Leading efforts at Vittas Inc.
Engineering & consulting background. 6+ years startup experience. Over 10 years experience in operations, product management, management consulting and relationship management.

Strengths:
Product strategy, Process improvement, Data analytics, Storytelling, Resource management/Process design, Navigating uncertainty.

Sulav Singh

LeanSuite

Website: TheLeanSuite.com
Inquiries: sales@theleansuite.com

Co-Founder

Simplified Automation Inc. 

PointClickCare

Process Manager, Business Operations

Unilever

•Spearheaded various cross-functional optimization projects to deliver $1.5M in savings along with quality improvement
•Drove digital initiative in the factory by automating workflows and making various processes paperless and more efficient
•Developed one central database for the plant KPI/KAIs to better evaluate each project’s success
•Established new data points and discipline behind the existing data collection system to improve the integrity and 
the accuracy of information available to help prioritize the list of process improvement projects
•Assisted engineering department in establishing a robust change management process to meet audit requirements
•Collaborated with leaders from across the organization to implement various continuous improvement projects from E2E 
•Led the labor strategy meetings to identify the labor constraints to reduce weekday overtime
•Accountable for implementing industry best practices across various departments
•Generated and optimized weekly and monthly progress reports of plant KPIs for better visibility to the respective stakeholders
•Developed an automated skill matrix to optimize the project assignment process making sure right resources are deployed
•Held various workshops to train SMEs from various functional teams on Lean Six Sigma tools to lead cost reduction, quality improvement and process improvement projects
•Built an internal capacity utilization tool to foresee any production constraints to efficiently meet customer demands
•Conducted the capacity utilization study to help finance department lay a solid groundwork for 2016 budget
•Supported EEM pillar to successfully launch a $3M project with a vertical startup by engaging key pillars
•Reduced the changeover time using the SMED principles saving the plant over $500k in one cycle
•Identified a strong pipeline of projects with appropriate assignments to deliver $1.5M in savings by the end of the year

Manufacturing Excellence Manager, World Class Manufacturing

Chrysler Group LLC

•Delivered $3.3M savings to a target of $2.5M by implementing numerous focused improvement projects
•Assigned competent people to the appropriate areas, to generate high benefit/cost ratios by attacking highest losses 
•Owned the kaizen process by tracking each individual’s kaizen performance and effectiveness hence achieving plant’s monthly targets year over year
•Engaged people in kaizen activity by coaching and training the importance of lean manufacturing 
•Trained engineers in the deep root cause analysis techniques like 4M, 5why and systematic diagram to solve complex problems
•Increased people involvement in WCM/Lean methodologies from 25% to 80% using suggestion blitz program
•Presented the achievements of Focused Improvement department during the World Class Manufacturing audit and was awarded level 2 certification

Focused Improvement Plant Lead, World Class Manufacturing

•Managed 8 die casting lines and 3 furnaces by supervising 24 people in the department 
•Lead several cycle time and process optimization projects to improve the OEE of the machines by 45%
•Drove the 5S initiatives and autonomous maintenance activities keeping the production floor organized
•Assisted production teams in preparing SOPs and standard work instructions

WCM Specialist/ Backup Production Supervisor, World Class Manufacturing

Illinois Institute of Technology

•	Designed a  Solar and Geothermal powered cooling system for a 2000 sq. ft house in Chicago area
•	Simulated the multi stage compression refrigeration cycle for its effective functioning
•	Optimized it for cost and space with the life expectancy of 25 years

Team Member, Senior System Design Team

Sloan Valve Company

•	Developed cost matrix tool to compare costs associated with   different Sloan products globally
•	Helped the company identify potential market to source products
•	Achieved 10% cost reduction in expenditure by outlining the hidden cost elements

Cost Matrix Team Member

•	Used Analytic tools to design an innovative trash can, “THE CLEAN BIN”
•	Built prototype for unique loading system aimed at saving user’s time and energy
•	Generated 3D images for 3D printing and Beta – prototyping using AUTOCAD

Senior Design Team Leader

Pentair

•	Generated different ideas to maximize use of condensate from HVAC
•	Created idea of pre-cooling coils and built a working prototype increasing the efficiency by 5%

Manufacturing Team Member

Research In Motion

•	Coordinated set-up of devices built by outsourced manufacturing partners
•	Guided outsourcing partners with qualification and localization of indirect materials
•	Coordinated with outsourcing sites to ensure timely delivery of SMT and assembly fixtures
•	Assisted manufacturing engineers and debug technicians understand new product and process issues

Manufacturing Engineering Specialist

•	Supported manufacturing engineers to implement proprietary process at outsourced site
•	Synchronized maintenance of new Doc-Share system between RIM IT and outsourced sites. 
•	Collected data and developed line and qualification build reports as required 
•	Sourced equipments and created purchase requisitions

Manufacturing Assembly Associate

Are you overwhelmed by the admin work in lean journey?

Or looking to...

Digitize your continuous improvement efforts but unsure where to start?

If you've been nodding along until here, congrats!

Looks like we might be the perfect fit!

Hi, my name is Angad Singh.

Most people here know me as the co-founder of LeanSuite.

So far, I've helped numerous manufacturing companies streamline their lean processes and achieve operational excellence through innovative digital solutions.

In the last 14 years in manufacturing...

I've worked with industry giants like Chrysler and Unilever, gaining invaluable insights into the challenges of implementing lean methodologies.

