Coaching Step 1 When You Can’t Go and See
Series Context
This article concludes a four-part series on Step 1: Clarify the Background, the foundation of effective problem-solving.
In the previous three articles, we explored:
- Why Background Clarity Matters – how skipping context wastes time and derails meetings.
- Tools and Methods – when to use rapid 5W1H versus the structured five-substep approach.
- What Good Evidence Looks Like – how to raise the resolution of understanding through genchi, genbutsu, and direct observation.
Now, in this fourth and final article, we turn to the coaching dimension of Step 1 — how to help teams build shared understanding when they can’t go to gemba.
The challenge: how do you coach clarity when the team is distant from the actual place and objects of the problem?
When Distance Creates a Problem
Back when I was stationed at Toyota’s Kamigo Engine Plant, problems would occasionally surface at the Georgetown, Kentucky facility. We were expected to support and understand what was happening there.
The ideal solution? Go and see. Walk the floor together. Point at the actual equipment. Touch the parts. See the problem with your own eyes.
The reality? I couldn’t get on a plane every time Georgetown had an issue. Time, distance, and cost made that impossible.
So we adapted. We got very good at sketching problems and faxing them. We took photographs. We used machine and product drawings, marking them with pencil to show exactly where the problem was occurring.
When Georgetown once reported a hydraulic leak on one of their lathes, I couldn’t see their exact machine. But I could walk out to our floor in Kamigo and study a similar lathe. I could trace the hydraulic circuit with my own eyes, feel where the oil lines ran, and understand how pressure was controlled.
Looking at our machine didn’t tell me what was wrong with theirs, but it changed the quality of my questions.
I could now ask:
- “Is the leak near the pump or the return line?”
- “Is it before or after the pressure-control valve?”
- “Is the piping steel or flexible hose?”
By grounding myself in something tangible, I eliminated entire lines of speculation and focused only on what mattered. That clarity made remote problem-solving specific and useful.
Even when you can’t go to their gemba, you can still bring yours to the conversation.
That mindset—making the situation tangible through sight, touch, and physical understanding—is the essence of coaching Step 1 from a distance.
Why Gemba Still Matters
Gemba means the actual place. In problem-solving, it’s where the work happens and where reality exists instead of abstraction.
But here’s the key: going to gemba doesn’t solve the problem—it simply puts you in the right place to see reality.
Once there, two more principles matter:
- Genchi – the specific location within the gemba
- Genbutsu – the actual object involved in the problem
A coach’s role is to help teams stay anchored to those two “gens,” even when they can’t physically visit the site.
People often say, “Go to gemba,” as if it’s magic. But walking the floor without knowing what or where to observe isn’t useful. You can walk right past the evidence if you haven’t clarified genchi and genbutsu.
When the team can’t go, the coach helps them recreate that seeing and touching experience — through photos, videos, physical samples, or comparisons to similar processes.
The goal isn’t to have a “meeting-room gemba.” It’s to maintain the spirit of genchi genbutsu when logistics, safety, or distance get in the way.
The Coach’s Dilemma: When You Can’t Go
Modern work often prevents direct observation. Teams are global. Meetings happen virtually. Equipment may be in a restricted area or another country.
The coach’s task is to prevent that separation from turning into abstraction.
Here’s how effective coaches adapt:
-
Ask for tangible evidence
“What can we see or show from the actual site?”
Encourage photos, short videos, marked-up prints, or real components. -
Coach specificity, not generality
“Where exactly did this occur?” is better than “Which area?”
“This bearing” is better than “the bearing.” -
Model curiosity
When the team offers a description, respond with:
“Can you show me?” or “Can we visualize that somehow?” -
Emphasize showing over telling
Reality must be visible, not just narrated.
The human brain understands through sight and touch far better than through words alone.
By helping teams bring evidence into the room, you’re protecting the quality of understanding that real gemba visits create.
What to Bring
When coaching teams who can’t go and see, help them ask: What can we bring from gemba to the room?
Here are effective options:
- Actual parts or samples – Let people hold or compare good vs. defective parts.
- Photographs and video – Capture the process and variation. A short video can show what pages of text cannot.
- Technical drawings with annotations – Circle the problem area, mark dimensions, show tolerances.
- Data and measurements – Charts, trends, and control plans that quantify the gap.
- People from gemba – Bring frontline voices to describe what they see and experience.
- Comparisons to similar equipment or processes – Use analogy when direct observation isn’t possible.
Your job as coach isn’t to produce a slick presentation—it’s to bring reality into view.
The more senses you engage, the higher the understanding.
The Language of Understanding
Listen carefully to people’s language when they finally grasp a situation:
“Oh, I see now.”
“Now I get it.”
“I didn’t see that before.”
Visual language signals comprehension. “I see” means “I understand.”
When someone says, “I don’t see it,” that’s your coaching cue.
It’s time to show something—photo, sketch, video, or data—until they do see it.
Good coaches know that understanding is fundamentally visual.
The Modern Reality
We have better tools than faxes and sketches now—phones, video conferencing, digital twins—but the principle hasn’t changed.
Start simple:
- Take good photos.
- Capture short, clear videos.
- Mark up images.
- Bring physical samples when possible.
Sophisticated tools are useful only when the basics of seeing and showing are in place.
Technology can transmit images, but coaching transmits discipline—the habit of connecting words to actual evidence.
The Coaching Question
When a team says, “We can’t get everyone to gemba,” the coach asks:
“Then what can you bring from gemba to the room?”
Specifically:
- “What genchi and genbutsu can you show?”
- “What tangible evidence will help others see what you’ve seen?”
That shift—from telling to showing—transforms how people think. It anchors discussions in fact, not conjecture.
Why This Matters for Background Clarity
Background isn’t just about information; it’s about shared understanding.
A coach ensures that people don’t just hear the background—they see it.
You can fill in every 5W1H detail, but if participants can’t picture the situation, you haven’t achieved clarity.
Bringing gemba to the room bridges that gap. It gives people confidence that they truly grasp the situation, so the problem-solving that follows stands on solid ground.
The Simple Truth
In a perfect world, everyone would walk to gemba together.
In reality, schedules, safety, and distance often prevent it.
So we adapt:
- Sketch the specific location.
- Photograph the actual object.
- Record short video clips.
- Bring defective and good parts for comparison.
- Invite people who have seen the problem.
Coaching Step 1 in these circumstances means preserving the discipline of observation even when travel isn’t possible.
Ask:
“What specific location and actual object would help others see what I see?”
Then bring that into the discussion.
Your background clarity—and your coaching—will improve immediately.
Series Wrap-Up
This concludes our exploration of Step 1: Clarify the Background.
Across the four articles, we’ve examined why background clarity matters, how to build it, what good evidence looks like, and finally how to coach it when gemba isn’t accessible.
In the next phase, we’ll move to Step 2: Break Down the Problem, where high-resolution background work becomes the foundation for effective analysis.