toyota problem solving pdf

Toyota Practical Problem Solving (PPS)—Introduction

The Framework: PDCA

• Plan is to identify and clarify the problem, including collecting data to understand the problem, setting a target, and doing a root-cause analysis.
• Do is the development and implementation of countermeasures.
• Check verifies whether these countermeasures were effective and the target has been reached.
• Act is to re-do and further improve if the targets have not been met (yet). If it was successful, the Act part looks for other locations and applications where this solution could be used (e.g., if it was a smaller trial to be rolled out on a larger scale). Toyota also shares these yokoten on an internal website with other plants.

Toyota practical problem solving consists of the steps as listed below. Note that sometimes you have a step more if you decide to split a step into two.

• Clarify the Problem
• Break Down the Problem
• Set a Target
• Root-Cause Analysis
• Develop Countermeasures and Implement
• Monitor Process and Results
• Standardize and Share

I will explain all these steps in much more detail, including the risks and difficulties, throughout this small series of posts. But before explaining these steps in detail, let me also show you the structure.

The Structure: A3

You probably know the structure already, or at least have heard of it: it is the famous A3 . This report, named after the standard A3 paper size, is commonly used at Toyota to tackle medium-sized problems. The A3 format was chosen because it was a good compromise between getting lots of data on a single page and also having a page small enough to be carried around on the shop floor. (And, as legend has it, A3 was supposedly the largest format to fit though a fax machine back in the day).

You will find all the steps from above again in this A3 format, an example of which is shown below, plus the obligatory header row with organizational data like title, date, and so on.

The A3 is intended to be filled out in pencil (not pen), which makes changing content easy by using an eraser. Nowadays digital tools are also often used, although Toyota still does this mostly by hand using pencil on paper. Digital A3s are easier to share and look prettier, but they are harder to make and much more effort is needed in creating the A3. If you have ever created an A3 in Microsoft Excel, you know what I am talking about (as Excel is wholly unsuited for such graphical work…Ugh!)

The “Do” part is actually quite small. If you understand the problem well, the solutions are rather easy. If you don’t understand the problem, you still may have a solution, but it will probably be an inferior one, if it works at all. Similarly, the Check and Act are also rather small.

In my experience, this is often done differently (and in my opinion worse) in many other Western companies. The focus is all on doing something, implementing some sort of solution. There is a bit of planning, but the vast majority of the effort goes into the “Do” part. The “Check” and “Act” parts are quite underdeveloped, if they exist at all.

A fancy presentation often substitutes for “Check,” resulting in many supposedly successful projects that did not improve much or even made it worse. Below I compared the normal representation of the PDCA circle having four equal quadrants with a PDCA circle based on the effort by Japanese or Toyota standards, and another PDCA circle based on the effort of (way too many) Western companies. I’ll let you be the judge on how this is in your company.

Over and over again I guide people through the practical problem-solving process, and at every single step they jump to a solution. Let’s take a (fictitious) example for the steps of the problem solving, where every step is going right for the solution, ignoring the initial purpose of the step:

• Clarify the Problem: Well, we need kanban!
• Break Down the Problem: Okay, how many kanban do we need?
• Set a Target: That’s how many kanban we need!
• Root-Cause Analysis: Um… we did this already. It’s the lack of kanban…
• Develop Countermeasures and Implement: Add kanban!
• Monitor Process and Results: Do we have kanban now? Yes, we do. Case closed.
• Standardize and Share: Hey, guys, use kanban!

PS: Many thanks to the team from the Toyota Lean Management Centre at the Toyota UK Deeside engine plant in Wales, where I participated in their 5-day course. This course gave us a lot of access to the Toyota shop floor, and we spent hours on the shop floor looking at processes. In my view, this the only generally accessible course by Toyota that gives such a level of shop floor involvement.

6 thoughts on “Toyota Practical Problem Solving (PPS)—Introduction”

Great ‘ Flow ‘ and easy to understand , specially for many who have limited exposure. Thanks

Thank you for sharing. PDCA is applicable on the shop floor, logistics, service industry – wherever Problems are accurately defined

Nice blog. I’m working in an NHS Production System (NHSps) design based on the Toyota and VMI Production Systems. Do you have any experience in this area?

Hi Tom, sorry, I am completely unfamiliar with the NHS production system. if you mean the National Health Service in the UK, I do have a bit of experience with lean Hospital.

