Jean-Philippe Douet - Les standards de travail Lean pour développer l'autonomie et l'apprentissage

[00:00:06] Here we go. It works.
[00:00:12] Hello everyone. Thank you very much for being here.
[00:00:18] So today we're going to talk about work standards in the sense of Lean management. How they help develop learning and autonomy, but above all, they also help reduce psychosocial risks. And you'll see that I have a background where I mix a bit of everything, which allows me to take this orientation towards reducing psychosocial risks. Very quickly, it's been a number of years since I got into Lean.
[00:00:53] Uh, I even got a Black Belt at one time, and then I unlearned everything I had learned with the Black Belt to relearn Lean, but in the sense of the Toyota Production System. I became interested in neurosciences about 8 years ago, which today allows me to have a certain level of knowledge. And uh, I am what we call a decision-making practitioner coach. Uh these are training courses where we work on all aspects of neuroscience and we try to understand the mechanisms of adaptation to our environments. Everything related to change management, for example. And if you're interested, I have a blog, lineuro.com, where you'll find plenty of articles on the subject. One day, I asked myself the question when I woke up, uh, does my work as a Lean and Agile coach allow me to avoid psychosocial risks? Beyond helping teams perform, do I also help them develop their well-being at work? And in fact, I started mixing, as I said in the introduction, both Lean, psychosocial risks, and neuroscience, these three domains that we are not used to seeing together. Even more so Lean and RPS, because sometimes we say that Lean generates psychosocial risks. But there are two Lean approaches: there's the Lean that seeks to fire people, and then there's the Lean that seeks to develop people.
[00:02:41] What Toyota tells us, notably in 1977, is that they defined the TPS as a system that respects people by allowing them to get involved daily in their tasks and in the improvement of their work and their workshops. And so that's what we call the learning system at Toyota. I won't go into more detail and further into Toyota. Uh, just quickly, what we also say is that performance is safety, quality, deadline, cost in that order, according to the morale of the teams. I will detail what we are looking for is to have more, to increase the level of safety, whether it's physical, psychological, environmental, and that applies to both customers and employees. We also seek to develop quality. Sorry. Often, we hear from companies, from managers, and I hear a lot of them, who tell me, I want speed, speed, speed, speed. If you don't have quality at the beginning, you don't have speed.
[00:04:01] So quality is really the differentiating system.
[00:04:06] And that allows, consequently, to then lower lead times. We're going to work on, well, precisely eliminating waste in processes, which will allow us to reduce lead times. And it's the consequence of these three, it's the reduction of costs.
[00:04:22] In our companies, we do the opposite. We say we're going to cut costs, and figure it out, and figure out how to lower them. Toyota's model is reversed, and it's often said that Tai is nicknamed the man who thinks backwards. And there you go, we think completely backwards.
[00:04:47] On psychosocial risks, before I go into a little more detail, I experienced a burnout 2 years ago. Uh, and so I told myself, what can I learn from my burnout and what can I transmit following my burnout? If I can prevent at least one person from experiencing burnout, I think I will have succeeded in my professional career. Before talking about RPS, I will recall the WHO definition. Health is a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being.
[00:05:31] It's the sum of the three.
[00:05:35] And that's super important because in companies, we tend to separate physical safety from mental health. However, the two are intimately linked.
[00:05:47] Perhaps some of you know the Golak report, which was published in 2011 and was commissioned at the time by the Ministry of Labor. What's good in France and Europe is that we produce reports, reports, the 2011 report followed a 2008 report which itself followed a report from a few years earlier. But having read this 200-page report, it's probably one of the first reports where everything is super finely detailed and that we can appropriate to work on the reduction of uh psychosocial risks. Ah, what are RPS? They are risks to mental, physical, and social health. We make the connection with the WHO definition.
[00:06:40] So, don't try to read all of that, it's the detail of what's in the Golak report. So you have the six factors, 22 sub-factors and 42 immediate determinants, that's where there are the little pluses, there's an example on the intensity of work. However, what I'm going to ask you to keep in mind is what we call impeded quality. Because we're going to talk about it with the standards. I'll come back to it at the end to show you how standards have an impact on the reduction of certain psychosocial risks that are in this table.
[00:07:16] So, we talk a lot about psychosocial risks, but is there a solution? Yes. Uh, notably, there's Yves Clo and Michel Golac, so Golac was the rapporteur, uh, who works on a lot of topics around psychosocial risks. And in fact, what they tell us is that health is linked to the power to act.
