the lean manufacturing champion: reducing time and risk by encouraging risk-taking

Steve StewartCopeland Corporation

Mel AdamsCenter for Automation and Robotics, Universityof Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, AL 35899

The leanmanufacturingchampion:reducing timeand risk byencouragingrisk-taking

This paper documents how a generalmanager encouraged risk-taking tostrategically reposition a leadingmanufacturer from a focused facilitymaking a narrow product line for a fewdomestic customers to a ¯exible, leanmanufacturer making a wide productline for many global customers.Speci®cally, we:

. review research on managementperspectives on risk and changechampions

. summarize key leadership strategiesand behaviours of champions

. suggest ways to promote change anddevelop time-based infrastructure

. present bene®ts of encouraging risk-taking, and

. suggest actions to become a leanmanufacturing champion

Use of lean manufacturing at Copeland/Hartselle doubled production in thesame ¯oorspace, and changed theculture of the organization. Based onexperience in transferring the Copelandmodel, we provide speci®crecommendations for implementation.

# 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Strategic Change, Sept±Oct 1998

Strategic ChangeStrat. Change, 7, 357±366 (1998)

`What we have to learn is not how to slowdown change but to speed up solutions.'Ichak Adizes (1996)

Introduction

The risks of global change are rede®ningmanagement. After 30 years of post WWIIexpansion, the last two decades have been farmore challenging as sometime market alliesgrew into tough competitors. Using lower costlabour, teamwork, process improvement andtechnology commercialization over invention,hungry Paci®c rim ®rms steadily gained USand world market shares. Initially focused onmaintaining pro®tability, many domestic in-dustries realized in the 1980s that they mustpay more attention to global change and adaptmuch faster so as to protect market share.Change is now a given; only the rate of changeseems to vary between fast and faster. Time hasbecome a key competitive front (Blackburn,1991; Stalk, 1988), with new risks arising frommismanaging time. Thus, the risks of notchanging have overtaken the risks of change.

Individuals and ®rms tend to maintain their

own risk tolerance levels, some at very lowlevels, others at seemingly high levels. Also,risk impacts organizations differently acrossthe stages of growth. For example, entrepre-neurs actually understand and manage risksbetter, whereas managers in mature ®rms tendto minimize risk. Further, each stage of growthinvolves different risks, as the enterprisechases new markets and customers, taking onnew people and infrastructure. Yet, somemanagers may actually increase ®nancial andmarket risk by trying to ignore, prevent, orreduce the risks of change. Risk reduction, aspractised in most ®rms, discourages innova-tion, increases non-value adding activities,thus making ®rms less responsive to customersand more vulnerable to market forces. Risk

reduction ends up being the `death of athousand cuts', as transaction costs and cycletimes increase.

We suggest that improving manufacturingperformance is directly related to managers'ability to compress time by developing risk-taking behaviour by employees. We focus onthe role of the plant manager as champion inimplementing a time-based change strategy.The champion role requires entrepreneurialleadership behaviours not exhibited by mostadministrative managers (Shane, 1994). Speci®-cally, we describe how one innovative managerat Copeland Corp. accomplished dramaticchange by developing entrepreneurial quick-learners, encouraging risk, and developing achange-friendly, time-based infrastructure. Inan increasingly lean-thinking competitiveenvironment, few ®rms will survive withslow infrastructures operated only by the risk-averse. Successful managers refocus on com-pressing time by creating new roles, structuresand risk paradigms. The approach developed atCopeland is one lean-based methodology thatcan be used by most managers to becomechange champions.

Managers and risk

Risk is a key variable in managerial decisionmaking. Luce and Raiffa (1957) distinguishedrisky situations from certain and uncertaindecision situations. Unlike certain decisionswhere each action leads to known outcomes,risk situations lead to a few known outcomeswith a known range of probabilities. Uncer-tainty exists when the probabilities are un-known for a clear set of outcomes. Thus, riskcomes from undesirable variation in out-comes. Research has turned up some surpris-ing ®ndings:

. risk and returns are not always positivelycorrelated,

. individuals are not always risk averse,depending on mood, framing effects,context, etc.

. managers and entrepreneurs do not differin risk propensity.

Risks of not changing haveovertaken the risks of change


358 Steve Stewart and Mel Adams

Overall, in a wide range of situations, peopleappear to behave differently from classicaldecision theory which is based on expectedutility (Shapira, 1995).

