Lean Six Sigma Improve Phase Tollgate Review. Lean Six Sigma DMAIC Tools and Activities Review Project Charter Validate High-Level Value Stream

Lean Six Sigma Improve Phase Tollgate Review Improve

Phase

Lean Six Sigma DMAIC Tools and

Activities Review Project Charter Validate 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 Root Causes Reduce 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

Develop Potential Solutions Evaluate, 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

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

Project Charter Voice 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

Value Stream Mapping Process 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

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

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

Mistake-Proofing/Zero Defects

Standard 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

Value Stream Map Flow Identify 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

Define Measure

Analyze

Improve

Control

2International Standards for Lean Six Sigma

Kaizen Events Targeted in Measure to Accelerate Results

Analyze Overview

Value Add Analysis - Current State

0

20

40

60

80

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Task #

Task T

ime (

seco

nd

s)

CVA Time BVA Time NVA Time

Takt Time = 55

Root cause:Effect

Root cause:Effect

Root cause:Effect

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

Hypothesis Test (ANOVA, 1 or 2 sample t - test, Chi Squared,

Regression, Test of Equal Variance, etc)

Factor (x) Tested

p Value Observations/Conclusion

Example: ANOVA Location 0.030Significant factor - 1 hour driving time from DC to Baltimore office causes ticket cycle time to generally be longer for the Baltimore site

Example: ANOVA Part vs. No Part 0.004Significant factor - on average, calls requiring parts have double the cycle time (22 vs 43 hours)

Example: Chi Squared Department 0.000Significant factor - Department 4 has digitized addition of customer info to ticket and less human intervention, resulting in fewer errors

Example: Pareto Region n/aSouth region accounted for 59% of the defects due to their manual process and distance from the parts warehouse

Describe any other observations about the root cause (x) data

International Standards for Lean Six Sigma

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

3

Hypothesis Tests Value-Add Analysis

Tools UsedRoot Cause / Effect

To-Be Process Map

Places information into HR EXIT database

Utilize web tool to submit a delete request

to vendor

Access database daily

Delete account

Create Work Request

Avg. Cycletime = 0

days

Avg. Cycletime = 1

day

Avg. Cycletime = 1

day

Avg. Cycletime = 1

day

Avg. Cycletime = 1

day

Client Contact

Client HR

Admin

Client Mgr

NT Admin

Email Vendor

Admin closes work request and manager notified

Notify HR of employee exit date



4

Quick Win Documentation Template

1. Root Cause: _________________________________________________2. Obvious Solution: __________________________________________3. Low or No Cost: __________________________________________4. Low Risk:

________________________________________________5. Implementation Plan: ______________________________________________6. Stakeholder (s) Approval: ___________________________________________

Process Name: __________________ Process Lead: ___________________

Process Owner: ______________________ Start Date: ______________

Process Area: ________________________ Stop Date: ______________

Benefits: __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________

5s 4-Step Setup Reduction Inventory Reduction MSA Improvements Price reductions Reduced DOWNTIME

(NVA steps or work) Pull System Kaizen events Other



5

Item/ Process Step

Potential Failure Mode

Potential Failure Effects Se

verit

y #

Causes of Failure O

ccur

renc

e #

Current Control Dete

ctio

n #

RPN Recommended

Action Responsibility

Target Completion Date

Actual Date Action Completed Ne

w S

ever

ity #

New

Occ

uran

ce #

New

Det

ectio

n #

New

RPN

ExampleDocument not Received

delay of scheduled delivery

7

User forgot to update system and send document

3Call user to escalate issue

7 147

Automate system settings for missing field values and auto send

Ima N. Charge, Program Manager

Joe Schmoe, Process Mgr

9/30/2005 10/20/2005 7 1 1 7

FMEA

Risk Analysis recommended actions (Key Speaking Points) Rating Index Total Current RPN Risk



6

Value Stream Map (VSM)Future State

<Step1> <Step3> <Step3>

Information Flow

CustomerSupplier

1 2 1

Sources of Value ? ? ? ? ?



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 Replicated Estimate

Revenue Enhancement

• Type 1: ?• Type 2: ?• Type 3: ?

• Type 1: ?• Type 2: ?• Type 3: ?

