A Proposed Systematic Framework for Applying Hoshin Kanri Strategic Planning Methodology in Educational Institutions

Abstract

Hoshin Kanri is a methodology that was developed in Japan in the late 1960s. Now, it has become an essential component in numerous institutions that are implementing new management systems and concepts such as Balanced Scorecard (BSC), TQM, and Lean Management or Six Sigma. Hoshin Kanri is a management method used for reinforcing strategic work. In spite of a number of Hoshin Kanri success stories in many sectors and a variety of institutions, little research attention has been given to the implementation of Hoshin Kanri methodology in educational institutions. This research supports an increased focus on Hoshin Kanri methodology in Strategic Planning for educational institutions. The main aim of this paper is to propose a systematic framework for applying Hoshin Kanri strategic planning methodology in educational institutions. In achieving this aim, the meaning and origins of Hoshin Kanri were defined, the foundations of Hoshin Kanri planning methodology were analyzed, the factors influencing the implementation of Hoshin Kanri planning in educational institutions were discussed, and a structured process for implementing Hoshin Kanri planning in educational institutions was developed. Introduction Yoji Akao (1991) stated that Hoshin kanri is a planning, implementation, and review framework for systematic planned change. The planning perspective focuses on strategy preparation; implementation includes activities which give precedence to, integrate, and that coordinate institutional actions; and the review framework focuses on activities which manages and controls actions through a combination of daily process control and repeated review. However, the application of total quality management

Full text

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
158
A Proposed Systematic Framework for Applying
Hoshin Kanri Strategic Planning Methodology in
Educational Institutions
Hanaa Ouda Khadri Ahmed
Faculty of Education, Ain Shams University
doi: 10.19044/esj.2016.v12n16p158 URL:http://dx.doi.org/10.19044/esj.2016.v12n16p158
Abstract
Hoshin Kanri is a methodology that was developed in Japan in the
late 1960s. Now, it has become an essential component in numerous
institutions that are implementing new management systems and concepts
such as Balanced Scorecard (BSC), TQM, and Lean Management or Six
Sigma. Hoshin Kanri is a management method used for reinforcing strategic
work. In spite of a number of Hoshin Kanri success stories in many sectors
and a variety of institutions, little research attention has been given to the
implementation of Hoshin Kanri methodology in educational institutions.
This research supports an increased focus on Hoshin Kanri methodology in
Strategic Planning for educational institutions. The main aim of this paper is
to propose a systematic framework for applying Hoshin Kanri strategic
planning methodology in educational institutions. In achieving this aim, the
meaning and origins of Hoshin Kanri were defined, the foundations of
Hoshin Kanri planning methodology were analyzed, the factors influencing
the implementation of Hoshin Kanri planning in educational institutions
were discussed, and a structured process for implementing Hoshin Kanri
planning in educational institutions was developed.
Keywords: Hoshin Kanri, Policy deployment, PDCA cycle, Catch ball,
Total Quality Management
Introduction
Yoji Akao (1991) stated that Hoshin kanri is a planning,
implementation, and review framework for systematic planned change. The
planning perspective focuses on strategy preparation; implementation
includes activities which give precedence to, integrate, and that coordinate
institutional actions; and the review framework focuses on activities which
manages and controls actions through a combination of daily process control
and repeated review. However, the application of total quality management

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
159
(TQM) is what makes Hoshin Kanri unlike other strategy formulation and
implementation methodologies. TQM is of a particular type where the plan-
do-check-act (PDCA) cycle is applied at all levels and to all processes. This
is combined with a full employment of quality tools to collect information, to
detect issues, to classify critical actions, and to carry out solutions. The
purpose of Hoshin Kanri is to build actions into the daily management that is
consistent with the achievement of a few vital strategic priorities within a
certain year (Witcher & Butterworth, 1997).
Strategy Implementation
There are two clusters of strategy implementation. The first one is
effective immediately after the decision making process. They include
personnel, budgeting, or mergers and coalitions. On the other hand, the
second one is successful only with an institution-wide effort such as Hoshin
Kanri which is favored by the Japanese. This difference is a manifestation of
two traditions in strategic management. One is a market-based perspective,
while the other is a resource-based perspective of strategy. Michael Porter,
the most distinguished scholar of the last three decades, and his ideas greatly
focus on the external environment as an influential factor in the success of
the strategy. Thus, the direction of influence is outside-in as shown in Figure
1 below (Witcher, 2014).
Figure 1. Outside-in and inside-out influences on strategy
(Source: Witcher & Chau, 2012)
There are two strands of thinking in strategic management. The first
strand of thinking in strategic management is centered on the idea of starting

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
160
with the external environment. In addition, it also involves the use of a value
chain to organize and direct the institutional activities to sustain the strategy.
The second strand of thinking in strategic management is centered on the
internal environment. Therefore, this is an inside-out approach to strategy
thinking which considers strategic resources as non-economic resources.
Nevertheless, they are institution-specific, which makes them problematic
for competitors to understand and compete with. So the stress is on the
internal environment instead of the external environment. Also, the direction
of influence in formulating strategy is inside-out. However, Hoshin Kanri is
generally perceived by strategists as a system for operations. Specifically,
there is an institutional yearly review and it is of necessity that top
management should manage the strategic management process to PDCA
principles (Witcher, 2014).
Problems with Strategic Planning
The predominant methods of strategic planning and strategic
implementation were marked with problems. Several strategies are
unsuccessful to deliver for many reasons. As stated by Zairi & Alan (2014),
these reasons amongst others include:
 Goals are not communicated well– people working without clear
direction.
 Changing the goal – numerous interruptions and modifications in
direction.
 Interest in pet projects – favorite short-term goals due to the difficulty
of long-term competitiveness.
 Cost is the essential driving force for results without regard to actual
improvement opportunities.
 Goals created in isolation from the process.
 Voice of customer not actually captured.
 Achievements are not maintainable.
Consequently, one of the fundamental astounding phenomenon of
Japan’s success in controlling international markets for a long time is their
approach to strategic planning. Hoshin Kanri planning has well-benefited
Japanese institutions tremendously. Also, it has evidence to be a substantially
disciplined, systematic, and has an integrated approach for putting strategies
into operation. This was the situation at a time when there has been much
criticism of the Western approaches to strategic formulation and
implementation. Hoshin Kanri planning has been transferred from Japan to
the US (King, 1989; Babich, 1996; Colletti, 1995). The acceptance of Hoshin
Kanri planning in the West occurs as a result of adopting institution’s Total
Quality Management. Therefore, this is considered as an ‘implied’
consideration that Japanese institutions make. Also, they have continuously

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
161
based their approach to doing business on the adoption of quality systems
and techniques.
Hoshin Kanri is a strategic management method basically developed
in Japan. Although, Hoshin Kanri is extensively adopted in Japanese leading
companies such as Hewlett Packard, NEC Japan, Xerox, and Procter and
Gamble (Akao, 1991), it has less extended to Western and Arab institutions
in general and educational institutions in particular. There is an increasing
potential of adopting Hoshin Kanri in institutions as a methodology. In
addition, it is comprehensive in nature, i.e., it supposes the involvement of
all employees and functions in an institution, and integrates strategies into
daily operations (Kondo, 1998; Marksberry, 2011; Nicholas, 2014). In
addition, it provides a substitute to overcome the generic problems of
strategic management, in that it networks managers with employees by a
systematic deployment process via vertical and horizontal communication.
Here, the goals developed by the management were deployed and all efforts
lines up with the vision and targets (Akao, 1991). Therefore, Hoshin Kanri
presented a structured method of deployment, communication, and
implementation.
Interpreting institution strategy into operational strategy has been a
foremost center of attention of operations management for numerous
decades. Skinner (1969) stated that findings about operational dimensions as
the left behind link in institution strategy was a milestone. If an institution is
not aware of this link, it may finish up with noncompetitive system.
Furthermore, he indicated that the cause-and-effect factors which determines
the link between strategy and production operations is indefinable.
Leonard & McAdam (2002) declared that management pays attention
to hand over the implementation of strategy to operational levels devoid of
presenting the general strategic concept. However, this concept results to
defects in translating strategy into objectives and deliverable attainable
activities. Hoshin Kanri, as a strategic management tool, concentrates on the
vision of the institution. In addition, it calls attention to the importance of the
distribution of strategies down to operational initiatives.
Why Hoshin Kanri?
The essence of essential problems, particularly in an ever changing
dynamic and complex environment, necessitates an essential change on how
strategic planning process is conducted. The focus of strategic planning
process must change from determining the solution for problems which are
believed to exist, to defining a responsive process to the wicked
characteristics of the assumed problems. This process is dynamic and
changes continuously as long as additional learning happens. Furthermore,
this process is also comprehensive, repetitive, cross functional, cross-

