a3thinkingwebinar2012

First it is worth considering what is the definition of the work mentor. The word is actually an old Greek word and comes to us from Homer and the tales of the Iliad and The Odessy. Here is a short summary of the term from an on-line dictionary.

So the word mentor means wise and trusted counselor or adviser and I like to relay that it means to help people think. It does not mean telling them what to do or providing answers. A good mentor is someone that can help you think your way through a problem or difficult situation in a meaningful manner. At least with regards to mentoring and A3 reports I like to think of it that way.

In terms of general advice I break down Problem Solving / A3 Mentoring into technical and non-technical elements. First here is a list of the more technical elements for consideration.

Included in this discussion I suggest that mentors help the learner navigate the problem solving process in an efficient and results oriented manner. Don’t get hung up on making people just fill out the box. Dig deeper and understand what is behind the steps, why they are important, and how to best accomplish them in different circumstances.

Secondly I suggest asking probing questions to help people see their way though the problem solving process. Toyota is well known for the “5 Why” process for example. It is not known for the “5 What to Do’s”. Asking why and helping people define problems, isolate root causes, establish countermeasures, and determine check methods is part of being a good mentor.

Thirdly although I emphasize asking probing questions I also realize there is a time and a place for good old fashioned technical insight. If you are the subject matter expert on some topic of course share that insight and don’t make people waste their time reinventing the wheel. Summarize what you know and share that as a starting point for discussion.

Fourth if there are various experts in the company who need to be consulted I think it is best to help organize and align those experts for the person doing the problem solving work. Often people new in the organization or new to a division don’t know who all the various experts are so give them some help in identifying those people and setting up meetings.

Fifth there will often be barriers that come up in the process of problem solving. A good mentor is someone who can be helpful in removing those obstacles or barriers. For example maybe it is tough to access data. In this case help the person in question get access to the proper data so that analysis can proceed.

Sixth I like the Japanese expression that translate roughly as “a fool knows one way of doing things…an expert knows many”. The mythical warrior Benke never lost a battle because he knew how to use all his fighting tools. He always selected the right tool for the situation and won his battle. From this inspiration Prof. Kaoru Ishikawa created the 7 QC tools for problem solving. A good mentor knows when the current approach is not working or might have limits and should provide some advice on alternative methods of techniques to employ.

Seventh feel free to share similar experiences with the person that you are mentoring. Sometimes it is just good to know that I am not the only person who has gone down this part and struggled, etc. A few words of encouragement on similar tactics or methods can go a long way some times.

Lastly since this is not a completely exhaustive list use your instincts and come up with other good ideas and suggestions. Every situation is different and what is appropriate for one learner may now work for another. Which leads me to some non-technical advice for problem solving mentoring as well.

In the course of problem solving mentoring here are a few things to keep in mind. Number one is to always remember the roots of the word mentor and always aspire to help people think. While doing this however take the time to get to know the person if you do not know them well already.  Different people learn different ways and respond to different methods. Try and learn what works best for the person you are mentoring. Thirdly I think it is a good ideas to have some discussion about availability and time constraints. Are you going to meet in person for an hour per week? Or does ten minutes per day make more sense, etc.

I think a good mentor also always helps keep things in context. Why is this problem being worked upon? Why is it important for the company or for the learner. These sorts of contextual points are often important for the learner to hear. Giving feedback depends upon the learner and their ability and desire to hear what you are going to way. No everyone is open to feedback so handle this area carefully. If you are in a position to provide honest feedback however I’d think of the following three dimensions for starting points. How well is the quality aspect of the problem solving process working – are we employing the right methods and obtaining results. If not then why not? How fast or expedient is the process going? Just solving the problem is not good enough. We must strive to become efficient problem solvers as well. Additionally how well is this person communicating and interacting with others. Are people open and willing to help them solve the problem or are they reluctant to get involved? These are just some initial areas for discussion and there are many more as well.

At times problem solving will get bogged down especially on more difficult problems. Be prepared to provide encouragement and motivation if necessary. Sometimes like Thomas Edison one said genius is one percent inspiration and 99 percent perspiration. At times a good mentor has to help people stay the course and “perspire” some more until the problem is solved. On a slightly different vein it is also important to help people see their involvement in the big scheme of things and to feel somewhat important. Not every problem is the most difficult or important in the company but still we can emphasize what is important or significant about this particular problem.

