Author: Ailsa Carson

Delivering Process Improvement

Posted on by Ailsa Carson

We all want to improve the way that we work. Process improvement (digital or otherwise) doesn’t just happen though, someone has to drive these projects. Whose responsibility should this be? Should we ask our divisions to improve their own processes or do we create a transformation team to do it for them.  

 

To start, let’s quickly recap S A Partner’s Improvement journey:  

SA Partners Improvement Journey 

The model explains that to reach excellence, you need to: 

  1. Standardise the way that work is done 
  2. Optimise your process by removing waste  
  3. Use technology to scale your processes  

While there are more nuances, at a high level it really is that simple. The question then becomes, how, or rather who, needs to support this journey.  

There are three approaches that you can take when it comes to improvement:  

Centralised 

Under a central model, a central team is formed of skilled and experienced people whose day job it is to deliver improvement. These central resources may be employees of the organisation itself, external consultants, or a combination of the two. The division will remain involved; however, they will be stakeholders rather than being responsible for delivering projects.  

Decentralised 

Under a decentralised model, the responsibility for process management and improvement will sit with the division themselves with limited, if any, central support.  

Hybrid 

Under a hybrid model, a central team exists however the delivery work is shared with the division. The role of the central team can vary, and be anything from providing centralised planning and oversight, all the way through to doing the lion’s share of the delivery work.  

As you might imagine, there are advantages of each approach.  

A centralised approach:  

  • Helps ensure that the quality of development is consistent and in accordance to the established standards  
  • Accelerates the development of solutions by providing dedicated resources 
  • Reduces the time and cost of development through specialisation and economies of scale 
  • Helps to prevent shadow IT  
  • Minimises the duplication of work through the creation of reusable assets  
  • Allows the business to focus on their day job  
  • Ability to implement strong governance frameworks  

A de-centralised approach:  

  • Empowers Process Owners and Participants to improve their own processes  
  • May result in higher adoption from the business for solutions that they build  
  • Uncovers use cases that would otherwise have not been known 
  • Reduced the need to wait on a central team to become available  
  • Has lower central resource overhead requirements  

Clearly then there is no one best approach. In making the decision there are a few things to consider:  

  • Your strategy. Is there a business benefit for your division to diverting time from their day job to work on process improvement?  
  • Capability. Do your people have the skills needed to successfully deliver improvement themselves?  
  • Capacity. Do your people have the time to be able to deliver improvement projects while continuing to perform their day job?  

 

Again, while there is no one answer, I can offer some best practice guidance depending on the type of improvement work being done. Broadly speaking, we can split improvement work up into two arms, process management and process digitisation.  

Process Management  

Process Management involves documenting as-is processes, standardising the way that work is done, and improving these processes by removing waste. My recommendation is to decentralise this work.  

There is a huge strategic benefit of the division doing this work – they are the ones with their boots on the ground and therefore have the best understanding of where the process can be improved, what pain-points exist, and what the root cause of the underlying issues are. I would argue that asking your team to do this work is not taking time away from their day job, it is their day job.  

This of course does not mean that there is no need for a central team. You may have some large strategic projects that are too complicated to ask the division to deliver themselves, so you still should have access to central, highly skilled and experienced resources to deliver these projects as well as to support the division as they deliver projects themselves.  

Having agreed that there is a strategic benefit to decentralising this work, we now need to consider capacity and capability.  

Starting with capacity. There’s no point asking your divisional team to perform improvement work if they are already working at 110% utilisation. Something will need to change and overtime you need to ensure that everyone has time formally built into their performance plans to focus on improvement.  

Capability is much easier. Everyone across your organisation should have some amount of process management, improvement, and problem-solving skills; the level to which will depend on the extent to which they are expected to participate and lead improvement initiatives. As a starting point, here is our guidelines for the skills required:  

 

Process Digitisation 

The second arm of process improvement is digitisation and automation. This involves using technology to improve processes which may be as anything from implementing an off the shelf tool, automating process steps, or building custom applications.  

