The A3 thinking is a process of joint problem solving and succinct documentation. This practice fosters an environment that generates knowledge and helps people doing the work learn how to learn while solving problems in a collaborative effort across many groups within an organization. Through structured opportunities, employees are able to learn in a process that comes naturally to them involving the following steps:
-Experience
-Mistakes
-Planned trial and error
The development of a successful A3 may involve numerous iterations before it is final, but the process helps to generate efficient problem-solving skills for the learner, while also providing the manager with a practical mechanism to mentor others all while achieving desired business results.
The simple structure of a typical A3 involves the use of a sequence of boxes arrayed in a template (11x17in paper) in the following order:
1) Theme - What are we trying to do
2) Background - Business process context and importance of specific problem or issue
3) Current Condition - Defining the problem simply and powerfully represents the most important part
of any A3
4) Cause Analysis - Analyze situation to establish causality
5) Target Condition - Propose countermeasures
6) Implementation Plan - Prescribe action plan for getting it done
7) Follow-up - Map out process
The steps of the A3 add up, eventually leading to a story, that communicates both facts and meaning in an easily understood format. Readers familiar with the format are easily able to focus on the data presented, and therefore the report becomes the basis for reaching a shared understanding. Note that there is no one fixed, absolute, correct template...it's the underlying thinking that matters!
Some advantages and benefits of this process included the following:
(www.coe.montana.edu/ie/faculty/sobek/ioc_grant/ierc_2004.pdf)
1) The demand of documentation of how the work really happens; observing work first hand as opposed to recreating process from memory will lead to inaccuracies and over generalizations
2) The people closest to the actual work are heavily involved in solving the problems as opposed to just working around them
3) The process of using diagrams is a more realistic representation of the actual systems in comparison to other process representations such as flow charts
4) The design of the report exemplifies a thorough problem-solving approach in a succinct manner that involves a collaborative effort across an organization, promoting mentoring as well as encouragement of people to think as well as take initiative
One other advantage that easily come to mind is the idea that this process can be easily applied to any type of problem in a variety of circumstances.
One question that comes to mind is what are disadvantages to this process? Are there any?
Carmin, you did a very nice summary of the A3 process. I do like the reference you had outlining some of the benefits of this process. I agree with you that one of the key point in this process is the iterative steps. Through the multiple iterations, proteges learn problem solving skills through practice and managers get hold of a solid mechanism to mentor new members. The fact that everything fits in one page make this process simple yet structured.
ReplyDeleteI also wondered the same question you raised about the disadvanges of this process. One issue that may arise out of this much simplified process is the lack of details. For some complex technical issues, for example, one may need additional specs/docs to go with the countermeasures. I also believe not every problem needs to go through a formal process like A3 Report. If a problem is simply enough and a decision is needed ASAP, then a solution needs to be picked without going through a relatively longer process like A3 report.
Carmin, I am a fan! I like how you organize the analysis. It’s a really well-designed analysis starting from your understandings of the process to the actual process of the model and ending with the advantages of the model. I really like the flow. At first, I was really stuck with the article. I had no idea of where to start and what to analysis.
ReplyDeleteThen for the question you tossed out at last, I have also put some thoughts in it. However, so far I haven’t reach any conclusion yet. I was thinking of the flexibility of the model when it requires multi-departments corporations. Is this model adoptable when partnerships are required in the problem-solving process? Maybe the model can add an additional step or box that others can put comments and requirements in it.
I just think of a disadvantage while I was replying Tianming’s blog. Since we all agree that the informality of the A3 model is an advantage, maybe it also can be a disadvantage. For its informality, companies can’t set a standard for this model. The time length of designing on the format and content of the model can be a waste. Employees will incest time on creating a new format every time they use this model.
ReplyDeleteCarmin, you did a really nice job at setting the stage for what the A3 model looks like. As you've seen on my blog, I agree and feel that the succinct format and message of this process is one of it's biggest strengths. However, Mengting brings up a good point with the fact that it could also be seen as a disadvantage in some cases. Not everyone we deal with will be content with the abbreviated version and will require more detail in order to process the current state of the situation. In my experience, I've encountered coworkers or associates that would request additional information - at that point the simplified model is not enough and a more advanced analysis may be required to move forward.
ReplyDeleteRemember one of the lessons we learned from the "design thinking" tools discussion...don't let these tools force you into an inflexible process. Flexibility is critical for innovation.
ReplyDelete