Might I suggest a dry erase marker and a whiteboard? After a few times when the document structure is mostly stable, you can add lines with a permanent marker to fix the format in place. That way you’re not creating extra friction for the process.

As for actual A3, that works best when the A3 paper and printers that can print it are already readily available. I’m sure you ran across more than one business where just about every single printer on site can’t print anything larger than A4 or A3 paper simply isn’t available due to A4 used for everything.

Hi Andrey, I am a great fan of erasable notes, and use dry erase whiteboard markers a lot myself. An A3 printer is also really helpful, but just as you said, not every (small) business has one. For example, I only have an A4 printer in my office…

Leave a Comment

Notify me of new posts by email.

• Data, AI, & Machine Learning
• Managing Technology
• Social Responsibility
• Workplace, Teams, & Culture
• AI & Machine Learning
• Diversity & Inclusion
• Big ideas Research Projects
• Artificial Intelligence and Business Strategy
• Responsible AI
• Future of the Workforce
• Future of Leadership
• All Research Projects
• AI in Action
• Most Popular
• The Truth Behind the Nursing Crisis
• Work/23: The Big Shift
• Coaching for the Future-Forward Leader
• Measuring Culture

The spring 2024 issue’s special report looks at how to take advantage of market opportunities in the digital space, and provides advice on building culture and friendships at work; maximizing the benefits of LLMs, corporate venture capital initiatives, and innovation contests; and scaling automation and digital health platform.

• Past Issues
• Upcoming Events
• Video Archive
• Me, Myself, and AI
• Three Big Points

Toyota’s Secret: The A3 Report

How toyota solves problems, creates plans, and gets new things done while developing an organization of thinking problem-solvers..

• Workplace, Teams, & Culture
• Innovation Strategy
• Quality & Service
• Organizational Behavior

While much has been written about Toyota Motor Corp.’s production system, little has captured the way the company manages people to achieve operational learning. At Toyota, there exists a way to solve problems that generates knowledge and helps people doing the work learn how to learn. Company managers use a tool called the A3 (named after the international paper size on which it fits) as a key tactic in sharing a deeper method of thinking that lies at the heart of Toyota’s sustained success.

A3s are deceptively simple. An A3 is composed of a sequence of boxes (seven in the example) arrayed in a template. Inside the boxes the A3’s “author” attempts, in the following order, to: (1) establish the business context and importance of a specific problem or issue; (2) describe the current conditions of the problem; (3) identify the desired outcome; (4) analyze the situation to establish causality; (5) propose countermeasures; (6) prescribe an action plan for getting it done; and (7) map out the follow-up process.

The leading question

Toyota has designed a two-page mechanism for attacking problems. What can we learn from it?

• The A3’s constraints (just 2 pages) and its structure (specific categories, ordered in steps, adding up to a “story”) are the keys to the A3’s power.
• Though the A3 process can be used effectively both to solve problems and to plan initiatives, its greatest payoff may be how it fosters learning. It presents ideal opportunities for mentoring.
• It becomes a basis for collaboration.

However, A3 reports — and more importantly the underlying thinking — play more than a purely practical role; they also embody a more critical core strength of a lean company. A3s serve as mechanisms for managers to mentor others in root-cause analysis and scientific thinking, while also aligning the interests of individuals and departments throughout the organization by encouraging productive dialogue and helping people learn from one another. A3 management is a system based on building structured opportunities for people to learn in the manner that comes most naturally to them: through experience, by learning from mistakes and through plan-based trial and error.

Get Updates on Transformative Leadership

Evidence-based resources that can help you lead your team more effectively, delivered to your inbox monthly.

Please enter a valid email address

Thank you for signing up

Privacy Policy

The A3s reproduced in this article represent just some of the stages in a typical development sequence — a process that may involve numerous iterations of the A3 before it is final. To illustrate how the A3 process works, we’ve imagined a young manager — call him Porter — who’s trying to solve a problem. The problem is that his Japan-based company is building a manufacturing plant in the United States, requiring many technical documents to be translated into English, and the translation project has been going badly. Porter uses the A3 process to attack the problem, which means that he gets coached through it by his boss and mentor — call him Sanderson. The A3s shown on these pages will give an idea of how one learning cycle might go, as Porter works on the problem under Sanderson’s tutelage. Porter’s first attempt at the A3 reveals, as early-stage A3s often do, his eagerness to get to a solution as quickly as possible.

