HOW SMART LEADERS AND ORGANIZATIONS ACHIEVE OUTSTANDING PERFORMANCE

CLARITY

FIRST

K A R E N M A R T I N

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 3 1/10/18 10:40 AM

© 2018 by Karen Martin

figure 1.1 Organizational ambiguity is similar to Akiyoshi Kitaoka’s optical illusionFigures 1.1 and 1.2 are part of a collection of optical illusions including Ninio’s Extension Illusion created by Akiyoshi Kitaoka, professor in the Department of Psychology, Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto, Japan. Image used with permission by Dr. Kitaoka.

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 4

1/10/18 10:40 AM

figure 1.2 Clearing the lines of ambiguityFigures 1.1 and 1.2 are part of a collection of optical illusions including Ninio’s Extension Illusion created by Akiyoshi Kitaoka, professor in the Department of Psychology, Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto, Japan. Image used with permission by Dr. Kitaoka.

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 6

1/10/18 10:40 AM

CLARITY

ENGAGEDCONNECTED

CollaborationLoyalty

Innovation

EFFICIENT

Productivity

CONFIDENTCAPABLE Agility

figure 1.3 Clarity grows outstanding performance

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 9 1/10/18 10:40 AM

figure 2.1 Three levels of knowing who you are as an organization

What do you do?(What good or service do you

provide to customers?)

What do you really do?(What problem does your

good or service solve?)

Why do you do it?(What is your purpose?)

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 36 1/10/18 10:40 AM

MAYBE NOW

NOT YETNEVER

figure 3.1 Dispositioning the “Maybe” category of existing “special efforts”

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 82 1/10/18 10:40 AM

figure 3.2 Level of effort grid for “Now” priorities

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

1

1

1 1

1

1 11

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1

1 1

1 1

1

1

3

3

3 33 33

3

3

3

3

3

3

33

3

3

3

3 3

3

3

3

3

3

2

2

2 2

2

Level of E�ort Grid

Heavy - more than 240 hours total work e�ort

Priority

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

1

IT Mktg HR CEO QC COMOps Fin

3Medium - 16 - 240 hours total work e�ort2Light - 16 hours or less total work e�ort1

AM PD JD

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 83 1/10/18 10:40 AM

EXECUTIVE TEAM

YEAR

1

YEAR

2

YEAR

3

SENIORMANAGEMENT

MIDDLEMANAGEMENT

FRONT LINES

figure 3.3 The catchball process for achieving understanding and building consensus

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 85 1/10/18 10:40 AM

Client

Finalizecontract

Sales Executive

PT = 120 mins.LT = 2 days%C&A = 50%

1

2.0 hrs.2.0 days

0.1 hrs.3.0 days

0.5 hrs.5.0 days

0.2 hrs.2.0 days

2.0 hrs.10.0 days

8.0 hrs.10.0 days

1.5 hrs.5.0 days

0.2 hrs.2.0 days

Hold intro call with

client

ccount AManager

PT = 15 mins.LT = 2 days%C&A = 90%

4

Hold kicko�

meeting

AccountManager

PT = 1.5 hrs.LT = 1 weeks%C&A = 75%

7

Hold hando� meeting

SE, AM, & BA

PT = 30 mins.LT = 1 weeks%C&A = 75%

3

Sendtest files

Client

PT = 2 hrs.LT = 2 weeks%C&A = 75%

5

SQL Developer

DPT

Format test files

Business Analyst

PT = 8 hrs.LT = 2 weeks%C&A = 70%

6

Assign AM & BA

Area Director

PT = 5 mins.LT = 1 days%C&A = 99%

2

Salesforce

Process payment

Finance

PT = 5 mins.LT = 3 days%C&A = 70%

2A

Enroll client in

EDI interface

EDI Specialist

PT = 15 mins.LT = 2 days%C&A = 80%

8

figure 4.1 Current state value stream map or new customer implementation

4.0 hrs.10.0 days

10.0 hrs.10.0 days

8.0 hrs.10.0 days

0.5 hrs.3.0 days

0.0 hrs.10.0 days Lead Time (LT) = 82.0 days

Process Time (PT) = 37.1 hrs.Activity Ratio = 5.7%Rolled %C&A = 4.1%

PRM

Write code

ScrumTeam

PT = 10 hrs.LT = 2 weeks%C&A = 80%

10

Push into production

Operations

PT = 30 mins.LT = 3 days%C&A = 99%

12

Begin submitting financials

Client

PT = 1 mins.LT = 2 weeks%C&A = 90%

13

Send more test

files

Client

PT = 4 hrs.LT = 2 weeks%C&A = 90%

9

Set up application (technical)