In the course of problem solving it is nice to be on the look out for various other development opportunities. If there is a good chance to practice communication skills by presenting to another group, or if using certain techniques will help develop someone better for the future please remember to suggest those items as they occur. Similarly when a situation warrants the attention a good mentor should help if possible in arranging recognition for the person working on the problem. In particular this is important at the end of any A3 report of problem solving process.

Lastly I like to remind people that problem solving, leadership, and communication are all mutually reinforcing patterns. The better you are at communication the better you are at leading. The better you are at problem solving the better you are at leading, etc. Don’t think of mentoring problem solving in the narrowest sense. Keep in mind other angles that apply as well.

1. Be a good listener

In order to be a good communicator you must practice the art of listening. Listen before you present and find out what the audience is expecting and or needs to know. Listen to “body language” during an A3 presentation and of course listen and react to questions during your presentation. Listen as well at the end of your report presentation and plan your next steps accordingly. Don’t fall into the trap known as “two mouths and one ear” syndrome when presenting your report.

2. Be prepared

There is no point in presenting an A3 unless you have put some effort into it and are prepared to present. Of course this does not mean that your A3 has to be 100% complete or perfect as it never will be especially in the beginning. To some extent you will always be presenting a “draft” version of your report. However don’t present a report to a large group when the report is not ready to be shared or disseminated widely. The main exception to this piece of advice is of course in the very early stages of an A3 when you are looking for some initial feedback. Even in this case however I suggest that you stick to smaller groups or individual sessions and explain to them that you are at a very preliminary stage. In addition make sure you are adequately prepared to present what you have drafted so far. A boss in Toyota once commented to me that not being prepared was sending a signal to the audience that a) you don’t respect them or their time, and b) you are incapable of managing your own time and affairs. Those are good words to keep in mind. Balance your need for feedback and discussion with proper respect for the other parties time.

3. Get the facts straight

Few things are worse than a report that later has to be retracted for reasons of error or omission. Don’t draft A3′s based upon hearsay, rumors, or just general conversation. Take time to go and observe the actual process in question and get the facts straight. Obtain data and other useful pieces of information that contribute to the fact base for your report. If any information is preliminary, limited in scope, or tentative, etc. be sure to state that up front to the audience to avoid any misunderstandings.

4. Logical order

The A3 template is your aid in this regard. The generic pattern of explaining the background, current situation and problem, goals, analysis, countermeasures, checks, and follow up is intended to make things easy for the reader to follow. Don’t make the audience wonder where you are going next or confuse matters by following an illogical order. Don’t explain your checks or countermeasures, etc. before they know what the problem is.

5. Concise delivery

Plan on getting through your A3 in just a few minutes. Don’t recite a five minute speech on each little part of the report. Give a concise summary of the total story. Often this is called giving your “elevator speech” to the executive. Let the audience guide you where to spend more time. Don’t guess and force unnecessary information on the audience. Often reports can be done quickly and efficiently and not take up an hour or more of meeting time when done correctly.

6. T Shaped

By the term “T shaped” I mean practice the discipline of being both broad and deep where needed (but not everywhere). The typical A3 report has multiple boxes (Background, Current State, Goals, Analysis, Countermeasures, Check, and Follow up, for example). In any given review you will cover the whole (think top of the T) every time but drill down (the trunk of the T) only as needed. In initial meetings there may be more discussion on what is the exact problem or opportunity. In later reviews the emphasis or discussion should shift to the analysis of the problem and countermeasures. Later reviews should spend more time on the checks confirming the effectiveness of the items implemented. Realize that not every presentation will go the same and that the drill down on the A3 report depends upon the audience and where you are in the process.

7. 5W 1 H clarity

Avoid using bullet points and blanket statements like, “The team will implement improvements”. Use the 5W 1H method for exactness and detail. Who will do What by When? Where? Why? How or How much? These are basic questions that the audience should want to know. Anticipate the questions and have good answers drafted in the A3 report.

8. Check for comprehension

Along with good listening I suggest that you actually stop at certain points of the A3 and actively check for comprehension. For example after the background and current state section are presented ask the audience if this is clear especially if they are silent. Stop again after the goal is presented and your analysis for example. See if the audience agrees with your reasoning and thinking on the matter. If not then stop and discuss this until it is safe to proceed to the next step in the process.

