The Toyota Template

The Plan for Just-In-Time and Culture Change Beyond Lean Tools

Phillip Ledbetter

• Publisher: Productivity Press
• Year: 2018
• Print ISBN: 9781138578715
• eBook ISBN: 9781351263702
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Business Strategy
• Index: Business

Much has been written about Toyota over the last 30 years focusing on both its products (superior vehicles), and its operational excellence based on its Toyota Production System (TPS). The Toyota Template details the critical concepts and methods that Taiichi Ohno implemented in developing the Toyota Production System. This book is different, however, regarding the parallels it draws between Toyota's pre-TPS condition and companies today who are attempting to become more efficient and Lean.

In view of efficiency, excellence, culture, and general "Leanness," many organizations are in the same position as Toyota prior to implementing what was once called the "Ohno System." The building of TPS, with the goal to eliminate waste, evolved as problems were encountered and solutions put in place. A wonderful byproduct of these years of work was the growth of a problem-solving culture throughout Toyota that is unique in the business world.

Currently, the Toyota Production System is well established. Though constantly improving, the historical picture is visible. The question many have tried to answer for their own companies is "how can they achieve world class efficiency?" The Toyota Template answers this question. This book:

• Explains the critically important elements of the Toyota Production System.
• Analyzes the sequence of implementation as the system developed.
• Places these elements in a logical order of implementation based on the history and current knowledge. In addition, it addresses the effect of each element on the culture.

The author was prompted to write this book because of his personal observations of the failure of most attempts to develop Lean systems. What makes Toyota stand out is not any of the individual elements – It is crucially important to have all the elements together as a system. Most attempts have been focused on bits and pieces of the elements, or the tools.

The Toyota Template is about the relevance of the Toyota Production System to "any type of business" today. It is not an all-inclusive explanation of every aspect of TPS. Rather, this book succinctly identifies the key elements, places them in a logical, sequential order of implementation, and explains how each contributed to the formation of the Toyota culture.

1          

The Problem: Distance from Toyota

 

Problems require solutions.

The lean world has become an interesting place over the years. Lots of companies in many different industries all over the world have been, and are, attempting to implement lean systems. However, the overwhelming rate of failure is hard to understand. Most estimates are in the 90% range, some even higher. I’ve often wondered why this is so. What’s the problem? As I considered my experience at Toyota, researched the history, and observed what’s been going on, many thoughts came to my mind.

It’s well known that Toyota has been the gold standard for any company attempting its own lean implementation. People from all over the world have toured the Toyota plant in Georgetown, Kentucky, over many years. Even though I worked there, I’ve taken the public tour myself a few times out of curiosity. What people see on the tour is the current product of the Toyota Production System (TPS), which took many years, through trial and error, to develop.

[T]he Toyota Production System evolved gradually, step-by-step. Taiichi Ohno, Kikuo Suzumura, and others conceived elements of the system and worked heroically to put their concepts into practice. But none of those individuals ever possessed a comprehensive vision of the Toyota Production System as an integrated framework. They were simply tackling problems that arose in the workplace, one by one, and their solutions accumulated and gradually became—collectively—what we now know as the Toyota Production System. ¹

Toyota has been very open with their system since arriving in the United States. The extreme example was their 25-year joint venture from 1984 to 2009 in Fremont, California with General Motors (GM), called NUMMI. GM had full access to every part of the production system and training from hundreds of Toyota trainers. Yet, it has proved very difficult for them and others to implement real lean systems that approach the efficiency of Toyota. As I pondered this reality, my mind repeatedly arrived at the obvious question. Why?

Many companies that are successful, or at least making money, have decided, albeit cautiously, to take the plunge to become efficient. These companies have employed many resources, including outside help and benchmarking visits to those places they believe to be helpful, and spent a lot of money on production boards, kanbans, returnable dunnage, and any number of tools in search of a lean culture change, reduced costs, and world-class on-time-delivery.

