FREE LEAN PROCESS IMPROVEMENT LEARNING PATH

WikiFree original practice workbook

The improvement workshop

CASE STATUS: fictional/synthetic teaching material. Do not present the example as real research, employment experience or measured business performance.

OUTCOME
Map a small process, distinguish work from waiting and propose a measurable improvement with a balancing check.

BEFORE YOU START
Basic arithmetic and observation skills; the case uses supplied synthetic times.

CASE
Fern Print Desk processes a poster request through intake, proofing and printing. Each request takes 8, 12 and 10 minutes of active work. It waits 60 minutes before proofing and 90 before printing. The training case is a service process, not a healthcare procedure.

INPUTS
Step,Active minutes,Waiting before next step
Intake,8,60
Proofing,12,90
Printing,10,0


ENTRY CHECK

Question: Is all non-processing time automatically removable waste?

Self-check: No. Investigate its purpose and constraints before removing it.

Question: Can faster output with more defects be called an improvement?

Self-check: Only after considering quality and other balancing measures.

Question: Does a before-and-after change prove causality?

Self-check: Not by itself; other conditions may have changed.

STAGE 1: Define value and the boundary

Prerequisite: Basic arithmetic and observation skills; the case uses supplied synthetic times.

Instruction: Describe value from the recipient’s task, not from the amount of activity in the department. State where the process begins and ends so timing comparisons use the same boundary. Separate customer requirements from internal convenience. A faster intake is unhelpful if it sends incomplete specifications downstream and increases proofing rework.

Practice task: Write the request-to-accepted-poster boundary, three recipient requirements and one process measure. Identify what would make an output unusable.

Deliverable: A process purpose and boundary statement

Acceptance check: The endpoint is accepted output and quality requirements are explicit.

If stuck: If the purpose says keep the printer busy, rewrite it around the recipient’s completed task.

Record your work, decisions and evidence:




Record your result against the acceptance check:



STAGE 2: Map the current condition

Prerequisite: Bring your previous output: A process purpose and boundary statement

Instruction: A current-state map should include queues and information handoffs as well as active work. Use actual observations where available and clearly label the synthetic case. Keep time units consistent. Do not draw the proposed future state as though it already exists. The first map is an explanation of what happens now and where further observation is needed.

Practice task: Map the three active steps and two waits. Calculate total active time and elapsed time, then identify the longest wait.

Deliverable: A current-state value-stream sketch

Acceptance check: Active time is 30 minutes and elapsed time is 180 minutes; printing wait is 90.

If stuck: If the map totals only 30 minutes, add queue time rather than assuming work flows continuously.

Record your work, decisions and evidence:




Record your result against the acceptance check:



STAGE 3: Investigate the cause

Prerequisite: Bring your previous output: A current-state value-stream sketch

Instruction: A cause hypothesis must connect to evidence. The 90-minute queue may reflect batch release, setup constraints or missing approvals; a long queue alone does not tell you which. Use a small cause-and-evidence table before selecting a solution. Ask what observation would disprove your preferred explanation. This protects the team from buying a tool to solve the wrong problem.

Practice task: Propose three possible causes of the printing wait and one observation for each. Choose a hypothesis to test without claiming it is already proven.

Deliverable: A cause-and-evidence table

Acceptance check: Each proposed cause has a discriminating observation and an explicit uncertainty.

If stuck: If every cause points to worker effort, examine batching, information quality and scheduling rules.

Record your work, decisions and evidence:




Record your result against the acceptance check:



STAGE 4: Design a modest experiment

Prerequisite: Bring your previous output: A cause-and-evidence table

Instruction: An improvement experiment changes a defined condition and checks its effect. Here, trial smaller release batches while retaining the proof approval. Set a balancing measure such as reprint rate or setup time. Keep the scope small enough to reverse if it worsens quality. An A3-style narrative works when it connects condition, cause hypothesis, action and evidence; the page size is not the method.

Practice task: Plan a one-week smaller-batch trial. Predict a change in waiting, set a reprint-rate guardrail and define how to record comparable requests.