These activities do not necessarily have a strategic benefit of being performed by the division. Once we identify that our process has a step that can be automated for example, there is no strategic benefit for the division to build the automation itself. In this case, you would be better off leveraging experienced, competent professionals to perform the technical build and testing while the division focuses on their day job. There is however a benefit in the division receiving basic training on process digitisation and automation as, by understanding the art of the possible, they will then be well placed to flag where there are opportunities to incorporate technology in their processes.  

In summary then, as obvious as it sounds, if you want to improve your processes you need to consider who is going to perform the improvement work. This decision needs to be anchored in strategy and supported by realistic capability and capacity planning. Finally, this decision needs to be fluid, as your organisation and the environment in which it operates evolves, so too should your execution model.  

 Please do reach out if you would like to discuss this in any way. 

Ishan Sellahewa 

ishan.sellahewa@sapartners.com 

The SHINGO© Model that drives Enterprise Excellence & the focus on Culture & Behaviours that matter

Posted on by Ailsa Carson
By John Quirke, Author

In 1988 as a recognition for his work across a broad range of industry sectors, Shigeo Shingo was awarded an honorary Doctor of Management from Utah State University.  Over the course of his life Dr. Shingo wrote eighteen books on the improvement of work and the processes that support the effectiveness of work.  Many terms we use widely today such as ‘single minute exchange of die’ (SMED) and ‘go see activity’ or ‘going to Gemba’ originated in Dr Shingo’s writings.  The adoption and expansion of Dr. Shingo’s thinking and philosophy led to the development of the Shingo Enterprise Excellence Model, and the formation of the Shingo Institute, within the Jon M. Huntsman School of Business at Utah State University.

The Shingo Institute

has drawn on a wide range of expertise and research to expand the philosophy behind the original model to include a critical focus on the quality of leadership, organisational culture, and the critical link between desired behaviours and the impact of business system on these behaviours.

The outcome of the majority of business activity is based on a human behaviour and the actions that result for that behaviour.

The behaviours that count, are the ones that result in an action that we could see or hear.

  • An employee may see a problem but fail to raise it as an issue.
  • A leader fails to react to an obvious breach of agreed standards of work or safety protocols.
  • A supervisor may angrily chastise a team for poor performance.
  • A quality engineer develops a poor corrective action without seeing or ‘touching’ the process.

All the above are behaviours that will result in possible customer dissatisfaction, loss of trust, or loss of integrity.  At S A Partners we refer to these behaviours as ‘NIBs’, ‘Not Ideal Behaviours’.  Consider all the NIBs in your organisation.  How many have a direct impact on your bottom line?

I like to use the ‘two click rule’ to get serious about dealing with NIBs.  If that employee allows the damaged product to pass their workstation (click 1), and that part is missed during quality sampling (click 2), there will be an impact on the bottom line and the integrity of our product in the marketplace.

As an example, we regularly see a focus on generating improvement ideas in organisations.  This is seen as key behavioural indicator.  The idea being, that incremental ideas add together as marginal gains to improve overall performance.  This is a fine a laudable approach when process is stable, and we are seeking incremental improvements.  But when the process is in the red zone of variation and firefighting there are many KPI’s, alarms and often customers screaming at us to tell us what the problems/opportunities are now!  Yes, we need improvement ideas, but these ideas must be focused on the issues and problems at hand.  They require strong direction and good leadership to ensure teams are not distracted and get the time and support to implement their ideas effectively.

So where should focus behavioural measures in the above example?  Good implementation of employee ideas?  Well maybe.  But initially the behavioural measures must focus on the quality of leadership.  Are leaders spending time with their teams to support and understand their issues?  Are leaders appropriately recognising effort and exemplar behaviours within their work teams?  Are leaders actively involved in supporting and facilitating cross functional problem solving.  Gaining control and exiting the ‘red zone’ is dependent on the quality of leadership not on the random improvement suggestions of employees.

The point is organisations can spend a lot of effort measuring behaviours that do not have a direct impact on the effectiveness and efficiency of the work that needs to take place to meet customer expectations.  At the end of the day, it is about delivering measurable results.

