LSS Improve Tollgate Templates

8/17/2019 LSS Improve Tollgate Templates

1/41

Lean SixSigmaImprovePhase

TollgateReview Improve

Phase


2/41

ean x gmaDMAIC Tools and

Activities Review Project Charter

Validate igh!Level Val"eStream Map and Scope Validate Voice o# the

C"stomer$ Voice o# the %"siness

Validate Pro&lem Statementand 'oals

Validate (inancial %ene#its Create Comm"nication Plan Select and La"nch Team Develop Project Sched"le Complete De#ine Tollgate

Identi#) Root Ca"ses

Red"ce List o# Potential RootCa"ses Con#irm Root Ca"se to

*"tp"t Relationship +stimate Impact o# Root

Ca"ses on ,e) *"tp"ts Prioriti-e Root Ca"ses Val"e!Add Anal)sis Ta.t Rate Anal)sis /"ic. 0ins Statistical Anal)sis Complete Anal)-e Tollgate

Develop Potential Sol"tions

+val"ate1 Select1 and*ptimi-e %est Sol"tions Develop 2To!%e3 Val"e Stream

Map4s5 Develop and Implement Pilot

Sol"tion Implement 6s Program Develop ("ll Scale

Implementation Plan Cost7%ene#it Anal)sis %enchmar.ing Complete Improve Tollgate

Develop S*P3s1 Training

Plan $ Process Controls Implement Sol"tion and*ngoing ProcessMeas"rements

Con#irm Attainment o# Project'oals

Identi#) Project Replication*pport"nities

Training Complete Control Tollgate Transition Project to Process

*wner

Project Charter Voice o# the C"stomer and

,ano Anal)sis SIP*C Map Project Val"ation7R*IC

Anal)sis Tools RACI and /"ad Charts

Sta.eholder Anal)sis Comm"nication Plan +##ective Meeting Tools In8"ir) and Advocac) S.ills Time Lines1 Milestones1

and 'antt Charting Pareto Anal)sis

Val"e Stream Mapping Process C)cle

+##icienc)7Little3s Law *perational De#initions Data Collection Plan Statistical Sampling Meas"rement S)stem

Anal)sis 4MSA5 'age R$R ,appa St"dies Control Charts Spaghetti Diagrams istograms 9ormalit) Test Process Capa&ilit) Anal)sis

Process Constraint ID andTa.t Time Anal)sis

Ca"se $ +##ect Anal)sis (M+A )pothesis Tests7Con#:

Intervals Simple $ M"ltiple Regression

A9*VA Components o# Variation Con8"ering Prod"ct and

Process Complexit) /"e"ing Theor)

Replenishment P"ll7,an&an Stoc.ing Strateg) Process (low Improvement Process %alancing Anal)tical %atch Si-ing Total Prod"ctive Maintenance Design o# +xperiments 4D*+5

Sol"tion Selection Matrix Piloting and Sim"lation 0or. Control S)stem Set"p red"ction P"gh Matrix P"ll S)stem

Mista.e!Proo#ing7;ero De#ects

Standard *peratingProced"res 4S*P3s5

Process Control Plans Vis"al Process Control Tools M'PP

Statistical Process Controls4SPC5 Sol"tion Replication Vis"al 0or.place Metrics Project Transition Model Team (eed&ac. Session

Val"e Stream Map (low

Identi#) ,e) Inp"t1 Processand *"tp"t Metrics Develop *perational

De#initions Develop Data Collection Plan Validate Meas"rement

S)stem Collect %aseline Data Determine Process Capa&ilit) Complete Meas"re Tollgate

Defne Measure

Analyze

Improve

Control


3/41

Anal)-e *verview

Root ca"se=

+##ect Root ca"se=+##ect

Root ca"se=+##ect

Val"e Add Anal)sis *ne!0a) A9*VA

Two!0a) A9*VA Pareto Plots Simple Linear Regression M"ltiple Regression Test #or +8"al Variance Scatter Plots

