INTRODUCTION
In the long history of continuous improvement and Lean, many of the tools and, consequently, many of the well-known examples are from industrial operations. In fact, due to their importance and impact on industrial companies, the processes that are part of what is often called Operations (e.g. Production, Logistics, Maintenance, Quality) are subject to constant analysis, measurement and improvement. On the other hand there are many other processes, in other departments and functions, that, by their nature, don't have the same visibility. This does not mean that they do not represent a significant portion of costs and that they do not have potential for improvement.
As with their counterparts in production, there are multiple examples of non-value-added tasks in transactional processes. Drawing a parallel with the well-known list of 7 Mudas of the Toyota Production System, we can identify the following:
Production processes | Transactional processes | |
Overproduction | Producing more than necessary or before the time it is necessary | Make reports that no one reads Producing superfluous information or information too far in advance Make extra copies Purchasing more software licenses than necessary |
Stock | Product or raw materials stopped in the process | Information waiting to be processed Consumables Ongoing processes (orders, projects, complaints) |
Transport | Movement of materials and products between operations | Transfer of information between operations or stakeholders Travel to take/collect documents, information, signatures |
Wait | Time when employees are present at the workstation but are unable to carry out operations for some reason | Time when employees are present at the workstation but are unable to carry out operations for some reason |
Process | Duplicity of operations in the same process | Using inappropriate software Using forms with duplicate or redundant information; CC in emails Excess of approvals Transfer information from one system to another “Improving” an internal communication or presentation Use of individual records vs. computer system |
Movement | Employee displacement due to the way the process is organized | Employee displacement due to the way the process is organized |
No Quality | Product not in accordance with specifications | Errors (billing; payroll processing…) Loss of information Late information Incomplete information Unreadable information |
Below, we present a proposed approach to improving this type of process.
LEAN IN TRANSACTIONAL PROCESSES
Lean concepts and tools are applicable to any process. Although the concepts are clear, some adaptation is necessary to apply them to transactional processes, due to some of their characteristics:
They are not as easily observable as production processes
Workers perform different activities throughout the day/week
Certain transactional processes are quite long (e.g. a product development process), which requires obtaining data in a different way.
They often have complex flows with information circulating in different directions.
Adding to this the fact that it is not so simple or obvious to directly apply the Lean tools that have been standardized for longer and are better known, such as 5S, SMED, One Piece Flow and Pull.
It is therefore necessary to have a tool that allows us to grasp the current situation in terms of flows as well as in terms of data and indicators, before starting to apply some Lean tools.
PROCESS MAPPING - SWIMLANE
Although it is not the only way to map a transactional process, Swimlane mapping has been successfully used in many improvement activities. Its name comes from its similarity to the lanes in a swimming pool, each of which represents a function involved in the process.
This tool allows you to portray the process as a whole, taking into account all the activities required to satisfy a customer request. This mapping exercise is a team effort that brings together knowledge of the different stages of the process.
This teamwork allows us to build a global vision of the process that is shared by all stakeholders, breaking with individual visions, in which each person only knows their part and does not have an exact notion of the impact of what they do on the performance of the process and other activities.
Below we present a simplified example of the result of a mapping activity, in this case a maintenance request process in buildings:
The following indicators are typically extracted from this analysis:
Process time: sum of the execution time of the activities, in this case 49.4 minutes
Waiting times: sum of waiting times (information awaiting processing), in this case 47.9 days.
Process Lead Time: time from the initial request to the end of the process (in this example, Billing) = 47.9 days + 49.4 minutes
Based on the current situation map and the data collected, it is possible to make an initial identification of waste in the process. Below we present some key questions for this analysis:
Duplicate work: Is the same activity repeated at different points in the process?
Waiting times: Which points in the process have the longest waiting times?
Lead-time: Is the process lead-time acceptable, or do customers find it too long?
High percentage of questions: At what points does a high percentage of questions/doubts prevent the implementation of value-added activities?
Quality problems: Are there points in the process with a high error rate?
Working in parallel: Where is it possible to reduce process lead-time by executing tasks in parallel?
After this analysis, it may also be necessary to analyze in more detail the tasks within each activity, their duration and classify them (Added Value (VA) or Waste):
Based on this data, the mapping team must reflect on how to eliminate or reduce the waste identified:
The next step, after identifying and characterizing these improvement opportunities, is to select those to be implemented, based on their impact and implementation effort. The process resulting from the implementation of these improvements is represented in the future state map:
The implementation of improvements allows the following impact on the indicators:
Process time: from 49.4 minutes to 45 min
Waiting times: from 47.9 days to 17.4 days
Process Lead Time: approximately 17.5 days
The final step in this analysis is to draw up a plan with all the actions necessary to implement the future state of the process, the sequence, the implementation dates and who is responsible for each one.
IN SUMMARY
Since Lean principles were developed and initially applied in industrial processes, it is necessary to adjust the point of view in order to apply them in other contexts. As in other cases, it is more important to find ways to understand the process, rather than to identify which tool to use. This is also why it seemed more important to us to present a way of understanding the process than to give examples of the application of 5S, SMED or other tools to transactional processes.
If we know the process well and if the client's needs are well characterized, it is possible to use the method presented to identify activities without added value and, consequently, work on improving the process and improving its efficiency, whatever the business and geographical location.
REFERENCES
John Bicheno
“The Service Systems Toolbox”
PICSIE Books, 2008
ISBN: 978-0-9568307-0-8
“The Lean Office – Collected Practices and Cases”
Productivity Press, 2005
ISBN: 1-56327-316-0
James Womack and Daniel Jones
“Lean Solutions”
Simon & Schuster, 2005
ISBN 0-7432-7595-0
Comments