9. Ask questions

This may sound similar to the point above but I am encouraging and different twist. Don’t assume that you will have all the answers when you present your A3 or pretend to know things that you don’t for certain. Many times an A3 presentation is a good opportunity to ask questions of experts or executives in the room. Write out your questions that you might have in advance of the presentation and discuss them if and when the time presents itself. For example you might have analyzed the problem one way but suspect that there is another way. Ask if the person you are presenting to has a different way of thinking about how to analyze the problem.

10. Always confirm next steps

Even after a successful A3 it is a good idea to verify what the next steps are in the process for your self and others that are affected. Do you or someone else need to collect more data for example? Who will do this, how, and by when, etc. If you are requested to do something in addition to what you have already done make sure your understanding of the request is correct and confirm how you will proceed, etc. if needed. Lastly of course figure out when is the next time you should plan on giving an update on your A3 report.

I did not touch upon the specific contents of an A3 here or the mechanism by what you will deliver (LCD projector, handouts, etc.). Those are highly situation specific and require some actual observation to comment upon. These ten items listed above are fairly basic but often overlooked. Keep these (and others you might have as well) in mind and it should make for a smoother presentation in the future.

Common Mistakes in Writing A3 Reports

1. The scope is too big for initial A3 assignments

2. The A3 is an answer in search of a problem

3. No clear depiction of the process or situation

4. The entire document is in text

5. No PDCA cycle (or DMAIC or Scientific Method, etc.) for improvement

6. The problem statement is vague or missing

7. The analysis is superficial and does not get to cause and effect

8. The Goal Statements are fuzzy or action items in disguise

9. There are no clear assignments regarding who does what by when

10. The check part of the equation lacks and relevant before and after comparison of effect

11. The countermeasures don’t really address the root causes

12. There is no plan for reflection, standardization, or follow up at the end.

I’ll try and write a short post on each of these in the upcoming weeks for further explanation.

1.  The top level of the poster reflects three of the basic embedded tenants of A3 thinking. There are arguably more points than these three but these items certainly deserve some mention in any list. A3 Thinking is a form of problem solving as well and can function as a proposal writing device or status review tool. In all three cases executing some form of problem solving is a major pillar of the A3 thinking concept. Secondly is the concept of mentoring. By writing down what you are working on and having it critiqued by supervisors, managers, peers, or other associates in the company you are creating a great learning vehicle for yourself and others as well. Thirdly A3 Thinking is about effective communication and collaboration. Meetings that often take hours to get on track or obtaining traction can hone in on the necessary details very quickly and efficiently when done correctly with an A3.

2.  The second level of the poster depicts the concept that good A3 reports are not written in the dark. The reports contain some linkage to organizational goals and objectives. This may be accomplished via a formal mechanism such as policy deployment or a less formal method such as departmental goal setting. Of course A3′s can simply be a bottom up activity as well but for most impact in terms of focusing the vital few resources of any organization it is best to focus on the main problems or opportunities. On the right side the chart depicts a generic A3 format that follows the Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle of improvement. Different formats of course exist based upon need. This one is simply a common one used for training and communication purposes.

3.  The third level of the poster highlights seven of the key elements we discussed in the A3 Thinking book . These seven are what we consider critical characteristics (not steps) of a good A3 report. Not all will always be embedded in every report however these are good to review once you have a draft complete. On the right side is a sample dialogue that occurs between the writer of the A3 report and the reviewer. Creating meaningful reviews and discussions is one of the positive desired outcomes of an A3 report.

This is one of several concepts developed for the poster. Feel free to take this idea and use it as a basis to create your own custom poster or presentation slide. Below is a link to a pdf file of the graphic.

Link to a pdf version of the poster

Professor Sobek and I had an invitation recently to participate in a new website called The Lean Edge with some fellow lean authors. The concept is that various authors will be asked a question by a guest participant. Each author will answer the question with a few paragraphs of response. The idea is not to give the same answer but to give some different replies from different points of view. For now the participating authors in addition to ourselves are:

• Michael Balle
• Orry Fiume
• Dan Jones
• Jeff Liker
• Mike Rother

The initial question was asked by Professor Rob Austin author of Artful Making and other books as well.

As exciting as the lean ideas are, there’s a concern a person might have that starts with the name: Lean.  As in “lean and mean” or as in “cut your staff by half to make your operations leaner.” How do you keep lean initiatives from being bushwhacked by the cost cutting crowd, especially in today’s down economy? This is not an abstract worry. I’ve seen some so-called “lean” initiatives that looked suspiciously like cost cutting to get an organization ready for sale or spin off. How do you keep a program called “lean” from being (or perhaps becoming, step by step, as managers feel pressure) an apparently principled smoke screen to mask ruthless cost cutting? Partly this seems like an issue of priorities: Which take precedence, lasting improvements, or short term cost cutting? Managers might feel pressure to do both. And even when lean isn’t a smoke screen, people might suspect that it is, which amounts to an implementation problem. How do you get people who you need to cooperate in a lean initiative to put aside their suspicions and fears and embrace the overall philosophy?

