Bottom up direction onKaizen:

Production Innovationactivity for shopfloor engagement and development

Kamal S. K, Hiroshi Nakanishi

Malaysia Japan International Institute of Technology

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur Malaysia

(E-mail: , )

AbstractIt is very important to analyze Lean production directionof Kaizen activity named Junshi.Presently, there are many variations in understanding how Toyota develops its’ shop floor staff to support daily Kaizen, especially when Toyota staffs have different layers of understanding of Toyota Production System (TPS) and skills essential in applying TPS. This paper aims to clarify the Toyota’s Junshi process in the context of strengthening Just In Time (JIT) and analyze both the techniqueand management aspects of leansmall group activityby adopting the eight step of Toyota Business Practices (TBP) problem solving. Through this research,it was made clear thatmost attempts to imitate Toyota fail because techniques are adopted in pieces with little understanding of why they exist or what kind of organizational culture is needed to keep them alive. Junshi serves as an example of a technique which is successful only when embeddedwithin the right organizational culture.

KeywordsShopfloor development, Continuous improvement, Just In Time, Toyota Business Practice

Introduction

Toyota’s business success is largely and directly attributed to their unique approach to manufacturing. The Toyota production system (TPS) or more generically, “lean manufacturing” has been widely studied in the early of 1970s withquite a numbers of successful imitators. Thus, operational management researchers continue attempting tounderstand how TPS works.What makes Toyota’s approach to manufacturing difficult to grasp is often the implicit or perspective of the analyst, not necessarily TPS itself. Thatis, TPS is too often examined analytically and as if it were static – despite notableexamples of a contrary view1. For one main reason, at any given point what iscalled TPS is actually the state of a dynamic system that has evolved to a point and will continue to evolve.Commentators have described Toyota’s approach as a set of contradictions 2. As Fujimoto sees it,the mystery is that Toyota’s production system has evolved emergent qualities that cannot all beknown in advance. He sees TPS problem solving as an “evolving learningcapability” that is both “intentional” and “opportunistic” in that the company usesestablished routines to generate possible new production improvements and at thesame time is able to seize emergent “unintended” or surprise improvements and thenskillfully institutionalize them as well 3 and that is Toyota Business Practice (TBP).

The scope of this work is to analyze how Toyota applies Junshi to developshop floor worker ability to solve problems in daily activities and to support problemsolving skills by management team. Correspondently, Toyota must establish anorganizational culture where workers feel comfortable asking for help and learningTPS. This paper will evaluate what makes Junshi successful. One case examples that illustrate some prominent characteristics of Junshi inside Toyota are included. Lastly, Junshi are discussed as they might exist “outside” Toyota. The goal ofthis paper, however, is not to enable copycat imitation of Quality Circle, but to offer a point ofview that may be helpful for those interested in understanding TPS as a system.

2 Literature Review

Mixed methods studies the relationships of management understanding, support and execution towards a lean sustainability implementation. Exploratory longitudinal fieldwork of research diary and field notes with key informants over a period of time using descriptive, analysis and interpretation through questionnaires, in-depth interviews, meetings, document and observation to develop’s an insiders point of view.

Using the practical approach consists of the empirical study of small group activity consists of hands on approach. It involves first hand research through observations, data collection and discussion groups. This type of research methods requires quantifiable data involving numerical and statistical explanations. Quantitative Research is used to quantify the problem by way of generating numerical data or data that can be transformed into usable statistics. It is used to quantify attitudes, opinions, behaviors, and other defined variables and generalize results from a larger sample population. Quantitative Research uses measurable data to formulate facts and uncover patterns in research. Quantitative data collection longitudinal studies and systematic observations.

3 Research result

3.1 Literature review

(1) Quality Control Circles

Shortly after World War II, the Japanese government encouraged the formation of several industry organizations to help Japan recover from the war. The most noteworthy of these governing bodies has been the Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers (JUSE). The union brought together leaders and experts from all of Japan’s major industries so that they could share best practices. This was exercised in the hope of revitalizing Japan’s economy. Its main directive was to revitalize Japan’s economy and eliminating waste by improving quality. It wasn’t until 1949 that JUSE began to host statistical quality control seminars. In 1950 JUSE invited Dr. W. Edwards Deming4, a U.S. government statistical advisor to lecture to them on use of statistical quality control.

Although JUSE offered Dr. Deming the royalties for his lectures, he refused. JUSE, inspired by Dr. Deming’s kindness, began the Deming Prize in 1951 from those same royalties. The prize, which is a bronze medal bearing a likeness of Dr. Deming is awarded to those who have contributed to field of quality control. The Deming Prize was originally awarded in two categories. It is awarded to individuals who make a significant contribution to the theory and application of quality control and also to firms that obtain outstanding results in the application of quality control.

