A Response To a Comment About My Post "Lean Self"

Last month, shortly after my blog on the “Lean Self”, my friend and mentor Mark Graban posted a comment to that blog. This was unusual.  Usually, Mark emails his questions and points of concern to me after receiving my final draft of the blog post, but before I publish the final, final draft. His questions sometimes come from sheer confusion about what it is ‘that I am really trying to say’, but many times it is his way of teaching in the Socratic (and Toyota) method. That is, rather than lecturing, asking the student a series of questions that lead the student to discovering the answer or reflecting deeper on the subject. Occasionally, I am not sure which it is.

I have decided to answer in another blog post, rather than a reply to the comment that may go unnoticed.

Mark comments:

Thanks for sharing this, Chip.

I agree that having a personal “true north” and understanding your own “current state” can be beneficial.  I don't quite see how to apply the idea of a “value stream” though. What is “value?” How does it flow? How do you see that connection in one’s personal life?

Mark

Here is my response.

Mark, thank you for your comments. Please forgive my tardiness in replying. I have been recovering from a little bit of surgery.

Your questions have caused me to re-evaluate my premise as regards extrapolating the Lean mindset to the “self.” As they should.

What is ‘value’ in this context?

Another way to arrive at an answer to this question is to ask, “What is really important to you in healthcare?” Or, “What is really important to you in a car?” For the “self” it would be, “What is really important to you in your life?” I think (hope!?) for most people it would be “contentment.” To be contented financially. To be content at work. To be content in our relationships.  To be content with ourselves. The Hebrew word “shalom” is generally translated as meaning “peace.” And it does, but it is the peace that comes from being “whole” (content spiritually, physically, emotionally, psychologically); not having excess or being destitute, but from having enough or being grateful with what you do have.

Part of the Lean definition of “value” is that the customer be willing to pay for it. If you are not willing to put a price on what you want, it doesn’t really hold any value. This holds true for the “self”, also. But, it doesn’t necessarily mean money. It means doing the hard work of honest self reflection, letting go of false assumptions, admitting mistakes, mending relationships, simplifying, budgeting, pushing back the ego, stepping out of the forest and,then, prioritizing and starting, somewhere, on a lifelong journey of improvement.

What is the “value stream’?

The Lean concept of the “value stream” requires, amongst other things, a provider, a customer and a “gemba” (the place where the work actually occurs). Unlike other applications of Lean where the provider and customer are separate entities, for the “self” they are the same, us. And the “gemba” is our hearts and minds.

The steps we go through in our hearts, minds and lives to get whatever value we get is the “value stream”. Whether that process results in contentment or “dis-ease” in a particular area of our life depends on how much muda (waste, i.e. faulty thinking, biases, rewritten history, skewed priorities, energy vampires, B**l S**t, etc.) is embedded. Graphically representing this thought process produces a “value stream map”

For example: I must be perfect →  I burned the turkey → I’m a bad cook → I’m a lousy wife → I’m a bad person.  Not good “flow.” Lots of bad processes and “trash.” What’s the value here?

Note that using 5 Why might take you back through this process. For example:

     Why are you a bad person?  Because, I am a lousy wife.

     Why are you a lousy wife? Because, I am a bad cook.

     Why are you a bad cook? Because, I burned the turkey AND I must be perfect!

BINGO!! A possible root cause. The false belief that “I must be perfect!”!

Now, to be able to map this current state value stream may not be easy and it may require the help of “stakeholders” (others who have our best interest at heart). And, just as in any other Lean application, finding the “waste” in order to produce a better future value stream will work best if our “stakeholders” are given access to our gemba and are present; if we are open, honest and communicative about what is going on inside of us and in our lives.

Thus, I think the Lean concepts of value, true North, gemba, current value stream, future value stream, A3 thinking, 5S, 5 Why and kaizen are just as valid working on improving ourselves as it is in improving manufacturing, service industries, healthcare, etc. for the customer- us!

A Lean Staff Meeting Micro-experiment

The Lean philosophy is built largely around the concept of problem solving and continuous improvement (kaizen) by involving the workers who do the work on the floor (gemba) day in and day out. The idea is to foster and coach (working together) problem solving with them (bottom up), rather than telling them what to do and how (top down). Kaizen is the essence of what we strive for when we build teams or imagine when we use the term “teamwork”. 

