🍃 Leaf

Toyota Production System

The Toyota Production System (TPS) is both, part method, part methodology, designed for making continuous efficiency improvements to achieve maximum customer satisfaction, welcoming and encouraging everyone to be proactive, but most importantly, empowering and keeping humanity at top of priorities, fostering an optimistic, homelike workplace culture.

[Research and innovation] are areas that we should develop on our own without relying on anyone else; we cannot hope to [succeed] by simply imitating [someone else’s] technology. In fact, it is only by [pioneering and] walking our own path that we will surpass developed countries and develop the capability to contribute to a new civilization. (Kiichiro Toyoda, founder of Toyota Motors Corporation, 1942)

Taiichi Ohno (aka. the “Father of the TPS”) adopted several ideas from the company’s founder Kiichiro Toyoda and the parent company’s founder Sakichi Toyoda (aka. the Japanese “King of Inventors”). He developed and applied philosophy, methods, and practices systematically, at an industrial scale since 1943, when he was transferred from the Toyoda Automatic Loom Works to the Toyota Motor Corporation, and took more than two decades to be recognized. A job he shared with yet another TPS pioneer, Dr. Shigeo Shingo (aka. the “Quality Guru”) who played a key role in the creation of the TPS (since 1955), and the entire Japanese industry.

[TPS is a living thing.] If we write it down, we kill it. (Taiichi Ohno)

We should take into consideration that TPS does not have nor it is a guide with steps for success. Furthermore, it’s neither definitive nor complete, its ideal state is an ever-changing form which feeds from constant adaptation. Even when it has a battery of specific practices, I consider, its most valuable parts are its core values and philosophical principles.

Culture of Toyota Production System (and Japan)

Our workers provide 1.5 million suggestions a year, and 95 percent of them ar put to practical use. There is an almost tangible concern for improvement in the air at Toyota. (Eiji Toyoda, former president and chairman, spiritual leader, and key player of TPS and Toyota itself)

(More than) Respect for People

(1) Before cars, make people. (2) People are the most important asset, and the determinant of the rise and fall. (3) I want you to use your own heads. And I want you actively to train your people on how to think for themselves. (Eiji Toyoda)

Lean, an American interpretation of TPS, includes the pillar “Respect for People,” which is on point. Nevertheless, TPS itself doesn’t even mention such a thing. That is, perhaps, because it actually is part of the Japanese culture; it’s expected to happen all of the time, not only at work.

Note: genryou (減量, quantity reduction) means “dieting” or (a company) “becoming more streamlined.” It was translated (1988) as “lean” in Ohno’s “Workplace Management” book.

Workers are treasure of the factory. They are important to me. (Sakichi Toyoda)

Also, “respect” is a vague term based on the definitions of people who experienced or actually created TPS. While it implies “good manners,” it means much more. Some so-called industry experts struggle to get it right in their books and seminars, maybe due to cultural biases.

[TPS] is a system that says there is no limit to people’s creativity. People don’t go to Toyota to “work,” they go there to “think.” (Taiichi Ohno)

For a more appropriate name, we should think about appreciation and recognition. After all, appreciating and recognizing the people’s expertise, ideas, and good intentions is what TPS values. Regardless of the role or rank, any contribution is well received; people are trusted to have what it takes to do their job. Historically, leaders and honorable chairmans of Toyota have stressed that developing people and “respecting their abilities” is key for success—which is considerably different from the more generic expression “respect for people.”

E.g.: if a machine at the factory needs improvement, it cannot be addressed by the company’s president, nor the management team, nor any role different from “just” a machinist, which often has the least qualified job; the lowest educational degree; the lowest rank, etc. Nonetheless, she’s the most appropriate person to know what is wrong or what could be better, and probably how to address it, because she’s who (literally) faces these problems and inefficiencies everyday, not the others. So, companies must supply proper tools and sufficient training, but also encourage and empower employees to exploit their own capabilities.