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
162
hierarchical, and self-correcting (Gilmore & Camillus, 1996). Mulligan et al.
(1996) stated that:
“A major strength of Hoshin is its added dimension of adaptability
that arises from the constant application of Deming’s PDCA methodology.”
Consequently, Hoshin Kanri is concerned with the following four
primary tasks (Witcher & Butterworth, 1999):
1. Providing a concentration on the direction of the institution by
developing a few strategic priorities annually;
2. Adjusting the strategic priorities with institutional plans and
programs;
3. Integrating the strategic priorities with day-to-day management;
4. Offering a systematized review on the development of the strategic
priorities.
Hoshin Kanri aims to manage the direction of the institution by
directing change within an institution. Hoshin Kanri includes tools for
continuous improvement, breakthroughs, and implementation. The basic idea
of Hoshin Kanri planning is that it involves the whole institution in the
strategic planning process, both top-down and bottom-up. In addition, it
ensures that the direction, goals, and objectives of the institution are logically
created, clearly defined, well communicated, monitored, and adapted based
on a feedback system (King, 1989). Hoshin Kanri defines specific yearly
target policies obtained from the long and medium term policies that
encompass the long term visions of the institution. It achieves targets via
action plans that intend to develop the control system. Thus, these action
plans are deployed for their targets and policies (Akao, 1991).
Many leading companies have used Hoshin Kanri, which offers an
alternative method, to vanquish the normal problems associated with
strategic management. This is possible because it links managers and
employees by a methodical deployment process through vertical and
horizontal communication. Here, the goals developed by the management are
deployed and all efforts are aligned to the same vision and goal (Akao,
1991).
What is Different about Hoshin Kanri?
Hoshin Kanri involves both directions in the institution: Top-down
and bottom-up. Top to down direction is concerned with Vision and long
term plans. Also, lower levels are providing their feedback in order to
improve the process by their creative ideas. This interaction between the
various levels of institutions and team works is presented in figure 2.

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
163
Figure 2. Hoshin model
(Source: Leppänen, 2014).
Hoshin Kanri management has its unique features which greatly
differentiates it from the typical management systems. Hoshin Kanri
management aims at making the whole institution to work in the same
direction through vertical and horizontal alignment of the objectives, targets,
and means. In addition, Hoshin Kanri transfers the focus on the management
from the results to the processes. That is to say from output to input.
Therefore, this actually leads to the development of the processes which is
producing better results. Figure 3 indicates the difference between Hoshin
Kanri and institution with conflicting targets.
Figure 3. Comparison between the extremes of management style
(Source: Hutchins, 2008).

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
164
Tennant & Roberts (2000) indicates that one of the fundamental
features of Hoshin Kanri is the focus of Hoshin breakthrough strategy
management. Thus, this management strategy involves the improvement of
the whole multifunctional processes, rather than process improvements
inside the divided levels of the institution (Hutchins, 2008). Figure 4 presents
the comparison of the strategy management systems.
Figure 4. Breakthrough and incremental strategy management
(Source: Tennant & Roberts, 2000)
Strategic management involves the integration of an institution’s
vision, goals, policies, and tactics into a cohesive unified whole. After the
vision and foremost policies have been determined, the tools for
implementation must be identified. Therefore, these tools are required in
managing the institution. Also, it is very important for institutions to decide
on the applicable and fitting tools, which will cohesively interconnect with
the strategic and operational initiatives during the implementation process.
This study is concerned with such strategic management tool- Hoshin Kanri -
to structure and implement strategies.
Based on the previous discussion, it is clear that for an educational
institution to stay competitive, it is fundamental to develop distinctive
resources or competencies to translate institutions goals into operational
strategy and targets. It is this interpretation into suitable and purposeful
metrics and targets at each level of the institution, that is to say, the means
used by an institution to manage and develop its resources, which decides its
competitive advantage. Nevertheless, despite its importance, a structured and
systematically approach especially at the operations level was missing.
Literature in general indicates that there is a gap regarding how
institutions manage strategy. Till date, they have failed to identify and
develop deep knowledge of Hoshin Kanri as an important means of filling
this gap. Hoshin Kanri methodology presents significant features on how
strategy can be managed in daily operations. Therefore, the current study

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
165
aims at promoting a proposed systematic framework for applying Hoshin
Kanri strategic planning methodology in educational institutions.
Statement of the Research Problem
In the light of what has been mentioned, this paper seeks to propose a
systematic framework for applying Hoshin Kanri strategic planning
methodology in educational institutions. In achieving the objective, this
study will answer some questions.
Therefore, the main research question in this study is:
What is the systematic framework for applying Hoshin Kanri
strategic planning methodology in educational institutions? Furthermore, this
question is broken down as follows:-
1. What are the definitions of Hoshin Kanri and the related concepts?
2. What are the origins of and historical context of Hoshin Kanri?
3. What are the foundations of Hoshin Kanri planning methodology?
4. What is the difference between Hoshin Kanri planning process and
any other strategic planning process?
5. What are the factors influencing the implementation of Hoshin Kanri
planning in educational institutions?
6. What is the structured process for implementing Hoshin Kanri
planning in educational institutions?
Objectives of the Study
The main objectives of this study are to:
1. Define the concept of Hoshin Kanri planning and the related
concepts.
2. Track the origins of and historical context of which Hoshin Kanri
was developed.
3. Analyze the foundations of Hoshin Kanri planning methodology.
4. Identify the difference between Hoshin Kanri planning process and
any other strategic planning process.
5. Discuss the factors influencing the implementation of Hoshin Kanri
planning in educational institutions
6. Develop a structured process for implementing Hoshin Kanri
planning in educational institutions.
Significance of the Study
1. This study may contribute to the field of strategic planning in
education. This is because it provides a systematic framework for applying
Hoshin Kanri strategic planning methodology in educational institutions.
2. The strategists may benefit from this study by virtue of applying
Hoshin Kanri strategic planning methodology.

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
166
3. This study may increase the understanding of how Hoshin Kanri
strategic planning methodology can be initiated in educational institutions.
Research Method
The paper is based on literature reviews of theoretical and practical
researches on Hoshin Kanri methodology and strategic management. Thus,
the structured process for implementing Hoshin Kanri planning in
educational institutions was developed from the Hoshin Kanri literature. This
was, however, integrated with the knowledge attained by the researcher
through a Face to face workshop. Consequently, this workshop is divided
into interactive sessions conducted under close guidance through an
interview with 45 persons responsible for the strategic planning in some of
the Egyptian public and private universities. The interview was held during
the lectures conducted by the researcher as a part of the teaching practices of
“strategic planning in educational institutions” course. However, this is one
of the courses in Professional Diploma in Quality and Accreditation
Management Systems in the Educational Institutions at Ain Shams
University.
The Definitions of Hoshin Kanri and the Related Concepts
Hoshin Kanri
In this study, the accurate meaning of `Hoshin Kanri' is perplexed in
the linguistic vagueness as understood in its translation from Japanese. The
common translation of Hoshin Kanri includes Hoshin as 'policy' or 'target
and means', and Kanri as 'planning' or 'management or control'. The word
Hoshin is made up of two Chinese characters: ho and shin. ho means method
or form, while shin means shiny needle or compass. Kanri means
management or control. The two words when put together mean a
'methodology for strategic direction setting’. The most literal translation is
policy management. Consequently, a collection of different terms have been
adopted within a Western context. Such terms embraces policy deployment,
policy control, management by policy, managing for results, and Hoshin
planning (Akao, 1991; Jolayemi, 2008; King, 1989; Shiba, 1993). As a result
of this multiplication of terms, the term “Hoshin Kanri” will be adopted in
this paper.
Furthermore, different authors have presented a variety of definitions
or interpretations to Hoshin Kanri (Nicholas, 2014; Kondo, 1998;
Marksberry, 2011; Lee & Dale, 1998; Jolayemi, 2008). The meaning of
Hoshin is shining metal, pointing direction or compass, while Kanri means
management or control (daily) (Jolayemi, 2008). Thus, the two words put
together communicate the essential idea of the methodology.