C$+ Matrix Complexit)

Ca"se $ +##ect Diagram ,ai-en7/"ic. 0ins (M+A Control7Impact Chart T!Test *ther

International Standards #or Lean Six

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point !ere

>

Hypothesis Tests Value-Add Analysis

Tools UsedRoot Cause / Effect


4/41

To!%e Process Map

Places in"ormation into !R

E#IT data$ase

%tilize we$ tool to

su$mit a delete re&uestto vendor

Access data$ase

daily

'elete account

reate )ork

Re&uest

Avg* ycle

time + ,

days

Avg* ycle

time + -day

Avg* ycle

time + -

day

Avg* ycle

time + -day

Avg* ycle

time + -

day

lient

ontact

lient !R

Admin

lient Mgr

.T

Admin

Email

/endor

Admin closes work re&uest and

manager noti"ied

.oti"y !R o"

employee e0it date



?


5/41

/"ic. 0in Doc"mentationTemplate

-* Root ause1 @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

2* 3$vious Solution1 444444444444444444444444444444444444444444

5* 6ow or .o ost1 444444444444444444444444444444444444444444

7* 6ow Risk1 @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

8* Implementation Plan1 @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

9* Stake:older (s Approval1 @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Process 9ame= @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ Process Lead= @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ Process *wner= @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ Start Date= @@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Process Area= @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ Stop Date= @@@@@@@@@@@@@@

%ene#its= @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

6s ?!Step Set"p Red"ction Inventor) Red"ction MSA Improvements Price red"ctions Red"ced D*09TIM+

49VA steps or wor.5 P"ll S)stem ,ai-en events *ther



6


6/41

(M+A

Ris. Anal)sis recommended actions 4,e) Spea.ing Points5 Rating Index

Total C"rrent RP9 Ris.




7/41

Val"e Stream Map 4VSM5("t"re State

InformationFlow

ustomer Supplier

- 2 -

So"rces o# Val"e B

B

B

B

B




8/41

%"siness Impact

State #inancial impact o# #"t"re project leverage opport"nities Separate hard or T)pe EF #rom so#t T)pe < or >F 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: ?

GInternational Standards #or Lean Six



9/41

%"siness Impact Details

T)pe E= Descri&e the chain o# ca"salit) that shows how )o" determined the T)pe E savings: 4tell the stor) withca"seHe##ect relationships1 on how the proposed change sho"ld create the desired #inancial res"lt 4savings5 in)o"r project 5

Show the #inancial calc"lation savings and ass"mptions "sed: Ass"mption E 4i:e: so"rce o# data1 clear *perational De#initionsB5

Ass"mption < 4i:e: ho"rl) rate J incremental &ene#it cost J travel5

T)pe


10/41

C"rrent Stat"s

,e) actionscompleted

Iss"es

Lessons learned

Comm"nication1team &"ilding1organi-ationalactivities

EInternational Standards #or Lean Six



11/41

9ext Steps

,e) actions Planned Lean Six Sigma Tool "se

/"estions to answer %arrier7ris. mitigation activities

EEInternational Standards #or Lean Six



12/41

ow the sol"tion was determined=

• 0hat was the sol"tion selection tool "sedB• 0hat project management tools were "sedB

• Cost7&ene#it anal)sisB

• Incl"de an) other tools or methods "sed

E: B

: B

?: B

6: B

Improve S"mmar)



E<

Solution Selection riteria Pilot and Implementation Plan


13/41

Sign *##

I conc"r that the Improve phase was s"ccess#"ll) completed onMM7DD7NNNN

I conc"r the project is read) to proceed to next phase= Anal)-e

Enter Name HereDeplo)ment Championnter Name Here

inancial Representative

nter Name Herereen %elt7%lac. %elt

Enter NameHereMaster %lac. %elt

Enter Name HereSponsor 7 Process *wner



E>


14/41

Tollgate ReviewsBackup Slides

'o (or w ar d

0ai t ! 'o %ac.

