Psychology of 5S

Since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution in the United States, manufacturing leaders have struggled to transfer ownership of orderliness to those most important in production – the operators.

Intrinsic inspiration brings sustainable transformation while extrinsic motivation is temporary at best.

To understand how to transfer ownership of orderliness, we first must appreciate the necessity of leadership versus management. It has been said that anyone can manage, some better than others, but not everyone can lead. Myles Monroe stated,

“All leaders were once managers, but not all managers become leaders.”

Leadership requires a strong self-efficacy and a confidence that any circumstance can be navigated during limited understanding or experience. We don’t know what we don’t know, and a leader is able to confidently provide a vision for the future and respect the knowledge, skills, and abilities of team members to eventually get there.

At KY-MEP, we’ve seen how strong leadership culture directly impacts success in workplace transformation programs like 5S.

5S is a perfect indicator of oversight style. When someone with a title that exaggerates their capabilities is held accountable for workplace orderliness, success in 5S takes a turn for the worst. On the contrary, when a leader is responsible for orderliness, ownership is transferred slowly but surely to those who matter most – the operators. Systematic and procedural approaches to 5S are necessary but can easily devolve into ‘because I said so.’ When this occurs, the end of a successful 5S culture is in sight.

In conclusion, if a manufacturer is serious about 5S orderliness in their facility, it is necessary to first evaluate the leadership capabilities of those with titles and level-up for the sake of culture prior to implementing a ‘new program’ or ‘flavor of the month.’

Ready to build lasting culture around 5S and workplace improvement? Connect with KY-MEP to get started.