<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: To Standardize, or to Not?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://jamieflinchbaugh.com/2009/11/to-standardize-or-to-not/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://jamieflinchbaugh.com/2009/11/to-standardize-or-to-not/</link>
	<description>on lean culture, transformational leadership, and entrepreneurial   excellence</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 00:37:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jamie Flinchbaugh</title>
		<link>http://jamieflinchbaugh.com/2009/11/to-standardize-or-to-not/comment-page-1/#comment-160</link>
		<dc:creator>Jamie Flinchbaugh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 03:07:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jamieflinchbaugh.com/2009/11/to-standardize-or-to-not/#comment-160</guid>
		<description>Thanks George and Mark. 

Standardizing being permanent obviously defeats the whole purpose of continuous improvement. One of the biggest challenges people put in the way of this is making the PROCESS of making CHANGES too difficult. Then people don&#039;t want to improve because it creates too much work for them. Tragic. Keep it simple.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks George and Mark. </p>
<p>Standardizing being permanent obviously defeats the whole purpose of continuous improvement. One of the biggest challenges people put in the way of this is making the PROCESS of making CHANGES too difficult. Then people don&#8217;t want to improve because it creates too much work for them. Tragic. Keep it simple.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Graban</title>
		<link>http://jamieflinchbaugh.com/2009/11/to-standardize-or-to-not/comment-page-1/#comment-157</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Graban</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:14:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jamieflinchbaugh.com/2009/11/to-standardize-or-to-not/#comment-157</guid>
		<description>Great points, Jamie. I talked to somebody from a hospital the other day who said they had unfortunately erred in their early Lean efforts in giving the impression that standardized meant permanent. Kaizen has to be a part of the process, like you say.

I think there&#039;s also a fundamental question of how much you standardize one particular task, job, or function in a single site before you go spreading that method (with or without modification).

Even Toyota teaches that standardization is a spectrum -- the right point isn&#039;t always completely the same (identical work). There might be some areas in which variation is acceptable and doesn&#039;t impact the customer. Too many people err on the side of standardization meaning &quot;everyone do everything exactly the same way&quot; - especially when done in a top-down way, this doesn&#039;t get much buy in.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great points, Jamie. I talked to somebody from a hospital the other day who said they had unfortunately erred in their early Lean efforts in giving the impression that standardized meant permanent. Kaizen has to be a part of the process, like you say.</p>
<p>I think there&#8217;s also a fundamental question of how much you standardize one particular task, job, or function in a single site before you go spreading that method (with or without modification).</p>
<p>Even Toyota teaches that standardization is a spectrum &#8212; the right point isn&#8217;t always completely the same (identical work). There might be some areas in which variation is acceptable and doesn&#8217;t impact the customer. Too many people err on the side of standardization meaning &#8220;everyone do everything exactly the same way&#8221; &#8211; especially when done in a top-down way, this doesn&#8217;t get much buy in.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: George Dinwiddie</title>
		<link>http://jamieflinchbaugh.com/2009/11/to-standardize-or-to-not/comment-page-1/#comment-156</link>
		<dc:creator>George Dinwiddie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 12:15:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jamieflinchbaugh.com/2009/11/to-standardize-or-to-not/#comment-156</guid>
		<description>I love your advice to ensure that standardization doesn&#039;t inhibit innovation.  That&#039;s so important, and seems not on the radar of many of the standardization projects I&#039;ve seen.  There&#039;s always such a rush to get standards into place.  In fact, they often want to do so before they&#039;ve even done the experimentation--only the speculation about how things should be done.  I wrote about this problem in http://blog.gdinwiddie.com/2007/01/16/make-it-work-before-you-make-it-standard/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I love your advice to ensure that standardization doesn&#8217;t inhibit innovation.  That&#8217;s so important, and seems not on the radar of many of the standardization projects I&#8217;ve seen.  There&#8217;s always such a rush to get standards into place.  In fact, they often want to do so before they&#8217;ve even done the experimentation&#8211;only the speculation about how things should be done.  I wrote about this problem in <a href="http://blog.gdinwiddie.com/2007/01/16/make-it-work-before-you-make-it-standard/" rel="nofollow">http://blog.gdinwiddie.com/2007/01/16/make-it-work-before-you-make-it-standard/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

