toyota information system case study

When HBS professor Steven Spear recently released an abstract on problem solving at Toyota, HBS Working Knowledge staffer Sarah Jane Johnston e-mailed off some questions. Spear not only answered the questions, but also asked some of his own—and answered those as well.

Sarah Jane Johnston: Why study Toyota? With all the books and articles on Toyota, lean manufacturing, just-in-time, kanban systems, quality systems, etc. that came out in the 1980s and 90s, hasn't the topic been exhausted?

Steven Spear: Well, this has been a much-researched area. When Kent Bowen and I first did a literature search, we found nearly 3,000 articles and books had been published on some of the topics you just mentioned.

However, there was an apparent discrepancy. There had been this wide, long-standing recognition of Toyota as the premier automobile manufacturer in terms of the unmatched combination of high quality, low cost, short lead-time and flexible production. And Toyota's operating system—the Toyota Production System—had been widely credited for Toyota's sustained leadership in manufacturing performance. Furthermore, Toyota had been remarkably open in letting outsiders study its operations. The American Big Three and many other auto companies had done major benchmarking studies, and they and other companies had tried to implement their own forms of the Toyota Production System. There is the Ford Production System, the Chrysler Operating System, and General Motors went so far as to establish a joint venture with Toyota called NUMMI, approximately fifteen years ago.

However, despite Toyota's openness and the genuinely honest efforts by other companies over many years to emulate Toyota, no one had yet matched Toyota in terms of having simultaneously high-quality, low-cost, short lead-time, flexible production over time and broadly based across the system.

It was from observations such as these that Kent and I started to form the impression that despite all the attention that had already been paid to Toyota, something critical was being missed. Therefore, we approached people at Toyota to ask what they did that others might have missed.

What did they say?

To paraphrase one of our contacts, he said, "It's not that we don't want to tell you what TPS is, it's that we can't. We don't have adequate words for it. But, we can show you what TPS is."

Over about a four-year period, they showed us how work was actually done in practice in dozens of plants. Kent and I went to Toyota plants and those of suppliers here in the U.S. and in Japan and directly watched literally hundreds of people in a wide variety of roles, functional specialties, and hierarchical levels. I personally was in the field for at least 180 working days during that time and even spent one week at a non-Toyota plant doing assembly work and spent another five months as part of a Toyota team that was trying to teach TPS at a first-tier supplier in Kentucky.

What did you discover?

We concluded that Toyota has come up with a powerful, broadly applicable answer to a fundamental managerial problem. The products we consume and the services we use are typically not the result of a single person's effort. Rather, they come to us through the collective effort of many people each doing a small part of the larger whole. To a certain extent, this is because of the advantages of specialization that Adam Smith identified in pin manufacturing as long ago as 1776 in The Wealth of Nations . However, it goes beyond the economies of scale that accrue to the specialist, such as skill and equipment focus, setup minimization, etc.

The products and services characteristic of our modern economy are far too complex for any one person to understand how they work. It is cognitively overwhelming. Therefore, organizations must have some mechanism for decomposing the whole system into sub-system and component parts, each "cognitively" small or simple enough for individual people to do meaningful work. However, decomposing the complex whole into simpler parts is only part of the challenge. The decomposition must occur in concert with complimentary mechanisms that reintegrate the parts into a meaningful, harmonious whole.

This common yet nevertheless challenging problem is obviously evident when we talk about the design of complex technical devices. Automobiles have tens of thousands of mechanical and electronic parts. Software has millions and millions of lines of code. Each system can require scores if not hundreds of person-work-years to be designed. No one person can be responsible for the design of a whole system. No one is either smart enough or long-lived enough to do the design work single handedly.

Furthermore, we observe that technical systems are tested repeatedly in prototype forms before being released. Why? Because designers know that no matter how good their initial efforts, they will miss the mark on the first try. There will be something about the design of the overall system structure or architecture, the interfaces that connect components, or the individual components themselves that need redesign. In other words, to some extent the first try will be wrong, and the organization designing a complex system needs to design, test, and improve the system in a way that allows iterative congruence to an acceptable outcome.

The same set of conditions that affect groups of people engaged in collaborative product design affect groups of people engaged in the collaborative production and delivery of goods and services. As with complex technical systems, there would be cognitive overload for one person to design, test-in-use, and improve the work systems of factories, hotels, hospitals, or agencies as reflected in (a) the structure of who gets what good, service, or information from whom, (b) the coordinative connections among people so that they can express reliably what they need to do their work and learn what others need from them, and (c) the individual work activities that create intermediate products, services, and information. In essence then, the people who work in an organization that produces something are simultaneously engaged in collaborative production and delivery and are also engaged in a collaborative process of self-reflective design, "prototype testing," and improvement of their own work systems amidst changes in market needs, products, technical processes, and so forth.

It is our conclusion that Toyota has developed a set of principles, Rules-in-Use we've called them, that allow organizations to engage in this (self-reflective) design, testing, and improvement so that (nearly) everyone can contribute at or near his or her potential, and when the parts come together the whole is much, much greater than the sum of the parts.

What are these rules?