The Shingo Model’s focus on culture and behaviour is there so that organisations become laser focused on the behaviours necessary to make the difference between winning or losing.

Systems Thinking

An important insight brought by the Shingo Enterprise Excellence Philosophy is that expressed behaviours (actions or conversations) whether they are good or bad are a result of the quality of the systems within the business, or the absence of them.  The employee who passes a defective part may be measured for the most part on units produced per minute.  The quality engineer is driven by a corporate quality system that focuses on corrective action closeout rather than effective problem solving.

“If you need to change behaviour you must consider the systems and processes that drive the behaviour you need to change.”

S A Partners Improvement Journey Model

The power of the guiding principles

Many companies speak to high level values.  But very few connect these values to what is important for business success.  Even fewer translate values into observable effective winning behaviours. The ten guiding principles within the Shingo Enterprise Excellence model give organisations ‘lenses’ through which to view the work that they do and give insight into the necessary ideal behaviours necessary to support sustainable excellent performance.  The principles can be backed into’ set organisational values yet give a firm guide as to what aspirational values need to look a feel like where the value adding work gets done.

Taking some examples:

Does everyone in your organisation feel respected as an individual? Are they are listened to?  If their concerns or ideas are not listened to, if they are not developing as individuals or the organisation is not keeping them safe physically and psychologically, then they are not being respected.

If leaders spend their time telling teams what they should or should not do they are not leading with humility and the team will become dependent.  There will be no organisational learning, and poor leadership habits at senior level will be amplified as we travel down the organisational layers.

Equally if we consider some of the principles within the Shingo dimension of Continuous Improvement, do you see a true Focus on Process within your teams where standards are clear current, understood and regularly reviewed and improved by those who use them?

Or how about Flow and Pull?  Do we have a clear line of sight as to how you flow customer value through all aspect of work?  From sales to delivery and receipt of payment?  Do processes really flow or are they overly complex, bound up in compliance culture and continually prone to error and delay?  The flow of value in response to the pull or demand of the customer, thrives on elegance in process and work design.  It requires detailed knowledge of the work and the factors that impact the speed and reliability of the work.  The individuals who discover and cherish this knowledge are those individuals who are closest to the work. These individuals have incredible leadership who are excited by these discoveries and actively celebrate the constant improvement of the work by the team.

I encourage the reader to read their definitions along with the remaining principles in the freely available Shingo Handbook from the Shingo.org website.

While the Shingo Enterprise Excellence Model is an incredibly powerful approach to developing sustained levels of excellence in an organisation it does bring challenges.  It requires real and genuine commitment for a site leadership team.  They as a team must own it.

Another challenge we see arises from the complexity within corporations and their approach to enterprise excellence.  Often, we see sites who have gone on a ‘solo run’ having gained initial approval for the approach but then find themselves in a sea of confusion as attempts are made to align the Shingo Model with corporate values, improvement systems even branding!

Personally, I see the Shingo Enterprise Excellence model as providing an extremely powerful framework to develop a holistic approach to sustainable organisational excellence.  Many existing programmes and systems can be aligned to a clear unambiguous focus on excellence.  A focus that is supported by leadership skills that enable their teams to be brilliant at what they do.

It is a tough journey, but it can also be extremely rewarding.

Please do, get in touch or join us at an upcoming Intro to Shingo Workshop

Best

John

John.Quirke@sapartners.com

About John Quirke

John Quirke is a partner with S A Partners and is a Shingo Examiner.

John holds a BSc, MSc and BCL degrees and has over twenty five year experience in the area of operational excellence.

John co-authored the Shingo Prize winning Publication TPM a Foundation of Operational Excellence with colleagues Peter Wilmott (RIP) and Any Brunskill.

John has recently published Deep Excellence – Seeing and Hearing a Culture of Deep Excellence, with contributions for colleagues Juliette Packham, Bryan Cutliff and Simon Grogan.

