Okay, perhaps we cannot call it common sense, which was the title of this blog series until now. I was in another LinkedIn forum started by Professor Peter Hines. His question was, "Something's puzzling me, why are we not doing better with implementing Lean when there seems to be so much common sense talked about in the Lean Business System Linked Group?" The forum in general was pretty good (and still is at the time of this post). However, one response has made me think, and it was from Mr. James E. Mitchell. I suggest you find his entire response in the above linked forum. Let us just say, I thought there was a large gap between our views, however after thinking some more, it is a much smaller gap than I thought.
Mr. Mitchell stated he is on a personal mission to “eradicate the term common sense”. I took exception to that right away. However what he wrote made sense (pun was not intended here). He went on to suggest common sense was “mostly learned by experience”. Yes, I agree with that. He went on to also suggest “it can be intellectually arrived at”. Yes, I agree with that too. And then he went on to suggest most of what we call common sense “is still foreign to people”. Yes, I agree with that even more. So now Mr. Mitchell suggests if we do not teach what common sense is so that it becomes “common knowledge” throughout an organization, we will always keep saying is it not common sense. And on the flip side if common sense was really common sense, there would not be a point to the forum, or in my case to my old blog title. (Title was, "Can We Call It Common Sense?".)
Can we call it common sense? After contemplating what the forum response was getting at I would have to say no and agree to “eradicate” the term. However, does 2+2=4? Why? Would not someone say this is common sense? Why? Just because we were taught this in school? Why? Did we not just take this on blind faith because our teachers said so? Why?
Okay, many questions. Here is my answer. No, it needs to be common knowledge. Leadership is at fault here as Mr. Mitchell later on suggested. Nobody wants to fail. Nobody wants to back the “flavor of the month” because should it fail, that would be a sign of personal failure. Hey, does 2+2=4? Why? Does Lean Manufacturing work? Why? Does Six Sigma work? Why? Does it take a leap of blind faith to say “2+2 does indeed equal 4”, or does it take the backing of someone you respect? I say this is now common knowledge. What is preventing Leadership from accepting "common knowledge" is the failure of Lean and any other quality system practitioner to teach Leadership.
As Mr. Mitchell pointed out (and I will embellish a little here), it also takes leadership to Gemba so they can see, touch, breath, and listen to the reality, and to decide what the “common knowledge” needs to be. For once they do, they should, with the continued help of practitioners, continually improve.
After I wrote this today I kept thinking. Yes leadership needs to Gemba, but why? Why does that work? Then I came to a conclusion based on my knowledge. Today's leadership still operates from the top down. They read the numbers and set the goal in a statistically controlled process, where (as Deming would put it) an able and willing body puts all their effort in working to standardized work to maintain that statistically controlled process. Follow orders, keep you nose clean, and we will continue to make parts, and by the way, meet the new goal that is near the bottom of that statistically controlled process. This is top down management where there will never be success. So perhaps common knowledge is still above the equal of leadership and will never be reached. Once leadership understands the bottom up approach, perhaps common knowledge will come forth.
8/29/2011
My original writing (above) did not mention Mr. Mitchell because I wanted his approval to be sure I did not over extend his point, or leave anything out. With his permission I have included his name and quotes from his original post. In fairness and with support of his position, I will post a portion of his E-mail reply to me.
Your question "why does 2 + 2 = 4?" and isn't the answer common sense?, I would argue that the answer supports my premise. 2 + 2 = 4 because it can be proved, and that makes it common knowledge, but only if it is taught. Even a kid who can count to four does not know that adding two to two more will create four. Even though "everyone knows the answer", it is not common sense. Herein lies the problem with most uses of the term "common sense". The person who inveighs the term usually means that it is such common knowledge that anyone with any sense will already know it - a demonstrably false statement; one you can easily come up with examples of. One other problem I have with the term is how often it is use as a thinly disguised way of calling someone stupid, or maybe not all that bright, very often because of a lack of learning or inability to infer an answer from the existing evidence.
I hope you find this link interesting as well: Changing Education Paradigms
(Common Knowledge - Part 1) (Common Knowledge - Part 2)
No comments:
Post a Comment