‘‘Considering the Change Strategy of TNT post’
Research about Kaizen as a new change strategy for TNT postMaster thesis, MscBA, specialisation Change Management University of Groningen, Faculty of Economics and Business
Bart van Ommeren Student number: s1830651 Schuitendiep 15 B 9712 KD Groningen Tel.: +31(6)42131143 Email: bartvanommeren@gmail.com Supervisors:
University of Groningen TNT post
1st Supervisor: 1st Supervisor
prof. dr. ir. J. (Jannes) Slomp Mr. Enno van der Werff
2nd Supervisor: 2nd Supervisor:
dr. C. (Cees) Reezigt Maurice van Asperen
1
‘Considering the change strategy of TNT post’
Research about Kaizen as a new change strategy for TNT postAbstract:
This research was initiated by the management of the sorting center in Zwolle and by the management of the LSS team in Den Haag. TNT post faces a declining market and is trying to improve the organization. At this moment TNT post uses LSS as their change approach but since 2006, some Kaizen events have been executed in the sorting centre in Zwolle. In this research, it is investigated how Kaizen can be used as new change strategy to implement changes within TNT post. The central research question that results from this information is:
What role do the Kaizen critical success factors play in the implementation of Kaizen events at TNT post?
First, critical success factors for Kaizen are investigated based on literature and the experience of employees. Secondly, the most important critical success factors are discussed with employees in order to derive what factors already have and have not proven their value during previous Kaizen events. In answer to the research question it can be said that, based on the outcomes of the questionnaire and interviews, some Kaizen critical success factors play an important role for TNT post and that TNT post should create a culture which supports continuous improvement. In addition, linking Kaizen to the strategic goals of the organization will gain more acceptance of change and can help to maintain the changes that occur during Kaizen events.
2
CONTENT
CONTENT ... 2 1. INTRODUCTION ... 3 1.2 Organization ... 3 1.3 Management question ... 4 2. METHODOLOGY ... 8 2.1 Introduction ... 8 2.2 Research Design ... 8 2.2.1 Research strategy ... 8 2.2.2 Literature review... 9 2.2.3 Questionnaire survey ... 9 2.3 Case study ... 9 2.3.1 Case selection ... 10 2.3.2 Data collection... 10 2.3.3 Interviews ... 10 2.4 Conclusions ... 11 3. THEORY ... 13 3.1 History of Kaizen... 13 3.2 Characteristics of Kaizen ... 13 3.3 Continuous improvement ... 16 3.4 CI TQM and Kaizen ... 17 3.5 Project success ... 183.6 Critical Success Factors (CSF) for the implementation of Kaizen... 18
3.7 Explanation of the articles ... 19
3.8 Explanation of most important success factors ... 20
4. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ... 25 5. QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS ... 28 5.1 Introduction ... 28 5.2 Population ... 28 5.3 Results ... 28 6. INTERVIEW RESULTS ... 32 6.1 Introduction ... 32 6.2 Population ... 32 6.3 Results ... 32
7. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION ... 39
7.1 Introduction ... 39
7.2 Conclusion... 39
7.3 Discussion ... 41
7.4 Research limitations and further research ... 44
REFERENCES: ... 45
APPENDICES ... 50
Appendix 1 Lists with critical success factors according different authors. ... 50
Appendix 2 Results of critical success factors according to literature ... 52
Appendix 3 Project description ... 53
Appendix 4 Interview format ... 64
3
1. INTRODUCTION
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler (Albert Einstein). This statement
describes in a few words some of the basic concepts of the Kaizen philosophy. Organizations and managers currently face many possibilities to improve their organization. One of the most renowned strategies to improve organizational processes is the Toyota Production Method (TPM), where manufacturing focuses on what is needed by the customer, when it is needed and in what order quantities (Mika, 2006) This method became known under the name Lean production in the US, but in Japan it is commonly known as Kaizen (Mika, 2006). Kaizen is described as a tool to foster continuous improvement within a production system. The research presented in this thesis is focused on the Kaizen activities within TNT post in the Netherlands focusing specifically on the sorting center located in Zwolle.
1.2 Organization
TNT post is a worldwide organization, specialized in transferring goods to their customers. As stated on their website (2010) 1: ―TNT post is in the business of
transferring goods and documents around the world tailored to its customers’ requirements with a focus on time-definite and / or day-definite pickup and delivery”. In
the Netherlands, processing 15 million items each day, TNT post is market leader on both addressed and unaddressed mail. Originally, TNT post was state-owned, but in 1989 it changed from a public into a private company. Please note that only 8% of the total amount of all sent mail is private, which means that TNT post is highly dependent on the commercial market. In the Netherlands, there are seven sorting centers where all mail is sorted and divided into several regions. Recently, some Kaizen events were employed in the sorting center Zwolle, which will therefore be the focus of this research.
Due to increasing electronic markets and a decrease physical mail volume, TNT post is struggling to continue their operations while still making a profit. Since the introduction of e-mail correspondence, the total amount of mail processed is decreasing enormously. For example the decreasing amount of bank statements that are sent from banks to their
1
4 customers. The total amount of bank envelopes sent to customers decreased with 50% between 2002 and 2006. To deal with the continuing decrease in (physical) mail volume, TNT post constantly has to change and improve their organization in order to maintain their profitability. Furthermore, TNT post faces great variance in volume which requiring a large temporary work force to be able to handle the variance in work load.
Before 2007, TNT post did not use one specific improvement method in their organization. Often, changes were initiated by top management in the organization and implemented in a project-based way. Furthermore, TNT post made use of an ―improvement box‖ where employees could make suggestions for improvement initiatives. It was remarkable that every sorting center had its own way of dealing with the improvements and every center had its own change approach. In 2007, TNT post initiated Lean Six Sigma (LSS) as a new change approach to manage changes within the company. This approach can best be described as an combination of lean (focusing on reducing waste) and six sigma (which focuses on reducing variation) (Nave, 2002). El-Haik and Al-Aomar, (2006) claim that the combination of lean techniques and Six Sigma analysis will result in synergy enabling the organization to reduce variability, resulting in the elimination of waste and reduction of process lead time. Reason for the implementation of LSS was the alignment of the new change approach and the new organizational structure. Initially, LSS was enforced by TNT post‘s higher management but currently it has become part of the organizational culture. LSS is a method to improve work processes top-down from a project perspective. Within TNT post, LSS is often used to cover large scale transformational changes that occur a few times per year. According to Burnes (2009), a large scale transformational change is seen as strategic and important. By altering the organizational structure, TNT post tries to adapt continuously to customer demands.
