kaizen event case study

To read this content please select one of the options below:

Please note you do not have access to teaching notes, kaizen event approach: a case study in the packaging industry.

International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management

ISSN : 1741-0401

Article publication date: 10 June 2019

The purpose of this paper is twofold: first, a case study on the application of lean production principles in a manufacturing facility is presented to demonstrate the impact of frequent and systematic use of a Kaizen event on quality and delivery performance. Second, the detailed description and analysis of the Kaizen event and its impact are provided, including a comprehensive analysis of the role of Kaizen events on employee participation and motivation.

Design/methodology/approach

The study utilizes a Kaizen event’s case study data with the help of various waste detection and elimination tools and techniques. Changes in overall productivity along with potential long-term improvements in the delivery process are also analyzed and documented.

Pre- and post-quality measures are provided to demonstrate the results of the event on the production quality and on the performance of the overall manufacturing processes. Qualitative findings regarding performance measurements and the impact on the employees are reported.

Research limitations/implications

The Kaizen team applied analytical techniques to one manufacturing site in North America of a company that has a manufacturing presence in 20 different countries.

Originality/value

Kaizen studies involving packaging operations are quite limited. This study fills this gap by detailing the Kaizen event implementation in a packaging delivery and dispensing systems manufacturer for the cosmetic industry. The implementation of this Kaizen event is detailed along with the data and techniques utilized for process improvement. The study also reports findings regarding the impact of the Kaizen event on employee participation.

• Lean production
• Consumer-packaging industry

Vo, B. , Kongar, E. and Suárez Barraza, M.F. (2019), "Kaizen event approach: a case study in the packaging industry", International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management , Vol. 68 No. 7, pp. 1343-1372. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-07-2018-0282

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2019, Emerald Publishing Limited

Related articles

We’re listening — tell us what you think, something didn’t work….

Report bugs here

All feedback is valuable

Please share your general feedback

Join us on our journey

Platform update page.

Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

Questions & More Information

Answers to the most commonly asked questions here

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Int J Environ Res Public Health

An Enhanced Kaizen Event in a Sterile Processing Department of a Rural Hospital: A Case Study

Valentina nino.

1 Mechanical & Industrial Engineering Department, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59717, USA; moc.liamg@allavoel

David Claudio

Leonardo valladares, sean harris.

2 Jake Jabs College of Business & Entrepreneurship, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59717, USA; [email protected]

Operating Rooms (ORs) generate the largest revenues and losses in a hospital. Without the prompt supply of sterile surgical trays from the Sterile Processing Department (SPD), the OR would not be able to perform surgeries to its busy schedule. Nevertheless, little emphasis has been brought in the medical literature to research on surgical instrument processing in the medical literature. The present study was done applies an Enhanced Kaizen Event (EKE) in the SPD of a rural hospital to identify sources of waste and minimize non-value-added steps in the SPD processes. The EKE consisted of three successive Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycles, which focused on improvements at the departmental level first, then at an area level, and finally at the station level. The EKE yielded an improved streamlined workflow and a new design for the SPD layout, one of its areas, and a workstation. This paper aims at building a methodology, including identified steps. Results exhibited a 35% reduction in travel distance by the staff, eliminating non-value-added processes, reducing errors in the sterilization process, and eliminating cross-contamination for sterilized materials.

1. Introduction

In 2016, the United States of America (US) spent almost twice as much as other high-income countries on medical care, but utilization rates were similar to other countries [ 1 ]. The increase in US healthcare costs has promoted the pursuit of reducing waste in hospitals [ 2 , 3 ]. Taiichi Ohno created the Lean way of thinking about production and identified seven types of waste: inventory (stock on hand), waiting (time on hand), defects, overproduction, motion, transportation, and over-processing [ 4 , 5 , 6 ].

Lean thinking (LT) has provided good results in manufacturing industries for many decades and has been adopted in healthcare to reduce cost and waste while increasing quality and safety [ 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 ]. Some researchers argue that LT in healthcare has not proven to be as effective as expected [ 16 ]. In fact, Suárez-Barraza and Miguel-Dávila [ 17 ] recognized that there might be opportunities for improvement in the implementation and sustainability of the continuous improvement philosophy in healthcare. Researchers have studied the reasons behind this and concluded that many of the factors are centered around resistance to change due to lack of employee training and participation, lack of management involvement, lack of incentives, and lack of experience [ 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 ]. Nevertheless, some researchers argue that LT is well on its way to being validated in healthcare [ 20 ] and others have reported the benefits of implementing LT in healthcare [ 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 ].

Akmal et al. [ 24 ] stated the importance not just of implementing LT in healthcare, but of closing the gap between LT and Healthcare Supply Chain Management (HSCM). One example of a supply chain within a hospital is the Operating Room (OR) and all its upstream and downstream departments. ORs generate the largest revenue and losses in a hospital [ 2 , 7 ]. The Sterile Processing Department (SPD) is an important piece in the Operating Room Supply Chain. Without the prompt supply of sterile surgical trays from the SPD, the OR would not be able to start surgeries on-time or conduct as many surgeries in its busy schedule. Thus, it is of great importance that the SPD provides efficient and reliable instrument processing.

Since there is great pressure to reduce waste and cost in healthcare [ 24 ], the reprocessing of reusable instruments has grown, resulting in increased workload at the SPDs [ 2 ]. Some researchers have focused on surgical tray optimization by reducing the instruments present on surgical trays or by creating trays for specific procedures [ 2 , 3 , 7 , 23 , 25 , 26 ]. Nevertheless, little emphasis has been brought to surgical instrument processing research in the medical literature [ 27 ]. In addition, little work has been done on implementing LT in an SPD [ 24 , 28 ].

The main idea behind LT is to identify value in any process and eliminate waste [ 6 ]. Approximately 40% of the total healthcare cost is attributed to waste [ 25 ]. Additionally, LT helps to overcome barriers between departments, encouraging them to work together, which results in better service for patients [ 29 ]. The LT tools that are most used in healthcare are 5S, Kaizen—Continuous Improvement, Value-Stream Mapping (VSM), and Visual Management [ 30 ].

One critical tool for rapid improvement is the Rapid Improvement Event (RIE) or Kaizen Event (KE) [ 5 ]. According to Imai [ 31 ], Kaizen, which means “continuous improvement” (CI), also refers to trying or experimenting with new ways of doing things through the Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle. It is a focused and structured improvement project, using a dedicated cross-functional team to improve a targeted work area, with specific goals, in an accelerated timeframe [ 32 ]. The main goal is to identify and quickly remove waste [ 30 ]. Glover et al. [ 22 ] argue that the purpose of KE is two-fold. The first purpose is to address opportunities for improvement in the process (a.k.a. the technical system). The second purpose is to address the social system by developing human resources for long-term continuous improvement.

This article presents a case study in which a series of sequential improvement cycles within one KE was designed so that employees could learn through practice [ 18 ]. We called it an Enhanced Kaizen Event (EKE) as each improvement built upon the previous one through a series of PDCA cycles, and the cycles went from a macro-level to a micro-level along the improvement ramp. Many researchers have reported using an improvement ramp to slowly make enhancements to a process in which each improvement cycle is done through a different KE [ 21 , 33 , 34 , 35 ]. In our case, we used a different approach in which one EKE was composed of several improvement cycles along an improvement ramp; going through the improvement ramp was our EKE. The first cycle consisted of improvements at the departmental level (macro-level). The second cycle focused on improvements in an area within the department (mid-level). Finally, the third cycle made improvements at the station level (micro-level). To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this approach has not been reported in the literature before.

The EKE was designed as a series of improvement cycles within one KE for two reasons: (1) to move several processes at (macro, mid, and micro-levels) to a more desirable and efficient state more quickly (technical system), and (2) to teach employees and hospital management about CI by example; the purpose was to create a culture of CI and reduce resistance to change (social system) [ 19 ]. Glover et al. [ 21 ] maintain that deploying KE systematically and more frequently provides conditions for success. For this reason, we decided to use the PDCA framework to add a systematic way of performing CI and conducted a series of PDCAs within one EKE to increase the frequency of improvement cycles and, therefore, increase the chances of success. The end goal was to train and empower employees so that LT and CI would be sustained after we were gone.

This article presents both the methodology and the findings of a case study in which we developed and implemented an EKE. One of this article’s contributions is at the level of detail in the description of the continuous improvement implementation process in a sector that has undergone little research in this regard. In fact, Akmal et al. [ 24 ] recently found, that while many researchers explain why they implemented LT, only 22% out of 299 articles mentioned “how”, which speaks of the necessity for more case studies in the literature like that presented here.

Akmal et al. [ 24 ] also found that only two articles had reported on KEs in the SPD, and only one study mentioned the seven sources of waste. This article adds to the body of knowledge by describing a success story of implementing EKE in the SPD and sharing our findings regarding the seven waste sources in our setting. It should be noted that the objective of this work, focusing on a single case, is not to generalize the conclusions but to open avenues of investigation through the conclusions that can be drawn.

2. Enhanced Kaizen Event Framework

The EKE framework comes from prior work in organizational problem-solving, which is grounded in the PDCA (or Deming) cycle and the improvement ramp [ 33 , 34 , 36 ]. PDCA is one of the core elements behind the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) Quality Improvement approach (IHI-QI) [ 20 ]. It is also a core component behind the A3 problem-solving technique [ 20 , 33 , 34 ] and was designated as a Kaizen Management Philosophy Technique by Suarez-Barraza et al. [ 9 ].

The combination of successive PDCA cycles and an improvement ramp along a single KE was selected as it presents a structured way for people who have never undergone process improvement projects before. It addresses the statement of Glover et al. [ 21 ] that deploying KE in a systematic and more frequent manner provides conditions for success. It consists of a series of sequential improvement cycles within a single KE ( Figure 1 ). Each improvement builds upon the previous one through a series of PDCA cycles along an improvement ramp. The first cycle consists of improvements at the departmental level (macro-level). The second cycle focuses on improvements in an area within the department (mid-level), whereas the third cycle focuses on the station level (micro-level).

Enhanced Kaizen Event: a single KE with sequential PDCA Cycles within the KE.

