Continuous improvement, problem solving, and innovation

[wagner]

This is probably my least favorite thing about working here. I feel like this concept actually constricts us to always doing the same things. Those who are very good at what they do are rewarded the exact same as those who constantly fuck things up. I would venture to say we're 10-15 years behind the curve in automation technology. We're just moving from COAX to Ethernet based networking for our machine data collection.

 

As far as the training goes, ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS TRAINING!!!! Another place I think new hires can benefit are the steps to solving a problem. I see it all too often that kids come in and are very anxious to hit the ground running, but skip over the first steps of solving a problem (understanding the cause of the problem, understanding that relieving symptoms of the problem isn't the same as solving the problem, etc.).

 

Root cause is actually one of our supporting points to an objective, so glad to see that show up in this.

 

The IT Lean concept is something I'm going to pitch to my team as an innovation to list as an example.

[Trouble Maker]

This is probably my least favorite thing about working here. I feel like this concept actually constricts us to always doing the same things. Those who are very good at what they do are rewarded the exact same as those who constantly fuck things up. I would venture to say we're 10-15 years behind the curve in automation technology. We're just moving from COAX to Ethernet based networking for our machine data.

 

Which part?

 

I will say, I'm at R&D and have been (at various companies) my entire career. So, I can't say that what works here from a work place structure necessarily translates perfectly to manufacturing. But, I'm honestly not sure how a flat, 'open' structure leads to "this concept actually constricts us to always doing the same things. Those who are very good at what they do are rewarded the exact same as those who constantly fuck things up." I've personally seen it foster innovation, from any level. That last part is the key to me, at any level. "Those who are very good at what they do are rewarded the exact same as those who constantly fuck things up." This just poor management, completely separate from the concept of the work place being a level playing field.

 

I would venture to say we're 10-15 years behind the curve in automation technology. We're just moving from COAX to Ethernet based networking for our machine data.

 

It's a conservative company about everything, and as such, will seem 'behind the times' sometimes. There are also positives to a company that plays things a little conservatively.

From what I understand, lack of automation and focus on (flexible machines) humans, is a purposeful strategy. Maybe that's a line? I don't know, but it is what it is. I personally like the idea that

Bottom line, yes, Honda doesn't do everything like most other companies, especially ones of their size. But, maybe that's kind of the point. Love it or leave it!

[DavidBaustert]

Which part?

 

I will say, I'm at R&D and have been (at various companies) my entire career. So, I can't say that what works here from a work place structure necessarily translates perfectly to manufacturing. But, I'm honestly not sure how a flat, 'open' structure leads to "this concept actually constricts us to always doing the same things. Those who are very good at what they do are rewarded the exact same as those who constantly fuck things up." I've personally seen it foster innovation, from any level. That last part is the key to me, at any level. "Those who are very good at what they do are rewarded the exact same as those who constantly fuck things up." This just poor management, completely separate from the concept of the work place being a level playing field.

 

 

 

It's a conservative company about everything, and as such, will seem 'behind the times' sometimes. There are also positives to a company that plays things a little conservatively.

From what I understand, lack of automation and focus on (flexible machines) humans, is a purposeful strategy. Maybe that's a line? I don't know, but it is what it is. I personally like the idea that

Bottom line, yes, Honda doesn't do everything like most other companies, especially ones of their size. But, maybe that's kind of the point. Love it or leave it!

 

In the manufacturing environment, we've got a lot of associate input to solve problems, which could be very useful, but more often than not the associate will provide some solution which doesn't attack the root cause of the problem, because they put no time into understanding or analyzing the problem. There's no one to filter these ideas, good or bad. I'm not tied directly to production anymore, so luckily it isn't my problem.

[Exodus]

Sent some stuff on over. Hope it helps.

 

One thing I will mention that has been astronomically helpful with continuous improvement is associate empowerment and autonomy. Having the ability to work with your business partners to improve the process without all the bureaucracy and politics is key.

[wagner]

Sent some stuff on over. Hope it helps.

 

One thing I will mention that has been astronomically helpful with continuous improvement is associate empowerment and autonomy. Having the ability to work with your business partners to improve the process without all the bureaucracy and politics is key.

 

Thank you for the info, and the others who provided useful responses here, or via PM.

 

It has been an interesting take as to how other professionals in the business world approach this either on their own, or with their company.

 

The Lean IT stuff will be making the cut as an example in our class.