According to Shigeo Shingo, a subtle but important distinction exists between problem-solving and continuous improvement.
I grew up in manufacturing with the idea that problem solving was standardization Kaizen: a means to return flagging process performance to an established standard. For example, when a machine suddenly began producing defects, a team gathered, progressively asked why five times, and uncovered the root cause: a worn locator pin. The pin was replaced, and the defect eliminated. An abnormal condition was identified, and the established standard was restored. I think I first learned this approach from Taiichi Ohno’s Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production. Years later, 5 Why’s became a standard component of A3 thinking.
Improvement Kaizen, inquired “Why” of each of these production phenomena in order to raise performance to a higher level than before. Shingo encouraged us to ask a deeper question than “What is the cause of the problem?” Shingo challenged: “Why do we do it this way at all?” Could the locator be redesigned so it cannot wear into the wrong position? Could the part be self-locating? Could mistake-proofing make incorrect positioning impossible? Better still, could the entire operation be simplified or eliminated? Those questions sought a new standard, not a return to the old one. Shingo’s 5W1H was more than direct observation. It was directed observation to make sure no stone was unturned.
This distinction appears repeatedly throughout Shingo’s writings. He admired disciplined root-cause analysis, but he also warned against becoming too comfortable fixing yesterday’s problems. A factory can become exceptionally good at extinguishing fires while making little progress toward eliminating the conditions that create them. In other words, organizations can become complacent with maintaining the status quo. Shingo’s philosophy challenged us to seek perfection. Inspection should not become better; defects should become impossible. Setup should not merely become more consistent; it should become dramatically shorter. Scheduling should not become increasingly sophisticated if better flow can reduce the need for scheduling altogether. In each case, the objective is not simply to solve a problem but to redesign the process so that the problem no longer exists—or never has the opportunity to recur.
Perhaps this is why Shingo devoted so much of his career to not merely teaching techniques, but to changing the way people think. The real opportunity is not becoming faster at solving problems. It is designing processes that make yesterday’s problems increasingly irrelevant.
That is the essence of improvement Kaizen. As I think back on the excitement surrounding improvement Kaizen in my former factory, it was the exhaustive front line investigation and creativity that defined our culture.
So, the next time your team celebrates solving a problem, pause for one more question:
Have you simply restored the process, or have you actually improved it?
O.L.D.