Business Analyst

PT = 30 mins.LT = 3 days%C&A = 50%

9A

Set up application

(user)

Account Manager

PT = 1 hrs.LT = 1 weeks%C&A = 90%

10A

Test & debug

code

A & LeadB D elopev er

PT = 8 hrs.LT = 2 weeks%C&A = 85%

11

PB4

figure 4.2 Performing CT scans: value stream and process- level views

VALUESTREAMLEVEL

PROCESSLEVEL

Order CT Scan

Referring MD Patient

Visit MD re:symptoms

Front office staff

Greet patient;Enter time in

IT system

Imaging tech

Review order;Clean & set up

scanner

Imaging tech

Greet patient;Escort to scanning

room

Imaging tech

Conduct scan

Imaging tech

Escort patient to front office

Imaging tech

Complete study in EMR; Enter charge

Patient

Disrobe & put gown down

Imaging tech

Explain process;

Inject contrast

Registrationdept

Registerpatient

Front officestaff

Greet &prep patient

Imaging tech

Conductexam

Radiologist

Dictate report

Transcriptionist

Edit report

Radiologist

Approvereport

Back office staff

Send report to referring

MD

Referring MD

Diagnose; Create

treatmentplan

Schedulingdept

Verify insurance; Schedulepatient

Imaging tech

Push study (in PACS) to Radiologist

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 110

1/10/18 10:40 AM

figure 4.3 Skills matrix

SKILLSMATRIX

Training required

Performs task w/ assistance

Certified but unqualified to train

Certified and qualified to train

Performs task w/o assistance

Skill 1

Skill 2

Skill 3

Skill 4

Skill 5

Skill 6

Skill 7

Skill 8

Skill 9

Skill 1 0

Person 1

Person 2

Person 3

Person 4

Person 5

Person 6

Person 7

Person 8

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 119 1/10/18 10:40 AM

figure 5.1 Monthly volume of customer requests from all sources

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr MayJun Jul

Phone Email User input Staff input

Num

ber

of

tick

ets

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 133 1/10/18 10:40 AM

figure 5.2 Contract amendment turnaround times: table

10

12 16 13 20 17 17 17 14 18 1916 16

5

10

9 10 9 9 8 8 7 7 7 66

January

Requestto draftDraft to execution

Target(days) WK1 WK2 WK3 WK4 WK5 WK6 WK7 WK8 WK9 WK10 WK11 WK12

February MarchContract Amendment Turnaround Time

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 138 1/10/18 10:40 AM

figure 5.3 Contract amendment turnaround time: stacked bar chart

0

5

10

15

20

25

30Tu

rnar

oun

d T

ime

(Day

s)

WK1 WK2 WK3 WK4 WK5 WK6 WK7 WK8 WK9 WK10 WK11 WK12

Target requestto draft

Target draftto execution

Request to draft Draft to execution

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 139 1/10/18 10:40 AM

figure 5.4 Sample level 3 scorecard

180

190

200

210

220

230

240

250

1.5

1.7

1.9

2.1

2.3

2.5

2.7

2.9

3.1

600

1100

1600

2100

2600

3100

3600Safety (OSHA Injury Rate)

Aug-14Nov-

14

Feb-15

May

-15

Aug-15

Nov-15

Feb-16

May

-16

Aug-16

Aug-14

Nov-14

Feb-15

May

-15

Aug-15

Nov-15

Feb-16

May

-16

Aug-16

Sept-1

4Nov-

14Ja

n-15M

ar-15

May

-15Ju

ly-15

Sept-1

6Nov-

16Ja

n-16M

ar-16

May

-16Ju

ly-16

Sept-1

6

Aug-14

Nov-14

Feb-15

May

-15

Aug-15

Nov-15

Feb-16

May

-16

Aug-16

Aug-14

Nov-14

Feb-15

May

-15

Aug-15

Nov-15

Feb-16

May

-16

Aug-16

Aug-14Nov-

14

Feb-15

May

-15

Aug-15

Nov-15

Feb-16

May

-16

Aug-16

Aug-14

Nov-14

Feb-15

May

-15

Aug-15

Nov-15

Feb-16

May

-16

Aug-16

Aug-14

Nov-14

Feb-15

May

-15

Aug-15

Nov-15

Feb-16

May

-16

Aug-16

Quality (Complaints per Million Units Sold) Service (Fill Rate %)

