A3 Thinking Workshop Guide

www.leanuk.org
John Kiff
5th November 2013
“Managing to Learn”
A3 Thinking Workshop
Lean Enterprise Academy1

www.leanuk.org
Objectives
 To explore the lessons and insights of
Managing to Learn from 4 perspectives by:
 Following the stages of learning as illustrated in
Managing To Learn
 Examining how the A3 changes with each revision
to develop you to recognize effective A3 stories
 Showing you how to create the Title, Background,
Current Situation, Goal, Analysis and
Recommendations sections of an A3
 Showing you various forms
and uses of the A3 format

www.leanuk.org
Agenda
 What is an A3?
 Working through Porter’s A3
 Reading, reviewing and responding to A3s
 Applying A3 Thinking to your own work
 Problem Solving
 Draft Problem Situation
 Present / Review
 Revise
 Extend to Analysis and Countermeasures…
 Discuss the use of the A3 Process also for:
 Proposals
 Status Reports

www.leanuk.orgLean Enterprise Academy4
Day 1 Agenda Timetable Approach
08.30 – 09.00
09.00 – 09.30 Introduction, Agenda, Expectations Expectations exchange
09.30 – 10.00 What is an A3? Presentation & Discussion
10.00 – 10.30 Working through Porter’s A3 Reading & Discussion
10.30 – 10.45 Break
10.45 – 11.30 Working through Porter’s A3 (continued) Reading & Discussion
11.30 – 12.00
12.00 – 12.30
12.30 – 13.00 Lunch
13.00 – 13.30 Read, review & respond to A3s Presentation & Discussion
13.30 – 14.00 Applying A3 Thinking to your own work Presentations & Exercises
14.00 – 14.30
14.30 – 15.00
15.00 – 15.30 Break
15.30 – 16.00 Applying A3 Thinking to your own work (cont’d) Presentations & Exercises
16.00 – 16.30
16.30 – 17.00
17.00 – 17.30 Reflection Discussion
17.30 – 18.00

www.leanuk.org
Managing Expectations
 This workshop will address the objectives…
 But it won’t make you an expert
in A3 Thinking
 Only practice will…!

www.leanuk.org
Expectations
This workshop will have
been a success & made
good use of my time if…

www.leanuk.org
Agenda
 What is an A3?
 Problem Solving
 Revise
 Proposals
 Status Reports

www.leanuk.org
Initial Discussion
 What makes a “good A3” good?
 What is good use of an A3?
 What benefits to an organization do you
see in the A3 process?
8 Lean Enterprise Academy

www.leanuk.org
Background
 Problem solving deeply influenced by the methodology
developed by Walter Shewhart
at Bell Laboratories in the 1930’s
 Later adopted and
made popular by
W. Edwards Deming
 Methodology based on
Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA)
– The Deming Cycle
– 8-Step problem solving process
Key texts: John Shook (2008) “Managing to Learn”
Durward Sobek II & Art Smalley (2008): “Understanding A3 Thinking”

Plan Do, Check, Act

www.leanuk.org
The A3 Thinking Steps
 What is the problem?
 Who owns the problem?
 What is the root cause of the problem?
 What are some possible countermeasures?
 How will you choose which countermeasure to propose?
 How will you get agreement among everyone concerned?
 What is your implementation plan? What timetable?
 How will you know if your countermeasure works?
 What follow-up issues can you anticipate?
 How will ensure learning and continuous improvement?

www.leanuk.org
Lean Managers do two things
 Get each person to take initiative to:
- solve problems and
- improve his or her job
 Ensure that each persons’ job is aligned to:
- provide value for the customer and
- prosperity for the company
Ref: John Shook: Leadership for Value Stream Management
Get the work done
AND
develop your people
at the SAME time

www.leanuk.org
Lean Managers do two things
 Get each person to take initiative to:
- solve problems and
- improve his or her job
 Ensure that each persons’ job is aligned to:
- provide value for the customer and
- prosperity for the company
 A3 process designed to make it easy:
 To see problems
 To improve
 To learn from
Ref: John Shook: Leadership for Value Stream Management
Get the work done
AND
develop your people
at the SAME time

www.leanuk.org
How do you want to manage?
 Do you want to manage…..
 With a process or structure that
makes it easier to:
 Gain agreement (alignment?)
 Clarify responsibilities (ownership?)
 Mentor people on the job
(ask questions & develop people?)

www.leanuk.org
Problem Solving
 In order to learn by doing we will practice on
real problems
 Let’s start by reading about a production
problem that a certain Supervisor had to
solve…

www.leanuk.org
Solving Problems
Date: _____Dept. ________________Name _______________________
What is the problem?
List of possible causes List of possible countermeasures
Exactly what should be done about it? When by? Who do you need to help?

www.leanuk.org
Smith’s Problem Handout
Brown, the drill press operator in Department A was working at his job,
drilling the #1 hole in angle plates. He had cut his finger while moving tote
pans of material to the work area.
The standard specifications for the job called for gauging one piece in twenty
for size. Brown did this and although the pain from his finger was diverting
his attention all that he gauged seemed to be good.
He therefore had no indication that the drill was dull nor that the machine
wasn’t running at the correct speed. It was just as the set-up man had left it.
By mid-morning he had completed five tote pans for a total of 100 pieces.
Smith the Supervisor suddenly called Brown to his desk and reprimanded him
for carelessness in his work.
Brown was angry and felt discouraged. He told the supervisor he was going
home at noon.
Smith the Supervisor was worried because Department B needed the work
now or they would stop production. The Inspector had told him that a great
many of the angle plates were off specifications

www.leanuk.org
Agenda
 What is an A3?
 Problem Solving
 Revise
 Proposals
 Status Reports

www.leanuk.org
Porter’s A3#1
 In pairs, please read the text describing the
background to Porter’s Problem
 Pages 14-18 left hand column only
 Using A3#1 (pages 22-23) discuss:
1. What is Porter claiming in his A3?
2. What does he (and what do you) actually know?
3. Would you agree to sign this A3 if you were Porter’s manager?
4. What is Porter ASSUMING?
5. What is Porter not grasping about the situation?
6. What does Porter need to do next?

