There is so much about “productivity” and “prosperity” in the news these days.  The Canadian Institute for Competitiveness and Prosperity’s Report on Canada 2010 shows us trailing the US on many measures – and yet our economy is supposed to be in better shape.  We have a $9,300 annual per [...]]]> Productivity Improvement made simple

There is so much about “productivity” and “prosperity” in the news these days.  The Canadian Institute for Competitiveness and Prosperity’s Report on Canada 2010 shows us trailing the US on many measures – and yet our economy is supposed to be in better shape.  We have a $9,300 annual per capita prosperity gap there – 17% of the US GDP.  The Globe and Mail’s Report on Business is running a series, “More with less: The Productivity Challenge” and this week they wrote about “Reinventing the Factory”.  They give examples of companies that are trying (not necessarily achieving) “more with less”.

Here’s a simple answer.  Go after work management and reliability improvements – you’ll gain loads.

The average maintenance workforce is around 15% of the total workforce in most industrial facilities.  Through work management alone, you can gain labour productivity in that group that effectively doubles the work accomplished.  If 15% of your workforce is getting almost twice as much done there’s a gain in productivity.

Now, in addition to getting caught up on all that work they aren’t doing (e.g.: your PM program that keeps getting put aside so you can fight fires), you can now focus on doing the right work.  Improving your PM program, solving some of those nagging reliability problems and generally keeping things running longer (more Uptime).  With that you get more produced with less effort.  That doesn’t mean you should go out and lay off people – you will defeat yourself with that idiocy.  No, do more with less.

The world of lean talks about “the hidden factory”.  It is real.  I see it every day – sadly, it’s a vision for most companies because they are not making the choices necessary to realize it.  Stop looking through the lens of a cost accountant – it’s looking backwards.  You know what’s right.  You know the right things to do.  What’s holding you back?  Just choose.  You won’t be punished for doing the right things, and if youi do, get in touch with me.  I know plenty of companies that want to do the right things who just might welcome you with open arms.

This morning I was inspired by death. There was an article about a young girl – a teenager who lived near Toronto who hanged herself after taking drugs. The drugs were meant to deal with “depression” – a diagnosed condition being treated by a doctor. Yet it is clear from [...]]]> Who are we kidding?

This morning I was inspired by death. There was an article about a young girl – a teenager who lived near Toronto who hanged herself after taking drugs. The drugs were meant to deal with “depression” – a diagnosed condition being treated by a doctor. Yet it is clear from the outcome that her treatment only dealt with the symptoms, not the causes of the depression. What is depression? Along with a variety of geological, economic, climactic and other uses for the word I found (in Google’s online definition):

 
• a mental state characterized by a pessimistic sense of inadequacy and a despondent lack of activity
• sad feelings of gloom and inadequacy

 

 

And I asked myself if a drug can possibly deal with these. Of course not. Mental states are brought on by the mind, not by chemicals. We can all smile when only thinking about something that makes us happy, or we can move ourselves to tear by thinking of something sad. Actors do it all the time to give us those tears on screen. Sad feelings, indeed feelings of any sort, are brought on by the mind judging the body’s reactions to events it perceives. All of this is the mind’s doing. Drugs can only alter our ability to perceive, not what we perceive.

Doctors prescribe drugs all the time. But do they deal with problems or symptoms? Even drugs that help with clogged arteries – they may deal with the clogging, but they don’t deal with the source of the clogging – often an unhealthy life style.

OK – this is an asset management website. Why is this relevant here? We are often moved to solve “apparent problems” – realy the symptoms of some deeper underlying problem. Underlying most of our problems are deeper issues just presenting themselves for solution. They present themselves through lesser yet more immediately evident problems on the surface. And our corporate culture, indeed our entire western civilization, seems to value the short term fixes over the longer term solutions. We seem to be afraid to dig deeper and really deal with the deep underlying issues. And that applies in our businesses as well as in our lives. That young lady who took her life would very likely have been far better served to dig deeper into the causes of her depression rather than taking a drug to hide it. She got the short term fix and the long term sentence.

What is it about our consciousness that takes us down that short term path to a quick fix that only hides the real problems? Perhaps we just don’t love ourselves. Oh, we say we do, but do we really. Did that young lady really love herself. Did her family really love her? Did her doctor really love her and her family? Did he / she have a real love of helping, or only creating an illusion of helping?