These are good companies, with good products that are in demand in the market, that are looking for improvement that differentiates them from their competitors. Either they realize that there’s room for improvement or they fear falling behind the competition. Either way, from an efficiency standpoint, companies today are in a similar position to that of Toyota prior to the development of the TPS. They’re running with the herd. And, let’s be honest, there’s some safety in the herd. Excessive inventory, unsynchronized production, poor housekeeping, and excessive costs are common problems today, just as they were at Toyota many years ago. Unfortunately, many don’t realize they have problems, because they’re comfortably settled in with the herd.

Since companies today are in a similar starting position, wouldn’t it make sense to understand what Toyota did when they were in this same spot? If we agree that Toyota is the leader and best example of a “lean” company, wouldn’t it be instructive to examine the Toyota record to understand what they did, why they did it, how they did it, and the results? And how did the steps they took lead to the development of that elusive lean culture?

Once the what, the when, the why, and the how are deeply understood, wouldn’t there exist a template for a successful lean implementation? Absolutely! If companies today that strongly desire to become efficient manufacturers, world class in their markets, were to set about following this “Toyota Template,” shouldn’t it follow that they could become efficient and world class? Yes!

The fact is that a successful and sustainable lean production system and culture requires the implementation of the “Toyota Template.” In fact, it’s the only way to become an efficient, just-in-time company. TPS is the benchmark for all lean initiatives. In this book, I’ll examine the key steps and concepts Toyota took under the leadership of Taiichi Ohno, with the full support of Kiichiro and Eiji Toyota, and develop this Toyota Template.

The Problem: Distance from the Toyota Template. Lean efforts are far away from the TPS.

Culture: Culture is not grown through tools. The culture developed because of the steps Ohno took over time.

Endnote

1. Shimokawa, Koichi and Fujimoto, Takahiro. 2009. The Birth of Lean, p. 129. Cambridge, MA: The Lean Enterprise Institute.

2

The Predicament: Perplexing Failure

Predicaments are where we find ourselves when we take actions or make plans based on our beliefs, but it turns out we’re wrong.

Each idea was conceived and developed in response to a need. ¹

Several years ago, I was asked, “What’s your favorite lean tool?” I was surprised and taken aback by the question. As I pondered my response, it occurred to me that I had never thought about the Toyota Production System (TPS) in that way. I never had a favorite tool. Tools weren’t addressed in this way at Toyota. We didn’t discuss our favorite tools at lunch. What’s going on here? Initially, I wasn’t sure if this was a serious question or not. But as I looked around the room, I realized that these people were truly interested in my favorite. I could not disappoint them! Hesitatingly, my response was, “Whichever tool is appropriate for the problem.” The reaction was a blank stare. How could I be a “lean guy” and not have a favorite lean tool? I wondered if they thought I was skirting the question. Later, I realized that the questioner, and everyone else, had a very different viewpoint. In fact, everyone in the room shared this view. TPS was not a management system, as I’d experienced. It was a collection of interesting tools, one of which should be my favorite. Kind of like my favorite ice cream flavor, I suppose? In the years since, I’ve come to realize that this is not an uncommon view of TPS.

The majority of “lean transformations” are, and have been, tool oriented. This is the most common understanding of what lean means, even to many who say otherwise. In terms of culture change, many leaders talk about it, but usually in a mythic way. It’s as if talking about behavioral models and learning methods will make culture change a reality. It seems as if education on lean concepts is the key to changing the way people think. Putting a few tools in place will, somehow, change the culture. People just need to have the concepts explained to them, participate in a few “kaizen events,” use the terms, and “POOF!” we’re on our way to efficiency. This is tragic for business. In so many situations, a tool is rolled out as the solution to some problem. If parts are put on kanban or a 3P is done in an area or an hour-by-hour board is put up at some line, then we have the solution, right? I’ve even witnessed several countermeasures over the years that are nothing more than data collection methods. It’s crazy! Of course, I have no problem with any of the Toyota tools. They were developed and/or adopted as countermeasures to problems Toyota encountered while developing their production system. But is this tool approach the way to a lean enterprise? Based on history, I think not.