[00:07:37] If you don't allow your employees to act on the content and how they work, it will be very difficult to reduce them. And what's important is also to rediscover the pleasure of doing well. When, for example, I discovered woodworking during the Covid periods, when I messed up a piece, it annoyed me. I had the possibility to rework my piece, to redo it, it's a waste in line to redo it, but never mind, I was relearning the gesture to arrive at obtaining the piece that I wanted to obtain. And there's a real satisfaction behind it. It's normal because it's the it triggers the reward circuit, which we call dopamine, and the fact of being able to do your job well is something super important for all of us. Quickly on neurosciences, what we're trying to understand is this. It's what you all have at the top of your body, what we call the brain. Uh, a few years ago we talked about the man-machine interface, well, our brain is the man-environment interface. It's the system that allows us to adapt daily to our different environments, sorry. Uh, just a little anecdote, uh, the weight of the brain is 1.4 on average, it's a little bit lower for women, but above all, do not draw the conclusion that women are less intelligent than men. And uh, Albert Einstein, his brain weighed only 1.250 kg and he was considered the most intelligent man of the 20th century. We also look, when we work on neurosciences, we also look at evolution. And in fact, our brain took 7, well, evolution allowed the brain to evolve up to 500 cm3 in 7 to 8 million years. And then we had a very rapid growth of 2 million years to reach 1350 cm3 which is our current volume, knowing that we went up to 1750 cm3. But at 1750 1750 cm3, there was actually a problem, that the brain no longer passed through women's pelvises, and so evolution selected brains that had skulls, sorry, selected babies with skulls, with a soft skull in fact, that allows it to deform. And which then generated the two-stage evolution of the brain, one part during gestation and one part, the entire learning part. After after birth, it's the same for chimpanzees.
[00:10:38] We are just, for the record, uh, we don't descend from apes, apes, chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans are cousins of evolution. We all descend from the same ancestor around 7 to 8 million years ago in evolution.
[00:11:02] That's everything I've acquired in terms of skills in neurosciences, uh, and I've highlighted the adaptation strategy part in blue because, in fact, we realize when we dig deeper, that all our cerebral skills are really linked to our adaptation strategies.
[00:11:19] So, the origin of standards.
[00:11:24] Uh, for my part, I have trouble accepting that someone comes and tells me, "Here, set up standards" if I haven't understood where it came from. Because most of the time, we lose the meaning.
[00:11:36] So in fact, where do standards come from? It started in 1919 with Charles Allen's book, which explained that to train, you had to show, explain, execute, and correct.
[00:11:53] And all those who applied this book got quite exceptional results in terms of learning.
[00:12:03] During, in 1940, just after the fall of France against Germany, we had the United States create what is called Training Within Industry, which is now known as TWI. And uh, in fact, that's what enabled the United States to support the war effort. What was the war effort? Well, all American soldiers were on the front line, and only women, teenagers, and men who couldn't go to war remained. We mainly know the image of Rosie the Riveter, which dates back to 1943, but she became more known from the 70s-80s for feminist movements. But she really really existed. And in fact, TWI allowed more than 2 million supervisors to be trained in 16,000 different factories. The TWI is based on three books, you'll have a bit of trouble finding them today because they date back to the 40s. Uh, we have job instruction which allows training on work standards, job relation, which is a culture of how we create a culture of change in companies, and the job method, which is how we actually improve the whole system. And you have in the middle here the wheel, the five competencies of a supervisor, and I admit that reading that, I tell myself it would be great if our managers of today had these five competencies, we would probably do a little better in certain, in certain companies.
[00:13:52] Uh, you can find, I've put the QR code for you, you can find on the internet a promotional video from 1944. Uh, you can scan it, it's 13 minutes long so you can watch it after the after the conference. But you will really see the the the change in posture of the team leader uh between this part where the first part where in fact the team leader presents the workstation, he quickly explains the job to be done. He tells him to read the small guide and then figure it out yourself. Anyone who hasn't experienced that today, raise your hand.
[00:14:36] We've all experienced that in business.