The results of all of this are:

1. Many vs. a few minds working to solve the problem.
2. Identifying more problems.
3. Better determination of the root cause(s) of the problem(s).
4. Fosters the Lean concept of a leader/manager being a teacher as well as a supervisor in problem solving.
5. Shifts some of the frustration of management off our "plate" (without losing responsibility).
6. By involving staff in this process, it shows that we value and respect their input.
7. Engages staff in the practice.
8. Increases their value to the practice. Their value appreciates over time.

So, with all of this in mind, try this micro-experiment with your employees (team) at your next staff meeting by taking a more Socratic approach to problem solving (teaching through questioning rather than lecturing).

The Micro-Experiment

• Chose or a elicit a small, non-crisis problem to work on.
• Communicate that this is a safe environment and a "Judgement free zone.” Everyone is intelligent and has ideas to contribute.
• Place three coins in front of you. You are allowed three declarative statements during the staff meeting. If you make such a statement, then remove a coin. All other statements need to be in the form of open-ended questions.
• Think in terms of system failures, not people failures.
• Ask lots of “Why?”s, “How?”s and “What makes you say/think that?”s, not “Who (is to blame)?”s
• No leading questions like “Don't you think it would be better to do _______?” You are not trying to 'manipulate' them into arriving at a solution you've already decided on or simply making it seem like they are participating. This is truly listening to their ideas and honestly involving them in finding possible solutions through concensus (nemawashi).
• Praise participation.

Remember back to when you were learning how to diagnose and what questions to ask and how? Formulating a list of deferential diagnoses and, then, trying to arrive at a definitive diagnosis. It is basically the same process that you are trying to teach your staff about, except instead of a pet with a problem, we are dealing with a practice system, process, flow, and/or communication problem.

It won't work perfectly the first time. This is completely different than how most staff meetings are conducted. Look for small successes and then build upon them. With enough coaching and practicing, one day your staff may identify a problem, find its root cause and decide, together, on a viable solution to try, collect the results and plan the next step with little more than oversight involvement from you. Can I get a “Hallelujah!”?

Let me know how it went. Did your staff surprise you with their deep understanding of the issues? Were they more creative than you expected? Did they have a more realistic perception of the actual problem and root causes than you? How difficult was it for you to teach by asking questions? What did you learn? What would you change the next time? Could you cut back to two coins? One?

Thanks for stopping by. Please tell your friends, staff and colleagues about the blog. Comments and questions always appreciated.

Lean and Veterinary Medicine: Like a Glove

After reading, studying and thinking about Lean over the past seven years, I am convinced that Veterinary practice and Lean are destined for each other. As veterinarians and systematic problem solvers, we already know and are familiar with over eighty percent of Lean; we just don’t know it. Lean promotes greater value for the customer (from the customer’s perspective), with higher quality, better utilization of all resources  (especially our human resources), less expense and increased engagement of staff. I think most veterinarians want the same things.

Lean is the Western name for the Toyota Production System (TPS). Coined for its ability to remove the “fat” (wastes or muda) from processes.  Toyota developed TPS in an effort to rise out of war torn Japan, with its limited resources, to be able to go beyond truck manufacturing for the small, Japanese economy to complete with the American auto giants in a global economy. Since then, most other industries have found successes with Lean, including human healthcare. Can it do for veterinary medicine what it has done for many hospitals and healthcare system around the world? I think it can and that we need to try.

We’re Not That Different, Really

First of all, Lean takes a systems approach to problems. Problems are examined from a systems breakdown perspective before people are blamed. Lean asks “Why did this happen?”, or “How did this happen?” as opposed to “Who is responsible?” As doctors, we work with systems in our patients every day. We understand inputs, outputs, delays and feedback loops, both positive and negative. We know what can happen when one system is changed and how it can affect other systems for the better or the worse.

In order to identify the abnormal, we must first understand what is normal; what is ideal for this species, breed or animal. In veterinary school, we learned normal anatomy and physiology before we studied pathology. The same concept is true for Lean. We must have a very clear idea of what our ideal practice would look and function like. Notice, that I did not say an ideal practice. Lean is not trying to make your practice some management guru’s idea of the perfect “cookie cutter” practice. Lean understands that your practice is unique. The doctors are different. Their biases, philosophies and perspective are unique. The neighborhood where your practice is located is different than other neighborhoods. The mix of your employees is one of a kind. The Lean objective is to make your practice the best “your” practice it can be, now and into the future.