The PDCA cycle, presented in Figure 2 , starts with grasping the current situation, which includes understanding the current process in detail, defining objectives, identifying all stakeholders, and creating a Kaizen Team (KT) composed of representatives from each stakeholder group.

The PDCA Processes (extracted from Sobek and Smalley [ 34 ], page 20).

The Planning stage for cycle #1 typically takes the longest time during the entire improvement ramp. A team of observers, preferably from outside of the department or the organization, needs to interview personnel, understand the current state of the system, map the flow of people, material, and information, and develop visual tools to convey the findings to the KT. The next step is to conduct root cause analysis, followed by generating ideas that address the root cause(s), in order to achieve the desired objective. Implementation and follow-up plans are then created to realize the proposed changes and validate the improvement. Throughout these steps, discussions within the KT and stakeholders occur to solicit input and agreement on the nature of the problem and root cause(s). Stakeholders’ opinions and ideas are taken into consideration to verify if the proposed course of action is the best one for the organization. These discussions may return to an earlier step to gather more data or otherwise modify the proposed plan [ 33 ].

Once an agreement has been achieved throughout the entire Planning stage of the first cycle, the “Do-Check-Act” and subsequent PDCA cycles along the improvement ramp typically occur to a short, fast-paced time-scale (the EKE). It is important to note that stakeholders’ involvement within each cycle throughout the improvement ramp is crucial to the sustainability of the new standard. In the proposed EKE, the first PDCA cycle occurs at the departmental level (macro-level), the second cycle occurs at an area within the department (mid-level), and the third cycle corresponds to the station level (micro-level).

3. Materials and Methods

This case study was performed at the SPD of a medium-size local hospital. The hospital is an Acute Care facility, a medium volume, 86 bed facility, with over 2000 employees of which 200 are physicians. The health professionals cover over 35 specialties and compose more than 20 clinics. SPD supports seven existing surgical suites (six surgery and one procedure room), Labor and Delivery, Emergency Department, Diagnostic & Treatment areas, patient beds, and associated on-site clinical programs. It also provides processing for the regional veterinary clinics.

SPD stakeholders in the partner hospital recognized that the department had some opportunities for improvement; SPD running behind schedule, OR delays due to late instruments, and un-sterilized trays sent to the ORs were identified as the primary concerns (problem definition). Un-sterilized trays represent a safety hazard that could cause infections or death. It has been reported that 50,000 to 100,000 lives are lost each year due to medical errors in the US alone [ 5 ]. The proposed EKE was conducted to identify sources of waste, their root causes, and countermeasures to eliminate or reduce them at the departmental level, area level, and workstation level.

KEs are generally performed in a period of three to five days and use low-cost problem-solving tools to propose and implement improvements [ 37 ]. Since healthcare delivery systems present different challenges than the manufacturing industry, Culcuoglu et al. [ 37 ] developed a novel approach to apply KEs in healthcare. They proposed two to four-hour sessions to overcome managerial problems and estimated that 8 to 16 sessions would be needed to fully execute Kaizen activities. Considering this approach and trying to avoid managerial problems, we proposed a modified Kaizen alternative that fitted better. It was decided to divide the EKE into thirty sessions of one hour to minimize interference with normal operations and reduce scheduling conflicts among the team members. We then had one session of six hours to simulate and implement the proposed solutions.

The Kaizen Team (KT) consisted of six SPD staff members (out of 12), the SPD supervisor, the OR nurse manager, one quality improvement manager from the hospital’s Quality Department, and an engineering team consisting of two industrial and management systems engineering (IMSE) graduate students, and an IMSE professor.

During the “grasping the current situation” session for the first cycle (macro-level), information regarding the current state of the process was gathered by naturalistic observations [ 38 ] and interviews [ 39 ] with the KT members and the SPD staff. With the information gathered, flow charts, a Current State Value Stream Map (VSM), and spaghetti diagrams were created to summarize and visualize the current process [ 40 ] and help identify sources of waste. Spaghetti diagrams uncover inefficient layouts and discover large distances traveled between key steps [ 41 ]. These tools allowed the KT to visualize the operation flow in the current layout.

The KT, supported by the engineering team, identified the seven types of waste in the process. The engineering team also trained the KT on how sources of waste insert variability in a process and, therefore, irregularities, unpredictability, and inefficiencies. Brainstorming [ 42 ] was used to evaluate the current state and generate new alternatives. The brainstorming sections occurred first within the engineering team and then within the KT. After these sessions, a new layout that grouped processes by areas was proposed.

The new layout was implemented (Do-Check-Act stages of cycle#1) during a six-hour EKE session on a Saturday as there were no surgeries planned on that weekend. The entire KT participated in the EKE. Metrics such as movement, number of steps, and number of times dirty and clean instruments path crossed each other were collected to assess the proposed layout. The KT then went through a second improvement cycle during the six-hour EKE. The team proposed improvements at a specific area (Prep and Pack) as part of the PDCA cycle #2. The SPD staff performed their activities for about 30 min to get a sense of the improved Prep and Pack area layout. Further changes were proposed at the workstation level during the simulation (PDCA cycle #3) and the SPD staff performed their activities once more for about 30 min to get a sense of the final tweaks. Consent was achieved, and the new layouts and workstation designs were adopted as the new standard.

4.1. Grasping the Current Situation

After observing the process and interviewing the SPD staff, a clear picture of the SPD operation was obtained. The ORs are located a floor above the SPD. When a surgery is completed, OR nurses take all the trash, equipment, and instruments to a centralized location, which houses a “dirty elevator.” OR nurses place all the material in this elevator and send it downstairs to the SPD. The SPD process consists of three phases: Decontamination, Prep and Pack, and Sterile Processing.

During the Decontamination phase, non-disposable equipment, instruments and supplies from the ORs are received after each surgery via the dirty elevator. The SPD staff classifies the incoming material; they remove instruments from the trays and place any trash in a wheeled container. Trays are placed in a special cart designed to go inside a cart washing machine. The cleaning process is done in two stages. First, the staff manually removes any organic material. Then, the instruments are machine washed. The washing machine uses detergent products and steam to decontaminate the instruments. Although the instruments are exposed to several cycles designed to sterilize them, they are not presumed to be sterile because of the high microbial contamination present before the washing. Once the washing machine completes its cycles, the instruments are removed and set on a specific area to dry [ 43 ].

The Prep and Pack phase is the process of organizing the instruments according to recipe cards. Each recipe card has detailed instructions on how a tray should be assembled. It has a complete list of all the instruments that are included in each tray. The SPD staff assembles a tray according to an Earliest Due Date policy. They then walk to the area where the instruments are cooling and select the instruments. Each SPD technician has a workstation to perform the assembly process. Once a tray is assembled, it needs to be packaged in a way that will maintain its sterile condition until use. The materials used for the packaging must allow the sterilant to process the instruments during the sterilization process and protect the tray from contamination before it is used [ 43 ].

Once a tray is packed, the SPD technician takes it to the Sterile Processing machine. The SPD at this hospital has two steam sterilizers and three low-temperature hydrogen peroxide sterilizers. The steam sterilizers run more than 90% of the workload, and the low-temperature sterilizers are used to process small trays. The trays are collected on a special cart that goes into the steam sterilizer. This cart is set in front of the machine until it is full. The sterilization process is based on pressured steam. The steam must penetrate every fiber and get in contact with any surface. Direct saturated steam is the basis of this process [ 43 ]. After the sterilization process finishes, the cart is removed from the machine and set aside to cool down. The trays are then sent up to the OR to be stored until the next surgery via a “clean elevator.” Figure 3 depicts the flowchart of the SPD process described above.

Sterile Processing Department (SPD) process flow chart.

After the team had studied the current process, it was decided to study the movement of information, materials, and people in the department to identify sources of waste. A current state value stream map (VSM) was developed to understand the SPD process’s flow of materials and information. Figure 4 presents the current state VSM. The VSM revealed that there was a lot of stagnation occurring between processes. Besides, there were a few workarounds at some operations. There was also a preemptive priority process that occurred every time the OR signaled that they needed some tools immediately.

Current State Value-Stream Mapping (VSM) of the SPD.

The team had an opportunity to observe a work-around procedure that the SPD staff followed every time they felt the instruments needed by an OR would not be ready on time. In these situations, they placed one tray on the steam sterilizer and ran the sterilization cycle with just that one tray instead of waiting for the rack to fill up and run the cycle. Figure 5 shows the difference between a full cart versus a cart with one tray going into the steam sterilizer. This procedure was the biggest source of waste that magnified the delay issue at the SPD and one of the main reasons that they were usually behind schedule.

Carts going into the steam sterilizer: ( a ) Cart with one tray, ( b ) Cart at full capacity.

A spaghetti diagram of the current state was also traced. Using this tool, we were able to appreciate the location of the equipment, workstations, storage areas, and how materials and people flowed through the SPD. This tool also allowed us to generate and evaluate new plant layouts with the KT to streamline the process flow. Figure 6 shows the original SPD layout, whereas Figure 7 presents people and material flow through the area.

Current State SPD plant layout.

Spaghetti diagram of the current state.

From the spaghetti diagram, it was observed that the movement around the layout was erratic and messy. The staff needed to walk long distances between their workstations and the instrumentation that needed to be packed into sets.

We also observed cross-traffic between storage areas for instrumentation waiting to be sterilized, dirty trays, and instrumentation already sterilized. Part of this crossing between dirty and clean instruments can be observed in Figure 8 . It was also evident that there was an overloaded area in front of both steam sterilizers that limited staff movement, reduced the use of the small steam sterilizer, and nullified the use of a computer located in that area. There were two computers at the SPD area used to check the OR surgery schedule and decide which trays needed to be assembled. Limiting the computers to just one increased the distance that some of the staff traveled and created a wait line when more than one SPD technician needed to check the OR instrument requirements.

Dirty and clean materials placed in the same area.

It was also possible to identify that the Decontamination area had an issue related to lack of space due to the presence of big trash containers ( Figure 9 : yellow containers). Besides, it was observed that the handling of trash coming from the ORs overflowed in the area at different points in time during the day. Handling the trash at the Decontamination area caused an increase in the number of steps of the process and inefficient movement of people and materials, as seen in the yellow area in Figure 7 (Decontamination area).