[00:14:39] And in fact, uh, the job instruction allows, with the work standards, in fact, it will really bring the person to understand their job. And we see there that the hand of the worker who is learning, it is placed on the hand of the instructor. In fact, you will see it in the film, he will teach him to feel the vibrations to know where to stop when he is drilling the metal piece. When we learn when we learn something, and I make a connection with neurosciences. We have a mechanism uh that was identified in 1946, called the Hebbian system. And in fact, each neuron that activates together connects together. What does that mean? It means that all the sensations you feel while you are learning something, trigger synaptic connections and these synapses will associate all together. And in fact, it's a faculty that allows you to then retrieve information much more quickly. Why sometimes in the street, you walk on a sidewalk, there's a scent and suddenly it makes you think of a lot of things you've experienced, maybe a person you know who has that scent, well, it's exactly that mechanism that's at work. And at Toyota, when they talk about on-the-job training, that's exactly it: I learn my trade on the machine tool, for example. which will be my everyday work tool. So I'm going to learn all the vibrations, I'm going to learn everything that allows me to know if my machine tool is working correctly or not.
[00:16:35] So, are we just trying to show or are we trying to instruct? In fact, that's the question. After, I chose, it's to instruct. Uh, that would be the ideal to have in companies.
[00:16:53] So, we're going to focus a little bit on the job instruction, which we also call GI.
[00:17:01] And in fact, we're going to see that they do what we call, for IT specialists, we all did that when we were doing Gantt charts, we break down all the work into elementary tasks and so on. So they do this task breakdown.
[00:17:18] But what's important are the key points. What are, in fact, uh, the elements that allow me to know if what I'm doing is OK or KO? Uh, what are uh, the tricks and tips that allow me to really succeed in my work? I often see uh procedures where, in fact, we have a list of instructions, for those who have already experienced that, and in fact, you get to the end of your list of instructions, but you don't know if you succeeded or not in what had to be done. And we often see it among the ops, sorry, uh, who find themselves rolling out, without any context, rolling out instruction sheets and then, "Oh, I'm done." And in fact, it doesn't work. So the the the work standard will allow all that.
[00:18:15] So to make a connection again with Toyota, uh, how did what we call the TWI, which was invented in the United States, end up in Japan? We need to put ourselves back in the context that, uh, in the 1950s, Japan was emerging from two nuclear bombs and bombings, massive bombings that destroyed all infrastructure, and everything had to be rethought. So Japanese industrialists brought in Americans, went to see in the United States, and uh, at the time, the productivity of an American was 10 to one for a Japanese. So they said, how are we going to catch up with this delay? Tai, who is one of the, well, considered as the father of the Toyota Production System, was himself TWI certified, and so they brought the Job Instruction, Method, and Relation into Toyota in '51, '52, '53. To test them, and in fact, it was really Izato, I think he's still alive, uh, who was mandated by Toyota to create the training courses uh for scaling up on on work standards. And that's how we, when we learn Lean and the Toyota Production System, we arrive at the notion of standard at Toyota. And they have a mantra, Monozukuri or Hitozukuri, which can be translated as making people before making objects. They also say it another way: the employees who work at Toyota, we first seek to develop people's skills before they build cars. Uh, and that, we see it well, you will see it in the standards that I will show you, that if we don't have the capacity uh to do our work correctly, well, it will be difficult to produce, in addition to cars, uh, of good quality. So in practice. production system that we arrive at the notion of standard at Toyota. And they have a mantra Monozukuri, Hitozukuri which can be translated as making people before making objects. They also say it another way, it's the employees who work at Toyota, we first seek to develop people's skills before they build cars. Uh, and that, we see it well, you'll see it in the standards that I'm going to show you, that if we don't have the capacity to do our job correctly, then it will be difficult to produce, in addition, good quality cars. So in practice, the idea is not to make standards everywhere in your company. Uh, it's not ISO 9001 where, before the 2000s, we put it a bit everywhere, having done it myself, so I am guilty. Uh, what I propose to you is that in fact, when you have a performance gap, whatever the subject, quality, deadline, etc., a performance gap will trigger a problem resolution for you. PDCA or other, in Lean, we often talk about PDCA or A3, but a problem resolution that will ultimately improve an existing standard, that's the case where we already have an existing standard. If we don't have a standard, well, we'll write one. And ultimately, what will this standard do? It will stabilize performance, meaning we will reduce the variabilities we have in performance. An important point that we too often forget in businesses when we do problem solving, is the act.
[00:21:37] The act is learning, and learning is the standard that has been updated or created. That's how you become a learning organization.
