What is the level of lean maturity of companies?

For many companies that want to introduce lean management in their organization, the initiatives taken fall asleep again after some time - with the result that high quality fluctuations occur again and waste increases again. One reason for this is that companies often introduce lean methods and tools to create efficient processes before the necessary culture exists in their organization. The improvement processes are correspondingly unstable.

Against this background, the consulting firm Kudernatsch Consulting & Solutions in Strasslach near Munich investigated the extent to which a lean leadership culture already exists in companies that have already started and/or implemented lean management projects and how high the lean maturity level of their organization is. The maturity of the lean culture was assessed in relation to the three levels:

• "Vision, strategy, goals, customer focus "
• "Processes and Continuous Improvement"
• "Leadership and Problem Solving"

In relation to these levels of action, the companies were asked to make a self-assessment on the basis of 15 questions using a 5-point scale as to the extent to which there are still small, larger or (success-) critical gaps in their organisation compared to the ideal state they are striving for. In addition, they were asked to justify their assessment in a comment field.

732 executives and (lean) project managers from Germany, Austria and Switzerland took part in the survey across all industries. Of these, just under 40 percent assessed a company or company unit with 200 to 999 employees, 20 percent with 1000 to 4999 employees and 7 percent with more than 5000 employees. Most of the companies participating in the study were already quite "leaner experienced ". 30 percent of them have been active in lean for 2 to 4 years; 32 percent even for 5 to 9 years.

Study results

When it comes to establishing a lean culture in their organization, most companies have more or less major problems at all three levels of action. However, these are least severe at the level of "vision, strategy, goals, customer focus". For example, when it comes to developing a clear vision, the companies generally note only minor deviations between the target and the actual situation. The gaps only become serious and large when it comes to the consistent pursuit of a long-term strategy and the consistent alignment of goals. One of the reasons for this is that in day-to-day operational activities, the focus is usually on short-term goals and the long-term ones are forgotten. Further causes are: There is no consistent coordination of goals and customer orientation is insufficiently anchored in the organization. The companies most frequently state a "critical gap" in the goals that need to be coordinated company-wide, top-down and cross-functionally.

However, companies have greater problems at the level of "processes and continuous improvement" - especially when it comes to value stream-oriented process design, the application of the PDCA cycle and the implementation of shop floor management. Many companies are still at the beginning with flow-oriented process design. The PDCA cycle as a basis for structured problem solving and continuous improvement is also hardly established yet. Some companies have already started with shop floor management, but essential, associated problem solving methods (e.g. A3 report, deviation analyses) are still rarely used. Defined standards are mostly in place, but there is still a lack of understanding that these are not control instruments, but create the basis for continuous improvement.

On the level of "leadership and problem solving", many companies also admit to "serious" and "large" target-performance deviations. For example, most companies do not yet have a clearly defined understanding of leadership and uniform leadership behavior. In addition, the managers do not live the company values - such as permanent self-reflection and willingness to change. A consistent and systematic on-site presence of the managers is usually not given. In addition, managers do not see themselves as coaches who support their employees in developing their problem-solving skills. Only rarely do managers consistently solve problems on the basis of the PDCA cycle and other problem-solving methods (e.g. A3 report). One reason for these deficits is: In the selection of (junior) managers, the question of the extent to which the candidates have the necessary leadership understanding and behavior for the development and expansion of a lean culture still plays a very minor role in everyday business.

Based on the self-assessment of the companies, the study also determined their lean maturity level. Five maturity levels were distinguished:

• Maturity level 1: The company is at the beginning of the Lean journey.
• Maturity level 2: There are still major gaps in the anchoring of a CIP and lean culture.
• Maturity level 3: There are still some serious gaps on the way to a CIP and Lean culture.
• Maturity level 4: The organization is well on its way to a CIP and lean culture.
• Maturity level 5: The company can be described as best practice.

The classification showed that around 38 percent of the companies are still largely at the beginning of their development (maturity level 1 or 2) when it comes to establishing a lean culture. Around 57 percent have already come a considerable distance in terms of the desired cultural change (maturity level 3 or 4). And only five percent have already reached the development goal, maturity level 5, and can be considered best practices in building and establishing a lean culture in companies. Interested companies can request more information about the design and results of the Lean Management and Leadership Study free of charge from the management consultancy Kudernatsch Consulting & Solutions, Strasslach near Munich. www.kudernatsch.com