We have a long way to go. There are many tools and methods in Lean that we have not fully explored, that we haven't fully tried, and I'm sure there were tools and techniques that we will discover to suit our needs as time goes on. I think in the long run, I think industry will have to become Lean, whether companies want to become Lean or not, the leaders are becoming much more productive and much more successful than other companies are, and I think it will change the game, the competitive market game, and the laggards, I'm afraid, are going to lose out in the long-term. My theory is that Lean will be the mainstream method in the future. However, there's no stable state. Lean keeps continuously evolving. Well, I think Lean is foundational. There's lots of discussion about technology, the use of technology. BIM, building information modeling, is a good example of that and integration in the project teams and Lean. Sometimes they appear to be, especially to the young people, as they're not necessarily able to see the connections, the interconnection, the very tight web that really exists that can't be separated. At a tools level, they're all a tool box, a set. But the BIM, for example, can't really be leveraged unless you have the value focus. So Lean is really foundational for us, it's down below. Then we'll use a sets of practices and tools to bring about value, but we have to be Lean thinkers, otherwise we're not focused on the right thing, and our actions are not productive. They don't lead to the outcome that we need. So I think the future is actually that we will get to a place where we realize when we think more about the product that we're delivering, because the value will lead us to that, and just like this watch here is Apple Watch, is a product. We will start to think about what we do as delivering very high quality and oftentimes unique products, but summed up more and more there will see opportunities to deliver families of products, for example, and even products that are produced in multiple is far beyond what we do today and much higher levels of quality. So they actually can serve more people than our industry is able to do right now. So once we begin to think about what we do in that way, we'll realize that we have to stay focused on value. We can use modeling and simulation, for instance, to really understand the performance and the appearance of our product, to make sure that it's the right product for a customer, we can engage with them that way. One limitation for us is always been, as an industry, that we essentially are forced to build prototypes because we couldn't build more than once. Now, as technology develops, we can move towards building multiple times and simulating multiple times with building information modeling and advanced simulation techniques and to the point where we're already doing this and you've been involved in this yourself, where we can simulate construction operations, for instance. So I believe that's the value-driven product approach will allow us to leverage the technologies using Lean thinking, and practices to deliver much higher value. Well, that remains to be seen. I mean, we have some interesting tools available now. We have some interesting ideas concerning flow and value, but I think that the actual applications will take time to mature. I think that some of those applications will be done in the context of changing technology. So as we see more building information modeling or BIM, as we see more automation of data gathering on site, as we see more communication through mobile phones, through laptops, through various other modes, more applications that are available on those tools. We'll see that Lean Construction will develop with them, and one of the key threads I think that it will be, will be far more work performed offsite and less work performed on-site, because our communications and design technologies will allow us to have a very good understanding of what is to be built on site and then to build prototypes but electronic, digital prototypes. When you have digital prototypes, you can then, with confidence, produce parts offsite, that you can then bring to the site and they'll all fit together in a much more secure way and risk-free way than it is the case today with perhaps precast construction or even steel or other areas, where they're still very heavily dependent on accurate shop drawings which tend to be error-prone. So Lean Construction will grow with the technology with the context. How exactly remains to be seen, we already know that in, for example, in projects where they will do ducts in the ceilings, piping and so on. They'll prefabricate them in a warehouse offsite that will be multi-disciplinary. We may see that those multi-disciplinary units become more and more extensive including more and more parts of the building because they were trained to learn how to use a technology and the Lean benefits within a factory setting in ways that can't be done onsite. But anybody's guess, it can occur in any which way as things develop and emerge. I think clients, we have to re-establish the basis for trust. We had an interesting experience in Australia. In Australia, we had a lot of alliance projects which were [inaudible] project. Well over 150 public sector infrastructure projects delivered through alliance. Very many of them were excellent. A few of them didn't go well. I think in part, some of the ones that didn't go well was because the client was incompetent and the supply chain, the construction supply chain, took advantage of that. Now, what happened in Australia was that the ordered a general in one of the states really decided that this was unsatisfactory. It wasn't transparent enough, you couldn't see value for money clearly enough. So he decided to push back against alliances. He did that in a number of ways but firstly, he got a report review which was actually very biased. They only