Number 95 – Building Our Problem-Solving Muscle

Use A3 to conduct projects.

Practitioners: tactical, and integrative

Building Our Problem-Solving Muscle

A problem-solving system of some kind is a necessary element in the change process of the performance system. Consistency in practice is building our problem-solving muscle. The language used to describe this system varies, depending on who taught you continuous improvement. I like the term performance system because it emphasizes the performance of the process. I have worked with organizations that use other terms like learning system, operating system, or simply improvement system. To me they all pointed to the same concept. The question I use to direct attention is this, “Are we able to change the functional and relational processes to achieve our strategic objectives?” 

The A3 framework is common to the lean or operational excellence environment, so it is often the problem-solving technique of choice. One view of the A3 framework includes the following steps:

1. Background
2. Current State
3. Goals and Targets
4. Analysis
5. Countermeasures
6. Implementation
7. Follow-up

In another post we discussed the vast array of problem-solving frameworks and the similarities and differences they each pose.

Consistency in Practice

One idea that surfaces for me in writing about A3 is the idea that consistency is just as important if not more important than method. If you change your standard method every six months, the learning if focused on the method instead of the outcome. That may seem obvious to some practitioners, but it is lost on others. Name your poison and stick to it.  We have to start building our problem-solving muscle.

As far as practitioners go, the tactical practitioner should be well versed in leading teams through problem-solving technique. The integrative practitioner should hold everyone accountable to appropriate levels of participation and to a specific outcome. Afterall, the integrative practitioner is working from an agreement with the strategic practitioner. That is why the strategic practitioner is not a required participant in this topic. If the agreement exists, the accountability between the integrative and strategic practitioners present in the integrative practitioner.

Questions For Your Consideration

Does your organization have a standard project management framework?

Does that framework include a clearly defined problem-solving technique?

How consistently are these tools used?

What benefits come from common language and thinking within an organizational setting?