Go see, ask why, show respect. (Fujio Cho, former president and honorary chairman of Toyota)

Yet another respect-related TPS feature is a workplace in which it’s ok to say I’m sorry; it’s a good sign if people take responsibility for their own mistakes; a no-blame culture, which is a way to show respect to others. This is also heavily related to the Japanese culture.

Even the greatest idea can become meaningless in the rush to judgment. To gauge an idea … we must cut our ties to the status quo. (Shigeo Shingo)

Inherently, TPS requires people to forget about status quo and value what really matters, growing talent and promoting creativity & innovation. It requires management to be present, listen, and encourage team members to share their insights and use their own problem-solving skills without having to ask for permission or passing through a bureaucratic (barrier) process.

Kaizen

Having no problems is the biggest problem of all. (Taiichi Ohno)

Kaizen (改善) is a simple yet universal concept; or philosophy; or methodology, for recognizing that there will always be room for improvement to pursue a never-reachable state of perfection.

Once you discover the bountiful results of Kaizen improvements, you’ll continue forever in the spirit of Kaizen. (Taiichi Ohno)

In terms of limitations, our own imagination is the limit. It’s an abstract idea that’s applicable in any industry or aspect of life; promoting either big or small, constant improvements that will, later or sooner, make a difference, adding up throughout time and multiple tries.

Kaizen’s etymology: 改 (Kai), “change” and 善 (Zen), “good,” or just “improvement.” However, since it’s a life-long path that requires commitment and discipline in order to be effective, it is translated and popularly known as “continuous improvement” instead. (Yet, quite often “experts” say: Kai = continuous; Zen = improvement. They just need to do their homework.)

To do Kaizen you don’t need money, it is enough to be willing to improve, a bit of knowledge, and a lot of effort. (Chihiro Nakao, former chairman of Toyota, 1992)

The following are well-known examples of (systematical) Kaizen implementations.

Kaizen Events

They are a formal way of “doing” Kaizen by having scheduled, short-term sessions dedicated to the creation of improvement plans. This kind of instance is limited in scope and time, as opposed to Kaizen itself. The working team decides to address an specific issue, analyzes it, defines possible solutions, and reasonable outcomes.

Kaizen events could take from 15 minutes to a week long through multiple sub-sessions of about 4 hours each, for instance. Anybody can participate. There are no specific numbers since it’s not a framework. However, its only requirement is to start with a well-defined purpose. Any effort to be made must to be justified. Before it begins, an agenda is be created, including potential participants, scheduling date, time, duration, and location for each meeting.

As a side effect, it aids to build enthusiasm and share knowledge through the workplace.

5 Why’s

The basis of Toyota’s scientific approach … by repeating why five times, the nature of the problem as well as its solution becomes clear. (Taiichi Ohno)

Industry experts, including actual TPS creators, recognize that quite often, when addressing an issue, we tend to address a symptom of that issue instead of the issue itself. It could happen because of a lack of knowledge or effort, or both, consequently ignoring the actual problem.

The five why’s (5W) is a practice for finding the root cause of a given problem to solve it for good. It was introduced by Sakichi Toyoda for uncovering a series of cause-and-effect events until the one that causes them all in the first place is discovered in a consistent manner.

It works by asking why an issue and its cause happen, the cause of that cause, and so on. The number of “whys” doesn’t have to be strictly five, but it proved to be effective that way. This approach is useful for exposing hidden inefficiencies and exploring improvement opportunities.

5S

The key is to improve the workshop environment so people can feel good as they work. (Taiichi Ohno)

This method is a five-step process meant to make environmental improvements in order to nurture the organization with a healthy workplace & culture. It works as a systematic tool for exposing inefficiencies through high-impact yet low-cost activities. We can expect from it a direct, positive impact on business productivity, people welfare, and organizational harmony. It also raises the sense of ownership. It’s an activity in which everyone takes part to benefit everybody.