We've seen that consistently—across functional roles, products, processes (assembly, equipment maintenance and repair, materials logistics, training, system redesign, administration, etc.), and hierarchical levels (from shop floor to plant manager and above) that in TPS managed organizations the design of nearly all work activities, connections among people, and pathways of connected activities over which products, services, and information take form are specified-in-their-design, tested-with-their-every-use, and improved close in time, place, and person to the occurrence of every problem.

That sounds pretty rigorous.

It is, but consider what the Toyota people are attempting to accomplish. They are saying before you (or you all) do work, make clear what you expect to happen (by specifying the design), each time you do work, see that what you expected has actually occurred (by testing with each use), and when there is a difference between what had actually happened and what was predicted, solve problems while the information is still fresh.

That reminds me of what my high school lab science teacher required.

Exactly! This is a system designed for broad based, frequent, rapid, low-cost learning. The "Rules" imply a belief that we may not get the right solution (to work system design) on the first try, but that if we design everything we do as a bona fide experiment, we can more rapidly converge, iteratively, and at lower cost, on the right answer, and, in the process, learn a heck of lot more about the system we are operating.

You say in your article that the Toyota system involves a rigorous and methodical problem-solving approach that is made part of everyone's work and is done under the guidance of a teacher. How difficult would it be for companies to develop their own program based on the Toyota model?

Your question cuts right to a critical issue. We discussed earlier the basic problem that for complex systems, responsibility for design, testing, and improvement must be distributed broadly. We've observed that Toyota, its best suppliers, and other companies that have learned well from Toyota can confidently distribute a tremendous amount of responsibility to the people who actually do the work, from the most senior, expeirenced member of the organization to the most junior. This is accomplished because of the tremendous emphasis on teaching everyone how to be a skillful problem solver.

How do they do this?

They do this by teaching people to solve problems by solving problems. For instance, in our paper we describe a team at a Toyota supplier, Aisin. The team members, when they were first hired, were inexperienced with at best an average high school education. In the first phase of their employment, the hurdle was merely learning how to do the routine work for which they were responsible. Soon thereafter though, they learned how to immediately identify problems that occurred as they did their work. Then they learned how to do sophisticated root-cause analysis to find the underlying conditions that created the symptoms that they had experienced. Then they regularly practiced developing counter-measures—changes in work, tool, product, or process design—that would remove the underlying root causes.

Sounds impressive.

Yes, but frustrating. They complained that when they started, they were "blissful in their ignorance." But after this sustained development, they could now see problems, root down to their probable cause, design solutions, but the team members couldn't actually implement these solutions. Therefore, as a final round, the team members received training in various technical crafts—one became a licensed electrician, another a machinist, another learned some carpentry skills.

Was this unique?

Absolutely not. We saw the similar approach repeated elsewhere. At Taiheiyo, another supplier, team members made sophisticated improvements in robotic welding equipment that reduced cost, increased quality, and won recognition with an award from the Ministry of Environment. At NHK (Nippon Spring) another team conducted a series of experiments that increased quality, productivity, and efficiency in a seat production line.

What is the role of the manager in this process?

Your question about the role of the manager gets right to the heart of the difficulty of managing this way. For many people, it requires a profound shift in mind-set in terms of how the manager envisions his or her role. For the team at Aisin to become so skilled as problem solvers, they had to be led through their training by a capable team leader and group leader. The team leader and group leader were capable of teaching these skills in a directed, learn-by-doing fashion, because they too were consistently trained in a similar fashion by their immediate senior. We found that in the best TPS-managed plants, there was a pathway of learning and teaching that cascaded from the most senior levels to the most junior. In effect, the needs of people directly touching the work determined the assistance, problem solving, and training activities of those more senior. This is a sharp contrast, in fact a near inversion, in terms of who works for whom when compared with the more traditional, centralized command and control system characterized by a downward diffusion of work orders and an upward reporting of work status.

And if you are hiring a manager to help run this system, what are the attributes of the ideal candidate?

We observed that the best managers in these TPS managed organizations, and the managers in organizations that seem to adopt the Rules-in-Use approach most rapidly are humble but also self-confident enough to be great learners and terrific teachers. Furthermore, they are willing to subscribe to a consistent set of values.

How do you mean?

Again, it is what is implied in the guideline of specifying every design, testing with every use, and improving close in time, place, and person to the occurrence of every problem. If we do this consistently, we are saying through our action that when people come to work, they are entitled to expect that they will succeed in doing something of value for another person. If they don't succeed, they are entitled to know immediately that they have not. And when they have not succeeded, they have the right to expect that they will be involved in creating a solution that makes success more likely on the next try. People who cannot subscribe to these ideas—neither in their words nor in their actions—are not likely to manage effectively in this system.

That sounds somewhat high-minded and esoteric.

I agree with you that it strikes the ear as sounding high principled but perhaps not practical. However, I'm fundamentally an empiricist, so I have to go back to what we have observed. In organizations in which managers really live by these Rules, either in the Toyota system or at sites that have successfully transformed themselves, there is a palpable, positive difference in the attitude of people that is coupled with exceptional performance along critical business measures such as quality, cost, safety, and cycle time.

Have any other research projects evolved from your findings?