[00:21:50] So what is a standard? A standard is the best practice of a team or a person at a given moment. What's important is the given moment.
[00:22:04] Uh, at Toyota, there's a little story about Tachion who used to check the latest versions, the updates of the standards. And if the standard wasn't updated, he considered that there was no standard anymore, and they had to start over because ultimately they were no longer progressing.
[00:22:23] So, we can also use standards to trigger a new target when we want to progress. We say, well, today, I'm just saying anything, today we deliver 10 US per sprint, how are we going to deliver 15 US per sprint? So, we're going to trigger a problem resolution that will allow us to understand where our points of difficulty are. That will allow us to update the standard, and as a result, we will improve performance.
[00:23:01] You remember on the left side, uh, the part, yeah, the left side for you, sorry. Uh, it's the example that was in the in the book Job instruction. And actually, by searching on the internet, I found the same example but updated.
[00:23:22] So what we've seen appearing recently is, uh, this column, the third column, why in fact the key points are important. In fact, we give back the meaning of the key point. Why do I need to do this self-check?
[00:23:44] Here's another example, and we find what was explained in the job instruction, I've highlighted it in yellow. So it serves to train newcomers, to detail the tips and tricks that allow us to work safely but with the highest quality and the greatest possible efficiency.
[00:24:12] This is an example of a standard that I built based on TWI, based on what we found in Lean and other examples. Uh, so we clearly see the three columns, the 'what' which are the steps, so we we break down the work to be done into unitary elements. We have the 'how', which is all the tips and tricks that allow us to succeed and to know if I'm okay or if I'm out, and we find the 'why' these points are important. I'm going to give you some examples.
[00:24:51] So this is a, we are in the context of a project on an Oracle Finance ERP. And we have the head of this team who is going on maternity leave. And who had a skill that her teams didn't have yet. So she had asked us how to transfer a part of my skills that are necessary for production releases and so on. And so we told her, well, we're going to write a standard. So we wrote the standard. So you'll find, this one is quite heavy in general, I ask for a bit more, for it to be a bit lighter, but never mind. And so we always find the three columns, we find key points, uh, and we find the necessary explanations. And in fact, we can see it clearly when I circle them a bit, uh, it allows us to, uh, ensure that everything will go well, and it allows us to ensure that when these teams execute this standard, they are in a condition to succeed. In fact, what does it allow?
[00:26:06] It avoids errors that will be propagated following the execution of this standard. Uh, I had suggested you remember the notion of prevented quality regarding psychosocial risks, and in fact, that, it truly allows one to do work with a good level of quality and to ultimately be proud that, uh, well, the production release will happen without any problems. This brings us to the three principles of quality.
[00:26:43] So here we have a fairly classic process.
[00:26:47] In fact, there are, we don't accept defects.
[00:26:53] It's hard to say, but if we practiced it every day, it might be easier for companies to experience it. If you accept defects, what happens? What happens is that you're going to have raw material, in quotation marks, that won't be of good quality, and you'll have to rework it to bring it up to standard.
[00:27:18] And do the work you have to do and then pass your work to the next step. But by doing that, you don't make the defects visible, you don't make the problems visible. The principle of Lean is to make problems visible. So by saying I don't accept the defect, in industry it goes into what's called a red bin, for those who know Kanban, also in IT we use the red bin a lot, it's that finally the part is removed from the process, put in the red bin and very quickly, as soon as possible because otherwise we'll quickly forget them. Very quickly, we're going to deal with the red bin, we're going to look at the defect, we're going to try to understand it and do problem resolution to find the root cause. So obviously, if I don't accept defects, I won't produce defects. So the standard will allow me to achieve that. And the third is, I don't transmit defects.
[00:28:17] There is both a principle of flow, meaning that if I transmit a defect in a flow, it will propagate. And there is also a principle of respect for my colleagues. It's okay, I have a hot potato with a defect, well, I'm not going to pass the hot potato to my friends.
[00:28:35] Now, you're going to tell me it sounds very industrial, but it's exactly the same in IT.
[00:28:43] Exactly the same. And I fight one of my battles, which is to make managers understand when I hear them say speed, speed, speed, speed. I and often they do speed and quality, I tell them no. It's quality and speed. You have no speed if you have no quality. Because you'll be forced to re-take your parts. So, a standard is all well and good, but how do we transfer skill with a standard?
