In my years of process improvement work, I've identified some
problems that hinder the achievement of excellence. These are likely
not unique to my experience and I want to share them with you, along
with some suggestions on how to avoid them.
Pitfall No. 1: Lack of upper-level management support for
process improvement initiatives
This can have a number of causes, including lack of understanding of
the potential value, a poor implementation process, insufficient sustain
controls, inadequate validation process, or loss of focus on the bottom
line.
There are a number of things that can/should be done to minimize
this. For example, you can schedule an orientation session with upper
management. Or better yet, encourage them to become trained and run a
project. Routine project reviews should include participation, not only
from the process owner, but also from those over him/her. Ensure that
improvement initiatives always maintain their focus on the business'
bottom line. The language of management is money. If they don't see
benefit hitting the bottom line, they question the validity and/or
value. Toward that end, you need to ensure that independent, active,
financial participation is a part of the process, particularly when the
project is being scoped and again as the control plan is being put into
place (more on this later). Finally, it may be necessary to revitalize
the existing process with a new wave, initiative, or focus.
We implemented a pilot Six Sigma program from the middle of our
organization. At the end of that first year, top management noticed
millions of dollars positively affecting the bottom line -- and wanted
to know where it was coming from. As a result, they searched us out,
and we gained active, broad support to expand the initiative throughout
the business.
Pitfall No. 2: Failure to link project objectives with
corporate/business goals
This also can have a number of causes, such as project scoping that
is done at the local/functional level without feedback from corporate
functions. Or it could be that functional metrics rather than global
metrics are used to measure success. In other instances, corporate
goals or objectives may not be clear, or even worse are conflicting at
different levels/functions within the organization.
To prevent this, projects should be ranked according to
corporate/business goals (e.g. cause and effect matrix), not just
functional objectives. To do this, business project requirements need
to be determined and used to rank all projects.
The last thing you want to do is spend time and resources improving a
product that the business plans to eliminate in the near future.
Pitfall No. 3: Optimizing the part at the sub-optimization
of the whole
This is closely related to No. 2 where siloed functions, using local
objectives, obtain benefit to their area at the detriment of other
functions or areas. The root cause is insufficient focus on the overall
business objectives. One of the most common cases of this involves
procurement. In an effort to get the best pricing, purchasing tends to
order in large quantities. While this results in savings in purchasing,
it costs the plants in inventory and warehouse space. When looking at
the benefits of such a project, the effect on the whole organization
should be assessed.
Possible solutions include a focus on ranking projects according to
corporate/business goals (mentioned in No. 1). Also, the synchronous
management metrics of throughput (defined as dollar
value of product sold), operating expense (cost to
convert raw materials to finished product), and
inventory (including raw material, in-process, and
finished product) can be used to assess benefit at the product line
level no matter which function the project comes from. The goal is to
focus on projects in which all three move in the proper direction at the
same time. If a project benefits one at the expense of the other two
(e.g. the purchasing example), it should be reconsidered.
Click
here to continue.