We titled the results of our initial research "Decoding the DNA of the Toyota Production System." Kent and I are reasonably confident that the Rules-in-Use about which we have written are a successful decoding. Now, we are trying to "replicate the DNA" at a variety of sites. We want to know where and when these Rules create great value, and where they do, how they can be implemented most effectively.

Since we are empiricists, we are conducting experiments through our field research. We are part of a fairly ambitious effort at Alcoa to develop and deploy the Alcoa Business System, ABS. This is a fusion of Alcoa's long standing value system, which has helped make Alcoa the safest employer in the country, with the Rules in Use. That effort has been going on for a number of years, first with the enthusiastic support of Alcoa's former CEO, Paul O'Neill, now Secretary of the Treasury (not your typical retirement, eh?) and now with the backing of Alain Belda, the company's current head. There have been some really inspirational early results in places as disparate as Hernando, Mississippi and Poces de Caldas, Brazil and with processes as disparate as smelting, extrusion, die design, and finance.

We also started creating pilot sites in the health care industry. We started our work with a "learning unit" at Deaconess-Glover Hospital in Needham, not far from campus. We've got a series of case studies that captures some of the learnings from that effort. More recently, we've established pilot sites at Presbyterian and South Side Hospitals, both part of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. This work is part of a larger, comprehensive effort being made under the auspices of the Pittsburgh Regional Healthcare Initiative, with broad community support, with cooperation from the Centers for Disease Control, and with backing from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

Also, we've been testing these ideas with our students: Kent in the first year Technology and Operations Management class for which he is course head, me in a second year elective called Running and Growing the Small Company, and both of us in an Executive Education course in which we participate called Building Competitive Advantage Through Operations.

· · · ·

Steven Spear is an Assistant Professor in the Technology and Operations Management Unit at the Harvard Business School.

Other HBS Working Knowledge stories featuring Steven J. Spear: Decoding the DNA of the Toyota Production System Why Your Organization Isn't Learning All It Should

Developing Skillful Problem Solvers: Introduction

Within TPS-managed organizations, people are trained to improve the work that they perform, they learn to do this with the guidance of a capable supplier of assistance and training, and training occurs by solving production and delivery-related problems as bona fide, hypothesis-testing experiments. Examples of this approach follow.

• A quality improvement team at a Toyota supplier, Taiheiyo, conducted a series of experiments to eliminate the spatter and fumes emitted by robotic welders. The quality circle members, all line workers, conducted a series of complex experiments that resulted in a cleaner, safer work environment, equipment that operated with less cost and higher reliability, and relief for more technically-skilled maintenance and engineering specialists from basic equipment maintenance and repair.
• A work team at NHK (Nippon Spring) Toyota, were taught to conduct a series of experiments over many months to improve the process by which arm rest inserts were "cold molded." The team reduced the cost, shortened the cycle time, and improved the quality while simultaneously developing the capability to take a similar experimental approach to process improvement in the future.
• At Aisin, a team of production line workers progressed from having the skills to do only routine production work to having the skills to identify problems, investigate root causes, develop counter-measures, and reconfigure equipment as skilled electricians and machinists. This transformation occurred primarily through the mechanism of problem solving-based training.
• Another example from Aisin illustrates how improvement efforts—in this case of the entire production system by senior managers—were conducted as a bona fide hypothesis-refuting experiment.
• The Acme and Ohba examples contrast the behavior of managers deeply acculturated in Toyota with that of their less experienced colleagues. The Acme example shows the relative emphasis one TPS acculturated manager placed on problem solving as a training opportunity in comparison to his colleagues who used the problem-solving opportunity as a chance to first make process improvements. An additional example from a Toyota supplier reinforces the notion of using problem solving as a vehicle to teach.
• The data section concludes with an example given by a former employee of two companies, both of which have been recognized for their efforts to be a "lean manufacturer" but neither of which has been trained in Toyota's own methods. The approach evident at Toyota and its suppliers was not evident in this person's narrative.

Defining conditions as problematic

We concluded that within Toyota Production System-managed organizations three sets of conditions are considered problematic and prompt problem-solving efforts. These are summarized here and are discussed more fully in a separate paper titled "Pursuing the IDEAL: Conditions that Prompt Problem Solving in Toyota Production System-Managed Organizations."

Failure to meet a customer need

It was typically recognized as a problem if someone was unable to provide the good, service, or information needed by an immediate or external customer.

Failure to do work as designed

Even if someone was able to meet the need of his or her customers without fail (agreed upon mix, volume, and timing of goods and services), it was typically recognized as a problem if a person was unable to do his or her own individual work or convey requests (i.e., "Please send me this good or service that I need to do my work.") and responses (i.e., "Here is the good or service that you requested, in the quantity you requested.").

Failure to do work in an IDEAL fashion

Even if someone could meet customer needs and do his or her work as designed, it was typically recognized as a problem if that person's work was not IDEAL. IDEAL production and delivery is that which is defect-free, done on demand, in batches of one, immediate, without waste, and in an environment that is physically, emotionally, and professionally safe. The improvement activities detailed in the cases that follow, the reader will see, were motivated not so much by a failure to meet customer needs or do work as designed. Rather, they were motivated by costs that were too high (i.e., Taiheiyo robotic welding operation), batch sizes that were too great (i.e., the TSSC improvement activity evaluated by Mr. Ohba), lead-times that were too long, processes that were defect-causing (i.e., NHK cold-forming process), and by compromises to safety (i.e., Taiheiyo).

