This chapter covers two important topics:
It describes the prerequisites for initiating a lean philosophy within organizations
•
involved in design and/or construction, including “success strategies” for lean coaching. It presents commentary on these topics from recognized members of the lean community—Greg Howell, Robert Blakey and Matt Horvat.
It shares with readers the journeys of four visionary subcontractor organizations
•
that implemented lean in their internal operations, even when working with proj-ects that did not represent a lean environment.
These organizations are Tweet/Garot Mechanical, Inc., Belair Contracting, The Grunau Company, Inc., and Superior Window Corporation.
Prerequisites for Lean Design and Construction
There are several prerequisites that have to be met before a design or construction organi-zation can successfully implement lean principles.
a. A willingness to change is essential. Lean methods are a departure from con-ventional methods and their adoption requires changing the behavior of people.
Cultural change is the most compelling quest along with the physical transfor-mation of an organization. One cannot force change on people—they have to be engaged so that the intrinsic satisfaction of outstanding performance will motivate them. In a lean culture, people have to be treated as the only appreciating asset.
Lean enables organizations to have Responsiveness, Reliability, and Relevance.
b. A commitment to training and learning. Stakeholders at all levels need to be trained in lean techniques in order to become successful participants in lean proj-ects. Lean implementation also requires that completed assignments have to be continually examined as a source of learning for future improvements instead of serving as sources of blame.
c. A quality-oriented culture is needed for successful application of such techniques as Just-In Time (JIT), Lean Construction, and Supply Chain Management. JIT in particular, demands discipline, as there is no room for unreliable suppliers. JIT does not work in an atmosphere of suspicion, distrust, and internal competition.
d. A “Shared Vision” is essential to have all stakeholders on the same page (Macomber and Howell 2005). Promote the importance of a shared vision in which a work-force aligns itself with the direction set by a leader. This alignment is far different from carrying out orders. It is based on a sharing of beliefs and a common view of a future state that benefits everyone and makes them receptive to the changes
necessary to reach that future state. In the case of lean construction, the shared vision would lead to a lean mind. A study-Action Team™ (SAT™)* is recom-mended to develop the shared vision. Members start as a reading group and focus on learning as much as possible in order to bring about change. The SAT members should be volunteers from various groups involved in construction.
e. A commitment to reducing or eliminating waste is a fundamental principle of lean construction (Polat and Ballard 2004). A commitment to improving safety is criti-cal to lean implementation as construction accidents are rivaled only by mining. In 2006, construction accounted for 21% of all deaths and 11% of all disabling injuries/
illnesses in private industry in the United States (Bureau of Labor Statistics 2006).
f. A commitment to cost and performance measures. These measures are impor-tant indicators of the impacts of lean in construction projects. Benchmarking is based on comparing performance with other organizations (Alarcon et al. 2001).
Measurements of percentage projects completed (PPC) and commitment reliabil-ity are essential as a foundation for continuous improvement.
g. A willingness to implement lean during the design stages. Tsao and others (2000, 2001) identified that committing more project resources to the earlier design phases improved the impact of lean techniques.
h. Collaborative relationships. Lean requires close collaboration between the parties;
the standard forms of contract are adversarial in nature. Relational contracting is a transaction or contracting mechanism that apportions responsibilities and benefits of the contract fairly and transparently based on trust and partnership between the parties. It provides a more efficient and effective system for construction deliv-ery in projects that require close collaboration for execution. Working relations between the stakeholders are improved, and improved efficiency and reduction in conflict lead to better financial returns. The most significant factors that underlie relational contracting are cooperation and dependency between the parties.
i. Information technology makes it possible to effectively manage the construction process to transform physical resources such as money, materials, manpower, and equipment. Integration is greatly improved by the sharing of information between the parties. Building Information Modeling (BIM) is a technology that effects many economies in construction projects (See Chapter 8). It makes a reli-able digital representation of the building availreli-able for design decision making, high-quality construction document production, construction planning and per-formance prediction, and cost estimates. Having the ability to keep information up-to-date and accessible in an integrated digital environment gives architects, engineers, builders, and owners a clear, overall vision of all their projects, as well as the ability to make informed decisions quickly.