Handling of trash in the Decontamination area: ( a ) trash containers reducing workspace, ( b ) accumulation of trash.

One SPD technician mentioned that working in this area felt like solving a puzzle; one piece needed to be moved to create space to move the next one. Technicians needed to move the trash containers several times to be able to receive and process dirty carts and instruments.

Regarding the Prep and Pack process, we noticed that there were two different settings for workstations. The workstation type 1 (WST1) provided an ergonomic configuration with a chair and several bins placed close to the employee to facilitate the tasks. Workstation type 2 (WST2) was simply a clean table with no chair or racks on it. Each staff member decided where they wanted to work and performed all their activities related to assembly and package in the selected area.

Through the issues exposed during the observation of the current process, the KT decided to identify specific examples of the seven types of waste in the SPD process. The most important were:

• Inventory: express sterilizing equipment acquired to solve some of the SPD problems, increasing the number of available sterilizers, some of them being underused. Also, there were trays ready to go to the OR waiting on the SPD because no one was aware of them.
• Waiting: surgeries that were delayed because one or more trays were not available. Trays ready to be sterilized waiting, because the steam sterilizer was busy; this issue was magnified when the steam sterilizer was used to process only one tray. Trash waiting at the decontaminated area to be picked up and SPD technicians waiting for computer availability.
• Motion/movement: movement of trash containers in and out of the area. Movement between workstations and other areas to pick up instruments. Reaching for tools or instruments that were far out of reach of the worker. Movement to the only accessible computer.
• Transportation/transfer: long distances traveled by instruments or trays throughout the process. The need to process trays outside the decontaminated area due to lack of space. Unsterilized trays sent to the OR, ignoring the fact that unsterilized instruments cannot be taken to the OR.
• Rework/defects: trays returned to the SPD because they had been mistakenly brought to the OR without being sterilized. Trays that were rushed to the OR and skipped inspection and were later returned because they did not have all the required instruments.
• Over-processing: trays that were sterilized more than once due to disorganization and confusion on the carts in front of the steam sterilizer; an SPD staff would place a cart that had finished the cycle in front of the steam sterilizer to cool down, another technician, not aware of this, placed trays that were not sterilized and re-introduced the cart to the sterilization process again.
• Overproduction: the team did not identify any waste of this type; the process regularly runs behind schedule. SPD staff follow a list of OR needs to work on trays needed with priority.
• Waste of people’s potential (8th source of waste): before the EKE, SPD staff had never been consulted concerning the design of the workstations or the SPD layout.

4.2. Enhanced Kaizen Event: Going through the Process Improvement Ramp in one Kaizen Event

Given the analysis of the current state, the spaghetti diagram, and the identification of types of waste, the team did a root cause analysis using the “Five Whys” technique [ 34 ]. Five Whys is a practice of asking five times why a problem or type of waste exists with the goal of getting to the root cause of a problem. While using this technique in most of the issues and types of waste identified in the current state, it was revealed that there were major flaws in the SPD layout; the KT decided to focus on improving the SPD layout for the first PDCA cycle (macro-level).

Focusing on the layout allowed the KT to generate and evaluate alternatives that could streamline the process flow to eliminate the cross-traffic between dirty, clean, and sterilized material. The layout modification’s first objective was to separate the floorplan based on the three different processes and, therefore, on the cleanliness of the instruments: soiled instruments (Decontamination), clean instruments (Prep and Pack), and sterilized instruments (Sterile Processing). The goal was to meet the standards expected from the SPD process to ensure patient safety.

The reconfiguration of the layout aimed at reducing the types of waste identified by the team. Figure 10 exhibits the first proposed layout designed by the team. According to the first proposed layout, the low-temperature sterilizers were relocated to the Sterile Processing area. With this relocation, all the workstations were situated in the Prep and Pack area.

Separation of activities by phase on SPD. Proposed layout #1.

Another root cause the KT examined was the trash containers, which took up space and added unnecessary movement. Two KT members (the OR nurse manager and an engineering graduate student) studied the floor plans and the process that occurred at the OR prior to sending instruments and trash to the SPD through the dirty elevator. They discovered that there was no particular reason why trash needed to be sent to the SPD. It was just “the way it has always been done.” They then asked if the trash could be disposed of at the OR. The people in charge of collecting the trash were fascinated by this idea as it made sense and was preferred.

The KT members went to the centralized location where the dirty elevator is located and realized that there was more than enough space for the two large yellow containers. The OR nurse manager then changed the trash disposal policy; OR nurses were now responsible for disposing of their trash before sending the trays and instruments to the SPD. For the OR nurses, this policy change had no additional steps; before, they would place trash in the elevator, whereas now, they place it in the yellow containers.

With the trash from ORs no longer arriving at Decontamination, the processing of the trays was performed entirely at Decontamination. Due to this improvement and the movement of the workstations, space was cleared to create one area to store the trays going to the steam machine, and another area was defined to store the trays that are cooling down after the sterilization process (waiting to go to the OR). This layout improved the SPD process flow, reduced distance walked, separated instruments based on their status (eliminating the cross of dirty materials with clean and sterile materials), and improved the sterilization process (eliminated error and reduced waste).

With the help of all the KT members, equipment, racks, and workstations were moved to arrange the proposed layout during a six-hour EKE session on a Saturday. All of this was part of the first PDCA cycle in which changes were made at the macro-level by changing the entire SPD layout. Nevertheless, as with many changes, the first proposed layout ( Figure 10 ) still presented improvement opportunities.

The engineering team led a second PDCA cycle (cycle #2), where the team focused on the Prep and Pack area (mid-level changes). The KT developed a new alternative for the Prep and Pack area. Following the team’s remark that the assembly is better performed in the WST1 and the wrapping on the WST2, the new layout aimed to improve the Prep and Pack area by executing the assembly and the wrapping process in separated workstations. Figure 11 presents the second proposed layout.

Proposed layout #2.

The materials needed to wrap the trays were relocated next to the WST2. Six WST1 and two WST2 were incorporated in the new design, given that, on average, the cycle time of the first process was more than three times the cycle time of the second process. Each WST1 was designed to be used by one SPD technician, and all technicians would share WST2. Due to the difference in cycle times, the second process was not expected to become a bottleneck. There were two groups of 3 WST1 in this layout. Both were facing each other. Technicians moved on corridors between the walls and the workstations. The SPD staff performed their activities for about 30 min to get a sense of the improved layout.

After the SPD staff performed their activities to test the new Prep and Pack layout and the new workstation assignments, a third PDCA cycle took place to tweak and change the workstations (micro-level). They organized the bins and materials at the stations to allow for easier reach and access. They also decided to change the orientation of the workstations. Changes to the workstations resulted in more space in the corridor and improved communication between SPD technicians.

Other factors such as illumination, workstation design, and placement of the instruments to be assembled were addressed in cycle #3. The new configuration on the workstation improved working conditions while minimizing bending, twisting, and reaching. Figure 12 presents the third proposed layout. Figure 13 presents the new WST1 design and shows the space that has been cleared in front of the steam machines that used to be cluttered with carts related to the sterilization process.

Proposed layout #3.

After Kaizen Event (KE): ( a ) Workstation type 1, ( b ) Space in front of the steam machines.

After the simulations, the KT concluded that this final layout configuration (layout #3) was a significant improvement. It provided more space in the corridor to walk and allowed the SPD technicians to communicate more easily. Once consent was achieved, all the new changes were adopted as the new standard, and modifications made during the Saturday EKE were kept in order to resume normal operations on Monday. One week later, the engineering team came back to observe the process. A new spaghetti diagram was completed to show a better understanding of the new Figure 14 . presents the spaghetti diagram after the new layout was implemented. The new disposition reduced over 35% in walking distance (between workstations and equipment) and established a more streamlined workflow. Since the macro-level changes focused on designing the layout by separating the department into three major areas, cross-traffic between storage areas for dirty, clean, and sterile instrumentation was eliminated. This practice has been sustained due to the physical separation of the areas.

Spaghetti diagram after all the changes were implemented.

After the implementation of the changes, the decrease in variability was palpable. The SPD process delay decreased; rush was reduced, since processing only one tray at the steam sterilizer was no longer needed. The number of surgeries that started late due to trays not been ready was reduced by about 60%. This last improvement also helped reduce lateness in upcoming surgeries for the day.

The OR trash is not sent to the SPD anymore. Therefore, unnecessary processes have been eliminated (moving trash containers). Since this was a policy change, it has been sustained over time. The Decontamination process is faster and streamlined. Accumulation of trash at the Decontamination area increased the variability of the process during the day, given that there were less space and more trash to move every hour. Soiled trays processing used to be performed differently by different staff. One person used a cart to move trays out of the Decontamination area, and another person used to move trays one by one going in and out of the area several times.

The transfer of the trays outside Decontamination was eliminated. Since the Decontamination area now has more space, this change has also been sustained over time. This is due to the fact that the process was standardized, reducing variation; every tray follows the same process. As a consequence of the clearing of the area in front of the steam sterilizer, the second computer was available for use, reducing time waiting for an available computer and reducing variability in the process.

Given the new organization of the process, it is clear for the SPD staff which cart is being filled to go to the steam sterilizer and which cart has already finished the sterilization process. Visual management has been used to identify the status of the carts and sustain this practice. The process flow is steadier, trays that are not sterilized are not sent to the OR by mistake, and trays are not being sterilized twice. There is room for two carts in the storage area to go to the clean elevator (trays already sterilized). When a third cart arrives in this area, the first one has finished the cooling process, allowing a visual way of signaling when the trays need to go to OR (eliminating the waiting time for the finished product created by confusion about its status).

Many of the changes made during the EKE have been sustained over time as they were either physical changes (layout designed by area, designated areas for carts, designated storage) or policy changes (trash containers and trash disposal). As a summary of the Enhanced KE accomplishments, Figure 15 presents before and after layouts of the SPD. In a similar manner, Figure 16 present before and after spaghetti diagrams of the flow of people and material.

SPD layout: ( a ) Before the Enhanced KE, ( b ) After the Enhanced KE.

