Home > Managing to Learn> A3 Dojo

A3 Dojo: Share and Discuss A3s with Other Lean Thinkers

Welcome to this shared space for A3 thinking, which we┬╣ve designed to be a resource for lean practitioners to ask and discuss A3 questions, share common problems, and work together on ongoing challenges. This area builds on a conversation about lean management that was launched by John Shook's book Managing to Learn: Using the A3 Management Process to Solve Problems, Gain Agreement, Mentor, and Lead.
Below you will find a "wall" where you can post your A3s, ask questions, coach others and be coached yourself. You can also read an ongoing A3 column, written by experienced senseis, that teaches problem-solving and lean management, shares useful resources, and sparks new debate for the Dojo.
Please keep in mind that everything that you post on this site will be viewable to the public! We welcome your input, but caution you about revealing sensitive information.
Already registered? Please log in.
  Forgot your password?
    Remember Me
  or Become a Member of the LEI Community

The Managing to Learn - A3 Dojo

Postings for February 28, 2014

Subject: A3 review
Message: Is there a A3 review form / format that someone can share? the intent is to ensure we capture the right things in an A3 and develop learnings to be used by Sensei's.
Posted 2/28/2014 11:26 AM by Lalgudi Vasudevan
Comments (1) 

Hello Lalgudi, 

Here is a A3 "cheatsheet" that can help you understand the "thinking" that goes into each part of the A3.   Remember a lot of it is at the gemba engaging with people creating a dialogue about their work process.   This "cheatsheet" is from John Shook's book - Managing to Learn A3 class we do at LEI.   Hope this is helpful.   Tracey

Posted 2/28/2014 11:31 AM by Tracey Richardson send a private message to this person
Subject: Policy on use of A3
Message: Can anyone share a sample company policy around the use of A3/continual improvement?
Posted 1/23/2014 6:17 PM by Jeffrey Leap send a private message to this person
Comments (0) 
Subject: A3 for Accident investigation
Message: Hi
I'm working to Implement A3 to help our group leaders make better work accident investigations. The investigation they make is often incomplete and don't respond to the question What is the root cause of this accident. So we think introducting A3 to structure their process , will help us. Does anyone ever used A3 for investigation of work accident. Is there any thing we should adapt to fit this need or any pitfall to avoid ?
Posted 12/11/2013 2:03 PM by Loic Rafenomanjato
Comments (3)  view all
Message: Yes, thanks. I added what I call an "immediate response" to my for.This was the missing elements to meet our needs .
Posted 12/18/2013 4:52 PM by Loic Rafenomanjato
Message: Hi,
definitely you could use the A3 process.
The only comment I would make is to ensure, that you tackle all three legs of a Root Cause.

A. Non-Conformance
Why did it happen? What went wrong?

B. Non-detection
Why was the "unsafe" Situation not identified Prior to happen

C. Systemic approach
Where is the "lack" within our governing System, that allow this accident happen?

If you going with the Team through all 3 areas, you may find more and better answers and Actions, to ensure that the accident will not happen again.

Save and peaceful Christmas time to all of you
Posted 12/20/2013 2:14 AM by Olaf Klau
Subject: DMAIC & A3
Message: Would you please explain how DMAIC can be used in the A3 format?

Thank you!
Posted 12/6/2013 4:39 PM by Fatima Al-Roubaiai
Comments (1) 

The quick answer is DMAIC easily maps to the A3:

Define & Measure = Background, Current Situation and Target

Analyze = Analysis / Recommendations

Improve = Action Plan

Control = Follow-up


But here are my cautions:  

1. Think of the A3 as a process, not a format.  If you haven't read the book Managing to Lean, I would suggest you read it.  That will offer clarity on what I mean.

2.  Key to the A3 process is the effective engagement of ALL the stakeholders involved in the problem.  It has been my experience that most stakeholders get lost or overwhelmed by the DMAIC terms.  The terms typically used in an A3 are more approachable.

3.  Finally, and I say this as a black belt, be careful about treating DMAIC as a gated, unidirectional linear process.  Effective problem solving is messy.  We never have perfect knowledge.  Expect to make discoveries that will cause you to back up and redefine the problem.