And that happens in our businesses too. Perhaps we don’t really love what we are doing as a business. We may love our work (our job) within that context of the business, but do we really love the business? Do we see the deeper contribution we are making to society, to humanity by doing our job? Just as your heart is a part of supporting what you choose to do with your live, you are doing something in your business that contributes to whatever the business chooses. That business is, after all, just a collection of individual people all choosing something together. If we do see that deeper contribution, then are we inspired by it? Do we really love it? If not, are we really loving ourselves by being there and doing it?

Tough questions to ask and tough questions to answer. Look at the implications. You’ve just read those questions and come up with quick answers. Don’t go back and over think this. What are you going to do now, if you got an answer that truthfully reveals that you are not doing what is most loving for yourself? Continue to do it? Why? Because you have a family to support? We are masters at justifying what we choose after the fact. Why not choose to love yourself first? It starts there. That simple choice will open you up to further answers that are more loving to yourself. Being conscious of your choices is like the solution to a problem – a large part of the solution is in merely identifying the problem. Then we are open to a solutioon. And why not being with a choice to find a loving solution?

This applies at work too. Let’s say we answer the above questions with “yes”. We are inspired by what we do and the contribution we make at our work. It is meaningful. Terrific. Yet you have problems at work – equipment that continually breaks down. Underlying the technical problems are people problems. Perhaps problems with the design, the installation, the quality of parts used, the rush to put it back into service the last time it broke down… These are all people problems. And underlying those are deeper systemic problems in the business. Repeated problems are a chronic condition of the business, not just the equipment. You can not solve these with the industrial equivalent of a drug – the rapid repair. You are only making it go away for a short while. It’s time to dig deeper.

Can our businesses make that leap? Can they encourage long term solutions and digging deeper into the tough issues that are not amenable to short term fixes? My answer is “yes”. But it will take a shift in consciousness on the part of all of us as individuals. As each one of us shifts our consciousness, others around us will notice.

I’ll use myself as an example. If you have read this far and if this has touched you in some way. I’ve started that shift in those around me. I’d apprecaite it if you would just let me know that you felt something here. With your help that can spread. You have influence over those around you. Collectively, our consciousness can shift to one that is truly loving to the self and that will spill over into our families and loved ones, our workplace and companies, eventually into all of society.

Love, Jim

Leaders are people we can always remember as those who “just do it”. They make things happen. They never seem to have excuses to explain why they are not doing something. They don’t see problems, they see opportunities. They feel fear, just as we all do, they don’t [...]]]> Leaders don’t let fear stop them

Leaders are people we can always remember as those who “just do it”. They make things happen. They never seem to have excuses to explain why they are not doing something. They don’t see problems, they see opportunities. They feel fear, just as we all do, they don’t operate from it. They don’t let fear get the better of them and prevent their progress. Are you a leader? Or do you let fear (even small fears and hesitations) get in your way?

How do you view training? Most of us probably don’t fear training, especially when it’s training that is aimed at improving our level of knowledge, skill or ability. Many of us welcome it, but we all fear the work load we will face when we return. That can turn a pleasant expansive experience into something that bogs us down. What about training for your people – those who make you a success?

A leader does whatever possible to enhance those who work for himself. A leader surrounds herself with people who are better and more capable, who make up for the leader’s own shortcomings. A leader is aware of his shortcomings and actively seeks to balance them with strengths or improve. Are you a leader who helps your people be better than you? Or are you a leader who must grab the glory? Are you one of those so-called leaders who must know it all, must control it all, must be the one calling the shots?

General George Paton, the famous US tank commander in WW2, once said words to the effect of, “never tell people how to do things, tell them what you want and let them surprise you with the results”. He knew that people, relieved of controls and bindings, would be creative and productive, often delivering more than you expected – to your delight. He was considered to be a great leader. And he didn’t control – he was not a micro-manager. He made sure his people could shine – and they did.

If you truly want your people to experience expansion and glory, why not encourage and support their training. You may be well qualified and experienced. Are they? Can they outshine you? If not, then you are missing an opportunity.

We hear many excuses for not doing training. They range from just plain, “not interested,” through “oh, there’s no budget for that” and “that doesn’t fit our program” to “I’m already qualified”.

Why are you not interested? Is there nothing to gain? Are you and your people already doing perfectly? Or are you afraid that someone might outshine you?

Why would you let a budget stop you from doing something that will likely have the effect of saving you money, or even making more for you? Do you fear that you would choose training that is not going to be of benefit? Do you fear that your employees are just out to cheat the company (their livelihood) and pick training just for fun? Do you fear that you can’t turn new knowledge into something that drives value for your company?