a l t ! o l d

D

M

A

I

C


15/41

Project Charter

Pro&lem= Descri&e pro&lem in non!technical terms Statement sho"ld explain wh) project is importantO wh)

wor.ing on it is a priorit)'oal= 'oals comm"nicate &e#oreF and a#terF conditions

Shi#t mean1 variance1 or &othB Sho"ld impact cost1 time1 8"alit) dimensions

+xpress goals "sing SMART criteria

Speci#ic1 Meas"ra&le1 Attaina&le1 Reso"rceRe8"irements1 Time %o"ndaries +xplain leverage and strategic implications 4i# an)5

Problem/Goal tatement

Toll!ate Re"ie# chedule

$inancial %mpact

Team

State #inancial impact o# project +xpenses Investments 4inventor)1 capital1 A7R5 Reven"es

Separate hardF #rom so#tF dollars State #inancial impact o# leverage opport"nities 4#"t"re

projects5

P+S 9ame Project +xec"tive Sponsor 4 i# di##erent #rom PS5 PS 9ame Project Sponsor7Process *wner DC 9ame Deplo)ment Champion '%7%% 9ame 'reen %elt7%lac. %elt M%% 9ame Master %lac. %elt

Core Team Role Contri&: LSS Training Team Mem&er E SM+ QQ N% Team Mem&er < TMQQ '% Team Mem&er > SM+ QQ PS+xtended Team Team Mem&er E %(M QQ 9ot Trained Team Mem&er < IT QQ 9ot Trained

Review high!level sched"le milestones here= Phase Completions Tollgate Reviews

Tollgate Sc:eduled Revised omplete

De#ine= QQ7QQ7QQ ! QQ7QQ7QQMeas"re= QQ7QQ7QQ QQ7QQ7QQ QQ7QQ7QQ

Anal)-e= QQ7QQ7QQ QQ7QQ7QQ QQ7QQ7QQImprove= QQ7QQ7QQ QQ7QQ7QQ QQ7QQ7QQControl= QQ7QQ7QQ QQ7QQ7QQ QQ7QQ7QQ



E6


16/41

Meas"re *verview

T;1 B

%nit 4d5 or Mean 4c5= B

'e"ect 4d5 or St* 'ev* 4c5= B

PE


17/41E

Anal)-eTollgate Chec.list

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?

$oes the team understand why the problem the %uality, &ycle 'ime or &ost

(fficiency issue identified in the Problem Statement! is being seen?

Has the team been able to identify any additional )%uick *ins+?

Have learnings todate re-uired modification of the Project &harter? .f so, havethese changes been approved by the Project Sponsor and the /ey Stakeholders?

Have any new risks to project success been identified, added to the 0isk

1itigation Plan, and a mitigation strategy put in place?

TollgateReview

TollgateReview

S t o p

Deliverables: List of otential Root causes

rioriti!ed List of "alidatedRoot #auses

$dditional %&uick 'ins() ifapplicable

Re*ned #+arter) as necessar,

-pdated Risk .itigation lan

Delivera&les ploaded to CentralStorage Location or Deplo)mentManagement S)stem

as the team identi#ied the .e) #actors 4critical Q3s5 that have the &iggest impact on

process per#ormanceB ave the) validated the root ca"sesBEInternational Standards #or Lean Six


18/41

ImproveTollgate Chec.list

TollgateReview

TollgateReview

S t o p

Deliverables: rioriti!ed List of Solutions

%To/Be( "alue Stream.ap0s1

ilot lan 2 Results

$pproved Solution andDetailed 3mplementation

lan

$dditional %&uick 'ins() ifapplicable

Re*ned #+arter) asnecessar,

-pdated Risk .itigationlan

Delivera&les ploaded toCentral Storage Location orDeplo)ment ManagementS)stem

*hat techni-ues were used to generate ideas for potential solutions?

