Lean Vedio Clips

Kano Model

Accidently I touch about this topic when having a discussion with Gary regarding his wish to set up a moon cake business. According to him, he can be outperforming in this field by maintaining high product quality and fair price.

Is this good enough to sustain a business in a competition? I doubt.

My argument is, there are so many players in the market, everybody believes high product quality and fair price is the factor to success. By nature, all customers are expecting highest production quality at lowest prices. So, high product quality and fair price is just a minimum requirement for him to enter the market place as a player. It is not a differentiation factor to differentiate his advantage from others.

He just can’t give me an answer when I ask him to list down his uniqueness about his moon cake or the service he can offer beside quality and price.

I wanted to order some moon cake from him, but I want him to make it in Pokimon or Doremon shape, unfortunately he can’t make it, he only can supply the standard moon cake he has. I don’t have the option to choose.

This led me recall the famous quote from Henry Ford: “You can get what ever color you like as long as it is black”.

What is Kano Model?



Kano model is a theory developed by Professor Noriaki Kano in studying the factor of customer satisfaction. He classifies five quality factor that influence customer preferences. i.e;

Attractive quality: an attractive quality is the attribute that will enhance customer satisfaction level when it exist, but it will not cause any dissatisfaction during the absent of the attribute. These attribute usually are not a “must be” feature in the product, but customers welcome if it being offered. For example, a customer may not interested to know the power level when they purchase an AA size battery, but they would welcome the feature if there is a power level indicator attached on it without significantly increase in cost.

One-dimensional quality: an attribute that directly linked the customer satisfaction level and product or service performance. Customer satisfaction level increase when the quality performance increase, whereas, decrease in quality performance will led to a decrease in satisfaction level. For example, customer satisfaction level of an internet service may be varying based on the transmission rate of an internet service provided.

Must-be quality: an attribute that must build in the product or service as a minimum requirement that specified by the service provider. For example a new computer must come with the peripheral that match with the specification spell out. Any mismatch with the specification will led to dissatisfaction.

Indifferent quality: is an attribute that will not create any excitement to the customer. For example, a computer that offer additional one USB port.

Reverse quality: is an attribute that result dissatisfaction when high degree of quality or service level being introduced. Window Vista could be a good example for this case. Window Vista that claim to be more advance than Window Xp has causing high level of dissatisfaction due to incompatibility between the Vista and Xp user.

Theory X and Theory Y

Been in the bad mood for the past two days, therefore I try to be very quiet, because I worry I will make silly mistake due to my personal emotion. Anyway, my bad mood is linked to my work actually.

Two projects were delay for five month just because a manager from other department did not execute his duty in order. Because of that, some trouble makers use it as a block for me to move forward. I reflect my problems and disappointment to my manager, but I end up walk out from his office with no conclusion plus a bad mood.

In fact, he is right; the environment is as such, if I wish to change the situation, I should find way to overcome the blocking. Else, my only way is “wait”. Wait for all the issues settle before I proceed.

Since my manager says so, no point I continue the discussion, as I may end up instructed to help the manager solving his problems. I just pick up his advice and “wait”. Anyway, I’m not satisfied with the outcome as I dislike having so many open items in my work. I don’t like to delay my work, some more I have to entertain a group of so call “senior managers” who lack of self discipline. I have to talk to them nicely, convince them to accept my deliverable. If I m so unlucky, I my end up being the root cause of the mess.

Another case that make me very upset, that I mentioned several time in my blog. One person make mistake, many peoples feel the pain. Two prototypes build fail due to human error. I was busy arranging for the third build for the past few days. Unfortunately I make a silly mistake this round and was called to attend a lecture by my big boss.

I review back what my manager told earlier, in fact, he does have his point. As a project manager, I should be responsible for the entire mistake that peoples did, including my mistake. Because I m the leader of the assignment. I should ensure my team members deliver expected result at the right time. Regardless of team member’s attitude and performance, it is my fault if I m not able to lead the team to achieve the common goal. He also right, I don’t have other option to choose, I have to accept the fact.

The two unhappiness stir my mind for two days, led me think of Theory X and Theory Y. I used to be in Theory Y and expect my working partner in the same group as well. I believe, since I receive payment from my employer, it is my responsible deliver good result. I expect other having the same thinking as well. Unfortunately, the actual situation was not as what I expect. I realized I made a wrong assumption for the past three years !!!

Hmm.. I have to realign my assumption to reflect the actual situation. From next week onward…

Anyway, I would like to stress that, I m not in the Theory X group. I insist I do not want to be in the group, because the thinking will bring me laziness and negative opinion. I behave in this manner just to adapt to the environment.

“Because of the environment, therefore I have to accept the fact…” no wonder they end up in such a deep shit.


