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

Lean Six Sigma Measure Phase Tollgate Review Measure

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

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

International Standards for Lean Six Sigma

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

3

Data Collection Plan

For each performance measure (Y), update a data collection plan Include MSA measure plan (Gantt chart, MS project plan is Optional) Add Financial measure plan if separate from performance Y Add any Time Study or other data collection plans for Value Stream Map Sample Size Calculation Use additional slides if needed

Performance Measure

Operational

Definition

Data Source and Location

How Will Data Be

Collected

Who Will Collect Data

When Will Data Be Collected

Sample Size

Stratification Factors

How will data be used?

VOC

MSA

Process

VSM

Financials

Others



4

Operational Definitions

Y – Continuous data (Process start/stop and cycle time boundaries (such as the unit of measure (ex minutes), the unit (the thing you are measuring), will you include weekends, holidays, non-business hours?)

Y – Discrete data (Define Success/Defect or other attribute values you will measure

X – The subgroups values or X-factor groupings you will use on your project data collection

Other unique terms that apply to your project that require clear operational definitions

Use additional slides as needed to complete your operational definitions



5

MSA Conclusions

The measurement systems are acceptable. The data is considered to have no potential for significant error. Need to be careful to appropriately use the data during the Analyze Phase.

Type of Measurement

ErrorDescription Considerations to this Project

Discrimination (resolution)

The ability of the measurement system to divide into “data categories”

Work hrs can be measured to <.25 hrs. Tool usage measure to +- 2 min.

Bias The difference between an observed average measurement result and a reference value

No bias - Work hours and radar start-stop times consistent through population.

Stability The change in bias over time No bias of work hrs & radar usage data.

Repeatability The extent variability is consistent Not an issue. Labor and radar usage is historical and felt to be accurate enough for insight and analysis.

Reproducibility Different appraisers produce consistent results

Remarks in usage data deemed not reproducible, not used in determining which radars were used in each op

Variation The difference between parts n/a to this process.



6

Baseline Basic Statistics

The current process has a non-normal distribution with the P-Value < 0.05 but does have a normal bell-shape.

Since the mean and median are the same in days (29) +/- 0.5 days, we will not transform data.

The range is 35 and the standard deviation is 2.7 days

343230282624

Median

Mean

29.429.329.229.129.028.928.8

Anderson-Darling Normality Test

Variance 7.169Skewness 0.201075Kurtosis -0.471714N 266

Minimum 24.000

A-Squared

1st Quartile 27.000Median 29.0003rd Quartile 31.000Maximum 35.000

95% Confidence Interval for Mean

28.805

1.95

29.451

95% Confidence Interval for Median

29.000 29.000

95% Confidence Interval for StDev

2.468 2.927

P-Value < 0.005

Mean 29.128StDev 2.677

95% Confidence I ntervals

Summary for Delivery Time



7

Baseline Process Capability

266 data points collected between 11/1/04 thru 11/30/04

Mean 29 days, St. Dev. 2.9 days, CP is 1.16 indicating process needs centering to the LSL of 10 and USL of 30 days. Cpk is .1 indicating that the process is exceeding the USL.

With an overall PPM of 371,895 defects per million opportunity, the current process has a Sigma Quality Level of 1.8 or a 62% yield

36322824201612

LSL Target USL

Process Data

Sample N 266StDev(Within) 2.87033StDev(Overall) 2.69154

LSL 10Target 20USL 30Sample Mean 29.1203

Potential (Within) Capability

CCpk 1.16

Overall Capability

Pp 1.24PPL 2.37PPU 0.11Ppk

Cp

0.11Cpm 0.35

1.16CPL 2.22CPU 0.10Cpk 0.10

Observed PerformancePPM < LSL 0.00PPM > USL 281954.89PPM Total 281954.89

Exp. Within PerformancePPM < LSL 0.00PPM > USL 379619.67PPM Total 379619.67

Exp. Overall PerformancePPM < LSL 0.00PPM > USL 371895.18PPM Total 371895.18

WithinOverall

Process Capability of Delivery Time



8

Xbar 15S 2

USL 18LSL 5

Sigma = 3 Sigma

1.5

0.933193

0.066807

-5

2.87E-07

2.87E-07

0.066807

0.933193

93.3193%

3.00

Sigma Quality LevelDelete if no LSL (Lower Specification Limit)Delete if no USL (Upper Specification Limit)Standard DeviationMean (Average)Enter Values in Yellow