Deliverable: An improvement experiment brief

Acceptance check: The plan has a prediction, comparison window, quality guardrail and stop rule.

If stuck: If the intervention removes proofing, explain how quality will be protected before proceeding.

Record your work, decisions and evidence:




Record your result against the acceptance check:



STAGE 5: Standardize only what works

Prerequisite: Bring your previous output: An improvement experiment brief

Instruction: A new process is not better because its map looks cleaner. Compare observed outcomes with the prediction and inspect unintended effects. If the trial succeeds, write the minimum useful standard and a review trigger. If it fails, retain what was learned and change the hypothesis. Do not erase inconvenient results to make the experiment appear successful.

Practice task: Assume printing wait falls to 45 minutes while all other times and quality remain unchanged. Calculate the new elapsed time and propose a standard and review trigger.

Deliverable: A result review and provisional standard

Acceptance check: Elapsed time becomes 135 minutes, a 25% reduction; unchanged quality is an explicit case assumption.

If stuck: If the report claims 50% overall improvement, distinguish the halved queue from the whole process.

Record your work, decisions and evidence:




Record your result against the acceptance check:



WORKED CASE
The current process is 8+60+12+90+10=180 minutes, with 30 active minutes. Reducing only the printing wait from 90 to 45 yields 135 minutes overall. The improvement is 45/180=25%, not 50%. Whether it persists requires further observation.

FINAL PROJECT
Deliver the Fern improvement case: boundary, current map, cause hypotheses, trial plan and a cautious result/standardization decision.

REQUIRED CRITICAL CHECK
Do not invent observations, remove a quality check without replacement or confuse one queue improvement with total-process improvement.

SCORING
Score each of the five stage acceptance checks from 0–16 (0 missing/incorrect; 8 partially supported; 16 complete and evidenced). Score the final integrated project from 0–20 (0 missing; 10 incomplete handover; 20 complete, reproducible and consistent with the case). Target: at least 80/100 AND the critical check must pass. A total score never overrides a failed critical check.

SCOPE LIMIT
This is an introductory service-process project, not Six Sigma certification or a validated industrial-control design.

SOURCES AND ACCESS
Assigned public videos can be watched free. Complete the original case in a text editor, on paper or in a spreadsheet you already have. No paid course, exam or provider certificate is included.

Free MIT Course: Lean Six Sigma and Process Improvement
WikiFree: https://wikifree.com/courses/mit-lean-six-sigma-and-process-improvement/
Official source: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLUl4u3cNGP60dsF8ICyGEiSJcTYzQWSVZ
Why selected: The MIT lean, mapping, quality-tool and A3 selections support a disciplined small improvement cycle; healthcare-specific units are outside this assessed route.

Stage 1 selected lessons:

1. Ses. 1-2: The Start of Your Lean Journey (1:00:49)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1K4pkhtad8&list=PLUl4u3cNGP60dsF8ICyGEiSJcTYzQWSVZ&index=1

2. Ses. 1-3: Lean Thinking: Part I (43:19)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POBjtg7oDFg&list=PLUl4u3cNGP60dsF8ICyGEiSJcTYzQWSVZ&index=2

Stage 2 selected lessons:

5. Ses. 1-6: Value Stream Mapping Basics (33:38)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ba8ZyAmffAM&list=PLUl4u3cNGP60dsF8ICyGEiSJcTYzQWSVZ&index=5

Stage 3 selected lessons:

13. Ses. 3-5: Quality Tools and Topics (26:15)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQRfikgHzdg&list=PLUl4u3cNGP60dsF8ICyGEiSJcTYzQWSVZ&index=13

Stage 4 selected lessons:

12. Ses. 3-4: A3 Thinking (24:47)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1KloN7Ub0M&list=PLUl4u3cNGP60dsF8ICyGEiSJcTYzQWSVZ&index=12

REUSE
Original WikiFree teaching text and synthetic fixtures are supplied for personal learning and adaptation with attribution. Provider lessons remain on their original sites and retain their own terms. No provider certificate is included.