Standing in the Ohno circle. And then?

Ohno circle is also known as “Taiichi Ohno’s Chalk Circle”, a circle drawn on the shop floor to materialize the observation point from where to learn to observe, see, analyze and understand.

The original method puts (commits?) the “disciple” in such a circle for extended time with instruction to watch and not leave the circle. After the time the master judged sufficient, he (would a lady-master do this to others?) will ask the disciple to tell what he/she have seen, of course expecting to feedback on something the master’s attention got caught.

I would probably never had impressed Ohno that way, nor would I have appreciated this kind of treatment. With such a vague assignment and a “creative brain”, my observation would probably have turned into a virtual mind stroll.

Getting a scolding afterwards for not having experienced an epiphany (e.i. the great revelation) while dreaming in my circle or for having dared stepping out of it would not have pleased me, at all.

As I never was never told to do it and never have done it this way, the reservations and benefits I express in this article are merely assumptions.

My reservations about the chalk circle

Holding a static position for observing and understand when there is no other reasons than the master’s saying so does not make sense.

Observation and understanding is certainly easier and more effective when observers can change point of view and ask questions.

Executing a task without knowing the purpose is not very motivating and just been told to “watch” without moving from the spot is not very respectful.

Hence my question: Couldn’t it be nothing else than a manager-humiliating exercise disguised as a master’s skill?

Being told to watch may lead to have too much to look at, especially when not familiar with the environment. Chalk circle promoters will answer that this is precisely what the exercise is meant for: get and overall impression then gradually become aware of things in foreground/background, what is normal and what is abnormal and eventually focus.

So far so good, but does a manager need such a constraint method and spend several hours to get a fair level of understanding? In the era of high speed and volatility, the understanding-to-time ratio does not make the chalk circle a method with reasonable ROI.

Lean Management has long promoted Gemba Walks, not Gemba Stands, where the motto is go see, ask why and show respect.

This way is probably far more effective than standing hours in a circle.

If it wasn’t the case, Lean gurus and the Lean community would have made it clear, long time ago.

Being convinced to have observations and analyzing skills and voluntarily spend time watching from a static standpoint may lead to erroneous conclusions, a risk easily mitigated when changing the vantage point and interacting with subject matter experts.

To me the chalk circle method looks outdated and rooted in asian master-to-disciple apprenticeship, no more fit for purpose in current times.

Benefits (Devil’s advocate)

Over the years and with more experience and wisdom, I’ve somewhat softened my first impression and could see some benefits about observing while “standing in a circle”.

There are some situations in which walking around freely to observe a situation and asking people questions is simply not possible.

In such cases, having developed ability to watch, analyze and understand is indeed a great asset. Think about my trade as a consultant during diagnostics or a buyer during a supplier’s assessment.

Organized factory tours are other instances with limited possibilities to move freely or get good answers to questions. Here again, the individual ability to observe and understand is a great asset as it will yield more information than the host is willing to share.

In some cases, the knowledge about something isn’t existing and there is noone to ask for explanations. I experienced this in a factory, facing a machine with unstable performances, in a noisy and space-limited location. Spending several hours in several sessions, taking data and observing the machine’s cycles helped me understand the kinematic and some of the malfunctions.

What to look for?

Alright, I have shared my cons and pros, now what can I recommend to look for when observing, in a circle or not?

  • Look for the sequence. In industrial production, in logistics or in services, what you’re looking at may be in some degree a repeatable process. What is the sequence? In what order are things done or do things happen?
  • Look for harmony. Mastered motions are seamless. Controlled processes are operating smoothly.
  • Count. Count the resources involved, the physical units moved, produced or consumed. Count the steps walked, the number of times one person have to stoop, to pick up the phone or turn to someone.
  • Estimate. If counting is not easy or impossible: estimate. Get a sense of duration, of time elapsed between two events.
  • Look for consistency. Do your counts or estimates repeat themselves sequence after sequence or do you see variations?
  • Look for disturbances. What/who is disrupting the flow? How frequent and how long is it?
  • Look for the bottleneck. Is some spot the accumulation point where flow is significantly slowed down? Why? Is it managed?
  • Search for the muri, mura and muda, the 3 evil doers from a Lean point of view. Muri and mura are lesser mentioned, so try to spot them first. Chances are muri and mura, if they exist, will induce some muda.