Expenses Reduction

• Type 1: ?• Type 2: ?• Type 3: ?

• Type 1: ?• Type 2: ?• Type 3: ?

Loss Reduction • Type 1: ?• Type 2: ?• Type 3: ?

• 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: ?



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. Assumption #1 (i.e. source of data, clear Operational Definitions?) Assumption #2 (i.e. hourly rate + incremental benefit cost + travel)

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. 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?



Current Status

Key actions completed

Issues Lessons learned Communication,

team building, organizational activities

W/E:

Due Revised Due

For deliverables due thru:

Deliverable/Action Who Due Revised Due Comments/Resolution Need Help

Issue/Risk Who Due Revised Due Recommended Action Need Help

Lean Six Sigma Project Status and Planning

Upcoming Deliverables/Tasks - 2 weeks out Comments

Deliverables/Tasks Completed last week Comments

Actions Scheduled for next 2 Weeks

Current Issues and Risks



Next Steps

Key actions Planned Lean Six Sigma Tool use

Last Revised:

No. Description/RecommendationStatus

Open/Closed/HoldDue Date

Revised Due Date

Resp Comments / Resolution

12345678910

Lean Six Sigma Project Issue Log

Questions to answer Barrier/risk mitigation activities



Vital X (root cause) Proof of CausationPractical Solution (process change

to address X)Operating

Tolerances for XClient 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

Eliminate process - Place accountability on Client HR for information placed into new database.

n/a

E-mail vendor's contract with Client

The SLA has a range of 3-5 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 3-5 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

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

1. ?

2. ?

3. ?

4. ?

5. ?

Improve Summary



12

Solution Selection Criteria Pilot and Implementation Plan

Sign Off

I concur that the Improve phase was successfully completed on MM/DD/YYYY

I concur the project is ready to proceed to next phase: Analyze

Enter Name Here Deployment Champion

Enter Name Here Financial Representative

Enter Name Here Green Belt/Black Belt

Enter Name Here Master Black Belt

Enter Name Here Sponsor / Process Owner



13

Tollgate ReviewsBackup Slides

Go Forward

Wait - Go Back

Halt - HoldD

M

A

I

C

Project Charter

Problem: Describe problem in non-technical terms Statement should explain why project is important; why

working on it is a priorityGoal: 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)

Problem/Goal Statement

Tollgate Review Schedule

Financial Impact

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)

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 BeltCore Team Role % Contrib. LSS Training Team Member 1 SME XX YB Team Member 2 TM XX GB Team Member 3 SME XX PSExtended Team Team Member 1 BFM XX Not Trained Team Member 2 IT XX Not Trained

Review high-level schedule milestones here: Phase Completions Tollgate Reviews

Tollgate Scheduled Revised CompleteDefine: XX/XX/XX - XX/XX/XXMeasure: XX/XX/XX XX/XX/XX XX/XX/XXAnalyze: XX/XX/XX XX/XX/XX XX/XX/XXImprove: XX/XX/XX XX/XX/XX XX/XX/XXControl: XX/XX/XX XX/XX/XX XX/XX/XX



15

Measure Overview

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



Observation

Indiv

idual Valu

e

2442171901631361098255281

40

35

30

25

20

_X=29.13

UCL=37.70

LCL=20.56

Observation

Movin

g R

ange

2442171901631361098255281

10.0

7.5

5.0

2.5

0.0

__MR=3.22

UCL=10.53

LCL=0

I-MR Chart of Delivery Time

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



16

Process Capability Graphical Analysis

Tools UsedRoot Cause / Quick Win

17

AnalyzeTollgate Checklist

Has the team examined the process and identified potential bottlenecks, disconnects and redundancies that could contribute to the problem statement?

Has the team analyzed data about the process and its performance to help stratify the problem, understand reasons for variation in the process, and generate hypothesis as to the root causes of the current process performance?

Has an evaluation been done to determine whether the problem can be solved without a fundamental recreation of the process? Has the decision been confirmed with the Project Sponsor?

Has the team investigated and validated (or devalidated) the root cause hypotheses generated earlier, to gain confidence that the “vital few” root causes have been uncovered?

Does the team understand why the problem (the Quality, Cycle Time or Cost Efficiency issue identified in the Problem Statement) is being seen?

