a3 management (part 2 of 2)
DESCRIPTION
Recorded webinar: http://slidesha.re/1l6raT1 Subscribe: http://www.ksmartin.com/subscribe Karen’s Books: http://ksmartin.com/books This is part 2 of a 2-part series and focuses on the Do, Study Adjust stages of the (PDSA) cycle.TRANSCRIPT
Company
LOGO
A3 Management: From Structured
Problem-Solving to Workforce
Development
Part II of II
1
© 2011 Karen Martin & Associates
Your Instructor
Early career as a scientist; migrated to
quality & operations design in the mid-80’s.
Launched Karen Martin & Associates in
1993.
Specialize in Lean transformations in non-
manufacturing environments.
Co-author of The Kaizen Event Planner;
co-developer of Metrics-Based Process
Mapping: An Excel-Based Solution.
Instructor in University of California, San
Diego’s Lean Enterprise program.
2
Karen Martin,
Principal
Karen Martin &
Associates
© 2011 Karen Martin & Associates
PDCA: Plan Stage
3
Primary
problem-solving
role:
Investigator
© 2011 Karen Martin & Associates
PDCA: Do-Check-Act Stages
4
Primary
problem-solving
role:
Director
Common Components of the A3 Report
Theme: ________________________________ Owner: ________________________________
Plan Do, Check, Act
Background
Current Condition
Countermeasures / Implementation Plan
Effect Confirmation
Follow-up Actions
Target Condition / Measurable Objectives
Root Cause & Gap Analysis
Common Components of the A3 Report
Theme: “What is our area of focus?” Owner: Person accountable for results.
Plan Do, Check, Act
Background
Current Condition
Countermeasures / Implementation Plan
Effect Confirmation
Follow-up Actions
• What?
• Who?
• When?
• Where? (if relevant)
Target Condition / Measurable Objectives
• Diagram of desired state
• Measurable targets – how will we know that
the improvement has been successful?
• Diagram of current situation or process
• What about it is not ideal?
• Extent of the problem (metrics)
• Problem statement
• Context - why is this a problem?
Root Cause & Gap Analysis
• Graphical depiction of the most likely direct
(root) causes
• What measurable results did the solution
achieve (or will be measured to verify
effectiveness)?
• Who’s responsible for ongoing
measurement?
• Where else in the organization can this
solution be applied?
• How will the improved state be standardized
and communicated?
Building a Lean Enterprise
Process
Stabilization
Tools
Building a Lean Enterprise
Flow-Enabling
Tools
© 2011 Karen Martin & Associates
Once you know the root cause,
brainstorm and prioritize solutions
1. List relevant countermeasures.
2. Eliminate those that aren’t possible.
Regulatory, budgetary, resource availability,
system capability, etc.
3. Combine those that are similar.
4. Number the countermeasures sequentially.
5. Place countermeasures accordingly on the
PACE Prioritization Grid.
PACE Prioritization Grid
High Low Anticipated Benefit
Ease o
f Im
ple
men
tati
on
Dif
fic
ult
E
as
y
20
7
5 13
4 23
1
22 8 9
2
10
16
11
6
12
14 19
15
17
3 21
18
© 2011 Karen Martin & Associates
Consider all options
Be innovate – be willing to challenge your paradigms & help
others challenge theirs.
Make sure the countermeasure is directly very
specifically to the root causes.
Make it clear exactly what will be done – by whom, by
when, where, how, in what order, etc.
Aim for full implementation by a certain date.
The problem owner’s role shifts to advocate and project
manager.
Cross-functional involvement & consensus is a key
success factor.
11
Implementation /
Countermeasures
Sample Implementation Plan
Task Type Accountable Implementation Schedule (weeks)
Progress Date
Complete 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Create visual board to track KPIs. KE Mary W. 100 25
75 50
Clearn up data base. Proj George S. 100 25
75 50
Create self-quality checklist. KE Sally R. 100 25
75 50
Create standard template. KE Sally R. 100 25
75 50
Modify weekly report. JDI Bruce M. 100 25
9/22/2010 75 50
100 25
75 50
100 25
75 50
100 25
75 50
100 25
75 50
100 25
75 50
Type: JDI = Just do it; KE = Kaizen Event; Proj = Project
12
Sample A3
Countermeasures / Implementation Plan
Common Components of the A3 Report
Theme: “What is our area of focus?” Owner: Person accountable for results.
Plan Do, Check, Act
Background
Current Condition
Countermeasures / Implementation Plan
Effect Confirmation
Follow-up Actions
• What?
• Who?
• When?
• Where? (if relevant)
Target Condition / Measurable Objectives
• Diagram of desired state
• Measurable targets – how will we know that
the improvement has been successful?
• Diagram of current situation or process
• What about it is not ideal?
• Extent of the problem (metrics)
• Problem statement
• Context - why is this a problem?