For more information please visit www.sapartners.com and www.shingo.org

 

 

Align, Engage, Improve with Effective Tiered Meetings

Posted on by Ailsa Carson

By Sonja Allen Image of Sonja Allen

Have you ever considered…

  • How many meetings you have a week?
  • How many of these meetings could be an email?
  • How many of these meetings have few or no results?
  • How many rabbit holes do your meeting conversations go down?
  • How regularly do you talk about what really matters, in a focused fashion?

And more importantly have you asked if there is a way to ensure you and your team leave every meeting feeling it had value and purpose and moved you forward.

Getting the right team together to make the right decisions at the right time is hard. Often it’s made harder by the fact that we don’t naturally approach communications and decision-making in the same intentional and systematic fashion as we would other business processes.

To sustainably deliver great customer results all organisation must align their business systems and processes to deliver on the organisation’s purpose…

⇒ engage all their people into that purpose

⇒ and into continuously improving the business processes they are responsible for

In the world of Enterprise Excellence, we achieve this by deploying a Management System – a structured, interlinked set of measures, meetings, actions and decisions which allow us to run today’s business and shape tomorrows. It provides a right time, right place, right focus, right pace decision-making focus at every level of an organisation, or, as we call it at S A Partners: The Align Engage Improve System (AEI for short).

AEI brings all of the elements together to make your improvement journey successful. It aligns teams on the organisational purpose, engages everyone in delivering towards it and surfaces opportunities to improve, which is why embedding AEI into a transformation journey means rooting it in the culture and behaviours that will sustain it.

You may think “HUH?” at this point. How practical is this? The answer is simple – management systems really are at their core just a better way of organising our meetings.

To be effective Meetings need to visually focus on the things that are most important to each team.  To do this we use a few basic principles:

  • Make organisational goals / purpose clear and visual.
  • Help your team understand their personal contribution to goals and track the actions required to achieve them.
  • Show where you are winning and where you are losing.
  • Help your team understand the expected behaviours.
  • Create a standard approach for all meetings across the business.
  • Define clear escalation & feedback pathways.​

Organisations embed AEI or any management system, to align to & deliver on strategic priorities, speed up problem solving and escalation, reduce time spent in meetings, reduce fire-fighting, shape organisational culture in an intentional fashion and engage and empower the whole organisation to become part of their Enterprise Excellence journey.

After you have stabilized your meeting structure you can focus on taking a holistic view of the organization. In this phase you will create a schedule of meetings, also known as an inventory of meetings. This is where you hold information on all regular pulse meetings, attendees, frequency, purpose and  how the effectiveness of the meeting is reviewed. As with all other processes – meetings should be subject to review and refinement. Redundant meetings can cease, duplicate meetings merged – by holding this information in one place the senior leadership team have complete oversight of how the various meetings contribute to the companies objectives.

If you want to find out how we can help you develop and deploy an effective tiered meeting system please do contact me..

Sonja.Allen@sapartners.com

Understanding Lean Leadership

Posted on by Ailsa Carson

By MEGAN JAMES, European Business Development Manager

I previously shared the S A Partners implementation model for Enterprise Excellence and how to use this to build effective training programmes. In case you missed it, you can find it HERE. I received some great queries specifically about the design of the Leadership element so I wanted to share some further insights on how we develop this with our customers and why it is so critical.

Fundamentally, the role of Lean Leadership is to create the right environment in which a culture of continuous improvement can be realized, where every individual has the capacity and capability to solve problems; improve their task, processes and systems on a daily basis. It is not just about tools and techniques but also about understanding the systems required to achieve Enterprise Excellence and how those systems can drive the right culture and behaviors.

To do this a different approach to Lean Leadership is required – one that truly equips leaders for the challenge ahead. Over the years we have seen Continuous Improvement & Lean programmes live and die because of the Leader in charge, the culture they have created.

Leaders that have the accountability for deploying Continuous Improvement and Lean, potentially need to change the way their teams work, think and behave. They, themselves will need much more than an understanding of Lean tools and principles. They need to understand which systems are required to drive the right behaviours; and how to engage their team in those systems to make them sustainable.

