You learned in Lecture 5 that the Kaizen philosophy has two aims:
- Developing a culture where all employees are actively engaged in improving the company.
- Organizing rapid improvement events focused on improving specific areas within the company.
Using the PowerPointtemplate
Download template, outline Caesars Casinos' approach to achieving each of these aims at their Tunica, Mississippi location. Upload your visual and talk your colleagues through your diagram. Also, in your written submission, connect what was done at the Mississippi location to your own professional work.
Introduction to Process Improvement & Managing Process Improvements Quality and Process Improvement Methodologies BUS665 – Managing Business Processes 1 Agenda What’s the difference between six sigma and lean? Six Sigma DMAIC (improving existing processes) DMADV (creating new processes) Lean (Toyota) Kaizen PDSA/PDCA 5S Poka-Yoke High Reliability Total Quality Management (TQM) Quality Standards ISO 9000(1) Baldridge 2 What’s the difference? Six Sigma Basics GOAL: Eliminate defects and waste to improve quality and efficiency; initially designed for manufacturing Lean Basics GOAL: Cutting out unnecessary/wasteful steps—only steps taken are those that directly add value (what customers are willing to pay for) How they compare… Similar goal seek to create the most efficient system possible but take different approaches Identify the root cause of waste differently… Six sigma – waste results from variation in the process Lean – waste results from non-value added steps in the process BOTH ARE CORRECT! Especially powerful when used in tandem… 3 DMAIC Six sigma framework for improving existing processes… 4 Define Develop a charter Understand relationships Measure Create operational definitions for metrics Develop data collection and analysis plan Analyze Map current state Identify issues that cause the process to be problematic Improve Control Develop potential solutions Develop a control plan for continuous monitoring VoC SIPOC Develop objective Problem to be studied Metrics Target Deadline Collect and establish a baseline Conduct FMEA Identify the significant cause-and-effect relationships Verify root causes Select optimum solution Map optimized process (w/value stream elements) Pilot solution Confirm desired results Implement full-scale Document standard operating procedure Transition ownership DMADV Six sigma framework for designing new processes… 5 Define Establish business case for project Assess risks and benefits Measure Understand relationships Use results as inputs to find Critical to Quality (CTQ) elements Analyze Generate several possible designs (high level) Compare designs and select best one Design Verify Construct detailed design of the “best” process Facilitate buy-in of process owners Form team Develop project plan Write project objective SIPOC VoC Use matrix to understand relationship of needs/wants of stakeholders and features of the process Perform FMEA Refine “best” design Develop and estimate the capabilities of the critical features of the “best” design (CTP – elements) Do a trial run Verify plan is acceptable by all relevant departments Design a control and transition plan Conclude project and celebrate Transition ownership Lean (Toyota) Largely created by Toyota founder Sakichi Toyoda, his son Kiichiro Toyoda and Toyota chief engineer Taiichi Ohno Eliminate waste: “muda” with specific emphasis on non-value added activities What are customers paying you for? Everything else is waste. 6 I recommend this book! Any resource consumed by inefficient or nonessential activities, any unwanted material left over from a production process, or any output that has no marketable value NEW: Unsafe workplaces Lack of information or sharing of information Equipment breakdown Environmental Kaizen A lean approach; Japanese for “improvement” or “change for the best” Aims for continuous improvement of processes, involving all employees… Daily process that humanizes the workplace eliminates overly hard work (called “muri” in Japanese) and teaches people how to perform experiments on their own work through PDSA cycles Rapid improvement events focused on addressing a specific area or problem within an organization 7 PDSA/PDCA Also called Deming cycle or Shewhart cycle Consists of four steps used to continually improve a process by reducing variation or eliminating waste from the process Plan Do Study – changed from “check” Act Easy framework to understand/implement; can be used in a variety of settings 8 Plan What changes can be made? Do Implement the change Study What are the results? Act Adopt? Abandon? Revise? Kaizen Rapid improvement event… 9 3-5 days Pre-event Identify area to be kaizened Identify team members Event Event kickoff Post-event Follow-up on outstanding action items Celebrate success Plan the event (logistics) Conduct VoC Collect baseline data Create RIE charter Get management on board Elect Project Champion Review baseline data Map out current state Observe current state Do root cause analysis Brainstorm/prioritize improvements Develop implementation plan Create new tools and train staff Implement future state process Track progress over time Review data periodically to ensure maintenance of desired state Review/fix what is not working 5S Method Simple techniques for highlighting and eliminating waste, inconsistency, and unreasonableness from the workplace… 10 Poka-Yoke (POH-kah YOH-kay) Japanese for “mistake-proofing device” Used to prevent the causes of defects or errors fail safes Promote ZERO QUALITY CONTROL zero errors, scrap, downtime, or rework 11 Bar coding on patient bracelets to prevent medication errors Sponge bags to let surgical teams count sponges to prevent any from being