|
Well-Tested
Tools and Techniques Needed for Tight Times
By Dr. Ben S. Graham
The Ben Graham Corporation
© Copyright 2010, The Ben Graham Corporation. All rights reserved.
Permission is granted to post, print and distribute this document in its
original PDF format.
It never hurts to get back to
the basics, but in the tight times we are experiencing today it can be
especially beneficial. One of those basics is Process Improvement using the
tried and proven methods of ‘Work Simplification’. Work Simplification grew out
of the outstanding work of Frank and Lillian Gilbreth who were improving work
processes a century ago. It is defined as, “The organized application of common
sense to eliminate waste and develop more efficient and effective ways of doing
work”. Common sense is as relevant today as it has ever been and the tools that
we use to organize the facts for applying that common sense have been and
continue to be updated.
Work Simplification applied to work processes starts with preparing detailed
charts of major processes. These charts show (step by step) the processing of
each of the parts (in manufacturing processes) and documents, both electronic
and hard copy (in all processes). Then teams of the most experienced people who
do that specific work are coached in how to creatively improve the process - and
they do it. The process is re-charted as they think it should be, the changes
are presented to management for approval and those changes that are approved are
installed. The normal outcome is that a number of steps (sometimes large
portions of a process) are eliminated and a few things are added that make the
process more effective. The net result is doing less work and accomplishing
more.
Defining a Project
A potential process improvement project is easily defined. This is done by
listing the process name, the name of the lowest ranking manager whose authority
spans the entire process, the start and end point of the process, the
organizational units/departments that are involved and any specific objective
for the project (other than simply improving it) such as adapting it to be in
compliance with changed regulations, reducing the processing time or making the
process less error prone, etc. Once the major processes of the organization have
been so defined they are presented to senior management who select those they
would like to do first. For those, additional information is added including the
names of the team members, a start date, a finish date (when recommendations
will be presented to management) and the name of a facilitator who will draw the
charts and guide the team.
The ‘As – Is’ Charts
As soon as a project becomes active, a chart is prepared of the process as
it is currently being performed. It usually takes a facilitator (who has worked
with detailed process charts) only a day or two to prepare the chart. Then the
team meets, usually for one to two hours, at a time least likely to interfere
with their regular work. They study this ‘As – Is’ chart step by step. During
their first meeting the team is organized with a team leader (usually someone
with considerable experience whose work is central to the process being studied)
and a recorder who will keep a list of the change ideas that the team comes up
with. This meeting also, usually, includes some coaching in how to find
improvements.
Improvement Coaching
The improvement coaching, which the team members receive is basically
questioning the process step by step. The questioning involves asking each of
the five descriptive questions (what, where, when, who and how) along with the
judgment question, why. What are we doing at this step and why are we doing it?
Where do we do this step and why do we do it there? When do we do it and why do
we do it then? Who does it and why does that person do it? And, how do we do it
and why do we do it that way?
The most important aspect of this questioning is the sequence in which the
questions are asked. We always ask the questions “What – Why?” first. If those
questions don’t produce a reasonable answer there is not (in the eyes of the
people who are most knowledgeable about the process) a good reason to continue
doing that work. That part of the process should be eliminated and the rest of
the questions are superfluous. When we eliminate a portion of the work we
produce the greatest benefit that we can with the least cost. Failure to ask
this question first invites wasting time on alternative ways of doing something
that shouldn’t be done at all.
If, however, there is a good reason for doing that step we continue with the
questions “Where – Why?”, “When – Why?” and “Who – Why?” These questions lead to
opportunities for changing the location, the timing and the person doing the
work. These are changes that generate improvement with little cost. There is no
need for new equipment or developing a new method at this point. We continue to
do the work as we have been doing it, however, in a better place, and/or at a
better time and/or by a more appropriate person.
The questions, “How do we do it and why do we do it that way?” should not be
pursued until after the other questions have been asked and answered to the
satisfaction of the team. These questions lead to changes in method and
equipment. All too often process improvement is initiated at this detailed level
of ‘How’, which invites unfortunate outcomes such as programming expensive new
equipment to perform unnecessary work in an inappropriate place, at an awkward
time and by an inappropriate person.
Re-Charting
As the team comes up with ideas for changing it the ‘As – Is’ chart, it is
revised with little more difficulty than writers have in revising their writing
on a word processor. After a couple of passes through the chart by a team of
experienced employees they arrive at a ‘To – Be’ chart. Since these two charts
are drawn using lines and symbols using the same software, they can be precisely
reconciled, quickly and easily. The differences become the list of changes that
the team will recommend to management. Those that are approved will be installed
and the ‘To – Be’ chart is easily revised to reverse the changes involving
recommendations which were rejected.
When the recommendations are being presented to management for approval, the ‘As
– Is’ chart and the ‘To – Be’ chart are prominently displayed, usually one above
the other so that the difference in size becomes apparent. The ‘To – Be’ chart
is usually considerably shorter and contains fewer steps. We encourage
facilitators to color in the lines of those portions of the ‘As – Is’ chart that
have been eliminated in red and color in the portions of the ‘To – Be’ chart
that they have added in blue. This provides a clear illustration of the
differences between the two charts. (It is imperative, for the integrity of this
display that these two charts be printed in the same scale.)
