Proposal System Design Guide — From "No One Cares" to "Everyone Competes to Submit"

Many companies have proposal systems: suggestion boxes, suggestion forms, quarterly evaluations... However, the actual results are often: the first year is lively, the second year is a struggle, and the third year is silent. Employees are not proactive, reviews are not transparent, and there is no follow-up on implementation. This is not a problem with the system itself, but rather a lack of systematic design methods.

This article builds on the framework of the first issue of the Continuous Improvement System series, "From Proposal System to Improvement Culture," focusing on the design and implementation of the proposal system itself. It provides a practical guide for quality managers and continuous improvement leaders.

1. Why Do Most Proposal Systems Fail?

Let's look at three typical scenarios:

Scenario A: A manufacturing company established a "Rationalization Suggestion Award," evaluated quarterly. Employee A submitted a proposal to improve welding parameters. After three months of review, they were told "the technical department is still assessing it." A year later, the employee never submitted another suggestion.

Scenario B: An electronics factory stipulated that each employee must submit at least one proposal per month, which is included in performance evaluations. The result: the number of proposals skyrocketed, but most were about "suggesting more dishes in the cafeteria" or "suggesting repainting the parking lines" — completely unrelated to quality management.

Scenario C: A food company rewards proposal stars annually, but the evaluation process is monopolized by the quality department. Proposals from frontline employees are often rejected with the reason "does not align with the annual improvement focus." Employees jokingly refer to this system as a "showpiece."

These scenarios reveal common reasons for the failure of proposal systems:

Understanding these pitfalls is essential to designing a proposal system that can survive and thrive.

2. Core Design Principles of a Proposal System

A good proposal system should follow five core principles:

Principle 1: Immediate Feedback — Commit to "A Response Within 7 Days"

After any proposal is submitted, the review department must provide a clear conclusion within 7 working days: adopted, deferred, or rejected, along with a brief reason. This seemingly simple rule directly determines whether employees will submit again. Committing to and strictly enforcing feedback timelines builds trust more effectively than offering multiple rewards.

Principle 2: Tiered Evaluation — Small Improvements for Immediate Implementation, Major Improvements for Project Management

Not all proposals deserve the same review process. Suggestions should be categorized into three levels based on the scope of improvement:

• S Level (Small Improvements/Micro Improvements): Improvements that can be implemented within the same workstation or team. Use standardized forms, approved directly by the team leader, implemented immediately, and rewarded instantly (e.g., small gifts or minor cash bonuses).
• M Level (Team Improvements): Improvements that span multiple processes or departments. Require filling out an A3 report or a simple analysis form, reviewed by the department, and bonuses awarded upon project completion.
• L Level (Strategic Improvements): Improvements involving process redesign, process changes, or new equipment investments. Follow a formal project review path and be integrated into policy management.

The essence of tiered evaluation is: do not let small improvements get stuck in the major review queue, and do not let major improvements be stifled by the small review framework.

Principle 3: Transparency — Show Everyone What Happens After Submission

Establish a simple proposal board (physical or digital) to display the progress of each proposal from "submission → review → implementation → standardization." Employees can see where their proposals stand and what changes others' proposals have brought. This peer demonstration effect is far more powerful than the call to action in the system documentation.

Principle 4: Closed-loop Operation — From Proposal to Standardization

After a proposal is adopted and implemented, it must be standardized — updating work instructions, control plans, inspection standards, or training materials. If improvements are not documented, problems will recur within three months, and the proposal's effectiveness will be nullified.

Principle 5: Decentralized Management — Delegate Review Authority to Those Closest to the Field

Headquarters/Quality Department should manage the rules and platform of the proposal system, but the review authority should be delegated to the department or production line level. Only frontline managers know best whether an improvement is valuable, feasible, and free of side effects. Headquarters is responsible for setting standards, building platforms, conducting statistics, and annual recognition.

3. Incentive Mechanism Design — Money Is Not the Only Driver

When it comes to incentives, many people's first reaction is "how much money?" However, actual research shows: for frontline employees, recognition and visibility often have a greater motivational effect than the bonus itself.