left in the patient Rumble strips to warn the driver the car is not in its lane Beeping if keys left in ignition or headlights left on to avoid locking keys in car and running down the battery High Reliability 12 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Sources: Weick et al 2007; Hines et al 2008; Chassin et al 2013; Rochlin 1999. Personnel actively think about what could go wrong and are alert to small signs of potential problems; absence of errors/accidents leads to complacency; near misses are shared as opportunities to learn Personnel resist simplifying their understanding of work processes and how and why things succeed or fail in their environment; they seek underlying rather than surface explanations, respecting the complexity involved in daily operations Personnel maintain “situation awareness,” cultivating an understanding of their work in relation to the organization—“What is going on around me? How does the current state support or threaten safety? Personnel appreciate the people closest to the work are the most knowledgeable about the work—in a crisis or emergency (or in trying to prevent one) the person with the greatest knowledge is likely not the one with the highest status or seniority Personnel assume the system is at risk for failure and practice performing rapid assessments of and responses to challenging situations—teams cultivate situation assessment and cross-monitoring to identify safety threats before harm occurs Preoccupation with failure Reluctance to simplify Sensitivity to operations Deference to expertise Commitment to resilience Total Quality Management (TQM) A management approach that originated in the 1950s and has steadily become more popular since the early 1980s. A management philosophy that seeks to integrate all organizational functions (marketing, finance, design, engineering, and production, customer service, etc.) to focus on meeting customer needs and organizational objectives. Views an organization as a collection of processes. It maintains that organizations must strive to continuously improve these processes by incorporating the knowledge and experiences of workers. The simple objective of TQM is… “Do the right things, right the first time, every time.” 13 Total Quality Management (TQM) 14 Quality Standards Developing a Quality and Process Improvement Culture 15 ISO-9000(1) 16 ISO 9000 (series) A set of international standards on quality management and quality assurance developed to help companies effectively document the quality system elements needed to maintain an efficient quality system. Not specific to any one industry and can be applied to organizations of any size. VS. ISO 9001 (specific standard in the 9000 series) Is defined as the international standard that specifies requirements for a quality management system (QMS). Organizations use the standard to demonstrate the ability to consistently provide products and services that meet customer and regulatory requirements. It is the most popular standard in the ISO 9000 series and the only standard in the series to which organizations can certify. ISO-9000(1) 17 Baldridge 18 Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award (MBNQA) is an award established by the U.S. Congress in 1987 to raise awareness of quality management and recognize U.S. companies that have implemented successful quality management systems Three MBNQA awards can be given annually in six categories: Manufacturing Service Company Small Business Education Healthcare Non-profit Leadership: How upper management leads the organization, and how the organization leads within the community. Strategy: How the organization establishes and plans to implement strategic directions. Customers: How the organization builds and maintains strong, lasting relationships with customers. Measurement, analysis, and knowledge management: How the organization uses data to support key processes and manage performance. Workforce: How the organization empowers and involves its workforce. Operations: How the organization designs, manages and improves key processes. Results: How the organization performs in terms of customer satisfaction, finances, human resources, supplier and partner performance, operations, governance and social responsibility, and how the organization compares to its competitors 19 Baldridge Example: service industry award winner Example: healthcare industry award winner 10 Strategies to Overcome Resistance to Change Anthony Marker 1 10StrategiesYouCanUsetoOvercomeResistancetoChange Anthony Marker, Ph.D. Boise State University Change is such a constant in today’s organizations that to mention it is like telling an old and not‐very‐ welcome joke at a dinner party. Nevertheless, sometimes in a change effort, the organization makes you the story‐teller. How then can you bring out that old saw in fresh and effective ways? How can you help your workplace accept an impending and unavoidable change? Here are some proven strategies that can make you more successful at overcoming resistance to change. 1. AddressPersonalConcernsFirst Most organizations justify the need for change by telling their employees—the ultimate users of the change—all of the wonderful things the change will mean for the organization. This is a poor approach to getting audience buy‐in. When faced with a change, people react first with their own concerns: “What’s in it for me?” “Does this mean I’ll have a different schedule?” “Will this break up our department?” So, first things first. As a change agent, you should deal with the users’ personal concerns first and focus later (if at all) on the organizational benefits. 