What is the right way to structure a cost reduction initiative?

Leverage CAEDENCE's Engineered Cost Reduction Approach (ECRA)™ - it addresses all aspects of planning and execution and can be easily tailored to suit your needs.
Executing an effective cost reduction initiative goes beyond simply identifying a need, communicating a dollar value, and holding workshops.
Cost reduction initiatives must start with a broader review of gap areas across the entire enterprise (considering existing and acquired sites) and definition of the future state goals. Buy-in must be secured among the key stakeholders and participants. The steps and metrics needed to ensure engagement before, and accountability beyond, the initiative kickoff must be planned.
Three stages are needed to execute a strong cost reduction program:
1) Preparation and Kickoff: Set the overarching strategy, set goals, align stakeholders and teams, and create an execution plan.
2) Site Workshops: Complete needed pre-work, create a pilot program, fine tune the initiative based on the pilot, and define a coordinated rollout plan.
3) Control: It is critical to set up an accountability plan with KPIs and owners, set periodic steering team meetings, and monitor progress.
CAEDENCE can support you every step of the way from program planning to control and accountability. Let us help manage your cost reduction initiative to achieve the optimal results for your company. Our Engineered Cost Reduction Approach (ECRA)™ addresses all aspects of planning and execution. It can be easily tailored to suit your needs.
Over the years we’ve been exposed to Six Sigma, Juran, Deming PDCA, 8D, Dale Carnegie, A3, Shainin, and more. Each technique works pretty well, and has been demonstrated many times in a wide variety of industries and circumstances. At the core they are all essentially the same!
Each approach relies on an underlying logical flow that goes like this: [a] make sure the problem is clearly defined; [b] be open to all sources of information; [c] vet the information for relevance and accuracy; [d] use the process of elimination to narrow down all possible causes to the most likely few; [e] prove which of the suspects is really the cause of the issue; [f] generate a number of potential solutions; [g] evaluate the effectiveness, feasibility and risk of the potential solutions; [h] implement the winning solution(s); and [i] take steps to make sure your solution(s) don’t unravel in the future.
The differences between the paradigms resides in supplementary steps and toolkits. For example, 8D contains the important “In
Your primary role as a manager is to ensure your team’s success. Internalize this. Make sure your team members know this. Build an environment of trust and collaboration. A direct report of mine would frequently leave me out of the loop as problems escalated, preferring instead to “work harder”. It was clear that he felt uncomfortable delivering bad news to me (his boss) when things were not going according to plan. Let me tell you the rest of the story.
