Category Archives: Lean

Forget Lean Sourcing, It’s Time for Mean Sourcing!

While it sounds like lean sourcing, which can be defined as a strategic purchasing approach focused on maximizing value and minimizing waste, should be the ultimate solution to strategic sourcing, especially when you consider some of the core activities in Procurement:

  • Value Addition: Identifying exactly what the end customer values and eliminating products, features, services, or luxury materials that do not contribute to it. (Supports Value Definition and Value Stream Mapping)
  • Process Standardization: Simplifying workflows to reduce bottlenecks, speed up purchasing cycles, and lay the foundations for automation. (Supports Flow)
  • Strategic Partnerships: Cultivating close, long-term relationships with a compact, reliable supplier base rather than continually chasing the lowest bidder to streamline the supplier network. (Supports Pull)
  • Continuous Improvement: Cultivating a culture where buyers regularly refine practices and reduce inventory. (Supports Pursuit Perfection)

it should be the perfect solution. But it’s not. The problem is that Lean was born out of manufacturing, not supply chain, and not sourcing and procurement. Here are the problems with Lean in Sourcing/Supply Chain:

  • Myopic focus: Taken to extremes, not only results in a company minimizing not only product lines, and the components used, but their focus on the product lines that consumers want. This is profitable and successful in the short term, but consumer preferences for products change over time, and if you don’t keep up with shifting consumer trends, you’ll be too late to capitalize on major opportunities. (Just like Blockbuster missed out on Netflix, Kodax on digital cameras, and Xerox on the personal computer.) And if you don’t keep an eye out on new developments, you’ll miss opportunities for new integrated components and working with engineering to save money.
  • Automation First Philosophy: the whole point of process standardization was to allow for consistency, transparency, productivity, error reduction, and resource optimization, not necessarily automation — but the interpretation has been to automate everything without any thought as to whether or not humans can do it better or Human Intelligence (HI!) is needed
  • Long Term Agreements: a long term agreement is not a partnership, it’s just a long term contract; most Procurement organizations have failed to grasp what a strategic partnership is! (Japan gets it with keiretsu, but that’s about it.)
  • JIT: you want JIT in terms of factory production, especially since factories have limited space so you don’t want to pull from the warehouse too fast, but it’s one thing to JIT from a local warehouse, it’s another thing to try to JIT across global supply chains filled with fragility and unpredictability and constant disruptions

In other words, in order to succeed from lean, you have to modernize Lean for Procurement and the modern world. And get a little mean while you’re at it.

  • while the primary focus is optimizing costs against the value stream, the secondary focus is pushing strategic partners for new designs and products that will change both the value of the customer offering as well as the cost of production and service; in other words, you’re only happy with the status quo today, you expect proposals for improvement tomorrow
  • constantly push for process redesign where you can reliably use unintelligent automation (with rules-based deterministic certainty and adaptive exception management) and not hallucinatory agentic / Gen-AI for true efficiency improvements; it also keeps platform/cloud costs way down even as throughput scales by orders of magnitude
  • shift from cost focus in agreements to co-development focus — that’s the way you form true partnerships
  • migrate to balanced inventory management where you keep extra stock on hand of critical/scarce/hard-to-get materials and components sufficient to cover at least the average delay time when a disruption occurs — it can also optimize logistics costs and production costs at a different economy of scale, making up for the slightly increased inventory costs (which only need to be a fraction of their traditional inventory-cost based percentage with smart inventory management)

In each of these cases you are forcing more than just the process (which your team and suppliers will think is mean), putting cost second (which the C-Suite will think is self-centered because it’s all supposed to be savings to please the board members), and putting more burden on your internal networks (which your team will think is really mean, considering your operations and consultants have spent decades shifting to suppliers).

It might seem mean, but modernizing your practices in a resilient and collaborative fashion is what it will take to thrive in today’s global landscape.

Demand Control: Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, Redefinition and … Requisition Everything!

