Standard Work versus Initiative and Creativity

With the ever growing application of lean concepts to industrial work places, the creation of structured work stations and application of standard work to those work stations is becoming more common. This transformation might lead one to ask the questions:

• Why is this change needed?
• Is this change healthy for our work places?

It is impossible to attach the need for this change to a single cause, but it is possible to identify several reasons that have contributed to the need for change.
Maybe one way to answer the first question is to reflect on the industrial workplace some twenty or twenty-five years ago and ask “Was this change needed then?” and “If not, why not?”

If I were to think about how work was done some twenty or twenty-five years ago, I have a picture in my mind of a highly skilled and largely self-motivated worker. During this time, I worked in areas that employed strongly unionized “building trade” workers and both “weak union” and non-union workers. In my memory, I can see skilled and self-motivated workers in all of those situations.
The skill level was the result of both strong apprenticeship programs within unions and strong training programs in non-union environments. The strong work ethic was the result of individual pride in being members of a highly skilled craft and unwillingness to allow members of their craft to be viewed as unproductive or ineffective.

If asked, “Would I create standard work stations or standardized work for the kind of individual described above?”, I would have to answer “No”. The change would be likely to make the individual less effective because it would reduce his personal initiative and creativity. The added structure and simplification is of value only when dealing with less skilled and somewhat unmotivated individuals.

If the situation described above provides a realistic explanation of why structured work is needed and why it is needed on an increasing basis, then one must ask what has changed between twenty years in the past and now. One change has been the rapid expansion of non-union contractors who utilize individuals who have not been through any form or apprenticeship program. A second part of that change has been the fact that many of these organizations feel little or no accountability for providing training or ensuring that the individuals they employ have had adequate training.

I have observed instances where individuals have worked as a pipefitter one week and a machinist foreman the next. When this is done, the employer is telling the employee that craft skills and craft pride are unimportant. When craft skills and pride are unimportant, it is unlikely you will find individuals with the ability to be either self-motivated or creative. They can only work within a highly limited structure. Deviation is likely to result in work being done in an incorrect or incomplete manner. That is by definition the very root of standard work and work specification structure emanating from many lean initiatives.

Going back in history, studies found that assembly lines created unfulfilling situations that turned individuals into robots. This lack of fulfillment and sense of lost control ultimately produced an estranged workforce. In response to the negative impacts of this estrangement, many companies made changes that empowered individuals and made their roles more fulfilling. Employee attitude was found to be critical to effectiveness, efficiency and overall performance.

It seems that we may be unlearning and undoing some of the things that were hard learned and hard won in the past. Of course, that is what keeps the consultants employed.

This article introduces the following concepts:

• Standard work and structured work stations
• Causes for the need for these programs
• The risk of undoing what was learned in the past

If readers would like to comment on these issues or any related topics, please do so.