. In Taylorism, duties are separated.
With Pulse, we use manageable sections with larger, related duties.
Work is done in groups, teams and projects to complete the sections. In Taylorism, work is done individually.
Within FoE we work in projects and teams. At Pulse these are self-organized.
That the people who work in groups, teams and projects are encouraged to be able to take care of several different duties since that makes it easier to distribute work and problem-solving. Taylorism requires maximum specialization.
With Pulse, there are few roles. Cooperation is the key. No activities are dedicated to a specific role or position. People choose what to work on.
There are few permanent roles. In Talyorism, the defining of different roles is very important. Within Pulse, there are just a few permanent roles.
Increase individuals’ and groups’ ability to act so that everyone can adjust their actions to the current situation and unforeseen events. The goal of Taylorism is to decrease the ability to act through standardization and optimization of processes.
With Pulse there is no standard way to work or process thinking. Pulse is a part of the technological structure and it is within this structure that visual management is used.
The above list, which details the components necessary for a successful implementation of Lean stands in contrast to Taylorism and bureaucracy. Instead, it aligns with sociotechnical systems. When correctly implemented, lean is a way to realize the ideas behind sociotechnology.
In production, the kanban is used for visual management within the technical structure.
Within strategy and development, the physical spaces in the form of the team room, Pulse room and Pulse boards make up the technological structure. The Pulse meetings form a network that we call an agile network organization.
Sociotechnology was created in the 1960’s and is based on the knowledge available then. The past decades have seen a fast development within organizational theory based around complexity research. The main tenants of sociotechnology, including self-organized teams, have strengthened in recent years while the explanation models have changed considerably.
Today there are methods to implement sociotechnology with the help of Pulse.
Lean in practice means self-organization with visual management and jidoka. When you’re more organized, it’s more likely that your work will have greater value.
In a previous post I defined lean as a concept for creating self-organization. This means visual management and a “take-things-as-they-come” attitude (jidoka). When a system becomes more organized, you’ll be more likely to see valuable work being created.
Lean In Practice – Visual Management and Jidoka
Visual management and “take things as they come” (jidoka) are two principles. A principle is something that will be achieved. A method tells us how to achieve a principle. Many descriptions of lean are based on methods and not the fundamental principles and this can lead to confusion.
In production, workcells are defined by the flow of material. The workcells can be linked together with a method called Kanban. When the different parts become more linked to each other, the system as a whole becomes more organized. Here is a short clip (1m20s) that demonstrates how Kanban works in production.
Methods are very valuable tools but methods that work well in one context might not work at all in a different one. For example, production methods can seldom be transferred to strategy and development, since there are no recurring repetitive flows. This is why we use other methods in strategy and development that link together actors and allow them to be more self-organized. For example, when working on projects, daily stand-up meetings in front of a Pulse board may be used for visual management.
Lean In Action – Pulse Methods
In the picture above you can see an activity window on a Pulse board. The window is divided into three parts: to do, in progress and done. The project group meets every day and discusses what they will work on based on what is on the board. This way of working is called pull. With pull, a demand for results is created in the same way Kanban is used for production. In classic project management, a plan which describes who and what should be done at what time is needed. To work based on such a plan is called push. The problem with the push principle is that we can’t predict the future. Plans that go far into the future have a high level of insecurity and lead to interference and wastefulness. Management and staff spend their days putting out fires. Pull only plans for a few hours at a time, which leads to less interruptions.
Push is also an example of how an exterior actor prevents self-organization. This doesn’t mean that planning is unnecessary nor impossible – only detailed plans are impossible. Comprehensive planning is possible as long as you are aware that there will always be faults in these plans. Comprehensive plans are necessary in order to know what should be on the To Do list. With Scrum, a prioritizing backlog is used. With Pulse we work with a comprehensive synchronization plan. However, management of daily work isn’t based off of this plan. Instead, it’s based off of the current needs that are visualized on the Pulse board that’s used during Pulse meetings.
Yellow and Red Post-Its
Planning determines which yellow post-its will be used in the activity window. The red post-it illustrates a way to handle unexpected problems that come up, jidoka. These problems must be handled quickly and efficiently.
When using lean, oftentimes the project members themselves plan and manage their work. They do this through putting up post-its in the activity window and through moving the notes on the board as the work progresses. The appearance of the board tells the group about its current needs and what they have to do in order to move the project forward. By moving the post-its on the board, it’s possible to see lean in action.
Workloads within strategy and development are always uneven and need to be balanced. In order to handle this issue, the activities posted in the To Do section are not assigned to any single individual. Matchmaking between individual and task takes place at the Pulse meeting. Distribution is done by the individuals themselves in the form of taking notes. The role of the project leader is to make sure that no one is overloaded and this can be done by making sure that no one takes more than 1-3 post-its.
Lean In Action Depends on the Context
To summarize, lean in practice can look different depending on the context yet the underlying principles are always the same. When it comes to lean for strategy and development we have defined what we see as the foundation of lean in product development.
An Obeya is a large room for visual management and jidoka. Obeya was invented in 1993 as part of the Prius project with the aim to shorten lead times.