2. LinktheChangetoOtherIssuesPeopleCareAbout The perceived need for a change can be increased by linking it to other issues that people already care about (CRED, 2009). By showing how a change is connected to issues of health, job security, and other things that are already in the front of people’s minds, you can make a change “more sticky” and less likely to be replaced as new demands for their attention show up. 3. TapintoPeople’sDesiretoAvoidLoss People are more sensitive to loss than to gain. This “negativity bias” is a longstanding survival trait that has kept humans alive throughout their development as a species. Historically, it was always more important to avoid stepping on a snake than to find a soft place to sleep. Humans may have advanced in many ways, but something scary still gets and holds attention more quickly and longer than something pleasant. Therefore, rather than just telling people what they stand to gain from a change, you may have a greater impact by telling them what they stand to lose if they don’t accept the change. 4. TailorInformationtoPeople’sExpectations People generally hold firm views of how the world works. These often unconscious and invisible “mental models” govern much of people’s thinking including how they perceive a potential change (Carey, S., 1986; Morgan, M., Fischhoff, B., Bostrom, A., et al., 2002). For example, they may tend to see a change as something good about to happen (a promotion model) and willingly accept it, or they may see a change as something bad about to happen (a prevention model) and deal with it as an “ought to do” while focusing their energy on avoiding loss (Cesario, Grant, and Higgins, 2004; Higgins, 1997, 2000). You can provide all the logical arguments in the world in support of your 10 Strategies to Overcome Resistance to Change Anthony Marker 2 change, but if your arguments don’t match the basic assumptions and rules to the way the person sees the world, you are unlikely to get very far. To make matters worse, people hold fast to their current beliefs, desires, or feelings; this “confirmation bias” means that if the change you are promoting doesn’t appeal to their current beliefs, desires, or feelings, you may have a hard time making any headway. 5. GroupYourAudienceHomogeneously Getting the message over to a group of people who share basic opinions with regard to the change is easier than getting it over to a group of people with diverse opinions. Whenever possible, divide your audience into homogeneous groups insofar as their view of the change goes. For instance, if you want to convince people to do certain things differently because of climate change, you might want to know who watches Fox News and who watches MSNBC. Not because one is better than the other, but because the argument you present will be tailored differently for the two groups. This isn’t manipulation (unless you are operating in the shadows without their knowledge and consent); it’s merely being smart about how you present your argument and evidence for change. 6. TakeAdvantageofPeople’sBias—BuyNow,PayLater! People tend to see things that are happening now as more urgent than those that will happen in the future (Weber, 2006). This tendency is often referred to as “discounting the future.” For instance, when presented with the option of getting $250 now or $366 in a year (a 46% rate of interest), the average person will choose the $250 now (Hardesty and Weber, 2009). This suggests that when trying to persuade others that a change is necessary, even though the future threat and loss may be great, it is desirable to emphasize that inaction now poses its own threat and loss. Also, it is often easier to get people to agree now on a solution, if they can postpone implementation until some time in the future. People tend to believe that they will be in a better position to change in the future; they expect to have more time, more money, and fewer demands then than they do now. While experience does not support this belief, it is one that provides people with the motivation to act in the present toward a future goal. Consequently, it is often easier to get people to agree now on a change that won’t take place until some point in the future. You will no doubt recognize this as a strategy commonly used by merchandisers—Buy now, pay later! 7. MaketheChangeLocalandConcrete Often organizational changes are responses to some sort of threat. If that threat is seen as more relevant to distant outsiders than to the people in the organization, or if the threat is presented in the abstract, then the targeted people will have little motivation to change (Leiserowitz, 2007). However, if you can demonstrate in concrete terms that the threat is local and will have a real impact on the people you are trying to get to accept the change, you may find it easier to persuade them to buy‐in. For instance, when people think about the threat of climate change, many think of it as a threat to other people and other places. In a situation like this, getting people to adopt inconvenient changes is difficult. On the other hand, if you can show them with concrete examples exactly how the change will impact them in their local community or organization, then they are more likely to adopt the necessary changes. 