(Editor’s note: The example is drawn from Managing to Learn , by John Shook, The Lean Enterprise Institute, 2008.)

Seeing this first version, Sanderson uses the A3 process as a mechanism to mentor Porter in root-cause analysis and scientific thinking. Through coaching Porter and others in this manner, Sanderson seeks to embed organizational habits and mind-sets that enable, encourage and teach people to think and take initiative.

The iterative process of producing progressive A3s generates practical problem-solving skills for the learner, while providing the manager with a practical mechanism to mentor others while achieving desired business results.

The last pages of this article show the final A3 in this iterative sequence. Author Porter uses the A3 process not only to figure out the best solutions to his problem, but to manufacture the authority he needs to proceed with his plan. Sanderson uses it to mentor his protégé, while getting the required results for the company (in this instance, the solution to a problem). Organizations use A3s to get decisions made, distribute authority to the level needed for good decisions, align people and teams on common goals and learn for constant improvement. The ultimate goal of A3s is not just to solve the problem at hand, but to make the process of problem solving transparent and teachable in a manner that creates an organization full of thinking, learning problem solvers. In this way, the A3 management process powerfully embodies the essence of operational learning.

About the Author

John Shook is an industrial anthropologist and senior advisor to the Lean Enterprise Institute, where he works with companies and individuals to help them understand and implement lean production. He is author of Managing to Learn: Using the A3 Management Process to Solve Problems, Gain Agreement, Mentor, and Lead (Lean Enterprise Institute), and coauthor of Learning to See (Lean Enterprise Institute). He worked with Toyota for 10 years, helping it transfer its production, engineering and management systems from Japan to its overseas affiliates and suppliers.

More Like This

Add a comment cancel reply.

You must sign in to post a comment. First time here? Sign up for a free account : Comment on articles and get access to many more articles.

Comments (22)

Sheila colinlak, patrick doyle, acta de constitución de proyecto ágil, un elemento diferenciador. | agilia, dave whaley, william harrod, howard s weinberg, systemental, khucxuanthinh.

• Find a Dealer
• MyToyota Login
• Parts & Services
• Resource Library

About Toyota

Electric forklifts.

Electric Pallet Jacks

Electric Pallet Stackers

Reach Trucks

Order Pickers

Internal Combustion: Cushion Tires

Internal Combustion: Pneumatic Tires

Heavy Duty Forklifts

Tow Tractors & Tuggers

Hand Pallet Jacks

Automated Guided Vehicles

Aerial Work Platforms

• Toyota Assist
• Smart Environment Sensor
• Rental & Used
• Find a Forklift
• Compare Forklifts
• Industry Solutions
• Automation Solutions
• Energy Solutions
• Consulting Solutions
• Financial Solutions
• Fleet Solutions

Food Storage

General Warehouse

Cold Storage

General Manufacturing

Building Materials

Automate Receiving Processes

Automate Material Transportation

Automate Storage Systems

Automate Picking Solutions

Automate Shipping Systems

Become a Greener Business

Lithium-Ion Batteries

Convert from IC to Electric

Analyze Warehouse Space

Increase Employee Education

Improve Operation Safety

Improve a Process

Toyota Commercial Finance

Financing with Toyota

MyToyota Credit Card

Benefits of Buying Toyota

Highest Quality Parts

Toyota forklift dealers are a one-stop-shop, full service forklift solutions provider.

• Model & Serial Number
• Part Number

How to Find Your Equipment Model Number

Finding the right parts for your equipment is easy when you have your model and serial number which can be found on the data plate. Luckily, a forklift data plate is installed on every truck on the market to help you understand what your forklift can do and provide vital information.

Model Number:  The model number of your toyota forklift is extremely important for relaying information to your dealers about repair or technical assistance and for looking up replacements part!

Serial Number:  The serial number on your lift is the most important number.The model serial number combination will allow us to provide you with the parts that will fit your particular piece of equipment.

How to Find Your Equipment Serial Number

Model Number:  The model number of your toyota forklift is extremely important for relaying information to your dealers about repair or technical assistance and for looking up replacements part!

