Lean Six Sigma Project on Handling time improvement by Advance Innovation Group

04/11/231 04/11/231

To Improve the AHT for XYZ Process

DMAICDMAIC

04/11/232

Project Progress Overview

D1. Map Project

D2. Approve Project

M1. CTQ Characteristics& Standards

M2. Measurement System Analysis

M3. Data Collection

A1. Baseline Process

A2. Performance Objective

A3. Identify Drivers of Variation

I1. Screen for Vital Xs

I2. Screen for vital Xs

I3. Define Improved Process

C1. MSA on Xs

C2. Improved Process Capability

C3. Establish Control Plan

Key Deliverables: • List of Customer(s) and

Project CTQs• Team Charter• High Level Process Map

(COPIS)• CAP Plan (Optional)• Preliminary CBA, if

applicable

• QFD / CTQ Tree• Operational definition,

Specification limits, target, defect definition for Project Y(s)

• Data Collection Plan• Measurement System

Analysis

• Baseline of Current

Process Performance• Normality Test • Statistical Goal

Statement for Project• List of Statistically

Significant Xs

• List of Vital Few Xs• Transfer Function(s)• Optimal Settings for

Xs• Confirmation

Runs/Results• Tolerances on Vital

Few Xs

• MSA Results on Xs• Post Improvement

Capability• Statistical Confirmation

of Improvements • Process Control Plan• Process Owner Signoff• Final CBA, if applicable

Tollgates:Planned

Completed

13/09/2010 23/09/2010 30/09/2010 22/11/2010 26/11/2010

13/09/2010 23/09/2010 30/09/2010 22/11/2010 26/11/2010

Steps:

Tools: Survey Focus Groups Interviews ARMI, Stakeholder

Analysis In/Out of Frame Threat vs. Opportunity

Matrix Other ______________

QFD FMEA (1st half) Data Collection Plan Continuous Gage R&R Attribute Gage R&R Sample Size Calculator Other ______________

Basic Statistics Histogram Dot Plots Box and Whisker Plots Run Charts Normality Testing Continuous/Discrete Zst, Zlt Benchmarking Detailed Process Mapping Moments of Truth Nature of Work Flow of Work Fishbone Hypothesis Testing Regression Analysis Other ______________

DOE Pugh Matrix New Process Mapping FMEA on new process Process Modeling /

Simulation Other ______________

Continuous Gauge R&R Discrete Gauge R&R Control Charts Hypothesis Testing CAP Plan Control Plan Other ______________

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

OverviewOverview

04/11/233

Customer Sample CommentsKey output characteristics important to

customer (CTQs)

Mr. Pranay Kumar (MBB)Reduce the AHT to under 500 seconds per call in the process by the end of Nov’10

Achieve the AHT of not more than 8 minutes & 20 seconds per call.

Stakeholders

The process has been budgeted to cater to not less than 7 calls per hour per associate for XYZ process. Historically the team has not been able to achieve that. Through this project we can explore opportunities in the process which if amended /corrected may result in achieving the desired results. Improvement in AHT for XYZ process by identifying influencing factors & improving / inhibiting these factors from impacting the AHT of the process. Also identifying & working on the bottom performers contributing to the high AHT of the process team wise. Project team need to ensure that there should not be any negative impact on any other metrics including CQ.

Achieve the AHT of not more than 500 seconds per call.

Manager Operations How doe my customers see me Improve the AHT & meet the target

Map Project DefineDefine

04/11/234

In Scope:

All XYZ Customer care front office Noida Center

Out of Scope:

All other Departments and centers

Business Case:

AHT for XYZ Business is high resulting in customer dissatisfaction, sales being missed, missing the revenue optimization.Calls in XYZ process are received from the customers having general queries or complaints about the new product or existing product, which is handled by voice associates for resolution after probing, up selling & investigation.The current average handle time varies from a 2 seconds to a 992 seconds a call inhibiting the process to achieve the target of handling more than 7 calls per hour per associate per day

Problem Statement:On Analyzing the data for average handle time for calls per associate for the last 3 months, shows that more than 35% of the calls are handle at more than 500 seconds of average handle time which needs to be addressed on priority to improve the efficiency of the process, reduce call abandon rate, and in turn enhance customer satisfaction along with increasing the revenue for the process with lesser FTEs deployed. Therefore, its very critical that this issue is addressed on priority to run our business process effectively with increased profitability.

Goal Statement:

This project targets to decrease the current AHT to 500 seconds per call by improving the performance levels of all with high focus on the bottom performers to further improve the capacity of handling more call volumes with the same number of FTEs deployed by 22 Nov’10.

DefineDefineProject Charter

Target Date Actual Date

Start Date 10 Sep’0 10 Sep’10

Define 16 Sep’10 16 Sep’10

Measure 23 Sep’10 23 Sep’10

Analyze 30 Sep’10 30 Sep’10

Improve 22 Nov’10 22 Nov’10

Control 26 Nov’10 26 Nov’10

High Level Project Plan

Project Lead: Dushyant Sawhney Project Team

Sponsor – Pranay Kumar Singh

Champion – Shishir Singh

MBB – Binny Arora

Mentor – Jai Kapur

GB – Dushyant Sawhney

04/11/235

Stakeholder Analysis & Communication Plan

Key Stakeholder Define Measure Analyze Implement ControlPranay Kumar I I I I I

Pratap Kumar I/R I/R I/R I/R I/R

Binny Arora I/A I/A I/A I/A I/A

Jai Kapur A/R A/R A/R A/R A/R

Kirti Arora M M M M M

Adrian Miller M M M M M

AA – Approval of teams decision outside their charter / authorities, i.e. SponsorRR – Resource of the team, the one whose expertise may be needed on a irregular / ad hoc basisMM – Member of the team, with the authority & periphery of the charterI I – Interested party, one who needs to kept informed on the findings & directions, if in the later phase

found to be as a worthy outcome

CommunicationCommunication planplan

Message Audience Medium Responsibility When

Project update Project Team, Champions E Mail

Shishir Singh

Weekly Friday

Project Tollgate Project Team, Champions, Stakeholders, Sponsors Conference calls At the end of each Project phase

