An organization has received complaints from customers regarding incident resolution times. The organization is using value stream mapping to visualize the activities involved in restoring service…

Question

Options

• ADetermine where work is sitting in queues
• BIntroduce additional sources of demand
• CCompare the map to actual activities
• DAutomate repeatable work activities

• A
  73% (33)
• B
  9% (4)
• C
  4% (2)
• D
  13% (6)

Explanation

Option A is correct because value stream mapping's primary value in identifying delays comes from revealing queue time - the periods when work is waiting between activities rather than being actively processed. If the team only mapped the active work steps without capturing where incidents sit idle (waiting for assignment, approval, escalation, etc.), they've missed the main source of delay, since most lead time in IT service management is wait time, not work time.

Why the distractors fail:

• B (introduce additional demand sources) is backwards - adding more demand increases load and would likely worsen resolution times, not improve them.
• C (compare the map to actual activities) might sound reasonable, but it focuses on whether the activities themselves are accurate, not on where time is lost. You can have a perfectly accurate activity map that still hides all the queuing delays.
• D (automate repeatable work) is a valid improvement tactic, but it's premature - you need to first know where the delays are before deciding what to fix or automate.

Memory tip: Think of VSM as a highway map. If your commute is slow, the problem isn't usually the roads themselves (activities) - it's the traffic jams (queues). Always ask "where is the work waiting?" before asking "how do we do the work faster?"

No community discussion yet for this question.