After that...

I co-founded LeanSuite, where I learned crucial lessons about the complexities of automation in manufacturing.

My offer to you?

Let's ditch those spreadsheets and cut the admin work.

Together, we'll digitize your lean manufacturing processes and foster a culture of continuous improvement.

LeanSuite isn't just any software. It's a catalyst for change in your organization.

I've spent years perfecting this platform.
I've collaborated with industry leaders.
I've helped countless CI professionals.
I've developed AI-powered solutions.

I've put in the work, so you don't have to.

To put it bluntly...

I'm combining my years of manufacturing experience with cutting-edge technology to help you succeed in your lean journey.

I don't just want to sell you software. I want to see you excel.

4 ways LeanSuite can transform your lean practices:

Suggestion Platform - Engage frontline workers and collect valuable ideas
Continuous Improvement - Document and track Kaizen projects effortlessly
Issue Tracker - Identify and resolve production floor anomalies quickly
Competency Planning - Upskill employees and align with company goals

Interested?

Let's connect and explore how LeanSuite can digitize your lean manufacturing processes and drive continuous improvement.

For everything else, I'm one DM away.

Thanks for reading up until here. You're on your way to lean excellence!

❤️

Angad S.

Toyota didn't succeed because of Kanban boards.

They succeeded because of culture.

But culture is hard.
Tools are easy.

So we invest in tools and wonder why nothing changes.

- You walk into a Toyota plant.
- You see the Kanban boards.
- The Andon cords.
- The problem solving boards.

You think: "We need this."

So you go back, install the boards, and hang the cords.

And nothing changes.

Because you copied the artifacts.
You didn't copy the mindset.

At Toyota: Operators pull the Andon cord because they know they won't be blamed.
In your plant: Pulling the cord means an hour of explaining yourself.

At Toyota: Problems are exposed immediately, in front of everyone.
In your plant: Problems are hidden until the monthly review.

At Toyota: Leaders spend 50% of their time on the floor, asking questions.
In your plant: Leaders spend 90% of their time in meetings, giving orders.

At Toyota: They stop the line to protect people and quality.
In your plant: You keep the line running to hit the numbers.

See the gap?

You can't install psychological safety with a Kanban board.
You can't install leader humility with a 5S event.

Most companies want Toyota's results.
Without Toyota's sacrifices.

They want the speed, without the patience.
They want the quality, without stopping the line.
They want the engagement, without giving up control.

It doesn't work that way.

So here's the real question:

Is your organization ready for the culture shift that TPS actually requires?

Or are you just shopping for tools?

Drop your honest take below. P.S. If you build the culture first, the tools become powerful. Start with trust. Everything else follows.

Changing the way you think about Lean & Continuous Improvement | Co-founder @ LeanSuite | Helping Fortune 500s to eliminate admin work using LeanSuite apps | Follow me for daily Lean & CI insights

In this post Angad Singh, the cofounder of LeanSuite, highlights a core lean insight: many companies want the Toyota Production System but aren’t willing to adopt the Toyota culture behind it. The graphic features his quote emphasizing that organizations copy tools and artifacts but ignore the mindset, trust, and behaviors that make TPS work.

Everyone in manufacturing has ideas. So why is nothing changing?

Walk any plant floor and you'll hear:
- "We should fix that."
- "Someone needs to change this."

Ideas are everywhere.  
Execution is rare.

Here’s what I’ve seen:

The door to criticize? Crowded.  
Everyone’s an expert at pointing out what’s wrong.  
“This won’t work.” “We tried that before.”

The door to procrastinate? Packed.  
“We’ll get to it next quarter.”  
“Let’s wait for the new system.”

The door to generate ideas? Busy.  
Brainstorming sessions. Whiteboards full of sticky notes.  
Everyone loves ideation.

The door to plan? Getting emptier.  
Some people make it here. Gantt charts. Timelines. Action items.

But then…

The door to take action? Almost empty.

This is where your CI program dies.  
Not because of bad ideas — and certainly not because of bad people.  
But because nobody walked through that last door.

I’ve watched plants spend 6 months planning a Kaizen event…  
Then 2 days executing it…  
Then zero days sustaining it.

The ratio is backwards.

Here’s what separates the plants that actually improve:
- They don’t wait for perfect.
- They don’t need 100% consensus.
- They don’t plan for 6 months.

They try something. This week.  
Even if it’s small.  
Even if it might fail.

Ideas without execution are just conversations.  
Plans without action are just documents.

The plants that win?  
They’re not the ones with the best ideas.  
They’re the ones who walk through the last door.

Which door is YOUR team stuck at?  
Be honest. Drop it below.

P.S. If you're stuck at the Plan phase and can’t get to Act, the problem isn’t the idea, it’s the fear of imperfection.  
Start small. Start messy. Just start.

Angad Singh

Angad Singh, cofounder of theLeansuite uses the metaphor of "5 Doors" to explain why manufacturing improvements fail. He argues that while the doors to Criticize, Procrastinate, Generate Ideas, and Plan are crowded, the door to Act is empty, urging leaders to prioritize execution over perfection. The post breaks down the stages of inaction vs action. It highlights that criticizing, procrastinating, generating ideas, and planning are easy and popular, while taking action is rare. The instruction is to stop waiting for perfection and start executing small changes immediately. An illustration showing five doors side-by-side. The first few doors labeled Criticize, Procrastinate, Generate Ideas, and Plan have massive crowds of people waiting. The final door labeled ACT has almost no one, illustrating the execution gap in most organizations.