Organizing Lean Construction
The adoption of the lean construction methodology represents a paradigm shift for many owners, designers, contractors, and suppliers who have been accustomed to traditional
*Study-Action Team™ (SAT™) is the intellectual property of Lean Project Consulting, Inc.
Lean Construction Applications 135
construction practices. The success of The Last Planner® System hinges on counterintui-tive actions by members of the construction supply chain to optimize the entire project instead of maximizing the efficiency and profitability of their respective portions of the work.
Greg Howell, co-founder of the Lean Construction Institute (LCI) references the opinion of Dean Reed from DPR Construction “that The Last Planner® System (LPS) is a disruptive technology.” In effect it reveals issues and opportunities invisible to those operating in current practice. The LPS changes the way work is planned and managed on projects and in construction organizations. Companies implementing LPS always face these contradic-tions and eventually must decide to transform their company or somehow wall off those projects operating on LPS. The first projects managed on LPS can show companies what will need to change to support wider implementation.
Greg Howell suggests that at this point the senior management of the respective com-pany (in the project delivery team) must decide their future. Then they must tell this to the people in the company. People need a compelling reason to change; they must be able to understand their role in the change and where it will lead. It is senior manage-ment’s job to say, “We are going Lean” and then tell why, what it will mean, what it will require, and what it will produce.
Howell recommends that this declaration must be followed with a steady effort to shift the organization to the adoption of a lean culture. It isn’t easy to put a company on a learning track, and people will follow their leaders as they explore the ideas and plan for implementation. Regardless of whatever structure is adopted, the focus needs to be on learning.
Some consultants recommend that one should avoid creating a complex structure for lean implementation. Robert Blakey*, founding principal of Strategic Equity Associates, LLC sug-gests tailoring the structure to the size of the project or implementation effort; an overburden of administration would bog down attempts at cultural change. Another approach would be more along the lines of a “quality circle” where one individual serves as a champion and works with the other members already normally assigned to the project/program team to raise their awareness and to build them into a lean team. Based on that success, a larger effort could be mounted in future projects/programs that might involve the creation of a
“council” approach as is applied with total quality management (TQM).
Glenn Ballard (1999) in “The Challenge to Change” suggests that companies should first understand themselves before rushing out to hire a consultant to make a lean transforma-tion. He cites Peter Block (Flawless Consulting) on the three possible roles for a consultant:
(1) as a technical expert who tells people what to do to accomplish a specific goal; (2) as a temporary member of the organization, often for unpleasant jobs such as layoffs and reorganization; and (3) as a facilitative consultant that teaches an organization new skills.
However, in the case of lean construction the people in the organization need to learn to think, see, and act in a lean mode.
Companies that understand and that have practiced self-transformation can benefit from the fresh ideas brought by a consultant. Those that have not tried to change from within may delude themselves by expecting consultants to bring about change extrinsi-cally, when it needs to occur intrinsically. A lean consultant would benefit a company most by helping it to learn how to change. Ballard views a consultant as “always an outsider.” If
*Comments by Greg Howell, Robert Blakey and Matt Horvat on organizing lean construction are based on e-mails with L. Forbes between December 2008 and January, 2009.
he or she makes the mistake of acting like management, then real change does not occur as an outsider cannot force anyone to learn new behaviors.
Ballard recommends that companies start with the LPS as it identifies improvement opportunities while freeing up resources to address them. A consultant can prepare proj-ect staff (with studied diplomacy) to face unpleasant truths about their need to change their beliefs and actions in order to benefit from improved project outcomes.
actions for Change
Leading change successfully requires several necessary actions (Macomber and Howell 2005); construction project teams need to be guided in adopting new attitudes and behav-iors in order to deploy lean construction. Five specific actions* have been identified as a minimal requirement; while adopting all five does not guarantee success, excluding any one of them will derail lean efforts.