Spaghetti diagrams: ( a ) Before the Enhanced KE, ( b ) After the Enhanced KE.

5. Discussion

Many people believe Lean thinking (LT) to be solely about identifying and removing waste [ 44 ]. This narrow approach of LT, where most interventions are directed at reducing direct waste without understanding its implications, results in local improvements without any major effect in the overall process [ 44 ]. It could also result in transferring the sources of waste to an upstream or downstream process [ 24 ]. The underlying benefit of removing waste comes from the reduction of process variability [ 44 ]. When variability is reduced, consistency and predictability are improved, resulting in better productivity and quality [ 45 ]. Roemeling et al. [ 44 ] argue that a small effort put into knowledge dissemination on the roles of variability can have a huge impact on a Kaizen event’s success.

During this study’s execution, the engineering team invested time in educating the rest of the KT on the effects of process variability in operations and how the seven types of waste were responsible for inserting deviation from expectations into operations. We then worked as a team and identified several sources of waste and how those contributed to increased variability. By identifying specific examples of the seven types of waste (eight including the waste of people potential), the KT was able to determine assignable causes of variation that decreased SPD productivity and quality. It was conveyed that the SPD process variability was responsible for uneven arrival of trays at the ORs, causing delays in surgery start times, increasing wait times by the ORs, and, therefore, lowering OR utilizations.

The first PDCA cycle in the improvement ramp resulted in changes at the macro-level. It physically divided the SPD into physical areas, according to each process: Decontamination, Prep and Pack, and Sterile Processing. This first cycle resulted in the elimination of cross-traffic between storage areas. It also resulted in more space availability by eliminating the handling of trash at the SPD. The relocation of the trash containers was possible due to two factors: (1) including the OR nurse manager in the KT; and (2) removing steps for the SPD without adding more steps for the OR nurses. Therefore, system-wide solutions move beyond departmental boundaries to ensure waste elimination rather than waste transference to other entities [ 24 ].

During the second PDCA cycle, the KT focused on the Prep and Pack area (mid-level). It was clear to the KT that performing all the Prep and Pack processes at one workstation was not recommended, especially with two different types of workstations (WST1 and WST2) available (lack of standardization). WST1 was better suited for the assembly job since most of the disposable items were already organized and labeled in bins and drawers at the station.

The technicians who used WST2 for prep needed to walk to the nearest WST1 to collect all the disposable items needed to put in a tray to then move back to WST2. If they forgot a disposable item or grabbed the wrong one, they needed to go back to a WST1 to find the right items. Besides, all the items were clearly separated and easy to find on WST1s, in contrast to a group of mixed items in a tray that the technician needed to go through (search) each time they needed something. In fact, sometimes, a technician would spend time searching in the tray at WST2 before realizing they were missing something or had the wrong item. They would walk to a WST1 to exchange items to then walk back to their station.

Figure 17 shows WST1 and WST2 before the second PDCA cycle. From the picture, two technicians doing the same task can be compared. One is comfortable sitting with all the disposable items organized within reach (WST1), and the other one has no chair and has to adopt an uncomfortable position (reaching and bending) to obtain some of the needed instruments (WST2) from a tray which is not organized or labeled.

( a ) Workstation Type 1, ( b ) and Workstation Type 2.

The assembly process time varied from tray to tray, depending on the tray’s number of instruments and complexity. The average assembly time was 15.67 min, with a standard deviation of 8.00 min. On the other hand, the wrapping process time took, on average 3.99 min, with a standard deviation of 1.03 min. During this process, the tray is covered with a piece of cloth. WST2 provides more space to work for technicians since it consists of a table with nothing on it. Thus, as a result of the second PDCA cycle, it was decided to perform the assembly process on WST1 and then move to WST2 for the wrapping process.

Finally, the third PDCA cycle consisted of changes at the Prep and Pack workstation level (micro-level). Changes to the workstations resulted in more space in the corridor and improved communication between SPD technicians. Other factors such as illumination, workstation design, and placement of the instruments to be assembled were addressed in cycle #3. Improvement in working conditions was evident for the SPD staff. The new configuration of the workstation improved working conditions while minimizing bending, twisting, and reaching.

The success of the EKE was possible due to the active participation of people representing those who work in the process, the process supervisor, those who have a direct impact on the process, and those affected by the process (in our case, the OR nurse manager was in both of these groups), hospital management, and a few external people (fresh sets of eyes). Furthermore, education and training on waste elimination, CI, variability effects, workflow, and ergonomics were crucial for the adoption and solidification of this new way of thinking.

It was noticeable for the KT that small changes can greatly impact working conditions, workload, and productivity. Since the ideas came from the team, the SPD staff felt a sense of ownership and accountability. They were committed to making the changes work or further improving them. In fact, after the first PDCA cycle, the SPD technicians were constantly looking for improvement and appreciated what they could change to make a task safer, easier, and more effective. This positive change in behavior supports the LT of increasing value and decreasing waste while addressing the eighth type of waste: waste of people’s potential.

Waste of people’s potential is a hidden type of waste that people often disregard. It is addressed by empowering employees to take ownership of their processes and stations. This was an important achievement for the engineering team since we strived to create an atmosphere of CI at the SPD. Our hidden agenda was to change the way employees looked at variability, waste, and the flow of material and people. Our end goal was to teach hospital employees about LT and ignite the concept of CI in them.

To our delight, the SPD staff grasped and adopted the concept of CI. Since this EKE, they have come up with new ideas on how to further improve the process. This is evidence of how training employees and explaining the reasoning behind LT and CI can create better staff engagement. As a matter of fact, the current layout is still similar at the macro-level, but with quite a few improvements made by the SPD technicians over time at the workstation level.

On a final note, an additional improvement obtained by training employees on LT, waste, and variability was on the awareness of body postures, in particular when observing excessive or unnecessary motion. During the execution of this study, we observed that SPD staff were assuming awkward body postures when they were being rushed. Figure 18 shows pictures of employees assuming awkward positions before the EKE [ 46 ].

Employees adopting awkward positions before the KE.

The EKE improvements allowed for a reduction in movement (stretching and reaching) and reduced the general feeling of being rushed among the SPD technicians. This is an example of the impact LT can have in ergonomics at the workstation and how an EKE can help workers identify bad work practices and find better ways to perform their activities. The improvement in ergonomics shows that EKE can have a positive long-term impact on people’s mental and physical health. The reduction in the stress level and better work practices could result in fewer work injuries and less absenteeism in the workplace.

6. Conclusions

This article presents both the methodology and the findings of a case study where we developed and implemented an Enhanced Kaizen Event (EKE) using the PDCA framework and the PDCA improvement ramp. The EKE consisted of three successive PDCA cycles, which focused on improvements at the departmental level first (macro-level), at an area level (mid-level), and at the station level (micro-level).

Given an analysis of the current state, the spaghetti diagram, and the identification of types of waste, the Kaizen team (KT) conducted a root cause analysis and realized there were major flaws in the current SPD layout. Focusing on the layout allowed the KT to generate and evaluate alternatives that could streamline the process flow to eliminate the cross-traffic between dirty, clean, and sterilized material.

The first PDCA cycle resulted in changes at the macro-level. It physically divided the SPD into physical areas, according to each process: Decontamination, Prep and Pack, and Sterile Processing. Layout changes resulted in the elimination of cross-traffic between storage areas. During the second PDCA cycle, the KT focused on the stations at an area level, in particular, at Prep and Pack. Six workstations were relocated to reduce the distance staff needed to walk between the workstation and the instruments that need to be packaged (more than 35% reduction).

The SPD staff performed their activities for about 30 min to get a sense of the improved layout. Changes at the station level were proposed during a third PDCA cycle, and the SPD staff performed their activities once more for 30 min to get a sense of the final tweaks. Consent was achieved, and the new layout was adopted as the new standard.

Benefits of the EKE include the elimination of cross-traffic between dirty and clean material, a streamlined process, less walking, and less searching. Besides, errors due to confusion about the status of the trays in the sterilization process were eliminated. The SPD technicians also noticed improved communication, improved satisfaction, and a positive long-term impact on people’s mental and physical health. Nevertheless, the most important benefit was on employees’ change of mindset. They now perceive every task from a CI perspective in which they constantly look for sources of waste, awkward postures, or anything that may cause a deviation from the standard or expectation (also known as sources of variability).

The three key factors that contributed towards the success and sustainability of the changes, and most importantly, the sustainability of LT and CI thinking for employees were:

• (1) Identifying all stakeholders and creating a Kaizen Team (KT) composed of representatives from each stakeholder group [ 34 ]. In our case, the KT was made up of the people who work in the process, the process manager, people upstream with a direct impact in the process (suppliers), and people downstream affected by the process (customers; in our case, the OR nurse manager was in both of these categories), hospital management, and external people who can bring a fresh set of eyes. Active participation of all people is required, and all ideas are considered.
• (2) Education and training on LT, CI, waste elimination, variability, workflow, ergonomics, and a holistic way of thinking [ 44 ].
• (3) System-wide solutions that move beyond departmental boundaries to ensure waste elimination rather than waste transference to other entities [ 24 ].

This study illustrates how complex issues creating delays, errors, affecting hospital revenue, and threatening patients’ safety can be addressed and solved using Lean thinking (LT). EKEs can produce vast improvements in productivity and working conditions. Besides, EKEs promote the participants’ awareness of how their process can affect or improve other areas in their organization; they bring a holistic view of the processes. It should be noted that the objective of this work, having a single case, is not to generalize the conclusions but to open avenues of investigation through the conclusions that can be drawn from this case. Future research should focus on testing the proposed Enhanced Kaizen Event in different settings.

Acknowledgments

Our gratitude to all the SPD staff, OR nurse manager, and administration at the facility for their support and participation in this study.