Eric Ethington

Posted 12/10/2013 10:14 PM by Eric Ethington send a private message to this person
Subject: What is strategic A3 and How strategy is developed, deployed and monitored?
Message: We are in a phase of stragic A3 development for implementation of LEAN. but confused about overall stratgy and Lean strategy..
Posted 11/1/2013 6:24 AM by Maqsood Ashraf Bala send a private message to this person
Comments (1) 

I was just with the plant managers of a company that has started hoshin (strategy) planning.  They were responsible for creating their plant hoshins to achieve the contributions they are expected to make to the manufacturing vice president's FY2014 hoshin objectives.  I worked with them on translating the performance improvement objectives deployed to each plant into goals for performance improvements by specific parts of their operations. The plant managers were then shown how to create strategy A3s to describe how and why those goals were arrived at and to deploy responsibility to specific managers for making specific improvements in the performance of their units and value streams.  
After the plant managers had drafted their strategy A3s with input from and discussion with their managers, the managers then worked on breaking their goals down to identify specific parts of their areas (values streams, lines, cells, departments or groups) that would need to achieve specific improvement targets. These managers were shown how to draft tactics A3s to describe their thinking and analysis in that breakdown and indicate why specific leaders and areas were given responsibility for specific improvements targets. In most cases the managers either went to their areas, pulled in data or contacted specific leaders and staff members to help them grasp the situation of their overall operations or the nature of performance problems in specific parts.  
The Countermeasures sections of their A3s outlined changes and performance capability improvements they selected to achieve their target performance levels and the Plan sections described schedules, targets, timing,responsibilities and reviews for each improvement activity.  Some of the initiatives will required cascading projects A3s and others just action plans by the responsible people. The monitoring will be done through a regular schedule of reviews with the people responsible for changes, improvements, projects or actions plans reporting on their plan versus actual progress and how they propose to address gaps between the two and barriers to implementation. The end-of-plan cycle review will also include a reflection on the effort and its accomplishments and a grasp of the end-of-cycle situation and lessons to carry forward into the next year's hoshin planning.
I hope this is some help in answering your questions about "How strategy is developed, deployed and monitored." As a brief response to your question about the difference between overall strategy and lean strategy,  I have come to the perspective that lean is not a business strategy;  it is a means of achieving a business strategy.  My thinking would be that you decide the top priority strategic and performance objectives for the company or operation for the planning period and then figure how to use lean performance improvement and continuous improvement to build the capability to achieve those objectives.  Thanks for your questions.  Best wishes in your strategic effort. David

Posted 11/1/2013 5:45 PM by David Verble send a private message to this person
Subject: Strategy A3 verse Problem Solving A3
Message: Doesn't a Strategy A3 require a Gap to be resolved? Is that not the same as a Problem solving A3? What is the difference?
Posted 10/22/2013 12:49 PM by Andrew Retter send a private message to this person
Comments (3)  view all
Message: Thank you Tracy for the recalibration!
Posted 10/23/2013 8:02 AM by Andrew Retter send a private message to this person
Message: Thank you Tracy for the recalibration!
Posted 10/23/2013 8:02 AM by Andrew Retter send a private message to this person
Subject: A3 in managing ot learn by John Shook
Message: I got lost in the analysis section of the "Lost in Translation A3" . Would someone like to help me? you can contact me at colin.roach@aol.com
Posted 8/27/2013 8:32 PM by Colin Roach send a private message to this person
Comments (1) 


Thanks for asking.  Can you clarify which part isn't clear.  It will help us provide a more useful response.


Posted 8/29/2013 8:04 AM by Eric Ethington send a private message to this person
Subject: Implementing A3
Message: Good morning,

One of the big challenges in my organization is this culture of fire fighting. Senior managers have been promoted based on this way of doing things, but now want us to change. I have read about how A3 thinking has helped organizations become problem solvers. How has this successfully been introduced?
Posted 7/23/2013 9:55 AM by Hazel Lord
Comments (2) 


Thanks for asking.  The good news, if I am understanding your posting correctly, is that your management has stated the desire to change.  That is big, since as you have correctly observed, they have achieved their current positions by being awarded for different behaviors.

Regarding "fire fighting" - one thing to realize is that it is never eliminated; but an organization can shift such that fire-fighting is the excpetion and not the norm.  The A3 can be a powerful enabler in making this shift as it drives more effective countermeasures (getting to the root cause of problems versus jumping to solutions and confusing activity with progress) and is a medium to develop more and more problem solvers in your organization.

