toyota style problem solving

• 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 Lean Post / Articles / How the A3 Came to Be Toyota’s Go-To Management Process for Knowledge Work (intro by John Shook)

Problem Solving

How the A3 Came to Be Toyota’s Go-To Management Process for Knowledge Work (intro by John Shook)

By Isao Yoshino

August 2, 2016

A3 thinking is synonymous with Toyota. Yet many often wonder how exactly this happened. Even if we know A3 thinking was created at Toyota, how did it become so firmly entrenched in the organization’s culture? Retired Toyota leader Mr. Isao Yoshino spearheaded a special program that made A3s Toyota’s foremost means of problem-solving. Read more.

In the late 1970s, Toyota decided to invest in cultivating the managerial capabilities of its mid-level managers. Masao Nemoto, the same influential executive who led Toyota’s successful Deming Prize initiative in 1965, led a development program especially for non-production gemba managers called the “Kanri Nouryoku Program” – “Kan-Pro” for short. Nemoto chose to structure this critical management development initiative around the A3 process .

The A3 is well established now in the lean community. As a process, as a tool, as a way of thinking, managing and developing others. The question often comes up of where did it come from and how did it become a common practice. The basic answer is that it dispersed mainly from Toyota. But how did it become so prevalent in Toyota? And how did it evolve from its humble beginnings as a tool to tell a PDCA quality improvement story on an A3-sized sheet of paper, as it had been commonly used by many Japanese companies since the 1960s?

What had started as a simple tool to tell PDCA stories grew at Toyota into something more: the A3 process came to embody the company’s way of managing in an extraordinarily profound sense. How did this happen?

My first “kacho” (manager) at Toyota (in Japan starting in 1983), Mr. Isao Yoshino, was a member of Nemoto’s four-man team that created and delivered the “Kan-Pro” manager-development initiative that directly answers that question. The program has been unknown outside Toyota … until now.  

-John Shook

Interview with Mr. Isao Yoshino

Q: what was the purpose of the kanri nouryoku program.

A: The main purpose was to nurture “Management Capabilities” of employees who were at manager (kacho) level and above. There were four rudimental capabilities for managers:

• Planning capability, judging capability
• Broad knowledge, experiences and perspectives
• Driving force to get job done, leadership, kaizen capability
• Presentation capability, persuasion capability, negotiation capability

Mr. Nemoto decided to take actions in reinvigorate managers (especially administrative) and help heighten awareness of their role. Mr. Isao Yoshino

Q: Why did Toyota decide it needed this program?

A:  After introducing Total Quality Control (TQC) in 1961 and receiving the Deming Prize in 1965, TQC-based perspective had taken root widely across the company. In the late ‘70s, Mr. Nemoto (one of the main people behind launching TQC) noticed that management capabilities and TQC awareness was decreasing among managers, particularly within the non-manufacturing gemba or office divisions. Mr. Nemoto decided to take actions to reinvigorate the managers (especially administrative) and help heighten awareness of their role. And so, in 1978, he formed a task force that promoted a two-year program (the Kanri Nouryoku Program) for two thousand managers from all over the company. I was one of the four staff members on the task force in Toyota City.  

Q: What sort of tools and activities did the Kanri Nouryoku employ?

A:  All the managers went through “a presentation session” twice per year (June and December). The officers in charge of each department attended to have a Question and Answer session with the managers. Officers tried to focus on the problems each manager was facing as well as the effort and process needed to solve the problems. Officers focused more on “What is the major cause of the problem?”, rather than “Who made those mistakes?” This problem-focused attitude (as opposed to the who-made-the-mistake attitude) of the officers encouraged managers to share their problems rather than hide them.

The key to giving the presentations was that they had to be done using an A3. The managers learned how to select what information/data was needed and what was not needed, since an A3 has only limited space. This helped them acquire the seiri and seiton functions of the 5S concept as applied to knowledge work . A3 was also a great tool for officers. They could easily see, at a glance, all the key points that the presenter wanted to convey. As it is just one single document, you can quickly see from the left top corner to the right bottom of an A3 and grasp the key things the writer wants to communicate. This is something that you cannot get from a written document or PowerPoint presentation.

Q: What was your personal experience with the program?

A:  First, I was fortunate to get acquainted with many admirable managers, who inspired me in many ways. I also learned how to express myself more effectively by studying A3 documents from two thousand managers. Strikingly, I discovered that managers whose A3s were excellent were also excellent managers at work.

Strikingly, I discovered that managers whose A3s were excellent were also excellent managers at work. Mr. Isao Yoshino

Nemoto-san highly praised managers who took a risk to report their mistakes (not success stories) on A3s with a hope of finding a solution. Nemoto valued their sincere and proactive attitudes. “Nemoto Lectures” were held for managers three or four times a year. Mr. Nemoto went through every single impression memo from the audience as feedback for his next speech.

Mr. Nemoto also appreciated the efforts by managers who tried to nurture excellent subordinates. This created a new company-wide notion that “developing your subordinates is a virtue.” It was amazing to see managers in their 40s and 50s willing to give 100 percent of their energy to work on hoshin kanri and A3 reporting, because they were convinced the program was practical and useful and worth using to bring themselves up to a higher level. Seeing all this happen at work truly helped me grow professionally.

Q: What was the effect of the program on Toyota?

A:  Well for one, every mid-level manager who was involved in this program over the two years came to clearly understand their roles and responsibilities and also learned the importance of the hoshin kanri system. People at Toyota don’t hesitate to report bad news, which has been Toyota’s heritage since day one. The Kanri Nouryoku program has further reinforced this tradition because of its praise toward managers and others who were honest about their mistakes. And after the program was implemented to the back-office managers, the level of their awareness of their role rose up to the same level of that of manufacturing-related managers, which significantly strengthened the management foundation. 

Everybody became familiar with using the A3 process when documented communication was needed – A3 thinking eventually became an essential part of Toyota’s culture. People learned how to distinguish what is important from what is not. 

Managing to Learn

An Introduction to A3 Leadership and Problem-Solving.

Written by:

About Isao Yoshino

Isao Yoshino is a Lecturer at Nagoya Gakuin University of Japan. Prior to joining academia, he spent 40 years at Toyota working in a number of managerial roles in a variety of departments. Most notably, he was one of the main driving forces behind Toyota’s little-known Kanri Nouryoku program, a development activity for knowledge-work managers that would instill the A3 as the go-to problem-solving process at Toyota.

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.

Revolutionizing Logistics: DHL eCommerce’s Journey Applying Lean Thinking to Automation  

Podcast by Matthew Savas

Transforming Corporate Culture: Bestbath’s Approach to Scaling Problem-Solving Capability

Building a Problem-Solving Culture: Insights from Barton Malow’s Lean University

Related books

A3 Getting Started Guide

by Lean Enterprise Institute

The Power of Process – A Story of Innovative Lean Process Development

by Eric Ethington and Matt Zayko

Related events

June 10, 2024 | Coach-Led Online Course

June 12, 2024 | Morgantown, PA

Building a Lean Operating and Management System 

Explore topics.

Subscribe to get the very best of lean thinking delivered right to your inbox

Privacy overview.

Embracing The Toyota Way: A Practical Problem-Solving Framework for Improved Efficiency

This entry was posted by pabloadmin on March 19, 2023 at 11:17 pm

Introduction

The Toyota Production System (TPS) has long been regarded as a paragon of efficiency and effectiveness in the manufacturing industry. One of the primary principles of TPS is “The Toyota Way,” a management philosophy emphasizing continuous improvement and respect for people. In this blog post, we will share a practical problem-solving framework inspired by The Toyota Way that can be applied to various industries and organizations. This comprehensive blog post will delve into the critical elements of this framework and provide insights on how you can leverage it to improve problem-solving and boost efficiency within your organization.

Understanding the Problem-Solving Framework

This framework consists of five distinct stages, which together form a systematic approach to problem-solving:

• A. Define the Problem
• B. Break Down the Problem
• C. Set Targets
• D. Analyze the Root Causes
• E. Implement Countermeasures

Each stage is vital in identifying and resolving issues and ensuring practical and sustainable solutions. Let’s look at each stage and how they contribute to the framework.

Stage-by-Stage Analysis

A. define the problem:.

Before diving into problem-solving, clearly defining the issue at hand is essential. This involves understanding the gap between the current situation and the desired state and identifying the symptoms and effects of the problem. A well-defined problem sets the stage for more effective problem-solving and helps ensure that the correct issues are being addressed.

B. Break Down the Problem:

Once the problem has been defined, the next step is to break it down into smaller, more manageable components. This process helps clarify the issue’s scope, making it easier to understand and address. By breaking down the problem, you can more easily identify the underlying causes and focus on finding targeted solutions.

C. Set Targets:

After breaking down the problem, it’s crucial to establish measurable targets that define the desired outcome. These targets should be Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound ( SMART ). Setting clear and achievable goals ensures that your problem-solving efforts are directed toward meaningful improvements and allows you to track progress over time.

D. Analyze the Root Causes:

With targets in place, it’s time to dive deeper and identify the root causes of the problem. This stage thoroughly analyzes the underlying issues, using tools such as the “5 Whys” technique or the Fishbone Diagram. By identifying the root causes, you can develop targeted countermeasures that address the core issues rather than merely treating the symptoms.

E. Implement Countermeasures:

The final stage of the framework involves developing and implementing countermeasures to address the root causes of the problem. This may include changes to processes, systems, or behaviours. Once countermeasures are in place, monitoring their effectiveness and making adjustments is essential, ensuring that the problem is fully resolved and improvements are sustainable.

