Measure Phase Tollgate Template

Report

Lean Six
Sigma
Measure
Phase
Tollgate
Review
Lean Six Sigma
DMAIC Tools and Activities
 Review
 Value
 Identify
 Validate
Project Charter
High-Level Value
Stream Map and Scope
 Validate Voice of the
Customer
& Voice of the Business
 Validate Problem Statement
and Goals
 Validate Financial Benefits
 Create Communication Plan
 Select and Launch Team
 Develop Project Schedule
 Complete Define Tollgate
 Identify
Stream Map Flow
Key Input, Process
and Output Metrics
 Develop Operational
Definitions
 Develop Data Collection Plan
 Validate Measurement
System
 Collect Baseline Data
 Determine Process Capability
 Complete Measure Tollgate
 Reduce
Define
Measure
 Project
 Value
 Voice
 Process
Charter
of the Customer and
Kano Analysis
 SIPOC Map
 Project Valuation/ROIC
Analysis Tools
 RACI and Quad Charts
 Stakeholder Analysis
 Communication Plan
 Effective Meeting Tools
 Inquiry and Advocacy Skills
 Time Lines, Milestones,
and Gantt Charting
 Pareto Analysis
Stream Mapping
Cycle
Efficiency/Little’s Law
 Operational Definitions
 Data Collection Plan
 Statistical Sampling
 Measurement System
Analysis (MSA)
 Gage R&R
 Kappa Studies
 Control Charts
 Spaghetti Diagrams
 Histograms
 Normality Test
 Process Capability Analysis
Root Causes
List of Potential Root
Causes
 Confirm
Root Cause to
Output Relationship
 Estimate Impact of Root
Causes on Key Outputs
 Prioritize Root Causes
 Value-Add Analysis
 Takt Rate Analysis
 Quick Wins
 Statistical Analysis
 Complete Analyze Tollgate
Analyze
 Process
Constraint ID and
Takt Time Analysis
 Cause & Effect Analysis
 FMEA
 Hypothesis Tests/Conf.
Intervals
 Simple & Multiple Regression
 ANOVA
 Components of Variation
 Conquering Product and
Process Complexity
 Queuing Theory
 Develop
Potential Solutions
Select, and
Optimize Best Solutions
 Develop ‘To-Be’ Value
Stream Map(s)
 Develop and Implement Pilot
Solution
 Implement 5s Program
 Develop Full Scale
Implementation Plan
 Cost/Benefit Analysis
 Benchmarking
 Complete Improve Tollgate
 Evaluate,
 Develop
SOP’s, Training
Plan & Process Controls
 Implement Solution and
Ongoing Process
Measurements
 Confirm Attainment of Project
Goals
 Identify Project Replication
Opportunities
 Training
 Complete Control Tollgate
 Transition Project to Process
Owner
Improve
 Replenishment Pull/Kanban
 Stocking Strategy
 Process Flow Improvement
 Process Balancing
 Analytical Batch Sizing
 Total Productive Maintenance
 Design of Experiments (DOE)
 Solution Selection Matrix
 Piloting and Simulation
 Work Control System
 Setup reduction
 Pugh Matrix
 Pull System
Control
 Mistake-Proofing/
Zero Defects
Operating
Procedures (SOP’s)
 Process Control Plans
 Visual Process Control Tools
 MGPP
 Statistical Process Controls
(SPC)
 Solution Replication
 Visual Workplace
 Metrics
 Project Transition Model
 Team Feedback Session
 Standard
Kaizen Events Targeted in Measure to Accelerate Results
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma
2
Improve Summary
Vital X (root cause)
Proof of Causation
Practical Solution (process change
Operating
to address X)
Tolerances for X
Eliminate process - Place accountability n/a
on Client HR for information placed into
new database.
Client IT need to reverify
all exit data received from
Client HR
Average delay between
reception of information
from Client HR until it
reaches NT Admin or
general admin
E-mail vendor's contract
with Client
The SLA has a range of 35 business days for the
completion of a delete
request
E-mail vendor instituted new web
interface for all add/delete requests,
vastly improving request processing
time.
1 - 2 days
E-mail vendor's contract
with Client
The SLA has a range of 35 business days for the
completion of a delete
request
E-mail vendor instituted new web
interface for all add/delete requests,
vastly improving request processing
time.
1 - 2 days
Solution Selection Criteria
How the solution was determined:
• What was the solution selection tool used?
• What project management tools were used?
• Cost/benefit analysis?
• Include any other tools or methods used
Pilot and Implementation Plan
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
?
?
?
?
?
Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma
3
Descriptive Statistics
Process Capability
Process Capability Analysis for Cholesterol
Process Data
USL
Data
ST
LT
220.000
*
*
(Baseline)
193.133
30
26.0455
22.4931
USL
Target
LSL
220.000
*
*
Mean
Sample N
193.133
30
StDev (ST)
StDev (LT)
26.0455
22.4931
Capability
*
0.34
*
0.34
*
120
160
180
200
220
240
Process Capability
Analysis
for
Control
Expected
ST Perf
ormance
Capability
Observed Perf ormance
*
0.40
ess Data *
0.40
220.000
)
)
140
260
Expected LT Perf ormance
PPM < LSL
PPM > USL
*
133333.33
PPM < LSL
PPM > USL
*
151146.50
PPM < LSL
PPM > USL
PPM Total
133333.33
PPM Total
151146.50
PPM Total
USL
*
116152.65
116152.65
ST
LT
*
*
184.967
30
(Improved)
20.4206
16.3662
(ST) Capability
*
0.57
*
0.57
*
LT) Capability
140
160
Observed Perf ormance
180
200
Expected ST Perf ormance
220
Process Data
Potential (ST) Capability
USL
Cp
Target
CPU
LSL
220.000
*
*
0.34
*
CPL
Mean
Cpk
Sample
N
184.967 *
0.34
30
Cpm (ST)
StDev
StDev (LT)
20.4206 *
16.3662
240
Expected LT Perf ormance
Overall (LT) Capability
Potential (ST) Capability
Pp
Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
*
0.71
PPM < LSL
PPM > USL
*
0.00
PPM < LSL
PPM > USL
*
43119.06
PPM < LSL
PPM > USL
*
16153.51
*
0.71
PPM Total
0.00
PPM Total
43119.06
PPM Total
16153.51
Cp
PPU
CPU
PPL
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma CPL
*
*
0.40
0.57 *
* 4
FMEA
Example
Document delay of
not
scheduled
Received delivery
User forgot to
update system
7
and send
document
3
Call user to escalate
issue
New RPN
New Detection #
New Occurance #
Current Control
New Severity #
Causes of
Failure
Target
Actual Date
Recommended
Completion Action
Action
Responsibility Date
Completed
Ima N. Charge,
Automate system
Program
settings for
Manager
7 147 missing field
9/30/2005 10/20/2005 7 1 1 7
values and auto
Joe Schmoe,
send
Process Mgr
RPN
Item/ Process Step
Potential Potential
Failure
Failure
Mode
Effects
Detection #

