What is an A-3 Report?
REFLECTION: FOR STUDENTS: “Having no problems is the biggest problem of all.”- Taiichi Ohno
FOR ACADEMICS: “Data is of course important in manufacturing, but I place the greatest emphasis on facts.”- Taiichi Ohno
FOR PROFESSIONALS/PRACTITIONERS: “Make your workplace into showcase that can be understood by everyone at a glance.”- Taiichi Ohno
Foundation
The A3 Report is a model developed and used by Toyota and currently used by many businesses around the world. The A3 Report is named for a paper size-A3 (29.7 x 42.0cm, 11.69 x 16.53 inches). The entire current state and PDCA aspects of the project are captured visually for easy communication and reference. When CIP projects use an A3 methodology to track projects, it has been demonstrated that clear visual communication helps the team members and the overall organization be more aware of the team’s progress.
A minor improvement event, in my experience, is generally four weeks to six weeks. Still, when an issue needs to be addressed thoroughly, the organization must be willing to invest more time and resources. Almost every moment of improvement time spent may be wasted if the true root cause is not adequately addressed due to failure to properly invest resources. There are four distinct phases: 1) preparation and training; 2) process mapping and current state analysis; 3) process mapping and future state analysis; and 4) implementation and ownership. I will put up a basic template below and walk through the A3 report.
Example
- Clarify the Problem
- IS/IS Not Analysis-excellent first tool to use to define the scope of the problem.
- After the scope of the problem has been defined, define the problem relative to the organization or process. The focus should always be on an underlying process or systematic issue, not an individual failure. Systematic failures are frequent but can be corrected with teamwork. The problem statement should never include a suggestion for a solution.
- Breakdown the Problem
- Clearly define the problem in terms of the 5 Why’s and 2 W’s (Who?, What?, When?, Where?, Why? And How?, How much or often?
- Set goals for improvement towards the ideal state vs current state
- Team sets S.M.A.R.T. goals relevant to block 1 state, establishing the end improvement target
- Root Cause Analysis
- Team uses focus areas from block 2 to determine Root Cause(s) employing relevant RCA tools
- Common RCA tools
- Cause-Effect/Fishbone Diagram
- 5 Why Analysis
- Fault Tree Analysis
- Pareto Chart
- Clearly state the determined root cause(s) and display the output of the tools
- Develop Countermeasures
- The team should take the root cause/causes from Block 4 and assign specific countermeasures.
- Countermeasures should directly address the root cause and, in theory, should solve the problem identified in Block 1.
- The completed fifth block is populated with any tool that will outline the countermeasures.
- Implement Countermeasures
- The team tracks the countermeasures from Block 5 and ensures each one is accomplished.
- The completed sixth block should be populated with the tool used in Block 5 to outline the countermeasures and updated as each is accomplished.
- Monitor Results and Process
- Effectiveness Check of Countermeasures
- Before/After Analysis
- SPC Control Charts
- Use Data from block 1 to determine if countermeasures from block 5 are having the desired effect relative to the target.
- If countermeasures are not effective, go back to RCA-block 4 (PDCA) and reconvene.
- Use the tool from block 6 to track countermeasure as ineffective in Block 7
- Effectiveness Check of Countermeasures
- Standardize successful processes
- If countermeasures are effective-
- Standardize all successful processes and note successful countermeasures as Standardized as they are approved using the tool from block 6 in Block 7
- A separate block can be used for Standardized processes
- If countermeasures are effective-
Conclusion
A complete A3 report can use many different tools, depending upon the problem being examined, so don’t fall into the habit of always using the exact same format. Be certain all four phases are completed. Innovation comes from creativity, so leave behind SOPs that demand exact clones of past reports. You may be dealing with a problem no person in your organization has yet to encounter, so outside of the box is thinking should always be on the table (Not locked away in a closed mind)
Processing…
Success! You're on the list.
Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.
Try Amazon Prime 30-Day Free Trial
Bibliography
Quality Management Journal, Volume 16, 2009 – Issue 4
Published Online: 21 Nov 2017
Quality Progress Volume 49, 2009 – Issue 1
Jan 2016
Six Common Weaknesses With Teams
REFLECTION: FOR STUDENTS: “If two men on the same job agree all the time, then one is useless. If they disagree all the time, both are useless.” —Darryl F. Zanuck
FOR ACADEMICS: “If you have built castles in the air, your work need not be lost; that is where they should be. Now put the foundations under them.” —Henry David Thoreau
FOR PROFESSIONALS/PRACTITIONERS: “Don’t be afraid to give up the good to go for the great.” —John D. Rockefeller
Foundation
Teams and teamwork are much more a part of Quality and general business culture than a generation ago. The lone wolf “I’ve got this” type is almost extinct- but they are still highly useful due to being productive and often individually creative. I will not make this discussion about individual vs. team performance. The focus of this post will be to highlight some of the common failings in team dynamics (internal and external forces included), to help raise awareness. Too often, a team has become a “magic wand” used to fix a problem, and the team leader may have to drag a lot of that weight if the team does not properly understand how each moving part has to function for full success. When each part of the team has full accountability, the members are much more invested, and the team overall improved.
