A3 Dojo: Share and Discuss A3s with Other Lean Thinkers

Message:

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.

Eric

Message:

Paula,

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.

Eric

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)

Message:

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.

Tracey

@thetoyotagal

Message:

Susan,

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

http://www.lean.org/Bookstore/ProductDetails.cfm?SelectedProductId=83&ProductCategoryId=viewAll

 

Eric

Message:

Isabella,

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.

Eric

Message:

Susan,

Your question does get one thinking.  The phrase "too many" implies that there are more A3's being worked than you have resources to handle.  So the short answer would be, "no."  A good follow-up questions would be, "How do you prioritize your A3's to match the resources you have available to work them?"

I have some ideas here, but would like to see if anyone else out there has some thoughts.

Readers - share your ideas with us!

Eric

Message: Thank you for your response. I thinks that's it not enough resources. I would like to hear what others have to say as well.

Message: This leans towards the bigger issue of resources versus appetite for progress. In our company, we have been stressing 5S and VM for a few years now, and these processes are really becoming embedded in the daily work. That being said, we are currently trying to push out Teamwork, Focused Improvement and Leading and Managing Change to the company, and we are finding that we need to slow it down from where we would like to go.

Everyone wants to start accomplishing the goals that are being developed through our strategy A3's, and quick! However, we need to ensure that we get the PROCESSES right and the floor buy in, else we may unwittingly create a feeling that this is just the latest fad program.

Very delicate balance, but I would suspect that as you are already thinking about the resources versus the goals, you are most of the way to your answer.

Message:

Jason,

Thanks for the comment.  I am guessing your thoughts ring true with many others out there.

Message:

Susan,

This discussion thread can go many ways - I am going to take it down one.  Although I am not a proponent of specific formats for A3's, most begin with a background.  A key aspect of the background is that it should describe the BUSINESS reason for addressing the problem.  Take a look at your A3's.  Is there a good business reason for each one?  Can a business reason be described?  If not, those might be candidates to either stop working or reduce in priority.

 

Digging deeper, if your organization doesn't have a clear way of cascading objectives, then linking your A3's to a business reason becomes unclear - and that is a different problem.  If that is the case there is a discussion thread already on this dojo - you have to scroll WAY down - down to August 16, 2011 - and you will see some dialogue on that topic.

 

If this doesn't help - please let us know on the dojo - ask another question.  That is why we are here.

 

Take care,

EE

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.

Message:

HI Lora,

A Lean transformation can often be a very challenging because there are so many things involved when it comes to changing the way people think. Many folks have been doing things a certain way for a long time and feel, why change if it works, right?

A couple of things to remember is that the transformation itself is a journey, its not a destination, so its a never ending process of small steps and successes learning to engage, challenge and involve people at their process (gemba).

When it comes to A3, Im not sure based on your post the level of knowledge that your organization has a whole about it, what I would like to suggest is asking some questions about it and how people view it. Sort of like assessing the current situation. What I find when I'm working with organizations is that A3 is often seen only as a "tool" or piece of paper that has a template that a person must "fill out". This is usually done at a desk or at a computer.

I tend to make a clear distinction between A3 as the "tool" that the people view it as and A3 and the "thinking" process behind it. So the thinking process behind the A3 (PDCA)-plan do check action, is a series of questions leaders should be asking at the gemba with the people involved at the process. It can be as simple as - what is currently happening and what should be happening (if there is a standard). The difference between the two should give you a measurable gap.

One lesson my trainer taught me was if you cant measure something then how can you improve it, his way of expressing it was simple- No measure No do!. So when I think about A3 and having meeting and frequency of interaction, I try not to bring it across as an "add-on" or something special they should be doing. During my time at Toyota it was an expectation of my role as a leader in the organization. I should be present asking questions and understanding when we werent meeting the standard and why.

I would ask are these meetings you are having held in a meeting room with discussions taking place, or are they out at the processes where the problems are happening? The A3 really is a visual manifestation of our thinking as a problem evolves, we document it as we go to try to tell a story that follows the PDCA that we can then share this thinking with others (shared wisdom). Usually the A3 evolves as we investigate with the people at the process. We gather information (preferably facts not assumptions) and try to understand all the processes involved that arent meeting an expectation or a customer need.

Once we condition our leaders to start being present and learning to ask those questions then the A3 is a much easier process. In my experience organization usually struggle with the A3 because they dont have standards and they cant measure the difference between the ideal and current so then the assumptions start.

