This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Welcome to Scribd! Start your free trial and access books, documents and more.Find out more

**<Project Title (State From ... To)>
**

< Last Name, First Name > Wave No: <xx> Review Date: <xx/xx/xxxx>

Define

Measure Analyze Improve Control

LEAN SIX SIGMA

Define

**Lean Six Sigma Program Name
**

Measure Analyze Improve Control

LEAN SIX SIGMA

**Analyze Phase Road Map
**

Define Measure Analyze Improve

Analyze

Control

Activities

• • • • • •

Tools

• • • • • • • • •

Identify Potential Root Causes Reduce List of Potential Root Causes Confirm Root Cause to Output Relationship Estimate Impact of Root Causes on Key Outputs Prioritize Root Causes Complete Analyze Gate

Process Constraint ID and Takt Time Analysis Cause & Effect Analysis FMEA Hypothesis Tests/Conf. Intervals Simple & Multiple Regression ANOVA Components of Variation Conquering Product and Process Complexity Queuing Theory

Bonacorsi Consulting

3

Measure Overview

Process Capability

CTQ: ? Unit (d) or Mean (c): ? Defect (d) or St. Dev. (c): ? DPMO (d): ? Sigma (Short Term): ? Sigma (Long Term):? MSA Results: show the percentage result of the GR&R, AR&R or other measurement systems analysis carried out in the project

40 Individual Value

Analyze

Graphical Analysis

I -M R C h a r t o f D e l i v e r y T i m e

U C L= 3 7 . 7 0 35 30 25 20 1 28 55 82 109 136 O b s e r v a tio n 163 190 217 244 LC L= 2 0 . 5 6 _ X= 2 9 .1 3

1 0 .0 M oving Range 7 .5 5 .0 2 .5 0 .0 1 28 55 82 109 136 O b s e r v a tio n 163 190 217 244

U C L= 1 0 . 5 3

__ M R = 3 .2 2

LC L= 0

**Root Cause / Quick Win
**

Root cause:

Quick Win #1

Tools Used

Detailed process mapping Measurement Systems Analysis Value Stream Mapping Data Collection Planning Basic Statistics Process Capability Histograms Time Series Plot Probability Plot Pareto Analysis Operational Definitions 5s Pull Control Charts

Root cause:

Quick Win #2

Root cause:

Quick Win #3

Bonacorsi Consulting

4

**Graphical Analysis Summary
**

Normal Non-Normal

Investigation What is the shape of the Project Y data? Is the Y data normally distributed? What is the normality test p-value?

Analyze

**Data is Continuous: ?? Data Points Collected Between XX/XX/XX and XX/XX/XX Normality Central Tendency Variation
**

Average Median or Q1 or Q3

Statistical / Graphical Analysis Histogram Normality Test

**Std. Dev (long term) Span (1/99) or Stability Factor (Q1/Q3)
**

Observations/Conclusion

What is the central tendency of the Mean, Median, or Quartile Values Project Y data? What is the spread of the Project Y Standard Deviation, Span, or data? Stability Factor Is the data stable over time? Run Chart

Describe any other observations about the Project Y data Include any other findings regarding the data here

**Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
**

Bonacorsi Consulting

5

TPC Analysis

Technical-Political-Cultural (TPC) Analysis Sources Of Resistance Definition Causes Of Resistance Rating Examples

Analyze

Technical

Political

Cultural

**Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
**

Bonacorsi Consulting

6

Sources of Variation

Defect Overproduction Transportation Area 1 <Area 1> <Sub area 1> Area 1 Sub area 1 Sub area 1

Analyze

Was the Action workout performed #1?

NVA

Area 1 Sub area 1 Processing Motion Area 1 Area 1 Sub area 1 Sub area 1 Inventory Waiting

<Right Click, and select Add Text>

Was the Action workout performed #2? <Right Click, and select Add Text>

< Insert your variation percentage as shown in pie chart >

32%

5% 5% 5%

11%

42%

Man Machine Method Measurement Mother Nature Machine

**Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
**

Bonacorsi Consulting

7

**Cause and Effect Matrix
**

Importance Rating Score Blank = no correlation 1 = remote correlation 3 = moderate correlation 9 = strong correlation