Taiichi Ohno never went to Harvard BUT built the most influential production system in history.

Business school teaches you frameworks. The shop floor teaches you reality.

Here are 9 lessons from the father of TPS that no MBA program will teach you:

1. Go See for Yourself
"Data is important, but I place the greatest emphasis on facts."
Don't trust reports from the conference room. 
Go to the Gemba. The truth lives where the work happens.

2. Respect for People
"Standards should not be forced down from above but set,
 by the workers themselves."
The people doing the work know it best. 
Your job isn't to dictate. It's to listen.

3. Ask Why 5 Times
"Having no problems is the biggest problem of all."
Surface-level thinking creates surface-level solutions. 
Keep asking why until you find the system failure.

4. Eliminate Waste Ruthlessly
"Costs do not exist to be calculated. Costs exist to be reduced."
Don't measure waste. Remove it. 
If it doesn't add value for the customer, it goes.

5. Progress Over Perfection
"If you're going to do kaizen continuously, 
you've got to assume that things are a mess."
Start messy. Improve daily. 
Small changes today beat big plans for next quarter.

6. Make Problems Visible
"Where there is no standard, there can be no kaizen."
You can't improve what you can't see. 
Make abnormalities obvious so everyone owns the solution.

7. Stop the Line
"The Toyota style is not to create results by working hard. 
It is a system that says there is no limit to people's creativity."
Quality over speed. Always. 
Stopping for a problem isn't failure; it's preventing disaster.

8. Think in Systems
"We are doomed to failure without a daily destruction of our various preconceptions."
Question your beliefs daily. Fix the system, not just the parts.

9. Simplicity Wins
"The more inventory a company has, the less likely they will have what they need."
Complexity hides waste. 
Remove until there's nothing left to remove.

Ohno didn't learn this from case studies. 

He learned it from decades of watching, asking, and improving.

That's the difference between theory and transformation.

Which of these 9 lessons does your organization need most right now? 

Drop the number below.

P.S. I keep this list on my wall. Some lessons take years to truly understand. Start with one. Master it. Then move to the next.

Changing the way you think about Lean & Continuous Improvement | Co-founder @ LeanSuite | Software trusted by fortune 500s to implement Continuous Improvement Culture | Follow me for daily Lean & CI insights

Angad Singh, co-founder of LeanSuite, shares 9 lessons from Taiichi Ohno, the father of the Toyota Production System, that business schools don't teach. The infographic displays a 3x3 grid with each lesson containing a principle name, quote from Ohno, and practical lesson. The 9 lessons are: 1) Go See for Yourself (Genchi Genbutsu) - trust the Gemba over reports, 2) Respect for People (Core TPS Pillar) - let workers set their own standards, 3) Ask Why 5 Times (Root Cause Thinking) - dig until you find system failures, 4) Eliminate Waste Ruthlessly (Muda Elimination) - costs exist to be reduced not calculated, 5) Progress Over Perfection (Kaizen Mindset) - start messy and improve daily, 6) Make Problems Visible (Visual Management) - you can't improve what you can't see, 7) Stop the Line (Jidoka) - quality over speed always, 8) Think in Systems (Holistic View) - question preconceptions daily, 9) Simplicity Wins (Lean Thinking) - complexity hides waste. 

Most KPIs in manufacturing aren’t wrong.

They’re just misunderstood, misused, or misaligned.

Here’s how to fix that 👇

1/ OEE (Overall Equipment Effectiveness)
– Misused as a benchmark instead of a diagnostic tool
→ Use it to find bottlenecks, not to chase 100%

2/ First Pass Yield
– Misinterpreted as a pure quality metric
→ Always pair it with rework data for full context

3/ Downtime
– Often tracked, rarely categorized
→ Split into planned vs unplanned & then go deeper (reason codes)

4/ Scrap Rate
– Used in isolation
→ Relate it to production volume and trends over time

5/ Cycle Time
– Teams chase faster cycles
→ Instead, focus on consistency and takt time alignment

6/ Lead Time
– Understood only as delivery time
→ Include every touchpoint, from raw material to finished product

7/ Throughput
– Taken as an output metric
→ It’s also a signal for process flow health

8/ Changeover Time
– Seen as “something to reduce”
→ Use SMED principles to reduce waste, not cut corners

9/ Capacity Utilization
– More ≠ better
→ Balance with actual demand and takt time

10/ Inventory Turnover
– Misjudged without a benchmark
→ Find the right rate for your product mix — not just “higher”

11/ MTBF (Mean Time Between Failures)
– Tracked without root causes
→ Always contextualize with operator, part, and process data

12/ Overall Labor Effectiveness (OLE)
– Sounds complex, becomes ignored
→ Break into Availability, Performance, Quality, simplify and share

📌 Remember: KPIs are tools, not goals. Use them to make better decisions, not just prettier reports.

P.S. Liked this? Repost ♻️ and follow me Angad S. for more!

Why do your 1st shift and 2nd shift run the same job differently?
Because you gave them a target, but not a method.

Most plants confuse Work Standards with Standard Work.
They sound the same. They are completely different.
And confusing them is the root cause of your variation.

(I’ve broken down the detailed differences in the image below).