Benefits of the Toyota Way-Inspired Problem-Solving Framework

Adopting a structured problem-solving framework like the one inspired by The Toyota Way offers several benefits:

• Enhanced problem-solving capabilities: The systematic approach ensures that problems are thoroughly analyzed and addressed, leading to more effective and lasting solutions.
• Improved efficiency: By identifying and resolving the root causes of issues, organizations can optimize their processes and systems, reducing waste and improving productivity.
• Increased employee engagement: The framework emphasizes teamwork and collaboration, fostering a culture of continuous improvement and empowering employees to contribute to the organization’s success.

Implementing the Framework in Your Organization

To successfully implement this problem-solving framework within your organization, consider the following steps:

• Develop a strong understanding of the framework: Ensure that key stakeholders and team members are familiar with the five stages of the problem-solving framework and understand how they contribute to the overall process. This may involve conducting training sessions or workshops to educate employees on the principles and techniques of The Toyota Way-inspired framework.
• Establish a culture of continuous improvement: Encourage a mindset of ongoing growth and development within your organization. Promote open communication, collaboration, and a willingness to learn from mistakes. Foster an environment where employees feel empowered to share ideas and contribute to problem-solving efforts.
• Adapt the framework to your organization’s unique needs: While its fundamental principles remain the same, it’s essential to tailor the approach to your organization’s specific context and requirements. This may involve adjusting the tools and techniques used in the analysis stage or adapting the implementation process to fit your organization’s structure and culture.
• Monitor progress and measure results: Regularly assess the effectiveness of the problem-solving framework by tracking progress towards established targets and measuring the impact of implemented countermeasures. Use this information to identify further improvement areas and refine the framework.
• Celebrate successes and share learnings: Recognize and celebrate your team’s achievements as they successfully navigate the problem-solving framework and implement effective solutions. Share the lessons learned and best practices across the organization, fostering a culture of knowledge-sharing and continuous improvement.

The Toyota Way-inspired problem-solving framework offers a structured and systematic approach to identifying and resolving issues within your organization. By embracing this framework, you can enhance problem-solving capabilities, boost efficiency, and foster a culture of continuous improvement. By implementing the framework thoughtfully and deliberately, you can unlock your organization’s potential and achieve lasting success in today’s competitive business environment.

• February 2024
• January 2024
• December 2023
• November 2023
• October 2023
• September 2023
• August 2023
• February 2023
• January 2023
• December 2022
• Uncategorized

• Data, AI, & Machine Learning
• Managing Technology
• Social Responsibility
• Workplace, Teams, & Culture
• AI & Machine Learning
• Diversity & Inclusion
• Big ideas Research Projects
• Artificial Intelligence and Business Strategy
• Responsible AI
• Future of the Workforce
• Future of Leadership
• All Research Projects
• AI in Action
• Most Popular
• The Truth Behind the Nursing Crisis
• Work/23: The Big Shift
• Coaching for the Future-Forward Leader
• Measuring Culture

The spring 2024 issue’s special report looks at how to take advantage of market opportunities in the digital space, and provides advice on building culture and friendships at work; maximizing the benefits of LLMs, corporate venture capital initiatives, and innovation contests; and scaling automation and digital health platform.

• Past Issues
• Upcoming Events
• Video Archive
• Me, Myself, and AI
• Three Big Points

Toyota’s Secret: The A3 Report

How Toyota solves problems, creates plans, and gets new things done while developing an organization of thinking problem-solvers.

• Workplace, Teams, & Culture
• Innovation Strategy
• Quality & Service
• Organizational Behavior

While much has been written about Toyota Motor Corp.’s production system, little has captured the way the company manages people to achieve operational learning. At Toyota, there exists a way to solve problems that generates knowledge and helps people doing the work learn how to learn. Company managers use a tool called the A3 (named after the international paper size on which it fits) as a key tactic in sharing a deeper method of thinking that lies at the heart of Toyota’s sustained success.

A3s are deceptively simple. An A3 is composed of a sequence of boxes (seven in the example) arrayed in a template. Inside the boxes the A3’s “author” attempts, in the following order, to: (1) establish the business context and importance of a specific problem or issue; (2) describe the current conditions of the problem; (3) identify the desired outcome; (4) analyze the situation to establish causality; (5) propose countermeasures; (6) prescribe an action plan for getting it done; and (7) map out the follow-up process.

The leading question

Toyota has designed a two-page mechanism for attacking problems. What can we learn from it?

• The A3’s constraints (just 2 pages) and its structure (specific categories, ordered in steps, adding up to a “story”) are the keys to the A3’s power.
• Though the A3 process can be used effectively both to solve problems and to plan initiatives, its greatest payoff may be how it fosters learning. It presents ideal opportunities for mentoring.
• It becomes a basis for collaboration.

However, A3 reports — and more importantly the underlying thinking — play more than a purely practical role; they also embody a more critical core strength of a lean company. A3s serve as mechanisms for managers to mentor others in root-cause analysis and scientific thinking, while also aligning the interests of individuals and departments throughout the organization by encouraging productive dialogue and helping people learn from one another. A3 management is a system based on building structured opportunities for people to learn in the manner that comes most naturally to them: through experience, by learning from mistakes and through plan-based trial and error.

Get Updates on Transformative Leadership

Evidence-based resources that can help you lead your team more effectively, delivered to your inbox monthly.

Please enter a valid email address

Thank you for signing up

Privacy Policy

About the Author

John Shook is an industrial anthropologist and senior advisor to the Lean Enterprise Institute, where he works with companies and individuals to help them understand and implement lean production. He is author of Managing to Learn: Using the A3 Management Process to Solve Problems, Gain Agreement, Mentor, and Lead (Lean Enterprise Institute), and coauthor of Learning to See (Lean Enterprise Institute). He worked with Toyota for 10 years, helping it transfer its production, engineering and management systems from Japan to its overseas affiliates and suppliers.

More Like This

Add a comment cancel reply.

You must sign in to post a comment. First time here? Sign up for a free account : Comment on articles and get access to many more articles.

Comments (22)

Sheila colinlak, patrick doyle, acta de constitución de proyecto ágil, un elemento diferenciador. | agilia, dave whaley, william harrod, howard s weinberg, systemental, khucxuanthinh.

Toyota Practical Problem Solving (PPS)—Clarify

A Quick Recap

Clarify the Problem

Break down the problem.

• Set a Target
• Root-Cause Analysis
• Develop Countermeasures and Implement
• Monitor Process and Results
• Standardize and Share

A problem is often a deviation from a target. You have a target (quality, productivity, cost, etc.), and your actual performance is not meeting these targets. If possible, try to express you target quantitatively (i.e., have a current performance measure that differs from the target for this performance measure). For example, if you have problems with frequent breakdowns of machines, measure the availability of the machine(s). If it is a quality problem, measure customer complaints, first pass yield, or similar quality measures. If you are not happy with your output, measure parts produced per hour or similar. If you can, make a graph, diagram, timeline, or similar visualization; it will be quite helpful.

Try not to narrow it down too much. This will be done in the next step. If you narrow it down too much, you may exclude a root cause that is a major influence on the performance. At the same time, try not to cast a too wide net either. Yes, I know, I am not very helpful here, as it should not be too big nor too small. Unfortunately, while in other cases most people tend to go in one direction (e.g., too much inventory), here I have seen both directions. Some people take a too high-level approach (e.g., analyze company-wide quality issues), while others take a too-narrow view (e.g., quality issue missing weld at process 30). If given a choice, I’d say rather go large then small. The nest step, “Break Down the Problem,” will narrow it down anyway, and it will probably be much more structured than a half-hazarded guess during the problem clarification.

This includes what Toyota calls “stratification.” Try grouping or displaying your data into smaller groups or aspects to analyze them. Try to look at the problem from different angles:

• When is it happening? Is it a certain time of the day? Is it something that did not happen before and now it is happening, and if so, when did it start?
• Where is it happening? Is it at a certain process in the value stream or work instructions? Is it with a specific supplier? Does it happen mostly in selected market regions or market segments?
• What is it happening to? Is it a certain product group or product? Is it a specific module or part? Is it a certain type of customer complaint? Is it a specific type of defect?
• How much is it happening (e.g., how much is produced)?
• Who is it happening to? Is it happening with a certain employee or shift? (Side note: If so, it is probably not a fault of the employee, but e.g. defective tools, lack of training, etc.)

Above are four bullet points (when, where, what, who) that you should consider. In reality, you may even have multiple aspects to stratify for the same bullet. For example, the question “what” for a quality issue could be looking at the type of complaint, the type of product, or the type of defect, etc.

For more complicated problems you can also try to split it into sub-problems. For example, if you find out during your stratification that there are multiple types of defects that ruin your quality, you may investigate these types of defect separately.

Whenever possible, use graphical charts and displays to visualize the data during stratification. There are many different ways to visualize data, like pie charts, bar charts, Pareto diagrams, timelines and trends, histograms, scatter diagrams, radar charts, surface plots, and many more. below are a few visualizations.

The goal of breaking down the problem is to better understand when, where, what, and who is happening. During the clarification of the problem I told you to look at the big picture. The breaking down of the problem narrows this down to the actual problem you are having. Toyota calls this the prioritized problem , and it is often confused with the root cause. This prioritized problem is an essential input for setting the targets… which I will discuss in the next post. Now, go out, define and understand your problem, and organize your industry!

PS: Many thanks to the team from the Toyota Lean Management Centre at the Toyota UK Deeside engine plant in Wales, where I participated in their 5-day course. This course gave us a lot of access to the Toyota shop floor, and we spent hours on the shop floor looking at processes. In my view, this the only generally accessible course by Toyota that gives such a level of shop floor involvement.

Leave a Comment

Notify me of new posts by email.

The Lean Thinker

Thoughts and Insights from the Shop Floor

Toyota Kata “A3 Problem Solving”

Over the years, I’ve been exposed a number of efforts to “implement A3 problem solving” in various companies. I worked for some of those companies, I’ve observed others.

