a3 approach to problem solving

• A Step-by-Step Guide to A3 Problem Solving Methodology
• Learn Lean Sigma
• Problem Solving

Problem-solving is an important component of any business or organization. It entails identifying, analyzing, and resolving problems in order to improve processes, drive results, and foster a culture of continuous improvement. A3 Problem solving is one of the most effective problem-solving methodologies.

A3 Problem solving is a structured and systematic approach to problem-solving that originated with the lean manufacturing methodology. It visualizes the problem-solving process using a one-page document known as an A3 report. The A3 report provides an overview of the problem, data analysis, root causes, solutions, and results in a clear and concise manner.

A3 Problem Solving has numerous advantages, including improved communication, better decision-making, increased efficiency, and reduced waste. It is a powerful tool for businesses of all sizes and industries, and it is especially useful for solving complex and multi-faceted problems.

In this blog post, we will walk you through the A3 Problem Solving methodology step by step. Whether you are new to A3 Problem Solving or simply want to improve your skills, this guide will help you understand and apply the process in your workplace.

Table of Contents

What is a3 problem solving.

A3 Problem Solving is a structured and systematic approach to problem-solving that makes use of a one-page document called an A3 report to visually represent the process. The A3 report provides an overview of the problem, data analysis, root causes, solutions, and results in a clear and concise manner. The method was created within the framework of the Lean manufacturing methodology and is based on the principles of continuous improvement and visual management.

Looking for a A3 Problem solving template? Click here

Origin and History of A3 Problem Solving

A3 Problem Solving was developed by Toyota Motor Corporation and was first used in the manufacture of automobiles. The term “A3” refers to the size of the paper used to create the report, which is an ISO standard known as “A3”. The goal of the A3 report is to provide a visual representation of the problem-solving process that all members of the organisation can easily understand and share. A3 Problem Solving has been adopted by organisations in a variety of industries over the years, and it has become a widely used and recognised method for problem-solving.

Key Principles of A3 Problem Solving

The following are the key principles of A3 Problem Solving:

• Define the problem clearly and concisely
• Gather and analyze data to gain a deep understanding of the problem
• Identify the root causes of the problem
• Develop and implement effective solutions
• Evaluate results and continuously improve

These principles serve as the foundation of the A3 Problem Solving methodology and are intended to assist organisations in continuously improving and achieving their objectives. Organizations can effectively solve problems, identify areas for improvement, and drive results by adhering to these principles.

Step 1: Define the Problem

Importance of clearly defining the problem.

The first step in the A3 Problem Solving process is critical because it lays the groundwork for the remaining steps. To define the problem clearly and accurately, you must first understand the problem and identify the underlying root cause. This step is critical because if the problem is not correctly defined, the rest of the process will be based on incorrect information, and the solution developed may not address the issue effectively.

The significance of defining the problem clearly cannot be overstated. It aids in the collection and analysis of relevant data, which is critical for developing effective solutions. When the problem is clearly defined, the data gathered is more relevant and targeted, resulting in a more comprehensive understanding of the issue. This will enable the development of solutions that are more likely to be effective because they are founded on a thorough and accurate understanding of the problem.

However, if the problem is not clearly defined, the data gathered may be irrelevant or incorrect, resulting in incorrect conclusions and ineffective solutions. Furthermore, the process of collecting and analysing data can become time-consuming and inefficient, resulting in resource waste. Furthermore, if the problem is not accurately defined, the solutions developed may fail to address the root cause of the problem, resulting in ongoing issues and a lack of improvement.

Techniques for Defining the Problem

The first step in the A3 Problem Solving process is to clearly and accurately define the problem. This is an important step because a clearly defined problem will help to ensure that the appropriate data is collected and solutions are developed. If the problem is not clearly defined, incorrect data may be collected, solutions that do not address the root cause of the problem, and time and resources may be wasted.

A problem can be defined using a variety of techniques, including brainstorming , root cause analysis , process mapping , and Ishikawa diagrams . Each of these techniques has its own advantages and disadvantages and can be used in a variety of situations depending on the nature of the problem.

Best Practice for Defining the Problem

In addition to brainstorming, root cause analysis, process mapping, and Ishikawa diagram s, best practices should be followed when defining a problem in A3 Problem Solving. Among these best practices are:

• Define the issue in a specific and quantifiable way: It is critical to be specific and concise when defining the problem, as well as to quantify the problem in terms of its impact. This will help to ensure that all stakeholders understand the problem and that data collection is focused on the right areas.
• Focus on the problem’s root cause: The A3 Problem Solving methodology is intended to assist organisations in identifying and addressing the root cause of a problem, rather than just the symptoms. Organizations can ensure that their solutions are effective and long-lasting by focusing on the root cause of the problem.
• Ascertain that all stakeholders agree on the problem’s definition: All stakeholders must agree on the definition of the problem for the A3 Problem Solving process to be effective. This ensures that everyone is working towards the same goal and that the solutions developed are relevant and appropriate.
• Consider the problem’s impact on the organisation and its stakeholders: It is critical to consider the impact of the problem on the organisation and its stakeholders when defining it. This will assist in ensuring that the appropriate data is gathered and that the solutions developed are relevant and appropriate.

Organizations can ensure that their problem is defined in a way that allows for effective data collection, analysis, and solution development by following these best practices. This will aid in the development of appropriate solutions and the effective resolution of the problem, resulting in improvements in the organization’s processes and outcomes.

Step 2: Gather Data

Gathering data in a3 problem solving.

Data collection is an important step in the A3 Problem Solving process because it allows organisations to gain a thorough understanding of the problem they are attempting to solve. This step entails gathering pertinent information about the problem, such as data on its origin, impact, and any related factors. This information is then used to help identify root causes and develop effective solutions.

One of the most important advantages of data collection in A3 Problem Solving is that it allows organisations to identify patterns and trends in data, which can be useful in determining the root cause of the problem. This information can then be used to create effective solutions that address the problem’s root cause rather than just its symptoms.

In A3 Problem Solving, data collection is a collaborative effort involving all stakeholders, including those directly impacted by the problem and those with relevant expertise or experience. Stakeholders can ensure that all relevant information is collected and that the data is accurate and complete by working together.

Overall, data collection is an important step in the A3 Problem Solving process because it serves as the foundation for effective problem-solving. Organizations can gain a deep understanding of the problem they are attempting to solve and develop effective solutions that address its root cause by collecting and analysing relevant data.

Data Collection Methods

In A3 Problem Solving, several data collection methods are available, including:

• Observations
• Process diagrams

The best data collection method will be determined by the problem being solved and the type of data required. To gain a complete understanding of the problem, it is critical to use multiple data collection methods.

Tools for Data Analysis and Visualization

Once the data has been collected, it must be analysed and visualised in order to gain insights into the problem. This process can be aided by the following tools:

• Excel Spreadsheets
• Flow diagrams
• Pareto diagrams
• Scatter Plots
• Control diagrams

These tools can assist in organising data and making it easier to understand. They can also be used to generate visual representations of data, such as graphs and charts, to communicate the findings to others.

Finally, the data collection and analysis step is an important part of the A3 Problem Solving process. Organizations can gain a better understanding of the problem and develop effective solutions by collecting and analysing relevant data.

Step 3: Identify Root Causes

Identifying the root causes of the problem is the third step in the A3 Problem Solving process. This step is critical because it assists organisations in understanding the root causes of a problem rather than just its symptoms. Once the underlying cause of the problem is identified, it can be addressed more effectively, leading to more long-term solutions.

Overview of the Root Cause Analysis Process

The process of determining the underlying causes of a problem is known as root cause analysis. This process can assist organisations in determining why a problem is occurring and what can be done to prevent it from recurring in the future. The goal of root cause analysis is to identify the underlying cause of a problem rather than just its symptoms, allowing it to be addressed more effectively.

To understand Root cause analysis in more detail check out RCA in our Lean Six Sigma Yellow Belt Course Root Cause Analysis section

Techniques for Identifying Root Causes

There are several techniques for determining the root causes of a problem, including:

• Brainstorming
• Ishikawa diagrams (also known as fishbone diagrams)
• Root Cause Tree Analysis

These methods can be used to investigate the issue in-depth and identify potential root causes. Organizations can gain a deeper understanding of the problem and identify the underlying causes that must be addressed by using these techniques.

Best Practices for Conducting Root Cause Analysis

It is critical to follow these best practices when conducting root cause analysis in A3 Problem Solving:

• Make certain that all stakeholders participate in the root cause analysis process.
• Concentrate on determining the root cause of the problem rather than just its symptoms.
• Take into account all potential root causes, not just the most obvious ones.
• To identify root causes, use a systematic approach, such as the 5 Whys or root cause tree analysis.

Organizations can ensure that root cause analysis is carried out effectively and that the root cause of the problem is identified by adhering to these best practises. This will aid in the development of appropriate solutions and the effective resolution of the problem.

