親愛的現(xiàn)場教練：
精益是一個(gè)騙局。最近兩年我們請了顧問協(xié)助我們進(jìn)行“精益轉(zhuǎn)型”，他們所做的一切就是不斷給我們的團(tuán)隊(duì)施加壓力要求更多產(chǎn)出，他們還說，如果沒有成功的話是因?yàn)槲覀儾粔蚺?。我看了很多精益書籍，我覺得像你們所說的“尊重”就像一個(gè)煙幕彈，讓顧問們可以在不解決公司深層次問題的情況下，迫使團(tuán)隊(duì)提高產(chǎn)出。
我明白你在說什么，但我并不打算和你爭論，因?yàn)槲夷芊浅Ｇ宄叵胂蟮竭@樣的情況。但在我們進(jìn)一步討論之前，需要搞清的第一個(gè)問題是：你真的是在做精益嗎？還是有人打著精益的旗號向你兜售過時(shí)的泰勒主義？
以下是評估你的精益轉(zhuǎn)型計(jì)劃是否“精益”的三個(gè)核心準(zhǔn)則：
1. 我們有多么認(rèn)真地將價(jià)值回饋給客戶？精益戰(zhàn)略是通過消除系統(tǒng)中的浪費(fèi)（從工程、設(shè)計(jì)、供應(yīng)鏈到工作站的流程中存在的七大浪費(fèi)）來提升整個(gè)供應(yīng)鏈的價(jià)值，以便將其回饋給客戶。經(jīng)驗(yàn)法則以三分之一來表示：1/3的額外價(jià)值給客戶，1/3我們自己保留，1/3給為改進(jìn)工作做出過貢獻(xiàn)的供應(yīng)商們。
2. 我們有多么堅(jiān)定地在整個(gè)供應(yīng)鏈中拉動價(jià)值？即時(shí)拉動系統(tǒng)是一種將整個(gè)運(yùn)營（跨邊界協(xié)作）與（均衡的）實(shí)時(shí)的客戶需求保持一致的裝置。通過縮短橫跨價(jià)值鏈的時(shí)間周期，在系統(tǒng)中產(chǎn)生一個(gè)創(chuàng)造性的張力，讓大家在正確的時(shí)間以正確的順序向內(nèi)部客戶（然后是最終客戶）提供良好的部件，然后解決由于這種拉力引發(fā)的所有問題。
3. 我們有多么堅(jiān)定地培育員工？培育員工最重要的不是“行政性”地解決問題，而是給每個(gè)人提供自己解決問題的手段（主要是目視化管理和支持），并通過開放的管理和有力的系統(tǒng)來支持他們，以便他們自己解決問題。在精益中，我們雇用員工是為了讓他們在工作上取得成功，而不只是做自己的工作。
買方注意
我不是不理會你的抱怨，但請根據(jù)這三個(gè)維度（0到10）評估你的精益工作。評估結(jié)果將告訴你，你在做的是真正的精益計(jì)劃或還是常規(guī)的卓越運(yùn)營計(jì)劃。
我知道這也許不能幫助你擺脫困境，但這也許能幫你確定被騙的感覺從哪里來。我不認(rèn)為精益是一個(gè)騙局。我相信精益是一種新的經(jīng)營方式，最初由豐田公司創(chuàng)造，而且目前豐田公司仍然憑借其精益計(jì)劃、豐田生產(chǎn)系統(tǒng)、豐田開發(fā)系統(tǒng)和豐田銷售系統(tǒng)在汽車行業(yè)遙遙領(lǐng)先。我們正試圖搞清它在豐田公司和汽車行業(yè)之外能發(fā)揮多大作用。
對于那些沒有真正致力于精益的顧問而言，他們不過是打著精益的旗號在販賣過時(shí)的東西（最近有很多人打著方針管理的旗號兜售老掉牙的目標(biāo)管理方法）---對這種做法有什么可說的呢？買家自己當(dāng)心吧。
關(guān)于“尊重”是煙幕彈的指控，這個(gè)問題回答起來確實(shí)有點(diǎn)復(fù)雜。不過我們先來搞清楚，我們所說的“尊重”是什么意思呢？
“尊重員工”這個(gè)詞的起源似乎是“尊重人性”，但此處他們的含義是完全不同的。這里我們所說的不是有禮貌（盡管這很好），我們說的是尊重“人是人類”的事實(shí)。換一種說法：
1. 他們的時(shí)間是寶貴的。每個(gè)人的生命都在一分一秒地流逝。我們要求他們所做的每一秒無意義的工作，對于他們內(nèi)心中的人生（或者至少是他們的工作時(shí)間）需要有所作為的追求而言，都是一種損害。
2. 當(dāng)人們沒有足夠的挑戰(zhàn)時(shí)，他們會感到無聊；當(dāng)他們負(fù)擔(dān)過重時(shí)，他們會感到壓力。“負(fù)擔(dān)過重”是一個(gè)有趣的概念，因?yàn)樗m用于很多不同的場合。要求某人做一個(gè)無聊、無意義、重復(fù)的任務(wù)，在危險(xiǎn)的工作環(huán)境中工作，或?qū)ιa(chǎn)力給予太大的壓力都會讓人負(fù)擔(dān)過重。我們經(jīng)常處于負(fù)擔(dān)過重的狀態(tài)。精益的問題是：在多大程度上和在什么維度？我們可以提供哪些幫助來讓他們更好地應(yīng)對？我們可以做些什么來減輕過重的負(fù)擔(dān)？
