Understanding A3 Thinking
Download
Report
Transcript Understanding A3 Thinking
The A3 Process and A3 Thinking
The source for much of this is material is from:
“Understanding A3 Thinking”
Durward K. Sobek II and Art Smalley
CRC Press
What is an A3?
Problem Solving Tool
Developed by Toyota
– Supported PDCA
– Supported Total Quality program
– Top management preferred visual control over lengthy
text reports
A3 name derived from size of paper used (A3 is metric equivalent of
11 x 17 paper)
Problem Solving at Toyota
Ultimate Goal is a problem resolved
– So it is less likely to occur in the future
– Skill of the problem solver is increased so they can handle
more challenging problems in the future
* Process to solve problem is more critical that short term results
Why A3?
Allows collaborative in-depth problem solving
Drives towards Root Cause
Defines the issue through the “Eyes of the Customer”
Forces an understanding of the Current Condition before
jumping to solutions
Provides a consistent approach to Problem Solving
It is easy to learn and remember
A3 and Lean
Direct tie in and support of:
– Value Stream Mapping
– Kaizen Philosophy
– Fast Response
A3 Involves
Actual Observations
Collection of Facts and Data
Interviews
Analysis
Good Problem Solving Skills
It is also recommended that a coach/adviser assist with dialog,
critique, feedback, and development.
A3 versus A3 Thinking
A3 is a problem solving tool
– Used without A3 thinking it is just another tool,
that will get the same results as PDCA, or any
other tool
A3 Thinking is the process of logically working
through a problem in a systematic and
standard method
- The A3 form serves as the roadmap to guide the thinking
The 7 Elements of A3 Thinking
Logical Thinking Process
Objectivity
Results and Process
Synthesis, Visualization, Distillation
Alignment
Coherency within and Consistency across
Systems Viewpoint
The 7 Elements of A3 Thinking
Logical Thinking Process
– A3 thinking promotes Scientific Method of investigation
– Importance is placed on factually discerning the
difference between Cause and Effect
– Takes into account
• Numerous potential avenues
• Effects of implementation
• Possible stumbling blocks
• Contingencies
The 7 Elements of A3 Thinking
Objectivity
– Quantitative facts are used to verify understanding
– Facts and Details are framed as objectively as possible
– Courses of action promote organizational good vs.
personal agendas
The 7 Elements of A3 Thinking
Results and Process
– A3 Thinking is a Process that drives Results
• Results without process lead to little long term value
• Process without results fails to move the organization
forward
– A3 Thinking By You
• Allows you to know how well a person understands
the problem
• Understand how a solution fits into the larger picture
The 7 Elements of A3 Thinking
Synthesis, Visualization, and Distillation
– Brevity of reports forces synthesis of information to only
the most vital points
– A3 thinking encourages information through graphical
representation to communicate the message clearly and
efficiently
– Graphical information, clearly and concisely stated,
distills thinking to critical facts
The 7 Elements of A3 Thinking
Alignment
– Inclusion of the problem, the analysis, the actions, and
the follow-up plan gives all team members something
concrete to agree or disagree with
– A3 structure provides a vehicle for communication
• Horizontally – those affected by change
• Vertically – the hierarchy of the organization
• Back and Forth in Time – a record of past remedies
and recommendations to consider for the future
The 7 Elements of A3 Thinking
Coherency Within, Consistency Across
– A3 report structure establishes a logical flow that
promotes coherency in the approach and thinking
– Flow of the A3 promotes consistency across the
organization, that speeds up communication and
understanding
The 7 Elements of A3 Thinking
Systems Viewpoint
– A3 format demonstrates that the problem solver
• Has a purpose for the actions proposed
• Actions proposed further the organization’s goal,
needs, and priorities
• Understands how the actions proposed affect other
parts of the organization
Select A Problem
Objectively describes the PROBLEM
Is described in action
– Reduce
– Eliminate
– Improve
*Should not contain a solution
Grasp the Current Situation
Background to the Problem
Written for a target audience
– What is their background?
– What is their informational need?
Tied to a company (business) goal
Is Clear and Visual
– Use historical data and dates
– Help the audience understand the problem
Grasp The Current Situation
The Current State
Before a problem can be properly addressed, one must have a
firm grasp of the current situation. To do this, Toyota
suggests that problem-solvers:
Observe the work processes first hand, and document one’s
observations. (Go to GEMBA)
Quantify the magnitude of the problem (e.g., % of customer
deliveries that are late, # of stock outs in a month, # of errors
reported per quarter, % of work time that is value-added); if
possible, represent the data graphically
Create a diagram that shows how the work is currently done.
Any number of formal process charting or mapping tools can
be used, but often simple stick figures and arrows will do the
trick.
Target
How will we know the project is successful?
What will be the standard for comparison?
Make the goal measurable
Consider how to collect the data to validate effectiveness
5 Why’s Analysis (Root Cause)
Root Cause Analysis
Failure to address the root seed of the problem, most likely
means it will reoccur
– 5 Whys technique used by TOYOTA to dig to root cause
– Structured tests and experiments when 5 Whys do not
deduce root cause
Key Questions:
– Are the work activities specified in terms of content,
timing, sequence, and outcome?
– Are the connections between entities clear, direct and
immediately comprehensible?
– Are the pathways along which goods and services travel
simple, direct, uninterrupted, and value add?
*Almost all failing systems violate one of these
Devising Countermeasures
Countermeasures
Once root cause is identified then brainstorming changes to
the system (countermeasures) to address the root cause
begins
– Countermeasures should be designed to prevent a
reoccurrence of the root cause
– Emphasis on Why the problem occurred not just fixing
the problem
– Multiple countermeasures are encouraged to help insure
a systems viewpoint
*Like the Current State the Future State should also be
expressed graphically
Creating an Implementation Plan
Should include the 4W’s and 1 H
– Who is responsible for the countermeasure
– What is the cause of the problem
– When it will be implemented
– Why this countermeasure is being implemented
– How will this be implemented
* Also includes the expected outcome of each task
Effect Confirmation
Effect Confirmation
Graphical representations of the effects of the Implementation
Plan
– Use the same standard as in the Goal section
– Try to verify the effectiveness of each countermeasure
– Plan in advance the data collection strategy
– Identify who will collect the data and how often it will be
collected
Follow-up Actions
Follow-up Actions
What have we learned?
What additional changes are needed from our learning?
Can other areas within our department/plant benefit from our
changes?
Can other areas of the company benefit from our changes?
Do our changes need documented?
Do our standards need changed?
Creating a Follow Up Plan
Follow-up Actions
Important to verify the actual results against the predicted
results
– Was the implementation plan effective?
– Did you learn enough about the problem to devise
countermeasures that actually worked?
– Demonstrates that the organization is paying attention to
problems
Obtaining Approval
Not done as a bureaucratic step
Is an opportunity to mentor
– Was their rigor in the development of the A3?
– Did the problem solver visit Gemba?
– Does the root cause make sense?
– Do the countermeasures address the root cause?
– Is the implementation plan realistic?
– Is the follow up plan (metrics) substantive?
Example A3’s
A3 Examples
Example A3’s
A3 Examples
Example A3’s
A3 Examples