This is part 2 of 2 on how to re-use familiar Lean Six Sigma (LSS) tools for problem prevention. Part 1 was in the October 2009 issue of this newsletter.

To reiterate part 1, just as the DMAIC steps have guided thousands of Lean Six Sigma (LSS) teams to conduct their corrective projects, this article (part 2 of 2) will define a repeatable set of six steps to prevent problems, using familiar LSS tools, or simple adaptations of them. There is an excellent set of re-usable LSS tools, methods and best practices (TMBP) to work with as we approach our preventive FutureSigma strategy in our process or project work.

Throughout these steps, we will reference the Potential Problem Prevention and Impact Mitigation Analysis (P3IMA) table. The P3IMA table is an adaptation of the Failure Modes & Effects Analysis tool (FMEA) and is the heart of the problem prevention process. The contents of P3IMA table are developed during these 6 steps, culminating in the preventive and contingent action definition and selection for the process for which problems are being prevented.

In the same fashion as one can perform a corrective DMAIC (Define-Measure-Analyze-Improve-Control) project, one can perform a preventive project as follows:

Step 1-Plan and Rank Tasks of the Preventive Project

Step 2-Define Potential Problems

Step 3- Document and Evaluate the Root Causes

Steps 1-3 and their corresponding LSS tools were explained in part 1. Here are the remaining 3 steps:

Step 4-Define Preventive Actions

What to do in Step 4:

a)     Define preventive actions for effectiveness and value

b)     Finalize the probability of occurrence - be proactively efficient

Once we know the details underwriting the structure and dynamics of a potential problem, we can innovate creative ways to disrupt it. We need to "go for the jugular" in this case. With information from the three previous steps, we are prepared to assess and isolate clever ways to stop the problem from occurring.

We develop preventive actions if a) the problem has a high probability of occurring, b) it will have significant impact, and c) there is no leading indicator for the problem. In this case, we want outright prevention of the problem. We must assess the relative value of preventive actions to decide where to invest our limited resources as the P3IMA Table is filled out.

Re-use these LSS TMBP's for Step 4

• P3IMA table (an adaptation of the FMEA tool)
• Poka-Yoke (Mistake-proofing)
• Leading indicator ID
• Value and cost-benefit analysis
• Visual management tools
• Innovation tools: Brainstorming, mind mapping, SCAMPER, TRIZ
• Robustness and Axiomatic principles
• Pugh process
• Benchmarking best practices
• Standard Work, 5S
• Lessons learned checklists

Step 5-Define Contingency Actions

What to do in Step 5:

a)     Define contingency plans for if and when the problem actually occurs

b)     Measure and track leading and lagging indicators - be reactively effective

We put a lot of effort into developing contingency actions when there is a leading indicator for the problem. The more significant the impact of the problem, the more effort we should expend to identify contingency actions and their trigger points. Developing contingent actions requires innovation skills to create leading indicators, trigger points, and the actions in an integrated network that provides credibility. You are taking a calculated risk to wait, watch, and then act, rather than proactively preventing.

Re-use these LSS TMBP's for Step 5:

• P3IMA table (an adaptation of the FMEA tool)
• Leading and lagging indicator ID
• Visual management tools
• Process mapping, flow diagramming
• Value and cost-benefit analysis
• Innovation tools: Brainstorming, mind mapping, SCAMPER, TRIZ
• Robustness and Axiomatic principles
• Pugh process
• Benchmarking best practices
• Lessons learned checklists

Step 6- Re-use Learning

What to do in Step 6:

a)     Re-use the lessons learned for future pro-activity

b)     Continuously improve the prevention process

Once a balance between preventive and contingent actions is achieved, as the project proceeds, lessons will be learned and documented to form the basis of future application of the six steps. One best practice from Toyota's Lean Product development system is the rigor and discipline with which the Chief Engineer checks the current project against past lessons learned.

Re-use these LSS TMBP's for Step 6:

• Lessons learned checklists
• Best practices
• Preventive Kaizen methods
• Preventive control planning
• Poka-yoke

In Conclusion