Has the team been able to identify any additional ‘Quick Wins’? Have learnings 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, added to the Risk

Mitigation Plan, and a mitigation strategy put in place?

Tollgate ReviewTollgate Review

Stop

Deliverables: List of Potential Root causes

Prioritized List of Validated Root Causes

Additional “Quick Wins”, if applicable

Refined Charter, as necessary

Updated Risk Mitigation Plan Deliverables Uploaded to Central

Storage Location or Deployment Management System

Has the team identified the key factors (critical X’s) that have the biggest impact on process performance? Have they validated the root causes?


ImproveTollgate Checklist


Stop

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

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?

Has the team developed improvement solutions for the critical X’s, piloted the solution and verified that the solution will solve the problem?


ControlTollgate 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?


Stop

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

Has the team implemented the solution, and a control plan to insure the process is robust to change?


Welcome

and Introduction

s20

Lean Six Sigma DMAIC Improvement Process

Tollgate Review

Tollgate Review

Stop

Define

Measure

Analyze

Improve

Control

Tollgate Review

Tollgate Review

Stop

Tollgate Review

Tollgate Review

Stop

Tollgate Review

Tollgate Review

Stop

Define the opportunity from both the customer and business perspective

Understand the baseline process performance

Identify the critical X factors and root causes impacting process performance

Develop solutions linked to critical x’s

Implement solutions & control plan



250

200

150

100

50

0

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Root Causes

#1 #2 #3 #4

Evaluating Solutions Against Criteria (Optional)

Example: Independent Solutions

Solution A = a 32% reduction in defects (80% of 40%)

Solution B = a 21% reduction in defects (20% of 25% + 80% of 20%)=(5%+16%)

Solution C = a 17.5% reduction in defects (30% of 25% + 100% of 10%)=(7.5%+10%)

Implementing Solutions A & B achieve a 53% reduction in defects.

(Assumes no interaction effects of the solutions)

Original goal is a 50% reduction.

Solutions% Contribution of Root Cause to Process Deficiency

Root Cause #140%

Root Cause #225%

Root Cause #320%

Root Cause #410%

Solution A 80%

Solution B 20% 80%

Solution C 30% 100%

Solution D

Solution E 20% 5%



21

Term

Standardized Effect

AC

B

AD

AB

BC

A

CD

D

BD

C

350300250200150100500

2.6Factor

%Overbooked

NameA Training DollarsB JetsC EmployeesD

Pareto Chart of the Standardized Effects(response is Mean, Alpha = .05)

Design of Experiments (DOE) Results (Optional)

The number of Employees is the biggest driver for Mean Time Late

Mean o

f M

ean

1-1

60

45

30

15

01-1

1-1

60

45

30

15

01-1

Training Dollars Jets

Employees %Overbooked

Main Effects Plot (data means) for Mean

Number of Employees is the only significant factor for Mean - Time Late

Pareto Chart for Mean Time Late

Fractional Factorial Fit: Response = MeanEstimated Effects and Coefficients for Mean (coded units)Term Effect Coef SE Coef T PConstant 29.64 0.08610 344.22 0.000Training 0.10 0.05 0.08610 0.60 0.573Jets -0.08 -0.04 0.08610 -0.44 0.676Employee -55.93 -27.97 0.08610 -324.81 0.000% Overbo 0.36 0.18 0.08610 2.11 0.088Training*Jets -0.10 -0.05 0.08610 -0.57 0.591Training*Employee 0.05 0.02 0.08610 0.28 0.788Training*% Overbo 0.09 0.05 0.08610 0.53 0.619Jets*Employee 0.10 0.05 0.08610 0.57 0.591Jets*% Overbo -0.40 -0.20 0.08610 -2.34 0.066Employee*% Overbo 0.17 0.09 0.08610 1.01 0.359

Employee is the only statistically significant factor for Mean besides the constant term. All other main effects & 2-way interactions have a p-value > 0.05.