I. Background
New domestic plant expansion has massive technical
requirements that must be translated from Japanese to
English. The size and complexity of the project are creating
errors and delays
A3#1 Create Robust Process for Translating Documents
II. Current Conditions
Cost overruns, delays, and errors due to:
• Sheer volume of documents
• Multiple and varied vendors (pricing, quality, ease)
• Involvement of various departments and working styles
III. Goals/Targets
• Simplify and standardise the process
• Reduce costs by 10%
IV. Analysis
• Challenge of translating from Japanese to English
• Multiple varied vendors create a complex, nonstandard
process
• Overall improvement can be defined by reduction in cost
overruns
VI. Plan
Evaluate current vendor
Identify new vendor candidates
Develop bid package, distribute, and choose winning bid
VII. Followup
Monitor cost to proposal
Review performance at end of one-year contract
Put contract up for bid again if performance goals are not
met
V. Proposed Countermeasures
Simplify and improve process performance by choosing one
vendor based on competitive bid process
DP
6/1/08

Is this the issue?
“Massive”?
How big or
important is
this problem?
How much?
How long?
How many?
??????
Why 10%?
What do
‘challenge’
and ‘
complex’
mean?
What
problem and
what cause?
What does the
number of
vendors have to
do with the
problem?
How can we
know that any
of this will
work when we
do not even
know the
problem or
the root
cause?

www.leanuk.org
Questioning Mind
22
Lean is not acting on assumptions
or jumping to conclusions.
Lean Enterprise Academy
What we actually know?
(About the problem)
How to confirm it?
(How do we know it?)
What do we need to know? How can we learn it?

www.leanuk.org
Go See…and Listen
23
“Data is of course important, but
I place greater emphasis on facts.”
-Taiichi Ohno
And where do you find the FACTS of a situation?
At the Gemba –
the place where the problem is actually happening.
Not in a conference room or at a desk.
Grasp the actual condition, firsthand

www.leanuk.org
The Problem with
Problem Solving
 Our Natural Human Tendency?
Perception
of a
Problem
The
SOLUTION
Facts
Black
Hole
FactsImpressions &
Assumptions
Theory

www.leanuk.org
How we can solve problems
more effectively?
 Ask questions to help ourselves to see:
 What is actually happening?
 What do I actually know?
The Real or
Main
Problem
A SOLUTION
Impressions &
Assumptions
Theory
Facts
Facts
Facts
Facts
Facts
Facts
Facts

www.leanuk.org
Oh! Gettin’ away from the Gemba!
 About what actually happened and what
it means
 Conclusions about the nature of
situations and events and what “really”
occurred
 Recognition of patterns, trends, types
and familiar elements in situations and
events
 What is directly seen, heard, sensed, felt
and perceived
from the actual conditions of a situation
or event
What We Tend to Report
 Assumptions:
 Interpretation:
 Impression:
 Experience:

www.leanuk.org
Oh! Gettin’ away from the Gemba!
 “I guess I shouldn’t rely on Ben to do
the team’s safety and quality reports
by himself.”
 “Ben doesn’t pay attention to standards
and details the way he should.”
 “It sounds like he’s not checking the
torque on his wrench often enough.”
 “Inspection says they caught 4 bolts
that Ben didn’t tighten enough this
morning.”
 Assumptions:
 Interpretation:
 Impression:
 Experience:

www.leanuk.org
Porter’s A3#2
 Pages 28-33 left hand column only
 Using A3#2 (page 34) discuss:
1. How is Porter’s 2nd A3 better problem solving than his 1st attempt
2. What did Porter learn and how did he learn it?
3. What pitfalls in problem solving thinking does Porter avoid this time?
4. What does he still need to work on to have a better grasp of the
problem situation and his responsibility?

I. Background
Acme plant to double capacity!
Much document translation required!
• Poor English translations of Japanese documents caused many problems at
original plant start up
• Expansion plans call for aggressive launch timeline and cost reduction
A3#2 Deliver Perfect Translations
IV. Analysis
VI. Plan
VII. Followup
V. Proposed Countermeasures
DP
6/3/08
Problems in document
translation at time of initial
plant launch:
Cost = High
Delivery = Highly variable
Quality = Many errors!
Problems in
document translation
process have not been
corrected!
2
5
0
Document translation problems could impede plant launch!
5
0
0
Document
translations
tsunami
Current Expansion
Now Begin translation Launch
12 months 6 months
Translators
Engineering
Job
instructions
Office
documents
Technical
engineering
document
Gen
Documents by
department
Documents by
type
How high?
How variable?
How many errors?
Is this the right title?
Don’t get
ahead of
yourselves
Engineering
HR,
other
IT

www.leanuk.org
What is a Problem?
 A “problem” is… the gap between the way things
are now & the way they’re supposed to be, or you
want them to be, in the future
 A manager has a problem when the work assigned
fails to produce the expected results
(Ref: TWI Training Materials)

www.leanuk.org
“A problem clearly defined
is a problem half-solved”
 What do we mean by “clearly defined”?
 Gap between:
- what is actually happening (current condition)
and:
- what should/needs to be happening…
…described in performance terms.
 Gap broken down to concrete, observable
conditions (smaller problems in the gap or in
the related work processes) that are
contributing to the gap & can be investigated
first hand

www.leanuk.org
What is the GAP?
How can you measure it?

www.leanuk.org
Breaking down Porter’s problem
 Why don’t the employees have
the translated documents when
they need them?
 The documents don’t get into the
system on time
 Why don’t the documents get into
the system on time?
 Because the translators take too
long to complete them
 Why do the translators take too
long to complete them?
 Because the translators work at
different paces
 Why do they work at different
paces?

www.leanuk.org
Caused
GAP
Created
GAP
A Gap: The two types of Gaps:

www.leanuk.org
Exactly what is and what is not the problem?
Clarify the Problem
35
35
Technical
Documents
Office
Documents
Job
Instruction
Documents
Departments Generating
Documents
Types of Documents

www.leanuk.org
Porter’s A3#3
 Pages 43-44, 49-50 and 52-57 left hand column only
 Using A3#3 (page 58-59) discuss:
1. What did Porter have to do to get all the information about the problem
situation that he has now?
2. What three tools did Porter use to grasp the problem situation?
3. What is Porter focusing on now as the REAL Problem(s)?
4. What has Porter learned?
5. What does he need to do Next?

A3#3 Support Launch Objectives with Accurate, Timely Document Translation
Next Steps
IV. Analysis
DP
6/6/08
I. Background
• Poor English translations of Japanese documents caused many problems at original
plant start up
III. Goals/Targets
Problems in document translation at time
of launch:
Cost = 10% over budget
Delivery = Over 50% late
Long, variable lead times
Quality = Much rework >50%
Many errors reach
customer
Overall = Constant expediting
Poor quality
Much rework
Overtime
Everyone unhappy
Problems in document translation
process have not been corrected!
2
5
0
5
0
0
Document
translations
tsunami
Current Expansion
12 months 6 months
Translators
Office
documents
Gen
Engineering
HR,
other Job
instructions
Office
documentsIT
Gen
Documents by
department
Documents by
type
Job
instructions
Office
documents
Technical
engineering
document
Quality - 0 defects at launch
- Rework less than 10%
Delivery - 100% on-time
Cost - 10 % decrease – Rework down; overtime down
What Who When
Confirm agreement of the analysis Porter Next week
Begin generation and evaluation Porter Next two weeks
of countermeasures
Volume Delivery
and LT
problems
Error
generation
100%
Job
inst’s
Tech
eng
docs
Office
docs
Current-state map
Lostintranslation
Lost
Translation
problems
In physical transit
In cyberspace
In in-basket
In out-basket
Random causes:
 No ability to track
 Unclear expectations
Large batches of work
Confusing formats
Random use of vocabulary
Written explanations of
complex operations
Unclear expectations,
lack of training
Selection
Training
No standard vocabulary
No or poor editing
Unclear expectations
Uneven and
unpredictable workloads
Poor original
Translator’s
skills
Wrong technical
vocabulary
Poorly written
or expressed
Translator can’t
understand original
Translator
understands
original but still
poor translation
Processcharacteristics
andweaknesses
Vendor
processes
Acme
internal
processes
Original
document
creation
Vendor’s document
processing variance
Translator’s different
expertise
No quality check
No timing check
Send to random
translators
Varying technical
expertise
Varying English
ability
Varying document
formatting ability
Varying skills
in writing
documents
Different
vocabulary for
same item
Varying language
used by different
shops and depts
No central oversight Each shop or department
handles independently
No monitor of
quality or timing
Poor process to
select vendors
No ability to
standardise
Huge variation
in process
Random sending to
random vendors
Have you shown
the problem
breakdown,
clearly?
Is the root cause
clear?

