I think you will spend 88 seconds reading this post
Currently re-reading TWI‘s “how to get continuing results”, I stumbled upon this paragraph:
To get appropriate action on this fundamental [Assign Responsibility for Getting Continuing Results], the TWI representative might get a decision by raising such questions as these:
(a) “How do you now inform your executive and supervisory organization of a new responsibility – or a new policy – or a new requirement? What change have you had recently where you had to get detailed information across to your supervisors (such as new procedures under your wage agreement, or change of manufacturing method, or change in production methods)? How did you get the results you wanted?
(b) “Will a similar procedure be adequate to get continued results in the case of JI, JM or JR?”
The new responsibilities mentioned above are the following ones:
The sponsoring executive must make it clear to the members of the executive and supervisory staff that they are responsible for results. To get continuing results, each executive and supervisor must:
- use the plan himself.
- provide assistance to those who report to him.
- require results of those who report to him.
Question (a) is clearly a “what works here?” question in a typical Solution Focus approach. Then it is inquired with question (b) whether this approach could be used for getting continuing use of the methods.
It’s marvelous that in 1944 already, TWI knew that it’s better for change management to build on current practices rather than create something new.
It’s also interesting to note that the “continuing use” of the J programs was supposed to be done through 1) coaching and 2) coaching from line management (not dedicated coaches).
How are you assuring continuing use of your Lean programs? Is it building on current managerial practices?