Continuous Improvement Quick Wins

 

When it comes to Continuous Process Improvement, action is everything. It makes no difference what training you provide, slogans you use, or posters you put up if you don't get things done, measured, and stabilized so the solution sticks.

'Quick Wins' is an effective tool for motivating teams to take action.

However, it is easier said than done. In this article, we'll look at Quick Wins, why they're important, what can go wrong, and how to improve your chances of success.

'Quick Wins' is an effective tool for motivating teams to take action.

However, it is easier said than done. In this article, we'll look at Quick Wins, why they're important, what can go wrong, and how to improve your chances of success.

What Exactly Is A 'Quick Win'?

The key elements are right there in those two words: it must be quick and successful.

A Quick Win must be completed in 4 to 6 weeks at most, but many are implemented much faster, such as in a "kaizen blitz," in which a small group focuses full-time or half-time on an improvement for a day or two, or half-time for a week.

Because of the time crunch, if a solution necessitates a significant capital investment, it will not be a Quick Win. If a large team or cross-functional buy-in is required, chances are it will be a slow win, if it succeeds at all.

Many Quick Wins do not necessitate the formation of a formal team; a natural work team can often identify the problem and implement a quick solution. It is almost always an improvement that can be completed with the people closest to the work and the resources closest at hand for a solution to become a Quick Win.

A Quick Win is a high-value improvement that is completed quickly. However, even a small dollar impact improvement can have a large ROI because the time and expense invested is so low and the organisation begins reaping the benefits so quickly.

Why Are Quick Wins Important?

Creating Quick Wins, according to John Kotter, author of Leading Change and The Heart of Change, creates momentum, defuses cynics, enlightens pessimists, and energises people. Education, when quickly followed by action, produces motivation, and success inspires success. Theoretical opportunities and methodologies are meaningless until a person begins to see the possibilities through hands-on process improvement in the real world.

As a result, a Quick Win is a shot of adrenaline for a Continuous Improvement culture or an ongoing change effort. Making the work more effective, efficient, or cost-effective gives the people involved a lot of satisfaction. Their effort is rewarded, and it is rewarded quickly. They are more likely to seek another such improvement.

People who see or hear about the Quick Win are frequently inspired to go on the hunt for their own Quick Wins. As a result, the motivational value of a Quick Win increases the return on effort.

But wait, there's more.

A Quick Win begins to pay off sooner, which can have a significant impact on the total return from the improvement.

As needs change and new options emerge, every advancement becomes obsolete. If a project that generates $1,000 in benefits per week is completed in two weeks, it will provide benefits for the remaining 50 weeks of the year.

If it takes 22 weeks to implement, it has 20 fewer weeks of payoff, resulting in a $20,000 opportunity cost. Moreover, enthusiasm and concentration tend to fade as time passes.

People become distracted, scopes expand, priorities shift, and resources are redeployed. The less time people spend in meetings, trying to remember where they left off and who said what, and writing up minutes and status reports, the less time they spend in meetings.

The longer the project, the more likely the team will lose members or disband before it is completed; if this occurs, the work they completed may be completely wasted.

A two-day kaizen blitz, on the other hand, has very little overhead and is almost always completed before the team is disbursed.

So Quick Wins are critical for morale and motivation, especially when people are just learning about and internalising Continuous Process Improvement or when interest is waning. They produce results over longer time periods, have lower overhead, and are less likely to be written off. In a nutshell, Quick Wins are a must-have tool for any organisation that is constantly striving to improve! The Dangers of Quick Wins However, focusing on Quick Wins is not a foolproof strategy. Without effective leadership, an organisation may experience rapid failures. Here are some of the potential Quick Wins pitfalls: To expedite the implementation of a solution, a team may skip the analysis. This is fine in situations where it is simple to determine whether or not the solution worked. If trying the solution is cheap, and it is quick and easy to determine if it solved the problem, just do it!

In this case, measuring the results is all that is required for analysis. However, if the results are unlikely to be immediately visible or measurable, it is preferable to conduct additional research ahead of time to ensure that the solution you intend to implement will actually result in improvements. For example, if a company is concerned about employee morale, there are numerous quick fixes that could be implemented in the hopes of improving morale. However, organisational morale cannot be measured on a daily or even weekly basis. It could take months to determine whether or not a change was beneficial. In a situation like this, more upfront analysis is critical to selecting the best solution. When you aim for speed, you may experience a rush resulting in sub-optimization of judgement When a more thoughtful consideration of the alternatives would reveal a significantly better solution, the first idea is the only idea. A band-aid, patch, or work-around may be used by an organisation rather than a solution that addresses the root cause. These band-aids can accumulate to become a significant component of waste in their own right. Often, a Quick Win is simply an idea that someone has "on the shelf" that they have been carrying around for a while. When a company is introduced to Continuous Improvement, a flood of these ideas may come to the surface. An off-the-shelf idea, on the other hand, does not provide a true "cycle of learning" in systematic process improvement because people eventually run out of ideas "on the shelf." Unless an organisation truly internalises the search for waste, the study of facts and data, the search for root causes, and the testing and standardisation of the solution, they will be unable to continue improving once these "off the shelf" ideas have been exhausted. However, speed does not always imply that a team must take shortcuts in the process improvement methodology. Time can limit thoughtful exploration of alternatives. Even 30 minutes spent brainstorming alternatives or improvements to an idea can make a significant difference. Allowing 24 hours for feedback and improvements on the idea can help identify areas for improvement. it even better - with minimal impact on speed. Finally, here are a few quick ideas that may assist you in successfully implementing a Quick Win improvement: Don't allow the Perfect to be the Enemy of the Good. One bite at a time, eat the elephant (Manage Scope Size) Rely on People Who Are Close to the Work