In order to implement [5S], it’s necessary to have the spirit of “和” (wa, harmony), which values the workplace, a tradition of Japanese craftsmanship. I feel it’s important to cherish this spirit. (Practical Production Improvements [Part 2] - 5S Activities, Kenji Kawamata, Electrical and Electronics Engineer, 2004)

The 5S’are described as follows:

  1. Seiri (整理, organization): We first logically discriminate items by how necessary they are. We should keep critical items in place for immediate access considering their amounts; store apart those not regularly needed; and discard the ones that are just unnecessary. Thus, seiri is about performing a general organization by getting rid of the useless.
  2. Seiton (整頓, orderliness): Items left are then put in order and positioned to—mainly and at least—ensure safety, confort, and maximum practicality. Often, items are sorted by frequency of use, size, color, etc. Whatever aids a more efficient workplace. “A place for everything, and everything in its place.” Seiton is about the precise and specific arrangement.
  3. Seisou (清掃, cleaning up): Now we do an in-depth cleaning up, of both workplace and tools, for further inspections that bring about even more improvements. This way we expose remaining issues, resulting in more satisfying, motivating, and optimal working conditions.
  4. Seiketsu (清潔, cleanliness): Once we are done with the hard work, we shall turn it into a minimum acceptable to preserve this new immaculate state. At this third step we proceed to set boundaries: write down standards, policies, or rules; use color codes, labels, signs, etc. The idea is to generate good practices to make sure we don’t revert the good results.
  5. Shitsuke (躾, discipline): Now, rules are set, but they don’t work alone. They need us to follow and obey them in order to make good results stand the test of time; to maintain the positive outcomes and replicate them in a consistent manner; to reeducate us and change our attitude with moral guidance by teaching ourselves good habits and firmly committing to them.

Note: the original translation is preferred since the more popular one (sort, set in order, shine, standardize, sustain) is terminologically inaccurate for some terms.

5S has an interesting psychological/social effect that’s explained by the “Broken Window Theory” from environmental criminology. It states that if a building displays a broken window that has been left unrepaired: it suggests that no one cares about it; it shows negligence and abandonment. This leads to more broken windows, vandalism, and disorder, since people think they can get away with it because nobody is paying attention, and eventually the situation escalates—until they run out of windows to break—affecting also the surroundings.

Therefore, not only morale and ownership are raised by taking part, building a more appealing, comfortable workplace, but it also triggers a virtuous cycle which aids the materialization of good decisions, while, at the same time, prevents the bad from occurring and escalating.

Philosophy of Toyota Production System

Tools and techniques are no secret weapon for a business. Toyota’s continued success … stems from a deeper business philosophy based on its understanding of people and human motivation; [from] its ability to cultivate leadership, teams, and culture … to build [strong, strategic] relationships, and to maintain a learning organization. (The Toyota Way, 2004)

The Five Main Principles of Toyoda (豊田綱領) are corporate ethic statements that were followed as conduct guidelines and business standards. Risaburo Toyoda and Kiichiro Toyoda wrote them (October 30, 1935) to honor the fifth anniversary of (Kiichiro’s father) Sakichi Toyoda’s death, whose actions, ideas, and teachings served as inspiration. TPS inherited these principles.

We are unified in our purpose to never forget your [(Mr. Sakichi)] spirit of contributing to the company and the overall good, and we strive to never eschew these responsibilities. (Risaburo Toyoda, former president of the company)

The Five Main Principles of Toyoda:

More at Adoption of the Five Main Principles of Toyoda (toyota-global.com).

Foundations of Toyota Production System

Ultimately, there are no special secret strategies to the TPS. We are just doing the obvious things, thoroughly, without omission, as a habit. This is simple, but difficult to do consistently across large organizations. (Eiji Toyoda)

Stability by Standardization

(1) My first move as the manager … was to introduce standardized work. (2) Where there is no standard there can be no Kaizen. (3) Standard work is the root of Kanban. (Taiichi Ohno)

The only way to achieve stability is by standardizing the work. By definition, a given standard is the best, demonstrated way of doing something, in this case, our job. It helps people know what to do and how to do it, that way everyone is able to perform their job properly—at least. It behaves as the ground from which we then build up improvements; it prevents slow, unsafe, and ineffective practices; hence, standards are considered the foundation of Kaizen.