Project Review Champions, MBB, Mentor Conference calls Ad hoc

DefineDefine

04/11/236

Customer Sample Comments Key Output important to Customer

Pratap Kumar (Champion)

The intent should be to effectively manage the current AHT level to a maximum of 500 seconds

AHT level on call volumes should be met

VoC DefineDefine

04/11/237

Improvement of Average handle

time

CTQs

Increase the number of calls answered (Project Y)

500 seconds(Upper specification limit)

Any day the time taken to handle the total calls answered should be not be ≥ 8 minutes 20 seconds otherwise would be considered as a defective day

Decrease in daily AHT to ≤ 500 seconds for improved C Sat

(Project Y)

Total login time available in the day ≥ 7 calls per hour Total time taken to handle the number of calls answered in the day

Understanding VoC DefineDefine

04/11/238

SIPOC

Suppliers

Classified Advertisements Stickers on product Website

Knowledge management system Cheat sheet

Advertisements Website Work requirement / specifications

Knowledge management system Livewire – Internal Updates link Contact history screen of the account on the Delware

Knowledge management system Livewire – Internal Updates link


Suppliers

Classified Advertisements Stickers on product Website


Advertisements Website Work requirement / specifications

Knowledge management system Livewire – Internal Updates link Contact history screen of the account on the Delware

Knowledge management system Livewire – Internal Updates link


Inputs

Toll free call from the router

Opening script

inquiry about a new launch or existing product Purchase of a Dell product issue / s in usage of the product Upgrade of the existing product

Questionnaire Product Updates Previous contact notes in the system

Information about the inquired product Upgrade the product Up sell associated hardware Free hardware / accessories on offer Free redeemable coupons

Closing script

Inputs

Toll free call from the router

Opening script

inquiry about a new launch or existing product Purchase of a Dell product issue / s in usage of the product Upgrade of the existing product

Questionnaire Product Updates Previous contact notes in the system

Information about the inquired product Upgrade the product Up sell associated hardware Free hardware / accessories on offer Free redeemable coupons

Closing script

Process Customer call received

Call opening with the greeting script / verbiage

Customer call is a general product related query or a complaint

Associates understands the query or complaint supported by probing conversation & investigation on the system

Associate provides a resolution as per the guidelines

Associate wraps the call with a gratitude script / verbiage & logs the contact notes on the account on ACW before taking the next call

Process Customer call received

Call opening with the greeting script / verbiage

Customer call is a general product related query or a complaint

Associates understands the query or complaint supported by probing conversation & investigation on the system

Associate provides a resolution as per the guidelines

Associate wraps the call with a gratitude script / verbiage & logs the contact notes on the account on ACW before taking the next call

Outputs

o Call open

o Customer greeted

o Initiate reasons for call

o Initiate help towards the reason for call

o Resolve query

o Call ends with capture of conversation on the account

Outputs

o Call open

o Customer greeted

o Initiate reasons for call

o Initiate help towards the reason for call

o Resolve query

o Call ends with capture of conversation on the account

Customers

Airtel user

Airtel user

Airtel user

Airtel user

Airtel user

Airtel user

Customers

Airtel user

Airtel user

Airtel user

Airtel user

Airtel user

Airtel user

DefineDefine

04/11/239

SIPOC DefineDefine

SupplierSupplier InputInput ProcessProcess OutputOutput CustomerCustomer

• Avaya• CRM• KMS

• Inbound Call • Query resolved • End User

Start

Open call

Investigate the query

Log contacts on system

End

Close call

Route the call to concerned

department

N

Y

Project Y Can the query be resolved

04/11/2310

Data Collection PlanWhat question do you want to answer?What is the current AHT of the process

KPI Operational Definition Defect Def Performance Std

Specification Limit

OpportunityLSL USL

Average Handle TimeTotal time taken from opening to closing of an incoming call by an associate on a daily basis

If the total time taken by an associate is more than 500 seconds per call per day

500 seconds NA 500

To reduce the current Associate / Process level AHT to the desired level of ≤ 500 seconds

How would you gauge the current AHT?Process wise & Team wise current AHT of Airtel customer care

KPI Data Type Data Items Needed Unit

Plan to collect Data

Plan to sampleWhat Database or Container will be used to record this

data?

Is this an existing

database or new?

If new, When will the

database be ready for use?

When is the planned start date for data collection?

Total number of calls handled

Discrete

Total number of calls handled within 500 seconds on a daily basis

Seconds Excel sheet Existing NA 17-Sep-10

Monitor the Daily call AHT summary

Daily AHT Summary sheet

MeasureMeasure

04/11/2311

Effectiveness & Efficiency

For the purpose of data validation, 545 data points as provided by MIS Team have been re-verified for the time taken.

Procedure Used:• 545 random samples picked up from 5450 data points. The samples have been randomly generated by Avaya• On verification, we found that 3 data points were differently captured in the 543 samples which were re-verified.

Effectiveness % = Number of samples where both measurement were similar * 100 Total Number of samples under consideration

= 542 * 100 = 99.4495 545

Effectiveness at 99.44% with 545 samples is good enough, and we conclude that the measurement System is adequate.

Effectiveness at 99.44% with 545 samples is good enough, and we conclude that the measurement System is adequate.

MeasureMeasure

04/11/2312

Process Capability

Mean 405.653211

Std Dev 273.4167104

Target 500 Sec

ZLt 0.345065921

Zst 1.845065921

Z Score of the process is really poor, there is immediate need to improve the process capability

Z Score of the process is really poor, there is immediate need to improve the process capability

MeasureMeasure

04/11/2313

Data Analysis - Stability

P values for Cluster and Oscillation is less than 0.05 pointing towards existence of cluster and oscillation in the system. Further analysis needs to be done to understand the impact

of the same

P values for Cluster and Oscillation is less than 0.05 pointing towards existence of cluster and oscillation in the system. Further analysis needs to be done to understand the impact

of the same

MeasureMeasure

04/11/2314

Data Analysis – Stability Contd.

Test Results for I Chart of MIS Data by Month

TEST 2. 9 points in a row on same side of centre line.

TEST 4. 14 points in a row alternating up and down.

TEST 5. 2 out of 3 points more than 2 standard deviations from centre line (on one side of CL).

