Results of this initial work afford team members (in many cases for the first time) a comprehensive understanding of operating performance from page flow to the doorstep. Almost always the results show that time- and cost-consuming constraints are not a by-product of any singular aspect of the production or distribution process, but that multiple factors are involved.

Consequently, substantial improvements require systemic changes or — as many project teams have realized — entirely rethinking their business operations.

While systemic changes and rethinking business models may seem like a daunting task, utilizing a logical four-step approach streamlines the process:

1. Define the specific opportunities and corresponding solutions or list of alternatives to pursue.

2. Design new operating models that showcase the opportunities in various scenarios.

3. Review the models and refine them through an iterative evaluation process.

4. Choose a final model for the final phase of the project – detailed modeling and impact assessment.

This approach ensures a focused project that allows the client, owner and project team to be results-oriented.

What opportunity looks like

Opportunity means that the project team shifts its focus from how work is done today to how work can be done in the future.

Thinking about future work processes uncovers opportunities for cost and time savings. Opportunities to analyze might include:

• Increasing throughput by relieving bottlenecks in equipment or labor

• Decoupling processes, for example, allowing single-copy production to proceed regardless of the truck readiness

• Improving work coordination and planning

• Improving information systems

• Reducing redundant process steps and handling

• Reducing, or dehassling, complexity throughout the system. Examples include simplifying mainsheet editioning, inserting packages, distribution routes and driver schedules

• Uncovering time pad such as “conservative” guaranteed travel times. For example, a drive time to a distribution center may be listed as 50 minutes, but during the discovery phase it turns out that the drive time is actually 25 minutes and the excess time is “pad.” The opportunity phase explores how to better utilize this time.

The press chart above shows how diverse opportunities can lead to an improved press net and that it is critical to harmonize many different elements toward a common goal.

Developing models

Rather than looking for incremental changes, end-to-end process analysis is about new ways of working. Modeling becomes the backbone of a project team’s work because it enables an objective and quantitative assessment of an operating vision. By modeling various scenarios, the team can judge the feasibility of operating alternatives.

Additionally, modeling also supports the consultants’ role as it enables a third-party perspective that can depersonalize critical analysis.

Assumptions, the foundation of all end-to-end modeling, must be agreed upon by all team members. Just as a structure cannot be trusted without a firm foundation, the validity of the new models rests heavily on the acceptance of their key assumptions. An assumption can be as simple as estimating the time from cold start to the first good copy to as challenging as forecasting draw in three years. Ultimately, complex models can be supported by a list of as many as 40 assumptions, each of which must be resolved and agreed upon by the project team in order to ensure successful, robust models.

Exploring new operating models helps achieve the project goals that were developed early in the discovery phase. For example, if reducing cost is a stated goal, then the models will seek to find scenarios to remove cost from the system. If time is the team’s focus, then models will look at a variety of ways to remove time from the system. Because the team is not looking for incremental benefit, but is seeking systemic changes that will support long-term business goals and strategy, choice is critical to making strong decisions. Simply stated, the more options the team can explore, the more likely it is the results will be significant.

Model review

In order to gain further confidence and detail in the new models, the project team can form separate sub-teams to focus on specific model elements. Adjunct team members such as financial or information systems experts can add value to this process; nighttime crew members can offer yet another perspective. From the pressroom, mailroom, distribution centers and dock area, sub-teams meet to perform the detailed analysis required to reach consensus.

Sub-teams often begin by revisiting the model process and challenging the model assumptions. Confidence can be gained through extended data analysis, conversations with key employees, and even on-site tests to confirm performance assumptions. The sub-teams succeed by delving into the models with greater detail and vigor as the models are refined.

Choosing final models:

The opportunity-phase review

After the models have undergone several reviews by the project sub-teams, the end-to-end project team is poised to determine which models should be pursued further, and which can be eliminated. Models succeed for a variety of reasons:

• It may be a simple case of return on investment due to capital, labor or other costs.

• The model may best achieve the blend of operational, distribution or other project goals.

• The operating or consumer risk is more palatable than in other models.

• The model is flexible in accommodating diverse product strategies.

As facilitators and project managers, the consultants’ role is to ensure that the team members maintain the original project focus. Additionally, the consultants keep the focus on the high-level modeling that takes place at this phase. While the models are directionally accurate, they are in no way implementation-ready.

Implementation work will be discussed in the next article, detailed modeling and impact analysis.