You are on page 1of 20

The ManageMen ® Operating System (OS1) ®

John Walker



Presentation to the Ivy League Custodial Leadership Meeting

Presentation to the Ivy League Custodial Leadership Meeting Yale University October 6, 2002 © 2002 •

Yale University October 6, 2002

© 2002 • All rights reserved.

It is used at thousands of facilities, schools, universities, and offices buildings throughout North America. It is credited with improving safety, reducing cost, and improving the quality of cleaning. It has positively impacted the health of those doing custodial work as well as other building occupants. “It” is (OS1)®; a cleaning system developed by John Walker, founder of Salt Lake City based ManageMen, a cleaning consulting firm. In 1985 Walker received a grant from the Utah State Department of Education to develop a staffing formula for public school custodial operations. The state legislature was grappling with how to appropriate funding and had no reliable indicator of how many custodians were necessary. Productivity rates varied widely from school to school, as did tools and techniques. One school used vacuums that allowed cleaning workers to cover 2500 sq. ft. in an hour. Another school used vacuums that covered 7500 sq. ft. Walker discovered productivity rates had less to do with the cleaning worker than with the tools and processes he/she used. The following year ManageMen was awarded another grant. This time state officials wanted Walker to develop a statewide training program for school custodians. An endless variation of tools and techniques convinced Walker there was a critical need for someone to identify the best practices and tools. A staffing formula and training program supporting those practices could then be developed.

The ManageMen Operating System or (OS1) – the first operating system in the cleaning industry – was born.

One Best Way (OS1) is founded on principles introduced in the late 1800’s by Frederick Winslow Taylor. Taylor pioneered time and motion studies. One of his most famous experiments was a landmark study on improving productivity in the steel industry. Using Bethlehem Steel as his laboratory, Taylor tested two of the company’s best coal shovelers to determine how much material they were able to move. With stopwatches and notebooks, Taylor measured the weight of each scoop, how many loads were moved, and how long it took to do it. He determined the men moved about 20 tons of coal per day with scoops that weighed 38 pounds each.

Then Taylor cut the shovels so each would hold only about 34 pounds. Each worker’s productivity went up – from 20 tons per day to 30. Taylor again cut the shovels, reducing the scoop load to 30 pounds. Once again, the men were able to actually shovel more coal than before. By reducing the shovel load and tracking the results Taylor and his men were able to average shoveling 60 tons of coal per day with a 21 1/2-pound shovel scoop. He later testified before Congress, “When we went to the Bethlehem Steel Co. we found from 400 to 600 men at work in that yard, and when we got through 140 men were doing the work of the 400 to 600, and these men handled several million tons of material a year…the cost of handling a ton was brought down from between 7 and 8 cents to between 3 and 4 cents.” But there were other benefits as well. All those men that used to shovel coal were moved inside the plant to help keep up with increased capacity. And the coal shovelers themselves made an average of 60% more than their peers who worked for competitors. Perhaps best of all, the increased productivity resulted in less fatigue for the workers. Taylor’s goal was to identify the one base way to perform work. Walker decided to build his cleaning system on the same principle. He would develop a set of rules for operating a cleaning organization at the highest level.

Two Options There are essentially two ways to approach cleaning. One of them is (OS1) – a standardized, measured, and tested process. The other approach may be termed laissez faire – a system made up as the organization goes along.

With the latter approach, well-intentioned people try to make improvements and add bits and pieces in an unstructured way. The result is chaos.

There are many ways to fail. When you find a way to succeed you stay with it. The (OS1) process was created piece by piece as a result of ManageMen time and motion studies. The consulting firm was hired repeatedly by organizations looking for data that didn’t exist. Out of every project Walker learned something new about how cleaning systems could be improved. Most of the system components were developed by janitors who showed Walker their “one best way” of doing things. (OS1) is the sum total of 17 years experience with thousands and thousands of cleaning workers in hundreds and hundreds of organizations. The very best tools and techniques have been distilled into a powerful process with consistent results.

