We frequently ask people in our workshops and webinars to tell us about the challenges they experience from day to day. This is done using a non-technical audio measurement system of our own invention which we call the ‘ugh-ometer’. We simply ask people to provide us with an “ugh” if they experience any of the following things in their work. The louder and longer the “ugh”, the greater the feeling. You might like to “ugh” along, silently or otherwise, as you read.

Frustration – not being able to do things easily. This generally encourages a loud “ugh” that grows more confident when people realise that they’re not alone. Why aren’t things right first time? And why do they take so long?

Confusion – people not really sure of what is going on. This conjures a thoughtful “ugh” as people start to consider what might have happened to certain pieces of work after they’ve been handed off, and if their teams are really aligned with what matters most in their organisation.

Hassle – fires to put out. A big, strong “ugh” is usually the response to this one.

Overload – too much to do. And again, though possibly a bit louder.

Complaints – spending too much time dealing with unhappy customers. A higher pitched, thoughtful “ughhhmm”, and often the admission that the hassle and overload is brought about in an attempt to deliver the right thing to customers, to prevent the complaints from happening.

And on top of all of that, people also then tell us that they’re being asked to do more with less.

Digging a bit deeper, as we always do, we find certain themes below the surface of the “ughs”. Among these is a lack of clarity about customers’ requirements. What aspects of processes, services or products do customers really value? When was the last time that this was considered?  Where offerings and ways of working are shaped around assumptions, or what is easiest to deliver, we often find that the measures and metrics being used to understand performance are not focussed on the aspects that matter most to customers. How well are the most critical aspects being delivered? And it gets worse – activities aimed at improving the delivery of products and services to customers can only fail to hit the mark if the mark has not been clearly defined!

A lack of definition and clarity around those ways of working is also found to be a theme – the outputs of processes are not consistent or take too long to deliver, or the work itself feels inefficient and frustrating. We’re not just talking about the core, front facing or ‘money making’ processes either. Processes such as the recruitment process, the expenses process, the board papers process, the complaints process etc often feature in our discussions. And since these aren’t the raison d’etre of most of the organisations we come across, the situation is more frustrating still!

And while we’re on the subject of frustration, data and information are a significant source. Organisations are certainly not short of the stuff – as the saying goes, “Data, data, everywhere, but no one knows a thing!” Despite the surfeit, people in organisations still admit to making decisions based on gut feel and opinion where they find they don’t have the data they need. They also admit to using bad data – which may be worse.

Improvement itself is not easy, people have told us. Solutions that have been implemented have not been effective, as problems resurface over time instead of going away. And projects themselves can be too big and take too long to deliver. Improvements have been unfocused, and it has been hard to pinpoint their impact.

A further theme is that people in the organisation aren’t getting involved and engaged in shaping processes or there is a lack of acceptance for change.

Be glad to know there are alternative ways to approach things. “There’s a way to do it better”, Thomas Edison once observed. “– find it”. Well we can certainly help to shed some light on another way of working!

The extract from A.A Milne about Pooh Bear, who initially went by the name of Edward, puts it very sweetly:

“Here is Edward Bear, coming downstairs now, bump, bump, bump, on the back of his head, behind Christopher Robin. It is, as far as he knows, the only way of coming downstairs, but sometimes he feels that there really is another way, if only he could stop bumping for a moment and think of it.”

So like Edward Bear, start by recognising, talking about and challenging the bumps, the “ughs”, frustrations, hassles, overload and confusion. There really are other ways of working that are smoother, easier and better for the organisation, its customers and its people.  The thing is, its those who need it the most that find it most difficult to step back and consider them.

Stop bumping for a moment, and let us tell you about Lean Six Sigma.  It’s really not as difficult as people think its going to be.

If you would like to learn more about working with Catalyst, then please contact us and we will be happy to help.

This article was first published by LID Publishing.

“In every job that must be done, there is an element of fun. You find the fun, and – SNAP – the job’s a game!” So said Mary Poppins prior to bursting into song before a bemused looking Jane and Michael Banks.

At Catalyst we always bring a spoonful of sugar to our work. In fact, when I recently asked colleagues which words they’d use to describe us, ‘fun’ was one of the words most used. But it’s not just frivolous – fun and enjoyment at work create an environment that’s relaxed and comfortable and these are ideal conditions for learning.