In the Lean mindset, this ideal is called our “True North.”  What would your practice look like if it was perfect? How would your practice perfectly relate to your clients? What would your ideal staff look and function like? How would your practice benefit your neighborhood and community if it is was perfect? It’s totally up to you. What ever you decide your True North is, Lean is designed to get you there. Forget, what a “Top 100 Best Practice” says you should be. What is important from the Lean perspective is that you are closer to your True North today than yesterday; closer this month than last month.  The perpetual destination of the Lean journey is perfection, knowing full well, of course, that this is impossible. The Lean journey never ends. As Vincent Lombardi said, we pursue perfection, knowing we will never get there, in order to reach excellence.

We Know This

As veterinarians, we are already quite familiar with eighty percent, or more, of the Lean methodology. We just don’t know it. Both mindsets are based on the scientific method of problem solving.

When a sick pet comes into our practice, health is our goal, our ideal state. The first step in diagnosing that pet is to understand fully the current state of that patient. We start with the primary client complaint. Regardless of whatever else we discover, we want to make sure we address this problem. Next, we collect a complete history; vaccinations, diet, current medications, symptoms and their progression, etc.

The second step is to perform a complete “tip of the nose to tip the tail” physical exam, paying particular attention to the client’s primary complaint. Can you imagine trying to make a diagnosis without performing a physical exam on the patient?

Next, we might perform diagnostic tests, such as a complete blood count, a general organ profile, urinalysis, radiography, and specific serology tests. We are attempting to explain why the patient is having the symptoms it is having. Medicine is based on facts, objective data, not fantasy.

At this point, we should have a reasonable understanding of the pet’s current state of health. Now, because we know what the ideal state of health is for this species, breed, gender and age, we can identify the problems; the gaps between our patient’s current state and the ideal state.

Based on our problems list, we formulate a treatment plan. This is an experiment. We don’t know if our treatments will work, but we decide, maybe with consultation with colleagues and specialists, what we are going to do. Later, we will follow up with the client and pet in order to analyze if we were successful  at reaching our ideal state of health. If we were successful, we will set a time for the next review, maybe in six months or a year. Remember the 3Rs; Recall, Re-examine or Reminder? If we were not successful, we reflect on what went wrong and start the process over again with additional history, another, possibly more in depth, physical exam, additional tests, a second, adjusted round of treatments (another experiment) and another analysis of the outcome.

As I said, the Lean methodology of management problem solving is also based on the scientific method. The process is almost identical to the one described above for diagnosing and treating sick pets. So how do we know we have problems? Because we have not reached our ideal state in one form or another.

The first step in Lean problem solving is to thoroughly define and understand our current state, just as it was with our patient. This step might include past and current metrics; key performance indicators. What is our story? “The facts, ma’am, only the facts!”

Defining the current state also includes an essential “physical exam.” In Lean, this is called “going to gemba.” Gemba is the Japanese word for the work floor, the place where the work (and problem) actually occurs. For instance, if the problem has to do with surgery, then the surgery room is the gemba. Lean emphasizes the importance of physically observing the flows and processes (the “value stream”) in real time in order to deeply understand the current state as it really is. A big difference in the Lean mindset, however, is that this observation (physical exam) should take place with the staff that are there on the floor, because they know better than anyone what the real issues are. They deal with it every minute of every day. They are an organization’s most valuable asset and resource, especially for helping to identify and provide solutions to problems. Lean promotes partnering with employees in this effort. Our staff wants to be part of the process of finding solutions, rather than always being seen as the cause of problems. This is a big part of what engages them.

Now, as in the diagnostic process, we can identify the gaps between our current state (disease) and our True North (health). However, many problems can appear to be caused by a particular cause when, in fact, it is caused by something much deeper; something more basic. Just as not diagnosing and treating the real problem versus treating symptoms will probably not yield a cure for or patients, not solving problems at their root cause will not provide a permanent solution to the problem at hand.

So, in Lean there is a “diagnostic” called “5 Whys.” This is the idea that one should ask “why” five times to insure the root cause has been identified. A fix for anything less will not solve the problem once and for all. The number five is somewhat arbitrary. It could be four or it could be seven. The idea is to ask enough times that the root (absolute) cause has been identified.

Does it ever seem like you are having to deal with the same problems over and over again? As if you are constantly playing the game “Whack-A-Mole?” As soon as you think a problem has been squashed in one place, it “pops up” again somewhere else? One of the main reasons for this could be the fact that the root cause (the definitive diagnosis) has not been found (another reason could be that your unique, valuable and knowledgeable staff played no part in the process). That it has always only been handled with “Band-Aids.” And, all of this effort is found to be just a waste of time and effort.

