I agree with the triad of Value, Flow, Waste. But, it's important to note that:

1) It's not serial -- a, b, then c.
2) In fact the notion of "value" is about having the worldview of "value" and "perfect flow", because then it's much easier to "see" the waste.
3) So, given (2), it seems that Value, Flow, and Waste is quite parallel, yet dependent on each other.
4) The mistake that is often committed by most people who actually never worked at Toyota is the overemphasis on topics of popular literature -- the tools and methods -- but, what is underemphasized is the other pillar of Toyota: Respect for People.
5) Waste is part-and-parcel with "Burden" on people and systematically removing the "Burden" through effective countermeasures.

Great article, David.
Pete Abilla | Homepage | 03.31.08 - 11:46 am | #

Perhaps, then, "queue" is a misleading term? I have the impression that you use "queues" in the role of buffers or "supermarkets"?
Kevin Rutherford | Homepage | 04.07.08 - 1:44 am | #

This is a very useful categorical pattern. The relationship I see is 'importance' rather than sequence. I would rename the third category in a positive sense as 'Efficiency' rather than waste elimination.

So, Value (delivery) is more important than Flow. And both Value and Flow are more important than Efficiency.

Value > Flow > Efficiency

An easy pattern to remember and use.
Frank Gorham-Engard | 12.23.08 - 9:36 am | #

Frank, the problem with "efficiency" is that it has too much baggage dating from Scientific Management where efficiency has a different meaning, equivalent to utilization.

Waste reduction is just one strategy for efficiency. It happens to be a superior strategy in many circumstances. I've talked about this elsewhere. David
David Anderson | Homepage | 12.23.08 - 10:16 am | #

Pete,

You seem to have misunderstood the article. No one is suggesting that a focus on value happens before a focus on flow or a focus on waste reduction. Yes, surely all three things happen in parallel.

The article is about making decisions and offers a decision framework for people using Lean when faced with a conflicting choice.

If given a choice to make a change or improvement, the choice should favor value creation over flow maintenance or waste elimination. Or assuming value is unaffected by the choice, flow maintenance over waste elimination. A change that eliminates waste should only be undertaken if it does not affect flow or value creation.

Regards,
David
David Anderson | Homepage | 12.23.08 - 10:19 am | #