Revenue/Week ($MM) EBITDA/Week ($MM)

Inventory Turns Days Sales Outstanding (DSO) Sales per Employee per Year (Thousands)

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

$15

$17

$19

$21

$1

$2

$3

$4

$5

$6

$7

3.0

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

3.5

3.6

3.7

3.8

3.9

50

52

54

56

58

60

62

64

66

68

24 HR 72 HR

Target

TrendO� target

On target

LEVEL 3 SCORECARD

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 149

1/10/18 10:40 AM

5 Tracey Richardson and Ernie Richardson, The Toyota Engagement Equation: How to Understand and Implement Continuous Improvement (McGraw- Hill Education, 2017), pp. 190–192.

figure 6.1 Caused and created gaps

Defined standard

New standard

Current state

CAUSED GAP

CREATED GAP

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 166 1/10/18 10:40 AM

9 The questions in this model are best suited for solving problems with existing products, processes, environments, and so on (i.e., going from something to something else). Different questions may be needed when creating new products or processes, entering new markets, and so on (i.e., going from nothing to something).

Big vague problemAmbiguity

Specific problem

Problem breakdown

Area of focus

Current state

Rootcauses

Countermeasures forexperimentationClarity

What?

Why?

How?

figure 6.2 Using CLEAR problem solving to move from ambiguity to clarity

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 171 1/10/18 10:40 AM

figure 6.3 CLEAR problem solving phases and questions

CClarify

LLearn

EExperiment

AAssess

CLEAR PROBLEM SOLVING

RRoll out

What’s the problem?

How do you know?

For whom is it a problem?

How significant is it?

What are the problem components?

Which part(s) will you focus on?

What’s the reality of the situation?

What is/are the most significant root cause(s)?

What happened?

Will you adopt, adapt, or abandon the countermeasure?

What’s the best way for rolling out the new way of operating?

Who will monitor performance?

Has the new way resolved the problem?

What did you learn?

Which countermeasures might eliminate the root cause(s)?

Which will you try first? Why?

How will you run the experiment?

What do you think will happen?

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 172

1/10/18 10:40 AM

figure 6.4 Sample problem breakdown tree

Grow overallmarket share

from15% to 22%

Hardware15% revenue

8% profit

> $500,00012% sales

Domestic80% sales

International20% sales

< $500,00088% sales

Domestic50% sales

International50% sales

Software35% revenue

40% profit

Fee-for-service25% sales

Domestic45%

International55%

Subscription75% sales

Domestic62%

International38%

Hardware + Software 50% revenue

25% profit

Customerindustry A30% sales

Domestic100%

Customerindustry B70% sales

Domestic73%

International27%

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 180 1/10/18 10:40 AM

figure 6.5 Information flow and handoffs in an approval process

CURRENT STATEDIR2

MGR2

MGR1

DIR1

COO

DIR4

VP2VP1

DIR3

SUP3

SUP2

SUP1

MGR4

MGR3

DIR2

DIR1

DIR4SUP3

SUP2

SUP1

MGR4

MGR3

FUTURE STATE

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 184 1/10/18 10:40 AM

13 Load leveling is a Lean management technique that’s used to reduce or eliminate uneven-ness (mura) resulting in smoother flow throughout a work system. In manufacturing, it’s also referred to as production smoothing. Leveling incoming demand is a critical improvement for achieving flow, and the problem is often ignored because teams believe they can’t influ-ence customer behavior. That may be true in the case of seasonal goods and services, but organizations can often influence customer behavior in other circumstances.

figure 6.6 Patient arrivals versus physician staffing

0

5

10

15

20

25

05

:00

06

:00

06

:30

07:0

0

08

:00

09

:00

10:0

0

11:0

0

07:3

0

08

:30

09

:30

10:3

0

11:3

0

12:0

0

12:3

0

14:0

0

14:3

0

16:0

0

16:3

0

15:0

0

15:3

0

13:0

0

13:3

0

05

:30

Patients arriving

Patients seen by physician

Physicians scheduled

# p

ati

ents

or

physi

cia

ns

Time of day

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 185 1/10/18 10:40 AM

figure 6.7 How rebate programs affect customer ordering patterns

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecJan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Cas