*hat narrowing and screening techni-ues were used to further develop and -ualify potential solutions?

*hat evaluation criteria were used to select a recommended solution? $o proposed solutions address all the identified root causes, at least the most critical? *ere the solutions verified with the Project Sponsor and Stakeholders? Has an

approval been received to implement? *as a pilot run to test the solution? *hat was learned? *hat modifications made?

Has the team seen evidence that the root causes of the initial problems have beenaddressed during the pilot? *hat are the expected benefits? Has the team considered potential problems and unintended conse-uences 21(3! 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? *hat is the status? Have changes been communicated to all the appropriate people?

Has the team been able to identify any additional )%uick *ins+? Have )learning4s+ todate re-uired modification of the Project &harter? .f so, have

these changes been approved by the Project Sponsor and the /ey Stakeholders? Have any new risks to project success been identified and added to the 0isk 1itigation

Plan?

as the team developed improvement sol"tions #or the critical Q3s1 piloted the sol"tion

and veri#ied that the sol"tion will solve the pro&lemBEGInternational Standards #or Lean Six


19/41

ControlTollgate Chec.list

Has the team prepared all the essential documentation for the improved process,including revised5new Standard 6perating Procedures S6P+s!, a training plan and a

process control system?

Has the necessary training for process owners5operators been performed?

Have the right measures been selected, and documented as part of the Process&ontrol System, to monitor performance of the process and the continuedeffectiveness of the solution? Has the metrics briefing plan5schedule beendocumented? *ho owns the measures? Has the Process 6wner+s job description

been updated to reflect the new responsibilities? *hat happens if minimum performance is not achieved?

Has the solution been effectively implemented? Has the team compiled results dataconfirming that the solution has achieved the goals defined in the Project &harter?

Has the 7enefits 0ealization Schedule been verified by the 2inancial0epresentative?

Has the process been transitioned to the Process 6wner, to take over responsibilityfor managing continuing operations? $o they concur with the control plan?

Has a final Storyboard documenting the project work been developed?

Has the team forwarded other issues5opportunities, which were not able to beaddressed, 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?

TollgateReview

TollgateReview

S t o p

Deliverables: S45s

Training lan

rocess #ontrol S,stem

Bene*ts Reali!ationSc+edule) validated b,6inancial Representative

"alidated Solution

Replication7 Standardi!ationlan

Lessons Learned

Transitioned ro8ect

ro8ect Risk erformance

Delivera&les ploaded toCentral Storage Location orDeplo)ment ManagementS)stem

as the team implemented the sol"tion1 and a control plan to ins"re the process is

ro&"st to changeBEInternational Standards #or Lean Six


20/41


21/41

250

200

150

100

50

0

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Root Causes

#1 #2 #3 #4

+val"ating Sol"tions Against Criteria 4*ptional5

E0ample1 Independent Solutions

Sol"tion A a > red"ction in de#ects:

4Ass"mes no interaction e##ects o# the sol"tions5

*riginal goal is a 6 red"ction:

Solutions

% Contribution of Root Cause to Process Deficiency

Root Cause #1

40%

Root Cause #2

25%

Root Cause #3

20%

Root Cause #4

10%

Solution A 80%

Solution B 20% 80%

Solution C 30% 100%

Solution D

Solution E 20% 5%




22/41

Design o# +xperiments4D*+5

Res"lts 4*ptional5

The n"m&er o# Employees is the &iggestdriver #or Mean Time Late

9"m&er o# Employees is the onl) signi#icant#actor #or Mean = Time 6ate

Pareto Chart #orMean Time Late

+mplo)ee is the onl) statisticall) signi#icant #actor #orMean &esides the constant term: All other main e##ects$

Nmean !


