clarity first
TRANSCRIPT
HOW SMART LEADERS AND ORGANIZATIONS ACHIEVE OUTSTANDING PERFORMANCE
CLARITY
FIRST
K A R E N M A R T I N
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 3 1/10/18 10:40 AM
© 2018 by Karen Martin
figure 1.1 Organizational ambiguity is similar to Akiyoshi Kitaoka’s optical illusionFigures 1.1 and 1.2 are part of a collection of optical illusions including Ninio’s Extension Illusion created by Akiyoshi Kitaoka, professor in the Department of Psychology, Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto, Japan. Image used with permission by Dr. Kitaoka.
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 4
1/10/18 10:40 AM
figure 1.2 Clearing the lines of ambiguityFigures 1.1 and 1.2 are part of a collection of optical illusions including Ninio’s Extension Illusion created by Akiyoshi Kitaoka, professor in the Department of Psychology, Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto, Japan. Image used with permission by Dr. Kitaoka.
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 6
1/10/18 10:40 AM
CLARITY
ENGAGEDCONNECTED
CollaborationLoyalty
Innovation
EFFICIENT
Productivity
CONFIDENTCAPABLE Agility
figure 1.3 Clarity grows outstanding performance
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 9 1/10/18 10:40 AM
figure 2.1 Three levels of knowing who you are as an organization
What do you do?(What good or service do you
provide to customers?)
What do you really do?(What problem does your
good or service solve?)
Why do you do it?(What is your purpose?)
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 36 1/10/18 10:40 AM
MAYBE NOW
NOT YETNEVER
figure 3.1 Dispositioning the “Maybe” category of existing “special efforts”
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 82 1/10/18 10:40 AM
figure 3.2 Level of effort grid for “Now” priorities
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1 1
1
1 11
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1
1 1
1
1
3
3
3 33 33
3
3
3
3
3
3
33
3
3
3
3 3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2 2
2
Level of E�ort Grid
Heavy - more than 240 hours total work e�ort
Priority
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
IT Mktg HR CEO QC COMOps Fin
3Medium - 16 - 240 hours total work e�ort2Light - 16 hours or less total work e�ort1
AM PD JD
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 83 1/10/18 10:40 AM
EXECUTIVE TEAM
YEAR
1
YEAR
2
YEAR
3
SENIORMANAGEMENT
MIDDLEMANAGEMENT
FRONT LINES
figure 3.3 The catchball process for achieving understanding and building consensus
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 85 1/10/18 10:40 AM
Client
Finalizecontract
Sales Executive
PT = 120 mins.LT = 2 days%C&A = 50%
1
2.0 hrs.2.0 days
0.1 hrs.3.0 days
0.5 hrs.5.0 days
0.2 hrs.2.0 days
2.0 hrs.10.0 days
8.0 hrs.10.0 days
1.5 hrs.5.0 days
0.2 hrs.2.0 days
Hold intro call with
client
ccount AManager
PT = 15 mins.LT = 2 days%C&A = 90%
4
Hold kicko�
meeting
AccountManager
PT = 1.5 hrs.LT = 1 weeks%C&A = 75%
7
Hold hando� meeting
SE, AM, & BA
PT = 30 mins.LT = 1 weeks%C&A = 75%
3
Sendtest files
Client
PT = 2 hrs.LT = 2 weeks%C&A = 75%
5
SQL Developer
DPT
Format test files
Business Analyst
PT = 8 hrs.LT = 2 weeks%C&A = 70%
6
Assign AM & BA
Area Director
PT = 5 mins.LT = 1 days%C&A = 99%
2
Salesforce
Process payment
Finance
PT = 5 mins.LT = 3 days%C&A = 70%
2A
Enroll client in
EDI interface
EDI Specialist
PT = 15 mins.LT = 2 days%C&A = 80%
8
figure 4.1 Current state value stream map or new customer implementation
4.0 hrs.10.0 days
10.0 hrs.10.0 days
8.0 hrs.10.0 days
0.5 hrs.3.0 days
0.0 hrs.10.0 days Lead Time (LT) = 82.0 days
Process Time (PT) = 37.1 hrs.Activity Ratio = 5.7%Rolled %C&A = 4.1%
PRM
Write code
ScrumTeam
PT = 10 hrs.LT = 2 weeks%C&A = 80%
10
Push into production
Operations
PT = 30 mins.LT = 3 days%C&A = 99%
12
Begin submitting financials
Client
PT = 1 mins.LT = 2 weeks%C&A = 90%
13
Send more test
files
Client
PT = 4 hrs.LT = 2 weeks%C&A = 90%