[00:29:20] An important point Bertrand Degrave talked about this morning, it's the knowledgeable ones, that is, those who are on the ground daily, those who work, are those who will actually create the standards. So the standard is created by the team's expert. It's not a person who was mandated by the company, like a quality manager, who lives very, very far from the field, who will write the standard. Well, I can make fun of it because I was a quality manager for a period, and so indeed, uh, I was quite far from the field, we write procedures and then we ask everyone to apply the procedures. What happens?
[00:30:13] There are perhaps 2-3%, and even fewer, people who will apply the procedures. It's just normal, actually.
[00:30:22] So, what's really important is that it's the team's expert on this subject who writes, uh, who writes the standard. I'm affected if you remember Taylor, it was the battle between the white-collar and blue-collar. It was the white-collar workers who wrote the procedures and the blue-collar workers who had to execute them. The real difference with Toyota is that it's the experts themselves who, uh, who write. Then, the expert will have his standard tested.
[00:30:53] He will have it tested by a novice.
[00:30:56] How does he test it? He, in fact, the novice will execute the work standard without the help of the expert. The expert makes no comments, makes no corrections. The result produced by the novice must be the result expected from the standard. Both in terms of quality and in terms of speed if you are dealing with standards that require times of 10 minutes, 12 minutes, and so on. As long as there are errors, the expert will update his standard until, well, he'll take other novices, because otherwise there's already a form of learning. until the standard is correctly existed, uh, executed, sorry.
[00:31:47] Once that's done, we're going to come across the notion of training, how the expert will actually transmit this skill to the rest of the team. Because as an expert, he is also responsible for the skill development of his team.
[00:32:02] In fact, there are several, uh, several steps. So you're going to have a line that appears there, it's "execute the standard". In the beginning, it's the expert who executes the standard. He presents, uh, the operations, he explains each step. He will remind us of the key points, uh, he will explain why if we don't correctly execute the key point, uh, it will have an impact on what follows. And he will execute it at least three times in front of the learner.
[00:32:37] Then, it's the expert, he's going to step back a little and take on a kind of observer role, and it's the learner who will, uh, execute. And, uh, well, in fact, he does the same, he will follow the steps written in the standard, he will explain the key points. He will sometimes answer questions from, uh, the expert who might ask him a very simple question: if you don't do this step, this step, uh, this key control, what happens?
[00:33:11] And the learner has the possibility to execute it as many times as he wants. Uh, at Toyota, they have places where we do what's called, they do Kata, they have Dojos and Kata, a bit like in Asian sports, and in fact, they can perform their movements several, several times until they gain complete confidence and autonomy. So now, we're going to draw a small parallel with the neurosciences of learning. It's a model proposed by Steve Masson, who is a researcher in learning, a Quebecois researcher. Uh, you would take, uh, what's his name, Stanislas Dehaene, who is also a French researcher on learning. It's the same, you know, they're the same, they're the same models. In fact, there are seven principles, and what I'm going to show you is that ultimately, when we look at the work standard and the way to apply it for learning. So principle number 1 is to activate these neurons. Well, that's a basic. Just by being here, you're already activating your neurons. Principle 2 is repeatedly. So on the same subject, we come back to work on the gesture, we come back to work on the repetition. Principle 3 is by retrieving from memory. So what does retrieving from memory mean? It means that, uh, typically, repeating the key points, the consequences of the key points, etc., will make it, it will allow the neurons to make the reverse path. That is to say, instead of registering the information, I'm going to retrieve the information, and the act of doing these back and forths will increase what we call the neural pathway, it will make it stronger.
[00:35:01] Principle 4, by elaborating, by elaborating, sorry, it's the end of the day, explanations.
[00:35:11] Uh, if that's like for children, in fact, if you just tell them to repeat like a parrot, the learning is less good.
[00:35:22] You have to make them reformulate within a sentence, within a problem, and so on. And that, that, that effectively allows, researchers have discovered it, it actually allows the brain to synthesize, to retrieve all the information, to synthesize it, and to restore it.
