A Kaizen trick in the men’s public restroom

Upgrade to High-Speed Internet for only ₱1499/month!

Enjoy up to 100 Mbps fiber broadband, perfect for browsing, streaming, and gaming.

Visit Suniway.ph to learn

February 17, 2026 | 12:00am

Tony, a 75-year-old widower, a retired factory manager and an unapologetic movie buff, accidentally conducted “field research” at a neighborhood cinema. As the credits of the last full show were rolling, he made a strategic detour to the men’s room ahead of everyone.

Knowing that I specialize in Kaizen and Lean Thinking (KLT), he emailed a question with the excitement of a man who had just discovered a new production hack. With a rough illustration of what he saw, he asked: “Would this count as a Kaizen idea?”

Tony explained that this movie house could be having a “nightly” ritual involving its men’s toilet (and, he suspects with gender equality, the women’s as well). Maybe, management is quietly implementing what appears to be a “waste elimination” strategy by avoiding repetitive cleaning.

For Tony, even a restroom can become a case study. After all, once a factory manager, always a factory manager. While some people watch the movie, Tony audits the system.

At around 10 p.m. or 15 minutes before closing time, the four urinals are reduced to only one while the rest are marked as “Out of Order.” He suspects someone is giving priority to maintenance efficiency over customer service.

Apparently, the janitor has finished the first three urinals and has effectively declared them “Museum Exhibits: Do Not Touch” which is a smart hustle. Why spend your life scrubbing when you can just intimidate people into holding it?

Analysis

Whether it’s a workplace issue, strategic dilemma, case study or personal decision — clarity beats cleverness. So, let’s assume, for discussion purposes, that this is intentional. What exactly is happening? If you had to state it in one sentence, what would it be? And what’s the proof it’s a nightly recurring practice?

We need data for at least one week, maybe even two consecutive weeks, if not several months to make a conclusion. If not, there’s no conclusive evidence that the janitor, with the support of management, is “cheating.” But, let’s analyze the situation with the available information given by Tony:

1. Reduced area for cleaning. By subtly directing all users into a single urinal, the janitor ensures that only 25 percent of the urinals need scrubbing at the closing time. The question is – which urinal should be declared open for use? Is it the one near the door or away from it? It should be the first urinal so patrons need not walk several feet to reach the available urinal.

2. Standardized work. Under KLT, having a standard work ensures that tasks are done in a predictable cycle within a specific takt time or the pace of production needed to meet customer demand. By “closing” three urinals early, the janitor can perform his routine. However, this requires the janitor estimating the audience volume before initiating a pre-close cleaning.

3. Visual control. The “out of order” signs direct cinema patrons to the available urinal. It could be a pretense that they can’t be used. In a KLT environment, clear signaling prevents confusion. It masks the clean and orderly urinals as abnormal to force a specific behavior that benefits the worker’s schedule rather than the customer’s comfort. But, why not do both?

4. Respect for people. True KLT balances janitorial efficiency with the quality of customer service. This requires having a standard work (as stated above) for the janitor to clean the urinals in the most efficient way possible and avoid muda (waste) of waiting or customer’s queue. But how about the “out of order” signs? A white lie is a form of disrespect.

The paradox

If this restroom tactic is management-driven, it may reflect a deeper problem — improvement imposed without regard for people. That’s the paradox, an ironic situation where a philosophy built on continuous improvement ends up creating stagnation, resistance or even decline.With KLT promoting small, incremental improvements every day, the paradox happens when continuous improvement contradicts its spirit. When management demands low-cost and common-sense ideas to flourish nonstop, employees experience continuous exhaustion.
Instead of empowerment, it feels like endless correction.

If everything must improve every day, people eventually conclude that nothing is ever good enough. Sometimes, KLT becomes a polite label for resource reduction — fewer people, tighter budgets — without process redesign. That’s not improvement. That’s arithmetic.

KLT works only in a culture of psychological safety and respect for people. When imposed as pressure instead of voluntary participation, it becomes the opposite of what it intends to promote. In short, it can fail when improvement becomes a command instead of a commitment.

So, what’s the cure? Establish or re-establish “Respect for People” (not just Respect for Metrics) as a culture and primary objective. Instead of asking the workers – “why didn’t you improve this?” better to ask – “what obstacle is preventing you from improving this?”Lastly, let’s give credit to Tony for sharing this story. Maybe he prefers the last full show — when both suspense and systems are fully exposed.

Rey Elbo is a quality and productivity enthusiast. Email [email protected] or DM Facebook, LinkedIn, X or via https://reyelbo.com. Guaranteed anonymity for widowers.