Since standards need to be tested in order to be established, of course a minimal level of stability is needed beforehand. However, major stability is reached just after standardization is started. This is what enables Kaizen: turning a given process into a more predictable event that becomes truly measurable and quantifiable, which is crucial—because “what cannot be measured, cannot be improved.”

(1) Impressive standards are never absolute in practice. (2) Progress cannot be generated when we are satisfied with the existing situations. [This is to walk around aimlessly] (Taiichi Ohno)

Standards are to be maintained continuously, even in predictable, stable, monotonous contexts. Any process, machine, or piece of software could have its reasons to be refined. There are at least four major reasons for a standard to be modified (or created in the first place):

  1. Defective products (waste);
  2. Operational mistakes (waste), or worse;
  3. Accidents, producing either material (waste again) or human damage;
  4. Workers’ better ideas, for the mere fact of improving.

Standards naturally prevent negative points 1, 2, and 3.

Today’s standardization … is the necessary foundation on which tomorrow’s improvements will be based … But if you think of standards as confining, then progress stops. (Henry Ford)

Mr. Ohno used to stress that “we are creative, thinking people, not robots.” Degrading, boring, and routine jobs lead people to lose motivation, especially if strict standards are followed for no apparent reasons, which makes people as useful as machines—they “do” without thinking. We must strive not to turn standards into a preventive force against flexibility; avoid solidifying and destructive standards that grow disabling bureaucracy, leaving no place for human creativity.

Develop human ability … to best enhance creativity and fruitfulness, to [perform] well, and eliminate waste. (Taiichi Ohno, Toyota Production System, 1978)

Some Toyota workers (with +50 years at the company) argue that, because of this emphasis on having or requiring process experts, leaders of process improvement; a more accurate name for TPS should have been Toyota Process Development System. And that TPS wasn’t originally a method for improvement—despite their culture—but for Genka Teigen (原価低減), which translates to cost reduction*, and human capital development, instead.

*Toyota’s Genka Teigen is not necessarily “buy cheaper things,” but “make things cheaper.”

Standards should not be forced down from above, but rather set by the production workers themselves. (Taiichi Ohno, Toyota Production System, 1978)

The reasons to create/change standards mainly involve safety, quality, and efficiency in general, as said before. Anybody could participate. However, it wasn’t always that way—the Toyota Way. There were dark days in which theorists seeking optimization forgot about humanity, the prominent approach was to think of people as muscles that follow orders. They used to measure the fastest, strongest worker and set his performance as a (target) standard, while also imposing a procedure standard. And all of this without even asking for workers’ insights. In fact, at some point it started to be normal for workers to lie to their managers and engineers in order to avoid high—often unrealistic—levels of demand by being deliberately unproductive.

So, is that always the bad boss’ fault? Not necessarily.

Some people simply do not like to feel under pressure when taking responsibilities, due to a temporal lack of self-esteem and self-confidence—which is absolutely understandable. Perhaps they don’t have the critical, non-conformist personality it takes to judge their everyday reality—which is also fine, it’s just a natural trait for many people. Or maybe they have new ideas indeed, but didn’t build up (yet) the mental strength and determination to materialize them. Moreover, poor training may give people unclear goals, so they might perceive things as “good enough.”

Management should make workplaces that motivate people to work and sustain the motivation. (Taiichi Ohno)

Nonetheless and back to the point, a control mechanism imposed through rigid standards; to see workers as machines to be optimized by the “people who knows” i.e.: top management or industrial engineers: lead to—at least—neutral or even negative mindsets. TPS is against this system. Mr. Ohno himself complained that “bad management leads people to not take initiative.”

Then, how to healthy promote initiative and boost creativity?