Part of good cost avoidance in Procurement is good demand management — reducing the consumption, and expenditure, on MRO, T&E, one-time buys for events, etc. We’ve covered the classic techniques in the past, which include:

Reduce: which can be accomplished by accurately predicting needs (and reducing waste) based on past use and current trends (and not maintaining volume levels on toner cartridges for a printer line being phased out)

Reuse: which can take the form of repurposing old equipment (as old developer workstations are probably just as powerful as the business user desktops used in the rest of the organization) or simply collecting unused/discarded collateral at an event and using it again next time

Recycle: where MRO inventory can be replenished by breaking down equipment (like workstations, production lines, etc.) that go out of service and harvesting still working parts that can be used in other equipment

Redefinition: where it’s not a need for more paper, but a need for second / bigger monitors so that people don’t need to print invoices / documents still submitted as (scans of) handwritten documents that can’t be OCR’d or that aren’t in a format the OCR recognizes or for tablets that allow executives to access their reports on the go

but a new type of demand management is popping up in the Procurement world, and it’s called:

Requisition Everything: where you have to literally submit a requisition to the procurement system so that all demand, and consumption, is tracked (and you can be visually guilted to control demand or utilization if you are consuming significantly more of a resource than your peer).

Now, this probably sounds very onerous to you and not worth it, but it all comes down to the implementation and user experience. At Coupa inspire, one company described an innovative method that they used to track and control demand on the factory floor (where workers would forget where they put their gloves, or realize they left them in the lunch room, and just go to the closest supply room or where workers would store extra tools or parts at their desks, just in case, leading to low stock signals and unnecessary ordering). They installed vending machines and when a worker needed something, they needed to go to the machine and punch in their id and slot number. Nothing was restricted (and no limits were placed), but every “requisition” was sent to the central Procurement system which not only updated MRO inventory but also tracked who used what, and allowed Procurement, and departments, to understand usage patterns better. This simple process reduced demand as it instilled the notion of cost consciousness and responsibility in the workers (who knew that their usage patterns could be analyzed and if they consumed considerably more than their peers, it would show), and didn’t really add any time or complexity to the process (as all the workers had to do was punch a few buttons) — especially since this process insured that the workers always knew where the stock was (which wouldn’t happen if it was moved around on the shelves).

Moreover, this technique is not limited to what fits in a vending machine — one could also use cheap RFID tags for larger items (of sufficient value) that would automatically be requisitioned when the tag left the store room (and be assigned to the right person using the employee record obtained from the entry control system when the person swipes their key card).

And, with micro-budgeting, it can be used to insure departments don’t go over their allotted new-hire budget unnoticed. New hire equipment can be kept in the secure storeroom, automatically tracked when retrieved, and automated re-orders made if stock gets too low. Plus, reusable equipment can be returned on employee departure, residual amortization amounts credited back to the micro-budget, and employees / departments who opt to use recycled equipment can be charged a deep discount against their micro-budget (and, more importantly, rewarded at annual recognition events as reuse stats can be tracked).

Now that almost everything can be automated, it might just be the time for Requisition Everything as the new method of employee-based demand management and cost control. Thoughts?

Want Lean Success? Get Lean With Your Lean!

Inbound Logistics recently published a short article on How to Deploy a Successful Improvement Program that chronicled the advice of APL Logistics’, who saved 30M through continuous improvement initiatives, foremast Lean/Six Sigma/JDI professional that had some really good advice.

To summarize, the article outlined a five-step method for deploying a successful improvement program.

  1. Choose One Quality Discipline and Focus On It
  2. Choose And Deploy Your Preferred Training Model
  3. Select the Right Members For Your Project Teams
  4. Choose the Right First Projects
  5. Continuously Improve Your Odds of Program Success

Two of these tips in particularly are especially poignant. In particular, tip #1 and tip #4. The secret to success is focus, focus, focus. Don’t try to adopt too many initiatives at once and don’t try to take on too many projects at once. Just like too many cooks spoil the broth, too many initiatives spoil the effort.

Lean projects, like any other type of improvement project, take effort to accomplish, and there is only so much effort that can be applied to any project. Thus, undertaking multiple types of improvement initiatives splits the effort that can be applied to each, and reduces the chances of success.

Similarly, undertaking multiple projects simultaneously reduces the effort that can be applied to each project, and extends the amount of time required to complete it. If a project takes too long, the chances of it being cancelled before it is completed increase, and, thus, the chances of failure.

