How Can Lean Help With Brexit Bureaucracy?
Brexit is sure to bring about huge bureaucracy challenges, the speed of business can’t wait so how can Lean thinking help?
The deal has been signed and parliament has ratified it, Brexit is happening and although there will be fewer tariffs than feared there is likely to be more bureaucracy for companies to manage when dealing with cross border supply chains. Luckily, Lean thinking can help with, keeping the impact of additional bureaucracy to a minimum. Four Lean tools will help here: Process Mapping, SMED, 7 Flows and Risk Analysis (FMEA / Try-Storming). I have used this combination of tools quite often and it is very effective in improving existing processes of all types, (including one-off processes), as well as providing a solid basis for creating new ways of working.
First of all, get a copy of the new rules as they apply to the process you are looking to redesign, have the links to the government advisory websites to hand also. Select your team, I would gather representatives from each of the areas who are or will interact with the process, an example is moving stuff (or even people) across the UK/EU border (or the Great Britain/Northern Ireland border). Include the people who will be on the frontline of the process, like truck drivers, as they will be the people who will have to deal with difficulties when the ultimate test comes. Distribute the new rules and the links to the team members asking them to review and identify problems to be discussed during the mapping session. Asking people to read something with a goal (like preparing for a test) makes it easier for them to really get to grips with the material. Asking them to search for issues makes it more personal to them, building engagement. Distributing these documents and links on the invitation for the mapping session will give them a deadline to work to.
Gather the team and have them map the current process in the normal way, see my article 10 Top Tips for Mapping a Process to help you. This gets everyone on the same page, you might want to have them add “issues” post-its as another engagement tool.
Now ask the team to map another process that includes everything required to be compliant with the new regulations. Having mapped the current process, the team should be able to take this process backbone and add any new steps to come into line with new requirements and rules.
So far so generic.
Now you can have the team analyse this proposed process in two ways, and this is where SMED comes into action. Analyse the process for steps that can be amalgamated, for example, steps where information is taken but transposed onto two different forms, perhaps using a macro or, if the rules allow, using a form generic to the current process and the new requirements, or inventing a form that is generic for EU and UK rules (this might be as simple as adding an extra piece of information or as complex are redesigning a whole form and having it ratified by both regulatory bodies). As part of this, you can also identify steps that can be one at the same time. You might find potentially concurrent steps but you only have one person to do them, ensure these steps are captured too, as the team works on the project they might identify a different way or person who can do one of the steps.
Now go through each step to identify which ones can be done before the process begins, an example might be partially completed forms, or weighing individual standard parts where the weights can be automatically added together from manifests and entered onto various forms, once again using a Macro.
You may even find that certain steps can be carried out whilst a critical path process in running, for instance after a shipment has left the depot, which should reduce the overall process lead time (though not the touch time).
Now you have mapped these steps map what is required for each step to be done, this can be on post-it notes stuck below each step. Often it is difficult to know what sort of stuff to include so the 7 Flows might be useful here.
You can then deconflict steps, identify concurrent steps that use the same people or equipment, for instance, steps might need a particular form to be edited at the same time. Each of these potential issues can have a pink post-it slapped on it, and once this analysis has been done the team can go through each of them in turn, finding their root cause and implementing solutions or mitigations.
Now is the time to call on the Black Hat, this is the person who is by nature the pessimist, their task is to identify where the process is likely to fail. The term comes from Edward de Bono’s Six hats approach to idea generation and testing. Another term for this process is Try Storming, the team try to find flaws in the new process, areas where it might fail, often this is best done by someone who is a stakeholder but wasn’t part of the team.
An extension of Try-Storming is the FMEA (Failure Modes Effects Analysis) which is a much more in-depth analysis to identify potential issues prioritizing them against chances of occurrence, impact, and chances of detection. The FMEA is usually done as a team exercise and can take a number of days, but the same team can carry-it out once the new process has been defined.
After all of this has been carried out and implementation is complete you should have a process that is much more streamlined and accepted than you would likely have had if, say, a single manager designed it on their own as a new procedure. After the Try-Storming or FMEA, it will be de-risked, though it would still be useful to monitor the process for problems as it is being used so each time the process runs it gets better and keeps-up with the reality of doing business.
Darren Clyde has spent 15 years working with organisations and teams to reduce cost and effort of doing business. He has facilitated many teams in different countries from a wide range of backgrounds including, aviation, military, medical and energy organizations in reducing lead times and designing new processes.
