For brilliant answers

The Seven Deadly Sins of Strategic Change

R O N K I N G E N A N D P A T R I C K W I L K E R S O N

Despite the best of intentions, efforts to improve or- ganizational performance do not always pan out. This article gives examples and shows how, in their pursuit of excellence in an often-challenging envi- ronment, even the most respected organizations are tempted to commit one or more of the seven deadly sins of strategic change. They are: forgetting about value for the customer, focusing solely on greater profits or market share, treating improvements as “just another program,” neglecting to make contin- ual improvement and learning part of the corporate culture, lacking discipline in the pursuit of growth, favoring training over application, and losing con- stancy of purpose. Being aware of these pitfalls is the first step in avoiding them, so organizational improvement efforts can stay on the right path to success. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Organizations ranging from those at the top of the Fortune 1000 to small, family-owned businesses have implemented a variety of cost-savings and other programs to achieve organizational improvements. Many of those organizations, however, have not re- alized the results they expected. In The Dance of Change (1999), Peter Senge reported that 70 per- cent of strategic change efforts fail—a figure that McKinsey & Company confirmed in its 2006 and 2008 Global Surveys. Moreover, a survey of the top 100 management-driven improvement efforts con- ducted by John Kotter (1995), the noted authority on organizational change, found that fewer than half of them survived the initial phase of implementation. Given the significant number of research projects on strategic change, as well as the multitude of pro- grams led by world-renowned consultants and the books and articles they have generated on the sub- ject, should we not expect a much higher success rate?

When it comes to leading and managing change and improvement processes, there appear to be no universal rules that have proven to be suc- cessful over time. Indeed, theories and approaches to strategic change or organizational improvement efforts are often contradictory. In addition, most theories lack empirical evidence to support their claims, and the theories that appear to be backed by sufficient evidence rarely take into considera- tion the large number of variables within today’s dynamic organizations. Perhaps most disturbing is that over time, even successful organizations have not been able to maintain a high level of perfor- mance. Organizations once identified as great have fallen from grace. The Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award has recognized companies that im- plemented significant improvements, such as Mo- torola’s Six Sigma process, only to later learn that some of those organizations ultimately succumbed to their competitors. Toyota’s well-publicized re- cent problems reveal how difficult it is to achieve long-term sustainability, even for a firm whose leg- endary production system has been admired as the standard for improving quality while reduc- ing costs. What went wrong at these organizations and, more important, what can we learn from their experiences?

As W. Edwards Deming maintained in Out of the Crisis (1986), unknown and unknowable issues are likely to affect the sustainability of any strategic im- provement process.

Although any one of a number of factors can derail strategic improvement efforts, there are seven mis- takes organizations typically make that contribute to the failure of both newly started and mature strate- gic improvement processes.

4 4

c© 2 0 1 1 W i l e y P e r i o d i c a l s , I n c . P u b l i s h e d o n l i n e i n W i l e y O n l i n e L i b r a r y ( w i l e y o n l i n e l i b r a r y . c o m ) G l o b a l B u s i n e s s a n d O r g a n i z a t i o n a l E x c e l l e n c e • D O I : 1 0 . 1 0 0 2 / j o e . 2 0 3 6 8 • J a n u a r y / F e b r u a r y 2 0 1 1

Sin 1: Forgetting About Value for the Customer

If program goals are not clear about improvement objectives or well communicated, teams will fo- cus on internal improvements, not customer value. Although organizations typically state that they are “customer focused” or talk about listening to the “voice of the customer,” they often neglect to define customer value as a program objective or priority.

Only recently have organizations made the effort to truly understand what value means for the cus- tomer(s). For example, Motorola pioneered the first cellular phone and developed the initial Six Sigma variation reduction process that dramatically im- proved the quality of the phones it produced. In the early 1990s, Motorola became obsessed with improving its analog mobile phones to Six Sigma levels. At the same time, Nokia decided to pursue development of the next generation of signal deliv- ery, known as digital. With digital service, varia- tions in phone technology were less sensitive, and Nokia could use more traditional industry-quality levels. Motorola had more than 40 percent of the global market share when it focused on Six Sigma analog mobile phones. By focusing on developing a digital mobile phone that would provide more over- all value for customers, in 15 years Nokia swapped its global market share position with its competitor. In 2009 Nokia had more than 40 percent of market share, and Motorola had less than 8 percent.