Not to over-simplify the implementation of the A3 process, but we often break it down to 3 simple steps:

1. Make a decision - leadership makes the willful decision that they want to get better

2. Provide a process - the A3 can be that process

3. Practice - effective problem solving and coaching do not happen easily; it requires practice (just as ANY skill does)

Key to making this truly work is to get a good understanding of what the A3 process really IS and WHY.  If you haven't read Managing to Learn I strongly suggest you do as it is one of the best books I have seen on the topic, exploring both the role of the A3 owner/writer and the role of the coach.


Posted 7/30/2013 11:00 AM by Eric Ethington send a private message to this person
Message: > "How has this successfully been introduced?"

1. Begin with yourself: study as much as you can, use as many sources as you can.

2. Once you feel sufficiently confident, don't "sell" the methodology to others, solve problems! As a Chinese proverb says: "Talk does not cook rice." Start small. As you involve others in the framing and solution of those problems, you'll make visible progress.

3. For new problems, offer to do pair-problem solving (i.e. you are both authoring the A3) with the selected few who show promise and want to learn the approach. Once you'll achieve visible results, other managers will often beg to "teach them" :D

4. After a few problems, take the official role of "acting" mentor/coach and let the former peer become your "student" (the problem-solver). Students will eventually become future coaches.

5. Repeat.

My first peer and student is now Head of the Lean Office in a Fortune 50 company. Skilled a3 thinkers get promoted too ;-)

Posted 7/30/2013 2:34 PM by Claudio Perrone send a private message to this person
Subject: Discovering the Problem really isn't a proble
Message: Hello fellow lea(r)ners!

I'm very new to the lean topic and wanted to pose a couple of situations that have arisen during a pilot A3 we're conducting wtih our Customer Care team to see how they should be properly handled:

1. What do you do when the team does not agree that the problem posed by their leader(s) is the highest priority problem for them?
2. How do you get a team's buy-in that the problem being solved is one that's important to solve if it's not a problem for them? For instance, a process for the collective Customer Care team is problematic, but for the folks on the team, the problem is one they do not encounter often enough for it to impact them on a day-to-day basis because of how different their customer bases are?
Posted 7/17/2013 5:32 PM by Michael Scott
Comments (1) 

Michael - interesting pair of questions.  I sense both relate to scoping as part of deploying problem solving responsibility.  In scoping you are dealing with problems at three levels: business or operational performance issues, value stream or work flow performance issues and process step or work method level problems. The key in scoping is making sure you've got the linkage among the levels correctly defined and clearly communicated.  The first thing to check is whether the process or value stream level problems the leaders have asked to have addressed are the primary contributors to the higher level performance issues.  If so it's a matter of helping those in the value stream or the process see the linkage and the importance of addressing the problems [which is basically what you are trying to describe in the background of an A3.]  If there isn't a critical linkage then it's a matter of helping the leaders see what performance issues at the process level are actually contributing to their performance concerns.  That can be done either with a value stream or process map with the primary problems highlighted [in other words the problem breakdown between performance gap and contributing problems in the work that you want to show in the current situation section of your A3] or with an invitation to the leaders to come to the gemba and see and hear firsthand. I am attaching some slides from the Managing to Learn workshop that show the three levels and give an example of the linkage.  Hope this helps a bit. Come back to us with more questions if you have them.  Thanks

Posted 7/18/2013 8:24 PM by David Verble send a private message to this person
Subject: Building the Team
Message: Can someone help me answers these questions as part of LEAN team development?

1. What qualities do the team members need to possess?
2. How will you recruit people with these qualities to work for your organization?
3. What training and development needs are there and how will they be addressed?
4. How will you retrain the employees that are currently employed at your organization? Consider all levels of employees (examples: shop floor employees, middle managers, executive leadership).
5. What will you do to motivate the employees?
6. What activities will you involved them in?
7. How will you measure their performance?

Posted 7/13/2013 12:10 AM by Ann Remus send a private message to this person
Comments (1) 

Wow - the answer to these questions could be an entire book; there is a lot there to think about.  

I am assuming you do not want to write a book for your organization, and if you did there would be the issue of getting everyone to read it and understand it.  Also, the answers to these questions are not absolute - it depends on the current state of your organization.  One size doesn't fit all.

 That said, what problem are you trying to solve with this list of questions?  What is the business reason for addressing that problem?  And, what is the current state of the process right now?Answering these questions with the stakeholders in you organization will help you identify the real problem(s) you are trying to solve and leader you to countermeasures that will be USEFUL.