www.leanuk.org
Porter’s Problem Analysis Tree

www.leanuk.org
Porter’s Current State Map
“Cost overages come from rework,
expediting, and overtime – most
of which come from errors!”

www.leanuk.org
Porter’s Problem Analysis Tree

www.leanuk.org
Porter’s A3#4
 Pages 67-72 & 76-77 left hand column only
 Using A3#4 (page 84-85) discuss:
1. What has Porter done in the Analysis section of this A3?
2. What is he doing in the Countermeasures section?
3. How are the two sections related?
4. What has Porter learned?
5. What does he need to do next?

A3#4 Support Launch Objectives with Accurate, Timely Document Translation
Next Steps
DP
6/13/08
I. Background
• Poor English translations of Japanese documents caused many problems at original
plant start up
III. Goals/Targets
Problems in document translation at time
of launch:
Cost = 10% over budget
Delivery = Over 50% late
Long, variable lead times
Quality = Much rework >50%
Many errors reach
customer
Overall = Constant expediting
Poor quality
Much rework
Overtime
Everyone unhappy
Problems in document translation
process have not been corrected!
2
5
0
5
0
0
Document
translations
tsunami
Current Expansion
12 months 6 months
Translators
Office
documents
Gen
Engineering
HR,
other Job
instructions
Office
documentsIT
Gen
Documents by
department
Documents by
type
Job
instructions
Office
documents
Technical
engineering
document
Quality - 0 defects at launch
- Rework less than 10%
Delivery - 100% on-time
Cost - 10 % decrease – Rework down; overtime down
What Who When
Confirm agreement of countermeasure evaluations Porter Next two weeks
And target-state map
Begin consolidation of plan and overall timeline Porter Next three weeksVolume Delivery
and LT
problems
Error
generation
100%
Job
inst’s
Tech
eng
docs
Office
docs
Current-state map
IV. Analysis
Lostintranslation
Lost
Translation
problems
Large batches
Random causses:
Poor document creation skills
Many document formats
Random use of technical vocabulary
Written descriptions of complex
operations
Poor or wrongly skilled translator
No or poor editing
Large batches and uneven and
Target-state map
Cause Counter Description Eval. Benefit
-measure
A
B
Central
document-flow
Tracking
process
Overall process ownership established
V. Countermeasures
How much consensus does
the organisation have around
the countermeasure?
Who agrees/disagrees?
How did you
determine the
evaluations?
Is this do-able?
Is there any risk?
What is the incremental cost?
What is the expected ROI?

www.leanuk.org
Porter’s Problem Analysis Tree:
3 Root Cause Groupings
Lostintranslation
Lost
Translation
problems
Lost & never found 5%
Lost & found 40%
Just stuck 40%
Never lost 15%
Large batches
Random causes:
Incomprehensible
original documents
Incorrect or difficult to
understand translations
(even with clear originals)
Poor document creation skills
Many document formats
Random use of technical vocabulary
Written descriptions of complex
operations
Poor or wrongly skilled translator
No or poor editing
Large batches and uneven and
3 common issues:
1) Lost documents,
2) Translation problems due to problematic originals, and
3) Translation problems due to a poor translation process

www.leanuk.org
Two Levels of Cause
Direct Cause
 An occurrence or
condition that is
confirmed to be the
reason a specific
problem (effect) exists.
 It is a link in a
cause/effect chain that
can be pursued and
addressed at the root
cause.
Systemic Cause
 An aspect of the
“design” of the work
system that leads to a
category of problems or
a type of waste in the
output of the system.
 It can be addressed by
an improvement in the
design of the work flow.
44
44

www.leanuk.org45 Lean Enterprise Academy

www.leanuk.org
A
A
B
C
C
?
46
B

www.leanuk.org
Porter’s
Authorized A3:
47
Please read the A3
(pages 98-99)

www.leanuk.org
Agenda
 What is an A3?
 Problem Solving
 Revise
 Proposals
 Status Reports

www.leanuk.org
A3 Practice: Reading, Reviewing
and Responding to A3s
 Does it tell a story that makes sense?
 Can you “see” the facts of the situation?
 Are the links between problem, cause and
countermeasure clear?
 Does the story engage your thinking?

www.leanuk.org
A3/PDCA Thinking:
Underlying Expectations
 Proposals and plans must make sense to others, not
just the person(s) presenting them.
 “Make sense” means the need and appropriateness of
the action or plan must be clear based on the facts of
the actual situation.
 Making plans that make sense requires:
 Truly grasping the situation (the factors that influence it and the
broader business needs)
 Understanding the probable specific effects of actions on the
situation and system as a whole
 Facts link the proposal to the purpose and show why it
makes sense.

www.leanuk.org
Questions to check if
an A3 story makes sense
5. Where did you get the answers to the
questions below?
4. Why does he/she think the accomplishment is
important?
3. What does he/she want to accomplish?
2. Why did he/she pick those things to do?
1. What Action is the Author proposing to do?
52
START HERE!

www.leanuk.org
Listening in reverse
 Why is it important?
How do you know? What’s the gap?
Why? What will that accomplish?
Why? What will it change?
Do what?
53
To test the linkages

