I love the idea of "Just-in-Time" to reduce waste, but in my industry, supply chain delays are a constant threat. How do you keep a project "Lean" without making it so fragile that a single delay ruins the entire timeline? Is there a middle ground between Lean and "Just-in-Case"?
3 answers
This is a classic dilemma. In Lean Project Management, we use "Strategic Buffers" rather than "Safety Stock" everywhere. The key is to identify your "Critical Chain" and only place buffers at the end of the project or at high-risk integration points. This keeps the rest of the workflow Lean and fast, while still providing a shock absorber for the most unpredictable parts of the project. I’ve found that being transparent with vendors about your Lean goals actually helps them align their delivery schedules better, which further reduces the need for "Just-in-Case" hoarding.
Do you find that having "redundant" suppliers goes against Lean principles, or is it considered a necessary part of waste reduction to prevent total project stalls?
I suggest focusing on "Lead Time" reduction with your primary vendors. If they can deliver faster, you don't need to carry as much inventory or risk-related buffer.
I agree, Sharon. Working closely with partners to shorten those delivery windows is much more "Lean" than simply padding the schedule with extra weeks of buffer.
George, having a secondary supplier is actually a form of "waste" (redundancy), but it's a calculated one. In Lean, we call this "Poka-Yoke" or mistake-proofing. If the cost of a project stall is higher than the cost of maintaining a backup relationship, then the backup is the most efficient choice.