1.3 Management question
5 involved in the changes they would like to achieve. They think that with the involvement of their employees, commitment to their work will increase, leading to more efficient work processes and ultimately to cost reduction.
This can be realized using the Kaizen method, using (small) improvements initiated by lower level employees to optimize work processes. These small changes, initiated by the workforce should result in more commitment of employees, ultimately leading to better operational results. According to iSixSigma llc, (2004), ‗Kaizen‘ literally means ―good change‖ (―Kai‖, meaning change and ―zen‖, meaning good). However, other explanations are given, e.g. Minton (1998, p.19) who states that: ―Kaizen can be defined as: ―to take
apart and put back together in a better way”. A more practical understanding of the
Kaizen philosophy is provided by Brunet and New (2003). With their explanation, they say that Kaizen is based on the participation of the workforce in process improvement and refinement which is a key element in Japanese Manufacturing success. In this research, the following definition of Kaizen is used: “An improvement method which
focuses on small-scale, incremental changes with involvement of lower level employees and therefore with participation of the workforce”.
Ideally, TNT post Zwolle wants employees to think about ways to improve work processes by looking at small improvements in these processes. Therefore, TNT post recently started a pilot project of Gemba Kaizen as new change approach. This method focuses on continuous improvement and is based on incremental small scale changes taking place every day on the Gemba (work floor) to improve work processes. Based on this new change approach, the management question of this research is:
Is (Gemba) Kaizen a good change strategy to make sustainable changes within TNT post
and what is the lack of LSS initiatives?
6 will investigate whether Kaizen and LSS can complement each other. Mr. Haverkate will answer the part of the management question related to LSS and how Kaizen can complement this improvement strategy. This study focuses on Kaizen and therefore on the other part of the management question, namely whether Kaizen is a good change strategy for TNT post. For this part of the research, the following research question for this thesis can be derived from the management question posed above:
What role do the Kaizen critical success factors play in the implementation of Kaizen events at TNT post?
Sub-questions are defined, which support in answering of the research question. The first sub-question aims to investigate what factors are critical and contribute to a successful implementation of a Kaizen event in general. A theoretical explanation of success factors serves as the basis of this research and therefore, the first sub question will be:
What factors contribute in a positive way to the implementation of Kaizen according to the literature?
The second sub-question will help to contextualize the factors which are the outcome of sub-question one. Since this research focuses on TNT post, it is of interest what factors are relevant to TNT post as an organization. Therefore, sub-question two is formulated as:
Which factors contribute in a positive way to the implementation of Kaizen according to the employees of TNT post?
The third sub question is about the performance of the success factors mentioned by employees as an answer on sub-question two. The relation between the importance of the success factor and the performance of that factor in the organization might be of
7 resulting from question two, and the performance of those factors, the third sub-question is:
To what extent does a gap exist between the available promotional factors for Kaizen and the desirable factors?
The last sub question is related to Kaizen events (projects) that have already been
executed at TNT post between 2006 and 2010. Evaluation of these projects will provide insight in the factors responsible for success and failure during the implementation of the Kaizen events. Investigating the key success factors will support TNT post in
determining their focus when implementing a new Kaizen event. Therefore, the fourth and last sub question is:
What factors have already proven their value in Kaizen events?
8
2. METHODOLOGY
2.1 Introduction
This chapter presents an overview of the methodological perspective of this research. Section 2.2 describes the research design based on the research questions and theory. In paragraph 2.3 the case study methodology used will be explained and in Paragraph 2.4 the execution of the interviews will be described. Finally, Paragraph 2.5 summarizes the research methods used in this research.
2.2 Research Design
The aim of research design is to connect the data that will be gathered to the research questions. The design is the basic plan for the empirical research and includes key concepts, such as research strategy, tools and procedures to be used for the collection and analysis of empirical data (Punch, 2000). In this section, the research strategy and general research samples are described.
2.2.1 Research strategy
9
2.2.2 Literature review
A literature review approach is selected to answer the first research question- ―Which
factors contribute in a positive way to the implementation of Kaizen according to the literature‖- The literature review on the success factors aids in gaining in-depth insight
into what factors are key in the successful implementation of Kaizen. Literature is used, describing different studies executed in both the private and public sector and within various companies in different countries. Furthermore, the selected authors are experts in the field of Kaizen, Continuous Improvement (CI) and Total Quality Management (TQM). For this literature study, eight authors are selected, because of their variation in research method and their variation in companies in which the researches were executed. For this study, factors used by at least 50% of the authors are seen as critical.
2.2.3 Questionnaire survey
The second and third research question- ―Which factors contribute in a positive way to
the implementation of Kaizen according to employees of TNT post‖ and ―To what degree is there a gap between the available promotional factors for Kaizen and the desirable factors‖- are posed to examine what employees of TNT post have experienced as being
critical in working with Kaizen events. An email questionnaire survey was used because of the flexibility and speed of completion (Cooper & Schindler, 2005). In this study, the questionnaire survey was used to obtain a large set of data on success factors and how employees indicate these factors as successful. The survey consisted of 28 questions about the importance of the success factors and 28 questions about the performance of the success factors during earlier Kaizen events. A 7-point Likert scale is used in order to measure the results. All 102 participants who had experience with Kaizen events were asked to participate in a questionnaire survey. All factors that have an average score of >6 on the 7-point Likert scale are selected, because these factors can be seen as very important.
2.3 Case study
In order to answer the fourth sub question- ―What factors have already proven their value
in Kaizen events”, a case study is performed. Four cases are analyzed and interviews
10 assess which factors were critical to success in these events. Yin (1989) defines a case study as: ―An empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its
real-life context; when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident and in which multiple sources of evidence are used‖. According to Zhang (2001)
the case study approach has both advantages and disadvantages. The main disadvantage is the lack of statistical evidence from the research findings. However, a key advantage of the case study is that it is the only methodology providing in-depth insight into the processes within complex organizations. Aim of this case study is to test theory with help of the cases and interviews with employees.