Is your “program” perfect? Has it considered all the possibilities? Is is perhaps too conservative and you fear that someone may return from learning something new and raise the bar? A bar that perhaps you set too low in the first instance?

And so what if you are already qualified. What about your people? Do they know as much as you? Are they as capable as you? What do you fear if they gain what you already have?

These, and many more, are just a few of the excuses we hear when people resist training suggestions. Admittedly, not all training is beneficial. Is an immediate and outright dismissal of an opportunity, without even exploring it more fully, really doing it and yourself justice? Are you shutting out opportunities that are being placed before you?

We often resist what is good for us. If you look around yourself in your workplace and see a situation that could be improved, know that you were a part in creating it and allowing it to exist. You and others co-created it. And you and others can co-create what it takes to set it right. Resisting is only perpetuating the situation as it is. Why not be open to ideas that can help you? Why keep shooting yourself in the foot?

You may fear your own company bureaucracy. We see a lot of that, particularly in larger companies with headquarters offshore somewhere. The system won’t allow it or the red tape is too excessive or it will never get past the purchasing process. With a bit of insight we can all see that we create what we fear by the mere act of giving it energy. Resist something and you invite it in. It’s as if the universe, like a dog, doesn’t understand that no means no. Our excuses about never getting approvals, etc. are all about giving in to something you see as being more powerful Henry Ford has a great saying – “whether you think you can or you think you can’t, you’re right”. He knew that the attitude you bring to a problem will reveal the direction you will take.

And if you are too beaten down by past experience to be positive, then dig back into those past events and really ask yourself honestly how you approached them. Were you defeatist? You probably were. And you probably sustain that today too. You’ve been giving your fear too much power. And it’s been bringing you exactly what you don’t want.

Be positive and face those fears – do not give them power over you. You choose. You can see the cup as half full or half empty – which is your preference?

Businesses today are struggling with their costs and capabilities because of past “sins”. It may not be evident in the board room either – executives just don’t seem to get it. But on the shop floor, in the field and in factory settings around North America we hear a similar story. [...]]]> On choosing mediocrity

Businesses today are struggling with their costs and capabilities because of past “sins”. It may not be evident in the board room either – executives just don’t seem to get it. But on the shop floor, in the field and in factory settings around North America we hear a similar story. It goes like this; “about 10 years ago we did all that but we stopped”. So what happened?

In case after case we hear that past practices were quite successful. The sort of methods and techniques we teach in our Uptime Training and in our Asset Management training were being done in the past. Yet along the way, “resources” (usually meaning people) were cut. In the early ’90′s we saw the emergence of the “re-engineering” craze. Companies went overboard with staff reductions in the interest of cutting costs. Somehow the original intent of re-engineering – to eliminate waste and streamline, was misunderstood and interpreted as an opportunity to shed staff and hence cut costs. People became more of a commodity. Loyalty plumeted – it’s almost non-existent in some industries today. The manufacturing sector got the “lean” craze. It was similar to “re-engineering” in its attempts to get rid of waste and excess. Both are valid and excellent concepts when properly applied. But application was anything but “proper”. Consciousness had shifted in the direction of short term profit taking, get rich quick, don’t worry about the future, selfishly make profit today and hoard it for yourself, don’t worry about the future security of our children – they can take care of themselves. We had set ourselves up for failure and it is our children that must now deal with the legacy being left.

Two years ago a colleague, Art Rice, CEO of Maintenance Technology, made a statement about “lean” at the IMEC 2008 conference in Toronto. I don’t have the exact quote but he said something to the effect that “lean” has become “anorexic”. And he was so right! Companies had slimmed down, cut staff, cut training budgets, stopped investing in their own future to the point of becoming diseased shadows of their former selves. And all in the interest of short term cost cutting.

And where are they today? Baby boomers are retiring now. Experience and the knowledge of the methods used to keep things running smoothly is disappearling. Replacements are coming from a younger and very different generation – the children of the baby boomers. Some older workers lament their poor work effort, lack of dedication and focus. Although the numbers of boomers can be replaced, one for one, their work ethic (live to work) is being replaced with “work to live”. I for one think the younger folks have it right to a degree – perhaps it is a bit overboard though. Life is give and take, not all take. We have yet to reach a happy medium. Anyway, workforce experience, knowledge of the “plant” and well-honed skills is diminishing. The replacements are often better educated, they lack experience, know only the theory of how the “plant” works and they are quick learners. However, in the endeavor to cut costs, training and development spending was reduced to a bare minimum or even less. Exploration of up to date methods stopped. The methods through which knowledge (real useful knowledge, not just data and information) is transferred from experienced to younger are seldom exploited. The result is that as boomers retire, the numbers of people needed will have to grow. The very thing that the bean-counting types feared, is exactly what they are bringing on. And the timing could not be worse.

