We’ve all heard the old adage, “If at first you don’t succeed, try, try, again.” It is a common phrase that reminds us of persistence and dedication but for those of us in the Lean world it is also a reminder of one of the often overlooked fundamentals: Trystorming. Trystorming is different from brainstorming in that it encourages the rapid development and test of an idea rather than merely thinking about the possible solutions. Often in our desire to design the perfect Future State we forget that the best way to build a process that works is through the iterative process of trying, adjusting/correcting, and trying again.

Why Trystorm?

One of the key reasons to utilize trystorming as part of any process design activity is that it models action rather than talk. By leaving the conference room and actually trying ideas during the course of the work, your team will quickly realize that your activity is more than just a meeting or an exercise in theory. In addition, taking action typically increases the level of idea generation and team engagement exponentially. By mocking up and trying concepts the team will be able to visualize their ideas and transform plans into tangible improvements quickly. While trystorming requires much more energy than the traditional design approach, use of this methodology will significantly reduce the overall time needed to reach a workable solution.

Why do we skip it?

Given that trystorming is a relatively basic/simple tool for Lean implementation, why do we often neglect to put this concept into practice? In some instances I believe this step is bypassed in our zeal to use more complex Lean tools or Six Sigma analysis to attack the issues. In many of these cases, the iterative process of trying and refining solutions to achieve the desired outcome is considered “lower order” problem solving and project leaders are lead to believe that application of “higher order” tools will be the most efficient approach. In fact, for most problems this is not the case, and issues that could have been resolved in a matter of hours or days through trystorming linger for weeks and even months while more complex problem solving methods are employed. There is certainly a time and place for more complex tool utilization; however, we must not lose sight of the value of trystorming in our quest to use them.

Another possible reason that trystorming is overlooked is our natural dislike of failure. Today’s society has created such a stigma around failure that we cannot bear to have our names attached to a project or idea that did not succeed on the first try. This stigma has engrained in most of us a fear that presents itself as “analysis paralysis” and a desire to work out the minute details of a process before trying it. For many this is a much easier route than facing potential judgment for a failed experiment. We must remember that many of the world’s greatest discoveries were the result of a failed experiment. As Lean practitioners we must push past this fear in order to truly understand the nature of trystorming.

In order to get past many of the previously mentioned fears and minimize the impact of failure, many Lean organizations have designated certain areas as “models” for testing. In doing so, they create a safe environment in which to test new ideas, try new processes and measure outcomes. These areas become a “Petri dish” for new ideas and organic growth within the organization. If you cannot dedicate an area of your facility to this type of activity then another alternative is to find areas where specific ideas can be piloted and improved before rolling them out to the facility.

Regardless of where your trystorming occurs, the key point is that it is occurring. Don’t forfeit the opportunity to accelerate the pace of change through trystorming in the quest to slowly define the “perfect” process.

This week’s blog was written by HPP’s Marshall Leslie. Marshall, a Six Sigma Blackbelt, oversees various HPP projects and Lean Healthcare transformations for clients throughout the USA. As a former multiple year “top-ten percent” performer at General Electric, Marshall brings clients the much needed tools and techniques needed in any industry, including healthcare. Marshall is a graduate of General Electric’s Operations Management Leadership Program; he has experience in various supply chain capacities including quality engineering and global sourcing for both GE and Procter & Gamble. Marshall’s expertise in both Six Sigma and Lean enables him to apply a broad spectrum of process improvement tools tailored to the healthcare industry’s needs. He holds a degree in Industrial and Systems Engineering from Georgia Tech.