1. Communicate the need for change in a manner that resonates with the people involved. Maintaining the status quo makes everyone vulnerable in a competitive environment. Provide specifics of how proposed changes can have concrete ben-efits to all involved.
2. Present stakeholders with reasonable performance standards they are expected to meet and secure their agreement. Maintain transparency with setting standards in order to project fairness, and establish on-going measurement in order to hold people accountable to their “customers.” These customers may be downstream actors. Reinforce positive behaviors with sincere, public appreciation.
3. Demonstrate clearly the new behaviors instead of merely talking about them, and engage people in emulating them. Tools such as video are excellent for conveying knowledge and new information.
4. Measure, acknowledge, and reward new behavior. Work with people hands-on and try to see them doing something right. Point out the negative consequences of old behaviors and help to correct mistakes.
5. Help to make the changes positive for the participants. That reduces frustration and engages the workforce in responding to benefit all stakeholders, including themselves. A change agent must positively display passion in order to convey a sense of commitment to the work force. To do less is to diminish the value of lean endeavors in the eyes of those who need to be an integral part of the change.
leadership’s role
The primary responsibility of lean leaders is:
Ensure processes are running as designed
•
Improve processes
•
Empower and develop people
•
*Macomber and Howell’s five Necessary Actions for Change, Lean Project Consulting, pp. 1–2. With permission.
Lean Construction Applications 137
Leaders must visibly lead the change. The lean transformation is organizational, not just a project commitment. It needs to be continuous and not sporadic. Leaders would do well to heed the words of Aristotle:
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit. Aristotle
Lean requires time from people for training, conference space, equipment and supplies ranging from computers to sticky notes. The organization must provide these resources.
Mentors are essential; they help people to understand change and their role in it as a posi-tive experience. Training should be Just-In-Time; when people start work on their projects they should already have the necessary lean training, but not too long before.
Desirable leaders’ attributes:
Practice servant leadership
•
Teach—be the sensei
•
Be a humble learner
•
Enable and celebrate the successes of others
•
Leading Lean with Passion
Jay Berkowitz, President of Superior Window Corporation cites the importance of having a leader with passion, and credits his success with applying lean to his manufacturing and installation operations to that rare attribute. In his words “Lean without passion is like a love lost relationship”, i.e., one that has no spark and no energy to sustain itself.
He sees passion as the invisible ingredient that drives the lean culture, analogous to a wave of sustained enthusiasm that spreads throughout an organization, influencing everyone to carry out work without waste, overcome resistance to change and adopt new approaches to supplant old and inefficient habits. Berkowitz links his success with lean to a management style that overturns the traditional pyramid to make manage-ment accountable and place workers in a position where empowermanage-ment, recognition, and performance feedback bring out the passion for self—improvement that resides in every-one. While his company’s lean process needs the continuing maintenance of a “Kaizen Professional Officer”, the passion of the leader is needed to make the lean initiative thrive.
(See Case# 4 on page 161)
Training the Work Force
Construction involves the collaboration of a number of permanent organizations (contrac-tors, subcontrac(contrac-tors, suppliers, etc.) to form a temporary organization in order to execute a project. If lean construction is to be adopted, then some orientation and preparation need to be provided to the members of those organizations. Blakey suggests that it takes a “champion” and a firm (general contractors (GC), CM, owner) interested in investing in
the process. A model project of limited risk and cost may provide a good foundation for learning; it may involve implementation of only one element of lean construction (such as The Last Planner® System). Thus, the involvement of the firm’s top executive may be very limited beyond approval of a model project. A number of lean projects have evolved based on having the major training effort focused on a ranking executive responsible for an indi-vidual project, and then subsequently moving down to foremen and trades.
Howell* is wary of the idea that people can be trained in lean; some learning is required but it does not persist without leadership support. This support is usually the limiting resource.
They need not be lean experts but they do need to be an active force for studying, learning, and thinking. Simulations such as lean-based games (see lean coaching, p. 140) convey and reinforce very powerfully that collaborative, sharing behaviors hold mutual benefit for stake-holders in contrast to the destructive results of adversarial attitudes.