My first suggestion is to understand a couple of things. I use an expression in my sessions called the "what-how-why" model. I can tell someone easily what and how to "do" something, but if they dont understand "why" its important then it may not be viewed as a value added activity or back to the add-on mentality. I would ensure that people understand why we are looking at Lean, why we are using A3, and why the thinking behind it is important. I call this the infrastructure necessary to create a culture of thinkers who are sparked by their leaders asking questions and setting standards so the A3 thinking can take place.

As far as frequency, it shouldnt be scheduled- our motto was everyday, everybody, problem solving at their process. This creates the actions, that leads to habits and builds the character of your workforce to change the way they do business, and at that point you dont have to label it anything, its just their job/role. This is what we created when I worked at Toyota.

So to sum up just remember:

1. Show respect by involving people and asking their thoughts about it

2. Set standards so people can see abnormality (this starts step 1 of the A3)

3. When abnormality happens ask why

4. Do this at the process, everyday, everybody

5. Solve it so it doesnt return (get past the symptom)

6. Continue this process.

I hope this helps, let me know if you have any questions.

Tracey Richardson

@thetoyotagal

Message: Thanks for your reply, Tracey!

I would say that we're definitely still in the beginning phases of A3 usage within the corporation. I like that you seperate an A3 from being a tool we use versus the PDCA cycle thinking. When you are seeing activity getting done, but the KPI's/results are still not being met what are some of those key questions to ask? Maybe that's where I could use some more help too. I think that overall I'm working with some very strong personalities, and no one really knows what a lean culture looks like so it's been a bit of an uphill battle!

Message:

Hey Lora, IM sorry for the delay in responding to your response.    I have been having issues with the LEI site and my computer, but its worked out now.  Also been on vacation. 

Everyone has to start their journey and decide they want to make a difference, its simple its just not easy as some say. 

I think there is a distinct separation between the A3 as the piece of paper to fill out, and also the thinking process behind it (the dialogue that creates the A3).

Part of the process of PDCA is to always link any activity to the KPI's.  In step 1 of the process you must determine or frame the problem.  By doing that you are telling the reader its purpose, and the purpose is why is this important to solve.   The reason most A3's are difficult to track is because there are no measures.   If you ask those questions I talked about.  What is currently happening, that doesnt mean describe it, it means to measure the problem in a quantifiable sense.   Same with what should be happening.  For example we should be running our outputs at 95%, our current state is 85%, we have a 10% gap in productivity.    So then I begin to look what encompasses that gap.   It doesnt have to be percentages, it can be dollars, how many times something is happening (numbers), its how ever you track it.   So until A3 owners link their A3's to the KPI's to say this A3 is going to improve cost, quality, safety, productivity or Human Resources, then you may not see the proper results.

In many of my/our classes at LEI we discuss the problem solving process and the questions and the coaching behind it.   It takes time, I suggest to just ask a few questions at a time, let people get used to that, if you bombard them with many questions then it can be overwhelming.   There is a column on asking the right questions I wrote last year that could help you.  Here is a link - http://thetoyotagal.blogspot.com/2010/01/are-you-asking-right-questions.html     

I hope this helps, thanks Lora!

Message: my opinion to success A3 on company are :
1. Involve your team leader to do A3 by clear A3 each division. A3 should be part of project & anual project to success company vision/mision.
2. Make sure your baby A3 aligment with mother A3
3. Periodic report of A3 (presentation) by A3 project leader on Top Management.
4. Get a powerpull by invole Manging director or CEO to join at periodicly meeting.
5. Coacing each A3 project leader periodicly and make sure to do with timely maner.


Just do it & learn from mistage

cheers

Guntar Sagala-Indonesia

Message:

Troy,

Thanks for posting your A3.  I want to start at the very beginning.  The purpose of the background should be to establish clearly WHY we are talking about this issue - in this case ATRE Scrap.  When answering WHY, it should link to a business reason.  Is there a company goal that addressing ATRE Scrap will help you achieve.  It is important to establish this up front in the background as everyone has limited resources, and those resources are very busy.  So as you try to engage key stakeholders at your company on this issue - WHY it is important should be very clear to everyone.  Also, and I have had this happen to some of my A3's, if you cannot link the problem to a business reason then perhaps it should not be addressed - perhaps there is a more pressing issue that needs your attention.

In the current situation you should communicate how the current process operates, how it is currently performing, and how it SHOULD BE performing.  The difference between IS and SHOULD BE is your gap.  Now you need to decide how much of the gap you are going to target with this A3 and the logic for arriving at that target.