Many other organizations have made similar errors. General Electric is one, as the authors learned while running the Molded Rubber Division (MRD) of Fel- Pro in Skokie, Illinois, during the mid-1990s. Fel- Pro’s MRD division produced high-quality rubber molded components for the auto and heavy-duty in- dustry and purchased silicone molding compound from GE and another company. While trying to improve the molding processes, MRD experienced problems with GE’s silicone, but not with that of the other supplier. Even though GE was well into its Six Sigma program, Fel-Pro’s problem did not seem

to merit GE’s improvement efforts. GE ultimately responded to the issue only after Fel-Pro stopped all purchases until the problem was resolved. Signif- icant improvements were made to GE’s processes, and the Fel-Pro/GE project eventually was high- lighted as one of GE’s Six Sigma customer-supplier success stories. In one of GE’s annual reports, CEO Jack Welch did indicate that his organization had fo- cused too much on internal improvements and not enough on customer value issues.

It is critical for organizations to understand that overall value to the customer is more than improv- ing quality while reducing costs. It is having the right products at the right time with the right value priced accordingly. This is common sense, but not common practice.

It is critical for organizations to understand that overall value to the customer is more than improving quality while reducing costs. It is having the right products at the right time with the right value priced accordingly.

Sin 2: Focusing Solely on Greater Profits

or Market Share

In highly complex multinational organizations, it is not easy to determine a root cause for many business problems. In a statement released on February 24, 2010, Toyota’s former vice president, Jim Press, of- fered this explanation of Toyota’s woes: “The root cause of their problems is that the company was hijacked some years ago by anti-family, financially oriented pirates. They didn’t have the character to maintain a customer-first focus” (Valdes-Dapena, 2010). Jim Womack, founder and chairman of the Lean Enterprise Institute, identified another poten- tial root cause when he made the following comment on Toyota’s initiative to increase its global market share from 11 percent to 15 percent, a goal set in 2002: “The 15 percent target was totally irrelevant to any customer and was just driven by ego.”

G l o b a l B u s i n e s s a n d O r g a n i z a t i o n a l E x c e l l e n c e J a n u a r y / F e b r u a r y 2 0 1 1 4 5D O I : 1 0 . 1 0 0 2 / j o e

Toyota’s loss of customer focus is not unique. As consumers, we all have experienced disappointment with a product or service. Providing real value to customers while improving organizational perfor- mance is a true challenge. Organizations of all sizes are faced with the task of not only surviving but also thriving in a competitive environment. But if they lose sight of what matters most to their customers, they are likely to join the list of com- panies that no longer exist or have fallen so far that returning to their level of prior achievement repre- sents a massive struggle.

Providing real value to customers while improving organizational performance is a true challenge.

Sin 3: Treating Improvement as “Just Another

Program”

Most of us have been on either one side or the other of a new corporate program. As John Kotter dis- covered with his survey (1995), rarely does manage- ment’s stated long-term commitment last beyond the initial phase. Management makes the commitment, spends tremendous time and energy to launch the program, hires consultants, and so forth, and then something gets in the way. Executive leadership de- cides to acquire or merge with another company, the economy takes a dip, or current managers move on to better opportunities elsewhere or they just decide to retire. Some executives do not appreci- ate the amount of senior-level involvement required and delegate the leadership to another executive or an external consultant. Rarely do these individu- als have the authority or influence to ensure that the programs needed to effect long-lasting change are implemented for the long run.

For example, within two years of Fel-Pro’s be- ing acquired by Federal Mogul, customers no- ticed its world-class performance had slipped as management pushed more responsibilities onto the

highly successful business unit without additional re- sources. The Continual Value Improvement (CVI c©) process in place at the company, which had led to 20 percent annual growth over six years by improv- ing customer value, was replaced by what the plant personnel called “just another program.”

