Where to start with lean?

[mattf]

Hey all, my name is Matt and I work within a medium sized print company in Massachusetts as the "Workflow Administrator". I was hired for the basic idea of updating the company and bringing in lean concepts.

The status of the company is very complex. To make it a bit simpler to understand, the company is basically a "mom and pop" print shop outgrown into a 5 million dollar a year print company. Old habits die hard, and it seems old habits are everywhere. Most of the company is run via paper forms, not a lot is computerized, and many basic concepts of a workflow is not even remotely followed.

My concern with this company is where to begin. One of the first things I did immediately when coming on board, which was about a month ago, was to implement some tasks that are done into an electronic form. One of which is a electronic job ticket, and that will soon be in place. Yes, they were and still are using a paper job ticket.

The next deal in my mind is to keep trying to implement more computerized tasks, we are using the EFI Logic system, in order to potentially save time and money on all fronts of the business.

The next big step, which is where I'm stuck, is of course to make the shop as lean as possible. It seems when I walk around the cubicles and the plant itself there seems to be problems arise everywhere, and its a bit of a daunting task to think about where I can start. I am reading up on the concepts of lean and I feel that I am learning a lot, but I seem to be faced with the problem of where to begin. Any advice on how to start to figure out where to begin would be dynamite!

 

[David Dodd]

Getting Started with Lean

Getting Started with Lean

Matt,

First of all, welcome to the forum! My greatest hope for this forum is that it will become a valuable resource for people in your position - those who are on the front lines of implementing and using lean.

The question you asked - Where do I begin? - is an extremely important one. Although every company is different in some ways, there is a general approach that I've found works pretty well in most companies. This approach includes six steps.

Step 1 - Learn About Lean - From your post, it appears that you've already begun working on this step. If you're going to be the "lean champion" at your company, then it's imperative that you have a solid understanding about what lean is and how it works. You don't need to have a "PhD-level" understanding of every lean tool and technique, but you will need to have a solid command of how the basic tools work and how to use them.

Step 2 - Get Management Support - As with any change effort, you need the support of your company's owners and/or senior managers to get the changes implemented. So, you may need to spend some time and effort educating your company's senior leaders about lean and its benefits. Without management support, you will almost certainly run into problems that can derail your effort. If your company is underperforming in some ways (if the senior leaders are feeling "pain"), then your leadership team may be very open to lean.

Step 3 - Introduce the Workforce to Lean - A successful lean implementation requires the active participation of people from all across the organization. So, you need to introduce lean to your workforce early in the process. I'm not talking about in-depth training on every aspect of lean at this point - what is needed here is a good foundation about what lean is designed to accomplish and WHY IT'S IMPORTANT TO THE COMPANY. In a good lean implementation, in-depth training is done on a just-in-time basis.

Step 4 - Begin a 5S Program - 5S is a methodology for cleaning and organizing the workplace. I won't attempt to describe the 5S process here in detail - entire books have been written about 5S. 5S is a good place to start because, in most printing companies, it will make a dramatic visual impact on the appearance of the plant. 5S is often viewed as a "housekeeping" process, but it's much more. Yes, 5S is about "having a place for everything, and everything in its place." But more importantly, 5S is about having everything in the RIGHT place. 5S is also a good place to start because it get a significant number of people involved in the lean effort

Step 5 - Begin a Total Productive Maintenance Program - Having reliable equipment is important for any printing company, but as a printing company becomes leaner, equipment reliability becomes even more critical. Again, this is a good tool to begin using early in the implementation process, because it gets a number of people involved and it usually produces immediate results.

Step 6 - Begin an SMED/Quick Changeover Program - Fast makereadies or changeovers will obviously benefit any printing company, regardless of whether they do anything else with lean. From a lean perspective, makereadies are "non-value-adding" activities. If you reduce makeready times, you create new additional production capacity, and that new additional capacity is essentially free.

There are lots of resources available about 5S, Total Productive Maintenance, and SMED/Quick Changeover, and I would encourage you to begin learning about those tools soon. Once these programs are in place and functioning, there will be plenty left to do. Even with good 5S, TPM, and SMED/Quick Changeover programs in place, you will not be a truly lean organization, but you will have made a good beginning.

Good luck, and please let me know if you have more questions.

 

[jbeniston]

Find out as much as you can about 5S, and start with this. Instigate a "clean and check" program for all your equipment at each shift start, closely followed by a new PM system.
Keep it simple, keep it documented.