Author Contributions

Engineering team, V.N., L.V., S.H. and D.C.; conceptualization, V.N., D.C. and S.H.; methodology, V.N., D.C., L.V. and S.H.; formal analysis, V.N and S.H.; investigation, V.N., D.C., L.V. and S.H.; writing—original draft preparation, L.V.; writing—review and editing, V.N. and D.C.; visualization, L.V. and D.C.; supervision, D.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Kaizen Event: A Comprehensive Guide to Continuous Improvement

The continuous improvement of processes within an organization is pivotal to its sustained success and competitiveness. Among the various methodologies for fostering such improvement, the Japanese concept of Kaizen stands prominent. Kaizen, which translates to “change for better,” is a philosophy that encourages ongoing, incremental improvements involving all members of an organization.

This article embarks on an exploratory journey into Kaizen events—a structured, team-based approach to rapid problem solving and improvement. As we delve into the intricate process, roles of participants, benefits, and potential challenges of implementing Kaizen events, the expert insights provided herein aim to equip readers with a comprehensive understanding of this transformative approach.

Introduction to Kaizen

Definition of kaizen and its origins.

The Kaizen philosophy originates from post-World War II Japanese business practices and has since become an integral part of various online certificate programs designed to teach process improvement. Kaizen integrates a mindset where all employees are actively engaged in suggesting and implementing improvements to the company's processes, products, or services. This philosophy stands on two foundational principles: the notion that small, ongoing positive changes can reap major improvements, and the pursuit of perfection through the elimination of waste.

Brief overview of a Kaizen event

A Kaizen event is an action-oriented, short-term activity aimed at improving a specific process or area within an organization. Generally conducted on the floor of the business and involving employees across different levels, a Kaizen event seeks to identify and swiftly eliminate inefficiencies. The duration of these events can range from a few days to a couple of weeks, filled with intense problem-solving and innovation sessions under the guidance of a facilitator.

Importance of Kaizen principles in continuous improvement

The application of Kaizen principles is not merely about sporadic changes but about fostering a culture where employees at every level persistently look out for ways to enhance operations. Continuous improvement under Kaizen becomes an integral part of the organization's DNA, making it more responsive and adaptable to the ever-changing business environment. This philosophical ethos is also driving the demand for a problem solving certificate , as companies seek individuals who can effectively lead continuous improvement initiatives.

The Kaizen Event Process

Root Cause Tree Analysis: Insights to Forensic Decision Making

Limit Feedback Sessions: Boost Decision-Making Efficacy

Process Mapping: A Comprehensive Guide to Efficient Workflow Management

Problem Management: A Guide to Change Success

Preparation for a Kaizen event

Identifying the problem.

Every Kaizen event starts with the identification of a specific problem or inefficiency that needs to be addressed. This process involves a detailed analysis of current performance metrics and operations, to establish a baseline for improvement. The problem must be sufficiently defined so that it can be effectively tackled within the timeframe of the Kaizen event.

Assembling the team

The next step entails assembling a cross-functional team that brings together diverse perspectives and expertise relevant to the problem at hand. This diversity is crucial in fostering innovative solutions and ensuring that all aspects of the process under scrutiny are understood and addressed.

Setting Goals

With the team in place, the next essential phase is to define clear, attainable goals for the event. These objectives should align with the organization's broader strategic aims while being SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound) to ensure that the event remains focused and outcomes can be measured.

The intensive Kaizen event

Opening meeting and team briefing.

As the Kaizen event kicks off, an opening meeting is held to ensure all team members are aligned on the event’s goals, understand their roles, and are motivated to contribute to the success of the event. This session sets the tone for the days to follow and encourages an open, collaborative atmosphere.

Analyzing and Imagining solutions

The core of the Kaizen event revolves around team sessions where members analyze the current state of the process and brainstorm potential improvements. Transcending traditional thinking and encouraging creativity is critical during this phase, as team members propose inventive solutions to the problems identified.

Implementing Changes

Once solutions are agreed upon, the team works rapidly to implement changes, often starting with quick wins to build momentum. In this phase, the ideas move from the drawing board to tangible changes on the ground, providing an immediate look at potential gains.

Review and Follow up

No Kaizen event concludes without a review. This stage involves assessing the outcomes against the initially-set goals and planning for the sustenance of improvements. A crucial part of this phase is the follow-up, ensuring that the changes made during the event continue to provide value and do not regress to previous states.

Role of Participants in a Kaizen Event

Role of the team members.

Team members are the heart of a Kaizen event, bringing their unique insights and expertise to the table. They are expected to actively participate, communicate openly, and work collaboratively. Their direct interaction with the processes makes their input invaluable for identifying issues and generating solutions.

Responsibilities of the event facilitator

The facilitator plays a critical role in driving the event forward. This individual must guide discussions, maintain focus on the event’s objectives, manage group dynamics, and ensure that the event proceeds within the designated time frame. Above all, the facilitator is responsible for promoting an environment conducive to change and innovation.

Participation of management and leadership

Management and leadership’s support is pivotal for the event's success. Their role is to provide the necessary resources, endorse the changes recommended by the team, and reinforce the importance of the continuous improvement culture within the organization. Their commitment often sets the tone for employee engagement in the Kaizen process.

Benefits of Conducting a Kaizen Event

Immediate improvements and problem-solving.

Kaizen events are designed for rapid action, thus allowing organizations to reap immediate benefits from the improvements implemented. The problem-solving nature of these events often leads to significant enhancements in productivity, quality, and efficiency in a very short time span.

Building a culture of continuous improvement

Hosting regular Kaizen events ingrains a culture of ongoing incremental improvement. Employees become more attuned to the potential for enhancements in their day-to-day work, fostering an environment where change for the better is both encouraged and expected.

Encouragement of teamwork and collaboration

Kaizen events break down silos by bringing together individuals from various departments to collaborate on a project. This interaction not only leads to more comprehensive solutions but also enhances team dynamics and interdepartmental relationships.

Case study examples of successful Kaizen events

The implementation of Kaizen events across various industries is well-documented through numerous case studies. These real-life examples offer guidance, inspiration, and tangible evidence of the profound impact that these events can have on an organization’s operations and culture.

Challenges and Solutions in Implementing Kaizen Events

Recognition and understanding of common obstacles.

Despite their numerous benefits, Kaizen events can face challenges such as resistance to change, lack of engagement from team members, or insufficient support from leadership. Identifying these barriers early on is key to addressing them effectively.

Tactics and strategies to overcome these challenges

Strategies such as clear communication, adequate training, and recognition of team contributions can mitigate many of the common obstacles faced during a Kaizen event. Establishing a solid change management framework is also crucial to facilitate a smooth transition during and after the event.

Expert suggestions for successful Kaizen event execution

Experts in the field suggest a structured yet flexible approach to the execution of Kaizen events. This includes detailed planning, setting realistic expectations, and remaining open to adjusting strategies as events unfold. Solidifying a follow-up plan is also paramount to ensure long-term success.

Reflecting on the vital role and significance of Kaizen events paints a clear picture of their value in driving operational excellence and nurturing a proactive workforce. As organizations aim to stay competitive and adaptive in a dynamic business landscape, Kaizen events offer substantive avenues for improvement. They are not just episodic engagements but a strategic imperative, propelling companies towards superior performance and an enduring culture of development. The implementation of Kaizen events across various operational spectra underscores the inherent adaptability of this approach and serves as an enduring testament to the philosophy of continuous improvement.

What are the key principles and methodologies behind a successful Kaizen event?

Key principles of a kaizen event, understanding kaizen.

Kaizen denotes continuous improvement. It involves all employees. Efficiency and waste elimination are key.

Key Principles

Kaizen follows several essential principles. These guide successful implementation.

Customer Orientation drives all Kaizen events. Customer value takes precedence. Employee actions reflect this principle.

Respect for People underpins Kaizen philosophy. It emphasizes teamwork and personal development. Employee involvement becomes necessary.

Waste Elimination focuses on reducing non-value-adding activities. Kaizen identifies and removes such waste.

Standardized Work is another core principle. It ensures consistency and efficiency. It serves as improvement's foundation.

Process Orientation is crucial. Look at processes, not just results. Improvements come from process changes.

Methodologies Behind a Successful Kaizen Event

Program structure.

Organized structure guides Kaizen events. Clearly defined steps are crucial.

- Set clear targets

- Define team roles

- Provide necessary training

Event Preparation

Preparation cannot be understated. Detailed planning leads to success.

- Select a specific focus area

- Gather relevant data

- Map existing processes

Implementation

Active implementation defines Kaizen events. Teams work on-site to effect changes.

- Use collected data

- Brainstorm solutions collaboratively

- Implement identified improvements rapidly

Regular monitoring sustains improvements. It involves checking and adjusting processes.

- Track performance indicators

- Compare results against targets

- Adjust as needed for better outcomes

Teams reflect post-event. They review the outcomes and process.

- Share successes and lessons

- Document the event thoroughly

- Plan for future Kaizen activities

Sustaining Change

Lasting change is the goal. It requires continuous effort.

- Update standard work procedures

- Train employees on new standards

- Schedule follow-up sessions to monitor progress

In conclusion, a successful Kaizen event blends these principles and methodologies. It values customer focus, respect for people, and an orientation towards processes and waste elimination. With an organized approach, thorough preparation, collaborative implementation, and diligent monitoring and reflection, Kaizen events can drive significant and sustained improvements within an organization.

How can an organization effectively implement the Kaizen event for continuous improvement?

Understanding kaizen events.

Kaizen events stand as core elements in the pursuit of continuous improvement. They embody collective efforts to enhance processes. These events often span a few days to a week. They engage teams in problem-solving exercises.

Initiate with Clear Objectives

Start with concrete goals. Goals guide the effort. They align the team.

Select the Right Team

Diversity enriches teams. It brings varied perspectives. Pick members from different areas. Ensure they possess cross-functional knowledge.

Train Participants

Prepare the team. Training equips with necessary skills. It fosters a unified methodology.

Define the Scope

Be specific. Too broad, and focus falters. Too narrow, and benefits diminish.

Document Current Processes

Understanding begins with observation. Track and record existing workflows. Identify problem spots.

Analyze and Plan

Dissect the problems. Look for root causes. Develop strategic plans to address these issues.

During the Event

Communicate regularly.

Keep information flowing. Update all stakeholders. Transparency builds trust. It reinforces participation.

Foster a Collaborative Environment

Promote unity. Encourage openness. Ideas thrive in collaborative spaces.

