The Thought Map

Cheryl Hild, Doug Sanders, and Bill Ross

Six Sigma Associates

Key Words: Thought Map, Process Improvement, Statistical Process Control (SPC), Process Map,
Critical Thinking, Parallel Paths of Work, Data Collection Strategies, Design of Experiments (DOE).

Abstract

Statistical techniques such as Design of Experiments (DOE) and Statistical

Process Control (SPC), as well as many non-statistical quality tools, are instrumental
in improving many processes and products. A potential weakness in the use of these
methodologies is that they are often placed within an artificial framework or roadmap
commonly referred to as a “model for continuous process improvement”. These
roadmaps are most often defined as sequential paths of activities and decisions
required to achieve improvements in process outcomes or parameters. The
sequential nature of the defined improvement path provides limitations in thoughts
and work. Many questions, thoughts, and ideas are generated in a random or
sporadic fashion. The tendency is to structure these thoughts in a sequential
framework. However, the very essence of parallel thinking and learning is a critical
asset in identifying the key areas associated with the necessary work to improve
process or product. The thought map is invaluable in any focused work effort in order
to capture the multitude of questions that arise, the many possible paths that need to
be considered in obtaining solutions, the work performed, and the solutions obtained.

Published Quality Engineering 1999-2000 12(1) Hild (865) 909-0319

© 2000 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. Sanders (865) 448-3002
Ross (303) 494-8521
 The Thought Map

Six Sigma Associates

Introduction

There are three common mistakes with respect to process or product improvement
projects that usually lead to sub-optimal or wrong solutions. The first mistake is starting with
one proposed solution as opposed to generating alternative paths and understanding the
questions that need to be answered. Consider the issue of increasing capacity at a bottleneck.
An engineer is assigned to this project. The reality of the project is that the assignment is to
justify the purchase of new equipment, not to understand the critical factors contributing to
the performance at the particular line location. Another common mistake is the attempt to use
an existing historical data set to gain useful information to solve the problem. The information
in a data set is determined by the way in which the data is sampled. The sampling plan is
dictated by the questions needed to be answered. Rarely do historical data sets provide
sufficient relevant information for current problems.

A third mistake in process improvement work evolves by starting the work with a set of
technical or statistical tools believed to be useful for solving the particular problem. Consider
the flowchart for process improvement provided in Figure 1. The roadmap assumes that SPC
is the appropriate tool for any improvement activity. It also states that the first major step for
process improvement is to collect data. What initial questions drive the need for process
investigation? What alternative paths are available--outsourcing, materials, design? What are
the critical response variables? Is the relationship between process factors/variables and
process performance understood? Without considering such questions, the application of
statistical or technical tools will yield weak and irrelevant information.

As illustrated in the flowchart of Figure 1, a sequential path of activities is frequently

associated with the use of statistical and quality improvement tools. For those individuals with
technical backgrounds, the idea of a “roadmap” or flowchart is consistent with their
educational training that has taught them that there exists a formula, methodology, or piece of
equipment that provides the “right” solution for any problem. More often than not, it is not the
formula, equipment, or roadmap that leads to the solution; it is the questions that are
asked. If we want to obtain innovative solutions, we must think “out of the box” and,
should we say, structure our thoughts “out of a sequential flow”. True solutions, as

2 of 14
 Cheryl Hild (865) 909-0319
Doug Sanders (865) 448 3007
Six Sigma Associates Bill Ross (303) 494-8521

Determine objectives for Develop critical measurements for

process/project work. process/product performance.

Collect data. Construct Develop data

appropriate control charts. collection strategy.

Is process in NO Identify and remove undesirable assignable

statistical causes. Understand and work to sustain
control? desirable special/assignable causes.

YES

Is process NO Can specs be YES Change specs.

capable? changed?

NO

YES
Identify sources of common cause
variation. Make changes to
process to reduce variation.

Are specs NO
being met? Optimize the mean.

YES

Is further reduction YES

Conduct designed experiments to
in variabilility further reduce process variability.
desired?

NO

Put control charts in place to

monitor process performance.

Figure 1. A Flowchart of a Strategy for Process Improvement

3 of 14
 The Thought Map

Six Sigma Associates

Questons/ Suspicions Validation New Knowledge

Project
Objective(s) New Questions
& Existing Ideas/Suggestions Data/Information
Knowledge New Ideas/Theories
Engineering Theories Methods/Tools
Future Work

Figure 2. The Ongoing Nature of the Thought Map

opposed to repairs or fixes that often add complexity, come by asking new and
different questions. The investigation of multiple questions requires the consideration
of alternative paths of work. A single path is rarely the “right” path for all problems
and issues involved. Single paths ignore unasked and potentially unanswered
questions.