My sensei used to tell me, "general question, general answer."  General answers made for good conversation, but they rarely solved real problems.

So what's the problem?

Posted 7/14/2013 10:15 AM by Eric Ethington send a private message to this person
Subject: What is and avg. time for and A3
Message: I just wanted to ask, is there and average time that it should take before the A3 Team comes to a solution? It's been more than a year.
Posted 6/22/2013 1:50 PM by Susan Villalpando-Kyser send a private message to this person
Comments (3)  view all


Thanks for asking.  There is no easy answer here except to say, "it depends." (Bet you saw that coming).  As Vitezslav notes, the scope of the problem will have a big impact.  Another thing to think about is what is meant by "solution?"  

Even A3's that are large in scope can (and often should ) be broken down into smaller problems that add up to the whole.  An example could be a product that is not returning the projected profit margin.  Breaking this problem down could reveal variances in raw material costs, sales price, transportation costs and assembly costs.  Each of these could, in their own right, be a separate A3 requiring a different analysis approach and different set of countermeasures. When the problem is broken down, it is then possible to have incremental progress on the individual A3's.  Should your problem be broken down into several problems?  Can progress be made on the individual problems - some more quickly than others?

Another factor to consider is, "how is the A3 being used to move the project along?".  Is the A3 something that is referred to and discussed on a periodic basis in meetings, or is it constantly being used to move the project forward, always being referred to, always being carried around and socialized by its owner.  It is better to have short & frequent A3 interactions (small lot & flow) than to have longer and infrequent A3 interactions (batch & queue).

Eric Ethington


Posted 6/26/2013 2:17 PM by Eric Ethington send a private message to this person
Message: Thanks for the info. I thought it was taking too long.
Posted 7/19/2013 2:10 PM by Susan Villalpando-Kyser send a private message to this person
Subject: Who should the A3 owner be?
Message: We have a situation where one of the major root causes of a problem in manufacturing will surely be the culture that led to unwise manaufacturing practices. Somewhere (I think in MTL) I read that it is important to have the right level of person solving a problem. That only makes sense. An engineer would be the likely owner of the technical aspects of the problem we faced, but he/she wouldn't be the right person to own the cultural problem. The President would seem to be the right one to own the cultural problem, but he shouldn't be solving the technical aspects of this problem. Is the best thing to do to split the problem into two A3's? If not, how would we choose who the owner should be?


Posted 6/17/2013 10:03 PM by Greg Hildebrand send a private message to this person
Comments (2) 

Greg - please help out here a bit.  I am struggling with the idea of culture as a root cause. Cuture is as big as the company.  It consists of thousands of assumptions about how to do things.  Which one do you believe led to what unwise manufacturing practice?  Culture can't be tackled as a whole.  Not even a company president can take on a whole company culture.  She/her can, however, question a company practice -- if she/he knows what which one it is.  That will allow questioining the assumptions that underlie it.  Thanks.  We need help to help.

Posted 6/17/2013 11:04 PM by David Verble send a private message to this person


I saw your posting and had similar thoughts as David.  Culture can be described as the result of us working together - so your answer may be found in understanding the processes you use while working together.

A long time ago in one of my plants our engineers would develop then next generation production process, it would be installed in plant, it woudl be staffed, everyone would be trained and production would start.  Problems would arise and the finger pointing would begin.  You could say that was the culture.

We shifted to involving the operators upfront in creating mock-ups of the design concepts early on, evolving those concepts as the standard work was designed, building the line based on the final mock-up and standard work.  Production would start (the operators were trained as they helped to create the standard work) and problems would STILL arise - but the engineers and operators would work together to solve them.  A new culture had been created by how we did work.

Can you look at your working processes (it doesn't have to be creating new assembly lines) and see how they are impacting this thing we are calling culture?  Can you find a more specific root cause in that process?


Posted 6/18/2013 9:32 PM by Eric Ethington send a private message to this person
Subject: A3 Learning at School and Work
Message: Greetings LEI Friends,

I have a somewhat rhetorical question I thought I'd throw out...

What's the difference between a science fair poster and an A3?

Thanks, Jeff
Posted 5/16/2013 12:12 AM by Jeff Maling send a private message to this person
Comments (2) 
Message: Hi Folks, Any thoughts on this question? Wasn't meant to be tongue-in-cheek...but I can see how you might think it was!
Posted 5/30/2013 2:53 PM by Jeff Maling send a private message to this person


Sorry for the delay.  This can be approached several ways - here is a start.  What's the difference between playing in a song with a band and listening to the same song recorded?