Once we know the gaps between our current state and our ideal state, we, in dialogue with our staff,  can devise the counter measures (treatments) we feel are indicated. This is an experiment, also, since we don’t know if it will work. It will give us an idea of what the future state should look like. Since our True North, or ideal state, is perfection, and we know that is impossible,  then the best we can do is aim for the next, improved, future state. Lean is a journey that never reaches its final destination of perfection. It is the process of continuous improvement toward ever better future states. We can never reach our True North, but with constant effort, we can get really, really close!

The final step, as with our patients, is to study the results of our tiny experiments. If the results are positive, then we institute it as the new, best method or standardized work and the staff is trained to this new current state. We will continually, from time to time revisit this process in order to improve it  even more down the road. If our “treatments” does not turn out well, then we (along with staff) will make adjustments and start the whole process over again with different countermeasures and experiments.
I hope it is evident, now, how much diagnosis and treating patients in our veterinary practices is similar to the Lean methodology of management and problem solving. I told you that you knew more about Lean than you realized!

SOAP vs PDSA

We are all familiar with the SOAP format for writing medical record. “S” stands for “Subjective, “O” stands for “Objective”, “A” stands for “Assessment” and “P” stands for “Plan.” The Subjective and Objective parts define the current state of the patient. Assessment delineates our tentative diagnosis. Plan communicates our, hopefully, successful treatment. It is not the medical record that is so important. It is the diagnostic thought process that is important. We could write medical records with a different format, but the thought process is the same, regardless.

In Lean, the written document is called an A3 report because it was written on an A3 sized (approximately 11 inches by 17 inches) piece of paper which was the largest paper that would fit in a fax machine at the time. It is based on the Deming (named for the American, W. Edwards Deming, one of the first to use statistics for quality control and improvement) or PDSA cycle that is the thought process.

“P” stand for “Plan.” In this part of the report (which typically occupies about 50% of the entire report), we provide a statement of the problem, any 5 Why analyses, the necessary information (e.g. data, charts, graphs, Value Stream maps, etc.) to describe our current state, possibly a Future State map, and any cost estimates relevant to the experiment . 

Following is the “D” or “Do” section. This section delineates the proposed countermeasures we will experiment with. 

Next is the "C" or "Check" (some use “S” or “Study”) portion of the report. Here, we explain and study the results of the experiment. 

The final section is the “A” section which stands for “Act” or “Adjust.” Here, we reflect (hansei) on the results of our experiment. If it was successful,  then we act on the results by instituting them within the practice. If not, we adjust, come up with new countermeasures and experiments in a new PDSA cycle and A3 report. Again, it is not the format of the report that is important (although the idea that everything should be concise enough to fit on one A3 sized paper is an important aspect), it is the process (called A3 thinking) that is.

Because the diagnostic process and Lean problem solving are both based on the scientific mindset, both reports are similar. More that we didn’t know that we know!


Thanks for visiting. Tell your friends about the blog!

Einstein's Equation of Lean Relativity

No, not Albert Einstein! Moraito “Morey” Einstein, Albert’s third cousin, twice removed on his mother’s side.

Just kidding! However, this, in a simple equation, explains Lean.

“F” stands for Flow and “V” stands for Value from the client’s point of view.

Taiichi Ohno’s equation states:

                                      Capacity = Work + Waste

What this equation states is that there is always waste in our current state. When we remove some waste, we create a new current state, but there is still waste. We pursue perfection, but never achieve perfection.

If we substitute our total “Value Streams” for “Present Capacity” and “Flow” for “Work”, we get:

                                     Value Streams = Flow + Waste

Rewriting the equation gives us:

                                     Flow = Value Streams - Waste



This, then, is essentially what flow means. Flow is all the different processes (value streams) that occur in the management of a veterinary practice with as much waste removed as possible (and then continually improved).

Also, remember that Value is defined as that which a client desires (Dc) and is willing to pay for, that moves (Mp) the patient's condition toward the desired outcome and is performed correctly (without waste; W) the first time.