These are a few hints. The question list could go on endlessly. But if your observation exercise ends up with answers to most of these questions, it may have been worth the time spent.

Feel free to share your comments and experience.

View Christian HOHMANN's profile on LinkedIn

8 thoughts on “Standing in the Ohno circle. And then?

  1. Hi Chris,

    Not surprisingly, given the seemingly unusual nature of the practice (i.e., standing in an Ohno circle), I’ve seen this issue arise on multiple occasions over the years. And interestingly, the favorable and unfavorable responses to the practice are typically CONTEXT specific. So, when it comes to figuring out “where’s the value” in utilizing and experiencing the Ohno Circle, one likely needs to start with the CONTEXT underlying its use. That being the case, it would be reasonable – based on an accumulation of knowledge and insight into Ohno’s way of THINKING AND BEHAVING – that his intent was to stimulate/catalyze learning as a self-initiated process; one that begins with the act of observing.

    I say this based on my own experiences as a former Corporate Industrial Hygienist working in a wide variety of manufacturing environments. [Note: For anyone not familiar with the discipline of Industrial Hygiene, in its best and most effective form, it involves the application of a broad/diverse body of knowledge focused on the early/timely recognition, evaluation, and control of existing and/or potential hazards in the work environment. In this regard, there’s really only one way to apply the body of knowledge and that’s to spend time – often lots of time – out walking, observing and understanding the workings of the gemba.] And when it comes to becoming familiar with a new – heretofore unseen/unfamiliar – operation, it’s often NOT possible to observe and comprehend all of the intricacies and nuances that it entails on the first pass. Very often, developing a comprehensive understanding of all that’s going on requires making detailed observations from multiple vantage points. Quite often, in the early stages of building one’s mental model of an operation, picking a single vantage point – and sticking with it for an extended period of time (i.e., multiple cycles of activity) – is necessary simply because there’s too much going on – along multiple dimensions – to be observed and mentally registered while on the move.

    Why might that be the case, you wonder? Well, it’s because finding and sticking with that single vantage point represents the “best” (i.e., safest, least disturbing, most accessible, most broadly insightful) place to be/stand when attempting to build a fundamental and fairly comprehensive and cogent understanding of how things (i.e., processes/operations/equipment/people) work. In actuality, what most often arises from these earliest observational excursions is NOT so much a comprehensive picture or mental model, but – more importantly – a list of questions; of the sort that merit closer observation and investigation. [Note: This is where that saying about what the “best” consultants are know for… “It’s not the answers that they provide, but rather the questions that they ask!” derives it’s most germane meaning and significance.]

    With these thoughts in mind, the issue of whether Ohno’s circle is a beneficial practice – in terms of helping to elevate the level of understanding and comprehension of a person – or a detrimental one – in terms of being demeaning/humiliating to a person – is really a matter of how and why (aka the CONTEXT for which) it’s being utilized. In this regard, it’s like any other method/tool/technique that exists in any CI/OpEx toolbox, when it comes to its ability to add value. More specifically, such methods/tools/techniques are best utilized in a “VALUE-ADDING” CONTEXT by individuals who are fully committed to pursuing and realizing the highest-order value possible (i.e., value that’s EQUALLY shared and experienced by the CUSTOMERS, the EMPLOYEES, members of the MANAGEMENT STAFF, and the SHAREHOLDERS).


  2. When asked if to stand or whether to go I would go for “stand” :). Since there are so many distortions to Gemba Walks we need to try out something really, really simple and standing is such a thing. Aware leaders will treat it as an opportunity and not a humiliation at all. Immature units, well, they won’t read this post most probably so we don’t have to spend much of time on them. Ohno’s Circle is an act of respect for the unknown – for people (RESPECT for PEOPLE), for their environment (RESPECT for CULTURE) and an act of humility. Walking, tress-passing, bye-passing, stepping over, watching for your safety while moving, being occupied in the conversation – it’s all disturbing and disabling mind flows and focus. In VUCA we’re so much in full swing with no even idea to slow down, step back and re-think it all over for a sec even. And that’s all very, very bad because what drove us here won’t drive us for future success. Good read, Chris. Thanks.