There’s a limit to how much a brain can process at a time. The brain’s reticular activating system (RAS), located around about where the brain stem is, acts as a filter helping to cope with the millions and millions of pieces of information, signals and ‘noise’ all around. Things that are funny, intriguing, quirky or stimulating pass through the RAS filter most easily.

But if the atmosphere isn’t right, if people feel stressed and anxious, the amygdala might block the information and prevent it getting to the pre-frontal cortex and into memory circuits. So the more we as trainers can do to bring positivity the better, as the more positive our learners feel, the more likely they are to remember the information we’re sharing. This is because the hippocampus (the part of the brain that makes links between new information being entered and things that are already committed to memory) works better when people are at ease. And then, when we repeat key messages and important information we’re reinforcing the brain’s connections making it easier and easier for them to become embedded. That’s to say, when we repeat key messages and important information we’re reinforcing the brain’s connections making it easier and easier for them to become embedded!

Once information’s in, the pre-frontal cortex (the part of the brain known for thinking) processes it and cogitation and reflection begins.  But’s there’s more – let’s add a nice hit of dopamine into the mix and really get the party started! Dopamine is released by enjoyable experiences, such as learning something that’s particularly engaging, receiving positive feedback, achieving something constructive, laughing or doing something physical. Dopamine activates additional neurons to boost learning even further and bring pleasurable associations and a feel-good reward.

Of course there are other ways to learn. Some of the things that are most embedded in my brain were learned by rote – for example the times tables, the rhyme ‘30 days has September…’ and the fates of all the wives of Henry Eighth. Other things that have stuck have been lessons learned the hard way – the learning that comes from making mistakes. Like the time…well let’s just say I won’t be doing that again.

When all is said and done I believe that the most important part of our role isn’t training. It is lighting a fire in people and building the appetite, enthusiasm and confidence within our learners so that they are ready to go on and turn their learning into action. If they feel good about what they’ve learned and how they learned it that’s far more likely to happen.

I wouldn’t go as far as Mary Poppins and assert that every task they undertake will become a piece of cake, but agree wholeheartedly about the spoonful of sugar.

If you have any questions about learning Lean Six Sigma or other continuous Improvement projects, please do contact us.

When was the last time you saw something that wasn’t as it should be and just fixed it? Maybe your fix worked, or maybe it didn’t and you thought, ‘well at least I tried’. This sort of thing happens all the time and I guess it always will. In many cases it is not wrong, especially when the consequences of an ineffective fix are not important. However when the consequences are more significant, e.g. when they’d create a non-compliant situation or increase the time and cost of the process, then we really should be more careful before following through with initial assumptions. Another aspect of unsuccessful fixes is the time, energy and cost which is consumed for ultimately little or no benefit. So many process fixes are made based on an assumption that we know what is wrong … and as you probably know, when we ‘assume’ it makes an ‘ass’ out of ‘u’ and ‘me’.

A dictionary definition of ‘assume’ is, “suppose to be the case, without proof”, which is the real reason why acting on well-intentioned assumptions can lead to problems. We want the opposite of ‘assume’ which would include ‘to know’ or ‘to prove’ so that we can be confident we’ll avoid undesirable outcomes while making a change quickly. Mentioning the word ‘hypothesis’ can strike fear into people, bringing back unpleasant memories from school maths classes, but it really shouldn’t as its just “a proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation”. We should follow our initial assumptions with testing to prove or disprove them before taking action. Hypothesis thinking in process and product improvement projects can be critical in bagging the early gains and getting those improvements sooner, to deliver value to customers more rapidly and to prove to the nay-sayers that a structured approach to problem solving does not have to take too much time.

My experience with improvement teams is that they will discuss solutions throughout the project but all too often the project leader will park the discussion as ‘we are not ready for that yet, we’ll pick it up after we understand the root causes’. This prescriptive, sequential approach to problem solving is proven and understandable but not necessarily best for the team who want to see progress – and also the customers who may already be looking for an alternative provider. To make the improvements sooner and be confident about making the right changes rapidly, we should adopt the hypothesis thinking approach.