                                           V = Dc + Mp - W


Everything about Lean is about improving flow, because flow ultimately results in greater value. A3 problem solving, 5S projects, kanban, Just-In-Time (JIT) concepts, error proofing (jidoka), visual management, continuous improvement (kaizen), everything is aimed at pursuing the perfection of flow. We continually improve systems and processes in order to improve flow, and therefore, value. 5S organizes the hospital by removing clutter from work areas, organizing the areas so that they have only the needed equipment close to hand with a consistent place for everything and everything in its place. 5S also makes problems visible, and solving those problems allows us to improve flow.

For example, at our hospital we were constantly having to leave the exams rooms to find this or that item. Not good for flow! So, we went to each of the exam rooms and got rid of duplicate suture scissors, hemostats, tourniquets, etc. Then, the staff and I created a list of the supplies and instruments that we routinely use within the rooms. We chose a roll of tape, Vetrap, cotton swabs, gauze squares, clippers, a small supply of various syringes, a digital thermometer, a Nye tourniquet, a stethoscope, fecal loops, etc. We even put some blood tubes, Idexx spinners, and a bottle of heparin in each room to facilitate quick blood draws for lab tests. Finally, we organized the drawers so that they were the same in each exam room. Now, each room is the same, with the most used resources close at hand. In addition, we all now know, regardless of which room we’re in, that tape is in the right hand drawer and the tourniquet is in the left. There is less confusion. We don't have to think, “This is exam room 1, so the suture scissors are here...no, there...no, in that drawer.” There’s no more time spent searching for items. Also, doctors and/or staff can now quickly (visually) tell if the drawers are complete (standardized). If not, the problem is fixed right then so it doesn't continue to be a disruption. This improves flow, thus value.

Kanban and JIT improve resource utilization by creating a system that provides drugs, supplies, staff schedules and doctor’s time, to name a few, only when needed, where needed and in the amount needed. This frees up cash, space, staff and doctors to do more patient care which improves flow which equates with higher value. Visual management techniques, A3 (PDSA) thinking, and “5 Whys” root cause analysis allow problems to be easily seen and fixed at the root cause(s), again, in order to improve flow and value. Even kaizen, the concept of utilizing our ultimate resource, our staff, to identify and fix problems and remove waste (muda) from our value streams is for the purpose of perfecting flow.

Time is money. And, time spent on wasteful activities and processes is money lost. Everything in our hospital, even wasted items, has to be paid for through income from clients. Otherwise, it comes out of our pockets, our bottom line. Value from the client's perspective means not being charged higher fees in order to cover waste.


All of this, then, is contained in the equation F=V. Simple, right?

The different individual concepts and “tools” of Lean are relatively simple. The difficulty is conceptualizing how the different elements interrelate to create Lean, putting it into operation within your practice and, then sustaining it long enough to get positive results and change the organizational mindset to automatically think Lean. But, that is a different equation and a different blog!

For now, just remember, “it's all about da flow, ‘bout da flow, ‘bout da flow…!“

What are your thoughts? Let us know.

Have You Checked Your SMED, Lately!

SMED stands for Single Minute Exchange of Dies. One of Shigeo Shingo’s and Toyota’s greatest gains in increasing flow was figuring out how to change the extremely large, heavy dies used to produce (stamp) the large body parts of different car models quickly. Toyota was able to improve this changeover time for one part to another from an industry standard of many hours (often eight or more) to less than five minutes!

So, what did this allow Toyota to do? It allowed them the ability to make smaller, more efficient, lots of the different models of cars. When you lose a whole day of production to change the dies, you can’t afford to do it very often. Which means, for economy's sake, you need to make large batches (there’s that “b-word”) at one time, which, also, means large inventories of parts, which then need to be paid for and stored at high costs. All very “un-Lean.” Toyota was a small company back then. They couldn’t afford any of that and stay competitive. Plus they had a small market in Japan and had to challenge themselves to produce a high mix of different products.

What did Toyota do? They had a need, a problem, that required a solution. Shingo and the workers got to work using what we’d recognize today as A3 Thinking. They went to the gemba, observed every aspect of the change over, “brainstormed”  possible countermeasures (together), and experimented until they reached their goal, or very close to it, being much better than before.

The equivalent of SMED in veterinary medicine is the time it takes to get an exam room ready for the next patient, or the surgery room ready for the next procedure, after you’re done with the previous. How fast can you go from spay to neuter to dental to cat abscess?