(1) Knowledge is something [we can] buy. Wisdom is something [we] acquire by doing it. (2) If skills to be learned are not creative or stimulating and if they do not require the best people, training may not seem worthwhile. No goal, regardless of how small, can be achieved without training. (Taiichi Ohno)

First of all, it’s said that we need to “learn at the Genba,” which is not only fine but already well-known. Practice produces more competent professionals that are faster and less likely to fail. Notwithstanding, TPS needs more than obvious benefits from practice. Rather, making people truly knowledgeable about their job, is a means to be aware of opportunities so that they can—do it right, but also—spot issues and solutions by themselves; they know how and have the chance to do so. TPS needs leaders to openly promote this attitude, to “have eyes to see waste.”

You are a fool if you do just as I say; you are a greater fool if you don’t do as I say; you should think for yourself and come up with better ideas than mine. (Taiichi Ohno)

Additionally, managers need to entrust people and give them authority through their hierarchy. Leaders must be prepared to adapt to new circumstances; not to fear change and have a flexible mindset. Organizations shall strongly eradicate the idea of “I’m just an employee” from each and every team member and actively foster worker innovation. Top-level decisions should aim at nurturing human creativity through an enabling system of standards. Sadly, there were undesired consequences among Frederick Taylor’s greatest achievements. An old-way in which people (IEs and number-obsessed business guys) assumed that if an employee made something “different” than the rule: it was undoubtedly a mistake. So they developed a system to prevent those “mistakes.” TPS successfully mitigates the dark side of Scientific Management.

It’s not easy to tell people to follow you. On the other hand, if they do, you must take responsibility and look after them along the way. (Taiichi Ohno)

Asking people to be more proactive, however, still needs managers and supervisors—or whichever role name we give to them—to remain responsible for the outcomes, either positive or negative, so they do not hide behind their role description—which doesn’t even exist in TPS—and argue that “it’s the employee’s fault.” Otherwise, they would lose authority; they will no longer be asked for help and guidance. Also the company’s culture would be hurt.

Difficulties mastered are opportunities won. (Winston Churchill, 1951)

Nevertheless, leaders need to be tough teachers. They should be taken seriously at all times by not making things easy and keeping challenges going-on, or people will think that no changes are required whatsoever, and standards will become a religion. Thence both Taiichi Ohno and Shigeo Shingo are remembered for never ever giving a how-to. They would always give an answer such as “try it, you’ll find out.” Tough times push growth. Similarly, setting high standards aid the development of tools that wouldn’t exist otherwise. A perfect example of this is actually TPS, a result of what can be achieved when facing complex, challenging circumstances.

Good, we take care of people and their motivations, but now who takes care of standards?

In order to delegate and give authority: develop people who can be delegate to and be given authority. (Takehiko Harada, former president of Toyota Taiwan)

We still need to have people, with the highest expertise, do the science. TPS had always relied on the scientific method to assure a change is not just a change but “a Kaizen.” Often, many improvements happen without even asking, however, changes might have negative impacts on, e.g.: the product, external processes, or safety. That’s why a subtle level of control is still needed from people with two characteristics. (1) Someone aware of the big picture (sales, budget, company culture, etc.), often a manager. And (2) someone with deep technical knowledge (physics, electronics, mechanics, etc.), often a supervisor or team leader.

Then, what’s the secret behind those experienced members?

(1) [A manager is the] one who makes people do their job well in an easy way. (2) When [managers] give commands or instructions, [they] should imagine themselves receiving those instructions. [Managers and subordinates have contests of wits.] And when [managers] lose the battle, they should freely admit they are beaten … [They] have to suffer along with [their] subordinates and think along with them. (Taiichi Ohno)

Within TPS, leaders start as frontline employees. They are typically persons who show commitment, productivity, and can represent organizational leadership. Managers regularly chose new supervisors (their potential successors). They move this people out from their duties to focus on setting new standards and teaching them since they are the most suitable person. They have hands-on experience and are well-versed about their area of expertise. They also help team members excel, moreover, aid and push for further improvements from their part. One more time: challenging people to grow. This rol was back then called “kaizen leads” or “Ohno leads,” since Mr. Ohno started this practice producing a true, self-generating improvement culture, depreciating traditional, ineffective formalities.