What are Theory X and Theory Y?
Here the explanation from Wikipedia


前两天的心情真的是很不好，所以没什么说话。心情不好的我不爱说话，因为怕祸从口出。

心情不好，都是和公事有关。以下就是破坏我心情的主因；

手头上两项任务被耽误了整整五个多月，因为另一个部门的主管耽误了他的任务。给我被另外一批惹事者拿来当成一个阻挡我去路的理由。那天向小老板提出了我对整件事情的安排有所不满，没有结果，反而是被他训了一顿。

其实小老板说的也对，事情本来就是这样，这个环境本来就是这样，如果我想改变结局，我就应该去尝试改变那些阻挡我去路的人。要不然，我就只好坐在那里等，等到该部门主管把事情办好过后我才继续我的工作。

既然小老板都已经开口，我也不敢继续说下去，搞不好，我end up 还得帮那部门主管处理他的工作。唯有听从小老板的意见，“等”。虽然如此，其实我心里并不好受，因为我不喜欢我的工作又头无尾的，我不喜欢我的工作一天拖一天，还得应酬一大批缺乏纪律的so call 高级主管，还得好声好气的尝试说服他们接受我交出来的成绩。搞不好，到头来变成一却都是我的错。

另一件令我不开心的事情，其实这件事我已在在理谈了好几次。一人错事万人当。由于前两次的proto build都不合格，都是人为的疏忽，所以我前几天都在忙于处理第三次的proto build。不幸的，这一次轮到我犯了一个错误。结果被大老板叫去办公室里训了一顿。

回头想想，其实他说得也很有道理，身为一个project manager，我应该对所有人，包括我自己我犯下的错误负责。因为我的任务是领导一批人去执行某项任务，我的确保每个人都准时交出靓丽的成绩。任何人有不负责任的心态，工作上敷衍了事，交不出像样的成绩造成整个团队达不到目标，都是我的问题。他也说了这样一句话，我没得选择，因为整个环境都是这样，所以我必须接受。

这两项不开心的事情在我脑海里翻转了两天，让我想起了Theory X 和Theory Y的理论。一直以来，我都以Theory Y的心理来看待我的工作伙伴。在职场上，我一直抱着同样的信念，“受人钱财，替人消灾，天公地道”。既然收了公司的薪水，就得把我们分内的工作做好，我这认为，我也指望我其他的工作伙伴也这样认为。看来，现实并不如我所愿。因为我在一个大部分都是Theory X的大环境里工作！Shit，今天我才醒觉，我整整错了三年！！！

好，我必须即刻纠正我的错误。下个星期开始。。。
这里我必须声明，我不是Theory X的一群，我也坚持不加入Theory X这个懒人俱乐部。因为我两个顾客的要求，所以我必须作出少许的调整，已融入这个懒人俱乐部的大家庭。

“因为整个环境都是这样，所以我必须接受”。。。这也难怪他们会搞到今天这个地步。。。


或许你会问，Theory X Theory Y到底是什么？
以下就是我从Wikipedia 抄出来的解说。


Theory X
In this theory, management assumes employees are inherently lazy and will avoid work if they can. They inherently dislike work. Because of this, workers need to be closely supervised and comprehensive systems of controls developed. A hierarchical structure is needed with narrow span of control at each level. According to this theory, employees will show little ambition without an enticing incentive program and will avoid responsibility whenever they can. The Theory X manager tends to believe that everything must end in blaming someone. He or she thinks all prospective employees are only out for themselves. Usually these managers feel the sole purpose of the employee's interest in the job is money. They will blame the person first in most situations, without questioning whether it may be the system, policy, or lack of training that deserves the blame. A Theory X manager believes that his or her employees do not really want to work, that they would rather avoid responsibility and that it is the manager's job to structure the work and energize the employee. One major flaw of this management style is it is much more likely to cause Diseconomies of Scale in large businesses.

Theory Y
In this theory management assumes employees may be ambitious, self-motivated, and exercise self-control. It is believed that employees enjoy their mental and physical work duties. A Theory Y manager believes that, given the right conditions, most people will want to do well at work. They believe that the satisfaction of doing a good job is a strong motivation. Many people interpret Theory Y as a positive set of beliefs about workers. A close reading of The Human Side of Enterprise reveals that McGregor simply argues for managers to be open to a more positive view of workers and the possibilities that this creates.

Focus on Problems vs. Focus on Solutions

One of the most memorable case studies on Japanese management was the case of the empty soap box, which happened in one of Japan's biggest cosmetics companies.

The company received a complaint that a consumer had bought a soap box that was empty. Immediately the authorities isolated the problem to the assembly line, which transported all the packaged boxes of soap to the delivery department. For some reason, one soap box went through the assembly line empty.

Management asked its engineers to solve the problem. Post-haste, the engineers worked hard to devise an X-ray machine with high-resolution monitors manning by two people to watch all the soap boxes that passed through the line to make sure they were not empty. No doubt, they worked hard and they worked fast but they spent whoopee amount to do so.

But when a rank-and-file employee in a small company was posed with the same problem, did not get into complications of X-rays, etc but instead came out with another solution.

He bought a strong industrial electric fan and pointed it at the assembly line. He switched the fan on, and as each soap box passed the fan, it simply blew the empty boxes out of the line.

Moral of the story: always look for simple solutions. Devise the simplest possible solution that solves the problem..

When NASA began the launch of astronauts into space, they found out that the pens wouldn't work at zero gravity (Ink won't flow down to the writing surface).In order to solve this problem, it took them one decade and $12 million.. They developed a pen that worked at zero gravity, upside down, underwater, in practically any surface including crystal and in a temperature range from below freezing to over 300 degrees C. And what did Russians do....................?? The Russians used a Pencil !!!

So, learn to focus on solutions not on problems "If you look at what you do not have in life, you don't have anything" "If you look at what you have in life, you have everything"