Test Results for I Chart of MIS Data by Month

TEST 2. 9 points in a row on same side of centre line.

TEST 4. 14 points in a row alternating up and down.

TEST 5. 2 out of 3 points more than 2 standard deviations from centre line (on one side of CL).

MeasureMeasure

04/11/2315

Data Analysis - Normality

P values is less than 0.05, pointing at the fact that the data is non-normal. Further, on the first look the data is pointing towards existence of several populations in the same

population.

P values is less than 0.05, pointing at the fact that the data is non-normal. Further, on the first look the data is pointing towards existence of several populations in the same

population.

MeasureMeasure

04/11/2316

There is too much variation in the system, AHT varies from 2 Sec to 992 Sec.25% data point between 2 & 164 Sec (Min to Q1), while Median is @ 336 sec. The concern area has been the data between Q3 & Max value. 25% data points are between ..........

There is too much variation in the system, AHT varies from 2 Sec to 992 Sec.25% data point between 2 & 164 Sec (Min to Q1), while Median is @ 336 sec. The concern area has been the data between Q3 & Max value. 25% data points are between ..........

Data Analysis – Spread & Central Tendency

All data points to the right of the red line are

defects

MeasureMeasure

04/11/2317

There is too much variation in the system, AHT varies from 2 Sec to 992 Sec.25% data point between 2 & 164 Sec (Min to Q1), while Median is @ 336 sec. The concern area has been the data between Q3 & Max value. 25% data points are between 650 Sec to 992 Sec.

There is too much variation in the system, AHT varies from 2 Sec to 992 Sec.25% data point between 2 & 164 Sec (Min to Q1), while Median is @ 336 sec. The concern area has been the data between Q3 & Max value. 25% data points are between 650 Sec to 992 Sec.

Data Analysis – Spread & Central Tendency MeasureMeasure

04/11/2318

There is too much variation for all the teams trained by different trainers except for associates trained by DanielThere is too much variation for all the teams trained by different trainers except for associates trained by Daniel


04/11/2319

There is too much variation in the AHT performance when compared between the Morning, Evening & Night shifts. The AHT performance in the night shift is better managed than the AHT in the Morning & Evening shift

There is too much variation in the AHT performance when compared between the Morning, Evening & Night shifts. The AHT performance in the night shift is better managed than the AHT in the Morning & Evening shift


04/11/2320

Identifying Potential Causes Xs

S No. Potential Cause Operational Definition Data Type Test of be performed

1 Team Leader The process owner, who is responsible for managing the performance of a set of associates in a given shift Discrete General Linear Model

2 Associate The individual whose performance in a given shift contributes to the performance of that set of people & the overall process Discrete General Linear Model

3 Process Complexity The level of reasoning & decision making involved in the process Discrete Moods Median

4 TrainA person responsible for taking the new hires through the training module of the process & also responsible for downloading new updates to the existing process members

Discrete Moods Median

5 Process Knowledge The level of knowledge held by an individual associate about the process, gauged through the scores in the process test conducted Discrete Moods Median

6 Typing Speed The individual skill possessed by each associate of typing gauged by the number of words typed by the individual per second Continuous Correlation Regression

7 Shift Timing A set of hours required to be logged in by an associate in a day Discrete General Linear Model

8 Gender The sex of the individual associate logged in to take calls Discrete Moods Median

9 Centre wise The place where the operations is set up & function from Discrete Mann Whitney

10 Age The number of years an individual associate is old in his / her span of life Discrete Correlation Regression

11 Marital Status Married or un married Discrete Moods Median

12 Mode of Communication Language or Dialect. The medium used by an associate to converse Discrete Moods Median

13 Tenure The time in months / years which an individual associate has spent in the particular process Continuous Correlation Regression

AnalyzeAnalyze

04/11/2321

General Linear Model: AHT versus Team Leader

Factor Type Levels ValuesTeam Leader fixed 5 Binny, Jai, Ravi, Shishir, Sunny

Analysis of Variance for AHT, using Adjusted SS for Tests

Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F PTeam Leader 4 460303 460303 115076 1.55 0.188Error 540 40207340 40207340 74458Total 544 40667643

S = 272.870 R-Sq = 1.13% R-Sq(adj) = 0.40%

Mood median test for AHTChi-Square = 3.30 DF = 4 P = 0.508

Individual 95.0% CIsTeam Leader N<= N> Median Q3-Q1 ---------+---------+---------+-------Binny 49 61 391 516 (--------*----------)Jai 58 50 315 401 (----*-------)Ravi 61 51 325 400 (------*---)Shishir 48 55 369 544 (-----------*-------------)Sunny 57 55 292 507 (-------*-------------) ---------+---------+---------+------- 300 400 500

Team Leader Impact on AHT AnalyzeAnalyze

04/11/2322

Associate Impact on AHT

General Linear Model: AHT versus Associate Name

Factor Type Levels ValuesAssociate Name fixed 69 Aasim, Abhinav, Aftab, Ajit, Akhlaq, Akhtar, Akshay, Ali, Alka, Aman, Amit, Anas, Ankit, Ankita, Anukriti, Anupama, Arpita, Arti, Arun, Babita, Balbeer, Bapan, Bharti, Bhushan, Bhuvan, Bipin, Daniel, Divya, Fahim, Faisal, Garima,Himesh, Husain, Kanchan, Kavita, Kirti, Komal, Kritika, Nidhi, Nilesh, Nitin, Partho, Preeti, Priya, Qasim, Ragini, Rahul, Ram, Raman, Ramesh, Rita, Rohini, Rohit, Roopali, Roshan, Sheeba,Shefali, Shoaib, Sita, Sobha, Sunny, Suzainne, Tanay, Tanya, Tariq, Vaibhav, Vinit, Vinita, Vishi


Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F PAssociate Name 68 4498154 4498154 66149 0.87 0.757Error 476 36169489 36169489 75986Total 544 40667643

S = 275.656 R-Sq = 11.06% R-Sq(adj) = 0.00%

AnalyzeAnalyze

04/11/2323

Process Complexity Impact on AHT

Mood Median Test: AHT versus Process Complexity


Process Individual 95.0% CIsComplexity N<= N> Median Q3-Q1 --+---------+---------+---------+----L1 117 124 355 406 (---------------*------)L2 156 148 319 524 (------------*---------------------) --+---------+---------+---------+---- 280 315 350 385