Step 4: Develop Solutions

Developing solutions is the fourth step in the A3 Problem Solving process. This entails generating ideas and options for dealing with the problem, followed by selecting the best solution. The goal is to develop a solution that addresses the root cause of the problem and prevents it from recurring.

Solution Development in A3 Problem Solving

A3 solution development Problem solving is an iterative process in which options are generated and evaluated. The data gathered in the previous steps, as well as the insights and understanding gained from the root cause analysis, guide this process. The solution should be based on a thorough understanding of the problem and address the underlying cause.

Techniques for Developing Solutions

There are several techniques that can be used to develop solutions in A3 Problem Solving, including:

• Brainwriting
• Solution matrix
• Multi voting
• Force field analysis

These techniques can help to generate a range of options and to select the best solution.

Best Practice for Developing Solutions

It is critical to follow the following best practices when developing solutions in A3 Problem Solving:

• Participate in the solution development process with all stakeholders.
• Make certain that the solution addresses the underlying cause of the problem.
• Make certain that the solution is feasible and achievable.
• Consider the solution’s impact on the organisation and its stakeholders.

Organizations can ensure that the solutions they develop are effective and sustainable by adhering to these best practises. This will help to ensure that the problem is addressed effectively and that it does not reoccur.

Step 5: Implement Solutions

The final and most important step in the A3 Problem Solving methodology is solution implementation. This is the stage at which the identified and developed solutions are put into action to address the problem. This step’s goal is to ensure that the solutions are effective, efficient, and long-lasting.

The implementation Process

The implementation process entails putting the solutions developed in the previous step into action. This could include changes to processes, procedures, and systems, as well as employee training and education. To ensure that the solutions are effective, the implementation process should be well-planned and meticulously executed.

Techniques for Implementing Solutions

A3 Problem Solving solutions can be implemented using a variety of techniques, including:

• Piloting the solution on a small scale before broadening its application
• Participating in the implementation process with all relevant stakeholders
• ensuring that the solution is in line with the goals and objectives of the organisation
• Monitoring the solution to determine its effectiveness and make any necessary changes

Best Practice for Implementing Solutions

It is critical to follow these best practices when implementing solutions in A3 Problem Solving:

Make certain that all relevant stakeholders are involved and supportive of the solution. Have a clear implementation plan that outlines the steps, timeline, and resources required. Continuously monitor and evaluate the solution to determine its efficacy and make any necessary changes. Encourage all stakeholders to communicate and collaborate openly. Organizations can ensure that solutions are effectively implemented and problems are effectively addressed by adhering to these best practices. The ultimate goal is to find a long-term solution to the problem and improve the organization’s overall performance.

In conclusion, A3 Problem Solving is a comprehensive and structured methodology for problem-solving that can be applied in various industries and organisations. The A3 Problem Solving process’s five steps – Define the Problem, Gather Data, Identify Root Causes, Develop Solutions, and Implement Solutions – provide a road map for effectively addressing problems and making long-term improvements.

Organizations can improve their problem-solving skills and achieve better results by following the key principles, techniques, and best practices outlined in this guide. As a result, both the organisation and its stakeholders will benefit from increased efficiency, effectiveness, and satisfaction. So, whether you’re an experienced problem solver or just getting started, consider incorporating the A3 Problem Solving methodology into your work and start reaping the benefits right away.

Daniel Croft

Daniel Croft is a seasoned continuous improvement manager with a Black Belt in Lean Six Sigma. With over 10 years of real-world application experience across diverse sectors, Daniel has a passion for optimizing processes and fostering a culture of efficiency. He's not just a practitioner but also an avid learner, constantly seeking to expand his knowledge. Outside of his professional life, Daniel has a keen Investing, statistics and knowledge-sharing, which led him to create the website learnleansigma.com, a platform dedicated to Lean Six Sigma and process improvement insights.

Free Lean Six Sigma Templates

Improve your Lean Six Sigma projects with our free templates. They're designed to make implementation and management easier, helping you achieve better results.

5S Floor Marking Best Practices

In lean manufacturing, the 5S System is a foundational tool, involving the steps: Sort, Set…

How to Measure the ROI of Continuous Improvement Initiatives

When it comes to business, knowing the value you’re getting for your money is crucial,…

8D Problem-Solving: Common Mistakes to Avoid

In today’s competitive business landscape, effective problem-solving is the cornerstone of organizational success. The 8D…

The Evolution of 8D Problem-Solving: From Basics to Excellence

In a world where efficiency and effectiveness are more than just buzzwords, the need for…

8D: Tools and Techniques

Are you grappling with recurring problems in your organization and searching for a structured way…

How to Select the Right Lean Six Sigma Projects: A Comprehensive Guide

Going on a Lean Six Sigma journey is an invigorating experience filled with opportunities for…

Continuous Improvement Toolkit

Effective Tools for Business and Life!

A3 Thinking: A Structured Approach to Problem Solving

• 5 MINUTES READ

Also known as A3 Problem Solving.

Variants include 8D and CAPA.

A significant part of a leader’s role involves addressing problems as they arise. Various approaches and tools are available to facilitate problem-solving which is the driving force behind continuous improvement. These methods range from the advanced and more complex methodologies like Six Sigma to the simpler and more straightforward A3 thinking approach.

The power of the A3 approach lies in its systematic and structured approach to problem-solving. Although it appears to be a step-by-step process, A3 is built around the PDCA philosophy. It relies on the principle that it is much better to address the real root-cause rather than trying to find a solution. Hence, it’s important not to jump to the solution when solving a problem as it is likely to be less effective.

A3 thinking provides an effective way to bring together many of the problem-solving tools into one place. For example, techniques such as the 5 Whys and fishbone analysis can be used during the ‘Analysis’ stage to help identifying the root causes. Additionally, visual aids and graphs are highly recommended in the A3 report, as they are more effective than text in communicating ideas and providing concise project updates.

A3 thinking involves the practice of consolidating the problem, analysis, countermeasures, and action plan onto a single sheet of paper, commonly an A3-sized sheet. This brief document serves as a summary of the project at hand and is regarded as a valuable storytelling tool for project communication. Utilizing the A3 approach doesn’t require any specialized software or advanced computer skills. You may however use readily available A3 templates , or rely on basic tools such as paper, pencil and an eraser as you will need to erase and rewrite several times.

One of the characteristics of the A3 approach is that it does not get into specific details. Detailed documents are usually attached to the A3 report to prevent overwhelming the reader with an excess of information.

The A3 process is typically structured in multiple stages based on the PDCA model. The primary focus is on developing understanding of the current situation and defining the desired outcome before thinking about the solution. While the exact number of stages may vary depending on the preference of the company, what truly matters is adhering to a structured approach to problem-solving.

A3 Seven Stages Model

An A3 process is often managed by an individual who should own and maintain the A3 report. This individual takes the lead in steering the process, facilitating team involvement, and preparing the A3 report with team input. One of the most common models for A3 thinking is the seven stages model which is described in the following.

1. Background – The first step is to identify the business reason for choosing this problem or opportunity. In this stage, you need to identify the gap in performance and the extent of the problem.

2. Current situation – The purpose of this stage is to document the current state of the problem. You may need to refer to the process map or go to the Gemba to truly understand the current situation.

3. Target – The purpose of this stage is to define the desired future state. Clearly identify the expected benefits from solving the problem, the scope, and the key metrics that will help measure the success of the project.

4. Analysis – The objective of this stage is to conduct an in-depth analysis of the problem and understand why it’s happening. It might involve tools like the 5 Whys and cause-and-effect analysis, as well as advanced statistical methods.

5. Countermeasures – Countermeasures are the actions to be taken to eliminate root causes or reduce their effects. The team should brainstorm and evaluate possible countermeasures based on the analysis conducted earlier.

6. Implementation Plan – To achieve the target, develop a workable plan to implement the countermeasures. Gantt charts are great ways to manage implementation plans very simply and easily. Once the action plan is finalized, the team should begin working on the activities needed to implement the countermeasures.

7. Follow-up – The final stage involves evaluating the implementation of the plan and the results achieved. Follow-up actions are important to ensure the benefits extend beyond the project’s completion.

A3 thinking is considered to be the practical form of the PDCA model.

There are many online templates that can be used to manage your problem-solving efforts. One of the simplest and most straightforward ways is to use this A3 problem solving template .

Wrapping Up

A3 thinking represents a logical and structured approach for problem solving and continuous improvement. This approach can be used for most kinds of problems and in any part of the business. Originating from the Toyota Production System (TPS), it has been adopted by many Lean organizations around the world.

A3 thinking not only provides a systematic approach for problem-solving. The development of a continuous improvement culture is at the core of A3 thinking. It has become one of the most popular Lean tools today where people and teams work together to solve problems, share results and learn from each other.

Other Formats

Do you want to use the slides in your training courses?