The improvement team should always be considering the end goal for the customer, so with this in mind and with each new piece of information about the current state, the team must decide if the new information is likely to help achieve the goals or not; if not then move on, if yes then think how that hypothesis can be rapidly and thoroughly tested. The team must consider the risks versus rewards and whether more data will be required for the test to be conclusive – after all, you really don’t want to put the customer or current process at risk. If it helps, break the subject into smaller parts, test them individually and then in combinations to understand if anything changes. In reality there is likely to be more failed tests than accepted, so this process of elimination will reveal where the solution lies. Hypothesis thinking and assumption busting is a robust (and safe) way for the team to learn what is really happening.

Hypothesis thinking will certainly require some evidence: observations of people / process behaviours in different locations; sufficient reliable data to be visualised and analysed; identification of excessive work in progress as seen in the workplace or from a value stream map; the list goes on. If you have adequate data then statistical hypothesis testing may be appropriate to validate differences between groups (or not), or where there is causation regression testing may help quantify that relationship. In many cases however, the data is inadequate, so the team should test their hypothesis / proposed explanation objectively using their knowledge and available information in order to become confident that the fix will deliver the desired results.

Right first time should be the goal of anyone making process changes, but to get that point many hypotheses will have been tested and rejected and only a few accepted.

Developing a strategy is the easy bit – implementing it effectively (aka strategy deployment) can seem like a far harder challenge!

We can all say we want to grow our business by a certain amount, make it more profitable, or expand into new markets – but what does this really mean, and how do we align and engage our people and other key resources to deliver the desired outcomes? And how do we do this in a fast changing and increasingly uncertain world?

Let’s step back for a minute. In principle this shouldn’t be so difficult – fundamentally there are two ways to align our people to deliver our organisation’s goals:

Firstly, we can use the culture of our organisation constructively. Behind the business strategy should be a shared Vision and a set of Values. “Okay, we have these”, you might say – but do you really, and are they being put into practice?  (There may be some work to do here – this is a subject for another day!).  There is nothing as strong as cultural alignment and everything done through formal strategy deployment (the second mechanism, outlined below) will be helped or hindered by how well or how badly we gain real acceptance and application of our Vision and Values – which of course should be consistent and supportive of the strategy.

Secondly – and the point of this blog – we can use formal methods of strategy deployment. The simplest and oldest of these is ‘MBO’ or Management by Objectives. This highlights the needs for synergistic objectives deployed down and across the organisation – but is limited in effectiveness as it lacks a specific mechanism to tightly align them. We have seen the Balanced Scorecard used as a strategy deployment mechanism – essentially this builds on the principle of ‘what gets measured gets done’ – so if we develop, collect, and review performance against a balanced series of metrics based on our strategic goals,  then these will point people in the correct direction,  towards the ‘True North’ of the organisation. But there is something stronger and arguably more effective – ‘Hoshin’ – which those of us outside of Japan typically prefer to call ‘Strategy Deployment’ (note the Capital S and D). Since this builds on strategic goals and metrics it is arguably an extension of Balanced Scorecard thinking and practice. Organisations using Strategy Deployment will find that an appropriate Balanced Scorecard is almost a natural by-product output from the Strategy Deployment process.

Sounds complicated? Not really. All we’re seeking to do is to translate strategy into action. The trick is not to try and do it in one giant leap but rather in a series of simple steps. In the same way we can comfortably walk up a staircase to get to the next floor rather than trying an impossible leap – so it is with Strategy Deployment.

Step 1:

From the strategy, develop a clear set of balanced goals. Let’s try a topical example – contributing to securing net zero carbon emission by 2030 or earlier. Let’s look at what this might mean using the example of a UK wide fast food business delivering pizzas.  There is a strategic imperative to ‘go green’, but also a ‘business as usual’ to run. So, what’s the strategy for going green and how will the organisation plan for its implementation? The balanced goals might be along the following lines (which are cut short for sake of ease and clarity here):

• Drive carbon footprint to net zero over 5 years
• Continue developing our business – business growth in sales and profits unimpacted (at least not negatively) by going green
• Continue to engage and develop our people
• Capital investment to remain within previous planned parameters

The first objective is clearly the ‘green’ one, the others ensure that the green goal is not achieved at the expense of the ongoing normal planned development of the company.

