Tenik Rahasia Coder Sejati (TEKNIK CODING, SECRET CODING)

Dari dulu sampai sekarang, sudah menjadi suatu sunatullah bahwa yang namanya keahlian yang sejati diperoleh dari waktu belajar dan praktek yang lama, Seperti yang diketahui, di zaman yang modern ini, diperlukan jam terbang yang tinggi untuk menjadi master dalam suatu bidang kerja atau keterampilan tertentu. Dalam coding, diperlukan minimal 10,000 jam coding untuk menjadi seorang coder sejati atau disebut juga dengan hacker atau extreme programmer.

Ada beberapa rahasia coder sejati yang dipaparkan oleh salah seorang hacker top Google, antara lain:

1. Harus ada rasa suka dan ketertarikan dengan coding pada awalnya.

2. Mau berdiskusi dan bertukar pikiran serta berkomunikasi dengan programmer lain yang menyukai bahasa pemrograman atau mahir bahasa pemrograman tersebut, diutamakan seorang teman.

3. Berani untuk setting standard dalam belajar dan menentukan level pemecahan masalah dan level kesulitan algoritma coding sampai ke taraf advance, dari tingkatan basic pastinya, tapi harus dilakukan dalam koridor pemecahan masalah dan pembuatan proyek. Bukan dalam koridor latihan biasa.

4. Ikut dalam proyek pengembangan software, menjadi programmer terbaik di suatu proyek untuk mengetahui bagaimana cara kerja programmmer handal dan cara memimpin proyek, dan menjadi programmer terburuk dalam suatu proyek untuk mengetahui cara kerja programmer handal dan belajar darinya.

5. Ikut bergabung dalam komunitas pengembangan standar bahasa pemrograman.

6. Mempelajari alur kerja hardware dan mempelajari perhitungan memori komputer.

7. Pelajari minimal setengah lusin bahasa program, namun khususkan penguasaan optimal pada satu bahasa program tertentu, belajarlah bahasa program terstruktur, bahasa program object oriented, bahasa program lainnya yang berbeda karakter minimal 6 bahasa program.

8. Cari tahu mengapa sebagian orang menyukai bahasa program tertentu dan sebagian lainnya menyukai bahasa program lainnya.

9. Pengalaman di lapangan dan praktek tidak bisa dikalahkan oleh buku dan kursus, Jangan percaya buku belajar komputer dalam beberapa jam atau hari. Ingat, menjadi coder sejati perlu waktu dan pengorbanan, minimal 10,000 jam coding.

10. Gunakan temanmu sebagai tempat bertanya dan berdiskusi dan mendapatkan proyek, pelajarilah bahasa pemrograman yang mereka gunakan dalam bekerja dan ikutlah bekerja bersama mereka.

11. Anggaplah coding sebagai alat untuk bermain, bukan alat untuk serius dan mencari uang.

12. Sabar dan dan jangan bosan dalam ber-coding…selamat menempuh jalan menjadi coder sejati..semangat..!!!!

@2099, Ciganjur Tanah Baru, By Zaki.

Nations are built not with bricks and stones but with the capacity to create and apply knowledge. The result of knowledge creation and application in manufacturing and management practices is well demonstrated by Japan. Today we are witness to many industrialized economies that are strengthening their manufacturing activities simply by adopting these techniques.

The distinguishing characteristics associated with Japanese manufacturing techniques include an emphasis on designing and redesigning processes to optimize efficiency and a strong commitment to quality.

The manufacturing techniques that Japanese companies practice provide a competitive advantage and outstanding economic performance. The key for success is an understanding of the broad context of manufacturing culture, infrastructure and environment. These sound manufacturing and business techniques created and adopted by leading Japanese manufacturers have turned out to be the secret of their market leadership in many industries.

Following are a few of these concepts, which can help in managing any business set-up in a better way:

• Kaizen is one such technique, which in Japanese means ‘improve.’ This is commonly recognized as practices focusing on continuous improvement in manufacturing activities, business activities in general, and even life in general, depending on interpretation and usage. By improving standardized activities and processes, Kaizen helps in eliminating waste.
• Another management Japanese technique is the 5-S. It is a technique used to establish and maintain quality environment in an organization. It has five elements: Seiri (sorting out useful and frequently used materials and tools from unwanted and rarely used things); Seiton (keeping things in the right place systematically so that searching or movement time is minimized); Seiso (keeping everything around you clean and in a neat manner); Seiketsu (standardizing the above principles in everyday life) and Shitsuke (inculcating good habits and practicing them continuously). The 5-S practice helps everyone in the organization to live a better life.
• Kanban and ‘Just in Time’ are two other practices in inventory management practices that were pioneered by the Japanese automobile manufacturers, such as Toyota. Quality improvement, on the other hand, is the result of lower proportion of component scrap since the components spend less time in the supply chain.
• Poka-yoke is a process improvement focused on training of workers for mastering the increasingly complicated tasks to selectively redesign the tasks so they could be more easily and reliably mastered. It involves designing a foolproof process to eliminate the chance of errors.
• Jidoka is a practice by means of which an individual worker runs several machines simultaneously. Japan thus designs such machines that eliminate both error and the need for constant supervision.
• Muda is another technique that reduces wasteful activity in service processes. It ensures process efficiency and effectiveness.
• Mura curiously combines rigidity and flexibility and thus teaches service process improvement.
• Reducing Muri means reducing physical strain. In services process improvement, Muri applies to convoluted and unnecessary routings, physical transfer, and distances paper files may have to travel for a process to complete.
• Genchi Gembutsu means going to the actual scene (genchi) and confirming the actual scene (gembutsu). Observation of service processes at the point where it is actually delivered may unearth a host of problems such as lack of training, unnecessary steps, or a number of other areas that would benefit from small but significant process improvement ideas.

This is a glimpse of manufacturing techniques that Japan has so intellectually created and so profoundly practiced in its manufacturing systems that even with no natural resources, it has acquired the status of one of the most industrialized nations. Can we learn from Japan?

My Consultancy–Asif J. Mir - Management Consultant–transforms organizations where people have the freedom to be creative, a place that brings out the best in everybody–an open, fair place where people have a sense that what they do matters. For details please visit www.asifjmir.com, Lectures, Line of Sight.

You May Just Be An Entrepreneur if… Written By: Darren Bocksnick @2009

1) You May Just Be An Entrepreneur If you are driven by a burning, insatiable desire for something better and something more: The entrepreneurial spark innate within you is not doused by disappointments nor snuffed-out by setbacks; rather, it grows moment by agonizing moment until it completely engulfs you and the flames of potential consumes you to action. This pioneering seed latent within you may have been dormant, hidden and undiscovered or worst, it may have been covered by layers of neglect yet it fights for life and for the light of a new day to dawn.

Some may perceive or label you as overly-ambitious and others may be intimidated, even jealous over your drive but what they cannot perceive or possibly know is that you must act upon your entrepreneurial instinct to press on toward new heights. For, to the entrepreneur, to do anything contrary is tantamount to being stripped of his or her potential.

Such is the angst of an entrepreneur; they must continuously strive to satisfy that hunger for success until something gives and the situation turns to their advantage.