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
167
King (1989) in Witcher (2014, p. 74) describes Hoshin Kanri as
follows:
“Hoshin [kanri] helps to control the direction of the
institution by orchestrating change within an institution. This system
includes tools for continuous improvement, breakthroughs, and
implementation. The key to Hoshin [Kanri] is that it brings the total
institution into the strategic planning process, both top-down and
bottom-up. It ensures the direction, goals, and objectives of the
institution are rationally developed, well defined, clearly
communicated, monitored, and adapted based on system feedback.”
Akao defined Hoshin Kanri as:
"All organization activities for systematically accomplishing
the long and mid-term goals, as well as yearly business targets which
are established as the means to achieve business goals. In many
cases, it is used for yearly targets." (Akao, 1991, p.47)
Total Quality Engineering (1997) defines Hoshin Kanri as:
“A system of forms and rules that encourage employees to
analyze situations, create plans for improvement, conduct performance
checks, and take appropriate actions.”
At the same time, Integrated Quality Dynamics (1997)
defined Hoshin as:
"
A one-year plan for achieving objectives developed in conjunction
with management’s choice of specific targets and means in quality,
cost, delivery, and morale
"
.
or in “catch-phrase” form
Hoshin = target + means
Akao, also debates that Hoshin Kanri's exceptional intent is to
"integrate an entire organization’s daily activities with its long term goals.”
(Akao, 1991, p. xiii)
It can be concluded that Akao suggests a management process which
includes all the activities that relate to the strategic management process.
Thus, his definition is in agreement with the translation of Hoshin Kanri as a
'method for strategic direction setting'.
Witcher & Butterworth (1997) say:
“What makes Hoshin Kanri different from other strategy
formulation and implementation methodologies is the application of
total quality management.”
Watson (1991) simply says:
“Perhaps, the most accurate term for Hoshin Kanri would be
target-means deployment.”
However, I think Hoshin Kanri is a process-oriented methodology
and an organizing system for structuring and implementing strategies that

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
168
define precisely the direction, all through the whole institution, via
integrating the entire institution’s daily activities with its strategic goals.
Policy Deployment
The term “policy deployment” is a popular term generally used
interchangeably with Hoshin Kanri. The term 'policy' is used to include both
'target and means’. A 'target' is a quantifiable objective stemmed from
policy, while 'means' explains the exact steps for the accomplishment of the
target. Thus, this is in explicit contrast to the limited understanding of policy
in the West which refers to a top down directive method. On the other hand,
'target' refers to numerical, functional, and operational objectives.
Deployment refers to a process of devolving the targets and means all
through the organization (Akao, 1991).
Rank Xerox (1992) defines policy deployment as follows:
“A key by which Rank Xerox can articulate and communicate
the Vision, Mission, Goals, and Vital Few Programs to all
employees. It provides the answers to the two questions: “What do
we need to do?” and “How are we going to do it?”
Hoshin Kanri: Its Origins and Historical Context
Hoshin Kanri appeared in the 1950’s. The origin is unspecified, but it
is mentioned that the idea of the methodology initiated a course on quality
control sponsored by the Japan Association of Science and Technology
(Tennant & Roberts, 2001a). Therefore, the basis of Hoshin Kanri is a
combination of Edward Deming’s lectures on the PDCA cycle. It also has to
do with the causes of variation and process control jointly with Peter
Drucker’s “Management by Objectives” philosophy (Drucker, 1954). The
next turning point was in 1962 when the Bridgestone Tire Institution
developed Hoshin Kanri as a management system integrated with their Total
Quality Control (TQC) methodology (later TQM) (Akao, 1991). The next
phase was when Akao and Mizuno coached Yokagawa Hewlett-Packard on a
prize winning status in the 1970’s. Hence, through that, the approach was
diffused to America (Watson, 2005). Since then, the relation has been deep-
rooted between Total Quality Management (TQM) and Hoshin Kanri.
Witcher & Butterworth (1997) stated that this relation defines the
distinctiveness of the approach as Hoshin Kanri represents the application of
TQM in strategy. Afterwards, “Hoshin Kanri presented an organizational
architecture and transparency which is imperative if strategy and daily
management are to combine in their use of TQM” (Witcher & Butterworth,
1999, p.324).
One of the great successes of Japanese corporations during the 1980s
is that they witnessed the increase of new institutions that wanted to adopt

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
169
total quality. One of these institutions was Growth Opportunity Alliance of
Greater Lawrence, “GOAL/QPC”. However, it is a nonprofit educational
institute, founded in 1978 as a community-based group to advance jobs. It
advocated Hoshin Kanri (Cole, 1998). In 1988, it formed a members’
research team to advance Hoshin Planning/Management by Policy. Its
members include Dow Chemical, Procter & Gamble, Hewlett Packard, and
IBM. Furthermore, they developed the first English language report about
Hoshin Kanri (GOAL/QPC, 1989). In the same year, Bob King, a
GOAL/QPC executive, published his text which was based on a visit to
Japan by GOAL/QPC delegates the previous year (King, 1989).
Foundations of Hoshin Kanri Planning Methodology
Hoshin Kanri was created in Japan and emerged from the principle of
continuous improvement of tranquility in total quality management. It is a
system that concentrates on quality control and continuous improvement
activities (Akao, 1999, p. 49). Concurrently, Hoshin Kanri measures the
level of reaching the goals defined by improvements (Akao, 1999, p. 43).
Hoshin Kanri also conveys institution policy to every person in the
institution. Hoshin’s foremost focus is to consternate efforts on the
fundamental issues essential for achieving success. Japanese Deming Prize
winners credit Hoshin to be an outstanding key contributor to the success of
their business. Advanced US institutions, such as Xerox and Hewlett
Packard, have also adopted Hoshin as their strategic planning process.
Hoshin meets the intent of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award
criteria for Planning, but with different approach. This approach entails that
Hoshin is a system of procedures and instructions that support employees to
investigate and examine environments, develop plans for improvement,
conduct performance checks, and take suitable actions (Akao, 1999).
Hoshin Kanri as a Cyclical Framework for Strategy Management
Hoshin Kanri is a cyclical framework for strategy management. It
focuses on four fundamental tasks and the cycle is a yearly one as shown in
figure 5. Firstly, it concentrates an institution’s interest on corporate
direction by setting a few vital strategic priorities every year. Secondly, it
aligns these strategic priorities with institution plans and objectives. Thirdly,
it integrates them with daily management. Lastly, it provides a structured
review of their progress. Therefore, this way involves Focus – Alignment –
Integration – Review (FAIR) (Witcher & Butterworth, 1999).
Hoshin Kanri is composed of two dissimilar levels. The first level is
strategic planning (Hoshin), while the second level is day-to-day
management (Kanri). Therefore, these two levels need to be carried out
before the completion of the system. That is to say that Hoshin Kanri is not

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
170
just a process for the senior management to build visions and long term goals
and objectives, but it is also a process for middle management and
implementation groups to apply PDCA- cycle to the daily life of the
institution (Leppänen, 2014).
The Relationship between Hoshin Kanri and Total Quality Management
(TQM)
The Quality Deployment Process
Hoshin Kanri is a quality management tool. It has its origins in
comprehensive quality thinking. To understand the power of Hoshin, the
foundations and constraints of TQM must be understood.
Hoshin Kanri planning is the mandatory prerequisite for processes to
be performed well and for goals to be successfully achieved. Hoshin Kanri
planning is the tool by which quality effort is flown down all through the
institution. Hoshin Kanri planning is a top-down approach. Therefore, it is
considered to be the responsibility of senior managers. Process improvement
and measurement is seen as a horizontal effort, while quality deployment is
regarded as a vertical approach. As shown in Figure 5, quality improvement
is a continuous effort. Therefore, it is not limited and finite. Nevertheless, the
institution has to measure and quantify its quality effects against specified
targets (Akao, 1990). Hoshin Kanri planning is not simply a communication
process. Hence, it is a dynamic process where performance measurement is
regarded as a fundamental part and where goals are translated into clear
actions all through the various activities of the institution. Quality function
deployment is the horizontal process which guarantees that performance will
follow from the goal of the communication effort.
Figure 5. The quality deployment process (Source: Akao, 1990)

