Question

Per the textbook, to eliminate or reduce non-value-added work is a core step in improving profitability or efficiency of the business process. Give your opinion on whether or not you agree or disagree with this statement and include one (1) example of a business process which supports or criticizes the aforementioned statement to support your position. Determine at least two (2) challenges in identifying Opportunity for Improvements (OFIs). Suggest at least one (1) strategy that business management can use to mitigate the challenges in question. Provide a rationale to support your suggestion.

Answer 1

ANSWER;

Consider the non-manufacturing example of a flight to the Bahamas. The value-adding part of that process is the actual flight itself. The non-value-added parts of that process are driving to the airport, parking at the airport, walking to the terminal and then to check-in, waiting in line at check-in, walking to the security check, and so on. Many times the non-value-added time far exceeds the value-added time in this type of process. Where should our improvement efforts be focused—on the non value-added steps or on making the plane fly faster?

Understanding the difference between value and waste and value-added and non-value-added processes is critical to understanding lean. Sometimes it is not easy to discern the difference when looking at an entire supply chain. The best way is to look at the components of the supply chain and apply lean thinking to each one and determine how to link the processes to reduce waste.

Efficiency thinking is setting the quality level as “good enough” we don’t need to strive for perfection. Effectiveness thinking is thinking about the lifetime of a product (and the effects on the whole organisation “system”) which in the long run will cost less. If we do it right first time (which might be more costly at the outset), it actually saves our organisation money in the long run). Effectiveness is doing the right thing. Efficiency is doing things right.

Many “Lean” organisations could be doing the wrong things righter. Making things efficient that shouldn’t be done in the first place. Doing a lot of efficient things but not effective things. This is what Toyota turned on its head, following the work of Taguchi. Let’s do the right thing first, THEN we will make it efficient