If we want to excel in improving products or processes, we must rely on our own thought
processes (assuming logical ones) to guide the usage of technical or statistical tools. Without a
doubt, engineering knowledge of a process or product is essential to being able to make
innovative change and thereby drastic improvements. The success in improving processes is
not as much in the application of tools as it is in the knowledge that exists concerning the
process. As shown in Figure 2, existing knowledge (or ideas or suspicions) drives questions
which drive the type of information needed and work pursued (SPC, DOE, etc.) which, in
turn, provide answers that supplement existing knowledge and lead to new questions.

What is a Thought Map?

A thought map is an ongoing documentation of existing knowledge, the questions

asked, the parallel paths of work needed to answer those questions, tools applied to
answer questions, knowledge gained from work performed, and the direction of future
work. Figure 3 shows the initial phase of a thought map concerning the performance
of an injection molding process. The objective of the work as initially communicated
was to improve the Cpk of an injection molding process. As seen in this map, the first

4 of 14
 Cheryl Hild (865) 909-0319
Doug Sanders (865) 448 3007
Six Sigma Associates Bill Ross (303) 494-8521

Stated Objective: Improve Cpk of Injection Molding

What led to this objective? Work in design? Failures in field?

High defect rate?

Design
Outsourcing? Process Capability? Alternatives?

Is outsourcing a How was reported How were specs Inside Current Alternative
possibility? value of Cpk determined? Design Design
obtained? Concept? Concepts?
Are they
If so, what work has Over what time relevant? Tooling? Can we
been done to frame? eliminate
compare? What are the Materials? need for part?
What is known critical
about the stability characteristics
of the process? that need to be Changes
measured and in spec
What is the given specs? limits?
"natural" tolerance
of the process? Is the
measurement
What factors are system
major contributors adequate?
to that natural
tolerance?

Figure 3. The Beginning of a Thought Map

level of thought considers the major alternatives that exist (outsourcing, design
changes, and improvement of injection molding process). It also questions the
relevance of the stated objective. The next level contains questions that are generated
from the consideration of each of these alternatives. Without the documentation of
these major alternatives and associated questions, work down the single path of
improving the injection molding process might forego the consideration of other key
alternatives.

One of the difficulties that people have with the development of thought maps is that
there is no “right” way to construct a thought map. There is no “right" way because there are
multiple ways to improve understanding and to gain new knowledge. Box, Hunter and Hunter
best state this idea:

5 of 14
 The Thought Map

Six Sigma Associates

“Notice that, on this view of scientific investigation, we are not dealing with a
unique route to problem solution. Two equally competent investigators presented
with the same problem would typically begin from different starting points, proceed
by different routes, and yet could reach the same answer. What is sought is not
uniformity but convergence.”1

Even though there is no step-by-step instructions for constructing a thought map, there is a set
of critical elements that ensure that the thought map is effective in guiding work. These
elements are:

• An overall quantifiable objective of the project or process work being undertaken;

• Major alternatives and initial questions to be considered (questions lead, answers follow);
• Parallel paths of questions and subsequent work;
• Prioritization of questions to be answered;
• The tools and methodologies used to seek answers to questions (encouraging the
appropriate applications of tools and methods);
• A history of work performed to obtain answers;
• Documentation of answers to questions;
• Evolution of metrics and their relationship to the work being performed.

The Benefits

Thought maps require the documentation of information most often retained in the
minds of those who own the process or the improvement work. The evolutionary nature of
the maps requires those working on a process or product to evaluate the logic of their thinking
and actions with respect to the goals and objectives of the work. In turn, there are several key
benefits associated with the use of thought maps. These benefits include:

1) The expression of unanswered questions prior to the proposal of the solution(s).

2) The documentation and maintenance over time of parallel questions and ideas. Since the
mind processes large amounts of information and sensory data simultaneously, the mind
generates multiple questions about different issues within seconds. Often, a majority of
these questions and ideas are lost.

6 of 14
 Cheryl Hild (865) 909-0319
Doug Sanders (865) 448 3007
Six Sigma Associates Bill Ross (303) 494-8521

3) The “best” solution is obtained because multiple approaches are considered and
appropriately evaluated. Thought maps help to overcome the more common tendency to
communicate questions and issues in a step-by-step series.

