Consider two assembly factories—one assembles a car every minute and the other a bus every hour. Which factory setting is the most favorable for learning lean?
Car assembly factory (source: Toyota) Bus assembly factory (source: 123RF)
In the car factory, if two operators use two different methods to install the front seats, the differences would become readily visible to operators and supervisors because there is an opportunity to observe the differences every minute, and more likely prompt attention and motivation to establish a best practice for the task. This would result in the codification of the tacit knowledge that was held by the operators and a faster rate of learning for both.
In the bus factory, however, if two operators use two different methods to install the driver’s seat, any variation in the methods used can remain hidden because operators install them only once an hour rather than once every minute. Moreover, seat installation is one of the many tasks that these operators perform at their workstation, which can further conceal the differences because they can make up for variations in their methods to perform specific tasks by adjusting the time they spend on the other tasks in their workstation. Hence, variations in the methods of work are likely to attract less attention, and the knowledge is more likely to remain in tacit form—and the rate of learning slows.
Faster rhythms support learning lean
These insights may help explain why some factories are lagging and others are thriving in learning lean. We provide scientific evidence and an elaborate discussion in a recent paper in the International Journal of Operations & Production Management1.
As the figure above illustrates, slow rhythm factories are at a disadvantage when implementing lean. An important question is then; are there are ways to mitigate the adverse effects of slow rhythms? Yes, there is. Our in-depth analysis of the lean program of a global manufacturer of heavy vehicles, suggests that slow-rhythm factories can emulate the learning opportunities that come more naturally with faster production rhythms. For instance, factories can be more proactive in making problems on the line visible quickly, running more scientific experiments on the shop floor, and, in general, promote policies that help codify tacit production knowledge quickly. All this helps the factories to learn lean and create a virtuous learning cycle by showing the benefits of incremental improvements and motivating the employees to do more. These policies help every factory learn lean, but they are particularly helpful in overcoming the adverse effects of slow production rhythms.
1 Netland, T., Schloetzer, J. and Ferdows, K. (2021), "Learning lean: rhythm of production and the pace of lean implementation", International Journal of Operations & Production Management, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-02-2020-0092
This is a helpful observation. And knowing how to improve Lean impact in slower-paced factories is very valuable. I would think these mitigations also apply in the office environment, which is generally also much slower and harder to observe than a fast factory.
Good observation. I think you are correct, but we couldn’t test it. Not only is the rhythm slower (except for call centers and the equals), but the rhythm is also much more variable. I think both those factors hamper learning lean.