The results are nearly always the same.

Here are a couple of examples. Let me know if any of these match up with experiences you have had.

Example 1: The company had put many people through “Practical Problem Solving” training and was (ironically) trying to measure how many problem solving efforts were underway.

I was watching a presentation by one of these problem solving teams to management. Their A3 was on a computer, projected onto the screen. They were reporting their “results.” Yet there were large discontinuities in their problem solving flow. The actions they were taking simply did not link back (through any kind of identifiable cause) to the problem they were solving.

The management team listened carefully, applauded their efforts, and moved on to the next topic of their meeting.

Example 2: A different company had a form to fill out called an “MBF” or “Management by Fact.” From the labels on the boxes, it was clearly intended to be structured problem solving. By the time I worked there, however, “MBF” had become a verb. It was a solo activity, filling out the form at the desk, and reporting on it in a staff meeting.

Example 3: Well-meaning former Toyota team members, now working for a different large company wanted to “train everyone in problem solving.” They put together a “class” that presented the purpose of each block on their A3 form with the expectation that people would adopt the process.

All of these efforts had something in common.

They didn’t work.

Over the last few days, I’ve been privileged to be included in an email exchange about the relationship between A3 and Mike Rother’s Toyota Kata . My small contribution was apparently enough to get my name onto the cover, but I want to give a real nod in the direction of a Jenny Snow-Boscolo for instigating inspiring a really good exchange.

One of the difficulties with gaining insight into Toyota’s management processes is that they really aren’t codified. This shouldn’t be a surprise. Look at your own company, and ask how much of the culture – the reflexive way things are done and interactions are structured – is written down.

(In fact, if it is written down, I would contend it is likely your actual culture has little resemblance to what is written about it. Those things tend to be more about what they wish the culture was.)

Culture, any culture, is learned through daily interaction. This is all well and good in cases where people are immersed in it from the beginning.

But the rest of us aren’t operating in that problem solving culture. Rather, we are trying to create it. And as the former Toyota Team Members from Example 3 (above) learned, it isn’t a simple matter of showing people.

Rather than two different things, we are looking at a continuum here. At one end is the culture described on Slide 9. There isn’t any formal structure to it, the process for teaching it isn’t codified. It is learned the same way you learn the way to get the job done in any company. They just learn different things than you did.

But in another organization there is no immersion. If there is anyone who is steeped in The Way, they are few and far between.

In these cases, we want to start with something more overt. And that is the purpose of having a rote drill or kata . It isn’t something you implement. It is a structure, or scaffold, to learn the basic moves. Just as mastering the musical scales is only a prelude to learning to play the instrument, the kata is the foundational structure for learning to apply the underlying thinking patterns.

Share this:

2 replies to “toyota kata “a3 problem solving””.

You failed to mention that many of us called “Management by Fact” by another name – “Management by Fiction.” While the former was the intention, the latter happened more often than the leaders knew.

“You must unlearn what you have learned.” -Yoda

Late to the post, but I came across it as I consider another foray into an A3-trained organization. Examples 1 and 3 are certainly familiar, though in my experience it was somebody far less qualified than a Toyota consultant who taught the organization that if they did A3 reports, Lean-thinking would commence (incidentally, this was at the same healthcare organization where I met you, Mark, when you contributed your time and knowledge toward using Toyota Kata in a healthcare setting, thus beginning our daily practice there. Thank you!). The result of “the A3 is the most important Lean tool” thinking was that by the time I was brought on board there were scattered yellowed-with-age A3 reports on a few department white boards and a general consensus of “we tried Lean and it didn’t really work” along with resistance to devoting any time to delving deeper into Lean management.

Unfortunately misery does not love company in this case. I would prefer that it was an isolated case, but as exemplified by the fact that you are writing about the issue, it is not. As more organization “tried Lean” this will likely become more and more common. I like the idea of incorporating the kata into A3 reporting for those managers who are already using it, but when an executive team than has “done Lean” and moved on to other projects, changing the habits of the senior leadership may be the most important obstacle that needs to be addressed for the organization to succeed; possibly through iterative experiments toward the target condition of a transformed executive team!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Notify me of new posts by email.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

• What is Lean?
• Our Approach To Lean
• History & What We’ve Done
• Lean Research
• Lean Capability Development
• Login / Sign up

Sign up and join the community

Email address *

Subscribe to our newsletter

Please select all the ways you would like to hear from us Email

Your personal data will be used to support your experience throughout this website, to manage access to your account, and for other purposes described in our privacy policy .

Home > Back to Basics: Problem Solving at Toyota

Back to Basics: Problem Solving at Toyota

19th November 2014 - Lean Enterprise Academy

As Lean practitioners, we all know how to problem solve – don’t we? This is surely basic Lean stuff? Well, the answer may be that we think we do.

But often, it isn’t done well and in many cases may not fix the actual problem we set out to. In many organisations the problem solving process is rushed, focusing on finding the quickest, easiest solution rather than the one that is the most value adding. Toyota, on the other hand, uses a systematic problem solving process which carefully frames the problem, finds true root cause and uses experiments to test countermeasures to ensure the problem is fixed once and for all. This is a fundamental building block of Toyota’s success and is practised by all employees at all levels.

Toyota’s 8 Step Problem Solving

In a practice-based workshop, Mark Davies, Senior Manager at Toyota Lean Management Centre UK, took us through the 8 step problem solving process :-

1 – Clarify the problem 2 – Breakdown the problem 3 – Set a target 4 – Analyse the root cause 5 – Develop countermeasures 6 – See countermeasures through 7 – Monitor the process and results 8 – Standardise successful processes

Toyota understands that stages 1 – 4 are key to ensuring the right problem is tackled and in the right way. Problems can get messy and convoluted so it’s often confusing to teams as to which specific aspect of a problem to focus on. Step 1 and 2 are important to stratify data, often using Pareto to breakdown the problem. Asking what, when, where and who helps to highlight the top issue to be tackled. It then becomes easier to set SMART targets for improvement. Stage 4 and the identification of root cause is, arguably, the most difficult and the most poorly executed. Here Mark took us through a detailed process to move from the prioritised problem to possible direct causes. The mistakes are to jump in and prescribe possible direct causes to the problems without going to Gemba to confirm the facts. Here direct cause – observed causes of the problem – and root cause – the actual end cause we are trying to identify – are often confused. And then the use of the ‘5 whys’ , a simple tool, which is so effective in drilling down the causality chain to the true root causes.

So going through a case study to practise these steps, how did we do? Well, we didn’t get everything right! And the point here is, if we, as Lean practitioners, aren’t able to problem solve in a systematic way, how can we expect to coach and lead others to do the same?

Back to basics methinks.

An Update: Problem Solving 2021

Bringing this post up to date, we’ve developed the Lean Learning Platform so you can hone your skills. We have a range of materials to help you become self reliant on your lean journey. The complementary Level 1 Practical Problem Solving materials aim to provide knowledge around the subject area.

• Construction
• Manufacturing
• Public Sector
• Retail & Hospitality
• Supply Chain
• Capability Development
• Lean Leadership
• Lean Principles
• Management System
• Process Improvement
• Product Development
• Tools & Techniques
• Transformation
• Demand Analysis
• Flow Costing
• Lean & Green
• lean certification
• Lean Digital
• lean learning
• Lean Summit
• Lean Thinking
• Lean Transformation Framework
• Managment Routines
• People Capability
• Problem Solving
• product development
• Purpose Process People
• Rapid Problem Solving
• Standardised Work
• Supply Chain Management
• Teach Poster
• Training Within Industry (TWI)
• UK Lean Summit
• Value Stream Analysis
• Value Stream Mapping (VSM)
• Value Streams
• Visual Management

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Toyota-Style Problem-solving A3 Reports Adapted by

Related Papers

Aadil Rasool

REGE - Revista de Gestão

Luiz Eduardo Simão

Kuda Tak Bersayap

Jesse Pappers

Problem identification is a key phase in the Looper co-creation process. This phase seeks to engage residents of the area covered by the Living Labs in surfacing problems in the public realm and coming to understand those problems more deeply in order to address them. The Brussels Looper Living Lab is located in the municipality of Schaerbeek in the north of the Brussels Capital Region. This municipality has many issues regarding mobility and is therefore an interesting testing ground for the Looper co-creation methodology. VUB-MOBI partnered with citizen NGO BRAL to try to identify and address issues of concern in Schaerbeek. The problem identification for the second loop began in June 2019, with the explicit aim to focus on school streets to improve traffic safety near a school. Whereas in the first loop much time was spent on identifying the problem and organising participatory data collection moments, the second loop focused on the problems that could arise when implementing a t...

REVIEW, EVALUATION AND OPTIMISATION OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN WATER RESOURCES MONITORING NETWORK

musariri musariri

Edmond Weiss

Vasant Patel

Energy Efficiency Solutions for Historic Buildings

Zeno Bastian

Rostislav Popov

RELATED PAPERS

Kamila Hawa

International Journal of Molecular Sciences

Pavel Solopov

Demacio Oliveira

Diplomacia cultural , la vida

Andrés Ordóñez

International Journal of High Risk Behaviors and Addiction

maryam pourshams

Sorandil Project

Chukka Ranjith

Psychiatry Investigation

Rita Roncone

Darlan Santos

International Journal of Life Science and Pharma Research

raniyah abualnour

Noriaki Shimizu

Michael Matus

International Affairs

Richard Whitman

Syamimi Anis Amirah Binti Ismail

David Klugman

Virgílio Borges Pereira

RUDI AMALIA LOLI PONCE

Doru Caproiu

British journal of cancer

Jürg Bernhard

Journal of emerging technologies and innovative research

Dr. Bharat Bhushan Naib

Alicia Basso

Medical Physics

Örjan Smedby

Energy for Sustainable Development

Yohama Puentes

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Problem Solving the Toyota Way

More than solving problems, every problem is an improvement opportunity, telling the problem-solving story.