4) Provision of a structure for sequential work within parallel paths and thoughts.

5) Description of the breadth and scope of the work required to obtain effective solutions.
They encourage consistency in depth of work along the various paths, reducing the
tendency to focus on a single path without simultaneously considering other options.

6) Provision of an excellent mechanism to communicate strategies, tactics and activities to

peers, other functional areas, suppliers, customers, management, etc.

Ultimately, thought maps are like any other tool or methodology. They are only as valuable as
the information captured. So, if a key path of thought is missed, then suboptimization in
process or product performance can result.

The Thought Map as a Communication Tool

A typical question that is asked by those working on a project team is “Where should we
go next?” A typical question asked by others working within a process area or product design
group is “What changes are they making to the process/project and why?” A typical question
asked by managers is “How can I keep track of the progress and work being done by the
engineering staff?” Often, notebooks full of copied documents and formal presentations are
kept to provide information on the work performed on projects. However, these notebooks
rarely aid in communicating to others what questions have been asked, what solutions have
been obtained, and the breadth of work required to come to those solutions. In fact, the work
necessary to prepare for a presentation is often a distraction from the work performed to gain
process knowledge. Consider the thought map provided in Figure 4 on pin angle variation.
Immediately, one can understand where the work is directed. The next steps are evaluation of
the measurement process and the construction of a process map. Also, one quickly identifies
the reasons for this work -- to understand if we can accurately measure pin angle and to
understand factors affecting pin angle. With a quick look at the thought map, one can
understand the main objective, the direction of work, and the reasons for this work.

7 of 14
 The Thought Map

Six Sigma Associates

Objective :
Can we reduce the variability
in pin angle?

Are we sure pin angle is What factors affect pin Are we able to precisely and
important? angle? accurately measure pin
angle?

heat pressure?
Have we run
test/experiments? treating? How is angle measured?
tool
coolant? selection?
How were experiments
cleanliness? raw
performed? Conduct a Measurement
materials? System Evaluation.
humidity?
speeds?
What were results?
position?
feeds?
Can we replicate the others???
temperature?
results?
setups?

Construct Process Map

and categorize factors as
noise, critical, or
standard operations.

Next steps after MSE and Process Map:

If needed, work to improve measurement system.
Begin to plan for DOE--what factors, what response variables,
level settings, etc.

Figure 4. A First Thought Map for Reduction in Variability in Pin Angle *

Thought maps allow for transfer of process/product knowledge and for handing-off
components of work. They communicate the hierarchical nature of project work and the many
factors/questions/issues associated with the overall objective. Therefore, they are useful for
communicating and directing work across a team of individuals working on different paths
within the same project. As the thought map indicates (via the questions that are asked) the
parallel paths of work required, the team members can each work on a path while maintaining
linkages between the parallel paths. The map provides a means of providing feedback on the
work of others within the team and for developing an understanding of how individuals arrive
at specific conclusions. The evolving nature of the thought map brings all of the knowledge
gained back to a central location, from which new ideas and questions can be generated.

8 of 14
 Cheryl Hild (865) 909-0319
Doug Sanders (865) 448 3007
Six Sigma Associates Bill Ross (303) 494-8521

Thought maps are also effective at communicating where efforts can be combined to
more efficiently arrive at solutions. For example, in the project work depicted in Figure 3, a
data collection strategy can be planned to include information on the stability of the process,
the capability of the process with respect to the specifications, and the possible factors that are
contributing to the overall variation in the process. The thought map provides information on
where and how efforts can be combined, thus reducing redundancy of work efforts.

Thought maps are powerful communication tools in engineering and at design review
meetings. When they are used to introduce the technical information to be presented, others
can better understand why and how the data was collected and, therefore, the interpretation of
the results. When other technical staff members understand the questions one is attempting to
answer, they are able to provide inputs, knowledge, and support for the project work.
Consider the thought map shown in Figure 4. Imagine its use to preface a technical
presentation. Knowing the engineer’s initial questions opens the door for useful
communication about previous experimentation, critical factors impacting variability, etc. In
design reviews, they aid in an understanding of how a product will perform under various
conditions, what questions must be addressed in the design process, what tradeoffs have been
made and why. The communication of unanswered questions, planning stages prior to data
analysis, and inconclusive results provides greater opportunities for learning and developing
new ideas and knowledge.

