OK, now we're going to discuss a few strategies
that you can employ that will help you think
a little bit more critically.
Like I said earlier, there's about 101 different ways
to think deeper about an issue.
These are just a few that are pretty straightforward
and you can start using in your daily practices.
Every day you're going to have to face
issues, problems, decisions.
Some are going to be straightforward.
Others are going to require some deeper thought.
As you face these issues, you will
have to approach them based on their timeline
and their magnitude,
If it's a quick timeline, you're going
to have to act appropriately.
But also remember that rushing to a decision
without thinking it through can result
in consequences that might actually
outweigh the original action.
So you're going to have to want to think about the outcomes
that base on your decisions.
Others might be of larger magnitude.
Those are going to require more forethought
and planning on how you might break a bigger
problem into smaller ones that are more manageable,
and this will ensure a positive outcome and a solution
to the original problem.
As we learned in week one for process analysis,
a popular and easy to remember approach
to getting to the source of an issue is the 5 Whys.
This essentially means that you keep
asking why until you get to the source of the problem.
For instance, why are we getting so many returns of products,
might be a question someone would ask.
The products are damaged.
Why are the products damaged?
They're getting crushed in transit.
Why are they getting crushed in transit?
Their boxes are not as sturdy as they used to be.
Why are the boxes not as sturdy?
We decided to cut costs and use a different packaging
provider, and so on.
By asking the 5 Whys, you will more readily
get to the actual source of the problem.
And this may lead to a different action
than if you had just stopped with asking
why the products were getting returned.
So now you've have gotten to the source of the problem.
So what?
The So What approach helps you identify
what the outcomes of your decisions might be.
We aren't trying to be an incredulous teenager
by saying so what.
What this means is if I were to do this, what would happen.
Why is it important.
For instance, we have a long term supplier
that we have a good working relationship with,
but we're thinking about switching to another supplier
due to cost.
So what?
So we might save money, but we would also
have to start from scratch with the supplier.
So what?
There may be startup costs to switch the supplier
and get them up to speed.
So what?
They are also a new supplier, so we don't
know about their reliability.
So what?
We may need to do more analysis on what the trade-offs would
be about switching suppliers.
By conducting the 5 Whys and the So What
as a deep thinking process, you will more readily
get to the root cause of a problem
and be able to answer it appropriately as well
as thinking out the consequences of your decisions
before taking action so that there aren't negative outcomes.
Another approach that can be complementary
is to ask focusing questions before taking action.
Some of these focusing questions might be--
What is the real problem?
What's the scope?
What is the approach?
Who are the stakeholders?
How will the success be measured?
What are the key performance indicators?
And what are the constraints?
For example, you might ask, is this the right problem?
You're faced with the decision to switch carriers
for a particular route because the carrier keeps
missing the delivery windows.
Your gut reaction on face value is that this
might be the right decision.
But is switching the carrier that's
missing the delivery windows the real problem,
or is there's something else going on?
So you must identify what the real problem is.
You might go through the process of asking the 5 Whys,
and then you actually find out that there
is a peak season taking place.
And the distribution center is having problems
loading the trucks, and this is influencing the delivery times
by the carrier.
This means that the scope would be limited to one regional DC
because they're experiencing seasonal peak times,
and the approach could be to add more flex personnel
to the distribution center to help ensure efficient truck
loading.
There are several stakeholders involved
in this, including the distribution
staff, the carrier, and the retailer
receiving the product that will need
to be informed of the changes.
You will also want to see what are the constraints
to that solution?
Will it be sustainable?
Will that make your stakeholders happy?
And will it be for the long term?
These type of questions can get you
to a more thought out approach to a problem
than you may have taken in the past.
Another approach that is generally helpful
is to use new lenses.
That's not, to say, that we mean put on better glasses
although you may need to do that, too.
What we mean here is that there are so many stakeholders
involved in every supply chain decision,
such as internal stakeholders like your colleagues
or other departments, external stakeholders
like your suppliers or buyers or your customers.
By thinking from other perspectives
other than your own, you may choose
to take a different action.
This includes changing your context.
For example, if we are operating in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia,
how is that different than Cambridge, Massachusetts
in the USA?
Or you might even want to change reality.
You might imagine a situation with fewer or no constraints,
and this might help you to think a little bit more
creatively or have an open mind.
An example of changing your lens might
be thinking about regional differences and problems.
For instance, a company is using the same routing software
in their logistics for Southeast Asian deliveries.
Drivers in Singapore are following the optimized routes
while those in Bangkok are not following the suggested
routes at all.
However, before you sanction the driver in Bangkok,
you might choose to take a different lens,
and you would see that the routing software is not
including many of the localized issues
such as unaccounted-for roadblocks, higher traffic
rates in certain zones, absence of loading zones.
And other issues.
So the drivers are actually using their localized knowledge
to have a more efficient route.
They're using experience they've gained on the road
so that they are able to avoid some of these issues.
Given this new perspective, you might
want to examine the inputs for the routing software
instead of sanctioning the drivers
and make sure that there are more variables included
in the routing software.
Or you might want to allow more flexibility
for localized driver knowledge in route choice.
And this will make it more locally relevant.
This is one case of many, but as you can see in this case,
by changing lenses, you would see
from a different perspective.
And this might prevent further issues.
One of the great failures we all experience
without realizing it, in pretty much every institution,
is not making use of what we have learned in the past.
It's really quite tedious and time consuming
to collect, store, and organize our learnings
from every project, every decision, every action so
that they can be used in the future.
It has a huge value, but it really often doesn't get done.
If there is an available report, you
should read it before you take a future action.
Or even if there's just anecdotal experience
from yourself or your colleagues,
it is usually a worthwhile exercise
to check what has been done in the past on a different action
or process to ensure that you're learning from that before you
take action.
An example might be your company is
planning to implement a new system for warehouse
management or WMS.
It has new bells and whistles that will enable better
item tracking and beyond.
And you're all ready to start with this fresh implementation.
But wait, you've implemented WMS before.
So you might want to go through a few of these problems that
would help you figure out if somethings were done
in the past that you could implement in the future
or you want to learn from.
These questions might be--
has this problem been considered in the past?
What did we learn?
Were there any challenges the last time this was addressed?
What assumptions are limiting our thinking?
And who was involved in the problem solving effort
last time?
With these things in mind, your implementation
of the WMS system might go a lot smoother
because you'll avoid problems you made last time
as well as including learnings that were already figured out
in your past run of this issue.