Serial Number:  The serial number on your lift is the most important number.The model serial number combination will allow us to provide you with the parts that will fit your particular piece of equipment.

Need some help? For further assistance or more information, contact your local Toyota Dealer .

• Request a Parts Quote
• Toyota Genuine Parts
• Toyota Starlift Parts

Industry Leading Service

Increase your productivity, overall up-time and lifespan of your forklift.

• Request Service Quote
• Maintenance Plans
• 360 Support
• All Resources
• Customer Stories
• Whitepapers
• Management Guides
• Video Library

Toyota Careers

Management Team

Toyota Dealers

Sustainability

Corporate Social Responsiblity

• National Accounts
• Toyota Production System
• Forklift Safety
• Toyota Powered Engines

Press Enter to Search

Problem Solving Through Toyota Lean Management

Albert Einstein once wrote, “We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.” Simply put, coming up with creative and innovative solutions to problems oftentimes requires you to look at the problem with a fresh perspective. As we’ve discussed in previous  Toyota Lean Management blog posts , recognizing and cutting down on waste is critical to increasing your efficiency, reducing costs, and improving throughput. However, in order to make these improvements and see positive changes in ROI, a key step is recognizing where problems exist and working to solve them.

To recognize and solve these problems, it is often helpful to view them with a different lens to reach a newfound conclusion. Toyota’s 8 steps for problem-solving act as the lens that allows you to view different aspects of your operation from a new perspective.

Consider these eight steps as you start on the path to continuous improvement.

1. Clarify the problem

The first step in solving a problem is realizing that one exists. You can define a problem by asking yourself the following questions:

• Does my current process deviate from the standard?
• Is there a gap in my current process with what I am trying to accomplish vs. what I am accomplishing?
• Are my customer’s needs being met with my current process?

If the answer to any of these questions is no, then you know you have a problem that could use some improvement.

2. Break down the problem

Now that you’ve verified the problem, you can begin to break down the issue into smaller, more detailed pieces. It can be helpful to analyze the different inputs and outputs of your process so you can effectively see where you are currently placing your efforts. Don’t bite off more than you can chew. It is much easier to manage and solve smaller problems rather than attack one large problem with little direction.

3. Set a target

The third step is all about commitment and consistency. Now that you’ve broken down the problem, how are you going to go about solving it? How are you going to meet your new deadline, and how long will it take to complete? Allot adequate time for each activity to ensure you are giving each aspect of the project enough attention.

4. Analyze the root cause

Analyzing the root cause allows you to identify each of the factor(s) that caused a problem in the first place. Sometimes there is more than one cause, and it is important to consider each one as you work to address the issue.

5. Develop countermeasures

Establishing the root cause is only half the battle. Now, you must develop countermeasures for each of those root causes to prevent the same issues from occurring again.

6. Implement countermeasures

Now that you’ve established your countermeasures, it is time to put them into action. You may want to seek ideas from other team members to ensure you are not missing any steps. Also, it can be helpful to track how effective each countermeasure is performing along the way and making adjustments where necessary.

7. Evaluate Results and Process

The seventh step is all about implementing a system to review and evaluate how your new process is working. Countermeasures will fail, but it is important to develop an effective system that always looks for areas of improvement in order to reach the desired result.

8. Standardize Successful Processes

After receiving successful results from your previous evaluation, it is time to standardize the process within your team and the entire organization. As you work through the standardization process, continue to look for possible unresolved issues that you may have missed the first time.

Remember, the road to establishing a lean organization doesn’t stop once you improve a few processes. Lean isn’t just about identifying where you can do better; it’s about instilling a culture of respect and developing to create a workplace that your associates enjoy working in. Achieving business goals and leaner processes requires dedication and teamwork from every individual in the organization. Encourage open communication and empower your employees to bring problems to your attention when they are detected.

Related Articles

How Toyota Turns Workers Into Problem Solvers

Sarah Jane Johnston: Why study Toyota? With all the books and articles on Toyota, lean manufacturing, just-in-time, kanban systems, quality systems, etc. that came out in the 1980s and 90s, hasn't the topic been exhausted?

Steven Spear: Well, this has been a much-researched area. When Kent Bowen and I first did a literature search, we found nearly 3,000 articles and books had been published on some of the topics you just mentioned.