2) You May Just Be An Entrepreneur If you are never completely satisfied or contented working for someone else: To the entrepreneur, working for someone else is a temporal, transitional obstacle at best; and an utter, unresolved disappointment at worst. Entrepreneurs make both the best and worst employees. They are some of the best employees because they have a natural proclivity toward business and their modus operandi is fueled by principles of success that tend to place them in a category unto themselves.

However; they make the worst employees because they know what opportunities await them and what unfulfilled dreams still vie for their undivided attention. In this respect, they are never truly passionate about another company’s product, service or vision since invariably, it is not their own. If left unresolved, those with an entrepreneurial nature become indifferent and intolerable as employees, to the point they are difficult to deal with…

Such is the struggle of the entrepreneur; they are like square pegs trying to be fit into society’s round mold and are never quite able to adapt. They are forced by reason of job status to make the transition to mere employee but deep down know they must heed their heart’s calling to chart their life’s course and chip out their niche.

3) You May Just Be An Entrepreneur If you are a perfectionist or have a low tolerance level for ineptitude, incompetence and inefficiency: Entrepreneurs are by nature, achievers. The entrepreneur’s desire to achieve goals and see their dreams come into fruition is unparalleled. When dealing with individuals who don’t seem to possess the same drive or determination, entrepreneurs become annoyed and impatient to the point of being unbearable. Since seeking perfection in all they do is the gage by which they measure and thereby, scrutinize a matter or an individual, ineptitude and incompetence are indicative of failure and they will thereby, avoid or keep at bay those exhibiting such characteristics.

They will spend countless hours researching opportunities, reviewing start-up business ventures and interviewing other successful people in the hopes that somehow, amidst it all, to find that single product or idea that best embodies their ambitions. They are seldom satisfied though with what they discover and their search is never quite complete until they create their own opportunity or modify an existing one to their own liking.

Such is the lot of entrepreneurs; they are always seeking out that perfect situation be it in an opportunity or a relationship but are never quite able to find what they’re looking for until they create it for themselves.

4) You May Just Be An Entrepreneur If your thoughts are constantly at work “brainstorming” and “master-minding” on ideas for helping improve existing processes or for the development of new products: In other words, the entrepreneur epitomizes the Japanese ideal of Kaizen or “continuous improvement”. When an entrepreneur-at-heart is present at a typical, company-wide or departmental brainstorming session, others sitting near will sometimes cringe with uncertainty and trepidation over what the entrepreneur among them will say or do next since, entrepreneurs are by nature, a bit unpredictable.

Yet, their ideas are over-the-top and revolutionary. Therefore, entrepreneurs typically visualize what others overlook or have not completely thought-through. Their imagination is constantly at work; analyzing and theorizing possible conclusions or solutions until a resolution occurs or a resignation follows. Though they are often criticized in public for their “wild notions”, it is the entrepreneur who is typically called on in private for his or her conclusions in such matters from an almost, consultative stand-point.

Such is the case with entrepreneurs; their minds and thought processes typically out-pace that of their peers in the discovery of new ideas or paradigms and as such, must slow down till others catch up or worst, separate themselves altogether until they do it themselves.

5) You May Just Be An Entrepreneur If you are constantly in “create mode”; conceptualizing new product ideas, dabbling in the arts, playing musical instruments and/or tinkering with gadgets in an effort to figure out how things work: It is no coincidence that the movers and shakers of society past such as the DaVinci’s and the Benjamin Franklin’s of their time were inventors, artists and / or proficient musicians. There is a direct correlation between the creative faculties of the mind and higher levels of intelligence. This creative stroke of genius is what beckons the entrepreneur forward in his or her quest for success and sustains them when all has not occurred according to plan.

Entrepreneurs by interpretation are creators; they create innovative products, they create companies from ground-floor on up to top-tier and they create opportunities for others to benefit from in terms of their effort and labor. Innumerable are society’s advancements and conveniences that could safely be attributed to the work of an entrepreneur. Their noted mark of influence is shared by all and is routinely experienced on an ongoing basis.

Such is the plight of the entrepreneur; their efforts often go unnoticed and worse, are accredited to others. Their crowning achievements are typically so frequent and routine that others capitalize off of their works and take credit for the entrepreneur’s efforts.

6) You May Just Be An Entrepreneur If you don’t accept paradigms as routine; but rather, you break them and create new ones: Paradigms are established patterns of thought that become the standard norm for how individuals function and carry out their daily duties. These paradigms are “safe-zones” for many since they represent a form of tradition that’s been accepted and adapted as standard rule. Yet, to the entrepreneur; their inquisitive mind questions the establishment, bucks up against tradition and compels them to map out a new set of rules; their own!

Since, the entrepreneur by instinct is a trend-setter, a rule-breaker, and in most cases, an over-achiever; he or she cannot be boxed in or made to fit into society’s mold. Rather than making the pivotal mistake of attempting to tame the entrepreneur to become society’s civilized pet, society rather needs to release the entrepreneur out into the wild where he or she can roam, rule and run their course, uninhibited.

Such, however is the role of the entrepreneur; to leave his or her indelible mark on society by setting certain changes in motion that usher in a new paradigm shift in forward thinking and yet, be forced in many ways to watch from a distance as well as to savor the satisfaction of what they’ve accomplished in silence.

7) You May Just Be An Entrepreneur If you live your life as if endowed with purpose and empowered by a higher calling from somewhere beyond… To some, the entrepreneur may seem indifferent, aloof or even a bit out-of-touch. This isn’t necessarily the case but their sense of quiet contemplation and reserve can be unsettling. Typically, people will mark them as different and place them in a category unto themselves. If the truth be told though, entrepreneurs ARE different in every sense of the word. Entrepreneurs are dreamers whose thoughts of grandeur and success keep them up long into the night and rising up early into the morning as if to seize the day. It is this desire for better things, this drive to break free from the status-quo that makes the entrepreneur stand out and easy to spot in a crowd.

 Entrepreneurs may initially cause unease and unrest to those closest to them but it is the impact the entrepreneur leaves behind that often drastically improves circumstances for those same individuals, though entrepreneurs are seldom credited for doing so. In this regard, it could indeed be said that entrepreneurs do live their lives as if endowed with purpose and empowered by a higher calling because, by their mere actions- they break society free from the routines that have kept her at a stand-still and in doing so, usher in positive changes that improve the lives of those they’ve touched.

Such is the legacy of the entrepreneur; he or she may positively impact the lives of many and improve society on a routine basis but will most likely, not see the full scale of their influence nor realize the part they have played in the grand scheme of positive change they have introduced to their world.

In conclusion, entrepreneurs have left their indelible mark on society through the roles they have played in the advancement of technology, scientific breakthroughs and in pivotal, paradigm shifts that have helped procure new phases in our development as a civilized people. No doubt, without the impact of the entrepreneur, society may very well still be stuck in the agricultural age or worst. In the final assessment of things, it will be said by future generations that the entrepreneurs; those daring enough to do differently than what society’s expectations had confined them to- were the true heroes and heroines of their day; not the politicians, the celebrities or the CEO’s of large corporations. Though they are few and far between, society can still breathe a sigh of relief knowing that there always has and always will be the entrepreneur among us working quietly behind the scenes; contemplating development, creating improvements and causing advancement in the world to which they’ve been assigned…

 Darren.Bocksnick@gmail.com

http://mySuccessfulThinkers.com/Darren-Bocksnick

 http://highercaliber.blogspot.com/

http://lifeascent.wordpress.com/

http://hubpages.com/profile/WordWielder

Facebook:  http://profile.to/darrenbocksnick/

http://twitter.com/wordwielder

1. LẬP DANH SÁCH CÔNG VIỆC CẦN LÀM MỖI BUỔI TỐI HAY BUỔI SÁNG.

2.SÀNG LỌC, SẮP XẾP, LÀM SẠCH BÀN LÀM VIỆC MỖI NGÀY SAU GIỜ LÀM VIỆC.