Occurrence #

Risk Analysis recommended actions (Key Speaking Points)
Rating Index
Total Current RPN Risk
Severity #

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma
5
RACI Chart
R = Responsible – The person who performs the action/task.
A = Accountable – The person who is held accountable that the action/task is completed.
C = Consulted – The person(s) who is consulted before performing the action/task.
I = Informed – The person(s) who is informed after performing the action/task.
Step
Action/Task
Responsible
Accountable
Consulted
Informed
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma
6
Control / Response &
Escalation Plan
Process (x) and Outcome (y)
Indicators
Total number of open tickets at
end of day
UOM
ticket
Target
0
Control Process Owner/
Limit
Data Monitor
10
Joe Schmoe
System/ Source
Remedy Ticket
Data
What to check
Open ticket report on
reports screen
Frequency/
Time
Procedure
Reference
(optional)
Daily M-F at
SOP 7.2
5 pm
Notify Service Delivery Leader if # of open tickets per day is above control limit. SDL will carry out root cause analysis with
Action if control limit is exceeded: team members, post resulting findings on call center bulletin board and Knowledge Base web site. Program Manager will
be notified if open tickets exceeds 15; Customer will be notified if open tickets exceeds 20.
Remedy Ticket
Open ticket report on
Daily M-F at
SOP 7.2
Data
reports screen
5 pm
Notify manager if any individual has >2 open tickets for more than 1 consectuive day. Work with indivdual to determine
Action if control limit is exceeded:
root cause and agree on remedy actions.
Number of tickets per technician
ticket
0
2
Joe Schmoe
people
Number of staff with PTO Weekly
0
2
Tom Orrow
Outlook Calendar
none
out/day
for coming week
Friday pm
Arrange for coverage from XYZ account if more than 2 people on personal time off (unless predicted ticket volume is less
Action if control limit is exceeded:
than 200 per day)
Personal Time Off Schedule
Process Escalation Map
Data Monitor checks
the dashboard and
learns that I-MR and is
out of control
Escalates to the Process
Owner & Black Belt for
special cause
identification
FMEA is used to update
any failure/actions or
improvements not
recorded
Supplier is contacted to
review defects and
actions
Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma
7
Business Impact