Shapira (1995) also found that executivesde®ned risk much differently than theorists.Rather than looking at the total distribution ofprobable outcomes, managers focused on thenegative side and weighted the very high costoutcomes; i.e., the size of loss was usually morecritical than its probability. Also, to managers,risk-taking was not gambling, since theybelieved they had control and could use skill.Finally, managers were unwilling to quantifyrisk because it usually has so many dimensions.Thus, managers are less willing to take riskswhen negative outcomes will be irreversible;and when the decision would impact others,especially family and large groups of employ-ees. Curiously, most decision and risk researchfocuses on managers; there is little research onemployees' risk-taking behaviour in organ-izations.

Champions

To change organizations usually requires achampion, someone who takes personal riskto overcome individual and organizationalobstacles to innovation. This champion isusually key to business development, newtechnology development, and organizationalchange processes (Shane, 1994). The leanchampion often plays a key role in all threearenas to reposition the organization.

The term `champion' was ®rst used todescribe the role of a key executive whomentors and paves the way for a technicalinnovator in a corporate environment (Schon,1963). The term has since been applied morebroadly to include many types of organizationalchange. Research has shown that championsoften play ®ve valuable, distinct roles in thechange process:

1. establishing autonomy from organizationrules and procedures so innovators can®nd creative solutions to problems.

2. building cross-functional ties via support-ing coalitions between managers in differ-ent parts of the organization.

3. establishing decision-making mechanismsfor developing consensus on innovationsand changes.

4. using informal methods to persuade othermembers of the organization to supportthe innovation.

5. enabling innovators to circumvent hierar-chy by protecting the team from inter-ference by the hierarchy.

These roles differentiated experiencedchampions from non-champions across theglobe; thus the champion role is independentof culture (Shane, 1994). The roles must beplayed to overcome organizational groupthink.In deviating from the norm, entrepreneurs seenew ways of combining resources, and theseroles are essential to express deviant prefer-ences for better ways of doing things.

Continuous, fast-forward changevia lean methods

Given the usual resistance to change and risk-taking, leadership of organizational change forstrategic repositioning is perhaps the mostdif®cult task facing a new manager. Nearly allthe traditional policies, rules, norms and evenvalues of the entrenched organization must bechallenged. Quick results are especially dif®-cult for the incoming general manager of acapital and labour intensive plant with anembedded culture based on strong traditions,low performance and mistrust/cynicismgrounded in previous managers' failures. Tobe effective, the new manager must changethe current paradigm of middle managementand employees (Barker, 1993; Bounds et al.,1994). Some US managers use the BaldrigeAward or ISO-9000 certi®cation to motivateand organize the change process, but, sincethese models do not guarantee success,many have been disappointed in the results(Fuchsberg, 1992a, 1992b).

Over the course of a decade, one Copelandmanager developed his own lean-thinkingmanagement approach, called Quickstep2 to


Reducing time and risk by encouraging risk-taking 359

compress time and focus on the antecedentsof ®nancial performance (Grant et al., 1994).Quickstep2 is a `time-based, action-orientedmethodology of eliminating non-value activi-ties in manufacturing and business processes'(Stewart, 1996). In its focus on time-compression as the key, it combines thedrivers of end-customer requirements, TAKTtime and very challenging stretch goals todevelop a ¯exible manufacturing system.(TAKT time (German for `pace') is calcu-lated as available work time per day dividedby daily required demands in units perday). Low-cost kaizens provide the keymechanism, instead of database systems.

At Copeland, the need for a time-basedstrategy was driven by evolution of thecompressor market and management's vision.As a subsidiary of Emerson Electric Corp.(4$10B sales), corporate goals emphasizedquality, customer satisfaction and ®nancialresults. Copeland's Hartselle, Alabama plantwas designed and built in 1978 as a focusedfacility to make about one million reciprocatingcompressors per year in 235,000 square feet by800 employees. Fully integrated operationsincluded high-volume machining of basic com-ponents through assembly of ®nal product.

Using kaizen-based lean methods, Hartselleemployees responded well to global change.Rather than treating reciprocating compres-sors as a mature, perhaps even dying domesticcash cow, Copeland chose to expand intointernational targets in the face of formidabletrends. By 1992, the world market requiredmore than 1400 models, a 14-fold increasesince the early 1980s (see Exhibit 1). To meetcustomers' demands for better responsiveness,Hartselle cut order-to-delivery time from16 weeks to a few days, even as order size

dropped from more than 1000 units to lessthan 40. Capacity and productivity more thandoubled in the same ¯oorspace, which helpedthe company remain competitive when marketprices declined about 25%. Lean methodshelped Copeland/Hartselle more than doubleproduction in the same ¯oorspace, change theculture of the organization, and draw suppliersand customers into the improvement process.The plant recently produced its 25 millionthcompressor since its startup in 1978.