3. 人們需要在他們可以信任的團(tuán)隊(duì)中工作。沒有一個(gè)人是活在一個(gè)孤島上，如果你每天期待看到你的同事，那么工作起來一定很開心；或者如果你無法忍受他們，那么工作就會變得很糟糕。盡我們所能支持團(tuán)隊(duì)和團(tuán)隊(duì)精神是尊重人性的重要組成部分。
4. 人們希望他們的努力得到認(rèn)可。泰勒主義讓我們相信我們需要對人們的成果進(jìn)行獎勵(lì)，那可能是對的，但是大多數(shù)人都希望他們的努力被認(rèn)可，同時(shí)憎恨那些通過搶奪別人功勞而被獎勵(lì)或贊揚(yáng)的不公平的情形。
5. 在創(chuàng)造中有真正的快樂。當(dāng)一天結(jié)束時(shí)，如果創(chuàng)造性的工作不是太難（比如通過與系統(tǒng)、他人或管理層進(jìn)行斗爭而做成了某事），每個(gè)人都會在創(chuàng)造性的行為中體驗(yàn)到深深的喜悅。一個(gè)創(chuàng)意提案系統(tǒng)是任何精益系統(tǒng)的關(guān)鍵---這一點(diǎn)經(jīng)常被誤解。
一個(gè)希望，而不是騙局
設(shè)計(jì)精益系統(tǒng)的目的顯然是為富有成效、有意義的工作創(chuàng)造條件。當(dāng)精益管理的意圖是利用工具提高生產(chǎn)力，榨取員工更多剩余價(jià)值的時(shí)候，我也不知道如何來處理精益。
通過尊重員工的人性來創(chuàng)造有意義的工作條件是我們想要表達(dá)的意思。我們應(yīng)該如何創(chuàng)造工作條件，讓工作更自然，而且人們被聘用來在工作中取得成功，而不只是做工作？雖然我寫的很多文章有虛構(gòu)的成分，但是它們都來源于我在現(xiàn)實(shí)生活中看到的案例（不過我需要做一些偽裝來保護(hù)無辜的人和有罪的人）。我相信我們所提出的觀點(diǎn)是真實(shí)的，沒有刻意去隱藏一個(gè)丑陋的真相。
精益是一個(gè)騙局嗎？坦白地說，我并不這么認(rèn)為，我認(rèn)為它是一個(gè)希望。豐田向我們展示了一種工作和競爭的更好方式，精益是我們理解這一方法，將其轉(zhuǎn)移到豐田和汽車行業(yè)之外的努力的總和。我們的努力成功了嗎？很顯然沒有，我們在過程中學(xué)到了很多教訓(xùn)（其中最重要的總是回到TPS的基礎(chǔ)）。我們才剛?cè)腴T，未來的路還很長。
有哪一種希望可以變成騙局嗎？毫無疑問，精益或其他都有這種可能。我們每天都能看到這樣的例子。但請記住，任何騙局都是騙子和被騙者之間的交易，而被騙者總是希望不勞而獲。
英文原文：
ISN’T LEAN JUST A SCAM TO SQUEEZE TEAMS FOR MORE PRODUCTION?
Dear Gemba Coach,
Lean is a scam. We’ve had consultants working with us on a “lean transformation” for two years and all they do is put pressure on teams for more and tell us that if it doesn’t work it’s because we don’t try hard enough. I’ve been reading the lean books and I feel that people like you who write about “respect” are pushing a smoke screen that allows consultants to just squeeze teams for more production without ever resolving the company’s deeper problems.
Ouch.
Are you guys pulling? Seriously, I hear what you’re saying and am not dismissing it at all, as I can very well visualize how this can be happening. But before we go further in this discussion, the first question is: Are you really doing lean or have you been sold old-fashioned Taylorism in the guise of lean?