But here is the summary:
Work Standards tell you what to achieve (The Target).
Standard Work tells you the best way to achieve it (The Method).

The Common Mistake:
Most plants create a 30-page SOP, put it in a binder, and call it "standard work."
That isn't standard work. That’s a doorstop.
Nobody reads it. Nobody follows it. Nothing improves.

Real standard work is:
→ Visual: You can see it at the station.
→ Simple: Fits on one page.
→ Specific: Step-by-step, with timing.
→ Living: Updated the moment a better way is found.

So here's the test:
Go to any workstation. Ask the operator:
"Can you show me the standard work for this job?"

If they point to a binder on a shelf?
That's a Work Standard.

If they point to a simple, visual document right in front of them?
That's Standard Work.

If they say "we just know how to do it"?
You have neither.

Which one does your plant have? Be honest. Drop the number below:
Work standards only
Standard work
Neither
Both (but nobody follows them)

P.S. Standard work isn't a rulebook. It's a living method.
If it hasn't changed in 6 months, it's not standard work.
It's just another binder collecting dust.

Co-founder @ LeanSuite | I build the software that replaces your CI spreadsheets | Follow me for daily Lean & CI insights | Changing the way you think about Lean & Continuous Improvement

Kaizen is not enough.
If you only rely on small improvements, you will eventually lose.

We all know Kaizen. But do you know the other two?
There are 3 distinct approaches to improvement. Most plants only use one.

1. KAIZEN (改善) – Continuous Improvement
→ Small, daily steps.
→ Example: Shaving 5 minutes off a changeover.
→ Risk: Low.
→ Role: This is your baseline. It keeps the heart beating.

2. KAIKAKU (改革) – Radical Change
→ A complete overhaul.
→ Example: Tearing down a line layout to improve flow.
→ Risk: Medium.
→ Role: When incremental isn't enough. You need a reset.

3. KAKUSHIN (革新) – Innovation
→ New capability.
→ Example: Automating a process that used to be manual.
→ Risk: High.
→ Role: This is when you change the game entirely.

and here is what usually happens...
Most leaders pick a favorite and ignore the rest.

The "Lean Purists"
Kaizen everything to death. They inch forward while competitors leap.

The "Innovation Chasers"
Want Kakushin every day. They burn cash on moonshots while the basics crumble.

You need all three.
Different problems demand different approaches.

→ Process stable? Kaizen.
→ Stuck at a ceiling? Kaikaku.
→ Market shifting? Kakushin.

The best plants know when to tweak. When to transform. And when to reinvent.

So look at your roadmap. Which approach is your plant stuck in?
Drop it below: Kaizen, Kaikaku, or Kakushin.

(Visual credit: Ivan Carillo - follow him for brilliant Lean visuals)

The most wasteful activity is your Gemba walk...
If you come back without any findings.

I see leaders do this constantly.

They walk the floor.
They wave.
They nod.
They think: “Everything looks good today.”

Reality check:

There is no such thing as a perfect shift.
There is no such thing as a friction-free process.

If you walked the floor for 30 minutes and saw nothing to fix...

You aren’t running a perfect plant.
You are walking with your eyes closed.

You are missing:

→ The operator scrambling to find a tool.  
→ The material waiting 5 minutes at the next station.  
→ The subtle rework happening before the part hits the bin.  

That “invisible” waste is costing you thousands.

And you just walked right past it.

Here’s the rule for Gemba Walks: Don’t come back to the office empty handed.

You don’t need to find a catastrophe.
You just need to find one thing you can improve today.

If you can’t find one thing to improve,
stay on the floor until you do.

Or better:
Ask an operator what frustrated them yesterday.
They’ll show you where the waste is.

A Gemba walk without a discovery is waste.
And as a Lean leader, you should be the last person creating waste.

So be honest:

Did your last walk actually improve anything?
Or did you just check the box for the day?

Drop your answer below.

P.S. If you’re struggling to see waste,
stop watching the machines.
Start watching the people.
The struggle is always human.

Cheat-sheet infographic titled “The 12 Questions Every Gemba Walk Should Answer” with subtitle “Stop wandering. Start observing with purpose.”
A clean 3×4 grid lists 12 must-ask Gemba questions covering standards, real-time metrics, escalation, tool access, workplace organization, safety, targets vs actuals, quality visuals, andon use, suggestion follow-through, escalation paths, and the final check: Would you want to work here?
Bottom line reads: “If you can’t answer these 12, it’s not a Gemba Walk. It’s just a walk.” 

"In God we trust. All others must bring data."

It’s a famous quote. But having data is USELESS.

Most plants stop at Level 2 or 3, and then wonder why nothing changes.

Here is the progression from "Noise" to "Value":

LEVEL 1: DATA (Noise)
A pile of numbers. Defect counts. Downtime logs.
It exists. That's it.
Status: Useless.

LEVEL 2: SORTED (Organized Noise)
You organized it by shift, line, or product.
It's cleaner — but still silent.
Status: Organized, but dumb.

LEVEL 3: ARRANGED (The Chart)
You built a graph. Bars. Lines. Trends.
Now you can see patterns, but still don’t know what to do.
Status: Visible.

LEVEL 4: PRESENTED (Executive Candy)
You made it pretty. Colors. Labels. Formatting.
It looks professional in a PowerPoint, but does it drive change?
Status: Pretty.

