A lean leader's nightmare: Jury Duty

When I became a U.S. citizen in 2011, I swore an oath to uphold three responsibilities:

????? 1.?? Defend the U.S. Constitution and laws

????? 2.?? Fulfill duties like military and civilian service when required

????? 3.?? Serve on a jury if called upon

Because jury duty is a major civic responsibility, I’ve always taken it seriously. The concept is powerful—ensuring integrity and fairness in the legal system. I get goosebumps just thinking about the scene in 12 Angry Men where the jury unanimously reaches a “not guilty” verdict after long deliberation.?

Yet somehow, the court system forgot about me for 13 years, and I never got to experience my moment in court. When my letter finally came, the reality was a bit different. Government processes can often be inefficient, which isn’t surprising, as we see this even in efficiency-focused businesses. But jury duty takes inefficiency to the extreme.

On the morning of August 8th, I woke up early since the meeting point was downtown—and anyone who’s familiar with Atlanta traffic knows the struggle. The meeting time was set conveniently in the middle of rush hour at 8:30 a.m. I left home at 7:00, and it took me about 1.5 hours to arrive. The first hint of Lean waste came to mind: Transportation.

Transportation: Movement without value. This occurs between process steps rather than within them.

After navigating unfamiliar streets to find parking, I joined the line for the bus, only to face another form of waste: Waiting.

Waiting: Wasting time, often while waiting for the previous step in a process to finish.

After about 15 minutes, I checked the maps and realized I could reach the courthouse in a brisk 20-minute walk, so I set off. Enjoying the (albeit gritty) view of downtown, I eventually arrived—only to face yet more waiting before entering the courthouse. This round of waiting took about 25 minutes, and the frustration was palpable. No one likes to wait, and I believe it’s a natural reaction against waste.

Inside the courthouse, about 50–70 of us were lined up. With only one security line open, we faced another 15–20 minutes of waiting. Once past security, we waited again for the elevator, with some of us opting for the stairs to save time. Due to unclear instructions, we had to repeatedly ask employees where to report.

Finally, after reaching the correct floor and getting in line to receive forms and jury stickers, we were set to wait again. Here, another waste emerged: Over-processing.

Over-processing: Unnecessary steps in a process, such as redundant paperwork or overly complex instructions.

This form and sticker could have been included in the letter or completed online beforehand. Lacking this, we had to queue up as two employees provided the materials and repeated instructions to each person.

At last, in the right place at the right time, I waited to be called. I brought my computer, suspecting the wait would be long. Around me, about 100 people waited, many clustered near outlets to work while waiting. There weren’t enough chairs, so many of us (myself included) sat on the floor. There was no food or vending machine in sight. Every time a case was announced and names were called, we listened eagerly, but most of us ended up dismissed without being selected.

In many U.S. district courts, nearly 40% of summoned jurors are dismissed without ever being called to a trial. This overestimation of needed jurors contributes to Inventory and Defect Waste.

?Inventory: Resources left unused, waiting to be used.

Defect: Errors in juror selection

In our case, we were unused or underutilized human resources waiting to be dismissed.

In our case, we were unused or underutilized human resources waiting to be dismissed. I ended up waiting for four hours, feeling lucky as others were still waiting. For our time, they offered $20, which we could also choose to donate to the library system. I saw a long line for payments and decided to donate my compensation to the good cause.

While this might sound like a venting session, it’s actually a reflection on opportunities for Lean improvements in government processes. As a Lean leader working on global projects, I understand the challenges of red tape and slow changes. But, by analyzing jury duty through the lens of Lean’s eight wastes, we can identify areas for improvement to make the experience more efficient and pleasant for jurors and court staff alike. For instance, Connecticut has improved its processes, reducing dismissed jurors to just 11% by refining its approach to calling jurors and coordinating schedules with judges and attorneys.

Applying Lean principles to jury duty could make a difference. Streamlined communication, efficient scheduling, and reducing redundancies could lead to a smoother process, ultimately enhancing our judicial system’s integrity and service.