Root Cause & Gap Analysis
• Graphical depiction of the most likely direct
(root) causes
• What measurable results did the solution
achieve (or will be measured to verify
effectiveness)?
• Who’s responsible for ongoing
measurement?
• Where else in the organization can this
solution be applied?
• How will the improved state be standardized
and communicated?
© 2011 Karen Martin & Associates
The A3 Report:
Effect Confirmation
Tie confirmation directly to the target condition.
Define 2-5 key performance indicators (KPIs).
Determine ways to verify the effectiveness of the
countermeasures, one by one if possible.
Plan in advance for the data that will need to be
collected.
Identify who will help collect the data and how
frequently.
Common Components of the A3 Report
Theme: “What is our area of focus?” Owner: Person accountable for results.
Plan Do, Check, Act
Background
Current Condition
Countermeasures / Implementation Plan
Effect Confirmation
Follow-up Actions
• What?
• Who?
• When?
• Where? (if relevant)
Target Condition / Measurable Objectives
• Diagram of desired state
• Measurable targets – how will we know that
the improvement has been successful?
• Diagram of current situation or process
• What about it is not ideal?
• Extent of the problem (metrics)
• Problem statement
• Context - why is this a problem?
Root Cause & Gap Analysis
• Graphical depiction of the most likely direct
(root) causes
• What measurable results did the solution
achieve (or will be measured to verify
effectiveness)?
• Who’s responsible for ongoing
measurement?
• Where else in the organization can this
solution be applied?
• How will the improved state be standardized
and communicated?
© 2011 Karen Martin & Associates
The A3 Report:
Follow-up Actions
How will you communicate the new process?
Who will monitor the process?
Which metrics will be used to measure ongoing performance?
Look for similar processes within the department and across the organization that can benefit from these countermeasures
Ensure ongoing improvement – who will do this?
Share the wealth! Communicate results across the organization and teach
others to problem-solve via the A3 process
17
© 2011 Karen Martin & Associates
Sample Effect Confirmation Option
18
Metric Current
State
Projected
Future State
Projected %
Improvement
Actual
Results *
Actual %
Improvement
Lead Time 36 Days 16 Days 56% 20 Days 44%
Rolled First Pass Yield 55% 75% 36% 80% 45%
Scrap $1.2 M $0.5 M 58% TBD TBD
Labor Effort 5.6 FTEs 3.0 FTEs 46% 3.8 FTEs 32%
* Measured by Sally Turner on 8/20/2010; monthly measurement;
improvement efforts continuing.
Effect Confirmation & Follow-up
19
Sample A3
Effect Confirmation & Follow-up Actions
Follow-up Actions
Effect Confirmation
When Are You “Done”?
21
© 2011 Karen Martin & Associates
Deming’s PDCA Cycle
Plan
Do
Check
Act
Develop
hypothesis
& design
experiment
Conduct
experiment
Measure
results
Analyze
results &
take
appropriate
action
© 2011 Karen Martin & Associates
Using A3 to develop
organizational
capabilities
23
© 2011 Karen Martin & Associates
The Role of the A3 Coach
24
© 2011 Karen Martin & Associates
Coaching and Mentoring
Coaching is working in partnership to facilitate learning, improve performance, and create desired results. Primarily in service of the A3 owner’s development.
To this end, what will be most supportive?
Mentoring is the process for imparting subject matter expertise and wisdom to a less experienced person. Primarily in service of achieving results.
More of a one-way, training-driven relationship
Begin with coaching; move into mentoring as needed.
25
Mentoring Relationship Coaching Relationship
? ?
Focus: Asking questions Focus: Providing information
Wisdom Wisdom
Coach Coachee Mentor
?
? ? ?
Mentee
© 2011 Karen Martin & Associates
Problem-Solving Proficiency
Needed
Lean analytical, process design, and
implementation tools
Data analysis
Visual display of data
Project & time management
Team building / people skills
Change management skills / psychology
27
Coaching vs. Mentoring
Coach Mentor
Purpose Growth/development; helping people realize their potential,
while also generating results
Role Teacher/consultant; learning/thinking partner
Relationship Built on respect and trust; supportive in nature
Process
Drawing out knowledge that
resides within coachee
Sharing knowledge that
resides within mentor
Questioning; coach engages
in inquiry to guide the
coachee
Telling; Mentor shares
expertise, offering answers
and solutions
Focus Primary: Developing strong
problem-solvers
Secondary: Assuring the
problem is thoroughly
dissected and solved
Primary: Assuring the
problem is thoroughly
dissected and solved
Secondary: Developing
strong problem-solvers
The Wisdom Comes in Knowing When
to Coach and When to Mentor
Types of Coaching Owner’s Problem-Solving
Skill Level
Focus During Session
What to Ask / Do
Problem-solving is spot on. Coaching
Goal: “Thought
partners”
“How’s it going?”
“What’s working well?”
“What’s not?”
“What have you learned?”