Step 2:

The next step is to turn these goals into specific short to mid-term measurable goals – what the organisation seeks to achieve over the next planning period (normally 12 to 18 months forward). Let’s assume there’s an actual measure of the current carbon footprint (or net emissions), e.g. 100 CUs (CO2 units), so on a straight-line basis the organisation needs to cut to something like 70 to 80 CUs in this period. Along with the other targets from the current business plan, there will be about 5 or 6 key quantified targets in all, including the target for CUs.

Step 3:

The organisation should then identify the programmes it needs to run in order to deliver these targets. What will be both necessary and sufficient to achieve them? The ‘green’ programmes might include:

• Driving greater efficiency in the use of energy in the organisation’s facilities and its distribution operations, e.g. proportionately use less energy for cooking pizzas, lighting and heating premises, and powering delivery transportation.
• Switching types of energy to greener alternatives e.g. buying electricity generated from renewables, switching to electric delivery vehicles, using cycles rather than motorbike delivery etc.

There will of course be a range of other programmes in place – primarily focussed on operating and growing the business, distinct from the ‘green’ goals, but which may to a greater or lesser extent impact them as a by-product. These will all need to be defined.

Step 4:

The next step is to establish the impact each of these programmes have on each target. The organisation will need to appreciate that each programme will drive not only its primary goal but will also either enhance or conflict with the other goals to some extent. There is a many-to-many correlation at play here. In Strategy Deployment this is typically handled through a facilitated workshop where the key leaders come together to discuss and formulate their best views, and the ‘wisdom of the crowd’ enables a less subjective assessment to emerge.

Step 5:

Now the organisation should identify what individual projects, workstreams or activities constitute each programme. The impact these will have on any of the other programmes should also be considered. Again, the facilitated workshop approach enables this to be undertaken effectively. Have a think about the various possible projects and actions that might be required to drive energy efficiencies and switching to clear renewable sources – these are the details captured in this step of the process.

Step 6:

Through the Strategy Deployment process the organisation has so far correlated the programmes with the strategic goals, and then the individual projects (and workstreams and other activities) with the programmes. These correlations can now be linked to see the extent to which each project contributes to – or otherwise hinders – the strategic goals. A variant of the Pareto principle is helpful here. Some of the projects are seen to be the dominant contributors to several goals, whilst some have a relatively minor impact, and so the organisation can prioritise and rationalise its plans.

Final Steps:

With the projects determined (which can include ‘business as usual’ elements) the organisation can charter and resource them and engage those leading them to determine the detailed individual plans. Of course, governance and review mechanisms will be required, including integrating the outputs and outcomes of the individual projects and activities.

Supporting this process is a set of conceptually simple tools. The main one in Strategy Deployment is the ‘X-matrix’, which sounds much more complicated than it really is! It can be configured on a simple Excel spreadsheet to record the list of strategic goals, the programmes and the projects. It is constructed so that correlations between these, assessed by the business leaders, can be recorded and analysed.

Our advice is to separate the facilitation of the Strategy Deployment process from the participation in it. A couple of experienced facilitators can manage the X-matrix spreadsheet and guide the participating leaders to focus on identifying and assessing the goals, programmes and projects – thereby de-mystifying the Strategy Deployment process for all involved.

Catalyst has assisted many clients in developing and implementing their strategies using such approaches. Please contact us if you’d like to know more or see specific case studies.

Systems Thinking is described by Peter Senge as “a discipline for seeing wholes rather than parts, for seeing patterns of change rather than static snapshots, and for understanding the subtle interconnectedness that gives (living) systems their unique character”.  Systems Thinking examples include ecosystems, cars and human bodies as well as organisations!

Systems Thinkers have taught us that a system is a product of the interaction of its parts, not just the sum of its parts. For example if you take the car apart it is no longer a car, as it has lost its essential functions. It is the collective interactions of the parts that dictate system behaviour.

Instead of ‘analysis’ – a focus on individual components, Systems Thinkers place importance on ‘synthesis’ – the relationships between components and how they function as a whole.