Support required for major improvement programs does not come solely from the executives, and rarely do they understand how the rest of the people in their corporation feel about a new program. Long-term employees often see multiple improve- ment attempts—the so-called “flavor of the month” projects—die on the vine. Over time, they become reluctant to invest their energy in something they do not believe will last. Some may be concerned that the improvement efforts will threaten their job security. Middle managers, meanwhile, tend to support such efforts if they believe there is something in it for them; otherwise, they will probably view the new program as just another diversion from the “real business.” Top-level leadership is necessary for the success of any improvement initiative, but without grassroots and mid-level support, most programs will struggle to survive. Rare, indeed, is the orga- nization that has full support of a new improvement or strategic change program from the top to the bot- tom of the organization.

Sin 4: Neglecting to Make Continual Improvement

and Learning Part of the Corporate Culture

With its focus on customers and continual improve- ment, Toyota has long been the envy of many or- ganizations. Numerous books and magazine articles have been written about the Toyota Production Sys- tem (TPS), and many of the top 1,000 global corpo- rations have implemented their version of TPS. For the past two decades, the Toyota Production System provided high-quality and reliable vehicles at com- petitive prices. The company’s culture for contin- ual improvement has been well documented in such books as Jeffery Liker’s The Toyota Way (2003), in which he divides the 14 TPS principles into four sections:

4 6 J a n u a r y / F e b r u a r y 2 0 1 1 G l o b a l B u s i n e s s a n d O r g a n i z a t i o n a l E x c e l l e n c eD O I : 1 0 . 1 0 0 2 / j o e

� Long-Term Philosophy. The foundation of the TPS states, “Base your management decisions on long-term philosophy, even the short-term finan- cial goals.”

� Process. The right process will produce the right results.

� People and Partners. Add value to the organiza- tion by developing your people and your partners.

� Problem Solving. Continuously solve root prob- lems to drive organizational learning.

During the past few years, however, Toyota’s lead- ers appeared to view its success as an entitlement and lost sight of the firm’s underlying principles. In How the Mighty Fall, Jim Collins (2009) identified five stages of how great organizations fall into decline, with Stage 1 tagged as “Hubris Born of Success.” Like many other companies before it, Toyota de- cided it could change course from taking care of the customer to the pursuit of greater profits. A March 1, 2010, article in the Asia edition of the Wall Street Journal noted that Akio Toyoda, grandson of the founder and the current Toyota president, “said the company’s misguided strategic focus warped what he called the ‘order of Toyota’s traditional pri- orities’ in car making: a stress on product safety and quality first, sales volume and cost second. That order ‘changed’ when Toyota began expand- ing rapidly a decade ago, and aggressively increasing market-share and cutting costs became paramount” (Shirouzu, 2010).

There is no denying Toyota’s continual improve- ment and learning culture focused on customers and quality was key to the global recognition it enjoyed. But if Toyota cannot maintain a continual improve- ment culture, what company can? Sometimes ex- ecutive egos force a change in course from what has made the organization successful—for instance, shifting from a quality and customer focus to some- thing that has no meaning to customers, such as be- ing the largest company in your industry. Although this topic has many dimensions, only an organiza- tion’s board of directors and C-level executives are

in a position to ensure that a culture of continual value improvement and learning is established and sustained.

Sometimes executive egos force a change in course from what has made the organization successful—for instance, shifting from a quality and customer focus to something that has no mean- ing to customers, such as being the largest company in your industry.

Sin 5: Lacking Discipline in the Pursuit of Growth

Growth via internal sales or acquisition is often iden- tified as one approach to strategic improvement. But what will sales growth accomplish? An improve- ment in the bottom line tends to be the standard answer, backed by economic theory and business school training. Yet, although growth is usually good for organizations, Collins (2009) identifies the undisciplined pursuit of more as Stage 2 in the or- ganizational slide into failure.