[00:35:41] Principle 5 of spaced repetition, so we've seen that, I put it in a slightly different color, but they can do it at any time, we can repeat these gestures whenever we want. Uh, principle 6, master maximize feedback. Uh, it's a super important point for both children and adults. What is feedback? It's for someone to come and explain to you why you made a mistake. It's not just "you made a mistake." That brings nothing. There's an error, there's a discrepancy there compared to what you should have done. In your opinion, what happened? What occurred to create that gap? In fact, it forces reflection, and working on what is called negative feedback, uh, forces the brain to self-correct. Because if you leave bad information in memory, it's highly probable that next time your brain, your decision-making, will be based on the flow that is not good. We must properly consider the brain; there's an image Steve Masson uses that I really like: the brain is a virgin forest. When you have to build a habit, because what we're looking for here are habits, If you go through the virgin forest once, you're just going to push aside some leaves and so on. If you go through 10 times, you'll start to have the beginning of a path. If you go through 100 times, you have a clear path and nothing grows on that part anymore. In fact, you have to consider the brain like that. The more we use neural pathways, the more durable they become, and uh, and the faster they are. Uh, principle 7, cultivate a dynamic spirit.
[00:37:36] When we do problem solving, we are truly in a dynamic mindset because we tell ourselves, uh, I have problems, which is an opportunity to learn. If you're in a static mindset, the static mindset is, "yeah, that's it." Uh, I don't need to do problem-solving, or I've seen managers tell me, "go take care of my little friend next door and then let me work in peace," and in fact, we're in static mindsets. To want to improve one's memory and learning, one must have a dynamic mind.
[00:38:13] So, I'm going to present an example, a company I can't name, which works on secure projects. Uh, are there any of you who practice ITIL, CABs, etc., does that ring a bell? OK.
[00:38:33] So there are service requests, intervention requests, uh, and every intervention request must go through a CAB. Change advisory board.
[00:38:45] And the CAB makes a go/no-go decision based on the information described in the intervention request, and when it's go, well, we execute the intervention. In an ideal world, there would only ever be "go". Who hasn't experienced a "no go" in CAB and then found themselves having to redo their entire intervention request? Well, in fact, well, there you go, we have no-gos happening quite regularly and for this team, it was in over 30% of cases, there were no-gos. Knowing that the CAB there was driven by the client. So it's not even an internal CAB, it's a CAB driven by the client because they have interventions on the client's platforms.
[00:39:36] So the no-go, what does it lead us to do? To make corrections, and then we will sometimes go around several times, we may have the request rejected several times until a certain point where, well, we get the go from the CAB and we can execute. I can't give you the exact lead time, but I'll give you the minimum lead time, it was 6 days.
[00:39:59] There are some who will truly, you can add zeros because some of them have been going in circles for several weeks. So what did they do? They made a standard. a client. So it's not even an internal CAB, it's a CAB piloted by the client because they had interventions on the client's platforms.
[00:39:35] So the no-go, it leads us to do what? To make corrections, and then we're going to go sometimes several times, we're going to have several times the request that is rejected, until a certain point. where we have the go of the CAB and we can execute. I can't give you the exact lead time, but I'll give you the lead time, the minimum was six days.
[00:39:59] There are some who will really, you can add zeros, because there are some who have turned, who have made loops for a few weeks. So what did they do? They made a standard.
[00:40:12] So, I had the authorization to present you a very simple standard, but we find, what is the idea? We find the three columns, the what, the how, the why. Uh, it was written by an expert, it was tested, they trained all the people in the team who could execute this standard.
[00:40:37] So, when they updated this, when they created this standard, we are obliged, despite everything, to go through the CAB for the first time to have it validated. And there was a go right away. Superb.
[00:40:52] And after, once it's what we call the standard change, there is no more need for the CAB. And so they went from a lead time of a minimum of six days to a maximum of one day.
[00:41:08] And in addition, with zero execution errors, and they no longer needed to know who was to execute this intervention request, because finally, anyone in the team could take this standard, execute it.
[00:41:23] and have the right, the right result.
[00:41:28] So we, we like, well I'll show you the graphs, the gaps, so we had 6 days before, minimum, well, yes, minimum, and one day, one day max.
[00:41:41] It, it seems, it seems very simple like that, but it's not simple to do, it's, it's thorough work, uh, and like many things, we have the impression that it's simple, it's often what's simplest that's the most complex to implement. We talked about RPS at the beginning, so I'm coming back to that.