Overall median = 336

A 95.0% CI for median(L1) - median(L2): (-59,78)

AnalyzeAnalyze

04/11/2324

Trainer Impact on AHT

Mood Median Test: AHT versus Trainer


Individual 95.0% CIsTrainer N<= N> Median Q3-Q1 +---------+---------+---------+------Amit 56 32 247 367 (--*-----)Atul 56 20 194 247 (--*-)Daniel 69 49 270 459 (---*----)Rashid 21 43 535 517 (-------*------)Ruby 42 91 494 454 (------*------)Sonia 29 37 435 359 (--------*----) +---------+---------+---------+------ 150 300 450 600


AnalyzeAnalyze

04/11/2325

Process Knowledge Impact on AHT

Mood Median Test: AHT versus Process Knowledge


Process Individual 95.0% CIsKnowledge N<= N> Median Q3-Q1 -----+---------+---------+---------+-0.1222 7 8 337 601 (---------*----------------)0.1300 9 6 192 611 (----*------------------------)0.3100 6 9 499 515 (------------*---------)0.3300 6 10 598 460 (---------------*---)0.4000 9 7 297 276 (------*-----)0.4566 10 6 278 429 (-----*----------)0.4800 10 6 261 459 (----*----------)0.5500 10 6 226 289 (---*-------)0.5579 8 7 326 336 (--*-------------)0.5700 9 7 309 497 (-----*------------------)0.6332 7 8 373 425 (----------*---------)0.6455 8 7 310 615 (-------*------------------)0.6500 9 7 277 521 (----*--------------------)0.6569 6 9 435 536 (------------*----------)0.6600 15 17 370 465 (---------*-------)0.7500 9 7 235 619 (----*-----------------------)0.7543 8 8 330 528 (------*----------------)0.7700 6 10 491 474 (-----------*---------)0.8200 6 10 399 257 (-----*----)0.8413 7 8 426 626 (--------------*--------------)0.8500 12 11 335 546 (-------*------------)0.8700 7 9 382 380 (-------*--------)0.8900 11 5 233 299 (----*------)0.9000 11 12 366 467 (-------*--------)0.9100 7 9 386 530 (-------*---------------)0.9311 7 8 430 392 (---------*------)0.9354 5 10 496 479 (------------*--------)0.9534 9 7 272 444 (------*--------------)0.9644 8 7 297 470 (--------*-----------)0.9700 5 10 432 416 (---------*--------)0.9900 18 13 298 456 (------*------)1.0000 8 8 297 459 (-------*--------------) -----+---------+---------+---------+- 200 400 600 800


AnalyzeAnalyze

04/11/2326

Shift Timing Impact on AHT

General Linear Model: AHT versus Shift

Factor Type Levels ValuesShift fixed 3 Evening, Morning, Night


Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F PShift 2 393119 393119 196559 2.65 0.072Error 542 40274525 40274525 74307Total 544 40667643

S = 272.594 R-Sq = 0.97% R-Sq(adj) = 0.60%

Unusual Observations for AHT

Obs AHT Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid 11 988.000 388.490 22.038 599.510 2.21 R 59 987.000 389.121 17.633 597.879 2.20 R127 941.000 388.490 22.038 552.510 2.03 R139 953.000 388.490 22.038 564.510 2.08 R147 974.000 389.121 17.633 584.879 2.15 R149 956.000 389.121 17.633 566.879 2.08 R156 935.000 389.121 17.633 545.879 2.01 R177 992.000 389.121 17.633 602.879 2.22 R202 973.000 389.121 17.633 583.879 2.15 R211 978.000 389.121 17.633 588.879 2.16 R276 938.000 389.121 17.633 548.879 2.02 R298 972.000 389.121 17.633 582.879 2.14 R483 939.000 389.121 17.633 549.879 2.02 R499 953.000 388.490 22.038 564.510 2.08 R501 963.000 388.490 22.038 574.510 2.11 R517 965.000 389.121 17.633 575.879 2.12 R

R denotes an observation with a large standardized residual.

AnalyzeAnalyze

04/11/2327

Impact of typing speed on AHTRegression Analysis: AHT versus Typing Speed

The regression equation isAHT = 578 - 5.45 Typing SpeedPredictor Coef SE Coef T PConstant 578.27 51.21 11.29 0.000Typing Speed -5.449 1.575 -3.46 0.001S = 270.700 R-Sq = 2.2% R-Sq(adj) = 2.0%Analysis of VarianceSource DF SS MS F PRegression 1 877472 877472 11.97 0.001Residual Error 543 39790171 73278Total 544 40667643Unusual Observations TypingObs Speed AHT Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid 11 24.0 988.0 447.5 16.8 540.5 2.00R 40 56.0 44.0 273.1 40.0 -229.1 -0.86 X 47 56.0 296.0 273.1 40.0 22.9 0.09 X 59 25.0 987.0 442.1 15.7 544.9 2.02R110 56.0 657.0 273.1 40.0 383.9 1.43 X117 56.0 677.0 273.1 40.0 403.9 1.51 X162 31.0 988.0 409.4 11.6 578.6 2.14R177 45.0 992.0 333.1 24.0 658.9 2.44R180 56.0 111.0 273.1 40.0 -162.1 -0.61 X187 56.0 141.0 273.1 40.0 -132.1 -0.49 X250 56.0 191.0 273.1 40.0 -82.1 -0.31 X257 56.0 133.0 273.1 40.0 -140.1 -0.52 X298 30.0 972.0 414.8 11.9 557.2 2.06R320 56.0 782.0 273.1 40.0 508.9 1.90 X327 56.0 169.0 273.1 40.0 -104.1 -0.39 X390 56.0 237.0 273.1 40.0 -36.1 -0.14 X397 56.0 371.0 273.1 40.0 97.9 0.37 X460 56.0 124.0 273.1 40.0 -149.1 -0.56 X467 56.0 160.0 273.1 40.0 -113.1 -0.42 X476 27.0 974.0 431.2 13.7 542.8 2.01R517 37.0 965.0 376.7 14.3 588.3 2.18R530 56.0 195.0 273.1 40.0 -78.1 -0.29 X537 56.0 113.0 273.1 40.0 -160.1 -0.60 X

R denotes an observation with a large standardized residual.X denotes an observation whose X value gives it large leverage.