When a new effort is undertaken, success often depends on a quick win, and a quick win depends on selecting a project that can be completed in the effort available — and focussing all of the effort available to make it a success. This means that the last thing you should do is start a second effort half-way through the first in an attempt to duplicate a success you do not yet have. Get one success, then start another project. Get another success, start a third project. Once you have a pattern of success under your belt, you’ll get more support (in the way of effort available) and then you can start multiple projects. Until then, get lean with your lean initiative.

Leaders vs. Laggards in Lean

Earlier this year, SC Digest published a comment from Mike Loughrin, CEO of Transformance Advisors, on Designing a Lean Transformation Program that not only covered four key indicators of success in a lean transformation, but also covered the differences between leaders and laggards that deserve a second look.

According to Mike, the four key indicators of success are:

  • Methodology
    Lean is the systematic elimination of waste by way of the five principles of value specification, value stream identification, flow creation, leverage of pull, and the continual strive for perfection.
  • Measurement
    While lean is the top priority, measurement is second as it is necessary to determine the status of the transformation.
  • Community
    Lean succeeds when best practices are shared and people collectively improve upon them.
  • Coaching
    Lean succeeds when mentors coach novices so that they can grow into future mentors.

So how do you distinguish leaders from laggards? According to Mike:

Indicator Leaders Laggards
Methodology Very systematic in the approach to lean. Adopt a couple of techniques from the lean tool box and apply these hammers to every problem whether or not it mimics a nail.
Measurement Assess all of their value streams and focus attention on those areas that need improvement the most, getting to the root causes of the issues. Focus on the symptoms in an effort to identify quick fixes that may or may not address the root causes.
Community Leaders take an active part in the lean community and are very visible at educational and networking events. Laggards don’t have the time, or money, for attending lean educational and networking events.
Coaching Leaders understand that techniques from the lean tool box are systematic and most effective when people are coached on how to use them correctly. Laggards learn by skimming articles and viewing a few webinars. They have a very cursory understanding.

Lean transformation takes discipline not shortcuts. Great article, Mike!

Wanna Get Lean? Get Mean About Wasted Time, Effort, Production, and Transportation!

Apparel Magazine just ran a great article on “developing leaner product development and sourcing operations” for anyone looking for an easy to understand no-nonsense common sense introduction to going lean. Focussed on correcting the six-lean sins of the product development process in an average organization, the article did a great job of pointing out that if you are wasting time, effort, production, or transportation, you are not lean.

More specifically, a lean organization does the following.

  • Optimizes Time Utilization
    A lean organization identifies those parts of the cycle that take the most time or that tend to run out of control and reins them in with proper processes and controls. In supply management, if the longest part of the process is identifying suppliers who can meet certain needs, then, even before a product design is finalized, the process to identify suppliers with the requisite technical capabilities and production processes is begun. Then, when the design is finalized and the components need to be sourced, the organization simply needs to select the most appropriate supplier from a small pool.
  • Optimizes Effort
    As highlighted in the article, a lean process does not include unnecessary milestone meetings, [a] lack of communication between departments that leads to a re-creation of plans, [the] development of too many designs that do not get adopted, or the creation of unneeded samples. The requirements for a project are clearly identified and all efforts are aligned with meeting those requirements.
  • Optimizes Production
    There are three optimizations here. First of all, the organization avoids producing more units than are needed (in a given period of time). If the known demand is 100, 1000 are not produced in the hope that the need will magically appear. Secondly, the organization does not add features or functions that are not required by, or do not add value to, the end customer. Third, the organization avoids the creation of process silos to insure that one individual or group doesn’t over-engineer a part or value-add service that goes (well) beyond need or cost control requirements.
  • Optimizes Transportation
    This applies to all steps in product design, development, and distribution — not just the final distribution process. For example, sending partial products back and forth needlessly in the design and development process due to poor process design is waste. In production, if raw materials are transported from Africa to South America for refinement and then shipped to China for component production and the components are then shipped to the US for final assembly, that’s just inefficient, especially if the final products are then sold in Europe. That’s losing sight of the supply management forest while focussing on the old cost trees.

Lean is not a mystical, magical, chimera. It’s the systematic elimination of waste by taking a holistic view.