Cleaning for Health In ancient Rome the life expectancy was about 70 years, roughly the same as in the United States today for a Roman citizen who lived in the country. City dwellers, however, were lucky to live past 30. The difference was the cleanliness of their surroundings. Garbage was removed in the country and recycled and it accumulated and was not cleaned in the city. Dr. Charles Gerba of the University of Arizona recently conducted a study of bacterial levels inside American offices. He found the average desktop is home to 400 times more infectious micro-organisms than the average toilet seat. Cleaning is the process of locating, identifying, containing and properly removing and disposing of unwanted substances. It’s a science. It demands attention to details like dilution ratios and disinfectant kill times. Cleaning for health is the one best way. It requires considering the health of the worker, building occupants, the planet, and the budget that finances the cleaning. Most organizations consider some, but not all of those variables. Walker discovered the more he consider all of those factors, the better his cleaning process became. In 2001, 102,000 people were killed in hospitals by nosecomial infections – a disease acquired from the hospital environment. That is more deaths than everyone killed on the highways in car accidents, plus everyone killed with a handgun, plus everyone killed by a drunk driver, plus everyone killed in World Trade Center. Many of these nosocomial infections are related to cleaning, hand washing, and housekeeping practices. Where is the Attorney General in trying to protect the rights of these people? What is homeland security’s role in reducing these infections in hospitals? Who is speaking out against the terrorism involved in unclean environments, poor practices, and untrained janitors? (OS1) is the only system that has a way of tracking; measuring, comparing and reporting some of the key components that constitute cleaning for health. It measures virtually every bucket and bottle and tank of cleaning solution. It tracks assigned usage and compares it to results. (OS1) tracks and measure the filter usage of the vacuums. It tracks and measures and records the usage and care of all the machines in the program. The process tracks and measures requests given cleaning workers on the floor. It provides a way of measuring and recording who follows instructions, who cooperates in a team environment. It measures the cleanliness of equipment

and controls that cleanliness. These are the building blocks of cleaning for health.

Recently, Dr. Michael Berry has conducted a study of (OS1) cleaning vs. traditional cleaning at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. This study documented the (OS1) cleaning for health benefits compared to typical cleaning.

The Quality of Cleaning All quality programs are a function of process. Processes are a series of tasks. Because the (OS1) process is very simple and standardized, organizations see dramatic improvements without making people work harder. It is literally working smarter. Coupled with process, (OS1) identifies and incorporates the best tool for each task. This combination invariably raises the level of cleanliness. Even people who don’t generally notice cleaning quality comment on the improved appearance, smell and feel of the environment around them. The (OS1) process certified ISO 9001. This is the first time in the history of the cleaning industry that a certified quality standard has been identified. Because the process is standardized, the results are predictable and reproducible, a rarity in cleaning. Most organizations have a couple of areas that are clean if they have an excellent worker and effective tools. Other areas within the same institution, sometimes even within the same building, are not as clean. Perhaps the worker in that area is less motivated. Perhaps he/she is using tools and chemicals incorrectly. With (OS1) cleaning workers perform their duties as a team, with standardized processes, equipment and chemicals. These teams are replicated throughout the organization to provide the same high quality of cleaning.

Going Beyond Compliance Safety is built into the (OS1) system. While many cleaning organizations struggle to meet basic safety regulations, (OS1) is designed to take organizations beyond the bare minimum of compliance. There is written documentation of employee training and hazard awareness. A hazard communication plan is also included. The process starts with color-coding. Every chemical is coded so that employees can see at a glance whether or not they have the right chemical for the job. This is especially helpful for employees who struggle with

literacy or who do not speak English. Every bottle is labeled and every label is correct. Matching the color-coded chemicals is a Material Safety Data Sheet. There is a MSDS for every chemical used in the process. The (OS1) process dramatically reduces the amounts of kinds of chemicals most organizations use. Pre-measured chemical packets are stored in highly visible wall mount stations. The compact nature of these cabinets, combined with the exact measure of portion controlled packages, limits the amount of hazardous chemicals in use. Hazardous materials inventory becomes almost automatic. The only chemicals on site are those specified by (OS1). Employees receive training on how to identify hazardous materials, proper protective equipment and procedures, the Rule of One, how to read MSDS sheets, safe materials handling and the proper response to non- routine situations. Cleaning workers also learn how to protect themselves from blood borne pathogens. Training logs document which employees have been trained on which subjects. Employees sign to verify they have received the proper training.

