Comments on: You must lack common sense!

By: Michel Baudin

Michel Baudin — Wed, 07 Sep 2011 15:02:07 +0000

Common sense is sound, practical judgment that is independent of specialized knowledge or training. It’s not my opinion, it’s Webster’s. In other words, it is the best you can use in a situation you have not been prepared for. If you are a software designer accidentally stranded in the Alaskan wilderness, your survival depends on your common sense.
On the other hand, if manufacturing is your profession and you have been at it for 20 years, it is a reasonable expectation that the solutions you come up with should be more than common sense.

By: Justin Tomac

Justin Tomac — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 18:43:26 +0000

I agree, such a loaded term that is based upon ones experiences.
When the words “common sense” are mentioned, thoughts of farmers and ranchers of old come to mind. Each one challenged their own thinking on a daily basis to solve the problems as they came up.

By: Il meglio della blogosfera lean #27 â€” Encob Blog

Il meglio della blogosfera lean #27 â€” Encob Blog — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 07:32:06 +0000

[...] You must lack common sense! dal blog di Jamie Flinchbaugh: Lean vuol dire comune buon senso… dopo che si vedono i risultati… (traduzione automatica) [...]

By: JC Gatlin

JC Gatlin — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 01:07:25 +0000

Sometimes when I hear people refer to lean as “common sense,” it sounds like they’re discounting the discipline and methodology of the concept. They’re resisting change because they don’t realize or understand the depth of waste or how destructive recurring problems are.

By: Jefferson Martin/synfluent

Jefferson Martin/synfluent — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:04:42 +0000

Perhaps we would be better served if the term ‘common sense’ were changed to it’s more positive form as ‘common purpose’.

Great organizational leaders were able to create a common vision amongst their workers which produced predictable outcomes. Common purpose, shared purpose; common sense.

It is a shame that the term has become so loaded, as Mark pointed out above, in our current language.

Jamie, if you enjoy Suzaki, you may enjoy Kenichi Ohmae, as well.

By: Liz Guthridge, The LEAN Communicator

Liz Guthridge, The LEAN Communicator — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 06:53:11 +0000

Provocative discussion you started, Jamie! Very interesting. For what it’s worth, besides trying to avoid the phrase “common sense,” I prefer not to use the phrase “challenge the status quo.” For the latter, I’m trying to talk more about “questioning the assumptions we’re operating under.” When we do that, we start to realize that many of us may be working with very different assumptions that may either be in conflict or outdated. That helps get important details out in the open while not dissing anyone.

By: Mark Graban

Mark Graban — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 19:11:18 +0000

And slapping your own forehead is the key! Too many throw “common sense” around as a way of slapping the foreheads of others!

By: Jon Miller

Jon Miller — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 18:38:17 +0000

Hi Jamie

I agree with your point about respect for people.

The operative term in Suzaki’s quote is “after the fact” meaning that in hindsight, we see that lean was all common sense. I took his meaning to be the same as yours, that it’s all common sense but we don’t see this until we’ve implemented lean and looked back and slapped our forehead.

By: Jamie Flinchbaugh

Jamie Flinchbaugh — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 18:15:43 +0000

I wasn’t expecting so many great comments, I really appreciate the participation.

Brian – common knowledge and common sense are indeed different. It is the differences between information and wisdom, data and judgement.

By: Brian Buck

Brian Buck — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 16:07:35 +0000

I like Suzaki’s quote.

While Lean concepts are simple and common sense, the applications of them are elegant. As Mark Welch said above it is easier to understand than it is to actually do.

I also like to point out the difference between common knowledge (how things are done around here) versus common sense. It is easy to blur the two if not consciously separated.