Current Situation
Root Cause Analysis
Countermeasures
Effect Confirmation
Follow-up Actions
Background
1. Corporate Goals 2006
 Increase global market share
 Improve quality & service
 Increase corporate profits
2. Manufacturing Goals 2006
 Improve reduce cost by 5%
 Reduce scrap 15%
 Improve productivity 7%
 Improve HSE index 10%
*Health, safety & environment
Not meeting goal for
2006
1
2
3
Overall
Scrap %
3.2
2.7 2.6
2004 2005 2006
(YTD)
2.3%
Goal
Current Situation
1
2
3
£K 700
200
86
2004 2005 2006
(YTD)
4
5
6
Scrap by Department
Breakdown of Machine Shop
Scrap Rates
Status*
460150232740
Scrap
£K
8.73.70.70.91.5Scrap %
Final
Grindi
ng
Rough
Grindi
ng
Drillin
g
Turnin
g
Millin
g
Process
*Legend 0–1% 1–2% 2+%
Goal  Reduce scrap in rough grind from 3.7% to less than 2% by
December 2006
 Reduce scrap in final grinding from 8.7% to less than
2% by December 2006
Undersized
Shaft defect
Contamination
Grinding wheel
Set up
Manual offsets
Dimensions
Hardness
Surface finish
MAN MACHINE
MATERIAL METHOD
Spindle
Clamp & locator
Grinding wheel
Grinding conditions
Coolant
concentration
Wheel
dressing
72% of grinding defects
Suspected Cause Action Item Responsible Date Finding
1. Dirt & contamination Daily 5S & PM tasks Tony (T/L) 2/11 Conducting daily. No issues.
2. Grinding wheel set up
check
Grinding wheel set up
check Tony (T/L) 4/11 Checked out O.K.
3. Manual offset function Check offset function Tony (T/L) 4/11 Checked out O.K.
4. Spindle bearing loose Check spindle bearing Ed (Maint) 5/11 Loose bearing cap. Tightened.
5. Clamp & locator damage Check camp & locator Ed (Maint) 5/11 Nothing abnormal.
6. Grinding wheel balance Check grinding wheel Tony (T/L) 5/11 Nothing abnormal.
7. Incoming part dimensions Measure part dimensions Janet (QC) 9/11 Within spec.
8. Poor material hardness Measure hardness Janet (QC) 9/11 Within spec.
9. Abnormal surface finish
spec. Check surface finish Janet (QC) 9/11 Within spec.
10 Grinding conditions
abnormal Check grinding conditions Mary (Eng) 13/1
1 Nothing abnormal.
11. Coolant concentration Measure concentration Joe (Maint) 13/1
1 Contaminated tanks. Replaced.
12. Wheel dressing check Check conditions Mary (Eng) 13/1
1 Nothing abnormal.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Dates of action items & results confirmation
Defect%
Finish grinder
Rough grinderSpindle bearing
tightened
Coolant replaced
Target level
YTD
Average
Pending29/11Tom Engineering Mgr.4. Discuss bearing issue with
OEM
In-process22/11Tom Engineering Mgr.3. Communicate findings to
similar plants
Complete15/11Ops & maintenance2. Establish bearing check PM
Complete15/11Ops & maintenance1. Establish coolant check PM
StatusDateResponsibilityInvestigation Item
Pending29/11Tom Engineering Mgr.4. Discuss bearing issue with
OEM
In-process22/11Tom Engineering Mgr.3. Communicate findings to
similar plants
Complete15/11Ops & maintenance2. Establish bearing check PM
Complete15/11Ops & maintenance1. Establish coolant check PM
StatusDateResponsibilityInvestigation Item
Theme: Reducing Scrap in the Machine Shop
To: Chuck O.
From: Art S.
Date: 10/12/06
Ref: Sobek & Smalley 2008 pp48-49

Title: Increasing IPUD* in New and Used Car Sales
Current Situation:
 Our dealer vs a basket of 16 UK Brand X dealers, 14 have BMs, All on same package (VB)
 Data includes commission from Finance, PPP & GAP but excludes Safeguard
 New & Used remuneration package: £50/unit - but NB no incentive to retain GP
Finance:10% commission on our earnings excl VB. GAP & Safeguard: £50 / unit over 5
 Preferred supplier: poor on Used albeit criteria eased July 09. Slow systems so use Black Horse
Owner: Brian Edwards Version No. 5 Date: 03/08/09
Background:
 New and Used sales under volume pressure
 Limited scope to increase metal profit (new) or margin (used).
 Purpose: To close Sales Dept profit gap by increasing IPUD* from financial products
Proposed Countermeasures:
Topic of Analysis Who + Support When by: Status @
03/08/09
Next Step
Understand process used by Tony vs others in team BE 12/06 Persistence, detail Evaluate more
Understand why team use Black Horse vs VM BE 12/06 Now paid on VB None
Understand Used Finance rate spread BE 15/06 Now paid on VB None
Develop pros & cons for Business Manager BE 30/08 In progress Ongoing
Follow Up Issues:
Checking routine – simple, quick and visual - HOW? – Phoning a sample of customers?
Effect Confirmation:
Graphs of plan vs actual – improvement in IPUD for 2009 using Our numbers not VM – need easy method of measuring
monthly or at least quarterly. Discuss with Steve about getting easily from Close It. Simonto propose Pinnacle method by
04/08/09
Analysis:
 Problem statement: IPUD is too low and needs urgent increase
Cause Deliverable
Counter-
measure
Description Target Who +
Support
When
by
Status @
03/08/09
Next
Step
A, B & C 1. Fully trained &
FSA regulated
team
Mentor F&I online training and qualification.
10 exams per person – needs a plan / cadence
(NB new starter allowed 2 weeks)
All sales
team
qualified
BE & SJH 31/08/09
DONE
Checks+1
2month
tests
A
(i) & (ii)
2. Increased GAP
penetration and
standard process
Develop std sales process (inc JI) for selling GAP
to incl. Close-It based deal presenter (nearly
ready) with assumptive inclusion of GAP. Routine
checking std. process by BE/IC.
Identification of training needs by salesperson
Standard in
place
Checking
process in
place
BE + IC &
SJH
31/08/09 Not started Develop
plan.
Date with
SJH
needed
A
(i) & (ii)
3. Increased GAP
penetration for
Katrina
Alex to share best practice with Katrina but
involve Tony when understand his ‘best practice’
Kat to 20% BE 31/09/09 Kat selling
GAP, Alex
S’guard
Monitor
progress
for both
A (i) 4. Increase GAP
penetration
Double documenting at handover – one without
GAP etc., one with, to show cost/month diff to
protect
100% of
relevant
docs
BE Put back
to
30/09/09
GMAC sys
teething
troubles
Spk SJH
re
payouts
A (i) 5. Increase GAP
penetration
‘Unprotected’ Stamped on each Finance
Document (or IDD for Black Horse) where not
taking GAP already
100% of
relevant
docs
BE 12/06/09
(Actual
14/07)
DONE
Ongoing
checking
B (i), (ii)
& (iii)
6. Improved rate
spread
Decide, set & communicate new HQ base rate
policy. Develop std. work JI for process & new
starters. Identify training esp.objectionhandling
Raise to
1.00%
BE + BF &
SJH
JIs by
30/09/09
31/12/09
Paying on
VB + New
rate 14/07
Check
expected
increase
C. 7. Increase Used
finance
penetration
Increase finance awareness on website so
customer can propose self on-line
finance@
hutchings.
BE 05/06/09
DONE
Ongoing
checking
C
(i) & (ii)
8. Increase Used
finance
penetration
Develop standard process and identify training
needs – esp. Alex & Gavin
Both to
30%
BE + IC 31/12/09 Begun,
ongoing
Check
progress
C (iii) 9. Each (New as
well as) Used
sales person
reaching target on
all financial
products
Different remuneration method – based on IPUD –
as per Sewards. Pay on VB ASAP to max. oppty.
to do bus with GMAC but must sell 100%
products to100% customers100% of time
Standard process VITAL
New
method.
All Used
sales team
> XX% pen
BE + BF &
SJH & IC
New
method
30/09/09
Target by
31/12
Not started Develop
plan &
new
method
C 10. Improved
S/guard revenue
(& IPUD) by Alex
& Lewis
Katrina to share best practice with Alex and
Lewis. Maybe involve Tony
Alex to15%
Lewis 15%
BE + IC 30/09/09 Alex now
selling
S’guard
Check
progress
for both
(*Income Per
Unit Delivered)
A. New car GAP too low: Causes: i)
Lack of standard process ii)
Training
B. New & Used Rate Spread too low:
Causes: i) No policy, ii) Lack of std
process iii) Training
C. Used Fin Pen too low: Causes: i) Lack of
std. process ii) Training inc negotiation
skills, iii) Remuneration
Our dealer Average Max
Target/Goal – and thus the gap to close is: £38,000:
IPUD (£/unit)
(inc VB, excl
Safeguard)
Current
VM view of
“a good job”
Our
Target
Gap to Close
(Target – Current)
Close By:
Rate of Climb / month
July to December:
New £167 £350 £280 £113 31/12/09 7%-10%-9%-10%-8%-5%
Used £112 £250 £230 £118 31/12/09 14%-19%-11%-10%-5%-9%
Circulation: John Bill Steve Simon Nick