Working as a Team The (OS1) concept is based on cleaning teams. Each team is comprised of four specialists: Light Duty, Restroom, Vacuum and Utility. In Adam Smith’s book, “The Wealth of Nations,” published in 1776, Smith explained that the greatest economies are realized by the specialization of labor. A system of specialists simplifies training, balances workloads,

of specialists simplifies training, balances workloads, minimizes worker complaints, and makes it easier to hire,

minimizes worker complaints, and makes it easier to hire, train and retain qualified employees. Equally important, it provides a better quality cleaning product. Team cleaning workers are not specialists in name only. They are valued employees who deserve to be recognized as an important part of the learning/work environment. They are the first line of defense in keeping buildings clean and occupants healthy. (OS1) Scouting Reports explain the function of each specialist. They provide a standardized way of training employees on new topics. Scouting Reports are often accompanied by training videos and, in some cases, an

audio tapes with step by step instructions to assist on-site trainers with in developing effective training seminars. Scouting Reports are also effective during the hiring process. They provide a clear, written assessment of exactly what will be expected of the new employee. It covers every level of training in a very simplified way that’s been thoroughly tested in other facilities. Corresponding flow charts outline the sequence of work. A handbook is also available to help transition cleaning organizations from typical zone cleaning operations to team cleaning specialists. The Light Duty Specialist is responsible for emptying trash and recycling bins and reinstalling liners. This individual also cleans telephones and chalk trays and dusts all horizontal and vertical surfaces. In preparation for the Vacuum Specialist, the Light Duty Specialist picks up paper clips, paper and pencils from the floor. Finally, this specialist spot cleans surfaces such as doorplates and wall and fixture marks. The Vacuum Specialist follows. Using a backpack vacuum, this individual vacuums all traffic areas and spot vacuums other areas. The Vacuum Specialist cleans crumbs, ashes or other spills from the furniture. He/she makes certain each trashcan has been emptied, the furniture is positioned correctly, lights are out and the area is secure. As the name implies, the Restroom Specialist is responsible for all restroom cleaning and refilling dispensers. This specialist uses tools that are designed to prevent cross-contamination, eliminate contact with bloodborne pathogens, and kill germ-laden micro-organisms. Finally, the Utility Specialist is responsible for policing stairs and vacuuming stairwells, cleaning glass and brass, carpet spotting, cleaning first impression areas, and hauling trash to the dumpster. Training cleaning workers as specialists allows them to feel a sense of pride in their specific area of expertise. It also helps minimize the effects of absenteeism. Specialists can be cross-trained to cover more than one function, or can perform their given specialty in buildings other than those they may typically be assigned. As one university cleaning manager put it, the team concept gives each custodian ownership of the building as a whole, not just one small area, or zone.

The Right Tools Because the (OS1) process is committed to using the one best way to clean, the system requires different tools. It is not possible to use what will do when the rest of the cleaning process is built around what is best. In

addition, training materials have been developed using the best tools for each task. Choose a different tool and (OS1) training becomes useless. Among the specific tools required by the (OS1) process are portion controlled chemicals and backpack vacuums. In addition to promoting safety, pre-measured chemicals minimize waste and improve chemical efficiency by providing an accurate measure every time. Backpack vacuums have been proven to dramatically increase productivity while improving worker safety. According to a 1998 study by Ohio State University and Batelle Memorial Institute, backpack vacuums require less than half the energy to clean the same sized area as an upright vacuum. The study also found backpack vacuums avoid the repetitive motions that can result in medical disabilities. The report says backpack vacuums result in less body stress and increased efficiency. They allow more carpet to be cleaned in a shorter amount of time due to the natural walking motion. Riding auto-scrubbers are 20-40% faster than walk speed with no fatigue. The machines cost from $10-15 thousand. However, the money organizations save on increased efficiency, reduced downtime and associate problems often yields a return on investment within 12-24 months. Also unique to (OS1), the emphasis on dry vs. wet cleaning whenever possible. European cleaning processes and tools have shown cleaning methods that use less water decrease the rate of injuries to the worker, minimize slip and fall conditions, promote cleaner conditions, and minimize the downstream effects of the cleaning process. Micro-fiber cloths and mop heads are an important part of (OS1)’s drier cleaning strategy.

Standardized Training that Works For (OS1) transitioning to be most successful, training begins with top-level management. Organizational decision-makers attend a week-long session in Salt Lake City, Utah at Janitor University. There they learn how to lead their organization through the transition process. Key managers should also attend so the entire management team has a unified vision and understanding of what they are trying to achieve. Once this training has occurred, Boot Camp begins. The on-site Boot Camp includes lower level managers, supervisors, cleaning workers, human resource experts, purchasing and safety representatives.