A3 Thinking Training Material – $18.85

Related Articles

Project Charter

Gantt Chart

Related Templates

A3 Problem Solving

Written by:

CIToolkit Content Team

A3 problem-solving reports — what they are and how to use them

The A3 problem-solving methodology is part of Lean practices. If you’re familiar with Lean principles for project management, you may have used A3 problem solving before. However, if you haven’t heard of A3, keep reading to learn what it is, where it comes from, and how it’s used to resolve problems and track success.

In this post, you’ll learn:

What is A3 problem solving?

• A3 problem solving reports explained

Why use the A3 process?

The a3 problem-solving process.

• A3 report examples

Start solving your problems with the A3 process

A3 problem solving is a structured, collaborative problem-solving approach that distills a problem onto a single piece of paper — that is commonly used in Lean management and Six Sigma methodologies. The name “A3” is derived from the standard size of the paper (11" x 17") that is traditionally used to document the process.

The A3 problem-solving approach originated at Toyota as part of the Toyota Production System, which pioneered the Lean manufacturing philosophy. The A3 approach helped standardize problem-solving processes while encouraging collaboration and communication within the organization. It also uses a plan-do-check-act (PDCA) cycle to help leaders within organizations achieve constant improvement and growth.

A3 problem-solving reports explained

An A3 report is a structured document that concisely summarizes the problem-solving process. This document will typically include a problem statement, analysis of the current situation, proposed countermeasures, and the results of the implemented solution. The A3 report is designed to communicate the problem and solution in a clear way so it can be easily shared and reviewed by others in the organization.

There are several benefits to using the A3 problem-solving process, including:

• Structured approach. The A3 process provides a framework for identifying and working through problems in a systematic way.
• Collaboration. Input from all team members is an important part of the A3 process.
• Visual representation. The A3 report is a clear and concise document that is easily scannable by all team members involved.
• Continuous improvement. This problem-solving process encourages continuous improvement by providing a better system for working through problems in your organization’s processes.
• Standardization. The A3 process is standardized and repeatable, so you can use it to work through problems from organizations of all sizes in any industry.

Let’s look at the A3 process so you can use it to address any problems you and your organization are facing.

The A3 problem-solving process typically involves the following steps:

• Background of the problem. The first step is to clearly identify the problem that needs to be solved and any past issues that may have led to the problem.
• Current situation. This step involves collecting data and analyzing the current situation to better understand the problem.
• Set targets and goals. In this step, set specific and measurable targets so you’re able to monitor the progress toward achieving your goals.
• Root cause analysis. A root cause analysis identifies what is actually causing the problem so that solutions will go beyond temporary, surface-level fixes.
• Countermeasures. Once the root cause has been identified, potential solutions are developed. This step involves evaluating different options and selecting the most effective countermeasure.
• Implementation. The selected countermeasure is then put in place, and its effectiveness is monitored to ensure it is solving the problem.
• Effect confirmation and follow-up. This step involves measuring the impact of the solution and identifying if any additional improvements can be made.
• Standardize the solution. If the solution is effective, it should be standardized and incorporated into the organization’s standard work process to avoid the problem in the future.

A3 report example

Now that we’ve covered the A3 problem-solving process, let’s look at an example of what a completed A3 report might look like:

Problem statement. The customer complaint rate for our company’s new product has been steadily increasing over the past three months. We need to identify the root causes of the problem and develop a plan to reduce the complaint rate to below 1%.

Background. Our company recently launched a new product, and initial customer feedback was positive. However, over the past three months, we have seen a steady increase in customer complaints. Our customer service team has been working to address each complaint as it comes in, but the overall complaint rate continues to rise. We need to identify the cause of the problem so that we can implement a solution that will address the issue at its source.

Current condition. As of the last reporting period, the customer complaint rate for our new product was 2.5%. Our goal is to reduce this rate to below 1%. Most of the complaints we receive are related to product defects or shipping issues.

Root cause analysis. To identify the root cause or causes of the problem, we conducted a thorough analysis of customer feedback and internal data. We found that the most common complaints were related to product defects and shipping issues. We also identified several contributing factors, including inadequate quality control processes and insufficient training for our shipping team.

Countermeasures: To address the root causes of the problem, we have developed the following countermeasures:

• Improve quality control processes. We will implement a more rigorous quality control process for our new product. This will involve additional inspections at each stage of the manufacturing process to ensure that defects are caught before the product is shipped to customers.
• Provide additional training. We will provide additional training for our shipping team to ensure that they are properly trained to handle the new product. This will include training on how to identify and handle fragile items and how to properly package products to prevent damage during shipping.
• Improve communication. We will improve communication between our customer service team and our manufacturing team to ensure that any product defects or shipping issues are identified and addressed in a timely manner.

Implementation plan : To implement these countermeasures, we have developed the following plan:

• Improve quality control processes. We will implement the new quality control process within the next 30 days. This will involve additional inspections at each stage of the manufacturing process.
• Provide additional training. We will provide additional training for our shipping team within the next 60 days. This will include both classroom and hands-on training.
• Improve communication. We will implement a new communication process between our customer service team and our manufacturing team within the next 30 days. This will include regular meetings to discuss any product defects or shipping issues.

Follow-up: To ensure that our countermeasures are effective, we will monitor the customer complaint rate for our new product monthly. We will also conduct periodic audits of our quality control process and shipping team training to ensure that they are being implemented correctly.

A3 problem solving works to help businesses in any industry better understand and solve problems they may be experiencing in their business processes. By providing a standardized framework for identifying solutions, A3 helps teams continuously improve and become more efficient.

If you want to start using A3 problem solving and Lean business management principles in your organization, read our guide to Lean management to learn more .

Adobe Workfront is a project management tool that makes it easy to connect, collaborate, and simplify workflows at scale. If you’re ready to give Lean management and A3 problem solving a try, learn how Workfront enterprise project management can assist your team .

• Learn center
• Project management

How to use Toyota’s legendary A3 problem-solving technique

Georgina Guthrie

February 21, 2020

If you came home one day and found your kitchen taps on full-blast and your house full of water, what’s the first thing you’d do? Grab a bucket and start scooping — or turn off the tap?

When it comes to problem-solving, many of us take a rushed, reactionary approach rather than fixing the issue at the source. So in other words, we see the water, panic, and start scooping. If this sounds like something you’ve done recently, then don’t feel too bad: when the pressure’s high, we often jump towards the quickest fix, as opposed to the most effective one.

This is where the A3 technique comes in. It’s a problem-solving approach designed to efficiently address the root cause of issues.

What is the A3 technique?

The A3 technique is a structured way to solve problems. It’s part of the Lean methodology , developed by Toyota back in the mid-’40s. This doesn’t mean you need to implement a Lean way of working to take advantage of this process — it can work as a standalone exercise.

Granted, A3 isn’t an inspiring name, but the story of its origins is actually pretty interesting. Rumour has it that Taiichi Ohno, inventor of the Toyota Production System, refused to read past the first page of any report. In response, his team created A3 address and summarize problem-solving on one side of A3-sized paper. The A3 technique played a huge part in Toyota’s success and all kinds of industries have since adopted it. Here’s how to get started.

How to solve a problem with A3

The first thing to remember is this: A3 is collaborative and relies on good communication. It’s not something you should do by yourself.

There are three main roles involved:

• Owner (that’s you or someone under your charge)

As you’ve probably guessed, these aren’t roles that already exist in your company; you must create them for the purpose of this process. Here’s what they mean.

The owner is responsible for leading the exercise. They are the lynchpin between the two other roles, fostering good communication and keeping documents up to date. It’s tempting to think of the owner as the head of this trio, but that’s not true: everyone is equal here.

The mentor is someone with solid  problem-solving experience. It’s their job to coach the owner and steer them towards finding a solution. It’s not their job to find the answers themselves.

And finally, there are the  responders . This is someone (or a group of people) who have a vested interest in the outcome of the A3 project. Responders might include the client, stakeholders, or managers. A potential problem here is gaining access to them: if you work somewhere with a strict hierarchy — and you’re somewhere near the bottom of that structure — you may face challenges. There’s no easy way around this. Essentially, you need your organization to support this way of working and make it easy for you to access those at the top if needed.

How to create an A3 report

True to its origins, the A3 report is a one-page document. It typically contains 5-7 sections that systematically lead you towards a solution. These are the most commonly used steps, but feel free to modify them.

• Background:  Explain your project in a few sentences, including its context.
• Problem statement:  Explain the current problem. You can use process mapping to see the different tasks that surround the issue. This isn’t essential, but it will make it easier for you to locate the root cause.
• Goals:  Define your desired outcome, and include metrics for measuring success. You won’t know everything until you reach the end, so you may find you need to come back and refine stages 1-3.
• Root cause analysis:  This is a big stage of the process. You need to work out what you think the root problem is. You can use different methods to help you here, including 5 whys or a fault tree analysis .
• Countermeasures:  Once you’ve worked out your root cause, you can start proposing solutions.
• Implementation:  Work out how you’ll implement these solutions, including an action list with clearly defined roles and responsibilities. Project management software is a useful tool here because it can help everyone on the team track each other’s progress in real-time.
• Follow-up:  Using your metrics for success, decide whether the problem was solved. Report your results back to the team/organization. In the spirit of Lean (continuous improvement), you should go back and modify your plan if the results weren’t as expected. And if they were, you should make this process the new standard.