3.NHỮNG VIỆC NHỎ, KHÔNG MẤT NHIỀU THỜI GIAN CẦN LÀM NGAY, ĐỪNG ĐỢI NGÀY MAI.

TẢICHƯƠNG TRÌNH QUẢN LÝ DANH SÁCH CÁC VIỆC CẦN LÀM TẠI:

http://www.getemdone.com/free-download.html

LÀM THẾ NÀO VỪA PHỤC VỤ TỐT VỪA KHÔNG LÀM PHIỀN KHÁCH?

CHO TÔI TRÀ ĐÁ

XIN ĐỪNG LÀM PHIỀN

1.The true purpose of 5S is to spot problems quickly.
Mục đích thật sự của 5 S là giúp phát hiện sớm và nhanh các vấn đề, lỗi xảy ra trong quá trình sản xuất.
http://jamieflinchbaugh.com/

2.5S is the broken windows theory applied to the shop floor.

5S là lý thuyết cửa sổ vở áp dụng  vào phân xưởng sản xuất.

(The ‘broken windows’ theory was first enunciated in 1982 by James Wilson and George Kelling in the Atlantic Monthly. The theory suggests that if a window is broken and left unrepaired, people walking by will conclude that no one is in charge and soon more windows will be broken, which could result in the anarchy spreading from the building to the street. The authors propound that a successful strategy to prevent vandalism is to start when the problem is small.)

http://leanjourneytruenorth.blogspot.com/

[I apologize in advance for how dang opinionated this post is.  But really?  I’m not that sorry.]

     I have always used/learned about lean and kaizen in conjunction with one another.  As in, they go hand in hand.  As in, “ya can’t have one without the other.”  As in,

“Kaizen is the spirit of lean.”

                                           - Scott C. Reynolds

However, it wasn’t until a couple of weeks ago that I learned they are not actually related.

I…don’t understand.

How can you claim to have lean processes if you don’t have a kaizen mindset?  Eliminating waste and amplifying learning, how can you be committed to doing those things if you do not take an approach dedicated to continuous improvement?  Eliminating a little more waste at every available opportunity is continuously improving, eh?  Learning, obviously, is continuously improving in and of itself.  Empowering the team and building integrity, these are all things that need to be constantly worked at to improve, and a continuous improvement mindset is the only way to achieve maximum results.

Think about things you do to improve your team and keep things running smoothly.  You can’t just do the same thing every time, and you can’t just do one thing and expect it to stick.  People are constantly getting their panties in a knot about something, new challenges arise, processes break down…and you need to be working in a way that supports this kind of structure.  By being focused on continuous improvement, you will constantly be thinking of the best way to handle something at the time.  Then tomorrow, you get to do it again.  Lather, rinse, repeat.  This scenario applies organizationally and across concepts; you need to constantly adapt to dealing with situations as best as you are able to keep your process flowing as smoothly and effectively as possible.  Constantly addressing needs and problems to the best of your capability in the way that is most appropriate/best for the time in order to create the best [blank] you can is…well, it’s a pretty damned effective way to work.

If you are trying to improve your processes using lean thinking without employing a kaizen way of thinking, you are not achieving everything you could.  You’re only doing lean-ish.  And any methodology or philosophy of constructing software falls down when you only focus on the implementation details and not the root philosophies and what they mean.  Be sure you are coming at things with an attitude focused on doing a little better every time or you’ll never achieve a lean environment that is both successful and sustainable. 

Thanks to Scott C. Reynolds for all the lessons and all the help with this post.

Kaizen to, jak podaje Wikipedia, “filozofia wywodząca się z japońskiej kultury i praktyki zarządzania. Jej zastosowanie nie sprowadza się tylko do tego, by produkt, czy usługa odpowiadały określonym wymaganiom jakości. W myśl tej filozofii jakość sprowadza się do stylu życia – niekończącego się procesu ulepszania. Podstawową regułą tej filozofii jest ciągłe zaangażowanie oraz chęć ciągłego podnoszenia jakości firmy i produktu. Polega to na włączeniu procesu myślowego na każdym etapie produkcji, jest odpowiedzią na zautomatyzowane tradycyjne podejście do produkcji masowej, które eliminuje potrzebę świadomej oceny wykonywanego zadania.”

Warto by tę filozofię zastosować nie tylko w zarządzaniu, ale w każdej dziedzinie naszego życie. Przecież nigdy i w niczym nie jest się tak dobrym, by nie można być lepszym!

Zachęcam do bliższego zapoznania się z tematem ciągłego rozwoju osobistego a po jego pełnym zrozumieniu – zastosowaniem go w życiu. Ciągłe ulepszanie nie tylko daje satysfakcję, ale także skutecznie zapobiega kryzysom – jesteśmy po prostu przygotowani na wszelkie ewentualności i stale idziemy z postępem. Nie zwlekaj więc i “ukaizenuj” swoje życie. Nie czekaj na uśmiech losu tylko sam spraw, by Twoje życie stało się lepsze.

Rób to po kolei, krok po kroku, a z czasem efekty przerosną Twoje najśmielsze oczekiwania. Na początku może niewiele będzie się działo, ale z czasem… wiesz co to jest efekt kuli śnieżnej? No właśnie, to Cię czeka!

Filozofia Kaizen opiera się na dwóch głównych podstawach: ulepszanie i ciągłość tego procesu.

A do zasad zaliczymy:

- Problemy stwarzają możliwości

- Bierz pomysły od wszystkich

- Pytaj 5 razy „Dlaczego?”

- Myśl nad rozwiązaniami możliwymi do wdrożenia

- Użyj sprytu zamiast pieniędzy

- Wymówki, że czegoś się nie da zrobić są zbędne

- Wybieraj proste rozwiązania – nie czekając na te idealne

- Odrzucaj ustalony stan rzeczy

- Pomyłki poprawiaj na bieżąco

- Ulepszenie nie ma końca

Więcej wiedzieć nie musisz, teraz wystarczy wprowadzić te zasady w życie! Pamiętaj, nie chodzi o to, żeby coś robić perfekcyjnie! Ważne, żeby w ogóle zacząć to robić a na poprawianie przyjdzie czas w trakcie!

Do dzieła!

Pozdrawiam,

Daniel

PS. Jak zwykle, komentarze mile widziane

One of Jack’s casual models for this venture is a blog called interfluidity by Steve Randy Waldman. Not a model in terms of content, per se, but rather chronological structure (or charming lack thereof).

Waldman is a deep thinker on financial matters, often delving into topics of intimidating complexity. His posts run the gamut from thousands of words to a mere sentence or two; frequency is all over the map. There are long stretches of dormancy – sometimes so long one wonders if Waldman has given up the ghost – and then something new and insightful appears.

