DMAIC, the Power Drill

In previous posts, I wrote about the virtues of "Quick PDCA" and "Barn-Raising Kaizen."  It's obvious I favor approaches that have a bias for action.  But does that mean I'm averse to more methodical approaches such as the DMAIC approach as practiced by Six Sigma Black Belts?  Absolutely not.

As I mentioned in the "Barn-Raising Kaizen" article:

"Some repairs call for a hammer, and others call for a power drill.  It depends on the problem we're trying to solve, the information that is available, the stakeholders involved, and a whole lot more.  My suggestion is that we should not lock ourselves into any one way of bringing about improvement.  Use what works for whatever situation is presented."

 I think DMAIC is an awesome approach in certain types of situations:

• Some problems are better analyzed through data analysis and statistics, something which is at the heart of DMAIC
• Some organizations require that any and all projects show a measurable and verifiable ROI...something which is embedded in the DMAIC approach
• Some managers want projects in their departments to have a formal structure and mandatory gate reviews...which also is embedded in the DMAIC approach

There are many situations that call for the power drill that is DMAIC instead of the hammer that is Quick PDCA/Barn-Raising Kaizen.  Of course, many situations can be handled just as well by either approach.  I just think we have to pick the tool that makes the most sense for the situation.

Stay open-minded.  Be flexible.  See the scientific method in both the hammer and the power drill.

Barn-Raising Kaizen

A good friend of mine has an approach to process improvement that he calls "Barn-Raising Kaizen."    If you don't know what barn-raising is, here's a quick excerpt from Wikipedia:

"A barn raising is an event during which a community comes together to assemble a barn for one or more of its households, particularly in 18th- and 19th-century rural North America."

It's all about community, teamwork, and just getting it done.  I love it.

My friend uses the barn-raising concept when facilitating improvements out on the shopfloor.  He'll gather the folks together, get some ideas flowing, and then implement changes right there on the spot.  Then they'll monitor the changes, check results, and make adjustments...again, right there on the spot.  It all happens in this informal, team-oriented atmosphere that resembles the barn-raising events of yesteryear.  No prolonged data collection, no measurement system analysis, no project charter, no gate reviews...just kaizen.

So, is "barn-raising" kaizen effective?

You certainly won't get your Six Sigma Black Belt using the barn-raising kaizen approach, but it can be incredibly effective.  Because the changes are made so quickly, we get more chances to iterate...more turns of the PDCA wheel.  With each iteration, we get a chance to learn what works and what doesn't.  We're not at our computer using Mini-Tab to produce a control chart; we're out at the gemba looking at the gembutsu.

Also, every time we do barn-raising kaizen, we get another chance to practice problem-solving and build our kaizen muscles.  Have you read Toyota Kata yet?

But, how do you know if you've improved?

The fear is that without having a data collection plan, measurement system analysis, etc., we'll be in the dark when it comes to proving whether the changes worked or not.  This probably has more to do with trying to show a good ROI than it does with actually understanding how a change impacted a process.  If we're out at the gemba, we can usually see the impact with our own eyes.  We don't always need data, except to show ROI on paper.

Are you saying a more thorough approach, like DMAIC, is a waste of time?

Not at all.  Some repairs call for a hammer, and others call for a power drill.  It depends on the problem we're trying to solve, the information that is available, the stakeholders involved, and a whole lot more.  My suggestion is that we should not lock ourselves into any one way of bringing about improvement.  Use what works for whatever situation is presented.

On a somewhat related topic, Pete Abilla at the Shmula blog compared the PDCA and DMAIC approaches (link).

Quick PDCA

Do you ever get impatient when process improvements take too long? I know I do, as do several of the stakeholders that I work with in healthcare. Why does improvement sometimes take so long? One theory is that we wait too long to initiate PDCA cycles.

The Normal, Slow Approach

On a big Black Belt-led improvement project utilizing the DMAIC approach, we don't get to testing countermeasures using PDCA until the Improve phase. On some projects, it can take quite a while to get to that point. Sometimes, it's because data is not readily available during the Measure phase. Other times, it might be that the project team is having difficulty coming to a consensus during the Analyze phase on which countermeasures to implement. Whatever the reason, there almost always comes a point when we need to display a bias for action.

The Quick PDCA Approach

In other words, sometimes we need to stop relying on data and brainstorming, and just go do an experiment. PDCA is our approach for doing these experiments. Plan the test, perform the test, check and study the results, and adjust based on what you learn. It's rigorous, scientific, and time-tested. But we can't enjoy the benefits of PDCA unless we use it. So, have a bias for action. If data is hard to come by, go to the Gemba, do a quick PDCA, and see with your own eyes what works and what doesn't. If the team can't come to a consensus on what the countermeasure should be, stop deliberating and go do a quick PDCA.

Bias for action. Experimentation. Iteration. Learning opportunities. Quick PDCA.