When used as a communication tool for management, the thought map allows managers
to understand the true scope of work required to complete a project. They also communicate
priorities and needs, thus allowing for informed decisions regarding resource allocation
(including dedication required for project completion, priorities on laboratory resources,
overtime needs for experimentation, etc.). A great discredit to the work of engineers is the fact
that many times only the results get communicated to management. In fact, a common
comment heard from engineers is “My manager only wants to hear the results; he doesn’t care
about how the results are achieved.” However, without knowledge of the breadth of work
involved to obtain true, sustainable solutions, it is impossible to effectively prioritize and
schedule resources as well as to put systems in place to sustain the changes required over
time.

9 of 14
 The Thought Map

Six Sigma Associates

Failure Modes and Useful Tips

In the use of thought maps in the technical or engineering community, there are typically
two responses: either they find them extremely powerful or they fail to understand the
relevance of the map to their work. Thought maps are extremely powerful tools. When their
power is not realized, it is almost always due to two primary failure modes. The first major
failure mode is that they are treated as a static document, done once and left as is throughout
the project work. The intent of the tool is to be used as an evolutionary document, guiding the
paths of work through documenting questions that need answering and new knowledge as
gained.

A second related failure mode is that questions and theories are not explicitly defined and
stated. Therefore, the work is not guided by rational and logical questions for defining data
collection strategies and choice of analysis. Recently, an engineer gave a presentation on a
technical analysis performed to understand the variability in paint thickness on various
product types. Several pages of data were shown and the results from an experimental design.
However, the results were primarily inconclusive. What followed was a series of questions
from those observing the presentation. How did you set up the experiment? Why did you
choose those factors? What questions were you interested in answering? Are you trying to be
robust to lot-to-lot variation? What sources of variation are you attempting to understand?
How did you collect the data? etc. In essence, all of these questions led to the conclusion that
the analysis was not providing relevant information because the data collection and analysis
was not designed to answer specific questions. Obviously, the presence of an evolutionary
thought map was absent. In fact, the thought map had been developed after the data had
already been collected.

A third failure mode is only using thought maps to guide the technical components of
improvement work. It is important to keep in mind that the thought map provides the
documentation, the linkages, and the organization of thought. It does not contain all of the
vital backup information and data. Thus, the thought map should include references to actual
data and supporting documentation.

10 of 14
 Cheryl Hild (865) 909-0319
Doug Sanders (865) 448 3007
Six Sigma Associates Bill Ross (303) 494-8521

Initial thought map: Appropriate selection of candidates for advanced statistical training

Select persons capable of

training others, leading/facilitating teams
and achieving project results
Management
buy-in? Consultant input?
Week 1

Open issue???
Time constraints?
Selection
What is the selection How to measure What resources available? criteria
process? output?
Needed? List of criteria
Tactical plan Provided (e.g.,
Week 3

program mgmt.,desire,
Milestones established self-starter,influential)
Process Map Linked with resources? Brainstorm/list Benchmark work & Linked with results?
Possible metrics Budget established Prioritization of criteria?
Initial map created
Study of Universities &
List of input variables?
Other companies completed
Measurements taken during the process? Initial budget approved
Who is involved in the process? short-term: long-term: Budgeting process sufficient?
Relationship of process variables to y Y Feed-forward mechanisim
Week 5

output metrics? established?

Lists created
Correlated with long-term?
Correlated with company objectives?
Issues with measurement system
addressed?

Review/rev. Budget process map

Measurement
mechanism system
evaluation

Study of inter-
Week 20+

Characterize map: Establish metrics,

Y = f(y) = f(x) relationships
track through initial
courses, correlation
studies

Figure 5: An initial thought map for a non-manufacturing activity

Thought maps are designed for any type of problem-solving or improvement activity.
Thought maps may be used virtually everywhere. Figure 5 is an example of a thought map
applied to a training function. This map represents one branch from an overall training
development/delivery thought map. The main question of interest is that of candidate
selection. This objective leads to some first level questions (in ovals) that, in turn, lead to
activities (in boxes), results from these activities (in bold), and further questions.