Item Speed to Decision Cooperation, Seats Schedule Clarity, Feedback Meets Reach Available Options Accuracy Req Decision 10 7 6 7 10 9 Budget for Options 5 Funding Source Identified 7 Process Outputs Importance Rating Correlation of Input to Output Process Step Process Inputs To what extent does variability in these process steps/inputs impact variability across these outputs ? Develop Options Customer schedule & including price & requirements schedule Proper decision makers Approve options Database, tribal Inventory Search of knowledge known Vacant Space Interview Customer to Form Understand Form options, costs, schedule Brief customer on options, funding vehicle options Supervisor Approval Peer Review Approval Fill out Forms Accept Form Create Spreadsheet Dept Approval Approval Mgr 1 Approval Mgr 2 Identify Need Assign to Team Mark Up Floor Plan Notification Forms to requestor and Log in issue Prepare brief 9 9 9 3 9 9 9 9 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 9 9 1 9 9 9 9 3 3 9 3 3 3 1 9 9 9 9 9 3 3 9 9 1 Total Higher score = 3 9 459 392 261 217 216 118 111 108 51 30 30 30 30 21 21 0 0 0 0

Analyze

Was the rating of importance done by Kano analysis? <Right Click, and select Add Text>

16 18 15 14 17 8 7 11 12 3 4 5 6 1 13 2 9 19 19

Were all the process steps identified? <Right Click, and select Add Text>

What is the % of quick hits causing the problem? <Right Click, and select Add Text>

3 3

**Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
**

Bonacorsi Consulting

8

Run Charts

When the points are connected with a line, a run ends when the line crosses the median

Analyze

A run, in this case, is one or more consecutive points on the same side of the median

Median = 38

1 Run about the Median, can you count the other 8? There is a no nonrandom influence acting upon this process. There is no trend

Longest Run about the median

There is a nonrandom influence acting upon this process that is creating clustering

There is a no nonrandom influence acting upon this process. There is no Oscillation

**Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
**

Bonacorsi Consulting

9

Pareto Plot

150

Analyze

100 80

Count

100

60 40

50 20 0 0

So ut h r No th s Ea t he Ot rs

Defect

Count P ercent Cum %

100 58.5 58.5

50 29.2 87.7

15 8.8 96.5

6 3.5 100.0

**Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
**

Bonacorsi Consulting

10

Percent

Scatter Plot

Analyze

Average Expenses decrease as Sales Increase

**Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
**

Bonacorsi Consulting

11

Linear Regression

F i tt e d L i n e P l o t

W a it T im e = 3 2 .0 5 + 0 .5 8 2 5 D e live r ie s 55 S R-Sq R - S q ( a d j)

Analyze

95% confident that 94.1% of the variation in “Wait Time” is from the “Qty of Deliveries”

1 .1 1 8 8 5 9 4 .1 % 9 3 .9 %

50 Wait Time

45

40

35 10 15 20 25 D e liv e r ie s 30 35

**Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
**

Bonacorsi Consulting

12

**One-Sample T-Test and Dot Plot
**

Dotplot of Improve Data

(with Ho and 95% t-confidence interval for the mean)

Analyze

[

_ X Ho

]

This Dot Plot graphically displays 95% confidence intervals that the data will fall between 23.45 and 32.75 for response time (see the red brackets and red line). It also indicates that the Mean (Red X) is at 28.1. The blue Ho marks the Target Mean.

Hypothesis Test: Is the Improve data set mean different from the Target Mean mean of 30 minutes?

**We Are 95% Confident The Improve Mean Is Not Statistically Different
**

0 10 20 30 40 50

Improve Data

The test statistic, T, for Ho: mean = 30 is calculated as –0.84. The P-Value of this test, or the probability of obtaining more extreme value of the test statistic by chance if the null hypothesis was true, is 0.410 (> 0.05). This is called the attained significant level, or P-Value. Therefore, Accept Ho, which means we conclude that the Improve data set mean (28.1) is NOT different than the Target mean (30).

One-Sample T: Improve Data Test of mu = 30 vs mu not = 30 Variable Improve Data Variable Improve Data N 30 Mean 28.10 StDev 12.45 T -0.84 P 0.410 SE Mean 2.27

95.0% CI (23.45, 32.75)

**Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
**

Bonacorsi Consulting

13

**Test for Equal Variance
**

Test for Equal Variances for Total Time

95% Confidence Intervals for Sigmas Factor Levels Antenna

Analyze

Payroll

0 50 100 150

Test for Equal Variance Confirms Payroll Input Type Cycle Time is Significant

**F-Test Test Statistic: 0.108 P-Value : 0.001
**

Boxplots of Raw Data

Levene's Test Test Statistic: 21.054 P-Value : 0.000

Antenna

Payroll

The spread of the data is statistical greater for completing the payroll form than the Antenna time tracking.

50 60 70

0

10

20

30

40

T otal T ime

**Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
**

Bonacorsi Consulting

14

**One Way ANOVA
**

Net Hours Call Open

Analyze

After further investigation, possible reasons proposed by the team are supplier backorders, lack of technician certifications and the distance from the supplier to the client site.

