Supply Chain View

On the Scottish Executive website I have just come across a useful report examining the implementation of Lean in the public sector.

Politicians of all colours would love the administration of public services to be more efficient. Cost reductions can pay for pet projects, enhanced services or tax cuts. In the UK, the public has become very cynical about the state’s ability to realise efficiency gains that pre-election promises to cut waste. But governments in power have a strong incentive to pursue efficiency goals.

The dismal track record of government in this area – and there is no better illustration than the “Economy Drive” episode of Yes Minister – has led politicians and civil servants to look for private sector models for improvement. With the expansion of Lean into services, it was only a matter of time before Lean programmes were introduced into the public sector.

Inside the report

The report, prepared by Dr Zoe Radnor and colleagues from Warwick Business School, was published in 2006 and focuses on operations in Scotland. At 145 pages it isn’t lunchtime reading, but the exec summary is concise and there are lots of interesting nuggets to be found by flicking through it.

There is a comprehensive literature review, covering Lean in general and a good number of detailed papers on Lean in services and the public sector. There is also a selection of case studies and results of interviews with “public sector organisations who believed they were implementing aspects of Lean” (my emphasis).

What emerges is a picture of piecemeal implementations and tentative steps, rather than wholehearted and decisive transformations. Many organisations have an à-la-carte approach to the Lean toolset. The report suggests this may be because the sector has “yet to understand the value, relevance or purpose of the tools” – something that chimes with colleagues experiences in the sector.

Blitz or depth?

The report also contrasts full, deep implementations of Lean with those organisations who have taken the path of Rapid Improvement Events (RIEs) or Kaizen Blitzes. The latter were generally more widely used and liked, reasons given including the RIE’s perceived usefulness in overcoming “slow responses by staff to change initiatives”. Tellingly, managers liked the RIE approach because it “did not challenge existing management control styles to the same extent as Full Implementation”. I bet.

How successful were the implementations? The report is positive, but does point out that “most sites had not achieved all the objectives they had hoped.” This, I would say, is in common with the private sector experience, and is most likely caused by poor implementation. Indeed, among the issues highlighted is a general weakness in the link between organisational strategy and the improvement programme, which suggests “skin-deep” implementations.

Unsurprisingly, Lean was most successful in “organisations with high volume, repeatable tasks that allow greater standardisation and integration.” There was a general concern – not properly resolved – that Lean in service operations could lead to over-standardisation or “McDonaldisation” of the service offering.

Links

Warwick Business School: http://www.wbs.ac.uk/
The report in full: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/06/13162106/0