Our field research suggests that Toyota and those of its suppliers that are especially adroit at the Toyota Production System make a deliberate effort to develop the problem-solving skills of workers—even those engaged in the most routine production and delivery. We saw evidence of this in the Taiheiyo, NHK, and Aisin quality circle examples.

Forums are created in which problem solving can be learned in a learn-by-doing fashion. This point was evident in the quality circle examples. It was also evident to us in the role played by Aisin's Operations Management Consulting Division (OMCD), Toyota's OMCD unit in Japan, and Toyota's Toyota Supplier Support Center (TSSC) in North America. All of these organizations support the improvement efforts of the companies' factories and those of the companies' suppliers. In doing so, these organizations give operating managers opportunities to hone their problem-solving and teaching skills, relieved temporarily of day to day responsibility for managing, production and delivery of goods and services to external customers.

Learning occurs with the guidance of a capable teacher. This was evident in that each of the quality circles had a specific group leader who acted as coach for the quality circle's team leader. We also saw how Mr. Seto at NHK defined his role as, in part, as developing the problem-solving and teaching skills of the team leader whom he supervised.

Problem solving occurs as bona fide experiments. We saw this evident in the experience of the quality circles who learned to organize their efforts as bona fide experiments rather than as ad hoc attempts to find a feasible, sufficient solution. The documentation prepared by the senior team at Aisin is organized precisely to capture improvement ideas as refutable hypotheses.

Broadly dispersed scientific problem solving as a dynamic capability

Problem solving, as illustrated in this paper, is a classic example of a dynamic capability highlighted in the "resource-based" view of the firm literature.

Scientific problem solving—as a broadly dispersed skill—is time consuming to develop and difficult to imitate. Emulation would require a similar investment in time, and, more importantly, in managerial resources available to teach, coach, assist, and direct. For organizations currently operating with a more traditional command and control approach, allocating such managerial resources would require more than a reallocation of time across a differing set of priorities. It would also require an adjustment of values and the processes through which those processes are expressed. Christensen would argue that existing organizations are particularly handicapped in making such adjustments.

Excerpted with permission from "Developing Skillful Problem Solvers in Toyota Production System-Managed Organizations: Learning to Problem Solve by Solving Problems," HBS Working Paper , 2001.

Product details

Time period

Geographical setting, featured company, featured protagonist.

• Akio Toyoda (male), President and CEO

• 75-Year History TOP
•  >  A 75-Year History through Data
•  >  Management and Company Information
•  >  Personnel Matters
•  > Information Systems
• Personnel Matters
• Information Systems

Toyota has actively propelled growth and innovation in its information systems by incorporating new information processing technologies while responding to various changes in the external environment, including rapid globalization of development, manufacturing, and sales operations; advancements in car electronics technologies; compliance with global environmental standards; and changes in the Japanese and global economy.

Growth and innovation of information systems at Toyota in the second half of the 1980s to first half of the 1990s saw advances in office automation and in the globalization of corporate systems in the commercial systems of business application systems. In the engineering systems of business application systems, Toyota applied in-house-developed CAD/CAM systems to broader areas of activity and also extended them to supplier operations.

From the second half of the 1990s to the early 2000s, advancements in administrative systems made information systems more globally adaptable and also brought about reform of Toyota's overall management structure. Innovations in engineering system made engineering data more integrated and more useable on a global basis.

From the early to late 2000s, Toyota sought to globally standardize all business application systems and make better use of information. Even such IT infrastructure as IC network systems were globally standardized and shifted to TCP/IP-based systems in Japan and overseas. The economic crisis that shook the world from 2008 to 2009 also had a major impact on Toyota's information divisions. Since then, Toyota has sought to improve the efficiency of system development and maintenance and has instituted structural reform of its system development and maintenance organization.

• Business Data Processing Systems
• Technical Data Processing Systems
• IT Infrastructure
• Business Application Systems (Commercial Systems)
• Business Application Systems (Engineering Systems)

Developments in Business Data Processing Systems

• Organizational Changes

Computer Systems Introduced

Bill of Materials

Order Systems

• Business Objectives
• Changes and Innovations
• List of Executives
• Past Chairmen, Vice Chairmen, and Presidents (including National Honors and Decorations)
• Changes in Balance Sheets
• Changes in Income
• Changes in Shareholders' Equity
• Changes in Large Shareholders
• Changes in R&D Expenditures
• Automotive Organizations
• Economic Organizations
• Personnel Systems
• Developments in Education
• Training Facilities
• Changes in the Number of Employees
• Human Relations Activities: HUREAI Activities
• Human Relations Activities: Toyota Clubs
• Types of Facilities
• Dormitories and Company Housing
• Toyota Memorial Hospital, Toyota Motor Health Insurance Society, and Toyota Motor Pension Fund
• Joint Declaration of Labor and Management-Signed Declaration
• Past Officers and Union Membership
• Quality Assurance Activities
• Customer Relations Activities
• Chronology of Environmental Initiatives by Field
• Environment
• Traffic Safety
• Society and Culture
• Volunteer Activities
• Overseas Activities

Reference guide

• Labor-Management Relations

Capital Markets

Consumer goods, government and public services, life sciences, manufacturing, experiences.