Such gains are seldom achieved on technical®xes alone; Copeland management had to

rethink all manufacturing, logistics andbusiness processes. Unlike both cautious andradical approaches to organizational change,lean manufacturing helped the plant managerturn around Hartselle to an entrepreneurialculture in a continuous fashion by making thou-sands of quick, large and small improvementsthat compressed more than half the time out ofthe plant's processes and cycles. The Copelandchampion used the strategic managementprocess in Exhibit 2. By encouraging risk-taking to compress cycle time, he helped Hart-selle actually reduce ®nancial and business risk.

Developing entrepreneurialquick-learners

In any stagnant organization, the challengeis to transform ordinary managers and

Gains are seldom achievedon technical ®xes alone

Exhibit 1. World 1-5 Hp compressor market dynamics.



employees into people who know, value andact on change. Every change provides oppor-tunity to improve competitive position fasterthan competitors. In Copeland, change wasled by a core group consisting of a champion,facilitators and employee `challenger' groups(see Exhibits 3 and 4).

The Copeland lean champion. The keyperson in the Copeland Corp. lean approachis the champion. This person plays the keyroles of leader, entrepreneur, and manager todiagnose the situation, develop strategy andde®ne the lean approach (Bartlett and Ghoshal,1994; Ghoshal and Bartlett, 1995). As a leader,the champion must develop and communicatea vision of how the company must change toexcel in the emerging marketplace. As entre-preneur, the champion must constantly projectchanging customer needs into new productsand services. As manager, the champion willdrive process improvement and cost reductionto maximize competitiveness (as measured bygrowth rate, market share, margins and returnon capital).

The champion is typically a key member ofthe management team, someone who believeschange is imperative and who is capable ofeffecting change across the organization.Internally, s/he must diagnose and revitalizethe behaviour of the organization, identify andremove barriers, de®ne the framework anddevelop new criteria for evaluation and pro-motion. This person guarantees a free ¯ow ofinformation; directs the key change processesof networking and follow-through; and con-stantly sets new standards and goals. Thechampion encourages risk-taking by personallyteaching employees why change is essential tosurvival, what risks are acceptable, how toreduce risks of change and how to adoptchange as a way of life.

In effect, the champion changes employees'decision criteria in several ways (see Shapira,1995, pp. 111±115). First, the criteria them-selves are rede®ned in terms of improvementopportunities to make work easier, moreef®cient, and more competitive, not just costreductions and elimination of jobs. Second,training by the facilitators on how to makeimprovements systematically dramatically re-duces the probability of rejection since most ofthe implementation decisions are made by thegroup, not the champion. (The championcommitted in advance to implement as manyof the suggestions as possible). Third, thecombined effect of group effort and loweringthe aspiration level to include many small

Exhibit 2. Lean manufacturing in the Copelandstrategic management model.

Exhibit 3. Roles and responsibilities of champion,facilitators and challengers in lean manufacturing.



improvements instead of home runs dramati-cally lowers the probability of failure foremployees. In effect, the number of real gainsin productivity increases signi®cantly andoverwhelms the false positives, false negativesand wrong counter-measures that may besuggested.

Facilitators. The champion needs todevelop facilitators to help accomplish theamount of work required for organizationchange. Facilitators work closely with thechampion to effect change. This group ofinnovative, process improvement specialistsworks as a team reporting directly to thechampion. Each facilitator acts as a partici-pating guide and schedule keeper to com-press time now and reach aggressive goals.S/he has in-depth knowledge of lean tech-niques, experience in implementation, theability to communicate and teach, and asense of urgency. Facilitators maintain andschedule focus groups, arrange presentations,and encourage networking techniques. Toproduce improvements immediately, theyarrange critical services such as maintenance,tooling, and removal or installation of equip-ment and materials. They are most directlyresponsible for implementing lean methodsand for recording results upon which newgoals are based.