We are headed towards mediocrity at an alarming pace. The developing world with its well educated, less expensive and harder working workforce is catching up on our technological lead. We are heavily reliant on technology and we’ve probably gone beyond our own ability to manage and leverage it fully. We are slipping. The developing world is catching up and surpassing us. Only high fuel prices are keeping shipping costs high enough to protect North America from a flood of cheaper imports of equal or even better quality. We are on a very slippery slope and we’ve done it to ourselves – we’ve chosen mediocrity.

The developing world is choosing expansion. They have a lot to gain, little to lose. They can take advantage of our technology and do so with cheaper resources. And they started off doing it in companies that were originally North American based but looking for a cheaper source of labor. That has helped the developing world – but it has done so at our cost. While we were spending there, we stopped here. We’ve helped others but drained our own capability. We did not fill their cups from our overflow – we filled them from our lack. We’ve reduced, they’ve expanded. Good for them. Yet who will help us? Here we cannot rely on others – we must do it ourselves.

We need to work smarter. Stop cutting costs in the relentless pursuit of short term gains to satisfy shareholders’ who have no real interest in the company other than it’s profits. If businesses are to be sustainable they need to think and act sustainably. Shed the short-termism. Choose excellence. Choose sustainability (and I don’t mean just green). A major shift in business consciousness is needed – it is almost too late.

Feedback:

After reading this, a colleague who works for a large company provided the following feedback. It’s so powerful, I’ve included it here to underscore the message:

At the Shutdowns SuperConference in Calgary (8 & 9 Dec 2009) I presented a paper entitled, “Do As Little As Possible, Why Shut Down At All?” The premise is that we often create more work and more downtime that we need [...]]]>
Creating downtime through Shutdowns

At the Shutdowns SuperConference in Calgary (8 & 9 Dec 2009) I presented a paper entitled, “Do As Little As Possible, Why Shut Down At All?” The premise is that we often create more work and more downtime that we need to. We do it through poor work identification, doing the wrong type of work and by adding work scope that does not need to be in a shutdown.

The presentation was given to over a 120 maintenance professionals who focus most of their efforts on shutdowns. In the presentation I asked several questions and got some very interesting results. An automated response tracking system provided the statistical results for the questions. Those have been added to the presentation (after the event) and included in the copy you can download at the above link, as well as below.

1. Does you plant or facility schedule work that does not really need to be done a shutdown just because it is convenient?

2. Have you experienced forced outages within one week of a plant shutdown?

3. Was the cause of the forced outage directly related to the work that was done?

4. In your opinion, are you more likely to experience forced outages after doing “break in” work or work that was already planned into the Shutdown?

5. What does downtime cost your company per hour?

From the statistics gathered in this small survey we can see that shutdowns are quite expensive for most companies (at least those who attended the conference – largely oil and gas companies). We can also see that most add work for convenience, most experience failures shortly after the shutdowns are over, most of those can be attributed to work that was done and that it is most likely to happen with the work that was added to scope after the shutdown began.

It seems evident that we do ourselves a big disservice by adding work to a shutdown that doesn’t really need to be there. We do further harm by increasing scope with new “break in” work. That work is a result of a lack of diagnostic scoping work before hand – otherwise most of it would have been identified and planned well in advance. Most companies do an excellent job of planning shutdowns but clearly they are only planning part of what they need to plan and not planning for work

A lot of the post shutdown forced outages are due to work that was done in the shutdown. That points to a couple of factors – quality of the work is one possible culprit. Of course much of the work is done by armies of contractors – people who, almost by definition do not know your plant as well as you do. Perhaps your own oversight efforts to watch them are not working. Quality of work is something to look into here. Another possible culprit is that you are disturbing equipment and systems that are best left alone. Yes, some work must be done in a shutdown because there is no other way that we’ve thought of yet, but not all of it. If you disturb systems there is a high probability that you’ll make mistakes that lead to infant mortality failures. A good analysis using techniques like RCM2 can go a long way to avoiding this.

You put a lot of money into planning and executing these shutdowns; they cost a lot in lost revenues and we add hundreds of thousands, if not millions to their costs by sticking with traditional approaches. RCM2 is far less expensive and will save you a great deal of money. It fits well within our Uptime services offering and is an integral part of it. Why not stop wasting your company’s money – get Conscious.