Katrina Appell Consulting Inc.

PhD: 7 years of thinking

I was very fortunate to have the luxury to spend seven years thinking deeply while pursuing my PhD. My dissertation title is: “A Contingency Theory Approach to the Deployment of Lean Principles: The Case of Advanced Research and Complex Product Development Environments.”

The non-academic version of the title: There is no best way: Every situation is different, so the approach needed is different and needs to fit the organization and support the objective.

The 107 page version can be downloaded here: Dissertation

The 32 slide version: Appell Defense

 And the 2 page journal summary: photo

Katrina Appell

,

8 responses to “PhD: 7 years of thinking”

  1. I really like your “non-academic version of the title” – I finally know what your dissertation is about. I wonder if I can come up with a similar translation for my dissertation title…

  2. Hi Katrina, this is very cool. Thanks for sending out a link! I agree that every situation is different, however, I believe that too many use this as a reason to turn their back on Lean (I recognize that is not what you were advocating for or suggesting). There are so many universal truths in Lean that when executed effectively can bring a level of stability to a group (in so many ways). When a level of stability exists and the thinking is firmly in place, there is no limit to the problems that can be solved within the framework. Sorry if this seems vague and confusing, I was definitely not blessed with the gift of writing. I am looking forward to learning more from you and adding my two cents!

    • When I said sorry if it was vague and confusing, I was referring to the way I explained it, not the concept itself. In fact, I think we have even shared a conversation around this in the past!

  3. Kevin, I think chapter 2 of my dissertation gets to some of the point you are trying to make:

    The key characteristics of:
    1) Achieve stability
    2) Support a culture of problem solving
    should be consistent to support the objective of creating a problem solving culture. Unfortunately, that isn’t what everyone’s objective is with lean. So, first clearly articulating the objective and approaching the effort in a way that supports it is critical for success.

    The contingency argument comes in more in that the tactical approach isn’t going to be the same everywhere since everyone is starting out at a different place. We need to meet the learners where they are.

    This is where my thinking was in 2011:
    “A key lean tenet is that there is no one right way to do something and that the approach taken should be dependent on the particular context. Engaging in a continuous learning process is more important to lean deployment than implementing the right tool. Since every organization is different there can be no one universal road map for becoming lean (Liker and Meier 2006). Nonetheless there are key attributes that should be achieved and some logical sequencing of steps. In order to create a culture of continuous improvement basic process stability should first be achieved making achieving stability an important
    first step in lean deployment efforts. Focusing on stability ensures a consistent level of capability to produce consistent results to create a foundation for improvement (Liker and Meier 2006). Once foundational stability has been achieved efforts can focus on establishing a culture of problem solving and continuous improvement by providing people with the tools and resources needed to identify and solve problems. Defining appropriate behavior, providing training to support the behavior, and creating a support system to reinforce the behavior can be an effective method to change the culture of an organization (Shook 2010). Creating a system that highlights problems, makes solving
    problems without placing blame an essential part of the job, and creates a support structure that enables people to do their jobs successfully can facilitate the adoption of a lean system and culture (Shook 2010).”

    • While kaizen (at Toyota) usaully delivers small improvements, the culture of continual aligned small improvements and standardization yields large results in the form of compound productivity improvement. This philosophy differs from the command and control improvement programs of the mid-twentieth century. Kaizen methodology includes making changes and monitoring results, then adjusting. Large-scale pre-planning and extensive project scheduling are replaced by smaller experiments, which can be rapidly adapted as new improvements are suggested.