Ymean=f(x) equation is:

Ymean = -27.97(Employee) + 29.64



22

Key Criteria

Imp

ort

an

ce

Ra

tin

g

Be

nc

hm

ark

Op

tio

n

Alt

ern

ati

ve

1

Alt

ern

ati

ve

2

Alt

ern

ati

ve

3

Alt

ern

ati

ve

4

Alt

ern

ati

ve

5

Criteria 1 4 + S + + - -

Criteria 2 2 S - S + + +

Criteria 3 3 - + - + S S

Criteria 4 2 + S + + - +

Criteria 5 5 S - S S + S

Criteria 6 6 - - - - - -

Criteria 7 10 + + + + + +

Criteria 8 8 S S S S S S

Criteria 9 5 - - - - - -

Criteria 10 6 + + - + + +

Sum of Positives 4 3 3 6 4 4

Sum of Negatives 3 4 4 2 4 3

Sum of Sames 3 3 3 2 2 3

Weighted Sum of Positives 22 19 16 27 23 20

Weighted Sum of Negatives 14 18 20 11 17 15

Totals 8 1 -4 16 6 5

Pugh MatrixSolution Alternatives

Concept Selection LegendBetter +Same SWorse -

Pugh (Selection) Matrix(Optional)



23

Benefit-Effort Matrix(Optional)

Effort

Benefit

HighLow Med

Hig

hL

ow

Me

d

HighLow Med

Hig

hL

ow

Me

d

13

6

15

1 8

3

12

9

4

7

17

14211

5

10

16

Highly Desirable OpportunitiesProjects in upper left are the most desirable projects.

Potentially Desirable OpportunitiesProjects in the upper right are potentially desirable, but usually require more analysis to ensure good decision making.

“Potential Quick Hits”Possibility for Kaizen event or small GB project

Least Desirable OpportunitiesProjects in the lower right are the least desirable.



24

Stakeholder Analysis

1 1 1

2

3

0

1

2

3

4

StronglyAgainst

ModeratelyAgainst

Neutral ModeratelySupportive

StronglySupportive

Stakeholder Analysis(Optional)



25

Stakeholder Issues/Concerns Identify "Wins" Influence Strategy

Influence Strategy

Influence Strategy(Optional)



26

Measurement Systems Analysis (MSA) (Optional)

Measurement system is acceptable with the Total % Contribution <10%

Per

cent

Part-to-PartReprodRepeatGage R&R

100

50

0

% Contribution

% Study Var

Sam

ple

Ran

ge

0.10

0.05

0.00

_R=0.0417

UCL=0.1073

LCL=0

1 2 3Sa

mpl

e M

ean

10.00

9.75

9.50

__X=9.7996

UCL=9.8422

LCL=9.7569

1 2 3

Part10987654321

10.00

9.75

9.50

Operator321

10.00

9.75

9.50

Part

Ave

rage

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

10.00

9.75

9.50

Operator

12

3

Gage name:Date of study:

Reported by:Tolerance:Misc:

Components of Variation

R Chart by Operator

Xbar Chart by Operator

Response by Part

Response by Operator

Operator * Part Interaction

Gage R&R (ANOVA) for ResponseGage R&R %ContributionSource VarComp (of VarComp)Total Gage R&R 0.0015896 3.70 Repeatability 0.0005567 1.29 Reproducibility 0.0010330 2.40 Operator 0.0003418 0.79 Operator*Part 0.0006912 1.61Part-To-Part 0.0414247 96.30Total Variation 0.0430143 100.00 Study Var %Study VarSource StdDev (SD) (6 * SD) (%SV)Total Gage R&R .039870 0.23922 19.22 Repeatability 0.023594 0.14156 11.38 Reproducibility 0.032140 0.19284 15.50 Operator 0.018488 0.11093 8.91 Operator*Part 0.026290 0.15774 12.68Part-To-Part 0.203531 1.22118 98.13Total Variation 0.207399 1.24439 100.00

Number of Distinct Categories = 7



27

Bin 1 Bin 2

Pull System(Optional)

Bin 1Bin 2 Bin 1 Bin 2 Bin 1 Bin 2

Bin 1 Bin 1 Bin 2 Bin 1

Bin 2

Bin 1 Bin 2 Bin 1 Bin 2Bin 1 Bin 2Bin 1Bin 2Bin 1Bin 2

Bin 1 Bin 2Bin 1Bin 1

2-Bin MailboxOrder Cards

1. Always pull stock from bin with GREEN card if it is there.

2. Store/supply room replaces stocked items and switches RED card to items just replaced.

3. The cards are attached to magnetic strip labels (for ease of movement for resizing).

Bin 1Bin 1

Bin 2



28

Setup Reduction(Optional)

