When discussing the transition from a “firefighting” culture to structured problem solving, Polycom is one of the more interesting real-world manufacturing examples. Over the years, the company has systematically developed an approach where KPIs are not used only for reporting, but primarily for fast response, clear accountability, and consistent execution of improvements.
An important role in this transformation has also been played by Boris Šturm from company Polycom Škofja Loka d.o.o., who has been working for many years in the fields of manufacturing, logistics, and operational improvement. His approach is strongly based on practical teamwork, structured problem solving, and establishing management systems that reduce daily firefighting and enable more stable and predictable production operations.
Interestingly, Boris applies a very similar philosophy to his personal passion — cooking and food preparation. Just like in manufacturing, he believes that exceptional results are not the outcome of improvisation, but rather a combination of discipline, the right ingredients, repetition, attention to detail, and continuous improvement. This combination of practicality, directness, and energy is also reflected in the way he works with people.
In the interview, he speaks very openly about:
- why companies often remain trapped in a firefighting mode,
- why data without a clear decision-making system has little real value,
- how important tier meetings, execution discipline, and clear responsibilities really are,
- and why changing organizational culture primarily requires persistence and continuous work on real problems.
His presentation at LEAN AKADEMIJA 2026 will focus mainly on practical experiences from real manufacturing environments — how to build a management system that not only detects problems, but also solves them in a structured and sustainable way.
Many companies still operate in ‘firefighting’ mode. Why do you think this is still so common in manufacturing?
I believe it is partly connected to human nature, habits, and the way people are raised. Even in schools, we are rarely taught how to solve problems properly or how to build a real problem-solving culture. At the same time, quickly fixing a problem gives us a kind of “false” satisfaction because we think the problem has been solved — when in reality, it has not. It is simply easier for people to do something quickly to satisfy their conscience, without realizing that the same issue will have to be solved again countless times.
Transition to Structured Management:
What was the key step in moving from a reactive approach to a more structured management system?
The key step happened when we established a structured management system based on tiered meetings connected to problem solving. It was important that we did not only collect data, but also clearly defined who reacts, how quickly, and in what way.
Data vs. Decisions:
Today, companies do not lack data — in your experience, where is the connection between data and actual decision-making usually lost?
First of all, data must be properly organized and connected to real problems. Secondly, KPIs are often not linked to concrete actions. When a number drops, it should already be clear what the next step is — not another discussion, but action.
The Role of the Management System:
How important is it to have a clear management system compared to simply having tools or KPIs?
It is essential, yet people still underestimate it. Without a proper management system, you cannot expect sustainable long-term results. At the same time, many companies do not fully understand what a management system actually means. Without that understanding, KPIs become just reporting tools instead of management tools.
Practical Example:
Can you share a concrete example where a structured approach delivered visible improvements?
In one of our first projects, we reduced downtime by more than 60% through focused continuous improvement activities. The key was not new technology, but discipline in monitoring, follow-up, and corrective actions.
People and Habits:
How difficult is it in practice to change the mindset and way of working within a team?
This is actually more difficult than anything else. We still underestimate how much time people need, as well as the importance of continuous and repetitive learning, in order to move from one way of thinking to another. The easiest way to achieve this is through constant work on real projects combined with persistence and consistency.
Practical Takeaway:
What is one thing a company can start doing tomorrow to reduce ‘firefighting’?
Tomorrow is already too late — better start today. Make the decision to work differently and begin building a real management system.
Invitation:
What can participants expect from your presentation at LEAN AKADEMIJA 2026?
Additional Question:
Do companies today suffer more from a lack of data or from a lack of structured decision-making?
If you are currently only thinking about making changes, after LEAN AKADEMIJA you will start taking action.
