Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
University Admissions Application Processing
Using Computer Simulation to Evaluate Alternatives
Héctor LópezHani Aburas
Julia Pet-Armacost, PhD
University of Central Florida
November 6, 2001 University of Central Florida 2
Content
Objectives of studyBackgroundCurrent systemProposed systemSimulation modelResultsConclusion
November 6, 2001 University of Central Florida 3
Objective
To evaluate the potential impact of an alternative tool for processing admissions applications at a major metropolitan research university:
Document Imaging System, “an electronic copy” of a document
applications, transcripts, test scores, and letters
November 6, 2001 University of Central Florida 4
Background
The Operational Excellence and Assessment Support office conducted a process analysis of the admission operations in the Undergraduate Admissions OfficeUndergraduate Admissions wanted to know the potential impact of a document imaging system on processing admission applications Part of a larger study to identify improvement opportunities
November 6, 2001 University of Central Florida 5
Background (continued)
The scanned image of the admissions documents would substitute physical documents, thus minimizing the handling, move, and wait times during processing admission applicationsTo evaluate the potential impact before implementing the system
Computer Simulation Modeling
November 6, 2001 University of Central Florida 6
Process Flowchart of the Current Undergraduate Admissions Operation
GPACalculationFreshmen?
Counselor, Review/Decision
TSR
Application
Yes
No
Transfer?
Yes
File
Open,Classify andLogApplications
Matchapplicationwith scoresandtrascripts
Codingandbuilding ofrecord
Key-in(PeopleSoft)
Acknowle-dgement
Batch Batch Batch BatchBatch
Batc
h
NoFile
File
November 6, 2001 University of Central Florida 7
Key Elements of Current Admissions Operation
Peak daily volume of 350 applications Approximately seven steps in the processBatch processing is used between steps where batches are held overnightProcessing time per application: 12-15 minutes (best case) to 2 hours (worst case)Minimum completion time for an application is 7-8 days due to batching
November 6, 2001 University of Central Florida 8
Key Elements of Current System (continued)
In order to work on the application, the physical record is necessary in every step of the process Physical record is moved from cubicle to cubicle and between two different floorsAnswering applicant inquiries can be, on occasion, difficult
need to have physical record
November 6, 2001 University of Central Florida 9
Process Flowchart of the Proposed System
GPACalculationFreshmen?
Counselor, Review/Decision
TSR
Application
Yes
No
Transfer?
Yes
File
Open,Classifyand LogApplications
ScanningandIndexing
Building ofrecord
Key-in(PeopleSoft)
VerificationAcknowledgement
Matchapplicationwith scoresandtrascripts
Automaticallyby the system
Automaticallyby the system
New Operation
Manual operationin current system
November 6, 2001 University of Central Florida 10
Current vs. Proposed System-Key Differences
Workflow Physical record movement in current system versus “electronic workflow” in proposed systemImpact:
Move time between operations is reduced to zeroWait time due to lot sizing is minimizedApplication is available in following step almost immediately
November 6, 2001 University of Central Florida 11
Current vs. Proposed Systems-Key Differences, continued
Building process of physical recordManual within the current process versus automated within the proposed systemImpact: Reduction in lead time
Customer servicePhysical record may be required in current system versus all information available on-line in proposed system
