**4. Suggestions systems**

An article published in 1999 in the scientific journal Total Quality Management entitled "Stuff the suggestions box" [19] refers to an example of an ancient system of suggestions that existed in Japan at the beginning of the 18th century, created by the eighth Shogun (high-ranking military member) named Yoshimuni Tokugawa. This system of suggestions consisted of a box placed at the entrance of his castle with the following sign: "Make your idea known. Rewards will be given to ideas that are accepted". Rewards were given to people who provided good ideas, but any ideas seen as criticism of the Shogun were often rewarded with beheading.

Modern suggestion systems began to appear in some companies in the early twentieth century. There is reference to suggestion systems in American companies such as Kodak and NCR and Japanese companies such as Kanebo even in the early twentieth century. Later but even before the Second World War, more precisely in the 1930s, companies such as Hitachi, Yasukawa Electric and Origin Electric introduced suggestion systems.

Toyota's suggestion system was introduced in 1951 with the designation "Creative Ideas Suggestion System" and it is described in some detail in the book "40 Years, 20 Million Ideas: Toyota's Suggestion System [20]. It is very interesting to note the importance that Toyota already gave at the end of the first half of the last century to the potential for creativity and innovation of employees. This was so clear that as early as 1953 they formally adopted the slogan "Good Thinking, Good Products" [21]. Both the aspect of respect for creativity and the aspect of putting the customer first were well expressed in that motto.

Operators were led to take a very central role in solving problems that were occurring in the course of their work and also in developing suggestions for introducing improvements. According to some internal Toyota documents I had access to, the attitude of the operators should be as follows:

*"When we have an idea about a better way to perform the operation, we first clarify the idea with our supervisors and then experiment and evaluate the results. Then we fill out a creative suggestion and submit it for evaluation."*

**43**

*Continuous Improvement*

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93638*

most continuous improvement systems.

agement and thereby improve processes as a consequence.

indicators that can be used as a reference.

from a consortium between Toyota and GM.

John Shook1

Each proposal is then verified by a supervisor or group leader, who assesses its usefulness, effectiveness, and originality using a standard scoring system to ensure fairness. Evaluations are carried out almost immediately and a monetary premium

Another alternative for forwarding suggestions is through quality circles. A quality circle, or quality control circle is a group composed of many people from the same area of work or not, whose goal is to find solutions to solve quality problems or solutions to improve quality. When a good solution is found, that same solution or countermeasure can be applied to all other places facing the same problem. When the members of these quality circles belong to different areas of production, the dissemination of good practices becomes easier. Quality circles were popular in the 1980s but gradually lost their popularity as quality was taken over as part of production. The new type of team that began to exist began to take on purposes other than just quality. This type of team that is often named kaizen teams are the type of teams that would evolve from the initial quality circles. These kaizen teams are a very relevant entity in the structure of

Although it is assumed that Toyota's suggestion system was inspired by American suggestion systems (such as Ford's) the great effectiveness of Toyota's system is in the emphasis that Toyota has always been given to employees. In texts shared by

clearly neglecting the human aspect of the equation in suggestion systems. Shook argues that GM decided that suggestions that did not bring 20 USD of savings would be refused because the costs to process a suggestion were estimated at that value of 20 USD. The system was focused on the interest of the business and not integrated with the personal dimension. In general terms the conventional suggestion systems existing in America are oriented to encourage GREAT suggestions, to give GREAT prizes, evaluated by LARGE committees with the expectation of GREAT RESULTS. Unlike Toyota encourages small improvements with small prizes. According to the same author, most of the prizes at Toyota are around 10 USD maximum. At Toyota, each employee submits one suggestion per week on average and 98% of the suggestions are implemented. Reflecting on the purpose of Toyota's system the idea is not simply to improve processes, the idea is to improve employee involvement in man-

In the book "A Study of the Toyota Production System" published 1989 [22] the number of suggestions presented at Toyota by the workers goes from 10.6 suggestions per worker in 1976 to 18.7 suggestions per worker in 1980 and 94% of these suggestions were implemented in that year. The same author suggests that these suggestions have been responsible for the productivity advantage that Toyota's factories have over their competitors. Joakim Ahlstrom [23] found 13 improvements implemented per person per year was a number that very few companies in Europe could achieve. He also mentions that 20 improvements implemented per person per year were the best that was being achieved in the world. The accuracy of these numbers is difficult to guarantee but they are

Yasuda [20] describes the spirit of Toyota's suggestion system in the simple thought: "I want to make my job easier, even if only a little easier". It also says: "If people remain alert to detect problems, in an environment created that facilitates

<sup>1</sup> John Shook is one of the greatest figures in the Lean movement. He is the author of several books on lean as the famous "learning to see" dedicated to VSM (Value Stream Mapping). John Shook was involved in the first experience of applying TPS in America, the NUMMI project. It was a car factory that is born

in 2009 on suggestion systems it is suggested that one of GM's flaws was

is paid about 2 months after the suggestion has been approved.