Regarding your A3, the ppm chart shown provides some performance insight, but I am not sure if it is the right performance insight as I can see nothing about the actually process.  Not knowing what the ATRE process is, it is hard to give you specifics on how to describe the current process - but I was looking for something that shows how the process flows and the different steps in the process and the performance of those various steps

Hypothetically, if the ATRE process was six steps, A, B, C, D, E and F - and I could see the A feeds B which feeds C and so on.....that would allow me to begin to see the flow.  Now if I could see some key metrics of each process step (ppm, cycle time, number of employees, etc....)then I could gain an understanding of the ppm level of the entire system (2132 ppm??) and the need to get it to 150 (your stated goal).  That is a gap of 1982 ppm. Now I would want to see where in the process is the scrap generated?  Is step D generating all of the scrap?  Is it spread evenly across all of the process steps?  Is half the scrap due to the quality of the incoming parts?  This information allows you to set your actual target for this A3.  Although you ideally may want to close the gap of the entire 1982 ppm, if 50% is due to incoming product quality and 50% due to process step D, then you may choose in this A3 to focus on closing the gap due to process step D, as fixing supplier quality may be beyond the scope of your team OR you may need to impact quality right now - and fixing supplier quality issues may take a longer time.  Now your goal would be to reduce ppm from 2132 to 1141 (50%) on this A3, and then a 2nd A3 could be created to address the supplier issues.

The important part is that you have some logic behind your goal.  So I would ask in this specific case, why are you going from 2132 to 150 ppm?  Why not go to 500 ppm?  Why not 50 ppm

Once clear logic for you target is developed, then your analysis should focus on determining the root cause(s) for the gap (your goal)

This may sound like I am pushing you back to square #1.  Charles Kettering once said, "A problem well defined is a problem half solved."  They sound like simple words - but there is a lot of wisdom in those words.  Be cautious about jumping into analysis too early - make sure the problem is well defined

One final note, if you look under the columns posted in this dojo, David Verble's column posted on 7/18 may give you some additional insight as to why I am encouraging you to focus on better defining your problem.

Take care,

EE

Message:

Hailey,

This is a big question - as it is almost the essence of the book, "managing to Learn" itself.  That said, I am going to offer up two thoughts.  I also encourage others to add what they learned from MTL as it realtes to your questions.

On managing cross-organizational people issues: Engage, engage and then engage.  That is fundamental to the A3 as a process and is often missed by many organzations I visit.  The A3 is NOT merely a final report document.  Ask yourself, "why do projects or initiatives fail?"  The root cause of most reasons you will come up with is lack of alignement or agreement.  And to get agreement, you must engage others.

On Sanderson developing Porter as a problem solver: Lead and coach with questions versus dictates and answers.  Coaching others is a skill we can all practice.  When practicing we will have good days and bad days (I still walk away from sessions thinking, "I could have done that better!").  As Sanderson coaches he keeps in the forefront of his mind that he needs both the translation problem solved, but he also needs Porter developed.  To develop Porter, Sanderson needs to be careful to keep the problem solving responsibility with Porter at all times.  As a coach, one very effective way of doing this is to ask good questions rather than tell.  As soon as a leader tells the problem solver exactly what to do, whether indended of not, responsibility for solving the problem shifts back to the leader.  Now the person tasked with solving the problem has been deprived of the opportunity to learn and become a better problem solver themselves.  The leader will continue with the burden of having subordinates who cannot effectively solve problems for themselves.  So now the leader gets to do her job AND her subordinates' jobs.

Other thoughts?  Other key learnings?

EE

 

Message:

HI Hailey,

I agree with Eric about it being the essence of the book, any one who has read the book knows its a GREAT reference book for coaching, engaging people, asking the right questions that follow the PDCA format, hoshin alignment (business KPI's), gemba walking, and development of leadership just to name a few. 

To try to describe it in a couple of paragraphs would not do the book justice because it is that dynamic.  It's one of the best books written in context of 2 people having a dialogue that reflects a real life problem with real life situations and dilemnas.   Such as:   how to deal with resistance, the frustration of lean thinking, the discipline and accountability it adds to an individual, leader, or company embracing this type thinking. 

I am one of the instructors for Managing to Learn and I mapped out the process of what Porter is doing during his learning with Sanderson by chapter.   Maybe it can be of some help. 

