fPaper Outline:

1. Hypothesis-driven improvements and processes (Eisha)

2. Agriculture industry (Eisha)
3. Lack of procedural ambiguity (Richard)
4. Construction industry - prefabricated homes (Richard)
5. Constructed chain of command (Amogh)
6. Service industry (e.g. Softwares Assisted Services) (Amogh)
7. Investment in employees (e.g. education, engagement, etc.) (Iris)
8. Further education in healthcare industry (Iris)

Paper draft on the next page.

 Unlike typical organizations that hire scientists to conduct their research, Toyota works to instill
scientific principles and methodology into all of its employees (Spear & Bowen, 1999). Proposed changes
not only take innovative problem solving but rigorous hypothesis testing that begins at the level of the
workers and managers (Spear & Bowen, 1999). This contrary to the trial-and-error method which
bypasses deeper understanding of problems and is less productive. Simple application of the hypothesis
testing approach allows for efficient understanding of whether an activity in the production process is
working effectively. For example, if a worker is unable to install a steering wheel in the designated time
frame, it would indicate that one of the following hypothesis is invalid: (1) the individual installing the
steering wheel possesses the correct qualifications to complete the task; (2) the steering wheel can be
correctly installed in the alloted time (Spear & Bowen, 1999). In this manner, hypothesis based testing
allows discovery of the root issue in the inefficiency and subsequently, enhanced redesigning. For
example, Toyota may wish to speed up the process of adding wheels to their vehicles from 10 minutes to
6 minutes. However, when only able to achieve 8 minutes, Toyota would encourage its employees to
delve deeper and understand the individual impact of each aspect of the new process as opposed to taking
the combined changes at face value. This unique aspect of Toyota contributes to its success through
enhanced employee involvement and commitment to the company as well as through thorough production
systems.

This principle would be especially useful in the agricultural industry. It should come as no
surprise that the current agricultural output does not meet demand. In applying hypothesis-based testing in
the agricultural technology, increased productivity with reduced environmental impact could be achieved.
For example, countries in East Africa face reduced productivity due to labour bottlenecks and educational
inadequacies on efficient farming practices (Nisrane et al, 2011). By testing specific hypotheses, as
opposed to trial-and-error, the underlying causes for the bottlenecks could be distinguished. Furthermore,
different educational methods could be tested with hypotheses to determine the most effective manner of
spreading farming practice information. For instance, the following hypothesis could be tested: Providing
formal, in-person sessions on enhanced farming practices will generate interest in employing these
agricultural practices. If a trial-based approach was undertaken, a sufficient learning mechanism could be
utilized as opposed to the best practice. By striving to achieve scientific rigour in future design and
structure implementations, the agricultural industry could strive for the optimal output rate.

Another principle that Toyota implements is its lack of procedural ambiguity. By standardizing
and tracking every little action made by its employees as well as requests by customers, Toyota is able to
easily identify the responsibilities of each employee. The rule helps facilitate a customer and supplier
relationship between each employee as it keeps them accountable for themselves, knowing full well that
their work can directly affect the work of others (Spear & Bowen, 1999). It is not uncommon for other
companies to direct a significant amount of resources to coordinating people, but it is uncommon for them
to be very direct and unambiguous. For example, any supervisor can help out for any kind of problem as
there is no specific person assigned to any one issue. Toyota was able to recognize the disadvantage of
this common approach as they believe that when a problem belongs to everybody, nobody takes the
initiative (Spear & Bowen, 1999).

One particular industry that can greatly benefit from this principle of unambiguity is the
construction industry. In companies like Ledcor or Metric Modular, the employees are each given specific
tasks and responsibilities to work on, whether it be in the foundation, the studs for the walls, etc. The
principle of unambiguity greatly falls into play in this industry as it is crucial for each employee to know
what his/her role is the project so as to maximize efficiency, allowing for the project to finish on time for
the client. This is especially true for projects of large magnitudes that employ hundreds of employees
each with their own niche set of skills. If the construction workers were to suffer from role ambiguity and
not understand what role they have, it is inevitable that they will work on some unrelated tasks in their
daily work (Leung et. al, 2015).