Implement Quick Wins

Quick wins motivate. They demonstrate progress. This keeps momentum.

Ensure Robust Documentation

Record every step. Documentation creates a reference. It ensures knowledge is shareable.

Post-Event Activities

Review outcomes.

Gather the team. Assess the results. Compare against objectives.

Develop Action Plans

Plan for the next steps. Assign responsibilities. Set timeframes.

Train for Sustainability

Educate the workforce. New procedures require understanding.

Monitor Progress

Track the improvements. Use metrics. Adjust plans as needed.

Celebrate Success

Recognition boosts morale. It incentivizes future participation.

Continuous Follow-Up

Kaizen is cyclical. The process demands ongoing refinement. Regular check-ins enable this.

Fine-tune Processes

Adapt strategies. The market evolves. So should processes.

Plan the Next Kaizen Event

Continuous improvement never stops. Plan ahead for the next event.

Kaizen events can transform operations. They require careful planning and execution. Follow these principles. They foster success in your continual improvement journey.

What types of challenges might an organization potentially encounter during the implementation of a Kaizen event and how can these be effectively addressed?

Kaizen events offer organizations a powerful tool. The methodology aims at continuous improvement. Kaizen focuses on team collaboration. However, implementation often faces challenges.

Identifying Common Challenges

Organizations encounter multiple hurdles during Kaizen. Common issues include resistance, lack of engagement, and resource constraints.

Resistance to Change

Change can unsettle workers. Employees may fear new processes. It is essential to address such resistance early. Communicate the benefits clearly. Engage employees in the planning stage. Leadership support proves vital here.

Ineffective Team Dynamics

Teams may lack cohesiveness. Diverse groups bring varied perspectives. Yet, conflict can arise. Facilitate initial team-building activities. Establish clear communication channels. Set expectations from the outset.

Insufficient Resources

Kaizen requires resources. Some organizations fail to allocate enough. Ensure availability of necessary materials. Dedicate time for all participants. Offer the support needed for success.

Lack of Commitment

Commitment drives Kaizen success. Management must show its support. Without it, employee engagement drops. Lead by example to instill commitment.

Inadequate Training

Training underpins improvement. Provide thorough training on Kaizen principles. Equip teams with problem-solving tools.

Overcoming the Challenges

Effective solutions lie in strategic approaches.

Facilitate Open Communication

Communication bridges many gaps. Keep all levels informed. Encourage feedback and questions. Transparency eases the change process.

Tailor Training and Support

Adapt training to meet team needs. Consider different learning styles. Provide continuous support beyond the event.

Allocate Adequate Resources

Plan for resource needs in advance. Resources include time, money, and materials. Commit these resources fully.

Promote Wide Participation

Engage all affected employees. Invite contributions from various departments. Empower employees to drive change.

Monitor Progress and Adjust

Track improvements actively. Allow for flexibility. Adjust plans as necessary to achieve goals.

Sustain Gains

To maintain improvements, establish follow-up procedures. Celebrate successes. Integrate new processes into everyday work.

Kaizen events can transform practices. They encourage efficiency and innovation. Organizations must anticipate challenges. Address these with clear strategies. With commitment and support, Kaizen fosters sustainable progress.

He is a content producer who specializes in blog content. He has a master's degree in business administration and he lives in the Netherlands.

Risk Mitigation: An Essential Strategy for Successful Project Management

Game Theory: Strategic Analysis and Practical Applications

Unlocking Da Vinci's Problem Solving Skills

Decision Tree: A Strategic Approach for Effective Decision Making

What is a KAIZEN™️ Event and How Does It Foster a Culture of Continuous Improvement?

KAIZEN™️ Events are key elements of organizational transformation journeys. They are an effective way to organize project teams to solve a challenging problem or implement an innovative solution for an existing need. These intensive workshops bring together multidisciplinary teams to develop solutions and implement practical and measurable improvements. In this article, we will explore in detail what KAIZEN™️ Events are, how to implement them, and what benefits to expect from this transformative approach.

What is a KAIZEN™️ Event?

Focused on the organization’s need for improvement, a KAIZEN™️ Event is an intensive workshop typically divided into three phases:

1. Preparation

In this phase, relevant data is collected, and necessary equipment and materials are prepared. It is essential to clearly understand the process or area that will be targeted for improvement.

2. Implementation

The team designs and tests solutions for improving the identified process/area. The work is carried out according to standardized KAIZEN™️ methodologies .

3. Follow-Up

After implementation, the results are monitored, and any deviations are corrected. It is essential to track the results and assess the financial impact of the improvements made.

When executing a KAIZEN™️ Event, there is a set of golden rules that have to be followed to ensure its effectiveness:

1. Multidisciplinary Teamwork

A KAIZEN™️ Event should involve a multidisciplinary team, with representatives from different areas and different skill sets. This promotes a comprehensive and diversified approach to problem-solving and improvement roll-out.

2. Alignment and Focus on a Single Topic

All team members must be aligned and focused on a single matter during the event. This ensures a clear direction and avoids distractions that could compromise the results.

3. Quantified Objectives

The objectives of the KAIZEN™️ Event should be measurable. Setting specific goals allows the team to track progress and evaluate the impact of the improvements.

4. Defined Duration (Intensive Days)

A KAIZEN™️ Event should have a well-defined duration, usually over intensive days. This focused approach allows the team to fully dedicate themselves to deploying improvements, accelerating the change process .

5. Preparation Work

Before the KAIZEN™️ Event, carrying out adequate preparation work is key. This can involve either data collection or preparing materials and equipment for the workshop days.

6. Activities at the GEMBA

During the event, activities must be carried out at the Gemba – the place where the real work is done – allowing the team to observe and better understand the process and identify opportunities for improvement.

7. Immediate Implementation

The improvements identified during the KAIZEN™️ Event should be implemented right away. The rapid deployment of solutions prevents delays and ensures the benefits are obtained as soon as possible.

8. Standard Methodology (KAIZEN™️ Tools)

The KAIZEN™️ Event should follow a standard methodology, using tested and proven KAIZEN™️ tools. These tools help the team analyze problems, identify solutions, and implement improvements in a structured and efficient manner.

9. Application of Countermeasures for Rapid Deviations Correction

Whenever deviations in performance indicators are detected, immediate countermeasures should be applied to correct them.

10. Tracking Results and Calculating Financial Impact

In the follow-up of KAIZEN™️ Events, it is necessary to track the results of the implemented improvements and calculate their financial impact. This allows the organization to evaluate the workshop’s success and decide on replicating the implemented solution in other areas.

Unfortunately, many organizations fail to implement the improvements they plan. The way KAIZEN™️ Events are structured allows teams to stay focused on action, enabling quick and effective improvement implementation. A KAIZEN™️ Event is described by several expressions that capture its unique essence and approach:

1. Learn by Doing

This expression suggests that the team should test and do for itself. The best way to learn is to start doing autonomously;

2. Go to Gemba

This expression underlines the importance of going to the Gemba, where value is added, and all opportunities for improvement can be identified. Attend the Gemba to get the team’s full involvement in carrying out the actions;

3. MUDA Eyes

The team should always be focused on identifying MUDA (waste) to eliminate it;

4. Focus on Doing, Not Just Planning

Workshops should be for more than just planning actions – implementing them at the Gemba is the point. All preparation work should be done before the event day.

Who Should Participate in a KAIZEN™️ Event?

A KAIZEN™️ Event should involve a multidisciplinary team composed of members from different areas and different reporting levels. This includes operators, supervisors, managers, technical experts, or anyone directly involved in the process or area that will be the target for improvement. The leaders of the natural teams, and the management levels, should be leading these KAIZEN™️ Events. The participation of all involved is essential to obtain different perspectives and ensure that all stakeholders are heard.

How Long Does a KAIZEN™️ Event Typically Last?

The intensive days of a KAIZEN™️ Event typically last a week. During this period, the team intensely dedicates itself to the event activities, focusing on analysis, solution design, testing, and implementation of improvements. KAIZEN™️ Events are usually organized in 3-month sprints.

The rule of 1 event for every ten people per year is usually used when deciding the number of events. A company with 100 employees should hold about ten events annually. Practicing is the best way to master the process and make continuous improvements.

Where Should a KAIZEN™️ Event Take Place?

A KAIZEN™️ event should occur at the Gemba, the actual workplace where value is added. In this environment, the process or area needing improvement occurs. Conducting the event at the Gemba allows the team to directly observe the process in operation and identify MUDA, problems, and opportunities for improvement. In this way, participants can gain a complete understanding of the context and implement effective solutions.

When Should a KAIZEN™️ Event Occur?

The timing for conducting a KAIZEN™️ event can vary depending on the needs and circumstances of the organization. However, they are typically planned during Value Stream Analysis (VSA) workshops . In these workshops, an implementation plan is drawn up and includes the events to be conducted and their scheduling. KAIZEN™️ workshops can also originate from other types of activities, but this is usually the most significant.

How is a KAIZEN™️ Event Structured?

Within the universe of KAIZEN™️ events, we can find a wide variety of types, from more transversal workshops, such as 5S or standardization, to more specific workshops, such as layout and line design, standard work, SMED, supermarkets, Mizusumashi, Kobetsu Kaizen, auto-quality, new product development, website optimization, and value selling . Within the KAIZEN™️ and Lean Six Sigma methodologies , there is a wide range of tools available.

Although each of these workshops has specific methodologies with clearly defined stages, it is interesting to note that all can be summarized in one essential tool: the A3.

The 9-step A3 is a tool used to structure and track KAIZEN™️ Events. The term “A3” refers to the paper size used to document and communicate relevant information about the workshop. The sheet of paper is used to create a concise report that follows a 9-step structure. The nine steps of the A3 provide a systematic structure for addressing problems and improvements logically and comprehensively. Its use helps to promote team collaboration, clear communication, and standardization of the workshop follow-up process.

1. Define The Challenge

In the first step of the A3, we identify the business problem, who it is relevant to, and the reason behind the improvement need. Ensuring the topic is relevant to the organization’s objectives is essential. The problem to be solved should be clearly described, and for this, the 5 whys method can be used:

• What is the problem? (What?)
• Why is it a problem? (Why?)
• Where is the problem located? (Where?)
• When did it become a problem? (When?)
• Who is it a problem for? (Who?)
• What is the impact of the problem? (How much?)