 

[mattf]

Thank you both for your input. I am glad there is this resource out there that is able to help out people like me get started. I have created a comprehensive plan in order to clean up our entire operation. Still, there a number of chores needed to be done beforehand to make this all work. One of which is to create a better communication process between management and the plant. I bet I can start off with the first two steps until this issue gets settled, but I feel I have a way to go forward with my ideas.

Thanks again, this was a big help. And don't worry, I will have plenty of questions once I get myself neck deep in this process!

 

[rich apollo]

David,
You talk about a "Quick Changeover Program". Something that I've observed about makereadies is that direct approaches to faster makereadies often fail. Faster makereadies are generally the indirect result of other steps taken.

For example, online plate punching might save a few minutes of registration time. Color management can dramatically reduce makereadies because the proofs are more readily matched. Zeroing out all registration adjustments at the completion of jobs can save time. Having a completed and relevant AND readable job ticket can save folks running around looking for stuff.

Focusing on makereadies seems like it just results in people running around faster - faster than they're actually gonna' work. Hurried work always seems like it results in mistakes.

I guess it's a matter of truly understanding where the delays come from. But I find the makeready situation to be like night vision - you can see things better by not looking directly at them.

 

[David Dodd]

David,
You talk about a "Quick Changeover Program". Something that I've observed about makereadies is that direct approaches to faster makereadies often fail. Faster makereadies are generally the indirect result of other steps taken.

For example, online plate punching might save a few minutes of registration time. Color management can dramatically reduce makereadies because the proofs are more readily matched. Zeroing out all registration adjustments at the completion of jobs can save time. Having a completed and relevant AND readable job ticket can save folks running around looking for stuff.

Focusing on makereadies seems like it just results in people running around faster - faster than they're actually gonna' work. Hurried work always seems like it results in mistakes.

I guess it's a matter of truly understanding where the delays come from. But I find the makeready situation to be like night vision - you can see things better by not looking directly at them.

Hi Rich,

I would certainly agree with you that makeready times can be affected (either positively or negatively) by factors that are outside the actual makeready process. But I would argue that the place to start is with the process itself. The objective of an SMED/Quick Changeover effort is not to have people "running around faster" but to reduce or eliminate the need for people to run around. For example, if the tools or supplies needed for a makeready are not well-located and where they should be, makeready times will be longer. That's why I suggested doing a 5S program before starting an SMED program. Another technique that is used in an SMED analysis is to separate "external" makeready tasks from "internal" makeready tasks. External tasks are those that can be performed while the machine (press, folder, etc.) is working on another job. Internal tasks are those that can only be performed if the machine is stopped or if the machine is running as part of the makeready process. One objective of an SMED effort is to change as many internal tasks to external tasks as possible.

It is also important to remember that the "SMED team" would not be limited to looking at the makeready process alone. After the process has been streamlined, the team would continue to ask, "What would enable us to reduce our makeready times further?" And the answer might well be, "Implement a color management program."

 

[RaymondJPrince]

Where to start

Where to start


Where to start as David indicated is reading up on Lean and getting the "buy in" of the owner. The next step is a 5S program -- this is not easy at all. changing the way we do things is not easy to do. It is far easier to buy a machine than train people. If you cannot complete a 5S program do not go any further. This is a must stepp

Raymond J. Prince
Vice President
NAPL
[email protected]

 

[mattf]

Where to start as David indicated is reading up on Lean and getting the "buy in" of the owner. The next step is a 5S program -- this is not easy at all. changing the way we do things is not easy to do. It is far easier to buy a machine than train people. If you cannot complete a 5S program do not go any further. This is a must stepp

Raymond J. Prince
Vice President
NAPL
[email protected]

O how right you are sir. I'll just push this through to show you what I have to deal with:

WhatTheyThink - Printing Industry News - Smith Print, Inc. Installs New Komori Lithrone SX29

We bought a press before fixing the workflow. Granted, I didn't make the decision so I do not know all the factors. At this moment, I have support from the owners and administrative team, the next step is to actually plan this all out in order to make it work. We'll see how it goes!

 

[Deleted member 16349]

Hi Rich,

The objective of an SMED/Quick Changeover effort is not to have people "running around faster" but to reduce or eliminate the need for people to run around.
snip
One objective of an SMED effort is to change as many internal tasks to external tasks as possible.