Interfluidity (Waldman’s blog) has been a going concern for a fair length of time. With more than three years’ worth of archives, the posts continue to appear in the customary sporadic-but-inspired fashion.

Given the multi-year trend, one suspects that a few years down the road Waldman will still be posting, and perhaps years still after that.

What keeps him at it? Jack hypothesizes a few sustaining factors:

> Within the context of finance, Waldman has plenty to say (no shortage of topics).

> The organic posting frequency allows the blog to peacefully coexist with other high priority pursuits.

> Personal fulfillment plus no rigid time commitment pairs max upside with nil downside.

One could ask the reverse question – why do so many blogs fail? Again, a few basic thoughts:

> Because the writer runs out of things to say (or otherwise exhausts their limited command of a topic).

> Because the original motive (I’ll make money! Impress my friends! etc.) stalls out and dies.

> Because the perceived time commitment becomes a burden.

> Because life intervenes.

As Bruce Springsteen sang in Blood Brothers,

Now the hardness of this world
slowly grinds your dreams away
Makin’ a fool’s joke
out of the promises we made
And what once seemed black and white
turns to so many shades of gray
We lose ourselves in work to do
work to do and bills to pay…

For those of us who would rather die than let our passions succumb to the entropic, grinding monotony of it all, the question of sustainability – of keeping the passion intact and alive – becomes ever more important.

The likelihood of a small seedling growing into a large tree depends on the hardiness of the seed. A tender shoot that is easily killed – by distraction, regret, lack of commitment, lack of energy or what have you – is not likely to survive more than a season or two.

But the hardy seed – that which can survive boiling hot summers, brutal winters, and so on – has far better chance of growing into a sturdy and impenetrable oak.

Another way to look at it is like this: Flexibility fosters resilience. “Blessed are the flexible, for they shall not be bent out of shape.” Rigidity, in contrast, fosters tension, which causes things to snap.

In respect to metaprocess, there are at least three reasons why Jack has quiet confidence in the seedling:

> There is a great deal to be said.

> The topic at hand (as it relates to the living of life) has great depth and breadth.

> Posting frequency is wholly organic.

> And most importantly: At the end of the day, Jack writes not for others, but himself.

Human behavior is driven by motives and incentives. As far as sustainable motivations go, a desire for broad recognition (or fast-buck financial remuneration) is weak beer indeed.

In contrast, Jack sees the act and art of writing not just as an outer communication tool, but an inner communication tool.

This perspective allows Jack – or rather, Jack’s metaprocess blog – to be equally at home with an audience of millions or an audience of one. (Hi!)

In other words, the value sought and created here is not found in external recognition, but rather in the act of creation itself… and the resulting thought structure that is built out over time. The act of explaining metaprocess to an audience, layer by layer, creates a natural drive for architectural soundness, re, layered and connected thought.

Fellow travelers thus become guinea pigs of sorts… a handy excuse for Jack to take his profusion of notes, diagrams and scribbles, and hammer and saw them into something coherent. The aspect of having an audience – be it a very large and very real one, or a by-and-large hypothetical one – functions as a sort of oblique focusing device.

Lingo is defined in the Merriam-Webster online dictionary as strange or incomprehensible language or speech; as a: a foreign language b: the special vocabulary of a particular field of interest c: language characteristic of an individual

The term lingo applies perfectly for lean vocabulary. I have had many conversations where I use terms such as kaizen, 5S, heijunka, etc. and the person with whom I am speaking asks me to explain what I am talking about. Much of it is specific to lean but when we cannot speak it to a vast majority of American business, healthcare, and education it shows us how much hard work we need to continue to do to convert to a lean culture. Of course this is looking at it at the macro level but it applies to the individual organizational level as well.

Part of converting to a lean culture is getting everyone from management to the front lines speaking the same language. When individuals are able to speak the language you know that they understand the terms that they are saying. More importantly they are able to work collaboratively to implement them and teach others.

Lean Lingo, it’s an easy measure to know where you are on your lean journey. Next time you are at your gemba strike up some conversations and see if everyone is speaking Lean Lingo. If they are not, ask why five times.

After you have practiced for a while, you will realize that it is not possible to make rapid, extraordinary progress. Even though you try very hard, the progress you make is always little by little. It is not like going out in a shower in which you know when you get wet. In a fog, you do not know you are getting wet, but as you keep walking you get wet little by little.

“Bowing,” Zen Mind, Beginner’s Mind, Shunryu Suzuki

I recently began teaching a beginning yoga class at a community center. It’s a morning class, three times weekly. On those days, my personal practice is cut short. On one hand, I learn as much from teaching as from practicing. On the other hand, I miss my daily luxuriously lengthy practices.

“Home practice” is a popular workshop theme. Students, primarily novices but also longtimers, often need tips on sequencing or simply an impetus. Ultimately, one’s personal practice must occur organically. It can happen early or it can take two, five, or 10 years.

In my first year of yoga, I took three mixed-level morning classes and two noon intermediate classes (they were included in my gym membership at the university from which I’d graduated). They were a big priority and I made sure that my work schedule accommodated my yoga classes. Once, my classmate Ruth, who was also a new teacher, skipped one of the noon classes. She later told me that she felt like doing her own practice that day.

I was a bit incredulous. Our teacher was excellent. Miss one of her classes to piddle around at home?

But, during the next two or three years, while continuing the campus classes (plus more at yoga studios), I also felt compelled to practice on my own. I wanted to redo my favorite asanas, to master the impossibly tricky ones, and to explore yoga in solitude. My “home” practice was actually done at the campus rec center, as my apartment carpet was too cushy and my kitty too ferocious a distraction. I found a relatively untrafficked spot overlooking the gym’s weight rooms. It was still noisy, public, and not exactly pristine, but it became my little oasis.

Today I attend just one weekly class, partly due to inflation (paying $15 to $20 per class does add up) but mostly because I value my solo time. That switch (from avid class goer to regular home practitioner) marked a milestone in my yoga practice. It is also an example of kaizen, the Japanese concept of slow, steady improvement that I discuss in a prior post, “One Day at a Time.” To change a habit or start anew, a switch must click inside a person’s mind and body. It cannot happen merely by doing something because it’s the right thing to do.

My friend Elizabeth says, “It’s like salad.  For years I’d eat it only because it was healthy. But now I actually like it.” Salad was once an obligation. Now it’s a delicious preferred food. While she might have eaten it either way, she is now experiencing salad in a whole different way.

Change cannot be forced. You must just live your life, making the right choices day by day. Small changes are afoot, but they might be imperceptible.

Management hasn’t changed a lot in the last 100 years.  And what has changed, changed a long time ago – 50 years ago.  If your company hasn’t caught up, this is what you need to know!

‘Push’ management

In the olden days, or in a NZ meat-packing plant for example, the assembly line dictates the pace.  A carcass arrives.  A worker cuts off the relevant part, rinses the knife in water, and repeats.  Each cycle takes less than 30 seconds. The carcasses keep coming.  That is ‘push’ management.

Work is pushed at us. Adverts are pushed at us. As the poet said in The Charge of the Light Brigade – Ours is to do and die.  Ours is not to wonder why.