Setup Documentation WorksheetMACHINE: DOCUMENTOR:

DATE: PAGE 1 OF 1

SEQ #START TIME

EVENTELAPSED

TIMEINT EXT

1 0 Shut down machine :30 :30

2 0:30 Get change parts 3:00 3:00

3 3:30 Remove change parts from machine 3:30 3:30

4 7:00 Place new change parts on machine 3:30 3:30

5 10:30 Return change parts to storage 3:00 3:00

6 13:30 Load material onto machine 1:00 1:00

7 14:30 Generate test piece :30 :30

8 15:00 Measure and inspect 2:00 2:00

9 17:00 Adjust dies 1:00 1:00

10 18:00 Generate test piece :30 :30

11 18:30 Measure and inspect 1:30 1:30

12 20:00 Generate first good piece 1:00 1:00

TOTAL TIME THIS PAGE: 21:00TOTAL TIME ALL PAGES: 21:00



29

PDCA(Optional)

Plan: ? ?

Do: ? ?

Check: ? ?

Act: ? ?

?

?

?

?

Plan

Do

Check

Act



30

5s(Optional)

Sort ? ?Set Order ? ?Shine ? ?Standardize ? ?Sustain ? ?

ITEM NAME TAG NUMBER TAGGED BY

TAG DATE

o RAW MATERIAL o TOOLS o FURNITURE o OTHER (EXPLAIN)

o WIP o SUPPLIES o OFFICE MATERIAL

o FINISHED GOOD o EQUIPMENT o BOOKS/MAGAZINESQUANTITY CELL / AREA

o UNNECESSARY o LEFTOVER MATERIAL

o DEFECTIVE o UNKNOWN

o NON-URGENT o OTHER (EXPLAIN)

o DISCARD o TRANSFER

o IN-CELL STORAGE o LONG-TERM STORAGE

o REDUCE o OTHER (EXPLAIN)

ACTION DESCRIPTION APPROVED BY

DATE

NEW LOCATION NEW CELL / AREA

5s FORM

ACTION TAKEN

IDENTIFICATION

CLASSIFICATION

REASON

DISPOSITION REQUIRED



31

Kaizen(Optional)

Typical Kaizen Weekly ScheduleWeekly Calendar StatusXX/XX Pre-work

1. Review Scope, Goals, Objectives, and Deliverables With Senior Staff

2. Select Team Leader 2A. Select Team Members 2B. Inform Team Members

3. Gather Data (Demand, Quality, Headcount, WIP, Downtime, Overtime, Safety, Before Pics)

4. Set Meeting Rooms, Food, Develop Team Tool Box

XX/XX Monday

1. Kaizen Kickoff (Senior Staff Representative)

2. Kaizen Training (Lean Principles) & Specialized for Project

3. Review Project Scope, Goals (SMART), Deliverables with Team

4. Assign Tasks for Process Observations, Timestudies, 5-S, Spaghetti Charts, Takt Time Chart

5. Train Team Members in Timestudy Basics and Begin Observation and Data Gathering

XX/XX Tuesday

1. Complete Present State Analysis Using All Appropriate Data

2. Brainstorm Based on Goals & Objectives, Ergonomics, Safety, & Waste Elimination

3. Create Future State Analysis and Action Plan

4. Team Lead and Consultant Review FSA With Senior Staff

5 Launch Sub-Teams and Complete Plan

XX/XX Wednesday

1. Complete Action Plan

2. Train Process Participants in New Process

3. Fine-tune New Process and Take After Digital Pics

4. Retime and Compare to Goals, Objectives

XX/XX Thursday

1. Run New Process and Assess Effectiveness

2. Calculate Improvements in Cycle Time, WIP, Cost Savings, Etc.

3. Complete New Takt Time Cycle Time Bar Chart and Create 30 Day Follow-up List

4. Complete New Standard Operating Procedure

5. Prepare Presentation, Assign Presenters

XX/XX Friday

1. Practice Presentation

2. Present to Senior Staff 2A. Set 30 Day Follow-up 2B. Create Final Report & Monitor Results3. Celebration Luncheon and or event

