Routine Standardization (Part 2 of 4)
There will be very little review as we press forward, delving deeper into Routine Standardization. As always, let me encourage you to read the prior articles in this series if you haven’t already done so. It is necessary if you hope to have a full working knowledge of the concept.
It is said that Solomon, the son of David, King of Israel, having been endowed by God and gifted with wisdom, was the wisest man who ever lived. In his ancient writings in Ecclesiastes he said, “There is nothing new under the sun.” He was right.
In my opening comments of part 1 of this series, I mentioned that I had Googled the phrase “Routine Standardization” and didn’t come up with a match. I eluded to the fact that perhaps you had heard of it somewhere, somehow. It seemed likely to me that others would had come to similar conclusions, pertaining to management style and technique. As for me, it remained a personal discovery, realized simply by managing my own business.
Though I all but admitted it in that first article, I can now say this with full assurance, RS isn’t new. Nor is it mine, yours or anyone else’s. It’s just a principle/concept waiting to be put to work in any industry willing to utilize it. I can prove that and will do so in the following paragraphs.
Realizing that there had to be someone, somewhere, writing or thinking about this topic, I Googled it again but rearranged terms and mixed them up a bit. After a few searches using a variation of the same words, ah-ha! There it was staring straight back at me from my monitor. Where? On a health care blog that discussed 10 benefits associated with implementation of standardized work routines.
Before I tell you the rest of the story and give credit where it’s due, let me ask a tired and nearly worn out question: Why am I not surprised Routine Standardization is not new? Why is it we contractors get up so early but are too often too late to be found leaning into the cutting edge? Why are we seemingly always playing catch-up instead of leading?
Would I be unfair to say that we fail to manage to manage? At the very least, we typically fail to manage nearly as well as we could manage if we got our &*^% together and paid enough attention to our business. We can do better. Perhaps all you need a little inspiration. Hopefully, this series is it.
Getting back to the story, after some email interaction with a consultant by the name of Susan Stegall, a little content sharing, getting acquainted on a conference call and some back and forth, it was all too evident that businesses with regard to management and practice, though completely different, have much in common. We were definitely speaking each other’s language, though our areas of expertise are completely different. Stegall, who has more than 20 years of consulting experience, is owner and CEO of M. S. Stegall & Associates, LLC, a management consulting firm that has its origins in the laboratory segment of the healthcare industry.
Take a look at a quote used by permission from Stegall’s Healthcare Industry Blog: “The baseline standardized work routines should reflect the agreed upon best practices of the work group: the one best way to perform the work today.
“I can readily list 10 benefits associated with implementation of standardized work routines:
1. Employee involvement and empowerment.
2. Consistency (reduction of variation) among staff members performing the work.
3. Improved productivity without added stress.
4. Improved, consistent quality.
5. Reduction or elimination of errors and mistakes (causes of defects).
6. Work process stability.
7. Increased employee safety.
8. Improved cost management as wastes are removed.
9. Availability of a great tool for staff training.
10. Visual management—managers and supervisors can see when processes are not operating normally.
“However, these benefits come at a cost: They require that managers, supervisors and staff change how they work today. Everyone’s job changes when a laboratory embraces the philosophy of standardized work. Lean transformations and standardized work require discipline to develop and sustain; too many of us have our old ways of doing things to fall back on if we do not practice self-discipline.”
It’s easy to see that what works well in the health industries laboratories easily transfers and is applicable to the job site, too. Both can and should participate in the shared benefit, learning from one another reassured by the affirmation as we arrive at the same conclusions when it comes to business management.
Routine standardization (RS) is how we always do what we always do, until we find a better way to do it.
Henry Ford said, “If you think of standardization as the best that you know today, but which is to be improved tomorrow; you get somewhere. Note the word “today” in Ford’s quote. It is all too relevant.
More on that later.
Earlier we discovered that the health care industry uses routine standardization or, as they put it, “standardized work routines.” I also reasoned with readers to be certain that we had plenty to learn from other organizations, especially those typically more sophisticated than us. Typically and unfortunately, too often construction lacks the sophistication necessary to achieve full potential.
It is easy to see that what works well in the health industry’s laboratories is applicable to the construction industry’s job sites and office personnel. All industries can and should participate in the shared benefit and learn from one another, reassured by the affirmation as we arrive at the same conclusions when it comes to business management. Let’s revisit the quote I mentioned last month, the one from the consultant in the health care industry: “The baseline standardized work routines should reflect the agreed upon best practices of the work group: the one best way to perform the work today.”
Today! Take that word and ferret it out of the quote. It’s essential to RS. RS today won’t be the same as RS going forward, nor yesterday. Things are always changing, and we as managers must always be open and willing to change. The reason the word “today” is so significant is that there is always plenty of room for improvement. If we’re going to continually improve, tomorrow is an opportunity for improvement.
RS doesn’t mean you make a bunch of rules, pathways to eternal success, spell out every detail and then follow them into oblivion. It means that you agree (stakeholders as well) on what the very best way you can operate is, and operate that way “today” but only until you figure out a better way—the sooner, the better. There is always a better way.
You don’t want to take the attitude that it’s my way or the highway. Rather, actively seek input on improvement from management and from those who actually do the tasks. Don’t limit yourself to doing things your way; that is way too small minded and egotistical. You don’t want your business doing things your way. You want and need buy-in. That means including them in the decision making.
