Ibrahim Doumbia

Dr. Ralph Garcia

MGMT 516
February 22nd, 2022
VIRGINIA MASON MEDICAL CENTRE

Kaplan was appointed in the year 2000, when the organization was dealing with the havoc and
ruins from the past two years; where they had lost not only an enormous amount of capital but
the structural core of institution was barely holding up, due to the low morale caused by
ineffective measures taken up against the ongoing issues. In the above context, Kaplan was
attempting to attain a counter method by recognizing the organization’s need for a newly defined
ethos and structural directive for the working, whilst also taking into consideration the extensive
competition in the industry. He began by making certain required changes, such as eliminating
the electoral process, focusing on the less profitable business lines, shifting to explicit
physician’s compact and further introduced a new strategic plan (2001) redefining the ethos.
Coming to an end, he was trying to lead towards recovery by removing all inconsistencies
through establishment of a collaborative approach in becoming a quality leader by prioritizing
patient and their health-care in the industry. Before outlining the differences, it is crucial to
mention that VMPS is not an absolute replica of TPS, instead, is an integration of TPS’s
principles and tools with VMMC’s originally deduced methods. (See Exhibit 1) As the case
study already suggests, the Toyota production system is a ‘mistake-proofing’ system, meaning; it
recognizes unpredictability of issues regardless of a plan and focuses on real-time resolve and
counter measures, while aiming to avoid recurrences. Whereas, The Virginia Mason Production
System is based around achieving a goal of zero-defects and producing quality services whilst
also allowing flexibility and individual creativity within a standardized environment. I believe,
the debate “people are not cars” is an evident conjecture with mere understanding of VMPS and
the reasons for its implementation. Of course people are not cars but the adoption of TPS and its
incorporation into VMMC’s preexisting model is based and focused around managerial,
organizational and structural aspects of “how to”, in contrast to its portrayal as a non-competent
system for health-care services. It would prove ignorant to say so, for, be it a production of goods
or services business, both run on shared principles and building blocks like production, capital
gain, operation, customer value, employment, management etc. Besides, to introduce a proper
aligning production model and avoid the much addressed issue in the debate, TPS was broadly
customized and integrated with VMPS’s original strategic plan. In an attempt to answer this, it is
important to mind the fact that programmability, implementation and transferability of any
building or production model follows a criteria of its own. To say, the basic required criteria are
usually the absolute understanding of the respective model, in a way that the process of
implementation can be perceived transparent. Second, is to outline an executing plan next to the
implementation of the said model or system, where the course of action aligns perfectly with
strategic plan of the institution it will be applied to; which would require not replication but
stitch and customization of the model. This argument concludes that regardless of how good or
brilliant the plan is or how transferrable, it is a matter of subjectivity and would always come
down to the institution’s initial ability to adapt and understand. Following up, VMPS is a highly
transferable production model, owing to its ‘zero defects’ goal and the alignment of the plan of
action by it, covers the requirements of the strategy and the organization extensively,
maximizing the value-adding activities. If understood and implemented precisely, I believe that
VMPS can have a revolutionizing effect on the health-care industry.

EXHIBIT 1

Differences Between TPS and VMPS

Differences between TPS and VMPS VMPS
SCOPE TPS
Total-systematic method for overall
Semi-methodical manner of overall standardization, implementation and work
standardization and implementation. flow.
Methodology

Establishment of RPIW, a five-day in

round method of mapping, understanding
A real-time based system of required
and outlining all processes, along with
Identification of Waste production and problem resolve, to
emergence and implementation of new
identify abnormalities in the flow and
praxis to root out defects.
work in immediate action.

Standardized by incorporating serveral

effective and new directives (3Ps) for
Standardization Uses a method of streamlining the almost all proccesses and work demands.
processes to simplify and eliminate no- As well as redesigned work spaces to
value adding activities. achieve zero defects. (5s)

Orderly form type submission of creative

Innovation proposals for small scale changes by
A precipitate method of solving problems testing and reporting on it, on an
in real-time by the workers and eliminate individual level. Encouraging participation
reccurence. with a monthly reward contest.

Safety and resolve Collaborative approach, notifying seniors

protocol for immediate counter action, alongside a
Stipulation of required individual approach 24/7 MET backup educating floor staff and
prior to the involvement of superiors. preventing emergencies in real-time, upon
Upon failing, assembly line would be put meeting a health hazard. Bundles, another
to halt and the issue would go up in a system of regulatory documentation and
hierarchial order until solved. hourly inspections to avoid anosocomial
infections.

infectimaintain safety.
*MET: Medical Emergency Team *RPIW: Rapid Process Improvement Workshop