10 Strategies to Overcome Resistance to Change Anthony Marker 3 8. AppealtotheWholeBrain Often, when making a case for a change, change agents use lots of numbers, charts, tables, etc. Such facts and figures appeal especially to one side of the brain. But the human brain has two sides, and although they work together, each has a different way of processing information. The left side is analytical and controls the processing of quantitative information. The right side is experiential and controls the processing of emotional information. Even for audiences where one side may dominate (e.g., engineers who favor facts and figures), the most effective communication targets both sides of the brain (Chaiken and Trope, 1999; Epstein, 1994; Marx, et. al. 2007; Sloman, 1996). One compelling example of this is the design of Apple’s iPhone and other products. People do not stand in line to buy these products simply because of their valuable functionality (which appeals to the left analytical brain), but also because the objects themselves are designed to appeal to the emotions as well (the right brain). To appeal to both sides of the brain, you might Combine analytic information with vivid imagery in the form of film footage, metaphors, personal accounts, real‐world analogies, and concrete comparisons Employ messages designed to emphasize relevant personal experience and elicit an emotional response 9. BewareofOverloadingPeople While connecting with people’s emotional side, it is important not to overload with too much. People can attend to only a limited number of things. Scholars sometimes refer to this as the “Finite Pool of Worry” (Linville and Fischer, 1991). Change expert Daryl Connor (1993) likens this to pouring water onto a sponge. At first, the sponge can absorb the water. However, at some point, the sponge becomes full and any additional water simply runs off. The finite pool of worry is full. This has implications for change agents. Often people’s lives are already filled with change. When you ask (or demand) that they worry about many more things, you may inadvertently introduce “emotional numbing,” a state in which people fail to respond to anything except threats that are immediate. So, beware of overusing emotional appeals, particularly those relying on fear! 10. KnowtheProsandConsofYourChange Not all changes are equal. Some are more beneficial, and some cause more inconvenience and pain. It pays dividends for change agents to know how their change stacks up against six change characteristics (adapted from Rogers, 2003 and Dormant, 2011). Simple—Is your change complex or is it relatively simple to understand and do? Compatible—Is your change compatible with what your users are used to? Better—Does your change offer clear advantages over other alternatives, including the status quo? Adaptable—Can people adapt your change to their own circumstances or must they do it exactly the way you prescribe? 10 Strategies to Overcome Resistance to Change Anthony Marker 4 Painful—Does your change alter social relationships in any way by changing where people work, who they deal with, or how they spend their time? Divisible—Can you break the change you offer into smaller parts or phases, or must audiences implement it all at one time? It is worth noting a couple of important points when judging your change against these characteristics. The first is that any change can have both positive and negative aspects in the same characteristic. For instance, a change might be relatively advantageous in one way and be relatively disadvantageous in another. Secondly, as you evaluate these characteristics, do so—not from your perspective—but from your target audience’s perspective. You need to understand the change from the point of view of those who will feel it most acutely. Summary Change is hard. That’s a cliché, but it’s also true. And because we all have to do it and also get others to do it so often, it’s also boring. But just because change has become so common as to sometimes numb us to the bone, that doesn’t mean that we can’t apply a few simple (and admittedly, a few not‐so‐ simple) strategies to become more effective and give us a head start against resistance. 10StrategiesYouCanUsetoOvercomeResistancetoChange 1. Address Personal Concerns First 2. Link the Change to Other Issues People Care About 3. Tap into People’s Desire to Avoid Loss 4. Tailor Information to People’s Expectations 5. Group Your Audience Homogeneously 6. Take Advantage of People’s Bias—Buy Now, Pay Later! 7. Make the Change Local & Concrete 8. Appeal to the Whole Brain 9. Beware of Overloading People 10. Know the Pros and Cons of Your Change 10 Strategies to Overcome Resistance to Change Anthony Marker 5 References Carey, S. (1986). Cognitive science and science education. American Psychologist, 41(10), 1123‐1130. Cesario, J., Grant, H., & Higgins, E. (2004). Regulatory fit and persuasion: Transfer from “feeling right.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 388‐404. Chaiken, S., Trope, Y. (1999). Dual process theories in social psychology. New York: Guilford Publications. Connor, D. (1993). Managing at the speed of change. New York: Random House. Dormant, D. (2011). The chocolate model of change. Lulu.com. Epstein, S. (1994). Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious. American Psychologist, 49, 709–724. Hardisty, D., & Weber, E. (2009). Discounting Future Green: Money Versus the Environment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 138, 329‐340. Higgins, E. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52, 1280‐1300. Higgins, E. (2000). Making a good decision: Value from fit. American Psychologist, 55, 1217‐1230. Leiserowitz, A. (2007a) American opinions on global warming. A Yale University/Gallup/ClearVision Institute Poll. New Haven, CT: Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies. Linville, P., & Fischer, G. (1991). Preferences for separating and combining events: a social application of prospect theory and the mental accounting model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 5–23. Marx, S., et al. (2007). Communication and mental processes: Experiential and analytic processing of uncertain climate information. Global Environmental Change, 17(1), 47‐58. Morgan, M., Fischhoff, B., Bostrom, A., et al. (2002)