‘Pull’ management

Toyota perfected “pull” manufacturing ages ago.   There are three terms that you want to know.   (The New Yorker has just written an excellent case study which you may want to bookmark if you are in management education.)

• The andon allows a worker to stop the assembly line whenever they think it is necessary.
• The kanban is their signal that they need more parts.
• And kaizen means continuous improvements which are driven by them.

All-in-all, pull manufacturing moves the engine of improvement from managers to workers.

Why have we been so slow to implement ‘pull’ management?

If ‘pull’ management works so well, why don’t we copy Toyota?

Simply, we because the only way to get the advantage of the system is to do it.  And that means trusting in our workers and their ability to drive quality.

And it that works so well, why don’t we trust our workers in the west?  What is it about our system that we don’t trust the people who work for us?

Or is the truth that we know that they cannot trust us?

http://www.createhealthcarevalue.com/blog/post/?bid=107

What do providers need to start preparing for?

Here is my opinion about the core elements of the 5 bills presently in the Senate and House and what it may mean for doctors and hospitals

by John S. Toussaint, MD
President and CEO, ThedaCare Center for Healthcare Value. He writes:

…I would estimate that a 2-5% productivity improvement (depending on inflation) per year is the minimum to survive financially moving forward…

Those of you who have worked in hospitals or insurance understand the magnitude of that statement and the difficulty that organizations will have realizing that sort of sustained improvement. I had the pleasure of meeting this individual both during a symposium in Iowa City in 2007 and during a site visit last year at the ThedaCare in Appleton, WI. Even more impressive than Toussaint’s dedication to performance improvement was the level of staff buy-in. World class.

Find more about his recent article in Health Affairs here:

http://www.createhealthcarevalue.com/blog/post/?bid=10

Sometimes problems stick out like sore thumbs, and problem statements practically write themselves. But more often than not, the initial problem has so many layers and complications that it’s really hard to define. So what’s the problem?

A recent PDCA group was stuck asking this same question. There were five Construction Professionals in the group, and all five of them had issues with the same Building Partner. One Construction Professional said the problem was that the Building Partner couldn’t complete the work on schedule, while another said that the Building Partner was charging too much over the competition. Because each had a unique perspective on the problem, no one could agree on exactly what that problem was. So the PDCA just spun around in circles without ever defining an actual problem.

A lot of PDCA groups hit this early road block. It’s common when a process is creating multiple types of waste or a breakdown in the system affects several positions. The more complex the problem, the harder it is to define. In the situation with the five Construction Professionals, the only thing they could agree on was the Building Partner was making life difficult in each community.

The group had to hit the pause button. To get the PDCA moving forward again, the group leader initiated a brainstorming exercise that got all the problem ideas together then sorted out the causes from the actual problems.

Step 1:

The first step was brainstorming. (Read more about brainstorming by clicking here.) Each member of the group got an opportunity to describe the problem as he or she saw it, and the group leader wrote each description on a dry erase board. These problem description were very simple, 12 words or less. If a problem description got too complicated, he broke it into two shorter ideas. Each member of the group took turns until everyone had said “pass – I’m out of ideas.”

Step 2:

Once no one in the group had another idea to add to the board, the group leader read each idea. Then they evaluated and discussed each idea to determine if it was actually a problem, or if it was causing a problem. If the idea was a problem, he wrote “P” beside it. If it was causing a problem, he wrote “C” beside it. Ultimately, they had many more “C’s” than “P’s.” (Those “C” ideas were later used in the 5-Why Analysis.)

 Step 3:

Finally, the group re-evaluated each “P” idea. The goal was to have only one “P” standing. But since they started off with “Houses are over budget” and “Building Partner is more expensive than competition” as both “P’s”, the group leader asked if those ideas related to one another. When connecting the two thoughts, they found “Houses are over budget” because “Building Partner is more expensive than competition.” They then changed “Building Partner is more expensive” to a “C – Cause.”

Once “Houses are over budget” was defined as THE Problem, the group could move on to writing the problem statement. From what I hear, the group is now debating the Point of Cause, but that’s another story.

© October 2009 Homebuilding Partners, Inc.

I‘ve been paying a lot of attention to Starbucks as of late.  What began as an assignment for my MBA coursework has grown into an addiction.  For those of you keeping score at home, this is my third SBUX-related addiction.

Sadly, I’m not hooked on the tasty goodness of the Pumpkin Spice Latte or those delicious Cranberry Bliss Bars.  Instead, I’m a spectator witnessing an iconic institution … hmmm, how to phrase this? … over-roast itself.

A few weeks back, I described what makes for an excellent organization.  I was thinking about SBUX, as well as many other companies.  Don’t get me wrong, I’m not reversing the engines or changing course.  I’m not fickle.  Well, not that fickle.

But even excellent organizations don’t get “it” right 100% of the time.

You’re a coffee house, SBUX.  People COME TO YOU for coffee.  At HOME, people use your whole bean or pre-ground coffee.  So why-oh-why then would you willing associate yourself with the lowest common denominator in your industry’s product lineup?

I’m speaking of Via, which I blogged as being an 8oz. flavorless mistake with a coffee-like aroma.  The bigger questions regarding Via is: Why? What was the need, SBUX; was Folgers crystals posing a hostile takeover threat?  Are you testing the market’s perimeter; seeing if perhaps McDoanld’s will follow you here as well?  Or are you trying to create a monopoly so that you can become the Wal-Mart of coffee and thereby destroy your brand identity?

Up Close and Blurry is a high-level investigation into  . . .

ORGANIZATIONAL EXCELLENCE (?) – STARBUCKS

Introduction & Background

For all intents and purposes, there are effectively two Starbucks’: The first is the well-known, revered and reviled, coffee franchise that existed from 1971 through July 2008 Starbucks.  The second is the post-July 2008 Starbucks.

More is known about the former, as there is nearly 37 years of evidence to review.  The latter is the hopeful Phoenix, trying to be reborn from, and rebranded after its financial conflagration of July 2008.

That firestorm was the result of Starbucks’ pursuit of rapid and widespread  (read: unsustainable) and overzealous (read: reckless) expansion.  While the flames may have subsided, the ashes had not settled.  In July 2008, Starbucks began closing 600 stores and terminating 12,000 full- and part-time employees (Starbucks.com).  That was the announcement in July 2008; by January 2009, however, the company announced that the number of store closings would be increased to 900 (Flynn, 2009).

To their credit, Starbucks earned praise in the public relations realm for how they handled the closings.  They first notified employees, rather than announce to the media.  In addition, Starbucks leadership placed the responsibility for the need downsize on their own shoulders, as well as the poor global economy  (Schade, 2008, p. 10).

Little is known about the new Starbucks, other than what it is reporting to its stakeholders.  Regardless, for both Starbucks’, organizational excellence in all business areas is a seemingly paramount core value.  They strive to optimize, expedite, streamline and manage costs, all without sacrificing quality or injuring the mythical Starbucks experience.  Nevertheless, while the majority of their initiatives are spot on, others make one wonder what Starbucks was thinking.

Below, I break out a few areas of the Starbucks Corporation to detail their pursuit of organizational excellence.

Corporation to Consumer Interface

Understanding that its products, services, and overall experience are what customers purchase, Starbucks has invested heavily in Business Process Management (BPM).  While the true dollar figures are unknown, the extent of their efforts can be witnessed in the accounts below.