2.3.1 Case selection
Originally, four different cases (two successful and two unsuccessful ones) were to be evaluated in order to test the critical success factors, resulting from the first research questions. Unfortunately for this research, TNT post only had projects that are considered to be successful. In addition, all cases should be classified as Kaizen events in order to qualify for evaluation. Furthermore, people involved in the cases should be available for interviews. Lastly, in order to be of relevance, the selected projects should be executed in 2006 or later. As a result, the projects BUBA, SOSMA, HB and OPZETTERIJ were selected for evaluation. A short overview of the events can be found in Chapter four and a detailed description of the cases is presented in Appendix 3.
2.3.2 Data collection
In order to conduct the case study, information was mainly collected using two methods: Desk research (documents) and interviews. The use of multiple data sources offers a holistic insight into the subject than the use of a single data source. Interviews were conducted with operational managers, product team leaders (PTL-ers) and members of the project teams. Due to the limited availability of resources, only one operational manager, PTL-er and one employee per project team is asked.
2.3.3 Interviews
11 experience. An advantage of semi-structured interviews is the possibility to gather in-depth information (Segers, 2002), which is the aim of the interviews with operational managers. In addition, it leaves the opportunity for all participants of the interview to discuss other related subjects which are of importance and which are not prepared in advance. Every interview was conducted by two interviewers, having a positive result on validity and reliability (Kincaid and Bright, 1957). The interviews where structured according to three main topics. The first part of the interview is an introduction to the project and includes general questions about the role of the interviewee and the results of the project. The interview format can be found in Appendix 4. The second part of the interview consists of an explanation of the success factors (derived from the survey questionnaire and literature study) and the role of that specific success factor for the project. One of the questions is whether the factors were sufficiently available and what could be improved. The last part of the interview considers information about the success factors that influenced the results of the projects. Chapter 6 presents the results of the interviews. The results are plotted against the seven CSF‘s resulting from Chapter 3. The data received from the respondents is translated into a score on a 5-point scale, varying from -- to ++. An example of how results are presented can be found in Table 2.1 on page 12. An overview of the total results can be found in Appendix 5
2.4 Conclusions
12 Table 2.1 Result format (scale; --, -, +-, +, ++)
CSF Project BUBA Project SOSMA Project HB Project Opzetteri j Mean
Object of research Project mean Project mean Project mean Project mean CSF mean Opinion of the respondents
13
3. THEORY
This chapter will describe the history of Kaizen, some Kaizen principles and will make a distinction between Kaizen as a philosophy and Kaizen as an event. Furthermore, this chapter will introduce Total Quality Management and Continuous improvement and their relation with Kaizen. Goal of this chapter is to investigate which critical factors will contribute to the successful implementation of Kaizen and therefore will answer sub question one, ―Which factors contribute in a positive way to the implementation of Kaizen
according to the literature”?
3.1 History of Kaizen
Kaizen finds its roots in Japan where it was developed in the Toyota factories from 1950s to 1970s, before it was introduced in the U.S in the 1980s (Jha, Noori, & Michela, 1996). The Kaizen philosophy became known by the name of Toyota Production System (TPS), a method that won several international prices (Mika, 2006). This philosophy is respected around the world because of the challenge to continuously improve the production processes in order to eliminate waste (Imai, 1986). In his book, Imai describes Kaizen as a continuous change process, based on their process-oriented way of thinking and considering many aspects of quality management (Imai, 1986).
3.2 Characteristics of Kaizen
Management literature has often described Kaizen and the participation of the workforce in process improvement as being a key element in Japanese Manufacturing success (Brunet & New 2003). They describe the three widely accepted key characteristics of Kaizen:
1. Kaizen is continuous
2. Kaizen is usually incremental in nature
3. Kaizen is participative, entailing the involvement and intelligence of the workforce
14 continuous improvement, but to describe different characteristics of Kaizen in order to gain a better understanding of the Kaizen philosophy.
The Kaizen philosophy is described by Masaaki Imai (2005) who wrote several books to generate worldwide acceptance of this philosophy (improvement method). In one of his books, he goes one step further by bringing the concept of Kaizen to a lower organizational level, which he called ―Gemba Kaizen‖. Gemba, which means work floor, is the place where it all happens. Kaizen starts from the Gemba by introducing small improvements initiated by lower level employees (Imai, 2005).
A limitation in the descriptions of Kaizen is given by Mika (2006) who uses different terminology for the same concepts where he states that, in the United States, Kaizen usually relates to a Kaizen event. However, there are many names for such Kaizen events like: ―Kaizen blitz‖, ―Gemba Kaizen‖ and ―break-through Kaizen‖. Sheridan (1997), strengthens this statement of Mika by saying: ―According to the Kaizen institute
approaches factory floor events, -it calls them Gemba Kaizens- as an element in broader strategy that placed heavy emphasis on culture change and education”. All of these
definitions are based on improving cost, quality and delivery through the elimination of muda (waste)(Sheridan, 1997). In this research, Kaizen and Gemba Kaizen are used interchangeably. A reason to use Gemba Kaizen instead of Kaizen is to stress the importance of the work floor and their involvement in the improvement processes. A distinction should be made between Kaizen and Kaizen events. When Kaizen is mentioned in this research, the philosophy of Kaizen in the organization in its broadest way is meant. Nevertheless, a Kaizen event is defined here as: a planned change initiative initiated from the work floor, with a clear beginning and end.
15
experiment and adaptation at matching an organization’s capabilities to the needs” and
that ―This is best achieved through a multitude of (mainly) small to medium-scale
incremental changes”. Kaizen events can be related to planned change. According to
Burnes, (2009) ―Planned, in planned change does not mean that someone sits down in
advance and writes a plan detailing what will take place, when and how. Rather, it means that the organization identifies an area where it believes change is required and undertakes a process to evaluate and, if necessary, bring about change”. It is the
intention to change, which connects planned change to Kaizen events.