“What’s been most
surprising?”
“What are you doing next?”
“Do you need any help?”
Problem-solving is off course
and needs correction.
Coaching & Mentoring
Goal: Get person back
on track
Probe using Socratic
questioning. Focus on one
or two areas of the A3.
Problem-solving is on track
so far, but owner’s having
difficulty taking next steps.
Coaching & Mentoring
Goal: Build confidence;
remove obstacles;
create an action plan
Use Socratic questioning to
help person realize his/her
strengths & grow
competencies; provide
mentoring for knowledge
transfer (e.g. specific tools).
© 2011 Karen Martin & Associates
Why should we avoid telling
people what to do?
It robs them of the opportunity to think
through the problem themselves.
It deprives them of ownership of the
problem.
You might be wrong.
31
© 2011 Karen Martin & Associates
Socratic Questioning
Named for Socrates
Based on his belief that the
most effective learning results
from a disciplined practice of
thoughtful questioning.
Way of assuring “rigorous
thinking”
Open-ended questions that
cause the learner to think
deeply.
32
© 2011 Karen Martin & Associates
Questioning “Don’ts”
Masked recommendations
“Leading the witness”
Disguising your recommendation as a question (and
thinking that counts as a question)
“Run on” questions
Long questions that contain multiple questions
“The inquisition” – asking question after question
Instead of pausing and allowing the person to answer
Closed-ended questions
That can be answered with yes, no, or a word or two.
33
© 2011 Karen Martin & Associates
Questioning “Don’ts”
Harsh or judgmental tone
Multi-tasking or half-listening instead of
engaging the person in a focused dialogue
If the problem owner asks, “What do you
think?”, don’t take the bait!
34
© 2011 Karen Martin & Associates
Building Organizational Capabilities –
Model 1 – Leadership Development
Pre-select 4 problems related to annual business goals.
Break into 4 teams; team lead is the problem owner; others
play dual role, focused primarily on building coaching skills.
1-day workshop – learn P stage of PDCA.
4-6 weeks to work on projects; heavy support throughout
from seasoned coach/mentor (2nd coach).
1-day workshop – teams present progress; much discussion;
learn DCA stage of PDCA.
4-6 weeks to work on projects; heavy support throughout
from seasoned coach/mentor (2nd coach).
1-day workshop – teams present progress; focus on
sustainability and spreading the learning across the
organization.
35
© 2011 Karen Martin & Associates
Building Organizational Capabilities –
Model 2 – One-on-One Development
Specific problem is selected.
Identify problem owner and coach/mentor (typically
the project owner’s direct supervisor).
Seasoned coach/mentor serves as either:
“2nd coach” – coaches the coach (if coach is skilled in
improvement tools)
Primary coach to problem owner, with side-bar coaching
discussions with coach.
Support from seasoned coach is heaviest during the
P stage of PDCA.
36
© 2011 Karen Martin & Associates
How A3 Shifts Culture
Cross-functional engagement
Root cause analysis helps break the
“band-aid syndrome”
Learning together
Alignment with organizational strategy
Coaching role of leadership helps move
them away from tactical involvement
37
© 2011 Karen Martin & Associates
Common Problem-Solving Pitfalls
Problem isn’t tied to key business goals.
Problem owner isn’t proficient in analytical and
improvement tools.
Coach isn’t proficient in analytical and
improvement tools.
Consensus isn’t built throughout the process.
A3 drags on forever.
A3 used for everything.
38
Comment on how A3s and VSMs relate to one another, and which
one to turn to in the beginning.
© 2011 Karen Martin & Associates
Key Success Factors
Engage all stakeholders from the beginning.
They must clearly understand why “this” is a problem.
Gain consensus every stage of PDCA.
Keep leadership from getting into tactics.
Their role is strategy and policy.
Test/experiment before rolling out an improvement.
Assign clear accountability for monitoring the improved
state and continued improvement.
Avoid moving forward until true root cause is known.
Establish measurable targets.
Develop leaders into engaged and active coaches/mentors.
Share the process company-wide.
39
© 2011 Karen Martin & Associates
In Summary
The A3 process should become a
standardized form of currency for problem-
solving, dialogue, and decision-making in
your organization – creating an organization
of “scientists” who continually improve
operations and achieve results through
constant learning from the work at hand.
40
© 2011 Karen Martin & Associates
Other A3 Applications and
Common A3 Components
Proposal
Theme
Background
Current Condition
Analysis and Proposal
Plan Details
Unresolved Issues (if
relevant)
Implementation
Schedule
Total Effect
Status Report
Theme
Background
Current Condition
Results
Unresolved Issues /
Follow-up Actions
Total Effect
During Kaizen Events
Professional Development A3
42
For Further Study
44
7770 Regents Road #635
San Diego, CA 92122
858.677.6799
For Further Questions
Free monthly newsletter:
www.ksmartin.com/subscribe
Learn / Connect :