Leonardo DaVinci is an early example of a Systems Thinker. Though he became famous because of his paintings he was a Renaissance man – mathematician, geologist, anatomist, botanist, inventor, writer, sculptor, architect and musician. DaVinci sought to learn from every possible source, and was fascinated by the interconnections he found. “Learn to see”, he urged, “Realise that everything connects to everything else”. The Vitruvian Man is a systems thinking example: more than an illustration of human proportions it is the synthesis of anatomical, geometrical, religious and philosophical studies and way greater than the sum of its parts.

Other systems thinking examples include a loaf of bread, a supply chain, educational systems or healthcare systems. Each is a fusion of several component parts that interact, and are influenced by many factors which may include social, economic, political and environmental – a whole web of interconnectedness indeed.

Adopting a Systems Thinking habit clearly helps to understand important connections and encourages a wide perspective, rather than just a focus on specific events. The Iceberg Model used in Systems Thinking provides valuable framework to assist.

• At the tip of the iceberg – the ice you can see above the waterline – is an event or a happening. This is easily seen and recognised. For example, failure to deliver a project on time.
• Below the waterline, not visible to observers are patterns or trends that happen over time. In the systems thinking example of failure to deliver a project this may relate to several instances of missed tollgate review meetings, or the fact that a number of risks in the project risks register went unaddressed.
• Deeper under water are the underlying structures – the causes of the observed patterns. So why weren’t tollgate meetings made to happen, and why wasn’t appropriate attention given to project risks? This may be due to poor governance practices, an inexperienced project lead or sponsor, or a lack of consequence associated with failure to deliver.
• And finally, deepest of all are the mental models – the attitudes, beliefs and assumptions that allow structures to persist. In this example of systems thinking, they may include a lack of belief in the importance of the project or its objectives. We’re focussing not on the behaviour but on the motivation for that behaviour.

‘Zooming out’ (or looking ‘deeper’ under the water) is a powerful approach when seeking to understand how one thing influences another. It’s less ‘linear’ in nature than root cause analysis, as it recognises interactions and that the output from one part of the system forms an input into another.

Systems thinking is a powerful habit to practice. What Systems Thinking examples can you think of?

Need some advice on applying Systems Thinking to your business? Please feel free to contact our expert team.

There are plenty of tools and techniques in the Continuous Improvement toolkit to support different thinking and creativity, and it has long been maintained that equipping and engaging people in improvement activities is an essential CI principle. Indeed failure to use the talent and imagination of people has been recognised as one of the quintessential wastes, with Skills Waste being added to the famous list of 7 Wastes to turn TIM WOOD into TIM WOODS.

However, I find that something more than tools and techniques is needed when the learners and practitioners under my wing are required to work creatively, and that is courage. The courage to put an idea or suggestion out there, to put themselves out there. It’s like turning yourself inside out momentarily. And to risk being judged, rejected or criticized while your innards are out there? It’s a show of guts alright.

The term Psychological Safety is now fixed in the Continuous Improvement lexicon thanks to the work of, among others, Amy Edmondson, William A Kahn and Google’s Project Aristotle. This famous project sought to understand the dynamics of effective teams and found that the most important aspect was Psychological Safety – a belief in the safety of interpersonal risk taking.

Psychological Safety is the ability (shared in the team) to show yourself and be yourself, with a sense of confidence that the team will not embarrass, reject or punish you for speaking up. In her TED Talk ‘Building a Psychologically Safe Workplace’ Edmondson explains that when people withhold at work they are robbing themselves and their colleagues of small moments of learning, and of the opportunity to innovate.

Creating a safe environment for people to contribute fully means that it is acceptable for people to ask questions, ask for help, and make a mistake, and it is safe for people to be creative and think differently. A psychologically safe environment inspires courage, and inspiring courage is key to releasing the talent and imagination of our people.

Organisations committed to building a true Continuous Improvement culture can take steps to inspire courage. Creating the right environment, a safe space for taking interpersonal risks, is essential. They should also provide the opportunities, in the form of improvement projects for example, or a process for suggestions, or other mechanisms that encourage innovation and provide a means for managing it within the organisation. Then come the tools and techniques. With the environment and the opportunities in place, the tools and techniques to support creativity and different thinking are much more effective. And finally, it is important to acknowledge the courageous – those prepared to show their guts to bring talent and imagination to their work.

