socratic thinking about wate

1. Lean is never easy, a story Leo Monhemius, Dutch Six Sigma, December 2014
Four students prepare meals together.
Today is John’s turn; he is cooking potatoes, hamburgers and lettuce.
Both for idealism and for money savings, the group agreed to minimize waste.
John is not sure how late he will come from school in the afternoon; he does his shopping in
the morning before lectures.
He can buy a single lettuce, but for two heads the second is half the price.
The single one seems enough, but the outer leaves have to be cleaned carefully, in order to
avoid waste. John is not sure whether he will have enough time for that in the evening. Even
more, if the lettuce is in the warm school building all day, would quality reduce? Especially
the outer leaves could be brow. Competing targets: enough lettuce, and also … no waste
and low cost.
Since the second is half price, John buys two heads.
In the evening John is unexpectedly early and also the lettuce proved fully usable, including
the outer leaves that sometimes need to be removed. Sind he has two heads anyway, John
decides to take only the best leaves of both heads. And he has to scrap the rest. (House-
rule: never the same dinner on successive days)
Over dinner the issue was discussed, the group could not even decide which type of the 8
wastes was suffered.
Interesting conclusion: the half price bargain was tipping Johns decision into eventual waste.
The pattern … At the decision moment, not all information is available, how to
balance conflicting goals? It has to do with the forcefield of John, applying his personal
weight factors to the goals. Imagine John would take the risk by buying just enough lettuce,
would the group of students accept the calculated risk of “sometimes not enough”? The
forces may have a very different nature; the positive drive is rational and just a few dynes
each time. The negative force may be emotional and repressive, perceived as punishment
for random rare events.
Conclusion might be that a closed loop feedback system is not so easy to judge for waste?
Nor easy to improve? How would you intervene in this process without overruling the
students’ judgment roles?
Do you recognize in your business similar processes with high waste?
( For a fresh up of the 8 wastes, see last page. )
decide
menu
shop cook eat,
judge
decide
waste
Complex feedback of expectations, cost, quality
store

2. kies
menu
super
markt
koken eten,
oordeel
besluit
afval
Spanningsveld verwachtingen, kosten en kwaliteit
kap-
stok
Lean is nooit gemakkelijk, een verhaal
Leo Monhemius, Dutch Six Sigma, December 2014
Vier studenten koken gezamenlijk.
Vandaag is Jan aan de beurt, hij kookt aardappels, hamburgers en sla.
Zowel uit idealisme als uit zuinigheid komen ze overeen om zo weinig mogelijk afval te
veroorzaken.
Jan weet nog niet precies hoe laat hij uit de les komt vanmiddag; daarom doet hij ‘s ochtends
op de heenweg boodschappen.
Hij kan één krop sla kopen, maar de tweede is halve prijs. Één lijkt precies genoeg, maar
dan moeten ook de buitenste bladeren goed worden schoongemaakt, om alles te kunnen
gebruiken.
Jan weet nog niet of hij daar vanavond genoeg tijd voor heeft. Daar komt nog bij dat de sla de hele
dag in het warme schoolgebouw aan de kapstok hangt, zou de kwaliteit eronder lijden? Vooral de
buitenste bladeren kunnen eronder lijden. Hij heeft te maken met strijdige doelstellingen, genoeg sla,
en ook … geen afval en lage kosten.
Omdat de tweede halve prijs is hakt Jan de knoop door, hij koopt twee kroppen.
‘s Avonds is Jan vroeger thuis dan hij dacht en bovendien blijkt de sla helemaal bruikbaar, zelfs de
buitenste bladeren die soms weggegooid moeten worden. Maar omdat hij toch twee kroppen heeft,
besluit Jan om alleen de beste stukken van de beide kroppen te gebruiken. En de rest moet hij
weggooien. (Huisregel: nooit twee dagen hetzelfde eten)
Tijdens het eten wordt het voorval uitgebreid besproken, de groep kan zelfs niet overeenkomen welke
van de 8 verspillingen dit betreft.
Boeiende conclusie: de halve prijs korting bracht Jan juist tot een grote kans op verspilling.
Het patroon … Tijdens de beslissing is niet alle informatie beschikbaar, hoe moeten de
strijdige doelstellingen worden afgewogen? Het heeft te maken met het krachtenveld waarin Jan zich
bevindt. Hij kent zijn persoonlijke weegfactoren toe aan de doelen. Stel je voor dat Jan het risico zou
nemen om precies genoeg sla te kopen, zou de groep studenten het risico willen lopen op “soms te
weinig “? De krachten zijn ongelijk van aard; de positieve kracht is rationele besparing van een
dubbeltje per keer. De negatieve kracht kan emotioneel en onderdrukkend zijn, die wordt beleefd als
straf voor zeldzame, toevallige gebeurtenissen.
De conclusie zou kunnen zijn, dat een teruggekoppeld system niet eenvoudig te beoordelen is? En
ook niet eenvoudig te verbeteren? Hoe zou je in dit voorbeeld proces ingrijpen zonder het
beoordelingsproces van de studenten buiten spel te zetten?
Herkent U in Uw organisatie soortgelijke processen met hoge verspilling?
( Voor een kleine opfrisser van de 8 verspillingen, zie laatste bladzijde. )

3. The Eight Wastes (WIKIPEDIA)
Of course each of you is aware of the Eight wastes.
I just add them as a service, I hope you could use the story as an exercise.
Transportation
Each time a product is moved it stands the risk of being damaged, lost, delayed, etc. as well as being a cost for
no added value. Transportation does not make any transformation to the product that the consumer is willing to
pay for.
Inventory
Inventory, be it in the form of raw materials, work-in-progress (WIP), or finished goods, represents a capital outlay
that has not yet produced an income either by the producer or for the consumer. Any of these three items not
being actively processed to add value is waste.
Motion
In contrast to transportation, which refers to damage to products and transaction costs associated with moving
them, motion refers to the damage that the production process inflicts on the entity that creates the product, either
over time (wear and tear for equipment and repetitive strain injuries for workers) or during discrete events
(accidents that damage equipment and/or injure workers).
Waiting
Whenever goods are not in transport or being processed, they are waiting. In traditional processes, a large part of
an individual product's life is spent waiting to be worked on.
Over-processing
Over-processing occurs any time more work is done on a piece than is required by the customer. This also
includes using components that are more precise, complex, higher quality or expensive than absolutely required.
Over-production
Overproduction occurs when more product is produced than is required at that time by your customers. One
common practice that leads to this muda is the production of large batches, as often consumer needs change
over the long times large batches require. Overproduction is considered the worst muda because it hides and/or
generates all the others. Overproduction leads to excess inventory, which then requires the expenditure of
resources on storage space and preservation, activities that do not benefit the customer.
Defects
Whenever defects occur, extra costs are incurred reworking the part, rescheduling production, etc. This results in
labor costs, more time in the "Work-in-progress". Defects in practice can sometimes double the cost of one single
product. This should not be passed on to the consumer and should be taken as a loss.
Latent skill
Organizations employ their staff for specific skills that they may have. These employees have other skills too, it is
wasteful to not take advantage of these skills as well. "It is only by capitalizing on employees' creativity that
organizations can eliminate the other seven wastes and continuously improve their performance."