01 · Define the local meaning
Define the local meaning
Glass wall management is used differently across organisations. In this guide it means a shared shop-floor visual board, supported by a regular review that makes operating conditions and improvement work visible. It does not require literal glass walls, and it should not be presented as one universally defined Lean method. A physical board, a accessible digital board or a combination can serve the purpose when the team can see and use it at the point of review.
The board provides a shared account of what matters now. It connects customer outcomes, the current standard, actual conditions and actions. A dashboard primarily presents selected measures; the board also supports conversation about unresolved conditions, ownership and learning. These tools can share data without becoming identical. The board should not copy every chart available elsewhere or become a display prepared only for visitors.
Design the board for the people who manage the work each day. Ask what they need to decide, what evidence they need and what information must remain private. Visible management is compatible with respectful handling of personal information. Share process conditions and support needs rather than sensitive individual details.
02 · Build a board around a review
Build a board around a review
Agree the review sequence before arranging the board. A useful sequence starts with immediate safety and quality concerns, compares expected and actual delivery, identifies obstacles, assigns responses and checks previous actions. This is a decision routine, not a script for reading numbers aloud. Put supporting information where it helps that sequence.
Distinguish daily status from deeper improvement work. Daily status describes today’s conditions and unfinished commitments. A separate area records recurring problems, tested countermeasures and evidence. Another area can show the current standard or a recent approved change. Keep each item labelled with a date, owner and meaning. Avoid using the same colour for “not started”, “unsafe” and “needs discussion”.
Define update responsibility and timing. If collection data arrive overnight, the board should state which day is complete and which is provisional. If a shift did not update a field, show the missing status. A blank field should not be interpreted as zero problems. The board’s credibility depends on reflecting actual work rather than presenting an always-complete appearance.
03 · Worked example: dispatch review at Northbank
Worked example: dispatch review at Northbank
Fictional Northbank introduces a board beside its dispatch office after improving release checks. The board shows yesterday’s on-time loaded orders with numerator and denominator, today’s carrier cutoff times, parcels on hold by reason, and three open actions. It also shows the authorised release instruction revision. A short review occurs at shift overlap so outgoing and incoming staff can clarify exceptions.
On Wednesday, the board shows 27 held parcels, including 18 waiting for address correction. The team initially suspects that the scanner improvement has created a bottleneck. The operator representative explains that a new customer file arrived with incomplete postcode data. The board makes the cluster visible; the discussion identifies a plausible source requiring evidence. The supervisor protects the affected parcels and the customer-data owner checks the import.
A previous action called for a clearer reprint process. The owner reports that the instruction was revised, but the team sees two old quick-reference cards on the station. The action stays open until obsolete cards are removed and the new method is observed on both shifts. A green tick for publishing the document would have concealed an incomplete operational change.
04 · Use the board to expose gaps respectfully
Use the board to expose gaps respectfully
An abnormal condition should be safe to reveal. If every red mark leads to public criticism, staff will delay posting problems or choose vague categories. Ask what condition prevented the expected result and what support is needed. Keep the discussion anchored to observable facts: the number waiting, the event time, the defined requirement and the evidence from the work.
Northbank avoids ranking individuals by parcels released. Parcel complexity and assignment differ, and a speed ranking would conflict with the identity check. Instead, the board shows shared flow and quality conditions. Coaching about a particular skill occurs separately with appropriate context. This protects the board’s role as a place for managing the process collectively.
Invite disagreement about the interpretation. A planner may attribute missed collection to slow loading while operators point to late order release. Use event timestamps and direct observation to distinguish these explanations. The board is a prompt for inquiry; its layout does not establish causal truth. Record what the team knows, what it suspects and what it will check next.
05 · Connect tiers and follow-up
Connect tiers and follow-up
A local board can expose an issue that its team cannot resolve. Escalate the decision needed, the relevant evidence, current protection and required timing. For example, the dispatch team might request authority to change a carrier cutoff or help correcting a recurring customer import. Passing a red status upward without a decision request creates reporting traffic without useful action.
Keep ownership at the appropriate level. The local team continues protecting parcels while a cross-functional owner investigates the data interface. The higher-level review should respond with a decision, support or a clear explanation of the constraint. Feed that response back to the local board so workers can see that escalation produced something.
Carry unfinished work forward visibly, but do not let old actions accumulate indefinitely. Review whether each remains relevant, has a realistic owner and has evidence of progress. Separate overdue administrative tasks from unresolved high-risk conditions. At Northbank, an address-import action remains active after the immediate parcels are corrected because the next customer file can reproduce the issue.
06 · Maintain relevance and avoid theatre
Maintain relevance and avoid theatre
Common mistakes include boards updated only before management visits, targets without definitions, lengthy meetings in front of live work and action lists that never close. Another mistake is adding more sections whenever someone requests another metric. Every addition should support a decision the team actually makes. Remove obsolete content and link to detailed records rather than posting pages of tiny text.
Assess the board through use: do team members understand the normal condition, reveal problems early, receive support and verify actions? Audit freshness and consistency with source records without turning the board into a scorecard for neatness. A tidy board showing inaccurate green statuses is a weak management system.
For distributed teams, digital access can extend participation, but preserve a workable review at the place of work. Provide readable views, accessible labels and a fallback when connectivity fails. Do not require operators to navigate several screens to find a hold decision. As the process stabilises, adjust the board’s focus to emerging risks and improvement opportunities while retaining the essential controls.
07 · Make commitments specific enough to review
Make commitments specific enough to review
An action such as “investigate addresses” gives the next meeting little basis for judging progress. Northbank instead records that the customer-data owner will compare the import specification with five affected records and report whether the missing fields originate upstream or during import. That commitment identifies an owner, a concrete inquiry and a review point without pretending the cause is already known. When the evidence arrives, the board records the decision rather than carrying forward the same vague action. Keep detailed records elsewhere when necessary, but preserve enough information on the board to connect today’s discussion with yesterday’s commitment.
Connections
Related methods and phase use
Placed under Control because of the outcome it supports. Use the method in other phases when its purpose and assumptions fit the work; the phase list is a guide to selection, not a compulsory sequence.
Sources
Professional foundations and further reading
- Lean Enterprise Institute: Seeing the Work of a Daily Management System
- Lean Enterprise Institute: Follow-up on Leader Standard Work and Visual Management
The explanation and fictional teaching examples are written for LeanTrainingLab. Linked primary sources provide professional foundations; example values and local conventions are stated in the guide. The accepted toolset draws on Six Sigma+Lean Toolset, second edition (Lunau, editor; Springer, 2013). No book text or examples are reproduced here.