The term “Lean” is not part of the everyday language in any of the organizations under study in this thesis. Nevertheless, during the analysis, we found that both organizations have implemented what can be characterized as Lean-initiatives in the engineering phase. However, one can argue if everything they categorize as “Lean” actually is part of the theory. This is due to the fact that Lean can be interpreted differently by different people. In this chapter we will present our key findings regarding efficiency, standardization, and waste reduction, as illustrated in the figure below, and compare these to the theory we have presented regarding LPD.
103 Figure 12 Summary key findings LPD
5.1.1 Efficiency
As illustrated in figure 12, the main findings regarding efficiency are:
Continuous improvement of processes and tools
Developing software
Waste reduction
Standardization
These findings are discussed in relation to the theory presented in chapter 2, in the following section.
Due to the recession period in the industries, the focus on efficiency has increased considerably in both organizations. As a means to ensure an efficient project execution they continually improve products, processes, procedures and tools. Haque and James-Moore (2004) describe continuous improvement as a key activity regarding LPD.
Organization 2 has a focus on finding better solutions to work tasks by e.g. developing software or finding other less advanced solutions in order to better support that task. We later found that
104 many of these solutions were shelved due to lack of time to complete them. However, the
solutions that were implemented in the engineering phase were described as very beneficial in relation to efficiency. We argue that this can be related to the people principle, as well as the tool and technology principle, presented by Liker and Morgan (2006). Liker and Morgan (2006) presents six people principles, and two of them are as follows: (9) build in learning and continuous improvement, and (19) build a culture to support excellence and relentless improvement. Organization 2 support employees to use their knowledge in order to improve existing solutions through the continuous improvement initiative. We therefore argue that they have built a culture for excellence by supporting learning and continuous, relentless
improvement. As the organization also developed software to support the engineering process, we argue that this can relate to Liker and Morgan’s (2006) principle 11: adapt technology to fit your people and process.
Both companies also focus on standardization and waste reduction in order to become more efficient. These measures are both related to the approaches presented by Haque and James-Moore (2004) and Liker and Morgan (2006). Both will be explained in detail below.
Based on the preceding discussion, we conclude that all our findings regarding efficiency are supported by the theory.
5.1.2 Standardization
As illustrated in figure 12, the main findings regarding standardization are:
Processes
Products
Documents
IT-systems
These findings are discussed in relation to the theory presented in chapter 2, in the following section.
Due to the lack of a visual flow in the engineering process, standardization is difficult. Even so, as organizations grow and/or become global, their need for standardization increases. The reason for this is that in order to ensure that all projects have the same opportunity to be equally efficient in the engineering phase, all engineers within a company should work in more or less the same way. Both organizations in this case study focus on standardizing processes. Organization 1
105 asserted that they only use the Lean mindset while making their processes zero defect capable, whereas organization 2 use their continuous improvement initiative with methods like root cause analysis and value flow analysis. The standardization methods used in organization 2, are
therefore directly related to Liker and Morgan’s (2006) principle 13, which states: use powerful tools for standardization and organizational learning. Further, as both organizations focus on standardization of processes in general, in order to make the processes more predictable, one can argue that they both relate to Liker and Morgan’s (2006) principle three and four as well: (3) create a levelled product development process flow, and (4) utilize rigorous standardization to reduce variation, and create flexibility and predictable outcomes.
In addition to processes, both organizations also standardize products, documents, and IT-systems. The theory does not specifically mention standardization of products, documents and IT-systems. Nevertheless, we do argue that standardization of all three can be related to principle four, as it will reduce variation, and hence create more predictable outcomes in the engineering process.
Based on the preceding discussion, we conclude that all our findings regarding standardization are supported by the theory.
5.1.3 Waste reduction
As illustrated in figure 12, the main findings regarding waste reduction are:
Continuous improvement
Waste prevention: The pull-system
These findings are discussed in relation to the theory presented in chapter 2, in the following section.
The theory is very vague in terms of waste reduction. Haque and James-Moore (2004) state that to eliminate waste is one of the key activities that constitute a LPD system. However, they do not provide any specific examples of how to eliminate waste. On the other hand, one of the principles presented by Liker and Morgan (2006) states: establish a customer-defined value to separate value added from waste. However, we do not know whether or not any of the organizations build their processes on the direct basis of customer-defined value. Nevertheless, both organizations continuously try to root out waste and standardize their processes in order to make them as efficient as possible, and as cost-effective as possible. We argue that eliminating waste and
106 standardizing processes in order to be able to deliver products as fast as possible is in line with Haque and James-Moore’s (2004) statement.
As both organizations produce and deliver products on customer order, they both let the customer pull. As discussed in the analysis, the continuous improvement initiative solves problems which can be a source of waste. The pull-system prevents using resources and time on unnecessary activities that do not bring value to the customer, and hence not to the organization. To let the customer pull is also described as one of the key activities that constitute a LPD system, by Haque and James-Moore (2004).
Even though the theory regarding waste reduction is very vague, we conclude that all our findings regarding waste reduction are supported by the theory.