It is also important to remember that the "SMED team" would not be limited to looking at the makeready process alone. After the process has been streamlined, the team would continue to ask, "What would enable us to reduce our makeready times further?" And the answer might well be, "Implement a color management program."

In my opinion, SMED is THE most important concept developed by Toyota. Without SMED, most of the other techniques used, such as JIT, Pull production, low inventories, etc. would not have been possible.

SMED stands for Single Minute Exchange of Die. In the automotive industry they have dies or other tooling to cut and form metals, etc. Some of these dies are huge. In the past, some of these dies took many hours or even days to get running. This resulted in the concept of the Economical Order Quantity. This was a run length that was long enough to absorb the cost of set up. Long runs caused a lot of inventory of work in process with its hidden faulty manufactured material.

The idea was that if one could have a very quick set up, then there was no EOQ and therefore products produced with short runs would have the same cost as a long run. Some of the unforeseen benefits were that problems with quality showed up quickly when the production went to the next process step and also inventories could be greatly reduced.

SMED is NOT a continuous improvement process. The aim of SMED is to develop drastically new ways of doing things. The extremely difficult goal of SMED, which is to stop good production of one product or part and start up producing good product within one minute, is a goal that can not be reached with continuous improvement. This very difficult goal, forces the team to look at the problem in totally new ways. This is the spirit of SMED.

SMED is not just about a fast makeready. Remember that the goal requires good product to be running after one minute. For this to happen, in depth knowledge of how the process works is required. The extra benefit of SMED is that the rest of the production will also be in control.

I started looking at the density control problem in the offset press with the SMED philosophy as a goal since 1984. It has lead to a very different view of how the process works but one that can lead to practical solutions because the obtained knowledge is specific and predictable.

The printing industry has a tendency to only be interested in methods and technologies that others use. This goes against the aim of SMED which requires a total rethinking effort.

It is good if printers are trying to reduce makeready but to think that doing a few tasks that work is SMED is not true. If you are not aiming at the one minute goal, then you are not doing SMED but just getting some benefits from SMED techniques in the context of continuous improvement.

The beauty of SMED is that it forces people to rethink the process in order to try to meet a virtually impossible goal.

 

[gordo]

Elaborating on Erik's post, it is not just that "The printing industry has a tendency to only be interested in methods and technologies that others use." it's also that, unlike most manufacturing, the print manufacturing process is very often determined by the print buyer/specifier (in the request for quote) rather than the print supplier/manufacturer.
This typically leads to an unnecessarily inefficient print manufacturing process. For example, there are solutions, like Kodak Spotless printing, that virtually eliminate all the washups, ink inventorying, drawdowns, extended make-ready times, print-ability issues etc. associated with spot color ink usage, Implementing such a solution requires that the printer turn their thinking 180 degrees. Rather than simply manufacturing the job as per the print buyer's instructions in the RFQ, the printer using this solution delivers the spot color value - which is really what the buyer wants - without using spot color inks. The printers who have adopted this strategy effectively eliminate make-ready wastage associated with spot color usage and can provide exceptional flexibility in their printed products. Bottom line, better margins and happier customers.

gordo

 

[SQCGuy]

My biggest hurdle implementing SPC... It absolutely can NOT come from the top down.

If you were hired to be a stooge for the manager who wants XYZ done, because he says so and he thinks SPC is the way to go about it, quit.

Upper management buy-in is important, but unless your process champion is willing to participate, not dictate, don't bother.

When you do get to the point where you're attacking individual processes, the most helpful tool I can suggest is this: PF/CE/CNX/SOP.

Process Flow, Cause & Effect, Control/Noise/Experiment, Standard Operating Procedure

Start with a process flow, determine areas for improvement and then complete a cause and effect (fishbone) diagram. Mark that diagram up, identifying each variable as something you control, something you can't (noise) and something that's unknown (eperiments). Once you have your control measures documented and proven, your noise eliminated or otherwise accounted for, write clear, actionable standard operating procedure documents, then ENFORCE them.

In my experience, this will eliminate 60% or more waste.