However, there was an apparent discrepancy. There had been this wide, long-standing recognition of Toyota as the premier automobile manufacturer in terms of the unmatched combination of high quality, low cost, short lead-time and flexible production. And Toyota's operating system—the Toyota Production System—had been widely credited for Toyota's sustained leadership in manufacturing performance. Furthermore, Toyota had been remarkably open in letting outsiders study its operations. The American Big Three and many other auto companies had done major benchmarking studies, and they and other companies had tried to implement their own forms of the Toyota Production System. There is the Ford Production System, the Chrysler Operating System, and General Motors went so far as to establish a joint venture with Toyota called NUMMI, approximately fifteen years ago.

However, despite Toyota's openness and the genuinely honest efforts by other companies over many years to emulate Toyota, no one had yet matched Toyota in terms of having simultaneously high-quality, low-cost, short lead-time, flexible production over time and broadly based across the system.

It was from observations such as these that Kent and I started to form the impression that despite all the attention that had already been paid to Toyota, something critical was being missed. Therefore, we approached people at Toyota to ask what they did that others might have missed.

Q: What did they say?

A: To paraphrase one of our contacts, he said, "It's not that we don't want to tell you what TPS is, it's that we can't. We don't have adequate words for it. But, we can show you what TPS is."

Over about a four-year period, they showed us how work was actually done in practice in dozens of plants. Kent and I went to Toyota plants and those of suppliers here in the U.S. and in Japan and directly watched literally hundreds of people in a wide variety of roles, functional specialties, and hierarchical levels. I personally was in the field for at least 180 working days during that time and even spent one week at a non-Toyota plant doing assembly work and spent another five months as part of a Toyota team that was trying to teach TPS at a first-tier supplier in Kentucky.

Q: What did you discover?

A: We concluded that Toyota has come up with a powerful, broadly applicable answer to a fundamental managerial problem. The products we consume and the services we use are typically not the result of a single person's effort. Rather, they come to us through the collective effort of many people each doing a small part of the larger whole. To a certain extent, this is because of the advantages of specialization that Adam Smith identified in pin manufacturing as long ago as 1776 in The Wealth of Nations . However, it goes beyond the economies of scale that accrue to the specialist, such as skill and equipment focus, setup minimization, etc.

The products and services characteristic of our modern economy are far too complex for any one person to understand how they work. It is cognitively overwhelming. Therefore, organizations must have some mechanism for decomposing the whole system into sub-system and component parts, each "cognitively" small or simple enough for individual people to do meaningful work. However, decomposing the complex whole into simpler parts is only part of the challenge. The decomposition must occur in concert with complimentary mechanisms that reintegrate the parts into a meaningful, harmonious whole.

This common yet nevertheless challenging problem is obviously evident when we talk about the design of complex technical devices. Automobiles have tens of thousands of mechanical and electronic parts. Software has millions and millions of lines of code. Each system can require scores if not hundreds of person-work-years to be designed. No one person can be responsible for the design of a whole system. No one is either smart enough or long-lived enough to do the design work single handedly.

Furthermore, we observe that technical systems are tested repeatedly in prototype forms before being released. Why? Because designers know that no matter how good their initial efforts, they will miss the mark on the first try. There will be something about the design of the overall system structure or architecture, the interfaces that connect components, or the individual components themselves that need redesign. In other words, to some extent the first try will be wrong, and the organization designing a complex system needs to design, test, and improve the system in a way that allows iterative congruence to an acceptable outcome.

The same set of conditions that affect groups of people engaged in collaborative product design affect groups of people engaged in the collaborative production and delivery of goods and services. As with complex technical systems, there would be cognitive overload for one person to design, test-in-use, and improve the work systems of factories, hotels, hospitals, or agencies as reflected in (a) the structure of who gets what good, service, or information from whom, (b) the coordinative connections among people so that they can express reliably what they need to do their work and learn what others need from them, and (c) the individual work activities that create intermediate products, services, and information. In essence then, the people who work in an organization that produces something are simultaneously engaged in collaborative production and delivery and are also engaged in a collaborative process of self-reflective design, "prototype testing," and improvement of their own work systems amidst changes in market needs, products, technical processes, and so forth.

It is our conclusion that Toyota has developed a set of principles, Rules-in-Use we've called them, that allow organizations to engage in this (self-reflective) design, testing, and improvement so that (nearly) everyone can contribute at or near his or her potential, and when the parts come together the whole is much, much greater than the sum of the parts.