Another quality guru that also contributed to the culture and credence of JUSE was Joseph Juran5. He like, W. Edwards Deming, was also invited to give lectures to the still burgeoning JUSE and did so in 1954 and 1960. His lectures focused more on a managing quality and how to make quality a business strategy. His ideas greatly supported JUSE’s tenet beliefs in continuous improvement and quality circles. The most influential figures in the history of JUSE have been its founder Ichiro Ishikawa and his son Kaoru Ishikawa. In 1946 Ichiro Ishikawa6 organized JUSE and helped many of then top Japanese executives to meet and pay attention to W. Edwards Deming. However, it was his son Kaoru that headed JUSE during its flourishing and led the Japanese to internalize the teachings of Deming and Juran. As a professor of engineering at TokyoUniversity, he developed the concept of quality circles. A Quality circle is an approach to Total Quality Management that encourages workers to form teams to present process changes to management for implementation. This reinforces Deming’s 14th point for management, “Quality is everybody’ responsibility”Kaoru Ishikawa spearheaded the Japanese Quality Revolution that has given JUSE the prestige it enjoys today. Ishikawa left behind him a focus in JUSE of training others how to use Total Quality Management tools especially quality circles.

The quality circle concept has become so popular that there are now over 426,000 registered quality control circles in Japan. These groups, some small while others quite large, permeate all of Japan’s industries and play a major role in Japan’s culture. These quality control circles have helped Japan’s industries thrive and often define the work and social context of many Japanese.

(2) Junshi

If lean is a discipline that develops over time, then it requires commitment andconsistent leadership engagement and participation. One element in the current TPSapproach that is of interest as a focus and can also make this picture of lean clear is Junshi.There have been various attempts to explain small group activities such as Jishuken 7; however, these attempts have described only Quality Circles asa rapid shop floor activity similar to the kaizen blitz model 8,9 with connections to supplier quality development for those situations needingurgent solutions. What is more misleading is that none of the current work discusseshow lean problem solving is applied or how this activity can actually weaken shop floor workerinvolvement if applied incorrectly. There is also little understanding of how managerscan initiate, support or lead problem-solving activities when they themselves needhelp in developing their understanding of TPS problem solving.

These descriptions of Junshi mislead by creating the impression of a static impression, that shop floor within Toyota have a complete understanding of TPS, one which they somehowattained instantly without needing to develop it over time 10. Seen more clearly, Junshi’s, like many other TPS activities, have both a learning development goaland a productivity goal: as they harness shop floor teams for problem solving needed by the production process, Junshi help managers continue to improve their ability tocoach and teach TPS problem-solving to others, specifically production staffs.

What is important about this procedure is that the Junhsi team will pass much time studying and examining the current scheme to discover the smallest possible root causes for each countermeasure.This procedure can consume time and cannot be rushed, which is why Junshi can take weeks or months to complete, when performed right. Although Junshi may vary in time depending on the nature of the problem, the Junshi team may meet as needed to complete the problem-solving process. Junshi could meet continuously over a short period or spend a few hours a week over the span of several months. The form of time spent depends on the nature of the problem and what is involved in completing the problem-figuring out countermeasures. The only reliable way to know if a countermeasure was successful is by monitoring and monitoring through the current arrangement. This process can sometimes take weeks or months to complete and depending on the nature of the problem can be difficult to track.The research methodology used are based on PDCA cycle introduced by Dr. Deming which later it was developed further by Taichi Ohno. It is known as Toyota Business Practice (TBP) until today as the eight steps problem solving process.

(3) Toyota Business Practice (TBP)

The eight-step process aims to break down large problems into small problems and test various countermeasures for each small problem. The eight-step method is an agreed to use procedure for developing countermeasures that keep problems from returning. The eight-step is effective because, it links methods to results by running trials to determine countermeasures. Examples of its use and detailed descriptions of its steps can be found elsewhere 1112.

  1. 問題を明確にする(clarify the problem)
  2. Identify problems at worksite.
  3. Search for problems that are related to work processes, wastage, productivity, quality, cost etc.
  4. Brainstorm, Genchi Genbutsu, past records.
  5. 問題をブレイクダウンする(breakdown the problem)
  • Refer to problem statement on what data to collect (Object).
  • Check past data(if any) / Collect fresh data.
  • Analyse flowcharts(if any)/ Create flowcharts on current process (if unavailable).
  • Examine the situation over a period of time.
  1. 達成目標を決める(set the target to be achieved)
  • State where the improvement is to take place and visualize in chart or graph.
  • Make it clear what is to be done and what the objective is.
  • Express topic in terms of attacking something bad rather than improving something good.
  • Use SMART technique (Specific, Measureable, Achieveable, Realistic and Time bound).
  1. 真因を考え抜く(think through to the true cause)
  • Indicate your problem statement.
  • Use Fishbone/Ishikawa/Cause & Effect Diagram.
  • Brainstorm of possible causes.
  • Do the ‘5 Whys’.
  • Identifying the causes of the problem.
  • Narrow the long lists of causes down to the most important ones.
  • Use facts, data, past history and personal opinions to focus on the most important cause.
  • Verify the cause whether it is true or false. Evaluate the degree of influence of each causes identified.
  • Collect data on the most important cause and present it on graph.
  1. 対策を立てる(develop countermeasures)
  • Suggest the countermeasures / corrective action based on the cause analysis,

-Think of creative solutions.