November 6, 2001 University of Central Florida 12
Model – Computer Simulation
Software: Arena®Three models
Current systemProposed system – document imaging
Customer service includedCustomer service removed
November 6, 2001 University of Central Florida 13
Data Collection and Model Construction
Process flowInterviews and discussion with ~ 15 employees
Over 1,500 time and process observationsNew task (scanning of documents) in proposed system was based on observations of a similar operation in Graduate Admissions using an imaging system
November 6, 2001 University of Central Florida 14
Processes and Probability Distributions
A_ Op e n _ Ma i l S e i z e De l a y Re l e a s e Va l u e Ad d e d ERLA( . 1 7 7 , 2 )F _ Ke y I n S e i z e De l a y Re l e a s e Va l u e Ad d e d F i l e Mg r P r o c e s s i n gJ _ Co u n s e l o r _ Re v i e w S e i z e De l a y Re l e a s e Va l u e Ad d e d P r o c e s s Ti meH_ GP A_ P i n k _ S h e e t S e i z e De l a y Re l e a s e Va l u e Ad d e d LOGN( . 6 8 9 , . 3 8 6 )I _ GP A_ Ke y _ I n S e i z e De l a y Re l e a s e Va l u e Ad d e d LOGN( . 7 6 , . 3 1 4 )L_ TS R S e i z e De l a y Re l e a s e Va l u e Ad d e d UNI F ( 1 1 , 3 0 )K_ Ke y _ I n _ De c i s i o n S e i z e De l a y Re l e a s e Va l u e Ad d e d TRI A( 0 . 6 , 0 . 7 4 , 2 )B_ Lo g _ I n S e i z e De l a y Re l e a s e Va l u e Ad d e d . 2 3 + LOGN( . 2 1 3 , . 1 3 5 )C_ Ma t c h Do c u me n t s S e i z e De l a y Re l e a s e Va l u e Ad d e d . 2 4 + . 9 7 * BETA( 2 . 3 3 , 3 . 2 9 )D_ Co d i n g S e i z e De l a y Re l e a s e Va l u e Ad d e d 0 . 2 3 + l o g n ( 1 . 1 , . 7 9 )E_ Bu i l d _ Re c o r d S e i z e De l a y Re l e a s e Va l u e Ad d e d 0 . 1 9 + we i b ( 1 . 6 , 2 . 3 9 )De l a y GP A_ Co u n s e l o r De l a y No n - Va l u e Ad d e d 1De l a y Co u n s e l o r _ F Mg r De l a y No n - Va l u e Ad d e d 1De l a y Ma i l r o o m_ Ba t e s De l a y No n - Va l u e Ad d e d 1De l a y Ba t e s _ F Mg r De l a y No n - Va l u e Ad d e d 1G_ Ve r i f i c a t i o n Ac k n o wl e d S e i z e De l a y Re l e a s e Va l u e Ad d e d 1
November 6, 2001 University of Central Florida 15
Arena® Model – Current System
A _ O p e n _ M a il
F _ K e y I n
C h e c k in g
S t u d e n t C la s s = = 1S t u d e n t C la s s = = 2
E ls e
J _ C o u n s e lo r _ Re v ie w
H_ G P A _ P in k _ S h e e t I _ G P A _ K e y _ I n
H ig h S c h o o l s t u d e n t ?
S t u d e n t C la s s = = 1
E ls e
L _ T S R
O u t
A pp lic a t io n sI nc o m in g
C la s s if ic a t io nS t u d e n t
A s s ig n in g C o u n s e lo r T im e
S t u d e n t C la s s = = 1
S t u d e n t C la s s = = 2E ls e
H S C o u n s T im e
L T C o u n s T im e
H T C o u n s T im e
No t E n o u g h I n f o
c a llsCh e c k in g t o d is p o s e
T r u e
F a ls e
D is p o s e d D is p o s e Ca ll
H o ld _ A p p _ n o _ f e e
Calls
I nc o m in g P h o neC la s s if ic a t io n
A s s ig n 1 0
I s F e e in c lu d e d ?
T r u e
F a ls e
o u t d a t a
A p p lic a t io n t im e
A p p lic a t io nHa r d C o p y
H a r d Co p y v s O n L in e
T r u e
F a ls e
K _ K e y _ I n _ D e c is io n
A p p lic a t io nO n L in e
H a r d C o p y v s O n L in eT ru e
F a ls e
B _ L o g _ I n
D o c u m e n t sC _ M a t c h D _ C o d in g
E _ B u ild _ Re c o r d
D o c u m e n t s m a t c h e d ?
T r u e
F als e
K e y inB a t c h B a t e s t o
S e p a r a t e 2
G P A _ Co u n s e lo rD e la y
C o u n s e lo r _ F M g rD e la y
M a ilr o o m _ B a t e sDe la y
B a t e s _ F M g rDe la y
A c k n o w le d g e m e n tG _ V e r if ic a t io n
Doc u m e n tsnc o m in g S u p po r t
D o c u m e n tS u p p o r t in g D o c u m e n t ?