AnalyzeAnalyze

04/11/2328

Gender Impact on AHT

Mood Median Test: AHT versus Gender


Individual 95.0% CIsGender N<= N> Median Q3-Q1 -----+---------+---------+---------+-F 118 116 335 471 (------------*----------------)M 155 156 344 485 (-------------------*--------------) -----+---------+---------+---------+- 300 330 360 390


A 95.0% CI for median(F) - median(M): (-78,78)

AnalyzeAnalyze

04/11/2329

Center wise Impact on AHT

Mann-Whitney Test and CI: AHT_C5, AHT_C6

N MedianAHT_C5 303 363.00AHT_C6 242 299.00

Point estimate for ETA1-ETA2 is 8.0095.0 Percent CI for ETA1-ETA2 is (-30.01,49.02)W = 83501.0Test of ETA1 = ETA2 vs ETA1 not = ETA2 is significant at 0.6688The test is significant at 0.6688 (adjusted for ties)

AnalyzeAnalyze

04/11/2330

Age Impact on AHTRegression Analysis: AHT versus Age The regression equation isAHT = 377 + 1.03 AgePredictor Coef SE Coef T PConstant 377.02 75.94 4.96 0.000Age 1.025 2.686 0.38 0.703S = 273.632 R-Sq = 0.0% R-Sq(adj) = 0.0%Analysis of VarianceSource DF SS MS F PRegression 1 10905 10905 0.15 0.703Residual Error 543 40656738 74874Total 544 40667643Unusual ObservationsObs Age AHT Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid 11 27.0 988.0 404.7 12.0 583.3 2.13R 21 39.0 336.0 417.0 31.9 -81.0 -0.30 X 50 39.0 262.0 417.0 31.9 -155.0 -0.57 X 59 25.0 987.0 402.6 14.1 584.4 2.14R 91 39.0 678.0 417.0 31.9 261.0 0.96 X120 39.0 576.0 417.0 31.9 159.0 0.59 X139 27.0 953.0 404.7 12.0 548.3 2.01R147 36.0 974.0 413.9 24.6 560.1 2.06R161 39.0 905.0 417.0 31.9 488.0 1.80 X162 36.0 988.0 413.9 24.6 574.1 2.11R177 32.0 992.0 409.8 16.0 582.2 2.13R190 39.0 806.0 417.0 31.9 389.0 1.43 X202 22.0 973.0 399.6 19.8 573.4 2.10R211 25.0 978.0 402.6 14.1 575.4 2.11R231 39.0 832.0 417.0 31.9 415.0 1.53 X260 39.0 144.0 417.0 31.9 -273.0 -1.00 X298 27.0 972.0 404.7 12.0 567.3 2.08R301 39.0 555.0 417.0 31.9 138.0 0.51 X330 39.0 619.0 417.0 31.9 202.0 0.74 X352 27.0 962.0 404.7 12.0 557.3 2.04R371 39.0 296.0 417.0 31.9 -121.0 -0.45 X400 39.0 642.0 417.0 31.9 225.0 0.83 X441 39.0 229.0 417.0 31.9 -188.0 -0.69 X470 39.0 429.0 417.0 31.9 12.0 0.04 X476 27.0 974.0 404.7 12.0 569.3 2.08R501 27.0 963.0 404.7 12.0 558.3 2.04R511 39.0 181.0 417.0 31.9 -236.0 -0.87 X517 27.0 965.0 404.7 12.0 560.3 2.05R540 39.0 666.0 417.0 31.9 249.0 0.92 X


AnalyzeAnalyze

04/11/2331

Marital Status Impact on AHT

Mood Median Test: AHT versus Marital Status


Marital Individual 95.0% CIsStatus N<= N> Median Q3-Q1 --------+---------+---------+--------M 115 112 330 460 (----------*---------------------)S 158 160 341 480 (----------*----------) --------+---------+---------+-------- 320 360 400


A 95.0% CI for median(M) - median(S): (-75,80)

AnalyzeAnalyze

04/11/2332

Impact of Communication on AHT

Mood Median Test: AHT versus Mode of Communication


Mode of Individual 95.0% CIsCommunication N<= N> Median Q3-Q1 ---------+---------+---------+-------E 146 157 366 466 (-----------------*--------------)H 127 115 318 482 (-------*--------------) ---------+---------+---------+------- 320 360 400


A 95.0% CI for median(E) - median(H): (-41,94)

AnalyzeAnalyze

04/11/2333

Impact of Tenure on AHT

Regression Analysis: AHT versus Tenure

The regression equation isAHT = 405 + 0.06 TenurePredictor Coef SE Coef T PConstant 405.39 31.59 12.83 0.000Tenure 0.058 6.381 0.01 0.993S = 273.668 R-Sq = 0.0% R-Sq(adj) = 0.0%Analysis of VarianceSource DF SS MS F PRegression 1 6 6 0.00 0.993Residual Error 543 40667637 74894Total 544 40667643Unusual ObservationsObs Tenure AHT Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid 11 8.0 988.0 405.9 24.7 582.1 2.14R 12 9.0 204.0 405.9 30.4 -201.9 -0.74 X 13 10.0 355.0 406.0 36.4 -51.0 -0.19 X 59 4.0 987.0 405.6 12.3 581.4 2.13R 82 9.0 475.0 405.9 30.4 69.1 0.25 X 83 10.0 135.0 406.0 36.4 -271.0 -1.00 X139 5.0 953.0 405.7 12.0 547.3 2.00R147 1.0 974.0 405.4 25.8 568.6 2.09R149 5.0 956.0 405.7 12.0 550.3 2.01R152 9.0 847.0 405.9 30.4 441.1 1.62 X153 10.0 116.0 406.0 36.4 -290.0 -1.07 X162 2.0 988.0 405.5 20.3 582.5 2.13R177 5.0 992.0 405.7 12.0 586.3 2.14R202 3.0 973.0 405.6 15.5 567.4 2.08R211 2.0 978.0 405.5 20.3 572.5 2.10R222 9.0 929.0 405.9 30.4 523.1 1.92 X223 10.0 768.0 406.0 36.4 362.0 1.33 X292 9.0 766.0 405.9 30.4 360.1 1.32 X293 10.0 5.0 406.0 36.4 -401.0 -1.48 X298 3.0 972.0 405.6 15.5 566.4 2.07R352 3.0 962.0 405.6 15.5 556.4 2.04R362 9.0 268.0 405.9 30.4 -137.9 -0.51 X363 10.0 699.0 406.0 36.4 293.0 1.08 X432 9.0 386.0 405.9 30.4 -19.9 -0.07 X433 10.0 282.0 406.0 36.4 -124.0 -0.46 X476 7.0 974.0 405.8 19.3 568.2 2.08R499 5.0 953.0 405.7 12.0 547.3 2.00R501 8.0 963.0 405.9 24.7 557.1 2.04R502 9.0 667.0 405.9 30.4 261.1 0.96 X503 10.0 439.0 406.0 36.4 33.0 0.12 X517 2.0 965.0 405.5 20.3 559.5 2.05R