Facilitators take most of the direct risks ofinitiating and implementing change in theorganization. Thus, they must be protectedby the champion from distractions and press-ures to quit change efforts. They also play thekey role of translator in communicating theleader's vision, goals and strategy for change.The facilitator, in turn, helps protect challen-gers from the resistance to change in the oldorganization culture. Although they try to drawimprovements out of the group, they oftensuggest radically new ways to do things,and encourage challengers to make similarsuggestions.

Challengers. The people directly involvedwith a process across all levels of the organiz-ation make up the group held accountable forcompressing time out of the process. A givenfocus group may include operators, super-visors, maintenance, quality, schedulers andmanagement. These challengers have front-lineresponsibility to make immediate changesregardless of how small or bold (given gui-dance on system impacts on safety, quality,etc.). The focus group must also calculate andpresent results in kaizen exercises, and con-stantly focus on further improvement. In manyrespects, challengers de®ne networking atCopeland because they observe, measure,discuss, decide and act on process change.

Exhibit 4. Champion, facilitator and focus group roles in lean manufacturing.



Encouraging risk-taking

To reorient an organization, the champion andfacilitators must work together to change aninternally-focused, risk-avoiding culture to anexternally-driven, risk-taking unit. This usuallyrequires new purpose and new managementbehaviours. To communicate a new require-ment for change, the champion must providea clear, single-minded purpose for everyindividual employee's behaviour. Usually thisinvolves a long-term commitment to a grow-ing, learning, continuous improvement phil-osophy, complemented with speci®c short-term, non-®nancial, measurable targets. Goalsshould be so aggressive that challengersquickly realize the current behaviours andprocess will not work.

The champions and facilitators also insistand persevere every time individuals andchallenger groups resist change. As employeesbegin to take responsibility for process im-provement decisions, the champion can helpmiddle managers accept change. By exampleand training, the champion can help somemiddle managers also become coaches. In the

face of opposition, the champion must remaindecisive for immediate change.

At times, the champion must protect thefacilitators and challenger groups by permit-ting end-runs around the bureaucracy to getthe tools and supplies to make quick improve-ments. For example, the champion must agreeto take the risk for the group when thefacilitator uses a personal credit card at thelocal hardware store to buy the same screwsthat purchasing has had back-ordered formonths under typical purchasing procedures.

The champion must also demand exper-imentation with the key processes, eventhough the risk of a mistake is high. Thehigher risk, in fact, sends a strong signal to allemployees and managers about the import-ance of change. Initially then, rather than low-risk and impact `pilot' projects, kaizen projectsshould be highly visible, high and quick return,low-cost, and sure winners. Under thesecriteria, change projects are less risky thanthey appear. At Copeland, one team soonrealized that a major machine had beenmoved to an unworkable location. Reposition-ing the machine again would cost $17,000, andan operator on the team was the only personwith the nerve to tell the champion. Toreinforce the need for improvement, thechampion said `Just do it', and walked away.

Developing a change-friendly,time-based infrastructure

The champion must develop a sensitivity tokey behaviours at all levels. To avoid micro-managing, s/he must determine the mostimportant signals to track the change process.For example, something as simple as changingthe organizational language can improve risk-taking. At Copeland, the champion used thelist of `good' and `bad words' in Exhibit 5to help change a negative, `can't be done'culture.

The role of champion works often best witha low-key, coaching style that empowerspeople and replaces fear with personalgrowth and frequent, intrinsic group rewardsas the key motivators. Since managers in other

Exhibit 5. Copeland vocabulary changes for leanmanufacturing.



®rms have also become champions forCopeland's lean manufacturing methods, thestrategy does not depend on a speci®cpersonality type or personal characteristics.The champion must use each role (leader,entrepreneur, manager) to coach employeesand middle managers.

The champion actually helps reducephysical and schedule risks of change. Forexample, the champion must help facilitatorsorganize kaizens and implementation activitiesto minimize downtime and maintain pro-duction. In many cases, this requires the useof subcontract riggers who are trained to worksafely around an operating line. Equipment isoften moved on weekends or nights after com-pleting preparation for immediate operation.

Finally, the champion must work with thefacilitators to recognize and reward results ofrisk-taking. Each kaizen team member helpspresent results to management in a formal oralreport. Copeland team successes were re-warded with public recognition, Copelandshirts and other intrinsic rewards. The cham-pion, on behalf of the company, applied for andwon consecutive State of Alabama improve-ment awards. Each year, 50 employees weretaken to the awards ceremonies at companyexpense.