The thought map in Figure 5 provides technical guidance in the construction of thought
maps. The first tip to note from this map is the use of different symbols, fonts, or formats.
Even with a large number of simultaneous activities and parallel thoughts contained on the
map, one can easily differentiate the main objective, initial questions, work performed, etc. A
second useful tip is the noting of unresolved issues or issues outside the immediate sphere of
influence. The issue of management buy-in is included on the map and noted as a potentially

11 of 14
 Can product system be
converted to other system?
Concerns Team
Customer Acceptance of Sound Sponsor
The Thought Map

Advantages Reliability (15 yrs.) Leader

Manufacturability (robustness to noise) Chassis
Lab

Figure 6. A Thought Map on a Design Project **

Impact on quality?
Quality
Assembly cycle time improvement?
(is 20 sec optimal?) Supplier
Options Marketing
Energy savings?
Planning
Quicker cycle w/ less temp variation?
Manufacturing
Home Economics
System 1 Model Shop
System

12 of 14
(preferred) Alternatives
Do we know all of
customer "wants"? MBB responsible BB responsible Processing
Add Mfg. variation User Confirming
Sound Define Best
via time, shift profiles/ shipping DOE with
We have Performance Optimization Acceptable habits? test? Production
1 "golden" Optimization DOE Strategy Variation
Tools
part DOE Strategy Robustness COV on
Field Test Environment/
QFD DOE to include 2000 Test
Process Map Units Customer Noise
Variation How Fast
COV on Factors
6 units Can We
4=optimization Affecting Sound
2000 unit 2000 unit Finish Implement?
DOE Which platform/ Start
Limited Field Test
Six Sigma Associates

Sound system? lab test lab test Pilot

2=lab Production Results
Study
Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Nov Dec Jan Feb
'97 '98 '98 '98 '98 '98 '98 '98 '98 '98 '98 '98 '99 '99
Cost Design Capital Review Review Pilot
Pckg Review Plan
 Cheryl Hild (865) 909-0319
Doug Sanders (865) 448 3007
Six Sigma Associates Bill Ross (303) 494-8521

unresolved issue. Documenting and maintaining this and similar issues on the map will help
the investigator to prevent ignoring potential roadblocks or inappropriate assumptions.

The thought map in Figure 6 is from a design project dealing with the evaluation of
different systems while maintaining reliability of product and the customer acceptance of the
noise levels of the units. This thought map serves as a powerful communicator of the overall
project plan, the major questions outstanding, and the many paths of work that need to be
investigated. Three additional useful tips are effectively demonstrated in this thought map:

• The consideration of the multiple functional areas needed to be included in the work;
• The timeline associated with the activities to be performed;
• Identification and documentation of responsible parties for alternative paths of work (MBB
is identified to work on the understanding of System #1 while the BB is identified to
understand and study alternative systems).

Conclusion

The ability of employees to think logically, rationally, and creatively is an asset to

any organization. While suggested improvement models are intended to fuel this
creativity, it is the authors’ experience that it too often stifles creativity and
innovation. Improvement activities become limited to those that “fit within the box”.
Engineers are more motivated (and rewarded) to check the box on the list of tools
applied than to approach each situation as an investigation. We encourage the use of
thought maps to guide critical thinking in the planning of data acquisition. It is
through carefully planned data acquisition that the needed information is gleaned from
data analysis. The relationship between the many statistical tools that exist and the
critical thinking process is illustrated in Figure 7***. Sequential knowledge building
is based on the ability to ask and answer the right questions, to develop and test
theories, and to understand and document untested assumptions. Thought maps have
been found to improve idea generation, communication, tool application
effectiveness, and ultimately problem resolution efficiency.

13 of 14
 The Thought Map

Six Sigma Associates

Data Acquisition
Sequential Knowledge
Building

Data Analysis

QUESTIONS & THEORIES

Thought Maps

Process Maps
Failure Mode and
Effects Analysis

Cause and Effect Components of

Diagrams Variation Studies
Control Charts Design of
Experiments

ANSWERS & NEW

QUESTIONS & THEORIES

Figure 7. The Nature of Critical Thinking

Endnotes

* Notes on the Thought Map provided in Figure 4:

1) The process map is a tool that enhances flowcharting techniques by associating a causal structure with the
major stages of the process. For a complete description of process mapping, refer to “The Process Map” by D.
Sanders, W. Ross, and J. Coleman (1997).
2) Evaluations of the measurement systems should always be performed prior to SPC or DOE. However, there do
exist simultaneous paths of work. For instance, you can be developing the process map while evaluating the
measurement system.

** The map provided in Figure 6 is from the project work of Cy Connors.

*** The diagram in Figure 7 is from Phil Molloy. We appreciate his contributions.

References

1. George Box, Hunter & Hunter, Statistics for Experimenters: An Introduction to Design,
Data Analysis, and Model Building, Wiley, 1978, p. 5.
2. Doug Sanders, W. Ross, and J. Coleman, “The Process Map”, accepted for publication in
Quality Engineering, Vol. 11, No. 4, 2000.

14 of 14