We can probably all think about being more efficient ourselves. What do you want to save? The answer that’s likely to come to mind first is saving time.  According to the adage, ‘time means money’ – so perhaps it could ultimately come down to money. But what exactly is involved in becoming more efficient and what does efficiency really mean?

Let’s start with what it’s not. Efficiency is not the same as effectiveness – that’s about getting things right in the first place, and, typically, getting the it right for the customer. We can be effective (get the right result) but still be wasteful and inefficient. So perhaps we should also think about cost-effectiveness– and that is about being efficient as well as getting the right result.

So if efficiency is about not being wasteful, let’s look to the 7 Wastes to remind us of the inefficiencies – and ultimately the opportunities – for savings. There are 8 Wastes if we also include not using all talents and skills to their full potential. TIM WOOD is a mnemonic we use to remember them – let’s have a look…

• T for Transport – when we needlessly move things that we’re processing from one location to another
• I for Inventory – where we hold too much stock, or we create unnecessary work in progress
• M for Motion – if we have a poor office, factory or system layout that requires us to move to collect something which should otherwise be within easy reach
• W for Waiting – we already spoke about time; waiting is potentially wasted time during which we could be doing something more useful or delivering value to our customer earlier
• O for Overproduction – producing more than we need, e.g. food going to waste
• O for Over-processing – if we ‘guild the lily’ we end up with features or capabilities that the customer doesn’t really need, or at least didn’t ask for or want to pay for.
• D for Defects – if we don’t get it right the first time we have to rework or redo it until we do get it right – that indeed costs us money.

What does this list of waste tell us about efficiency? Certainly, it’s about the efficiency of a process; it’s also about the efficiency of people whether individually or collectively. So, we could have an inefficient sales process, an inefficient finance department, or an inefficient government. Better though to develop efficient ones by identifying the opportunities and addressing the wastes!

Bottom line – it probably is ultimately about money. But it’s also about time, people and processes – and about how we use the resources and assets we have. Money is how we measure its effect eventually.

Come and talk to us at Catalyst about Lean by clicking here. We can help you make your organisation more efficient!

Continuous improvement in organisations starts with continuous learning and growth at an individual level, which is why personal development is important.  Indeed, proceeding to achieve sustainable Operational Excellence calls for constant learning, honest reflection and harnessing the full potential of our people to routinely remove constraints, solve problems and find a better way.  Fujio Cho, Former Chairman of Toyota Motor Corporation put it vividly when he said “First we build people, then we build cars”, a notion which is enshrined in the Toyota Way and which remains a cornerstone of Toyota’s thinking and practices.

Respect

More broadly, personal development is a natural consequence of observing the principle of Respect for Every Individual which is the foundation of Lean Thinking. We know that when people feel respected, they give not only their hands but also their minds and their hearts. Respect for every individual is manifested when organizations structure themselves to value each individual as a person (not just those who are useful to us!) and nourish their potential. Great leaders see people for what they can become tomorrow, not just what they offer today.

Leaders

We are all accountable for our own personal development of course, but this does not get leaders off the hook. Leaders should take responsibility and make development of their people a priority, and have a key role in encouraging, supporting, challenging and enabling their people to grow in capability. A key part of this is providing timely feedback, in keeping with the PDCA (Plan, Do, Check, Act) cycle. They should also have the humility to accept the need for their own learning and development, and therefore act as role models in this regard. And vitally, leaders should create a supportive and ‘psychologically safe’ environment where it’s OK to make mistakes: learning from mistakes is often the best way to secure meaningful improvements, therefore it’s crucially important not to let blame and personal consequences lead to the covering up of defects, accidents, lack of knowledge, errors or even ‘near misses’.

We at Catalyst specialise in helping organisations unlock their potential and become the best they can be, and believe this is made possible by unlocking the potential in individuals and how they collaborate with others. We do this through our renowned training programmes of course, but also through coaching and mentoring of leaders and practitioners because we know that the most powerful learning is gained by real experience, through application in different situations, failing fast, reflecting on mistakes and feedback, and going again. As Richard Branson said:

“You don’t learn to walk by following rules. You learn by doing, and by falling over.”