www.leanuk.org
Agenda
 What is an A3?
 Problem Solving
 Revise
 Proposals
 Status Reports

www.leanuk.org
A3 Practice Exercise
As Author – Create Your A3
Draft the Problem Situation
portion of your A3:
Title, Background,
Current Condition, Goal

www.leanuk.org
Pick Up A Problem Worksheet
Try to focus on a specific observable or measurable problem rather than something that
is too big or complex to tackle directly.
What is the problem you want to address (high level description)?
Why do you think it is a problem?
How would you describe the problem (try to state in performance or output terms if possible)?
Why do you think this problem needs to be addressed now?

www.leanuk.org

How do you know?
What is the purpose? WHY? Background
What is problem or need? WHY? Current Conditions, Goal
What is the cause or constraint? WHY? Analysis
What is the plan? WHY? Countermeasures, Plan
What is the proof? WHY? Plan, Follow Up
Problem Solving
Thinking
61
A3 Creation

www.leanuk.org
Level of Problem Solving Focus
 Performance to Purpose:
 Not delivering to customer or contributing to business as expected
 Performance to Plan:
 Not executing as agreed or completing what is expected
 Process Performance:
 Work not flowing as designed or producing intended outputs or
outcomes
 Deviation from Procedure:
 Operation, task, work method not performed as specified or producing
as intended
 Deviation from Standard:
 Safety, Quality, Timing, Rate, Cost, Technical performance
specifications not met

Analysis
Countermeasures
Plan
Follow-up
Background
Goal
 Purpose: What is the business reason for choosing this
issue?
 Overall Situation: What is the strategic, operational,
historical or organizational context of the situation?
Theme: Review Questions For Problem Solving A3s
Ref: Developed from Sobek & Smalley 2008 pp 50 and David Verble
Current Situation
 What is the Problem or Need - the Gap in Performance?
 What is happening now versus what needs to be
happening or hat you want to be happening?
 What are the specific conditions that indicate you have
a problem or need, where and how much?
 Show the facts visually with charts, graphs, maps
 Is there a clear goal or target (gap?)
 What, specifically, is to be accomplished?
 How will this goal be measured or evaluated?
 What will improve, by how much, and when?
 What are the options for addressing the gaps &
improving performance in situation?
 How do they compare in effectiveness, feasibility &
potential impact?
 What are their relative costs and benefits?
 Which do you recommend and why?
 Show how your proposed actions will address the
causes of the gaps or constraints in the situation.
 What will be main actions & outcomes in the
implementation process & in what sequence?
 What support & resources will be required?
 Who will be responsible for what, when & how much?
 When will progress & impact be reviewed & by whom?
 Use a Gantt chart to display actions, steps, outcomes,
timelines & roles.
 How will you measure the effectiveness of the
countermeasures?
 Does the check item align with the previous goal
statement?
 When and how you will know if plans have been
followed & the actions have had the impact needed?
 What related issues or unintended consequences do
you anticipated & what are your contingencies?
 What processes will you use to enable, assure &
sustain success
 What do the specifics of the issues in related work
processes (location, patterns, trends, factors) indicate
about why the performance gap or need exists?
 What conditions or occurrences are preventing you from
achieving the goals?
 Use the simplest problem analysis tool that will suffice
to show cause-effect down to root cause. From 5 Whys,
to 7 QC tools (fish-bones, analysis trees, Pareto charts)
to sophisticated SPC or other tools as needed.
What are you talking about & why?
Where do things stand now?
What specific outcome is required?
Why does the problem or need exist?
What do you propose & why?
Specifically how will you implement? 4Ws1H
How will you assure ongoing PDCA?

www.leanuk.org
As Author – Present Your A3
In groups of 3:
Author/Presenter
Responder/Coach
Observer

www.leanuk.org
It Takes Two (or More) to A3…
A3 Review Roles
Each member at each table to rotate:
 A3 Author-Presenter
 The owner of the problem who takes initiative to understand
the situation dispassionately and lay out a proposal
 Designated Reviewer-Responders / Coach
 Anyone who receives questions, requests, is affected or
otherwise needs to know, or who must authorize the action
 Observer-Commentator
 To observe and comment on both the A3 presentation
and the coaching

www.leanuk.org
A3 Practice - Presenting
 A3 Practice – as Author-Presenter
 5 minute presentation, 5 minutes Q&A
 Walk through what’s on your A3
 Tell the story as you have it written
 Don’t skip over anything
 Add additional detail only if it need to full describe
the problem situation
 You need to get your story out…
 What do you need to emphasize?

www.leanuk.org
A3 Practice – Reviewing
Listening and Responding
 Protocol – “A3 Etiquette”:
 Seek first to understand by listening
 Let the presenter present, only stop him/her in if
there is something you completely don’t get
 Ask purely factual questions first
(Pure Inquiry through open-ended questions)
 Then more probing questions to help the
author share the facts as he/she knows them
 Is he/she focused on the Real Problem?
 Is why the problem is being addressed NOW clear?

www.leanuk.org
What to “see” from the Problem
Situation Section as Reviewer
 Can I see the “real” problem through the
“Noise” in the Situation as you described it
 Can I see the gap you are trying to close?
 Do I understand why you need/want to close
the gap?
 Can I see the specific problem(s) you are going
to have to address to close the gap?
 Do I understand how much of the gap you are
going to try to close…this time?