State financial impact of future project leverage opportunities
Separate “hard or Type 1” from “soft Type 2 or 3” dollars
Annual Estimate
Type 1: ?
Type 2: ?
Type 3: ?
Replicated Estimate
Type 1: ?
Type 2: ?
Type 3: ?
Revenue
Enhancement
•
•
•
Expenses
Reduction
• Type
• Type
1: ?
2: ?
• Type 3: ?
•
•
Loss Reduction
•
Type 1: ?
• Type 2: ?
• Type 3: ?
•
Cost Avoidance
•
Type 1: ?
Type 2: ?
Type 3: ?
•
•
•
•
•
Type 1: ?
Type 2: ?
Type 3: ?
Total Savings
•
•
•
Type 1: ?
Type 2: ?
Type 3: ?
•
•
•
Type 1: ?
Type 2: ?
Type 3: ?
•
•
•
Type 1: ?
Type 2: ?
• Type 3: ?
Type 1: ?
• Type 2: ?
• Type 3: ?
Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma
8
Business Impact Details


Type 1: Describe the chain of causality that shows how you determined the Type 1 savings. (tell the story with
cause–effect relationships, on how the proposed change should create the desired financial result (savings) in
your project )
Show the financial calculation savings and assumptions used.




Type 2: Describe the chain of causality that shows how you determined the Type 2 savings. (tell the story with
cause–effect relationships, on how the proposed change should create the desired financial result (savings) in
your project )
Show the financial calculation savings and assumptions used.



Assumption #1 (i.e. Labor rate used, period of time, etc…)
Assumption #2 (i.e. contractor hrs or FTE, source of data, etc…)
Describe the Type 3 Business Impact(s) areas and how these were measured



Assumption #1 (i.e. source of data, clear Operational Definitions?)
Assumption #2 (i.e. hourly rate + incremental benefit cost + travel)
Assumption #1 (i.e. project is driven by the Business strategy?)
Assumption #2 (i.e. Customer service rating, employee moral, etc…)
Other Questions
Stakeholders agree on the project’s impact and how it will be measured in financial terms?
 What steps were taken to ensure the integrity & accuracy of the data?
 Has the project tracking worksheet been updated?

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma
9
Current Status

Key actions
completed
 Issues
 Lessons learned
 Communication,
team building,
organizational
activities
Lean Six Sigma Project Status and Planning
Deliverables/Tasks Completed last week
Upcoming Deliverables/Tasks - 2 weeks out
Comment
Due
Revised Due
For deliverables due thru:
Actions Scheduled for next 2 Weeks
Deliverable/Action
Who
Due
Revised Due
Commen
Current Issues and Risks
Who
Due
Revised Due
Recomm
Issue/Risk
Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma
10
Next Steps