In addition, it is essential to investigate previous attempts to solve the problem.

2. Map The Current Situation

In this second step, it is necessary to describe the current situation. Tools such as Value Stream Mapping (VSM) or Supplier, Input, Process, Output, Customer (SIPOC) can be used. The current situation should be presented clearly, logically, and visually. Opportunities for improvement from the starting point should be identified, speaking with data and quantifying current performance.

3. Define Target State

In the third step, a specific goal must be defined using SMART objectives (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound). Describe the objectives qualitatively and quantitatively and establish criteria for measuring and evaluating them. It is important to ensure that the goal is clear, measurable, and one step closer to the target state.

4. Find Root Causes

In this step, the reason for the problem or need should be investigated. Identify all possible causes as much as possible. Conduct research and use techniques such as the 5 Whys and Ishikawa diagram (fishbone). The aim is to find the root causes and explain deviations from the target state, ensuring the analysis is understandable and addresses all relevant causes.

5. Design Solutions

In this fifth step, all possible solutions are identified to achieve the desired results. Then, the solution or tool that will likely bring the best results is selected. Ranking solutions using tools such as the effort and impact matrix can aid in determining which ones to implement. When choosing a countermeasure, consider solutions that were successful in similar previous situations.

6. Test Solutions

During this stage, the impact of the proposed countermeasures and solutions is evaluated. Trials or tests must be conducted to confirm that the solution works and generates the expected results. It is also relevant to anticipate possible resistances that may arise during the implementation of the solutions. Evaluating the impact, obtaining concrete results, and ensuring the solutions’ feasibility are essential to determine whether it is appropriate to proceed with the implementation or if additional changes are needed.

7. Update Action Plan

At this stage, it is important to define the implementation plan and update the action plan. The plan should answer the following questions: who will be responsible for each action, what needs to be done, when and where the activities will be carried out, and how they will be executed. It is also necessary to consider that potential problems may arise during implementation and how to deal with resistance in advance.

8. Confirm Results and Standards

In the eighth step, the results obtained are analyzed, and verification needs to be performed to check if the objective defined in step 3 was achieved and is sustainable over time. With the “goal line” represented, trend charts can be used to monitor results according to the agreed frequency. It is vital to collect data regularly to check the effects of the countermeasures and ensure that they work as expected. The sustainment of the final solution should be done through standardization. When the results are validated, ensure that there are standards that allow the stability of the new processes and that people are trained to apply them.

9. Consolidate & Improve

In this last step, the lessons learned throughout the process need to be identified. It is also necessary to anticipate follow-up issues and ensure continuous improvement . Ultimately, improvements to be applied in the next cycle should be planned. Communicating the results of the KAIZEN™️ event and positive marketing can be used to motivate teams.

The Impact and Benefits of KAIZEN™️ Events

A KAIZEN™️ event necessarily delivers results, as it implements a new and better work method. The entire team is aligned and focused on a goal, following a structured methodology to achieve it.

KAIZEN™️ events can generate impact and bring benefits to various indicators. We can group these benefits into five main categories: quality, cost, service (delivery), team motivation, and growth.

For example, in a just-in-time flow creation event, the results achieved are usually:

• 30% productivity gain
• Quality improvement by 50%
• 40% space reduction
• Stock reduction by 70%

The impact and benefits vary according to the workshop.

1. Quality Improvement

One of the potential benefits of KAIZEN™️ events is quality improvement. By improving, standardizing processes, and solving problems at the root, KAIZEN™️ events can significantly impact the quality of products or services. This results in a reduction of non-quality costs, a decrease in complaints, an increase in customer satisfaction, and, consequently, an increase in loyalty.

2. Cost Reduction

A large part of KAIZEN™️ events aims to reduce costs and eliminate process waste. This can be achieved through stock reduction, space release, operational efficiency, productivity improvement, and reduction of non-quality costs, among other possibilities. The improvements implemented in KAIZEN™️ events can lead to a significant decrease in operating costs and an increase in the organization’s profits.

3. Delivery Improvement

Some KAIZEN™️ events focus on reducing processes’ lead time (customer response time). This results in faster delivery of products or services to customers, greater flexibility to meet their needs, and reduced waiting time. Improving service and lead time can give the organization a competitive advantage, increasing customer satisfaction and brand loyalty.

4. Increased Team Motivation

KAIZEN™️ events involve employees in designing and implementing improvements and optimizing their daily work. This creates a collaborative work environment where everyone is encouraged to contribute to ideas and solutions to improve processes. Involvement in KAIZEN™️ events can increase team motivation, enhance internal communication, promote teamwork, and strengthen the relationship with the organization.

5. Business Growth

KAIZEN™️ events can also propel organizational growth. KAIZEN™️ events in areas such as marketing and sales often directly impact sales positively. Another area where these events also impact business growth is R&D. Growth can occur through entering new markets or expanding in current markets, developing new products/services, or increasing productive capacity.

These five categories encompass the key benefits organizations can achieve by implementing successful KAIZEN™️ events. It’s important to emphasize that these categories are not mutually exclusive and often overlap, resulting in comprehensive benefits for the organization.

How to Start Implementing KAIZEN™️ Events in Your Organization?

The selected KAIZEN™️ events should follow a structured process, as when conducted ad-hoc, they may not align with the organization’s actual priorities and, consequently, may not reach their full potential. KAIZEN™️ activities in an organization typically begin with an event called Value Stream Analysis , in which a priority value stream is selected to be worked on. During this phase, the current state is analyzed, the future state is designed, and a deployment plan is established with the KAIZEN™️ events to be carried out in the subsequent phase. In other words, events are selected, and priorities are set according to the improvement needs of the value stream.

How the Kaizen Institute Can Assist You on This Journey

Organizations often encounter the challenge of planning improvements but not achieving them. Teams often spend too much time thinking about what might prevent them from improving, looking for the perfect solution, and without realizing it, there are still no improvements after several months.

The Kaizen Institute has over 30 years of experience successfully implementing KAIZEN™️ events in various types of organizations worldwide.

The KAIZEN™️ method keeps teams focused on what they need to do to carry out the action plan as quickly as possible. This is the difference between planning and implementing. When leaders participate in a KAIZEN™️ event and realize that it is truly possible to implement changes so quickly, it becomes for them the only way to improve the organization and deliver effective results. KAIZEN™️ consultants act as facilitators and assist in the application of KAIZEN™️ methodologies that enable change implementation.

This new approach to implementing impactful and disruptive projects can develop KAIZEN™️ thinking in employees, reinforcing the importance of continuous improvement and, consequently, transforming the organizational culture.

Still Have Questions Related to KAIZEN™️ Events?

What is value stream analysis (vsa).

Value Stream Analysis is a KAIZEN™️ event that begins with mapping the current value chain, making all performed activities visible, to identify those representing waste or added value. This mapping includes not only the materials flow but also the information flow. Relevant data, such as labor, stocks, times, equipment data, and others, are added to this map. Then, the future state mapping phase begins, where the team is challenged to create a vision that contains only relevant activities. Subsequently, the definition of the KAIZEN™️ events to be carried out is made, and finally, the expected benefits are calculated.

What are some examples of KAIZEN™️ events and their respective objectives?

Pull planning.

Implement a planning model based on the actual demand of the customer, in which their consumption triggers the replenishment of the finished product stock.

Mizusumashi

Gather and allocate all operations that do not add value to the process, but are necessary, to one or more employees and standardize all these tasks in a repetitive logistic cycle.

WIP Inventory Supermarkets

Scale and implement systematic replenishment of work-in-progress stock by setting up supermarkets.

Just-In-Time

Implementation of a unit flow cell.

Single-Minute Exchange of Die (SMED)

Reduce setup time and series changes.

Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE)

Improve the overall efficiency of the equipment in terms of availability, performance, and quality.

New Product Development

Standardize and accelerate the development and industrialization of new products.

Value Analysis/Value Engineering

Improve the value of a product/component, defined by the relationship between function and cost, reducing the cost without reducing the essential functions.

Auto Quality

Implement a method to avoid receiving, making, or passing on defects or quality problems.

Problem Solving

Implement a structured approach to solve problems.

Website Optimization

Improve or develop a website to reach more potential customers and improve the user experience, providing valuable content and converting it into sales.

Value Selling

Improve the sales process, from preparation to closing, focusing on the value and benefits of a product or service for the customer.

See more on KAIZEN™️ Event

Find out more about our training program

See more on People & Culture

Find out more about improving your organization

Get the latest news about Kaizen Institute

We noticed you're visiting from United States (US). We've updated our prices to United States (US) dollar for your shopping convenience. Use Euro instead. Dismiss

• TKMG Academy
• Clarity First
• The Outstanding Organization
• Value Stream Mapping
• Metrics-Based Process Mapping
• The Kaizen Event Planner
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Lean Terminology
• Mindfulness
• Newsletter Archive
• Other Resources
• Recommended Reading

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR LIST

Please complete all fields if you’d like to receive industry- or location-specific content.