702009 O ##

Worksheet For Calculating Process SigmaWorksheet For Calculating Process SigmaContinuous Data Long-TermContinuous Data Long-Term

2. Determine Area 1:

Find Z1

Look up Z1 in Normal Table

Area 1 = 1 – Look Up Area 1 = 1 – Norm Dist (Z1) = 1 – ( )

4. Determine Total Area:

5. Yield = 1 – Total Area

6. Process Sigma Comes FromTable Look Up Of Yield

Total Area = Area 1 + Area 2 = ( ) + ( )

Yield = 1 – Total Area = 1 – ( )

SigmaST = Look Up Value in Sigma Table

(Z1) = Normal Table Look Up for Z1Norm Dist

=

( ) – ( )( )

=USL – x

sZ1 = =

= x 100%

=

3. Skip this step if there is no LSL

Area 2

2. Determine Area 2:

Find Z2

Look up Z2 in Normal Table

Area 2 = Look Up =

=

=LSL – x

sZ2 = =

(Z2) = Normal Table Look Up for Z2Norm Dist =

( ) – ( )( )

=

=

=

n X valuen X+s valuen USL & Shade Area To The Rightn LSL & Shade Area To The Left

s

x x+s

s USL = 22

Area 1Area 2

10 18

LSL = 8

1. Label The Normal Curve With The Following:

Example:

Example:The average processing time = 15

days (Xbar = 15)

The standard deviation was 2 days (s = 2)

A unit processed longer than 18 days was too late to the customer

(USL = 18)

A unit processed faster than 5 days was too early to the customer

(LSL = 5)

Sigma Quality Level = 3

Sigma Calculator: Continuous Data



9

1 N = 2001002 D = 35

3 O =

4 DPMO = #DIV/0!5 Sigma = #DIV/0!

General Worksheet For Calculating Process Sigma

Solve For Defects Per Million Opportunities (DPMO)Look Up Process Sigma In Abridged Sigma Conversion Table

Number Of Defect Opportunities Per Unit

Total Number Of Defects Made (Include Defects Made And Later Fixed)

Number Of Units Processed

Enter Values Below in Yellow

Example:200 pairs of boots were supplied (N = 200)35 shoelaces were found broken (D = 35)

Each shoe had 1 lace and there were 2 shoes per pair (O = 2)

Sigma Calculator: Discrete Data



10

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



11

Sources of Waste ? ? ? ? ?

Sources of Waste

NVA

Defect Overproduction Transportation

WaitingInventoryMotion

Area 1

Sub area 1

Area 1

Sub area 1

Area 1

Sub area 1

Processing

Area 1

Sub area 1

Area 1

Sub area 1

Area 1

Sub area 1

5%5%

5%

40%10%

30%

5%Defect

Overproduction

Transportation

Waiting

Inventory

Motion

Processing

< Insert your waste percentage as shown

in pie chart >



12

Swim Lane Process Map

Client Contact

Client HR

Admin

Client Mgr

Places information

into HR database

Sends Email to Admin

Sends exit date to IT, telecom & facilities

Re-verifies with mgr on employee’s exit status

NT Admin

Email Vendor

Utilize e-mail vendor’s web tool to submit delete

request to vendor

Sends Email to Admin

Generates ticket & forwards to Admin

Delete account

Mark request as completed on

admin web site

Create ticket if request coming

directly from client

Avg.Delay2 days

Avg. Delay2 days

Avg.Delay1 day

Avg.Delay1 day

Avg.Delay

4 days

Notify HR of employee exit date

Form require

approval?