T r u e
F a ls e
Do c u m e n t s
S u p p o r t in gD is p o s e
Current
S e p a r a t e 3
C o u n s e lo rV e r if ic a t io n a n d
K y in t oM a t c h in g
M a ilr o o m t oS e p a r a t e 5
C o d in gM a t c h in g t o
S e p a r a t e 6
B u ild in gCo d in g t o S e p a r a t e 7
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0
00 0
0
00
0
0
0
0 0
0 0
0
0 0 0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
00
0
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
November 6, 2001 University of Central Florida 16
Arena® Model – Proposed System
Do c u m e n tn c o m in g Su p p o r t in g
Do c u m e n tSu p p o r t in g
Ap p lic a t io nI n c o m in g Pa p e r o r O n L in e
T r u e
F a ls e
Ha r d Co p y
O n L in e
Cla s s if ic a t io nSt u d e n t
As s ig n in g Co u n s e lo r T im e
S t u d e n t C la s s = = 1S t u d e n t C la s s = = 2
E ls e
HSCo u n s T im e
L T Co u n s T im e
HT Co u n s T im e
A_ O p e n M a il
Ha r d Co p y v s O n L in e
T r u e
F a ls eI s F e e in c lu d e d ?
T r u e
F a ls e
Ha r d _ VS_ O n lin e
T r u e
F a ls e
Ap p o r Do c u m e n tT r u e
F a ls e
Ho ld _ Ap p _ n o _ f e e
B_ Sc a n n in g C_ I n d e x in g
Z _ Bu ild Re c o r d
Co p yO r ig in a l Ha r d
Se p a r a t e
Du p lic a t eDis p o s e
Bu ild Re c o r dDu p lic a t e t o
O r ig in a l
D u p lic a t e
Ba t c hDu p lic a t e d
Se p a r a t e
D_ Ke y I nI n c o m in g Ca ll Cla s s if ic a t io n Ch e c k in g _ t o _ d is p o s e _ c a llsT r u e
F a ls e
Dis p o s e d Dis p o s e Ca ll
Re v ie wG _ Co u n s e lo r
Sh e e tE_ G PA_ Pin k F _ G PA_ Ke y I n
I n _ De c is io nH_ Ke y
High Sc h o o l s t u d en t ?
S t u d e n t C la s s = = 1
E ls e
O u t
I _ T SR As s ig n 1 2
o u t d a t a
Ap p lic a t io n t im e
Dis p o s e _ No F e e
Ch e c k in g
S t u d e n t C la s s = = 1S t u d e n t C la s s = = 2
E ls e
En o u g h I n f o r m a t io n ?T r u e
F a ls e
Proposed, Scenario 1
0
0 0
0
0
0
00
0
0
0
0
0 0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
00
0
00
0
0 0
0
0
00
0
0
November 6, 2001 University of Central Florida 17
Running the Simulation
ReplicationsNumber: 3Length: 15 days (@ 9 hours, 7.5 + breaks)Applications: 5,250 / replication
ScenariosCurrentProposed 1– document imaging systemProposed 2 – document imaging + customer service reps. With re-distribution of resources
November 6, 2001 University of Central Florida 18
Sample Results, Total Output and Lead Time
1.6262.5250.6478Total lead time/application (hours)
3142,6551732,665571,273Total Output(Applications)
95% Interval
Half WidthAverage
95% Interval
Half Width
Average
95% Interval
Half Width
AverageStatistic
Proposed,Scenario 2
Proposed,Scenario 1
CurrentModel
November 6, 2001 University of Central Florida 19
Sample Results, Utilization of Resources
Proposed 2Proposed 1Current
314N/AN/AN/AN/ACustomer Service Reps.
299598330TSR Managers
462260220Counselors
530128011GPA Calculation
N/AN/AN/AN/A06Verification/Acknowledgement
642432315File Managers (9 in current and proposed 1, 6 in proposed 2)
N/AN/AN/AN/A190Bates/Coding/Build
096096082Mailroom
Half Width
Average (%)
Half Width
Average (%)Half WidthAverage
(%)Work Center
November 6, 2001 University of Central Florida 20
Sample Results, What if Analysis
Change in Scheduled UtilizationRedistribution of ResourcesProposed 1
989886TSR Managers
876266Counselors
762812GPA Calculation
N/AN/AN/AN/AVerification/Acknowledgement
653269File Managers (9 in current and proposed 1, 6 in proposed 2)
N/AN/AN/AN/ABates/Coding/Build
959653Mailroom
ToFromToFromWork Center
November 6, 2001 University of Central Florida 21
Conclusion
Simulation has proven to be a useful tool in understanding the potential implications of system prior to its implementation The simulation indicates that imaging system improves the turn around time of admission application processingSimulation is a useful OR tool in higher education
