Short answer
Kaizen and continuous-improvement records document how a manufacturer changed a task and why: the before and after method, the problem observed, sometimes timing and photos. They can give a buyer task rationale, versioned procedures and failure context. They contain no robot actions, forces or reliable motion data, so they supplement demonstrations and never replace them.
What a buyer is actually looking for
Most task data shows one version of a task. A trained model that sees only the current method has no idea that the part orientation changed last spring because operators were reaching across a fixture, or that a step was added after a rework pattern showed up. Improvement records can be one of the few places where a plant writes down why its work looks the way it does.
For a robot-learning team, that rationale can matter in three ways: as language explaining task constraints, as a time-ordered pair of procedures (before and after) that a model can be evaluated on, and as context for failure modes that a demonstration set otherwise hides. It is secondary material. Primary physical data for a humanoid still comes from demonstrations and robot or teleoperation capture. If you do not yet know which tasks you need, scoping manufacturing tasks comes first.
What these records tend to look like
Naming and format differ widely by company. Some plants use a one-page template, some keep slide decks, some store entries in a continuous-improvement or quality tool, and some keep nothing beyond a whiteboard photo. The table below lists record types a buyer may encounter; any of them may be absent at a given supplier.
| Record type | What it may contain | Value for task data | Typical gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| One-page improvement sheet | Problem, root cause, change made, before/after sketch | Rationale and constraints in plain language | Rarely has timing or video |
| Before/after photo pair | Workstation or part state at two times | Layout change, fixture or tool placement | No motion between the two images |
| Process timing note | Cycle time per step, sometimes a stopwatch table | Step ordering and relative effort | Method of timing often unstated |
| Revised standard work sheet | The new step order after a change | Versioned procedure for evaluation | Previous version may be overwritten |
| Idea or suggestion log | Short operator suggestions and status | Candidate failure modes, tacit knowledge | Informal, inconsistent, sometimes sensitive |
| Event or workshop report | Multi-day team review of a process | Broad context across several tasks | Summary level; details left out |
ISO lists ISO 9001:2026 as the current edition of its quality management standard, with requirements covering documented information, operation and improvement (ISO, 2026). That is background for why quality-managed plants may keep change documentation. It does not tell you that a given plant keeps kaizen records, in what form, or whether they are linked to the work being done on the floor. Treat that as a question to ask the supplier.
Linking records to the task they changed
An improvement record is far more useful when it can be tied to something physical. Ask whether each record references a station, part number, procedure version and date, and whether any video or photo of the task exists before and after. Without that link the text floats free of the task it describes.
Where plants hold both, a before/after pair can anchor an evaluation: does a model's task plan change when the described method changes? That is a planning or language question, not a control test. For how step order is represented, see standard work and job breakdown sheets; for time-ordered procedure changes, see procedural drift and SOP revision histories. Records that arise from defects and rework sit closer to corrective action records.
Illustrative request: improvement records for one station family
This is an Illustrative request outline, with synthetic identifiers, showing how a buyer might ask for improvement records rather than just "any kaizen data".
# Illustrative only - not an available dataset
request: improvement_records_v0
scope: manual fastening and fixture-loading stations, plant_A (synthetic)
record_types_wanted: [one_page_sheet, before_after_photos, revised_work_sheet]
link_fields_required: [station_id, procedure_version_before, procedure_version_after, date_changed]
media: images only where already existing; no new recording
redaction: supplier masks names, customer part numbers, supplier prices
permitted_use_to_confirm: training and internal evaluation; no redistribution
excluded: individual worker performance comments
The exclusion matters. Improvement notes sometimes mention named operators or comparisons between people. A buyer building task data does not need that content, and a supplier may not be able to license it.
Permissions and provenance
Records written by employees, consultants or facilitators raise questions about who holds the rights. Some improvement work is produced by outside consultancies whose own terms may limit reuse. Photos of workstations may show people, customer parts or drawings. Removing names or blurring faces does not settle whether the supplier may license the material; it only reduces what is visible. Confidentiality in plant data is discussed further in manufacturing data confidentiality. This is not legal advice.
Keep this material separate from any assessment of individual workers. Improvement records describe methods and processes, and a buyer should not use them to evaluate named people.
What these records cannot support
They cannot train robot control. There are no joint trajectories, end-effector commands, gripper states or contact forces in a one-page sheet, and a stopwatch note is not a motion trace. They also do not cover tasks the plant never wrote up: improvement documentation follows the problems people noticed, so it skews toward changed tasks and away from routine ones.
Before and after images show two states, not the motion between them. Rationale text is the writer's account of why something changed, not a measured result, and a reported saving may not hold up to scrutiny. Treat any claimed improvement as a claim made by the plant, not as a verified outcome.
Pair these records with video of the actual task, a procedure document, and for control, robot or teleoperation demonstrations. A time and motion study recording is a closer match for timing than a stopwatch note.
Evaluating an offer
- Sample 20 records at random and check how many name a station, date and procedure version.
- Check whether the before and after states are both retained or only the final one.
- Look for signs of copied text across entries, which suggests template filling rather than observation.
- Ask whether records cover a spread of tasks or cluster around a few departments.
- Confirm that language is consistent enough to use, including abbreviations and local jargon.
- Check whether sensitive content (names, customers, cost) has been removed and how.
Questions to ask suppliers
- In what systems or formats are improvement records kept, and since when?
- Can each record be tied to a station, procedure version and date?
- Are previous procedure versions retained, or overwritten by the improved one?
- Do records have attached photos or video, and who created them?
- Who authored the records: operators, engineers, a consultancy, or a facilitator, and does any author hold rights?
- Do entries mention named individuals, customers or suppliers, and how is that content removed?
- Were claimed savings measured, and how, or are they estimates?
- Is there an index or log, or would records need to be located folder by folder?
Discuss your requirements
If you want improvement and change documentation alongside task video or procedures, describe the tasks and record types to SourceX. SourceX looks for US businesses that may hold the material, checks the data and the supplier's licensing permissions, and coordinates the license and delivery. A request does not guarantee a match; SourceX reviews the requirement and follows up about potential sources. For orientation, see the humanoid training data guide and the manufacturing and assembly data hub. The catalog page on manufacturing quality records describes a related data category.
Discuss your humanoid training-data requirements with SourceX
Sources
- ISO 9001:2026 Quality management systems - Requirements — current edition listing; requirements include documented information and improvement; cited as context only.