No

Secure approval(s)

Yes

Note: Steps in blue shapes are non-value added steps

Admin closes ticket and

manager notified

Avg. Delay2 days

Oval shapes : Start/Stop of processDiamonds: Decision pointsRectangles: process stepsHalf-Moon: Delay/Queue Time



13

Value Stream MapCurrent State

Order Mgmt Supervisor

DISTOrder MgmtOrder MgmtOrder Mgmt Order Mgmt

P/T = 2 min

Error Rate=2%

Volume=800

P/T = 6 Min

Error Rate=0%

Volume=800

P/T = 6 Min

Error Rate=2%

Volume=800

P/T = 2 Min

Error Rate=1%

Volume=800

20 Orders

3 min

LargeBusiness

Home

6 Customers

5 Customers

3 Customers

SmallBusiness

CustomerInfo

4

ProductNeed4

Pricing4

ShippingInfo

4

PickPack & Ship

P/T = 120 Min

Error Rate=1%

Volume=1200

10

2 min 6 min 6 min 2 min 120 min

240 min5 min

Customer call time = 24 min

Service lead time = 384 minSUPPLIERS

2-5 days

Manual Update

Weekly Update

Phone CallTrigger:

Completion Criteria:

Cycle Time:

Takt Time:

Number of People:

Number of Approvals:

Items in Inbox:

% Rework:

# of Iterations (cycles):

# of Databases:

Top 3 Rework Issues:

1.

2.

3.

CUSTOMER

Screen for Acct Mgr

Order Mgmt

Phone Call

P/T = 3 min

Lost calls=10%

Volume=1200

Simplify/ Mistake Proof

AutomateMonitoring

ForecastImprovement

ImproveVisibility

Simplify/Combine



14

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



Sign Off

I concur that the Measure 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



19

Tollgate ReviewsBackup Slides

Go Forward

Wait - Go Back

Halt - HoldD

M

A

I

C

MeasureTollgate Checklist

Has a more detailed Value Stream Map been completed to better understand the process and problem, and where in the process the root causes might reside?

Has the team conducted a value-added and cycle time analysis, identifying areas where time and resources are devoted to tasks not critical to the customer?

Has the team identified the specific input (x), process (x), and output (y) measures needing to be collected for both effectiveness and efficiency categories (i.e. Quality, Speed, and Cost measures)?

Has the team developed clear, unambiguous operational definitions for each measurement and tested them with others to ensure clarity/consistent interpretation?

Has a clear, reasonable choice been made between gathering new data or taking advantage of existing data already collected by the organization?

Has an appropriate sample size and sampling frequency been established to ensure valid representation of the process we’re measuring?

Has the measurement system been checked for repeatability and reproducibility, potentially including training of data collectors?

Has the team developed and tested data collection forms or check sheets which are easy to use and provide consistent, complete data?

Has baseline performance and process capability been established? How large is the gap between current performance and the customer (or project) requirements?

Has the team been able to identify any complete ‘Quick Wins’? Have any Kaizen opportunities been identified to accelerate momentum and results? Have key learning(s) to-date required any 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

Key Deliverables: Detailed Value Stream

Map(s) Data Collection Plan Measurement Collection

Results Process Capability Results Current Baseline Process

Performance Quick Wins, if applicable Identification of Kaizen

Opportunities, if applicable Refined Charter, as

necessary Updated Risk Mitigation Plan

Deliverables Uploaded to Central Storage Location or Deployment Management System.



22

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?


23

Long-TermYeild

ProcessSigma (ST)