(1) Supervisors need to value their employees and create their own managerial structure. (2) Toyota employs so many people, however very few have good ideas. We must nurture more people who can generate good ideas. [Supervisor,] you’re underestimating the potential of your workers. They can surprise you with idas when they become serious about it. How dare you give up instead of inspiring workers to generate their unique ideas! (Taiichi Ohno)

TPS is not a framework, moreover, Toyota has never set that role fix for positions to be fulfilled, in fact it was formally established after being informally practiced (1954). This mechanism is an active effort for detaching business concerns from value-adding work management in a effective way. Roles are defined after practicality and based on what value they can add.

No matter how great the principles behind a manual are, it has no value if it cannot be applied in practice. Work can never be standardized based only upon your ideas and demands without validating facts in the shop floor. This is how you can collect useful clues as to what standard work should be. (Taiichi Ohno)

Those leaders grow through two must-have TPS concepts. The first, Genba (現場, actual place) which means in this case workplace, where value is created. Second, Genchi Genbutsu (現地現物, the situation on-site or the actual thing at the actual site), meaning on-site issue, popularized as the “go and see for yourself” approach. A mindset adopted by every leader. It is to verify and understand the reality firsthand, doing a thorough and deep observation to evaluate and analyze through exposing oneself to the facts at the workplace. This way we avoid secondhand information, thus potentially misleading assumptions. Considered by TPS creators, and current company leaders, a mandatory practice to grow and achieve success.

When people reach the upper echelons of an organization, they tend to translate their hopes into instructions and commands. (Taiichi Ohno)

It’s worth mentioning that Toyota has always found key leaders within the company since its first years, more than a century ago, from spiritual leaders to subject matter experts (in sales, research, design, production). Moreover, they resigning these positions by themselves when they consider they are no longer the most appropriate person (even former presidents). In contrast, westerns companies use to fire their CEO an hire a new “rockstar” to try fix everything.

Mr. Ohno could be very critical when he saw something wrong. It was very difficult for some people to take. And often we would work into the evening to solve problems. But then at the end of the day, even at 7 pm at night, he would gather us all together and explain why he was critical that day. Everyone, even the junior workers, appreciated that he was trying to teach them. He was interested in developing everyone to their potential. (Fujio Cho)

We could say that a key Toyota management standard was to develop people who would be able to develop more people in turn, leading to an ever-growing workforce where roles and positions are created for the sake of getting humanly better, rather than creating bureaucratic control layers. This way people will strive to do more than expected on their own initiative.

Pillars of Toyota Production System

We place the highest value on actual implementation and taking action. By constant improvement, or, should I say, the improvement based upon action, one can rise to the higher level of practice and knowledge. (Fujio Cho, 2002)

Just-in-Time

Just-in-Time (JIT) is a production concept/methodology aimed to improve the easier yet less efficient way of working in Europe and the USA at that time; buying and processing by large batches without a precise or actual reason. Instead, within JIT a product is to be build only when it’s required, by either reacting to a direct request or by predicting such a request through reasonable analysis; not earlier nor later, avoiding overproduction and, therefore, loss of investments.

Kiichiro Toyoda introduced JIT in 1938, the year after he turned Toyota Motors Corporation an independent company. He studied and considered the well-established methods not only inefficient, but also far from Toyota’s capabilities. Producing without sells guarantied was a concern for him, wasting raw-material, storage space, working hours, etc. Hence he thought JIT as an optimization to the state of the art. Just-in-Time was later developed (1945) and implemented (1949-1962) at scale by Taiichi Ohno as a key component (pillar) of TPS.