150

Boxplot: Part/ No Part Impact on Ticket Cycle Time

100

No Part

Analysis of Variance for Net Hour Source DF SS MS Part/No 1 7421 7421 Error 69 59194 858 Total 70 66615 Level No Part Part N 27 44 Mean 21.99 43.05 29.29 StDev 19.95 33.70

F 8.65

P 0.004

Pooled StDev =

Individual 95% CI's For Mean --+---------+---------+---------+---(--------*---------) (------*------) --+---------+---------+---------+---12 24 36 48

Because the p-value <= 0.05, we can be confident that calls requiring parts do have an impact on the ticket cycle time.

**Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
**

Bonacorsi Consulting

15

Part

It is also caused by the need for 50 technicians to make a second visit to the end user to complete the part replacement. Next step will be 0 for the team to confirm these Part/No Part suspected root causes.

Mood’s Median

After further investigation, possible reasons proposed by the team are supplier backorders, lack of technician certifications and the distance from the supplier to the client site. It is also caused by the need for technicians to make a second visit to the end user to complete the part replacement. Next step will be for the team to confirm these suspected root causes.

Chi-Square = 19.14 DF = 2 P = 0.000 Month N<= N> Median 10 88 132 8.43 11 123 121 6.57 12 111 68 4.77 Overall Median 6.63

40

Analyze

**Dotplots of Defects by Impact on Dot Plot: Part/ No Part Subgroup
**

Ticket Cycle Time

30

Defects

20

10

0 After Before

Subgroup

Q3-Q1 12.15 10.52 7.10

Mood’s Median Test Individual 95.0% Confidence Interval’s ------+---------+---------+---------+ (--------+-------) (------+------) (-----+------) ------+---------+---------+---------+ 4.8 6.4 8.0 9.6

Because the p-value <= 0.05, we can be confident that calls requiring parts do have an impact on the ticket cycle time.

**Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
**

Bonacorsi Consulting

16

**Statistical Testing for Discrete Data
**

Chi-Square Test

Expected counts (calculated by Minitab) are printed below observed counts Errors 33 40.46 27 40.90 132 107.03 32 71.35 168 132.26 392 Correct 60 52.54 67 53.10 114 138.97 132 92.65 136 171.74 509 Total 93

Analyze

1

Because this p value is less than 5% (0.05), we can be confident that department does have an impact on the proportion of correct tickets processed This is due to the fact that Department 4 has fewer people who need to add information to each ticket, which reduces the chances that an error will be made. Also, in Department 4 the customer name, address and ticket number are added directly from the contracts system without human intervention, reducing the possibility that a typo or other error type could occur that will need to be corrected later (taking more time)

2

94

3

246

4

164

5

304

Total Chi-Sq =

901

1.376 4.722 5.827 21.703 9.657 DF = 4, P-Value

+ 1.060 + + 3.637 + + 4.487 + + 16.714 + + 7.437 = 76.620 = 0.000

**Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
**

Bonacorsi Consulting

17

Process Bottleneck Identification & Workload Balancing

Analyze

Takt Rate Analysis compares the task time of each process (or process step) to: Each other to determine the time trap Customer demand to determine if the time trap is the constraint

Value Add Analysis - Current State

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Takt Time = Net Process Time Available Number of Units to Process

Takt Tim e = 55

-<Right Click, and select Add Text>

Task Time (seconds)

--

<Right Click, and select Add Text>

---

1

2

3

4

5 6 Task # BVA Time

7

8

9

10

<Right Click, and select Add Text>

CVA Time

NVA Time

**Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
**

Bonacorsi Consulting

18

**Hypothesis Test Summary
**

Hypothesis Test

(ANOVA, 1 or 2 sample t - test, Chi Squared, Regression, Test of Equal Variance, etc)

Analyze

Factor (x) Tested

Location

p Value

Observations/Conclusion

Was the hypothesis roadmap followed? <Right Click, and select Add Text>

Example: ANOVA

Significant factor - 1 hour driving time from DC 0.030 to Baltimore office causes ticket cycle time to generally be longer for the Baltimore site Significant factor - on average, calls requiring 0.004 parts have double the cycle time (22 vs 43 hours) Significant factor - Department 4 has digitized 0.000 addition of customer info to ticket and less human intervention, resulting in fewer errors n/a South region accounted for 59% of the defects due to their manual process and distance from the parts warehouse

Example: ANOVA

Part vs. No Part

What was the power and Sample Size?