23/41

P"gh 4Selection5 Matrix4*ptional5



% #i +## M i


24/41

%ene#it!+##ort Matrix4*ptional5

Effort

>ene"it

ighLow Med

i g h

L o w

M e d

ighLow Med

i g h

L o w

M e d

-5

9

-8

- ?

5

-2

@

7

-

-72--

8

-,

-9

ighl) Desira&le *pport"nitiesProjects in "pper le#t are the mostdesira&le projects:

Potentiall) Desira&le *pport"nitiesProjects in the "pper right are potentiall)desira&le1 &"t "s"all) re8"ire more

anal)sis to ens"re good decision ma.ing:

Potential /"ic. itsFPossi&ilit) #or ,ai-en event or small '%project

Least Desira&le *pport"nitiesProjects in the lower right are the leastdesira&le:




25/41

Sta.eholder Anal)sis4*ptional5




26/41

In#l"ence Strateg)4*ptional5




27/41

Meas"rement S)stems Anal)sis 4MSA5 4*ptional5

Meas"rement s)stem isaccepta&le with the Total Contri&"tion UE

P e r c e n t

art/to/artReprodRepeatAage R2R

=;

;

S a

;C;; L#LE;

Part

9;HIF

erator

>G

Components of "ariation

R C#art $y !perator

%$ar C#art $y !perator

Response $y Part

Response $y !perator

!perator & Part Interaction

'ae RR (A!"A) for ResponseGa!e R&R

'Contributionource VarComp (of VarComp)

Total Gage R&R 000158!6 3"0

Reeata$ilit 0000556" 12!

Reo'u(i$ilit 00010330 240

)eato 00003418 0"!

)eato*+at 00006!12 161

+at,To,+at 0041424" !630

Total -aiation 00430143 10000

Stu' -a %Stu' -a

Sou(e St'De. /SD /6 * SD /%S-

Total Gage R&R 03!8"0 023!22 1!22

Reeata$ilit 00235!4 014156 1138

Reo'u(i$ilit 0032140 01!284 1550

)eato 0018488 0110!3 8!1

)eato*+at 00262!0 015""4 1268

+at,To,+at 0203531 122118 !813

Total -aiation 020"3!! 12443! 10000

u$e o Distin(t Categoies "




28/41

%in E %in <

P"ll S)stem4*ptional5

%in E%in < %in E %in < %in E %in <

%in E %in E %in < %in E

%in <

%in E %in <%in E %in <

%in E %in E: Alwa)s p"ll stoc. #rom &in with 'R++9 card i# it

is there:

: The cards are attached to magnetic strip la&els4#or ease o# movement #or resi-ing5:

%in E%in E

%in <




29/41

Set"p Red"ction4*ptional5




30/41

PDCA4*ptional5

Plan= B

B

Do=

B

B Chec.=

B

B

Act=

B

B

B

B

B

B

Plan

'o

:eck

Act



>

6


31/41

6s4*ptional5

Sort B B

Set *rder B B

Shine B B

Standardi-e B

BS"stain B B



>E

, i


32/41

,ai-en4*ptional5

T)pical ,ai-en 0ee.l) Sched"le



><

% h . A l i


33/41

%enchmar. Anal)sis4*ptional5

%ased on the in#ormation a&ove1 what is the per#ormance o&jectiveB Red"ce de#ects &) Red"ce long!term DPM* #rom to : Improve short!term ; #rom to :

I# )o" do not &enchmar.1 per#ormance standards are &ased on= (or a process with ≤ > sigma level1 decrease de#ects &) Ex: (or a process with > sigma level1 decrease de#ects &) >

,e) %")ing (actor Anal)sis


34/41

,e) %")ing (actor Anal)sis4*ptional5



>?