I have often told everyone organizationally that RS, SOP, job descriptions, processes and the like, are not set in stone. They not only can, but should, change. They are living documents that quickly die if they are not reviewed and revised “routinely” and kept up-to-date. They are currently the best way we have learned to do the things we do “today,” and since we’ve agreed on the sequence, time frame, methodology, and communicated them and trained our personnel, we expect our organization to operate that way.
Sometimes in a moment of frustration, I’ve taken some to task for deviating. Since we’ve agreed on this, can anyone tell me why we aren’t doing it that way? Nobody answers. Why? Nobody has an answer.
The consultant’s advice I shared last month challenges the effort, and it’s worth repeating: “… these benefits come at a cost—they require that managers, supervisors and staff change how they work today. Everyone’s job changes when a laboratory embraces the philosophy of standardized work. Lean transformations and standardized work require discipline to develop and sustain; too many of us have our old ways of doing things to fall back on if we do not practice self-discipline.”
Once upon a time …
Those who delivered parcels got there the best they could, or at least the best way they thought they could. They tried hard to avoid traffic, travel faster, perhaps they even rushed deliveries into the hands of their recipients. However, that wasn’t enough. They were still too slow and needed to work smarter, not harder.
Now, if you don’t know this story, you are more than a decade of behind. Back in 2007, the following report was published: “UPS trucks drove 2.5 billion miles last year, but the company says its package flow technology combined with right-turn routes saved 28,541,472 million miles and three million gallons of fuel. The company puts almost 92,000 trucks on the road every day.”
Yes, the company puts almost 92,000 trucks on the road every day. But without its efficiency and right-turn routes, it would have to send out an additional 1,100 trucks.
Nowadays they use a special GPS system that was developed especially for UPS, which is programmed to guide drivers using right turns as much as possible. Sounds like a little RS to me. How about you?
Previously we finished with some comments about UPS efficiencies and the incredible savings realized by rerouting their drivers to turn right, not left. Let’s take a closer look at UPS, some of their innovations and how they relate to RS. What follows is a brief summary and some personal commentary on a section concerning UPS titled “Productivity” found in the online encyclopedia Wikipedia.
“UPS knows time is money, and it is obsessed with using data to increase productivity. Jack Levis, UPS’s director of process management, told NPR that “one minute per driver per day over the course of a year adds up to $14.5 million,” and “one minute of idle per driver per day is worth $500,000 of fuel at the end of the year.” The handheld computer drivers carry around, called a “DIAD” (Delivery Information Acquisition Device), tracks their every move.
Let me insert a few comments here. Sorry for the interruption, but there is simply too much packed into that paragraph, to fail to elaborate.
First, pardon me if the word “obsessed” isn’t all that politically correct in today’s world. There’s really nothing wrong with the word, but it does conjure up some negative thoughts. However, when it comes to productivity, I love it. What a compliment. UPS is obsessed with, in this case, “using data” to increase productivity. They are obsessed with productivity in general and the resulting efficiencies.
We are all familiar with the word “fan” as it is used in sports, of musicians or in a variety of venues. Did you know it comes from the word “fanatic,” which is a synonymous with “obsessive”? Rewind to the 16th century and the origin of “fanatic.” It was used to describe behavior or speech that might result from possession by a god or demon. In the 17th century it was closely related with the word “maniac.” Not exactly words you’d expect to be suitable for business acumen—or are they? How big of a fan are you when it comes to RS? Got any maniac in you?
I noticed a few quotes on the UPS website that fit well here: “Every day, UPS is faced with a complex challenge. How do we deliver more while using less?” “Efficiency is everything for United Parcel Service. Save time, space and money, and get there when promised. Efficiency is so much a part of the culture at UPS that to save space inside the dispatch centers the signature brown trucks are even parked just 5 inches apart with rearview mirrors overlapping.”
They refer to their massive fleet of delivery vehicles as rolling laboratories. The insinuation is that they are constantly studying everything they do. Is that how we view our offices, job sites, how well we execute, as well as our subcontractors and suppliers? Does this sound anything like what you and your organization are doing every day? Essentially that’s what RS is all about.
So then, it’s a good time to ask ourselves what it is business-wise that we are obsessed with. If you’re not obsessed with certain key components in business, watch out for competitors who are.
Doing great business is an obsession. Leaders and companies that are obsessed get it done, and it typically gets on the nerves of others who do not share such obsession. That is true, internally and externally, but for different reasons. Don’t be surprised by that. It isn’t for everyone. What about you?
Jim Winestock, a UPS vice president in Atlanta, said, “I know it drives my wife crazy, but I’ve been known to pass up drug stores, three or four on the left-hand side of the road, just to get to the one on the right-hand side of the road.” Yes, there is a line that you don’t want to cross, one where you can become borderline ridiculous.
It’s not as though UPS never makes a left turn; estimates are they do so about 10 percent of the time. Tasha Hovland, an industrial engineering manager, said regarding the right turn rule, “A guesstimate, I would probably say 90 percent. I mean we really, really hate left turns at UPS.” But when they do turn left, it’s because they know it makes sense to do so and it isn’t often. “They have a combination of not just experience, but computers, codes and programming that allows them to plot out right-turn routes in minutes.”
And did you notice Jack Levis’ title in the opening quote? Director of process management! Who manages your processes? (You do have processes, don’t you?) When it comes to process management and RS, they are inseparably related and very dear to my heart. Hopefully yours is as well.
Finally, why is UPS so obsessed with productivity? Ponder this mind-boggling excerpt: “One minute per driver per day over the course of a year adds up to $14.5 million,” and “one minute of idle per driver per day is worth $500,000 of fuel at the end of the year.”