Message: I fully agree with the above answers and would like to add some of my personal ruls from my practical perspective when trying to train others (I hope I got them right in the English):
- Questions, questions, questions
- Lead to ask "Why" not "Who" (find cause do not blame)
- Lead to not seek power but resposnibility
- Go Gemba !
- Lead to not skip steps in the mental process (do not jump to solutions)
- Lead to dig deep (especially process wise)
- Show, that 2 are infinitivelly more close to the objective solution, then a single person, but team even much better
- Lead to Nemawashi (involve during problem solving process, not on the end)
- Execute and lead to review and re-act
And the last, not emphasized by Tracey and Eric, but a very important one:
- Lead by personal sample (do you remember the moment Sanderson started his own A3 ?) = the personal sample is actually the only real motivator we have, the rest are just simulators (and might not work well or at all)

Message:

Dave,

Thanks for the question.  I will have to defer to some of my LEI colleagues regarding specific "app" training.  Regardless of what may be available, never forget the fundamental A3 process behind the app.  LEI does offer a 2-day workshop built around the book, "Managing to Learn."  The workshop is very effective at teaching the A3 process and critical problem sollving.  Personally, as i have gained a deeper understanding of the process it has allowed me to customize which media best supports the process in a given organization (app versus hand-drawn versus Excel, etc....)

I'm not sure if you have discovered that within the app there are short videos that you can watch that provide coaching on each segment of the A3.  Your mobile device will need to have a network connection to take advantage of this feature.  But again, this is more in support of how to use the A3 process effectively, not necessarily the app.

Hope this helps some.

EE

Message:

Hi Glenna, thanks for your post.   Just know you are not alone I hear many clients from various industry ask a similar question.

Even with my experience at Toyota we had a similar issue because we were so lean and the line had to run and it wasnt easy to get input from team members when they are working an important process.

Its always best when an organization and its leadership (high levels) support the change, and that is trying to provide resources the best way possible in order for successful transformation to take place.

We often met at times during a portion of our lunch time, we came in a few minutes early on our own time before shift to try and solve problems, sometimes its a combination of many things that helped .

If none of those things are options, then as a line leader or a supervisor it may be an option to shadow your nurses for short periods of time to understand their processes, what they do, where their gaps are, and what standards are in place and ones that may be missing. 

It is best to just start slow and do the things you can to understand the process and what your people do and try to identify the waste and make improvements a little at a time.

This process will hopefully engage and involve them in making changes and finding short periods of time where they can do small improvements.

I hope this helps, maybe other folks will chime in with hospital examples with your same situation.

Message:

HI Jack,

Good to hear from you!  This is making me smile!!  Yes what you are doing has a ton of merit to it.  It is what I would hope all participants would do with this exercise, its such a dynamic one.  Not only does it help align your own personal responsibilities with the expectations of the company but it can be a "gap creator" to see when you may be falling short of the expectations due to barriers and constraints in our jobs or maybe even available resources we dont have.   It can be the start of our own A3 in framing our work- what should be versus what is!.  I love it!

As you stated you can also use this in a group sense to ensure the company is trying to "see through the same lens" and working towards the same true north goals.   It can assist in creating leader standard work and/or department goals. 

I use mine very often to improve how I teach and what methods I can enhance in my sessions to teach the best way I can and learn from others along the way.

I appreciate your efforts in taking this to the level it should be taken to, maybe others will see this and understand how beneficial this exercise can be.  Very nice work Jack!!  Keep it up!  You guys are doing great things, Im glad to be a small part in helping.

For those of you who arent familiar with the Line of Sight exercise here is a column that was written earlier this year and posted on the Dojo.

http://www.lean.org/a3dojo/ColumnArchive.cfm?y=2012#Col2056

Message: Tracey, I continue to modify my LoS (attached). On this 4th version, I took a top-down approach. That is, started with True North goals and worked back to "My Role".. I found this approach to be helpful to me. After reviewing the current version LoS, my team leader wants to review and discuss it with our team to encourage further alignment of our work. Thanks for your help and encouragement.

Message:

Hi Jack, for some reason, I'm not seeing the attachment.    It didn't show up in the thread.  If it did, Im not looking in the right place.   It sounds like you are having some very good dialogue with your group, that is great.  I look forward to seeing your progress.  This is a very important activity I think and most companies overlook how beneficial it can be to develop scope of work and alignment to the company goals (true north).   Either send me the attachment to my email, or re-post.   Thanks Jack

Message:

Thanks Jack for sharing, that is a very good line of sight. So what you do is look at that as your ideal state, sort of like framing your own personal A3 on your performance and then consider it a "gap creator" and ask what are the barriers and constraints that keep me from doing this each day?