Equalizing customer requirements and manufacturing costs is a motto for TPS. JIT brings us closer to that by systematically cutting unjustified costs. A more english-correct name could be “Precisely/Exactly-on-Time” according to Mr. Ohno. Today we could say it’s an “on-demand” approach that aids to make the consumer responsible for every cost—as it should always be. In theory, we should only invest in that which is required and adds value to the customer. JIT concept was applied to almost any kind of relation: (final) consumer-company; company-supplier; process-process, etc. Its target is to keep inventory and overproduction levels near zero.

Just-in-Time relies on three principles:

Pull System

There is nothing so useless as doing something efficiently that should not be done at all. (Peter Ducker, often called the “Management Guru”)

The Pull System is a step closer to the implementation of JIT from its abstraction. It could be called a production control method. Within it we shall react after a “pull” from the customer rather than a “push” by the producer. This means, a consumer triggers a preceding process; from a producer’s point of view, assets are only made when needed by the proceeding step. Notice the term “customer” here is not necessarily an end-customer but just a next step process, an “internal customer,” in manufacturing aka. “downstream process” (後工程, ato-kotei).

Within Pull System each process is responsible for acquiring its own assets, they are in charge. Since they have the ultimate control of what, when, and how much they need: part of the (traditional) management authority is then transferred to them. It is no longer necessary to have a manager orchestrate every single movement.

Kanban (Supermarket)

supermarket 1955, Kanban early 60’s

…a means to achieve Just-in-Time (1950, 1959, 1962)

Do only what is needed, when needed, in the amount needed. (Popular phrase at Toyota)

Kanban (かんばん, sign board) is a workflow visualization and management method, it aids process optimization through a direct display of working status, commonly, tasks to be done; the work in progress; and the already finished tasks, to maximize efficiency and promote continuous improvement. It works as a real-time information repository, a channel for highlighting bottlenecks within processes that might interrupt smooth working practices.

Toyota developed and started applying it in the late 40’s as a supply scheduling system, a tool to implement Just-in-Time (JIT), their innovative and yet in that time new manufacturing approach. In Japanese, Kanban means “sign board.” It’s been adopted by multiple industries throughout the years, where it grew with new practices and metrics.

Jidoka

Our job [as managers] is to distinguish tasks that can be done by humans from those that can be done by machines. Do not use humans only as guards for machines, instead assign them to the tasks that can only be performed by humans. (Taiichi Ohno)

Jidoka (自働化, autonomation) …

The production line that never stops is either excellent or terrible. [And the first case is the least likely to happen.] (Taiichi Ohno)

…People are treated as part of a machine, but it should be the other way around, machines are to be “parts” of humans; extensions of their capabilities.

Target & Benefits of TPS

Formally, there’s only one target: more efficiency—at any scale, in any domain—that could benefit from employees; to machines; processes; the entire company; and, even contribute to the whole civilization and future generations (which has already happened), through waste (無駄, muda) elimination. However, we could enumerate multiple benefits, some of them are consequences of “doing” TPS, some others are consequences of succeeding with TPS:

  1. Higher morale and happier employees (better people),
  2. More proactive and productive employees (better professionals),
  3. More creativity and innovation (better tools and processes),
  4. Constant knowledge sharing (less silos of knowledge)
  5. More horizontal interactions (less bureaucratic barriers)
  6. Better safety at workplace,
  7. Lowest production costs,
  8. Higher product quality,
  9. Shorter lead-times,
  10. Reduced waste (more efficient business),
  11. Lowest product prices (more competitive business),
  12. More customers satisfied (more effective business),
  13. Higher customer loyalty (better reputation),
  14. More customers (larger market share), and,
  15. More profit (more reliable business).

(Among others.)

The Seven Wastes Model

According to Ohno and Shingo, eliminating waste was the main functional target of TPS despite the long list of high-impact benefits it brings about as side effects. Although Mr. Ohno once stated “waste is not limited to seven types. There is an old expression: ‘He without bad habits has seven.’ So I came up with [seven], but it doesn’t mean [they are the only ones]. Don’t bother thinking about them. Just get on with it and do kaizen,” he analyzed and developed the Seven Wastes Model for categorizing them, and they are as follows:

  1. Delay, waiting, time spent without adding value.
  2. Overproduction, doing more than we actually need.
  3. Over processing or undertaking non-value added activities.
  4. Transportation of resources or products.
  5. Movement of stuff by either machines or human power.
  6. Inventory, unwanted accumulation of resources or products.
  7. Defective products, meaning it made it through the hole production line in vain.