#### *Continuous Improvement DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93638*

*Concepts, Applications and Emerging Opportunities in Industrial Engineering*

promote CI have higher salaries than the average employee.

continues then easily reaches the value of 3% referred.

**4. Suggestions systems**

introduced suggestion systems.

the customer first were well expressed in that motto.

to, the attitude of the operators should be as follows:

beheading.

In this sentence it is suggested to spend more time on CI tasks than on the tasks of the work itself to add value to products and services. This is not really the practice in organizations. The percentage of time spent on CI is much lower. Although publications that advance with an indicative value are very rare, Mark Hamel & Michael O'Connor argue [18] a value of 3% as a reference for the percentage of human resources that in a company should be dedicated to CI tasks. Interesting value as a reference. However, 3% of the human resources dedicated to CI should be more expensive than 3% of the time of all human resources simply because by assumption the human resources dedicated exclusively to CI, with knowledge of CI and able to

Considering a round number of 460 minutes that each employee dedicates per day in his work, then 13.8 minutes (3% of 460 minutes) should be used on average for CI tasks. The daily meetings of 5 minutes of the operational teams have a very common practice in companies with organized continuous improvement systems. If we add these 5 minutes daily of all employees with some possible weekly meetings that have longer duration, if we also add the time spent in occasional continuous improvement events and the management and support time in the improvement

An article published in 1999 in the scientific journal Total Quality Management entitled "Stuff the suggestions box" [19] refers to an example of an ancient system of suggestions that existed in Japan at the beginning of the 18th century, created by the eighth Shogun (high-ranking military member) named Yoshimuni Tokugawa. This system of suggestions consisted of a box placed at the entrance of his castle with the following sign: "Make your idea known. Rewards will be given to ideas that are accepted". Rewards were given to people who provided good ideas, but any ideas seen as criticism of the Shogun were often rewarded with

Modern suggestion systems began to appear in some companies in the early twentieth century. There is reference to suggestion systems in American companies such as Kodak and NCR and Japanese companies such as Kanebo even in the early twentieth century. Later but even before the Second World War, more precisely in the 1930s, companies such as Hitachi, Yasukawa Electric and Origin Electric

Toyota's suggestion system was introduced in 1951 with the designation "Creative Ideas Suggestion System" and it is described in some detail in the book "40 Years, 20 Million Ideas: Toyota's Suggestion System [20]. It is very interesting to note the importance that Toyota already gave at the end of the first half of the last century to the potential for creativity and innovation of employees. This was so clear that as early as 1953 they formally adopted the slogan "Good Thinking, Good Products" [21]. Both the aspect of respect for creativity and the aspect of putting

Operators were led to take a very central role in solving problems that were occurring in the course of their work and also in developing suggestions for introducing improvements. According to some internal Toyota documents I had access

*"When we have an idea about a better way to perform the operation, we first clarify the idea with our supervisors and then experiment and evaluate the results.* 

*Then we fill out a creative suggestion and submit it for evaluation."*

**42**

Each proposal is then verified by a supervisor or group leader, who assesses its usefulness, effectiveness, and originality using a standard scoring system to ensure fairness. Evaluations are carried out almost immediately and a monetary premium is paid about 2 months after the suggestion has been approved.

Another alternative for forwarding suggestions is through quality circles. A quality circle, or quality control circle is a group composed of many people from the same area of work or not, whose goal is to find solutions to solve quality problems or solutions to improve quality. When a good solution is found, that same solution or countermeasure can be applied to all other places facing the same problem. When the members of these quality circles belong to different areas of production, the dissemination of good practices becomes easier. Quality circles were popular in the 1980s but gradually lost their popularity as quality was taken over as part of production. The new type of team that began to exist began to take on purposes other than just quality. This type of team that is often named kaizen teams are the type of teams that would evolve from the initial quality circles. These kaizen teams are a very relevant entity in the structure of most continuous improvement systems.