Team Weaknesses
- Team goals can become misaligned with the goals of the organization
- When teams and/or their decisions are not accepted and supported by management, the efforts of the team are wasted
- Time is needed to build and maintain high-performance teams
- Decision making is typically slower using a team because of the time it takes to make a decision by consensus
- Teams can also create negative synergy, where time is wasted simply because of the effort it takes to work with other people, or because teams get distracted with off-task activities, including social interactions
- Teams can be impacted by “group think”, in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the team results in lack of diversity of thought, shutting down of alternative points of view, and dysfunctional decision making
(WestFall, 2016)
Discussion
The first weakness (more often known as lack of strategic alignment) can make the team feel like they are accomplishing something, only to be informed mid-project or post-project that the overarching organization has a different goal. I would not count that so much as a team weakness, but more as a common communication failure between Management and teams.
Lack of Top Management support is a severe moral dampener to any team. Even if a team is successful despite lack of support, Implementation may not occur when Management offers no support.
Time is money, and because it takes time to build a good team, it drains financial resources. The time required to be dedicated to maintaining teams often pulls focus from day-to-day activities. Tasks required by Teams for special operations should never overwhelm the day to day work of standard operations.
Team Decision Making- Most teams have hit the wall of being unable to reach a consensus. This natural weakness can be overcome by using techniques like multivoting or Nominal Group Technique especially with a facilitator.
Negative Synergy is a common issue and can be well addressed with team self-discipline, a diligent and attentive facilitator, or a combination of both as required.
“Group Think” is one of the worst enemies of effective teams. No member of the team should fear to put forth a dissenting opinion. When a team is open to being questioned, the team is actively practicing critical thinking. One of the ways teams can avoid the phenomenon of “Group Think” is by creating ground rules that require objective data to be presented to make a decision. I would caution, though, that statistics can be twisted to look pleasing to your personal view, so each team member should be just as responsible for confirming the stats on their own after a presentation.
Conclusion
Potential team weaknesses should be considered when evaluating Project Risks. The ability to mitigate those risks as a team will help the team be a more cohesive unit.
Processing…
Success! You're on the list.
Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.
Try Amazon Prime 30-Day Free Trial
Bibliography
WestFall, L. (2016). The Certified Software Quality Engineer Handbook 2nd Edition. Milwaukee, WI: ASQ Quality Press.
Leadership From the Viewpoint of Motivation
REFLECTION: FOR STUDENTS: “Nothing in the world can take the place of perseverance. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful people with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost legendary. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Perseverance and determination alone are omnipotent.”
Calvin Coolidge
FOR ACADEMICS: “Motivation is a fire from within. If someone else tries to light that fire under you, chances are it will burn very briefly.”
Stephen R. Covey
FOR PROFESSIONALS/PRACTITIONERS: “People rarely succeed unless they have fun in what they are doing.”
Dale Carnegie
Foundation
The best leaders understand two key things: The nature of Motivation and the nature and consequences of Self-Betrayal. First, a Leader must realize how one person cannot motivate another. The feeling of motivation is brought about by creating an environment where the person feels comfortable and motivated. There are two categories of motivation: Extrinsic and Intrinsic.
Extrinsic Motivation– The satisfaction gained from material or psychological needs applied by others in the organization through incentive or reward.
Intrinsic Motivation- The qualities of work or of relationships, events, or situations that satisfy basic psychological needs (achievement, power, affiliation, autonomy, responsibility, creativity, and self-actualization) in a self-rewarding process. (Russell T. Westcott, 2014)
The concept of Self-Betrayal is a bit more abstract but inherent in all human beings. An act of Self-Betrayal is an act contrary to what you feel you should do for another person (or even for the organization). (The Arbinger Institute, 2010)
What a Leader Needs to Know about Self-Betrayal
The best way to categorize the behaviors and attitudes that lead to acts of Self-Betrayal is In the Box and Out of the Box. Out of the Box means you see yourself and others more or less as we are- as People or Entities. When you are In the Box, you see yourself and others in a systematically distorted way-Others are mere objects. Existing in the Box can create barriers to effectiveness in change, coping, communicating, implementing new skills, or even changing your behavior.
