Tag Archives: identifying and quantifying waste

Continuous Improvement, Identifying Waste, Root Cause, Theory Blindness

WYSIATI?

Continuing the theme of keeping improvement projects on track, CI leaders should be very careful to avoid falling prey to “theory blindness.”

Theory-blindness is an “expensive” pitfall that extracts a huge economic toll in organizations of all types and sizes. In some cases it leads companies to invest in expensive solutions that completely miss the real cause. In other instances, organizations will live with costly problems for years because of a shared but erroneous theory about the cause of the problem.

Psychologist Daniel Kahneman, (the only non-economist to win the Nobel Prize in Economics) describes the phenomenon in his book, Thinking, Fast and Slow.

The human brain, he illustrates by describing decades of research, is wired to apply a number of biases, theory-blindness being one of them. Understanding the biases gives us the tools to overcome them.

The most powerful mental bias underlying a great deal of the flawed decision making is what he calls: WYSIATI (which is a acronym for “what-you-see-is-all-there-is”). It occurs because we are inordinately influenced by what we see, and greatly undervalue information we do not have. As a result, paradoxically, the less we know, the more sure we are of our conclusions.

Based on research and many years of experience, we’ve determined the best way to avoid theory blindness is to rigorously adhere to an improvement process; one that includes a comprehensive method of identifying and quantifying root causes and the real waste.

Identifying Waste

Identifying Waste v. Solutions

2 Comments
get further faster

Surviving and coming out ahead in these turbulent times demands that we all think carefully and choose well what to study and improve.

As Bill Conway frequently said, “At least 50% of improvement is working on the right things.”

Organizations that are able to engage people in making good, fact-based decisions about what to work on and then execute with laser focus reap huge gains.

An opportunity search is key. That means that we must identify and act upon the opportunities for improvement that will potentially yield the greatest results.

In many cases, organizations do not focus on identifying waste, but instead come up with lists of idea driven improvements. That is, someone comes up with an idea for an improvement, puts together a proposal, and then tries to implement it.

The problem with the idea-driven approach is that there is very little correlation between the list of ideas for improvement and the biggest problems or opportunities for improvement within the organization. The idea-driven approach to improvement depends on someone identifying a solution at the outset. But the biggest opportunities are usually buried in the tough long-term problems for which solutions are not immediately obvious to anyone! If a solution doesn’t occur to someone, the problem doesn’t make the list. If it doesn’t make the list, it is never studied sufficiently to come up with a solution.

Organizations get further faster by identifying the waste first and choosing the best opportunities from all of the areas of waste you have identified. A portion of the waste is easily spotted and addressed if you take the time to collect the information. But much of the waste is hidden — built into budgets, accepted practices, current operating procedures, and shared assumptions. It is built into processes that are compensating for problems that have not yet been solved. This waste is difficult to see without expanding the vision of what is possible.

Our next post will focus on best practices for seeing “what is possible” and for identifying the best opportunities for improvement.

Communication, Continuous Improvement, Culture building, Identifying Waste

An Often Overlooked Tool for Driving Continuous Improvement

A vitally-important tool for bringing about a culture of continuous improvement and engagement within a workforce is communication, which many people agree is the most frequently-used skill in today’s workplace.

Aside from standard team or project meetings, there are a number of ways leaders might go about accomplishing this. For example, employee forums are an ideal way to engage people around their work and contribute to the building of a high performance culture of continuous improvement.

Consider that one of the most obvious yet often overlooked requirements for high performance is a setting for employees to share and discuss problems and ideas for improvement.

But too often, managers and leaders tend to believe that if someone has a really great idea for improvement, they will raise it.  Yet when we talk to people close to the work, we more often hear ideas they have carried around for months or even years but never found the right time or place to share; or felt their idea would not be welcomed.

Even worse, when no forum for sharing improvement ideas is provided, people adapt to the way things are and stop noticing the waste—the elephant in the room—and stop trying to think of better ways.

A number of other examples of effective discussion forums that were shared during one of our Partners in Improvement sessions included:

  • Monthly safety talks at the end of which the company president discusses pertinent issues with team members and provides input as well as support
  • Weekly one-on-one session between management and team members during which leaders not only offer ideas and support, but also gather feedback on successes and challenges
  • Regular “town hall” meetings where he shares information about what is going on and what to expect, and also provides an opportunity for people to raise questions or concerns

It is also important to recognize that some “forums” are better than others, which will be the subject of our next post.