• Customer Experience
• Workplace Experience
• Digital Products and Services

Microsoft Technology Services

• Analytics, Data and AI
• Emerging Technology
• Microsoft Security
• Modern Workplace

Integrated Solutions

• Cyber Resilience
• Digital Sustainability
• Future of Work
• Modernizing Cloud, Data and AI
• Smart Manufacturing and Products

Managed Services

Technology partnerships, client success stories, join avanade, life at avanade, internships, search jobs, responsible business.

• Global - English
• Australia - English
• Austria - German
• Belgium - English
• Brazil - Portuguese
• Canada - English
• Canada - French
• China - Chinese (Simplified)
• Denmark - English
• Finland - English
• France - French
• Germany - German
• Ireland - English
• Italy - Italian
• Japan - Japanese
• Malaysia - English
• Netherlands - English
• Norway - English
• Poland - English
• Portugal - Portuguese
• Singapore - English
• Spain - Spanish
• Sweden - English
• Switzerland - English
• United Arab Emirates - English
• United Kingdom - English
• United States - English

What matters to Toyota is realizing digitalization that drives the future

Share this page

Business situation.

As a world leader in innovative automotive products, Toyota Motor Corporation (Toyota) is fully committed to advancing digitalization throughout the company. To promote this digitalization, company leadership understands that all employees need to become agents of change. As such, Toyota is using “citizen development” as an effective means of solving onsite problems. This involves allowing employees with knowledge about their specific workplace needs to use no-code/low-code development tools to independently transform their business operations.

Having seen the short lead times that were possible for development using Microsoft Power Platform , management wanted to maximize the benefits of no-code/low-code development and increase the number of citizen developers in the company. Subsequently, Microsoft Teams  was introduced within Toyota and a technical community was launched on the platform.

"I think that what is essential for digital transformation is not to arrive at the top of the mountain and achieve a goal, but to create a state that is flexible enough to be able to respond to this wave of ever-changing conditions." Mr. Kenji Nagata Digital Transformation Promotion Department, Toyota Motor Corporation

The main activities of the citizen developer community include knowledge, expertise sharing and QA support. Within six months, more than 3,000 employees were part of the community. Since they volunteer outside of their main duties, the influx of novice users and their needs for support created a challenge for some of the more experienced community participants.

To support the growing interest in citizen development being embraced across the company, Toyota’s Information Systems Division partnered with Avanade to create a centre of excellence (CoE) to strengthen skills acquisition, self-help and support options for community members. The CoE supports the promotion of internal digital transformation, focusing on four priorities:

1. Education that supports employee development 2. Support for the promotion and popularization of employee development activities 3. Governance support 4. Service expansion to optimize smaller projects company-wide

Eight months after Avanade began providing support, employees are embracing digitalization. More than 1,200 technical counselling sessions were held, with more than 60% of participants improving their skills to intermediate levels. The number of active developers also grew to 2,845.

Extending employees’ technical capabilities is a benefit of working with Avanade, especially for those who have never developed software before. This support also allows some employees to focus on user interface and user experience development. In the future, Toyota leadership would like to expand the focus on digitalization through citizen development to other Toyota Group companies.

Related Client Stories

See the services we offer and the vision that informs them.

Insights to help you do what you do better, faster and more profitably.

About Avanade

Avanade is the leading provider of innovative digital, cloud and advisory services, industry solutions and design-led experiences across the Microsoft ecosystem.

Explore careers at Avanade, the leading provider of innovative IT consulting services focused on the Microsoft platform.

Media Center

Keep tabs on how and why we’re leading the marketplace.

Register to download the full Point of View.

• Bendi Drexel
• Switch to Electric
• Batteries & Chargers
• Racking & Shelving
• Online Catalog
• Fleet Management
• Toyota Lean Management
• Agriculture Industry
• Beverage Industry
• Distribution Industry
• Manufacturing Industry
• Concrete Industry
• Problems We Solve
• MyToyota Parts Store
• Forklift Certification Training Course
• Safety Checklists
• Safety Products
• Safety Videos
• Why Work with Us
• Hiring Forklift Technicians
• Leadership Library

Toyota’s Lean Management Program Explained (with Real Life Examples)

by Frank Stuart , on Nov 1, 2023 3:45:00 AM

If you’ve ever searched for information online about the Toyota Production System, you've probably seen a variety of house-shaped graphics. But even though we all know what a house is, understanding what the TPS house graphic means can be a challenge — especially when some of the words are Japanese.

In this article, I’ll explain the house graphic and Toyota’s lean management principles. Because I worked for Toyota and have spent many years as a Toyota lean practitioner, I’ll share insights you won’t find anywhere else including:

• How the Toyota management system boosts employee retention
• Three common misinterpretations of Toyota’s lean methodology
• Several real-world examples and a customer case study

The Toyota Production System is What Makes Toyota #1

Toyota has made the best-selling forklift in North America since 2002. That’s a long time to be number one. How do they do it? By following the Toyota Production System (TPS). 