This is a very different skill set to what is traditionally taught in “Lean Leadership”. Many organisations have general leadership programmes that teach core skills, but these often don’t provide the specific lean context, alternatively some programmes do provide an understanding of the principles of Lean but focus too much on Lean tools rather than the required Lean leadership capabilities. Somewhere in the middle there is a gap, leaving leaders ill-equipped to face the challenges ahead.

With this in mind, S A Partners has developed a Lean Leadership programme that supports leaders to be the enablers of Lean that we need them to be. This programme focuses on 3 core capabilities:

Who I am:

All Leaders at all levels first need to develop a deep understanding who they are, how they think, speak, listen and connect with others. We have characterised this as the Leaders DNA, what makes them tick, what they are good at and what can they improve.

 

 

What I do:

This element focuses on what needs to be done. To do this we use the Enterprise Excellence model which provides a framework for understanding what makes an effective organization, business, department, or team. It looks at purpose, process and people in conjunction with how the organisation aligns, engages and improves to deliver sustainable customer results. Leaders are taught how signature systems are constructed, how to create their own development plans and learn how to diagnose their own activities and teams. Leaders will learn how to effectively use Go-look-see as a way of understanding the current state, measuring progress against their roadmap and engaging with their teams.

 

 

My Team:

The third element is developing the skills necessary to engage and align the team. To do this we use a tried and tested framework to first identify what needs to be done and then develop the essential leadership skills to ensure it is delivered. Leaders are first taught how to diagnose current reality, set improvement goals, understand development needs and reflect the right leadership style. Following this their skills are developed enabling them to successfully instruct, mentor, coach and delegate.

 

 

 

70:20:10 Learning Philosophy

By focusing on the 70:20:10 learning approach (see below) we put the emphasis on supporting every Leader throughout their Leaning journey, translating the learning into a roadmap for their part of the organization that will truly drive and sustain change.

Lombardo, Michael M; Eichinger, Robert W (1996)
The Career Architect Development Planner

 

If you’d like to find out more about how we could work with your leaders then do get in touch with our team on info@sapartners.com or visit our website www.sapartners.com for further resources.

 

 

Why I’m uneasy with the term ‘True North’ by John Quirke

Posted on by Ailsa Carson

I came in for a bit of teasing by a work colleague recently over my uneasiness with the term True North.   We were working with a leadership community in a large automotive business, and he used the term True North, which brought about an obvious and over exaggerated wince from me which raised a few giggles in the room!   Following a recent webinar, I was also asked why I was so uneasy with the term.

 

A senior leader in a different organisation pointed to a one sentence slogan on a wall in a conference and explained to me ‘That’s our True North. We may never get there but that’s what we call Our True North’.

 

So, here’s my thoughts on the use of True North when we talk about business culture, business transformation, or the pursuit of enterprise wide excellence.

 

First off, and cards on the table, I am a keen sailor.

 

I own a sailboat and myself and my family have sailed the South and West coasts of Ireland and the Mediterranean.  I have also sailed East and Southern coasts of the United States.  Understanding and using a boats compass is critical skill on a sailboat especially during long sea passages, during night sailing or in poor visibility.

 

Choosing a direction to navigate is always based on your relative position to North.  But there are two Norths!  There is a geographical North Pole and there is a Magnetic North.  Magnetic North is the force that influences a compass bearing.  In choosing any course a skipper must take into account this magnetic variation. This is the difference between geographical or True North and Magnetic North. But the extent of magnetic variation is dependent on where you are on the globe.  At each location a skipper must consult with information provided on local charts to define the magnetic variation in the area and account for it in calculations on a given course.

 

In addition, the sailboat itself may introduce some element of magnetic interference know as deviation into the calculation due to the presence of metals or electric currents within the boat itself. These are generally small deviations.  However, on some occasions a carelessly placed mobile phone can have a dramatic impact on compass readings!