AS-IS
TO-BE
A bird’s-eye view of charts
from an actual project.
Presenting the Recommendations
The meeting at which the recommendations are presented for management’s
approval generally last about an hour. The participants are the team members and
the mangers of the areas through which the process flows. It is co-chaired by
the team leader and the manager who is the lowest ranking manager in the company
whose authority spans the entire process. Normally he is the highest ranking
manager attending the meeting. Since the team is made up of one person from each
of the areas affected by the process and there will be one manager at the
meeting from each area, there will usually be about the same number of team
members as there are managers. To help set a productive tone for the meeting it
is important for the team members and the managers to sit together with
alternate seating rather than sitting in two groups facing each other. This can
be achieved easily by having the team members arrive a little early and take
alternate seats.
The meeting begins with the senior manager covering an agenda as follows; team
members read their proposal, managers question the individual recommendations
and the team members fill in details to answer the questions and then the senior
manager works with the other manager, one recommendation at a time to decide
whether to approve, reject or assign to a specific manager to work on it
further, usually with a time frame of no more than five days. (If after the five
days that manager is still not satisfied, that recommendation will be rejected
rather than to hold up the implementation of those recommendations which have
been approved.)
The actual reading of the proposal is done by the team members starting with the
team leader who gives the bottom line of benefits that their changes will
produce if they are all accepted. Then each recommendation is read by the tem
member whose work area is most heavily affected by the change. This gives
considerable credibility to the ideas because the people who are reading the
recommendations have been chosen as those who have the best current experience
of that portion of the process. This reading usually takes two or three minutes.
Then the managers ask questions and this portion of the meeting is when the
mangers usually become sold on the changes. They find themselves asking
questions of the people who actually do the work and who have been carefully
studying that work for several days. Essentially, we have a normal situation of
people who do not do the work, but are knowledgeable and involved with higher
level responsibilities, asking questions of those who actually do it.
After, usually less than an hour of questioning the senior manager takes over
the meeting for decisions. Many times I have been told you will never get the
managers in our organization to decide on anything the first time they hear
about it. However, I have been doing this for half a century and have yet to see
it not happen. And, when it happens the reasons are obvious. The changes make
clear sense. They are also beneath the responsibilities of the people who have
to decide. And, the only reason they haven’t been made already is because they
have interdepartmental impact. The work simplification approach has gotten us
past these limitations.
Implementation
Once these decisions have been made the team has a list of approved changes.
This list is then reviewed by the team, one recommendation at a time to
determine the activities required to implement the approved changes. Activities
will involve changes in forms, equipment, policies, written procedures, computer
programs, facilities and work places, with each approved recommendation usually
requiring several of these. And, there is one more activity that will be
required for every approved change – training. As Confucius put it roughly
twenty-five hundred years ago, “To expect performance without proper advisement
is ridiculous.” The team carefully works through these options using a spread
sheet and produces a list of activities for implementation. This usually takes
less than an hour. These activities are then assigned and a network chart may be
prepared to help think through the sequencing of this work.
As the teams complete one project after another the effectiveness of the
organization steadily improves. Simultaneously, the people who have served on
the teams and seen their ideas put into practice generally share a well deserved
sense of pride in their accomplishments.
There is, however, a most important caution. As the teams discover parts of the
processes that can be eliminated they must be assured that it is work that is
being eliminated and not jobs. This can be accommodated by increasing output
which provides more for sale without a corresponding increase in costs. This in
turn permits reducing price and increasing sales, a win – win situation for
company and customer. Simultaneously, some reduction in staff may be
accomplished, without layoff, through normal attrition and transferring duties.
However, it simply does not work to expect people to work creatively and
enthusiastically on teams to eliminate their jobs or the jobs of their
co-workers.
Summary
Process Improvement using the techniques of Participative Work
Simplification is a quick and effective way of getting more work and better work
done with less effort. Those executives who can earn the trust of their people
can free those people up to use their ingenuity to find and implement changes,
many of which are only visible to them, building an organization that is as
efficient and effective as the combined experience and ingenuity of their people
can make it.
Dr. Ben Graham is an industrial
engineer (a fellow of the Institute of Industrial Engineers) with 50 years
experience in the tools of his profession, mostly specializing in process
improvement. He worked with many of the leaders of the profession including six
years with Dr. Lillian Gilbreth, twenty-five years with Alan Mogensen (the
creator of Work Simplification) and with his father, also Ben Graham, who
adapted work simplification from factory operations to information processing.
Early in his career it became apparent to him that the engineering aspects of
work improvement were straightforward when compared with the human aspects, so
he pursued and completed doctoral work in behavioral science. His doctorate was
awarded with distinction. His company introduced
Graham Process Mapping
Software in 1990. |