Lean bene®ts: how encouragingrisk-taking reduces risk

By taking risks and developing risk-takingemployees, the lean champion actually reducesboth technical and business risks. Intensetraining on lean methods during kaizenshelps make employees conscious of the sevendeadly wastes (Imai, 1986). Systematicallyreducing wastes lowers the risks of over-production and excess inventory; losses dueto downtime and waiting; unnecessary costsfor warehouses, storage and transportation;time-consuming operator motions, and mostimportant, defective output that is eithershipped to customers or reworked. Withlower delivered prices, ever higher quality andfaster delivery, the organization becomes moreresponsive. Applied to design and engineering

functions, lean principles lower the growingrisks of obsolescence, overdesign and excessfeaturing, or losing a product developmentrace. Together, these reduce the basic marketrisk of not meeting customer requirements orexpectations for improving value.

As employees become more involved andempowered, the organization becomes morecompetitive. With progressive leadership,stretch goals and training, higher employeesatisfaction usually leads to a much improvedcorporate culture, one that is externallyfocused and driven, rather than consumed byinternal turf and equity issues. As cash¯ow,pro®tability, productivity, and asset utilizationimprove, the risks of external stakeholderdissatisfaction also decline.

Many CEOs, presidents and plant managersincrease their organizations' total risk exposureby not adopting lean methods. For example,one executive in a world-leading plant dedi-cated one afternoon with his managementteam to presentations by two sets of consult-ants on lean manufacturing (one sent in by thekey customers). With lead times as long as twoyears and a huge backlog, these managers feltlittle pressure to change even with very lowproductivity. The top executive ®nally said,`Well, I don't really believe in this lean stuff.Our operating group can continue to workthis.' Then he asked the plant manager, `Whenwill your team have that plan on how weshould structure our quality team?' Denigra-tion, abdication and delegation sent clearsignals that the risks of change were greaterthan the risks of not changing, that time andspeed were not the bases of strategy.

Implementing lean manufacturing

For those who know that they and theirorganization must change to survive, severalactions can make the journey easier.

1. Develop and communicate an aggressivegrowth vision for the organization. Man-agers and employees generally prefergrowth and like a challenge; give it tothem with a broad direction and one very



ambitious, single, time-based target as thekey metric for the next annual planningperiod.

2. Use consultants to jump start a smallinternal team. Lean method consultantswill help overcome initial resistance tochange by showing quick results. Theinitial kaizen should be on a key processwith very high and quick payoff andvisibility, not a small pilot that will makeno difference if it fails. The main goal is toshow that change is possible and quickwith focused team efforts.

3. Dedicate at least one trained facilitator.This technically competent and lean-experienced coach must be protectedfrom the typical daily ®re®ghting. His orher sole purpose is to drive processimprovement through training, schedulingkaizens and weekly follow up. On-the-joband formal training during kaizen events bythe champion and facilitators encouragesteam and employee development, whileproviding the tools to understand andmanage the risks associated with change.

4. Drive follow up. Make sure that as many ofthe changes are implemented as soon aspossible. Publicize the results and recog-nize the team responsible to help institu-tionalize the desire for change. Thefacilitators should provide action itemlists, assign responsibility, and hold theseindividuals accountable for making thechange by an agreed-upon due date.

How to become a change championfor lean manufacturing

Lean manufacturing starts with personalchange to become a champion. Several tradi-tional managers have become lean championsafter seeing the results. Perhaps the keychanges required to become a lean leader

are to: become a student of change methods,put employees and customers ®rst so as toemphasize learning and improvement overshort-term ®nancial targets, and emphasizeempowerment and growth as much as controland results.

1. Study to become a believer. Most changechampions are voracious learners, takingadvantage of every opportunity to learnfrom others: books, trade literature, planttours, training seminars, etc. Develop aprofound, externally-driven view of theorganization and its place in the world.

2. Learn by doing. Participate in kaizens tolearn the approach, both at other com-panies and in your own ®rm. Study thebarriers to change, listen to employees, setexamples to change the culture, and learnfrom the failures without penalizingemployees.

3. Use a mentor. Find another executive orplant manager who has been converted tolean manufacturing and use this championas an advisor. A person from anotherindustry may provide the best insightsinto the roles a lean champion must play.

4. Refuse to accept anything but change.No excuses, high-cost solutions, researchstudies, long-term projects, or compla-cency are to be tolerated. The essentialchallenge facing the champion is to over-come the inertial resistance to changingbehaviour now. Experienced facilitators,supported and energized by an impatientchampion, can mobilize the latent creativ-ity and frustration in most individualemployees focused on challenger groups.