(OS1) Boot Camp in the Washington State Ecology Building

This training is done from site based training kits – standardized instructional materials produced with an “enter-trainment” value. Each kit contains workbooks, Scouting Reports, flow charts and video instruction. ManageMen’s (OS1) training videos have received more awards for excellence than any other cleaning organization. Video training in this format allows cleaning managers to repeat or refresh training any time. The workplace itself is visually instructive, providing employees with important written and visual guides on what is expected. Employees learn where and how chemicals and machinery are stored by looking at the work environment. There is consistency throughout the facility in both what is used, what it is called, where it is kept, and the condition in which it is maintained. (OS1)’s unique “Learn-n-Earn” program adds a financial incentive to employee training. Employees receive merit wages whenever they complete a practical, oral and/or written test proving they have mastered a new level of expertise in their present job or a new job contiguous to their primary responsibility. The advantages to this program are immediate and obvious. Achievers are freed from mandatory on the job time constrictions. They receive a raise as soon as a skill is mastered, not when a pre-requisite amount of time has passed. The program also engineers value, variety and interest into every job in exchange for top wages.

The Role of the Cleaning Supervisor As the cleaning process changes, (OS1) brings improvements and efficiency to the job of supervising that process. As one university professional said, “We know what is reasonable to expect from our crews and what can be done when there are absentees.” (OS1) uses the Functional Management concept. Many cleaning organizations typically rely on “hub of the wheel” management.

(OS1) Supervisor in the Check-in Area at University of Texas at Austin

All decisions lead to one individual who has ultimate power. Bottlenecks inevitably occur and the organization is helpless to move forward until the leader has had time to make a decision. Functional management separates managing processes into two categories: those necessary for planning work and those needed to perform work. Planning managers include supervisors for sequence of work, instruction cards, time and expenses and a disciplinarian. Performance of work supervisors include a trainer and job coach, speed of work and preventative maintenance supervisors, and a compliance inspector. With Functional Management there is no hub of the wheel bottleneck. Leadership is team based and interdependent. Another advantage of Functional Management is its agility. The system provides flexibility to meet changing needs. This type of management style makes it easy to spot and remedy poor performance.

style makes it easy to spot and remedy poor performance. Measure and Improve Measuring cleaning quality

Measure and Improve Measuring cleaning quality is a daily function of (OS1). The system focuses on three areas: solution changes, who is following instructions, and requests and complaints. No other cleaning system measures those variables. Cleaning operations typically rely on white glove inspections to verify that tasks have been completed. The problem with this type of approach is that it is inherently unfair. The cleaning environment itself may differ from one employee to another. Environmental conditions in or near the building may also impact the accuracy of this kind of inspection.

The (OS1) Team Checklist

(OS1) measures cleaning processes. Tracking solution changes and vacuum filters allows managers to see who is doing what, where and when. It is the most effective way to track every area, every shift, every day. There is no sliding scale. Either the work has been performed properly or it has not. Tracking solution changes alerts cleaning mangers to employees who may not be changing solutions often enough, requiring additional training.

The same is true for vacuuming. These are automatic indicators of employees who are following instructions. Cleaning managers can identify holes in the process, as well as budget, correct, project, and, if necessary, defend management. To facilitate training, (OS1) uses a Team Checklist. The list features approximately 20 simple pictograms to evaluate more than one hundred cleaning functions. Supervisors circle areas of the pictogram that need improvement. The Team Checklist is especially helpful in communicating with workers who may not read or speak English. A complaint log provides a written description of any problems, as well as a means of identifying when the problem was reported, if the information was given to the appropriate manager, and when the complaint was acted on. Because the ability to measure and improve cleaning process is central to the (OS1) philosophy, (OS1) is the leader in benchmarking cleaning products. To date, hundreds of tools have been tested, including high-flow extraction, ergonomic mops, buckets and restroom cleaning kits, backpack vacuums, pre-measured chemicals, micro-fiber cloths and mop heads, brushes, mixing hoses, safety acids and control cabinets. The commitment to measurable quality extends to benchmarking cleaning processes as well. The Rule of One, 2-minute check-in time, cross- training, point of use mixing, specialist work assignments, job cards, building profiles, logistics, and solution tracking have all fallen under the (OS1) microscope in the quest for the one best way to clean.