Here are the three core criteria I’d use to evaluate how “lean” is your lean transformation program:
1. How serious are we about giving value back to the customer? The lean strategy is about leveraging value from the entire supply chain by eliminating systemic muda (this is fractal, from engineering, design, and the supply chain to seven wastes on a workstation) in order to give it back to customers. The rule-of-thumb is expressed in thirds: 1/3 extra value to the customer, 1/3 we keep, 1/3 goes to suppliers who have contributed to the improvement effort.
2. How determined are we to pull value across the supply chain? A just-in-time pull system is a device to align the entire operation (collaboration across boundaries) with (averaged) real-time customer demand. By withdrawing at short intervals across the value chain, one creates a creative tension that is focused on delivering good parts to internal customers (and then final customer) at the right time in the right sequence, and therefore solving all the problems that appear as a result of this pull tension.
3. How committed are we to developing people? Working with people means first, not solving problems “administratively” but giving each person the means to solve their own problems (mostly visual management and support) as well as supporting them through both open-minded management and enabling systems so that they do solve their problems. In lean, we hire people to succeed at their jobs, not just do their jobs.
Buyer Beware
I am not dismissing your complaint, but please evaluate your lean effort according to these three dimensions, 0 to 10. This will tell you whether you’re indeed engaged in a lean initiative or just the usual operational excellence program.
I realize this might not help you out of your predicament, but it might help determine where, exactly, the feeling of being scammed comes from. I do not believe that lean is a scam, at all. I honestly believe that lean is a new way of doing business, pioneered by Toyota (who’s still ahead of the game with its lean programs, the Toyota Production System, the Toyota Development System and the Toyota Sales System). We’re trying to figure out what this means outside Toyota and the automotive industry.
As to consultants who are not committed to real lean, but sell the same old tired story as lean (the recent rash is selling grandpa’s management by objectives as hoshin kanri, completely ignoring the “catchball” principle) – what’s there to say? Buyer beware.
As to the charge that writing about “respect” is a smokescreen, well, this is indeed more complicated. Again, what do we mean by “respect”?
The origin of the phrase “respect-for-people” seems to be “respect-for-humanity,” which is quite different when you think about it. We’re not talking about being polite here (although that is good, for sure), we’re talking about respecting the facts that humans are … humans. In other words:
1. Their time is precious: Every human’s life runs minute-by-minute, second by second. Every second of meaningless work we ask something to do is an insult to their profound need to do something useful with their life, or at least their working time.
2. When people are not challenged enough they get bored; when they’re overburdened, they get stressed: “Overburden” is an interesting concept because it can apply in many different situations. Asking someone to do a boring, meaningless, repetitive task is just as much an overburden as a dangerous work environment, or too much pressure on productivity. We’re always overburdening people. The lean question is: how much and on what dimension? What can we do to help them cope better? What can we do to reduce the overburden?
3. People need to work in teams they can trust: No one is an island, and work is great if you look forward to seeing your colleagues, or can become hell if you can’t stand them. Doing everything we can to support teams and team spirit is a large part of respecting humanity.
4. People need to be recognized for their efforts: Taylorism has us convinced we need to reward people for their results, and that may be true, but mostly people need to be recognized for making an effort and hate the unfairness of others apparently being rewarded or praised when everyone knows they’re really coasting and appropriating others’ work.
5. There is real joy in creation: At the end of the day, everyone experiences deep fulfilling joy in creative acts, if the work of creation is not too difficult (such as fighting systems, others, or management to get anything done). A creative idea system is a key – often misunderstood – part of any lean system.
A Hope, Not a Scam
Lean systems are clearly designed to create the conditions for fruitful, meaningful work. How to deal with lean when management’s intent is to use the tool for productivity pressure and squeezing more out of people, I don’t know.
Creating the conditions for meaningful work through respecting people’s people-ness is essentially what we write about: how can we create work conditions where work is more natural and where people are hired to succeed at their job, not just to do their job? Although much of what I write is fiction, I do write it from real-life cases (which I then disguise to protect the innocent and guilty alike). I believe that the points we make are real, and not make-believe to hide an ugly truth.
Is lean a scam? I honestly don’t believe so. I think it’s a hope. Toyota showed us how there can be a better way both to work and compete, and lean is the sum of our efforts to understand this lesson and transfer it outside of Toyota and outside of the automotive industry. Have all our attempts been successful? Clearly not, and we learned many lessons on the way (not the least of which is to always go back to the basics of TPS). Still, here’s the door, and the room is large.
Can any hope be turned into a scam? Absolutely, lean or otherwise. We see this every day. But remember that any scam is a deal between the scammer and the scammed, who hopes to get something for nothing.
（文章來源：LEI 作者： Michael Ballé ）
