Hoshin With 27 Priorities
Helio Distribution operates five regional warehouses and has launched hoshin kanri for the first time. The executive team produced 27 annual objectives, including 'world-class safety,' '99.5% on-time delivery,' 'inventory turns of 12,' 'zero overtime,' 'automate 40% of picking,' and 'reduce cost per case by 8%.' Each function translated these into its own dashboard: operations tracks cases per labor hour, sales tracks revenue per order, finance tracks working capital, and customer service tracks first-contact resolution. At monthly reviews, every leader presents a green dashboard, yet customers report late deliveries, warehouse overtime is 14%, and inventory is up 9%. The A3s submitted are mostly status updates with action lists and no clear problem statement or target condition. The COO wants to know why hoshin is not working and asks you to redesign the process for the next planning cycle in 10 weeks.
1. Diagnose the flaws in this hoshin deployment. Distinguish issues in objective setting, deployment, and review.
Read the worked answer
Objective setting. Twenty-seven objectives is an annual wish list, not strategic focus. Several objectives conflict: 99.5% OTD, inventory turns of 12, zero overtime, and 8% cost reduction cannot all be pursued without explicit trade-offs. There are no baselines or target conditions, so 'world-class safety' and 'automate 40%' are slogans rather than measurable breakthroughs.
Deployment. Each function translated the objectives into its own dashboard. That is functional deployment, not hoshin. There is no catchball, no cross-functional X-matrix linking objectives to improvement priorities, and no shared value-stream measures. Operations optimizes cases per labor hour, sales optimizes revenue per order, finance optimizes working capital, and customer service optimizes first-contact resolution. Each can be green while the customer experiences late delivery.
Review. Monthly reviews accept green dashboards without asking for leading indicators, obstacles, or countermeasures. The A3s are status reports with action lists, not problem-solving documents with a problem statement, current and target condition, root cause, and test. The review system rewards presentation, not learning.
2. Propose a redesigned hoshin process for the next cycle. Include how many objectives, how to cascade, and how A3s and reviews fit.
Read the worked answer
Redesign for the 10-week cycle. Limit the enterprise to three breakthrough objectives, for example: improve customer OTD to 99.5%, reduce total inventory while protecting service, and improve warehouse productivity without mandatory overtime. Each executive owns no more than one or two. Set a baseline, target condition, and deadline for each.
Cascade with catchball. Build an X-matrix: annual objectives, annual targets, improvement priorities, and owners. Functions propose how they will contribute, and the executive team challenges and reconciles trade-offs. Use value-stream measures, not only departmental ones: OTD, dock-to-dock lead time, inventory days, overtime, and cost per case.
A3s. Each priority gets one A3 with problem statement, current condition, target condition, root-cause analysis, countermeasures, plan, and follow-up. A3s are living documents, not monthly status slides.
Reviews. Monthly gemba reviews ask about process, obstacles, and next experiments. Weekly owner check-ins track leading indicators. The COO reviews the system, not just the dashboard colour.
3. The COO says 'just tell me which KPI matters most.' How do you respond, and what would you do with the conflicting targets on inventory, OTD, and overtime?
Read the worked answer
Response. There is no single KPI that can run a distribution business, but there is a primary customer promise. I would make on-time delivery the primary outcome and treat inventory turns and overtime as guardrails, not equal priorities. A green inventory dashboard achieved by late delivery is not success.
Resolve the conflict explicitly. Set OTD at 99.5% as the customer commitment. Set inventory turns as a secondary target with a service boundary: reduce inventory in stages, but pause if OTD falls or stockouts rise. Treat zero overtime as a constraint on planned cost, not an absolute; use flex capacity and level scheduling, and allow overtime only as a controlled buffer. Automate picking only where it supports flow and accuracy, not as a standalone target.
Use a balanced review. Track OTD, inventory days, overtime, cost per case, and first-contact resolution together. Ask which trade-off is being made each month. Document the trade-off in the hoshin so leaders cannot optimize their own dashboard while the customer experiences the system failure.