Successful Cleaning Programs

As (OS1) approaches its 20 th anniversary, the number of organizations using the process continues to grow. Trade publications in North America and Europe have chronicled the system’s success. Cleaning organizations in all kinds of environments have asked, “Will it work for me?” and determined to put the process to the test. In August 2002 the Boeing Company hosted an (OS1) end-users seminar at their Puget Sound, Washington facility. In attendance were representatives from Boeing, Sandia National Laboratories, University of Massachusetts at Amherst, University of New Mexico and others. They shared their experiences since implementing (OS1). Paul Condie, Vice President of PJS; a Texas based contract cleaning company. Condie notes, “As I have watched organizations transition to (OS1), I have seen transition activities bring workers, supervisors and management closer together as they focus on a common goal.” At Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico cleaning managers dropped their cost per square foot of cleaning by 46%. At the same time, safety improved dramatically. In 2000 there were 71 lost workdays. As of August 2002 there were none. At the same time Sandia also experienced a 38% increase in the amount of area cleaned per custodian, while the number of custodians dropped from 94 to 77 At the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque, custodians cleaned roughly 27-thousand square feet before (OS1) implementation. Since then, cleaning workers now handle 32-thousand square feet. There has also been a reduction of more than 80% in the amount of accidents reported since the school transitioned to (OS1). Mary Vosevich, Director of Physical Plant says the school expects to save between 10-20% on labor. UNM also pocketed an additional 20% in vacuum maintenance costs with zero downtime on the machines. According to Vosevich, previous expenses for five different brands of vacuums and parts have been virtually eliminated. She says except for minor plug work, the backpacks required no other equipment maintenance. In addition to that, chemical costs at UNM have dropped by more than


R. Stuart Holdridge is Director of Boeing’s Shared Services Group Facilities Support Services at Puget Sound. Holdridge says before Boeing implemented (OS1) the company had few standards for chemicals, equipment or processes. Managers were also unhappy with the rate of injuries.

With no consistent way of tracking costs and a lack of management and employee accountability, the company was looking to improve cleaning performance and customer satisfaction. (OS1) provided the answer. To date, more than half of Boeing’s 16.8 million square feet of cleanable space has been transitioned. With the largest building in the world (according to the Guinness Book of World Records), 400 buildings, 23 cafeterias, 4 medical facilities, and more than 14-thousand offices and conference rooms, Holdridge says a standardized process is in place. Since beginning the transition in 2000, Boeing has seen a reduction in injuries and a significant return on its investment. Boeing is also ISO 9001 compliant in its cleaning process. Holdridge says system purity with no deviations was critical to (OS1) success.

purity with no deviations was critical to (OS1) success. Accept No Imitations/Limitations The University of Texas

Accept No Imitations/Limitations The University of Texas at Austin’s first encounter with (OS1) was less than successful. According to Ernest Hunter, Director for Support Services, Physical Plant, the Longhorns were poorly prepared for the transition.

Hunter’s department maintains almost 14 million square feet of space and 100 buildings. With an annual budget is more than $10 million, he serves a campus population of almost 72-thousand students and staff. Hunter says cleaning managers did not recognize the (OS1) team cleaning system is a culture. There was no real management understanding or buy-in and the school made no attempt to communicate the culture change to employees, customers, or students. Cleaning leaders attempted a partial implementation limited to equipment. They continued to use a zone cleaning approach. There was no training for custodians, supervisors or managers. The result was chaos and anger. Students, human resource personnel and faculty joined custodians in their outrage. Unwilling to abandon (OS1), cleaning managers stepped back for another look. While they believed in the (OS1) process, they acknowledged implementation had been poorly executed. They decided to try again. This time, managers and senior supervisors attended Janitor University. The department partnered with school officials in Texas to form a campus wide implementation team. They established an in-house training division. They strategically planned to improve communication by holding “Town Meetings” with the custodial staff and open forums for staff and students. This gave cleaning managers an opportunity to dispel myths or misinformation. Hunter established a Physical Plant Team Cleaning web site and developed a handout brochure. Then the department went out of its way to advertise transition successes. Using all of the (OS1) equipment and materials, Hunter sought continuous feedback from his customers and held face-to-face meetings with school administrators. Now he says the campus is “turning the corner.” Pilot results demonstrate improved cleaning, health and safety with concern for custodians and customers. He has learned to go

demonstrate improved cleaning, health and safety with concern for custodians and customers. He has learned to

slow, keep everyone informed, make certain training is in place before the transition, and accept no substitutes when it comes to equipment, chemicals or processes. By September of 2003 he anticipates an additional 2-million square feet will have been transitioned to the (OS1) cleaning process. Summary