The Toyota Way seeks to identify and remove obstacles on the path to perfection. This philosophy is rooted in the Japanese cultural desire to seek perfection in every activity. As we discussed earlier in the book, the Toyota Way is a cyclical process of achieving stability, standardizing practices, and then continually squeezing the process in order to expose the obstacles (seen as system weakness). Human beings tend to seek comfort and avoid discomfort. The Toyota Way is not a natural behavior. The Toyota philosophy relies on the “system,” and adhering to its concepts will force people supporting the system into uncomfortable situations. The choices presented then are to either remove the obstacles or to fail. For this reason, possessing the skills of solving problems and the ability to continuously improve are crucial to survival.

This process serves as the framework for most other aspects of the Toyota Production System (TPS) and its product development system, and is largely responsible for Toyota’s tremendous success. Toyota can generate greater results, with less effort, in a shorter period of time, more consistently than any of its competitors. This process provides a structure to align resources effectively, to ensure mutual understanding of the significance of the issue, to clearly outline the necessity and benefit of resolving the issue, and, with a high degree of accuracy, to predict the actual result.

The problem-solving methodology is a skill that runs deep and strong at all levels of the organization within Toyota and across all functions, from manufacturing to purchasing to sales and the rest of Toyota. The basic method is learned in training classes, but the real learning comes from daily practical application, continued use, and evaluation by others in the organization. Technically, the methodology is fairly simple and does not require complex statistical analysis tools. Because of it’s simplicity the method can be embraced and executed by all Toyota personnel regardless of education or previous experience. Toyota uses advanced statistical analysis in certain situations, but the day-to-day use of problem-solving is straightforward. This method may appear too simplistic to individuals trained as Black Belts in the Six Sigma process, but there is an elegant beauty to it. For one thing, the issues encountered by most associates on a daily basis require only basic analytical skills. More complex techniques are unnecessary and often confuse people who have a problem but are not trained in the methods. In addition, the process at Toyota can be applied rapidly, while Six Sigma and other similar processes tend to be lengthy and laborious.

This process may occur in a very short time frame (less than one minute) or may take months or even years. From the moment an operator discovers a problem on the line and signals the need for support (by pulling the andon cord, as described in Chapter 8), until the problem is controlled and corrected, may be less than one minute. At the other end of the spectrum is long-term strategy development, preparing a new product launch, process improvement, and policy deployment.

Calling this process “problem solving” may be a misnomer, since the process goes well beyond the basics of solving problems. This method encompasses a critical and logical thinking process. It requires thorough evaluation and reflection (genchi genbutsu and hansei), careful consideration of various options, and a carefully considered course of action, all leading toward measurable and sustainable goals.

With repeated use and practice, this process becomes second nature and is used in virtually every situation in which improvement is desired, when new or modified processes are added, and even as a framework for the development of a lean implementation process. Here are just a few of the situations for which this process can be used:

• Correcting weakness in skill levels and development of a training plan
• Purchasing new equipment
• Cost reduction activities
• Team improvement activities (Quality Circles, kaizen events)
• Improving productivity and process flow
• Annual planning and strategy development

The inverse of a problem is an opportunity. This has become a cliché and often means we don’t want to deal with the fact that we have problems. It becomes real only when the organizational culture focuses on continuous improvement. Within all organizations, including Toyota, there is a virtually endless supply of problems, and thus opportunities. We may also commonly refer to these problems as “issues,” and they fall into three broad categories: Large, Medium, and Small (Figure 13-1).

Many organizations fail to develop an effective process for capturing opportunity from all three categories. Quite often the Small category is overlooked entirely because these opportunities are viewed as “insignificant” or offering “not enough bang for the buck.” In addition, the Medium and Large categories are not fully exploited due to the small number of people being trained or qualified to resolve issues (Figure 13-2). In this structure, the primary impetus for improvement is management-directed and management-controlled. In this case change occurs from outside the process. This continues to foster the traditional we/they thinking, which implies that only management or specific individuals are responsible for improvement, and that the workers wait for “them” to correct issues. Individual efforts are not encouraged for various reasons, but primarily because there is no structure in place to support them and because managers fear a loss of control.

Figure 13-1. Typical quantities of opportunities available

Figure 13-2. Opportunities captured by typical companies

Also, in most organizations problems are not viewed as opportunities for improvement, but as failures, and thus are hidden rather than addressed.

Toyota is able to maximize its performance using two tactics:

• Every employee is trained and encouraged to use the process daily, thus achieving tremendous leverage from the combined efforts of many problem solvers each making frequent, small, continuous improvements. This contrasts with many U.S. companies, where select individuals (such as engineers, or Black Belts) are trained and designated to solve problems; often with little or no input from those actually closest to the process.
• Resources are utilized to address problems across all three levels, and the efforts can be focused, thus applying greater leverage and multiplying the results. The problem-solving process requires evaluation and comparison of issues, allowing people to focus efforts on the most significant items. In this way, a smaller amount of focused effort produces greater results by attacking the larger opportunities. In addition, individuals are able to focus efforts on the smaller items they control and that directly affect them. Toyota applies the 80/20 rule by effectively focusing 80 percent of their energy on the 20 percent of problems that will yield 80 percent of the total benefit.

The Toyota Way divides the categories and utilizes the resources appropriately for all three levels. Larger issues are generally addressed through managementdirected and management-controlled activities such as Management Kaizen Training [also referred to as Practical Kaizen Training, or jishuken activities (Figure 13-3)]. It is also management’s responsibility to establish expectations for the organization, to identify weak points in the system, and to apply the appropriate resources. Mid-level opportunities are generally initiated by the supervisor, the team, or by an individual. These items may be based on overall company objectives for improvement or on issues of particular challenge to the group affected. Finally, Toyota is able to capture a huge opportunity by facilitating the individual efforts toward improvement. The individual or small team nearly always initiates these efforts. Each person understands the process of continuous improvement and pursues that objective in his or her daily activities.

In fact, continuous improvement is so important that changes to processes are made up to the last day of production in a product cycle. This seems paradoxical until it is understood that the idea of continuous improvement truly means continuous—never ending. If people believe that improvements are only desired under the “correct” conditions, they will, in effect, not make improvements because the conditions may never be correct. We’ve often heard people state that a product or process will “go away” in six months, so it is not practical to spend time and money improving it. The Toyota Way suggests that a small improvement with minor effort yielding perhaps one second of time or one cent per piece saved over the six-month period is, in fact, a practical idea. It facilitates the idea that improvement must occur at all times at all levels by all individuals. Any rules suggesting appropriate times and conditions for improvement will kill the spirit of continuous improvement.

Management Kaizen

Cross-functional Team

Quality Circle

Individual Daily Kaizen

Figure 13-3. Toyota leverages opportunities at all levels

In addition, Toyota teaches basic problem-solving skills to all employees so that everyone becomes a problem solver. With thousands of people solving problems on a daily basis, Toyota can effectively leverage its people resource. For most issues encountered daily, the basic methods are sufficient. More complex techniques are unnecessary and often confuse people dealing directly with the problem. Problems of a more complex nature require a higher degree of skill, and members of management are trained via Management Kaizen events. The case at the end of this chapter on the Toyota Georgetown, Kentucky Plant illustrates the breadth and depth of kaizen activities across the organization.

Tables 13-1 through 13-3 summarize the characteristics of the three levels of issues, the typical scope of the specific issue, examples of each, and implementation methods.

Table 13-1. Toyota Approach to Large Issues

Table 13-2. Toyota Approach to Medium Issues

Table 13-3. Toyota Approach to Small Issues

Toyota associates learn that the problem-solving process is like telling a story. Every good story has an introduction or lead-in, character development and substance in the middle, a conclusion, and perhaps a hint of a sequel . The problem-solving process has distinct chapters or steps. And like a good story, a good problem-solving process will flow smoothly between each step, with a clear connection from one to the other. The completion of one step will lead to the next step, and there will be no break in the continuity. Here are the “chapters” of the problem-solving story:

Develop a thorough understanding of the current situation and define the problem.

Complete a thorough root cause analysis.

Thoroughly consider alternative solutions while building consensus.

Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA):

• Plan: Develop an action plan
• Do: Implement solutions rapidly
• Check: Verify result
• Act: Make necessary adjustments to solutions and action plan and determine future steps

Reflect and learn from the process.

There may be additional information contained in the story, but it will generally fall under one of these categories. As with good stories, each problem-solving process is somewhat different, but overall, the basic structure of the process is the same.

In Chapters 14 through 17, we’ll go into detail about each chapter of the problem-solving story and developing a thorough understanding of PDCA. You will notice that Chapter 14, which focuses on understanding the current situation and defining the problem, is the longest, and subsequent chapters get shorter. This reflects the importance and level of effort in each of these phases. Getting the problem right is the most important and should be where most of the effort is made, since doing a great job of solving the wrong problem has little longterm impact. Yet in most problem-solving activities we have noticed, people are more than happy to accept a superficial definition of the problem and launch into brainstorming solutions. This brainstorming is the fun and exciting part, so we want to get to that quickly, but it’s also the easiest part. Toyota’s practical problem-solving methodology is a disciplined process and does not always come naturally. It requires stepping back and thinking deeply before charging into solutions and implementation.

Case Study: Kaizen at the Toyota Georgetown Plant

Toyota’s first wholly owned assembly plant outside of Japan in Georgetown, Kentucky originally built only the Camry and has expanded greatly. This plant became the site of thousands of pilgrimages to see true TPS right here in our own backyard. The plant from the start began racking up J.D. Power awards that hang from the rafters, practically hiding the ceiling.

