There is a trend towards removing the Japanese language or jargon from Lean transformations in the U.S. I understand why organizations would want to make lean thinking and the corresponding tools easier to digest, but I think we should seriously consider keeping it Japanese.
- People get used to new words and phrases better than you might think – Until a few years ago nobody knew what an iPod was. A cougar used to be a big cat and not a woman who likes younger men. Jewelry is now commonly called bling.
- There is no standard for Americanized Lean – Some call Gemba “three actuals (actual place, actual process, actual people)”, others brand it as “direct observation”, some refer to it as just “process walk”, and I am sure Gemba goes by other names. The problem with this is members of your organization can not easily learn Lean from external sources. Article and book authors tend to use the Japanese terms at least in reference but your staff may miss it if the original word is not shared with them.
- Lean transformation is a significant change and language should reflect that – A lot of Lean will seem counter-intuitive at first and there is a major shift in thinking that will take place on your journey. A significant change in the language will help communicate to the culture that things will be different from here on out. To paraphrase Deming, you are no longer using the language of the old world.
Choosing the language of Lean is a strategic choice for your organization. It is easy to dismiss the notion of keeping the Japanese out and making easier translations. Please consider the pro side of keeping the original language.
I am very interested in your comments.
My 2009 Hansei: Scarcity inspires creativity and innovation. How can I help harness that inspiration?