www.leanuk.org
A3 Coaching Through Questioning
- What it’s Not:
 Not “Guess what? I think the real problem or
the best solution is…”
 Not “20 Questions”
 Not just trying to shoot holes, trying to find “gotcha”
errors.
 “I won’t be fooled again…!”
 Not just a big ‘STOP’ sign.
 “Why?” should not mean putting the brakes on
initiative or taking over responsibility

www.leanuk.org
As Author – Revise Your A3
Revise the Problem Situation
portion of your A3:
Title, Background,
Current Condition, Goal
to make the Problem Statement
as clear as you can

www.leanuk.org
Breaking down the problem (gap)
 Breaking down large, vague, overall problems…
for example:
 Quality Spills
 Expediting Costs
 Late Deliveries
 Scrap
 Overtime
 …into specific abnormalities at specific places in the way work
is done that can be addressed directly at the gemba.
 Wrong parts installed in final assembly averaging 19 per day
 1800 Quarterly Reports overnight-ed to investors this quarter
 Average 14 pizzas per night delivered after 30 minutes from store 4
 19% of pies made last night rejected for lumps in filling
 Overtime for pilots and attendants on east coast flights 21% over budget this month
Problem 1
Large
Vague
Problem
Problem 2
Problem 4
Problem 3

www.leanuk.org
Questioning Mind
72
Lean is not acting on assumptions
or jumping to conclusions.
What we actually know?
(About the problem)
How to confirm it?
(How do we know it?)
What do we need to know? How can we learn it?

www.leanuk.org
Two Levels of Cause
Direct Cause
 An occurrence or
condition that is
confirmed to be the
reason a specific
problem (effect) exists.
 It is a link in a
cause/effect chain that
can be pursued and
addressed at the root
cause.
Systemic Cause
 An aspect of the
“design” of the work
system that leads to a
category of problems or
a type of waste in the
output of the system.
 It can be addressed by
an improvement in the
design of the work flow.

www.leanuk.org
A Good Problem Statement
IS NOT:
 The simple reverse of your
proposed solution
“No one oils the machine”
 A lack of something, such as
lack of a specific
countermeasure
“There is no standard
work in place”
IS:
 A problem in performance.
“The bearing wears out too
frequently”
 Stated as concretely in
measurable performance
terms as possible.
“50% of the time bearings do
not last through the standard
of 300 hours”

www.leanuk.org
Analysis section
To show the (root) cause(s)

www.leanuk.org
Cause Investigation
76
Why does this gap between ‘what is’ and ‘what should or needs to be’ exist?
Real
Problem
You’re Tackling
Look. Ask. Watch. Think about and through the situation
If you don’t see a likely cause then what are possible causes?
A B C D E
3 1 2
X X
 Check them. Observe them. Track them. Eliminate when you can.
Prioritize and Test. Disprove or Confirm
 You have a cause when you can show there is a link between the
existence of your problem (Gap-or part of it) and the existence of another
occurrence or condition
 The best way to demonstrate a Cause  Effect Link is to remove or block
the Cause. If the Gap (or part of it) goes away you have found a Cause
of the Problem
Potential
Causes

www.leanuk.org
Root Cause Investigation
77
If you eliminate the cause you found is there a chance it will come back?
Then you’re NOT through
You’ve got to ask Why? Again. You’ve got to find the cause of your direct cause.
Effect Cause
How? Repeat the basic cause Investigation process.
Treat the direct cause of the problem as a problem itself and
investigate and test until you can prove a Cause - Effect Link
Problem
CauseX
Problem
Cause Cause
Effect Cause
Problem
Cause CauseXXX XX

Root Cause Investigation: 5 Whys
The machine stopped
The overload circuit tripped
The pump was seized up
Metal shavings damaged the shaft
Shavings entered lubrication system
No filter on the inlet pipe
Why?
Why?
Why?
Why?
Why?

To check 5-Why chain read in reverse
with the “Therefore” test
The machine stopped
Metal shavings damaged the shaft
Shavings entered lubrication system
No filter on the inlet pipe
Why?
Why?
Why?
Why?
Why?Therefore
Therefore
Therefore
Therefore
Therefore
The overload circuit tripped
The pump seized up

www.leanuk.org
Present-Review Again

www.leanuk.org
As Reviewer, What to Look and Listen for in
a Cause/Constraint Analysis…
 Do I have a clear image of the problem you are trying
to investigate by asking “Why?”
 Do I understand what related work processes you are
looking in to find causes and constraints for the
problem?
 Can I see the cause/effect links to the problem that
you are claiming?
 Am I confident you have found root cause(s)?
 Do I sense there is more you need to know?

www.leanuk.org
Helpful Coaching
Is NOT Asking
▲ Is that really the problem you
need to solve?
▲ Why do you think that’s a
problem?
▲ Why don’t you look at _____?
▲ How is that your root cause?
▲ Have you thought about trying
____?
▲ Are you sure that’s going to
work?
IS Asking
 Exactly what’s the problem you
are trying to solve?
 Can you describe what’s
happening vs. what should be?
 What have you looked at or
heard?
 What makes you sure you’ve got
a cause/effect link?
 What have you thought of trying?
 What impact do you expect that
CM to have?

www.leanuk.org
Develop the section where
you Evaluate and
Recommend
Countermeasures

www.leanuk.org
Problems and Solutions and
Countermeasures
 The Solution?
 To solve = to find the answer…..the One correct answer
 A Countermeasure?
 To resolve = to find and try out an action that seems likely to reduce the
problem condition (the GAP)
 A temporary measure “fixes” a problem by blocking or working around its impact
 A permanent countermeasure eliminates a problem by removing its cause
 Criteria for Evaluating Potential Countermeasures (H-M-L)
 Effectiveness: Extent to which an action will work as a way to eliminate a
cause and resolve the problem
 Feasibility: Extent to which an action can be taken with reasonable effort
and resources
 Impact: Extent to which an action will have the intended result with
minimum impact or creating problems in other areas (LOW is desirable)

www.leanuk.org
Cause Countermeasure Description EFF FES IMP Cost/Benefit EVAL
EFF =Effectiveness, FES =Feasibility, IMP =Impact
H = High, M = Medium, L = Low
85
EVAL = Evaluation
Best Good Questionable Not Good

www.leanuk.org
Manage your plan
like a Value Stream
 Focus on the timing and deliverables of the plan
 Manage the exceptions
 Ask “why” things went wrong
in order to address root cause
 Make sure someone is responsible
 Ensure that you perform reviews
(even when things go wrong)