  This begins the conversation of what should be happening and current state. I love the exercise myself, it really gives everyone a great way to see through the same lens and speak the same language and know when we (the company / and individual) isnt meeting expectation. Very good job. I like it! Thanks for sharing and spending time articulating your role. I'm sure its helpful for you as well as the others! Keep me posted on progress!  Tracey @thetoyotagal

Message:

HI Robert,

Thanks for your post.  It's important to know this is a continual learning process so its perfectly fine to just start and begin to revise along the way as we ask more questions preferably at the gemba engaging your people.  

So a couple of things.  First there are different types of A3 formats/templates.  One is a strategy/proposal A3, some would call that a created gap where you are trying to create a "new standard".

Another type is a problem solving A3, and some would call that a caused gap where you are not meeting a current standard you have in place. 

You have a lot of information on your first attempt and I am unable to read a lot of it due to the small print but I can gather that you may have a hybrid A3, meaning a little of both types.

So the question you may want to ask yourself is there a current standard for this process?  If so is it measurable? (Are you able to track?) Are you able to ask - What is currently happening in a measurable sense, and what should be happening?  This will give you a current versus ideal and give you a gap between the 2 if you have a caused gap and you are not meeting a current standard or expectation.  

Many created gaps do not go deep into root cause analysis with the 5 whys so Im making an assumption that you possibly have a problem solving  situation without knowing everything.

Now on the otherhand something to think about is if you do NOT have a current standard then you may be attempting to create a new standard.   Which then you would look at a proposed plan and implemenation schedule to complete it and a follow up.  You wouldnt want to start out with a root cause analysis.  

Im going to attach a problem solving template so you can see the questions it ask you which can be investigated at the gemba and engaging your people.  Especially if you need data to understand the measurable (which you want it to be fact based-not assumption). I will try to post a created gap strategy A3 example so you can see the different templates and decide which you may be dealing with.  I hope this helps.  Tracey Richardson @thetoyotagal

Message:

The problem solving template!

Message:

The strategy/proposal example and template.  I hope these are helpful.  Tracey

Message: The beauty of an A3 is that there is flexibility in it's use. As long as you know your audience (reporting, proposing) or the project team members (projects) the format should be simple, visual and easy to read. It should tell a story. I think your example easy to understand. Keep applying A3 thinking, and you will know best how to improve the reporting and format that is most effective.

Message:

Here is a template I use in my sessions that follow the 8 step PDCA process, I hope this helps.  Tracey

Message: Hi Stan,

This is just a reminder that the best A3's are created as a group. Sort of "a plan is useless but planning is everything" approach.

One of the biggest values of A3 thinking is that it forces the creator to go and interact colleauges and work on problems and fact gathering together, which creates better relationships.

Thanks,
josh

Message: I have been using SharePoint for a few years now, and it is possible to customize a site that would organize a directory of A3s. Depending on how you wanted people to use the A3s, you could provide an array of options to share the information(file folders, project timeline, etc..).
For instance, you could build a Discussion Board which can host the A3 file as an attachment, which people could comment on. If A3s "in progress" were posted, it would allow teams to offer feedback and share information in the discussion thread as the activities were being completed.

Message:

Conor - good question.  I've not come across the one tool that work for everyone, so you will have think through that for your own application.  One bit of advice I would like to offer is beyond selecting a tool or application, make sure you design a process that governs how A3's are posted, maintained, organized and if necessary, removed.  Many "sharing" databases fail as they become cumbersome to utilize.  And a good management process, defined up front, can help mitigate this issue.

Message: In our company we are simply using the internally instaled Wiki for such simple share and actually it is used by a small number of people (ussually specialists / supervisors / managers) - for most of the people is easier to ask someone getting to all parts of the company (for instance a quality specialist) a question like "have you or anyone in the company encountered this kind of problem ? And if yes, could you mail me all you can dig out about it ?"
Our mother company has also been trying asmore complex Internet tool for at least Corrective action request (CAR) management, but it also did not went well and finally they have also ended up in the Wiki.

Message: Hi all,

Many thanks for your input. I was concerned over the value of a database but it seems like others have had success in this area. I particularly like the idea of creating a discussion forum around the A3's and I then realised this answer was staring me in the face with the A3 Dojo! If only we could see what was in front of our eyes!

Many thanks

Conor