What is Toyota Lean Management vs. The Toyota Production System? Toyota Lean Management (TLM) is a system that takes the principles of the Toyota Production System and applies them to other industries such as construction, supply chain, healthcare and of course manufacturing. I’ve yet to find a business that doesn’t benefit from the Toyota production management system.

Toyota Principles Improve Retention and Your Bottom Line

Improving efficiency and customer satisfaction are the best-known reasons for following Toyota’s lean management practices. Most people don't know it can also improve employee retention.

Hiring and retaining qualified workers was the number one challenge reported in MHI’s 2024 Top Supply Chain Challenges survey . The responses come from more than 2000 manufacturing and supply chain industry leaders from a wide range of industries. 

This isn’t the first year hiring and retention created major heartburn for supply chain operations, and it likely won’t be the last. If finding and keeping good people is something your organization struggles with, TLM can help with that too .

Here’s my version of the TPS house.

Why is it a House?

Most people use a house-shaped graphic to explain TPS because the function of a house is to preserve what’s inside . All the parts of the house interact with each other to protect what’s the business and its people — from the groundwork to the pillars to the roof.

The Groundwork

Respect for People, Long-Term Thinking and Continually Improve

Respect for People, Long-Term Thinking and Continually Improve are fundamental management philosophies that drive all policy and decision-making under the Toyota way.

Respect for People is not about being nice (although that is important). This principle is about creating a home-like atmosphere where everyone is encouraged and supported to reach their full potential. 

EXAMPLE: A supervisor has monthly one-on-one meetings with each associate to:

• Review personal performance
• Discuss issues with work processes
• Uncover opportunities for improvement

This mentor-mentee program develops people from within. Associates move into higher and higher positions so eventually, the people leading the company not only know the product but understand the work.

Respect for people also includes being mindful of how decisions in one department affect another. Uncoordinated decisions can negatively impact the customer.

EXAMPLE: If sales and marketing decide to have a big sale the weekend before Thanksgiving, the extra orders could overwhelm an already understaffed shipping department — creating delays for the customer and/or increased overtime expenses.

Last but not least, respect for people means providing stable employment. This leads us to the next fundamental principle… 

Long-Term Thinking — During COVID and the supply chain challenges that followed, many companies made the hard decision to lay off workers. I was in the training department at Raymond during this time.

Instead of letting workers go, we chose to strengthen the company by training associates and improving processes. We developed online training programs on various topics for hundreds of associates in various roles. These actions and this type of thinking goes back to the 1950s when Toyota decided to focus on building a strong, stable company for the long term. The economy will cycle up and down, but because our people are our most important asset, we must take care of them and protect them, even during economic downturns.

Short-term decisions, like letting experienced and tenured employees go, can improve the bottom line in the short term, but long term it hurts the business. All too often, corporate culture lives and dies on a quarterly report. This is short-sighted. When times are good, you have to squirrel money away in your war chest to protect the company and its people when times are bad .

Continually Improve – It is said in business, as in life, we are either growing or dying. A structured focus on continual improvement ( kaizen ) and challenging the status quo ensures a company stays competitive and growing.

EXAMPLE: We challenged the team who reconditioned our forklifts this year. At the beginning of the year, our lead time was 12 weeks. By mapping the process, improving flow and using a kaizen philosophy, we are now at 6 weeks. We are not satisfied with this improvement and have further challenged the team to cut the lead time in half again by the end of this year.  

The Foundation

Organize, Standardize, Optimize

The next level of the TPS house is all about creating an efficient work environment. It starts with a clean, orderly workspace where the next tool (or whatever the worker needs) is right there and not hidden in a pile of clutter.

If we don’t give people an organized workspace and standards to follow, we’re not helping them be successful. Even worse, we’re wasting their time. It goes back to respect for people.

EXAMPLE: The litmus test I used in the factory was to have a workstation set up with all the necessary tools. If I could take a tool away from the workstation and the operator couldn’t tell me within five seconds what was missing, that meant we had more work to do to. 

To be clear, it isn’t about telling people: you must do it this way or to make changes for the sake of making changes. The goal is to:

• Find the best way of doing things for the people who are doing the work
• Develop standards and best practices
• If a better way is found, everyone starts using that new way instead

That last bullet point is the principle of kaizen showing up again. Toyota Lean Management is an ongoing process where small, incremental changes result in measurable improvements to quality or reduced cost, cycle or delivery times.

FYI, we haven’t gotten to the actual Toyota Production System yet. The groundwork and the foundation are the basis for TPS. The system doesn’t work without establishing the groundwork and creating a solid foundation. 

Creating optimized workspaces and processes are deceptively simple assignments. It’s really easy to make work hard and it’s hard to make work easy. When you’re stuck in chaos it can be hard to see the way out. 

The foundation of TPS helps make work easy. Once an orderly, efficient system has been established, we work on the two pillars.

TPS Pillars: The Toyota Production System

Just in Time & Continuous Flow

The first pillar is all about having what you need, when you need it. Waste, in the form of wasted time or excess inventory, should be avoided. 

Back in 2021, Bloomberg and other news organizations excitedly reported how Toyota had abandoned its “just in time” philosophy because it started stockpiling computer chips. This is just one example of how Toyota principles are misunderstood by the Western world.