Typical Kaizen Weekly ScheduleFinalize

Pre-Event Prep

Implement Improvements

Perform Process Participant Training

Tweak Design


Perform Process Participant Training

Tweak Design

Finalize Future State

Complete Training on Std Work

8AMMonday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday

12PM

4PM

6PM

10AM

2PM

Kaizen Kickoff

Lean/Kaizen Training

Specialized Training

Measure

(Present State Analysis)

Measure

(Present State Analysis)

Analyze

Lunch Lunch

Analyze

Brainstorm Ideas

Idea Effort/Impact

Idea Prioritization

Future State Design

Mid-Week Review

Process Part Design Review

Future State Des

Future State Des


Lunch Lunch Lunch and

Celebration

Final Presentation

Create and Implement Standard

Work

Measure Future State

Calculate Actual Benefits

Create Final Presentation

Step 1

Time

Activity 1-1

Time

Activity 1-2

Time

Activity 1-3

Time

Activity1-4

Time

Step 2

Time

Activity 2-1

Time

Activity 2-2

Time

Activity 2-3

Time

Activity 2-4

Time

Step 3

Time

Activity 3-1

Time

Step 4

Time

Activity 4-1

Time

Activity 4-2

Time

Activity 4-3

Time

Activity 4-4

Time

Step 5

Time

Activity 5-1

Time

Activity 5-2

Time

Activity 5-3

Time

Step 6

Time

Activity 6-1

Time

Activity 6-2

Time

Step 1

Time

Activity 1-1

Time

Activity 1-2

Time

Activity 1-3

Time

Activity1-4

Time

Step 1

Time

Step 1

Time

Activity 1-1

Time

Activity 1-1

Time

Activity 1-2

Time

Activity 1-2

Time

Activity 1-3

Time

Activity 1-3

Time

Activity1-4

Time

Activity1-4

Time

Step 2

Time

Activity 2-1

Time

Activity 2-2

Time

Activity 2-3

Time

Activity 2-4

Time

Step 2

Time

Step 2

Time

Activity 2-1

Time

Activity 2-1

Time

Activity 2-2

Time

Activity 2-2

Time

Activity 2-3

Time

Activity 2-3

Time

Activity 2-4

Time

Activity 2-4

Time

Step 3

Time

Step 3

Time

Activity 3-1

Time

Activity 3-1

Time

Step 4

Time

Activity 4-1

Time

Activity 4-2

Time

Activity 4-3

Time

Activity 4-4

Time

Step 4

Time

Step 4

Time

Activity 4-1

Time

Activity 4-1

Time

Activity 4-2

Time

Activity 4-2

Time

Activity 4-3

Time

Activity 4-3

Time

Activity 4-4

Time

Activity 4-4

Time

Step 5

Time

Step 5

Time

Activity 5-1

Time

Activity 5-1

Time

Activity 5-2

Time

Activity 5-2

Time

Activity 5-3

Time

Activity 5-3

Time

Step 6

Time

Step 6

Time

Activity 6-1

Time

Activity 6-1

Time

Activity 6-2

Time

Activity 6-2

Time



32

Benchmark Analysis(Optional)

Based on the information above, what is the performance objective*?• Reduce defects by % • Reduce long-term DPMO from to .• Improve short-term Z from to .

*If you do not benchmark, performance standards are based on:• For a process with 3 sigma level, decrease % defects by 10x.• For a process with > 3 sigma level, decrease % defects by 2x.• Other….please explain (corporate mandate, compliance/legal, VOC data, etc)

CTQProcess

Capability (X/Y)

BenchmarkGap /

OpportunitySource Assumptions Risks



33

Key Buying Factor Analysis(Optional)

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0CTQ Importance Company Comp 1 Comp 2 Comp 3CTQ Importance Company Comp 1 Comp 2 Comp 3



34

Pilot Plan(Optional)

Hand-Chek/ Hot-Chek Interface Test

• Sample Check-in Data entered in Hand-Chek device

• Sample Data Sets Transmitted to Hot-Chek System – All Hotel Floors, All Hotel Rooms