Example: Chi Squared

Department

<Right Click, and select Add Text>

Example: Pareto

Region

What are α and β risks? <Right Click, and select Add Text>

Describe any other observations about the root cause (x) data

**Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
**

Bonacorsi Consulting

19

**Control / Impact Analysis
**

Does the X have a high, medium, or low impact on the project Y?

Analyze

High Impact

?

Medium Impact

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

Low Impact

Does the X in he teams control, influence, or out of their control?

In Our Control

? ? ?

In Our Influence

? ? ?

Out of Our Control

? ?

**Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
**

Bonacorsi Consulting

20

**In/Out of Frame
**

Creating a visual depiction of what elements of the project are in the scope (frame) and out of the scope

Vital X #8 Vital X #2

Analyze

Influence

Vital X #5

Vital X #3

Vital X #7

No Control

Control

Vital X #6

Vital X #4

Vital X #1

Vital X #9

**Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
**

Bonacorsi Consulting

21

**Systems & Structures Assessment
**

System or Structure

Staffing 1 2 Training & Development 1 2 Measurements & Reward 1 2 Communication 1 2 Organization Design 1 2 Information Systems 1 2 Resource Allocation 1 2

Analyze

How should we use or modify to support "____" vision and objectives

**Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
**

Bonacorsi Consulting

22

Quick Wins

5s 4-Step Setup Reduction Inventory Reduction MSA Improvements Price reductions Reduced DOWNTIME (Non-value added steps or work) Pull System Kaizen events Other

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Bonacorsi Consulting

23

Analyze

Business Impact

State financial impact of project Separate “hard or Type 1” from “soft Type 2 or 3” dollars State financial impact of future project leverage opportunities

Annual Estimate

Revenue Enhancement Expenses Reduction Loss Reduction Cost Avoidance Total Savings

• Type 1: ? • Type 2: ? • Type 3: ? • Type 1: ? • Type 2: ? • Type 3: ? • Type 1: ? • Type 2: ? • Type 3: ? • Type 1: ? • Type 2: ? • Type 3: ? • Type 1: ? • Type 2: ? • Type 3: ? • Type 1: ? • Type 2: ? • Type 3: ? • Type 1: ? • Type 2: ? • Type 3: ? • Type 1: ? • Type 2: ? • Type 3: ? • Type 1: ? • Type 2: ? • Type 3: ? • Type 1: ? • Type 2: ? • Type 3: ?

Analyze

Replicated Estimate

**Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
**

Bonacorsi Consulting

24

**Business Impact Details
**

Show the financial calculation savings and assumptions used.

Assumption #1 (i.e. source of data, clear Operational Definitions?) Assumption #2 (i.e. hourly rate + incremental benefit cost + travel)

Analyze

Type 1: Describe the chain of causality that shows how you determined the Type 1 savings. (tell the story with cause–effect relationships, on how the proposed change should create the desired financial result (savings) in your project )

Type 2: Describe the chain of causality that shows how you determined the Type 2 savings. (tell the story with cause–effect relationships, on how the proposed change should create the desired financial result (savings) in your project ) 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
**

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?

**Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
**

Bonacorsi Consulting

25

Current Status

Key actions completed Issues Lessons learned Communications, team building, organizational activities

Upcoming Deliverables/Tasks - 2 weeks out Due Revised Due

Analyze

**Lean Six Sigma Project Status and Planning
**

Deliverables/Tasks Completed last week Comments

W/E:

Comments

For deliverables due thru: Actions Scheduled for next 2 Weeks Deliverable/Action Who Due Revised Due Comments/Resolution Need Help

Issue/Risk

Current Issues and Risks Who Due Revised Due Recommended Action Need Help

**Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
**

Bonacorsi Consulting

26

Next Steps

Key actions Planned Lean Six Sigma Tool use Questions to answer Barrier/risk mitigation activities

Analyze

**Lean Six Sigma Project Issue Log
**

No.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Description/Recommendation

Status Open/Closed/Hold

Due Date

Last Revised: Revised Due Date

Resp

Comments / Resolution

**Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
**

Bonacorsi Consulting

27

Analyze

Stop

Tollgate Checklist

Tollgate Review

Has the team identified the key factors (critical X’s) that have the biggest impact on process performance? Have they validated the root causes?

Analyze

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 ‘white paper’ recreation of the process? Has the decision been confirmed with the Project Sponsor? Has the team investigated and validated the root cause hypotheses generated earlier, to gain confidence that the “vital few” root causes have been uncovered? Does the team understand why the problem (the Quality, Cycle Time or Cost Efficiency issue identified in the Problem Statement) is being seen? Has the team been able to identify any additional ‘Quick Wins’? Have ‘learning's to-date required modification of the Project Charter? If so, have these changes been approved by the Project Sponsor and the Key Stakeholders? Have any new risks to project success been identified, added to the Risk Mitigation Plan, and a mitigation strategy put in place?

**Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
**

Bonacorsi Consulting

28

Sign Off

Analyze

• I concur that the Analyze phase was successfully completed on MM/DD/YYYY • I concur the project is ready to proceed to next phase: Improve

**Enter Name Here
**

Green Belt/Black Belt

**Enter Name Here Enter Name Here
**

Sponsor / Process Owner Deployment Champion

**Enter Name Here
**

Financial Representative

**Enter Name Here
**

Master Black Belt

**Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
**

Bonacorsi Consulting

29

Bonacorsi Consulting

This Training Manual and all materials, procedures and systems herein contained or depicted (the "Manual"), are the sole and exclusive property of Bonacorsi Consulting, L.L.C. The contents hereof contain proprietary trade secrets that are the private and confidential property of Bonacorsi Consulting. Unauthorized use, disclosure, or reproduction of any kind of any material contained in this Manual is expressly prohibited. The contents hereof are to be returned immediately upon termination of any relationship or agreement giving user authorization to possess or use such information or materials. Any unauthorized or illegal use shall subject the user to all remedies, both legal and equitable, available to Bonacorsi Consulting. This Manual may be altered, amended or supplemented by Bonacorsi Consulting from time to time. In the event of any inconsistency or conflict between a provision in this Manual and any federal, provincial, state or local statute, regulation, order or other law, such law will supersede the conflicting or inconsistent provision(s) of this Manual in all properties subject to that law. © 2006 by Bonacorsi Consulting, L.L.C. All Rights Reserved.

Steven Bonacorsi is a Senior Master Black Belt instructor and coach. Steven Bonacorsi has trained hundreds of Master Black Belts, Black Belts, Green Belts, and Project Sponsors and Executive Leaders in Lean Six Sigma DMAIC and Design for Lean Six Sigma process improvement methodologies.

Bonacorsi Consulting

30

- Image Update Six Sigma Case Study
- Deployment Output Improvement Six Sigma Case Study
- Dell Server Ordering Six Sigma Case Study
- Data Conversion Cycle Time Six Sigma Case Study
- Depot Repair Cycle Time Six Sigma Case Study
- Domain Consolidation Six Sigma Case Study
- Gage Area Deployment Six Sigma Case Study
- IBM Imaging Cycle Time Six Sigma Case Study
- Deploy Image Cycle Time Six Sigma Case Study
- Replacement Planning Six Sigma Case Study
- Time Reporting Cycle Time Six Sigma Case Study
- Certification Process Six Sigma Case Study
- Backup Completeness Six Sigma Case Study
- Workorder Error Reduction Six Sigma Case Study
- Software Store Six Sigma Case Study
- Serrver Imaging Six Sigma Case Study
- Gillette Six Sigma Case Study
- Kaiser Permanente Six Sigma Case Study
- E-Mail Optimization Six Sigma Case Study
- System Completeness Six Sigma Case Study
- Redeploy Diagnostics Six Sigma Case Study
- GEAE Tech Support Website Six Sigma Case Study
- Operating System Six Sigma Case Study
- Product Order Cycle Time Six Sigma Case Study
- Local Asset Inventory Six Sigma Case Study

Lean Six Sigma Analyze Phase Tollgate Template

Lean Six Sigma Analyze Phase Tollgate Template

- Six Sigma
- The Six Sigma
- Term Paper
- A Review on Six Sigma (DMAIC) Methodology
- The Basics of Lean Six Sigma - Www.goleanSixSigma
- Lean Six Sigma
- 5s,Sixsigma,Tpm,Pqm,Pert Etc.
- 14th Annual Asian Lean Six Sigma and Process Improvement Summit
- Six Sigma DMAIC Project Report Template
- Satistic Assignment 2
- Scores of students
- 07 Scatter Diagrams
- Appendix A
- Tools in Presenting, Analysing and Interpreting Classroom Data
- Jmp Ttest Anova Examples
- Six Sigma Healthcare Informatics and EMR
- T-Test - Two Groups
- Planning for Performance Improvement
- Telecom Process Analysis WP
- Uncertainty Analysis
- Jumlah Kecambah Bayam 1-7HST
- Process Analysis
- Hypothesis testing, Test Statistic (z,p,t,F)
- Appedix A
- 2010 Practice Promotion Exam Solutions)
- Standard Error
- International Journal Of Psychology.pdf
- STDM Presentation
- Factor Analysis
- AIGA Design Educators Salary Survey

Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

We've moved you to where you read on your other device.

Get the full title to continue

Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.

scribd