Please visit the site to see some sample answers and submit reader comments. The purpose is thoughtful discussion from different points of view!

The Lean Edge ]]> http://a3thinking.com/blog/?feed=rss2&p=127 0 http://a3thinking.com/blog/?p=110 http://a3thinking.com/blog/?p=110#comments Wed, 09 Sep 2009 02:07:11 +0000 Prof. Sobek http://a3thinking.com/blog/?p=110 Here is a reader question for Professor Sobek:

Hello Dr. Sobek-

I have been tasked with developing and A3 Training and rollout program for my company. We have a need for a common communication and problem solving tool and to me A3′s are a perfect solution because of the thinking behind them. We need to [...]]]> Here is a reader question for Professor Sobek:

Hello Dr. Sobek-

I have been tasked with developing and A3 Training and rollout program for my company. We have a need for a common communication and problem solving tool and to me A3′s are a perfect solution because of the thinking behind them. We need to foster a more rational and logical approach to problem solving.

Several of my colleagues think the A3 should be in DMAIC format vs. PDCA. What are your thoughts on how DMAIC fits within PDCA? To me DMAIC is just the Motorola coined version of the scientific method and PDCA is more fundamental. I have tried to build a case for PDCA as we are not doing Six Sigma here nor do we have any plans for rollout in the near future.

I would appreciate any thoughts on the matter.

Best Regards,

Professor Sobek’s response:

One question I have is where is the Act phase of the PDCA cycle in DMAIC? I suppose it can be fit in the Control phase or afterward but it feels like a forced fit to me…

Along the same vein one question I have with DMAIC is where do you fit the reflection and learning that we associate with the Act phase of PDCA. I asked this question to some master blackbelts at GE a year or so ago and their answers were enlightening. Most did not have an answer. The one that did said that his group added another step after the Control phase to essentially add an Act step…in other words something like a DMAIC-A.

The other thing that I caution people on is that PDCA cycles are frequently nested. You do a mini PDCA cycle for the “Do” step for example. I don’t know of DMAIC supports this kind of nuance? But the more important thing is what do you do with the learning from the Check step?

In talking with folks who are already trained about PDCA I find that many have a poor grasp of the Plan and Act phases and all the implied details. For example the Plan phase should ideally include (but is not limited to) the following:

• First hand observation of the problem (Go to Genba)
• Quantify the extent of the problem
• If it is a process then draw a diagram of the process showing the problem(s)
• Setting a goal or target
• Root cause analysis
• Generating effective countermeasures
• Creating an implementation plan
• Creating a follow up plan for confirmation
• Discussing the above with related stakeholders

I can see where the DMAIC framework is fairly prescriptive of the key elements of the Plan phase and that has some utility. On the other hand the Act phase involves one of two directions depending upon the outcome of the Check step:
1) If you did not achieve the goal or target it means there was something about the problem or the current situation that you did not understand quite right. So you have to go back to the Plan step and repeat the cycle
2) If you DID achieve your goal or target it means that you have confirmed what you hypothesized is probably correct. In this case you want to share that learning by a) incorporating that learning into the daily work routines (e.g. standardized work, or Control from DMAIC) and b) communicating to others who might benefit from what you just learned.

“Act” is so important in PDCA because that is the step of the continuous improvement cycle that translates individual learning into organizational learning.  It’s what implies the learning! If you don’t do the Act step you’ve dampened the benefit from all that learning pretty significantly because it remains localized to one person or a small group.

Have you perhaps given this some thought: Come up with a practical problem solving method specifically for your company that addresses the best of PDCA and DMAIC for your unique context? It might be a way for you to address some of your colleagues concerns (to which I’m sympathetic actually), while keeping the critically important elements of PDCA that don’t seem to be emphasized in DMAIC?

Another thought: almost any reasonably thoughtful structured problem solving approach is going to be better than an unstructured approach. This has been pretty established in research. So getting something in place is far better than having nothing at all. Then apply continuous improvement to it as you gain experience using the method.

Good luck with your journey!

Regards,

Prof. Sobek