AnalyzeAnalyze

04/11/2334

S No. Potential Cause Data Type Test performed P value

1 Team Leader Discrete General Linear Model 0.188

2 Associate Discrete General Linear Model 0.757

3 Process Complexity Discrete Moods Median 0.521

4 Trainer Discrete Moods Median 0.000

5 Process Knowledge Discrete Moods Median 0.984

6 Typing Speed Continuous Correlation Regression 0.000

7 Shift Timing Discrete General Linear Model 0.072

8 Gender Discrete Moods Median 0.892

9 Centre wise Discrete Mann Whitney 0.6688

10 Age Discrete Correlation Regression 0.703

11 Marital Status Discrete Moods Median 0.822

12 Mode of Communication Discrete Moods Median 0.319

13 Tenure Continuous Correlation Regression 0.000

Evaluation for X’s impacting AHT AnalyzeAnalyze

04/11/2335

Results of validation of potential X’s impacting AHT

S No. Potential Cause Data Type Test performed P value

1 Trainer Discrete Moods Median 0.000

2 Typing Speed Continuous Correlation Regression 0.000

3 Tenure Continuous Correlation Regression 0.000

Take away

• There is a significant impact of the Trainer on the AHT

• There is a significant impact of the Typing speed on the AHT

•There is a significant impact of the Tenure on the AHT

ImproveImprove

04/11/2336

Trainer (New hire within or outside the process)

Tenure (Retention of tenured resources)

Trainer (Replaced within the training dept)

Typing speed

Impact

Low High

Control impact matrix of the vital X’s ImproveImprove

04/11/2337

Take away

• 54.31% of associate population is positively contributing towards the overall AHT by achieving a typing speed of more than 30 words per minute

• 45.69% of the associate population is under performing with respect to the typing speed target & is a focus area for improved AHT

Stratification of tenure contributing to Typing speed in percentage ImproveImprove

04/11/2338

Stratification of Tenure Vs Population contributing to Typing speed

Take away

• Of the 45.69% of population contributing negatively, 87.75% of the population is from Tenure ranging between 2-8 months

ImproveImprove

04/11/2339

45.69% of total population below the target typing speed of 30 words per minute

Stratification of Typing speed ImproveImprove

04/11/2340

Stratification of trainer batch contributing to Typing speed

Take away

• Ruby’s batch is the highest contributor of population to the process & also has the highest negative contribution to the typing speed of the process contributing further to the project “Y” •Daniel followed by Amit’s batch are the chronological sequential highest population contributors after Ruby & also are highest positive contributors to the typing speed of the process contributing further to the project “Y”

ImproveImprove

04/11/2341

Relationship of vital Xs to Project “Y” & Identifying focus area

Take away

• Of the 45.69% of population contributing negatively to Typing speed is also impacting the AHT, 87.75% of the population is from Tenure ranging between 2-8 months

ImproveImprove

04/11/2342

Summary of Vital X’s

Vital X P Value Impact on “Y” (AHT)

Trainer 0.000Trainer has an impact on AHT, by the virtue of the typing speed of associates trained by them who hit the floor for production

Tenure 0.000

Tenure has an impact on AHT, but the analysis shows the bottom performers are across the levels of tenures with the highest population ranging between 2 - 8 months

Typing speed 0.000

Typing speed has a direct impact on the AHT as the analysis tells us that the highest population of low typing speed contributors & the highest population with high AHT belong to the same tenure level, which is 2 - 8 months

ImproveImprove

04/11/2343

Quality functional deployment ImproveImprove

04/11/2344

Quality functional deployment ImproveImprove

04/11/2345

Solutions identified for implementation ImproveImprove

Root Cause Solutions for Implementation Responsibility

Typing speed

Link the Half yearly assement score to the associate Goal form Manager - OperationsConduct process test Team Manager - OperationsMonitor weekly typing speed of the associates Manager - Operations

Provide 30 minutes session post the sift on a daily basis to practice on Typing tutor Team Manager - Operations

Conduct monthly typing assesment Team Manager - Operations

Identify consistent Typing test failures & recommend process improvement plan Manager - Operations

Refer to bench post no result in PIP Manager - OperationsIdentify scenario based training need from AH T perspective Manager - OperationsConduct process training refresher for bottom performers Team Manager - OperationsEvaluate refresher training monthly scores Manager - OperationsRecommend all assement failures for process improvement plan Manager - OperationsRefer to bench post no result in PIP Team Manager - OperationsLink the quaterly assement score to the associate Goal form Manager - Operations

Implement monthly skill reverification assesment for associates < 06 months old & any bottom performers Manager - Operations

Review associate wise AHT on a weekly basis Manager - OperationsCoach associate regularly to improve Team Manager - Operations

Implement provision of easy reference sheets for verbiage & new updates Team Manager - Process Excellence

Review associate wise ACW on a weekly basis Manager - OperationsProvide "Hot keys" reference sheet for quick notation Team Manager - Operations

Create scenario based knowledge management system for easy reference & quicker action while on call Manager - Training