• Confirmation Data Received from Hot-Chek to Hand-Chek Device – All Hotel Floors &Rooms

• Data Set Entry Accuracy < 3.4 DPMO

• Data Time < 6 Sec • Data Transmission/

Accuracy < 3.4 DPMO

SB, plus Hot-Chek tech rep

Start 3/1Complete 3/3

Check-in Verification Test

• Sample Guest Data Entered in Hot-Chek System (variety of room requirements)

• “Guests” (Hotel Employees) Walked Through Check-in Process (90% Pre-Registered, 10% Non-Pre-Registered)

• Volume Stress Test – Simulated Arrival 20 Guests in a “Tour Bus”

• Process Measurements recorded via Observer (see Design Scorecard); “Guest” Observations Recorded.


• Data Set Entry Time < 6 Seconds

• Data Set Transmission/ Reception Accuracy < 3.4 DPMO

• Design Scorecard CCRs

SB, + 6 Check-in Staff


Check-in Validation Test

• 25 Guests invited to experience hotel check-in• Guests “pre-registered” with their room

requirements in Hot-Chek system.• Guests Walked Through Check-in Process (90%

Pre-Registered, 10% Non-Pre-Registered)• Process Measurements recorded via Observer

(see Design Scorecard)• Guests Debriefed Following Experience.


• Data Set Entry Time < 6 Seconds

• Data Set Transmission/ Reception Accuracy < 3.4 DPMO

• Design Scorecard CCRs

SB, + 6 Check-in Staff


ScheduleTest TeamSuccess CriteriaDescriptionPilot Test



35

Verify Pilot Results(Optional)

Pilot Observations: 1) Data Reception Weak – 12th Floor, SW Rooms

2) Data Entry Sequence Confusing

GAP Analysis/Root Causes: 1) Insufficient radio transceivers, 12th Floor

2) Order of questions confusing staff

Follow-up Actions: 1) Add four more radio transceivers

2) Resequence guest questions

Measurement Plan:

MeasurePilot

sPlan

Target xCTQsProcess time

CTQsData TransmissionAccuracy

1 minute

< 3.4 DPMO

0.5 min.

100 DPMO

0.05 min.

Comments



36

Summarizing Pilot Conclusions (Optional)

Once all the pilot data has been collected and the results verified, the team can determine the next steps toward solution implementation. Only after an objective and comprehensive assessment of the pilot can responsible “next step” decisions be made.

Some questions a team should ask upon the completion of a pilot to help guide them toward identification of the proper next steps are: Did pilot have anticipated results? Was the plan for conducting the pilot effective? What improvements can we make to the solution? Can the solution be implemented “as-is”? Should it be? Can the solution remain in place at the pilot location? What lessons learned and best practices can we apply during solution implementation? Did the solution achieve the required design goals?



37

KaizenAction Workout (Optional)

Planning Execution Before

Graphical Analysis AfterRoot Causes / Quick Wins

Root cause:Quick Win #1



?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?



38

Technical-Political-CulturalTPC Analysis (Optional)

Sources Of Resistance Definition Causes Of Resistance Rating Examples

Technical-Political-Cultural (TPC) Analysis

Technical

Political

Cultural



39

Multi-Generational Project Plan (Optional)

Gen1 Gen2 Gen3Target Date

Key Functionality

Technology Requirements

Target Customers

MGPP

Metrics

Dependencies

Vision



40

Cost/Benefit Analysis(Optional)

Identify the various solution options Describe the Type 1 solution $ gained from the expected process

improvement Calculate the total cost of ownership to fully implement the solution

Financial Benefits: Solution A Solution B Solution C

Budget Increase $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Expense Reduction $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Loss Avoidance $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Other $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

$0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Financial Cost: $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Labor $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Technology $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Materials $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Other $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

$0.00 $0.00 $0.00

$0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Total CostCost/ Benefit

Pre-Implementation & first 12 months after

Cost/Benefit Analysis

First 12 months after Implementation

Total Benefits



41

Documents

Lean Six Sigma Improve Phase Tollgate Review. Lean Six Sigma DMAIC Tools and Activities Review Project Charter Validate High-Level Value Stream