[00:42:01] So if we look a little bit at the effects on the RPS, we have the, we're going to be able to act on the rhythm constraints, because in fact a standard. Uh, I don't know if we saw it, if you saw it well just before, uh, execution time 10 minutes. So in fact, uh, we're not trying to put the person who's going to execute in difficulty. The goal is to make the teams succeed. So if today the standard is executed in 10 minutes, we're not going to say that it's done in 5 minutes. However, we can set a goal for the next time, to say, hey, if we tried to do the execution of this, of this intervention in 5 minutes, we trigger a continuous improvement.
[00:42:48] And that allows the standard to be updated. Versatility.
[00:42:54] Well, it often happens to us to ask someone who doesn't know the subject, well, take this thing and then, you know, you'll get there. One, it doesn't work. And two, we also have people who, uh, who, who reproach companies for not being able to help them develop. Well, in fact, the standard allows to reduce a part of the versatility. The standard also allows to develop the notion of responsibility, because in fact the standard is under the responsibility of the expert and under the responsibility of the team. So in fact the team takes charge of itself and takes charge to be able to change its working methods. Uh, you have a Quebec researcher, whose name I forgot, sorry, who wrote a book called stress at work versus stress from work. And between the "au" and the "du", there's a huge difference, it's that in fact, it's our way of working that generates stress at work. Environments, apart from certain cases today that are quite controlled, when we are in the tertiary sector, working environments are not what will generate stress for us. It's rather the way we work. And so in fact, the responsibility is integrated into this, it's how I give responsibility back to the teams so that they can act, that's what we also said at the beginning of the presentation, act on their work. Under-qualification is the same, well the standard allows to reduce this under-qualification.
[00:44:36] Autonomy, I think you understood, it allows everyone to execute an activity that they couldn't do before. And that, what's important about autonomy.
[00:44:51] When you have someone who is autonomous in their task. She's not going to bother her friends.
[00:45:00] And so she's not going to break what we call the attention of her friends. And because you know that fragmented attention is also a source of stress. We are not multitasking. That, our brain, it's the physiology of the brain, we're not multitasking. And so the simple fact that you have someone who comes to tell us, can I bother you? It's, it's already too late. Can I bother you? Either you heard it and in that case, you lost your attention and so you moved on to something else, or you didn't hear it and the person might say, well, he's not going to talk to me, he's giving me the silent treatment. No, in fact, it's simply that the person is focused on their thing. So, autonomy. It also has this advantage of reducing, in neuroscience on attention, we talk about distractors.
[00:45:56] So you may have seen, I asked you to stay focused on the hindered quality, but in fact, the standard allows you. to largely eliminate hindered quality. And when you're satisfied with your work, as I said earlier, you have the reward circuit that activates, and well, you're satisfied with your work, it makes you happy to have had a good day and to come home saying, I had a great day. We don't think about it enough, but in fact it's. Uh, we have a tendency to believe ourselves above others as humans, but we are only mammals, primates, hominids, and we have all this heritage of functioning. You should know that the dopamine circuit, like stress, like attention, are all systems that have allowed us to survive until now. The fact of learning when we, when the ancients carved flint, when they managed to carve a flint correctly, well there was a shot of dopamine. that told them, it's the right one and I have to reproduce the same flint afterwards.
[00:47:14] Finally, useless work. So I'm going to make a parallel with RPA and AI. Uh, today, well, a few years ago, RPA is the case and AI is even more the case. Uh, it's that we try to automate useless work. We try to automate waste. In fact, uh, in lean principle, we only seek to automate what brings value. If you automate waste, there's a strong chance that at one point or another, you'll have a lot of things to process, since it's automated, so it's going much, much faster. And so the standard, in fact, we're going to try to write only what brings value. So we're not going to write in a standard useless work, which doesn't bring value for what we have to do.
[00:48:09] And finally, uh, the sustainability of work. If you remember, the first letter of performance = was what?
[00:48:21] Sorry? Security, yes. But in fact, it's the same, the standard, its goal is not to put people in difficulty, and so we're going to try to protect people and their humanity, and otherwise, well, unfortunately, we fall into the psychosocial risks. To finish. So this is my conclusion and it's the one I carry and defend. In the same way that there is a climate emergency, we cannot call it into question. There is an urgency to reduce psychosocial risks which are today a phenomenon of society and which cost us. Just to give a figure, in Europe in 2014, 750 billion euros. Over one year. Of which 500 billion for businesses, in loss of turnover etcetera etcetera.