Over the past 20 years, many companies have fallen into this trap. Federal Mogul was one of them, even though its CEO was considered a great visionary and leader during the 1990s, when the company ac- quired an impressive array of auto and truck parts– related suppliers. Its pursuit of more acquisitions was not as disciplined as it should have been, how- ever. Proper due diligence was not conducted on one of the foreign companies it acquired, Turner and Newell. When asbestos litigation claims were made against its new acquisition’s British operations, Fed- eral Mogul was forced into Chapter 11. As a re- sult, many employees lost significant investments, their hard work negated by what appeared to be an overly aggressive acquisition plan. How many other organizations have met a similar fate?

Although Toyota does not appear to be headed for Chapter 11, over the past 100 years, many

G l o b a l B u s i n e s s a n d O r g a n i z a t i o n a l E x c e l l e n c e J a n u a r y / F e b r u a r y 2 0 1 1 4 7D O I : 1 0 . 1 0 0 2 / j o e

outstanding organizations have not been as lucky. As W. Edwards Deming noted, “Survival is not mandatory.” The fact that only one company orig- inally listed among the 30 Dow Jones Industrials— General Electric—still exists today validates Deming’s statement.

Sin 6: Favoring Training Over Application

Training is an important aspect of organizational improvement; however, too many organizations give training months before the lessons that are taught can be applied. This approach leads person- nel to believe that the training itself, rather than business results, is the real objective.

Training is an important aspect of organizational improvement; however, too many organizations give training months before the lessons that are taught can be applied.

One of the authors experienced this firsthand while working as a manager at a General Motors division. In two years, the division implemented a compa- nywide statistical training program for more than 8,000 people, who then waited months before they could apply what they had learned. By the time they actually started a project, most of the peo- ple needed a refresher class. Moreover, the projects were directed only at internal issues. The division leaders were embarrassed during a tour with execu- tives from Chevrolet who asked, “So after training 8,000 people, what have you done to solve Chevro- let’s problems with your product?” Even though more than 100 statistical process control projects had been conducted, not one of them had focused on an issue of importance to Chevrolet, one of the Division’s most important customers.

At Fel-Pro, the authors developed and implemented the CVI c© process, which taught lean and Six Sigma

tools and techniques when the situation called for them. Improving value for the customer was the first objective. When a customer problem was identified, problem-solving techniques were used to determine the root cause(s) and which tools would be needed to solve the problem. The approach was more chal- lenging and time-intensive for the trainers, but the ability to use the training on an immediate and press- ing problem significantly improved the personnel’s understanding of the tools and techniques. Teams were held accountable for their results and also given quarterly incentive bonuses. A balanced scorecard was used so everyone could gauge progress by track- ing and prioritizing the objectives: safety, customer satisfaction, internal process metrics, and financial metrics.

Many of the successes gained using Continual Value Improvement stemmed from hard work and common sense. Fel-Pro’s Molded Rubber Division (MRD) was able to improve its operations with- out creating special levels of qualifications, such as Green or Black Belts. All individuals were en- couraged to participate in improvement efforts and join an improvement team. Skill charts tracked in- dividuals’ talents, knowledge, and expertise so that they could be applied to CVI c© projects. In addition, MRD developed a learning center where groups could hold team meetings and use various training resources. For this approach to succeed, resources must be made available and teams must have time to effectively pursue continual improvements.

Sin 7: Losing Constancy of Purpose

Examples abound of organizations that start a new improvement program and then, after a year or two, substitute it with something else. In some instances, that kind of overhaul occurs when a company has been acquired or merged, and the new organization decides to implement “its” brand of improvement in the acquired operations. As a result, existing pro- grams are refocused, usually with a significant loss of effectiveness and an increase in employee frustration

4 8 J a n u a r y / F e b r u a r y 2 0 1 1 G l o b a l B u s i n e s s a n d O r g a n i z a t i o n a l E x c e l l e n c eD O I : 1 0 . 1 0 0 2 / j o e

and doubt concerning the actual value of subsequent improvement efforts.