So, let’s all recommit to our own personal development!

On our theme of ‘getting started’ this month, we always recommend listening closely to the ‘voice of the customer’ to understand the experience of using products and services from their point of view. Catalyst Director, Mark Jones, recently had a holiday in Cuba but couldn’t switch off completely prompted by his experiences, as he explains in this blog by using the GEMBA.

A few weeks ago, we took a week’s holiday in Cuba to escape the UK winter weather and relax. We spent four nights of the holiday in Varadero, if you’re not familiar with it, imagine a twelve mile white sandy beach that pokes north of Cuba into the Caribbean. It has recently been rated by Trip advisor as one of the Caribbean’s five top rated Beaches.

The hotel we stayed in was excellent, all-inclusive and well-known for its service. At several points during the stay we were asked to provide customer feedback. One of these opportunities was a one-to-one with a senior service manager…. Here is what happened…..

Using the Gemba

I was asked to attend an interview in the hotel lobby at 11:45 AM, which I did, and I made myself known to a member of the reception staff. By midday nobody had come to talk to me, so I went back to the reception desk to give them a final chance before I went back to enjoying the bar and grill! Five minutes later, the reception manager appeared with a notebook in her hand and we started the conversation.

“What do you think of the restaurants, what do you think of the facilities, how is your room, what do you think of the bar, how is the food…..? The questions went on like this for a few minutes, all standard stuff, but none of it earthshattering or really important and all of it missing some fundamental thinking.

I couldn’t resist going into consultant mode explaining the importance of being in the place where the customer experience takes place to get the richest feedback – the Gemba.  Ask me about the food in the restaurant, ask me about our room in the room, let’s have this meeting in the bar and talk about the bar service and experience. Fundamental truths about the guest experience are less likely to be surfaced sat in the lobby. Above the reception desk is the office of the General Manager and I could see him while we were talking, I wondered how many hours a day he spends in there?

I presume the staff at the hotel are reasonably paid by local standards, but they clearly appreciate tips from the guests. I made the point to the manager that they don’t make it easy for guests to reward staff. When money is changed at the hotel, like most hotels and Exchange Bureau, you receive a lot of large notes and being an all-inclusive hotel the opportunity to get smaller change is limited. I was told that guests can go to the Bureau and ask for change, but I didn’t know that and it’s not exactly easy or in the Gemba. I made a suggestion that at one end of the bar (not the reception) they put two small plates, one with a couple of larger notes and the other with many small notes and coins; above the plates would be a small sign highlighting that guests can simply obtain change here without having to ask a member of staff or make it obvious….. put down your large note and take some change. The business risk would be small, the cost of setting it up would be negligible and it is a quick win experiment…. Why not try this and see what happens? Ask the staff if they see a change, and if not fail fast and take away the plates…. I think a week would do it!

How to use your Staff for feedback

We talked about how ideas for improvement are solicited from staff; I can’t remember the answer, which tells me it wasn’t very inspiring. Early in December the hotel was busy but nowhere near full….. if a staff member is highlighted for exceptional service, or suggests a great improvement idea, why not say thank you by letting them stay in the hotel with a partner for a couple of nights? They would get to have the “guest” experience and customer journey, be recognised for their contribution, be served by their colleagues and managers, have some fun and a new experience, and perhaps relax a little as well. The cost to the business would be small and the only requirement would be that the staff member and their partner provide some detailed feedback afterwards. Again, a short experiment would easily show the value (or not) of this concept.

I did give them some more traditional feedback of the kind they were expecting, about specific restaurant issues and some great staff members. However, the point I was trying to make was that this sort of feedback, although useful, doesn’t tend to create lots of innovative ideas and make a step change in performance compared with using a Gemba approach.

I finished our 30 minutes, which I actually enjoyed (I can’t stop myself), by pointing out to them that during any particular month they probably have hundreds of experienced business people from across the world staying at the hotel. Why not set up a facilitated session, maximum 60 minutes, and invite them to share some of their knowledge and ideas that could relate to their experience of the hotel……. it might just make a nice change from the beach and the spa!