© 2011 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
Chapter 8
Route to Lean
Let us remind ourselves of the journey taken by Cogent
Power as they traveled through their Lean transformation.
Their journey started with Marcel announcing his vision
to the senior managers. At that time it was understood
that Cogent Power was in poor financial health, making
huge losses, and a rapid turnaround was needed.
Although Marcel announced his intentions to the
management team in December 2003, the transformation
program was launched officially in January 2004 with
the aim of stemming the financial losses and making
the company more productive. Progress was reviewed
formally in July 2005 and, despite making considerable
advances, some concerns arose regarding the pace and
sustainability of change. As a result, the road map of the
journey changed slightly and more emphasis was put on
what we now recognize as the “below the waterline” ele-
ments of a sustainable Lean Iceberg.
In this chapter we explore the road maps in more
detail and illustrate the route they took by using circles
and numbers to signify the stages. The size of each circle
represents the emphasis that was placed, in terms of
effort, on each of the elements.
216 ◾  Staying Lean: Thriving, Not Just Surviving
© 2011 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
The first phase of the transformation (see Figure8.1)
took approximately 18 months and resulted in establish-
ing an awareness of Lean within the organization. The
training and communication programs that were started
in this phase involved many people, although they did
not engage everyone totally in the transformation. There
were still many skeptics and those who had seen it all
The emphasis at this stage was on getting the right
management team together and applying Lean tools
and techniques to improve productivity. At this stage, it
mainly focused on order fulfillment. This is illustrated by
a fishbone diagram (Figure8.2).
Although there was considerable improvement in
productivity and also sound progress in the financial
turnaround, the senior managers were concerned about
both the pace and the scope of change; some sites and
areas were seemingly progressing better than others. As
Figure 8.1 Roadmap 1 (2003–2005) of the Lean Iceberg Model.
Route to Lean ◾  217
© 2011 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
a result, a Lean assessment was conducted and a number
of issues were identified (Table8.1).
There were also some other areas of concern:
Some people were still identified as “roadblocks” to
progress, and a formal process of confronting these
people was needed.
Organizational structures were still traditionally set
by function and needed to be better aligned with
value streams.
Establishing what “Best Practicelooks like for the
business sector and setting new and improved stan-
dards for the Cogent Way would help visualize the
goal for the operating units.
This is not unusual at this stage and it is often where
many Lean implementations stagger or stall.
We describe the situation that we saw here as a nar-
rowing of the iceberg beneath the waterline. It happens
when the emphasis has been placed on the activities
above the waterline: the processes, technology, tools,
Technology, tools,
and techniques
Strategy and
Leadership Behavior and
5s, TPM and SMED
Pull systems
ICT e.g. Cambans
Primarily cost reduction:
e.g., order fulfillment
Primarily value creation:
e.g., order creation
Strategy formation
and deployment CSFs
Style e.g.,
Situational level 5
Lean leaders
Lean coach
PDPs linked to
7 Lean skills
Strategy alignment KPIs
Business cockpits
Reward structure
Lean business
Figure 8.2 Fishbone analysis of roadmap 1.

Get Staying Lean, 2nd Edition now with the O’Reilly learning platform.

O’Reilly members experience books, live events, courses curated by job role, and more from O’Reilly and nearly 200 top publishers.