In conjunction to having the scientific method ingrained in the way they solve problems, Toyota
also employs an explicit teaching model where all levels of management are involved in teaching and
training other employees. One of the differentiating factors for Toyota in this respect, and what makes
this teaching model successful, is that all managers have the skills and experience to execute the tasks of
the people they supervise. Therefore, they are well-equipped to teach their employees how to solve
problems, to guide them to important realizations, and to challenge their preconceived notions and
boundaries. In this way, the organization as a whole can continue to improve. Furthermore, Toyota hired
consultants to take on the role of “learner-leader-teachers” (Spear & Bowen, 1999) to support upper
management in leading the organization to an ideal state (by Toyota’s definitions) by ensuring a high
quality in learning throughout the organization. This model not only commits employees at all levels of
the organization to take part in learning and problem solving, but it also imposes a sense of responsibility
when it comes to implementing changes, solutions, or improvements. For example, the employees
directly involved in a problem are responsible for carrying out the proper solution and improvements,
under the guidance of their common supervisor (teacher). This teaching model therefore ensures that
problems are not just being identified, but also effectively resolved and improved by the responsible
parties involved.

Toyota’s principle of teaching, learning, and improving under a cascading teaching model rooted
in the scientific method can be implemented within the healthcare and medical industry. Many teaching
hospitals invest resources to organize continuing medical education (CME) events with the purpose to
improve healthcare quality. These events are generally available to and attended by medical and research
staff (and sometimes upper management). Therefore, the major difference compared to Toyota is that not
all levels of employees participate in learning and problem solving. While there are inherent teaching
hierarchies, namely in the training of medical students, residents, and fellows, not all levels of employees
have a supervisor who takes on a teaching role. The responsibility of implementing changes and
improvements also fall on the shoulders of healthcare professionals who are in direct contact with
patients, resulting in slow progress over time (Levine et. al, 2016). Therefore, by adopting a model similar
to Toyota’s where managers take on teaching roles, healthcare professionals could be better supported.
Implementation of solutions and improvements could be made at all levels and clearer responsibilities
could be imposed, leading the organization as a whole to greater success and improved healthcare.
 A defining characteristic of the Toyota methodology is their deep-rooted sense of clear, concise
and direct pathways between processes and people. The flow of any process is independent of resource or
personnel availability or similar uncertain parameters (Spear & Bowen, 1999). There is a decided, fixed
chain of command and order of hierarchy through which a product or service moves. Since these
pathways are established through experimentation and scientific methodology, there is an understanding
of its purpose and reasoning amongst all the individuals involved. In situations where experienced
personnel are required to step in and assist any individual on the floor, there is a specified chain of people
right from the shop floor employee to the plant manager, usually up to 5 links long (Spear & Bowen,
1999). The advantage of this highly granular, disaggregated frame of working is that potential bottlenecks
which stem from ambiguity or inaccuracy are essentially eliminated. Wait times and chokes in the flow
are also minimized since every person has a designated helper for any given bottleneck or assistance. The
detailed structure of support and guidance for every employee tends to create a very stable and rigid
network of processes that are both well-defined and smoothly executed.

An industry that could benefit from this way of work is Software as a Service (SaaS). In
companies such as Salesforce, Proofpoint and Oracle, clients are provided with a Service Level
Agreement that highlights all of the ground level parameters of the subscriped service. While these
agreements explicitly mention the obligations of both parties, the service being provided is never specific
to particular individuals or functions for a given task. For example, in Proofpoint’s publicly available
SLAs, we can see that the description of troubleshooting or usage issues does not include any specific
person or team that would be directly responsible for solving the problem (Proofpoint, 2016). These
companies would benefit from a Toyota inspired chain of command where any kind of service required
by clients is very specifically assigned to individuals, who can escalate the concern up a fixed path. This
would not only make it more convenient for clients to have a single point of contact for a given grievance,
but also reduce response times and lags in communications.
 References

Leung, M.-yung, Chan, I. Y. S., & Cooper, C. L. (2015). Stress Management in the Construction Industry
(p. 125).

Levine, D. M., Linder, J. A., & Landon, B. E. (2016). The quality of outpatient care delivered to adults
in the united states, 2002 to 2013. JAMA Internal Medicine, 176(12), 1778-1790.
doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.6217

Nisrane, F., Berhane, G., Asrat, S., Getachew, G., Taffesse, A. S., & Hoddinott, J. (2001). Sources of
inefficiency and growth in agricultural output in subsistence agriculture. International Food Policy
Research Institute , 55. Retrieved from https://www.ifpri.org/publication/sources-inefficiency-and-
growth-agricultural-output-subsistence-agriculture

Proofpoint (2016). Proofpoint Hosted Services Service Level Agreement [PDF file].
Retrieved from https://www.proofpoint.com/sites/default/files/general_terms_hosted_services_sla_-
_mar_2016.pdf