(OS1) has the largest installed base of any cleaning process in the industry. Thousands of custodians are using the system to clean hundreds of millions of square feet. Cleaning executives are driven to the (OS1) process because they realize too many custodial functions are simply performed, not managed. They seek better accounting, fewer accidents and injuries, and a cleaning system that will allow them to adjust to the forces of roller coaster economy without sacrificing the quality of cleaning.

that will allow them to adjust to the forces of roller coaster economy without sacrificing the

(OS1) Benchmarking Best Practices

Lessons Learned

Custodial Benchmarking starts with the tools

Tools dictate the task, time, training, safety, efficiency, frequency, and cost distribution

It is important to select the best tool for any task because it has a chain reaction affect on your total process

Most initial decisions on tools are prejudiced toward the present tools

Most information about tools comes from vendors who sell them or ads

Once you go down a path the best practice gets more complicated with more components.

Example (not in exact chronological order):

Decision to use Portion Pacs lead to different pricing structure. That leads to tracking who uses, steals and follows directions. That leads to using the Rule of 1. That leads to management training. That leads to training cleaning workers on proper use. That leads to reporting and disciplining. That leads to standardizing. That leads to color-coding. That leads to changing Hazcom program. That leads to counting empty pacs. That leads to two-unit inventory. That leads to control cabinets, bulk storage system pantry system and distribution trays. That leads to solution change assignments. That leads to reporting system. That leads to comparing results. That leads to cloning successes and eliminating failures.

(OS1) History Purchase Tools –> Task Assignment–> Training–> Tracking–> Management–> Improvement

Best Practices for

Before work

ISO 9001 Certified Process

Tested in peer locations

Janitor University Philosophy for mission statement


Goes beyond compliance on Hazcom regulations

Simplified MSDS Program

Includes simple training

Helps cleaning workers to protect themselves

Program proven to reduce accidents in cleaning operations

Tested in multiple situations locations

Logs training

Verifies training

Tracks implementation


Ergonomics Slip and fall Lung damaging particles


Site based training tools

Standardized for process

Entertraining video

Scouting Report

Job Card

Audio instructions for trainer

Train the Trainer for Trainer

Janitor University for trainer

Student centered learning

Training that works

Training room


On site training

Boot camp for start-ups

Basic Training handbooks

(OS1) CD

(OS1) Strategy Handbook


Large equipment set up in locations

Control cabinets per shift

Solution logs


Pac cutters

Key system

Request (complaint forms)

Clean equipment


Bulk storage room


Check in area

Control cabinets

Distribution tray


Clean/dirty barrels

Two unit inventory


Building Profile for Key numbers

Clean when cleanable

Night v Day cleaning

Job Card

Cleaning Teams

Specialists v generalists

During Work

Check in

2 min to start work

Kitting for shift

Set up

Carts, barrels equipment clean and operational from previous shift

Pantries stocked


Team Cleaning is better than Area/zone or Gang

Done at proper time-low traffic times

Specialist work assignments


Short Staffing formulas

Rule of 1 measurement

Point of use mixing

Refill empties

Visually instructive workplace



Routine, detail, projects assigned

Weekly spring cleaning wall to wall

Weekly project cleaning never skipped

Ergonomic tools

Flat mops

Micro fiber mops

Unger Nifty Nabbers

Low solution buckets

Double sided buckets

Safety acid

Corner and deck brush

Ergonomic Nifty Nabber squeezer

Super coach vacuum

Sternum straps

Four filter filtration

Lung association endorsement

PortionPac chemicals for daily cleaning

Fuller brush

Long handle

Stiff bristle

Point of use mixing hose

Carts set up correctly

Barrels set up correctly

Huck towels

Inspection mirrors

Pac cutters

2 nd labeled bottles

Corner brushes

Extension handles

Steamin Demon high flow extraction

0 hazard 7 pH carpet chemicals

Fill lines feel lines of containers

After work

Clean up


Send cleaning “valentines” to next shift/crew


All equipment clean


Proper storage


Vac filters clean/changed


Solution change tracking


Clean closets

Check out



Assignments by function-Functional Management

Budgeting based on usage

Measure and improve



Who follows instructions (use Team Checklist)


Requests/complaints (use Request Forms)


Solution changes (use Solution Filter log)


Equipment Usage

Data free discussions reduced