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
171
Hoshin Kanri through the PDCA Cycle
The Deming cycle of Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) is applied in the
context of Hoshin (i.e. strategically continuous improvement). As illustrated
in figure 6 (American Supplier Institute, 1989), the PDCA drives the strategy
and guarantees that the goals are accomplished. In addition, all the necessary
adjustments will be made as and whenever it is necessary. Also, it is done
when learning process takes place continuously. Hoshin Kanri is also about
an intentional and planned top-down positioning of yearly ‘vital few’
programs. It is employed since too many programs can result to distraction.
Additionally, these programs should be crystal clear and translatable for
everybody. Thus, persons should be able to find the means of implementing
them. Strategy is deployed as strategic intent, and corporate strategy is
expressed in some limited statements. Furthermore, there are no detailed
formulation of procedures, activities, and objectives for others to accomplish.
This approach is based on constant improvement and advanced change. In
addition, it is grounded on what is reasonable and open to discussion
(Witcher & Butterworth, 1999).
Figure 6. Hoshin Kanri planning through the PDCA Cycle
(Source: Witcher & Butterworth, 1999)
The “FAIR” Model of Hoshin Kanri
FAIR is an annual cycle which commences when management starts
to review the previous year’s performances and develops the strategic target
for the next year. Therefore, this is expressed as the ‘vital few targets’. After
the ‘plan’ phase, the vital few targets are aligned with annual plans and
implemented by the ‘catchball process’ through the business units. Then, the
cycle turns to the ‘do’ phase which focus on the integration of the vital few
objectives into daily management. As a result, the plans are implemented
where the PDCA cycle is performed continually for taking corrective

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
172
actions, process improvement, and standardization. The ‘control’ phase is a
review of the annual performance. Data from a completed cycle are fed back
into the act phase, so that the cycle starts over (Witcher & Butterworth,
1999).
Figure 7. The “FAIR” model of Hoshin Kanri
(Source: Tennant & Roberts, 2001b)
The act stage of the cycle is that which produces institutional
FOCUS.
The plan stage of the cycle produces institutional ALIGNMENT.
The do stage of the cycle produces institutional INTEGRATION.
The check stage of the cycle produces institution wide REVIEW.
(Witcher & Butterworth, 1999)
The Relationship between Hoshin Kanri and Strategic Management
Hoshin Kanri is considered as a strategic mechanism for setting
direction, and moving the institution towards the selected direction. Hoshin
Kanri is considered to be an advanced modern derivative of strategic
management. This is because strategic planning has been practiced by
‘Western’ institutions since the 1960’s (Ansoff, 1968). When a comparison
has been made between Japanese and Western forms of strategic
management, on one hand, it is found that the essential difference between
Japanese and Western forms of strategic management is the extent of details
in the senior management planning process. Hence, this is with the Japanese
management adopting the technique of setting ‘Strategic Intent’ instead of
carrying out a process of strategic planning. On the other hand, there are
well-defined similarities which are needed to adopt a new management
paradigm which is about setting the direction. Thus, it debates the means
with the workforce. Subsequently, where all the strategic planners fail, the

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
173
next step is to put a reasonable and practical system for managing
implementation.
Recent works in Strategic Management provide little in the way of
guidance for implementation. Perhaps, the reason behind that is the
assumption adopted among all strategy thinkers. This assumption states that
if the strategy is good, it would implement itself, or it can be implemented
through existent means. Possibly they think that implementation is case
specific, so a generic model cannot be created. Whatsoever the justification,
not taking this issue into consideration will persist to constrain the impact of
strategic thinking. Davidson (1995) expresses the differences between the
old paradigm of ‘Command and Control’ and the new paradigm of
‘Managing Change’ in which a great attention given to the role of the ‘new
manager’. In Davidson’s thinking, Change Management has its foundation in
leadership, common purpose, and the values and the role of the manager as a
facilitator and mentor.
The Relationship between Hoshin Kanri and Cross Functional and Daily
Management
Cross functional management can be defined as control activities that
consist of planning for components like Quality, Cost, Delivery, and
Employee (QCDE). Daily management or departmental/functional
management can be defined as the whole activities that each department
must carry out daily. In addition, they are necessary to accomplish their
business goals. Akao defines Hoshin Kanri “as all organizational activities
for systematically accomplishing the long and mid-term goals as well as
yearly business targets, which are established as the means to achieve
business goals” (Akao,1991, p. 47). In Hoshin Kanri, management of targets
that relates primarily to the functions of Quality, Cost, Delivery, and
Employees require an approach that can cross institutional boundaries.
Consequently, daily management means that the fundamentals of total
quality management of all the activities of an organization must be
performed daily.
The Relationship between Hoshin Kanri and the Balanced Scorecard
There is a clear link between the balanced scorecard as a strategic
management system and Hoshin Kanri. Schneiderman has created the
prototype scorecard in 1987 when he was the Vice President of Quality and
Productivity at Analog Devices Incorporated (Schneiderman, 1999, p. 7).
Analog was mentioned in the article of Kaplan & Norton (1992). Hoshin
Kanri was used to implement the scorecard at Analog Devices Incorporated.
The balanced scorecard’s four perspectives are similar to the cross-functional
management of QCDE objectives: quality parallels to the customer

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
174
perspective; the cost, delivery, and employee objectives parallel to the
financial, internal business process; and the learning and growth
perspectives. While the balanced scorecard is focused on choosing and
monitoring the correct measures to direct change, Hoshin Kanri is mainly
concerned with the capability of the institutional processes that provide value
to the customer. Furthermore, while the balanced scorecard is valuable on
what should be done, there is no much to say, at the same time, about how it
should be done (Witcher, 2014)
The Relationship between Hoshin Kanri and Performance Management
May be the best description of Hoshin Kanri planning is the process
which seeks to achieve agreement and clearly answers the questions: “what
to do” and “how to perform”. Performance measurement, on the other hand,
measures motion, action, and significant addition. The two activities of
Hoshin Kanri and performance measurement are (Zairi & Alan, 2014):-
1. Process Management: It is a senior management accountability
which has the authority of making the right decisions, creating the
appropriate objectives, and communicating with them at all levels.
2. Performance Measurement: Quality improvements happen
through team efforts and a multi-functional approach. Therefore,
performance measurement became the responsibility of the members of staff
who have the critical task of performing the essential improvements.
Therefore, Hoshin Kanri and performance measurement have to
concentrate not merely on defects and negative gaps, but also on quality and
the preservation of competitive advantages. Consequently, measures are of
significant importance at two levels (Zairi & Alan, 2014):-
1. Strategic Benchmarking: It is used to create strategic objectives
and critical success factors (CSFs) through a systematic understanding of
customer requirements and process capability.
2. Operational Benchmarking: It is used to raise process capability
at all levels through formation of new practices and methods learned from
leading institutions.

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
175
Figure 8. Integrating process management and performance measurement
(Source: Zairi & Alan, 2014)
The Principles of Hoshin Kanri
The principles of Hoshin Kanri can be summarized as follows (Lee
& Dale, 1998):
1. Concentration on processes, not results;
2. Based on day-to-day control;
3. Goals are contingent on customer needs;
4. Profound analysis of previous stage;
5. Top-down and bottom-up planning;
6. Catchball between different levels of institution;
7. Objectives aligned all over the institution to accomplish common goals;
8. Each and every one in the institution is responsible for the process of
bringing about the results;
9. Emphasis on a few number of advanced items;
10. Prevalent understanding of TQM and the PDCA cycle;
11. Means deployed with targets;
12. Recurring review mechanism, emphasis on corrective action;
13. Active, flexible, and endlessly improvement.

