So were all taking about different things now, even different time periods - and very little is about lean. Most of it has become theoretical economical eco systems.
WatchCat - small and medium sized companies can and do have assembly lines and mass produce parts - I’ve worked in all 3 ‘size’ categorizations and each has had assembly lines and mass production and in some cases each hasn’t. If you look at the definitions of those industrial terms you will see that organizational size doesn’t matter.
Lean doesn’t only apply to automation or mass production. It works in many types of organizations and industries. In fact some of the largest benefits are often in the non-manufacturing ‘support’ or ‘salaried’ positions. The real fact remains that there are very few organizations that have achieved a lean operating state.
Bill - your example of the guy pushing a broom is one that must be interpreted in terms of Lean, not cost savings. In many cases the ‘pushing broom’ is something operators do when there is a line down or as part of the standard 5S work. Depending on the situation, there may be a valid waste reduction reason for automating this task but in general lean doesn’t result in this. In fact automation is - in general kept at a minimum - and is only done for complicated physics tasks (welding, heat treat, etc.) that are difficult for humans to do or to do consistently, or to have the machine do an unsafe or an un-ergonomic task for the operator.
Ronen - your concerns are common but your eventual state is hardly possible - at least from our current vantage point. And this doomsday scenario is not a result of lean - in fact it would be the exact opposite of the Lean intent. I am quite familiar with AI and it isn’t artificial intelligence in the way you imply. It’s just a bunch of statistical algorithms that allow computers to remember more things than before. But they can’t think. Even AI needs hoards of people to make it work.
People will still be needed to design the machines, repair the machines, buy the parts, etc. yes there will be more efficiency but we’ve only ever produced more jobs in the long run even though the specific people effected by automation and emerging technology have a very difficult time finding other high paying employment due to constrained skills, geographic preferences etc. BUT this is not about Lean; it’s about general economic theories...
While these economic theoretical discussions are interesting they are laced with opinion and personal biases. Can we separate this discussion out from the lean thread?
WatchCat - small and medium sized companies can and do have assembly lines and mass produce parts - I’ve worked in all 3 ‘size’ categorizations and each has had assembly lines and mass production and in some cases each hasn’t. If you look at the definitions of those industrial terms you will see that organizational size doesn’t matter.
Lean doesn’t only apply to automation or mass production. It works in many types of organizations and industries. In fact some of the largest benefits are often in the non-manufacturing ‘support’ or ‘salaried’ positions. The real fact remains that there are very few organizations that have achieved a lean operating state.
Bill - your example of the guy pushing a broom is one that must be interpreted in terms of Lean, not cost savings. In many cases the ‘pushing broom’ is something operators do when there is a line down or as part of the standard 5S work. Depending on the situation, there may be a valid waste reduction reason for automating this task but in general lean doesn’t result in this. In fact automation is - in general kept at a minimum - and is only done for complicated physics tasks (welding, heat treat, etc.) that are difficult for humans to do or to do consistently, or to have the machine do an unsafe or an un-ergonomic task for the operator.
Ronen - your concerns are common but your eventual state is hardly possible - at least from our current vantage point. And this doomsday scenario is not a result of lean - in fact it would be the exact opposite of the Lean intent. I am quite familiar with AI and it isn’t artificial intelligence in the way you imply. It’s just a bunch of statistical algorithms that allow computers to remember more things than before. But they can’t think. Even AI needs hoards of people to make it work.
People will still be needed to design the machines, repair the machines, buy the parts, etc. yes there will be more efficiency but we’ve only ever produced more jobs in the long run even though the specific people effected by automation and emerging technology have a very difficult time finding other high paying employment due to constrained skills, geographic preferences etc. BUT this is not about Lean; it’s about general economic theories...
While these economic theoretical discussions are interesting they are laced with opinion and personal biases. Can we separate this discussion out from the lean thread?