Georgetown started out as a large site, building engines, stamping, welding, painting, molding plastic bumpers and instrument panels, and assembling cars. It grew quickly as the Avalon and Sienna minivan were added, then the minivan was moved out and the Solara coupe was moved in. Through volume changes, model changes, equipment changes (e.g., a completely new body shop), and growth, it has been a busy place with little time to catch a breath. Combined with the fact that it is a favorite recruiting ground for companies that want to hire away Toyota-trained employees, it has been a challenge to maintain the lofty expectations of the plant. By 2004 the site was up to 7,800 employees, which managers felt was beyond the size where communication is truly effective. They had to switch from thinking of it as a town to thinking of it as a big city with a lot of little neighborhoods.

The growth and losing managers led to tremendous pressure by 2000, as the J.D. Power awards became few and far between and cost pressure from the low-wage countries China and Korea pushed the plant into radical kaizen. While kaizen was part of the culture of the plant, they were used to continuous problem solving punctuated by the big changes associated with model launches and new equipment. The new competitive challenge required kaikaku (radical kaizen). Added to this was the pressure of becoming self-sufficient, since Toyota in Japan was spread thin, supporting plants throughout the world, and unable to afford sending additional Japanese engineers and coordinators. Georgetown had to figure things out largely with Americans.

Table 13-2, above, shows a variety of different approaches that Toyota uses for process improvement projects, including various types of crossfunctional teams, Quality Circles, and work groups under a group leader. The need for radical improvement at Georgetown taxed all of these approaches and more.

There are some common characteristics of these process improvement activities at Georgetown, and Toyota generally:

1. Process improvement projects in individual areas are driven by hoshin kanri (policy deployment) objectives for the site that are linked to improvement objectives for North America, which are linked to improvement objectives all the way up to annual goals of the president of Toyota. 2. The process improvement project follows the steps described in Chapters 13 through 17. Ultimately it will look like the problemsolving A3 report described in Chapter 18. It may be displayed on a board, a wall, or on an A3 report, but all the elements will be included (e.g., problem statement, improvement objectives, alternatives considered, selected alternatives, justification, results, additional actions to be taken). 3. It will follow the Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle. 4. It will be part of an organizational learning process, with any key learning shared across the organization.

To support these dramatic improvements, which were needed in many Toyota facilities, Toyota established the Global Production Center (GPC) in Japan. In the past, Georgetown had a mother-child relationship with the Tsutsumi plant in Japan, which also made Camrys. The Georgetown engine plant learned from the Kamigo engine plant in Japan. They “child” plant learned some specific traits of this parent. Now Toyota wanted a global common system and developed GPC to spread TPS in a uniform way. Originally, Japanese coordinators came to each plant in North America and mentored managers one on one. It was a learningby-doing approach. But now, with sites outnumbering coordinators, GPC had to rely on more formal training materials to spread TPS concepts. Georgetown also had the opportunity to learn from the Operations Management Development Division (OMDD) in the United States, which taught TPS to suppliers but now was a resource internally as well. Georgetown employees can engage in a twoto three-year rotation in OMDD, doing projects at suppliers to deeply learn TPS.

One way Georgetown used OMDD was to require all managers, even at the highest levels, to lead shorter kaizen projects at suppliers and get their hands dirty in a new environment with painfully honest critiques from OMDD’s TPS masters. They did a one-week process-level kaizen and then a two-week systems-level-material-and-information-flow kaizen. Managers who led the supplier kaizen activities were expected to lead four similar activities per year in their own areas back at Georgetown. To develop in-house knowledge, Georgetown set up an Operations Development Group (ODG) internally. Group leaders, area managers, and managers could rotate through for two to three years to get indepth TPS experience doing kaizen projects in the plant. Each area of the plant has a TPS specialist who has direct experience or mentored expertise from this group assigned to work on medium-sized projects.

Through hoshin kanri, aggressive goals were set for each plant in 2003. For example, to become globally competitive on price, the engine plant set a target of reducing total cost by 40 percent by 2007. Through kaizen, the engine plant had reduced the workforce size from 1,017 to 930 people between 2000 and 2003. But cutting direct labor was not going to get a 40 percent cost reduction. That required a major analysis of all costs, for labor, depreciation, maintenance, indirect materials, facilities, and purchased parts and materials. Cost targets were established in each area, adding up to 40 percent when achieved. To make it more challenging, the engine plant had similarly aggressive targets in safety, quality, and product launches.

The 2005 hoshin kanri was to be the best in North America at efficiency and effectiveness. This required breakthrough kaizen and a rededication to the Toyota Way. The Georgetown plants had the benefit of benchmarking their sister plants in Japan, which were already considerably ahead on these metrics. The engine plant could benchmark the Kamigo plant, note the significant gaps, study the root cause of the gaps, and develop specific action plans to close the gap. Each plant at Georgetown used benchmarking in this way. Some of the approaches taken at the engine plant were:

Minimize machine complexity through some new developments in machining technology at Toyota. This would increase operational availability.

Use the “cabbage patch” approach to make operations more visual. This included a review of machined scrapped parts, laying out all

the scrapped parts each day. Actual cost due to scrap is charted and a deep Five-Why analysis done. A daily board shows what the problem is, the root cause, shortand long-term countermeasures, who is responsible, and the status of the project every day.

Make the line more compact through line compression. Moving operations closer together reduces waste and allows operators to add tasks in their work cycle, without adding overburden, as well as reducing travel distance to respond to andon calls.

Bring subassembly operations in line with the main assembly to compress lines.

Bring in a new engine on new breakthrough machining technology (Global Engine Line) that is far more flexible and at the same time simpler and easier to maintain.

More local sourcing of materials and tooling to reduce shipping costs and take advantage of lower costs in America than Japan (tooling locally cut costs 30 percent).

Long–term, the objective was to merge the sixand four-cylinder lines into one flexible line that would greatly reduce capital costs and provide flexibility to level the schedule as demand patterns change for one versus the other engine.

There were many small kaizen activities in the engine plant. Here are a few examples:

Comparison to Kamigo showed that Georgetown was using significantly more labor. So many small projects were done using yamazumi (balance) charts and analysis using the Standard Work Combination Table discussed in Chapter 6. In one project a team under the group leader was able to reduce one process out of three in this way. Spread across all of the teams in the plant, this begins to add up. (Note: eliminating a “process” in many companies equates to eliminating a person’s job but at Toyota the person is not let go but moved to another position. Through attrition, early retirement, and reducing temporary employees this will ultimately lead to higher labor productivity).

A Quality Circle activity on tooling wear done by a team that saved 16 cents per unit.

One machine was hidden from view by curtains, and uncovering it to see what was going on revealed problems of how metal chips were building up and coolant was overflowing. A better preventive maintenance system was put in place, and scrap and operational availability were charted and improved.

There were so many changes occurring all over the Georgetown site to meet these aggressive targets that it’s hard to do justice to the magnitude of the improvement effort. Each improvement project used the same rigorous problem-solving approach, with specific measurable objectives to achieve the goals set at the next level up in the hoshin kanri. Here are a few examples:

• A large project was initiated to systematically work through the problems identified in the D. Power initial quality survey for the Camry and to implement countermeasures. The initial quality survey counted things gone wrong in six areas of the vehicle (chassis/transmission, engine/brakes, features and controls, body exterior/exterior paint, body interior). Six cross-functional “customer satisfaction teams” were established for these areas, each with a management-level lead for daily activities and a high-level “executive champion” to address external support. A visual management bay was set up on the shop floor to display information and hold weekly 30-minute stand-up meetings.

Each of the six areas has a portion of the wall to display information and project status. J.D. Power publishes results twice per year, and companies can get in-depth versions of the study comparing themselves to other companies. Toyota paid for an additional level, which gives monthly customer survey data, including verbatim descriptions of the problem and the actual Vehicle Identification Numbers of problem cars. The complete problem-solving process described in this section was followed from the problem definition to identifying alternative solutions to developing detailed action plans with what, who, and when. All of this was on the storyboards.

As an example, a detailed investigation of a steering pull problem led to some significant reengineering, while a quicker problem involved the keyless entry system, because people found it to easy to push the trunk release button unintentionally. Many of these problems cut across the company, involving corporate quality, product development, suppliers, and engineering in Japan, since there are Camry models for Europe and Japan. Georgetown took a leadership role coordinating all the activity, since they are the last line of attack and build the cars customers experience.

