Lean Blog Audio

The blog post Just over a week ago, I got back from Katie Anderson's Japan Study Trip. It was amazing! I have so much to write about and share. But first, Facebook reminded me of something from exactly ten years ago–the second time I visited Japan with the Kaizen Institute. I asked 2024 ChatGPT to translate this 2014 news story that's pictured below (with me sitting there and taking notes in the front row of the meeting room). See the English text below the image:

The blog post: https://www.leanblog.org/2024/11/surveying-the-lean-global-connection-audience-on-barriers-to-speaking-up/ At yesterday's Lean Global Connection event, I posed a straightforward yet revealing question to the audience: “What keeps you from speaking up at work?” The responses illustrated two of the common barriers. I posed the survey options based on the research of Prof. Ethan Burris, from the University of Texas at Austin, who has found that fear and futility are the top two reasons why people choose to stay quiet. For some, fear stood in the way–the fear of reprisal, being judged, or being seen as a troublemaker. For others, the obstacle wasn't fear but futility–the belief that speaking up wouldn't make a difference. Four people, sadly, said BOTH were barriers. And yet, amidst these challenges, eight people shared that they felt no barriers at all, a testament to the environments they work in. That is the ideal we should all strive for. The survey results line up with the Burris research that shows futility is actually the biggest reason, not fear.

Blog post My whole career, I have worked with the Lean methodology (aka the Toyota Production System). I've just really never done much with Six Sigma. I've read about Six Sigma. I took a Green Belt course when I worked at Dell in the late 90s. I've studied and used statistical methods (especially what I learned in my Industrial Engineering studies and at MIT), but I've never done anything I would call Six Sigma in my career. I have respect for Six Sigma as a discipline, just as if I were a chef, I would have respect for pastry chefs. They can co-exist in the kitchen. You might both use whisks, but you have slightly different training to do different things. These roles aren't interchangeable, and neither are Lean and Six Sigma. That's one reason I get riled up about so-called “Lean Sigma” or “Lean Six Sigma.” Most of the “L.A.M.E.” (Lean As Mistakenly Explained) examples that I see on the interwebs come from “Lean Sigma” discussions, especially on LinkedIn. What are the fallacies that are thrown around? They include, but are not limited to: Lean is about the average, Six Sigma is about the variation Lean is about internal processes, Six Sigma is customer-focused Lean is for efficiency; you need Six Sigma for quality (this one is the fault of Mike George and his books, many say) Lean and Six Sigma are just toolboxes, and you use whichever is appropriate for the problem at hand These are all incorrect, as somebody with good Lean training or Lean experience would realize.

How Often Does This Happen? Read the blog post It's a story I've heard too many times. An organization spends years, even decades, entrenched in a top-down, command-and-control culture. In this environment, employees are micromanaged, decision-making is reserved for those at the top, and when things go wrong, the finger-pointing begins. “Blame and shame” becomes the norm. Then, someone decides, “We're going to get Lean.” On the surface, this should be great news. Lean offers proven strategies to improve safety, quality, and employee engagement. But here's the catch: the organization doesn't change how it leads. It still clings to the same top-down mentality that has suffocated the workforce for years. What follows might be described as a superficial Lean transformation. It's probably more of a “Lean effort” (or “Lean hope”) than any sort of transformation.

I've played around with ChatGPT before (including in a few blog posts), but the advancements in A.I. technologies are pretty breathtaking. Check out the blog post I recently tried out the new “Notebook LM” tool from Google. I uploaded a PDF of my latest book, The Mistakes That Make Us: Cultivating a Culture of Learning and Innovation, and it was able to generate a realistic-sounding podcast episode about the book. It's like an NPR podcast in tone and style. There's a male A.I. host and a female A.I. host bantering about the book as they recap some of the key points and themes. It's not perfect — they pronounce my name wrong in a few different ways — but it's a fascinating experiment in how to take a really long document and summarize it in a consumable way. They definitely didn't say everything exactly the way I would have stated it. However, the podcast seems to perfectly simulate the discussion that two people might have after both reading and enjoying the book.

Read the blog post When discussing mistakes, it's common to hear terms like “stupid mistake” or “dumb mistake” thrown around, especially when reflecting on our own errors. However, labeling mistakes in this way is unproductive. In The Mistakes That Make Us, one of the key ideas is that we shouldn't label mistakes as “stupid” or “dumb.” Mistakes are a natural part of the human experience, and even the smartest, most capable people make them.

Read the blog post “I am never, ever wrong.” That's a statement that should disqualify an applicant from ANY leadership position.True leadership isn't about projecting infallibility–it's about fostering a culture where mistakes are seen as opportunities for learning and growth.Leaders who claim they're never wrong create an environment where fear of failure stifles innovation, and team members are less likely to speak up or challenge ideas. This is the opposite of what effective leadership requires.

The blog post Today, I want to share a section from my book, The Mistakes That Make Us. I'm sharing an excerpt here in this post, and I'm also making it available as a podcast episode using an excerpt from the audiobook version. In this book, I explore how mistakes can actually be one of the best ways we learn and grow—whether it’s in business or life in general. The excerpt I’m about to share is from Chapter Three, where I talk about the importance of kindness. Often, we think that being "nice" is enough, but real kindness goes deeper. It’s not just about being pleasant or avoiding conflict; it’s about helping others—and ourselves—grow and improve through constructive action. In this chapter, I also touch on self-kindness, especially after making mistakes. We tend to be our own harshest critics, but kindness towards ourselves is crucial if we want to learn and move forward. If you find this excerpt helpful, I encourage you to check out the rest of the book, The Mistakes That Make Us (including this free sample offer). It’s packed with stories and lessons on how embracing mistakes can lead to greater success. So, let’s get into the reading.

I've blogged about this before, but I'm going back to the problems at Starbucks again with today's post. Starbucks has a new CEO who is talking about how the coffee shop experience is broken. Many aspects of the Starbucks mobile ordering process are broken. Well, the ordering process is fine... it's the fulfillment process that needs improving.

Read the blog post In many organizations, moving away from a culture of punishment when mistakes are made is a significant leap forward. It signals a shift toward understanding, systems thinking, and improvement. But once you've made that change, what's next? Do we need to replace punitive approaches with something better? If so, what? How do you ensure that your new approach leads to meaningful learning and continuous improvement?