Defects Per1,000,000

Defects Per100,000

Defects Per10,000

Defects Per1,000

Defects Per100

99.99966% 6.0 3.4 0.34 0.034 0.0034 0.0003499.9995% 5.9 5 0.5 0.05 0.005 0.000599.9992% 5.8 8 0.8 0.08 0.008 0.000899.9900% 5.7 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.00199.8000% 5.6 20 2 0.2 0.02 0.00299.9970% 5.5 30 3 0.3 0.03 0.00399.9960% 5.4 40 4 0.4 0.04 0.00499.9930% 5.3 70 7 0.7 0.07 0.00799.9900% 5.2 100 10 1 0.1 0.0199.9850% 5.1 150 15 1.5 0.15 0.01599.9770% 5.0 230 23 2.3 0.23 0.02399.9670% 4.9 330 33 3.3 0.33 0.03399.9520% 4.8 480 48 4.8 0.48 0.04899.9320% 4.7 680 68 6.8 0.68 0.06899.9040% 4.6 960 96 9.6 0.96 0.09699.8650% 4.5 1350 135 13.5 1.35 0.13599.8140% 4.4 1860 186 18.6 1.86 0.18699.7450% 4.3 2550 255 25.5 2.55 0.25599.6540% 4.2 3460 346 34.6 3.46 0.34699.5340% 4.1 4660 466 46.6 4.66 0.46699.3790% 4.0 6210 621 62.1 6.21 0.62199.181% 3.9 8190 819 81.9 8.19 0.81998.930% 3.8 10700 1070 107 10.7 1.0798.610% 3.7 13900 1390 139 13.9 1.3998.220% 3.6 17800 1780 178 17.8 1.7897.730% 3.5 22700 2270 227 22.7 2.2797.130% 3.4 28700 2870 287 28.7 2.8796.410% 3.3 35900 3590 359 35.9 3.5995.540% 3.2 44600 4460 446 44.6 4.4694.520% 3.1 54800 5480 548 54.8 5.4893.320% 3.0 66800 6680 668 66.8 6.6891.920% 2.9 80800 8080 808 80.8 8.0890.320% 2.8 96800 9680 968 96.8 9.6888.50% 2.7 115000 11500 1150 115 11.586.50% 2.6 135000 13500 1350 135 13.584.20% 2.5 158000 15800 1580 158 15.881.60% 2.4 184000 18400 1840 184 18.4

78.80% 2.3 212000 21200 2120 212 21.275.80% 2.2 242000 24200 2420 242 24.272.60% 2.1 274000 27400 2740 274 27.469.20% 2.0 308000 30800 3080 308 30.865.60% 1.9 344000 34400 3440 344 34.461.80% 1.8 382000 38200 3820 382 38.258.00% 1.7 420000 42000 4200 420 4254.00% 1.6 460000 46000 4600 460 46

50% 1.5 500000 50000 5000 500 5046% 1.4 540000 54000 5400 540 5443% 1.3 570000 57000 5700 570 5739% 1.2 610000 61000 6100 610 6135% 1.1 650000 65000 6500 650 6531% 1.0 690000 69000 6900 690 6928% 0.9 720000 72000 7200 720 7225% 0.8 750000 75000 7500 750 7522% 0.7 780000 78000 7800 780 7819% 0.6 810000 81000 8100 810 8116% 0.5 840000 84000 8400 840 8414% 0.4 860000 86000 8600 860 8612% 0.3 880000 88000 8800 880 8810% 0.2 900000 90000 9000 900 908% 0.1 920000 92000 9200 920 92

