Webb Control Tollgate 15 DEC 14 Final Version

Embed Size (px)

Text of Webb Control Tollgate 15 DEC 14 Final Version

  1. 1. Webb, Justin, Green Belt Cook, Jason, Project Sponsor Wilkins, Stephen, MBB, Mentor Ruder, Christopher, RM Project Initiation Date: 06 AUG 14 Control Tollgate Date: 15DEC14 Lean Six Sigma NTC Eagle Team MILES Tracking LD 24897
  2. 2. Control v 3.0 Agenda Project Charter (Updated) Measure Review Analyze Review Improve Review Revised Process Documentation Plan for Transition to Process Owner Process Control Tool Project Summary Financial & Operational Benefits Project Contributors Completed Storyboard Control Tollgate checklist Tollgate Attestations 2
  3. 3. Improve v 3.03 Project Summary Problem statement The NTC Eagle Team MILES tracking and reporting process is currently at 83.56%. The expected standard is 90%. The current process lacks quality and is inefficient as the amount of time that MILES systems remain inoperative and not tracking averages 105 hours and can exceed 390 hours in certain cases. Goal statement The goal of this project is to increase MILES tracking from 83.56% to 98%. Scope-in The first step of the process is the MILES report received from the Fort Irwin IS and the last step is the link up of the non-tracking vehicle with the MILES Contact Team representative at the inoperative and not tracking MILES vehicle to fix the issue. The following are included: Eagle Team TAFF functions and the process of tracking, notification and reporting of MILES tracking within the Eagle Team and to the MILES contact team. Scope-out The following are excluded: NTC MILES maintenance, the actual hands on physical procedures for fixing the MILES systems tracking and anything outside of the Eagle Teams influence and control. Problem/Goal Statement Tollgate Review Schedule Business Impact Core Team Operational benefit: Improve the efficiency and to minimize the amount of time that a MILES equipped vehicle is not tracking from an average of 105 hours to 12 hours. Reduce the non tracking vehicles from an average of 14.8 per day to no more than 2 per day. Improve yield from 83.56% to 98% and sigma quality level from 0 to 3.57 PS Name LTC Jason Cook GBc Name CPT Justin Webb RM CPT Christopher Ruder Mentor Name Stephen Wilkins Core Team Role % Contrib. LSS Training DAC John Pablo TM 25 None CTR Logan Passig TM 25 None CTR John Argonez TM 10% None Tollgate Scheduled Revised Complete Define: 06 AUG 14 15 SEP 14 16 SEP 14 Measure: 23 AUG 14 09 OCT 14 09 OCT 14 Analyze: 11 SEP 14 29 OCT 14 30 OCT 14 Improve: 11 OCT 14 01 DEC 14 01 DEC 14 Control: 1 NOV 14 15DEC14 15 DEC 14
  4. 4. Improve v 3.04 Measure Phase Summary Process Map Baseline Data Collected Process is Not Capable Did the 5Ss Eliminated 2 process steps Updating Team SOP Added a new procedure Completed Quick Wins
  5. 5. Improve v 3.05 Analyze Review Critical X/Root Cause AnalysisCVA/NVA/NVA-R Analysis Prioritized Root Causes / Effects
  6. 6. Improve v 3.06 Improve Review To-Be Process Map Implementation RACI Chart Prioritized List of Solutions Pilot Results
  7. 7. Control v 3.0 Revised Process Documentation SOPs Requiring Revision Responsible Status Eagle Team MILES Troubleshooting SOP John Pablo Version 01 Completed Required Training Responsible Frequency Status All Eagle Team OC/Ts Trained on Troubleshooting and Process Justin Webb Monthly In Progress New TAFF Personnel trained on notification process John Pablo Monthly In Progress New or Current SOPs Requiring Revision Required New & Recurring Training 7
  8. 8. Control v 3.0 Plan for Transfer to Process Owner R = Responsible The person who performs the action/task. A = Accountable The person who is held accountable that the action/task is completed. C = Consulted The person(s) who is consulted before performing the action/task. I = Informed The person(s) who is informed after performing the action/task. RACI CHART 8 Step Due Date Action/Task Responsible Accountable Consulted Informed Comments 1 05DEC14 Create SOP Plan John Pablo Justin Webb Jason Cook John Argonez 2 10DEC14 Validate SOP Plan Justin Webb Jason Cook John Argonez 3 14JAN15 Train Team Justin Webb Jason Cook John Argonez During Pre- Rotational Brief 4 16JAN15 Execute Plan John Pablo Justin Webb Jason Cook John Argonez Implemented for all rotations starting January 2015 5 On Going Ensure TAFF notifies OC/Ts of non-tracking vehicles John Pablo Justin Webb Jason Cook John Argonez To ensure process is executed 6 On going Ensure TAFF notifies John Argonez of non- tracking vehicles John Pablo Justin Webb Jason Cook John Argonez To ensure process is executed
