It seems to me there is another fundamental aspect of lean manufacturing that needs to have the harsh light of reality shone upon it: this business of people empowerment – you know – respect for people, letting them control their work lives, etc, etc, etc.. – all that blather about people being such a valuable asset we splatter all over our web sites and annual reports. Most companies that believe they are doing well in this regard should have to explain why, if their production folks are so empowered, do they still have supervisors or foremen, quality inspectors and auditors, and material handlers?
If we really have respect for the folks in the factory, and we have empowered them to do their jobs, we should not have to pay people to look over their shoulders, check up on their work, or get their parts for them. They oughta be able to do all of that for themselves. Empowered people don’t need babysitters.
Like everything else about lean, empowering people is a cost reduction issue. If you are going to pay a guy fifteen bucks an hour, he had better be able to get his job done without someone dogging him all day, and someone else double checking everything he does, or someone making sure he has the right parts and has done the proper paperwork. If our people are not capable of working independently and getting the job done right, we need to get new people. More likely they are, and we are just not trusting them to do it, in which case, we need new management.
In any event, you cannot succeed by compounding high labor rates with a 3:1 direct to indirect ratio. In fact, you cannot win by hanging onto the archaic management belief that there is any significance to the distinction between direct and indirect labor at all.
Our Asian and Mexican competitors employ work checkers, babysitters and straw bosses out of necessity. We employ them out of ignorance. And so long as we continue to employ them, we have empowered no one to the point that they are really helping the bottom line.
Mark Graban says
I don’t understand what you mean about Asians and Mexicans hiring babysitters “out of necessity.”
Bill Waddell says
Mark,
It has nothing to do with the native intelligence of the people, but is purely a function of education. The typical Mexican worker comes to work with his or her compulsory 6th grade education (which often falls far short of what an American would learn by the sixth grade). In Asia, the typical worker imported from some remote village has even less. With so little knowledge of even the basics of math, science and communications (reading, writing,learning) the jobs have to be ‘dumbed down’ considerably. The productivity levels of Mexican and Asian workers is a fraction of that of an American or European worker partly due to technology, but mostly due to the woeful ignorance of the workforce.
Mike says
We should remember that something as powerful and difficult as empowerment is often evolving. Empowerment does not happen all at once. Employees do not go from unempowered to empowered in one easy step. Different managers and supervisors find empowering employees to be easy or difficult and different employees respond to empowerment differently–some positively and some not. An excellent how-to book for managers is Diane Tracy’s 10 Steps to Empowerment. Easy to digest, full of sound advice, good examples, and practical ideas.
Barry "aka the Hillbilly" says
I have always thought that the best form of empowerment ultimately shows up in what the Employee can take home to his or her family.
What would happen if Management’s goal was to care for its employees like family and help them to take as much home to their family as possible. The method is of course to use everyone’s talents to improve the company and its products or services continuously. The profits from these improvements need to be shared in a ongoing and tangible way with employees. Just like the shareholders.
Societies need progress. Progress comes in small pieces and sometimes great big jumps. But it doesn’t come easily. A company has to work for progress.
Isn’t it strange how a company can place so much value in a bunch of landscaping, sheet metal, steel beams, machinery, fancy sales publications, company perks, etc., and many times just let their people die on the vine.