es o

rder

ed p

er m

onth

RE

BA

TES

RE

BA

TES

RE

BA

TES

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 186 1/10/18 10:40 AM

figure 6.8 Product movement map

1,572K

74K

306K

514K

866K

661K

607K

662K

121K

676K

63K

29K

83K

24K

32K

13K

3K

11K

28K

47K

42K

43K

258K

336K

635K

110K

Warehouse1

Warehouse2

Warehouse3

Marketsegment

5

Marketsegment

4

Marketsegment

3

Marketsegment

2

Marketsegment

1

ProductionLine1-3

ProductionLine4, 9

ProductionLine5-7

ProductionLine

8

Distributioncenter

1

Distributioncenter

2

Distributioncenter

3

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 187

1/10/18 10:40 AM

figure 6.9 Analysis tree for river pollution

River waterquality is

deteriorating

Catch and income of fishing families

in decline

High levels ofsolid waste

dumped in river

Pollutersare not

controlled

No publiceducationprograms

Public unaware ofthe dangers of

dumping

Pollution is a low political

priority

Households andfactories discharge

wastewater into river

EPA ine�ectiveand aligned withindustry interests

40% of households and20% of businesses notconnected to sewer

High incidence of waterborne disease, especially among the

poor and children under 5

River ecosystem underserious threat, including

declining fish stocks

Inadequate capital investmentand poor business planning

in local government

Legal regulationsdo not prevent

wastewater discharge

Wastewater treatedin plants does notmeet regulations

PROBLEM

EFFECTS

CAUSES

© 1995–2016, European Union. Reprinted with permission. European Commission, EuropeAid Cooperation Office, Aid Delivery Methods, Volume 1: Project Cycle Management Guidelines, March 2004, 68, Figure 21, https://ec .europa

.eu /europeaid /sites /devco /files /methodology -aid -delivery -methods -project -cycle -management -200403_en_2 .pdf.

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 194

1/10/18 10:40 AM

figure 6.10 Fishbone diagram for excessive customer call backs at a repair company

CALL BACKS

Wrong tech sent

No criteria forcalling for help

Rushing

Bad part Low tech ambition

Not reachingout for help

Inherent problemin case

Repeat failure

Faulty gauges

Poor data Unplanned conditions

Equipment variationNo definedservice metrics

No help available

Wrong part

Missing part

MATERIAL PEOPLE

MACHINE MEASUREMENT ENVIRONMENT

METHOD

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 196

1/10/18 10:40 AM

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Num

ber

of

inst

ance

s

22%

37%

44%

51%

58%

64%69%

74%79%

84%89%

92%95%

97% 99%

Missed

Infiltr

atio

n

Order

s not f

ollowed

Wro

ng d

osage

Wro

ng m

ed/s

olutio

n

Wro

ng p

atien

t

Not sta

rted

Extra

dose

Delaye

d

Not ord

ered

Other

issu

e

Wro

ng ra

te o

f flow

Wro

ng ro

ute

Wro

ng ti

me

Allerg

y to m

ed0

40%

30%

10%

20%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

figure 6.11 Pareto chart that ranks problem factors

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 198 1/10/18 10:40 AM

figure 6.12 Prioritizing countermeasures based on ease and benefit

Benefit

Eas

e o

f Im

ple

men

tati

on

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

Develop lineal foot pricing model

Eliminate OI process

Create quote repository

Create pricing output

Reinstate drawing standards

Create drawings repository

Outsource drafting

Improve change process

Standardize master book

Hold new business kick-off in OTC

Develop pricing reconciliation process

12 Add option codes to pricing

1

4389 10

57

2 611

12

0 10

010

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 200 1/10/18 10:40 AM

figure 7.1 Your role in the organization

YOURORGANIZATION

PROFESSIONALYOU

PERSONALYOU

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 221 1/10/18 10:40 AM

figure 7.2 The blind men and the elephant

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 224 1/10/18 10:40 AM

Clarity blind

Clarity blind

Claritypursuer

Claritypursuer

Clarityavoider

Clarityavoider

CURRENT STATE FUTURE STATE

figure 7.3 Current and suggested future state proportions of clarity- related behaviors

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 226 1/10/18 10:40 AM

figure 7.4 Seven possible communication pathways

Not tryingeither way

Trying tobe clear

Clear

Unclear

Success

Failure

Trying tobe unclear

INFORMATIONDELIVERY

INTENT MESSAGE OUTCOME

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 239 1/10/18 10:40 AM

figure 7.5 Ideal communication pathway

INFORMATIONDELIVERY

Clear

Unclear

Success

Failure

Not tryingeither way

Trying tobe clear

Trying tobe unclear

INTENT MESSAGE OUTCOME

9781259837357_Martin_P4.indd 240 1/10/18 10:40 AM