On the surface the A3 and a science fair poster can seem very similar.  If I were to highlight one difference (amongst many) I would start with engagement.  A properly completed A3 does not merely report out the results, but engages stakeholders in all phases in its development, ensuring they too understand and buy in to the countermeasures and implementation plan.



Posted 6/3/2013 9:21 PM by Eric Ethington send a private message to this person
Subject: Looking for some feedback
Message: Attached you will find an A3 that one of my Lean Leaders is working through on a project. The group is currently in the evaluation stage, and are working through some experiments and time studies. In the "Plan section" I realized that the "Numbering" is off, and that will be addressed. Overall, I am just looking for some general feedback.
Posted 5/1/2013 9:46 AM by Ted Roethlisberger send a private message to this person
Comments (2) 

Ted - 

Some quick feedback to get the dialogue moving:

1.  If you haven't read, "Managing to Learn" I would suggest taking a look.  It can greatly improve your use of the A3 process.

2.  What is the high-level business issue you are trying to address?  The A3 currently starts out with a solution (identify new cabinet construction methods and implement).  Although the targets suggest a high level need of cost reduction - but it is not clear.  

3.  If the high level need is to reduce the overall cost by XX%, then the next section should describe the current value creating process - all of the steps that add to the cost.  Purchased material, value added process steps, work-in-process inventory, raw material and finished goods inventory, equiptment related costs, distribution costs, etc.  All of the costs drivers - not just the cabinet contruction method.  Once this is understood, then we can begin to establish new performance levels (targets) and the likely root causes keeping you from the new levels (root cause analysis).  Be careful to not jump to a solution before you understand the problem.


Posted 5/7/2013 9:24 PM by Eric Ethington send a private message to this person
Message: Eric,

I agree; looking at the A3 it only depicts how to put something together; I believe the A3 is designed to scope the issue in terms of a specific problem area and then determine what baseline metrics are accessible and map the value stream accordingly.

Posted 7/29/2013 3:47 PM by Anthony Hairston
Subject: Japanese Terms
Message: Thank you I got the Glossary of Terms. I appreicate it.
Posted 4/18/2013 11:26 AM by Susan Villalpando-Kyser send a private message to this person
Comments (0) 
Subject: First A3 -looking for some feeback
Message: I am the Lean manager for Midwestern insurance company. We are several years into our Lean journey, but attempting our first A3. I am working with a customer service unit where the management team has previously developed productivity metrics that are not working well. I am serving as the mentor and their Lean facilitator is developing the A3. We welcome your questions and feedback. Thank you! Paula
Posted 4/16/2013 9:22 AM by Paula Liotine send a private message to this person
Comments (1) 


Thanks for posting your A3.

I am going to focus on feedback on "Grasping the situation" - the background, current situation and target/goal.  If the problem is not properly defined, then the balance of the A3 will not be correct.

Here are some things to think about:

Background should make the business reason for addressing this topic clear.  This should link to a high level goal. Does your company currently have goals relative to quality? delivery? cost? other(s)?  I suspect the true business need is not about "POINTS".

Current condition reveal to us how the current process works, how it performs and how it SHOULD perform.  Be careful to objectively show how it currently works.  I see the word "manual" used to describe how it works - which makes me think (rightly or wrongly) that an automatic method is waiting in the wings; even before we have defined the problem.  Why is "manual" significant?  I am looking for more FACTS here and fewer descriptions (inequitable, discouraged, wrong).  You may consider expanding your process flow to be a value stream map with material and information flow. Of course, to do this you will have to answer, "what is the value you are actually flowing in this process?"  I suspect the logging of points isn't the actual value - it is something else.  The points logging is attempting to track the performance.  

I have seen organization that expect people to track data while serving the customer.  If the data tracking system is cumbersome the employees rightly serve the customer first and then make an attempt to log data later.  Go observe the work the colleagues are doing to serve their customer.  How does the points system support / hinder their ability to get work done?  How simple is it to use.

Identify the value, walk the value stream and map the value stream.  I think this will get you closer to understanding your real problem and closer to finding the root cause.