88
Site Level
Objective
Value Stream
Manager
Site Manager
Date:
Harry Bamford
Dave Johnson
02/02
Value Stream Plan: After Sales (90 Days)
Signatures
Site Manager
D. Johnson
Sales
T. Plant
After Sales
H. Bamford
Parts
A. Harvey
Person
Responsible
Related
Individuals/
Departments
Review Schedule (Monthly)
With weekly progress
Weekly Schedule
2 3 4 51 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Value
Stream
Loop
No
Value Stream
Goals
(“Deliverable”)
Target
(“Metric”)
Proposed Start
Proposed Completion
Actual Start
Actual Completion
Review (Major Milestones)
Review (Major Milestones) Complete
On Target
Behind Target
TroubleX
“right first time, on
time, at the right
price.”
Quality = 94%
Delivery
on Time = 97%
CF Combined = 92%
Productivity = 135%
Lead Time = 4 days
(no loan car
or collection &
delivery
4.1
4.2
4.3
4
Customer
Contact
&
Handover
Establish flow of work
for invoicing after
“Road Test”
Establish handover
slots to eliminate
waiting
Establish a handover
area so cust find cars
Invoices 100%
C/A & available
C/T = 10 Mins
Slot levelling
Eliminate waiting for
customers
T. Plant
Wco, Tch,
SA, Parts, Fi
T. Plant SA
J. Butterworth SA, Fi
2.1
2.2
2
Customer
Arrival
& Pre-
Diagnosis
Develop std pre-
diagnosis process
Eliminate tech waiting
for authority
C/T=10 min
95% work known
18 to 0 mins
H. Whittle Parts
H. Whittle
Parts, Wco,
Tch
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.1
1
Pro
active
reminder
&
Customer
Booking
Establish telephone pre-
diagnosis
Create visual capacity
management process
Book customers to
arrival slots
Develop a proactive
booking process
100% of cust.
Level, Retention
Data 100% C/A at
booking
Slot booking
implemented
Plan v Act = 5%
variation
T. Plant SA, Adm
T. Plant Tch, Wco
H. Whittle
Tch, Wco,
SA
T. Plant Tch, Wco
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.1
3
Pacemaker
Physical
flow of
car
H. Bamford
Adm Parts
SA Tch Wco
30 min cycles
CF Quality =
100%
Develop standardised
work & rapid f’back for
“road test”
CF Quality =
100%
work for “valet”
CF Quality =
100%
Establish FIFO rules
between “road test”
and “valet”
Min = 0 cars
Max = 3 cars
Develop pull between
“physical P/D” & “carry
out work”
Min = 0 cars
Max = 3 cars
Pre-pick parts, develop
pull &deliver to
technicians
10 minutes to 0
minutes
work for “carry out
work” so cars flow
H. Whittle
Sales, Parts
SA, Val
M. Rushton Tch Wco
J.Butterworth Tch, Wco
J.Butterworth
Wco, Tch,
SA, Parts
A. Harvey
Parts, Tch,
Wco
Reviewer
DJ
60 Days
Reviewer
DJ
30 Days
Feb 28

Feb 28
Reviewer
DJ
90 Days
Feb 28

Feb 28

Feb 28

Feb 28

Feb 28

Feb 28

Mar 28
Mar 28
Mar 28
Mar 28
Mar 28
Mar 28
Mar 28Mar 28
Mar 28
Mar 28
Mar 28
Mar 28
Mar 28
Mar 28
Mar 28
Mar 28
April 28
April 28
April 28
April 28
April 28
April 28
Mar 28April 28
April 28
April 28
April 28
April 28
April 28
April 28
April 28
April 28

www.leanuk.org
Present-Review Again
To include the Recommendations
/Countermeasures

www.leanuk.org
The A3 Process
 Is the purpose to describe your ideas and
solution in order…
 to convince?
 or to engage?
 Convince means to “sell” or “get buy in”
 Engage means to “become part of”
 to invite to take part in the thinking
 and the experiment based on it

www.leanuk.org
As Reviewer: What to look for in
Recommendations for Countermeasures
 Do I see the link between your proposed
countermeasures and the causes they are intended to
address?
 Do I feel you have considered all the options for
addressing the causes?
 Do your recommended countermeasures make sense
as the way to address the causes and resolve the
problem?
 Am I confident these countermeasures will accomplish
your goals and achieve your purpose for addressing the
problem?

www.leanuk.org
Three common problems in getting
proposals approved & objectives achieved
 Assuming that once you think you have the “best
solution,”
 Everyone will agree, and
 Therefore – problem solved, job done
 Thinking that defining the solution well is a “plan”
 Assuming that, once you’ve got a plan, everything will
go according to that plan
 Throwing the plan out the window when things go wrong
 Trying to stick to the plan no matter what
 In other words: Not completing the PDCA cycle

www.leanuk.org
What does it take to actually
resolve a problem?
 The real problem solving begins rather than
ends with implementation of the plan
 You usually have to solve a lot of problems to
actually* solve a problem
 That’s where the “continuous” part comes in
* ‘Actually’ means you see that what you did
made a difference (moved the needle)
in the way you intended.

www.leanuk.org94
GAP
Current
Condition
Target
Condition
CAUSE
CONSTRAINT
BARRIER
A P
C D
A P
C D
Remove
Overcome
Eliminate
A P
C D
A P
C D
You are
Here
Need to
be Here

www.leanuk.org
Reflections at this stage?

www.leanuk.org
Agenda
 What is an A3?
 Problem Solving
 Revise
 Proposals
 Status Reports

Plan Do, Check, Act
Background
Current Situation
Proposal
Analysis/Evaluation of alternatives
Plan Details
Unresolved Issues (optional)
Implementation Schedule
Storyline of the Proposal A3
Theme:

www.leanuk.org
Implementation Schedule
Overall
Background
Analysis & Proposal
 Is there a clear theme for the report that reflects the
contents?
 Is the topic relevant to the organisation’s objectives?
 Is there any other reason for working on this topic
(e.g. learning purposes)?
Theme: Review Questions For Proposal A3s
Ref: Sobek & Smalley 2008 pp 81
Current Situation
 What information does the audience need to find my
proposal compelling?
 Is the current condition clear & logically depicted in a
visual manner?
 How could the current condition be made more clear
for the audience?
 Does the current condition frame the problem or
situation clearly, accurately and objectively?
 Is the problem quantified in some manner or is it too
qualitative?
 Is there a clear goal or target?
 What, specifically, is to be accomplished?
 How will this goal be measured or evaluated?
 What will improve, by how much, and when?
 Is the analysis detailed enough and did it probe deeply
enough on the right issues?
 Has cause & effect been demonstrated or linked in
some manner?
 Are any key activities or steps missing?
 Is the implementation schedule clear and reasonable?
 How will the effects of implementation be verified?
 How will a reflection meeting be held and when?
 What budget or timing constraints exist?
 Who is the audience? Does this report give them all
the information necessary to make a good decision?
 What personnel are affected by this proposal? Have
they all been consulted?
 Is the report clean, neat and organised with good
flow?
 Is it readable and aesthetically pleasing?
 Would I approve this proposal based only on the
information contained in it?
Unresolved Issues (Optional)
 What problems or constraints might exist?
 What needs to be considered but cannot be resolved
at the moment?
 What remains to be discussed about this topic?