 

While all these factors relate to the compass and the influences on it, there are also some important environmental factors that influence any course selection. These are the prevailing wind conditions and tidal currents which can either combine or cancel each other to have a profound effect on a sailboat’s course. There are also hazards that may be encountered during the voyage. Rocks, hidden reefs, or areas of busy commercial marine traffic.

 

What we end up with after taking all these factors into account, is a calculation of a course to steer.  This is the guidance we give to crew as they take the helm for their watch.  It is the information we enter in our log of the voyage.  During a tight entrance to a harbour this course to steer will be closely followed. But during longer sea passages the course to steer may have limits, no higher than and no lower than a few degrees either way. On long passages the variation when managed well, cancel out allowing the vessel to arrive at the chosen destination.  But on these long passages the course to steer must always be reviewed based on the ever changes conditions of the external environment.  If during a watch on deck the crew cannot maintain the course within defined limits, they are given the authority to adjust the sails and allow the vessel to maintain its defined course.  The crew are also given clear directions on what issues must be escalated to the skipper.

 

Seldom can a skipper plan a direct point to point voyage over extended distances.  More often skippers need to carefully plan the journey.   A skipper will plan a route in stages aiming to arrive at an intermediate port where crew and boat systems can be reviewed and maintained. If all is well, they proceed to the next port. If not, the necessary changes or repairs are made before the voyage can continue.

 

A shrewd skipper will also plan ports of refuge.  Safe locations to bring the vessel to in the event of bad weather or serious problems with equipment or crew.  There will be points on the voyage where the skipper, unbeknown to the crew, will assess how things are going.  At these points (waypoints) the skipper will make the call.  Do we proceed, or do we need to head for safe port to repair, review or reflect?

 

So, just like in business choosing a defined course is complicated.

 

It needs accurate information to improve our chances of achieving the desired outcome.  It will require careful thought and consultation with others especially the crew who may be more familiar with the local waters.  It will also require the skipper to study the local conditions of tide and wind and how they may change over the course of the voyage.

 

The skipper will also need to be acutely aware of the subtle magnetic deviations arising from the vessel itself and the factors that can exaggerate it.  The skipper will also constantly check to ensure his crew are ‘onboard’ in that they are actively attending to their individual tasks and logging and monitoring progress and noting any corrections or observations made during the voyage.

 

So, when a leader in an organisation points to a sentence on a wall or power point presentation saying ‘that’s our True North’, I think okay, but tell me about the reasoning behind choosing that course?

 

What are the clear stages on the journey?

  • At what point do we assess the vessel the crew and our overall progress?
  • What are the equivalent weather and tidal conditions i.e. market conditions you have taken into account?  How are these likely to change over the course of the journey?
  • How have we considered the unique challenges ‘deviations’ with this vessel (business) and what are the situations that can exaggerate them?
  • What are the planned ports of refuge if the voyage is not as smooth as expected?
  • How do you check that your crew are ‘onboard’?

 

But most importantly:

 

Why is that destination so important to the business?

 

Many leaders point to a True North without either understanding the details of the voyage to get there, or engaging the team in the science and reasoning behind the the voyage and the destination.

 

A good skipper always communicates with the crew. Explaining the background and thinking behind the chosen course to steer.  Hazards will be noted and made clear. Crew will be given authority to make decisions within defined frameworks.  Waypoints and progress will be clear. At these defined points reviews are made, current information considered and where necessary the course is refined.

 

By simply pointing to a sentence saying that’s the direction we are going ‘Our True North’ a leader can quickly loose the confidence of the crew.

 

The crew must understand why the destination is so important.  They must be clear on the challenges that must be faced and overcome during the duration of the voyage.  They must also understand their responsibilities to the voyage and how they contribute to the adventure.

 

A very experienced skipper once told me that good navigation is both a science and a culture.  The science and calculations are useless unless the crew understand their role and the details behind a chosen course to steer.