What Follows Acts of Self Betrayal
- You begin to see the world in a way that justifies the self-betrayal
- Self-Justification (without objective evidence) leads to a distorted view of reality
- You enter The Box
- Over time, individual boxes become characteristics of you, and you carry them with you
- By being in the Box, you provoke others to enter their Box
Getting out of your Box as a leader is essential to leading others out of their Boxes. Being in the Box is not a passive act. Being in the Box is actively resisting what your humanity is calling you to do. While in the Box, you are assigning blame to people rather than trying to help improve. The blame game serves no useful purpose.
Once you stop resisting your natural tendencies and honor your original commitment to do what is best for the person beside you or what is best for the company, most of the barriers will evaporate. (The Arbinger Institute, 2010)
Conclusion
A good leader cannot push “followers”. The very term follower precludes the concept of pushing, so others must be motivated from within, either Intrinsically (just from the internal reward) or driven from within by the feeling that comes with an external incentive or reward (Extrinsically). Culture and the interconnectedness of the organization are essential. Remove yourself from the Box and connect with all others on a human level, or you as a leader will become just an object to your followers, and your followers will begin to seem distorted objects as well. If the entire culture is built upon a distorted reality, nobody will see the organization as a living entity worthy of serving. The organization will morph into an object to be used and abused. Lead your employees and your organization out of the Box, and lead towards a culture that is value-added for all stakeholders.
Processing…
Success! You're on the list.
Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.
Try Amazon Prime 30-Day Free Trial
Bibliography
Russell T. Westcott. (2014). The Certified Manager of Quality/Organizational Excellence. Milwaukee, WI: ASQ Quality Press.
The Arbinger Institute. (2010). Leadership and Self-Deception. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
10 Common Team Process Problems-And Their Solutions
REFLECTION: FOR STUDENTS: “Alone we can do so little; together we can do so much.” – Helen Keller
FOR ACADEMICS: “If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.” – Isaac Newton
FOR PROFESSIONALS/PRACTITIONERS: “No one can whistle a symphony. It takes a whole orchestra to play it.” – H.E. Luccock
Foundation
Issues with successful Teambuilding and team project execution about in the Quality and Management world, so I will give a quick overview of 10 of the most common team process problems, as well as potential solutions to those problems. Good Team Dynamics has a direct correlation with Team productivity and success, so take problem-solving down to the team dynamics level if you want your teams to thrive.
The ten problems I will discuss-
- Floundering (Failure to Launch or Close)
- Team members using title or authority to influence the team process flow (stealing empowerment)
- Team members who talk too much (making other viewpoints hard to voice)
- Team members who don’t participate enough (leaving potentially valuable input in their heads)
- Blind acceptance of opinions as facts, or team members making opinions sound like facts.
- Rushing to a solution or conclusion before a team has conducted the full problem-solving process
- Damaging Team Dynamics by attempting to explain other members’ motives
- Team members ignoring or ridiculing one another’s values statements made
- Team constantly drifts off the main Agenda and spends too much time on unfocused conversation.
- Conflict involving personal matters
Solving any of these issues begins with three critical items. First, the team must have a clear written Charter to avoid any disagreement about the actual problem, scope, objectives, and timeline currently on the table. Second, the first meeting should establish meeting ground rules for conduct that can be updated as a group as required. Third, it is best to include a member of the team who’s role is Facilitator. The Facilitator’s purpose is not to become involved in the content of the meeting, but to act to help the team avoid slow progress (or roadblocks) during difficult situations and act as a catalyst for the team while evaluating the team objectives and progress. (Russell T. Westcott, 2014)
The Solutions-
The solutions below are not the only solutions or necessarily the best, just examples of overcoming a problem.
- Floundering- The Team Leader or Facilitator should use the Charter to redirect the team to the recorded objectives.
- Team Member(s) Using Organizational Influence to Influence Team Process- Talk to the member or members attempting to use their power to influence the team off-line. Be certain to clarify the impact of their organizational role and how it may affect the team. Highlight the need for consensus, not agreement out of fear team members might feel repercussions for offering dissenting opinions. Ask for cooperation and patience.
- Team Members talk too much- Practice a form of Gatekeeping that structures the meetings in a way that requires the entire team to write down their opinion on a topic of discussion. Then the individual views are discussed as a group one opinion at a time. The “talking stick” technique works well also.
- Team Member reluctant to participate- Once again, a form of Gatekeeping is a good solution when members will not speak up. Lack of input from shyness or intimidation can deprive the team of useful information, so asking each member of the team to speak on the issue will encourage conversation. Direct assignments with the need to report on actions and progress with help foster involvement as well.
- Blind acceptance of opinions as facts- The best solution to this is to respectfully challenge a view being presented as fact by asking for the supporting data.
- Rushing- Remind your Team of the cost (in terms of dollars and lost time) of jumping to the wrong conclusions. Dollars and time carry a lot of weight in decision making.
