• Understand the reason to bring in the methodology and assess organization’s readiness (Starting Lean Six Sigma)
• Select the right projects and leaders and provide training and coaching (The First Six Sigma Project)
• Pay attention to organization’s management process and leadership behaviors (Revisiting the DMAIC Stage-gate Process)
• Ensure that process management is built as a foundation for improvement (Continuous Improvement Is More Than Projects)
• Avoid over-reliance on weeks-long classroom training to achieve results (Lean Six Sigma Training for Continuous Improvement)

In the last recommendation, I didn’t include an alternative approach because it required more elaboration.

The traditional Lean Six Sigma (LSS) deployment uses classroom training to teach concepts and tools to employees, who become Green Belts (GB) or Black Belt (BB) candidates.  The inexperienced GBs and/or BBs leading improvement projects often struggle to recall what they learned in the class and relate it to the real-world problems.  

What I think works better is project-based learning, in which the employees learn by participating in a job-related project led by an experienced CI professional.   The on-the-job hands-on learning is supplemented by expert coaching and self-paced learning. 

Assuming the organization is new to CI, I propose that it starts with a pilot project led by a CI veteran, who can guide the organization in a learning journey.  The journey will not only teach the team CI methodologies but also help the organization leaders discover many existing gaps, risks, issues, and opportunities, which leads to a better long-term strategy.  This CI leader has multiple roles — the coach to the organization leaders, the leader of the project, and the trainer of CI methodologies to the employees.

The proposed approach achieves multiple goals.

• Enable the organization to achieve optimal outcomes
• Build internal capabilities, including processes and skills
• Help develop a CI strategy and culture for the long term

The approach can include the following.

1. The senior CI sponsor (a top executive) recruits or retains a truly experienced CI leader (either an employee or consultant), with an explicit role of leading the pilot project, assessing organization, and helping develop its deployment strategy
2. The CI leader works with the sponsor to charter a suitable project, including clear expectations of their respective roles
3. The CI leader works with the sponsor and other managers to select project team members
4. The sponsor clearly communicates the role, responsibilities, and decision power of the CI leader to the entire organization
5. The sponsor personally demonstrates his/her commitment and holds the organization accountable
6. The CI leader leads the project and project team, giving just-in-time training as appropriate (Lean, Six Sigma, project management, change management, statistical methods, etc.)
7. The CI leader engages the team in using the CI concepts and tools in the project and demonstrates their value and limitations
8. Project members are given ample materials and opportunities to expand the learning on their own and have open access to coaching by the CI leader
9. The CI leader assesses the organization (e.g. organizational readiness, maturity, culture) and team members (e.g. skills, behavior, performance) throughout the entire project lifecycle
10. The CI leader provides analyses (e.g. SWOT) and recommendations to the sponsor, such as deployment strategy, high value projects, and high potential employees (i.e. future leaders)

This approach will avoid many common pitfalls in LSS training and deployment and take advantage of many opportunities provided by modern technology, such as online and on-demand learning.

The two limiting factors I see are a capable CI leader and a committed sponsor.

What other alternatives would you recommend?

Over 15 years ago, I received my LSS Black Belt (BB) training sponsored by my employer.  It was three weeks of classroom training delivered over three months by external consultants.  It kick-started my Continuous Improvement (CI) journey.  Since then, I have delivered LSS training as an internal trainer or external consultant to many large global organizations.  I also helped organizations in their LSS deployment, led many CI projects, and coached Green Belt (GB) and BB leaders in their projects.

Despite my own positive experience with LSS training, what I have learned over the years is that in most situations the traditional weeks long LSS training is ineffective in driving CI. 

If measured by the number of people trained or certified or the number of methods and tools covered, such training programs are very effective and easily justified for the investment.  

But if we start to measure the improvement of business outcomes, the desired problem-solving skills and behavior of the trained employees, and the positive impact on the CI culture and mindset of the organization, the training is very often ineffective.  Some troubling signs are

• It took 12 months or more to complete the first GB project.
• The GB could not recall some basic topics only a few weeks after the training.
• BB candidates have to create flash cards to prepare for their certification exams.
• GBs or BBs are no longer engaged in CI after obtaining their certifications.
• Certified BBs fail to exhibit or apply knowledge of some fundamental concepts, such as process stability, in their daily work.
• The trained employees do not perform or behave differently from those untrained in the CI methodology

I can see two main factors contributing to this poor outcome.

First, the training program only teaches the general methods and tools and does not improve skills.