Key actions
Planned Lean Six Sigma Tool use


Questions to answer
Barrier/risk mitigation activities
Lean Six Sigma Project Issue Log
No.
Description/Recommendation
Status
Open/Closed/Hold
Last Revised:
Revised Due
Due Date
Resp Comments / Resolution
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma
11
Lessons Learned
1. ?
2. ?
3. ?
4. ?
5. ?
6. ?
7. ?
8. ?
9. ?
10. ?
Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma
12
Project Contributors
Steering Team
Support Team
 <Name>: <Contribution>
 <Name>: <Contribution>
 <Name>: <Contribution>
 <Name>: <Contribution>
 <Name>: <Contribution>
 <Name>: <Contribution>
 <Name>: <Contribution>
 <Name>: <Contribution>
 <Name>: <Contribution>
 <Name>: <Contribution>
Project Ownership Team
Deployment Team
 <Name>: <Contribution>
 <Name>: <Contribution>
 <Name>: <Contribution>
 <Name>: <Contribution>
 <Name>: <Contribution>
 <Name>: <Contribution>
 <Name>: <Contribution>
 <Name>: <Contribution>
 <Name>: <Contribution>
 <Name>: <Contribution>
Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma
13
Sign Off
Once the project is complete and has been reviewed by the Green Belt/Black Belt or other Quality
mentor, the project should be reviewed with Deployment Champion, Project Sponsor, Process
Owner, Master Black Belt and other project or process stakeholders. In addition, financial benefits
of the project (or the method used to estimate financial benefits) should be confirmed by your
Process Owner and/or finance representative.
 Policies & Procedures for the Improve & Control phases were documented & communicated on
MM/DD/YY
 I understand the New Policies and Procedures
 I understand and take responsibility for monitoring the Defect Measurements as delineated in
the Control Plan
 I will report the progress on this sub-process on a regular basis to the customer
 I have reviewed this project’s financial benefits with the Champion, Sponsor, and Finance
 I understand the corrective action procedure and am responsible for ensuring that action items
are completed to hold the gains and capture the financial benefits
Enter Name Here
Enter Name Here
Enter Name Here
Enter Name Here
Sponsor / Process Owner
Executive Director
Financial Representative
Green Belt/Black Belt
Enter Name Here
Enter Name Here
Enter Name Here
Enter Name Here
“Other” Key Stakeholder
“Other” Key Stakeholder
Master Black Belt
Deployment Champion
Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma
14
Tollgate Reviews
Backup Slides
D
M
A
I
C
Project Charter
Financial Impact
Problem/Goal Statement
Problem: Describe problem in non-technical terms
 Statement should explain why project is important; why
working on it is a priority
Goal: Goals communicate “before” and “after” conditions

Shift mean, variance, or both?

Should impact cost, time, quality dimensions
 Express goals using SMART criteria

Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Resource
Requirements, Time Boundaries
 Explain leverage and strategic implications (if any)
Team








State financial impact of project
 Expenses
 Investments (inventory, capital, A/R)
 Revenues
Separate “hard” from “soft” dollars
State financial impact of leverage opportunities (future
projects)
Tollgate Review Schedule
PES Name
Project Executive Sponsor (if different from PS)
PS Name
Project Sponsor/Process Owner
DC Name
Deployment Champion
GB/BB Name
Green Belt/Black Belt
MBB Name
Master Black Belt
Core Team
Role
% Contrib.
LSS Training
 Team Member 1
SME
XX
YB
 Team Member 2 TM
XX
GB
 Team Member 3 SME
XX
PS
Extended Team
 Team Member 1 BFM
XX
Not Trained
 Team Member 2 IT
XX
Not Trained
Tollgate
Scheduled
Revised
Define:
XX/XX/XX
Measure:
XX/XX/XX
XX/XX/XX
Analyze:
XX/XX/XX
XX/XX/XX
Improve:
XX/XX/XX
XX/XX/XX
Control:
XX/XX/XX
XX/XX/XX
 Review high-level schedule milestones here:
 Phase Completions
 Tollgate Reviews
Complete
XX/XX/XX
XX/XX/XX
XX/XX/XX
XX/XX/XX
XX/XX/XX
Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma
16
Measure Overview
Process Capability






I-MR Chart of Delivery Time
40
U C L=37.70
Individual Value

CTQ: ?
Unit (d) or Mean (c): ?
Defect (d) or St. Dev. (c): ?
PCE%: ?
DPMO (d): ?
Sigma (Short Term): ?
Sigma (Long Term):?
MSA Results: show the percentage result of the GR&R,
AR&R or other MSA carried out in the project





Root cause:
Quick Win #1
Root cause:
Quick Win #2
Root cause:
Quick Win #3
_
X=29.13
30
25
LC L=20.56
1
28
55
82
109
136
O bser v ation
163
190
217
244
U C L=10.53
10.0
7.5
5.0
__
M R=3.22
2.5
0.0
LC L=0
1
Root Cause / Quick Win

35
20
Moving Range

Graphical Analysis
28
55
82
109
136
O bser v ation
163
190
217
244
Tools Used







Detailed process mapping
MSA
Value Stream Mapping
Data Collection Planning
Basic Statistics
Process Capability
Histograms