looked at failed alliances and they tried to purport this failed alliances to be typical of all alliances. When I really analyzed what happened in that whole process, what it happened was that the clients had thought that we don't have the people that do this work, let's just get an alliance and they'll just take care of it. So they just pass the ball right over. They didn't have the competence to oversee their own interests. What's important for every client is that they have to have the skill, either in-house or poor hide in. But they have to have the skill to make sure that their interests are well protected. It is a complicated project, and for me human nature is such a complicating factor here because just as there are individuals who we can't trust, there also companies who sometimes or teams who we can't trust. Yet the tension is that if we give trust, we get the best out of people but the client has had the responsibility of maintaining control. That's a management tension. The empowerment to get the best out of people and teams, but the control to make sure that our interests are being protected and so both parties have responsibility here. In the Australian case, the clients didn't act responsibly and some teams took advantage of that, and that gave it a bad night. So we need trust, but we also need control and context to understand that tension between those two. What I say has happened which is really interesting. In construction we started, well, there's this great American term which I didn't use tonight but the low hanging fruit in it. It was realized that the flow of work on projects and in design, and even still is often too unreliable. So that was the focus of work. So for possibly the first 10 years of the Lean Construction movement, there is a huge focus on Last Planner. Right. I actually being a cheeky guy, I thought of one states the whole movement suffers from last planner ideas. But really we are teasing out this problem because this is a complicated problem. It's very much about collaboration, it's very much about building trust, it has a real strong social dimension. So we started there. But what has happened is the movement is mature. What we're seeing is that all of the other aspects of Blaine which are in manufacturing and in service industries are coming into construction. So we say that companies who are mature in their practice of Blaine now. They are getting ideas from all of their employees. They're empowering maintains. They're doing Value Stream Mapping to improve specific processes. They're getting structural designers to work with steel, they fabricators and the installers to get the beginning and the end together to get better solutions that are more and more build-able. We're saying this idea of small wins where everyone is encouraged to come up with ideas. We're seeing ideas from the shop floor in subcontractors where, this has really amazed me in a sense to the last year or two where I've seen the number of ideas coming from people on the shop floor on the site just to improve processes. So it's actually having the faith in the people to say, ''give us your ideas and we'll implement them.'' That's that really empowerment of people from any level and across organizations. That's China tech construction, and I think the future is to really get that social interaction happening. Its almost English, and it excites people. So the people coming up with the ideas say, ''wow, what a way to work in this industry? It's so much better than in a contractually biased industry where everyone is fighting for resources and guarding their corner.'' Suddenly people are finding their ideas are valued and they're changing the way work is done. They're impound and they're excited and I think that's what excites them. Everyone who is involved in the lean movement. In terms of where lean needs to go I think, there's a real challenge. Originally, I think the Lean Construction Institute focused on areas of major dis-function within the construction process. So last plan was an early focus because planning is so unreliable, and the prices of the seconder are complex. What I think we have to come back to, is to refocus on quality because ultimately customer satisfaction is driven by quality of outcome and quality of service. From the earlier focus on our internal processes. I think we need to move to a view which is driven by the quality needs of the costumer. A minute but I sit here. Look go is this a sudden futuro MOOC which was Bill Dulles those advances A star or a song and see the particle data on a certain stability that want to sell that riddle serial availability that comes seminars plan and loyalty is assume the processes scalability hosts. Here little bit Ephesus Spiro as as an apartheid. I mean we've asked I'm witches conceptus Moslem and sagas kinda one seeds are implemented as como. Poor production como fluke on and nestedness a confederacy fetuses have a mutually tack time. Can you get some cool symptom then we went into the center and does this mean it but in total it must care for current poker. My business is called Cypselus Muslim science. A clerical paraplegic trellis concept was almost settles. I kept records bicycles. Obtained earliest W.will not throw ten of them. It is. Important is that they let thickness here that a full maturity communication ion beam principle minty clear care beam or for S m which has a particular lattice coma scenario. In many Clara care. Honda civic classes successfully lemon for Toyota. Lean production mostly Vim which are technology to take a look at the electron mass. So it says I kid I care. I get the inadequate data or no parapsychological here but till dishonest importantly lead it. But but I split unless he is versus para. Missile was those walls doors for tourism versus k k muscle to Cinna mosquito Scott is a particle symptoms Muslim scientists like Douglas soon commented. Tickle him polypharmacy.