In essence, what we are are doing is looking at the flow between “flows”; identifying the time (delays and activity) between value added operations. A competitive swimmer must perfect his/her strokes and pace, but races can be lost by sloppy "flips" between the laps. So, swimmers must perfect this process, also. How fast can you “reload, aim and get ready to fire, again?” Consider ways to eliminate waste, 5S projects in the exam room or surgery room to facilitate quick change over, standardizes work to get everyone on the same page, and improved resource (doctors, staff, supplies, inventory, etc.) utilization through kanbans (signals).

What does this mean for a vet clinic? For example, could the previous surgery be recovered someplace other than the surgery table? Could a staff member clean and repack instruments while the doctor is busy performing the next procedure so they are ready to be autoclaved later? Could a trained, licensed tech induce anesthesia, intubate and prep the next patient while the doctor is placing skin sutures in the current patient? If so, what safety procedures and standardized work would need to be put in place? In the past, I have allowed trained staff to draw up injectable anesthesia, inject it, intubate the patient and start prepping. BUT, a second trained tech had to verify the proper type and amount of injectable anesthesia, and had to double-check the correct endotracheal tube placement. Any uncertainty or questions resulted in a halt of the process by those involved until verification and resolution by a doctor could occur.

In all of my years of practice ownership and management, I had never thought about, or even heard about, this concept before. That is one of the things that intrigues me so much about Lean. The different perspective and mindset that it brings to the day-to-day practice of veterinary medicine.

So, after some work on improving your value streams, take a look at your own SMEDs. Don’t be embarrassed!  And then, let us know how it went!

An Interview with Samantha Parrett: NC State Vet Hospital's Dive Into Lean

I am especially pleased to present this edition of leanvets.com for a couple of reasons.

1)  It is the first podcast for me. Hopefully, others will follow in the future as subject material arises. I debated whether to present this blog as a written interview or as a phone interview. Mark Graban, my “partner in crime” for this thing, convinced me to try a podcast and said he would set it up, which he did. Thank you (again), Mark. (This is also being "simul-blogged" on Mark’s wonderful site, LeanBlog.org). I am so glad we did it this way. I want everyone to appreciate the enthusiasm and confidence about this Lean veterinary success that Samantha brought to the interview, which wouldn’t have been so apparent had we done this in a written, email format.

2) This references, to my knowledge, the first published report of the Lean philosophy and methodologies being applied in the veterinary practice arena. AND… it was very successful.  It has been very difficult trying to educate my profession on the merits of Lean. We’re a stubborn lot, at times. “It may work for building cars and even for human hospitals, but this is veterinary medicine. We’re different! Show me the proof it will work in our profession.”, everyone would say. Well, here’s at least one report that indicates veterinary medicine can benefit from Lean, the same as everyone else who has made the commitment to give it an honest trial.

Our guest today is Samantha Parrett. She is the Director of  Business & Administrative Services for North Carolina State Veterinary Hospital. I first came across NC State’s story, “NC State Vet College Dives Into Lean,” last summer while Mark and I were preparing our lecture for the 2016 TVMA Convention and Expo. I have been waiting eagerly for the opportunity to learn more ever since.

There are several points I would like to draw your attention to. 

First, is the enthusiasm and conviction that comes from trying Lean and experiencing the success that can be realized from Lean. 

Second, Sam mentions many of the Lean concepts and “tools” that we have tried to explain here at LeanVets.com. This demonstrates the “real world” applications of these methods. 

Thirdly, the problem of getting more of the surgeries performed during the normal business hours which had been unsuccessfully remedied for a number of years, finally found some success through Lean. 

And lastly, the positive effect the Lean mindset has had on the staff, doctors and, even, students at NC State Veterinary Hospitals. Lean works...even in veterinary medicine!

Thank you for listening. Here is Ms. Samantha Parrett’s interview.



To read a transcript of the interview,  click here.

What Is This Takt Time You Speak About?

When I first started learning about Lean, one of the terms I seemed to have difficulty wrapping my brain around was "takt time."

Or, maybe it was getting straight the difference between takt time, cycle time, lead time, process time, value creating time, non-value creating time and all of the other “times.”

At any rate, if you read much about Lean, you will come across the term. So, I thought I would explain.

According to Lean Lexicon-5th Ed by the Lean Enterprise Institute:

Takt Time is the available production time divided by customer demand. For example, if a widget factory operates 480 minutes per day and customers demand 240 widgets per day, takt time is two minutes. Similarly, if customers want two new products per month, takt time is two weeks. The purpose of takt time is to precisely match production with demand. It provides the heartbeat of a lean production system. Takt time first was used as a production management tool in the German aircraft industry in the 1930s. (Takt is German for a precise interval of time such as a musical meter.) It was the interval at which aircraft were moved ahead to the next production station. The concept was widely utilized within Toyota in the 1950s and was in widespread use throughout the Toyota supply base by the late 1960s. Toyota typically reviews the takt time for a process every month, with a tweaking review every 10 days.