9
Set up application (technical)
Business Analyst
PT = 30 mins.LT = 3 days%C&A = 50%
9A
Set up application
(user)
Account Manager
PT = 1 hrs.LT = 1 weeks%C&A = 90%
10A
Test & debug
code
A & LeadB D elopev er
PT = 8 hrs.LT = 2 weeks%C&A = 85%
11
PB4
figure 4.2 Performing CT scans: value stream and process- level views
VALUESTREAMLEVEL
PROCESSLEVEL
Order CT Scan
Referring MD Patient
Visit MD re:symptoms
Front office staff
Greet patient;Enter time in
IT system
Imaging tech
Review order;Clean & set up
scanner
Imaging tech
Greet patient;Escort to scanning
room
Imaging tech
Conduct scan
Imaging tech
Escort patient to front office
Imaging tech
Complete study in EMR; Enter charge
Patient
Disrobe & put gown down
Imaging tech
Explain process;
Inject contrast
Registrationdept
Registerpatient
Front officestaff
Greet &prep patient
Imaging tech
Conductexam
Radiologist
Dictate report
Transcriptionist
Edit report
Radiologist
Approvereport
Back office staff
Send report to referring
MD
Referring MD
Diagnose; Create
treatmentplan
Schedulingdept
Verify insurance; Schedulepatient
Imaging tech
Push study (in PACS) to Radiologist
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 110
1/10/18 10:40 AM
figure 4.3 Skills matrix
SKILLSMATRIX
Training required
Performs task w/ assistance
Certified but unqualified to train
Certified and qualified to train
Performs task w/o assistance
Skill 1
Skill 2
Skill 3
Skill 4
Skill 5
Skill 6
Skill 7
Skill 8
Skill 9
Skill 1 0
Person 1
Person 2
Person 3
Person 4
Person 5
Person 6
Person 7
Person 8
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 119 1/10/18 10:40 AM
figure 5.1 Monthly volume of customer requests from all sources
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr MayJun Jul
Phone Email User input Staff input
Num
ber
of
tick
ets
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 133 1/10/18 10:40 AM
figure 5.2 Contract amendment turnaround times: table
10
12 16 13 20 17 17 17 14 18 1916 16
5
10
9 10 9 9 8 8 7 7 7 66
January
Requestto draftDraft to execution
Target(days) WK1 WK2 WK3 WK4 WK5 WK6 WK7 WK8 WK9 WK10 WK11 WK12
February MarchContract Amendment Turnaround Time
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 138 1/10/18 10:40 AM
figure 5.3 Contract amendment turnaround time: stacked bar chart
0
5
10
15
20
25
30Tu
rnar
oun
d T
ime
(Day
s)
WK1 WK2 WK3 WK4 WK5 WK6 WK7 WK8 WK9 WK10 WK11 WK12
Target requestto draft
Target draftto execution
Request to draft Draft to execution
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 139 1/10/18 10:40 AM
figure 5.4 Sample level 3 scorecard
180
190
200
210
220
230
240
250
1.5
1.7
1.9
2.1
2.3
2.5
2.7
2.9
3.1
600
1100
1600
2100
2600
3100
3600Safety (OSHA Injury Rate)
Aug-14Nov-
14
Feb-15
May
-15
Aug-15
Nov-15
Feb-16
May
-16
Aug-16
Aug-14
Nov-14
Feb-15
May
-15
Aug-15
Nov-15
Feb-16
May
-16
Aug-16
Sept-1
4Nov-
14Ja
n-15M
ar-15
May
-15Ju
ly-15
Sept-1
6Nov-
16Ja
n-16M
ar-16
May
-16Ju
ly-16
Sept-1
6
Aug-14
Nov-14
Feb-15
May
-15
Aug-15
Nov-15
Feb-16
May
-16
Aug-16
Aug-14
Nov-14
Feb-15
May
-15
Aug-15
Nov-15
Feb-16
May
-16
Aug-16
Aug-14Nov-
14
Feb-15
May
-15
Aug-15
Nov-15
Feb-16
May
-16
Aug-16
Aug-14
Nov-14
Feb-15
May
-15
Aug-15
Nov-15
Feb-16
May
-16
Aug-16
Aug-14
Nov-14
Feb-15
May
-15
Aug-15
Nov-15
Feb-16
May
-16
Aug-16
Quality (Complaints per Million Units Sold) Service (Fill Rate %)
Revenue/Week ($MM) EBITDA/Week ($MM)
Inventory Turns Days Sales Outstanding (DSO) Sales per Employee per Year (Thousands)
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
$15
$17
$19
$21
$1
$2
$3
$4
$5
$6
$7
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
50
52
54
56
58
60
62
64
66
68
24 HR 72 HR
Target
TrendO� target
On target
LEVEL 3 SCORECARD
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 149
1/10/18 10:40 AM
5 Tracey Richardson and Ernie Richardson, The Toyota Engagement Equation: How to Understand and Implement Continuous Improvement (McGraw- Hill Education, 2017), pp. 190–192.