First: The Customer.

Starbucks conducts extensive research regarding its customers’ wants and needs.  This focuses heavily upon flavor, and there’s an entire team of coffee testers at the company’s Seattle headquarters (The science, 2009).  It also focuses on selection.  For example, the sale of espresso, which did not begin until 1982 when Howard Schultz, now CEO of Starbucks, experiences the drinks popularity in Italy and pushes the company to follow suit (A brief history, 2009).

Starbucks fumbled when it deviated from its core business, which it describes as “all things coffee” (Starbucks.com, 2009).  The introduction of foods beyond simple baked goods proved to be a debacle, one from which the company did not learn as they have launched, canceled and re-launched the initiative numerous times.  And while the average consumer did not notice, the company’s skeptics and shareholders did.

What stands out about this blunder is that, in my opinion, it demonstrates Starbucks’ misunderstanding of its market, meaning it is confused about whom it is serving (the customer) and with whom it is competing with (its competitors).  A company cannot have an achievable long-term strategy if these two inputs are shifting or unknown.

Second: The Store.

Each location is designed to be welcoming. This is a sensory experience, with sights, sounds, smells, and tastes recognized as playing critical roles.  Employees are told that Starbucks stores should be the customers’ “third place” – third to home and work, that is.  In fact, on their website’s jobs page, they describes the store as providing “a sense of belonging,” likening it to “a haven,” which provides escapism from “the worries outside, a place [to] meet with friends. It’s about enjoyment at the speed of life—sometimes slow and savored, sometimes faster.  Always full of humanity” (Starbucks, 2009).

A portion of that humanity was lost, however, when Starbucks optimized the store-building process utilizing a so-called kit of parts approach.  Opening six locations per day, the cookie-cutter was necessary, but it ultimately robbed the stores of their uniqueness, leaving customers with the feeling that Starbucks had no soul (Moore, J., & Williams, P., 2007).  As a result, Starbucks is now redesigning many of its locations based upon customer inputs and the corporation’s own research (Introducing a new store design, 2008).  New stores will feature local flavor, a more relaxed atmosphere, and new names.

Starbucks is renaming stores and removing the company’s name, logo and moniker, all in an effort to appear less corporate, more local, and more inviting (Allison, 2009).  This constitutes the third brand in the company’s line up, as they already own Seattle’s Best.  In my opinion, Starbucks is quickly venturing into brand-dilution territory.

Third: The Employee.

The Starbucks experience relies upon properly trained employees with positive attitudes serving quality products quickly.  Starbucks has gone to great lengths to remove the variables from the customer service process.  This includes extensive foundational training for all employees, from baristas to corporate leaders (Weber, 2005).  Additionally, it means adopting kaizen principles, ensuring that continuous improvement makes the entire process –for customers and employees alike– as efficient and positive as possible (Glover, 2008).

However, quite often the process does not always work, and the reason is simple: Starbucks’ process for churning out smiles and lattes did not grow with the company.  As Inc. Magazine’s Joel Spolsky (2009) discovered during a horrible Starbucks experience, Starbucks achieved its status by conducting operations research.  However, with the company’s rapid expansion, HR theory and store realities are divergent.  On an unofficial Starbucks site called Starbucks Gossip, employees and customers alike lament just how out of touch corporate seems to be from the front lines.

The Corporation and the Community

Starbucks operates within the framework of an extremely diverse Corporate Social Responsibility program.  Under the CSR umbrella is everything from Starbucks’ social agenda, to employee healthcare, to environmentalism.

First: The Employee.

Employees who work more than 20 hours per week are eligible for healthcare.  The company picks up 75% of the cost.  In a 2004 interview with BusinessWeek, Schultz reported that the company would spend more on employee healthcare costs than on its source product: coffee beans.  The rationale was simple: it’s the right thing to do.  But the reasoning is also personal, as Schultz reported that it is linked to his impoverished childhood, a childhood which he recounted bearing witness to his father’s “fractured American dream” due, in part, to a lack of healthcare (O’Connell, 2004).

Second: Society.

Starbucks’ social agenda includes rights for domestic partnership, universal healthcare, support of supplier and workplace diversity, and voting.  Its employee benefits include the standard fare, but they are available to same-sex or domestic partnership relationships (Starbucks.com, 2009).  It’s been involved for many years lobbying for universal healthcare, to include involving Sen. Bill Bradley in the effort, though Starbucks insists they are not involved in political activism (O’Connell, 2004).

Their CSR efforts include Starbucks RED, an effort to combat AIDS in Africa; Starbucks V2V, an online community action forum; and Starbucks Shared Planet.  The latter includes numerous CSR activities, including ethical sourcing/supplier programs, environmental stewardship, and community service (Starbucks, 2009). The company’s efforts extend as far away as Rwanda, where the company has established a partnership with coffee producers to provide certified-100% Fair Trade coffee (Starbucks.com, 2009).

The “All Things to All People Business” Model

Starbucks relentlessly pursues providing consumers with the highest quality products, services, and experience. If nothing else, Starbucks is an innovative tactician.  However, as with the previous areas, many of their business choices seem to be in contradiction with their espoused overarching strategy. For this reason, it is obvious that Starbucks has embraced the notion that failure is a learning opportunity, not a point of contention. Though, they may want to rethink the scope of their failure allowance, as it seems entirely too permissive.

The company’s product line goes far beyond drinks.  Starbucks has become as well known for their music as their odd array of names for drink sizes.  The drink size names, by the way, led to a hugely successful YouTube video wherein a customer enters into a Suess-ian tongue twister (Small is tall, 2008).  Later, Dunkin Donuts used the popularity of the original video to introduce its coffee to the market, as well as itself as the common person’s Starbucks.  This is quite similar to the McDonald’s coffee campaign that simply stated, “four bucks is dumb. now serving espresso,” (Ankarcrona, 2008).  The point being, Starbucks’ popularity and unpopularity has invited competition and given them a soapbox from which they can preach . . . while selling their own coffee.

The company has its own XM Radio channel, free iTune downloads on Tuesdays, and a line of CDs sold through their stores.  However, none of these are fairing well for the coffee purveyor.  It was reported that the average Starbucks was selling two CDs per week, though corporate disputes this and claims the music units sells 4 millions CDs per year (Sandoval, 2009).  Regardless, Starbucks announced that in-store CDs would be scaled back to four selections per-store, as the company “refocuses on [its] core business” (Sandoval, 2009).

Perhaps Starbucks has cleared away the “too big to fail” haze.  Whereas the company heretofore employed a top-down, command and control approach to business decision, they’ve now opened the forum to the consumer and employee. Since March 2008, Starbucks has been using a blog called “My Starbucks Idea,” to solicit ideas concerning their products, environment, and social involvement.  The site is active, with many employees, and even Howard Schultz himself, weighing in with ideas.  Still, the company is behind the power curve, as a site called Starbucks Gossip has been actively doing the same thing since August 2004.  Except, this site is not as polite with their comments as the company’s site (Romenesko, 2009).

Conclusion

Starbucks routinely receives industry and activist accolades; among them: “Best 100 Companies to Work For,” “Most Ethical Companies” “Most Admired Corporations” “100 Best Corporate Citizens” “Best LGBT Places to Work” and more. The list of honors, available on their website, is quite impressive and stretches back to the mid-1990’s (Starbucks.com, 2009).

