Discussion Questions:
1. What two aspects or features do you find most valuable about the A3 framework for kaizen events?
2. What one aspect or feature do you find perhaps least valueable about the A3 framework for kaizen events?
3. Not including A3 "Step: Identifying the Problem or Need", which one of the A3 steps do you believe, that if not well-completed, would most impact the long-term sustainability of a Kaizen Event improvement?
Connor Sawyer
1. What two aspects or features do you find most valuable about the A3 framework for kaizen events?
2. What one aspect or feature do you find perhaps least valueable about the A3 framework for kaizen events?
3. Not including A3 "Step: Identifying the Problem or Need", which one of the A3 steps do you believe, that if not well-completed, would most impact the long-term sustainability of a Kaizen Event improvement?
1) The point of a kaizen event is to eliminate waste and the A3 framework root cause analysis targets the root cause of the waste to prevent future waste. In a way you can look at required kaizen events (they don't create products or thoroughput but they are necessary to maximize efficiency) as wastes themselves and the A3 framework should make kaizen events less necessary which is eliminating waste.
2) I feel like developing the target state is common sense and doesn't need to be reiterated. In the first step anything that isn't ideal is identified for analysis. That first step assumes that the ideal situation is easily known.
3) I really like the root cause analysis step like I said in the first question. Fixing the root cause is preventing work in the future and may be preventing the necessity of kaizen events. Counter measures are very important though as well because if you identify the root causes and do nothing about the issue nothing is going to change. I think that it would be better to have a kaizen event actually help even if the help is temporary and the effects aren't lasting than to have a kaizen event where the problem was identified but nothing was done about it. So from that logic I think that countermeasures have the most impact long term.
1. What two aspects or features do you find most valuable about the A3 framework for kaizen events?
The two features of A3 that stood out to me as the most valuable were documenting the study using only one side of an 11" x 17" piece of paper" and that "A3 problem solving occurs in the course of work". The importance of completing this assessment on only one side of a sheet of paper is that it forces the surveyor to be clear and concise and make their desired point quickly making others understanding of the proposal much easier. The second feature that I felt was important was that problem solving occur in the course of work, which seems like a very obvious concept to me. It is much easier to see issues, or room for improvement in tasks as they are being completed, or not completed by those assigned to them. To truly study processes for corrective actions, one must witness the process first hand.
2. What one aspect or feature do you find perhaps least valuable about the A3 framework for kaizen events?
While all of the features seem like they are important, if I had to choose one that seemed a little less important I suppose I would go with "Measurement of the cost of implementation and the cost benefit is documented on each A3", the reason being that with such a small surface area to work with documenting all observed problems, solutions, implementation plans, etc. this seemed like a lot of space being taken by something that has little significance to the one doing the A3. This seems like a task that could be conducted following the review of the A3 for feasibility.
3. Not including A3 "Step: Identifying the Problem or Need", which one of the A3 steps do you believe, that if not well-completed, would most impact the long-term sustainability of a Kaizen Event improvement?
In my opinion, the implementation step would have the greatest impact in the long-term. A great solution to a problem is a lot less valuable if not implemented correctly, as well as standardized. In many cases, I believe that failure to see the significance in implementation and sustainability can lead to procedures such as A3 being wastes of resources.