figure 6.1 Caused and created gaps
Defined standard
New standard
Current state
CAUSED GAP
CREATED GAP
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 166 1/10/18 10:40 AM
9 The questions in this model are best suited for solving problems with existing products, processes, environments, and so on (i.e., going from something to something else). Different questions may be needed when creating new products or processes, entering new markets, and so on (i.e., going from nothing to something).
Big vague problemAmbiguity
Specific problem
Problem breakdown
Area of focus
Current state
Rootcauses
Countermeasures forexperimentationClarity
What?
Why?
How?
figure 6.2 Using CLEAR problem solving to move from ambiguity to clarity
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 171 1/10/18 10:40 AM
figure 6.3 CLEAR problem solving phases and questions
CClarify
LLearn
EExperiment
AAssess
CLEAR PROBLEM SOLVING
RRoll out
What’s the problem?
How do you know?
For whom is it a problem?
How significant is it?
What are the problem components?
Which part(s) will you focus on?
What’s the reality of the situation?
What is/are the most significant root cause(s)?
What happened?
Will you adopt, adapt, or abandon the countermeasure?
What’s the best way for rolling out the new way of operating?
Who will monitor performance?
Has the new way resolved the problem?
What did you learn?
Which countermeasures might eliminate the root cause(s)?
Which will you try first? Why?
How will you run the experiment?
What do you think will happen?
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 172
1/10/18 10:40 AM
figure 6.4 Sample problem breakdown tree
Grow overallmarket share
from15% to 22%
Hardware15% revenue
8% profit
> $500,00012% sales
Domestic80% sales
International20% sales
< $500,00088% sales
Domestic50% sales
International50% sales
Software35% revenue
40% profit
Fee-for-service25% sales
Domestic45%
International55%
Subscription75% sales
Domestic62%
International38%
Hardware + Software 50% revenue
25% profit
Customerindustry A30% sales
Domestic100%
Customerindustry B70% sales
Domestic73%
International27%
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 180 1/10/18 10:40 AM
figure 6.5 Information flow and handoffs in an approval process
CURRENT STATEDIR2
MGR2
MGR1
DIR1
COO
DIR4
VP2VP1
DIR3
SUP3
SUP2
SUP1
MGR4
MGR3
DIR2
DIR1
DIR4SUP3
SUP2
SUP1
MGR4
MGR3
FUTURE STATE
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 184 1/10/18 10:40 AM
13 Load leveling is a Lean management technique that’s used to reduce or eliminate uneven-ness (mura) resulting in smoother flow throughout a work system. In manufacturing, it’s also referred to as production smoothing. Leveling incoming demand is a critical improvement for achieving flow, and the problem is often ignored because teams believe they can’t influ-ence customer behavior. That may be true in the case of seasonal goods and services, but organizations can often influence customer behavior in other circumstances.