Admittedly, the company does many things well and, to use a subjective term, correctly.  For example, as defined by Dessler (2009), Starbucks’ hiring practices are designed to ensure a candidate is suited to help the organization achieve its desired end goal.  The mandatory 24 hours of training within the first few weeks reinforces this.  And the company’s investment in more efficient processes, equipment, and policies all lend themselves to an environment that is supposed to enhance the Starbucks experience (Dessler, 2009, p. 11-13. Kinicki & Kreitner, 2009, p. 36-41).

According to Kinicki and Kreitner (2009), Starbucks is conducting its HR business correctly.  They have established Total Quality Management (TQM) principles, and reinforced them with policies and training (p. 11).  Nevertheless, one must question the choice to purchase an $11,000 espresso machine for every Starbucks location in the midst of closing 900 stores.   This is precisely what Schultz did after drinking an espresso made with a Clover espresso maker.  In fact, he thought the cup of espresso was so good that he bought the Clover  company (Hanon, 2008).  Meanwhile, 12,000+ employees are being terminated.

Additionally, as noted earlier, the corporate HR office in Seattle has become divorced from the realities of the front lines.  Operations processes should be focused on creating value, improving efficiencies, and enhancing the Starbucks experience, instead they appear to lack focus.  They obviously have a grasp on the big picture, as Kinicki and Kreitner (2009) explained, Starbucks has cultivated plenty of Human and Social Capital (p. 15).  Nevertheless, they are misspending that resource by neglecting the details.

That is a true statement of Starbucks by and large.  While the organization provides for its employees hierarchy of needs (a la Maslow), it fails to provide for its own.  The inability to remain focused on its core business has led to failure repeatedly, and these repeated failures have been within the same arena: The company’s brand identity.  Is Starbucks a music store? A café? A coffee bar? The MarComm professional and Life Cycle Manager in me fears that even Starbucks executives do not know.

Starbucks does many things very well.  They have built a successful empire with a loyal following, and they have set the standard for quality.  They have also illustrated that, minus the recent meltdown, a company can be extremely successful while financing 75% of their employees’ healthcare, respecting the environment, and upholding high standards of product quality, staff performance, and meeting the mythical Starbucks experience.  These attributes make them an excellent organization.

Where they appear to be falling short is in their focus on the core business, growing their organizational structure and procedures to reflect their current size, and delegating managerial authority to the correct levels.  These three areas:  1) Business strategy and planning, 2) business process management, and 3) operational management are the company’s vulnerabilities.   Push on any one of these too hard, and the organizational becomes a house of cards.

Organizational excellence rating: C+

References

A brief history of starbucks.

A full-bodied talk with mr. starbucks.

Coffee war brews between mcdonald’s, starbucks.

Dessler, G. (2009). A Framework for Human Resource Management (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

How hard could it be?: Good system, bad system.

Introducing a new store design.

Kinicki, A., & Kreitner, R. (2009). Oranizational behavior: Key concepts, skills & best practices. (4th ed.). Boston: McGraw Hill.

Preserving the Starbucks Counter Culture.

Small is tall.

Solving starbucks problems: loss of store soul.

Starbucks.com

Starbucks and kaizen.

Starbucks, awaiting recovery, says profit fell 77%.

Starbucks gossip.

Starbucks scaling back music offering.

Starbucks tests new names for stores.

The coffee fix: Can the $11,000 clover machine save starbucks?

The next starbucks.

The science of coffee.

]]> http://cescabrasil.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/kaizen-parte-i/ Sat, 24 Oct 2009 13:56:23 +0000 cescabrasil http://cescabrasil.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/kaizen-parte-i/

 INTRODUÇÃO

O Shingijutsu KAIZEN ajuda as empresas alcançar a produção enxuta, ou seja, gerar um máximo de produção com um mínimo de recursos, satisfazendo elevados níveis de exigência em matéria de qualidade e serviço. O sistema KAIZEN, iniciado por Toyota no Japão e conhecido no ocidente como Sistema de Produção Toyota, tem sido reconhecido como a tecnologia de maior eficácia por parte dos homens de negócio de todo o mundo.

KAIZEN é uma cultura de “Melhora Contínua” centralizada na eliminação de desperdícios em todos os sistemas e processos de uma organização. O KAIZEN centraliza seu esforço nas pessoas, pois é ela quem termina tornando real seus conceitos. O objetivo é melhorar de forma continua e sistemática os níveis de qualidade, alcançando um controle ótimo e redução de custos, ao mesmo tempo em que se faz possível a entrega a tempo. O KAIZEN transforma as empresas em competidores globais de excelência. Segundo Goldratt “a melhora contínua será um tema cada vez mais crítico a medida que avance o século XXI”!

O KAIZEN consiste em 4 elementos chave que são:

1. A Qualidade
2. O Esforço
3. A vontade de melhorar
4. A comunicação efetiva

O Sistema de Produção Toyota é apoiado por dois conceitos essenciais que é o “Just In Time” e a “Automatização”, os quais contribuem em alcançar a “Produção cheia” (Heijunka).

O KAIZEN não representa só um sistema gradual de mudança, constitui ao mesmo tempo um enfoque revolucionário de ver e apreciar os processos e atividades, alterando a maneira tradicional de gerir uma empresa.

Geralmente os métodos de gestão tradicionais da produção adoecem de 4 graves defeitos:

1. Por um lado, todo o referente á previsão de vendas e necessidades, com fortes alterações e importantes diferenças entre demanda real e a produção efetiva.
2. Sobre o Planejamento da Produção, com fortes inconvenientes em matéria de controle de inventários, tempo de resposta frente as mudanças do mercado e profundas irregularidades nas quantidades produzidas.
3. Os sistemas de produção, com altos tempos de preparação, problemas para a troca de ferramentais, importantes “gargalos”, prolongados processos de transformação e constantes problemas em matéria de qualidade (com altos porcentuais de reprocesso)
4. Os almoxarifados (controle de inventário duvidosos, excesso de papéis, excessivo uso de área física para armazenagem, perdas por compras erradas, decomposição de materiais, etc.

Este artigo é vasto em conteúdo e para evitar que Você se estresse, deixo a continuação para outro momento, com exemplos de melhoria que se Você pode aplicar, no Corte, Costura, Montagem, Almoxarifado e Pré.

Queres exemplos e planilhas? Então envia já sua solicitação para: cescabrasil@yahoo.com.br

? Quieres La traducción para español y formatos electrónicos? Envía correo para: cescaméxico@yahoo.com.mx

Forte abraço de Gerson Vicente Ceschini

Apa itu Kaizen..? Secara bahasa Kaizen yang diambil dari bahasa Jepang yaitu Kai dan Zen. Kai artinya berubah atau change dan Zen berarti baik atau good. Jadi Kaizen dapat diartikan sebagai perubahan kepada arah lebih baik. Adapun dalam penggunaannya Kaizen sering dilengkapi dengan “berkesinambungan” dan dikenal sebagai continuous improvement.