[00:49:26] And the good lean, so I'm putting the good lean, for those who, to use the lean of Toyota and not the lean that is used to fire people. And the good lean is one of the answers to reduce psychosocial risks. Thank you and if you have any questions.
[00:49:54] We have 10 minutes.
[00:50:08] And hello and thank you for this session. I had a question concerning, it comes back, it's quite precise, it comes back to the learning process with testing the document, well, the training given by the expert.
[00:50:23] by the novice, without him explaining it.
[00:50:25] Yes.
[00:50:27] until there's no more to explain.
[00:50:29] Yes.
[00:50:30] And then we move on to learning where the expert does it and explains it.
[00:50:35] So it's, it's first the expert who does and explains. and then it's the learner.
[00:50:43] Yes, absolutely. But suddenly, if he made a documentation that does not need explanation, why does he explain?
[00:50:51] Since he worked it so that the novice can do it without him.
[00:50:55] Ah yes, okay, I understand the question.
[00:50:58] Uh, in fact, it's going to, the fact of, we are descended from 120,000 generations of hunter-gatherers. And so we worked with our hands. And executing the operations, it makes our brain work and it forces in a certain way learning. And so suddenly, the expert at that moment, he just verifies that there is no error, that we learn the right gesture, that we learn the right habit. In fact, uh, if you execute without being controlled, a form of control, I don't like the term controlled, but supervised, you risk generating, because human beings are what they are, that sometimes even if it's written, we're going to take a shortcut and we're going to say, I might go faster by doing that, and in fact, no, we create a bad habit. And our brain creates habits because a habit costs less to execute than something new. Except that, if you have generated a bad habit, well, you'll have to remove the bad habit. And that, it costs a lot to the brain, it hates that. So there you go, that's why we try to get people to execute. So it's perhaps a bit more difficult in IT, I agree. Uh, still, uh, notably by doing pair programming, for example, it's also a help. Uh, on the operations of putting into production, uh, I see it almost every day, when people do it correctly. When they are trained, so that the expert teaches the, allows to learn the good gestures, it works immediately afterwards. When we don't do it, the human being is what he is. The human being is what he is, he's going to say, well, I probably don't need it, I'll move on to something else. Does that answer the question?
[00:53:16] Well, in fact, I have a lot of questions, it's rushing in my head, I don't know what's going to come out. That's okay. Uh, in fact, what applicability do you see, especially in the, because in fact there are, well, it works when there are things that are repetitive. But is it really limited to repetitive things? Uh, do you see an applicability to the standard on things perhaps less repetitive?
[00:53:36] Well, it depends.
[00:53:37] Or and that's linked to another question I had about the breakdown. Because finally, I think in IT jobs, there are things that are perhaps quite long, but you have to manage to break down at the right level to have things that are repetitive, anyway, that's what.
[00:53:50] Okay.
[00:53:51] Or and that's linked to another question I had about the breakdown. Because finally, I think in IT jobs, there are things that are perhaps quite long, but you have to manage to break down at the right level to have things that are repetitive, anyway, that's what.
[00:54:01] In fact, uh, in the standard, you don't have to write everything. In fact, it's what, I'm coming back to the question of the performance gap.
[00:54:13] What is important to standardize so that we no longer have this performance gap? Uh, it's sure that if it's, if you have a procedure, I'm saying anything, of 10 pages to roll out, uh, well, I wouldn't call that a standard. Your standard, it must be two, three pages, no more, and so it's on a very precise subject. Uh, and then, to make choices, if it's not something that is executed regularly, try to put standards on things where today, you know that there are execution errors.
[00:54:57] Or that it's a point that's extremely important, that if it's not done, you have a deployment that's chaos, for example. Above all, do not use the lean work standards as the ISO 9001 procedures, absolutely not. We already had trouble with ISO 9001 procedures in dev teams, if you go like that it doesn't work, really. Uh, there I showed you a standard, what, a formalization of the standard in three columns, but a standard, a standard can also be on simpler things, it can be a checklist.
[00:55:42] Here, for the need, we needed to write things in a more, more structured way, but a simple checklist, correctly defined, can serve as a standard and avoid, avoid errors too. Does that answer the question? There may be other questions, but we can discuss them later.
[00:56:02] Unfortunately, time is up. I'm sorry, you can always ask questions to Jean-Philippe later if you stay here tomorrow. Thank you all. Good evening.
[00:56:14] Thank you, good evening.

Transcript (Translated)