www.leanuk.org
Storyline of the Status A3
Background
Current Condition
Results
Remaining Issues/Action Items
Theme:

www.leanuk.org
 Stamping division goals require reductions in lead-time, and inventory of
25% this fiscal year.
 Bracket value stream was a push style of operations with long lead-time,
excess inventory, over-production, and poor on-time delivery performance.
 A project was initiated to improve in these dimensions targeting full
completion by June 2002.
Acme Stamping Steering: Lead-time & Inventory Reduction Project Status Review 3/6/02
Stamping
Press
Welding & Assembly
Production Cell
Production
Control
Daily
Order
6.0
days
Production Lead Time
Supplier Customer
Current Condition – March 2002
Key Concepts Implemented:
1) Conversion to an improved flow of operations
2) Establishment of supermarkets for Raw, WIP, & FG inventory
3) Creation of replenishment style pull system with kanban signal
4) Creation of a pacemaker cell combining welding & assembly
5) Pacing of all work to takt time and hourly count boards
6) Creation of detailed standardized work for welding and assembly cell
7) Leveling of the production schedule in terms of type and quantity
8) Reduction of changeover time at stamping
9) Reduction of lot sizes in stamping
2.0
days
2.0
days
2.0
days
54” TT
Shipping
Prep Area
Results
Days
Lead-time
23.6
Dec.
‘01
March
‘02
Target
June ‘02
6.0 5.0
Inventory $$
36K
Dec.
‘01
March
‘02
Target
June ‘02
14K 10K
$
PPH
Overtime
5
Dec.
‘01
March
‘02
Target
June ‘02
.7
0
Hrs.
Productivity (Assy.)
Dec.
‘01
March
‘02
Target
June ‘02
12
16 17
On-time delivery
85%
March
‘02
Target
June ‘02
100% 100%
Dec.
‘01
Min.
Stamping C/O Time
60
March
‘02
Target
June ‘02
30
10
Dec.
‘01
Remaining Issues / Action Items
Category
Remaining
Problem
Counter-
measure
Responsibility
& Due Date
Lead-time
Inventory
Delivery
Productivity
Overtime
C/O Time
%
.5 days over goal Reduce stamping WIP PC by 5/30
$4K over goal Purchase parts market PC by 5/30
N/A Maintain performance Operations
1 PPH under goal Eliminate overtime Ops. By 5/30
.7 Hours over goal Eliminate minor stops Maint. By 5/30
20 min. over goal Reduce internal work Eng. By 5/30
Background
From: Sobek, Smalley A3 Thinking

Results
Remaining Issues/Future Actions
Background
Current Situation - Progress
Theme: Purchasing Card Implementation Status
To: Director of Admin
From: Finance & Purchasing
Date: 12/4/07
 Implementing purchasing credit cards for purchases <
£500 is expected to bring significant time
and cost savings
 Purchases < £500 acount for 47% of all purchases, but
only 5% of total cost outlay
 A new procedure and controls were needed
Implementation strategy
 Select card issuer
 Establish policies and controls
 Conduct training for card users in the facilities, purchasing
and finance departments
 Conduct pilot programme in same departments
Monthly Schedule
2 3 4 51 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Activity
Get cards with controls
issued
Conduct training in pilot
departments
Mgmt approval
Card issuer selection
Prepare training
materials
Develop new policy and
procedures
Conduct pilot
Monitor pilot; revise
policies, procedures
Pilot audit
Report audit results
Training company-wide
Implement company-
wide
Notes
Delay due to
previous step
Completed faster
than expected
Required 3
iterations to get
consensus
Delay due to
previous step
All trained
personnel able to
make purchases
Midstream ch’nge
to procedures
caused confusion
Feedback from all
pilot participants
Eval.
TBD
TBD
TBD
Proposed Start
Proposed Completion
Actual Start
Actual Completion
Review (Major Milestones)
Review (Major Milestones) Complete
 53 associates trained in 3 departments
 Pilot programme ran for 15 weeks
 780 purchases were made during the pilot programme
User Survey
 100% of users prefer credit card system over old paper based
system
 30% of users report confusion on procedures. Tracking receipts
for telephone purchases problematic
 Numerous suggestions for improvement gathered
 No difficulties regarding controls reported
£20
£40
£60
£103
£80
£100
£120
Estimated Costs
Prev.15
weeks
£0
£54
£20 £20
£18
£21
Pilot
predicted
Pilot
actual
More discrepancies occurred when using
credit cards – greater than predicted
200
400
600
952
800
1000
1200
Estimated Time (Hrs)
Prev.15
weeks
0
1125
187
432
195
620
Pilot
predicted
Pilot
actual
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
Discrepancies
Prev.15
weeks
0%
Pilot
predicted
Pilot
actual
1400
PO
Invoice
Activity Status Responsibility
Revise procedures Completed Purchasing
User and managerial review
of revised procedures In progress (complete by 21/4) Purchasing
Review and revise training In progress (complete by 30/4) Purchasing
Company-wide training To start 1/5 Training Dept.
Full company implementation To start 2/6 Purchasing
PO
Invoice

www.leanuk.org
 Is the theme of the project stated clearly?
 Does the project relate to the goals of the company?
 Is the reason why the project was undertaken clear?
 What other information might be useful for the
audience?
Unresolved Issues/Follow Up Action Items
Background
Theme: Review Questions For Status A3s
Current Situation
 Is the current condition clear & logically depicted in a
visual manner?
 Does it clearly show what progress has been made or
what specific action has been taken?
 Does the current condition frame the problem or
situation clearly, accurately and objectively?
 Is the current condition quantified in some manner or is
it too qualitative?
 What remaining problems exist in the project?
 What needs to be done to achieve progress as
planned?
 What other items need to be conducted to sustain the
gains and ensure success?
 Who else needs to know about this result?
Results
 What results have been obtained in the project so far?
 Are the results clearly indicated and quantified in
some manner?
 Has improvement actually taken place?
 Are these the right metrics to show that improvement
has been made?
 What else might explain the change in the metrics?
 Have any areas been adversely affected by the
change(s)?
 For areas where the improvement is not as great as
expected, is it clear why or why not?

www.leanuk.org
Glass Wall Management
Plan
Do
Act
Check

www.leanuk.org
The A3 Tool as a Process for…
 Problem Solving
 Proposing Improvements
 Standardizing
 Planning
 Reporting
 Reflection
 Project Management
 Change Management
 Alignment and Agreement
 Organizational Development
 Mentoring, coaching
 Developing people
105
All based on
PDCA

www.leanuk.org
Final Discussion
 What makes a “good A3” good?
 What is good use of an A3?
 What benefits to an organization do you
see in the A3 process?

www.leanuk.org
What Makes an A3 a Good One?
 It tells a story
 It contains objective facts, data
 It “resolves” a problem
But being technically “right” is only half the
battle…
 Engages and aligns the organization
 What really makes an A3 a “good one” isn’t the
specific collection of facts and data that tell a
perfect problem-solve. A good A3 is a reflection
of the dialogue that created it.

www.leanuk.org
Expectations Review

www.leanuk.org
John Kiff
5th November 2013
A3 Thinking Workshop

A3 Thinking Workshop Guide

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (20)

Ähnlich wie A3 Thinking Workshop Guide

Ähnlich wie A3 Thinking Workshop Guide (20)

Mehr von Lean Enterprise Academy

Mehr von Lean Enterprise Academy (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

A3 Thinking Workshop Guide