Q: What are these rules?

A: We've seen that consistently—across functional roles, products, processes (assembly, equipment maintenance and repair, materials logistics, training, system redesign, administration, etc.), and hierarchical levels (from shop floor to plant manager and above) that in TPS managed organizations the design of nearly all work activities, connections among people, and pathways of connected activities over which products, services, and information take form are specified-in-their-design, tested-with-their-every-use, and improved close in time, place, and person to the occurrence of every problem .

Q: That sounds pretty rigorous.

A: It is, but consider what the Toyota people are attempting to accomplish. They are saying before you (or you all) do work, make clear what you expect to happen (by specifying the design), each time you do work, see that what you expected has actually occurred (by testing with each use), and when there is a difference between what had actually happened and what was predicted, solve problems while the information is still fresh.

Q: That reminds me of what my high school lab science teacher required.

A: Exactly! This is a system designed for broad based, frequent, rapid, low-cost learning. The "Rules" imply a belief that we may not get the right solution (to work system design) on the first try, but that if we design everything we do as a bona fide experiment, we can more rapidly converge, iteratively, and at lower cost, on the right answer, and, in the process, learn a heck of lot more about the system we are operating.

Q: You say in your article that the Toyota system involves a rigorous and methodical problem-solving approach that is made part of everyone's work and is done under the guidance of a teacher. How difficult would it be for companies to develop their own program based on the Toyota model?

A: Your question cuts right to a critical issue. We discussed earlier the basic problem that for complex systems, responsibility for design, testing, and improvement must be distributed broadly. We've observed that Toyota, its best suppliers, and other companies that have learned well from Toyota can confidently distribute a tremendous amount of responsibility to the people who actually do the work, from the most senior, expeirenced member of the organization to the most junior. This is accomplished because of the tremendous emphasis on teaching everyone how to be a skillful problem solver.

Q: How do they do this?

A: They do this by teaching people to solve problems by solving problems. For instance, in our paper we describe a team at a Toyota supplier, Aisin. The team members, when they were first hired, were inexperienced with at best an average high school education. In the first phase of their employment, the hurdle was merely learning how to do the routine work for which they were responsible. Soon thereafter though, they learned how to immediately identify problems that occurred as they did their work. Then they learned how to do sophisticated root-cause analysis to find the underlying conditions that created the symptoms that they had experienced. Then they regularly practiced developing counter-measures—changes in work, tool, product, or process design—that would remove the underlying root causes.

Q: Sounds impressive.

A: Yes, but frustrating. They complained that when they started, they were "blissful in their ignorance." But after this sustained development, they could now see problems, root down to their probable cause, design solutions, but the team members couldn't actually implement these solutions. Therefore, as a final round, the team members received training in various technical crafts—one became a licensed electrician, another a machinist, another learned some carpentry skills.

Q: Was this unique?

A: Absolutely not. We saw the similar approach repeated elsewhere. At Taiheiyo, another supplier, team members made sophisticated improvements in robotic welding equipment that reduced cost, increased quality, and won recognition with an award from the Ministry of Environment. At NHK (Nippon Spring) another team conducted a series of experiments that increased quality, productivity, and efficiency in a seat production line.

Q: What is the role of the manager in this process?

A: Your question about the role of the manager gets right to the heart of the difficulty of managing this way. For many people, it requires a profound shift in mind-set in terms of how the manager envisions his or her role. For the team at Aisin to become so skilled as problem solvers, they had to be led through their training by a capable team leader and group leader. The team leader and group leader were capable of teaching these skills in a directed, learn-by-doing fashion, because they too were consistently trained in a similar fashion by their immediate senior. We found that in the best TPS-managed plants, there was a pathway of learning and teaching that cascaded from the most senior levels to the most junior. In effect, the needs of people directly touching the work determined the assistance, problem solving, and training activities of those more senior. This is a sharp contrast, in fact a near inversion, in terms of who works for whom when compared with the more traditional, centralized command and control system characterized by a downward diffusion of work orders and an upward reporting of work status.

Q: And if you are hiring a manager to help run this system, what are the attributes of the ideal candidate?