Rather than implementing the “next new idea,” it is essential to create a culture of improvement that utilizes new tools when appropriate and then to train personnel to use the tools on an as-needed basis. For a culture of continual improvement to take root, an organization must focus on improving value for its customers first, and then for the organization.

For a culture of continual improvement to take root, an organization must focus on improving value for its customers first, and then for the organization.

Deming (1986) advocated this approach with his first principle: “Create constancy of purpose toward improvement of product and service, with the aim to become competitive, stay in business, and provide jobs.” Toyota’s principles embraced constancy of purpose and the culture around the Toyota Produc- tion System produced legendary results. Toyota’s recent departure from its principles has resulted in a drop in consumer confidence and in its products being surpassed by several Ford and GM models, ac- cording to JD Power’s quality studies. Because of re- cent recalls, investors have also questioned the value of Toyota stock. Various speeches made by Toyota’s current leaders reveal that they now realize that the company’s recent focus on growth and greater cost reductions, without consideration of the impact on its ability to train people to ensure they make and sell top-quality products, was flawed. If an ultra- world-class organization such as Toyota can lose its constancy of purpose in the pursuit of growth over quality, it is easy to see how other companies can lose customer focus in the face of their own pressures.

At the American Society for Quality’s 2010 World Quality Conference, the keynote speaker, Alan

Mulally, CEO of Ford, said, “Continuous quality improvement is the essence of everything. Either you are improving or you are not.” Thanks to its com- mitment to continual improvement, Ford increased its sales, improved its quality ratings, and generated a profit of $4.7 billion for the first six months of 2010.

Lessons Learned on the Road to Continual

Improvement

Many factors contribute to the success or failure of a strategic improvement process: the level of involve- ment, planning, communication, and execution, all in an environment of uncertain competition, disrup- tive innovations, and other unpredictable and even earth-shattering events. Some might say this is akin to requiring all the planets to be in perfect align- ment. Yet, if organizations are to survive and thrive, they have no choice but to improve and adapt suc- cessfully to the changes around them.

Lean and Six Sigma tools and techniques are ab- solutely essential to help organizations identify and reduce both waste and variation. The softer side of change, however, needs significantly more attention than it has gotten to date. Even mature programs have issues that must be dealt with if they are not to risk jeopardizing the level and degree of future improvements. As we have seen, there are seven key mistakes that take even the best-made improvement plans off-course. What can be done to mitigate the risk of failure?

Avoiding Sin 1: Focus on Value

As Motorola learned the hard way, organizations must understand how the customers value their products and service. Improving a product to Six Sigma levels will not help an organization improve its competitiveness if the customer cannot see its value. Of course, if customers do perceive high value, raising products to lean Six Sigma standards will boost the organization’s competiveness.

G l o b a l B u s i n e s s a n d O r g a n i z a t i o n a l E x c e l l e n c e J a n u a r y / F e b r u a r y 2 0 1 1 4 9D O I : 1 0 . 1 0 0 2 / j o e

To create more value for their customers, organiza- tions need to deeply understand what they value in the company’s existing products and services. Many organizations have made “improvements” in the name of cost savings or perceived customer value only to learn that the “new and improved” feature constituted a major problem for the customer. For example, one company’s cost-saving change to a piece of commercial equipment slowed down how the equipment operated for the customers. Lead- ing customers immediately noticed the issue, which adversely affected their productivity, and stopped buying the new model. Some of Toyota’s recent problems resulted when its push toward cost sav- ings failed to consider the impact on the consumer, the Toyota Production System, and the supply base.

Identifying a new value proposition is sometimes best done by understanding the current issues and problems of the customers. Apple’s iPod and iTunes offered a solution for users of MP3 players who were concerned about how to legally obtain music. Apple addressed an issue other organizations overlooked, and won customer loyalty and industry respect in the process.

Avoiding Sin 2: Consider the Customer

in Strategic Planning

Toyota’s recent woes have greatly shaken both the company and its customers. Why executives would abandon the principles that had made the company so successful is hard to imagine. One can only con- clude that they did not realize the impact their strate- gic decisions would have on Toyota’s ability to build high-quality vehicles. Over the years, executives in other organizations have made similar decisions, and the lag time between the decision and its im- pact in the marketplace was several years—in some cases, five to seven years. A key point to remember is that customers are not interested in how big you are or how much additional profit you are able to make. Investors might be interested in the latter, which will affect your stock price, but the customer drives the top line.