A good example of this tool emphasis is the Value Stream Map (VSM). This tool has become the first must-do in many lean efforts, almost as if it were an antidote for the problem. If this were the first step to becoming efficient, why didn’t anyone who was involved in the development of TPS ever mention it? Looking back, I would think that this tool would have been a major part of my education at Toyota. Seems like we would have talked about it regularly? It’s hard to believe that Toyota would hold such a seemingly critical tool back from us.

Alas, given its widespread popularity, what is interesting about the VSM is that it was not developed at Toyota. Apparently, it was based on a comparatively lightly used tool called a Material and Information Flow Diagram (MIFD). ² The MIFD was generally used with suppliers to understand the direction of material and information flow through their processes. This is understandable, as the MIFD would quickly show whether a supplier was using a pull system or a push system. This would be important to know. A well-known blogger’s research gives several examples of the MIFD, used in publications about Toyota and Nissan, but he observes that “Their purpose is to explain, not to document a current state or design ideal and future states. They don’t use a standard graphic language, and are not bound by the strictures of VSM.” ³

The VSM is a snapshot in time of the current condition as it pertains to inventory/work in process (WIP), cycle times, total lead times, number of operators, value-added time, changeover times, batch sizes, and any other measures you decide to include. Keep in mind that this is a snapshot. It also shows the information flow through the processes from start to finish. After making a current state map, the idea is to follow up with a future state map. The future state map should represent the desired future condition. This is all interesting information. But is it useful?

One problem is that the VSM tends to point to symptoms. The detailed information about WIP between processes, lead times, and cycle times leads to a focus on these particular findings. The tendency is to concentrate efforts on these pieces of the puzzle as opposed to the system as a whole. Remember that what makes Toyota special is “having all the elements together as a system.” ⁴ Elements? What elements was he talking about?

In manufacturing, there are two basic operating systems. The first, and most common, is a push system. In this scenario, the various operations on the floor use schedules for production. The schedules are based on projected demand over a period of time, say a week. They are then delivered to each process where production is to begin. Generally, if each area has one schedule per day, the processes will either make their products in some predetermined order or make them in the order that best maximizes their process. Keeping in mind that each order on each schedule must mate up with other orders on the other schedules, a problem surfaces. That problem is timing. These various processes don’t run at the same pace, and many times the orders are not run in a cohesive sequence. These timing issues show up in the lack of synchronization between orders that must mate up to be completed or sold.

To deliver the finished product to the customer and collect the money, these various individual orders must come together during production or in shipping. If they don’t sync up during production, the result is waste. This can be in the form of wait time at the locations where the orders need to mate up, or it could result in overproduction of orders while waiting, or both. Also, some orders may arrive in shipping days ahead of their mates or days behind, resulting in products that cannot be delivered until their mates arrive.

Looking at things individually they say they are doing a good job of producing gears, or that they are using robots very well, or that they can do the work with just 3 people. But these items can only be sold when they are together as a set. ⁵

Push systems do not synchronize, nor do they pace production through the plant. Instead, each individual line or process runs to its own pace on its own schedule. Some orders go to batch build processes, while others start on one-piece flow lines. These timing issues affect synchronization. And in a push system, it’s difficult to tell the normal from the abnormal. Which area is behind, which orders are too early? There...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Endrosment
• Half-Title
• Title
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• Preface
• Author
• Chapter 1 The Problem: Distance from Toyota
• Chapter 2 The Predicament: Perplexing Failure
• Chapter 3 The Position: Plant First
• Chapter 4 The Purpose: Will and Skill
• Chapter 5 The Plan: Hoshin Kanri
• Chapter 6 The Property: Waste Elimination
• Chapter 7 The Practice: Standard Work
• Chapter 8 The Patois: 8-Step Problem-Solving
• Chapter 9 The Pattern: Flow, Pull, and Heijunka
• Chapter 10 The Program: Jidoka, Quality at the Source
• Chapter 11 The Path: The Toyota Template
• Chapter 12 The Proof: TPS Results
• Chapter 13 The Perceptions: Mental Images
• Chapter 14 The Post Script: Personal Matters
• Index