Final thoughts

A3 is an efficient, methodical way to solve problems at their source. When issues rear their head, rising stress can lead people to panic. Having a clearly designed system in place to guide you towards a solution minimizes the chances of people settling for a ‘quick fix’ or failing to act altogether.

Beyond being a guiding light in times of pressure, A3 is a great team-building exercise because it encourages individuals to work together towards a common goal — across all areas of the organization. Combine this with collaborative tools designed to help teams track progress and work together more effectively, and you’ll be unstoppable.

Solve problems like a pro with Root Cause Corrective Action

Lean to Six Sigma: process improvement methodologies explained

Subscribe to our newsletter.

Learn with Nulab to bring your best ideas to life

The A3 Problem-Solving Template: A Structured Approach for Lean Organizations

Last updated: November 10, 2023

By Alexander Connor

Discover how the A3 problem-solving template can help lean organizations effectively solve problems and improve processes, enabling them to make informed decisions and drive continuous improvement in a world that constantly demands increased quality and reduced costs.

The A3 problem-solving template is a widely adopted tool in lean organizations. This structured approach allows businesses to effectively address various problems and drive continuous improvement. 

By following a logical and structured approach within the four-stage model based on the PDCA (Plan – Do – Check – Adjust) management philosophy. A3 report templates enables the visibility of problem-solving progress and shared learning among teams, improving the decision-making processes used in the organization.

In a time when efficient problem-solving is crucial, it’s important for leaders, coaches, and project teams to have the ability to think critically and make informed decisions that can be reviewed and understood by all parties involved. 

The implementation of A3 management process can notably enhance the quality of decision-making processes, increasing the capability of teams to confront the root causes of diverse difficulties.

Providing a consistent structure to the problem-solving process, the functionality of the A3 report templates has expanded well beyond its original purpose. Industries worldwide, from manufacturing to retail to healthcare, have begun to embrace this tool in their problem-solving initiatives.

What is the A3 Problem-Solving Template?

The A3 problem-solving template is a one-page report format originally developed by Toyota , a company well-known for its lean thinking. The design of the ledger size paper encourages concise communication and collaboration among team members, as it requires the problem definition, root cause analysis, countermeasures, and follow-up plan to fit on a single page.

Here’s a quick rundown of the components of an A3 problem-solving template:

• Background : A brief explanation regarding the importance of the issue, spanning no more than three to four sentences.
• Current State : Describes the current situation, detailing the problematic area that needs to be addressed.
• Future State / Goal : Highlights the objective or desired state that your organization wants to achieve after resolving the issue.
• Analysis : Incorporates root cause identification and root cause analysis, using tools like fishbone diagrams , Pareto charts, or 5 Whys, to identify the underlying concern.
• Recommendations : Suggests countermeasures to tackle the issues identified during the analysis phase. The proposed solution should aim to remove the root cause of the problem.
• Follow-Up : Stresses an action plan for the implementation plan of the recommended solution, allocating responsibilities to team members, and designating a timeline for completion.

Lean organizations leverage the A3 problem-solving template as a tool to improve their problem-solving initiatives. This is done by encouraging rationalization among team members to ensure a systematic and holistic problem-solving process. 

This form of communication and collaboration brings out the best skills in team members and can be applied across various areas within a business, ranging from manufacturing and supply chain to customer service and process improvement.

Benefits and Applications

The A3 problem-solving template offers an array of benefits to lean organizations. It essentially simplifies the complexity of problem-solving and injects an organized approach to an otherwise daunting task. Here are some key benefits that come with the application of the A3 template:

• Promotes clear and concise communication : The A3 template condenses complex problem-solving steps into a single page. This requires teams to communicate the essential elements of the problem, the analysis, their recommendation, and action plan in a clear, simplified manner. This clarity of communication ensures that every team member, regardless of their expertise, is on the same page.
• Encourages root cause analysis : The template frames problem-solving in the context of root cause analysis. It forces teams to not just focus on symptoms or immediate fixes, but encourages them to dive deeper to identify underlying root causes.
• Facilitates data-driven decision-making : Through requiring an analysis of the current state and concern, the A3 template promotes fact-based, data-driven decisions. This results in more effective and sustainable solutions, as decisions are made based on analysed data and not guesses or assumptions.
• Enhances collaboration and feedback : As the template necessitates input at multiple stages, it forges cohesive relationships among team members. It also promotes feedback at each stage of the problem-solving process, ensuring a more refined and effective solution.

The A3 problem-solving template is a universal tool that can be applied across various departments and diverse industries such as manufacturing, healthcare, retail, construction, etc.

A3 Report Templates and Resources

Several A3 templates and resources are available to assist organizations in implementing the A3 problem-solving structure. These templates equip teams with a standardized structure that guides them through the process of problem definition, root cause analysis, countermeasures, and action planning.

In addition to templates, the market offers a myriad of books and training resources on lean and agile methodologies to enhance the understanding and application of the A3 problem-solving structure. 

There are resources available specially designed for all lean organizations, whether they are just starting their lean journey or are well-established lean practitioners, to ensure a smooth transition to adopting the A3 reporting system.

Several online platforms and software providers also offer A3 report templates tailored to business requirements, making it simpler for organizations to adopt this problem-solving tool and providing them with opportunities for continuous improvement and learning.

A3 Problem-Solving

The A3 problem-solving template is an invaluable tool for lean organizations aspiring to boost their capability in problem-solving and stimulating continuous process improvement. 

By utilizing this structured approach, teams can effectively handle diverse challenges, promote collaboration, make data-driven decisions, and effectively bring continuous improvement into their daily operations with the help of A3 report templates and resources.

In a nutshell, the A3 problem-solving template ingrains a problem-solving culture into organizations, empowering teams to excel in their problem-solving skill sets and consistently deliver improved operations. It’s more than a mere problem-solving tool; it’s a mindset shift towards heightened efficiency and efficacy.

Embrace it today, and witness the transformative power of A3 structured problem-solving for your organization. Unlock the potential to navigate challenges and drive continual improvement proactively, helping your organization adapt and thrive in the ever-evolving business environment.

• Recent Posts

• Maximizing Benefits with Enterprise Agile Planning Tools - February 22, 2024
• Exploring the World of Photochemical Reactors - February 19, 2024
• Revolutionizing Industries with Handheld Lidar Scanners - February 8, 2024

Related Posts:

Safety Protocols: Handling and Using Lithium-Ion Batteries in Electric Vehicles

November 1, 2023

Implementing the Age Appropriate Design Code: Protecting Children’s Data Online

January 17, 2024

Join our newsletter for the latest battery technology news & guides

Contact Info

Office Address: 2233 Heritage Road Fresno, CA 93721 Call us: +1 559-767-6498

Copyright 2024 © IonCore Technology. All Rights Reserved.

Privacy Policy

A3 Methodology

Purpose  A3 problem solving is part of the Lean management approach to quality improvement (QI). However, few tools are available to assess A3 problem-solving skills. The authors sought to develop an assessment tool for problem-solving A3s with an accompanying self-instruction package and to test agreement in assessments made by individuals who teach A3 problem solving.

Methods  After reviewing relevant literature, the authors developed an A3 assessment tool and self-instruction package over five improvement cycles. Lean experts and individuals from two institutions with QI proficiency and experience teaching QI provided iterative feedback on the materials. Tests of inter-rater agreement were conducted in cycles 3, 4 and 5. The final assessment tool was tested in a study involving 12 raters assessing 23 items on six A3s that were modified to enable testing a range of scores.

Results  The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for overall assessment of an A3 (rater’s mean on 23 items per A3 compared across 12 raters and 6 A3s) was 0.89 (95% CI 0.75 to 0.98), indicating excellent reliability. For the 20 items with appreciable variation in scores across A3s, ICCs ranged from 0.41 to 0.97, indicating fair to excellent reliability. Raters from two institutions scored items similarly (mean ratings of 2.10 and 2.13, p=0.57). Physicians provided marginally higher ratings than QI professionals (mean ratings of 2.17 and 2.00, p=0.003). Raters averaged completing the self-instruction package in 1.5 hours, then rated six A3s in 2.0 hours.

Conclusion  This study provides evidence of the reliability of a tool to assess healthcare QI project proposals that use the A3 problem-solving approach. The tool also demonstrated evidence of measurement, content and construct validity. QI educators and practitioners can use the free online materials to assess learners’ A3s, provide formative and summative feedback on QI project proposals and enhance their teaching.

• Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania
• Philadelphia, PA 19104
• Perelman School of Medicine
• Masters in Health Policy Research
• Division of General Internal Medicine
• Penn Medicine
• Healthcare Leadership in Quality Residency Track
• Join our newsletter for CHIPS news, research, and events!