Abridged Process Sigma Conversion Table…

24

z 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.090.0 0.0000 0.0040 0.0080 0.0120 0.0160 0.0190 0.0239 0.0279 0.0319 0.03590.1 0.0398 0.0438 0.0478 0.0517 0.0557 0.0596 0.0636 0.0675 0.0714 0.07530.2 0.0793 0.0832 0.0871 0.0910 0.0948 0.0987 0.1026 0.1064 0.1103 0.11410.3 0.1179 0.1217 0.1255 0.1293 0.1331 0.1368 0.1406 0.1443 0.1480 0.15170.4 0.1554 0.1591 0.1628 0.1664 0.1700 0.1736 0.1772 0.1808 0.1844 0.18790.5 0.1915 0.1950 0.1985 0.2019 0.2054 0.2088 0.2123 0.2157 0.2190 0.22240.6 0.2257 0.2291 0.2324 0.2357 0.2389 0.2422 0.2454 0.2486 0.2517 0.25490.7 0.2580 0.2611 0.2642 0.2673 0.2704 0.2734 0.2764 0.2794 0.2823 0.28520.8 0.2881 0.2910 0.2939 0.2969 0.2995 0.3023 0.3051 0.3078 0.3106 0.31330.9 0.3159 0.3186 0.3212 0.3238 0.3264 0.3289 0.3315 0.3340 0.3365 0.33891.0 0.3413 0.3438 0.3461 0.3485 0.3508 0.3513 0.3554 0.3577 0.3529 0.36211.1 0.3643 0.3665 0.3686 0.3708 0.3729 0.3749 0.3770 0.3790 0.3810 0.38301.2 0.3849 0.3869 0.3888 0.3907 0.3925 0.3944 0.3962 0.3980 0.3997 0.40151.3 0.4032 0.4049 0.4066 0.4082 0.4099 0.4115 0.4131 0.4147 0.4162 0.41771.4 0.4192 0.4207 0.4222 0.4236 0.4251 0.4265 0.4279 0.4292 0.4306 0.43191.5 0.4332 0.4345 0.4357 0.4370 0.4382 0.4394 0.4406 0.4418 0.4429 0.44411.6 0.4452 0.4463 0.4474 0.4484 0.4495 0.4505 0.4515 0.4525 0.4535 0.45451.7 0.4554 0.4564 0.4573 0.4582 0.4591 0.4599 0.4608 0.4616 0.4625 0.46331.8 0.4641 0.4649 0.4656 0.4664 0.4671 0.4678 0.4686 0.4693 0.4699 0.47061.9 0.4713 0.4719 0.4726 0.4732 0.4738 0.4744 0.4750 0.4756 0.4761 0.47672.0 0.4772 0.4778 0.4783 0.4788 0.4793 0.4798 0.4803 0.4808 0.4812 0.48172.1 0.4821 0.4826 0.4830 0.4834 0.4838 0.4842 0.4846 0.4850 0.4854 0.48572.2 0.4861 0.4864 0.4868 0.4871 0.4875 0.4878 0.4881 0.4884 0.4887 0.48902.3 0.4893 0.4896 0.4898 0.4901 0.4904 0.4906 0.4909 0.4911 0.4913 0.49162.4 0.4918 0.4920 0.4922 0.4925 0.4927 0.4929 0.4931 0.4932 0.4934 0.49362.5 0.4938 0.4940 0.4941 0.4943 0.4945 0.4946 0.4948 0.4949 0.4951 0.49522.6 0.4953 0.4955 0.4956 0.4957 0.4959 0.4960 0.4961 0.4962 0.4963 0.49642.7 0.4965 0.4966 0.4967 0.4968 0.4969 0.4970 0.4971 0.4972 0.4973 0.49742.8 0.4974 0.4975 0.4976 0.4977 0.4977 0.4978 0.4979 0.4979 0.4980 0.49812.9 0.4981 0.4982 0.4982 0.4983 0.4984 0.4984 0.4985 0.4985 0.4986 0.49863.0 0.4987 0.4987 0.4987 0.4988 0.4988 0.4989 0.4989 0.4989 0.4990 0.49903.1 0.4990 0.4991 0.4991 0.4991 0.4992 0.4992 0.4992 0.4992 0.4993 0.49933.2 0.4993 0.4993 0.4994 0.4994 0.4994 0.4994 0.4994 0.4995 0.4995 0.49953.3 0.4995 0.4995 0.4995 0.4996 0.4996 0.4996 0.4996 0.4996 0.4996 0.49973.4 0.4997 0.4997 0.4997 0.4997 0.4997 0.4997 0.4997 0.4997 0.4997 0.4998

Table of the Standard Normal (z) Distribution

Welcome

and Introduction

s25

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



15%

35% 35%

15%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Innovators Early Adopters Late Adopters Resistors

Attitude Charting

Key Constituents Map

Finance37%

Operations25%

Customer13%

HR25%

Attitude Charting & Key Constituency Map (Optional)

“Critical mass must be won-over”



26

Sample Size: Continuous Data (Optional)

Calculation for Confidence Intervals - Continuous Data

Population Size (N) 10,000

Confidence Level (1-alpha) 0.95000 (Percent expressed as decimal)