Brunet and New, (2003), describe the differences between Kaizen events and Kaizen as a philosophy in a different way. They explain that for some people, Kaizen is a way of life where others see Kaizen ―only‖ as a tool (Brunet and New 2003). This is an important statement with regard to this research because of the distinction between Kaizen as a philosophy and Kaizen events. In the study of Farris (2006), some similarities and differences between Kaizen and Kaizen events are described
Similarities
Both concepts use process improvement tools and techniques to make desired improvements
Both concepts include the aim of ultimately producing an organizational culture focused on ongoing improvement
Both concepts use the idea of empowering employees to make changes, by providing both the opportunity to improve work systems and training on the tools and techniques needed to make improvements.
Both concepts emphasize making relative incremental changes to improve performance.
Differences
16 process improvement teams and employee suggestions are all more long-term initiatives than the typical Kaizen event.
A Kaizen event, unlike Kaizen as a philosophy, focuses on low-cost change, rather than changes requiring significant investment, like training.
3.3 Continuous improvement
A term often linked to Kaizen is Continuous improvement (CI), which will therefore be examined in more detail to get a better understanding of the concept. In this chapter, continuous improvement will be linked to Total Quality Management (TQM) and Kaizen in order to support the selected list of critical success factors. CI is a philosophy which is described as: ―Improvement initiatives that increase successes and reduce failures‖ (Juergensen, 2000). Another definition of CI is ―a company-wide process of focused and
Continuous incremental innovation‖ (Bessant et al.1994). While Bessant et al. (1994)
mention that continuous improvement is meant to reduce failures through incremental change, another important part of continuous improvement is described by Ortiz (2006). He mentions that Continuous Improvement emphasizes the importance of involving employees at every level of the organization. Cummings and Worley (2005) emphasize the continuous part of CI by saying: ―CI is a philosophy of designing and managing all
aspects of an organization in a never-ending quest for quality”. This statement directly
links CI to quality management, which will be discussed later in this chapter. Another aspect of CI is given by Bhuiyan and Bagehel (2005). They emphasize the importance of culture by saying: ―A culture of sustained improvement targeting the elimination of waste
in all systems and processes of an organization. It involves everyone working together to make improvements without necessarily making huge capital investments”. The
17 in the field of CI emphasize that ―continuous incremental improvements are a powerful
potential source of competitive advantages for organizations‖ (Lange-Ros, 1999).
Table 3.1 – Correlation between the Deming Wheel and the Japanese PDCA Cycle (Imai, 1986)
1. Design -- Plan Product design corresponds to the planning phase of management 2. Production -- Do Production corresponds to doing-making, or working on the product
that was designed
3. Sales -- Check Sales figures confirm whether the customer is satisfied
4. Research --Action In case of a complaint being filed, it has to be incorporated into the planning phase, and action taken for the next round of efforts
3.4 CI TQM and Kaizen
Kaizen has a strong relationship with CI and TQM. The link between these three improvement methods is described in the literature by several authors. For example, Jacobson et al. (2009) describe Kaizen as a Japanese business philosophy built on the core principle of CI. Or Dale, Van der Wiele, and van Iwaarden, (2007) who relate quality management to CI and state that quality management is part of continuous improvement by saying: ―Another important part of quality management, which is also
part of continuous improvement, is the PDCA cycle of Deeming. This cycle (which means plan, do, check, act) is the cycle of continuous improvement”. They also relate Kaizen to
continuous improvement. Another definition of quality management is given by Flyn, Schroeder and Sakakibara, 2001: Quality management is defined as: ―An integrated
approach to achieving and sustaining high quality output, focusing on the maintenance and continuous improvement of processes and defect prevention at all levels and in all functions in of the organization, in order to meet or exceed customer expectations”.
Recht and Wilderom (1998) talk about Kaizen as a term encompassing various other Japanese practices which are well known in the Western world as TQM, Kanban and Just-In-Time (JIT).
18 quality circles, total quality management and lean production resulted in literature on continuous improvements, in which authors started to pay explicit attention to the organization of ongoing incremental improvements.
3.5 Project success
This research investigates how critical success factors contribute to a successful
implementation of Kaizen events. To answer this question, the success of a Kaizen event (project) should be further defined. According to Schwalbe (2009), Project success can be defined in several ways:
1. The project was executed within scope, time and cost goals. 2. The project satisfied the sponsor
3. The result of the project met its main objective (e.g. Return On Investment (ROI))
Schwalbe (2009) emphasizes that not all project members should have the same goals. Where the goal of the project sponsor could be that the ROI is obtained, the goal of the project leader can be that work processes are accelerated. Therefore, it is important to add the definition of TNT post in this research. In order to define project success according to TNT post, the year plan of the LSS team is referred to. In the year plan it is stated that: ―LSS is a success if the organization is able to continuously improve their process on
their own and is able to maintain the results‖ (jaarplan Lean Six Sigma-team, 2010).
Since this is not specifically related to the success of a Kaizen project, information is obtained from the management of TNT post and the LSS team. They define a Kaizen project to be successful when the economic result of the Kaizen event is obtained within the predetermined period and employees are satisfied with the process.
3.6 Critical Success Factors (CSF) for the implementation of Kaizen
This research investigates whether Kaizen is a good change strategy for TNT post. Therefore, identification of the critical success factors of Kaizen is needed in order to get insight in how to successfully implement Kaizen. What is a critical success factor? Rockart (1979) defines CSFs as: ―The limited numbers of areas in which results, if they
are satisfactory, will ensure competitive performance for the organization.‖ Brotherton
19 company or which areas will produce the greatest ―competitive leverage‖. In this research, CSFs are factors which are necessary in order for TNT post to successfully implement the change. To draw up a list of factors that are crucial to successful implementation of Kaizen, literature research is conducted. Please note that a limited amount of scientific research is available on the implementation of Kaizen and there are only a few authors who studied practical issues. However, a large amount of literature is available on continuous improvement and total quality management.
A literature study is performed to answer the first sub-question: ―Which factors
contribute to the successful implementation of Kaizen according to the literature?”.
Many articles were assessed in order to create a long-list of critical success factors. This list is based on eight authors who studied critical success factors of Kaizen, TQM and continuous improvement. Finally, all factors which are mentioned by at least 50% of the authors, are considered as important. Next paragraph will explain what research has been conducted by the authors and why these articles are selected for determining the critical success factors.