Copyright © 2024 The Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania

The Lean Post / Articles / Understanding the Many Facets of ‘the A3’

Executive Leadership

Understanding the Many Facets of ‘the A3’

By Patricia Panchak

July 6, 2022

A review of the many ways lean practitioners refer to this core lean practice reveals its versatility — and why it plays an essential role in cultivating an organization's lean thinking and culture.

If you’re sometimes confused by references to “the A3,” you’re not alone. The term “A3” is used as shorthand to refer to various lean practices. Because understanding this fundamental element of lean management is crucial to a successful lean transformation, here’s a guide describing the multiple contexts in which lean practitioners use the term “A3.”

• A standard paper size:  At its most fundamental, “A3” is the international term for a sheet of paper 297 millimeters wide and 420 millimeters long. The closest U.S. paper size is the 11-by-17-inch tabloid sheet. 
• A template:  Many companies and individuals use an A3-sized document pre-printed with the steps needed to conduct lean problem-solving or improvement efforts, with generous white space for “A3 owners” to record their progress. While they refer to this document as a template, an “A3” is not a template.
• A storyboard:  As users record their problem-solving or improvement project’s progress, the A3 becomes a storyboard used to facilitate communication, collaboration, and coordination with other stakeholders affected by the goal the A3 owner is working toward (e.g., solving a problem or improving a process ). By having all the facts about the effort in one place, logically presented and summarized, the A3 owner is better able to gain buy-in from other stakeholders for recommended process changes. 
• A report:  Once the A3 problem-solving effort concludes, the A3 storyboard serves as a report of the problem-solving or improvement initiative, including the facts and data gathered, hypotheses considered, countermeasures tried, experiment results, corrective actions taken, and the overall thinking of the A3 owner and stakeholders. At Toyota and elsewhere, A3 reports have evolved into a standard method for summarizing problem-solving exercises, status reports, and planning exercises like value-stream mapping.  
• A problem-solving methodology (or process):  Most lean practitioners know “the A3” as a problem-solving process guided by specific steps or questions. The left side of the A3 focuses on various elements of the problem or current condition, and the right on the countermeasures considered, tested, and chosen that resolves the issue or creates a higher standard.
• A management discipline (or process): At a higher level, lean leaders, managers, and supervisors use “the A3” as a means by which they oversee and guide subordinates while simultaneously helping them develop their lean thinking and practice — particularly lean leadership and problem-solving — capabilities. With A3 management, leaders challenge their direct reports to solve a problem. Then, with the A3 report guiding the dialogue and analysis, leaders coach them through the problem-solving process. Importantly, leaders coach by asking questions versus providing answers, ensuring responsibility remains with the subordinate to solve the problem by pursuing facts and building consensus. Through this interaction, subordinates address the issue, allowing them to make progress toward the objective and, in so doing, learn the lean approach to leadership and management and gain problem-solving capability.
• A3 thinking (or analysis):  Most A3 coaches and advanced lean practitioners refer to “the A3” as a thinking process. In this case, the term refers to a systematic approach to resolving problems or improving work processes. Someone can follow this systematic approach, regardless of whether they are guided by or record their findings on an A3 document.
• An alignment tool:  Advanced lean organizations that have incorporated lean thinking and practices throughout their operations use “A3s” as part of their strategy deployment and execution efforts. In this case, the A3 process ensures a standard approach to managing and coaching people, all directed toward solving problems that help achieve corporate objectives.

Overall, the A3, however deployed, exemplifies the learn-by-doing philosophy embedded in lean thinking and practice.

Managing to Learn

An Introduction to A3 Leadership and Problem-Solving.

Written by:

About Patricia Panchak

For 25 years as a business journalist, media strategist, and public speaker, Pat’s reporting and research have helped inform executives about adapting to the latest business issues, including the rise of digital technologies, employee engagement, and lean management.

As an independent journalist, she wrote about lean and digital strategies for a variety of organizations. As the former editorial director of Penton Media’s Manufacturing and Supply Chain Group and editor-in-chief of  IndustryWeek , Pat directed the group’s print and digital editorial strategy, leading the development, integration, and distribution of magazines, e-newsletters, webinars, blogs, social media, and in-person events.  

In theory this is a great form of developing and implementing improvements which are sustained. But…. How many CEOs (because this is where it should start), managers and supervisors are trained and are world-class coaches? Is it 99.9994% or, as I suspect 0.0006%?

Now look at the gold standard of management education, the MBA. How many of these very lucrative degrees have, as their foundation, a good coaching course so that the newly minted MBA emerges as a great coach with good practical experience? Does the MBA at Utah State (the home of the Shingo Institute) including coaching? Nada, I suspect.

Sadly, MBAs (poor babies) are great at analysis and can spot a problem in a speadsheet from outer space, but ask them how they would grow the capabilities of their people and you might as well be speaking academic Zogg. The pall of F W Taylor still hangs over the thinking of that vast majority of those who are responsible for the work and well-being of others: they think, their teams only do.

Now add Milton Friedman’s edict of “maximising shareholder value” to the mix and training and education is usually the first budget to get cut when rpofits look a tad shaky. Just look at the state of Detroit today which was riddled with Friedmanites.

Another thing that annoys me is that, by now, the basics of Lean should be taught to young people aged 16-18: it is not rocket science. It should not be the monopoly of consultants. Now imagine if these young people were taught how to use and A3 to plan a project, AND how to coach someone who was doing so. Wouldn’t this give them better knowledge of which organisations to choose when entering the world of work?

The Lean education process needs a radical overhaul.

Hi Patricia! It is Great. When dry and empty A3 form is filled by real data and completed, it appears as a success story. As John says it tells a story that can unify an Organization. Best regards!

Totally agree. When people put the whole story on one sheet, it helps everyone see the problem, as Shook said, through the “same lens.” The method reminds me of 5S, but for information instead of a workplace— to get to story to fit on one sheet, everything unnecessary must be jettisoned. Then, the real story almost tells itself. I’ve watched the A3 method transform project reviews and just about every other management review. Less time going over a 15-slide PPT means more time to dive into meaty issues. Thanks Patricia!

Thanks Patricia, Really enjoy this breakdown. My favorite thing about an A3 is the coaching and organizational elements. We balance toyota kata story boards with A3’s through are strategic deployment system. Really believe that many would embrace A3’s if they viewed them as a shared framing for coaching.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

What Matters When Giving — or Accepting — the Gift of Lean Thinking and Practice

Article by Josh Howell

2024 Lean Summit Recap

Article by Matthew Savas

Defining Winning: Turning Around Operations Through Clarity and Ownership with Billy Taylor

Podcast by Matthew Savas

Related books

The Gold Mine (Audio CD)

by Freddy Ballé and Michael Ballé

The Gold Mine Trilogy 4 Book Set

Related events

May 03, 2024 | Coach-Led Online Course

Hoshin Kanri

June 04, 2024 | Coach-Led Online Course

Management Systems

Explore topics.

Stay up to date with the latest events, subscribe today.

Privacy overview.

Mastering the A3 Problem Solving Process: A Step by Step Guide

The A3 Problem Solving Process: A Step-by-Step Guide to Use an A3 Report for Problem-Solving Success

What is the a3 process and why is it important.

The A3 Process problem solving process is a methodology originally developed by Toyota.  This methodology (and tool) is also used by many organizations, particularly in the field of quality management. A3 is the paper size commonly used for this process, which is approximately 11 inches by 17 inches. The A3 report is an effective way to present and communicate a problem and its proposed solution.

Understanding the A3 Process

The A3 process involves a structured approach to problem-solving, where the entire process is documented on a single sheet of paper. It helps teams identify the problem, analyze the current situation, and determine the root cause. The A3 process encourages cross-functional collaboration and ensures proper communication throughout the problem-solving journey.

The importance of problem-solving

Problem-solving is an essential skill that every organization needs to cultivate. It helps teams overcome challenges, improve processes, and achieve their goals. Without effective problem-solving, issues can persist, leading to inefficiencies, customer dissatisfaction, and lost opportunities. The A3 process provides a systematic framework that guides teams in solving complex problems efficiently.

Benefits of using the A3 Process

The A3 process offers several benefits to organizations. Firstly, it promotes a customer-focused mindset by encouraging teams to understand the problem from the customer’s perspective. Secondly, it facilitates data-driven decision-making by analyzing the current state and identifying the root cause based on evidence. Thirdly, it encourages teams to implement countermeasures and continuous improvement, leading to sustainable solutions. Lastly, it fosters collaboration and alignment among team members, promoting a culture of problem-solving and innovation.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List

The A3 Problem Solving Report: A 10-Step Scientific Method to Execute Performance Improvements in an Academic Research Vivarium

James a. bassuk.

1 Department of Research Continuous Performance Improvement, Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, Washington, United States of America

Ida M. Washington

2 Office of Animal Care, Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, Washington, United States of America

Conceived and designed the experiments: JAB IMW. Performed the experiments: JAB IMW. Analyzed the data: JAB IMW. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: JAB IMW. Wrote the paper: JAB.