LEVEL 5: EXPLAINED (The Story)
Now it means something.
“Downtime spiked on Line 2 because the backup compressor failed.”
The data has context. The data has a WHY.
Status: Understood.

LEVEL 6: ACTIONABLE (The Goal)
This is the only level that pays the bills.
“Here’s what we’re going to do about it.”
The data drives a decision.
It changes behavior. It solves a problem.
Status: Valuable.

The problem?
Most plants are drowning in Level 1.
They hire people to organize it into Level 2.
They buy software to turn it into Level 3 and 4.

Then they stop.

They have dashboards.
They have charts.
They have "pretty noise."

Data without a story is just noise.
Story without action is just gossip.

You don’t need more data.
You need to move the data you already have to Level 6.

So here’s my question:
Which level is your plant stuck at right now?

Drop the number (1–6) below.

P.S. I used to think charts were the goal.
Then I realized nobody was doing anything with them.
Now I don’t show a chart without a story and a proposed action.
Changed everything.

In this post Angad Singh, the cofounder of LeanSuite, uses LEGO bricks as a metaphor to show how raw data becomes valuable. The graphic illustrates the progression from scattered data to sorted, visualized, story-driven insights that ultimately turn into practical, actionable tools.

You're not fixing problems.

You're just finding scapegoats.

A defect happens.

The first question asked?

"Who was running the line?"

Wrong question.

That's blame culture talking.

The right question:

"What about our system allowed this to happen?"

Before you point fingers, check these 5 system failures first.

1. UNCLEAR INSTRUCTIONS

Was standard work visible?
If they had to guess, it's a system failure.

2. MISSING TOOLS

Did they have to hunt for tools or improvise?
It's a system failure.

3. INADEQUATE TRAINING

Was competency verified?
If not, it's a system failure.

4. POOR PROCESS DESIGN

Does perfection require superhuman effort?
It's a system failure.

5. PRESSURE TO KEEP RUNNING

Does your culture punish stopping for quality?
It's a system failure.

Here's the pattern:

Bad leaders ask: "Who messed up?"
Good leaders ask: "What failed in our system?"

Bad leaders find scapegoats.
Good leaders find gaps.

Here's the simple test:

If one operator makes a mistake, it might be the operator.
If multiple operators make the same mistake, it's always the system.

Most quality problems aren't people problems.
They're system problems in disguise.

Your job as a leader isn't to find who to blame.

It's to fix the system so the mistake becomes impossible.

So next time a defect happens, run through these 5 checks.

I guarantee you'll find the system failure.

Which of these 5 is the biggest gap in your plant?

Drop the number (1-5) below.

P.S. Blaming operators is fast. Fixing systems is slow. But only one actually prevents the problem from repeating.

Angad Singh, co-founder of LeanSuite, presents a framework for identifying system failures before blaming operators for quality defects. The infographic shows 5 system failures to check first when a problem occurs: 1) Unclear Instructions (was standard work documented and visible? If they had to guess, it's a system failure), 2) Missing Tools/Materials (did they have everything needed? If they improvised, it's a system failure), 3) Inadequate Training (were they properly trained and certified? If competency wasn't verified, it's a system failure), 4) Poor Process Design (is the process actually doable correctly? If perfection requires luck, it's a system failure), and 5) Pressure to Keep Running (does culture punish stopping for quality? If they're scared to stop, it's a system failure). Each point features an icon and is presented in alternating blue and green boxes with numbered circles. 

You can't make your shopfloor lean while leadership operates like a bureaucracy.

You spend millions on Lean training.
You run Kaizen events.
You hire consultants.

And nothing sticks.

Why?

Because while your operators are eliminating waste...

Your leadership team is busy creating it.

I call these the "4 Leadership Wastes."

(I've listed them in the image).

To be honest..

You can't empower operators while leadership hoards decision making.
You can't eliminate waste while leadership keeps creating it.

The biggest barrier to your Lean transformation?

It's not on the floor.
It's in the conference room.

So before you run another Kaizen event...

Ask yourself:

What waste is your leadership team creating today?

Which of these 4 is the biggest problem in your organization?

Drop the number (1-4) below.

P.S. Real Lean starts at the top. If leadership won't change how they operate, don't expect the floor to change either.

Angad Singh, co-founder of LeanSuite, exposes four types of waste that leadership teams create while operators try to eliminate waste on the manufacturing floor. The infographic shows a 2x2 grid with four leadership-generated wastes: 1) Waste of Waiting - created by approvals taking weeks, too many signatures, and slow decisions; Impact: floor stops, momentum dies. 2) Waste of Overprocessing- created by reports nobody reads, data in multiple formats, and excessive approval layers; Impact: more time reporting than doing. 3) Waste of Rework - created by changing priorities mid-stream, vague direction with rejected results, and inability to commit to decisions; Impact: teams restart, re-plan, redo. 4) Waste of Underutilized Talent - created by ignoring operator suggestions, conference room-only decisions, and treating workers as order-takers; Impact: best ideas never get heard. Each section includes an icon for visual distinction. 

I don't need to see your metrics to know your culture.
I just need to listen carefully for 10 minutes.

"They" vs. "We."
That one word tells me everything.

I spend a lot of time in plants. And language is the loudest metric you have.

Here is the difference:

BLAME CULTURE (The "They" Team)
"They didn't do it."
"Who messed this up?"
"That's not my job."
Focus: Third person. Deflection. Us vs. Them.

