Chapter 6
Is Standardization Coercive?
Standardized work evokes images of industrial engineers with stopwatches ter-
rorizing the workforce by squeezing out every second of productivity. It brings
to mind a highly regimented existence in which “big brother” is watching to
make sure you follow each and every rule. It is bureaucracy run rampant where
human will and creativity are wiped out and people become automatons.
But there are other views of standardization. Masaki Imai in his seminal
worksays he learned that there can be no kaizen without standardization.^1
Standardization is actually the starting point for continuous improvement. As dis-
cussed in The Toyota Way,Paul Adler took an organizational theory perspective
and looked in depth at the Toyota Production System (TPS).^2 He discovered that
much of what had been written on the unintended negative consequences of
bureaucracy were avoided by Toyota, which used the standardization of bureau-
cracy along with employee empowerment to create an “enabling” bureaucracy. We
think of bureaucracy as “coercive”—limiting the ability of people to be flexible and
improve. Yet Toyota’s enabling bureaucracy has the opposite effect—allowing for
flexibility and true innovation that makes a lasting impact.
The establishment of standardized processes and procedures is the greatest
key to creating consistent performance. It is only when the process is stable thatEstablish Standardized
Processes and Procedures
(^1) Masaki Imai, Kaizen: The Key to Japan’s Competitive Success, New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin, 1986.
(^2) Paul S. Adler, “Building Better Bureaucracies,” Academy of Management Executive, 13:4, November
1999, 36-47.
Copyright © 2006 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Click here for terms of use.