In this short series I have explored the application of the DMAIC process, the methodology underpinning the process improvement (intended here as ‘the job of examining the processes used in a company, department or project to see if they can be made more efficient, how efficiency can be introduced and then sustained‘). The steps in the DMAIC have been explained in the previous articles in the series.
Efforts to improve processes, products or services are at the core of every successful business or organisations. So, why the introduction of a formal, proactive and structured process improvement can be difficult? There are at least four obstacles to overcome when the subject of Process Improvement is to be formally introduced into an organisation.
In this final article of the series I would like to analyse these challenges. A small process improvement project could be a useful way to introduce the “lean thinking” into an organisation and overcoming these obstacles would be key for paving the way for the adoption of such transformational culture.
Four big challenges…
“It is not for our organisation…”
It is often believed that “lean” processes are only for the manufacturing sector and affordable only to big organisations. Approaching a process improvement with a DMAIC methodology can be seen as an initiative left for big enterprises.
My view: The “lean thinking” has been proven to be widely applicable and able to deliver benefits in various sectors in organisations of all sizes. If applied sensibly and to the right scale, “lean thinking” and structured process improvement practices are well applicable to small-sized organisations or small groups. As advocates in this series, a small process improvement project could be a useful way to introduce the “lean thinking” approach and demonstrate the benefits.
“It kills creativity and innovation…”
A structured process improvement is often seen as bureaucratic process that may hinder creativity and innovation, especially in specific non-manufacturing sectors.
My view: It would not be an obstacle to creativity and innovation. It will focus on the practices that exist in the organisation and that rule the day-to-day operations. The process improvement will certainly look into practices and procedures with discipline and with the application of specific techniques. It is a structured methodology and it is often misjudged as a bureaucratic construct. The process improvement aims to make those practices more efficient, transparent and reproduceable. Slick and efficient processes will ultimately create more time for creativity and innovation. It is a matter of identifying clearly what needs to be improved and keeping an eye on the right balance between practice and process with space always allowed to creativity.
“It costs time and money…”
It is seen as an added cost, a burden, a distraction from core processes and from key projects’ activities. “Why should an investment be made to improve processes that seem to work ok?“
My view: The undertaking of a process improvement initiative certainly requires an investment upfront, as time and money, whether for the recruitment of a consultant or a “lean” practitioner, the training of key staff and the improvement projects itself (which will require the adequate internal staffing). A structured process improvement will be evidence-based, so there will be a need for collecting hard data that will assist a sensible decision-making process, this requiring time and resources. These investments may be seen as deterrents.
If planned carefully (with an appropriate ‘charter’) the objectives and the potential benefits can be clearly identified upfront so the organisation can decide for the adequate sponsorship and resourcing … how far and how deep to go. There will also be the less tangible (but hugely important) benefits resulting with the staff engagement and motivation. The staff will certainly be motivated by the idea of having an opportunity to participate to the improvement of their own processes and, as benefits start to be realised and to become evident, the staff will appreciate the idea of working in a slick and efficient organisation. More generally, there will be a mindset well suited to the prompt and efficient actions that will be required to respond to unplanned events.
“it isn’t worth it …”
There may be the worrying that once a process has been improved, the improvement cannot be sustained due to continuous changes in circumstances, in the operation environment, as market, policies or with change in staff, in management etc. Therefore, a formal process improvement initiative might not be felt as worthwhile.
My view: This is probably the hardest challenge to overcome…. A key tenet of the “lean thinking” is its integration in the business fabric and organizational culture to make (and keep) the benefits of a process improvements sustainable. A small scale process improvement exercise would be be valuable to allow the organisation to explore the “lean” principles. It is likely that the benefits will be more tangible on the longer term, with the integration of “lean” into the organisational culture, providing the foundation for resilience. Once the culture has embedded, the organisation will be ready for reproducing swiftly process improvement practices as and when required, and it will find itself better prepared to tackle changes. The problem is tacking the initial resistance….
Even a small-scale process improvement can be the spark for a change of culture in an organisation towards lean and I hope that with this series I have been able to elicit some interest in the subject. There are certainly challenges to overcome, in getting the buy-in, the commitment and winning over the initial reluctance from management and staff. I am convinced that these obstacles can be tackled with the right reasoning and contextualisation. I hope that what has been provided in this series could help those with a specific interest in taking structured process improvement in their organisations. Those who intend to get more detailed and specialised information about Lean, Six Sigma and applied DMAIC can check this interesting blog for SSDSI. Please do not hesitate to get in touch with comments and feedback.
Marco Bottacini, Senior Portfolio Manager, GALVmed
The views and opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinion of GALVmed.
Project Management Discussion Group 