OWNERSHIP CULTURE (The "We" Team)
"We didn't do it."
"What went wrong in our process?"
"I'll help figure it out."
Focus: First person. Accountability. We're in this together.

See the pattern?
Blame culture asks "Who?" Ownership culture asks "What?"
Blame culture deflects. Ownership culture owns.

Here is what most leaders miss:
You can't fix culture with a poster in the breakroom.
You can't fix it with a mandatory training session.

You fix culture by changing the language.
When the words change, the behavior follows.

So listen to your team this week.
Are they saying "they" or "we"?

Then, look in the mirror.

Because your team's language is usually a reflection of yours.
If you want an ownership culture, start speaking ownership language.

What language does your team speak? Drop an example below.

P.S. I used to say "they didn't train them properly."
Now I say "we need to improve our training process."
Same problem. Different ownership. Completely different results.

In this post Angad Singh, the cofounder of LeanSuite, contrasts “Blame Culture” with “Ownership Culture” by showing how everyday language reflects deeper mindsets. The graphic lists common blame-driven phrases beside ownership-focused alternatives that encourage responsibility, learning, and improvement across teams.

Let's stop pretending CI is easy.

It's not.

Most Lean transformations fail.
Not because the tools don't work.
But because leaders aren't ready for the reality.

This takes years, not quarters.
People will resist you.
You'll want to quit.
Software won't save you.

And most companies calling themselves "Lean"?
They're not.

They have the posters.
They use the language.
But they don't have the practice.

I've seen this play out in over 100 plants.
Here's what the glossy case studies don't say:

---

6 BRUTAL TRUTHS:

1. Your First 10 Kaizen Events Will Fail
Not failure, just learning what works for YOUR floor, not the textbook's

2. People Will Resist (And They Should)
Resistance isn't the enemy. It's feedback. Listen before you push

3. CI Takes Way Longer Than You Think
Real culture change is years, not quarters. Accept it early

4. You'll Want To Quit Halfway
The messy middle kills more programs than bad tools ever will

5. You Can't Buy Culture
Software won't fix broken trust or a blame-heavy environment

6. Most "Lean" Companies Aren't Lean
They have the posters and the jargon. They don't have the practice

---

8 HARD LESSONS I LEARNED:

→ Start With Trust, Not Tools
5S means nothing if people don't believe you care

→ Floor > Conference Room
Real problems live where the work happens

→ Small Wins > Big Launches
Celebrate daily progress or lose momentum fast

→ Culture Eats Strategy
Your system only works if people believe in it

→ Slow Down To Speed Up
Rushing kills buy-in. Go deep, not fast

→ Teach Thinking, Not Answers
Build coaches, not order-takers

→ Fail Forward Fast
Test small, learn quick, adjust often

→ Listen > Tell
Ask "what do YOU see?" before giving solutions

---

This is what they don't show in the case studies.

The failed experiments.
The cultural battles.
The moments you questioned everything.

But here's what I've learned:

The plants that win aren't the ones with the best tools.

They're the ones that stay in the game when it gets messy.
They're the ones that build trust before systems.
They're the ones that listen before they tell.

Which truth hits hardest for you?
Drop a number (1-14) below.

P.S. If you're in the middle of this mess right now and need someone who gets it, DM me. No pitch. Just real talk from someone who's been there.

In this post, Angad Singh, co-founder of LeanSuite, shares the brutal truths about continuous improvement that most leaders aren't prepared for. He challenges the fantasy that CI transformations are quick and easy, arguing that most fail because leaders expect immediate results instead of accepting the messy, years-long reality. The post presents 6 brutal truths and 8 hard lessons learned from working with over 100 manufacturing plants.


5S is not a housekeeping initiative. It is a discipline initiative.

If you think 5S is just about "cleaning up," you’re missing the point.
You aren't training janitors. You are training problem-solvers.

I’ve broken down the real meaning of the 5 steps in the image below.
(Spoiler: "Shine" is not about sweeping the floor. It's about inspecting).

Here is the reality...
5S is like a litmus test for your entire organization.

If a team can't maintain 5S, they will never succeed at TPM, Kanban, or Six Sigma. If you can't manage the broom, you can't manage the robot.

Perfect your 5S implementation first. It creates the foundation where every other initiative flourishes.

So here is my question: 
Which "S" is the hardest for your team to master? (Usually, it's #5).

Drop it below.

P.S. 5S isn't a one-time event. It's a daily habit.
If you do it once a year, that's not 5S. That's just cleaning.

If your Lean program has an end date… it’s not Lean.

It’s just a project.
And projects die.

You can’t “install” culture like a software update.
And you definitely can’t do it in 90 days.

This is where most leaders miss the mark.

They treat Lean like a Q3 initiative.
A cost-cutting exercise.
A box to check.

That isn’t Lean.
That’s just corporate anxiety disguised as strategy.

Lean isn’t about moving faster or cutting corners.
It’s about removing the friction that stops value from flowing.

Here’s what real Lean looks like:

→ Seeing problems as opportunities to learn, not failures.  
→ Respecting the people closest to the work.  
→ Refining every day until improvement becomes second nature.  
→ Building culture, not just chasing tools.  

The harsh truth?

You can’t install culture.
You have to build it.

Every day.
Slowly.
With purpose.

