Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Six Sigma for Service_American Express

Six Sigma for Service_American Express

Ratings: (0)|Views: 99|Likes:
Published by api-3846962
Practical anagement
Practical anagement

More info:

Published by: api-3846962 on Oct 18, 2008
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

05/09/2014

pdf

text

original

SERVICE QUALITY SIX SIGMA CASE STUDIES
Chris Bott
Elizabeth Keim
Six Sigma Black Belt
Six Sigma Master Black Belt
American Express Company
Integrated Quality Resources, LLC
7701 Airport Center Parkway
4220 Pebble Beach Drive
Greensboro, NC 27409
Niwot, CO 80503-8359
336-668-5799
lizkeim@netscape.net
Sai Kim
Lisa Palser
Six Sigma Black Belt
Six Sigma Master Black Belt
American Express Company
E.I. DuPont de Nemours, Inc.
World Financial Center
BMP 35-2315
200 Vesey Street
P.O. Box 800035
New York, NY 10285-4525
Wilmington DE, 19880-0035
SUMMARY
This presentation will discuss the effective use of Six Sigma tools to improve several service processes.
Each case will cover the following five steps:
\u2022
Define the problem
\u2022
Measure the defect
\u2022
Analyze the data
\u2022
Improve the process
\u2022
Control the process
KEYWORDS
Case Studies, Service, Six Sigma
INTRODUCTION

Below are three cases studies, using the Six Sigma methodology for defect reduction using Define,
Measure, Analyze, and Control, from American Express and DuPont. Each will discuss the nature and
quantification of the problem and the benefits of resolving the problem. Then, each will describe the
analysis done to determine the root cause and evaluate potential solutions to the problem. Lastly, each
will discuss control mechanisms used to ensure sustainability and the results achieved.

CASE STUDIES
Reduce Closed Store Passive Suppression Uncallables at American Express
Sai Kim, American Express Company
SUMMARY

This presentation will discuss the effective use of the Six Sigma tools to improve external vendor
processes. It will take you through a project American Express completed, \u201cReduce Closed Store Passive
SuppressionUncallables\u201d. This analysis will demonstrate how we applied Six Sigma techniques to
reduce the defect rate from 8.0% to 2.8% with expected annual savings of $401,000.

INTRODUCTION:Reduce Closed Store Passive SuppressionUncallables

It is important that all American Express merchants place our point-of-purchase materials (POP) or decals
on storefronts, cash registers, or check presenters. POP helps our card members, especially Corporate
card members, identify service establishments that honor American Express cards. In addition to
increased perception of coverage, POP increases merchant and card member satisfaction and revenues for
both the merchant and American Express.

Despite the benefits of placing POP, merchants place competitive POP and no American Express POP;
we define these merchants as passive suppressors (merchants with at least 1 POP placed are defined as
non-suppressors). To monitor passive suppression, we work with an external vendor. The vendor is
responsible for placing POP in the market place and identifying passive suppressors, as well as,
measuring placement and passive suppression rates.

When we began our analysis, we learned that we had a 36%Uncallable rate, a rate at which we fail to
visit merchants for various reasons such as the store is closed, address is incorrect, ownership has
changed, etc. Applying Six Sigma tools, we focused on the largest factor contributing toUncallables -
closed stores. We were able to decrease our defect rate by 65%.

DEFINE & MEASURE THE PROBLEM

The objective of this project was to reduce closed storeUncallables (closed due to business hours),
representing 27.4% of totalUncallables and 8.0% of 831,000 annual total attempted visits. The process
represented a 2.9 sigma level and cost of poor quality of $615,000 annually.

ANALYZE THE DATA
We applied various Six Sigma tools to identify Vital X\u2019s or the root causes of the defect (critical to
success). The Pareto Chart pointed to the \u201cClosed Store\u201d category, the number one reason for
Uncallables. With the focus on closed stores, we identified the following potential Vital X\u2019s:
\u2022
Vendor Call Hours:By shadowing our vendor on merchant visits, we found that visits were

completed from 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM. It was brought to our attention that 45% of closed stores fell in
the retail segment and 16% in the restaurant segment. Since these two industry segments typically are
not open for business at 8:00 AM (or even at 9:00 AM), we hypothesized that vendor call hours
contributed to the high defect rate.

\u2022
Closed Store Inspection Process: After we mapped the vendor call process, we identified the

second Vital X, the inspection process. The current policy states that a merchant with at least one
POP placed is defined a non-suppressor. However, in spite of POP placement on the exterior of
closed service establishments, the vendor was not collecting this information. In fact, the calls were
immediately terminated without checking for externally placed POP and reported asUncallable. As a

result, the same merchants were being pulled from our database and visited multiple times - all
leading to rework.
IMPROVE THE PROCESS

After we identified two potential Vital X\u2019s, we had to test and validate our hypotheses. We changed the call hours for all visits to after 10:00 AM. Secondly, our vendor was required to continue the inspection process and audit exterior placement status (Amex POP only, Competitive POP only, All POP, etc.), regardless of regular business hours.

As a result of new call hours, we were able to reduce the defect rate by 43.7%, from 8.0% to 4.5%. This
reflects annual savings of $269,000. The second test, continued inspection, indicated that 35.4% of the
remaining 4.5% closed stores had at least 1 American Express POP placed on the exterior of the
establishment. We concluded that a little over a third of merchants in the closed store category were not
suppressing American Express cards, information we did not collect in the past. Going forward, we can
use this data to forecast the total number of attempts (merchant visits) needed to achieve a targeted
number of \u201cCallables\u201d. The new inspection process is expected to save an additional $132,000 annually.

In summary, the following chart outlines the combined test results:
Closed Stores
Baseline
Test Results
Defect Rate
8.0%
2.8% (Reduced by
65%)
DPMO
80,000
28,000
COPQ
$614K
$215K
Total Annual Savings
-
$401K
Cost per Unit
$9.25
$9.25
Sigma Level
2.9
3.2
CONTROL THE PROCESS

To ensure that we perform within the acceptable limits on an on-going basis, it is important to monitor the
new process. To achieve \u201ccontrol\u201d status, we will be using the p chart, a tool that tracks proportions of
closed stores over time. In addition, we have revised the vendor call report to reflectUncallable rates by
reason, which gives us the ability to monitor the defect rate on a monthly basis.

CONCLUSION

Later call hours and a continued inspection process for closed stores significantly enhanced efficiency.
Moving forward, we can make 43,336 fewer vendor visits and still achieve the same absolute number of
\u201cCallables\u201d as we did in past years. Also, we can expect $401,000 in annual savings with $0 project
investment. In terms of key learnings, we found that it is important to shadow vendors periodically to
identify areas for improvement or opportunities not readily evident to the vendor or the client. This will
help us accommodate the changing marketplace and meet business objectives using more efficient
processes.

Eliminate Non-received Renewal Credit Cards

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->