 

[Deleted member 16349]

it's also that, unlike most manufacturing, the print manufacturing process is very often determined by the print buyer/specifier (in the request for quote) rather than the print supplier/manufacturer.
This typically leads to an unnecessarily inefficient print manufacturing process. For example, there are solutions, like Kodak Spotless printing, that virtually eliminate all the washups, ink inventorying, drawdowns, extended make-ready times, print-ability issues etc. associated with spot color ink usage, Implementing such a solution requires that the printer turn their thinking 180 degrees. Rather than simply manufacturing the job as per the print buyer's instructions in the RFQ, the printer using this solution delivers the spot color value - which is really what the buyer wants -
gordo

Gordo,

This touches on several good points.
One is that in the printing industry Standards are not about what the customer wants but are too much related to how the process is supposed to be done in a "Standard Way". Standards based on dot gain or gray balance are not at all related to any target colour and can not guarantee a reproduced colour. An appropriate standard for printing would be one that says that every small region or point on the reproduced image should be within a + or - tolerance of the designer's target colour values in his image. The size of the region could be defined and the tolerance could be defined. The graphic designers image defined properly would be the specification that needs to be reproduced.

A separation is a part of the tooling process and graphic designers should not be involved with tooling. One can design a part in North America and have it manufactured half way around the world and get exactly the result one wants without worrying about the tooling. The tooling is the responsibility of the manufacturer. It is because the part can be defined in a clear specification that allows this to be possible. If images were defined properly, the customer would have a better chance at getting what they wanted. They should not care about the details of the method.

Your example regarding spot colours produced with process inks plus maybe some other inks, is good. It would save a lot of time if it is printed consistently. I am pretty sure you are talking about your FM screening which runs more consistently than conventional and that should help greatly to reproduce the spot colours. But it can also be done with conventional AM screens but the density control has to be much tighter, since a spot colour is made up of multiple inks, the density tolerance on each ink has to be much tighter to avoid visible variation. Yes, of course you know I am getting at the need for more consistent ink feed on presses. Enough said.

The final point is that a Spot colour produced with CMYK is exactly the same as any other colour printed in an image. If the Spot colour can be defined easily in your Spotless printing method, so can any other colour in an image. It is a mapping exercise from the ink/paper/screen construction to the printed colour.

Maybe Kodak should expand on this present Spotless method and apply it to the specification and reproduction of total images. That would be different and interesting and potentially very predictable.

 

[Karroog]

This is a more of a catch 22 question, not sure how this is gonna get answered:

I have read on this forum that a lot of information you need to know is by reading books that deal specifically with lean manufacturing and the specifics relating to it. Such topics would be 5S, SMED, quick changeover and so on. I can agree that to know how to solve a problem you need to understand the process that you are getting yourself into to correct the said problem.

The biggest issue for me is my superior. I was hired as the "champion" of his setup. That concept is within the 5S teaching realm as far as I can tell. Basically, he had brought up the whole "champion" terminology in my interview, however he never gave me information concerning 5S or what tactics to use until after I was hired and I had fished around for information of what was out there. Once I mentioned it and tried to push ideas of what we could do, he gave me a powerpoint presentation of 5S and let me read through it, basically pushing what ideas I had out of the way.

I can tell already his mentality is not of a teacher. I want to learn these concepts and bring them into the company, but I feel as if his thoughts are of what he knows within workshops that he has taken and not of any reading material that is out there. This issue of communication is seen throughout the company, and it seems like I am in for a complicated process to getting these concepts into action.

I am curious to get some advice on how to move forward. He has only given me information when I have brought it up from my own research or, IMHO, when he wants to just stop me from expressing my ideas and give me information that he has gathered himself. I know the first step in making these things possible is to create a plan and get administrative support. I have created a plan to move forward on, and I know my superior wants these concepts to improve the company. But I also feel that he just wants what he has learned to go into effect. I am not sure how to deal with this, and I am open to suggestions if anyone has any.

 

[gordo]

You wrote:

" I was hired as the "champion" of his setup."

That seems to be pretty clear.

best, gordo

 

[Karroog]

Gordo:

I know it doesn't sound promising, but its at this moment the environment I have to deal with. Don't get me wrong, I know my supervisor means well, I just don't think he understands entirely how to achieve certain goals he has for the company. Granted, there are many issues within the company in terms of how everything operates. I believe he sees the big picture and nothing more while I'm suppose to fill in to create the big picture from the ground up. Again, advice on how to start this process would be most helpful.

 

[David Dodd]

Karroog,

I'm not at all sure that I understand your situation. Were you hired to be the "lean" champion in your company, or to be the "champion" of your supervisor's ideas, some of which have nothing to do with lean? In your last post, you mentioned that your supervisor had "certain goals" for the company. What are those goals, and are they related to the benefits of lean?

