This organization is one of the world’s leading consumer health companies. It operates across multiple continents and manages a diverse portfolio of trusted brands and products that reach millions of people every day. Its laboratories play a critical role in ensuring compliance, accelerating product release, and maintaining consumer trust, with a strong focus on quality, safety, and innovation.

However, despite this central role and a strong culture of continuous improvement, the laboratories faced recurring challenges, including delayed product releases, unreliable planning, and teams being overloaded with administrative tasks. These issues slowed down time-to-market and put pressure on compliance and team morale.

To address these gaps in performance and elevate laboratory standards worldwide, the Lab Excellence initiative in QC (Quality Control) was launched. This case study showcases how one site implemented Kaizen practices to achieve significant improvements in workflow, planning, and overall efficiency.

Diagnostic phase

The diagnostic phase was designed to provide a clear picture of the laboratory’s current challenges, release lead times, and productivity, while establishing a solid foundation for the improvement plan.

1. Preparation and data gathering

This phase began with detailed project preparation, including agenda definition, resource involvement, and logistics. Data gathering focused on process information and was complemented by a Voice of the Customer exercise to collect pain points from the teams. A preparation visit was also conducted to gain an overview of the laboratory, its processes, and technologies, ensuring a solid baseline for the diagnostic work.

2. Current state mapping

The team conducted a thorough mapping of the material and sample flows, strategic planning practices, and execution routines. Analyses focused on efficiency, planning discipline, and bottlenecks that extended lead times. Scenarios were quantified to measure the impact of identified inefficiencies on throughput and service levels.

3. Future state design

Building on the current state analysis, the team engaged in Kaizen methodology training and in a “blank sheet” exercise to envision what a successful future state would look like. Improvement opportunities were then designed and quantified, linking potential solutions to measurable gains in productivity, lead time, and reliability.

The desired future state incorporated multiple dimensions of improvement:

• Enhanced data accuracy and accessibility through digital tools.
• Improved consumables management with better inventory control to avoid stock-outs.
• Streamlined workflows to reduce laboratory lead time.
• Stronger scheduling discipline to increase the reliability of on-time release.
• Better prioritization to balance urgencies and backlog.
• Reinforced quality and compliance practices, strengthening audits and reducing documentation complexity.
• Optimized workforce allocation, addressing absenteeism and minimizing non-value-added tasks.
• Consistent adherence to protocols, ensuring accuracy and reliability in testing.

4. Implementation plan and report-out

Finally, the diagnostic phase concluded with the prioritization of solutions. A cost-benefit analysis supported the selection of priorities, and the resulting improvement roadmap was presented internally to site management and externally to key stakeholders at the regional and global level.

This structured approach ensured that the diagnostic was not only an analysis exercise but also a co-creation process, aligning laboratory teams and leadership around a shared vision for improvement and setting the stage for a successful implementation cycle.

Implementation phase

The implementation phase was structured around improvement cycles. Each cycle combined implementation with structured follow-up. Next, we present the set of Kaizen Events carried out during the first implementation cycle.

Lab excellence governance

The laboratory struggled with governance: project milestones were rarely tracked, communication was irregular, and risks or resource needs often went unnoticed. As a result, decisions were delayed and team accountability remained low.

To change this, a new governance model was launched. Weekly meetings between the project lead and sponsor followed a clear agenda—progress versus plan, risks, KPIs, and actions. A visual tracker made milestones visible to everyone, while action and decision logs were updated in real time. Workshop leaders reported systematically on their initiatives, and results were consolidated through a project cockpit and A3 templates.

Figure 1 – KPI performance charts and A3

This disciplined but straightforward structure quickly built momentum. Decisions sped up, escalations dropped, and team engagement increased. Confidence grew cycle after cycle, and the model soon became a reference for other projects in the organization.

Performance and strategy management

Initially, the lab had no consistent performance management routine. Metrics were poorly followed, leadership rituals varied, and a single manager oversaw the entire lab, stretching supervision and weakening accountability.

The introduction of Kaizen Office Excellence (KOE) routines changed this dynamic. A tiered daily meeting structure (DM1, DM2, DM3) was rolled out across all quality control areas, supported by new confirmation routines and standardized templates. Leadership capacity was strengthened by appointing two additional DM1 leaders, ensuring closer and more balanced supervision.

Figure 2 – Daily Management Boards

With these practices in place, information began to flow seamlessly, responsiveness improved, and teams became more engaged in solving issues at the source, building a stronger, performance-driven culture.

Lab layout efficiency and testing standard

The lab layout and testing practices were another source of inefficiency. Analysts walked long distances between tasks, consumables often ran out mid-process, and high-runner products were tested in the same flow as slow movers. In addition, work was rarely standardized, leaving knowledge undocumented and test sequencing inconsistent.

The team redesigned the layout using a cell approach, applied design thinking to reduce movement, and introduced a Kanban system with Mizusumashi logistics to keep consumables always available. High-runner tests were prioritized under FIFO logic, while team dimensioning was adjusted to balance workloads.

Standardized work practices were introduced, improving versatility, reducing errors, and making test execution smoother. As a result, workflows became faster, more reliable, and less dependent on individual expertise.

Planning process

Planning was a constant pain point. Last-minute changes disrupted schedules, manual processes caused errors, and the absence of KPI tracking left blind spots in performance. Standard test times were undocumented, which made capacity planning unreliable and resource allocation inefficient.

The team responded by introducing planning adherence KPIs, documenting standard test times, and creating a dedicated tool for visibility. A frozen planning rule was enforced, stabilizing the schedule and aligning site and lab priorities.

A new planning tool allowed real-time lead time tracking and better resource utilization. With this, planning shifted from reactive firefighting to a structured and predictable process, giving the lab greater control over execution.

Figure 3 – New planning process standards

Lab support activities: lab assistant and Mizusumashi

Analysts spent a large share of their time on non-value-added work—cleaning glassware, verifying balances, preparing solutions, and chasing materials—leaving less capacity for actual testing.

To solve this, two support roles were introduced. A lab assistant took over routine preparation and cleaning tasks, while a Mizusumashi ensured smooth and reliable delivery of materials across the lab. Daily agendas and visual routes standardized their work, ensuring consistency and flow.

This freed up analysts to focus on testing, improved material availability, and reduced interruptions. Morale also improved, as specialists could dedicate themselves to high-value scientific work while support tasks were handled professionally in the background.

Improvements across all key process indicators

The Kaizen implementation cycle delivered substantial and measurable improvements across all key performance indicators, surpassing the defined targets in most areas:

• Bulk productivity improved by +116%, more than doubling efficiency compared to the baseline.
• Raw material productivity increased by +34%, consistently above the target.
• Bulk solids lead time was reduced by 41%, accelerating product release.
• Bulk liquids lead time decreased by 51%, cutting process times in half.
• Raw material lead time improved by 71%, enabling faster material availability for production.
• Finished goods on-time release (OTR) increased by +23.8 percentage points, surpassing the target and ensuring greater reliability in delivery.

These results demonstrate the tangible impact of applying Lean and Kaizen practices to QC operations: higher productivity, shorter lead times, and improved service levels. The approach not only delivered immediate results but also reinforced a culture of continuous improvement for sustainable performance.

This project shows that Kaizen is more than an operational tool; it is a strategic enabler for laboratories, helping accelerate product launches, ensure compliance, strengthen consumer trust, and empower their people.

We are committed to respecting our clients’ confidentiality. While we have altered or omitted their names, the results are genuine.