A key point to remember is that customers are not interested in how big you are or how much additional profit you are able to make. Investors might be inter- ested in the latter, which will affect your stock price, but the customer drives the top line.

Avoiding Sin 3: Make Improvement Meaningful

Companies that do not have a plan for a long- term continuous improvement process will find it very difficult to convince their people that this “new program” is one that will make a difference. Exec- utives need to show they mean what they say by implementing changes that improve innovation and competitiveness. Any long-term improvement pro- cess will attract many enemies and few supporters if it does not immediately show how it will help the organization and its members plus obtain improve- ments in the short term.

Avoiding Sin 4: Incorporate Continual Improvement

and Learning Into the Corporate Culture

The organization’s board of directors and C-level executives must establish and visibly demonstrate and support a culture of continual improvement and learning. “Walking the talk” has been the topic of numerous books, but many organizations still make the mistake of rolling out one initiative after another without showing how they all fit together around the organization’s culture of continual improvement.

Avoiding Sin 5: Maintain Discipline When

Pursuing Growth

Growth is good. But if organizations blindly pur- sue growth without understanding how it will affect its people, processes, products, and eventually cus- tomers, results are likely to deteriorate over time. The lag time between the action and observable deterioration might be so long most organizations will not identify the actual root cause.

5 0 J a n u a r y / F e b r u a r y 2 0 1 1 G l o b a l B u s i n e s s a n d O r g a n i z a t i o n a l E x c e l l e n c eD O I : 1 0 . 1 0 0 2 / j o e

Most organizations have a very disciplined ap- proach to their internal growth, but as Toyota learned, even the legendarily disciplined Toyota Production System and the Toyota supply base have their limits. While leading a rapidly growing busi- ness unit at Fel-Pro, we realized an annual growth rate of 20 percent was manageable for the size and complexity of the business unit. Growth above 20 percent challenged the engineering and opera- tions staff, so we limited our annual growth unless additional staff was approved. Each organization must develop an understanding as to the complexity and volume of annual organic growth it can handle. Yvon Chouinard, the founder and CEO of Patago- nia, adds another element to growth: How well can the environment handle growth? Sustainable growth is a major issue facing organizations today.

Disciplined growth by acquisition and merger is very challenging. As pointed out in the Federal Mogul ex- ample, organizations involved in such proceedings must take extraordinary care to minimize risk. In ad- dition to understanding financial, product, and envi- ronmental liabilities, they need to determine whether customers have existing quality problems or whether any suppliers are in distress and, thus, might endan- ger the supply of critical components.

Avoiding Sin 6: Promptly Apply Skills Acquired

in Training

Although there is a relationship between training and results, many organizations develop training plans in the absence of organizational improve- ment plans. Some organizations pride themselves on showing how many hours each employee is trained per year. But once an organization builds a very capable improvement process and all its existing employees have been through the team, problem- solving, and advanced training, will the same level of training be required each year? Will each loca- tion’s improvement process mature at a different rate? Tracking the amount of training given is mean- ingless unless the training is being put to use. There- fore, it is advisable to postpone training until the

skills learned in the training session can be put to immediate use on the job. Only then will the or- ganization reap any real benefits from its training efforts.

Avoiding Sin 7: Be True to the Organization’s Purpose

Constancy of purpose, from Deming’s view, is focus- ing on the long term to provide ever-improved prod- ucts and services for customers, jobs for employees, and dividends for shareholders—not just for the next quarter, but for 30 years from now. Johnson Bank, headquartered in Racine, Wisconsin, demonstrates its constancy of purpose with two messages that ap- pear on the LED signs outside its banks: “We treat you like family” and “Planning for the next quarter- century.” The proof of the value of Johnson Bank’s constancy of purpose became evident when major banks around the world were asking their govern- ments for help during the recent recession. Johnson Bank did not. The bank was also recognized in 2010 as one of the “Greenest Banks in the United States.” All its success can be traced back to its founder, Sam Johnson, and his purpose for the bank: “To make the communities we live in a better place because we are there.”