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
176
Hoshin Kanri Process
The Critical Elements of Hoshin Kanri Processes
Jolyaemi (2008) and Nicholas (2014) pinpointed the critical elements
of Hoshin Kanri processes. These critical elements are: PDCA, Vision,
strategy, long and medium-term goals, Cascade objectives, Catch ball,
Means/ends and targets, and Objectives connected to every day work.
Generally, Hoshin process entails the PDCA methodology.
PDCA
Hoshin Kanri has been described as “simply PDCA applied to the
planning and execution of a few critical (strategic) institutional objectives”
(King, 1989, in Witcher, 2014, p. 73). However, PDCA is the Deming’s
P(lan), D(o), C(heck), and A(ct) problem solving process (Jolayemi, 2008;
Sobek & Smalley, 2008; Witcher, 2014).
Vision, Strategy, Long and Medium-Term Goals
In Hoshin Kanri yearly, strategic objectives are derived from the
vision and long term strategy into some strategic objectives (3 - 5) that
should be attained throughout the year (Nicholas, 2014; Witcher, 2014).
Cascade Objectives
Based on the few strategic objectives, key functions are determined
and are involved in the analysis, planning, and execution processes. The
objectives and plans are cascaded to all levels in the institution.
Catch Ball
The catchball process is at the heart of Hoshin Kanri, which is the
main process for the aligning and integrating of strategies. Catch ball refers
to the two-way, top-down, and bottom-up process by which objectives and
plans are distributed and shared out in the institution. Thus, the objectives,
plans, and activities at every level of the institution are discussed with the
next level (Lee & Dale, 1998; Tennant & Roberts, 2001a; Nicholas, 2014;
Witcher, 2014). Furthermore, King defines it as:
"A term that refers to the fact that communication up, down, and
horizontally across the organization must sometimes go from person
to person several times to be clearly understood.” (King, 1989)
This element is closely related to the catchballing. This is because it
shows that the goal (end) of every institutional level is to create the actions
(means) needed to attain the intended goals and targets by the next-higher
level (Nicholas, 2014).
Therefore, I think that catchball is the continual repetitive up, down,
and horizontal essential communication for rational development of targets
and the guidelines for achieving them.

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
177
Objectives Linked to Daily Work
As the Hoshin objectives are cascaded down in the institution, the
lower level managers meet them through the day by day plans, control, and
management (Nicholas, 2014).
Consequently, Hronec (1993) illustrated Hoshin Kanri planning
process as a model of seven fundamental elements:-
1. Strategy – It involves creation and communication reinforced by
placing the appropriate mechanisms in place, training, and the existence of
benchmarking for doing the right things from the first time, and all the time
in the right way.
2. Goals.
3. Critical processes.
4. Output measures.
5. Essential activities.
6. Process measures.
7. Implementation.
Different Descriptions of Hoshin Kanri Process
In literature, there are different descriptions of Hoshin Kanri process.
Although process descriptions varies not only on the level of details, but on
the level of the big picture. Thus, these processes have the same principle.
They start with the mission, vision, and/or long term plan. Therefore,
through target alignment process, they finish up with the daily management.
The basic foundation of strategic planning, common factor of Hoshin
management, and BSC is their vision, objectives, strategies, and performance
as shown in Figure 9. In the strategic planning process, action plans are
developed in relation to the vision and objectives. The balanced scorecard
(BSC) evaluates the performance in four perspectives. In addition, it is used
to analyze the tasks with Key Performants Indicator (KPI). Hoshin is based
on continuous improvement and process oriented. When there is a demand of
improvement in the targets evaluated by BSC within four dimensions,
Hoshin management intervenes (Yang & Yeh, 2009, 996).

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
178
Figure 9. Strategic planning, BSC, and Hoshin management
(Source: Yang & Yeh, 2009, 996)
The Four Phases of Hoshin Kanri Planning
As opined by Witcher & Butterworth (1999), Hoshin Kanri is based
on a FAIR (Focus, Arrangement, Integration, Remark) cycle. Hoshin Kanri
Planning cycle has four phases which are similar, but are not equal to the
P(lan), D(o), C(heck), and A(ct) phase in the PDCA methodology. The cycle
starts with the phase of prevention (Focus) in which the previous
management performance (Strategy) is profoundly reviewed. At this phase,
the former year’s performance is accurately investigated and focuses on the
next year. Then, strategy (goals and priorities) is developed. In the following
planning (Arrangement) phase, strategic priorities are organized to be
consistent with units’ priorities. Application (Integration) phase is a phase
which is concerned with the integration of priorities with day-to-day
activities and project works. Control (Review) phase consists of suitable
management of day-to-day activities which is consistent with the strategic
goals and supervision. The outcomes which are gained from this supervision
and review phase give feedback to the focus phase (Asan & Tanyaş, 2007:
1002)
The First Phases: The Outlining/Prevention (Focus) Phase
In the outlining/prevention (Focus) phase, the organizational situation
is identified. The outlining phase is similar to the traditional design school
planning model (Andrews, 1987; Mintzberg, 2000:35). Here, the method
contains traditional environmental analysis with the application of tools such
as Porters Five forces and PESTEL in addition to the internal analysis of
resources and capabilities.

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
179
The Second Phases: The Objective/Planning (Arrangement) Phase
In the objective/planning (Arrangement) phase, long and short term
plans is developed in a top-down manner (Akao, 1991; Babich, 2005;
Hutchins 2008). The Japanese version of Hoshin Kanri differs from the
“Western version”, whereas the “Western version” pays more attention to the
analysis and the development of objectives (Jolayemi, 2008). Although the
tools used are overlapping with traditional design school planning, the results
are significantly different in the Hoshin Kanri approach. This is because the
aim is not in developing an encompassing strategic plan. On the contrary, the
aim is to keep objectives comprehensive and delimited. For comprehensive
as the general objectives (vision), it is better to be somewhat general and in
stating the general direction. Delimited, as the means to accomplish the
general objective, will be limited not to many strategic objectives. Therefore,
the ability to adhere not to too many issues is considered to be vital for the
success of a Hoshin Kanri process.
The Third Phases: The Operational /Application (Integration) Phase
In the third operational /Application (Integration) phase, the essential
words in all three alternative step-models above are deployment (policy
deployment) and catch balling. Here, in this phase, the Hohsin Kanri
methodology diverges more from traditional methodologies. The design
school planning strategy work focuses only on how to implement the plans
developed by the strategists. As Mintzberg, (2000, p.60) describes it, “in the
planning model, implementation should be close-ended and converging and
not permitting disturbances.” Deployment and catchballing in the Hoshin
Kanri approach are concepts that when they are defined, they encompass
terms such as alignment, dialogue, and consensus (Akao, 1991; Tennant &
Roberts, 2001a). Deployment and catchballing also implies a management
approach that has responsive, creative, and flexible principles. Practically,
this approach is interpreted into a decentralized strategy work. Rather than
developing the final and detailed plan at the top of the institution, strategy
work which is consistent with the Hoshin Kanri approach includes the setting
of vision, long term plans at the top, and objectives that are interpreted
through conducting conversation within the institution and with all levels of
employees. However, these employees are invited to work on their sub-
strategy on how to achieve the general objectives. Jolayemi defines catchball
as “relative up, down, horizontal discussions, and joint analysis necessary for
effective determination of objectives, strategies, and means.” (Jolayemi,
2008:310)
The Fourth Phases: The Control (Review) Phase
In the fourth phase, the Control (Review) phase, more important
characteristics of the Hoshin Kanri approach surface. One of these

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
180
characteristics is the need for continuous process development which
indicates that the Hoshin Kanri process takes a number of cycles to start.
Also, it will never be completely developed. In addition, the second
characteristic is the relationship between participation in strategy work and
the obligation for accomplishing the agreed actions. It is concluded that the
difference between the traditional design school model and the Hoshin Kanri
approach is that the traditional design school model often ignore the
balancing of authority and responsibility. “Why should co-workers assume
responsibility to carry out actions when they have no authority to define
actions?”
(Mintzbeg, 2000). On the other hand, the Hoshin approach is “about using a
participative and shared commonality of direction, rather than top-down
command and control. The over-arching principle is that everybody should
be involved in strategy (work)” (Witcher, 2014:88).
I think that the familiarization phase is very critical and important. It
is about getting employees to know each other and set-up a level of trust and
confidence and to identify the strategic issues that are most interesting to the
management of the institution. When top management practices the PDCA
thinking it will be compelled to create more common assumptions about the
institution. However, these assumptions will be progressively transformed
from general statements to common convictions among employees and
managers. After some time, the assumption will be translated into long-term
objectives and a vision.
As mentioned before, the PDCA thinking and a “Management by
Objectives” approach are fundamental prerequisites in Hoshin Kanri process.
On the “tool-level”, researchers propose some methods that are derived from
the total quality management tradition. Hutchins (2008) explains ideas and
tools pertaining to six sigma, quality circles, the kano model, pareto
diagrams, fish-bone diagrams lean manufacturing, etc. Furthermore, Babich
(2005) concentrates on the administrative process and the PDCA, thinking
and presenting the templates of how to administer the strategy work process.
In addition, the A3 methodology is considered as a common tool to
operationalize the PDCA logic (Tennant & Roberts, 2001a).
What is the Difference between Hoshin Kanri Strategic Planning
Process and Any Other Strategic Planning Process?
The Core Hoshin Planning Process
Although the model of Hoshin planning process may look similar to
any other planning process, yet the distinctness is clear in the application of
planning tools that is consistent with quality principles and tools. These tools
include PDCA, a few number of critical points for creating yearly objectives