• In final assembly, benchmarking versus Tsutsumi revealed a large gap in labor costs of $187 per vehicle. A large project process, called “cost competitiveness through line simplification,” was initiated at Georgetown. Many things were done to reduce the gap. One was the use of a procedure developed in Georgetown called “process diagnostics.” This was a checklist process in which the total workplace of the operator is assessed and points are assigned to many aspects (part presentation, ergonomics, tool reach distance, lighting, safety, etc.). It was based on a model of an ideal workstation from the operator’s perspective. By scoring an operation, the analyst gets a clear idea where there are opportunities for improvement and can measure progress as changes are implemented. A separate conveyance diagnostics instrument was developed to evaluate the conveyance process. These procedures are conducted weekly by the team leader (one process per week is confirmed in this way). This is not creating the process, but confirming that it is still working. It is initially also used to set up the process. Through repeated kaizen, the number of processes needed for the Camry (over one launch) was reduced from 628 in final assembly in 2001 to 454 in 2004.
• A medium-sized project focused on quality and cost in the paint shop, which has two full paint booths—one for Camry and Avalon (Assembly Line 1) and one for Camry and Solara (Assembly Line 2). In all, 730 people worked in the paint booths. The department hoshin focused on safety, environment, people development, and special productivity projects. From 2000 to 2004 intense kaizen activities were This four-year process started with trainers from Tsutsumi coming to the plant, then Georgetown managers and engineers participating in floor activities in Japan. By then, from 2002 to 2003, the hoshin required practical kaizen activities led by managers. One set of projects focused on motion kaizen, and over four years, the number of processes was reduced by 76, which put the Georgetown plant at a labor productivity level comparable to the sister Tsutsumi plant. In 2004 the focus was on how to drive all of the hoshin internally, becoming self-reliant from Tsutsumi.
• A more focused quality activity in paint, not based on benchmarking Tsutsumi, was a “zero paint seed” Paint seeds are a common problem when dust gets on the body and paint surrounds it, forming a dust speck in the paint. This must be removed by hand. For the top-coat paint process, 180 items were identified as the main control items for the whole paint shop. By creating a clean mix room, checking items on a checklist, and root cause problem solving, quality defects were reduced by 50 percent. For example, for repairing seeds not caught in inspection they used orbital sanders, which actually created dust and caused more defects in the body. This was replaced with a simple seed knife on a dampened area, which resembles shaving. Together with standard work, this improved direct run quality from 82 to 97 percent and reduced airborne dust. In 2003 alone, the paint department changed every piece of equipment in the shop while painting cars, built a wet wall that added humidity to reduce dust, eliminated a top coat, which saved $10 per vehicle, used a balance chart across three booths to reduce labor, reduced recoats/repaints, and added the seed knife process.
• This medium-sized project brought a new concept in material handling to Georgetown’s body shop, where subassemblies are welded and then brought to the final body station where the whole body is welded. The concept is minomi (parts only), which translates into something like a peanut without a In this case it is transferring the part without any container. The big bulky containers moved by forklifts are gone. Steel-stamped body parts to be taken for welding are hung individually on various kinds of racks with no containers. This “parts only” storage and delivery system first developed by Toyota in Japan is a breakthrough in material handling. It eliminates containers, thus reducing the waste of loading and unloading them, gets rid of forklift trucks (using tuggers instead), presents parts better to operators—reducing motion waste, damage, ergonomics problems—and reduces the number of process steps for material handling.
• One example is a hanging minomi in which the parts are hung on a rack on wheels as they are produced. In the traditional approach you press, convey, store, convey, and thus handle three times. Georgetown developed a cartridge system in which the cartridge is line-side in welding. The tugger slides the parts into the cartridge, which is a rack on wheels; it is brought over to the next operation; and then the parts are gravity fed to the operator one by one. Now the storage location is on the side of the line and the intermediate storage area is gone, also freeing space and reducing The process started with a model area, which Georgetown called a “schoolyard” for learning minomi. They selected relatively easy parts, easy to stack and to move and store. This freed up space by 150 square feet, created better visual control, eliminated a forklift, and presented parts in exactly the orientation needed for the operator. Ergonomics was improved, since the parts are loaded at the same height each time. Repacking versus this cartridge system reduced labor by 34 percent and inventory by 49 percent. Projected savings when this was spread throughout were 40 percent workability ergonomics improvement (based on a computer ergonomics model), 70 percent on racking, 5 percent on associated conveyance,11 percent fewer forklifts, 20 percent less space and less walking in the process, and a whopping 85 percent quality improvement because of reduced damage to parts. This started in 2003, and by July 2004 was about half complete.
• On a smaller level, a team leader kaizen in stamping focused on using a yamazumi chart (operator work load balancing) to reduce one process from an operation. This PKA (practical kaizen activity) was designed to teach TPS by doing. The team leader used a Standardized Work Combination Table to chart what the person and machine do. He identified waste, largely from conveyance, and combined what the conveyance driver was doing with the line operator’s job. There had been 499 minutes of work over a cycle of 450 minutes per By reducing waste by 49 minutes and bringing the workload down to 450 minutes, one operator position was removed from the operation. Safety and quality were carefully tracked and there were no problems. New standardized work was created by the team leader, an hourly employee.

These aggressive kaizen projects are being done at all levels and for big, medium, and small projects. They are being done cross-functionally and from the manager to the team associate level. Why would hourly team associates and team leaders participate in this when many of these projects lead to process reductions, which imply labor reductions? The reason is simple. Since the opening of the Georgetown plant, no fulltime team associates have involuntarily lost their jobs. Those “kaizened” out are reassigned and eventually, through attrition and by reducing the use of temporary workers, the employee levels are adjusted. More recently Georgetown began to offer early retirement packages and voluntary severance packages. The drivers for these aggressive process improvements include pressure to compete in cost with China and Korea, a target to become self-sufficient from Japan, and aggressive quality improvement targets. This is constantly communicated. The goal is to be competitive and healthy for the long term.

Reflect and Learn from the Process

The ability to identify and correct problems quickly and effectively is at the heart of Toyota’s success. Many aspects of the Toyota Production System are designed to surface problems quickly and at times harshly. The ability to solve these problems must exist at all levels of your organization so continuous improvement is possible. Reflect on the following questions to determine what steps

will be necessary to improve the problem-solving ability within your company.

1.Evaluate the cultural mind-set toward problems within your company. a.Do people generally prefer to keep problems hidden or suppressed? b.When problems occur, are people supported in the effort to find solutions, or are they blamed for making mistakes? c.Does your organization promote we/they thinking because there is a cultural mind-set and structure such that some people have problems and others are designated to solve them? d.Identify specific steps that will shift your culture to one that views the surfacing and solving of problems to be critical to the success of the company.

2.Evaluate the problem-solving ability in your company. a.Are problems easily identified and resolved? (If problems continually recur, they are not being resolved effectively.) b.Is there a defined methodology to guide the problem-solving process? c.What steps are needed to change your organization so it solves problems at all three levels? d.What specific training will be necessary to develop problem-solving skills?

3.Evaluate your organization’s ability to focus resources effectively. a.Does your organization leverage resources to resolve issues on all three levels? b.Are the efforts of your people focused effectively on the most critical issues? How do you know? c.Are you able to evaluate the effectiveness of your problemsolving efforts quantitatively? Can you verify that you’re not spending one dollar to solve a five-cent problem?

Related Posts

• Work Groups Are the Focal Point for Solving Problems - In a conventional automotive plant, white-collar or skilled-trade staff is responsible for problem solving, quality assurance, equipment maintenance, and productivity. By contrast, shop floor work groups are the focal point...
• “Practical Problem Solving” in Seven Steps - At Toyota, a five-why analysis is often used as part of a seven-step process they call “practical problem solving.”  Before the five-why analysis can begin, “practical problem solving” requires you...
• Continuously Solving the Root Causes - How does continuous improvement take place in a supply chain? In our view, continuous improvement is learning and implementing the lessons learned; thus, much of what has been written about...
• Toyota Supplier Partnering Characteristics - Table of Contents Mutual Understanding Interlocking Structures Control Systems Compatible Capabilities Information Sharing Joint Improvement Activities Continuous Improvement and Learning What follows are the seven characteristics of Toyota’s supplier partnering,...
• Toyota Leveling Paradox - Table of Contents Heijunka Provides a Standardized Core for Resource Planning Why Do This to Yourself? Smoothing Demand for Upstream Processes How to Establish a Basic Leveled Schedule Incremental Leveling...
• Toyota Supply Systems - Table of Contents 1. Become a Role Model Lean Customer 2. Identify Your Core Competencies 3. Develop Your Core Suppliers 4. Use Control Systems for Continuous Improvement 5. Favor an...
• Develop Leaders Who Live Your System - Table of Contents Success Starts with Leadership Importance of Leadership Within Toyota Toyota Georgetown Production Leadership Structure Toyota Georgetown Staff Leadership Structure Requirements for Leaders Group Leader Responsibilities on a...
• How Toyota and Suppliers Work Together as Partners - Interview on September 23, 2008, with Jeffrey Smith,Vice President and General Manager, Toyota Business Unit, Johnson Controls The purpose of the interview was to discuss how Toyota and suppliers work...
• Make Technology Fit with People and Lean Processes - Table of Contents Back to the Abacus? What Do You Believe About Technology, People, and Processes? Tailor Technology to Fit Your People and Operating Philosophy Contrasting Models of Technology Adoption...
• Starting the Journey of Waste Reduction - Table of Contents Lean Means Eliminating Waste Developing a Long-Term Philosophy of Waste Reduction Value Stream Mapping Approach Benefits of the Value Stream Mapping Approach Developing a Current State Map...
• Toyota's Global Expansion: Strategies and Challenges
• Toyota's Cross-cultural Communication Strategies in Global Operations
• Toyota Logistics Operation
• Toyota's Supplier Relationship Management: Building Long-Term Partnerships
• Toyota's Approach to Quality Management: Tools and Techniques
• Toyota's Joint Ventures and Strategic Alliances
• Toyota's Six Sigma Approach and Its Implementation
• Toyota's Digital Transformation in Manufacturing
• How Toyota's Just-In-Time (JIT) System Revolutionized Manufacturing
• Toyota Production Scheduling and Operations

• Our Services

Practical Problem Solving

Many organisations often struggle with effective problem solving and find that the best they can achieve is to merely contain the existing problems by introducing more waste into the organisation. For example an unreliable machine will be managed by adding in more stock to protect supply to the customer or through the acquisition of a second machine to ensure throughput. Real problem solving countermeasures the root cause of an issue preventing it from reoccurring and in doing so creates stability with the least amount of waste.

Toyota A3 Problem Solving is not a skill reserved for engineers and managers, if you truly desire to harness the creativity and innovation of your employees then it should be seen as a fundamental skill possessed by everyone.

Key Study Areas

• Introduction to Toyota A3 8 step problem solving approach
• Differences between Toyota approach and other such as six sigma
• Define the real problem
• Use and present data to clarify the point of cause of the problem
• Study the problem to ensure complete understanding
• Select countermeasures and evaluate effectiveness
• Monitor the results & gain greater benefits through effective sharing

All levels of an organisation.