Time Series Plot
Probability Plot
Pareto Analysis
Operational Def.
5s
Pull
Control Charts
Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma
17
Analyze Overview
Hypothesis Tests
Example: ANOVA
Example: ANOVA
Example: Chi Squared
Example: Pareto
Factor (x)
Tested
Value Add Analysis - Current State
p Value
Location
Part vs. No Part
Department
Region
Observations/Conclusion
0.030
Significant factor - 1 hour driving time from DC
to Baltimore office causes ticket cycle time to
generally be longer for the Baltimore site
0.004
Significant factor - on average, calls requiring
parts have double the cycle time (22 vs 43
hours)
0.000
Significant factor - Department 4 has digitized
addition of customer info to ticket and less
human intervention, resulting in fewer errors
n/a
South region accounted for 59% of the defects
due to their manual process and distance from
the parts warehouse
Takt Tim e = 55
Task Time (seconds)
Hypothesis Test
(ANOVA, 1 or 2 sample t - test, Chi Squared,
Regression, Test of Equal Variance, etc)
Value-Add Analysis
 Effect

Root cause:
 Effect

Root cause:
 Effect
40
20
0
2
3
4
CVA Time
5
6
Task #
BVA Time
7
8
9
10
NVA Time
Tools Used
Root Cause / Effect
Root cause:
60
1
Describe any other observations about the root cause (x) data

80








Value Add Analysis
One-Way ANOVA
Two-Way ANOVA
Pareto Plots
Simple Linear Regression
Multiple Regression
Test for Equal Variance
Scatter Plots








C&E Matrix
Complexity
Cause & Effect Diagram
Kaizen/Quick Wins
FMEA
Control/Impact Chart
T-Test
Other
Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma
18
Improve
Tollgate Checklist














What techniques were used to generate ideas for potential solutions?
What narrowing and screening techniques were used to further develop and qualify
potential solutions?
What evaluation criteria were used to select a recommended solution?
Do proposed solutions address all the identified root causes, at least the most critical?
Were the solutions verified with the Project Sponsor and Stakeholders? Has an
approval been received to implement?
Was a pilot run to test the solution? What was learned? What modifications made?
Has the team seen evidence that the root causes of the initial problems have been
addressed during the pilot? What are the expected benefits?
Has the team considered potential problems and unintended consequences (FMEA) of
the solution and developed preventive and contingency actions to address them?
Has the proposed solution been documented, including process participants, job
descriptions and if applicable, their estimated time commitment to support the process?
Has the team developed an implementation plan? What is the status?
Have changes been communicated to all the appropriate people?
Has the team been able to identify any additional ‘Quick Wins’?
Have ‘learning's’ to-date required modification of the Project Charter? If so, have these
changes been approved by the Project Sponsor and the Key Stakeholders?
Have any new risks to project success been identified and added to the Risk Mitigation
Plan?
Deliverables:
 Prioritized List of Solutions
 “To-Be” Value Stream Map(s)
 Pilot Plan & Results
 Approved Solution and
Detailed Implementation Plan
 Additional “Quick Wins”, if
applicable
 Refined Charter, as necessary
 Updated Risk Mitigation Plan
 Deliverables Uploaded to
Central Storage Location or
Deployment Management
System
Tollgate Review
Has the team developed improvement solutions for the critical X’s, piloted the solution
and verified that the solution will solve the problem?
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma
19
Control
Tollgate Checklist











Has the team prepared all the essential documentation for the improved process,
including revised/new Standard Operating Procedures (SOP’s), a training plan and a
process control system?
Has the necessary training for process owners/operators been performed?
Have the right measures been selected, and documented as part of the Process
Control System, to monitor performance of the process and the continued
effectiveness of the solution? Has the metrics briefing plan/schedule been
documented? Who owns the measures? Has the Process Owner’s job description
been updated to reflect the new responsibilities? What happens if minimum
performance is not achieved?
Has the solution been effectively implemented? Has the team compiled results data
confirming that the solution has achieved the goals defined in the Project Charter?
Has the Benefits Realization Schedule been verified by the Financial Representative?
Has the process been transitioned to the Process Owner, to take over responsibility
for managing continuing operations? Do they concur with the control plan?
Has a final Storyboard documenting the project work been developed?
Has the team forwarded other issues/opportunities, which were not able to be
addressed, to senior management?
Have “lessons learned” been captured?
Have replication opportunities been identified and communicated?
Has the hard work and successful efforts of our team been celebrated?
Deliverables:
 SOP’s
 Training Plan
 Process Control System
 Benefits Realization Schedule,
validated by Financial
Representative
 Validated Solution
 Replication/ Standardization Plan
 Lessons Learned
 Transitioned Project
 Project Risk Performance
 Deliverables Uploaded to
Central Storage Location or
Deployment Management
System
Tollgate Review
Has the team implemented the solution, and a control plan to insure the process is
robust to change?
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma
20
Lean Six Sigma
DMAIC Improvement Process
Define