A: We observed that the best managers in these TPS managed organizations, and the managers in organizations that seem to adopt the Rules-in-Use approach most rapidly are humble but also self-confident enough to be great learners and terrific teachers. Furthermore, they are willing to subscribe to a consistent set of values.

Q: How do you mean?

A: Again, it is what is implied in the guideline of specifying every design, testing with every use, and improving close in time, place, and person to the occurrence of every problem. If we do this consistently, we are saying through our action that when people come to work, they are entitled to expect that they will succeed in doing something of value for another person. If they don't succeed, they are entitled to know immediately that they have not. And when they have not succeeded, they have the right to expect that they will be involved in creating a solution that makes success more likely on the next try. People who cannot subscribe to these ideas—neither in their words nor in their actions—are not likely to manage effectively in this system.

Q: That sounds somewhat high-minded and esoteric.

A: I agree with you that it strikes the ear as sounding high principled but perhaps not practical. However, I'm fundamentally an empiricist, so I have to go back to what we have observed. In organizations in which managers really live by these Rules, either in the Toyota system or at sites that have successfully transformed themselves, there is a palpable, positive difference in the attitude of people that is coupled with exceptional performance along critical business measures such as quality, cost, safety, and cycle time.

Q: Have any other research projects evolved from your findings?

A: We titled the results of our initial research "Decoding the DNA of the Toyota Production System." Kent and I are reasonably confident that the Rules-in-Use about which we have written are a successful decoding. Now, we are trying to "replicate the DNA" at a variety of sites. We want to know where and when these Rules create great value, and where they do, how they can be implemented most effectively.

Since we are empiricists, we are conducting experiments through our field research. We are part of a fairly ambitious effort at Alcoa to develop and deploy the Alcoa Business System, ABS. This is a fusion of Alcoa's long standing value system, which has helped make Alcoa the safest employer in the country, with the Rules in Use. That effort has been going on for a number of years, first with the enthusiastic support of Alcoa's former CEO, Paul O'Neill, now Secretary of the Treasury (not your typical retirement, eh?) and now with the backing of Alain Belda, the company's current head. There have been some really inspirational early results in places as disparate as Hernando, Mississippi and Poces de Caldas, Brazil and with processes as disparate as smelting, extrusion, die design, and finance.

We also started creating pilot sites in the health care industry. We started our work with a "learning unit" at Deaconess-Glover Hospital in Needham, not far from campus. We've got a series of case studies that captures some of the learnings from that effort. More recently, we've established pilot sites at Presbyterian and South Side Hospitals, both part of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. This work is part of a larger, comprehensive effort being made under the auspices of the Pittsburgh Regional Healthcare Initiative, with broad community support, with cooperation from the Centers for Disease Control, and with backing from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

Also, we've been testing these ideas with our students: Kent in the first year Technology and Operations Management class for which he is course head, me in a second year elective called Running and Growing the Small Company, and both of us in an Executive Education course in which we participate called Building Competitive Advantage Through Operations.

• 28 May 2024
• In Practice

Job Search Advice for a Tough Market: Think Broadly and Stay Flexible

• 22 May 2024

Banned or Not, TikTok Is a Force Companies Can’t Afford to Ignore

• 27 Jun 2016
• Research & Ideas

These Management Practices, Like Certain Technologies, Boost Company Performance

• 01 May 2024
• What Do You Think?

Have You Had Enough?

• 06 May 2024

The Critical Minutes After a Virtual Meeting That Can Build Up or Tear Down Teams

• Infrastructure
• Organizational Design
• Competency and Skills
• Manufacturing
• Transportation

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

To read this content please select one of the options below:

Please note you do not have access to teaching notes, problem solving for managers: a mathematical investigation of toyota's 8‐step process.

Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management

ISSN : 1741-038X

Article publication date: 11 September 2011

Toyota's success in the automotive industry has been attributed to many factors, one of which is their systematic company‐wide problem‐solving approach. While Toyota's structured framework for thinking through problems may offer some interesting insight, it is speculated that how they develop and train their managers to share this thinking with their employees is the key to implementation. The purpose of this paper is to share these issues.

Design/methodology/approach

This work utilizes a new and novel technique to examine how Toyota trains and develops their managers to support problem solving. A form of data mining will be used in this research combined with Singular Value Decomposition to mathematically analyze organizational documents from Toyota.

