ONE of the problem-solving lessons I learned from Toyota was called the “A3 thinking.”
Developed in the 1940s, it was a concept based on the A3 sheet of paper, which is 11 by 17 inches in size, at the time, the biggest size of paper used in a photocopying machine. The idea was that the A3 paper could contain all the details everyone needs to solve a problem.
In his book, “The Toyota Way” (2nd edition), Professor Jeffrey Liker says the A3 is a “key tool for nemawashi,” or to help people do an extensive, consensual-seeking approach to deal with issues. The A3, he explains, is the best way to gather the “collective wisdom” of stakeholders and to make their thought processes visible.
The A3 supports the nemawashi process as it provides “a crisp and clear explanation of the current thinking that is used to get critiques and generate ideas” from people. To Filipinos, it explains why the Japanese can give you a painful waiting process before they reach an intelligent decision. To me, it makes a lot of sense.
The A3 has become a standard approach in problem-solving. Type “A3 problem-solving template” into a search engine and you’ll be overwhelmed with free downloads of problem-solving templates.
Question: Can we challenge the use of A3 in its traditional, manual approach to solving a problem?
8 windows
Today, the correlation between the A3 and the photocopying machine has become irrelevant, given the popularity of computers and other digital tools. To my mind, any paper size would serve the purpose of problem-solving as long as it contains the eight windows representing the following:
1. Identifying a problem
2. Calculating the losses
3. Setting of targets
4. Analyzing the root causes
5. Validating the root causes
6. Generating low-cost solutions
7. Implementing the best solution
8. Monitoring the result.
Sometimes, you can get templates with only six or seven boxes rather than the usual eight. You can insert another box for your monitoring plan, if not on how to reward people who made it happen. But that’s possible only if we can do it via a computer where the font sizes can be minimized or maximized. To repeat, we can use any paper size to solve problems with the help of computers. If you ask me what paper size to replace A3, I recommend the legal size or the 8-1/2 inches by 13 (or 14) inches. That size is manageable and is appropriate when consulting people online and offline.
Illusion
Professor Liker says what is important about A3 is the process. I suppose we can dispense with the 11 by 17 inches paper size as long as we can fit in seven or eight boxes in the template.
Yet today, after more than 80 years, there are people and organizations still using the A3 paper size as a manual tool in problem-solving. They don’t even know what they are overlooking. Are they still thinking? To prove this point is to understand the lesson of “The Monkey Business Illusion,” which can be viewed as a 1.41-minute video on YouTube. Another similar and interesting video with the same lesson is “The ‘Door’ Study,” which is also on YouTube.
These are excellent examples to demonstrate the so-called illusion of attention. The monkey illusion test shows people focused on counting the number of passes made by the white team.
Because we were so determined to give the correct number, many of us missed the sight of a “gorilla” and one player from the black team leaving the game.
The lesson is, we need to check everything to discover the obvious, but which is often unseen or overlooked.
Rey Elbo is a business consultant on human resources and total quality management. Contact him on Facebook, LinkedIn, X or email [email protected] or via https://reyelbo.com.
Be the first to comment