I first heard about Obeya and periodic stand-up meetings in 1998 while working with operation development at Scania. What I heard about Obeya had so many surprises that it really took me a while grasp. At this point in time I had, from time to time, been involved in different efforts to increase the productivity in product development. Until then, the development engineers had always been the focus of our work. We tried to increase productivity with the help of planning and different project models. Obeya changed our ideas of how problems should be solved. Not only do you meet standing up at an Obeya but Obeya meetings are considerably shorter – minutes instead of hours – compared to normal meetings. However, the big surprise for me was who participated in the Obeya meetings: management.
Clues to the Secret of the Obeya
It took me several years to understand what made these visual meetings with management so powerful. I found clues in books written by organization theorists (such Herbert Simon and James G. March). Further clues came during the development of The Pulse guide in the early 2000s. During this time Ulla and I created a model with a Pulse room that suited the organization and culture of Nordic technology companies.
In a Pulse room information and feedback is visualized so that everyone can see what’s going on. Besides frequent meetings between designers that work with projects and tasks there are also regular meetings with management. These managers represent different areas such as construction, acquisitions, production technology and marketing. Joint decisions are made and mutual action is taken. This creates heavy leveraging at the top of the operation, increasing the organization’s ability to take appropriate actions. Learning increases.
Obeya was invented between 1993-1994 when Toyota created the development project for the Prius hybrid. To develop a new car model is normally an incredibly complex task. However, with Prius they also had to develop a new driveline. These kind of projects can take a lot of time with lead times reaching up to ten years. The goal of the Prius was to launch the car in 1997 which was seen at the time as “mission impossible.” Against all odds, Toyota reached its goal and the car was developed in just three years. With this success Toyota didn’t just have a new product to offer the market but a whole new organizational model! This model might have been a more important success than the hybrid.
Obeya and Prius
The Obeya used during the Prius project was in many ways a kind of “project room.” We refer to this kind of project room as a Pulse room. In the Pulse room multiple projects can be developed. In the Pulse room the whole operation’s strategy and development work take place. All levels and functions are included in the Pulse guide and by doing so we could replace traditional project management with visual management. Furthermore, we could let the project’s Pulse board become the information and feedback that management use in order to help with decision-making. We also supplemented the concept with the organization’s strategic development. This meant that management and specialists that developed new markets, new products and new production technology solutions became a part of Pulse.
Anyone who has tried an Obeya or a Pulse room with management meetings has probably realized one thing: it’s a big success. However, there are pitfalls that can cancel out part of the positive effects. In some cases I’ve seen a bureaucratic viewpoint visualized when the management use visualization to control and monitor the project workers. In the bureaucratic tradition it’s also common for management, probably subconsciously, to have a personal agenda. When correctly implemented, management needs to place the problems and progress achieved within the strategic context of the operation. There is also a need to work together with the use of visual decision-making meetings; this type of coordinated action leads to success.
In an article in Ny Teknik, a Swedish technology publication, you can read about how Toyota has now created a new development center based around the Obeya concept. This is a strong indication of how important Obeya is for Toyota.
What is lean? I would like to answer that question with an explanation based on the description given by the inventor of lean, Taiichi Ohno.
Pull and push
Hopp and Spearman define pull in their work Factory Physics based on Little’s law. It’s a good definition that states that pull sets limits on any current workload while push doesn’t. However, there’s more to lean than pull.
What is Lean?
The inventor of the concept of lean is Taiichi Ohno. Ohno has written two books in which he summarizes the results of decades of experiments. These experiments and results are both comprehensive and have been tested by others. Ohno condenses the results into two principles: Just-In-Time (JIT) and jidoka (autonomation). Just-In-Time is the result that Ohno would like to achieve and the solution is Kanban(visual management). Kanban makes it possible for different actors to work together without the intervention of management or other planners. Besides these principles, Ohno also discusses 5S and wastefulness; however, his main focus is the challenge of getting people to work together.
Lean is Self-Organization
People who interact without the interference of outside actors practice self-organization. The term was defined in complexity research and is based on Claude Shannon’s information theory. When a number of actors, such as the participants of a group, have more interactions (more organization), the probability collaborating behavior (value-creating work) increases. This is called self-organization. An important prerequisite for self-organization is that the interactions are initiated by the actors themselves. There can’t be any outside actors (bosses, project leaders, etc.) that hinder or block interaction. However, the group does need information and feedback in order to deal with events appropriately.
Within a company, individuals will be a part of a greater whole (an infrastructure) that sets prerequisites for the groups to function well. In production, the production facility is this infrastructure. Within strategy and development we build an infrastructure through a network of Pulse boards and Pulse meetings.
Lean is Networks
With self-organization, the group has an opportunity to act more coordinated. Work that has previously been waiting for the contribution of another actor can now be done. However, with increased action there are also more problems that need to be solved in order for work to progress. The probability of problems appearing increases the greater organized the organization is. Therefore there is both a positive and a negative side. We can turn this into an equation:
Self-organizing (the ability to do things) = the degree of organization - problems that appear
With the help of visual management (such as Kanban, Pulse or Scum), increased organization is made possible. With the help of Jidoka (“pull the string” and other “take-care-of-problems-now methods”) you learn to deal with the problems that come up. When the “ability to do things” increases it’s a measure of increased productivity and quality. Productivity and quality improvements emerge from the interactions that come from self-organization. In theory, lean is therefore a concept that makes self-organization possible.
From Large-Scale to Networks
The time before lean was dominated by large-scale thinking. Nowadays we think in terms of networks. This has changed the duties of management. Previously, management lead and distributed work while in today’s world they build networks.