Blog

Deciding When to Dig

by Jamie Flinchbaugh on 09-29-09

If lean is about anything, it is about solving problems both large and small. Becoming a world class problem solving organization takes time. It requires learning new skills and developing the culture to truly invest in problem solving as a daily practice. But as you begin this journey, you can’t stop and solve every problem at a root level with engagement and skill. So how do you handle the tension between today’s firefighting and investing in deeper problem solving?

I recommend that organizations learn to use structured, criteria-based decisions about when to go into structured problem solving methods (whether A3s or 5 Whys or kaizen events, etc.) and when to simply stop at firefighting and installing Band-Aids on the problem. I know that it sounds awkward to accept. We don’t want to decide to just apply a Band-Aid, but in reality you are doing this already. The difficulty is that you aren’t calling it what it is. By calling solutions a Band-Aid (or choose the analogous term that works for you), you create clarity about what you are really doing. This clarity helps elevate the process of making the decision “do I dig or not” to a formal or conscious decision instead of a habitual or unconscious one. This in turn enables the organization to develop high agreement about when they will dig deeper into a problem and how they will do it. With that high agreement, you will reduce frustration and increase the overall practice of structured problem solving.band-aid.jpg

A key to success is developing that high agreement of what and how around problem solving. Having the skill is one thing. Using it as an organization in a consistent way is completely different.

How have you managed this challenge?

Comments

  • Does anyone have any examples of a structured, criteria based process that they use to determine when to go into structured problem solving?

    Roger Greer September 29, 2009 at 11:00 am
  • Does anyone have any examples of a structured, criteria based process that they use to determine when to go into structured problem solving?

    Roger Greer September 29, 2009 at 11:00 am
  • Does anyone have any examples of a structured, criteria based process that they use to determine when to go into structured problem solving?

    Roger Greer September 29, 2009 at 11:00 am
  • I wrote about fire fighting mentality and some methods to prevent such recently:
    http://leanjourneytruenorth.blogspot.com/2009/07/stop-fighting-fires.html
    One strategice tool you could use is SWOT – Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats.
    When problem solving you may want to consider these five 5 rules by Norman Bodek is this post.
    http://leanjourneytruenorth.blogspot.com/2009/09/problem-solving-rules.html

    TIm McMahon September 29, 2009 at 7:58 pm
  • I wrote about fire fighting mentality and some methods to prevent such recently:
    http://leanjourneytruenorth.blogspot.com/2009/07/stop-fighting-fires.html
    One strategice tool you could use is SWOT – Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats.
    When problem solving you may want to consider these five 5 rules by Norman Bodek is this post.
    http://leanjourneytruenorth.blogspot.com/2009/09/problem-solving-rules.html

    TIm McMahon September 29, 2009 at 7:58 pm
  • I wrote about fire fighting mentality and some methods to prevent such recently:
    http://leanjourneytruenorth.blogspot.com/2009/07/stop-fighting-fires.html
    One strategice tool you could use is SWOT – Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats.
    When problem solving you may want to consider these five 5 rules by Norman Bodek is this post.
    http://leanjourneytruenorth.blogspot.com/2009/09/problem-solving-rules.html

    TIm McMahon September 29, 2009 at 7:58 pm
  • Structured, criteria based problem solving could be develop by the team. For example, in my organization (beer production), if there is down time on Machine A for >30 min, we need to dig out more and find out the root cause. Or same failure happen 3 times per week on product, we need to solve problem by find out and eliminate the root cause. So we establish a clear guideline when to do what by who should involve.

    Totally agreed with Jamie, having the skill and using it is so much different. To me, it is require the patient and try to use it step by step until it is become a habit (consistently apply it). I believe it is journey, therefore take time!

    Ot Chan Dy September 29, 2009 at 9:36 pm
  • Structured, criteria based problem solving could be develop by the team. For example, in my organization (beer production), if there is down time on Machine A for >30 min, we need to dig out more and find out the root cause. Or same failure happen 3 times per week on product, we need to solve problem by find out and eliminate the root cause. So we establish a clear guideline when to do what by who should involve.

    Totally agreed with Jamie, having the skill and using it is so much different. To me, it is require the patient and try to use it step by step until it is become a habit (consistently apply it). I believe it is journey, therefore take time!

    Ot Chan Dy September 29, 2009 at 9:36 pm
  • Structured, criteria based problem solving could be develop by the team. For example, in my organization (beer production), if there is down time on Machine A for >30 min, we need to dig out more and find out the root cause. Or same failure happen 3 times per week on product, we need to solve problem by find out and eliminate the root cause. So we establish a clear guideline when to do what by who should involve.

    Totally agreed with Jamie, having the skill and using it is so much different. To me, it is require the patient and try to use it step by step until it is become a habit (consistently apply it). I believe it is journey, therefore take time!

    Ot Chan Dy September 29, 2009 at 9:36 pm