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
181
(the Pareto principle), the customer focus, fact-based data, and root-cause
problem solving. Therefore, the final step in the process focuses on
reviewing the Hoshin process itself – this concentration with process is
unfamiliar in conventional strategic planning. The one year plan is the
beginning of the heart of Hoshin planning process. Yearly, few key
objectives that are derived out of vision and long- term plans must be
accomplished during the year (step 3). Then, the fundamental
departments/functions are engaged in creating sub-objectives and plans. A
process of reaching agreements about how plans can be achieved through
managed coordination during deployment is drawn. Since this has to do with
throwing possibilities to and fro between effected parties, it is equated with a
game of catchball (in step 4, figure 10) (Witcher, 2014).
Figure 10. The core Hoshin planning process
(Source: Jolayemi, 2008)

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
182
The Steps of Hoshin Planning Process
Boisvert (2012) indicated the first steps of Hoshin planning like any
strategic planning process. It starts with gathering data and information on
current performance of the institution, its current and future customers, and
their needs and expectations. The mission and vision are reviewed, and it
develops the institutional measures of success. Then, Hoshin strategic
planning process departs from standard planning through four important
ways (Boisvert, 2012): -
Figure 11. Hoshin Planning Macro-Level Process
(Source: Boisvert, 2012)
First Way: Focus - Selecting ‘One’ Hoshin
The success of the strategic plan can be increased by defining the
priorities at the executive level. Defining the priorities can be a hard task for
the leaders. Subsequently, executives can manage this hard task by arranging
the Hoshins that are not chosen for a certain year in a Gantt chart. Also, they
assure their employees that a Hoshin which is not chosen in a certain year
may be the one selected next year or the year after. What distinguishes a
‘Hoshin’? A Hoshin is an advanced objective with three features. First, a
fundamental change in the systems of the institution becomes a must.
Second, it necessitates the involvement of the whole institution to attain.
Third, if achieved, it will lift the institution up to its higher level of
performance. However, accomplishing a Hoshin is transformational to an
institution.
Second Way: Organizational Involvement - Conducting ‘Catchball’
The catchball process is essential for successful implementation of
Hoshin Kanri, since it constructs the bridge between choosing the Hoshin
and implementing it. Catchball is derived from a children’s ball game, but in
place of a ball, an idea is thrown from one person to another. Catchball is an
essential process that necessitates continuous communication to develop the
applicable targets and means, and their deployment at all levels and sections
in the institution. In addition, feedback in multi-directional horizons must be
given through managed processes (Tennant & Roberts, 2001).

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
183
The product of the catchball process is the plan itself which
comprises of a connected set of planning tables. In catchball, managers and
senior employees develop the strategies, tasks, and metrics that sustain the
accomplishment of the Hoshin. The Affinity Diagram is one of the essential
Hoshin planning tools that are used to build an annual plan. This is carried
out by allowing people to answer questions within a very short period of
time. For the unprecedented strategies, people in charge search for a realistic
assessment of what it will take to carry out these strategies. After then, the
comprehensive plans are brought back up through the higher levels of the
plan, in order to allow for modification in the highest-level strategies. In this
context, the word ‘catchball’ refers to tossing back up these plans (Boisvert,
2012).
Third Way: Using the Planning Tools and Tables
The products of the group’s work at a meeting become the
components of the plan itself. There is a saying, ‘People support what they
help create.” Tools like the ID invite a high degree of interaction and are
designed to support consensus decisions. Executives who work with their
colleagues to produce a shared picture of drivers and outcomes like this,
more often than not, invest well in supporting the outcome later. Hoshin
planning gives great attention to the documentation of the planning process
and the plan itself. The group processing tools and planning tables are used
in the planning meetings instead of traditional meeting (Boisvert, 2012).
Fourth Way: Reviewing the Plans
One of the less exciting, but strongest features of the Hoshin planning
process is the review.
More than the typical progress report presentation, Hoshin planning
strategy owners must report regularly on whether metrics were made or
missed. If missed, what is the root cause that led to the result? The
expectation is that plan leaders will present data and what their plans are for
correction as part of the review. Care is taken to ensure that review meetings
will be conducted weekly, monthly, and quarterly as learning opportunities
from ‘Mistakes’, reaffirms on what is important to the institution, and the
removal of the completed parts of the plan (Boisvert, 2012).
Hoshin is mainly paying great attention to sustainability and building
strengths for increased competitiveness. While Hoshin concentrates on
results, it does so by unceasingly refining the processes involved in order to
avoid repeatability of performance and in achieving consistency. Hoshin
presents discipline, communicates the same goal at all levels, and ensures the
achievement of goal agreement or real alignment. In contrasting management
by objective (MBO), which focuses attentions on individual performance and

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
184
follows an inflexible hierarchical ranked line of authority and responsibility,
Hoshin follows a process flow chart and evaluates team performance. Unlike
MBO, Hoshin does not focus on “one leap at a time” kind of approach.
Subsequently, the effect is to concentrate on continuous improvement to
improve process capability, to avoid mistakes, to capture best practices and
ideas, and to achieve quality (Zairi & Alan, 2014).
Hill (1994) says that Hoshin Kanri:-
1. helps make unification within an institution and supports a consensus
of the institution objectives at all levels;
2. concentrates on a vision of the future of the institution;
3. harmonizes the efforts of all people within an institution into actions that
move the whole institution towards its objectives;
4. develops and creates process to carry out improvement year after year;
5. makes engagement and commitment to both the direction and application
ways chosen;
6. enhances interdepartmental collaboration;
7. employs and strengthens the PDCA cycle in every month progress
reviews;
8. develops a planning and implementation system that is reactive,
adaptable, yet disciplined and systematic;
9. provides a mechanism for leadership to understand the strategic problem
areas in an institution, and enable prioritization;
10. creates faster and more precise feedback circles; and by use of the
catchball process, it provides the best communication between both levels
and departments concerned.
Factors which are Likely to Enable or Hinder the Implementation of
Hoshin Kanri Planning in Educational Institutions
There are many factors that may enable or hinder the implementation
of Hoshin Kanri planning in educational institutions. However, these factors
can be summarized as follow:-
Written Strategies and Strategic Work
Hoshin strives at planning and implementing strategic objectives.
Also, they have a long term focus. In addition, the use of written strategies
has an effect on the implantation of Hoshin Kanri. The written strategies are
usually used as a tool for communicating the long term plans in the
institution.
Lean Experience and Work with Continuous Improvement
Hoshin strive in cascading strategies and long term plans into the
institution. Continuous improvement is an approach for change. Hoshin

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
185
continuous improvement takes into account the application of the PDCA
methodologies, experience of daily management, and a general continuous
improvements mindset (Kesterson, 2014).
Strategic or Operational Focus
The focus of the institution impacts the implementation of Hoshin
Kanri. This is because the benefits of adopting Hoshin Kanri take up to four
years to attain according to Hoshin experts (Kesterson, 2014). Hence, it is
more a way of living than the implementation of a methodology. Considering
this, institutions implementing Hoshin Kanri should have a long term
strategic focus. However, the institution needs to achieve small quick wins to
involve the employees and make them concerned. The small quick wins are
operational issues.
Leadership Commitment
Leadership commitment and involvement impacts the
implementation of Hoshin Kanri since the leader puts the directions for the
institution. Without commitment and involvement from both the leadership
and top management, the importance of the implementation of Hoshin Kanri
will be in doubt.
Top Management Team and Regular Top Management Team Meetings
Top management team and regular top management team meetings
impact the implementation of Hoshin Kanri because Hoshin Kanri is
comprehensive besides a systematic process. Teamwork, engagement and
involvement, are essential pillars in Hoshin Kanri. Taking into account this,
the people in the top management team should understand how to work
together before the implementation of Hoshin Kanri. Hoshin is also a
systematic process for achieving strategic objectives. In case that the top
managers are not accustomed to work together and do not have frequent top
management team meetings, this can hinder the implementation of Hoshin
Kanri (Tennant & Roberts, 2001a).
Institution Open for Change and Institutional Culture
It is important to understand the institutional culture and its
acceptance for change before implementing Hoshin Kanri. However, Hoshin
Kanri deals with change on how the institution plans and implements its
strategy. As mentioned before, Hoshin requires everyone to be involved. In
addition, the employees will achieve the strategic objectives and they will be
impacted by the end result (Tennant & Roberts, 2001; Kesterson, 2014).

