An online networking resource for product development professionals
Is there value in value stream mapping?
In the production world, "value" is one of the main tenets of lean philosophy and value stream analysis and mapping (VSA/M) considered a critical first step in beginning a lean manufacturing implementation. Whether or not this holds true for product development is a subject of debate.
For a good background on VSA/M, you'll definitely want to download the following article from MIT's Lean Aerospace Initiative:
"Value Stream Analysis and Mapping for Product Development"
by Hugh L. McManus and Richard L. Millard
This article will provide you with a thorough understanding of VSA/M's place in the Lean toolbox, how it is generally applied, the types of analysis required, sample output charts and some examples of how it is used by real companies.
Like all tools used in the manufacturing environment, particular scrutiny must be paid to how well they may work in the development and engineering areas. The specific debate regarding VSA/M centers on disagreements about the tool's benefit vs its cost.
Proponents of mapping tools will argue that you can not properly focus or even identify opportunities for improvement until you can map the system fully. Those with a contrary view will counter that the VSA/M exercise consumes valuable time and resources better spent focusing on more immediate high leverage improvements.
It does appear that VSA/M is of most use with large and complex projects. This seems logical and in line with the fact that the above article is taken from the aerospace industry. Also, VSA/M requires much time to do the necessary data collection, compilation and examination, and it takes much effort before you even can begin to see the value that is being mapped.
If you look at Figure 5 from the article, you will see a sample data collection sheet from a VSA/M exercise. From this it is easy to see the level of effort required as this is supposedly just a single data sheet from a system that could easily require hundreds more to complete the full map.
One could argue that a small, less complex project would be more manageable to map, but by the same token, you could say that a smaller, less complex project should not require such robust data to sort out the highest leverage opportunities for lean process application.
These types of value stream data sheets also seem to convert the product development process to a "gaming" system one might find in popular resource management simulation games such as SimCity or Theme Park Tycoon. In such games, a player can affect his success in managing something like an amusement park by tweaking numbers, for example, adding extra entrances to reduce wait time, raising concession prices strategically, etc. With value stream data maps, one could similarly play with scenarios like reducing the approval gates in the design process or changing the priority level of a particular test mode. This is not a judgement, just an interesting observation.
For those reading this, what are your thoughts on the value of value stream mapping? Is it an essential first step or glorified goose chase (or somewhere in the middle)?
For a good background on VSA/M, you'll definitely want to download the following article from MIT's Lean Aerospace Initiative:
"Value Stream Analysis and Mapping for Product Development"
by Hugh L. McManus and Richard L. Millard
This article will provide you with a thorough understanding of VSA/M's place in the Lean toolbox, how it is generally applied, the types of analysis required, sample output charts and some examples of how it is used by real companies.Like all tools used in the manufacturing environment, particular scrutiny must be paid to how well they may work in the development and engineering areas. The specific debate regarding VSA/M centers on disagreements about the tool's benefit vs its cost.
Proponents of mapping tools will argue that you can not properly focus or even identify opportunities for improvement until you can map the system fully. Those with a contrary view will counter that the VSA/M exercise consumes valuable time and resources better spent focusing on more immediate high leverage improvements.
It does appear that VSA/M is of most use with large and complex projects. This seems logical and in line with the fact that the above article is taken from the aerospace industry. Also, VSA/M requires much time to do the necessary data collection, compilation and examination, and it takes much effort before you even can begin to see the value that is being mapped.
If you look at Figure 5 from the article, you will see a sample data collection sheet from a VSA/M exercise. From this it is easy to see the level of effort required as this is supposedly just a single data sheet from a system that could easily require hundreds more to complete the full map.
One could argue that a small, less complex project would be more manageable to map, but by the same token, you could say that a smaller, less complex project should not require such robust data to sort out the highest leverage opportunities for lean process application.
These types of value stream data sheets also seem to convert the product development process to a "gaming" system one might find in popular resource management simulation games such as SimCity or Theme Park Tycoon. In such games, a player can affect his success in managing something like an amusement park by tweaking numbers, for example, adding extra entrances to reduce wait time, raising concession prices strategically, etc. With value stream data maps, one could similarly play with scenarios like reducing the approval gates in the design process or changing the priority level of a particular test mode. This is not a judgement, just an interesting observation.
For those reading this, what are your thoughts on the value of value stream mapping? Is it an essential first step or glorified goose chase (or somewhere in the middle)?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Herskovitz on -
The short answer to the question posed above is "yes". I am an engineer, so to me "a picture is worth 1000's of words". However, I believe that when applying Lean tools to R&D processes (particularly in the pharmaceutical research and development domain), the concept of VSM may need to be modified slightly. Since an R&D organization may have difficulties narrowing down the set of "values" it delivers (there are so many customers), it may be helpful to think of a value stream and a complementary set of "enabling feeder streams". For example, when one examines R&D processes and creates a map of the transactions (rather than the innovation, intellectual or scale-up) processes, it is suggested that it may be easier to have R&D scientists pick a "value" associated with regulatory filing or clinical trials, and map all the enabling feeder streams as a way to (a) visualize the complex transactional processes that scientists must follow and (b) to provide a visual mean by which to examine opportunities for process simplification.
-
Permalink Reply by Robert May on
-
I am not sure I have a short answer.
I agree with Michaels response in that visualization is very important. However - I do believe that the "Fuzzy Front End" is very different from traditional Manufacturing processes. At this point you often do not know what comes next until you have completed the task at hand - for example - an analysis may lead to more analysis, some test, some research or some redesign - but the key is standard work elements - so if Value stream mapping somehow allows you to identify these then its useful. I do believe a decision based framework rather than activity based framework is more appropriate here.
Later in Product Development things are more linear and transactional so I feel VSM should be a valuable tool.
About
© 2010 Created by Alex Cooper on Ning. Create a Ning Network!