figure 6.6 Patient arrivals versus physician staffing
0
5
10
15
20
25
05
:00
06
:00
06
:30
07:0
0
08
:00
09
:00
10:0
0
11:0
0
07:3
0
08
:30
09
:30
10:3
0
11:3
0
12:0
0
12:3
0
14:0
0
14:3
0
16:0
0
16:3
0
15:0
0
15:3
0
13:0
0
13:3
0
05
:30
Patients arriving
Patients seen by physician
Physicians scheduled
# p
ati
ents
or
physi
cia
ns
Time of day
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 185 1/10/18 10:40 AM
figure 6.7 How rebate programs affect customer ordering patterns
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecJan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Cas
es o
rder
ed p
er m
onth
RE
BA
TES
RE
BA
TES
RE
BA
TES
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 186 1/10/18 10:40 AM
figure 6.8 Product movement map
1,572K
74K
306K
514K
866K
661K
607K
662K
121K
676K
63K
29K
83K
24K
32K
13K
3K
11K
28K
47K
42K
43K
258K
336K
635K
110K
Warehouse1
Warehouse2
Warehouse3
Marketsegment
5
Marketsegment
4
Marketsegment
3
Marketsegment
2
Marketsegment
1
ProductionLine1-3
ProductionLine4, 9
ProductionLine5-7
ProductionLine
8
Distributioncenter
1
Distributioncenter
2
Distributioncenter
3
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 187
1/10/18 10:40 AM
figure 6.9 Analysis tree for river pollution
River waterquality is
deteriorating
Catch and income of fishing families
in decline
High levels ofsolid waste
dumped in river
Pollutersare not
controlled
No publiceducationprograms
Public unaware ofthe dangers of
dumping
Pollution is a low political
priority
Households andfactories discharge
wastewater into river
EPA ine�ectiveand aligned withindustry interests
40% of households and20% of businesses notconnected to sewer
High incidence of waterborne disease, especially among the
poor and children under 5
River ecosystem underserious threat, including
declining fish stocks
Inadequate capital investmentand poor business planning
in local government
Legal regulationsdo not prevent
wastewater discharge
Wastewater treatedin plants does notmeet regulations
PROBLEM
EFFECTS
CAUSES
© 1995–2016, European Union. Reprinted with permission. European Commission, EuropeAid Cooperation Office, Aid Delivery Methods, Volume 1: Project Cycle Management Guidelines, March 2004, 68, Figure 21, https://ec .europa
.eu /europeaid /sites /devco /files /methodology -aid -delivery -methods -project -cycle -management -200403_en_2 .pdf.
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 194
1/10/18 10:40 AM
figure 6.10 Fishbone diagram for excessive customer call backs at a repair company
CALL BACKS
Wrong tech sent
No criteria forcalling for help
Rushing
Bad part Low tech ambition
Not reachingout for help
Inherent problemin case
Repeat failure
Faulty gauges
Poor data Unplanned conditions
Equipment variationNo definedservice metrics
No help available
Wrong part
Missing part
MATERIAL PEOPLE
MACHINE MEASUREMENT ENVIRONMENT
METHOD
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 196
1/10/18 10:40 AM
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Num
ber
of
inst
ance
s
22%
37%
44%
51%
58%
64%69%
74%79%
84%89%
92%95%
97% 99%
Missed
Infiltr
atio
n
Order
s not f
ollowed
Wro
ng d
osage
Wro
ng m
ed/s
olutio
n
Wro
ng p
atien
t
Not sta
rted
Extra
dose
Delaye
d
Not ord
ered
Other
issu
e
Wro
ng ra
te o
f flow
Wro
ng ro
ute
Wro
ng ti
me
Allerg
y to m
ed0
40%
30%
10%
20%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
figure 6.11 Pareto chart that ranks problem factors
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 198 1/10/18 10:40 AM
figure 6.12 Prioritizing countermeasures based on ease and benefit
Benefit
Eas
e o
f Im
ple
men
tati
on
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Develop lineal foot pricing model
Eliminate OI process
Create quote repository
Create pricing output
Reinstate drawing standards
Create drawings repository
Outsource drafting
Improve change process
Standardize master book
Hold new business kick-off in OTC
Develop pricing reconciliation process
12 Add option codes to pricing
1
4389 10
57
2 611
12
0 10
010
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 200 1/10/18 10:40 AM
figure 7.1 Your role in the organization
YOURORGANIZATION
PROFESSIONALYOU
PERSONALYOU
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 221 1/10/18 10:40 AM
figure 7.2 The blind men and the elephant
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 224 1/10/18 10:40 AM
Clarity blind
Clarity blind
Claritypursuer
Claritypursuer
Clarityavoider
Clarityavoider
CURRENT STATE FUTURE STATE
figure 7.3 Current and suggested future state proportions of clarity- related behaviors
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 226 1/10/18 10:40 AM
figure 7.4 Seven possible communication pathways
Not tryingeither way
Trying tobe clear
Clear
Unclear
Success
Failure
Trying tobe unclear
INFORMATIONDELIVERY
INTENT MESSAGE OUTCOME
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 239 1/10/18 10:40 AM
figure 7.5 Ideal communication pathway
INFORMATIONDELIVERY
Clear
Unclear
Success
Failure
Not tryingeither way
Trying tobe clear
Trying tobe unclear
INTENT MESSAGE OUTCOME
9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 240 1/10/18 10:40 AM