 

[Karroog]

David:

Thanks for trying to understand my situation a bit better. I apologize for what seems a confusing topic, its been a rough few months.

The premise my supervisor pitched to me was to be the "champion" of the company. This position was created for the purpose of making the company more lean. He didn't mention lean manufacturing when I was interviewed. It seemed that my overall position and its job description was still up in the air even after I was hired. I had understood the position to be to make the workflow of the company more efficient, particularly within Account Managers at the beginning. The more efficent the Account Managers are, the more accounts they can handle and so on. Eventually, I have slowly move into both administrative as well as manufacturing issues.

I have been trying to work on a plan to organize our manufacturing facility. The plant is decently organized. There is a section for finishing equipment, small press equipment, large press equipment and so on. However, each section isn't as neat as it should be. There are ink containers everywhere, used plates are stored in multiple locations, cut paper ready to be used on press do not have a specific place to go, the stock room isn't labeled and so on. That's when I started researching. I came across 5S, which is a system to organize and clean up a facility in order to start making it more efficient. I thought this would be the perfect way to start it off.

As usual, there are steps in getting any idea into a reality. I learned all I could about 5S in order to better implement it when the time comes. I've even setup a team with the plant manager, a facilitator and a team leader. For the next two weeks I had planned out meetings so we could discuss each section of the plant and what section needed the most work and so on. I feel I have made significant progress in that area of my plan.

The next issue that comes up is administrative support. Of course, I was hired for this very purpose so I believed I had my supervisors support. However, it seems that what he thinks I have learned is inferior to what he has learned. I gave him all the documentation I had found on the 5S system, showed him a plan of how we could implement these changes and so on. As he heard out my plan for the plant, he said what I wanted to do was not going to work. After giving some further explanation on how I believed my plan would succeed, he basically gave me a Powerpoint presentation on 5S that I guess he had received after completing a workshop on the subject. I was then instructed to read through the powerpoint and get back to him when I had a different plan.

I went over the workshop information, and it was literally all the information I had gathered from bits and pieces that I had found online, in magazines, catalogs and books I have acquired. I expressed this to him afterwards, but he his reaction was nothing short of aggressive. I could write more out but I feel this could give a clear picture of his mindset. In my opinion, I feel that he has "his" ideas on how to implement lean but he doesn't know how. In a sense, I really do feel he just wishes to dump his impression of what he has learned onto me so I can make it happen to his specifications

The problem I see is that to start any sort of major project like this the team or individual doing this needs to make sure certain building blocks are in place. One of which is a plan. I feel I have created a comprehensive plan to ensure the success of this project. The next would be administrative support of that plan. At this moment, I feel as if we both wish for the same thing, but he wants it done his way. He just doesn't know how to make it happen, so he gives me his "big picture" idea and puts me to fill in the blanks.

To me, its a complicated situation and I don't expect anyone to fill in all the blanks for me. I'm still working on how to even approach what he wants, but I feel this project has already gone off course. I am seeing one scenario from talking with the plant workers, seeing their environment, noting their ideas and creating a plan for how it would work. My supervisor barely comes into the plant, only comes in and does snapshots of where equipment is and not of what the workers are doing. I can tell he doesn't have the whole picture, but he still has the "big picture" of what he wants.

Yes, this is complicated I know. I'm trying to figure out how to make this all work. Ensuring the plant workforce can trust me enough to give them the power to improve their work environment, make a plan that everyone can get excited about; including my supervisor and finally implement the changes and start the 5S process. Again, any advice on anything that I commented on would be most helpful, but it is a complicated situation. Thanks for hearing me out, that is my rant for the day.

 

[David Dodd]

Karroog,

As you have already determined, you are facing a very difficult situation. From your post, it sounds like your supervisor wants you to do the work, but he wants the work done exactly like he would do it, down to the minute details. If my perception is correct, then what your supervisor really wants is a clone of himself. I wish I could be more positive, but I think your supervisor's approach and attitude pose a real threat to your success with lean. For example, let's suppose that you implement a pilot 5S program in one of your work areas. We'll even assume that you use the approach described in the PowerPoint. You create a team, and the team works hard to make the 5S project a success. After the project is completed, your supervisor visits the work area and immediately begins to criticize many of the small decisions that the team made. "You should have used different kinds of tool bins." "You should have installed different shelving." And so on. If that happens, you will find it extremely difficult (if not impossible) to get employee involvement for your next lean project.

