Operational Excellence - Part 4: Makigami

In Part 1, we began our journey to operational excellence by enlightening “The way of the manufacturer”. Muda, Mura and Muri are types of waste in daily business which I just call Waste Work. In Part 2, we continued the journey by learning about Kata, a mainly cooperative leadership culture which is similar to a zero-defects culture. In combination with the Harada Method, employees empower their knowledge, skills and potential. In Part 3, we learned about the Hoshin Kanri way of thinking, planning and processing activities to achieve company goals.

We implemented a cooperatively working, problem-solving culture that strives for effectivity, efficiency and zero-defects. Now, we might need some tools and methods that allow to achieve this desired state. Makigami is equally suitable for planning and creating of new processes as well as optimizing existing processes. Makigami makes processes and workflows transparent. It enables to analyze, improve and shape processes. The method reveals non-value-added activities and their causes. Interface and communication problems come to the fore. Unnecessary process steps or documentation become recognizable. Makigami is suitable for the internal efficiency increase of administrative processes and services.

Makigami – Neither Japanese martial arts, nor sushi, nor paper arts

Let us get back serious again. Makigami comes from Japanese Maki (role) and Kami (paper). Since mankind can write, administrative processes were recorded and redesigned with paper (or animal skin) rolls. With Makigami, recorded process steps are questioned and labeled as "value-adding" or "non-value-adding". A timeline shows action times and value-adding times. Loss time is understood as "action time minus value-adding time". Similarly, transfers (interfaces, information sharing) are included. Makigami is process mapping method, a worldwide proven tool for the visualization and analysis of business processes of all kinds.

In process analysis with Makigami, the view is always on the process steps, never on the employees performing the process steps. This also applies to the search for waste. The central question is if the customer would pay for a process step. After recording the actual state, the process is redesigned based on the question for the ideal process. This takes into account future developments and the company's vision. The focus is on the entire process and all related processes.

Administrative processes contain 30% waste work

 In contrast to production processes, internal administration processes and interface problems, e.g. between individual departments or with customers or suppliers, are much more difficult to be recognized at first glance. Makigami achieves the necessary transparency in several phases. Especially, administrative processes live a shadow existence in most companies and are rarely examined for added value. The Fraunhofer Institute measures up to 30% waste in these areas – for years. Hence, it is worth to take a closer look.

 Makigami offers several advantages over other process analysis methods such as process mapping and value stream design. The process appears as a flowchart. Interfaces are easily recognizable. Process steps are presented in detail and assessed. Losses and wastes are easily recognized. Also, there is an easy implementation of theory into practice (no symbolism necessary). Thereby, execution is largely self-explanatory.

 Makigami is a four-phase process analysis method

1)     Preparation phase

The first step is to clarify which specific process should be optimized or designed, including process boundaries. In addition, a suitable team is to be determined. It must necessarily involve affected employees because they can best estimate problem sources and required times. Before the planning of the processes can be started, there should also be clarity and defined requirements with regard to process quality, process costs or service level.

2)     Recording and visualization of the actual state

For existing processes, the current status is to be included. To design new processes, a rough process model is first developed. The team initiates the process by dividing the process into sub-processes or activities, bringing those sub-processes into a meaningful chronological order (horizontal), then assigning them to the responsible department or person (vertically) and marking the transitions with arrows. To be used documents and data carriers are listed. As a result, problems and breaks in the information transfer becomes visible. In a sum column, the number of transfers of information to other departments and the documents being used is noted.

Hence, specific times are determined for each process step. The lead time is the total time required to complete a process step (action time + lay time). The action time is the total processing time within a process step (value-adding time + loss time). The value-adding time is the time spent on all activities that add value for customers. The loss time is the effort for all activities that bring no added value for the customer. The lay time is any time period in which further processing of the process step is suspended (e.g., waiting times).

These values can either be measured or collected through an expert estimate. If the times are available for each process step, the total time for an entire process run can be determined. The value creation factor is calculated from the value-adding time divided by the cycle time and multiplied by 100%.

3)     Development and visualization of the target state

First, the most important problems are identified and then eliminated as far as possible. The numerical values determined so far already offer valuable insights. In addition, an assessment (point query) and labeling of individual activities and interfaces can help identify relevant problems. The team can assess activities to what extent they are necessary or problematic.

To express if an activity is necessary, the classification can be used in a value-adding, non-value-added but necessary or non-value-added and not required form and process steps are marked accordingly. Unproblematic and problematic activities are also marked. Similarly, red arrows indicate interfaces where difficulties often arise. Green arrows represent unproblematic transitions. Finally, the identified problems are described in the appropriate line.

4)      Development of the improvement process and implementation of the target state

Working groups now work together to find solutions to avoid unnecessary work steps, to eliminate or improve interfaces and documents used, and to shorten the process time. In this context, the ideal process should be outlined in which all external requirements are initially left out. For this purpose, it must be clarified whether and, if yes, which process steps, interfaces or documents are omitted, whether tasks are processed in parallel and whether and, if yes, how information can be simplified and ensured. By testing and improving the processes, the concept can be verified and successively optimized.

 If the target concept is sufficiently sharpened, the implementation planning and the subsequent implementation are started by means of a concrete action plan. Based on defined goals, the determined values of the actual analysis and the predicted values of the target concept, the success and the degree of implementation can be checked at any time.

Conclusion

For the presentation of information flows and the associated process steps, Makigami offers best execution and visualization forms that is easy to understand and easy to implement. Each process step is presented individually and thus provides a very good basis for the development of improvement potential or the creation of new processes.