3.7 Explanation of the articles
20 a study of Mohd Yusof & Aspinwall (2000), who conducted field research on respondents with different backgrounds with respect to products in the manufacturing industry. The research was focused on small and medium enterprises resulting in a list of CSF. This sixth list with critical success factors by Caffin (1999) is the result of practical, action-oriented research in the manufacturing sector representing many different industries. It comprises a set of ten generic CI behaviors that are seen as essential fundamentals in organizations of all types and sizes. The seventh list of success factors comes from Black and Porter (1996). They also conducted a study to determine the TQM critical success factors using, as an example, members of the European Foundation for Quality Management. The survey questions were developed from a thorough literature review. The CSFs were determined based on a factor analysis of the 204 returned surveys. The last list is from Sheridan (1997) who writes about success factors for implementing a Kaizen event after interviews with consultants and managers from different companies.
3.8 Explanation of most important success factors
With the CSFs derived from the literature study, sub-question one can be answered. In Table 3.1 the critical success factors most often mentioned are listed. From this, it can be concluded that management commitment and engagement, integrating CI with strategic planning, establish a culture for CI, focusing on critical process, customer focus, open and honest communication and development of cross-functional teams for a Kaizen event are the most important factors for the successful implementation of Kaizen according to literature. This paragraph will explain these critical success factors.
Table 3.1: Top 7 CSFs according to literature
Success factor Author
1 Author 2 Author 3 Author 4 Author 5 Author 6 Author 7 Author 8 Total
Management commitment and engagement
x x x x x x 6
Integrating CI with strategic planning x x x x x x 6
Establish a culture for CI x x x x x x 6
Focusing on critical process x x x x x 5
Customer focus x x x x 4
Open and honest communication x x x x 4
Develop a cross-functional team for Kaizen event
x x x x 4
21
Author 7 = Black & Porter (1996), Author 8 = Sheridan (1997)
Management commitment
Kaye and Anderson (1998) emphasize that all managers should be committed to and involved in the Kaizen program. They claim that the awareness of those managers should be raised of the relevance and importance of quality and CI within their particular organizational context. This means that senior management should demonstrate its commitment to and involvement in quality and CI through regular contact with the staff. Caffin (1999) agrees with this explanation by saying that managers at all levels should display their active commitment to, and leadership of, CI throughout the organization. This will help people to engage proactively in incremental improvement.
Fryer et al. (2007) in addition emphasize the importance of visibility of the senior officers within CI programs. They emphasize that without this factor, it is unlikely that Kaizen will succeed.
Kaizen and link with strategic goals
Kaye and Anderson (1998) say that the business objective should be identified and linked to the vision, mission and business plans. They also mention that the organisation‘s strategic goals and objectives should be used to identify and prioritise continuous improvement activities across the whole organisation, across functional boundaries and at all levels. Caffin (1999) goes one step further and identifies two key types of behaviour which are important when strategic goals are linked to activities of CI:
1. Employees demonstrate awareness and understanding of the organization's aims and objectives
2. Individuals and groups use the organization's strategic goals and objectives to focus and prioritise their improvement activities.
Without these types of behaviour, it is unlikely that the Kaizen project will be aligned with the strategic goals.
Establish a culture for CI
22 appropriate) of the general concepts of quality and how they apply to them and their particular organisational context. In addition, management should continuously encourage staff to actively participate in identifying improvements and making changes. This can be influenced by:
Open communication
Spreading the word and raising staff awareness and understanding Training people in quality concepts
Sila and Ebrahimpour (2003) describe the importance of a quality culture in the implementation of TQM and mention this as critical to TQM. This factor is emphasized in different studies all over the world where the common factors are: ‗the existence of a quality culture‘, ‗work environment and culture‘ and ‗leadership and quality culture‘. (Sila and Ebrahimpour, 2003)
Focus on critical processes
Considering their focus on critical processes, Kaye and Anderson (1998) state that: ―All major business processes should be identified and documented. Processes should be regularly reviewed to identify their contribution to the achievement of the organisation's aims, objectives and critical success factors.‖
Kaizen and customer focus
According to Kaye & Anderson (1998) it is not only the customer that should be focused on, but also of the major stakeholders should be taken into account, for example:
Customers Shareholders Employees Suppliers, etc.
23 satisfaction (particularly customers and employees). Their final point of attention is that the organization‘s long and short term strategies (vision, mission, critical success factors, operational objectives, etc.) should be regularly reviewed and modified if required, in the light of feedback from stakeholders (particularly customers).
Communication
Another very important success factor is related to communication. Sila and Ebrahimpour (2003) investigated factors related to communication and they concluded that effective communication is of importance across functions and work units in order to ensure that customer requirements are addressed and that an environment of trust and knowledge sharing is created. According to Sila and Ebrahimpour (2003), effective communication is essential for the successful implementation of TQM. Both internal communication (between the levels within an organization involving top management, supervisors and employees) and external communication (with customers and suppliers) are of vital interest. Organizations can address different issues in order to align their communication systems with Kaizen events. A few of them are described by Sila and Ebrahimpour (2003):
The mechanisms or channels used by companies to communicate their TQM efforts and progress made across functions and work units
The types of communication methods used by companies and their role and effectiveness in instilling a culture of quality in employees and suppliers with a focus on customer satisfaction
The use of the Internet and e-commerce as vehicles to communicate with employees and conduct business and communicate with customers and suppliers, and the impact of these technologies on quality management
24
Use of cross functional teams
25
4. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This chapter provides a short description of the Kaizen events analyzed in order to give answer sub question four.
Project: Opzetterij
The department of ‗Opzetterij‘ produces semi-manufactured goods. Unsorted mail enters the process, after which it is separated into three major streams. Mail suited for SMK, SMG or SMO (sorting machine for small letters, large letters or others).
Reason: Performance of individual employees was not measurable and employees could pick the easiest products to process, resulting in an inefficient work process
Goal: Goal was to increase efficiency and to measure individual contribution of the employees.
Project team: A project team of employees, managers and change experts was formed. The team was guided by consultants from McKinsey who had a facilitating role.