Misunderstanding #1 Here’s what most news outlets got wrong: After the earthquake and tsunami in 2011, Toyota reevaluated the lead time required for semiconductors and other parts. Their assessment revealed they were unprepared for a major shock to the supply chain, such a natural disaster. 

To ensure a continuous flow of chips to their factories, Toyota required suppliers to carry a 2-6 month supply of semiconductors. When COVID hit, the news reported Toyota was “stockpiling” chips when, in fact, the company was simply following a plan it had created ten years earlier. 

Our business training in the Western world is all about the balance sheet. Reducing inventory becomes a goal unto itself and that’s when things start to go badly. “Just in time” doesn’t mean “last minute.” It means keeping enough supply to ensure a continuous flow.

For Toyota, "just in time" meant a supply that could weather supply chain ups and downs. In 2021, when the chip shortage forced other automakers to stop their production lines, Toyota kept churning out vehicles and raised its earnings forecast by 54% . 

Visual Management & Zero Defects

EXAMPLE: Zero defects is pretty self-explanatory, but here’s an example of zero defects through visual management. The first thing Mr. Toyoda built was an automated loom for the textile industry. Occasionally, a thread would break and the operator wouldn’t see it. When this happened, the final product had to be thrown away. 

To fix the problem, Mr. Toyoda put a washer in the thread. If the thread broke, the washer fell off into the machine and it stopped. The operator could fix the problem without any waste (defective product). This also allowed one operator to oversee multiple machines.

Misunderstanding #2 Some people say Toyota Lean Management is basically the same as Six Sigma. I disagree. There are major differences between the two systems , but here’s a big one related to TPS Pillar Two: Six Sigma says you can have 3.4 defects per million operations. An “operation” is defined as a single action, such as attaching a wire or screwing a bolt. Building a jumbo jet requires millions of operations. Knowing 3.4 defects are permitted per million operations, would you rather fly on an airplane built by a company that follows Six Sigma principles or Toyota?

Another comparison you may have heard is one about a GM versus a Toyota factory. At GM, workers can get in trouble for stopping the line. At Toyota, it’s the opposite. If workers aren’t periodically stopping the line, managers get concerned. It goes back to the fundamental principles we talked about in the very beginning: respect for people and a culture of continuous improvement.

Toyota Lean Management Case Study

I worked with a hard cider manufacturer in upstate NY. The company was approaching its busy season and trying to build up its inventory to supply its distributor. Their “we gotta get this done” mentality caused them to overrun their facility.

A Foundational Problem The company thought they were following the “just in time” lean methodology. What they had was a mess. 

• Product and supplies were all over the place
• Equipment was haphazardly maintained
• They didn't have good standards on how to clean the kegs

A bottleneck in their system meant a new batch would get stuck behind the previous batch and unfinished inventory would pile up. Disorganization and stress led to unnecessary handling, damage and waste (wasted time and wasted product). 

After speaking to everyone who helped produce the cider, we created a list of best practices. Next, we helped the company organize, standardize and optimize the workspaces and procedures throughout their facility. With groundwork laid and a firm foundation in place, we were ready to move on to Pillars One and Two.

Guess what? The company had more than enough capacity. They didn’t need to build up inventory for their distributor. All they had to do was tame their operational chaos.

• Standardized practices saved time and improved product quality
• Clear processes and optimized workspaces helped everyone work more efficiently
• The company reclaimed space previously used to store inventory

Cider Batches Now Flow Continuously Once the bottleneck was subdued and equipment was kept in good working order, the cider company could run continuously with minimal downtime between batches. By staggering five batches to start over six weeks the company could meet customer demands.

The Core of the House: Its People

Grow People: Skills, Competence, Leaders

I added this circle in the center of the house (you won’t find it in other TPS house graphics) because I was fortunate to learn about Toyota’s lean management system directly from Toyota executives. 

The addition was inspired by a story I heard that really stuck in my mind. Mr. Onishi, Toyota’s president, visited a plant in Canada. He asked one of the plant managers to explain TPS. The manager described the house and the elements of zero defects, continuous improvement, etc. Mr. Onishi politely said, “It’s actually a people development process. We want to improve people’s skills and competence and grow them into leaders. Our goal is to promote people from within because they know the products, the customers and understand the work.”

The TPS Circle

Everything starts and ends with respect. 

Teamwork is about supporting the person who does the thing the customer is paying for. 

EXAMPLE: At SST, that means the technician working on a customer’s forklift.

Go and See — when a problem arises, the best way to find a solution is to observe the problem. 

EXAMPLE #1: At the forklift factory, units occasionally came off the line with the wrong counterweight. We observed the employee do everything right until one time he read the build sheet but chose the wrong counterweight. He was always on the go which created an opportunity for this mistake. By adding a simple step, stopping to highlight the weight info, the problem disappeared.

EXAMPLE #2: A warehouse thought they needed to buy more pallet rack and even had a rack consultant on-site while I was there. Turns out the company had plenty of rack space. They just needed to throw out three years of inventory they couldn't sell. The executive team almost wasted thousands of dollars on rack they didn’t need rather than take a hit on their balance sheet.

Challenge does not mean I had a challenging day because two associates didn’t show up for work. It means aiming for the stars and making it to the moon.

