Confucius, also known as Kong Zi, was an ancient Chinese philosopher who believed that trust—or shin—enables people to contribute to society. He believed that, for a leader, earning trust was essential. In addition, according to Confucius, to consider the concerns and interests of another person was necessary for trust to be established between two people.

At the heart of the Toyota Way are two pillars, continuous improvement and respect for people. These are supported by five values: challenge, improvement (kaizen), seeing for yourself (genchi genbutsu), respect, and teamwork. The word “challenge” means either a tangible thing, such as competition or obstacles to overcome, or the action to engage in a contest, adventure, or experiment that may succeed or fail.

In our world of excess everything, savvy innovators realize that less is actually best. They know that delivering a memorable and meaningful experience hinges on user engagement, which is best achieved through a subtractive approach. Anything excessive, confusing, or wasteful is intelligently and cleverly removed, or never added in the first place.

Isee the same cycle in so many places. What cycle? A five-step process for ensuring that ideas fail.

Anthony Burns’ opinion piece, “Six Sigma Psychology” published in the Oct. 25, 2012, edition of Quality Digest Daily, piqued my interest. I read it in anticipation of discovering a candy house waiting at the end of a long dark path, along with suggestions about how to avoid the oven. Perhaps I’d find a scroll illuminating the psychology of change and the struggles change agents endure every day.

Editor’s note: In response to Kyle Toppazzini’s article, “Lean Without Six Sigma May Be a Failing Proposition,” published in the Sept. 27, 2012, issue of Quality Digest Daily, Rip Stauffer left the following observant comment.

In a Harvard Business Review article Tom Davenport writes, “I hope that when companies start getting excited again about process improvement, they resist one method for doing so. A hybrid, combined approach is really the only approach that makes any sense. In religion many people worship only one god, but in process management we should all be pantheists.”

In a class last month I was asked to explain a number that occurs in some measurement system evaluations and which is known as the precision to tolerance ratio (P/T ratio). As I will show in this column, it turns out to be related to the capability ratio.

When I was in production, we used the term “waves” to describe the ebb and flow of work to the factory. Some days there would be very little, and others a big heaping pile. When the waves came, we worked overtime, bumped queues, and sometimes used less experienced workers to fill in gaps. So-called work-in-process was piled everywhere, and workers and supervisors flew around the factory, escorting the stodgy production flow.

I love product development and quality engineering. There are days when I can’t believe that I actually get paid to do this. Between you and me, I’d do this work for a lot less money. In fact, even on the days that I hate the particular circumstances of my job, I still love my job. If that makes any sense.