Liase with Technology to check for such provision Manager - OperationsChange to be approved by client before implementation AVP - OperationsReview stratification of call volume by scenario wise disposition Manager - OperationsEvaluate the top three scenarios which contribute to the call volume Team Manager - OperationsConduct FTE analysis based on the top three scenarios Manager - OperationsTrain all resources on the top three scenarios Team Manager - Operations

Deploy high performing good process knowledge resources to handle the top three scenarios if call volumes received split wise Team Manager - Operations

Implement decision based on Dashboard based review Manager - Operations

Trainer

Conduct assesment for existing trainers to qualify for giving training Manager - Training

Training to update the Culture training material based on the updates received in the process Manager - Training

Implement changes to the culture & pre process training assesment thresholds based on the process requirement Manager - Training

Changes to the culture & pre process training assesment thresholds to be approved from Client before implementation AVP - Training

Conduct process training refresher for bottom performers TrainerEvaluate refresher training monthly scores Manager - OperationsRecommend all assement failures for process improvement plan Manager - TrainingRefer to bench post no result in PIP Manager - TrainingReview associate wise AHT on a weekly basis Manager - TrainingCoach associate regularly to improve TrainerEvaluate the top three scenarios which contribute to the call volume Team Manager - TrainingTrain all resources on the top three scenarios TrainerImplement decision based on Dashboard based review Manager - Training

Tenure

Implement recreational activity calender Manager - HRImplement inhouse skill improvement training calender Manager - HRHiring team to screen experienced profiles for hiring Manager - Recruitment

Implement > 1 year experience in calling for telecom process in the Job discription Manager - Recruitment

Evaluate the renumeration grid with leadership involving HR, Compensation and Benefit& Recruitment team AVP - Recruitment

Implemet the revised grid AVP - RecruitmentImplement Loyality bonus VP - HREnsure Annual Townhall for Reward & Recognition AVP -HRCategorize R & R to Yearly AVP -HR

04/11/2346

Implementation Roadmap ImproveImprove

Root Cause Solutions for Implementation Responsibility Days Start Date End Date Level of Fix

Typing speed

Link the Half yearly assement score to the associate Goal form Manager - Operations 1 1-Oct 1-Oct 5Conduct process test Team Manager - Operations 1 1-Oct 1-Oct 5Monitor weekly typing speed of the associates Manager - Operations 30 11-Oct 19-Nov 5Provide 30 minutes session post the sift on a daily basis to practice on Typing tutor Team Manager - Operations 30 11-Oct 19-Nov 5Conduct monthly typing assesment Team Manager - Operations 1 22-Nov 22-Nov 3Identify consistent Typing test failures & recommend process improvement plan Manager - Operations 1 22-Nov 22-Nov 3Refer to bench post no result in PIP Manager - Operations 1 22-Nov 22-Nov 3Identify scenario based training need from AH T perspective Manager - Operations 1 1-Oct 1-Oct 5Conduct process training refresher for bottom performers Team Manager - Operations 5 4-Oct 8-Oct 5Evaluate refresher training monthly scores Manager - Operations 1 11-Oct 19-Nov 5Recommend all assement failures for process improvement plan Manager - Operations 1 22-Nov 22-Nov 3Refer to bench post no result in PIP Team Manager - Operations 1 22-Nov 22-Nov 3Link the quaterly assement score to the associate Goal form Manager - Operations 1 1-Oct 1-Oct 5

Implement monthly skill reverification assesment for associates < 06 months old & any bottom performers Manager - Operations 301-Oct 11-Nov

5

Review associate wise AHT on a weekly basis Manager - Operations 30 11-Oct 19-Nov 5Coach associate regularly to improve Team Manager - Operations 5 11-Oct 15-Oct 5

Implement provision of easy reference sheets for verbiage & new updates Team Manager - Process Excellence 1 11-Oct 11-Oct 5

Review associate wise ACW on a weekly basis Manager - Operations 5 11-Oct 15-Oct 5Provide "Hot keys" reference sheet for quick notation Team Manager - Operations 1 11-Oct 11-Oct 5

Create scenario based knowledge management system for easy reference & quicker action while on call Manager - Training 312-Oct 14-Oct

5

Liase with Technology to check for such provision Manager - Operations 3 1-Oct 5-Oct 4Change to be approved by client before implementation AVP - Operations 1 15-Oct 15-Oct 4Review stratification of call volume by scenario wise disposition Manager - Operations 5 11-Oct 15-Oct 5Evaluate the top three scenarios which contribute to the call volume Team Manager - Operations 1 1-Oct 1-Oct 5Conduct FTE analysis based on the top three scenarios Manager - Operations 1 4-Oct 4-Oct 4Train all resources on the top three scenarios Team Manager - Operations 5 4-Oct 8-Oct 5

Deploy high performing good process knowledge resources to handle the top three scenarios if call volumes received split wise Team Manager - Operations 511-Oct 15-Oct

5

Implement decision based on Dashboard based review Manager - Operations 1 1-Oct 1-Oct 5

Trainer

Conduct assesment for existing trainers to qualify for giving training Manager - Training 1 1-Oct 1-Oct 5

Training to update the Culture training material based on the updates received in the process Manager - Training 2 2-Oct 3-Oct 4

Implement changes to the culture & pre process training assesment thresholds based on the process requirement Manager - Training 21-Oct 1-Oct

4

Changes to the culture & pre process training assesment thresholds to be approved from Client before implementation AVP - Training 14-Oct 4-Oct

4

Conduct process training refresher for bottom performers Trainer 5 4-Oct 8-Oct 5Evaluate refresher training monthly scores Manager - Operations 1 11-Oct 19-Nov 5Recommend all assement failures for process improvement plan Manager - Training 1 22-Nov 22-Nov 3Refer to bench post no result in PIP Manager - Training 1 22-Nov 22-Nov 3Review associate wise AHT on a weekly basis Manager - Training 30 11-Oct 19-Nov 5Coach associate regularly to improve Trainer 30 11-Oct 19-Nov 5Evaluate the top three scenarios which contribute to the call volume Team Manager - Training 1 1-Oct 1-Oct 5Train all resources on the top three scenarios Trainer 5 4-Oct 8-Oct 5Implement decision based on Dashboard based review Manager - Training 1 1-Oct 1-Oct 5

Tenure

Implement recreational activity calender Manager - HR 1 1-Oct 1-Oct 5Implement inhouse skill improvement training calender Manager - HR 1 1-Oct 1-Oct 4Hiring team to screen experienced profiles for hiring Manager - Recruitment 1 1-Oct 1-Oct 5Implement > 1 year experience in calling for telecom process in the Job discription Manager - Recruitment 1 4-Oct 4-Oct 5

Evaluate the renumeration grid with leadership involving HR, Compensation and Benefit& Recruitment team AVP - Recruitment 25-Oct 5-Oct

5

Implemet the revised grid AVP - Recruitment 1 5-Oct 5-Oct 5Implement Loyality bonus VP - HR 3 8-Oct 8-Oct 4Ensure Annual Townhall for Reward & Recognition AVP -HR Ongoing 1-Oct 1-Oct 3Categorize R & R to Yearly AVP -HR Ongoing 1-Oct 1-Oct 3

04/11/2347

ImproveImproveCritical path

04/11/2348

ImproveImproveBefore After analysis

There is significant improvement in the AHT as the mean has shifted from a 252 seconds ‘Before” to a 182 seconds “After” pilot in improve phase

There is significant improvement in the AHT as the mean has shifted from a 32.92 words per minute ‘Before” to a 40.92 words per minute “After” pilot in improve phase

04/11/2349

ImproveImproveValidation of improvement

Two-Sample T-Test and CI: AHT, AHT - Post improve

Two-sample T for AHT vs AHT - Post improve

SE N Mean StDev MeanAHT 40 299 240 38AHT - Post improve 40 182 211 33

Difference = mu (AHT) - mu (AHT - Post improve)Estimate for difference: 117.195% lower bound for difference: 32.9T-Test of difference = 0 (vs >): T-Value = 2.32 P-Value = 0.012 DF = 76

Two-Sample T-Test and CI: Typing Speed, Typing Speed - Post improve

Two-sample T for Typing Speed vs Typing Speed - Post improve

N Mean StDev SE MeanTyping Speed 40 32.92 7.52 1.2Typing Speed - Post improve 40 40.92 7.52 1.2

Difference = mu (Typing Speed) - mu (Typing Speed - Post improve)Estimate for difference: -8.0095% upper bound for difference: -5.20T-Test of difference = 0 (vs <): T-Value = -4.76 P-Value = 0.000 DF = 78

The P value of 0.012 statistically suggests a significant impact on improvement through the Pilot post implementation of the solutions

The P value of 0.000 statistically suggests a significant impact on improvement through the Pilot post implementation of the solutions

04/11/2350

Failure Mode Effect Analysis ControlControl

FMEA_AHT

04/11/2351

Control Plan ControlControl

Control Suggested Action Plan Responsibility Frequency

Implement Dashboard based review

Manager operations to design, implement & review the Dashboard weekly

Manager - Operations Daily / Weekly

Implement robust update sharing mechanism

Manager operations to liaise with Quality manager to create information path & review the adherence monthly

Manager - Operations / Manager - Quality

Monthly

Conduct process test for associates & trainers

All associates & trainers to clear the process knowledge assesment

Manager - Training Monthly

Conduct Scenario based trainingTeam manager & Manager operations to identify "Top three contributing scenarios" by analyzing the incoming volumes & recommend refresher training

Manager & Team manager - Operations

Weekly

Conduct Typing training & assesment

All under performing associates to go through the typing training session on a daily basis & clear the weekly assesment


Daily / Weekly

Review weekly AHT Associate level AHT to be reviewed on a daily & weekly basis


Daily / Weekly

Review weekly ACWAssociate level AHT to be reviewed on a daily & weekly basis


Daily / Weekly

Coach associates All associates to be a part of the Mentor mentee programManager & Team manager -

OperationsDaily / Weekly

Implement healthy performance improvement plan

Associates to be recommended for Performance improvement plan

Manager & Team manager - Operations, Manger - HR

Monthly

04/11/2352

Quantifying results & evaluating benefits ControlControl

There is significant impact of control mechanisms to the Typing speed as the mean has shifted from a 40 words per minute in “Improve” phase to 46.42 words per minute post “Control” phase

There is significant impact of control mechanisms to the AHT as the mean has shifted from a 182 seconds per calls in “Improve” phase to 142 seconds per call post “Control” phase

04/11/2353

ControlControlPost control Analysis of the Vital Xs

c

Take away• There has been consistent improvement in the Typing speed in the entire process during the phase of implementing controls• All the data points are above the desired threshold of 30 words per minute, which clearly suggests the process is in control• The controls therefore must become a part of the normal process to ensure consistent performance • Equal data points as compared to Analyze phase, which suggests non of the employees has left the process

04/11/2354

Post control Analysis of the Vital Xs ControlControl

Take away• There has been consistent improvement in the AHT in the entire process during the phase of implementing controls• All data points are below the desired threshold of 500 seconds per minute call, which clearly suggests the process is in control• The controls therefore must become a part of the normal process to ensure consistent performance• All the employees are with the process & have not left, which shows the impact of various solutions implemented with controls around regular R & R , revision of hiring thresholds etc.

04/11/2355

Evaluating benefits

Benefit type Contractual AHT Current AHT AHT in seconds (Before) AHT in seconds (After) Time saved in seconds Improvement %ge Total FTE impact

External 500 287 406 287 119 29% 29% of Total FTE

Cost benefit In Dollars

Average Associate cost per day $27.00

Cost per associate per month $810.00

Cost per associate per year $9,855.00

Net savings per associate per year $2,956.50

Take away

• The improvement in AHT post the control phase clearly suggests that the current volume can be handled by 29% lesser FTEs deployed

• Also, this benefit of 29% provides an opportunity to add any further up selling component to the current call flow which can enhance the current revenue

• 29% lesser FTE deployment amounts to cost savings of $2,956.50 / FTE YTD

CBA

ControlControl

04/11/2356

ControlControlSign off

Customer Sign off

AVP Operations

Client

Education

Lean Six Sigma Project on Handling time improvement by Advance Innovation Group