by Jean-Claude Kihn and Norbert Majerus
In Part One of Lean Ethics, we examined reasons individuals behave unethically and how Lean principles may impact their behavior. We determined that process-focused Lean principles and practices have little to no impact on ethical behaviors, and, in some instances, can even present opportunities for bad behaviors. It is only when process principles are combined with the establishment of a sound Lean management system and the right people principles that a culture is established in which the likelihood for unethical behavior is greatly minimized, and one in which individuals are unlikely to even conceive of such behaviors.
When implementing people principles, two guidelines are critical:
We have found five “people principles” to be helpful in moving an organization to a highly ethical culture. These principles help to illustrate ethical behavior as the ideal behavior and to establish ideal behavior as a cornerstone of company culture. Some components of these people principles have traditionally been part of Lean, while others are excellent complements to a Lean management system.
Use every means possible to develop a culture that focuses first on the people. If you get the people part right, sales, profits, efficiency, stock price, shareholder returns, etc. will fall in line. Paul O’Neill Sr. keeps a relentless focus on perfect safety at Alcoa, which exhibits the company’s earnest concern for employees and helped the firm achieve incredible bottom- and top-line growth. A more recent example is the amazing transformation and care for people at Barry-Wehmiller under the leadership of CEO Bob Chapman.[1] Caring for people helps to earn employee trust, which is necessary for a system of motivation and empowerment. It takes time to earn and build trust, but once established it is treasured by those on both sides of the trust equation.
Trust can be nurtured by developing an atmosphere less reliant on consequences of bad behavior and more guided by responsibility and accountability. Responsibility is accepted with pride because it is based on trust. Accountability is based on a covenant between leaders and team members, it is not dictated. Team members agree with their leadership to deliverables that they know and believe they can deliver. This covenant also includes how the deliverables are accomplished, including their own behaviors. When those behaviors begin to move out of sync, an accountability discussion with coaching should follow.
An organization’s people must also be working in unison. Replace competition with collaboration. Collaboration is used to find the best outcome for the customer and the company, it circumvents power plays, it encourages diversity, and it sets up natural checks and balances that make unethical behavior almost impossible.
People are respected and engaged when they’re given the opportunity to recommend and collaborate on the best solutions. As a result of a people-focused culture, people are proud of their contributions. And who could be proud of a contribution that was accomplished by less than perfect behaviors?
Many publicized ethics scandals can be quickly traced to an egocentric leader. In contrast, a humble leader sets the perfect example. Humble leaders are not examples of greed, personal ambition, or power plays. Respect is a two-way street, and the people they support willingly give it back. Who would disappoint a leader who cares about them and helps them?
As with most any human endeavor, when it comes to ethics, positive reinforcement is preferred over consequences. However, rarely is good ethical behavior publicly recognized. Most of us can look back on leaders we have known and see characteristics such as humility, a caring attitude, and support. In fact, you may not even be reading this without their influence. (You’ve probably also known leaders who are in stark contrast to such executives. For the sake of charity, let’s consider them useful for their example of what to avoid.)
A perfect Lean quality system is not achieved by just decreeing the use of a Lean quality process. In addition to training, coaching, and culture change, some checks and balances may be needed, especially early on. But it shouldn’t be a system of policing everyone’s behaviors all of the time.
A good example is the self-scan systems used in stores that allow customers to scan their items, create their bill, and pay. Both companies and consumers like these systems, even though they can present an opportunity for customer abuse. Companies trust that the vast majority of customers won’t be tempted, but they recognize that some will. Companies have studied consumer behaviors in their stores for many years (there are cameras, of course), and they’ve learned who may be likely to take advantage (by demeanor, body language, unusual behaviors). They also know how to help customers avoid temptation by ensuring that consumers know that some oversight is present, even if most consumers don’t notice or care about the oversight.
Similarly, in a company, instead of policing everyone for compliance, company leaders can learn where the trip points are and implement an intelligent and more respectful system that helps improve workforce behaviors by asking just the right questions to the right people at the right time. Although it is disrespectful of leaders to give people detailed instructions of what to do in their areas of expertise, leaders do have the right to know. It is respectful to ask people for suggestions and to ask how their work will be accomplished. Leaders also have the right to ask the right questions until they are convinced that work will be done according to the highest ethical standards and behaviors. Unlike an inspection system or a Lean ethics office that audits the behaviors of 100 percent of employees, a right-to-know approach exhibits far more trust and respect for the workforce and presumes that the vast majority of employees are conducting themselves appropriately.
Separation of power also helps to minimize auditing, inspecting, and controlling. Let’s take the example of a new product release. If the person responsible for the development of a new product (a chief engineer or project manager) is also the one who has the responsibility to present the test results to a release committee, it is tempting to embellish the results, emphasize the positive, and de-emphasize (or omit) negative results. This can be avoided by having the testing department present the results. This department is responsible for the integrity of testing and is charged with presenting an honest, complete, unbiased picture of the new product to the release committee. Similarly, for a cost-reduction program, the finance department calculates and presents the findings instead of the improvement team that developed the ideas. All entities still collaborate on the project with no overlap or duplication. Separation of powers can and should occur without having one department act as if they control another, however, and care must be taken to ensure that these checks and balances do not turn departments into adversaries.
This principle is inspired by the Toyota playbook. With andon, anyone in a production setting is empowered to pull an andon cord if he or she sees something that is not perfect quality on the line. That individual may stop the line and bring attention to the problem instantly. The same approach can be applied to associates’ observations of behavior. When someone witnesses a potential breach of ethics, they are morally obliged to pull the ethics andon for the best of the company and their fellow associates. People should not publicly embarrass their fellow associates, but they should be encouraged and empowered to coach their colleagues toward ethical behavior rather than reporting them. And if that doesn’t work—as with problems on the line that can’t be resolved at the frontline level—they should be encouraged to escalate it to someone who can help.
Although ethics are more of a behavior than they are related to a process, a good process certainly helps. A process that encourages ethical behavior:
No Lean system takes hold unless the culture changes, and ideal ethical behaviors must become part of a good Lean culture. The culture change starts the first day of a transformation, so make ideal ethical behaviors part of the Lean transformation from day one. That makes it a lot easier for them to take root than trying to plug them in when undesirable things happen and countermeasures are urgently needed.
The outcome of Lean ethics and a transformation that embraces people principles and ethical behavior is a culture in which people are proud of what they do and are equally proud of doing it the right way.
Lean ethics minimizes the severe but well-deserved consequences of unethical behaviors, which alone make it worth pursuing this approach. But more importantly, Lean ethics can change for the better the destiny of a company and the lives of every associate.
[1] Bob Chapman and Raj Sisodia, Everybody Matters, Portfolio, New York, 2015.
Optional footer text. If none, Advanced > Layout > Display: None