Posted 5/6/2013 10:03 AM by Eric Ethington send a private message to this person
Subject: A3 Analysis section
Message: My manager in Sweden is asking for more support and advice regarding this section. His team have been on A3 problem solving training (both physical and on the net) but lacks the confidence to have a go. Now his team are asking me to create an A3 problem solving guideline on 'how to do it'. I just fear it will never be enough.
What do you advise here?
Thanks, Carl.
Posted 4/1/2013 4:12 PM by Carl Woodward send a private message to this person
Comments (1) 
Message: The question is - what sort of guideline they want if they have been on a training ?
When trying to work through A3 with some newbies in our company, I have found, that it is possible to do a sort "technical" guideline, sort of "background = here you put simply how did yout stumble onto the problem and why you have chosen to solve exactly this one" plus with some simple clues like "target = try to formulate it in SMART" or in what part which of the 7Q tools are most propriate to use.
However such technical guideline does not tells you how to create the A3, how to use it and what is the problem solving process behind the A3 - the only way how to learn it is to do it (including the fails, re-do, start from start, go gemba and again go gemba, review and review once more ...). This is not possible to hammer down in any easy guideline.
P.S. And actually it would be difficult into any guideline on the end write down "and now, when A3 si finally finished, it is useless - archive it" :o)
Posted 4/10/2013 2:54 AM by Vitezslav Pilmaier send a private message to this person
Subject: Japanese Terms
Message: This may or not be a strange question....is there a definition "cheat sheet" of all of the Japanese words that are in the managing to learn. Example: Gemba means going to where the action is. Or going out to where the work is preformed. Dojo is "place of the way". I find myself looking up every word I don't understand. That's not a bad thing because I am learning, I guess I answered my own question. I could make my own definition sheet. Just thought there may be one out there already.
Posted 3/10/2013 6:03 AM by Susan Villalpando-Kyser send a private message to this person
Comments (2) 

Hey Susan, see if this "cheatsheet" for the Japanese terms. among other Lean terms that may be helpful. It's something I made up for some of my sessions. The MTL book usually explains the meaning of the term, this may help with different ones you may hear in the Lean world. Let me know how this works.



Posted 3/10/2013 4:44 PM by Tracey Richardson send a private message to this person


Another resource is the "Lean Lexicon" book available in the LEI book store.




Posted 3/11/2013 1:27 PM by Eric Ethington send a private message to this person
Subject: Teaching A3 in Asia
Message: Next week I am going to be teaching an A3 class in Asia, to learners from a number of Asia/Pacific countries. My local contact and I have been discussing the challenge of getting people to start solving problems, when culturally they feel the need to "save face." I will be explaining that the problems we have at work are not ascribed to individuals, but i think it will take more than the visitor from the US saying that to get people comfortable talking about, and working on solving problems. Any thoughts would be appreciated.
Posted 2/25/2013 10:06 PM by ISABELLA Englebach send a private message to this person
Comments (1) 


When approaching any problem (in Asia or any other part of the world) the problem solving needs to be focused on the PROCESS generating the problem.  Stay process focused.  That is why, when describing the current conditions it is so important to show how the process works.  This is about improvement - and all processes need improvement.  There is no "perfect process."

This process focus should carry through the analysis.  We are trying to understand the root cause of the problem - WHY.  Not Who.  (Although we know it happens, we are not proponents of using the 5-Who technique).

Others reading this discussion thread - what do you think?  Let's help out each other.


Posted 2/26/2013 1:07 PM by Eric Ethington send a private message to this person
Subject: A3 Teams
Message: I was wondering if it is such a good idea to have two many A3's going all at the same time?
Posted 2/15/2013 10:47 AM by Susan Villalpando-Kyser send a private message to this person
Comments (7)  view all
Message: Thanks to all for your responses. It's helped me understand and look at the A3 problem solving tool in a better light. Thanks again.
Posted 2/23/2013 1:30 PM by Susan Villalpando-Kyser send a private message to this person
Message: Good morning Susan,

There are potential problems with having multiple A3s working at the same time if they are on the same value stream. Even if you are solving separate issues within the same VS they will effect eachother.

My suggestion is to incorporate a value stream map into any A3 and eliminate duplicates by combining kaizens. This was the issue dealt with in 'The Goldmine' toward the end if you're interested in reading material.
Posted 7/10/2013 10:17 AM by Stephen Kleitsch send a private message to this person
NEW - A3 Creator App
Search the Dojo:
My A3 Dojo Posts
[none found]
My Followed Threads
[none found]
Most Active Threads