<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Refuting Lean</title>
	<atom:link href="http://theleanthinker.com/2008/05/09/refuting-lean/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://theleanthinker.com/2008/05/09/refuting-lean/</link>
	<description>Thoughts and insights from the shop floor.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 01:58:04 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ray G</title>
		<link>http://theleanthinker.com/2008/05/09/refuting-lean/#comment-4621</link>
		<dc:creator>Ray G</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 May 2008 04:54:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theleanthinker.com/?p=131#comment-4621</guid>
		<description>The most typical resistance is that it's all pie-in-the-sky and thus just a fad. Lean principles are just too unrealistic, and "The last place I worked at tried that JIT stuff and everything got worse!" 

Same answer that we all know already: Where lean fails, it does so from incomplete implementation. 

I've had to fight tooth and nail just to establish a basic master-scheduling system. Guys that have been there for years say things like "Why don't we just hire another expediter?" or "Production control just aren't following their priority lists. If they would just stay on top of their lists. . . " 

In some instances, some people just have to be gotten rid of, but I'm not telling where the bodies are buried.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The most typical resistance is that it&#8217;s all pie-in-the-sky and thus just a fad. Lean principles are just too unrealistic, and &#8220;The last place I worked at tried that JIT stuff and everything got worse!&#8221; </p>
<p>Same answer that we all know already: Where lean fails, it does so from incomplete implementation. </p>
<p>I&#8217;ve had to fight tooth and nail just to establish a basic master-scheduling system. Guys that have been there for years say things like &#8220;Why don&#8217;t we just hire another expediter?&#8221; or &#8220;Production control just aren&#8217;t following their priority lists. If they would just stay on top of their lists. . . &#8221; </p>
<p>In some instances, some people just have to be gotten rid of, but I&#8217;m not telling where the bodies are buried.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gabriela</title>
		<link>http://theleanthinker.com/2008/05/09/refuting-lean/#comment-4517</link>
		<dc:creator>Gabriela</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 13:29:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theleanthinker.com/?p=131#comment-4517</guid>
		<description>Excellent topic, Mark. We really don't talk enough about what reasons people give to disprove/counter lean.
1. One of the most used reasons I hear is: "Lean is just another fad. Wait and see. It will go away". 
Answer: Lean is not going anywhere. It is not something we do on top of everything else (I.e. QS9000). Lean is a paradigm shift and it's about doing things in a different way (in a simplistic way same like an electronic watch is measuring time differently than a mechanical watch)
2. Another "favourite" is: "We can't do it here. We are not Japanese and we don't want to change our culture".
Answer: The origins of lean are in North America (Ford, supermarkets, Training within Industry) and as such becomes a wordly concept. It's not about changing your identity but about changing your mentality, about trying to improve yourself and the environment you work in.
3. The third is "Don't you see that Toyota has problems too? Look at their recalls. They also have big inventories so all this just-in-time is just theory."
Answer: If they have problems is because they don't follow the lean principles in the sense that their growth rate exceeds the rate with which they develop the lean leadership and mentality in their new plants. Inventories are not bad if controlled to assure smoothness and timely delivery. It's about total cost ultimately so use your judgement when applying tools. They are just tools not goals.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent topic, Mark. We really don&#8217;t talk enough about what reasons people give to disprove/counter lean.<br />
1. One of the most used reasons I hear is: &#8220;Lean is just another fad. Wait and see. It will go away&#8221;.<br />
Answer: Lean is not going anywhere. It is not something we do on top of everything else (I.e. QS9000). Lean is a paradigm shift and it&#8217;s about doing things in a different way (in a simplistic way same like an electronic watch is measuring time differently than a mechanical watch)<br />
2. Another &#8220;favourite&#8221; is: &#8220;We can&#8217;t do it here. We are not Japanese and we don&#8217;t want to change our culture&#8221;.<br />
Answer: The origins of lean are in North America (Ford, supermarkets, Training within Industry) and as such becomes a wordly concept. It&#8217;s not about changing your identity but about changing your mentality, about trying to improve yourself and the environment you work in.<br />
3. The third is &#8220;Don&#8217;t you see that Toyota has problems too? Look at their recalls. They also have big inventories so all this just-in-time is just theory.&#8221;<br />
Answer: If they have problems is because they don&#8217;t follow the lean principles in the sense that their growth rate exceeds the rate with which they develop the lean leadership and mentality in their new plants. Inventories are not bad if controlled to assure smoothness and timely delivery. It&#8217;s about total cost ultimately so use your judgement when applying tools. They are just tools not goals.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