Change tools: PDCA cycle is used on the basis of trial and error. Results: Performance increased with 31%
Project: HB
HB stands for ―handbedrijf‘, translated in English this means the hand sorting process. Currently, the majority of the mail is processed automatically. However, a small volume remains, that is not suitable for automatic processing
Reason: Lack of efficiency in the process. The second problem was the mess on the work floor and therefore missing items.
Goal: The main goal of this Kaizen event was to increase the efficiency in order to decrease the losses of the department. Eventually it is the goal to meet the budget or even making a profit.
26 Change tools: PDCA cycle is used and was the leading tool for the improvement. 5S also played an important role in order to create structures on the work floor
Results: Efficiency increased with 20%
Project: BUBA
BUBA stands for ―Business Balie‖ and is the location where all non-valuated business mail is processed. The Business Balie pats this mail in the system and invoices it later to the companies. After the mail is patted, it will be (based on their size) divided into different sorting machines.
Reason: Work stations of the employees were not ergonomic and too much mail fell on the ground. Second problem was the inefficient flow of the containers and standard work processes.
Goal: Goal of this BUBA project was to eliminate waste in the production process and to make processes more fluent and efficient. Second goal was to create an improved work station by making the BUBA more ergonomic
Project team: The team consisted of 3 employees, a team coach, area manager and two LSS managers. This team was supported by 6 consultants from McKinsey.
Change tools: Both the PDCA cycle and 5S were important during this Kaizen event. 5S is used to clearly mark parking lots for all stations, containers and floor scales.
Results: By the end of the project, productivity had increased with 22%.
Project: SOSMA
The SOSMA machine, which stands for ―schift opzet en sorteermachine‖ sorts the mail arriving at the sorting center. This machine sorts mail by dividing it between large, small and others.
27 Goal: SOSMA had three main goals
1. Increase of efficiency of the processes
2. Adapt employee planning to the constantly changing of the volume of post 3. Growing into the new standards through the use of improvement groups
Project team: 11 people from TNT post with different backgrounds were in the project team. The team was guided by 3 consultants from McKinsey.
Change tools: PDCA cycle was used in combination with the 5S philosophy. PDCA focuses on the project phases where 5S focuses mainly on the organization of the workplaces.
28
5. QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS
5.1 Introduction
This chapter will present the results of the questionnaire survey and will answer sub question two and three. Paragraph 5.2 describes the data from the respondents and Paragraph 5.3 gives the result of the questionnaire survey and will answer sub question two: ―What factors contribute in a positive way to the implementation of Kaizen
according to employees of TNT post”. Finally paragraph 5.4 will answer sub question
three: ―To what extent does a gap exist between the available promotional factors for
Kaizen and the desirable factors”. This is illustrated in an importance performance
matrix. 5.2 Population
The questionnaire consisted of 28 success factors and data is gathered between November 9th and December 1st. The questionnaire was sent to 102 employees and on the due date (December 1st) 25 respondents had been received, which equals a response rate of 24,5%. All respondents are employees with experience in Kaizen philosophies or Kaizen events.
5.3 Results
29
Table 5.1
Success factor Importance Standard dev. Performance
Quality should be established and is important in the Kaizen process 6,70 0,46 1,70 Leadership is important on all levels in the organization 6,65 0,48 1,61 There should be a customer focus 6,61 0,49 1,30 Kaizen teams consists of employees from different part of the
organization (cross-functional teams) 6,57 0,71 1,70 There should be a culture which support continuous improvement 6,48 0,77 2,00 There should be open/honest communication about improvement
projects. This may not cause any threat. 6,43 0,71 2,26 There is involvement from employees for Kaizen event planning and
decision making 6,39 0,82 2,09
There are enough resources available in order to successfully
implement a Kaizen project 6,39 0,70 1,70
The results of the questionnaire show that the eight most important success factors all have a high score (>6) on the 7-point Likert scale. It is noticeable that there is very little difference between the most important success factor and the least important success factor in the list. Answering sub question two: ―What factors contribute in a positive way
to the implementation of Kaizen according to employees of TNT post”, it can be
concluded that: Quality assurance, leadership involvement on all levels of the organization, customer focus, cross functional teams, a culture that support continuous improvement, open and honest communication, involvement from employees for Kaizen event planning and decision making and the availability of enough resources promote the implementation of Kaizen.
To answer sub question three: ―To what extent does a gap exist between the available
promotional factors for Kaizen and the desirable factors”, an importance/performance
30 horizontal axis of the matrix shows the importance of the success factors where 9 indicates a low performance and 1 a high performance. The vertical axis shows the performance of that success factor where 9 indicates a poor performance and 1 a very good performance.
Figure 4.1 Importance /Performance matrix (Slack. N, 1994)
As illustrated in Figure 4.1 and mentioned earlier, almost all success factors are listed as critical and therefore, all factors are rated in the right part of the matrix. In addition, there are some factors requiring improvement. Especially the sixth success factor, ―There
should be open/honest communication about improvement projects, this may not cause any threat”, could be improved. On the other hand, the third success factor, ―There should be customer focus”, is present and is classified as appropriate. Answering sub
question three, ―To what degree does a gap exist between the available promotional
factors and the desirable factors”, it can be said that there is a small gap between the
importance success factors in general. The following factors can be mentioned as appropriate:
Quality should be established and is important in the Kaizen process Leadership is important on all levels in the organization,
31 There should be customer focus
Kaizen teams consist of employees from different parts of the organization
(cross-functional teams)
On the other hand the following factors require improvement:
There should be a culture which support continuous improvement,
There should be open/honest communication about improvement projects. This
may not cause any threat
There is involvement from employees for Kaizen event planning and
decision-making
There are enough resources available in order to successfully implement a Kaizen
32
6. INTERVIEW RESULTS
6.1 Introduction
Aim of this chapter is to answer research question four: ―What success factors have
already proven their value during Kaizen events” and is based on the experience of
employees of TNT post where critical success factors are discussed. In this chapter the results are presented based on four Kaizen events. A short description of the events has been given in Chapter 4 and an extensive explanation of the events can be found in Appendix 3. The results are ranked according to the success factors that resulted from the literature review and rated above six in the survey questionnaire.
6.2 Population
This paragraph explains characteristics of the interviewees. For every project, three employees were interviewed. Participants are managers, project team leaders (PTL-ers) and employees. Due to the privacy of the interviewees, job titles will not be included in the tables, but they are referred to as employee 1, 2 and 3. An explanation of the table structure is already given in Chapter 2.