Pilot Plan


35/41

Pilot Plan4*ptional5

*and+C#e,-*ot+C#e,Interace.est

• Sample #+eck/in Data entered in Hand-Chek device

• Sample Data Sets Transmitted to Hot-Chek S,stem J $ll Hotel 6loors) $ll Hotel Rooms

• #on*rmation Data Received from Hot-Chek toHand-Chek Device J $ll Hotel 6loors 2Rooms

• Data Set Entr, $ccurac,K >C< D.4

• Data Time K Sec• Data Transmission7

$ccurac, K >C< D.4

SB) plusHot-Chek tec+ rep

Start >79#omplete>7>

C#ec,+in"erifcation.est

• Sample Auest Data Entered in Hot/#+ek S,stem0variet, of room reuirements1

• %Auests( 0Hotel Emplo,ees1 'alked T+roug+#+eck/in rocess 0;@ re/Registered) 9;@Non/re/Registered1

• "olume Stress Test J Simulated $rrival G;Auests in a %Tour Bus(

• rocess .easurements recorded via 4bserver0see Design Scorecard1M %Auest( 4bservationsRecordedC

• Data Set Entr, $ccurac,K >C< D.4

• Data Set Entr, Time K Seconds

• Data Set Transmission7Reception $ccurac, K>C< D.4

• Design Scorecard ##Rs

SB) #+eck/in

StaO

Start >7#omplete

>7F

C#ec,+in"alidation.est

• G= Auests invited to ePperience +otel c+eck/in• Auests %pre/registered( wit+ t+eir room

reuirements in Hot-Chek s,stemC• Auests 'alked T+roug+ #+eck/in rocess 0;@

re/Registered) 9;@ Non/re/Registered1• rocess .easurements recorded via 4bserver

0see Design Scorecard1• Auests Debriefed 6ollowing EPperienceC

• Data Set Entr, $ccurac,

K >C< D.4• Data Set Entr, Time K

Seconds• Data Set Transmission7

Reception $ccurac, K>C< D.4

• Design Scorecard ##Rs

SB)

#+eck/inStaO

Start >79;

#omplete>79;

Sc:eduleTest TeamSuccess riteria'escriptionPilot Test



>6

Veri#) Pilot Res"lts


36/41

Veri#) Pilot Res"lts4*ptional5

Pilot *&servations= E5 Data Reception 0ea. H E


37/41

S"mmari-ing PilotConcl"sions 4*ptional5

*nce all the pilot data has &een collected and the res"lts veri#ied1 the team candetermine the next steps toward sol"tion implementation: *nl) a#ter an o&jective andcomprehensive assessment o# the pilot can responsi&le next stepF decisions &emade:

Some 8"estions a team sho"ld as. "pon the completion o# a pilot to help g"ide themtoward identi#ication o# the proper next steps are=

Did pilot have anticipated res"ltsB 0as the plan #or cond"cting the pilot e##ectiveB

0hat improvements can we ma.e to the sol"tionB

Can the sol"tion &e implemented as!isFB Sho"ld it &eB

Can the sol"tion remain in place at the pilot locationB

0hat lessons learned and &est practices can we appl) d"ring sol"tion implementationB

Did the sol"tion achieve the re8"ired design goalsB



>

,ai-en


38/41

,ai-en Action 0or.o"t 4*ptional5

Planning Execution Before

Graphical Analysis AfterRoot Causes / Quick Wins

Root ca"se=

/"ic. 0in E

Root ca"se=

/"ic. 0in <

Root ca"se=

/"ic. 0in >

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B B

B

B

B

B B

B

B

B

B

B

B



>G

Technical Political C"lt"ral


39/41

Technical!Political!C"lt"ralTPC Anal)sis 4*ptional5



>

M"lti 'enerational Project


40/41

M"lti!'enerational ProjectPlan 4*ptional5



?

Cost7%ene#it Anal)sis


41/41

Cost7%ene#it Anal)sis4*ptional5

Identi#) the vario"s sol"tion options Descri&e the T)pe E sol"tion W gained #rom the expected process

improvement Calc"late the total cost o# ownership to #"ll) implement the sol"tion


Documents

LSS Improve Tollgate Templates