Constancy of purpose, from Deming’s view, is fo- cusing on the long term to provide ever-improved products and services for customers, jobs for em- ployees, and dividends for shareholders—not just for the next quarter, but for 30 years from now.

So what can companies do to ensure they have con- stancy of purpose? The challenge for corporate lead- ers is to balance the pressure on the next quarter’s results with the long-term health of the organiza- tion. This can be very difficult if executive bonuses are tied to annual performance. Boards of directors need to ensure that compensation plans do not send the wrong message if they truly believe in constancy

G l o b a l B u s i n e s s a n d O r g a n i z a t i o n a l E x c e l l e n c e J a n u a r y / F e b r u a r y 2 0 1 1 5 1D O I : 1 0 . 1 0 0 2 / j o e

of purpose. Likewise, investors also need to shift their focus away from a short-term orientation and tie organizational bonuses to the long-term growth of their wealth. When adhered to within a culture of continual improvement that is focused on improving value for the customers, constancy of purpose will deliver the ultimate dividends.

Organizations around the world have different is- sues, based on their political, commercial, and social environment, as well as the maturity of their own culture’s view toward improvement. Young compa- nies have a clear advantage to establish the right culture from the beginning. But no matter where an organization is in its journey to continual improve- ment, it is never too late to learn from others, its own organization, its partners, and even its competi- tors and, thus, avoid repeating the mistakes of the past.

References

Collins, J. (2009). How the mighty fall. New York: Harper- Collins.

Deming, W. E. (1986). Out of the crisis. Cambridge, MA: MIT.

Kotter, J. (1995). Leading change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Liker, J. (2003). The Toyota way. New York: McGraw-Hill.

McKinsey & Company. (2006, July). Organizing for success- ful change management: A McKinsey Global Survey.

McKinsey & Company. (2008, August). Creating organiza- tional transformations: McKinsey Global Survey results.

Senge, P. (1999). The dance of change. New York: Currency Doubleday.

Shirouzu, N. (2010, March 1). Toyoda visits China. Wall Street Journal (Asia edition). Retrieved from http://online.wsj .com/article/SB1000142405274870408990457509326112- 5732590.html

Valdes-Dapena, P. (2010, February 24). Former exec: Toy- ota was ‘hijacked.’ Retrieved from http://money.cnn.com/ 2010/02/24/autos/press toyota statement/index.htm

Ron Kingen is president of the CVI c©-Lighthouse Group, a consulting practice that helps companies improve their value for all shareholders and stakeholders, including communities and the environment. He is also a partner in GTA Partners, an interim personnel placement business for mid- to senior- level personnel. He has served as president and chair of the board of directors of the American Society for Quality (ASQ), and holds the following ASQ Certifications: Six Sigma Black Belt, Quality Engineer, Reliability Engineer, Quality Audi- tor, and Manager of Quality and Organizational Excellence. He also has a Master Lean Sigma Black Belt. He can be reached at [email protected]. Patrick Wilkerson is a Continual Value Improvement consultant working with CVI c©-Lighthouse Group on operational improvement– related assignments. He specializes in office and plant process workflow improvements, waste elimination, and variation reduction. Wilkerson is also president of Northwest Group Inc., a contract manufacturing company specializing in com- plex engine gaskets and assemblies. A Lean Six Sigma Black Belt, he is a member of the American Society for Quality and the Society of Manufacturing Engineers and serves on the education and certification committee for the SME Chicago chapter. He can be reached at [email protected].

5 2 J a n u a r y / F e b r u a r y 2 0 1 1 G l o b a l B u s i n e s s a n d O r g a n i z a t i o n a l E x c e l l e n c eD O I : 1 0 . 1 0 0 2 / j o e

Copyright of Global Business & Organizational Excellence is the property of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. and its

content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's

express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.