And:

Cycle Time is the time required to produce a part or complete a process, as timed by actual measurement.

For example, if you have 90 clients wanting routine annual exams and vaccinations performed on their pets each week and you have 30 planned hours available Monday through Saturday (40 hours/week/doctor, less surgery time, less in-patient treatment time, less new sick pet time), then your takt time is 30 hours/90 visits or or 1800 minutes/90 visits or 20 minutes per appointment.

Takt time is a time that represents the pace at which you need to work in order to meet current demand. To meet demand within the allotted time, a routine annual exam would need to be completed, on average, every 20 minutes.

In order to find the cycle time, an actual measured time, you would measure several appointments and calculate the the average time required to actually complete them. If you have a lot of variation, you might measure ten appointments, which is a good Industrial Engineering guideline (thanks to Mark Graban for that tip).

If the actual cycle time is less than or equal to takt time (meaning you can work faster than the demand rate), then you can meet demand within the available time restraints and everything should be good.

But, if cycle time is greater than takt time, then you definitely have a problem, because you cann not meet demand as performed within the time requirements. This scenario will necessitate a kaizen project and/or A3 thinking to work out some countermeasures. These might include finding more time for these exams sometime during the week (expanding your working hours), or eliminating waste and improving flow so the cycle time falls within takt time. We'd want to reduce the time it takes to complete the appointment, but without rushing or impacting quality or client satisfaction.

In manufacturing, it is sometimes a little less complicated because product is often moving through the production line at a much more precise interval and the time for each step has very little or no variation. So, cycle times in manufacturing are much more consistent. Manufacturers also have the opportunity to level their production rate by using inventory as a buffer against variation in demand. In a vet clinic, we might be able to somewhat level our workload through appointment schedule, but if we're taking walk ins, we have to be able to react and adjust to that variation in demand.

But, again in veterinary medicine, we have more variation. There is variability in how long an annual exam actually requires. Are there issues that need to be addressed? Will a fecal exam be required? How about a heartworm test? How many vaccinations are due? Do medicines needed to be filled and dispensed? In addition, there is variability in the arrival times of clients, even with appointments. This results in variance squared (variance X variance), and that = chaos.

There are two points that should be made here. The first is that variability is a form of waste and should be reduced as much as possible using the Lean mindset and methodologies. Meeting takt time is a first goal. The second point is that this is the reason you probably should not schedule more than 85% of your available appointment times. This allows you some "wiggle"room. I have heard some advocate high density scheduling, i.e. close to or at 100% booked.  But, even with a highly trained staff in a Lean environment, you just can't escape variation. The first time an appointment goes long or a client shows up late, you are behind schedule which means each subsequent appointment will have to wait. Waiting is muda. High density appointments are not value for the client, from the client's point of view.

In a later blog, I hope to write about queueing theory, exponential statistical distribution, and Poisson distributions. These concepts produce more realistic models that take into account the variabilities of arrivals and cycle times.

A3 Reports

A3 reports are the written documents that succinctly record the PDCA cycle problem solving effort, often providing a bit more structure than the four steps. The thought process and steps are very similar to the Practical Problem Solving method. This is sometimes called “A3 thinking.” The PDCA thought process is more important than the specific A3 report format.

The name A3 comes from the international size of paper that’s approximately 11 by 17-inches (in landscape orientation) traditionally used by Toyota and Lean organizations for these reports.

The left side of the A3 is for the Plan step of PDCA. It should include a title, a statement of the problem and a description of the current state. This side is filled out with such information as facts, graphs, charts, key performance indicators, value stream maps and 5 Whys root cause analysis, to name a few. The fact that the Plan step takes close to fifty percent of the entire report is an indication of the importance Toyota places on planning.

The right side of the document contains the Do, Check and Act steps of the cycle. This side might contain the implementation plan (along with the “who”, “what”, “where”, “when” and “how”), the future state value stream map, a short cost/benefit analysis, the result of the implementation plan, the root causes that were eliminated (or not), the changes in policy and procedures (the new standardized work) and a date to revisit the issue in order to continually improve.