-Use 5W 2H to describe countermeasure.

  • come-out with several alternatives solution, consider the advantages and disadvantages of each countermeasures in term of its effect, cost and practicality.
  1. 対策をやりぬく(follow through on the countermeasures)
  • To execute countermeasures and monitor the implementation
  • Confirm the tangible and intangible results.
  • Analyze result based on quality, cost, time and other benefits.
  1. 結果とプロセスを評価する(evaluate the result and the process)
  • To confirm and monitor the results of countermeasures against the target.
  • Compare result with target set, evaluate and study why target did not achieve.
  • Confirm your achievement by checking your data.
  • Evaluate success and failure.
  1. 成果を定着させる(make sure the results take hold)
  • Monitor the trends of result obtained to confirm the effectiveness of countermeasure for long term.
  • Where results are successful, standardize the countermeasures and establish as SOP (Standard Operating Procedure).
  • Create a system in which can confirm that SOPs are followed and continue to have the desired effect (Training, Audit, Result Monitoring and etc).
  • To standardize the countermeasures that are effective in eliminating root causes of problem for permanent and long term effect.
  • Review the project.

- what went well.

- what did not go well.

  • Record the remaining problems that were not solved and select new theme for next project.
  • Review the benefits that the team has received in being part of the project.

(4)An important difference between Quality Circle and Junshiactivity.

Figure 1 Scope, structure and direction of Junshi Activities

A significant different between Quality circle and Junshi activity is the team members are coming from bottom up with support and commitment from management. Therefore, the engagement of shop floor workers in problem solving activity is being recognized and highlighted by the management. Junshi can be misunderstand as “single purpose”: as only a plant improvement activity 10,13–15. In fact, Junshi has two main purposes: to solve problems in the workplacethat need management attention and to correct, enrich and deepen understanding ofTPSby management through first-hand on the job application of the problem-solvingprinciples using hands-on activity and coaching. It differs from problem-solving activity conducted by management (“Quality Circle” in Toyota’s language) because Junshi involves only shop floor workers to identify the problems and implement the countermeasures.

(5) Significant roles and support function of management

Since in addition to their other roles, managers perform an important function in TPSas coaches and teachers for team members doing problem solving, Junshi is both atechnical problem-solving activity and a management development process that helpsmanagers learn how to be better teachers 16,17. Junshi continuallydevelop management’s interpersonal skills so that they understand the right way tocoach and support kaizen 18. A third organizational culture function of Junshi is to communicate, maintain and reinforce the company’s values, beliefs andbehaviors (known as the Toyota Way) (The Toyota Business Practice (Toyota MotorCorporation, 2005)). Participation in Junshi gives management a common languageand a common approach to problem solving standard across the company.

3.2 Case Study: Junshi Project for the Inventory Reduction

The implementation of the small group activity activity namely Junshi has been executed upon several breakthroughcases in the automotive industry. Previously, there was a workers small group activity on complexity planning for automotive components using thisapproach. In this study, a project that explores new approach from small group activity known as ‘Inventory Reduction’ is presented. In the automotive industry, inventory plays a critical role in controlling and keeping optimumstock that bring high impact to manufacturing competitiveness in terms of cost effectiveness.

It aims to create an opportunity to develop own style, alongside cost reduction on the benchmarkedsystems. The case project in adopting using Junshi activity was conducted in an automotive OEM. The focus area was selected because of their incapability in controlling a full cycle production process. The cost improvement results were recorded after the case implementation was completed.

Process flow for performing Junshi

The general process flow for performing Junshiis explain in the follows the eight-stepproblem-solving process are as follows:

Step 1. Clarify the problem.

Step 2. Break down the problem.

Step 3. Target setting.

Step 4. Root cause analysis.

Step 5. Develop countermeasures.

Step 6. See countermeasure through.

Step 7. Monitor both results and processes.

Step 8. Sharing (yokoten) successful processes.

3.2.1The clarification and target of stock reduction activity

Inventory plays a significant role in a manufacturing environment, one most widely use term is Just In Time (JIT) concept, as it derive as a pillar by Taichi Ohno, creator of Toyota’s production system. The Just-in-Time approach attempts to reduce costs and improve workflow by carefully scheduling material to arrive where needed at the right amount and at the right time. Consequently, costs of inventories can be substantiallyreduced and the use of space can be maximized. In this case, this approach is targetedto lower the costof the product. Due to space limitations, inventory is high thus the problem is surfaced.

3.2.2 Break down the problemexample using 5W2H

What; To optimize stock reduction activities.

Where; To which focuses on Finish Good (FG), Local parts and Completely Knock Down (CKD) parts inventories.

Who;A team that specialized in the automotive material management and inventory was established and explored the stock reduction on manufacturing system.

Why;The research target of this study is to reduce the holding cost and towards having the right parts at the right quantity at a right time.

When;The duration of the case study was around 3 months to be completed at the conceptual level, and further 6 to 12 months to actually implement the concept into the production systems.