  9. 9. Control v 3.0 Process Control Tool
  10. 10. Control v 3.0 Project Summary The Solution Achieved the Project Goals Project Goals Operational: Improve yield from 83.56% to 98% (Actually Achieved: 98%). Operational: Improve efficiency by minimizing time that a vehicle does not track MILES from 105 hours to 12 hours (Actually Achieved: 18 hours). Operational: Reduce non-tracking vehicles from 14.8 to no more than 2 per day (Actually Achieved 1.45 per day). Total Financial Benefit (Savings) Projected IAW LSS Guidebook, Section 8: No Financial Benefits The Validated Solution has been executed The solution was approved 05 NOV 14 and began full implementation on 07 NOV 14. It is presently being executed by the Process owner with no major issues or degradation of service to our customers. New/Improved Process Capability Cpk improved from -0.85 to 2.26 CPM improved from 0.17 to 2.37 SQL improved from -0.32 to 8.60 The process is now in Control 10
  11. 11. Control v 3.0 Final Financial & Operational Benefits There were no financial benefits Operational benefits Improved SQL by 2,687% Improved yield by 14.44% Improved average time vehicles are not tracking by 587% Assumptions No controlling assumptions identified 11 Working Estimate Financial Benefits ($K) FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 Total Net cost avoidance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Net savings 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Net increase in revenue generation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sum of all financial benefits 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ASA(FM&C) Army LSS Financial Guidebook Version 7.0
  12. 12. Control v 3.012 Final Operational Benefits: Revised Process Capability 1.0050.9900.9750.9600.9450.9300.9150.900 LSL Target UB LSL 0.9 Target 0.98 UB 1 Sample Mean 0.979887 Sample N 11 StDev(Within) 0.011768 StDev(Overall) 0.0112573 Process Data Z.Bench 6.79 Z.LSL 6.79 Z.UB * Cpk 2.26 Z.Bench 7.10 Z.LSL 7.10 Z.UB * Ppk 2.37 Cpm 2.37 Overall Capability Potential (Within) Capability PPM < LSL 0.00 PPM > UB 0.00 PPM Total 0.00 Observed Performance PPM < LSL 0.00 PPM > UB * PPM Total 0.00 Exp. Within Performance PPM < LSL 0.00 PPM > UB * PPM Total 0.00 Exp. Overall Performance Within Overall Process Capability of Pilot Percentage
  13. 13. Improve v 3.0 Final Operational Benefits 13 Performance Measure Before Pilot Target Pilot Mean Comments Average hours that a vehicles MILES not tracking 105 hours 40 minutes 12 Hours 18 Hours Improved by 87 hours and 40 minutes Average number of vehicles not tracking per day 14.85 2 Per Day 1.45 Per Day Improved by 13.40 MILES Daily Average Tracking Rate 83.56% 98% 98% Improved by 14.44%
  14. 14. Control v 3.014 Project Contributors Team Member Project Contribution Justin Webb, CPT Champion Jason Cook, LTC PS/PO John Pablo, DAC Supervisor Team member Logan Passig, CTR SME John Argonez, MILES Supervisor SME Stephen Wilkins, Quality MBB These team members contributed to the success of this project!
  15. 15. Analyze v 3.0 MEASURE ANALYZE IMPROVE CONTROL 15 DEFINE Completed Storyboard 1.0050.9900.9750.9600.9450.9300.9150.900 LSL Target UB LSL 0.9 Target 0.98 UB 1 Sample Mean 0.979887 Sample N 11 StDev(Within) 0.011768 StDev(Overall) 0.0112573 Process Data Z.Bench 6.79 Z.LSL 6.79 Z.UB * Cpk 2.26 Z.Bench 7.10 Z.LSL 7.10 Z.UB * Ppk 2.37 Cpm 2.37 Overall Capability Potential (Within) Capability PPM < LSL 0.00 PPM > UB 0.00 PPM Total 0.00 Observed Performance PPM < LSL 0.00 PPM > UB * PPM Total 0.00 Exp. Within Performance PPM < LSL 0.00 PPM > UB * PPM Total 0.00 Exp. Overall Performance Within Overall Process Capability of Pilot Percentage
  16. 16. Control v 3.016 Control Tollgate Checklist Has the team prepared all the essential documentation for the improved process, including revised/new Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), a new/updated training plan, and a process control system/report? Has the necessary training for process owners/operators been performed? Have the right metrics (Xs/Ys) 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 Owners 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 Financial Benefit Summary been completed? Has the Resource Manager reviewed/validated it IAW LSS Guidebook? 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 to similar agencies (internal and external)? Has the hard work and successful efforts of our team been celebrated? Required Deliverables: Updated Project Charter Measure, Analyze, and Improve Phase Reviews Revised Process Documentation (Updated/New SOPs & Train