To generate significant improvements, you need an aggressive challenge and a team that’s committed to reaching a common goal. It changes your approach. To keep the space analogy going, consider all the technological innovations we enjoy that came from putting a man on the moon .

Misunderstanding #3 Toyota’s Production System strives for 100% customer satisfaction by eliminating wasteful activities. Many business leaders incorrectly believe running lean means using cheaper materials or reducing staff. By now you know this isn't the Toyota way. Building a strong house requires leaders who respect their people and think long-term. 

Companies that refuse to think beyond the bottom line will always struggle to stay competitive. Their short-term savings on cheap materials create long-term losses as customers become dissatisfied. They will also waste money hiring and training people who leave when they aren’t treated with respect. 

Sometimes I have to have a conversation with new clients about helping team members overcome challenges. When something goes wrong, some companies look for someone to blame (reprimand or fire) but that’s not the Toyota way.

Toyota’s approach focuses on fixing broken systems, not pointing fingers. We encourage leaders to challenge their team members to improve processes, but if the team member fails and gets fired after one try, how is that person’s replacement going to feel about taking on the same challenge?

The Roof of the TPS House

The roof protects the house and the people inside. A safe workplace that produces quality products at the lowest cost with the shortest delivery time in a good environment generates high morale and protects the business. By protecting the business, you protect the people inside and help them to grow into successful leaders. 

Request a Free Toyota Lean Management Consultation

If you’d like to reduce costs and turnover while increasing customer satisfaction, why not schedule a free consultation ? Toyota Lean Management has a low cost of implementation and is designed to help you get more out of your existing resources. 

During the initial consultation, we’ll talk about where your company is now versus where you’d like to be. The next steps depend on the individual client, but typically we’ll Go and See your space and look for:

• Inventory build-ups
• Excessive transportation
• Cluttered workspaces
• Unnecessary motion
• Producing more than what’s needed for the near-term
• Piles of defects

To learn more, contact us online or by phone (800) 226-2345.

FLORIDA : Jacksonville South, Jacksonville North, Ocala, Orlando, Lakeland, Tampa, Winter Haven GEORGIA : Albany, Macon, Midland, Valdosta

The SST Blog

Want to increase your productivity, increase your safety, and increase your profits? Our blog can help. Fill out our form below to subscribe.

Subscribe to Updates

• Aerial Equipment (3)
• Electric (11)
• Finance and Leasing (5)
• Fleet Management (7)
• Forklift Batteries (5)
• Forklift Maintenance (24)
• Forklift Parts (6)
• Forklift Repair (15)
• Forklifts (47)
• Industrial Cleaning (5)
• Insider (2)
• Loading Dock (2)
• New Equipment (9)
• Pallet Jack (2)
• Pallet Rack (10)
• Problems We Solve (7)
• Recruitment (3)
• Safety (32)
• Scissor Lift (3)
• Special Offers (3)
• Stacker (2)
• Toyota Lean Management (3)
• Training (10)
• Used Equipment (4)
• Utility Vehicles (2)
• Warehouse Automation (9)
• Warehouse Solutions (24)
• May 2023 (4)
• May 2019 (3)
• December 2019 (3)
• February 2020 (3)
• May 2020 (3)
• October 2020 (3)
• May 2021 (3)
• September 2021 (3)
• March 2022 (3)
• July 2022 (3)
• September 2022 (3)
• July 2023 (3)
• August 2023 (3)
• October 2023 (3)
• April 2024 (3)
• May 2024 (3)
• August 2018 (2)
• June 2019 (2)
• July 2019 (2)
• September 2019 (2)
• July 2020 (2)
• August 2020 (2)
• November 2020 (2)
• December 2020 (2)
• January 2021 (2)
• March 2021 (2)
• April 2021 (2)
• June 2021 (2)
• July 2021 (2)
• August 2021 (2)
• October 2021 (2)
• November 2021 (2)
• December 2021 (2)
• January 2022 (2)
• February 2022 (2)
• April 2022 (2)
• June 2022 (2)
• November 2022 (2)
• February 2023 (2)
• April 2023 (2)
• June 2023 (2)
• September 2023 (2)
• November 2023 (2)
• December 2023 (2)
• January 2024 (2)
• February 2024 (2)
• March 2024 (2)
• February 2019 (1)
• April 2019 (1)
• August 2019 (1)
• October 2019 (1)
• January 2020 (1)
• April 2020 (1)
• June 2020 (1)
• February 2021 (1)
• May 2022 (1)
• August 2022 (1)
• October 2022 (1)
• December 2022 (1)
• January 2023 (1)

Southern States Toyotalift

Corporate office 115 s. 78th st,  tampa, fl 33619  call:  800.226.2345  •  813.734.7940 accounts receivable: (813) 549-3545 / [email protected], florida locations.

Winter Haven, FL 863.967.8551

Orlando, FL 407.859.3000

Ocala, FL 352.840.0030

Jacksonville, FL 904.764.7662

Lakeland, FL 863.577.5438

Georgia Locations

Valdosta, GA 229.247.8377

Macon, GA 478.788.0520  

Midland, GA 706.660.0067

Albany, GA 229.338.7277

• Spotter Trucks
• Personnel Carriers
• JLG Aerial Platforms
• Industrial Floor Cleaners