Associated Data

The purpose of this study was to illustrate the application of A3 Problem Solving Reports of the Toyota Production System to our research vivarium through the methodology of Continuous Performance Improvement, a lean approach to healthcare management at Seattle Children's (Hospital, Research Institute, Foundation). The Report format is described within the perspective of a 10-step scientific method designed to realize measurable improvements of Issues identified by the Report's Author, Sponsor and Coach. The 10-step method (Issue, Background, Current Condition, Goal, Root Cause, Target Condition, Countermeasures, Implementation Plan, Test, and Follow-up) was shown to align with Shewhart's Plan-Do-Check-Act process improvement cycle in a manner that allowed for quantitative analysis of the Countermeasure's outcomes and of Testing results. During fiscal year 2012, 9 A3 Problem Solving Reports were completed in the vivarium under the teaching and coaching system implemented by the Research Institute. Two of the 9 reports are described herein. Report #1 addressed the issue of the vivarium's veterinarian not being able to provide input into sick animal cases during the work day, while report #7 tackled the lack of a standard in keeping track of weekend/holiday animal health inspections. In each Report, a measurable Goal that established the basis for improvement recognition was present. A Five Whys analysis identified the Root Cause for Report #1 as historical work patterns that existed before the veterinarian was hired on and that modern electronic communication tools had not been implemented. The same analysis identified the Root Cause for Report #7 as the vivarium had never standardized the process for weekend/holiday checks. Successful outcomes for both Reports were obtained and validated by robust audit plans. The collective data indicate that vivarium staff acquired a disciplined way of reporting on, as well as solving, problems in a manner consistent with high level A3 Thinking.

Introduction

Problem solving tools come in many shapes and sizes. From a complex, multipage research grant application designed to unravel the molecular mechanisms of human disease [1] , [2] , to the one-page A3 Report developed by the Toyota Motor Corporation [3] , [4] , problem solving tools typically have the scientific hypothesis as the one common attribute. A3 Reports exist as the following 3 types: (i) The Problem Solving A3 Report, (ii) The Proposal A3 Report, and (iii) The Status A3 Report [4] .

Originally developed on A3 paper (297×420 mm, 11.69×16.54 in), the largest size that can fit through a fax machine, the A3 Problem Solving Report fully documents a given process on one side of one sheet of paper. Based on the 13 th Principle of the Toyota Way (“Make Decisions Slowly by Consensus”) [3] , the A3 Problem Solving Report is a tool that describes how consensus on complex decisions can be efficiently reached. The key to generating a good A3 Report is nemawashi – the process of getting consensus. The purpose of A3 Reports has been described as written documents to support mentor/mentee dialogues during application of the improvement kata [5] . Excellent textbooks have been written that provide expert A3 advice and insights, especially in A3 Thinking [4] , [6] , [7] .

A3 Reports are based on the Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle, a high level problem solving algorithm pioneered by Walter Shewhart in the 1930s [8] and later adopted by W. Edwards Deming in the 1950s [9] . The PDCA cycle has evolved into the Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle and has recently been reviewed [10] .

Performance improvement (“lean”) initiatives in a non-profit research organization are being championed by Seattle Children's Research Institute (SCRI), a multicenter complex founded in 2006 by Seattle Children's Hospital. The early adapter of lean at the Institute was the Office of Animal Care (OAC), which oversees an accredited vivarium facility that supports dozens of laboratories through approved animal use protocols. Such accreditation has been granted by the Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care International. Using the same tools and methods of the Toyota Production System [11] , the OAC reported that the elimination of wasteful procedural steps in the dirty cage wash area led to marked improvements in material flow, macroenvironmental quality, increased employee safety and enhanced customer service [12] . Despite being reported by Seattle Children's research leaders [13] , [14] , these improvements were not sustained when the vivarium relocated from a temporary research facility to its permanent home in downtown Seattle.

Another academic research vivarium engaged in performance improvement via lean thinking is the Center for Comparative Medicine at Massachusetts General Hospital, who introduced their management of animal facility operations using the Toyota Production System approach to the 2005 Annual Meeting of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science [15] . Waste removal and process improvements have converted the Center from operating in a deficit to annually realizing a small profit [16] .

Two problems that the OAC chose to examine are of importance to all vivariums due to their impact on animal welfare. The first problem addressed involvement of the veterinarian during the OAC response to sick animals. The second problem focused on the potpourri of inefficient methods that OAC staff employed on weekends and holidays to keep track of animal health checks. The current publication describes how the OAC utilized A3 Thinking to drive A3 Problem Solving Reports to completion. Specific attention is drawn to the increase in the level of quality of its animal care and associated services while simultaneously removing waste from its system.

Materials and Methods

I. human subject research.

The study presented in this manuscript did not perform any research that used, created, or shared Protected Health Information. The study was therefore not subject to the State of Washington Uniform Health Information Act or the United States of America Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.

II. The A3 form

The blank A3 Problem Solving Tool form used at Seattle Children's Research Institute is populated on both sides of 11×17 inch paper. The front side of the form consists of a left and right side, and has 10 sections which are listed below and illustrated in Figure 1 . Sponsor approval lines are provided for signoff once the left and right sides have each been sequentially completed.

The A3 form is printed on 11×17 inch paper, is filled out with a pencil, and contains 10 sections, as illustrated above. The Goal statement is a hypothesis which is “checked” via the Test (step 9) and auditing (step 10).

Step 1. Issue. A clear, focused, stand-alone statement that defines the problem.

Step 2. Background. Details that cannot be described in the Current Condition drawing and useful baseline metrics may be included in this section.

Step 3. Current Condition. A drawing that conveys a complete understanding of the current situation is essential in order to realize what improvements may be necessary.

Step 4. Goal. A quantitative statement that will form the basis for how improvement will be measured is provided in this section. In many ways, this statement is the hypothesis for the experiment. Goals in this context are equivalent to Targets, which need to be SMART ( s pecific, m easurable, a ttainable, r elevant and t imely) [17] .

Step 5. Root Cause Analysis. The Root Cause Analysis section can accommodate either a Five Whys analysis or a Ishikawa (fishbone) diagram [18] . These two options give the Author flexibility, depending on the complexity of the problem.

Step 6. Target Condition. A drawing that conveys a complete understanding of what the situation will look like once the improvements have taken hold is placed on this step. The Target Condition describes what is necessary to meet the Goal.

Step 7. Countermeasures. A listing of the improvements needed to attain the Target Condition.

Step 8. Implementation and Cost Analysis. A listing of specific tasks that will lead to improvements, along with timelines, ownership and the expected outcomes is described in this step. The expected outcomes are an essential component of the scientific process because they provide the basis for evaluating whether or not the improvements are successful. This section also contains the cost of completing the A3 report, how much money will be saved after implementation of the Countermeasures, and what types of waste have been removed from the process.

Step 9. Test. A small pilot conducted over 1–2 weeks is recommended. Do the measured results match the predicted results?

Step 10. Follow Up/Audit. This section contains a description of an audit plan (typically 30–90 days), the results of the audit plan, and, if needed, recommendations for how the next A3 Reports will become standard work.

Fifty A3 Problem Solving Questions [19] – [21] populate the back side of the form and are listed as Questions S1 . These questions guide the development of the project's focus and serve to remind the Author that consensus among colleagues is an essential requirement within A3 Thinking.

III. A3 supporting documents

The Four Rules of the Toyota Production System were adopted to guide the A3 Report's Author when asking questions about the Current Condition and when designing the Target Condition [22] . Rule #1 (activities): All work shall be highly specified as to content, sequence, timing and outcome. Rule #2 (connections): Every customer-supplied connection must be direct, and there must be an unambiguous yes-or-no way to send requests and receive responses. Rule #3 (pathways): The pathway for every product and service must be simple and direct. Rule #4: Any improvement must be made in accordance with the scientific method, under the guidance of a teacher, at the lowest possible level in the organization. The 14 Principles of the Toyota Way are presented in Table 1 [23] .

IV. A3 teaching and coaching

A multi-session course in A3 Thinking and Problem Solving was originally developed by the Seattle Children Hospital's Continuous Performance Improvement (CPI) department with consultative guidance by Cindy Jimmerson (Lean Healthcare West, Missoula, Montana, USA). This course was subsequently revised for use at the Research Institute by Research Continuous Performance Improvement (RCPI) consultants. The Research Institute course, currently in its 9 th iteration, was implemented via four 1–2 hour classroom sessions spread over 2–3 months. Each student/Author was assigned a Coach, derived from a pool of RCPI consultants or from colleagues who had successfully completed the course. The Coach provided expertise in scoping, guidance during process walks and data collection, and assistance in understanding A3 Thinking and tools. Each student/Author began the A3 Report process by selecting a Sponsor (typically their supervisor) whose role was to (i) approve the project's commencement and implementation, (ii) support the Author by removing barriers, (iii) ensure the project's completion, and (iv) assure that the Followup/Audit section would be completed. Administratively, all ∼70 employees of the Institute's Research Support Services completed A3 Problem Solving Reports, to varying levels of completeness and sustainment, during FY2012.

