Problem solution

Problem solution

The PDCA (Plan-Do-Check-Act) cycle, which consists of PLAN, DO, CHECK, and ACTION, is a framework that has been around for a long time. This framework has been used by many companies as a management method for improving manufacturing processes and managing teams and projects.

Specifically, this framework involves analyzing the current situation, constructing a hypothesis based on the analysis, coming up with a target value to verify the constructed hypothesis, coming up with an action plan to verify the target value, executing the plan, verifying/analyzing how the results compare to the target value, and then implementing the cycle to come up with the next hypothesis based on the results of the analysis. This is the cycle.

The key to doing this is analysis and hypothesis building. I would like to explain this with a concrete example. For example, suppose a client or a supervisor asks you to come up with a mechanism that can work without supplying electricity to reduce the maintenance cost of a device installed in a remote location.

There are several approaches to this. The worst approach would be to look it up on the internet and say “something that runs without power -> perpetual motion engine -> thermodynamically proven impossible -> such a thing is impossible”. In a worse case scenario, the “perpetual motion engine -> thermodynamically proven to be negative” part could be investigated in more detail to add more weight to the theoretical armament.

The problem with the above logic is that it starts with the idea of something that can run without electricity. The original question was “how to reduce the maintenance cost of equipment installed in remote locations”, but they have left that part out. The “perpetual motion machine” is just an example of a means to an end, and the problem to be solved is “to reduce the maintenance cost of equipment installed in remote areas.

If we start from this essential issue and consider it, we can come up with various solutions such as “self-powered”, “long-lasting batteries”, “ultra energy-saving devices”, “micro nuclear power generation”, etc. In fact, it turns out that the requirement of “something that runs without electricity” is not essential.

I think this stance of not having preconceived notions in one’s thinking is similar to the aforementioned Zen way of thinking. The idea is to analyze the information that is currently in front of you from a flat perspective, eliminating subjective assumptions. The problem with doing this is that even if you are told to think from a flat perspective, how do you know where to start?

Especially if you don’t have any experience in this field, you may just accept the information at face value. I think it is difficult to move forward. An effective way to solve this problem is to use various analysis methods that have been tried and proven effective in the past.

For example, the famous “Why-What Method” of Toyota is one of them. This method is based on the question, “Why does it have to be done that way? (Why is it so?)”. In the aforementioned example, “Why do we need a perpetual motion machine? →In the aforementioned example, “Why do we need a perpetual motion machine?” and “How can we reduce the maintenance cost of equipment installed in remote locations?

In this world, many analysis methods have been developed and published with their examples. I believe that learning and using these methods will increase the infinite number of drawers mentioned in the Zen way of life. In the next article, I would like to discuss KPI, KGI, and OKR, which appear in analyzing issues and setting targets.