- Attempting to explain other members’ motives- Avoid pointing fingers; turn to the person who has had their motives explained, and ask, “would you please clarify that for the team” so that motives do not become accusations. If it becomes a consistent issue, take the offender off-line and ask them to stick to the problems and objective evidence. Adding a Conduct rule is possible if there are team dynamics issues (especially when your pool of team members is small).
- Ignoring or ridiculing one another’s values or statements made- Listening and understanding should be emphasized to the team. The Team Lead and Facilitator should support the Discounted person or persons. Remind everyone that some ideas seem crazy until they succeed.
- Digression/tangents- Remind members of the agenda and time estimates. This problem is where a Facilitator is most helpful. Always move the meeting back on track, reminding the Team of the current mission, objectives, and norms established.
- Conflict-Take real conflict off-line and Reinforce ground rules of conduct.
(Russell T. Westcott, 2014)
Conclusion
These problems within a Team should never be solved with generic solutions, and each team will have such a unique perspective that only your team can answer these problems for you. Still, it must be your team together that solves your internal team process problems, or the main issue your team is facing will continue to go unsolved or ineffectively solved.
Processing…
Success! You're on the list.
Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.
Try Amazon Prime 30-Day Free Trial
Bibliography
Russell T. Westcott. (2014). The Certified Manager of Quality/Organizational Excellence. Milwaukee, WI: ASQ Quality Press.
How Do You Define Good Leadership?
REFLECTION: FOR STUDENTS:
“The challenge of leadership is to be strong, but not rude; be kind, but not weak; be bold, but not bully; be thoughtful, but not lazy; be humble, but not timid; be proud, but not arrogant; have humor, but without folly.”
— Jim Rohn, entrepreneur and motivational speaker
FOR ACADEMICS:
“A leader is best when people barely know he exists…when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will all say: We did it ourselves.”
— Lao-Tzu, an ancient philosopher and founder of Taoism
FOR PROFESSIONALS/PRACTITIONERS:
“A true leader has the confidence to stand alone, the courage to make tough decisions, and the compassion to listen to the needs of others.”
— General Douglas MacArthur
Foundation
I have seen Leadership defined in many ways. One who inspires or influences is a Leader to some. Others see a person who sets an example worthy of following as a Leader. In the Quality world, Leadership is paramount. The Leadership of Quality teams, Major Projects, and Cross-Functional teams are usual functions as a QE or QM. Effective Leadership is a highly complex responsibility. Unfortunately, there is no simple recipe for executing Leadership. Because those you lead will be at varying levels of maturity, this can throw some leaders off. Those leaders who do not consider the maturity factor may not provide the needed guidance. A good leadership model is Hersey and Blanchard’s situational leadership model(Russell T. Westcott, 2014). This model focuses on three factors:
- 1.Task Behavior
- Level of work-related detail & guidance a leader must provide
- Extent to which direct action must be taken with the follower
- Relationship Behavior
- Extent of communication required with the follower
- Amount of coaching/support given a Follower
- Employee Maturity or Readiness
- The ability of follower to assume risk
- Willingness of follower to assume the task
- High Task, Low Relationship (Telling Mode). In this mode of Leadership, specific instructions are given, and close supervision of performance occurs. Using the Telling Mode would be typical for a new employee until the job skill has been developed
- High Task, High Relationship (Selling Mode) This style of Leadership involves an explanation of decisions and an opportunity to clarify and ask questions as the Follower needs. At this stage, the employee has learned the necessary skills but is learning the why of the how.
- High Relationship, Low Task (Participation Mode) The Leader acts as a coach, and ideas are shared and encouragement provided. The Participation stage is the stage just before the training wheels come off.
- Low Relationship, Low Task (Delegating Mode) The leader now shifts responsibility for decisions and implementation to the employee. Successful Delegation is the culmination of a Leader doing their job effectively
(Russell T. Westcott, 2014)
Conclusion
This Model is not a guarantee of success. It is merely a tool to help guide a leader down the right path, enabling a leader to use the most appropriate mode of leadership. One style cannot fit all situations, so a Leader must adapt to the employee and the situation. An outstanding leader will re-evaluate which mode to employe each time a leader interacts one on one. The truly engaged and aware leader needs to be aware of other potential factors, such as health issues, personal/life issues, conflicts caused by co-workers damaging team dynamics, and working conditions. Leading is teaching, but refusing to move beyond the Telling Mode is only “Managing,” not Leading, and will drive good talent away over time.
Processing…
Success! You're on the list.
Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.
Try Amazon Prime 30-Day Free Trial
Bibliography
Russell T. Westcott. (2014). The Certified Manager of Quality/Organizational Excellence. Milwaukee, WI: ASQ Quality Press.
Quality Concepts Matter 