Problem Solving Course Information

This course can be delivered at Deeside or at a client's site. Undertaking the course at your own facility will allow for a real problem to be tackled.

This course is available in two versions:

One day version which will teach you the theory and challange you to apply your knowledge on a case study.

Two day version where, in addition to the above, we will support you to apply the principles to an area within your own organisation.

Customer Comments

"As a six sigma green belt I was sceptical about how this would compare. I was amazed at what Toyota are achieving with this approach." - 13/11/19

• Find a Dealer
• MyToyota Login
• Parts & Services
• Resource Library

About Toyota

Electric forklifts.

Electric Pallet Jacks

Electric Pallet Stackers

Reach Trucks

Order Pickers

Internal Combustion: Cushion Tires

Internal Combustion: Pneumatic Tires

Heavy Duty Forklifts

Tow Tractors & Tuggers

Hand Pallet Jacks

Automated Guided Vehicles

Aerial Work Platforms

• Toyota Assist
• Smart Environment Sensor
• Rental & Used
• Find a Forklift
• Compare Forklifts
• Industry Solutions
• Automation Solutions
• Energy Solutions
• Consulting Solutions
• Financial Solutions
• Fleet Solutions

Food Storage

General Warehouse

Cold Storage

General Manufacturing

Building Materials

Automate Receiving Processes

Automate Material Transportation

Automate Storage Systems

Automate Picking Solutions

Automate Shipping Systems

Become a Greener Business

Lithium-Ion Batteries

Convert from IC to Electric

Analyze Warehouse Space

Increase Employee Education

Improve Operation Safety

Improve a Process

Toyota Commercial Finance

Financing with Toyota

MyToyota Credit Card

Benefits of Buying Toyota

Highest Quality Parts

Toyota forklift dealers are a one-stop-shop, full service forklift solutions provider.

• Model & Serial Number
• Part Number

How to Find Your Equipment Model Number

Finding the right parts for your equipment is easy when you have your model and serial number which can be found on the data plate. Luckily, a forklift data plate is installed on every truck on the market to help you understand what your forklift can do and provide vital information.

Model Number:  The model number of your toyota forklift is extremely important for relaying information to your dealers about repair or technical assistance and for looking up replacements part!

Serial Number:  The serial number on your lift is the most important number.The model serial number combination will allow us to provide you with the parts that will fit your particular piece of equipment.

How to Find Your Equipment Serial Number

Model Number:  The model number of your toyota forklift is extremely important for relaying information to your dealers about repair or technical assistance and for looking up replacements part!

Serial Number:  The serial number on your lift is the most important number.The model serial number combination will allow us to provide you with the parts that will fit your particular piece of equipment.

Need some help? For further assistance or more information, contact your local Toyota Dealer .

• Request a Parts Quote
• Toyota Genuine Parts
• Toyota Starlift Parts

Industry Leading Service

Increase your productivity, overall up-time and lifespan of your forklift.

• Request Service Quote
• Maintenance Plans
• 360 Support
• All Resources
• Customer Stories
• Whitepapers
• Management Guides
• Video Library

Toyota Careers

Management Team

Toyota Dealers

Sustainability

Corporate Social Responsiblity

• National Accounts
• Toyota Production System
• Forklift Safety
• Toyota Powered Engines

Press Enter to Search

Problem Solving Through Toyota Lean Management

Albert Einstein once wrote, “We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.” Simply put, coming up with creative and innovative solutions to problems oftentimes requires you to look at the problem with a fresh perspective. As we’ve discussed in previous  Toyota Lean Management blog posts , recognizing and cutting down on waste is critical to increasing your efficiency, reducing costs, and improving throughput. However, in order to make these improvements and see positive changes in ROI, a key step is recognizing where problems exist and working to solve them.

To recognize and solve these problems, it is often helpful to view them with a different lens to reach a newfound conclusion. Toyota’s 8 steps for problem-solving act as the lens that allows you to view different aspects of your operation from a new perspective.

Consider these eight steps as you start on the path to continuous improvement.

1. Clarify the problem

The first step in solving a problem is realizing that one exists. You can define a problem by asking yourself the following questions:

• Does my current process deviate from the standard?
• Is there a gap in my current process with what I am trying to accomplish vs. what I am accomplishing?
• Are my customer’s needs being met with my current process?

If the answer to any of these questions is no, then you know you have a problem that could use some improvement.

2. Break down the problem

Now that you’ve verified the problem, you can begin to break down the issue into smaller, more detailed pieces. It can be helpful to analyze the different inputs and outputs of your process so you can effectively see where you are currently placing your efforts. Don’t bite off more than you can chew. It is much easier to manage and solve smaller problems rather than attack one large problem with little direction.

3. Set a target

The third step is all about commitment and consistency. Now that you’ve broken down the problem, how are you going to go about solving it? How are you going to meet your new deadline, and how long will it take to complete? Allot adequate time for each activity to ensure you are giving each aspect of the project enough attention.

4. Analyze the root cause

Analyzing the root cause allows you to identify each of the factor(s) that caused a problem in the first place. Sometimes there is more than one cause, and it is important to consider each one as you work to address the issue.

5. Develop countermeasures

Establishing the root cause is only half the battle. Now, you must develop countermeasures for each of those root causes to prevent the same issues from occurring again.

6. Implement countermeasures

Now that you’ve established your countermeasures, it is time to put them into action. You may want to seek ideas from other team members to ensure you are not missing any steps. Also, it can be helpful to track how effective each countermeasure is performing along the way and making adjustments where necessary.

7. Evaluate Results and Process

The seventh step is all about implementing a system to review and evaluate how your new process is working. Countermeasures will fail, but it is important to develop an effective system that always looks for areas of improvement in order to reach the desired result.

8. Standardize Successful Processes

After receiving successful results from your previous evaluation, it is time to standardize the process within your team and the entire organization. As you work through the standardization process, continue to look for possible unresolved issues that you may have missed the first time.

Remember, the road to establishing a lean organization doesn’t stop once you improve a few processes. Lean isn’t just about identifying where you can do better; it’s about instilling a culture of respect and developing to create a workplace that your associates enjoy working in. Achieving business goals and leaner processes requires dedication and teamwork from every individual in the organization. Encourage open communication and empower your employees to bring problems to your attention when they are detected.

Related Articles

Redesign, Specs & Reviews

Toyota’s 7 Steps to Problem Solving

As an affiliate, we may earn a commission from qualifying purchases. We get commissions for purchases made through links on this website from Amazon and other third parties.

Welcome to a comprehensive overview of Toyota’s problem-solving process. With this step-by-step approach, Toyota has overcome countless challenges and continuously improved its operations. But what makes these steps so effective? And how can they be applied to various industries and contexts?

In this article, we’ll explore Toyota’s problem-solving techniques in detail, breaking down each of the . From problem Toyota’s 7 Steps to Problem Solving  definition to result evaluation, we’ll explain how Toyota approaches each stage of the process and provide real-life examples of its success.

Whether you’re a business owner, a manager, or an aspiring problem-solver, understanding Toyota’s approach can help you tackle any obstacle more efficiently and effectively. Let’s dive in!

Table of Contents

Step 1: Define the Problem

Before attempting to solve a problem, it is crucial to have a deep understanding of the issue at hand. At Toyota, problem identification is seen as the most critical step in the problem-solving process.

According to Toyota’s problem-solving approach, the first step is to define the problem clearly. This involves gathering all the relevant data, defining the scope of the problem, and identifying the specific symptoms or issues that require attention.

To do this effectively, Toyota encourages a thorough and collaborative problem analysis that involves all relevant stakeholders, including employees, customers, and suppliers. The goal is to identify the underlying causes of the problem and gain a comprehensive understanding of the issue.

“If you can’t describe what you are doing as a process, you don’t know what you’re doing.” – W. Edwards Deming

Following this quote by Deming, it is clear that defining the problem is the first step in establishing a successful process for problem-solving. Without a clear definition of the problem, not only will efforts to identify solutions be ineffective, but the underlying issues will not be addressed and will continue to cause problems in the future.

Step 2: Break Down the Problem

Once the problem has been clearly defined, the next step in Toyota’s problem-solving process is to break it down into smaller, more manageable components. This allows for a more in-depth analysis of each part, as well as identification of any interdependencies or patterns that may exist.

Breaking down a problem can be a challenging task, especially if it is complex or multifaceted. However, Toyota has developed several techniques to streamline this process. A common approach is to use a structured problem-solving method that breaks down the problem into smaller modules.

By analyzing each part separately, Toyota can better understand the root causes of the problem and determine the most effective countermeasures to implement.

Another benefit of breaking down a problem is that it helps prevent potential oversights or biases. By examining each component independently, one can avoid making assumptions and jumping to conclusions based on personal biases or past experiences.

Applying Step 2 to Real-Life Problems

Let’s consider a hypothetical example of a manufacturing company that has identified a problem in its production line. The problem is that a particular machine consistently malfunctions, leading to delays in the production process and decreased productivity.

Using Toyota’s approach, the problem would first be defined: the malfunctioning machine is causing delays in the production process, leading to decreased productivity.

The next step would be to break down the problem into smaller, more manageable components. In this case, the production process could be divided into modularized functions such as machine operation, material handling, and packing.

Each of these functions could then be analyzed independently, looking for any potential causes of the problem. For example, a closer examination of the machine operation module may reveal that a faulty sensor is causing the machine to malfunction. A countermeasure could then be developed to replace the faulty sensor, and the results evaluated to ensure the solution was effective.

Through this approach, the problem can be tackled systematically and thoroughly to identify and address the root cause of the issue.

Step 4: Analyze the Root Cause

Identifying the root cause is critical to solving any problem effectively. Toyota’s approach to root cause analysis involves digging deeper into the issue to understand why it exists. This step is often the most time-consuming and challenging, but it is also the most crucial.

