Processes must incorporate “poka-yoke” to be error-proof

Consumers have been complaining in droves about companies' mistakes on the internet for a long time. However, the impression is that this has been increasing more and more.

The “Procômetro,” for example, an indicator from Procon-SP that adds up the amounts involved in customer complaints, recorded around R$ 1.8 billion in complaints last year alone. And by May of this year, the 2023 total had already exceeded R$ 1.5 billion, which indicates that we will soon have a record.

This ends up becoming an Achilles' heel for many companies, whose wear and tear caused by excessive complaints is sometimes impossible to overcome.

Of course, organizations' mistakes happen for a variety of reasons. Many companies tend to hold employees responsible for most of the failures that end up generating problems detected by customers. They always look for an explanation in some lapse of attention or in their not following details that the process required.

In the lean system, the stance is the opposite: of course people need to perform their tasks as well as possible, but, first and foremost, processes need to be designed to prevent the possibility of failures occurring as much as possible.

In the lean system, we call this “poka-yoke,” a Japanese expression that can be translated as “mistake-proofing.” These are systems that make it difficult or even completely impossible for an error to occur.

In companies, this idea emerged at Toyota, the cradle of the lean system. Since then, it has been spreading through factories and offices. For example, when a device is created that only allows a product to move along the production line if all the screws are properly tightened. Or a digital system in which you cannot go to the next screen unless all the required data has been entered.

If well thought out and applied at the critical points of processes, poka-yoke devices do not allow failures to occur or go unnoticed. In fact, the concept of poka-yoke can and should go beyond systems acting at specific points. Its application can be broadened toward a culture in which everyone relentlessly searches for possible risks or vulnerabilities, with the aim of making all of the company's activities mistake-proof.

For example, by developing simple processes. The more complex a process is, with many back-and-forths, the greater the chance that it will allow failures. Simplicity, transparency and clarity about how to carry out activities tend to make the possibilities of errors more apparent, which is the first step toward avoiding them. Processes should be born mistake-proof from their very conception.

Another important point is to plan processes together with the people who are in the gemba – the place where everything is produced – and who will be responsible for them, from end to end. It is these people who have deep knowledge of how the activities are carried out. They will certainly know where the risks are and will be able to help eliminate them right at the source.

Another important factor is to test each operation to validate it. In other words, to simulate the process as faithfully and accurately as possible to what will happen when everything is actually implemented. To experiment and experience it exhaustively in order to check quality. That is, to run the entire process in a controlled environment, putting yourself in the customer's shoes, observing value creation, what works and what can be improved. And to stress the process in every way, anticipating extreme variations that may occur.

And also to keep everyone permanently focused on analyzing: what can go wrong? What are the consequences? How can it be prevented? These are routine questions in engineering analyses of possible failure modes, but they should be extended and practiced in different ways by everyone in their daily work.

A culture spread throughout the entire company of seeking out, preventing and minimizing sources of possible errors, keeping them from reaching customers, can reduce greater losses, whether in winning back the consumer or in correcting the failures that occur. Doing it right the first time is always better than fixing mistakes. It will spare dissatisfaction and keep the organization's reputation stronger every day.