• Email Address *
• First Name *
• Industry * Select One Agriculture Biotechnology Construction Consulting Communications Distribution Education Energy Engineering Design & Architecture Entertainment & Sports Financial Services Food Service Government & Military Healthcare Hospitality Information Technology Insurance Law Enforcement Manufacturing Non-Profit Pharmaceuticals Professional Services (consulting, law, accounting) Publishing Real Estate Repair / Maintenance Research & Development Retail Social Services Student Telecommunications Transportation Travel & Tourism Unemployed & Retired Other
• State / Province Select One ——— United States of America ——— Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming ——— Canadian Provinces ——— Alberta British Columbia Manitoba New Brunswick Newfoundland and Labrador Northwest Territory Nova Scotia Nunavut Ontario Prince Edward Island Quebec Saskatchewan Yukon Territory ——— Mexican States ——— Aguascalientes Baja California Baja California Sur Campeche Chiapas Chihuahua Coahuila Colima Distrito Federal Durango Guanajuato Guerrero Hidalgo Jalisco Mexico Michoacan Morelos Nayarit Nuevo Leon Oaxaca Puebla Queretaro Quintana Roo San Luis Potosi Sinaloa Sonora Tabasco Tamaulipas Tlaxcala Veracruz Yucatan Zacatecas Not Applicable
• Country * Select One Afghanistan Åland Islands Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Darrussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos Islands Colombia Comoros Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Republic of the Cook Islands Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Curaçao Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Eswatini (Swaziland) Ethiopia Falkland Islands Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard and McDonald Islands Holy See Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Isle of Man Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macau Macedonia Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Micronesia Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island North Korea Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestine, State of Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Réunion Romania Russia Rwanda Saint Barthélemy Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Martin Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Sint Maarten Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia South Korea South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Islands Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay US Minor Outlying Islands Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Virgin Islands, British Virgin Islands, U.S. Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe
• Business Phone
• Email This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Kaizen Event Case Studies

• Skip Intro 0:58

In this webinar, Karen shares a case study for a Kaizen Event she has facilitated that addresses the following questions:

• What was the driver for the improvement?
• Why was a Kaizen Event chosen for making the improvement and not a traditional project?
• Who was involved in the planning process and on the Kaizen team itself?
• What was their process, from analysis through rolling out the improvement (including the specific tools used)?
• How were they able to pilot and refine the improvement using PDSA within such a short time?
• What challenges did the team encounter and how did they overcome them?
• How did they manage their time?
• How was the event closed out?
• What’s the current state of the improvement?

• Explore the Platform
• Integrations
• Governance & Change Management
• Common Data Model
• Integrated Validation
• Data & Analytics
• Computer Vision
• Frontline Copilot®
• Automations
• Edge Connectivity
• Machine Connectivity
• Edge Devices
• Machine Kit
• Device Library
• Composable MES
• Digital Guidance
• Production Management
• Traceability and Compliance
• Digital Work Instructions
• Manufacturing Training Software
• Kitting Software
• Production Tracking Software
• Manufacturing Dashboards
• Inline Quality Inspection
• Non-Conformance Management
• Visual Quality Inspection
• Electronic Batch Records
• Device History Records
• Genealogy & Traceability
• Equipment Logbooks
• Industrial Products
• Consumer Products
• Luxury Goods
• Electronics
• Automotive & Specialty Vehicle
• Aerospace & Defense
• Food & Beverage
• Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
• Biotech Manufacturing
• Cell & Gene Therapy
• Medical Devices & Diagnostics
• High-Mix Discrete Assembly
• Additive Manufacturing
• Batch and Hybrid Batch
• Contract Manufacturing
• New Product Introduction (NPI)
• Case Studies
• Augmented Ops Podcast
• Augmented Lean
• 30-Day Free Trial
• Tulip University
• Knowledge Base
• Attend Operations Calling 2024
• Tulip Experience Center
• Trust Center
• Website Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Service
• Support Policy
• Acceptable Use Policy

Lean Manufacturing

Kaizen Events: A Complete Guide To Planning & Holding A Kaizen Blitz

Jump to section

What is a Kaizen event or Kaizen blitz?

What is kaizen, when to hold a kaizen event, benefits of holding a kaizen event, planning a kaizen event, holding a kaizen event:, metrics of success: how to measure improvement, beyond the kaizen event, share on social.

• Share on Twitter
• Share on LinkedIn

Kaizen events, also known as Kaizen blitzes, are short-duration events, usually in the form of a week-long workshop, in which a facilitator guides a team in improving an area with a specific goal in mind.

Typically during a Kaizen event , the facilitator leads the team (which is generally comprised of people who work in the area in which the event is being conducted) in standardizing and documenting processes and identifying, implementing, and documenting improvements to that area. After the event, improvement opportunities are prioritized based on the needs of the business.

Download our Ultimate Guide to Kaizen & Drive Continuous Improvement in Your Operations →

“Kaizen” is the philosophy of continuous improvement. Translated from Japanese, the word “kaizen” translates to “changing something for the better.” It was originally used by Japanese businesses after World War II, influenced by teachings in American business and quality management, and became adopted by the Toyota Production System (also known as TPS), where employees are famously required to stop the line if an abnormality arises (known as Jidoka) and, along with their supervisors, suggest an improvement.

Kaizen is used as a tool in lean manufacturing with the goal of eliminating waste by continuously improving standardized processes, equipment, and other procedures for carrying out daily production. The main requirement is that existing procedures be standardized and documented so that improvements can be evaluated objectively.

While Kaizen is primarily associated with manufacturing, it is practiced across all functions of a business and has been adopted by other industries such as healthcare, finance, psychotherapy, life-coaching, government, and banking.

Beyond improving workflows, Kaizen is an ongoing process that can facilitate a culture of identifying and correcting inefficiencies and nurture a sense of ownership among workers. It also has the benefit of eliminating wastes in the process by reducing non-value added activities to a minimum.

Build a culture of continuous improvement with Tulip

Digitize your lean manufacturing practices, collect and analyze data in real-time, and remove communication barriers.

While the principles of Kaizen should be practiced by all members of an organization on a continual basis, scheduled Kaizen events may be necessary in order to tackle larger problems. Also, maintaining a culture of solving the root cause of problems before they become bigger is key.

Reasons to hold a Kaizen event include :

• Solving an urgent problem that puts the business at risk and needs to be addressed quickly • Achieving a strategic goal that will impact KPIs • Identifying and solving the root cause of issues that prevent daily improvement cycles from achieving results • Solving cross-functional challenges, such as improving the handoff of work between teams, including upstream and downstream events on a production value stream. • Sustaining the practice of continuous improvement in your company, especially if you haven’t had a Kaizen event in a while • Introducing new team members to continuous improvement techniques

In addition to the primary benefits of improvement in your standard work processes, holding a Kaizen event can foster problem-solving, collaboration, and communication skills and allow employees to demonstrate leadership. Engaging team members to identify problems and suggest improvements in their work areas encourages a sense of ownership over their work, which can improve overall motivation, morale, and productivity. Finally, holding a Kaizen event is one way to reinforce a robust culture of continuous improvement within your organization, after all, the best way to sustain the principles that you want to guide your company is to put them into practice.

Investing time into planning your Kaizen event is critical to the event’s success; in fact, properly planning the event is just as important as the event itself. Set your event up for success by clearly defining the goals and scope of the event and strategically assembling a team that will bring important insights to the table. Here are some key steps to planning your Kaizen event:

Appoint a skilled facilitator

The facilitator should be trained in lean techniques and philosophies and be able to help your team stay on track and motivate them; the facilitator should be someone who is passionate about creating positive change. You may wish to hire a consultant for this role or train a team leader from within your organization. Having a skilled facilitator is key to the success of your Kaizen event.

Make sure leadership is engaged

Make sure your organization understands the importance of the Kaizen event to your business’s bottom line. Gaining buy-in is crucial to the success of your Kaizen initiatives, and if your organization’s leaders are committed to sustaining a culture of continuous improvement, they will set the tone for the rest of the company.

Set the scope and limits of the event

Clearly define the scope of the Kaizen event. The main focus of the event should be an area or process in which it has been determined that inefficiency is reducing value to the customer. The focus can be narrowed by analyzing KPIs, root causes, and other Lean metrics. Keep in mind that the end goal is to promote continuous improvement and reduce waste

Assemble the team

While everyday Kaizen should involve all members of your organization (from employees on the shop floor to upper-level leadership), Kaizen event teams usually consist of 6-10 people and should be strategically chosen. Keep in mind the following when choosing team members:

• At least half of the team should be made up of people who regularly perform the work that the Kaizen event is intended to improve.
• Limit the number of managers/company leaders on the team.
• Choose team members from a wide range of relevant departments, who all touch the process being improved
• Include people who provide input to the area
• Include people who receive output from the area
• Include subject matter experts who have special knowledge about the process. • Include someone who’s not directly involved in the process to provide an outside perspective.

Define success

It’s imperative to be able to objectively measure success from your Kaizen event and other continuous improvement efforts. Identify metrics that quantify improvements. These may include metrics revolving around quality, cost, resource utilization, customer satisfaction, space utilization, staff efficiency, and other KPIs. Set benchmarks for improvement by measuring your current performance.

Provide training

Communicate expectations to the facilitator and team members.

Outline the event schedule

Have a rough schedule mapped out, including what you hope to achieve in the Kaizen event. Identify milestones for each day of the event.

Here is a typical outline for a week-long Kaizen event:

Day 1 : Define your goals for the event. Map and measure the process’s current state and identify wastes. Decide on desired results.

Day 2 : Consider the root causes of wastes and identify possible solutions. Achieve consensus on improvements to be implemented. Document resources needed to apply improvements.

Day 3 : Implement the improvements.

Day 4 : Test the improvements. Measure the results of improvements made and apply any necessary adjustments. Standardize and document new procedures.

Day 5 : Train employees on new standard work procedures. Communicate the changes to the organization. Recognize and reward team members who contributed to the success.

Measuring the impact of your Kaizen event is crucial to the success of future Kaizen efforts. In order to accurately measure improvements resulting from your Kaizen event, it’s important to make sure you have complete and accurate data about your operations before, during, and after your Kaizen event. Digitizing your operations using manufacturing software such as Tulip is a good way to gain visibility into your operations. Tulip collects data from your shop-floor employees, machines, and tools as they perform their tasks, so you can get an accurate view of production and quality metrics such as production rate, defect and scrap rate as well as defect causes, and process timing such as process and step cycle times. With this data in hand, you can conduct analyses into the effects of your continuous improvement efforts over time by using Tulip’s real-time analytics tools .

As always, Kaizen doesn’t stop when you’ve successfully completed your Kaizen event. You should see this Kaizen event as just in an ongoing series of efforts and improvements. Building a mindset of continuous improvement among your organization’s culture requires daily practice, and with time, you’ll see an increase in the efficiency, productivity, and quality of your operations.

For more resources to help you achieve continuous improvement in your factory, check out our Ultimate Guide to Kaizen .

Enable continuous improvement with Tulip

See how a system of apps can capture real-time data and error-proof workflows with a free trial of Tulip.