The findings of this research show that the role of management is essential to the successful application of problem solving at Toyota. Results indicate that managers are trained to provide more intense coaching early on the front end of problem solving, specifically in step 2 problem breakdown, so that decision making and involvement of employees can occur more naturally in developing countermeasures.

Practical implications

This research method is solely based on mathematical and statistically analysis of organizational documents to reveal important and latent criteria critical for effectiveness.

Originality/value

This paper provides new insights and understanding of Toyota's 8‐step problem‐solving process. The role of management has been identified as an essential element in coaching and developing employees in the implementation of a company‐wide, systematic problem‐solving methodology.

• Problem solving
• Toyota production system (TPS)
• Latent semantic analysis (LSA)

Marksberry, P. , Bustle, J. and Clevinger, J. (2011), "Problem solving for managers: a mathematical investigation of Toyota's 8‐step process", Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management , Vol. 22 No. 7, pp. 837-852. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410381111160924

Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2011, Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Related articles

We’re listening — tell us what you think, something didn’t work….

Report bugs here

All feedback is valuable

Please share your general feedback

Join us on our journey

Platform update page.

Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

Questions & More Information

Answers to the most commonly asked questions here

• Our Services

Practical Problem Solving

Many organisations often struggle with effective problem solving and find that the best they can achieve is to merely contain the existing problems by introducing more waste into the organisation. For example an unreliable machine will be managed by adding in more stock to protect supply to the customer or through the acquisition of a second machine to ensure throughput. Real problem solving countermeasures the root cause of an issue preventing it from reoccurring and in doing so creates stability with the least amount of waste.

Toyota A3 Problem Solving is not a skill reserved for engineers and managers, if you truly desire to harness the creativity and innovation of your employees then it should be seen as a fundamental skill possessed by everyone.

Key Study Areas

• Introduction to Toyota A3 8 step problem solving approach
• Differences between Toyota approach and other such as six sigma
• Define the real problem
• Use and present data to clarify the point of cause of the problem
• Study the problem to ensure complete understanding
• Select countermeasures and evaluate effectiveness
• Monitor the results & gain greater benefits through effective sharing

All levels of an organisation.

Problem Solving Course Information

This course can be delivered at Deeside or at a client's site. Undertaking the course at your own facility will allow for a real problem to be tackled.

This course is available in two versions:

One day version which will teach you the theory and challange you to apply your knowledge on a case study.

Two day version where, in addition to the above, we will support you to apply the principles to an area within your own organisation.

Customer Comments

"As a six sigma green belt I was sceptical about how this would compare. I was amazed at what Toyota are achieving with this approach." - 13/11/19

Lean Manufacturing and Six Sigma Definitions

Glossary terms, history, people and definitions about Lean and Six Sigma

Toyota Business Practice (TBP)

TBP is Toyota’s problem solving process, based on the original Plan Do Check Act ( PDCA ) model, but more detailed and prescriptive with 8 steps instead of 4.

Toyota had originally developed The Toyota Way 2001, and wanted a way to put those principles into action across the organization and with their suppliers and partners.

The 8 steps are as follows:

• Clarify the problem
• Breakdown the problem
• Set a target
• Analyze the root cause
• Develop countermeasures
• See countermeasures through
• Evaluate both results and process
• Standardize successful processes

A3 documentation is used to capture the status of a problem within these 8 steps, so there is a natural connection between A3 , PDCA , Kata and TBP.

• What is Lean Leadership and How Do You Get it? by Jeffrey Liker
• The Toyota Business Practice – Gemba Academy
• The Toyota Engagement Equation
• Extreme Toyota
• Managing to Learn: Using the A3 Management Process to Solve Problems, Gain Agreement, Mentor and Lead

Additional Resources

• FOCUS-PDCA – creativesafetysupply.com
• Eight Steps To Practical Problem Solving – kaizen -news.com
• Why You’re Still A Lean Student – Using Lean Practice Routines to Avoid Common Growth Stunting – blog.creativesafetysupply.com
• The Toyota Production System House – blog.5stoday.com
• Why Ask Why? – lean -news.com
• Another Recall For Toyota – 5snews.com
• Continuous Improvement Applied to Safety at Toyota – iecieeechallenge.org
• The Concepts of Kaizen – creativesafetypublishing.com
• 5 Kaizen Tools to Start Using – hiplogic.com