Easy Problem Solving - LeanVlog Podcast - Ep. 015

Welcome to the deep dive. We're uh jumping straight into a really powerful problem solving shortcut today. For the next few minutes, we're unpacking a method honed over like two decades, focusing on a surprisingly simple way to get to the root of most issues. That sounds great. Our mission basically to give you a practical no frills framework for tackling problems, you know, efficiently. That's right. And we're drawing from our source today, easyprosolving.txt. txt. It argues pretty strongly actually that most problems aren't these big complex mysteries. Okay. They often just stem from well fundamental issues with how we do things. Our process standards. Process standards. Can you define that quickly? What do we mean by that? Yeah, sure. By process standard, we just mean the documented agreed upon way of doing a task or activity. The official method if you like. Got it. Okay. So the headline that really uh jumped out at me was this idea that maybe 90% of our headaches come down to these process standards. That feels huge. What does that actually look like in practice? Well, yeah, it is significant. The source highlights three sort of core scenarios where these process standard problems typically show up. Okay. And understanding these scenarios really helps you quickly figure out what's actually going on. All right, let's dive into those then. What's the first one? So scenario one is when you do have a standard process and importantly people are following it. Okay, standard exists, people follow it but but the outcome still isn't what you want or need. Um think of a restaurant example. Maybe they have a well doumented recipe, everyone follows it exactly but uh the dish consistently gets bad reviews. Ah so the standard itself might be the problem there. The recipe is just not good. Exactly. The process is followed but it's flawed. Okay. What's scenario two? Scenario two is maybe well more common. A standard exists. It's probably fine, but for whatever reason, it's not being followed consistently. Ah, okay. Like, uh, think of maybe a factory with clear safety rules. The rules are written down, but workers sometimes skip steps, maybe to save time, and then accidents happen. The standard's there, but adherence is the weak link. Okay, that makes sense. Standard exists, not followed. So, what's the third scenario? Sounds like maybe no standard at all. You got it. Scenario three, no process standard exists. Period. Right. The wild west you mentioned earlier. Pretty much everyone's just doing things their own way, maybe how they think is best or just improvising and the results are all over the place. Highly variable, inconsistent. Uh, imagine a customer service team where every agent handles calls with their own unique undocumented style. Yeah. you'd get wildly different customer experiences. Some good, some terrible. Precisely. And that lack of consistency itself is often the core problem you're trying to solve. Okay. So, those are the three buckets problems tend to fall into regarding standards. Mhm. And what's really neat about this problem solving made easy approach is how simple the questions are to figure out which bucket you're in. Right. It's supposed to cut through the complexity. So, let's hear these key questions. It starts right at the process. The very first question is simply, is there a standard process for this thing we're looking at? Seems almost too simple, but I guess if you don't ask, you don't know. What if the answer is no? Well, if it's no, boom, that immediately flags a huge improvement opportunity. You need to create a standard. Makes sense. Create the foundation first. Exactly. Establish that clear documented standard so you have a baseline for consistency. Okay. So, if the answer to question one is yes, there is a standard. What's next? Then question two, is that standard actually being followed? Okay, checking adherence, right? This helps you differentiate quickly. Is the problem the design of the process or is it the execution? And if the answer here is no, it's not being followed. Then your immediate focus is clear. Get people to follow the existing standard. Ensure adherence. Then critically check the output again. Does following the standard fix the problem? That makes perfect sense. Address the immediate gap. But what if the standard is being followed? So yes to question one and yes to question two. Then we move to the third question. Are we correctly measuring the characteristics of the output? Ah measurement. Okay. Tell me more about that. Yeah. This forces you to look at whether you're accurately assessing if the process even though it exists and is followed is actually delivering what it's supposed to. So the way we're checking is maybe wrong. Could be. Maybe your measurement tools are off. Maybe they're not calibrated. Or perhaps you're not even tracking the right things, the critical characteristics of the output. Interesting. So it's a really logical sequence. Is there a standard? Is it followed? Are we measuring it right? Exactly. And the source emphasizes this as like a prerequisite, a simpler, faster check before you jump into potentially more complex time-consuming methods like say A3 problem solving or the eight disciplines. Right. It's like learning the basic chords before trying to play a complex solo. Master the fundamentals. Precisely. This framework is all about efficiency. Quickly identifying and tackling the most likely causes these process standard issues which apparently account for you know the vast majority of problems. Okay, so let's recap quickly. This problem-solving made easy idea really boils down to starting with the process and asking one is there a standard two if yes is it being followed? Yep. And three if yes again are we measuring the output correctly? That's the core of it. You work through those systematically and in most cases you can quickly categorize the issue and know where to focus your efforts first. It really does make you pause and think, doesn't it? For anyone listening, consider a challenge you're facing right now. Does it maybe stem from not having a clear process? Or is there one but it's being ignored? Or perhaps are you sure you're even measuring success the right way? Thinking about which of those three scenarios applies could genuinely be the most efficient first step you take. A great starting point. Thanks for walking us through that. My pleasure.