 

 

John Quirke

Senior Partner

Author of Deep Excellence (2023); TPM: A foundation of Operational Excellence (2021)

Shingo Publication Award Recipient

john.quirke@sapartners.com

Follow me on Linked In: https://www.linkedin.com/in/john-quirke-76375113/

Team Celebrates Shingo Publication Award for TPM: A foundation of Operational Excellence

Posted on by Ailsa Carson

On May 19 in Orlando, Florida, John Quirke, Life Science Practice Leader at global consulting company, S A Partners, received the SHINGO Publication Award on behalf of the team for the book TPM (Total Productive Manufacturing): A Foundation of Operational Excellence.  John, along with business colleagues Andy Brunskill and Peter Willmott, are authors of the book which has been hailed as a key reference text in relation to operational excellence.

John Quirke who has been working with S A Partners for the past thirteen years commented:

“It is great to receive this honour from the SHINGO Institute who are recognised as an international benchmark for Enterprise Excellence.  It is also great recognition for the level of operational excellence that exists in Ireland too as, in writing the book, we drew on multiple projects from across the world.

At S A Partners we support businesses in Ireland, UK, Europe, North and South America and Australia with Enterprise Excellence, of which TPM is a critical part.  We are passionate about TPM as it is a mechanism that can drive improved reliability and asset utilisation for any organisation (not just manufacturing); it drives waste reduction, improves health and safety and enables employee engagement”

At a basic level, our approach to TPM is about creating an environment and culture that allows teams to understand the equipment they use and the processes they support in much greater detail.  The approach develops higher levels of equipment consciousness, where teams become more engaged with their work and improving that work.  Teams learn new skills and rekindle old ones that allow them to improve the way equipment and processes perform, eliminating waste, reducing cost and increasing output.

The book outlines a tried and tested 11 Step model which will support any organisation in delivering an excellent TPM programme.  Through the case studies interspersed throughout, the authors observed that those companies that successfully deployed TPM and sustained excellence were those that demonstrated a number of key mind-sets – all of which are outlined in the easy to digest book.  This includes illustrating how TPM can align with the systems thinking and ideal behaviors implicit in the Shingo Model™.

What sets this book apart is the focus on how to engage all employees in the TPM cycle of improvement, not just the maintenance team or engineering.  TPM is a foundational system that should be at the heart of every manufacturing and utility operation as it provides the reliability and stability required for successful and profitable value adding performance. 

At the awards ceremony in Florida, John gave thanks to his co-authors Peter Willmott, Andy Brunskill and the books designer Alex Everitt.

For more information on TPM or how we can support your organisation please do contact our head of TPM services Phil.Spooner@sapartners.com

The book is available for purchase from AMAZON here

For more information, please contact:

Ailsa Carson
S A Partners
Phone: +44 (0) 783 222 3453
Email: Ailsa.Carson@sapartners.com

Some expert reaction to the book:

“This book will become a reference on how it should be done.  A paradigm shift to Total Productive Manufacturing that is long overdue.”

Greg Julich, Director Global Reliability, Pfizer Inc, USA

“I know of no other publication on TPM that comes close to the scope, detail and practical utility of this book, that is likely to become THE standard text on the topic.”

John Bicheno, University of Buckingham, UK

“The book provides a road map for success with practical guidance and first-hand case studies that help bring the model to life.”

Michael Hempton, Moy Park, UK

 

About the SHINGO Publication Award

The SHINGO Publication Award recognises and promotes writing that has had a significant impact and advances the body of knowledge regarding operational excellence.  The SHINGO awards are issued by the US-based SHINGO Institute whose mission is to promote the process of improvement by conducting cutting edge research, providing relevant education, performing insightful organisational assessments and recognising organisations committed to achieving sustainable world-class results.

 

– Ends –

 

About S A Partners

S A Partners is a leading global consultancy that delivers business transformation programmes.  They also deliver training, events and workshops to support organisations improve and achieve Enterprise Excellence. They are accredited by both the Shingo Institute and the Blanchard Corporation and have offices in the UK, Ireland, North America and Australia.  S A Partners was established in 1993 and is widely acclaimed by its customers for supporting them to drive change through people engagement and leadership.