Define the opportunity from both the customer
and business perspective
Measure
Understand the baseline process
performance


Analyze
Identify the critical X factors
and root causes impacting
process performance
Improve

Develop solutions
linked to critical x’s
Control

Implement
solutions &
control plan
Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma
21
Measurement Systems
Analysis (Optional)
Total Gage R&R
Repeatability
Reproducibility
operator
Part-To-Part
Total Variation
41.38 For Continuous Data, use Minitab GR&R Study
For Discrete data, use AR&R Excel Tool
41.38
For more information, see Notes section of this slide
0.00
Known Population
Individual 1
Individual 2
Match
Match
0.00
Sample #
Attribute
Try #1
Try #2
Try #1
Try #2
Each Other Known
91.04
1
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
N
N
100.00
2
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
N
N
17.12
17.12
0.00
0.00
82.88
100.00
Conclusions: 17.12% of component
variation from measurement system,
82.88% of component variation from
part-to-part measured
Gage name:
Date of study:
Reported by:
Tolerance:
Misc:
Gage R&R (ANOVA) for time
Xbar Chart by operator
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
1
operator*part Interaction
2
operator
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
Average
3.0SL=75.30
X=59.80
-3.0SL=44.30
0
part
1
2
1
R Chart by operator
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1
3.0SL=56.83
R=26.87
-3.0SL=0.00E+00
0
Oper
0
Reprod
Percent
4
1
Part-to-Part
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
part
1
2
3
fail
fail
fail
pass
pass
pass
fail
fail
pass
pass
fail
fail
pass
fail
fail
fail
pass
fail
fail
fail
fail
pass
fail
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
fail
fail
pass
fail
fail
fail
pass
fail
"REPEATABILITY" ->
"ACCURACY" ->
2
Response By part
%Total Var
%Study Var
50
Repeat
3
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
Components of Variation
100
Gage R&R
2
Response By operator
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
4
fail
fail
fail
pass
fail
pass
pass
pass
pass
pass
fail
fail
pass
fail
fail
fail
pass
fail
fail
fail
pass
pass
fail
pass
pass
fail
pass
pass
fail
pass
pass
pass
fail
fail
pass
fail
100.00%
85.00%
pass
fail
fail
pass
fail
pass
pass
fail
pass
pass
fail
fail
pass
fail
fail
fail
pass
fail
N
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
80.00%
70.00%
"OVERALL REPEATABILITY & REPRODUCIBILITY" -> 65.00%
"OVERALL REPEATABILITY, REPRODUCIBILITY & ACCURACY" ->
55.00%
Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma
22
Control Chart
(Optional)
P Chart for Total Defectives
Proportion
0.10
Control Chart Findings
Feb/Mar Data Confirms Process Has
Remained In Control
3.0SL=0.08162
0.05

?

?

?

?

?
P=0.03817
0.00
-3.0SL=0.00E+00
0
50
100
150
Sample Number
Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma
23
Takt Board – Monitor
(Optional)
TAKT BOARD: <Department Name>
Last Week: <CTQ>
This Week: <CTQ>
Day
Scheduled
Actual
Diff (+/-)
Comments
Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma
24
Mistake Proofing
(Poke Yoke) (Optional)
 Solution:
Make use of existing bar codes on shipping paperwork to
mistake proof receiving function.




Validate with suppliers (shipping company) that all shipping containers
will have barcode label ($0)
Purchase RF (wireless) bar coding equipment and software ($100/gun *
20 guns)
Train all longshoreman on use and care of equipment ($50/hr * 20 hrs)
Install error metrics for error tracking ($100)
Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma
25
Cultural/Educational
Issues (Optional)

Force Field Analysis:
1. Select a process control
Driving Forces
Restraining Forces
method & explain why
this choice for your
project.
2. Identify 4-6
cultural/educational
barriers to successfully
implementing your
process controls &
potential solutions using
the Force-Field Analysis
Table below:
Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma
26
Replication
(Optional)

Replication Goals
29% $ savings captured with 1st
completed project in 10 week
project
 70% $ savings captured with 5
locations replicated in 6 months
 100% $ savings captured with 9
locations replicated in 9 months


Replication Strategy

Build change team
 Train / Kaizen
 Dashboard Metrics
10
Wks
6
Mo
9
Mo
Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma
27

similar documents