Four Levels of Incentives

Key Design — Do Not Let "Money" Drive Away "Heart"

A common pitfall: as the reward amount increases, employees start to focus on "how much is this proposal worth" rather than the improvement itself. Recommendations:

1. Standardize reward levels, no negotiation. S Level: 30 yuan, M Level: 100～300 yuan, L Level: 500～3000 yuan. Publicize these levels in advance and enforce them strictly.
2. Maintain the weight of "non-monetary incentives." Honor walls for annual improvement champions, lunch with the CEO, hall of fame — these should not be priced in monetary terms.
3. Prioritize team incentives over individual incentives. For M Level and above cross-departmental improvements, reward the project team as a whole to encourage collaboration rather than individual efforts.

4. Implementation Roadmap

Here are step-by-step implementation suggestions based on a timeline:

Week 1～2: System Design

• Determine the grading standards, review process, and feedback timeline for proposals.
• Design standardized forms (at least: proposal submission form, review record form, implementation tracking form).
• Establish the framework for the incentive mechanism.

Week 3: System Setup

• Set up a proposal board (physical + digital, recommend digital first — no need for custom development, use existing OA or collaboration tools).
• Train reviewers (team leaders, department supervisors).

Week 4: Pilot Run (Select one workshop or department)

• First month goal: each team submits at least one S Level proposal.
• Ensure the first "response case" is generated on the first day — show employees that "someone really cares."

Month 2～3: Full Rollout

• Review pilot data: submission rate, adoption rate, implementation rate, standardization rate.
• Optimize the review and feedback rhythm.
• Launch the monthly improvement star selection.

Month 4～6: Consolidation and Upgrade

• Data analysis: which types of proposals are most common? Which workstations have the highest adoption rates? Which issues are repeatedly raised (indicating systemic problems not yet resolved)?
• Integrate with QC group activities and policy management — upgrade high-quality proposals to QC topics or policy management priorities.
• Initiate the "improvement case library" construction.

5. Common Issues and Solutions

Q1: Employees say "it's useless to submit," how to solve this? A: This is the hardest psychological inertia to reverse. The only solution is to create "the first successful case." Even a tiny improvement (like adjusting the workstation lighting angle) should be reviewed, implemented, and publicized within 48 hours. This "first shot" is more convincing than a hundred mobilization documents.

Q2: Too many proposals, how to handle the review? A: Return to the tiered mechanism — S Level proposals are approved immediately by team leaders and do not require centralized review. Only M Level and L Level proposals go through the review committee. If there are still too many S Level proposals, it indicates the need to increase the authorization of team leaders, not to reduce the proposal channels.

Q3: Employees always suggest "improving the cafeteria," what to do? A: Do not reject these suggestions outright — this will make employees feel "their opinions are denied." The correct approach is to clearly inform them, "such suggestions should be submitted through the facility/admin logistics management department channel," and set up "improvement areas" in the proposal system. Let employees choose whether their suggestion is for "quality improvement," "efficiency improvement," or "work environment improvement" at the source.

Q4: Proposals are implemented, but revert to the old state after three months? A: This indicates a lack of standardization. The system must enforce a hard constraint: when a proposal is accepted, a "list of updated documents" must be included as a deliverable. Without standardization, the improvement is incomplete.

Q5: How to measure the effectiveness of the proposal system? A: Look at three core metrics:

• Participation Rate (%): What percentage of employees have submitted at least one proposal in the past 6 months? (Target: >30%)
• Adoption Rate (%): The percentage of adopted proposals (normal range: 40%~60%, too high indicates loose standards, too low indicates strict standards or process issues)
• Standardization Rate (%): The percentage of adopted proposals that have completed file/standard updates (Target: >90%)

6. From Proposal System to Improvement Culture — What's Next?

A proposal system is not the end of an improvement culture. When the team is accustomed to "spotting issues → proposing improvements → standardizing," consider the following steps:

1. Upgrade Excellent Proposals to QC Topics — use more structured methods (QC seven tools, A3, 8D) to solve more complex problems.
2. Align Annual Improvement Priorities Through Policy Management — break down improvement priorities to align with organizational strategy.
3. Establish an Improvement Community — make proposers "improvement coaches" to engage more people.

Knowledge Number: 5.1.2

Knowledge code: 5.1.2

Version: v20260602

Author: QTank