Matt Horvat,† a lean coach at Lean Project Consulting Inc., engages upper management by forming a Lean Leadership Group that meets on a biweekly basis. Meetings usually last one hour, in order not to detract from the busy work schedule. Matt evaluates par-ticipants’ skill set with the use of a People Development Plan (Toyota Talent and TWI–Job Instruction). A typical agenda is as follows:
1. Defining roles for this meeting (timekeeper, gatekeeper, commitment cop) 2. Reviewing issues of concern from a previous meeting
3. Concerns of management 4. Concerns of project participants 5. LPS roll out schedule
6. Training needed
7. Creating/updating standard work
8. Small group improvement teams report out 9. Other aspects of creating a lean environment 10. Issues to be followed up
Need for Training at Project inception
The best course of action would be to have a single lean development office coordinat-ing all coachcoordinat-ing and traincoordinat-ing (Howell 2009). Some “all hands” work is needed, where all involved people are brought together. They may work in small groups on specific types of problems, but cross-functional teams are an absolute requirement in order to secure smooth interaction during the project. A fair amount of time—at least a few weeks, should be allowed for people to absorb new concepts. Experience suggests that people adopt lean when they make the connection with what they see, and when it influences how they explain the world. Lean simulations such as the “Airplane Production Simulation http://www.visionaryproducts.biz/” and “Parade of Trades” do this for some people.
These simulations are typically used in a classroom setting for lean training, and are especially helpful with a mixed group of design/construction professionals. The Airplane Production Simulation involves having a team of people—often 4, 5, or 6 set up as a series
*Comments by Greg Howell, Robert Blakey and Matt Horvat on training the work force are based on e-mails with L. Forbes between December 2008 and January, 2009.
† Self-published report “What Does a Coach Do?” December 9, 2008, pp. 1–8. With permission.
Lean Construction Applications 139
of work stations in an assembly line. Lego blocks are used to assemble a number of model planes. Varied work rules clearly demonstrate the impact of the structure of the work. The Parade of Trades demonstrates the impact of reliable promising on the variability of work flow. (This section on lean coaching is based on e-mails from Howell, Blakey, and Horvat between December 2008 and January 2009 on the subject of initiating a lean construction program.)
Blakey notes the value of coaching/facilitation/training at the project team level. After becoming aware of lean construction, many firms (particularly general contractors or mechanical subcontractors) form their own internal teams to carry forward the coaching/
training/facilitation to future projects. However, this approach is limited, as it benefits each firm internally, but not external stakeholders.
Horvat generally starts coaching on lean implementation with a Study Action Team™
(SAT™ is the trademark of Lean Project Consulting), which is very effective in helping par-ticipants to understand lean principles and to visualize the possibilities that are available to them. The SATs are most effective with a cross-functional group because team members can see how others work and a relationship can begin to grow. The very act of having people in the same room can have a synergistic effect.
Cross-functional teams benefit especially with explanations of The Last Planner® System. It is helpful for the project engineers and superintendents to work together. This also applies to the project leadership of the general contractor/CM and the leadership of the owner and the architect/engineers. The LPS is built on making and keeping promises, and all team members need to internalize these principles. For small group improvement teams, cross-functional representation is also essential because these teams have a broad impact on a project, and bring a systems approach to finding solutions.
Duration of Coaching
People should be coached until they are able to swim on their own (Howell). Blakey sug-gests that, at a minimum, the coach should be involved throughout the originally assigned project. Many firms establish an internal position related to lean implementation after becoming aware of it. Typical coaching engagements last between 3 and 5 months, involv-ing about 3 days on-site every other week. With an ambitious team, this is generally enough to set the basic habits in place. Larger organizations such as nationwide builders with many divisions are more complex and generally require a longer time. They often need additional coaching/facilitation to standardize approaches on a companywide basis.
As shown in Figure 6.1, with the passage of time, a team’s knowledge increases while the
As shown in Figure 6.1, with the passage of time, a team’s knowledge increases while the