6.3 Results
This paragraph will show the outcome of the interviews which is a summary of the outcomes per success factor per project and is visualized using tables. Quotes are used to make information more comprehensive. The qualitative data received from the respondents is translated into a score on a five-point-scale, from --, which stands for very negative, to ++, which stands for very positive. Additional information, gathered from the interviews will be discussed in next chapter.
33 Table 6.1 shows the outcome of the CSF ―Management engagement and commitment‖. In three projects, McKinsey initiated the improvement and therefore guided these projects acting as facilitator. According to the employees, McKinsey played an important role in the beginning of the Kaizen project. This is illustrated in Table 6.1 where project HB received a lower score for this success factor. Managers of TNT post consider leadership to be very important, especially being enthusiastic and involved. Managers of TNT post have experienced that for example in Zwolle, managers are very enthusiastic. The role of a good facilitator (often fulfilled by McKinsey) should not be underestimated. A big difference can be seen when the same Kaizen event is conducted on other sorting centers in the country. Interviewees experienced that leadership was not fully committed to the Kaizen projects, when they were first initiated in Zwolle. The interviewees indicate that this could be because McKinsey was not facilitating the project. An employee who was enthusiastic about the support of management stated:
―Management of all layers of the organization participated in the project and you could
feel the involvement”
Another advantage of the involvement of managers was mentioned by one employee saying:
“Because of the involvement of managers at all layers of the organization, almost everything was possible”
Table 6.2 CSF 2 CSF Event BUBA Event SOSMA Event HB Event Opzetterij Mean
Kaizen and link with
strategic goals
+/-
--
-
+
-
+ -- - -- - -- - - +- + + +-
Table 6.2 shows the outcome of the CSF ―Kaizen and link with strategic goals‖. The interviewees have not been explicitly informed about the link with the strategic goals. They knew the goal(s) of the event but a link to the strategy of TNT post was not made in their opinion. However, in one project, an employee could imagine that the Lean manufacturing concept 5S is important and states that:
34 Every project was initiated in order the optimize work processes with as a goal to do the same work in less time with less mistakes. Employees think that this really contributes to the strategic goals of the organization. In the Opzetterij event it was clear that the underlying goal of the organization was to process more business mail in the department. Table 6.3 CSF 3 CSF Project BUBA Project SOSMA Project HB Project Opzetterij Mean
(Internal) customer focus
-
++
+
+
+
+ -- -- + ++ ++ + ++ + + + +
Table 6.3 shows the outcome of the CSF “Kaizen and (internal) customer focus)”. Interviewees of TNT post think that the focus on the customer is not only very important but also present. An example of this is the SOSMA project where employees of the project team went to their (internal) customer, in order to investigate how they would like to receive their goods. One employee illustrates this by saying:
“People from the project team went to the other departments within the sorting center (their customer) in order to investigate how they would like to have their goods packed”
However, not all events were focused on their customer. An employee of a project said:
“We did not consider what this change could mean for our customer, but people from other departments came to us asking what we were doing”
35 Table 6.4 CSF 4 CSF Project BUBA Project SOSMA Project HB Project Opzetterij Mean
Use of cross-functional teams
++
++
++
++ ++
++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ + ++ ++ ++ ++ +
Table 6.4 shows the outcome of the CSF ―Use of cross-functional teams‖. All project teams consisted of employees from different layers of the organization. The employees, who participate in the project, were asked by TNT post because of their openness and positivism towards changes and improvements within their work/department. Apart from the employees, there are several people from other parts of the organization who participated in the project, like project team leaders and business managers. One employee said:
“My project team consisted of several people from the whole area and from different departments, this was really stimulating”.
He experienced this as very positive because it showed the commitment of the company towards the project. The experience of employees is that such cross-functional teams generate acceptance by employees. It is more transparent what happens in the organization and what is possible. In addition, employees admit that they were asked because of their openness and creative mind towards change projects. A significant advantage for teams with management support is the access to the opportunities and possibilities, which would otherwise not be available.
Table 6.5 CSF 5 CSF Project BUBA Project SOSMA Project HB Project Opzetterij Mean
Honest and open
communication
++
++
+/-
++
+
++ + ++ ++ ++ ++ + - - + ++ ++
36 members as good. Interaction existed between project members and other employees in order to optimize the improvement, as one interviewee said:
“Everything that worked, was communicated and explained to other employees”
In another project, communication towards all employees of that department consisted with the use of a weekly news update. One employee stated that:
“This weekly update brought more unity in our department because everybody knew what we were doing”
In one project, before the start, the team members were invited to have dinner with the project team in order to explain the goal and to discuss the event. This was experienced as really positive by employees. One employee said that he felt special and thought:
“Because of this dinner, it became really clear for us that the event was important for the organization and we felt really involved”
In another project, all other employees got information about the project in their daily ―team aftrap‖ which is a short explanation with goals and tasks of that day. As said before, communication between the project team and the internal customers was experienced as being positive as well. Improvements where explained to them where they could try it and reply it with some comments (their experience).