Although it is assumed that Toyota's suggestion system was inspired by American suggestion systems (such as Ford's) the great effectiveness of Toyota's system is in the emphasis that Toyota has always been given to employees. In texts shared by John Shook1 in 2009 on suggestion systems it is suggested that one of GM's flaws was clearly neglecting the human aspect of the equation in suggestion systems. Shook argues that GM decided that suggestions that did not bring 20 USD of savings would be refused because the costs to process a suggestion were estimated at that value of 20 USD. The system was focused on the interest of the business and not integrated with the personal dimension. In general terms the conventional suggestion systems existing in America are oriented to encourage GREAT suggestions, to give GREAT prizes, evaluated by LARGE committees with the expectation of GREAT RESULTS. Unlike Toyota encourages small improvements with small prizes. According to the same author, most of the prizes at Toyota are around 10 USD maximum. At Toyota, each employee submits one suggestion per week on average and 98% of the suggestions are implemented. Reflecting on the purpose of Toyota's system the idea is not simply to improve processes, the idea is to improve employee involvement in management and thereby improve processes as a consequence.

In the book "A Study of the Toyota Production System" published 1989 [22] the number of suggestions presented at Toyota by the workers goes from 10.6 suggestions per worker in 1976 to 18.7 suggestions per worker in 1980 and 94% of these suggestions were implemented in that year. The same author suggests that these suggestions have been responsible for the productivity advantage that Toyota's factories have over their competitors. Joakim Ahlstrom [23] found 13 improvements implemented per person per year was a number that very few companies in Europe could achieve. He also mentions that 20 improvements implemented per person per year were the best that was being achieved in the world. The accuracy of these numbers is difficult to guarantee but they are indicators that can be used as a reference.

Yasuda [20] describes the spirit of Toyota's suggestion system in the simple thought: "I want to make my job easier, even if only a little easier". It also says: "If people remain alert to detect problems, in an environment created that facilitates

<sup>1</sup> John Shook is one of the greatest figures in the Lean movement. He is the author of several books on lean as the famous "learning to see" dedicated to VSM (Value Stream Mapping). John Shook was involved in the first experience of applying TPS in America, the NUMMI project. It was a car factory that is born from a consortium between Toyota and GM.

their identification, the generation of creative ideas will not be exhausted". The idea of making very frequent small improvements seems counterintuitive in the culture of most of our companies. In many companies we are always looking for a very good solution that makes us have significant performance gains and we do not give much credit to insignificant or sometimes intangible gains but that, in the long run, by their frequency, are extremely powerful. This is a key idea for the sustainability of continuous improvement.

In 'Human Resource Development in Toyota Culture' [24] the authors mention that the relationship of trust created between the employee and the company or institution is extremely important and perhaps that is the reason why 90,000 suggestions per year are presented by Toyota employees. It is also curious to note that, according to the same authors, Toyota intentionally does not give emphasis to cash rewards. This is consistent with Devine's work stressing recognition rather than reward [14]. Generating ideas is supposed to be part of the work and as such does not reward a person for having done only his work. The ideas generated are part of the relationship of trust between the parties and this relationship of trust is the currency of exchange between employer and employee. Employees individually can and should place suggestions in suggestion boxes placed in specified places. They are encouraged to write them or ask for help from more experienced engineering personnel to write them if necessary but can also give suggestions verbally so that there is no excuse for suggestions not to be given.

Toyota handles the suggestion system in a very similar way to how the system was originally implemented many years ago. There is a committee that evaluates all the suggestions of the workers. Whenever a worker has an improvement idea in his work, he first talks about his idea with his direct boss, as a team leader, and tries to implement it as a test to find out how the idea works. If they find it would work, the worker will put the idea in a specific predefined format, with the support of the boss, if necessary, and formally send the idea to the committee. The committee then assesses the suggestion very quickly and decides whether it is implemented or not and what the reward should be. However, it is important to emphasize that the main objective of the system is NOT to give money to the employee who sends the suggestion. The main objective of donating a small amount of money is to APPRECIATE the worker's initiative and encourage him to continue the approach. Therefore, the main objective of the system is not to compensate the worker with the money, but to encourage his attitude.