Most plants try to sprint to the finish line.
Then they wonder why nothing sticks after the consultant leaves.

The plants that thrive stopped chasing “implementation dates.”

They figured out the simple truth:

Lean isn’t a toolset you buy.
It’s a mindset you practice.

And that takes time.

So here’s the question:

Are you treating Lean like a project with a deadline 
or a habit with no end date?

Drop your honest answer below.

P.S.  
If you want to build a system that supports the habit of improvement, 
not just track the project of improvement, send me a DM.

In this post Angad Singh, the cofounder of LeanSuite, shares a dictionary-style definition of “Lean,” describing it as the discipline of valuing real problems on the shop floor over comfortable narratives in the boardroom, and a reminder that true lean removes the arrogance that the office knows more than the floor.

This is what error-proofing actually looks like.

No training required.
No counting.
No mistakes.

That's poka-yoke.

Most plants would have a bin of screws.

"Take 4."

And hope people count correctly.

100 times a day.
Multiple operators.
Different shifts.

Mistakes happen.

Toyota said: "Don't make people count. Make the system count."

This is the difference between:

Hoping people do it right.
And making it impossible to do it wrong.

That's the whole point of error-proofing.

Don't rely on attention.
Don't rely on training.
Don't rely on discipline.

Design the mistake out.

Simple. Brilliant. Effective.

What's one task in your plant that could be error-proofed like this?

Drop it below.

P.S. This probably cost $100 to build. But it prevents thousands in rework and missing parts. That's the ROI of poka-yoke.

Your SOP says one thing.
Everyone does another.

Because the real rules aren't written down.

Every plant has two sets of rules.
The ones in the binder (The SOPs).
The ones everyone actually follows (The Culture).

The unwritten rules always win.

Here is the reality on the floor:

OFFICIAL RULE: "Safety is our #1 priority. Report all incidents."
REAL RULE: "Don't report small things, or you'll be buried in paperwork and blamed for the metric drop."

OFFICIAL RULE: "Stop the line for quality issues."
REAL RULE: "Only stop if it's catastrophic. If you stop for something small and we miss the hourly target, you're in trouble."

OFFICIAL RULE: "Follow standard work exactly."
REAL RULE: "Take whatever shortcuts you need to hit the number. We look the other way as long as you make rate."

See the gap?

New employees learn the unwritten rules on Day 1.
From watching what gets rewarded and what gets punished.

So, how do you fix this?

You have to rewrite the unwritten rules through action.

1. Stop rewarding the wrong heroes.
If someone breaks the process to hit the daily number, do not celebrate them.
You just taught everyone that the process is optional.

2. Start celebrating the right behaviors.
Publicly praise the operator who stopped the line to prevent a defect.
Even if it cost you production counts.
You have to prove that quality actually matters more than speed.

If you want the SOP to be the real rule...
You have to make following it the path of least resistance.

What's one "unwritten rule" at your facility that needs to change? Drop it below.

We are trying to hire 2025 talent.

With a 1985 offer.

And we are shocked when they say no.

There is no labor shortage.
There is a "Bad Job" surplus.

And unfortunately, many manufacturing jobs fall into that category.

Gen Z sees:
→ Dirty floors.
→ Old equipment.
→ Managers who yell.

And they vote with their feet.

Can you blame them?

We blame "kids these days" for not wanting to work.
But let’s be honest about the offer most plants are making.

Here is the reality:

→ We hand a 22-year-old a clipboard when they live on their iPhone.  
→ We offer a career path that takes 15 years to move up one level.  
→ We run "because I said so" leadership in an era of collaboration.  
→ We expect loyalty while treating operators like replaceable parts.

Why would they choose that?

They can work remote.
They can join a tech startup.
They can learn new skills on YouTube and get promoted in 2 years.

We are competing with the future.
And we are running our plants like the past.

The problem is...

We created this talent gap.

We spent decades squeezing margins instead of investing in people.
We ignored ideas from the floor.
We let the facility age and the culture rot.

And now we’re shocked that the next generation doesn't want in.

But here is the good news:

Some plants are hiring.
Some plants are retaining.
And those plants aren’t complaining about Gen Z.

Here’s what they do differently:

→ Tech: They use apps and tablets, not binders.  
→ Growth: They show a clear path from Operator to Leader.  
→ Respect: They listen to ideas on Day 1, not Year 10.  
→ Environment: It’s clean, safe, and modern.

If your plant can't attract young talent...
It’s not because young people don’t want to work.

It’s because they don’t want to work THERE.
And frankly, they shouldn’t have to.

So here’s the only question that matters:

If you were 22 years old today...
Would YOU apply to work at your plant?

Be honest. Drop your answer below.

P.S. I visit plants where the average age is 55+.  
Zero succession planning.  
Then leadership wonders why they can't fill positions.

The answer is in the mirror.

I can predict if your CI program will fail next year.

I just need to see one number.

And it’s not on your main dashboard.

Walk into any plant. Ask to see their CI metrics.

They'll show you:
→ OEE trending up
→ Defects trending down
→ Cycle time improving

All good, right? Not quite.

Because there's one number they're usually not tracking. And it's the only one that tells you if your culture is actually alive.

The Metric: How many operator suggestions were implemented last month.
Not submitted. Not "under review." Implemented.

Here's why this matters.
If that number is zero? Your CI program is already dead. You just don't know it yet.