Table 6.6 CSF 6 CSF Project BUBA Project SOSMA Project HB Project Opzetterij Mean
Focus on critical process
+/-
+/-
+/-
+
+/-
+ +- +- + - - + - - + + +-
Table 6.6 shows the outcome of the CSF ―Kaizen and focus on critical process”. This point did not make any sense to most of the interviewees. During the project, the team investigated bottlenecks in the process, which initiated the improvements. One employee states:
“The focus was on the bottle neck of a machine which acted as the starting point of the improvement. Central question here was: What is missing and what can be done in a
37 What employees did experience is that especially McKinsey focuses on a specific part of the machine. However, this is often not discussed with employees. They saw the events only as optimizing the work processes without thinking whether these processes are critical or not. Table 6.7 CSF 7 CSF Project BUBA Project SOSMA Project HB Project Opzetterij Mean
A culture which improves
Continuous Improvement
--
--
--
--
--
- -- -- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- --
Table 6.1 shows the outcome of the CSF ―A culture which improves Continuous
Improvement”. Establishing a culture for CI is something that was beforehand mentioned
by the principal of this research as one of the most interesting points. Managers explained that TNT post is trying to establish a culture of CI but that it is very hard to obtain a good result. This is because the turnover rate of employees is relatively high and that much of the work is done by temporary workers. One employee mentioned that:
―The organization is too inflexible to establish a culture of CI‖ Whereas another employee said:
“If I think I can make an improvement in my work process, it has to go through too many hierarchical layers” “A person behind a desk will decide if this practical improvement is
really an improvement and this just does not work”
He describes that improvements initiated by employees often remain stuck in the process because there are too many management layers who should approve the idea to make a decision. Another employee commented on the anonymity of submitting an improvement. He said:
“If I have an improvement, I will not use the improvement board but rather tell it immediately to my manager”
38 Answering sub-question four: ―What factors have already proven their value in Kaizen
events”, it can be said that the following factors did prove their value in the four Kaizen
events analyzed:
Management commitment and engagement in all levels in the organization Customer focus
Cross functional teams
39
7. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
7.1 Introduction
This chapter summarizes and discusses the answers of the sub questions and links the theory section to the results section in order to give a final answer to the main research question. First, conclusions will be drawn for all the sub-questions before discussing the outcomes and posing questions for further research.
7.2 Conclusion
This research has been conducted in order to investigate which factors are of great importance for TNT post for the implementation of Kaizen. For the implementation of changes within the company, TNT post is using LSS as their change method (since 2007). However, since Enno van der Werf - manager of the sorting center in Zwolle - is a strong supporter of Kaizen, research is done to determine what factors play a crucial role in this process. Therefore, TNT post wants to know the answer on the research question:
First, it is investigated which critical factors are mentioned by literature. After that, a questionnaire survey was conducted amongst personnel of TNT post in order to investigate what factors they indicate as being important. Finally, interviews were held to investigate what success factors have already proven their value during the implementation of Kaizen events. To answer the research question, it has been divided into the following sub-questions which will be answered first.
The box above repeats the first sub-question and is answered by literature research, which is done in Chapter 3 of this thesis. Many authors have created a list of critical success
What role does the Kaizen critical success factors play in the implementation of Kaizen events at TNT post?
Sub question 1:
40 factors for the implementation of Kaizen or other CI initiatives. Most of these lists have similar factors but terminology may differ. As an answer on sub-question one, it can be concluded that management commitment and engagement, integrating CI with strategic planning, establish a culture for CI, focusing on critical process, customer focus, open and honest communication and develop a cross-functional team for a Kaizen event are the most important factors for the successful implementation of Kaizen according to literature.
The outcome of the survey questionnaire will help to answer sub question two on the success factors. The questionnaire is based on the success factors from the literature and consists of 32 factors. As an answer on sub question two, it can be concluded: quality assurance, leadership involvement on all levels of the organization, customer focus, cross functional teams, a culture that support continuous improvement, open and honest communication, involvement of employees for Kaizen event planning and decision making and the availability of enough resources promote the implementation of Kaizen.
The answer to this sub question is given by the importance/performance matrix of Slack (1994) and shows the relation between the importance of one success factor and its performance. It can be concluded that there is a gap between the available promotional factors for Kaizen and the desirable factors for some of the success factors. In addition, it can be concluded that improvement is needed for the following success factors:
There should be a culture which support continuous improvement,
There should be open/honest communication about improvement projects, this
may not cause any threat,
There is involvement from employees for Kaizen event planning and decision
making
Sub question 2:
What factors contribute in a positive way to the implementation of Kaizen according to the employees of TNT post in Zwolle?
Sub question 3:
41 There are enough resources available in order to successfully implement a Kaizen
project.
In order to answer this sub question, cases have been studied and interviews were held with employees. Outcome of this analysis resulted in the assessment of the success factors mentioned in the literature. It can be concluded that management commitment and engagement in all levels in the organization and, customer focus, cross functional teams and honest & open communication did prove their value during the four Kaizen events under evaluation.
Answering the main question: ―What role do the Kaizen critical success factors play in
the implementation of Kaizen events at TNT post”? It can be concluded that critical
success factors play an important role in the implementation of Kaizen and that they contribute to a successful implementation of Kaizen. Various employees mention that TNT post should pay more attention to the creation of a culture supporting continuous improvement. Without this success factor, it seems to be very difficult to maintain the initiated changes. Furthermore, Kaizen events should be more aligned with the strategic goals of the organization. This should lead to the implementation of a Kaizen event in a way that employees better understand the goal of the events, which will increase the willingness to change. It is recommended that TNT post should follow the philosophy of Kaizen. By using Kaizen events for improvement, as they did before, at least one Kaizen manager should be appointed. This manager should act as a facilitator (like McKinsey during the events) and should focus on the maintenance of the improvements.
7.3 Discussion
In this paragraph I will debate the choices made during this research and discuss some findings from literature and interviews. Furthermore, information about a presentation which I gave to the management of TNT post is discussed in this section.
Sub question 4:
42 In chapter three, a list is presented with critical success factors based on different authors. This list is based on success factors of literature written on Kaizen, Continuous improvement (CI) and Total Quality Management (TQM). Integrating these themes provides a more valid list of success factors. Translating the success factors for the questionnaire, it is chosen to use the Dutch word ―continu verbeteren‖ because employees where familiar with that term and it covers all concepts.
A presentation about the outcomes of this research was given to the management of the sorting center in Zwolle. During the presentation a discussion arose on the availability of a Kaizen manager who should constantly focus on implementing and sustaining Kaizen initiatives. In the situation of TNT, two extra managers are appointed in order to decrease workload of other managers which should result in extra attention to Kaizen initiatives by all managers. This did not work out. By appointing a Kaizen manager, Kaizen initiatives are prioritized and the chance of success will increase.
From the interviews, it became clear that assurance is difficult to sustain. An example was the use of improvement boards. These boards are initiated in Zwolle and has its aim of employees introducing changes themselves by writing the improvements on the board. Unfortunately the boards are rarely used and when used, the suggested improvements are
caught in the organizational process. By prioritizing Kaizen, a manager who is focusing
only on the implementation can help to make it part of the change culture of TNT post. Otherwise, Kaizen initiatives often do not generate enough priority with managers.