V. Cost estimations

In order to determine labor costs associated with (i) completing the A3 report and (ii) labor savings, a quasi-generic calculator in an Excel spreadsheet (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA) was used. All jobs at Seattle Children's, the parent organization of the Institute, were placed into 15 groups by the human resources department. A brief description accompanied each job group, providing additional details such as general and specific job titles and functions. After entering the number of hours contributed to the A3 report according to job group ( e.g. , # hours for RCPI consultant, # hours for the A3 Author, # hours for the A3 Sponsor, etc.), the calculator returned a reliable estimate for the sum dollar amount of employee salary plus benefits.

VI. Improvements via rapid Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) process improvement cycles

Improvements were realized after implementation of PDCA cycles, a high level algorithm for solving problems [8] . Foundational to many quality improvement systems, PDCA cycles provide a means to (i) realize continuous change, (ii) achieve better quality in processes, and (iii) sustain the gains brought about by increased efficiency. Such PDCA-dependent improvements are expected to lead to stable, linear processes. After allowing for the collection of baseline data, methods for a hypothesis were developed (“Plan”) and tested (“Do”). Once metrics for the improvement had been captured, results were analyzed against the hypothesis (“Check”). If the observed outcomes failed to meet expectations, then the improvement process was revised (“Act” or “Adopt”) and retested. These cycles were repeated until the target condition was achieved.

VII. Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis was applied to OAC A3 Report #1. The percentage of sick animal cases requiring DVM (Doctor of Veterinary Medicine) input that received DVM input within 2 hours was summarized for baseline, audit 1 and audit 2. We then compared the observed percentages using pair wise Fisher's exact tests. The threshold for statistical significance was set as p <0.05.

I. The A3 Problem Solving Report is a 10-Step Scientific Method based on the P-D-C-A cycle

The 10 sections of the A3 form are aligned with Shewhart's Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle, as illustrated in Figure 1 . Seven sections are devoted to Planning (“Plan”), in alignment with Principle 13 of the Toyota Way. Following nemawashi , the countermeasures are implemented rapidly (“Do”), in order to avoid new problems that could crop up soon after implementation. The “Check” portion of Shewhart's cycle may be the single most important part of the A3 tool, as it examines whether the desired outcomes have been attainable or not. If the desired outcomes have not been reached, then it is time to “Act” by revising the countermeasures.

II. Overview of the A3 Problem Solving scientific method in the OAC

Nine reports were completed by OAC staff between October 1, 2011 and September 30, 2012 ( Table 2 ). All 9 reports represented first-time efforts by the Authors in A3 Problem Solving. Authors interacted with their Sponsors prior to project initiation in order to align the problem statement with departmental and/or institutional goals. Authors “went to gemba” by visiting the location of the problem process and interacting with employees who worked the process. In cases where the problem process directly involved the Author, this was considered beneficial as the problem process was within their sphere of influence. Twice a month, Authors would congregate as a group to practice nemawashi by exchanging perspectives with their colleagues and interact with their Coaches. Once the left side was completed to the satisfaction of the Author, the Sponsor was asked to convey approval by affixing their dated signature to the form. The OAC group continued on to complete the right side by again interacting with each other and with their Sponsors and Coaches. Once the right side was completed, Sponsor approval was gained via dated signature and the “approved” Report was scanned and emailed to the RCPI department, which posted the Report to a SharePoint site. Authors then began their Tests, designed to measure several instances of the process over 1–2 weeks. If any of the Countermeasures failed to meet expectations, then the Author revised the “fix” ( Figure 1 ) and the Test was repeated. Once there was an indication that a stable process had been achieved, then the Author began a 30–90 day Audit Plan. After the results of the Audit Plan were incorporated into the Follow Up section, the “final” Report was scanned, emailed to the RCPI department, which updated its SharePoint site. In this manner, the 9 OAC A3 Reports satisfied an Institutional requirement that all employees of Research Support Services would complete an A3 Problem Solving Report during FY2012.

Since their nine A3 Reports were focused on processes in which OAC Authors were directly involved, it followed that Authors would incorporate the Target Condition into their daily work. In most cases, Authors converted their improvements into their daily work. Presented below are two representative A3 Reports that were judged to be highly successful and sustainable.

III. A3 Report #1: Veterinarian input into treatment of sick animals

The Issue was that the sick animal reporting process limited veterinary input into treatment options, which could impact research and was inconsistent with standard care. The Background section described that 107 sick animal cases were identified in September of 2011 by animal technicians and handled by the veterinarian technician without DVM input. A retrospective analysis determined that 52 of these cases should have received DVM input. This was the current state of the OAC because no full-time DVM was employed prior to August 2011.

The Current Condition illustrated in Figure 2 tells a story of how a convoluted process notified the DVM of the work day's sick animal cases at the end of the work day, a situation that essentially prevented veterinary input into animal care. An Ishikawa diagram (lower right corner) indicated that a combination of historical Methods, communication Machinery (email, telephone), communication Materials (health/cage cards) and People (OAC staff, researchers) all contributed to delay of information to the DVM. A Five Whys Analysis (not shown) revealed that the Root Cause for the convolution was the historical work patterns that existed before the DVM was hired and that modern electronic communication tools had not been fully implemented. The following SMART Goal was therefore developed: “By end of 2011: DVM provides input into treatment of all sick animals requiring DVM consult within 2 hours of detection”.

Animal cases are classified as either “urgent” or “sick” and are typically first detected by one of six animal technicians (AT). In each case, a single veterinary technician (VT) provides the primary interface to the researchers (PI, lab).

The Target Condition ( Figure 2 ) and Countermeasures were then developed (i) to reduce emails to researchers, (ii) for the 6 animal technicians to contact the 1 veterinary technician directly via electronic iPod iTouch (Apple Inc., Cupertino, California, USA) devices, (iii) to update contact info for researchers, and (iv) to gain DVM input within 2 hours after the first instance of sick animal detection. Costs associated with generating the A3 Report included ∼20 and ∼3 hours of DVM and OAC staff time, respectively, which was estimated by the cost calculator to be ∼$925. Expenses associated with implementing the Countermeasures included ∼$1,500 to purchase iPod iTouch devices. Expected benefits, prior to Testing, included (i) improved quality of animal welfare and (ii) improved standard veterinary care.

The quality of OAC responses to sick animal cases was evaluated prior to and after improvement, i.e. successful implementation of the A3 Report #1's Countermeasures ( Table 3 ). The following two definitions of quality were evaluated: (1) Fitness for Use via the customer's assessment and (2) Conformance to Specifications via regulations established by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) and the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals [24] . At Seattle Children's Research Institute, the customer is the patient/family. Data that associate customer satisfaction with DVM input into sick animal cases are non-existent, other than our assumption that the customer expects that regulations are followed during research into the cures of pediatric disease. Instead, we have assessed customer satisfaction through the eyes of the IACUC as a stakeholder, thus providing this governing body direct input into operational logistics of the OAC that influence quality. Additional stakeholders include the researcher, who designed and conducted the animal experiments, and extramural funding agencies. These stakeholders eventually have, or will, benefit from CPI-dependent improvements. After implementation, 82.4% of sick animal cases requiring DVM input received input within 2 hours – corresponding to a quality level of 1. After a PDCA cycle, the improvement rose to 90.6% – corresponding to a target quality level of 3.

During improvement work, procedures were redesigned to remove waiting and to bring flow to the sick animal process (Toyota Way Principle 2), the workflow was modified to include the DVM (Principle 4), processes were addressed such that quality was achieved the first time in gaining the timely input of the DVM (Principle 5), standardized tasks were implemented to bring stability to how the OAC responds to sick animals (Principle 6), and trusted technologies such as the iPod iTouch were brought in to enhance flow (Principle 8).

Waste removal metrics, prior to and after improvement, were also assessed. Wait time for researchers to respond to telephone calls was reduced from 2–6 hours to <2 hours ( Table 4 , waste #2). Multiple handling steps of sick animal information were reduced from 5 to 2 ( Table 4 , waste #3). Unnecessary steps, such as Animal Technicians contacting laboratory researchers directly, were eliminated through the introduction of iPod iTouch devices, a proven and reliable technology (waste #4). The number of queues in which sick animal information was communicated tallied 5 prior to improvement and 2 afterwards ( Table 4 , waste #5). Searching for correct researcher contact information was eliminated from the Animal Technician's role and reduced to <2 hours for the overall process ( Table 4 , waste #6). The defect of not involving the DVM in animal care decisions was reduced ( Table 4 , waste #7), as described below.