Summary

Using the lean model, organizational changebecomes a way of life. Quick time com-pression through faster, decentralized, groupdecision-making is an important key to im-proved organizational performance andreduced external risk. Champions, facilitatorsand challengers work together to reduce timeand waste in all operations, from order-getting

Lean manufacturing startswith personal change



to receipt of payment and customer feedback.Lean methodology drives quick, radical,continuous transformations of products andprocesses by motivating facilitators and chal-lengers to risk change. The Copeland Corp.lean philosophy is summarized best as:

1. Just do it.2. Publish the results.3. Just do it again.

Nearly all organizations can bene®t fromlean-thinking, but the change must start at thetop with the person in charge. Lean championsare made, not born.

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to Copeland Corpo-ration, a division of Emerson Electric, forits support. The Copeland/Hartselle plantreceived the 1995 Alabama US Senate Pro-ductivity and Quality Award. In 1996 and againin 1997, the plant also received the Award ofExcellence in Continuous Productivity andQuality Improvement. This work was alsopartially supported by the Department ofCommerce Manufacturing Extension Programthrough the Alabama Technology Network, Inc.

Quickstep2 is a registered trademark ofMr Steve Stewart. The Copeland methodologyhas been documented in the Quickstep2

Process Improvement Handbook. For moreinformation on Quickstep2, call UAH at (205)890-6243 x205, fax (205) 890-6970 or email:[email protected].

Biographical note

Steve K. Stewart is Vice President of AsiaOperations in Hong Kong for Copeland Corp.,a division of Emerson Electric Corp. He has anMBA from Pfeiffer University. After beginningat Copeland as a quality engineer, he advancedthrough production manager, plant manager,and Vice President and General Manager ofManufacturing.

Mel Adams is Senior Research Scientist inthe Center of Automation and Robotics at the

University of Alabama in Huntsville. He has aPh.D. in management from the Universityof Tennessee. He consults with Fortune 500

®rms and new ventures on business develop-ment. His research focuses on the managementof strategic change, technology commercial-ization and entrepreneurship.

References

Barker, J. A. (1993). Paradigms: The Business

of Discovering the Future, Harper Collins,New York.

Bartlett, C. A. and Ghoshal, S. (1994). Changing therole of top management: beyond strategy to pur-

pose, Harvard Business Review, 72(6), 79±90.Blackburn, J. D. (1991). Time-Based Competition:

The Next Battleground in American Manu-

facturing, BusinessOne Irwin, Homewood, IL.

Bounds, G., Yorks, L., Adams, M. and Ranney, G.(1994). Beyond TQM: Towards the Emerging

Paradigm, McGraw-Hill, New York.Fuchsberg, G. (1992a, May 14). Quality Programs

Showing Shoddy Results. Wall St. Journal,pp. B1.

Fuchsberg, G. (1992b, October 1). `Total Quality' isTermed Only Partial Success. Wall St. Journal,

pp. B1.Ghoshal, S. and Bartlett, C. A. (1995). Changing the

Role of Top Management: Beyond Structure to

Processes. Harvard Business Review, 73(1),86±96.

Grant, R., Shani, R. and Krishnan, R. (1994). TQM'sChallenge to Management Theory and Practice.

Sloan Management Review, 35(2), 25±35.Imai, M. (1986). Kaizen: The Key to Japan's

Competitive Success. McGraw-Hill, New York.Luce, R. and Raiffa, H. (1957). Games and

Decisions. Wiley, New York.Schon, D. (1963). Champions for Radical New

Innovations. Harvard Business Review, 41(7),77±86.

Shane, S. A. (1994). Are Champions Different fromNon-Champions? Journal of Business Ventur-

ing, 9(5), 397±421.Shapira, Z. (1995). Risk Taking: A Management

Perspective. Russell Sage Foundation, New York.Stalk, G. Jr. (1988). Time-The Next Source of

Competitive Advantage. Harvard Business

Review, 66(4), 41±53.Stewart, S. (1996). Quickstep2 Process Improve-

ment Handbook, Copeland Corp., Hartselle, AL.

CCC 1086±1718/98/060357±10$17.50 Strategic Change, Sept±Oct 1998# 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.


the lean manufacturing champion: reducing time and risk by encouraging risk-taking

Documents