Observed Sample Mean 25.00000 (Best estimate from data)

Observed Sample Std. Dev. 5.00000 (Best estimate from data)

Actual Sample Size 100

Lower Conf. Int. Limit (Mean) 23.86764596 (Corrected for finite population)Upper Conf. Int. Limit (Mean) 26.13235404 (Corrected for finite population)

Lower Conf. Int. Limit (S.D.) 4.390034232Upper Conf. Int. Limit (S.D.) 5.808376227

Calculation for Sample Size - Continuous Data

Population Size (N) 860


Power Level (1-beta) 0.90000 (Percent expressed as decimal)

Standard Deviation (s) 10.00000 (Best prior estimate or Range/5)

Required Precision (+/- delta) 3.00000 (Margin of Error)

Initial Sample Size 117 (Assumes infinite population)Corrected for Population 104 (Correction for finite population)

Recommended Sample Size 104

? ? ? ? ?

? ? ? ? ?



27

Sample Size:Discrete Data (Optional)

Calculation for Sample Size - Discrete Data (Proportions)



Power Level (1-beta) 0.90000 (Percent expressed as decimal)

Expected Proportion (p) 0.50000 (Best prior estimate or 0.50)

Required Precision (+/- delta) 0.03000 (Margin of Error)

Initial Sample Size 2919 (Assumes infinite population)Corrected for Population 746 (Correction for finite population)

Recommended Sample Size 746Calculation for Confidence Interval - Discrete Data



Observed Proportion (p) 0.50000 (Best estimate from data)

Actual Sample Size 100

Lower Conf. Int. Limit 0.402488147 (Corrected for finite population)Upper Conf. Int. Limit 0.597511853 (Corrected for finite population)

? ? ? ? ?

? ? ? ? ?



28

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



29

Probability Plot (Optional)

40353025201510

99.9

99

95

90

80706050403020

10

5

1

0.1

QTY

Perc

ent

Mean 24.74StDev 4.177N 100AD 0.380P-Value 0.397

Normal - 95% CIProbability Plot of Anderson-Darling Normality



30

Control Chart(Optional)

The current baseline delivery time is stable over time with both the Moving Range (MR) (3.22 days) and Individual Average (29.13 days) experiencing common cause variation

255 data points collected with zero subgroups, thus the I&MR control chart selected

Observation

Ind

ivid

ua

l V

alu

e2442171901631361098255281

40

35

30

25

20

_X=29.13

UCL=37.70

LCL=20.56

Observation

Mo

vin

g R

an

ge

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



31

PDCA(Optional)

Plan: ? ?

Do: ? ?

Check: ? ?

Act: ? ?

?

?

?

?

Plan

Do

Check

Act



32

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



33

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



34

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



35

Sample Value Stream Mapping Symbols (Optional)

Machining C/T = 36 Sec

Set Up Time 7 Min

Uptime 86%

Process Box

Data Box

IQueue/

Inventory

1

Personnel

Flow(Information)

Electronic Information

Sign Off Point

Push Systems

Truck Shipment

Quotes

Supplier/Customer

Flow(Physical)

Physical Pull

ProjectBurst

SupermarketReplenishment

KanbanStation

PaperKanban

ElectronicData

System F I F OFIFO Lane

PhysicalTransport

“Go See”Monitoring



36

To Office Parking LotEAST

Vault

(finance)

Supply

Room

(paper and office supplies)

Records

Room

(Order Management)

OM Supr Office

Reception

Engineering Offices

CafeteriaRestrooms

Foyer

Order Taker 1

Order Taker 2

Order Taker 3

Order Entry 1

Order Entry 2

Order Entry 3

CC & Val 2

CC & Val 3

CC & Val 1

OM LeadPrinter, Fax

Copier

Indicates an in-box or outbox where work (forms/ information) waits to be worked on or transferred

Planning &

Scheduling

Lines indicate paper/information travel:

- No set path

- Lots of rework

Spaghetti Diagram(Optional)



37

AS-IS Process Mapping Symbols (Optional)



38

Documents

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