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
186
A Structured Process for Strategic Planning using Hoshin Kanri
Methodology in Educational Institutions
A structured process for implementing Hoshin Kanri planning was
developed from the Hoshin Kanri literature. This literature was integrated
with the knowledge attained by the researcher through a face to face
workshop that is divided into interactive sessions. However, it was
conducted under close guidance by the research with 45 persons. These
persons were responsible for the strategic planning of some of the Egyptian
public and private universities. This was held during the lectures that the
researcher conducted as a part of teaching practices for “Strategic Planning
in Educational Institutions” course. However, this course is one of the
courses in Professional Diploma in Quality and Accreditation Management
Systems in Educational Institutions at Ain Shams University. From this
workshop, a structured process was developed in two phases that cover the
Plan part of the PDCA methodology. In phase one, “the scanning” which
aims at understanding the history of the institution, is giving a description
and is characterizing the present strategies and strategists in the institution.
The scanning phase is followed by the second phase, “formulation phase”
in which three strategies are identified. Therefore, these three strategies are
as follows (Melander et al., 2015; Jackson, 2006): -
(1) Apply a traditional strategic planning process, which comprises
of workshops, mapping the internal and external environment, developing a
vision, and a long and short term strategic objectives. In addition, this is to
be followed by a deployment process.
(2) Apply an experienced based strategy, in which the PDCA
methodology is the dominant tool repetitively used for resolving issues.
Gradual deployment of the technique occurs in the institution when the top
management is supportive.
(3) A combination of the two methods in which the second strategy
gradually resulted in the adaption of more traditional planning tools for
establishing corporate objectives and vision.
The 10 Steps of the Application of Hoshin Kanri Planning in
Educational Institutions
Akao proposed 10 Steps for applying Hoshin Kanri as outlined below
(Akao, 1991):-
1. Providing a context for and focusing institutional action
(Establishing annual policy)
Steps 1 to 3 are similar to the institutional planning process. Also, it
relates to the determination of longer-term policies which develops the
context from which the institution’s annual policy can be derived.

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
187
Step 1: Establish an institution motto, quality policy, and promotion
plan.
Step 2: Devise long and medium term management strategies.
Step 3: Collect and analyze the information.
The institution vision which is not mentioned within the steps is a
general guideline. However, it will not be changed repeatedly. Also, the
management concept or motto is a yearly statement. Quality policy
concentrates on customer satisfaction which is defined in terms of Quality,
Cost, Delivery and Employee (QCDE). Long and medium term policies are
developed within the context of the institutional vision. Step 3 is concerned
with information that shows the current position of the institution. This step
also provides the essential knowledge for determining annual policy. Thus,
the annual Hoshin Kanri process is derived in this step through the
application of the PDCA cycle. To all intents and purposes, the freedom of
institutions to carry out Steps 1 and 2 will be deeply influenced by the
context within which they function.
Aligning institutional action (Deploying annual policy)
Steps 4 to 7 apply the annual policy to manage institutional activities.
This is done through the translation of targets and means which bring about
policies for every part of the institution.
Step 4: Plan the target and means.
Step 5: Set control items and prepare a control item list.
Step 6: Deploy the target and means.
Step 7: Deploy the control items.
Targets are expected results, while means outline the actions taken to
achieve targets. The application of quality control (QC) is essential in the
formation of targets and means. Consequently, quality control (QC) apply
the Paretio analysis to make sure that data based priorities become the central
point for action. Managers employ annual policy to determine targets and
means which are suitable to them. After then, they are passed down to the
institution. Higher level means to become the focus for next level managers
to decide their targets and means. However, this process needs repetitive co-
ordination between different institutional levels. In Hoshin Kanri, control
items are the measures that monitor the progress of achieving targets. These
measures result from the application of the PDCA cycle during the
development of policy and related plans. In addition, they are linked to the
target and means, and are developed by the individuals responsible for the
target/mean setting process. After setting the targets and the means and
control items, the next two steps involve their deployment all through the
institution.

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
188
Integrating institutional action through implementation (Implementing
annual policy)
The implementation of the policy plan is governed by the culture and
purpose of the institution. There is an implied assumption that as soon as the
process has reached the implementation stage, success will be tagged
alongside with it.
Step 8: Implement the policy plan.
Reviewing the results of institutional action (Reviewing annual policy)
Step 9. Check the results of the implementation.
Step 10: Prepare the status report for implementing Hoshin Kanri.
Steps 9 and 10 involve the review of the development of policy
deployment which entails two forms. The first form involves examining the
results of the implementation through the application of the PDCA cycle
continuously at every institutional level. This will decide suitable data
analysis based corrective action where anticipated results are not being
fulfilled. Critical to this is the process which produced the results. However,
it is the focus of any corrective action, not just the results itself.
The process is repetitive and it serves as feedback into Step 3. Review
step aims at allowing changes to be made to the courses of action or policy.
The second form of review involves the development of Hoshin Kanri,
where an institution pursues a continuous improvement of the process. Step
10 involves composing a report that describes in details the status of progress
towards the achievement of targets at each level of the institution.
Essentially, this is reporting on the PDCA of the yearly policy. Also, it
creates a foundation upon which decisions will be made for future policy.
Furthermore, this classification provides a conceptual model of
Hoshin Kanri as seen in figure 13 below. As mentioned earlier, the essential
requirement for Hoshin Kanri is a successful TQM. Planning, doing,
monitoring, and the stage at which corrective actions is taken are regarded as
the four stages of Hoshin Kanri.

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
189
Figure 13. PDCA & Akao's 10 Steps of Hoshin Kanri
(Source: Butterworth, 2002)
Figure 12. Hoshin Kanri process and total quality management
(Source: Hutchins, 2008)

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
190
PDCA- cycle
PDCA- cycle consists of four phases and eight steps as it is
presented in 1 (Du et al., 2008).
Phase
Step
Content
plan
1
Analyses the existing conditions and finds out the current and prevailing
problems.
2
Determines the root causes of those problems.
3
Identifies the principal factors from root causes.
4
Applies the solutions and improvement plan according to the principal
factors.
Do
5
Performs the plan and measures.
Check
6
Checks the implements according to the requirements of the plan.
Action
7
Sums up experiences and reinforces achievements.
8
Turns problems that have not been solved or that appears newly in the
next cycle.
PDCA- cycle is the heart of the Hoshin Kanri and continuous
improvement. When Hoshin Kanri is completely implemented, the PDCA-
cycle has an effect on every function daily. Senior management uses the
cycle in determining the direction, follow-up, and improvement of the whole
institution. Middle management is coordinating departmental actions and
targets to assist the upper level cycle. When going down in the institution,
the turning speed of the PDCA-cycle is increasing. The annual cycle starts
with act. Here, the top level management presents the next year few vital
objectives to the next level of the institution. Figure 14 indicates the
relationships between annual Hoshin and the PDCA- cycle (Leppänen,
2014).
Figure 13. Annual Hoshin and PDCA- cycle
(Source: Witcher, 2002).