Because zero implementations means:
→ Ideas are being ignored.
→ Operators have stopped trying.
→ Leadership doesn't trust the floor.
→ The "culture of improvement" is just a poster on the wall.

Your OEE might be climbing. But it's climbing because of management-driven pressure. Not because your people are solving problems.
And the moment leadership stops pushing? Everything stops.

But if that number is 5, 10, or 20 per month? Different story.
That means:
→ People feel heard.
→ Leadership trusts their judgment.
→ Small improvements are happening daily.

Those plants don't just improve. They sustain.

Here's the test. Go ask your CI manager right now:
"How many operator suggestions did we actually implement last month?"

If they can't answer immediately? Red flag.
If the answer is "we're still reviewing them"? Bigger red flag.
If the answer is "zero"? Your CI program is running on fumes.

Lagging indicators (OEE) tell you what happened.
Leading indicators (Implementation Rate) tell you what's coming.

And if operators have stopped suggesting improvements? Your defect rates will climb again. Your OEE will plateau. It's just a matter of time.

So here's my challenge: Go find out.
How many operator suggestions were implemented last month at your plant?

Drop the number below. Be honest.

P.S. If that number is zero, don't panic. Start small, implement one idea this week.

(And if you need a simple way to track this without spreadsheets, send me a DM. That's exactly what we built LeanSuite to do).

Blaming your team for "resistance" is lazy leadership.

It’s the easy way out. It lets you ignore the real problem: How the change was led.

Every time a new initiative fails, leadership says the same thing:
"There's too much pushback."
"We need better change management."

But here is the truth.
People don't resist change. They resist being ignored, blamed, and confused.

Here are the 5 types of change people actually resist:

1. The "Command" Change
"We're doing this now."
"Why?"
"Because leadership decided."
That's not communication. That's a command.

2. The "Ivory Tower" Change
They see the problem every day. They have ideas. Nobody asked. Then you wonder why they aren't "bought in."

3. The "Friction" Change
You optimized for a metric. But you broke their process. Now they have to use workarounds just to get through the day.

4. The "Flavor of the Month" Change
New initiative. Big launch. 90 days later? Leadership moves on.
Why invest in something that won't last?

5. The "Blame" Change
"We need to fix how YOU work."
Instead of: "We need to fix the system that made this the only option."

See the pattern?
It's not resistance to improvement. It's resistance to change that doesn't make sense.

The problem isn't your people. The problem is how the change is being led.

Here's what actually works:
→ Explain the why before the what.
→ Ask for input before deciding.
→ Test small before scaling.
→ Stay with it past 90 days.
→ Blame the system, not the people.

When people feel heard, involved, and respected? They don't resist. They lead.

So next time you hear "there's too much resistance"...
Ask yourself: Is this resistance to change? Or resistance to how we're leading it?

The answer is usually the second one.

What's your experience with this? Drop it below.

P.S. The teams that "resist" the most are often the ones who care the most.
They're not pushing back because they're lazy. They're pushing back because they see what you don't.

You’re still trying to inspect quality into your process.

You should be building it in.

Big difference.

Quality Control means finding defects after they happen.
Quality Assurance means preventing defects from ever happening.

One reacts.
One prevents.

Most plants are stuck reacting.

Here’s what Quality Control looks like:

Inspect at the end of the line.
Catch defects after they’re made.
Sort the good from the bad.
Hope inspectors catch everything.

The problem?

You already wasted time, material, and labor making bad parts.

You’re just finding the waste.
Not stopping it.

Here’s what Quality Assurance looks like:

Build quality into the process.
Catch problems as they happen.
Find and fix the root cause.
Inline checks, not end-of-line panic.

The result?

Defects don’t get made.
Because the process stops them before they start.

Quality Control asks, “Is this part good?”
Quality Assurance asks, “Why would this part ever be bad?”

Quality Control fixes defects.
Quality Assurance fixes the system that creates them.

See the difference?

Here’s the catch:

Quality Assurance takes investment.

In people.
In process.
In culture.

Quality Control just takes inspectors.

That’s why most plants stick with Control.

It feels easier.

But it costs way more in the long run.

The best plants stopped inspecting quality in.
They build it in.

They stopped catching defects.
They started preventing them.

That’s the evolution.

Where’s your plant?

Still inspecting?
Or building?

Drop it below.

P.S. If your quality team only catches defects, you’re doing Control. If they eliminate the reasons defects happen, you’re doing Assurance. One finds problems. One prevents them.

Infographic showing "The Evolution of Quality: From Quality Control to Quality Assurance." Left side shows Quality Control - inspection-based, reactive approach with person inspecting boxes at end of production line, focused on detecting defects after they occur. Right side shows Quality Assurance - proactive approach with detailed production line including root cause analysis and inline checks throughout entire process, emphasizing prevention and continuous improvement. Bottom sections list implementation steps (establish quality culture, statistical process control, root cause analysis, employee involvement, continuous improvement) and benefits (reduced waste, improved satisfaction, enhanced efficiency, lower costs, increased engagement). White arrow points from Quality Control to Quality Assurance showing progression. Navy and light blue design by Angad Singh @asingh63.

taplio

The Battle

Sulav Singh

Angad S.

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScoreAngad S.'s LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Sulav Singh

Angad S.

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Angad S.'s LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScoreAngad S.'s LinkedIn Performance