Untuk lebih jelas mengenai Kaizen, yuk kita lihat…

Sesuai artinya, filosofi dari Kaizen adalah melaksanakan perbaikan atau peningkatan yang berkesinambungan. Adapun realisasinya dalam suatu perusahaan harus bisa membudaya dan mendarah daging dari tingkat atas (top management) sampai bawahan atau istilahnya way of life perusahaan.

Kata kunci dari kaizen sendiri ada 3 yaitu :

• Continuous
• Never Ending
• Consistent

Adapun peranan Kaizen dalam suatu perusahaan adalah sebagai alat untuk menyelesaikan problem yang belum terselesaikan, menyelesaiakan masalah yang diangkat oleh management serta menemukan masalah yang selama ini belum terangkat yang dinamakan problem laten.

Beberapa aktifitas yang memerlukan Kaizen adalah :

• Vallue added yi aktifitas yang memberikan keuntungan atas produk bagi pelanggan dan menjadikan harga atas produk
• Non value added yi aktivitas yang tidak memberikan keuntungan atas produk bagi pelanggan dan menjadikan harga atas produk
• 6R (Ringkas, Rapih, Resik, Rawat, Rajin dan Rasa Aman) pada pengorganisasian tempat kerja
• Prinsip penanganan material
• SOP

Dalam prakteknya dalam pekerjaan sehari-hari, aktifitas Kaizen dapat diwujudkan dalam bentuk :

• SS (Sugestion System)
• QCC (Quality Control Circle)
• QCP (Quality Control Project)
• PPS (Practical Problem Solving)

Untuk mewujudkan Kaizen yang membudaya dalam diri perusahaan memang tidaklah mudah dan memerlukan kontribusi dari semua elemen yang dalam perusahaan tersebut mulai dari top management sampai dengan karyawan dengan tingkat paling bawah. Semangat dari Kaizen yaitu ”Hari ini harus lebih baik dari kemarin dan hari esok harus lebih baik dari hari ini” harus mampu ditularkan ke berbagai elemen dalam perusahaan.

Selain itu semangat tiada hari tanpa perbaikan pun patut ditanamkan pada setiap karyawan sehingga lambat laun budaya itu menjadi seperti kebiasaan. Jangan lupa mulailah perbaikan dari hal paling kecil sekalipun dan hargailah perbaikan betapapun kecilnya itu.

Salam improvement..!

Vou aproveitar a leva de trabalhos que estamos fazendo atualmente na faculdade, e vou divulgar aqui no blog alguns dos trabalhos apresentados em sala de aula. O Primeiro trabalho é o meu próprio, que juntamente ao meu grupo, levantamos questões sobre Just In Time, Kaizen e a biografia de Shigeo Shingo. Segue abaixo o link para a visualização da apresentação, como também o link para a visualização do trabalho entregue.

Para ilustrar um pouco mais este post, deixo um video que mostra bem o funcionamento do processo de Just in Time:

Link para a Apresentação: Apresentação em Power Point

Link do Trabalho: Apresentação em Word

We have an expression in our company — something originally told to us by our lean consultant Sammy Obara with the Honsha Associates.  He said, “You don’t need PDCA to kill a snake; just kill it.”

One of our recent PDCAs reminded me of this expression when we had some confusion with the title company. It seems a document used to communicate closing information had an outdated address for the title company, and a PDCA was initiated to correct this. The PDCA went something like this:

Problem: Closing notification form has incorrect address

Goal: Closing notification form has correct address

Point of Cause: Title company moved to a new location

Root Cause: No one updated the form used to schedule closings

Counter Measure: Update the closing notification form with the new address

This PDCA killed a snake. It completed an obvious task that needed to be accomplished. And, there is really no need to PDCA an obvious task such as updating someone’s address. Still, there was a PDCA to be done.

The outdated closing notification form actually created a series of problems: The Process Director had to correct several closing documents, and the Sales Professional had to make additional phone calls to the home buyer and the Realtor, who may have been confused by the misprint. And we don’t want that to ever happen again.

So, this was the deviation from standard (translation = “The Problem”). Normally, the document is printed and sent to the parties who use the info to schedule the closing, then everyone shows up at the appointed time and location, some paperwork is signed and the Home Buyer becomes a Home Owner. But in this instance, it didn’t happen that way.

That pesky outdated form created a lot of waste for a lot of people. It caused a problem. So the “closing notification form” is actually our Point of Cause. (Click here for more information about Problem vs. Point of Cause.) From there, we can mine down to the 5-Why Analysis, asking, “Why was the closing schedule form outdated?”

Which brings us back to our snake.

If we’re trying to bludgeon a snake with Plan-Do-Check-Adjust, hit the pause button. We may be confusing the problem with the Point of Cause. Ask, “How did the snake get inside in the first place? And are we taking measures to keep another snake from coming back?” At some point, information on that closing notification form will become outdated once again, and we’re going to get mighty tired of walloping snakes on the head.

© October 2009 Homebuilding Partners, Inc.

I have been using protein supplements for about six months now and have noticed a difference in my body. A good difference. I used to never take protein when working out. I was actually a bit intimidated to take them. I thought they were mainly for strict bodybuilders and not average joes like myself. You live and learn I guess. Anyway, the first is Pro Complex gainer. I used the double chocalate flavor, which tastes pretty good. The gainer adds extra calories with all major carbs, whey protein, some saturated fat (unfortunately), and other ingredients. One big scoop is about 650 calories. I don’t know if it is this product alone, but when taking supplements I have gained 13 pounds. I was around 130-135, now I am at 143-145 pounds. When I see myself in the mirror, I am more muscular and can tell I am bigger. I am a lot stronger than I once was too, this surprised me a lot. The reason I take pro complex is because I need to put on weight. I have always been under weight, and want to be at about 155-160. I believe this is normal for age 22 at 5′10 height. Now moving to Kaizen 100% Whey protein. This stuff is pretty damn healthy. No bs here, it has all the good stuff in it for you. One scoop is around 120 calories. This is good right when you wake up or pre/post workout. If you are already at a comfortable weight, then is great to take, or throughout the day. I am still rather new to protein supplements and am seeing what is right for my body. Any suggestions are appreciated.

Point of Cause can be a difficult concept to grasp, and it’s often confused with the actual problem. The problem is waste. It’s a deviation from standard (or the norm). The point of cause is the physical time and/or location the deviation is occurring.

Here’s an exercise that illustrates this concept very clearly:

Let’s say that I snore very, very loudly. In fact, my snoring is so loud that it keeps my next door neighbor awake all night. He can’t sleep. Now, what’s the problem and what’s the point of cause?

The problem is my neighbor can’t sleep. His standard is sleeping at night, but he’s deviating from that norm. In fact, if this were a PDCA, he’d be the one to initiate it.

But wait — why isn’t my very loud snoring the problem?

The answer: Because I sleep just fine, thank you. If it wasn’t for my neighbor being kept awake, no one would care that I snore. If no one cares, where’s the problem?

If we apply the Because Equation to this (The problem occurs BECAUSE of the point of cause), we’d say, “My next door neighbor can’t sleep BECAUSE of my snoring.”

Once the snoring is identified as the point of cause, you can break it down into root causes. Why am I snoring? I need to lose 10 pounds. Or, I have a deviated septum. Or, who knows what the root cause would be. But at least now we can find it.

© October 2009 Homebuilding Partners, Inc.