Previously, I discussed training and coaching considerations in LSS deployment in The First Six Sigma Project and recommended customized training in Making Employee Training Effective.

Most LSS training programs developed by universities, professional organizations, and commercial vendors are designed for efficiency and profitability. The generic programs do not connect the content to the client organization’s problems and operational reality.  Few external trainers have the subject matter or industry knowledge to tailor the training to each client’s need.  Even if they are able to customize, few clients are willing to pay the substantial premium.

Corporate internal programs are not much better in terms of sufficiently relevant materials that relate to each employee’s job.  Employees do not start learning real problem-solving skills until they encounter problems in their projects, by which time they already forgot most of what was taught in the training. 

Second, the organization overly relies on training to improve business performance.

Two common fallacies can lead to this “improvement training trap.”

1. Employees have to be trained in the methods and tools or they won’t be able to learn themselves.
2. Once the employees are formally trained, they will solve all the problems on their own.

Can classroom training help accelerate learning? Absolutely.  Is it necessary or sufficient to develop the skills, mindset, and behavior for CI?  No.

These programs train methods and tools, whereas what the organizations really need is leadership development and behavior modification.  

Management has to understand that employees’ knowledge in CI methodologies is only a small but essential driver in business improvement.  When employees are not engaged in effective CI activities, it is not necessarily due to lack of knowledge – something else is likely limiting.  The root cause is rarely lack of training, and the solution is not more or even better training.  

It is management’s job to critically analyze all aspects of the organization, e.g. processes, structure, policies, resources, people, and culture, to identify the barriers to CI.  When they do, they will likely find out that LSS training is not the solution to their problem.

As an employee, I was fortunate to receive various technical and managerial training throughout my career.  The knowledge, skills, and experience I gained allowed me to grow continually.  As a manager, I planned and sponsored training for my teams.  As a trainer and consultant, I have designed and delivered training ranging from statistical methods to executive leadership.  It is always gratifying whether I am a student or instructor.

I believe that people in every organization have tremendous potential for greater creativity and productivity.  Employee training is an important aspect of capability development.  Few people would argue its value.  However, training requires substantial investments in time and resources, and its benefits for the employees as well as the organization can be hard to measure, especially in the short term.  

How can we ensure a good return on investment in employee training?

Based on my experience, one effective approach is to integrate the training into the normal business operation so that the benefits are immediate and measurable.  This necessitates customizing the training to each organization’s needs.

Ideally an organization has the internal resources to deliver customized training.  But most have to rely on external vendors or consultants.  Evaluating and selecting the right vendor and services to build and deliver customized training requires more careful considerations than standard, off-the-shelf solutions offered by many.

As examples, here are a few questions you may want to ask when evaluating a vendor, its trainers and services.

Planning

• Does the vendor inquire and seek to understand the specific need of the training with respect to your business objectives and strategy? 
• Does the vendor discuss about your short- and long-term goals of the training?  How are they being measured?
• Does the trainer discuss with your managers, subject matter experts (SMEs), and staff being trained to understand how the training materials fit in their current or future jobs or projects?
• Does the trainer request and acquire specific client information to build relevant and engaging examples and case studies for the training? Do they build it themselves or with your SMEs?
• What alternative training approaches does the trainer present?  Do they present the risks and benefits of each, given your specific business situation and needs?
• Are different levels or scopes of training offered to employees based on their roles and special needs? What are some roll-out options if you have multiple business units or sites?
• Can the vendor provide change management and communication support so that the new capability is fully adopted in the organization?
• Is there a train-the-trainer plan to allow you to deliver your own training in the future?
• How much freedom do you have to use and/or reproduce the training materials for internal training and capability development?

Training

• How effective and engaging is the training, including pre-class reading, hands-on exercises and discussion, simulations, team activities, assignments, and knowledge reviews?
• Does the trainer encourage feedback during the training? Are they able to make same-day or next-day modifications based on feedback?
• Does the training continue to incorporate real business problems raised by students during the class?
• Does the training include facilitated sessions to practice skills to solve real or simulated business problems?
• How often are the concepts, methods or tools taught in the class used right away by the employees in their jobs?

Post-training

• How much do trained employees continue to use the knowledge and skills in their jobs? How much do they recommend the training to others?
• Can the trainer coach employees in applying the skills in their jobs?
• Does the vendor provide you a summary of feedback and improvements made?
• After each session, does the vendor discuss with you to refine the training content, delivery, and/or the roll-out plan?

Not every organization needs customized training.  For many, it can be a powerful way to unleash the potential of its people while delivering measurable business outcomes.