Continuous Improvement, Developing People, Identifying Waste, Identifying Waste, Leadership, Process Improvement, Working on the Right Things

How to Nurture the Ability to Identify Waste

Continuing the theme of our previous post — which stressed the importance of focusing on “identifying and eliminating waste” rather than simply focusing on “improvement” — it is important to encourage people at all levels to look for the waste that is hidden within their work processes.

But people tend to be risk averse, and it is often uncomfortable and difficult for most to acknowledge waste.

Yet identify it and acknowledge it they must, before they can envision a solution for it. Therefore, senior management needs to nurture the practice if it is to take hold within the organization. Until an organization recognizes the waste for what it is, there will be no full court press to eliminate the underlying problems, and no breakthrough improvements.

How do you nurture the ability to recognize the waste embedded in your business processes?

Constant questioning. Ask yourself and everyone else if you would need this if everything were right, and right the first time.

It sometimes helps to bring in outsiders to help you look for waste, because it is easiest to think “outside the box” if you come from “outside the box.” Customers and suppliers or people from adjacent processes may challenge assumptions we don’t even realize we are making.

Benchmarking internally, within the industry, and in different industries can also raise questions and help you recognize waste that you have overlooked before.

Continuous Improvement, Identifying Waste, Identifying Waste, Quantifying waste, Working on the Right Things

Steps for Quantifying Waste

Noting that at least 50% of improvement is working on the right things, our previous post shared insights on “why” identifying and quantifying waste within our organizations is so important.

Now, the question is “how” to do it…

The first step is to identify areas of waste, many of which may have previously gone unnoticed. This step often requires the use of historical financial and operational data, and also that we think “outside of the box” when examining our work processes. Involving people at all levels, and people from cross-functional areas, can help the team look at each problem or bottleneck without bias.

Once problems are uncovered, review how each affects the four forms of waste:

  • Lost sales or opportunities (typically the largest waste)
  • Material costs
  • Capital costs
  • Lost time

If the problem causes delays, think through and estimate the form of waste that the delay results in.   Does it increase capital such as inventory or receivables?  Does it delay sales and revenue?  Does it cost you customers and future business? Does it require additional people time?

Keep in mind that many problems will affect more than one of the four forms of waste.

For example, excess inventory not only ties up capital, but may increase the number of people who need to manage it, the warehouse costs to store it, and the probability of scrapping All these factors can be reasonably estimated with some historical data and getting close enough to the work.

Next we must quantify the impact of each problem, recognizing that some assumptions and estimates will probably have to be made.  Try to document a range that you are pretty confident about.

Finally we can “do the math” to prioritize the improvement projects we’ll undertake first. Key criteria will be the overall potential savings (i.e., the problems creating the most waste), and the estimated time-frame for implementation.

These two determining factors are important, and sometimes it is better to opt for a smaller “return” if the project will involve fewer complexities and a significantly shorter time-frame. We’ll take a closer look at this perspective in our next post.

Identifying Waste, Identifying Waste, Process Improvement, Quantifying waste, Working on the Right Things

Working on the Right Things Part 2: Identifying & Quantifying Waste

nowlaterIn a recent post we discussed the many daily decision we all make with respect to “what we’ll work on next…”

As referenced in that post, Bill Conway always said, “At least 50% of improvement is working on the right things.”

Organizations that are able to engage people in making good, fact-based decisions about what to work on and then execute with laser focus reap huge gains.

An opportunity search is key.

That means that we must identify and act upon the opportunities for improvement that will potentially yield the greatest results. This implies that those opportunities not selected are clearly inferior — but this might not always be the case.

And, if so, should we work on all of them? If not, then how many? Which ones in particular?

These can be tough questions to answer. 

We have found that most organizations need help to determine the best course of action to take; or in other words, to “identify and quantify the waste.”

It is only then that people will be able to truly determine whether some options are better than others or if all of the options are good; it is only then that people can determine the best opportunities for improvement, and then set priorities and time-frames.