  3. Hi chris,
    My point of view is this, when we keenly observe something by standing at a point we may observe small details about the work instead if we are walking around and just skimming the little things to improve and just looking for something big to improve.


  4. Hi Chris,

    Approaching the Ohno Circle from another perspective – that is, through the eyes of a trained industrial hygiene/occupational health professional – the importance of and need for observing/monitoring and understanding exactly what’s happening in any given work environment where humans are engaged is an undisputed essential way of THINKING AND BEHAVING. From an occupational health (i.e., health hazard) perspective it’s quite well known/documented that clear cut cause and effect relationships are not always apparent and often require quite intense study. And under such conditions, it’s very possible that best way to evaluate any particular work environment could very well require being stationary for an extended period of time.

    HOWEVER, when it comes to developing a more comprehensive understanding of an end-to-end process – that is, developing a SYSTEMIC perspective – attempting to do so from a stationary perspective is very often next to impossible. Ergo, throughout the course of my two careers (one as a Certified Industrial Hygienist and one as a consultant/practitioner of continuous improvement/operational excellence), I’ve found that developing a SYSTEMIC perspective is often much more valuable than concentrating on a localized perspective. And in this regard, I believe that the former approach acts as a much more powerful stimulant for the development of an overall SYSTEMS THINKING ABILITY… something that I believe is essential to any and all good CI/OpEx practitioners and business leaders.

    For any interested readers, here are a few excerpts taken from a source focusing on the history of industrial hygiene/occupational health as a profession. Of particular not is what Ramazzini had to say about the practice…

    In the Middle Ages, guilds worked at assisting sick workers and their families. In 1556,
    the German scholar, Agricola, advanced the science of industrial hygiene even further
    when, in his book De Re Metallica, he described the diseases of miners and prescribed
    preventive measures. The book included suggestions for mine ventilation and worker
    protection, discussed mining accidents, and described diseases associated with mining
    occupations such as silicosis.

    Industrial hygiene gained further respectability in 1700 when Bernardo Ramazzini,
    known as the “father of industrial medicine,” published in Italy the first comprehensive
    book on industrial medicine, De Morbis Artificum Diatriba (The Diseases of Workmen).
    The book contained accurate descriptions of the occupational diseases of most of the
    workers of his time. Ramazzini greatly affected the future of industrial hygiene because
    he asserted that occupational diseases should be studied in the work environment
    rather than in hospital wards.

    Industrial hygiene received another major boost in 1743 when Ulrich Ellenborg published
    a pamphlet on occupational diseases and injuries among gold miners. Ellenborg also
    wrote about the toxicity of carbon monoxide, mercury, lead, and nitric acid.

    In England in the 18th century, Percival Pott, as a result of his findings on the insidious
    effects of soot on chimney sweepers, was a major force in getting the British Parliament
    to pass the Chimney-Sweepers Act of 1788. The passage of the English Factory Acts
    beginning in 1833 marked the first effective legislative acts in the field of industrial
    safety. The Acts, however, were intended to provide compensation for accidents rather
    than to control their causes. Later, various other European nations developed workers’
    compensation acts, which stimulated the adoption of increased factory safety
    precautions and the establishment of medical services within industrial plants.

    In the early 20th century in the U.S., Dr. Alice Hamilton led efforts to improve industrial
    hygiene. She observed industrial conditions first hand and startled mine owners,
    factory managers, and state officials with evidence that there was a correlation between
    worker illness and exposure to toxins. She also presented definitive proposals for
    eliminating unhealthful working conditions.


  5. Standing at a place in a circle is quiet boring but if this reasonable activity is followed by an approach
    , specifically 6M approach it could be a far too beneficial.
    So, what is this 6M approach?
    Working in a horn manufacturing company , I am supposed to stand in the OHNO circle as asked by our Plant Head(Probably , he is extensively inspired by the Ohno’s concepts) but what to observe?
    It was a rewarding suggestion from one of the Sr. Executives to observe –
    Machine , Man , Method , Material , Measuring Instrument and Mother Nature.
    These factors encompassed 24 Improvement points from a single stage. Probably , a lot more to come but standing in a circle is great to observe things with a purpose.
    Additionally , The assumption I assumed ” Everything is in a mess , nothing is going right!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.