Again, I wish I could be more positive, but I've seen this kind of situation in a number of companies I've work with over the years. In many cases, the only real hope of success is to have an "outsider" come in to the company and talk very "plainly" with the company leader.

 

[Karroog]

Karroog,

As you have already determined, you are facing a very difficult situation. From your post, it sounds like your supervisor wants you to do the work, but he wants the work done exactly like he would do it, down to the minute details. If my perception is correct, then what your supervisor really wants is a clone of himself. I wish I could be more positive, but I think your supervisor's approach and attitude pose a real threat to your success with lean. For example, let's suppose that you implement a pilot 5S program in one of your work areas. We'll even assume that you use the approach described in the PowerPoint. You create a team, and the team works hard to make the 5S project a success. After the project is completed, your supervisor visits the work area and immediately begins to criticize many of the small decisions that the team made. "You should have used different kinds of tool bins." "You should have installed different shelving." And so on. If that happens, you will find it extremely difficult (if not impossible) to get employee involvement for your next lean project.

Again, I wish I could be more positive, but I've seen this kind of situation in a number of companies I've work with over the years. In many cases, the only real hope of success is to have an "outsider" come in to the company and talk very "plainly" with the company leader.

David:

Thanks for your honest take on my situation. I had a feeling it would probably go like this, but I'll still try my best to do it the right way. If it comes to the point where he's on the ideas of "should of done this and that" I'll know I just did everything I could to make it work.

The idea of a consultant or an "outsider" to talk to my supervisor might not be such a bad idea. I'll keep that in the back of my mind in case things go awry. Might come in handy later on.

Thanks again!

 

[Deleted member 16349]

David:

Thanks for your honest take on my situation. I had a feeling it would probably go like this, but I'll still try my best to do it the right way. If it comes to the point where he's on the ideas of "should of done this and that" I'll know I just did everything I could to make it work.

The idea of a consultant or an "outsider" to talk to my supervisor might not be such a bad idea. I'll keep that in the back of my mind in case things go awry. Might come in handy later on.

Thanks again!

Karroog,

Your problem is not about Lean but really about employer/employee relations. I would suggest that you do not know what your role is. Let me make some comments and maybe they will help or maybe not but I think they are valid.

First of all, you do not work for your company. You work for your boss. It is your responsibility to help your boss meet his goals. He in turn is trying to meet the goals of his boss.

Now your manager might not be the best manager there is but that is a given in the printing industry which has probably a very high level of terrible managers. That is not the point. This is not about right or wrong. There are very many ways to run operations and to do things. Some are better than others but that is not the issue. You work for someone who needs to get something done.

So you might have a problem with the substance of what your supervisor wants done but you should not defend a position at all cost. Make a comment on how you see things but if that is not accepted, do what he wants and in his way. That is what you are paid to do. You are not paid to specifically accomplish anything. You are paid to support the direction and effort of the management.

The "way" he wants it done is more related to his style of management. Some managers want to see lots of details and others don't. Both styles are OK. Don't confuse style with substance. Provide a few different suitable methods and ask which one he likes. Then ask how he would want it done. You will soon learn what his style is.

Sometimes people think that when they are in a job that they are working for the greater good of the company and that they need to fight for the best solution. To a point this is admirable but the problem is that there is no best solution. Let me repeat, you don't work for the company, you work for your supervisor so he can reach his goals.

Put yourself in the supervisor's position. Let's say he has five people reporting to him. The supervisor has promised his boss that he will deliver on some goals. The supervisor needs his reports to support that effort. If he finds that the reports are working in different directions because they think it is better for the company and continually questioning and arguing about what is the best direction, the supervisor will never be able to deliver what was promised.

The responsibility to help meet the goals of the boss goes all the way up the ladder. Your boss has to meet his boss's goals and his boss has to meet the goals of the next guy up. You can not be a leader unless you know how to follow.

In your situation, I would suggest you try as much as possible to do what your boss wants and in the way he wants it done. If you can do that well enough, he will have more confidence in you and give you more room to do things in your way. At this early stage in your employment with him, he just wants to know that he has someone he can count on and who doesn't waste his time. It is not about doing the right thing or doing something perfectly.

Good luck.