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
191
In the next phase plan, “catchball” process is taking place. This
process is concerned with setting the practical targets based on vital few
objectives for the next year by all departments. Also, it ensures that the
targets and means are not mismatching. The catch-ball comes to an end after
the opinions of so many people right down to the front line have been
brought together and after information have been fed to the top management.
The nested PDCA cycles are the result out of the catch-ball process where all
participants know well their roles to reach the annual targets. In the phase do,
the targets and means are deployed to the daily management where
continuous processes are controlled as part of daily operations. In check
phase, the results out of the processes are continuously checked and
corrective actions are taken when needed (Kondo, 1998).
Figure 14. Nested PDCA cycles
(Source: Jackson, 2006).
Conclusion
Hoshin Kanri planning is a systematical methodology for
achieving strategic institutional improvements through focusing on choosing
the institutional priorities, participation of all employees, the use of well-
regulated and established planning and improvement tools, and the
application of a structured review process that leads to a continuous
improvement.
Hoshin Kanri is a methodology for perfecting strategy execution.
This is done through applying PDCA to the planning process and the
application of a few significant strategic objectives of an institution. Hoshin
Kanri is best used by institutions that adopt TQM. Hoshin Kanri is also a
structured framework for strategic management. However, it has four
essential tasks. Firstly, it focuses on the attention of an organization on a
business direction by setting a few vital strategic priorities every year.
Secondly, it aligns these few strategic priorities with business plans and
programs. Thirdly, it integrates them with every day management. Finally, it
provides a well-defined methodical review of their progress.
The most significant Key defining features of Hoshin Kanri are
PDCA which is considered to be a basis for improvement. It also provides a
common approach to problem solving and the setting of priorities. In

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
192
addition, catchball is another significant defining feature of Hoshin Kanri.
Catchball is linked to the broader concept of nemawashi which is a
distinctive feature of institution life. Furthermore, it is a process of achieving
consensus that aims at determining the correct course of action for a specific
policy.
Future Research
There is a need in the future to address both strategy work (with the
Hoshin Kanri planning methodology) in addition to institutional structure in
which development and deployment processes can be established. Practical
examples of Hoshin Kanri planning methodology within the education sector
in Egypt and Arab world need to be explored. Also, there is the need to
further explore the factors which affects the implementation and
development of the process.
References
Akao (1991). Hoshin Kanri: Policy Deployment for Successful TQM,
Productivity Press, Cambridge, MA.
American Supplier Institute (1989). Policy Management – Executive Briefing
Manual, American Supplier Institute, Michigan.
Andrews (1987). The Concept of Corporate Strategy, Irwin, Homewood, Ill.
Ansoff (1968). Institution Strategy, London, Penguin Books.
Asan & Tanyaş (2007). Integrating Hoshin Kanri and the Balanced
Scorecard for Strategic Management: The Case of Higher Education, Total
Quality Management & Business Excellence, 18(9), 999-1014.
Babich (1996). Hoshin Handbook (2nd Ed.), USA, Total Quality
Engineering, Inc.
Babisch (2005). Hoshin Handbook. Total Quality Engineering. Poway, US.
Boisvert (2012). Strategic Planning Using Hoshin Kanri, Retrieved on June
27, 2014 , Available at: URL:
https://www.goalqpc.com/cms/docs/whitepapers/GOALQPCHoshinWhitepa
per.pdf
Butterworth & Rosemary (2001). Hoshnn Kanri: An Exploratory Study
Nissan Yamato Engineering Ltd. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Durham.
Cole (1998). Learning from the quality movement: what did and didn’t
happen and why? California Management Review, 41, 43-73.
Colletti (1995). A Field Guide to Focused Planning: Hoshin Kanri -
American Style, The Wood ledge Group, East Granby, CT, USA.
Davidson (1995). The Transformation of Management, London, Macmillan
Business Press.
Drucker (1954). The Practice of Management. New York.

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
193
GOAL/QPC (1989). Hoshin Planning: A Planning System for Implementing
Total Quality Management (TQM), research report 89-10- 03, Methuen MA:
GOAL/QPC. 52 pps.
Du et al. (2008). Application of the PDCA-cycle to Performance
Management system. Shangdong University of Technology. Shangdong.
Hronec (1993). Vital Signs Using Quality, Time and Cost Performance
Measurements to Chart Your Institution’s Future, AMACOM, New York.
Hutchins (2008). Hoshin Kanri: the strategic approach to continuous
improvement, Gower Publishing, Farnham, UK.
Integrated Quality Dynamics (1997). TQM: Hoshin, Retrieved on June 27,
2014 , Available at: URL: http://www.iqd.com:80/hoshin.htm
Jackson (2006). Hoshin Kanri for the lean enterprise, CRC Press, Boca
Raton.
Jolayemi (2008). Hoshin kanri and hoshin process: A review and literature
survey, Total Quality Management, 19 (3), pp. 295-320.
Kesterson (2014). The basics of Hoshin Kanri, CRC Press, Boca Raton.
King (1989). Hoshin Planning: The Development Approach, GOAL/QPC,
Methuen, MA, USA.
Kondo (1998). Hoshin kanri-a participative way of quality management in
Japan, The TQM Magazine, 10(6), pp. 425-431.
Lee & Dale (1998). Policy deployment: an examination of the theory,
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 15(5), 520-540.
Leonard & McAdam (2002). The corporate strategic-operational divide and
TQM, Measuring Business Excellence, 6(1), pp. 5–14.
Leppänen & Kalle-Pekka (2014). Study of the hoshin kanri strategy deployment
elements in Sappi Kirkniemi Paper Mill, Master’s thesis, Tampere University of
Applied Sciences.
Marksberry (2011). The theory behind hoshin: a quantitative investigation of
Toyota's strategic planning process, International Journal of Business
Innovation and Research, 5(3), pp. 347-370.
Melander et al. (2015). Initiating the Hoshin Kanri approach in small and
medium sized companies, a paper submitted at the 22nd EurOMA
Conference, June 26th to July 1st, 2015, Retrieved on June 27, 2014 ,
Available at: URL: http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:hj:diva-28692
Mintzberg (2000). The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning, Prentice Hall.
London, UK.
Nicholas (2014). Hoshin kanri and critical success factors in quality
management and lean production, Total Quality Management & Business
Excellence, DOI: 10.1080/14783363.2014.976938.
Rank Xerox (1992). The European Quality Award Rank Xerox, Submission
Document, Marlow: Rank Xerox.

European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.16 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431
194
Shiba & Shoji (1993). A New American TQM: Four Practical Revolutions in
Management. Productivity Press, Cambridge MA.
Skinner (1969). Manufacturing - missing link in institution strategy. Harvard
Business Review, Boston.
Sobek & Smalley (2008). Understanding A3 thinking, Productivity Press,
Boca Raton, FL.
Tennant & Roberts (2000). Hoshin Kanri: A Technique for strategic quality
management, Quality Assurance, 8, 77-80.
Tennant & Roberts (2001a). Hoshin Kanri: a tool for strategic policy
deployment, Knowledge and Process Management, 8(4) pp. 262-269.
Tennant & Roberts (2001b). Hoshin Kanri: Implementing the Catchball
Process, Long Range Planning, 34, 287-308.
Total Quality Engineering (1997). “Hoshin planning”, Retrieved on June 27,
2014 , Available at: URL: http://www.tqe.com:80/tqehelp/hoshin.html
Watson (1991). Understanding Hoshin Kanri, in Akao, Y. (Ed.), Hoshin
Kanri: Policy Deployment for Successful TQM, Productivity Press,
Cambridge, MA.
Watson (2005). Design and Execution of a Collaborative Business Strategy.
Journal For Quality & Participation, 28, (4), 4-9.
Witcher & Butterworth (1997). Hoshin Kanri: a preliminary overview. Total
Quality Management, 8, (2-3), 319-323.
Witcher & Butterworth (1999). Hoshin Kanri, How Xerox Manages, Long
Range Planning, June 32(3), 323 - 332
Witcher (2002). Hoshin kanri: A study of practice in UK, Managerial
auditing journal
17 (7), 390-396.
Witcher & Chau (2012). Strategic management and varieties of capitalism:
managing performance in multinationals after the global financial crisis,
British Journal of Management, 23 (March), S58-73.
Witcher (2014). Hoshin Kanri through the eyes of English Language Texts,
The journal of business studies, 53, (3), 72-90.
Witcher (2014). Hoshin Kanri, Perspectives on Performance, 11(1), 16-24
Yang et al. (2009). An Integrated implementation model of strategic
planning, BSC and Hoshin management, Total Quality Management &
Business Excellence, 20(9) 989-1002.
Zairi, Mohamed & Erskine (2014). International Journal of Applied Strategic
Management, 2 ( 2), Special Edition, Driving Strategy with Quality: A
Useful Insight. Excellence is Born out of Effective Strategic Deployment:
The Impact of Hoshin Planning, Retrieved on June 27, Available at: URL:
http://www.managementjournals.com/journals/strategic/vol2/12-2-2-2.pdf