Two 30-day audits were performed to determine the number of sick animal cases requiring DVM input that actually received DVM input within 2 hours ( Table 5 ). The baseline metric was 0%. Following several rapid PDCA cycles that optimized communication among six Animal Technicians, one Veterinary Technician, one DVM and dozens of researchers, the results of the first audit realized a significant improvement to 82.4% ( p <0.0001). After an additional PDCA cycle, a trend towards improvement was observed (8.2% to 90.6%, p  = 0.11).

IV. A3 Report #7: Weekend checking process of animal health and habitat in the vivarium

The Issue focused on the confusing process to keep track of what has been completed and not completed during weekend/holiday checks. Such checks involved animals, feeds, treatments and reports – the types of activities that could be fit into an 8–10 hour shift by one OAC staff individual. The significance of this problem was that, if left unsolved, the obligation of not meeting IACUC expectations could be compromised.

As Background, the vivarium at SCRI consists of 22 rodent, 2 large animal, 4 fish and 3 satellite animal rooms spread over multiple floors in the same building. Responsibilities involve an overall health check of animals, mechanical functionality, and the feeding and treatment of animals. The Current Condition described a linear process where the OAC staff individual could be called away for emergencies or to procure treatment medications, thus triggering a lapse in where the checking left off and where it needed to be picked back up. As the Institute grows by adding investigators who use animal models in their research, a true need for optimization of the weekend/holiday check is essential.

A Five Whys analysis concluded that the Root Cause of the dysfunction was that the OAC had variation in the process for weekend/holiday checks. Accordingly, the Goal of this A3 Report was to “create/maintain a process to find where staff had left off in the routine facility check and know what had been completed/not completed”.

The Target Condition and Countermeasures specified (i) the creation of a “Weekend Check Log” that contained all responsibilities in reusable, laminated check forms that clearly delineated a standard process of checking, (ii) training of OAC staff in use of the log, and (iii) maintaining an updated log for all weekend/holiday checks.

Engagement with OAC staff by the Author was via nemawashi . The Countermeasures were carefully planned through 8 Implementation Steps and then rapidly implemented (“do”), in alignment with Shewhart's Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle. The Cost of improvement was minimal (7 hrs of staff time) while the Cost Benefits were organizational, time management and 1–2 hours of time saved each holiday or weekend day.

Testing of the improvement took place over a 2-day weekend and identified minor problems and inconsistencies. A rapid PDCA cycle was performed, followed by re-testing over the next weekend. After another round of rapid PDCA, the improvement was subjected to a 73-day audit period that spanned 10 weekends and 1 holiday. After a final round of rapid PDCA, the improvement was incorporated into standard work for all OAC staff assigned to such responsibilities.

Because, in part, of the quality and pace at which this Author pursued this A3 Problem Solving Report, he was promoted to be an OAC CPI team leader in a manner consistent with Principle 9 of the Toyota Way: “Grow leaders who thoroughly understand the work, live the philosophy, and teach it to others.”

The usefulness of the A3 Problem Solving Tool has been validated as the OAC undergoes a productive transformation, in alignment with Principle 14 of the Toyota Way: “Becoming a lean organization through relentless reflection ( hansei ) and continuous improvement ( kaizen ).” Being able to complete 9 A3 Problem Solving Reports in a manner that utilizes rapid PDCA cycles and downstream incorporation into daily standard work is a solid foundation as the OAC breaks down silos and implements cross-training. The OAC, as a department within Research Support Services, has begun its CPI journey in a manner consistent with the following 4P Model developed in The Toyota Way [25] . Philosophy : Dr. Ida Washington, OAC Director, and Dr. James Hendricks, Research Institute President, view the OAC as a means to adding value to patients of Seattle Children's Hospital – namely supporting research into cures of pediatric diseases and conditions. People and Partners : Dr. Washington has team-empowered the OAC staff in the department's CPI journey. These nine A3 Problem Solving Reports certainly support the Research Institute as a learning organization. Process : Elimination of waste in the OAC has been accomplished by applying CPI principles such as A3 Reports and standard work. Problem solving : The CPI toolbox to solve problems within the OAC is growing and currently consists of A3 Reports, 5S organizing systems, a Kaizen board, a Daily Management System, and Heijunka and pitch boards.

Implementation of the Countermeasures in an A3 Problem Solving Report is often expected to lead to incorporation into standard work. For OAC A3 Report #7 (“Weekend checking process of animal health and habitat in the vivarium”), the weekend check log is now a stable of standard work on weekends and holidays. The log is described in the standard work document for OAC huddles, and is discussed on the day prior to and after its use. Typical data that populate the log include special feeding or handling instructions for any given animal, technical procedures such as injections, or logistical considerations in the aquatic center. The collective data indicate that A3 Thinking has taken hold for A3 Report #7 in a manner aligned with Principle 14. Consistent with this A3 Thinking is a new PDCA proposal to convert the written log into an electronic log in order to reduce errors attributable to handwriting legibility issues.

The format of A3 Problem Solving Report form that is currently in use at the Research Institute lacks sufficient white space for documentation of observed outcomes ( Figure 1 , step 7) and for the results of the testing process ( Figure 1 , step 9). This brevity contrasts with the typical results section of a scientific manuscript, which is the most important part of peer-reviewed, published studies. While this brevity is probably founded on the notion that A3 Thinking is paramount to the A3 Problem Solving Report, there is no formal restriction that prevents appending additional outcomes and results to the Report – other than the overall requirement to present the entire Report on one side of an 11×17 inch piece of paper. The Author is faced with aligning these results with the basis for comparison that is stated in the Goal section ( Figure 1 , step 4). It then follows that A3 Thinking provides a platform for establishing a causal linkage between the action items of the Countermeasures and the outcomes of the Implementation Plan. In this perspective, the A3 Problem Solving Report does align quite well with traditional hypothesis-driven scientific experimentation.

A conventional position in laboratory animal care is that compliance equals quality. But that attitude is misplaced, especially in the new Guide's allowance for performance standards that permit flexibility in designing and evaluating evidence-based approaches for desired outcomes [24] . Being able to implement CPI-dependent improvements that specifically address Toyota's definition of quality can only serve to benefit the OAC's stakeholders: the IACUC, the researcher and the extramural funding agency. The ultimate beneficiary, of course, is Seattle Children's customer – the patient/family who awaits new cures for pediatric disease.

Veterinary medical care is an essential part of any animal care and use program. Such a program includes, at a minimum, effective plans for preventive medicine, monitoring and treatment of disease, surgery and post-op care, and anesthesia, analgesia and euthanasia [24] . Given that parts of each plan can be carried out by OAC staff, the communication within the OAC during the assessment and treatment of sick animals becomes paramount. Likewise, the daily observations of animals for signs of illness, injury or abnormal behavior need to be conducted by trained personnel. Such observations include holidays and weekends, a process in which a single OAC staff member is expected to visit every cage in the facility – a somewhat daunting task that was standardized by OAC A3 Report #7.

Being able to reduce the time it takes for veterinary input in sick animal cases has brought the OAC closer to realizing one-piece flow for that process. An important assessment of the sick animal Current Condition (OAC A3 Report #1) was to identify what was value added, using the Three Toyota Categories: (i) value added, (ii) non-value added and (iii) non-value added but required [26] . In the context of waste, Seattle Children's lists the following three categories: (i) muda , non-value added, (ii) mura , unevenness or variation in work processes, and (iii) muri , overburdening people or equipment [27] . Seattle Children's teaches that there are 9 types of waste contained within the muda category (see Table 4 ). Step by step, the OAC is pursuing its True North by acting as a tortoise and not the hare. Removal of waste can only lead to increased efficiencies while allowing OAC staff to increase supportive interactions with Institute researchers. Lean improvements do not happen overnight. Instead, they are a transformative process – and for a complex healthcare organization like Seattle Children's, this CPI journey is expected to demonstrate constant planning, doing, checking and acting.

Supporting Information

Questions s1.

Fifty A3 Problem Solving Questions [19] – [21] populate the back side of the A3 form. These questions guide the development of the project's focus and serve to remind the Author that consensus among colleagues is an essential requirement within A3 Thinking.

Acknowledgments

The Authors acknowledge the expert instruction and coaching in A3 Thinking by Delila Katzka and Lucinda Getz, CPI consultants and project managers in the Department of Research Continuous Performance Improvement at Seattle Children's Research Institute. The suggestion by Stephanie Axelrod that the IACUC is a stakeholder at the Institute is also acknowledged. The OAC staff is also acknowledged, specifically the OAC CPI team (Jonathan “JD” Pedersen and Lindsey Jackson) and Euclid Curioso, for helpful support while CPI was reintroduced to their department. Statistical analysis was provided by the Seattle Children's Core for Biomedical Statistics, which is supported by the Center for Clinical and Translational Research at Seattle Children's Research Institute and grant UL1RR025014 from the NIH National Center for Research Resources. The authors appreciate a critical reading of the manuscript by Lucinda Getz, Stephanie Axelrod and Delila Katzka, and a proofreading review by Kori J. Flajole.

Funding Statement

This work was supported by internal funding. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.