To help identify the root cause, Toyota uses techniques such as the 5 Whys and the Fishbone Diagram. The 5 Whys technique involves asking “why” five times to help identify the underlying cause of the problem, while the Fishbone Diagram helps to visually identify the multiple causes that may be contributing to the issue.

By analyzing the root cause, Toyota can develop targeted countermeasures that address the problem at its source. This step ensures that the problem is not merely superficially resolved, but that the solution is sustainable.

Once the problem has been clearly defined and broken down into manageable components, the next step in Toyota’s problem-solving process is to identify the underlying cause of the issue. This is where root cause analysis comes in, and Toyota has developed several techniques for conducting this critical step.

The 5 Whys technique is one approach Toyota uses to get to the root cause of a problem. It involves asking “why” five times, with each subsequent answer leading to a deeper understanding of the issue until the underlying cause is identified. This technique helps to uncover the origin of the problem and helps to avoid merely addressing the symptoms.

Another valuable tool used by Toyota in root cause analysis is the Fishbone Diagram. This technique helps to visualize all the potential causes of the problem, including people, processes, materials, environment, and equipment, among others. By considering all possible factors, Toyota can identify the primary root cause and develop effective countermeasures.

Step 5: Develop Countermeasures

Once the root cause has been identified, the next crucial step is to develop potential countermeasures or solutions. Toyota emphasizes the importance of considering multiple options and evaluating their feasibility. This ensures that the chosen countermeasures not only address the root cause but are also practical and effective in the given context.

There are various techniques that Toyota employs during this step, such as brainstorming, creating action plans, and running simulations. The goal is to generate a range of potential solutions that can be evaluated based on their impact, cost, feasibility, and sustainability.

It is important to note that in this step, Toyota focuses on developing countermeasures, not solutions. This means that the proposed actions are meant to be temporary, allowing for continuous improvement and refinement until a permanent solution is achieved.

Toyota also stresses the need to involve all relevant stakeholders in this step, ensuring that all perspectives and ideas are considered. This promotes a collaborative and inclusive problem-solving culture that values diversity and fosters innovation.

Step 6: Implement the Countermeasures

Once Toyota selects the most viable countermeasures to address the identified root cause(s), it’s time to implement them. This phase requires effective planning, coordination, and communication among all relevant stakeholders to ensure a successful outcome.

Toyota uses a detailed and structured approach to implementation, including developing an implementation plan, allocating necessary resources, and clarifying roles and responsibilities. The company understands that successful implementation depends not only on technical aspects but also on people-related factors, such as buy-in, ownership, and collaboration.

During the implementation phase, Toyota monitors progress and adjusts if necessary. The company emphasizes the importance of involving all stakeholders in the process, gathering feedback, and addressing concerns promptly.

Best Practices for Implementing Countermeasures

Here are some best practices that Toyota recommends for implementing countermeasures:

By following these best practices, companies can increase the likelihood of successful implementation and avoid common pitfalls, such as resistance, misunderstandings, or delays.

Step 7: Evaluate the Results and Standardize

After implementing the chosen countermeasures, it is essential to evaluate their effectiveness and make any necessary adjustments. Toyota emphasizes the importance of assessing the results of the problem-solving process and standardizing successful solutions to ensure consistency and future reference. This step is critical in promoting continuous improvement and efficiency.

When evaluating the results, Toyota uses a variety of measures, including data analysis, feedback from stakeholders, and performance indicators. This helps to determine whether the implemented countermeasures have addressed the root cause(s) and achieved the desired outcomes.

If the results are not satisfactory, Toyota begins the process again, starting with step one. However, if the countermeasures are effective, Toyota standardizes the solution to promote consistency and prevent similar problems from occurring in the future.

Standardizing successful solutions involves documenting the problem-solving process, including the steps taken and the results achieved. This information is shared across the organization to ensure that everyone is aware of the solution and how it was reached.

Benefits of Toyota’s 7 Steps

Toyota’s 7-step problem-solving process offers several benefits for individuals and organizations facing various challenges. By following a systematic and structured approach, this process enables people to identify, analyze, and solve problems efficiently and effectively. Some of the advantages of Toyota’s problem-solving techniques include:

• Continuous Improvement : Toyota’s 7 steps promote a culture of continuous improvement by encouraging individuals to identify and eliminate problems through root cause analysis and countermeasure development.
• Efficiency : By breaking down complex problems into manageable components and analyzing each part separately, Toyota’s problem-solving approach helps individuals save time and resources.
• Cost Savings : By identifying and eliminating the root cause of a problem, organizations can avoid recurring expenses associated with addressing the symptoms of that problem.
• Collaboration : Involving all relevant stakeholders in the problem-solving process, Toyota’s 7 steps encourage teamwork, communication, and knowledge sharing.
• Standardization : By standardizing successful solutions, Toyota’s problem-solving process enables organizations to replicate effective strategies across different departments and projects.

Overall, Toyota’s 7-step problem-solving process provides a structured approach to addressing challenges that can benefit businesses and individuals alike. By promoting continuous improvement, efficiency, collaboration, and standardization, this process can help organizations stay competitive and achieve their goals.

Real-Life Examples of Toyota’s Problem-Solving Success

Toyota’s 7-step problem-solving process has been successfully implemented in various industries, resulting in significant improvements and positive outcomes. Here are some real-life examples of Toyota’s problem-solving success:

Example 1: Toyota Production System

The Toyota Production System (TPS) is a prime example of how Toyota’s problem-solving process has led to remarkable success. By applying the 7 steps, Toyota was able to create an efficient and flexible production system that minimized waste and increased productivity. This approach not only boosted Toyota’s profitability but also set a new standard for manufacturing industries worldwide.

Example 2: Toyota’s Health Care Initiative

In 2001, Toyota applied its problem-solving process to the health care industry, partnering with the University of Michigan Health System. By using the 7 steps, Toyota helped the health system streamline its processes, reduce errors, and improve patient care. The results were impressive, with the initiative saving over $5 million in the first year alone.

Example 3: Toyota’s Environmental Efforts

Toyota’s problem-solving approach is not limited to operational improvements but also extends to environmental challenges. In 2002, Toyota faced an issue with excessive landfill waste generated by its suppliers. By applying the 7 steps, Toyota was able to develop a comprehensive waste reduction plan that not only addressed the immediate problem but also reduced overall waste production. This initiative saved over $1 million and reduced 7,000 tons of waste in one year.

These examples demonstrate the versatility and effectiveness of Toyota’s problem-solving process in various industries and problem-solving scenarios.

FAQ: Frequently Asked Questions about Toyota’s Problem-Solving Process

Here are some common questions and concerns related to Toyota’s 7-step problem-solving process:

Q: Is Toyota’s problem-solving approach only applicable to manufacturing industries?

No, Toyota’s problem-solving process can be applied to various industries and scenarios. The 7 steps focus on identifying and addressing root causes, setting clear goals, developing effective solutions, and continuous improvement. These principles can be useful in any setting.

Q: Do I need to follow all 7 steps for every problem I encounter?

Not necessarily. The 7 steps are a guideline to help ensure a systematic and effective approach to problem-solving. However, depending on the nature and complexity of the problem, some steps may not be necessary or may require more attention than others.

Q: How long does it take to implement Toyota’s problem-solving process?

The timeline for implementing the 7 steps depends on the nature and complexity of the problem, as well as the resources and expertise available. Some problems may be resolved quickly, while others may require more time and effort. The key is to ensure a thorough and systematic approach to problem-solving.

Q: What happens if the selected countermeasures do not work?

If the implemented countermeasures do not produce the desired result, Toyota recommends revisiting the analysis and problem definition stages to identify any missed or underlying issues. The process may need to be repeated with adjusted countermeasures until the problem is resolved.

Q: How can I ensure that the solutions are standardized for future reference?

Once the problem has been resolved, it is important to document the process and the selected countermeasures, as well as any results or outcomes. This information can be used as a reference for future problem-solving endeavors and can help ensure the standardization of effective solutions.

Q: Can Toyota’s problem-solving process be used for personal problems or issues?

Yes, the 7 steps can be applied to personal problems or issues as well. The process emphasizes identifying root causes, setting clear goals, and developing effective solutions, which can be useful in any problem-solving scenario.

Conclusion  Toyota’s 7 Steps to Problem Solving

In conclusion, Toyota’s 7 Steps to Problem Solving is an invaluable approach that promotes efficiency and continuous improvement in any organization. This methodology fosters a culture of critical thinking, teamwork, and proactive response to issues.

It is a versatile tool that can be applied across various industries – not just in the automotive sector. Implementing these steps can lead to significant cost savings, improved customer satisfaction, and overall business growth. Therefore, every organization aiming for operational excellence should consider adopting Toyota’s practical and systematic problem-solving strategy.

About the author

Latest Posts

Is Toyota Extended Warranty Transferable?

As a Toyota owner, you want to ensure your vehicle is protected in case of any unexpected expenses. That’s where Toyota’s extended warranties come in. But what happens if you decide to sell your Toyota before the warranty expires? Can the new owner benefit from the extended warranty as well? is toyota extended warranty transferable…

Does Toyota have a grace period?

If you are considering purchasing a Toyota vehicle, you may be wondering if the company has a grace period. A grace period is a specified period of time in which a customer can return a product for a full refund without penalty or fees. does toyota have a grace period we will explore the concept…

Why are Toyota so reliable?

Toyota is known for manufacturing some of the most dependable vehicles on the road. You might have heard people rave about their Toyota’s reliability, or maybe you’re considering purchasing a Toyota and wondering what makes them so trustworthy. Why are Toyota so reliable  we’ll explore the reasons behind Toyota’s reputation for reliability and durability, including…