Influence of TPS on Scrum & XP, so Agile

Let’s not start with Agile but Waterfall and what do they have in common. Waterfall (IT) started as an analogy to the serialized processes of production lines from, specially, car manufacturing (Ford, 1910s). On the other hand, Agile was inspired by the revolutionizing approaches manufacturers such as Toyota introduced, which then many industries adopted for the better (1970s-1980s). Inventions that aimed at producing more and better with less, quite tempting for IT professionals at that time—not to say they were in absolute need and desperate for it.

As an example, among many books and authors, we have “The Art of Agile Development,” by James Shore, which makes it clear that TPS has had a considerable influence not only in the development of some Agile methods but the whole methodology itself. It includes Lean (TPS) and Kanban as “contributors to what [we] think of as ‘Agile’ today.”

Also some terminology and expressions sound quite identical to the ones written by Mr. Ohno in his books, e.g.: “Rely on People … Put decisions in the hands of those who are most qualified … Base your work on healthy, collaborative relationships … Focus on [customers and] deliver valuable results … Eliminate Waste … Improve Your Process. Experiment with new Ideas.” And explicit references such as “Kaizen was imported to Agile … [and it] is based on the revolutionary Toyota Production System,” among others.

Both the Toyota Production System and Agile focus their efforts on rapidly delivering value; being flexible, knowing that changes are imminent; relentlessly seeking perfection despite it is never achievable; to succeed through teamwork and human creativity, etc. Paradoxically, we could often find “disrupting” ideas combining TPS (or its methods) with Agile not realizing they are already connected by history, “Kaizen/Kanban/Lean Agile” or viceversa for all of the combinations—then we have a whole battery of “[insert-name-here] Thinking” versions of those. No Frankenstein tools would be required if we properly understood and value the foundational ones, or simply put them together not trying to reinvent them with more catchy names. It seems that there is a tendency or caprice for authoring new tools rather than growing g’old ones.

When creating a prototype, [Kiichiro Toyoda] first got an engineer to make it, and if it worked, then he got an academic to figure aut the theory. (Jirokichi Chigusa, director of Toyoda Machinery Works, 1935)

Scrum

Scrum, on its part, exists as it is thanks to two people, Hirotaka Takeuchi and Ikujiro Nonaka. They made a superb research and analysis of Japanese and American companies that were launching groundbreaking products at record deadlines and great innovation at the same time. They published a paper introducing the term “scrum” in the 1986. Nine years later Ken Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland co-authored the Scrum we know today based on this paper.

TPS aids to produce organic organizations, which are the most complex yet adaptable, flexible, and suitable for unpredictable & rapidly-changing environments. The exact same description of the companies that inspired the creation of the paper which later inspired Scrum in turn.

See also Scrum Origins (leaf).

Extreme Programming

The resonance of [TPS’] ideas to my experience rocketed my world. It fundamentally changed the way I was thinking and the way I explain Extreme Programming. (Kent Beck, Twenty Years of Extreme Programming [talking about the time he read Mr. Ohno’s book], 2015)

“Extreme Programming Explained” version two has brought two changes referencing TPS. One was the adhesion of “Respect” to XP’s values after Simplicity, Communication, Feedback, and Courage. A direct reference to the concept of “respect [and appreciation] for people.” The other are two chapters: “Chapter 18. Taylorism and Software,” about the damage cause by Scientific Management and (a wrong use of) Ind. Engineers. Topics mentioned several times in Mr. Ohno’s books; and “Chapter 19. Toyota Production System,” as an honorable mention—despite the author’s terribly vague and biased, money-oriented interpretations of TPS.

Reference: