Lean Six Sigma Case Study Executive Overview Lean Six Sigma Case Study Executive Overview
Lean Six Sigma Case Study Executive Overview Lean Six Sigma Case Study Executive Overview
Sigma Group
Root Causes: Nature of problem and time of call were identified as root
Pp 0.07 PPM < LSL 0.00 PPM < LSL 33440.39 PPM < LSL 7909
PPU -0.34
LPPM
S L> USL 948717.95 PPM > USL
US L 906498.25 PPM > USL 84521
P roc es s Data Process Capability
causes. PPL
Ppk US L
0.47
-0.34 20.0000
PPM Total 948717.95 PPM Total 939938.64
– After
PPM Total 92431
T arget *
ST
LS L 0.0000
Cross-training on call types was performed and staffing was arranged S tDev (S T )
S tDev (LT )
3.38716
4.61648
around peak call times. Metrics are reviewed weekly and posted to an
IT dashboard.
P otenti al (S T ) Capability
Cp 0.98
CP U 0.51
Results/Benefits CP L
Cpk
1.46
0.51
Cpm *
After the 3 month project, the customer saved US$150K, or 30%, as a 0 10 20 30 40
result of reduced end user downtime. Pp
Overall (LT ) Capabil ity
0.72
Obs erved P erform anc e
P P M < LS L 0.00
E xpec ted S T Perform anc e
P P M < LS L 6.29
E xpec ted LT P erform
P P M < LS L
PPU 0.38 P P M > US L 130177.51 P P M > US L 62109.19 P P M > US L 129
PPL 1.07 P P M T otal 130177.51 P P M T otal 62115.48 P P M T otal 130
Individual Value
35
PCE%: ? 25
20 LC L=20.56
Moving Range
7.5
5.0
O bser v a tion
T ask T im e (seco n d s)
Takt Tim e = 55
Significant factor - 1 hour driving time from DC
80
Example: ANOVA Location 0.030 to Baltimore office causes ticket cycle time to
generally be longer for the Baltimore site
60
Significant factor - on average, calls requiring
Example: ANOVA Part vs. No Part 0.004 parts have double the cycle time (22 vs 43
40
hours)
Significant factor - Department 4 has digitized 20
Example: Chi Squared Department 0.000 addition of customer info to ticket and less
human intervention, resulting in fewer errors 0
South region accounted for 59% of the defects 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Example: Pareto Region n/a due to their manual process and distance from Task #
the parts warehouse
Describe any other observations about the root cause (x) data
CVA Time BVA Time NVA Time
Type 2: Describe the chain of causality that shows how you determined the Labor Efficiency savings. Tell the
story with cause & effect relationships on how the change should create the desired financial result ($).
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 (i.e. Cost/Risk Avoidance)
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?
i-nexus: http://www.i-nexus.com
Strategy Execution Community LinkedIn Group
https://www.linkedin.com/groups/Strategy-Execution-Community-3725091
SigmaXL: http://www.sigmaxl.com
SigmaXL LinkedIn Group: https://www.linkedin.com/groups/SigmaXL-1812101?gid=1812101
Each Week, the Lean Six Sigma Group Grows +1,500 New Members; +2,000 Lean
Six Sigma Jobs; +200 Discussions; +500 Comments
+280,000 Members – Come Join the Conversation
International Standards for Lean Six Sigma (ISLSS) 17
Lean Six Sigma Resource Blogs
(Click Logo’s to Follow Blogs)
See Notes Section for Links to Lean Six Sigma Group Contributors